FWIW I just looked at the AliExpress-tier options and they are much cheaper

Those low cost Aliexpress hdmi over RJ45 are “last gen” HDMI limiting yourself to 4k@30Hz. This place already has CAT7 cabling so this would have been so much easier but sadly it isn’t good enough and the current gen are to expensive.

I didn’t even know HDMI cables went up to 15m for the copper version.

They are fiber optic with copper for power supply and side channel. For some reason they are fairly affordable compared to OM3 fiber solutions. Probably due to them running multiple fibers allowing the transceiver to be slower and simpler. With OM4 cables there is only one fiber per direction. I think HDMI is 4 pairs so it is 5GB/s for 4 fiber compared to 20GB/s for the OM4 cable.

I personally hate copper cables. There are so many bad cables out there that it can be hard to find one that works reliably (2-5m range). Knowing now that you can buy 5m fiber optic for 30€ I probably will move forward only buying fiber optic and just coil up the excess length.

HDMI over Ethernet box on either side.

$300 per connection: 2 display connections and two USB connections would cost $1200.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1649024-REG/kanexpro_ext_50m18g_4k_18gbps_hdmi_over.html

https://www.avaccess.com/products/u3ex100-usb3-2-extender/

Does this answer your question?

My solution isn’t cheap either: 10m USB-C 10gbit: 50€ each(b-stock/customer returns, normally expect to pay 100€), 15m DisplayPort & HDMI: 40€ each.

Total is approx. $200-2500 between cables and building materials.

And more often than not I find myself having to change one thing to wireless

Wireless HDMI is pretty interesting but low quality and high latency. The 60 GHz never took off and wouldn’t work anyway as it can’t pass through walls.

Wireless USB was a thing with USB 2.0 but it is dead. There was also some 60GHz USB for VR but that also failed in the market.

Water won’t get there and if the entire house is flooded and the walls are wet.

Fire protection is up to code.

If you would want to specify this (commercial installation) you likely would need to explicitly allow its use as this shape is not in the ISO/DIN standard.

Data rates and cost:

2x Display connections = 40 gbs

2x USB 3.0 = 10 gbs

=> 50 gbs through a CAT 7 is difficult

OM4 fibre optic is dirt cheap (under $1/m) but the KVMs are expensive at $800.

Using optical thunderbolt cables is also very expensive with $700 for the cable and dock.

UL94 V0 filament is available: PLA, PETG, ABS, PC and probably more.

V0 means stops burning within 10 seconds and no dripping. That’s good enough for these applications.

edit: apparently dripping is allowed as long as those aren’t flammable. Regardless most V0-rated filaments don’t drip as the “charcoal” when exposed to fire.

Yes you can:

• enable Arachne in the slicer

• tune the pressure advance setting

That’s fair.

$10 retail

approx. $7 for the manufacturer (30% retail)

cost 2x “formular”: $3.5

With packaging, this might cost around $3 to make.

for me it is the other way around:

private: Play & mess around. Gathering knowledge/expertise. Modifying/experimenting on a production machine is just not possible.

company/business: Use the knowledge to source (or modify it into) a reliable solution. After all, you are paid to produce good outcomes/results.

Prusa XL is a difficult machine.

On the one hand, it pushes toolchangers to the mainstream. On the other hand, it is utterly unreliable for it’s price.

Paying $5k for a printer and then finding out that the printed parts they used deform causing repairs, the heatbed title issues and some more and this is already after a massive delay (launched a few years later than they initially “announced”).

The previous goat of toolchangers was the E3D toolchanger. While not perfect it at least had the build quality to match its price point (btw. lower cost than the Prusa XL) and if you fix one minor design oversight they are reliable.

There is no clear answer to what is better.

CoreXY:

• lower moving mass (benefit)
• stationary bed (benefit)
• compact dimensions, easy to build an enclosure (benefit)
• VERY long belts (downside) => you can upgrade to high pitch ball screw and servos (no longer coreXY) => even superior are linear induction motors like those used in pick and place machines but both options would cost significantly more (will never be seen on consumer printer).

bedslinger

• short belts are good for dimensional accuracy
• independent axis makes it easy to get a high rigidity with good dampening characteristics further benefiting the print quality
• bed is moving this is a significant limitation for fragile/tall prints. You can pretty easily simulate the distortion this will cause. To keep it fair: Even with coreXY there will be some forces/drag from the molten material/nozzle to the printed parts.

TL;DR/Opinion?

• CoreXY it is for the consumer market. Those machines look nicer, are smaller and print quality matches expectations.
• For the (ultra) high end it gets blurry. There are outstanding bed slinger options out there made of granite frames, precision linear rails, and so on. These machines aren’t designed for high speed but for ultimate reliability and quality with price tages in the $10k+ range for a 200x200mm machine.

This is the base folder of the unzipped update.

differencing: WCH CH341 driver eve: AI chatbot scripts: boring scripts and a binary blob (.elf file: fdm_virtual_device)

Regarding the M9999:

	else if(strcmp((const char *)rec_cmd[ptr].cmd,"M9999") == 0 )
	{
		ansifo->main_cmd   = SET_AUTO_TEMP_CMD;
		return SET_AUTO_TEMP_CMD;
	}

https://github.com/Raise3D/Klipper-Raise3D-Pro3-Series/blob/97416850a18466eea04865f2c92503501841681c/klipper/klippy/extras/virtual_sdcard.py#L535

For M99123 there is only one reference: https://github.com/Raise3D/Klipper-Raise3D-Pro3-Series/blob/97416850a18466eea04865f2c92503501841681c/klipper/klippy/extras/virtual_sdcard.py#L535

I might have the klipper source unzipped from the update file (7 zip noticed that there is more data). Where do I need to check/look for this M99123 implementation?

