Just Enlarged my Shapeoko with some UpGrades

Share your Shapeoko created projects!
getSurreal
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:40 pm

Re: Just Enlarged my Shapeoko with some UpGrades

Post by getSurreal » Mon Jul 29, 2013 8:18 pm

Great work juicebox! How important do you think it is to use aluminum 90 and T brackets? I've been using printed parts for this on a smaller project and they feel really solid.
Shapeoko 1868F
"The only difference between a madman and me is that I'm not mad" - Salvador Dali

JuiceBox
Posts: 48
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 3:54 pm

Re: Just Enlarged my Shapeoko with some UpGrades

Post by JuiceBox » Mon Jul 29, 2013 11:17 pm

How important do you think it is to use aluminum 90 and T brackets?
I would say that this is borderline very important. In fact, I'm not even 100% comfortable with this setup, but I haven't found a better one yet. The reason being is that your router will encounter forces from all directions, x,y and z. In my case, the y-axis forces are distributed between frame and the Maker slide rails. However, the x-axis forces are only on those brackets and nothing else. Therefore, having anything less than metal brackets wouldn't be ideal. (I can show you the math on it if you'd really don't believe me) If you did choose to use printed parts, you could do it, and potentially produce very nice results, but in my experience, printed parts are not ideal. After a while they will warp and become more flexible because they are not solid parts (even with 100% infill). I've experienced this in many cases no just this. An alternative is you can start out with plastic to get you going, and then switch to metal soon after, I think that would be the most ideal solution for a couple of reasons. The biggest one being that you can customize your metal brackets to fit exactly what you need, and this will also be a cheaper option (assuming you don't value your time as much as you value the dollar).

Feel free to post pictures of your plastic brackets. I'd be interested to see them.

Hope this helps,
Brian

JuiceBox
Posts: 48
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 3:54 pm

Re: Just Enlarged my Shapeoko with some UpGrades

Post by JuiceBox » Sun Aug 04, 2013 6:08 am

Little update to my build. I encountered a problem with the belt tensioners that were made using a 3d printer. I tightened the one a bit too much and instead of the belt slipping, the part became two parts and left me somewhat stranded. Luckily, I had bought corner brackets from Inventables for a separate project and I hadn't taken the opportunity to use them yet, so I threw them in there and I'm even happier with the results than I was before. The Inventables bracket is made from cast aluminum and are very robust. They even have a slight raised area that seats in the channel of the extrusion and locks in place.
Here are the new brackets I used:

https://www.inventables.com/technologie ... ket-gusset

Image

Image

akhlut
Posts: 304
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 1:16 am

Re: Just Enlarged my Shapeoko with some UpGrades

Post by akhlut » Mon Aug 05, 2013 7:47 pm

I doesn't help that the part was printed in the wrong orientation. :(

If that part had been printed the way that the broken bit is is oriented (not that part with the screw) it would have withstood much more force before breaking. Notice that is broke clean across a single layer. If it were printed on it's side (with the screw parallel to the surface) there would be many layers to resist that shear force instead of just one.

Also, PLA is not ideal. For that application ABS would have been better as it is much less brittle.

3D printed parts have their place, but your current solution is superior. :)

JuiceBox
Posts: 48
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 3:54 pm

Re: Just Enlarged my Shapeoko with some UpGrades

Post by JuiceBox » Tue Aug 06, 2013 1:21 am

I doesn't help that the part was printed in the wrong orientation. :(
If that part had been printed the way that the broken bit is is oriented (not that part with the screw) it would have withstood much more force before breaking. Notice that is broke clean across a single layer. If it were printed on it's side (with the screw parallel to the surface) there would be many layers to resist that shear force instead of just one.
Couldn't help it given the design. I preferred this orientation due to less need for wasted support material.
Also, PLA is not ideal. For that application ABS would have been better as it is much less brittle.
PLA was actually more preferred, though it may be brittle it is more rigid than ABS. I didn't want something that would flex a whole lot nor did I want to buy ABS filament.
3D printed parts have their place, but your current solution is superior. :)
You're absolutely right, and as I believe I had stated above, I don't like using 3D printed parts for anything more than prototyping or as a temporary replacement for something stronger. In this case I expected them to last a bit longer than they did. I'm sure they would have too but I wasn't paying close attention to when I was tightening it and that's when it snapped. At the time I was looking to see if the belt was slipping within the zip ties or if the plastic part was sliding down the aluminum extrusion. Sadly I never got to find out because it broke too soon.

Anyways, thanks for the comments. :D

akhlut
Posts: 304
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 1:16 am

Re: Just Enlarged my Shapeoko with some UpGrades

Post by akhlut » Tue Aug 06, 2013 5:19 pm

I'm kinda surprised that you'd need support in that orientation, especially with PLA and a fan. I would think it should bridge quite nicely.

And I completely understand about material choice - work with what you've got. :)

I mention ABS because while it will give, it won't catastrophically fail as readily as PLA.

But I'm really liking your machine. Are you eventually going to enclose it with acrylic panels?

JuiceBox
Posts: 48
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 3:54 pm

Re: Just Enlarged my Shapeoko with some UpGrades

Post by JuiceBox » Tue Aug 06, 2013 8:43 pm

Are you eventually going to enclose it with acrylic panels?
My original plan was to make the enclosure sound proof. After a bit of research and a peek at my bank account I decided against that. The current issue with enclosing it is that the motor plates stick out on either side. But if I wanted to I could do it for the top,front, and back and then come up with some sort of overlapping layers for the sides. I'm still in the process of upgrading and finishing the build so the paneling will have to wait until I'm ready to say that I'm 100% satisfied with the way it works. This way I won't have to remove paneling and what not in order to just add a few parts here and there.

