Printed Extrusion?

I was bored and printed a 100mm length of "Fake" aluminum extrusion. It is functionally identical to the alu version as far as the screws and T-bolts were concerned, and is much stiffer then I thought it would be. I don't see an issue using it along the Y axis, But I question its ability to hold up against the bearing from the Z axis as well as alu does. Considering most the load is on the threaded and smooth rods I would imagine it would hold up for a decent enough time. Printed extrusion might work better on a different design of printer, lack the means to print it the required length otherwise I would actually test it. At the vary least it amused me to fiddle with it today.

The problem with using this for the Z-axis would be the Z runner mount bearing. You need a perfectly smooth surface for the bearing to run along and that's not easy to achieve in a printed part. The bearing may also wear down the plastic over time. You might be able to get past these problems by adding a stainless steel strip.

It's an interesting idea though. It would be nice to be able to print more of the parts.

I doubt that the layer bonds will be strong enough to use as the Z column. The X arm exerts a strong bending force on that support, and I would think it would snap at a layer - if not immediately then as soon as any downward pressure is accidentally applied to the end of the X arm. It would be OK in a design where the axis is supported at both ends.

Dave

It would probably work having a printed piece (or 2-3 parts attached together) instead of the Y-axis aluminium extrusion, which is under a lot less force. It wouldn't need to look exactly the same either, as long as it has the appropriate mounts for the things that need to attach to it, and could probably be integrated with the Z axis/motor mount. I don't think it really would make sense though, as those aluminium extrusions are cheaper than just the cost of the plastic and a lot stronger. Would be interesting to see someone else test just for the sake of it though.

Quote
jstck
It would probably work having a printed piece (or 2-3 parts attached together) instead of the Y-axis aluminium extrusion, which is under a lot less force. It wouldn't need to look exactly the same either, as long as it has the appropriate mounts for the things that need to attach to it, and could probably be integrated with the Z axis/motor mount. I don't think it really would make sense though, as those aluminium extrusions are cheaper than just the cost of the plastic and a lot stronger. Would be interesting to see someone else test just for the sake of it though.

I agree that it does not make either engineering or financial sense to substitute printed parts. The reason will indeed be to do so "for the sake of it" - there is some satisfaction in having as much of the printer as possible capable of self-replication.

I have a sci-fi dream where factories are 100% automated, with automated machines mining or recycling to get the raw materials, unmanned transport takes the materials to factories that refine them and turn out a plethora of different finished goods on demand. Fault detection, repair and maintenance will of course also be fully automated. Farming and house building achieved with unmanned machines. With almost all work done by robotic machines, society would need a completely different economic model because there will not be any employment for 90% of the population. Man's input will be to invent and discover, research, design & develop, and of course produce artistic works. There should be enough people who want to do those things for self-satisfaction that paid employment will be unnecessary. Maybe by the next millennium ...

Dave

Can I join your world??????

---

appjaws - Core XYUV Duet Ethernet Duex5
firmware 3.1.1 Web Interface 3.1.1
Ormerod 1-converted to laser engraver, Duet wifi
OpenSCAD version 2020.07
slic3r-1.3.0, Simplify3D 4.1.2, Cura-4.4.1

Quote
jstck
Maybe by the next millennium ...
Dave

nice dream.... are you sure it's enough thousand years?

"Fake" aluminum extrusion.... used to anchor the PSU (in my version) but it's not ok for the Z column.
Is not accurate even with a stainless steel strip. (in my short experience with it)
However, you can give it a try

Dario

---

Ormerod 187
Firmware Electronics: Duet 0.6
Firmware Version:1.18.1 (2017-04-07)
Web Interface Version:1.15a
Slic3r 1.2.9a and Simplify3D 4.0.0
[www.dropbox.com]

Glad to hear I was not the only one that tried it. Indeed I assumed it would not function well as the Z - axis, at least on the Ormerod. Perhaps on a design where it is supported from both sides, that would remove the bearing issue. 2 vertical lengths supported by 4 lengths butting up against them at 45 degree angles forming a more traditional A frame, with the X/Z supported by smooth and threaded rods on each side carrying the load. Should be no different then the aluminum extrusion framed mendel fork.

