this me after gf puts the collar and leash on me >///<

Really awesome build 😁 as an idea why not attach an imu to the build plate, just for measurement and calibration puproses?

it seems nozzle swell is low in the second 7 because there is already melted plastic inside the nozzle but gets big after second 9 as the newly inserted filament can't be fully melted fast enough. Or maybe the hotend itself is cooling because of the large flow of plastic. Cool stuff, would like to see more.

You had to make it white... 😅😳

Shouldn’t the rotational mass test be off center from the motor?

Thats me on a good night

OOOUUUGGGHGHHHHH

Would duet3d parts be of advatage? 🤷

How long would a 1kg spool last at that flow rate?

What happens with a bigger diameter? Not practical for the benchy, but would be interesting!

Ich freue mich schon wieder auf das Video!

Das ist so krass...gut! Du Wahnsinnicher...😊

Any Idea why it looks like it expands after leaving the nozzle? Is it extruding faster than the filament is falling, combining the excess into a single larger strand?

Looks interesting! What kind of filament is this? I also heard some clicking noises in the background every few seconds, presumably from the feeders, what is that?

Mayonaise

Angry Toothpaste

Kinda looks like spraying whipped cream on a hot surface. But that custom-machined heaterblock-thing is sick!

Elephants foot visualizer

It's basically injection molding at this point lol. I assume it is being fed by several extruders running several filament rolls.

Why not adapt chc heating cores?

Parallel cable machine. Pretty damn brilliant! Subscribed!

Not sure what the exact rules / regulations are but a possible design could be mounting the bed up higher and allow the connecting belts to run underneath it. Laying the bed across the belts with the corners pointed towards the motors, giving it the most surface area for attachment / support / stabilization. But you could then have the opposing motors work in conjunction puling the belt (string or whatever) instead of opposing each other. This would also shorten the belt / string, and could make it a large loop so its pulling against itself? Removing slack / pulleys. There would be way more inertia and what have you, all things that would need to be worked out. "Design" just randomly came to my mind so thought I would suggest it.

You should definitely try clearpath servo motors! From Teknik torque will go up dependability will go up as well! You can even set them up to follow step and direction signals, among other things

I know this is pretty far in your build to change up now, but what about for your next build, for your moving platform, instead of cables you change your drive to an air piston system? You seem to have access to the a compressor, a 3d printer, and machining equipment. You can have air solenoids connected with pistons situated in each axis. As long as you create a feedback loop, inertia shouldn't be as much of an issue. Robots already use air motors and pistons for the exact challenges you're running into. As for cooling, a liquid cooling system and reverse heater core could keep your systems ice cold. It would be a beast power wise, but you could easily surpass your bench marks. Good luck!

10:48 that looked like straight out of a sifi movie and ❤

Clearance is clearance i guess 9:47

What about splicing the dyneema cords to get rid of the plastic parts? There’s even a special splice for tensioning from the hammock community

Novanta IMS makes Nema23 stepper motors that on paper looks great. Might be worth taking a look.

i have just bought the same lathe, I hope to restore it like yours. it looks like you did a great job, well done.

It's cool and all but practically worthless and a waste of time. Your time would be better spent creating a new thermoplastic that can actually handle these speeds. Because all of these sub 10, 5 minute benchy look like complete ass and I would not consider it a pass.

4204s1 has more speed than torque. u should use 4204s instead

The minute this thing starts printing, it will have finished it.

awesome stuff!

This looks quite challenging! One thing to keep in mind is that you won't be able to push bed acceleration all that much, since the object being printed will contribute a changing amount of mass to the system. Or do you plan to compensate for that as you go and reduce acceleration based on amount of filament extruded / mass added? I also wonder how much acceleration is possible without breaking the bond between bed and object.

🤣🤣

Inside a thrift store?

I remember not long after the Prusa MK3 came out, I was talking with someone who was ABSOLUTELY convinced that the quoted 200mm/s max speed would never be reached as he felt the accelerations would shake it apart or at least move it across the table. (Silly, I know.) If only I could show him this now. WOW. (To be clear, I understand how older printers often wouldn't reach their theoretical top speed due to lower accelerations. With a Benchy, there's no way the MK3 would reach 200mm/s, but not because it would shake itself apart, but because the necessary accelerations just wouldn't be able to be achieved with the stock hardware.)

