There was a time when curious hardware hackers had to build their own 3D printers because business models were very expensive unless well-funded institutions could not afford it. We are fortunate to live in an era where we can have quality off-the-shelf machines without breaking the bank, but this is not to say that homemade 3D printers are a thing of the past. On the contrary, the community of rapid prototyping experimenters continues to push the boundaries of art, and we all benefit from it. An example comes from [Morgan Lowe], his 3DLS screw-driven 3D printer has joined the free downloadable design on Thingiverse.
If you think it is a bit familiar at first glance, then you are right, because its frame design is derived from the popular AM8 metal frame upgrade of the Anet A8 spot printer. It borrows heavily from other A8 upgrades and introduces some components, such as the extruder and bed from Creality Ender3. This is the beauty of incremental open source. The result is that a beltless printer can make a good-looking Benchy on a bench. As a party work, when it hangs at 45 degrees, it manages to print a slightly hairy Rope on the ceiling of a small plastic boat.
When getting into the world of homemade 3D printers, it's interesting to see some of the early Hackaday RepRap posts to see how far we have come.
It's interesting. My impression is that the tooth gap of the toothed belt system is small, which may be incorrect. Systems that use lead screws as the Z axis can use them because the Z axis usually only moves upward. The X-axis and Y-axis are ubiquitous in typical prints. I also suspect that the lead screw is more expensive. Still a neat project.
If you look at the structure, he will use an anti-backlash guide nut, which consists of a guide nut and a driven nut, coupled by a (hopefully very stiff) compression spring. This forces the two nuts to move away from each other, thereby preloading the nuts in one direction, thereby theoretically eliminating the gap. In practice, I don’t know how these compare to belts.
Belts may have less rebound, but they are elastic.
The screw with anti-backlash nut has absolutely no backlash. I have used belts, ball screws and lead screws to design machinery for more than 20 years. Each has a position, but nothing can change the fact that ball screws and lead screws are the most precise and accurate way to convert rotary motion into linear motion. You can't design a $200.00 printer. Its belt system has no backlash. In fact, you can multiply this amount by 10 times, but there is still no zero backlash belt system. It doesn't matter how tight the belt is, because in the end, the backlash is irrelevant-this is due to the design of the riding gap between the pulley and the belt. I actually designed and manufactured such a system, and the internal backlash of the belt system must be considered. Not only that, the small 2 mm pitch toothed pulleys and belts used in 3D printers do not transmit motion linearly. The effective radius of the belt will change slightly, which will cause it to enter the pulley, which inadvertently affects the linearity, causes the belt to ring, and introduces vibration into the system. The effects of this vibration can even be seen on the finished parts of better tape printers on the market. Belt systems are cheap and good enough for most people, but better yet they are not.
Screws with anti-backlash nuts can definitely have backlash.
There are two types of anti-backlash nuts: spring type and screw type. The spiral guarantee allows some backlash unless they are stretched so tightly that the lead screw is elongated; this does not allow any lubrication, so they wear out very quickly. If the spring load is large enough to overcome the spring tension, they can still allow recoil.
If you assert that "the lead screw with anti-backlash nut has absolutely no gap", then I have to question the credibility of your "I actually designed it"; any real engineer knows better than this.
Oh, nonono...Belts, especially GT2 belts, are terrible compared to lead screws. GT2 belts at actual printing speeds have various backlashes, provided that the user knows how to tension the belt correctly. Most printers do not have properly tensioned belts and they are jumping teeth almost all the time, and these people usually claim that they need 32-bit uP to get millions of microstep accuracy to achieve micron-level accuracy. After turning off the printer, hold the pulley and push the print head, you will see a 1/8 inch tilt in most GT2 settings.
This is one reason why I made this machine, and the other is because I challenged myself to make a complete printer a year ago, and then I started to modify my machine with a screw. Some people commented on how impossible it is.
Now 3DLS is my daily driver. It has been printing every day for 3 months and it has been flawless.
hehe. Even when you use the right belt material to get the right tension, people can't reconcile the belt is a kind of vibration, singing things, the vibration is so great. It's like a violin or guitar string person. Oops, people will even tell you to choose a specific tone to express tension even when plucking strings. (Hint: What does the Z axis of Creality use? Its backlash is smaller than a belt, but it is cheaper to use an X/Y belt. All about the cost and what they think can be found from their bill of materials)
It's simpler/easier/cheaper is everything you have in GT2 and other places.
It has done a good job on 3DLS and LSD printers. Now planning to copy your work-thanks for sharing. For some time, I have suspected that it is not "irrevocable"-it is a situation where people "know" rather than really understand/understand the whole thing.
think about it. All CNC milling machines use a type of screw, whether it is a lead screw or a ball screw. And they are accurate to 0.001 millimeters than 3D printers. I made it myself, and the tolerance obtained is less than 0.01 mm, you can’t get it from the belt
In addition, your "bell" is not a real screw.
Everyone seems to be talking about recoil...this is the "problem" of the lead or ball screw. There is also speed.
The reality is that the belt can sing. This is a string, people. You can't get this kind of precision or tolerance with that kind of thing. Vibration and backlash (yes, you actually have the damping effect of the belt and rubber to prevent it from singing too much...hehe...backlash...) eliminates a lot of Think of it as the gain of GT2 and other timing belts.
The reality is that GT2 is *cheaper* than others...but it's not enough now. If you are doing your own build, you won't think about it seriously. This is a consideration of mass production, and it has no practical significance for certain designs and products. You run with the screw.
