On this post or another. I want 4 of these!! So should I send a check now or…?
A couple of random thoughts for this random thread.
@RobertCanning 's suggestion for a cam clamp is an interesting idea. It reminded my of a horizontal cam clamp by Festool which is prety $$ btw.
Also, there’s a subtle design aspect that can make a big difference. It was missing from the first concept over at the other thread, but I see you added it here: a way to bolt down the adapter to the track. If you omit this, you might be overstressing the T-track.
So far you have limited the move of the adapter along the track. There’s one degree of freedom you need to remove as well: the T-nut pushing up and bending the T-track open. In order to do so you will need to add a spacer high enough so it clears the wasteboard. This way you sandwitch the T-track between the spacer and the T-nut and you can then tighten the bolts that hold the adapter without fear of damaging the T-track.
This is best drawn than told. Give me a minute.
Now the tricky part is how high should a spacer be if everybody has different wasteboard thickness. Not to mention that periodically people resurface their wasteboard. Well, a stack of washers with a dia of approx the T-track’s width could do the trick as well. Then you could add or remove at will.
I don’t see any give on my tracks and I have to crank the hell out of them sometimes. My local BBS has a horrible supply. More bows than the local archery shop.
Bending the T-track open is very unlikely to happen. Bad choice of words. What I am trying to point out is that if the top (open) side of the T-track is not sandwiched in such a configuration, there’s an open channel trying to fight an upward force. How much it can take, depends on that force. T-nut or T-bolt makes no difference in that case.
Btw, here’s another one for inspiration.
For the same reason discussed above, these work best when T-track_height >= bench_height (all product pictures are shown in such setups).
Now, these people got it right. See the little gap between the wasteboard and the clamp? There’s a spacer underneath. There’s a recommendation in the user manual (leaflet). I know cause I use these
Is it bigger than a breadbox?
A priner based on the file name…
Does it happen to other people to try to click and drag/rotate when they see CAD models even if they know they are jpegs or is it just me?
It’s possible at $150 Did my first DIY printer last year (Prusa-style) and spent around $200 with parts from Ali and eBay. Most parts are cheaper nowadays and more options. Your controller and hotend/extruder choices would probably the most expensive depends on what you wanted to use. Like a RAMPS clone + MK8 extruder assembly would cost you < $40 vs a 32-bit board like Smoothieboard / DuetWiFi + E3D v6 (with maybe Titan or Bondtech or whatever extruder) which will cost you $200+
The chain salons require it. And they get lazy and let you check yourself in.
man i guess i am old school. i go sit in a chair and look to see who was in front of me when i went in. i need to upgrade.
Makes me wish I still had hair!
Parts are looking good Phil
How about skip the t-track and use 3/4" holes in the wasteboard. Then you could squeeze the material with these new Kreg clamps. They caught my eye a couple of months ago, I really want to try this.
One thing to keep in mind when it comes to strength of 3D printed parts, the number of walls/bottoms/tops adds a lot more to strength as opposed to 100% infil.
Increase the number of walls/tops/bottoms so that there is very little if any infil and the piece will be much stronger.
Sounds good in theory but the real issue is the fine tuning of the printer. If the layers are not sticking or not tight enough, all bets are off. It took me awhile to get the printer “just right”!
In theory I understand what you are saying, but in application, as long as the printer is dialed in properly, the thicker walls add more to the rigidity of the parts, especially when you are talking these thin prints. With thicker/larger parts I think the infil patterns help more for structural integrity.
I think the biggest issue is that infill does a weaving pattern and the filament sorta mushes two layers into one at 100% since they’re overlapping all over the place. Since there is a lot of starting and stopping of extrusion with infill you increase risk of gaps from late starts or overfill.
With multiple walls/perimeters and accurate overlap in relation to each other you’re laying down a consistent single layer and moving on to the next. A very efficient manner of laying down an exact amount of material uniformly from layer to layer.
Nice. I just got my invoice.
Phil is making that machine pay for itself already…