Wallace Questions March 17, 2014 12:21AM |
Registered: 10 years ago Posts: 5 |
Re: Wallace Questions March 17, 2014 10:13AM |
Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 258 |
Re: Wallace Questions March 17, 2014 11:18AM |
Registered: 10 years ago Posts: 5 |
Re: Wallace Questions March 17, 2014 01:30PM |
Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 35 |
Re: Wallace Questions March 17, 2014 09:34PM |
Registered: 10 years ago Posts: 5 |
Re: Wallace Questions March 18, 2014 12:10AM |
Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 258 |
Quote
Matidas
I'm not well versed in Openscad, so I'm not sure how to run the code.
Re: Wallace Questions March 18, 2014 09:20PM |
Registered: 10 years ago Posts: 5 |
Re: Wallace Questions March 19, 2014 02:11AM |
Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 258 |
Re: Wallace Questions March 19, 2014 11:51AM |
Admin Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 1,470 |
Quote
DaveX
You could build it, but don't think this design would perform well at that scale--you'd be asking relatively small printed pieces to control relatively large forces, moments and motions. This is all made out of cantilevered beams and the deflections for the same amount of loading would increase by a factor of L^3. So for example in Y, scaling up by (500/200)^3 would get you at least 15 times the deflection unless you beef up everything accordingly. Exchanging M8 for M6 wouldn't be nearly enough.
Help improve the RepRap wiki!
Just click "Edit" in the top-right corner of the page and start typing. Anyone can edit the wiki! |
Re: Wallace Questions March 19, 2014 12:40PM |
Registered: 10 years ago Posts: 474 |
Re: Wallace Questions March 19, 2014 12:43PM |
Admin Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 1,470 |
Quote
cnc dick
New perfection equations are correct but they rely on scaling up which would work fine if the original was strong enough but that is not the case. The original design is extremely weak so you would have to go much larger. I would suggest totally supported rails the weight of the larger rails alone will cause it to SAG too much if it was unsupported
Quote
NewPerfection
The Z rod deflection is of concern on the Wallace-type design at normal sizes already since the top ends are basically unsupported.
Help improve the RepRap wiki!
Just click "Edit" in the top-right corner of the page and start typing. Anyone can edit the wiki! |
Re: Wallace Questions March 19, 2014 12:50PM |
Registered: 10 years ago Posts: 474 |
Re: Wallace Questions March 19, 2014 03:13PM |
Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 258 |
Re: Wallace Questions March 19, 2014 04:11PM |
Registered: 10 years ago Posts: 474 |
Re: Wallace Questions March 19, 2014 09:25PM |
Admin Registered: 11 years ago Posts: 3,096 |
Re: Wallace Questions March 19, 2014 10:02PM |
Registered: 10 years ago Posts: 474 |
Re: Wallace Questions March 19, 2014 10:44PM |
Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 258 |
Quote
cnc dick
I guess it's all up to the individual to me all of those large ones you see there do not produce anywhere near quality prints and their is only one showing a large print and because there is no enclosure there is cracks in the print because of shrinkage. This is just a small test piece of bottle opener I printed on my machine look closely this is what I call acceptable
Re: Wallace Questions March 19, 2014 11:52PM |
Registered: 10 years ago Posts: 474 |
Re: Wallace Questions March 19, 2014 11:54PM |
Registered: 10 years ago Posts: 5 |
Re: Wallace Questions March 20, 2014 12:01AM |
Registered: 10 years ago Posts: 474 |
Quote
Matidas
Thank you all for the replies. I was looking at using this for making boat sections for rather large model boats. I was wondering why it looked so simple, and know I know Perhaps something like a rostock max would work printing the sections vertically. Has there been any work towards a dual extruder rostock?