@deckingman an RX 580 or RX 5500XT should fit the budget, with 8GB VRAM, if barely. 4GB would probably be just fine for 1080P, but more would help for 4K. Vegas doesn't care too much about AMD vs Nvidia, just memory, memory bandwidth, and GPU throughput. Resolve can and will use the GPU a lot, but also all of your logical CPU cores, where most others don't.

As an aside, it's the i7-8700 that houses your current GPU, not the motherboard itself.

Originally, I was going to try tool changing from the start, but I'm more interested in getting something going, now, that's a bit more proven, and easy to implement (which now includes CoreXYU/XYUV). There are several things I'd like to try, but embedding TPU into prints, choosing to print coarser stuff faster, without swapping hotends and nozzles a lot, heating it and venting it out a window (for funky fuming filaments), and to make it cat-proof (spools need to go in the enclosure, too), are the key things.

So, this year has been a bit crazy, and I didn't get near as far as I was hoping, on my custom printer (I had hopes of being able to get more time at home, but that was short-lived). To make sure I can get one going over the coming months, then maybe add to it later, I'm reigning in my feature set. One absolute must is dual outputs, with one being a high flow type (Volcano if shared X, or Dragon high-flow if IDEX). A single carriage would allow for one bundle of cables and tubing, and one X/Y mechanism. IDEX would prevent interference, but require more parts, more space, and more tuning, assuming the shared carriage would work alright.

I notice some people use things like Chimeras, and even same-plane V6s, with no real issues. Many others can never get them working right, and give up, going to very different mechanisms. Does anyone have any insight into what causes these experiences, both ways? FI, for the idle hotend marring prints, would faster printing mitigate that, maybe, or going colder for idle, with (small) ooze shield or purge tower?

@gtj0 said in Black Beauty Arises!:

I'm trying to picture your arrangement. With a cantilevered toolhead, I'd expect the rails to be "vertical", one above the other with their open faces facing the front of the printer, yeah? Or am I thinking something different? A lot depends on the length of the unsupported span and the mass of the toolhead but the rails are stiffest in that orientation so I wouldn't expect a problem. You may want to think about using a single 40mm wide rail and carriage though.

That's still up in the air a bit. I'm planning to implement a Frank Herrmann style tool changer, though any tool changer will be easier with a cantilevered head. I doubt I'll be putting more than 500g on it, but am aiming for much less. The whole machining thing is new to me, so I'll probably be spending some evenings learning and wasting aluminum at my makerspace, figuring out what's most practical to end up with. Two horizontal rails of 17mm, or one of 27mm or 40mm, should allow for the least weight with a lot of rigidity, and least alignment work (IE, make the whole axis out of one piece of aluminum, like E3D's/Jubilee's, with rail lips and screw holes, with most of the work done by CNC milling), so I would lean that way, for now.

Did you opt for a fixed/floating mix on the X axis, or all 4 fixed?

In my design all 4 are fixed but that's because I have the ability to adjust the center-to-center distance of the rails. I align the front X rail so it's square with the Y rails, then adjust the back X rail so the toolhead slides with consistent friction across the span and with no twisting.

Some questions on the Igus rails, for you. I've been following this for quite awhile (since the Hypercube Overkill thread on RepRap.org), but now I'm getting close to ripping off the motion platform. This has been quite the project, and become very impressive.

You mention using 17mm, and overmolded. The only 17mm option on their site is the solid plastic carriages only, and that looks like what I see if the few photos where they are clearly visible, which was on the previous printer. The other options are there for 27mm and 40mm, though.

While the original design more or less explains the rail and toolhead layout on your newer revision, based on your experience with these rails, would you foresee any problems with them used in more common cantilevered toolhead layout (provided the use of 2 X rails, spaced at least as far apart as the printhead's center of gravity is from the front rail)?

Did you opt for a fixed/floating mix on the X axis, or all 4 fixed?