Duet3D Logo Duet3D
    • Tags
    • Documentation
    • Order
    • Register
    • Login

    Orbiter 2 extruder mounting for Smart effector with Magball arms

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved
    Smart effector for delta printers
    12
    56
    5.6k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • dc42undefined
      dc42 administrators @Adrian52
      last edited by

      Nice!

      What Smart Effector arm spacing do you think would be needed to accommodate the Orbiter 2, if we kept the 12mm spacing between the balls at the corners?

      Duet WiFi hardware designer and firmware engineer
      Please do not ask me for Duet support via PM or email, use the forum
      http://www.escher3d.com, https://miscsolutions.wordpress.com

      jay_s_ukundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • jay_s_ukundefined
        jay_s_uk @dc42
        last edited by

        @dc42 PXL_20220208_170527385.jpg
        I've managed to mount an LGX Lite and (just about) keep the full 380mm diameter on the predator I'm working on without adjusting the magball mountings

        Owns various duet boards and is the main wiki maintainer for the Teamgloomy LPC/STM32 port of RRF. Assume I'm running whatever the latest beta/stable build is

        bbergerundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
        • bbergerundefined
          bberger
          last edited by

          For reference:
          This is the absolute minimum needed for the Predator with a 380mm bed, 440mm arms and 235mm delta radius with a 55mm smart effector.

          I'm currently using this and it's clearing the rods by maybe 1mm at the extreme edge of the bed.

          Currently prototyping 80mm spacing (with 12mm distance between the adjacent balls), but haven't had time to mount it yet, some tweaks still needed as I also want to directly integrate an Orbiter mount on my adapter. Goal would be to mount it completely flat for center of gravity reasons.

          @jay_s_uk wow. Isn't the LGX Lite supposed to be even bigger than the orbiter? (see the mount I'm using from above).

          jay_s_ukundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • jay_s_ukundefined
            jay_s_uk @bberger
            last edited by

            @bberger could be. mines on a predator too, although using 450mm arms

            Owns various duet boards and is the main wiki maintainer for the Teamgloomy LPC/STM32 port of RRF. Assume I'm running whatever the latest beta/stable build is

            bbergerundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote -1
            • bbergerundefined
              bberger @jay_s_uk
              last edited by

              @jay_s_uk what's the motor (or better how deep is the motor, 17mm? 20mm? 24mm?) you're using on the LGX?

              jay_s_ukundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • jay_s_ukundefined
                jay_s_uk @bberger
                last edited by

                @bberger using a 17mm Moons rather than a 20mm LDO

                Owns various duet boards and is the main wiki maintainer for the Teamgloomy LPC/STM32 port of RRF. Assume I'm running whatever the latest beta/stable build is

                bbergerundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • bbergerundefined
                  bberger @jay_s_uk
                  last edited by

                  @jay_s_uk after toying around im CAD I see why the LGX Lite fits better: it's a symmetrical design with the motor in the center. On the orbiter the motor is heavily offset.

                  Adrian52undefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                  • amjm22undefined
                    amjm22
                    last edited by

                    Here is what I am using with my Smart Effector.

                    https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:516254120220207_212516.jpg

                    20220201_065321.jpg

                    Adrian52undefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • Adrian52undefined
                      Adrian52 @bberger
                      last edited by

                      @bberger my thought about horizontal assymetry is that it will create a turning effect for vertical motion, so it should not be much of a problem for the small incremental z movements whilst printing. I was trying to get the extruder weight as low as possible to minimise the turning moment caused by large and rapid x/y motion. The slightly wider arm spacing should also resist this turning effect better?

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • Adrian52undefined
                        Adrian52 @amjm22
                        last edited by

                        @amjm22 This is what mine looks like now
                        alt text
                        I have made the part cooling fan bracket vertical, and redone the duct - its much easier to get at the mounting screws and adjust the fan height.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • bbergerundefined
                          bberger
                          last edited by bberger

                          This is what I've tried so far. Just disassembled it and trying something different (all-in-1-adapter for Orbiter + SE).

                          IMG_20220213_184310.jpg
                          IMG_20220213_184304.jpg

                          https://youtu.be/rO-gD0ADkQc

                          Will upload pics of my current/latest attempt shortly..

                          I tried to keep the underside of the effector flat to the adapter so I can reuse my cooling solutions..

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • bbergerundefined
                            bberger
                            last edited by

                            Just a note:

                            After ghosting got worse and worse the more I experimented with 80mm spacing I'm back to this:
                            https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:5162541
                            +
                            https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:5253693 (I remixed the excellent 2 arm rigid adapter to be a 3 arm adapter, rigidly mounting the Orbiter v2 adapter from above to the hotend adapter woth 3 screws and additionally the nut).

                            This seems to have solved all my problems and is the clear winner.

                            No ringing ghosting visible without Input Shaper up to ~4k, with 42Hz MVZ the limit on my machine are the motors now (striking out at ~12k acceleration on the far edges of the bed).

                            I printed a 23 minute Benchy yesterday with 500mms@10k + Input Shaper (outer walls at 250mms@3k) with basically no defect.

                            So I'd wager to say: rigidity beats center of gravity in my case. Screwing the rigid 3 arm adapter to the tall Orbiter v2 adapter together tightly was the secret sauce. Didn't work well with just the nut on the V6 M12 heatsink.

                            I can also run the SE on 25 sensitivity and get excellent results. Deviation < 0.002.

