Putting some ideas together for a new printer. Right now I’m trying to decide on which xy configuration to use. Does anyone know of a place where several configurations are summarized? Or, what do you think is the most appealing configuration?
I had asked a similar question about 13 posts down. I was trying to figure out if I should go with a Delta-bot configuration or an xy gantry configuration. @ThantiK and @Tim_Rastall posted some really good information that helped make up my mind. The ingentis printer that @Tim_Rastall is building has similar features as the ultimaker and the ultimaker puts out some really nice prints. The ingentis is just basically a larger version but with what I feel are some good upgrades…aluminum frame, spectra line. That’s the one that I’m building…I think it will be a nice upgrade from my Prusa I2. I don’t know if that helps but that’s my 2 cents.
I’ll look at your post. I guess I should have specified, I definitely need a system where the x and y movement are both on the head and it can’t be a delta. I like the makerbot system, but I don’t like that it requires a lot of rods/shafts. I’m debating a core xy or similar set up as I would like to keep the motors stationary thereby reducing the moving mass.
I have been following @Tim_Rastall and his Ingentis build quite closely as I like the cube frame configuration. I’ll probably end up doing something like that with belts but I’m trying to minimize the number of parts. It’s a difficult line to walk between simplicity and performance.
Personally, I’d want to try the CoreXY with an open carriage and a slide-in/snap-in magnetic mount.
I think I’m going to go with the configuration from @Dale_Dunn cable bot. https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-753_E-QeVmo/UlYKlAfRqGI/AAAAAAAAIEg/Ki-oSosqbEU/w471-h514-no/Unnamed+mechanism.jpg
It’s similar, but when I think of core x/y I think of this set up. http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:22005
@Matt_Kraemer1 look again, it’s a weird pen plotter configuration . @Ben_Malcheski it’s @David_Moorhouse 's design, not @Dale_Dunn s.
In this video http://vimeo.com/40914530 you can see that movement in either x or y is dependent on both motors. The precise direction is determined by the difference in angular velocity between the motors. For the cable bot system one motor is dedicated to x and one is dedicated to y.
@Tim_Rastall oops, thanks for correcting me!
@Tim_Rastall thanks for clearing that up. I was trying to remember posting a printer design.
@Matt_Kraemer1 With the cable bot configuration both belts have a 2:1 advantage over the carriage. Therefore, there are twice as many steps/mm. Not sure how the stepper accuracy would play in with core x/y vs this or traditional.
So, at higher level, what do all these complex belt setups provide that a stepper for X, and a stepper for Y, don’t? Coming from a CNC mill conversion, I’m just wondering.
They move the motors off of the moving components. They also allow you to move only the printer head which can be significantly lighter with the right set up. Therefore you can accelerate quicker without as much vibration.
@Matt_Kraemer1 Bit early to say, the brief and fairly amateur bit of static analysis I did on it indicated it was very well balanced, without the same shearing forces that make H bots prone to binding. @Sanjay_Mortimer seems to be enamored with it an he’s a proper engineer ( I think).
@Matt_Kraemer1 that is exactly the advantage I saw when I looked at it. All the forces are balanced and act directly along the axis of the linear motion system. The only downside is the quantity of pulleys it requires.
@Matt_Kraemer1 that’s good to know and thanks! but I think I’ve got my hands full with the Ingentis for the next few months: I need to get a build guide together as folks appear to want to make their own versions, imo documentation takes as long as building the damn thing. @David_Moorhouse is in Auckland so he might be interested if the spectra solution he’s got the prototype running on doesnt have legs. You did see that video of it running eh?