I may be wrong but I think that the way you simulated the weight of the printing platform using flywheels is not accurate since the motor will have to accelerate AND decelerate the flywheel all by itself, but when printing it only accelerates the mass by itself decelerating is done by the other motor since you can't push on the string. I don't know how much it matters but I thought to point it out.

might be a dumb idea, but why dont you just use 2 motors pulling on each side? double the torque? and if you connect the shafts together, than you have bearings on two sides of the pullys

Crazy Guy, Crazy Projekt, Crazy Workshop, Crazy skill and I love it

Amps = torque volts = acceleration/top speed

Some time ago I suggested kinda similar extruder😮 SL_ST 3xEXTRUDER-04 ❤

Great work!

would be a software nightmare to implement but if you also had the extruder moving with a separate set of steppers you could squeeze some more acceleration out of the system. Feeding the heating element from Boden tubes too could get the practical weight of what's actually being moved much lower

Gosh, I think input shaping could help a whole lot. Your data seems to show that the inertial contributions of the build platform and the stepper rotor/pulley are comparable. Then they're connected by the significant compliance of that Dyneema or whatever you've got there. And we can see the slack side of the cable system flopping around during certain parts of the video when the platform motion aliases with the camera shutter. It seems like input shaping or something similar could do a whole lot to prevent the build platform from jerking the slack cable as the tension is removed, and knocking the rotor out of the magnetic detent. You're controlling three masses connected by very significant compliances by applying force to only one of them, and treating the system as rigid. It seems like the oscillatory motions of the system could easily be producing for spikes equal to the applied forces: in the worst case maybe doubling the propensity of the system to skip steps. Obviously, you have managed to tune it through cable tension adjustments and gotten performance much closer to the rigid body ideal than this, since you're getting clearly quite close to your rigid inertial mass test data. But I question whether this motion control system is actually useful when tuned this way. I would guess that you're being forced to allow excessive cable slack and excessive build platform wiggle in order to avoid spending your torque on the resonant motions that would occur between the two rotors and build platform if the cable were properly taut the whole time. I think you're going to need more than inverse kinematics here. You're going to need a separate feed-forward/input shaping algorithm for both the driving motor and the slack motor during any given motion, to smoothly tension the cable between the masses on the driving side, smoothly relax the cable on the paying-out side, and then smoothly return to normal tension as the motion segment terminates. Maybe it could be the same code, but I have a feeling you're going to need to treat the Dyneema elasticity as nonlinear on the paying-out side. Point 2: You're talking about how much trouble you have dealing with the cable tension: how about fixing that directly? One thing which comes to mind is that it might actually be helpful to have extra compliance in this system to set that tension, in parallel with a very stiff viscous damping element or even a simple locking clamp. The idea would be to have a soft compliance/spring that sets the resting torque of the motor, and a stiff damper (or clamp) in parallel with it that keeps the system rigid during motion. For instance, you could dispense with the cable tensioners, and one of the motors of each pair could be mounted on a sliding mount. The mount could then be provided with a long, compliant spring that applied the static bias force to the cable segment between opposing motors, setting their resting torque. Then, you need the motor platform to remain locked in place during printing. Ideally you'd have a parallel damper or mass/damper element to keep it pinned in place dynamically: a very stiff shock absorber from the platform to the motor mount. Perhaps more simple, although not as ideal, you could just lock down the stepper mount with screws in a slot after allowing the spring to properly tension it. This isn't as nice because it doesn't deal with nonlinearities in the cable tension that would start showing up as the platform begins to move. The damper would automatically deal with that, and keep the average motor torque fixed to the desired value. But then again, setting the tension and then locking it down might be more predictable.

replace the cable ends/adjusters you have with spliced amsteel or UHMWP cables. you could do a splice that also works as the adjustment mechanism but ideally that can be done on the back end to remove all excess weight.

Hailo erstmal, ich habe jetzt das Video fast komplett durch und frage mich die ganze Zeit, was gegen ein reduzieren der Schwungmassen der Antriebsräder spricht. Auch sehe ich noch das Potenzial sämtlichen Umlenkrollen Kugellager zu verpassen. Die maximale Geschwindigkeit wird erreicht, wenn die dynamischen Massen Null erreichen. Aber im großen und ganzen ein sehr interessantes Projekt allein dafür eine Messplatte als Basis zu verwenden 😃👍

Any specific reason you insist on using steppers?

I like how the video compression codec really struggles to show the fast movements.

someone needs to get this guy a high speed camera