                            The only thing that's still puzzling me a bit is that 42Hz resonance frequency. It's the same frequency I ended up with all of my tried solutions, be it 55mm spacing with the M12 and the tall adapter, 80mm spacing with the short adapter or the "solid shield". The difference is just the amplitude of it. Mounting the frame on squash feet, using the stock machine damper feet or bolting it to a slab ob granite. All ending up on 42Hz.

                            Not sure if stiffening my frame would help here, I suspect it's either the PLA-CF carriages on the MGN12 rail bolted to the frame, the belts (6mm geniune Gates RF belt or the Moon's motors themselves..?).

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • bbergerundefined
                              bberger @jay_s_uk
                              last edited by

                              @jay_s_uk would you be willing to share the STEP/F3D file on your LGX Mount? Would be using a 20mm motor though and would like to get a starting point on the tilt and offset..

                              Fred-Yundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • bbergerundefined
                                bberger
                                last edited by bberger

                                I've settled on a solution for me now. Still undecided if I want to go back to the flying orbiter v2 though as the input shaping graphs don't look too bad, but compared to the flying extruder don't look too good either.. and I'm kinda into getting prints done as fast as I can:

                                Direct Drive Orbiter v2 on 80mm adapter:
                                shaper_calibrate_y_orbiterv2_direct.png

                                Flying Orbiter v2 on stock 55mm Smart Effector:
                                shaper_calibrate_y_220908_1311.png

                                Flying Orbiter v2 on 80mm Adapter for reference what the 80mm adapter alone does to my input shaper graph:
                                shaper_calibrate_y_3points_220423_80mm_flying_extruder.png

                                //Edit: the graphs only tell half the truth. I can't even get close to max suggested accelerations on the direct drive without having motion artifacts (no ringing, but "smoothing" from hell). Need to go down to about 2.5k to have comparable print quality to the flying extruder on 8.5k acceleration.

                                I'll be reverting back and just get a second printer for printing flexibles.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • Fred-Yundefined
                                  Fred-Y @bberger
                                  last edited by

                                  @bberger Have you redesigned a LGX lite mount for the Smart Effector?
                                  I spend quite some time lately on pushing my SR with a flying LGX Lite so I would like to compare with a direct drive.

                                  bbergerundefined weed2allundefined 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • bbergerundefined
                                    bberger @Fred-Y
                                    last edited by

                                    @fred-y I don't have a solution that I'm happy to share tbh (80mm rod spacing adapter + a pain in the butt mount for the LGX lite).

                                    That LGX Lite is a pain to mate to the smart effector and any adapter I had thought of. The pain of a need to screw them from the bottom is real.

                                    BUT: on the SR I suspect you could probably get away with this without losing print volume:
                                    https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:5255358

                                    It doesn't print really well though and needs supports.

                                    Fred-Yundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                    • Fred-Yundefined
                                      Fred-Y @bberger
                                      last edited by

                                      @bberger Thanks for the link, I didn't see this one the other day when I did a search.
                                      On my other printers I have a 2 parts mount for the LGX Lite because of these screws on the bottom; Maybe I should be looking at doing the same or just give up.

                                      On a side note, the other day I realized something about how we mount the extruder on the SE - I have not an expert on kinematic / force but with the extruder mount attached on the effector we apply the filament pressure on the 3 screws.
                                      When doing high speed printing this pressure is fairly high.

                                      I was wondering if we could be looking at reusing the thread from the hotend by this way there is no (or very little) pressure on the PCB but I'm worry about the impact for the probe.
                                      The 3 holes on the PCB could just be used to stabilize everything.

                                      I'm just sharing the idea ... what do you think?

                                      bbergerundefined Adrian52undefined Falkiaundefined 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • Adrian52undefined
                                        Adrian52
                                        last edited by

                                        Just to add that I have updated the orbiter 2 mount, posted at https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:5402227
                                        I have made small changes including thickening the top mount and extruder mount, and kept the 55 mm magball spacing. I have recently started using a revo micro extruder, so have included a part cooling duct for that.
                                        The revo seems to have a higher melt rate than the v6 I was using previously, so I have been able to print at 250mm/sec, with 300mm/sec travel speed, with very good results.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                        • bbergerundefined
                                          bberger @Fred-Y
                                          last edited by

                                          @fred-y though about exactly that multiple times. Problem is that it's pointless with 55mm magball spacing as you need some real nasty vertical offset and tilt to jot collide with the arms which then puts a lot of direct force onto the hotend itself.

                                          Adrian52undefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • Adrian52undefined
                                            Adrian52 @bberger
                                            last edited by Adrian52

                                            @bberger I find that the 55mm spacing (which I wanted to use to avoid changes to carriages) works well with a 12mm extension - the extruder can be horizontal (filament path vertical). Here is my setup in the furthest -Y position, where the arms are closest to the extruder motor.
                                            17a6cb34-f741-4cca-8309-6bb432cae6fb-image.png

                                            The gap between the extruder platform and the top of the hotend is about 1mm:
                                            7ce2022e-d946-4cbd-9f47-617e41d37057-image.png , giving the shortest possible filament path. I would have thought that as the downward force during extrusion is symetrically distrubuted, the strain on the effector/hotend should not be a problem.

                                            These puzzle pieces, which are about 40mm long and 14mm high, were printed at 250mm/sec, with 300mm/sec travel.
                                            f241454c-c872-4c4f-a09a-1c1a926cd784-image.png
                                            The pieces fit together to make and Escher solid:
                                            44446e98-1829-4e15-b6f1-eefd34f70c0d-image.png
                                            We have just had a jubilee here in the UK - hence the red white and blue. The pieces have to be very precise to fit together with no gaps.

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Unless otherwise noted, all forum content is licensed under CC-BY-SA