Welcome to the SeeMeCNC Community

Does anyone actually read the patents?

Every independent claim in this patent specifies the gantry system being isolated from and external to the heated build environment. So putting ANY kind of 3D printer "inside" a chamber designed to control temperature completely avoids this patent.

The independent claims are 1, 10 and 18. Google does a nice job highlighting the claims to easily distinguish the claim types.

Heated build chamber patent:
http://www.google.com/patents/US6722872 ... &q&f=false

Apparently I am not the only one intrigued by this:
http://payne.org/blog/stratasys-heated- ... re-patent/

Is the build chamber inside of the printer, or is the printer inside of the build chamber... Chicken or the egg


And, no. I'm guilty of not reading the patent

The independent claims basically state the "gantry system" is isolated from the build chamber. If the gantry system (even partially) is inside the build chamber then you avoid the patent altogether.

Demolishun wrote:The independent claims basically state the "gantry system" is isolated from the build chamber. If the gantry system (even partially) is inside the build chamber then you avoid the patent altogether.

I thought it was more specific than that, specifically the motors and belts are outside the heated chamber, which is unfortunately exactly what you'd want, since I don't think the steppers will tolerate the 60C or so (which is I believe what Stratsys uses for ABS) for extended periods.
However I believe that it is specific to X/Y gantries, so any delta design should be clear.

If you are a company planning to manufacture and sell a product you had better do a patent search and understand any potential prior art claims in detail. You are opening yourself up to a law suit if you don't. In high tech where I work, patent search and response is required for any form of outside investment.

If you are an individual making things for your own use, patents do not apply. You just can't sell anything that you make for yourself that infringes on an existing patent.

Please, read the patent and don't conjecture what is in there. Only the independent claims matter, and if those apply then the dependent claims matter. The rest of the text of the patent is just background information and are not claims. Nothing in the claims even mentions belts, motors, etc. Only one of the independent claims is even broad enough to encompass typical gantry printers.

Gantry is dangerously specific, too... Wouldn't that mean that you can do whatever you want to a Delta machine?

"Deformable thermal insulator"

That means rubber bellows, right? If you were to make a sheet-metal telescoping heat cover (or plastic for that matter), you would avoid the deformable part of it.

Also, since the build chamber would probably never get over 120 degrees C, the linear rods could be put inside it? The stepper motors could be put inside it too as long as they're actively cooled. Not so sure about the belts, but I think there are alternatives to rubber belts for all printers. Maybe there are high temperature belts that would work. Aramid fibers are stiff up to 300 degrees C I think.