Simplified Huxley

I have recently been working on/creating/re-designing a simplified version of Huxley, pretty much sampled ideas from a culmination of sources, picked and hacked parts to my own liking. Ultimately, you can compare most of its mechanical components to that of the Prusa, but down-sized and tweaked. As a result, I have gotten print time to under 6 hours ( 3 prints on a 140mm by 140mm bed), it can be further reduced if I were to stack parts, but clean-up would be some what more difficult.

As for assembly time, I've been able to get the mechanical assembly done in about an hour, so things are def getting a lot faster all around.

The build size is approx. 6" by 6" by ??". As for hardware, uses printable bushing and only requires 3 R4ZZ bearings and is compatible with either 1/4" rods/studding or 6mm, making it a lot more accessible to everyone.

Still debating on whether to implement a Bowden extruder, but for the time being have gone with the Brutstruder.

I've been trying to keep up with development and blogging, but turns out its alot harder than I thought. Slowly posting documentation and progress on my blog, found here.

The goal is to get more RepRap's into the wild, more people RepRapping the better. With the current state of RepRap parts pricing, I was considering pricing a set of these somewhere in the realms of $75-100, but will reconsider if things don't work out as planned.

I'll post up .stl files onto thingiverse once I get all kinks worked out. Currently still working on further reducing part count.

That's it for now. Feel free to ask anything/make suggestions.

EDIT: Forgot to mention that all hardware in total was under $40 and could be found at my local hardware store. (I'm in the Washington DC area, so I have a choice of Lowes/Home Depot)

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/07/2011 12:40PM by MrTa921.

I've run into a decent amount of snags sampling other people's revision of the Huxley and even more designing my own. The more I work on things/think about it, the more it becomes the Prusa Mendel except for the Huxley. Has anyone done a direct translation like that? If it ain't broke, why fix it? Right?

In case you're wondering, I recently just got access to my original account, I am also the same person as the original poster.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/07/2011 11:57PM by ata0921.

---

- Andy
digifabindustries.blogspot.com

Ruxley?

---

-----------------------------------------------
Wooden Mendel
Teacup Firmware

That was where I started, but I ran into a lot of issues. Certain holes didn't line up with parts, pieces too thin in particular areas and so on (it is still a work in progress tho). So I've been contemplating doing a more direct translation of Prusa's simplifications applied to the Huxley, but I've been seeing a lot of work in simplifying the Huxley and might just do some sort of hybrid adaptation.

I think a simplified Huxley is what RepRap needs. Faster build/print time, lower part count, easy to find hardware, the list goes on and on. All around, it sets up for easier access to everyone. With a total cost in the realms of somewhere between $300 - $400 for everything (that being the higher end of things, meaning buying instead of fabricating it yourself), even the casual "somewhat interested" individual would be more willing to buy into.

---

- Andy
digifabindustries.blogspot.com

Seems like several variations have come about since I posted. Search for "Simplified Huxley" on thingiverse and check out eMakershop blog to take a peek at their twist on it. And of course, the previously mentioned Rusty Huxley "Ruxley" is also available.

Maybe there is room for improvement still?

---

- Andy
digifabindustries.blogspot.com

Hi,

I have a question.

The effective diameter of Huxley's pulley is approx. 10 mm = ~30 mm perimeter/turn. A typical Nema 14/17 used for repraps has 200 steps/turn. This gives 30/200 = 0,15 mm per step.

A threaded rod M6 has 1 mm/turn. Taking a cheap stepper (like this) with 24 steps/turn would result in 1/24 = 0,042 mm/step.

Disadvantage: 3 times slower

Advantages: 3 times more accurate
Much cheaper steppers
Rods are much cheaper than belts
Simplification (no pulleys, no idlers)

Wouldn't that be acceptable?

Detlef

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/16/2011 04:31AM by theodleif.

There are plenty of threaded rod designs out there. Consensus is they're too slow for good prints so far. Feel free to create an exception if you can

---

-----------------------------------------------
Wooden Mendel
Teacup Firmware

The consensus holds for 200 steps/turn. But afaik not for a stepper 10 times faster, isn't it?

It isn't ten times faster because the motor has a higher inductance. I don't think anybody has managed to get acceptable performance from a screw drive so far, but feel free to try.

---

[www.hydraraptor.blogspot.com]

steps/rev does not define speed, unless the bottleneck is the step rate of the controller. In fact, I suspect a more precise stepper would be able to go faster than cheap printer-grade steppers all else being equal simply due to having less space between steps, thus less power required to successfully make each step.

Perhaps others have some experience in this matter, but I think you would need a decent quality stepper with low steps/rev as opposed to the crappy ones from a printer to realise the speed increase you envisage

---

-----------------------------------------------
Wooden Mendel
Teacup Firmware