The update file itself starts with: “RAISE - MXC - PACKAGE…” MXC might stand for STM MXcube as Rais uses an STM32 MCU. Scrolling through the file it looks like it also contains some sort of files for YOCTO-Linux for an NXP chip which might be related to the display.

Also does Klipper still use Python 2.7 and other EOL packages that are 15 years old by now?

Looking at the key-file: It is a gzip which contains a USTAR which contains some sort of, I suppose, key: “RAISE - MXC - KEY _ 'C[…]”

Implementing a G-code that allows abitary code execution sounds like a pretty dumb idea especially since these are “industrial” printers.

But I have to say it kind of looks like some sort of binary blob. What is interesting is that the section “DQafsD84EnC8915R6MD0IpD0Ipw/” is repeating.

Preview images are in a separate .data file.

is this a cloud-first printer? Also totally possible it’s just telling the printer to download something remotely to support that HyperFFF mode

The printer isn’t connected to the internet and the hyperFFF works. The HyperFFF upgrade requires a firmware update and a key file that is specific to the machine/serial number. GCode isn’t machine-specific.

The underlying software/“firmware” is Klipper.

What’s kinda interesting is someone posted an identical one to the prusa forums like 2 years ago

IdeaMaker is so different meaning it is a good idea to streamline it to Bambu or Prusaslicer. Hardware-wise the Raise is great but sadly this whole slicer situation makes them difficult to integrate/use in a mixed fleet as you need HyperFFF for these machines.

I hope Raise changes their mind and officially supports Prusa or OrcaSlicer soon as they are probably sitting on a sinking ship. Especially now with the Bambu H2D.

https://github.com/prusa3d/Prusa-Firmware-Buddy/issues/3333

Introduced in 5.10 and fixed more than a year later in 6.11 (they claim I can’t check as I no longer use Prusa).

The print quality is fine if the printer doesn’t freeze. Nothing exciting but also not bad for a $100 used device. Still, nothing to ride home about if $200 buys you a new BambuLab A1 mini. In sharp contrast is the Bambulab a reliable and superior printer in every aspect.

With this sad. If you still consider the Prusa Mini:

1. DO NOT update the firmware to versions with input shaping! They introduced a bug that you need to remove the SD-card before turning it on or otherwise the printer believes the firmware is damaged/bricked. This bug has been known for quite a long time without any fix from Prusa (present in multiple “stable”/release firmware versions!!!). I got rid of the last Prusa few years ago because of this issue so it might be fixed, might be still broken.

2. Do not rely on network connectivity/features. They are unstable meaning the printer needs to be restarted multiple times per day (combine this with the SD-card issue) and might freeze mid-print.

DRM on the resin combined with their high resin pricing is an issue. Heygears ABS-like is close to $90/kg while other ABS like are $25/kg.

Sadly this printer will never be a cost-effective solution with those jacked-up resin prices.

Recomendation?

The buildplate should fit to make it easy to use.

Software subscription and DRM on resin/filament are huge red flags. Had a look at heygears offerings as people describe it as the BambuLab equivalent for SLA. Looking into it, the feels more like a FormLabs company with overpriced resins and DRM to make you buy their resin.

Spending once 1.5-2k€ for the Flex RS printer is fine (more than I would like) but paying 40-70€/kg for resin killed it. Just not possible to economically justify paying twice as much for the source materials (resin). This would mean HeyGear jacking up the production cost by approx. 50-80%, indefinitely. A better option is it spend a day dialing in a third-party resin on the Prusa or Elegoo.

subscription = selling the same software indefinitely

paid upgrades = forced to deliver value/improvements with each paid update

for materials it is similar:

DRM = jacking up prices

open = competing on quality: You could use our first-party product with perfect integration but you are free to source whatever you like

Well, any printer will do that if you calibrate it well enough.

Pain point in the past where the build platform. Prints frequently failed because they would lift from the aluminum plate.

After a lot of trouble, I switched to a flexible buildplate which first was blasted with course “sand” followed by fine glass beans. flexplate so I can remove the print. The course surface makes the print stick but not stick too well. Would like this time to avoid all of this troubleshooting.

Also considered buying one of those printers that work upside down by projecting the light onto the surface and the print is lowered into the resin vat.

“Good” is fairly ambiguous here because what would a “good” slicer look like to you?

Good workflow (UI design), decent automatic support generation, good tool for manually brushing/configuring support material and ideally an elephant foot compensation setting/calibration for the first layer which has a significantly longer exposure time.

Support generation and being able to manually edit those pushed me toward PrusaSlicer.

The VAT tilt is a bit dangerous because of a potential resin leak of the release film, leaking into your printer’s internals

How big of an issue is that? Are there upgrades to seal the printer?

Back in the day, it was more or less a total economic loss for those cheap printers: LCD damaged, UV-array damaged and a complete mess within that was hard to clean.