I also think that the lead screw is much slower. I can see that they have to move large and heavy heads (such as CNC tools), but it doesn't seem to be a suitable application here.
They use a 2 mm 4-head lead screw, so each revolution has a stroke of 8 mm. Therefore, it is 40% of the speed of a typical 10-tooth GT2 pulley (20 mm/rev). Still very fast. It is easy to reach 50 mm/s, if there is a good driver, it may reach 100 mm/s.
I would be more worried about wearing nuts because they do not use ball screws.
Well, I *may or may not* use Tr8x2 4 starting screws with printed nuts on my z-axis...I made them with PETg (later I realized that it is good for these things It's too difficult for me) and they work very well, there is no wear after 6 months, and the TMC2130 that the printer can run at 36V reaches a speed of 85 mm/s. So, I think it will not be that bad. They also have zero rebound
Me too... but they have this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQ1KrQZN0Y0
Not long ago I used Openbuilds C-Beams to build a printer (I still use it now), and I can print at 100mm/sec on Duet wifi without problems. The biggest problem I found was noise and maintenance. Even with the Trinamic driver, it is not quiet. In terms of maintenance, I think its relationship with the Openbuilds part is more important than anything else.
On the bright side, there is no bounce and no ringing/ghosting.
So far, after about 6 months, everything is still very tight and running smoothly. I used SuperLube grease on the screws, and I am running a brass anti-backlash nut. They are 4-start M8 lead screws with closed-loop stepper drives that can easily meet the required high RPM. I moved at a speed of 150 mm/sec and printed at a speed of 100 mm/sec, and it worked well.
In any case, the belt is like a rubber band. This is their nature. They are suitable for printers because I can. I am currently making the second one.
Agree-in this case, the anti-backlash nut can work well. Brass nuts should be replaceable and several times more durable than steel screws, but the anti-clearance design helps to further extend the service life.
So I have some around the store (actually there is a spare SKR 1.4 Turbo), and a lot of the rest of the mechanics that I didn't order, as well as other printed materials that we are talking about. It looks like a very interesting build.
Astonishing! I now have 9 complete sheets to make, and my second part is from China. If you can publish your work on thingiverse, please! If you have any questions, I am also happy to help you.
On my cables, I customized each cable because I have the tools to do this. This is not required and also includes wire management.
> Print at a speed of 100 mm/sec
Obviously, your printing speed is not 100 mm/sec. You may have set this speed in the slicer, but the printer has never reached this speed. Since ancient times, people have been making such false claims.
agree. Publishing the acceleration you use is more useful than publishing the maximum speed.
Check the thingiverse link on the firmware and youtube I set up for it.
Its acceleration is set to 300, which is a bit low. It will be higher, but I have not yet. The maximum speed is also set to 300.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQ1KrQZN0Y0
Remember kids, this is 24V with closed loop step control on X and Y. It will move. I set the acceleration to 3000 and run the printing at 150 mm/sec in one minute. Youtube video will be published
Morgan, what thrust washers do you use on these screws, where are they, and how do you preload them? It is not obvious from the video, but there is no Y-axis motor end.
It is against the bearing. There is a small collar in the print, and then use a stop collar with fixing screws. Preloading is only manual. As long as it doesn't loosen. This has always been because the bearing is still the first group of the first experimental version.
Because Y must cross the frame, it will push against the front bearing bracket, while X is all on the motor side.
This is the video of the start of the 150mm/sec printing, the screenshots and details of the slicer and marlin configuration are in the instructions. I had to restart it to replace the bad fan, but it is now running, timelapse and results will also be posted to Youtube.
https://youtu.be/QUFZcTm5FsU
I have a large standard i3 clone, if I run it at 120mm/sec, it will fly and the print quality is good. Now that a large number of long straight lines are used for large printing, any fool can see that it has reached the set 100 mm/sec.
I have been designing a design similar to Ultimaker, but I have been in a dilemma between the design of a gantry with X motors using two Y steppers and another design.
Of course use linear guides instead of rods or wheels on V-shaped guides.
Why is it a linear guide instead of a rod? What are the advantages of rails compared to rods with ball bearing slides?
1. They are easier to install on 20 and 30 profiles. 2. There are well-known companies that produce high-quality guide rails. 4. Rails looks cooler.
There are some other options.
Not to mention that rods are more difficult to accurately manufacture than linear guides.
To be honest, I don’t understand why people are more interested in poles than others.
It looks cool/familiar and does not affect performance. Performance wins every time, and what many people think of as "effective" has nothing to do with reality-they are using what other people tell them, and other people don't know anything about it.
This is what it says about rods-if you can get a clean, straight rod, you can put your hands on it. If this is what the design requires and I can get them, then you can bet I will. If I can't do it, then redesign another one I can touch.
> This is the beauty of incremental open source,
This is not an open source design because it does not have an open source license.
According to the license on Thingiverse, it is a Creative Commons-Attribution-Non-Commercial License.
This is designed in Solidworks 2019. The Solidworks file is not released, but it can be modified freely. I can also prove its IGES or STEP file.
Considering that people seem to have no clues here... you should probably put these on Thingiverse or provide GitHub/etc. Content repurchase.
They will come up with all kinds of reasons to defeat you... I guess it's time to pay for all of them. What is your STL file, guys? No one makes modules/mixes individually, or uses them as newly designed cribs (hell, I know I have...)-so it’s the source, people... just to be able Print it.
Please be kind and respectful to help make the comment section great. (Comment Policy)
This website uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how to handle your comment data.
By using our website and services, you explicitly agree to the placement of our performance, functionality and advertising cookies. Learn more