mirror of
https://github.com/maziggy/bambuddy.git
synced 2026-05-09 08:25:54 +02:00
[GH-ISSUE #694] [Feature]: Optional printer depreciation cost for more accurate print cost estimation. #460
Labels
No labels
A1
automated
automated
bug
bug
Closed due to inactivity
contrib
dependencies
dependencies
duplicate
enhancement
feedback
hold
invalid
Notes
P1S
pull-request
security
ThumbsUp
user-report
wontfix
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
starred/bambuddy-maziggy-1#460
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Originally created by @wreuel on GitHub (Mar 13, 2026).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/maziggy/bambuddy/issues/694
Originally assigned to: @maziggy on GitHub.
Problem or Use Case
Currently the archive tracks filament and energy usage, which already helps estimate the cost of a print.
However, the printer itself also has a finite lifetime. In production environments it is common to include a small depreciation cost per printing hour to estimate the real cost of a print.
Example:
Printer price: $600
Expected lifespan: 3000 printing hours
Depreciation cost: $0.20/hour
This would allow users to approximate the total cost of a print:
Filament + Energy + Printer depreciation.
Proposed Solution
Allow an optional configuration per printer:
Printer cost
Expected lifespan (hours)
The system could calculate:
printer_hour_cost = printer_price / lifespan_hours
Then multiply by the print duration to estimate depreciation cost.
This could optionally appear in the archive as an additional cost component.
Important:
This would be entirely optional and would not affect existing workflows.
Why this could be useful
This is particularly helpful for:
Alternatives
This could also be implemented as:
Alternatives Considered
No response
Feature Category
Print Archiving
Priority
Would improve my workflow
Mockups or Examples
No response
Contribution
Checklist
@maziggy commented on GitHub (Mar 14, 2026):
More interesting would be, where you plan to place the stats.
@wreuel commented on GitHub (Mar 14, 2026):
@maziggy I think the archive card would be the most natural place because it already shows the cost breakdown of a print (filament and energy). Printer depreciation behaves similarly since it is derived from the print duration, so it fits conceptually as another optional cost component in that same breakdown.
The stats page could then expose aggregated information per printer, such as configured cost/hour, total printing hours, and accumulated depreciation cost. That would keep the archive focused on per-print information while the stats page provides long-term insights.
This approach also reuses the existing cost model instead of introducing a new concept — depreciation would simply be another optional cost component alongside filament and energy.
@wreuel commented on GitHub (Mar 15, 2026):
@maziggy I do have some questions about how this could be done better:
Should I add the depreciation cost on the Quick Stats?
When the use Edits the Price and lifespan of a Printer, should I ask if he wants to recalculate the Archive Item associated with the printer?
@maziggy commented on GitHub (Mar 15, 2026):
I want to be honest and please don't take it personally.
You don't follow the contributing guidelines when submitting PR's. Furthermore this one contains critical pipeline files, which would overwrite my CI. Furthermore reviewing such PR's is quite work intensive and I cannot review each PR multiple times until the code is following our project rules and all issues are fixed.
@wreuel commented on GitHub (Mar 15, 2026):
I will try to make it better, but again, I'm asking question on how to make this better, and don't got the answer!
I really didn't saw that I had sent the file that changed the PR.
@maziggy commented on GitHub (Mar 15, 2026):
I'm sorry, but since most of your PR's didn't follow the rules, I cannot review and approve any more PR's. It will just generate too much work on our side.
@wreuel commented on GitHub (Mar 15, 2026):
Aside of the .toml file, @maziggy what was the other rules that I didn't follow on this one?
There was the other one that even didn't got a review because I didn't wait to be assigned, and that I understood fine.
@maziggy commented on GitHub (Mar 15, 2026):
For example: nearly all language files were missing.
@wreuel commented on GitHub (Mar 15, 2026):
That could be added, but what more??? Yeah, I just did for English and German. Sincerely right now I just see the TOML file that it was big error of my part.
@maziggy commented on GitHub (Mar 24, 2026):
Before we commit to building this, I'd like to gauge community interest. If you'd find this feature useful, please give this issue a thumbs up (👍) reaction so we can prioritize accordingly.
@lightmaster commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2026):
I price my prints as (material costs + electric cost + wear & tear cost per hr) × profit percentage. The Projects page and Archive page have a breakdown of filament and energy cost already. It would be great if they could also have a wear & tear cost calculated as $X × printing time which would be configurable in the printer settings for each printer, as well as a profit percentage that has a default value in settings, but can be overwritten per archived file and per project to account for discounts.