-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 20
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Alternative Design Ideas #1
Comments
I actually thought about a parameterized OpenSCAD model. Maybe also the gears can keep their size and an extra plate on top for the coaster lead to a constant gear transmission ratio. Then the board can also work for machines with different diameter. |
@fastriker You would need to increase the travel of the linear axis too. Maybe just move it out and increase the rod length. |
You are right - I didn't thought about that. But maybe it is also not always necessary to use the full space of the coaster.
That is also a nice quick solution - and also interesting for me. |
It has been noted that other countries use different coaster sizes. There is a not a lot of flexibility in the current design, especially going to a larger diameter coaster.
The firmware can handle any size and probably accommodate other changes. If you are looking at a redesign, here are some thoughts.
The board does not need to be part of the design. A simpler existing board could be used remotely or packaged within the base. I sell some on Tindie.
The geared rotational bed is complex to model. Someone suggested a direct drive. That is probably doable without affecting quality. I would probably suggest a metal hub, rather that direct mounting of the 3D printed part. It is more likely to be concentric and could buffer the heat from the motor.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: