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

    Square shaped effector = easy toolchanger?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved
    Smart effector for delta printers
    3
    11
    643
    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.
    • o_lampeundefined
      o_lampe
      last edited by o_lampe

      Hi gents,
      I recently stumbled across Nicholas Sewards Wall mount Delta from 2015.
      It has some designflaws, but there is one intriguing detail, I want to discuss here:
      the square shaped effector
      wallMountedDelta.jpg

      Because the effector has one open side, it could be build "U-shaped" , which would allow for easy toolchanging.
      Now, if we would skip the idea of wall mounting, we could move the two outer towers to the front. Almost like a common delta, but still with a square effector.
      That will eliminate the biggest flaw, but would still work with RRF Delta kinematics, right?

      Insane or intriguing, what's your opinion?

      o_lampeundefined dc42undefined 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • o_lampeundefined
        o_lampe @o_lampe
        last edited by

        @o_lampe
        It would also be a good candidate for direct driving with a geared extruder, like Orbiter or LGX light. Just let the motor stick out to the free side...

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • dc42undefined
          dc42 administrators @o_lampe
          last edited by

          @o_lampe see also this square delta thread https://groups.google.com/g/deltabot/c/INiYbXKw84s.

          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

          o_lampeundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • o_lampeundefined
            o_lampe @dc42
            last edited by o_lampe

            @dc42 Thanks for the link, it was an interesting flashback to 2015-problems regarding V-rollers and bowden drive issues.
            I'll use mgn12 rails and magballs, hope I can sort out some problems with that setup right away...

            Only have a sketch, but my approach will have equal angles, since I can move X&Y towers.
            SquareDelta.jpg

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • o_lampeundefined
              o_lampe
              last edited by o_lampe

              Today I started to sketch the U-shaped effector and MGN12 carriers with freeCAD, which is completely new to me. After hours, I finally managed to draw a fully constrained sketch, but somehow I still couldn't "extrude" it. It seems to miss some reference to the body?!
              Anyway, too tired to read another tutorial I exported it as DXF file and Inkscaped it to cut it out with my laser.

              It's just a basic shape with the common 55/12mm magball pattern from the smart effector.
              screenshot.jpg

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • o_lampeundefined
                o_lampe
                last edited by

                The first tool in the U-frame fits easily. An Orbiter would fit too without interfering the rods.
                Lot's of room for fans and Z-probe underneath.
                For now the tool isn't changeable, but for testing the square frame it's a start.

                squareTool1.jpg
                squareTool2.jpg

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • o_lampeundefined
                  o_lampe
                  last edited by o_lampe

                  I cobbled together a square frame and manually moved the effector around.
                  It's rock solid around the Y-axis, but when the Z-tower (left one in the pic) reaches a flat angle, I can tilt the effector around X.
                  I was wondering, if I could use longer rods for the Z-tower to avoid flat angles, but that would cause unequal endstop positions for homing.
                  The best way to cope with that is to use longer rods for all towers and sacrifice printable height.

                  criticalAngle.jpg

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

                    @o_lampe should that matter? The firmware can handle different effector rod lengths

                    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

                    o_lampeundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • o_lampeundefined
                      o_lampe @jay_s_uk
                      last edited by

                      @jay_s_uk That's true, but max. printable height would still be determined by the longest rods, right? I'll try it, just out of curiosity.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                      • o_lampeundefined
                        o_lampe
                        last edited by

                        Let's get crazy!

                        The X&Y rods don't contribute to stability around the Y-axis right now.
                        I could take an extra step and turn these towers outwards.
                        That would be a parallelogram with a very wide open side...
                        The tower position would be closer to the Z-tower, just as it was in Sewards wall mount delta
                        I could even add a fourth (passive) tower that also works as parking lot for the tools.

                        parallelogram.jpg

                        o_lampeundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                        • o_lampeundefined
                          o_lampe @o_lampe
                          last edited by

                          @o_lampe
                          Even better?
                          The Z-tower Rod distance only 20mm wide, because the passive tower is still ~90mm wide
                          parallelogram20.jpg

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