BuildOne Head Unit Brainstorming

[ekettenburg]

BuildOne Head Unit Brainstorming

See: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/robotic-industries/buildone-99-3d-printer-w-wifi-and-auto-bed-levelin/posts/2257356

[Defragster]

What is the hard part of this that would simplify the part's molding if removed to a second piece?
Is it by any chance just the funnel tip?

[mumin50]

hi.
Fist can you save that design to other file type. i want to view it but not possible.
Some ideas for brainstorm:
1)Cooling fan duct - I would remove it and just make a connector. 100% all people will change it / mode it to be something else. Myself i use this https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1954001
on my anet a8 there is great difference in comparing it to thing You have on it.
IMO that will make it way easier to mold it than.
I would make connector and provide for people a ready file to just print it after receiving as a first print
Make it easy to print and mount .

[Defragster]

That was the reason I posted yesterday. It seemed removing that from the injection mold would simplify it and make it more reproducible that would allow production. It should print without the final tip on and it could be the first thing to print and snap on or attach - because as noted redesign of that for 'perfect' airflow is commonly done.

But I was waiting to add that until I got confirmation of my post and initial question from yesterday after the update said to come here. … Erik?

[mumin50]

2. remove whole part cooling fan from right side and mount it on top of print head
   Like that on anet a8
   https://goo.gl/images/VYWz1d

3)mount partcooling fan sideways on top of x axis berings to blow from right side or mount it on it to blow from back side.

4)In head design most important is the weight of it. So why just not remove part cooling fan and exchange it with aquarium pump and a tube that will blow directly below nozle. I know it is not cost friendly but just had this idea now:)

[DataWorm]

Two separate parts also sounds better for me, especially since it might be more friendly for mods. But wasn't the design working so far as a 3d printed part? Of course it might minimize cost and reduce weight on the print head but is that really worth the investment of those additional months of development time? Or did I miss something and the head unit in its 3d printed version didn't work fine? Sure 3d printing all those units might take longer than molding them, but regarding that extra engineering time I doubt it will be faster...

[emardee]

I'm also a fan of a two part carriage. Particularly if it makes the design of the moulding simpler and therefore quicker. Because it has the added advantage of also making the base carriage part more flexible for future mods (if the funnel is removeable). If they are two parts, I suspect the cariiage itself could be injection moulded, and the funnel 3D printed and therefore wouldn't need to be worked on in detail until the carriage mould was already being produced and tested. I said more on BobC's thread on the build one forum.

[mornawka]

huge fan of a two part carriage and detachable funnel, I am 100% certain I will be printing my own at one point.

[emardee]

For completeness, here is a copy of what I wrote to BobC on the buildone forum:
https://www.robotic.industries/community/d/94-b1-head-unit-and-the-wisdom-of-crowds/3

A few of us have mused several times over the last few months (both on kickstarter comments, and a few on github too) whether splitting the carriage into two parts: namely the main carriage part; and a separate bolt-on / clip-on / zip-tie on nozzle/funnel piece.... would achieve two things:-

1. Making a more flexible base carriage for future mods to be built-upon, including redesigned nozzle/funnel to replace the stock design very easily without needing to ditch the stock carriage itself (getting more value out of that being injection moulded part). And would easily allow for removal of the funnel completely for say a freeing up space for a dremmel spindle, second hot end etc.

2. More fundamentally for this stage of discussion, it would potentially greatly simplify the design for injection moulding the two parts, such that the design and manufacture might be much simpler! This could be crucial for getting the best result in the quickest time. My understanding is that the funnel part heading in a different direction is one of the items that makes injection moulding the carriage so tricky to design (the mould has to close from top to bottom to press out the funnel part, whereas virtually everything else on the carriage would prefer a different direction of moulding). Removing the need for the carriage and funnel to be one part, allows both parts the be very simple to manufacture and design. In fact it might mean the carriage can be injection moulded, and the very simple funnel to be 3D printed? If so, the carriage mould could be already be being made and tested before we then move on to finalising the exact funnel design, on the basis it is a simple part.

We might even be able to work from existing open source designs as a basis for both parts too, and just add-in the requirements for the B1 specifics. Thereby further simplifying the speed to manufacture for both parts.

Regardless of whether it ends up as one part or two... I think some collaborative working like you suggest could be good and could make this happen. The worst however would be to spread the discussion over too many locations though... AND it would need engagement by Erik too. There was already the start of carriage discussions on GitHub (possibly back in Aug?) after Erik asked for input over on GitHub in one of his updates. Unfortunately, it looked like Erik never posted there after the invite, so I assume those trying to engage with carriage design wandered off again. Hopefully they could be re-engaged though. And maybe GitHub would be a better location for technical engagement anyway (than here on the forum) The main barrier then would be the need for Erik to engage with those people to answer questions and provide direction and input.

[cwleveck]

I posted this on the Robotic forum.....
So far, no response.

I live relatively close to Erik and find myself a few miles from him at least once a week now due to business meetings.
I also have a full machine shop, wood shop and composites shop as well as an entire inventory of cnc related parts (everything you'd need to build a full machine of virtually any kind as well as test stands or fixtures....) available to me 24 hours a day at home in my garage and a block away in my storage units.
I have offered to prototype and even help engineer any parts necessary to help this project along and would still be interested and happy to do so.
I have plenty of materials and even time at the moment. All of which are available at no cost so that should just about make any objections to my help non issues....
I have built, some more successful than others, just about any and every type of cnc machine you can think of and then a few a normal person wouldn't even consider.
In fact, I like to build machines. I usually have a hard time finding uses for them once I build them except to help make parts for more machines. In other words, I am not the guy who uses a 3d printer, I am the guy who will make one, then sell it to try something different. Actually, I usually will tear them down for parts to make another one. I have fun trying new and interesting things.
The one point I might try to make as far as this carriage situation is concerned, is that it would make a lot more sense to split it into two pieces making the barrel its own part. It may be easier and cheaper and better to make that a simple aluminum part that could be turned simply and really cheaply on a lathe. Also, if the carriage where modular it would be easier to hang new "extras" on it such as lasers and water jets and plasma cutters, etc etc etc.
Some of that was tongue in cheek, but I'll let you decide which.
As far as files go, I mean this thing isn't exactly rocket science. What is the size of the bar its going to slide on, lets pick a bearing/bushing material and size the hole accordingly. I think it would be a good Idea to size the hole in such a way that a simple bushing can be used to cut costs but also allows for an upgrade to bearings. If sized correctly then bearings would be a VERY simple and EXTREMELY effective upgrade and possibly a good upsell for Erik....
So how can I be of service?
Christopher

[cwleveck]

Left messages and sent emails to every conceivable address and phone number even placed a small online order all in an attempt to offer my help without a single response.
i also had a close friend offer to design parts and i said i would cnc the molds with his company offering to run the parts at COST. Had him make the offer directly and independently in case I was somehow a problem.
So with no response even to EXACTLY the services he says he needs tomake ths happen, i can only assume that this part being ready virtually at no cost and in a matter of days instead f weeks or months must NOT be the problem, or at least the only problem, holding up this project.
Christopher

[mumin50]

cwleveck you know what i dont think you can do it cheaper than China can.

[FS1041]

@mumin50 Do you understand English? If yes, read cwlevecks posts again!

[FS1041]

@cwleveck Did you receive -if yes then when- an email from Erik? He claims: "... BobC and cwleveck have both made a few offers to help via email as well and I have responded to their offers in the past ..."