Perhaps copying the extrusion cross section exactly is not as effective as reworking it a little, maybe change the internal angle of the slots on 2 sides so it could be printed horizontally, that would ensure one surface would be nice and flat.

As long as the real thing remains cheaper and more accessible, than the printed I see no real benefit with the exception being in lines with the reprap philosophy of being as printable as possible. I will continue to pursue this for my own amusement.

-Cola

Quote
Cola
Glad to hear I was not the only one that tried it. Indeed I assumed it would not function well as the Z - axis, at least on the Ormerod. Perhaps on a design where it is supported from both sides, that would remove the bearing issue. 2 vertical lengths supported by 4 lengths butting up against them at 45 degree angles forming a more traditional A frame, with the X/Z supported by smooth and threaded rods on each side carrying the load. Should be no different then the aluminum extrusion framed mendel fork.

Perhaps copying the extrusion cross section exactly is not as effective as reworking it a little, maybe change the internal angle of the slots on 2 sides so it could be printed horizontally, that would ensure one surface would be nice and flat.

As long as the real thing remains cheaper and more accessible, than the printed I see no real benefit with the exception being in lines with the reprap philosophy of being as printable as possible. I will continue to pursue this for my own amusement.

-Cola

Yes, printed flat it would be a lot stronger and may even work for the Z beam. But as you say, it would be better if the X-axis were supported at both ends. I recently came across this kit, which was being offered for £400 a couple of years ago (I wish I'd seen it then) - I have no idea whether it is still available, though as the full BOM is provided it would not be too difficult to source/make the parts if it is no longer offered as a full kit. [hydraraptor.blogspot.co.uk]

It looks like a very well thought-through design that I am very tempted to build, and it would probably work with a Duet controller (I'm not sure whether the two Z motors could be simply wired in parallel?). I have come to the conclusion that the Bowden extruder of the Ormerod is a design weakness that somewhat limits the quality of the parts it prints, and am keen to try a printer that has a different arrangement. It is doubtful that an X-arm that is supported only at one end could support the weight of an extruder, so I have abandoned the idea of modifying the Ormerod in favour of building a different printer from scratch.

Dave

Quote
dmould

Yes, printed flat it would be a lot stronger and may even work for the Z beam. But as you say, it would be better if the X-axis were supported at both ends. I recently came across this kit, which was being offered for £400 a couple of years ago (I wish I'd seen it then) - I have no idea whether it is still available, though as the full BOM is provided it would not be too difficult to source/make the parts if it is no longer offered as a full kit. [hydraraptor.blogspot.co.uk]

It looks like a very well thought-through design that I am very tempted to build, and it would probably work with a Duet controller (I'm not sure whether the two Z motors could be simply wired in parallel?). I have come to the conclusion that the Bowden extruder of the Ormerod is a design weakness that somewhat limits the quality of the parts it prints, and am keen to try a printer that has a different arrangement. It is doubtful that an X-arm that is supported only at one end could support the weight of an extruder, so I have abandoned the idea of modifying the Ormerod in favour of building a different printer from scratch.

Dave

I agree about the extruder, I have a e3D V6 hot end I was going to use for my next build. I was originally using the Ormerod as my base the the more the idea came together in my head the more I looked at various Mendel based designs, Mendel Max mostly due to its all extruded frame design. I would also like to use the Duet Board, If I recall correctly RRP Ian said somewhere that the firmware would need to be modified to use a limit switch in the Z-axis or one could always use the probe on a new design with no changes. As for 2 Z motors, It should be no issue I believe the Steper drivers on the Duet are rated for 2A of current. On the Ormerod it set in the config.g to use only 800mA on the Z.

