Would love to see that
I’m going to call R6 the last major revision. But where should I put this stuff? It’s about 1.5MB.
Design Files
- .blend: The raw Blender file where the design was built. It’s a bit complex for a Blender design, making use of Modifiers and Geometry Nodes to parametrically tweak some things I found tedious. I also heavily relied on Blender’s 3D Printer plugin to check for mesh issues.
- .stl: Basically just the .blend file model with the original non-split case model deleted (leaving only the two halves you’d actually print). Should import into slicers without a problem.
- .3mf: Slicer file with print settings used and the model (if you just want to try making it, this is probably all you need).
Major slicer settings are all defaults in Orca Slicer 2.3.0 and include 0.2mm layer height, 2 wall loops, 15% Grid infill, no support/brim/etc. needed.
The case was printed and tested with an X1 Carbon. However I recommend avoiding doing business with this company. Not because of quality, but because of some of recent anti-freedom and other offensive actions they took, after I had already purchased. They are apparently going the way of “Apple” and we do not need more of that in the world.
I should post this with a license. I’m thinking CERN-OHL-S (CERN Open Hardware Licence Version 2 – Strongly Reciprocal). This is the most radically Free license I can find which should ensure a design stays completely open to everyone and is supposed to prevent someone from trying to hijack it with patent claims or other nonsense. There is zero risk of that happening, but what the heck.
Any reason this license would be a bad choice?
Codeberg:
Can you provide more details about your experience?
Seems fine to me.
I think CC-BY-SA could be better, since it’s just a case design and no electronics or similar. Who knows CC-licenses? Lots of people. Who knows CERN-OHL? Much less people. The “share alike” from CC makes sure that it stays free. I released my own files also under CC-BY-SA.
That’s why I brought it up. CC-BY-SA is what I was thinking too. But I wonder if 3D print designers are walking into a problem. CC-BY-SA works for digital stuff, but once there’s a physical component it seems problematic.
I asked an “AI” about this stuff. It’s pointing out that CC-BY-SA doesn’t prevent a derivative design from being created and sold as a physical product without the release of design files. I’m fine with someone printing and selling or gifting (not all of us have 3D printers), but if someone improves or adapts things I’d prefer the community to get the design templates. I don’t really care about credit/attribution that CC-BY-SA mandates.
I confirmed with the “AI” (quoted):
The CERN Open Hardware Licence v2 Strongly Reciprocal (CERN OHL-S v2) provides robust protections against intellectual property (IP) law being weaponized to make hardware designs non-free.
I don’t think there’s risk of annoying things happening in this case (no pun intended), but maybe we should stop using CC-BY-SA for 3D printed stuff in general if we want it to be maximally anti-intellectual-property. I think CERN OHL is the better license but what ‘What the heck is that?’ was my first reaction reading about it too.
But I’m getting off topic… if we continue the horrible IP discussion maybe we should break off into a different thread.
This started the recent controversy that took over 3D printing ‘news’ for a while. Firmware Update Introducing New Authorization Control System
I’ll try to explain briefly but it’s complicated - best if you read about it on their forums or other places if you want to know more. Basically Bambu Lab decided to update their firmware to force the use of this stupid closed source “authorization” app on your PC. That’s a deal breaker for a lot of people right there (this is a Chinese company with all the baggage that comes with that), but it gets worse.
When we originally purchased these printers it came with an advertised “offline” LAN mode which didn’t interact with their cloud. No Internet access needed to run it, sounds reasonably safe right? Well this dumb new system reaches out to their cloud to “authorize” even for the supposedly offline LAN users. Had I known that was coming I’d have gone elsewhere just on this much. These companies think they have the right to mess with how our property works even after they sold it to us.
Due to public pressure they slightly backtracked and added this “Developer Mode” thing which supposedly lets you opt out of this stupid system. (Which sounds like an excuse to void warranties because of how it’s named IMO.)
To make it worse it’s not even a good system, it was “cracked” 2 days after they put it out because they put private keys inside the closed source app. Basically it doesn’t even add any real security because the implementation is plain broken.
I don’t think I need to lecture anyone here about the problems and where this is possibly going. All this was done under cover of “SECURITY” - don’t laugh too hard.
I tried creating an account at https://source.puri.sm but it looks like it needs some kind of approval so I don’t know if that’ll work. Maybe Codeburg would be better, hmm.
Codeberg is a better place. Lots of people of this community are there (me for example).
Okay. It looks like there was weird security breach and political stuff that went on there recently but I’m giving this to the community anyway so we’ll go with that. Will be up shortly.
Repo created! Maybe I’ll add some more details or pictures/renders later on.
If anyone tries this out of course let us know here. It’d be awesome if some others find it useful, especially if you can print it successfully with a better (more Free/Open) printer brand.
Right now I have no idea how some of the small details will work out with other printers. At least it’s only $1-$2 of filament to try it out. The big phone companies selling cases for an obnoxious $40+ can go pound sand.
You should open an account there in case you ever need to report a bug or edit something in the wiki.
Be prepared for long waits and having to proactively request approval in multiple steps. Instructions are vague and assume you already have a particular project in mind that you want to contribute to even though the account will be general. (They don’t monitor the overall request address and want you to request access from the individual project maintainer with no obvious way to find out who the maintainer is.)
Yep I think that’s already in progress now (as far as I can take it). Since I posted it to Codeberg already anyway, probably the most the Wiki would need is a link to the repo somewhere. Anyone else who can is welcome to post the URL on the wiki, of course.