Welcome to the SeeMeCNC Community

Here is a screen capture image of the design

How far off till we see a built one? Curious of the stepper pulley setup.

You'll find that laser cut aluminum is faster and more cost effective.

If its a good price i would get one, can't wait to see it posted for sale

Here is a bit more detail of the idler and motor mounting.

bvandiepenbos wrote:Here is a bit more detail of the idler and motor mounting.

It looks like there is a seam in the horizontal piece which suggests it is in two pieces. This would then suggest that if the ends were in an assortment of sizes [4, 5, 6, 7, 8 inch] then various total lengths could be created [4 + 4 = 4, 4 + 6 = 10, etc.]. This would allow a builder flexibility in choosing tower spacing and platen sizes while retaining the rigid and self aligning features.

Or maybe just one size of end piece and the coupling between them would be left as an exercise for the builder? This would suggests that the end pieces could be relatively short as the salient points are the 30 degree angle and the locating dowels[not something that is currently available off the shelf] while the coupling between them at what ever length the builder needed would be pretty straight forward.

Is that a reasonable stream of thoughts or is the line suggesting a seam simply an artifact of your design tool be available or the usual option of my not knowing what I'm talking about?

Arvid

Thats kinda funny Brian, I'm printing this right now. I contemplated turning the motors sideways like you have shown for different type of linear rail.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/ruy7n8L.png[/img]

I'll stick vibration dampening feet on the bottom of the motor mounts

JFettig wrote:Thats kinda funny Brian, I'm printing this right now. I contemplated turning the motors sideways like you have shown for different type of linear rail.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/ruy7n8L.png[/img]

I'll stick vibration dampening feet on the bottom of the motor mounts

Looks nice!. Still has plastic parts though, and part count is higher. I am not knocking it, I think it is a good design that should work well.

By machining the ends of frame sides at 30 degree angle (also includes machined key to lock in slots and locating dowel) it simplifies frame design.... only 2 different parts, (9) total.
Plus it self aligns square and evenly spaced when bolts are tightened. It is very rigid.
I have been working on a better frame design for probably two years, it has drove me a bit crazy.

McMaster has a good selection of rubber feet.
I used these on my NEMESIS Air Delta http://www.mcmaster.com/#60525K13
These are going on the MAX METAL frames http://www.mcmaster.com/#9540K782

arvidj wrote:

bvandiepenbos wrote:Here is a bit more detail of the idler and motor mounting.

It looks like there is a seam in the horizontal piece which suggests it is in two pieces. This would then suggest that if the ends were in an assortment of sizes [4, 5, 6, 7, 8 inch] then various total lengths could be created [4 + 4 = 4, 4 + 6 = 10, etc.]. This would allow a builder flexibility in choosing tower spacing and platen sizes while retaining the rigid and self aligning features.

Or maybe just one size of end piece and the coupling between them would be left as an exercise for the builder? This would suggests that the end pieces could be relatively short as the salient points are the 30 degree angle and the locating dowels[not something that is currently available off the shelf] while the coupling between them at what ever length the builder needed would be pretty straight forward.

Is that a reasonable stream of thoughts or is the line suggesting a seam simply an artifact of your design tool be available or the usual option of my not knowing what I'm talking about?

Arvid

The sides are one piece, that is a construction line in drawing.
Interesting thought though. Might compromise accuracy and integrity of frame. Certainly makes it more complex, which I am trying to make it as simple and few parts as possible.
Not a bad idea.

Hi,

Two questions on this metal frame:

1. Is there room for the astrosyn dampers? I like my dampers, but I remember some people decided they were compromising accuracy or something. Was there ever a consensus on the dampers?

2. I think some other builder made a frame where the triangle was oversized compared to the build plate and the arms were somewhat longer - so that they didn't have to get so horizontal to reach the edge. This was to reduce the size of the troublesome zones between towers. Would that be worth considering for this frame?

I like your idea for a simple, super-rigid frame.

Thanks,
Barnett

You're absolutely right Brian - but no machining required

Definitely a stout design.

barnett - that is how I have been designing mine, arms have to be at least as long as the bed is in diameter to get proper reach. Rostock Max has towers too close to the build plate and arms too short to get a proper 280mm diameter out of it. It will do more than 260, but not very well.