jasonharper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ok, crazy idea time - what if the multi-Morgan had
> one station with a fixed platform (not attached to
> the Z mechanism like the rest), and an optical
> mouse sensor instead of a hot end? With a printed
> grid taped to the fixed platform, it could
> accurately determine its X/Y position via the
> sensor, independent of motor steps. It wouldn't
> even need stepper motors at all for X/Y, you could
> use much cheaper/easier to drive DC motors, with a
> servo loop in software.
>
> The idea could be applied to a single-station
> printer, too - mouse sensor would be mounted
> directly above the hot end, facing upwards, with
> the "mouse pad" being a ceiling on the printer.
> The arms could be made a lot thinner than a Morgan
> normally needs, if the head was spring-loaded
> upwards so that the sensor rides on the ceiling
> (which just needs to be made perfectly parallel
> with the print bed).
Mouse sensors would not be enough, they have a hard wired rudimentary DSP and the native video resolution is poor at 16x16 to perhaps 64x64 pixels. They might work on the Bamboo Printer [reprap.org] because it still maintains rectilinear motion (even though each actuator swings it through an arc). It could be done with a dedicated camera (USB web cam perhaps) and a bit more processing power to calculate the exact position from the 'map' image. The double hinge tool pivot that was originally considered on the Wally would have maintained the head in rectilinear motion.
The filament feed would have to come from the side if the sensor was above an only arm as well.
Also there are limits to how much one needs to economise on a production printer. If you have enough work for it to print 4 identical parts then it is often faster to clone the printer a few times and pool them. Maintaining a tricky fussy 4 head machine for production does not sound appealing to me, any failure mode will only involve one printer while repairs are taking place.
The thought of having a second set of opposite arms on the Morgan just for cantilever balancing does appeal to me though I would just put a weight there so there are no tipping forces on the framework rather than trying to calibrate multiple heads and beds together. It is not really required as the Z-axis is used to dynamically zero the bed at all points.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ok, crazy idea time - what if the multi-Morgan had
> one station with a fixed platform (not attached to
> the Z mechanism like the rest), and an optical
> mouse sensor instead of a hot end? With a printed
> grid taped to the fixed platform, it could
> accurately determine its X/Y position via the
> sensor, independent of motor steps. It wouldn't
> even need stepper motors at all for X/Y, you could
> use much cheaper/easier to drive DC motors, with a
> servo loop in software.
>
> The idea could be applied to a single-station
> printer, too - mouse sensor would be mounted
> directly above the hot end, facing upwards, with
> the "mouse pad" being a ceiling on the printer.
> The arms could be made a lot thinner than a Morgan
> normally needs, if the head was spring-loaded
> upwards so that the sensor rides on the ceiling
> (which just needs to be made perfectly parallel
> with the print bed).
Mouse sensors would not be enough, they have a hard wired rudimentary DSP and the native video resolution is poor at 16x16 to perhaps 64x64 pixels. They might work on the Bamboo Printer [reprap.org] because it still maintains rectilinear motion (even though each actuator swings it through an arc). It could be done with a dedicated camera (USB web cam perhaps) and a bit more processing power to calculate the exact position from the 'map' image. The double hinge tool pivot that was originally considered on the Wally would have maintained the head in rectilinear motion.
The filament feed would have to come from the side if the sensor was above an only arm as well.
Also there are limits to how much one needs to economise on a production printer. If you have enough work for it to print 4 identical parts then it is often faster to clone the printer a few times and pool them. Maintaining a tricky fussy 4 head machine for production does not sound appealing to me, any failure mode will only involve one printer while repairs are taking place.
The thought of having a second set of opposite arms on the Morgan just for cantilever balancing does appeal to me though I would just put a weight there so there are no tipping forces on the framework rather than trying to calibrate multiple heads and beds together. It is not really required as the Z-axis is used to dynamically zero the bed at all points.