Side note:
Currently I'm pricing out options to switch over to MACH3 instead of grbl. Though the grbl made life simple to get started, I'm finding a lot of short comings with it that MACH3 capitalizes on. My biggest gripe is that I don't have a home function. I'm sure there are other programs out there that I could switch to that would allow a home function, but since I already know MACH3, so I might as well stick with what I know.
I'm kinda surprised that you'd need support in that orientation, especially with PLA and a fan. I would think it should bridge quite nicely.
My machine doesn't bridge all that well because I haven't had the time nor patience to sit down and calibrate it in properly. Software and myself don't get along often and at the moment 3D printer programs are just meeting the minimum requirements in my eyes. So I'm hoping, and holding out really, until someone gets on the ball spends a ton of money developing good solid software and makes a paid for program with support software. I'm honestly not sure why it hasn't happened already. Every time I do see good software come out, they make machine specific and/or non-arduino compatible. Anyways, I just want to be clear that I'm not hating on what the community has done so far, I'm just waiting for the next guy to grab the ball and run like they have with the machines.

Thanks again for the comments! :D :D

danimal
Posts: 332
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 5:53 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: Just Enlarged my Shapeoko with some UpGrades

Post by danimal » Wed Aug 07, 2013 5:43 am

That is a good looking setup!

I am browsing through all the build files right now because I am going to completely reconfigure my machine and build an enclosure for it. I like a lot of the things that you have done here, and like you I am awaiting a more comprehensive GRBL based solution or I will be doing the same and switching over to Mach 3. If you do end up swapping over, I would really appreciate a write up similar to your belt tensioner write-up so that I could compare it to what I have been finding. I want to stay with the opensource community and help build, but I am a operations and electrical systems engineer working with power generation so I am not the greatest when it comes to contributing to the software sides of things. I just need something that I can work with so that I can develop more operation and machine capability solutions.
Shapeoko # 1458

RT0701C Spindle || dual y motor || x axis nema23 with custom carriage 1000mm length || z axis nema23 linear rail upgrade with 1/2-10 ACME

JuiceBox
Posts: 48
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 3:54 pm

Re: Just Enlarged my Shapeoko with some UpGrades

Post by JuiceBox » Wed Aug 07, 2013 6:15 am

I am browsing through all the build files right now because I am going to completely reconfigure my machine and build an enclosure for it. I like a lot of the things that you have done here, and like you I am awaiting a more comprehensive GRBL based solution or I will be doing the same and switching over to Mach 3. If you do end up swapping over, I would really appreciate a write up similar to your belt tensioner write-up so that I could compare it to what I have been finding. I want to stay with the opensource community and help build, but I am a operations and electrical systems engineer working with power generation so I am not the greatest when it comes to contributing to the software sides of things. I just need something that I can work with so that I can develop more operation and machine capability solutions.
Thanks for the kind words. Most of the solid information I've found is using a C10 board with motor controllers from keling inc

(http://www.kelinginc.net/KLDriver.html)

which apparently are now automation technologies.

(http://www.automationtechnologiesinc.com/)

My plan is simple really, since I dont want to have to be burdended by a parallel port I'm looking to get this board

http://www.automationtechnologiesinc.co ... kout-board

and use it with MACH3 and 3 motor controllers. The problem is the cheapest I've found that board is 130 fand or a set of controllers is about 200-300 or so. The solution sounds simple, but I've only seen a few videos on youtube describing how they did it which worries me. I think everyone's major turn off is the cost of the board verses a $25 C10 board with a $15 parallel port board.
If you do end up swapping over, I would really appreciate a write up similar to your belt tensioner write-up so that I could compare it to what I have been finding.


I'm not looking to do this swap very soon. I'm planning on using some Xmas money to contribute to this and potentially make this cheaper but who knows because on the other hand I might just get really mad one day and just buy it. (which almost happened this weekend). In any case, I'll be sure to doe a write up as best I can when I do get around to the swap.

--I'll also be selling the grbl so for those who are interested, please give a hollar cause you might speed this process up a bit. (I'd sell it for standard price that you can get it from inventables (~$100+S&H with Grbl and Arduino Uno) because it's already flashed properly and I'd include some software to get you started on a CD or thumb drive and I can also include a 3D printed mounting plate if you want) --

Anyways I hope that answers all of your questions, and as always Thanks for the comments! :D

Will Winder
Posts: 435
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 2:40 pm
Location: Hudson, MA
Contact:

Re: Just Enlarged my Shapeoko with some UpGrades

Post by Will Winder » Wed Aug 07, 2013 3:06 pm

I'm not trying to dissuade you from Mach3, but the current version of GRBL (0.8c) does have homing functions. If nothing else you can go ahead and install/use those limit switches with GRBL until you get around to setting up a Mach3 machine.

It sounds like you're pretty well versed in both of these tools, so if you know about some limitations in the GRBL homing implementation compared to Mach3 I'd be curious to what they are.
ShapeOko #367: Dual-Y drive, Belt on outside, 1000mm Y-Axis, DW660 Spindle, Nema-23 X/Y motors.

Primary developer on Universal Gcode Sender.

Post Reply