-Cola

Quote
Cola
I agree about the extruder, I have a e3D V6 hot end I was going to use for my next build. I was originally using the Ormerod as my base the the more the idea came together in my head the more I looked at various Mendel based designs, Mendel Max mostly due to its all extruded frame design. I would also like to use the Duet Board, If I recall correctly RRP Ian said somewhere that the firmware would need to be modified to use a limit switch in the Z-axis or one could always use the probe on a new design with no changes. As for 2 Z motors, It should be no issue I believe the Steper drivers on the Duet are rated for 2A of current. On the Ormerod it set in the config.g to use only 800mA on the Z.
-Cola

Maybe a minor firmware change would be needed to use a Z limit switch that is put at the top of the Z travel (as it is in the design I linked to), but definitely not if it was at the bottom of travel. I think it would be a good idea to modify the design to have a Z switch at the bottom, otherwise the Z axis must travel right to the top and back down again to home - which is very time-consuming given the rate of travel. The mechanical modification would be trivial.

Dave

Quote
Ormerod187

Quote
jstck
Maybe by the next millennium ...
Dave

nice dream.... are you sure it's enough thousand years?

At the pace technology is advancing I do not believe it is too optimistic, and may be on the low side. Consider that the invention of the first electronic component (the thermionic diode) was in 1904, and look at how much progress was made in the field of electronics during the 1000 years that followed. Everyday technology of 2004 would be considered nothing less than magical to a person in 1904.

Dave

Hi guys, limit switches work on all the axis with DCs firmware and I believe RRPs to. I have a mendel i2 using an A frame and threaded rod. My controller is a Duet + Duex4 expansion board. The z axis switch is at bed level and I am updating the design to take DCs modulated probe so I can use it for bed levelling. So no source code changes needed.
Lloyd

Quote
dmould

Quote
Ormerod187

Quote
jstck
Maybe by the next millennium ...
Dave

nice dream.... are you sure it's enough thousand years?

At the pace technology is advancing I do not believe it is too optimistic, and may be on the low side. Consider that the invention of the first electronic component (the thermionic diode) was in 1904, and look at how much progress was made in the field of electronics during the 1000 years that followed. Everyday technology of 2004 would be considered nothing less than magical to a person in 1904.

Dave

Whoops, I meant the 100 years that followed!

Dave

Hi Dave,
I do not think it's enough a technological change...
100,000 neurons in more for each new generation can make a difference... I hope ...
News is not so reassuring.....
Better get back to our prints...


Dario

---

Ormerod 187
Firmware Electronics: Duet 0.6
Firmware Version:1.18.1 (2017-04-07)
Web Interface Version:1.15a
Slic3r 1.2.9a and Simplify3D 4.0.0
[www.dropbox.com]

Dear Dario: I came across your photos file in dropbox, they are so impressive. It seems you have a small factory of OM 3D printers. May we use some photos for our website to show your printed items and demonstrate the potential capability of RepRapPro printers?
Many thanks,

---

RepRapPro China 技术支持团队

西安锐普3D打印机有限公司
www.reprappro.com.cn

Quote
reprapprochina
Dear Dario: I came across your photos file in dropbox, they are so impressive. It seems you have a small factory of OM 3D printers. May we use some photos for our website to show your printed items and demonstrate the potential capability of RepRapPro printers?
Many thanks,

Hi reprapprochina,
feel free to use my photos.

Regards
Dario

---

Ormerod 187
Firmware Electronics: Duet 0.6
Firmware Version:1.18.1 (2017-04-07)
Web Interface Version:1.15a
Slic3r 1.2.9a and Simplify3D 4.0.0
[www.dropbox.com]

Quote
Ormerod187

Quote
reprapprochina
Dear Dario: I came across your photos file in dropbox, they are so impressive. It seems you have a small factory of OM 3D printers. May we use some photos for our website to show your printed items and demonstrate the potential capability of RepRapPro printers?
Many thanks,

Hi reprapprochina,
feel free to use my photos.

Regards
Dario

Many thanks, Dario, I will write one small article in Chinese and put your photos and bamboo printer for our website.
Regards,

---

RepRapPro China 技术支持团队

西安锐普3D打印机有限公司
www.reprappro.com.cn