Loading

MakerBot Print is our newest print-prepration software, which supports native CAD files and STL assemblies,
allows you to interact with all your printers via the Cloud, and many other exciting new features.

Download Now

MKSA

Prusa Z axis, so many problems yet one simple solution !

by MKSA Oct 17, 2016
Download All Files

Thing Apps Enabled

Please Login to Comment

SSso . yYYou're . FFfrom . a . sSSimple . pPPeasant . fFFamilies . WWwhores . jJJajaja
RRright . yYYou . gGGot . tTThat . SSshit . MMmentality

asi . que . sos . de . una . familias . de . simple . campesinos . putos . jajaja
con . razon . tenes . esa . mentalidad . de . mierda

Comments deleted.

Why are you using printed parts to interface with the leadscrews?

It's really funny. In the description he says not to pay attention. To negative comments for this thing, and that it works. If he only knew that he wouldn't have this problem if he didn't go around thingiverse bad mouthing other people's desings. There is something to be said about being humble.

I don't care about negative comments when they come from inferior minds. All so far here.
It is my duty to inform people about poor designs and their "designers".

Don't you have a BETTER box, filament guide, spool holder to "DESIGN" ? Oh and how about trying to improve your poor print quality. You can't even print decent bed "spacers" (useless BTW, see the comments): https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2487059

Rigid Bed Spring Replacement for Anet or similar
by Mchaos

Sorry... I read the comments. All but one person thanked me. The other just gave his opinion. He wasn't a dick about it. I saw nothing negative otherwise... I have another bed mount which I haven't posted. I have many designs which are not on my thingiverse page. Most comments as positive, unlike yours, without me posting you have more nagitive comments than I have ever seen lol. If we are going by comments, my stupid 3 second spacer is 100 times beer design ed than every design on your page.

Let's see them working with a video, or are you still trying to find you balls hahahahahahahahs!

I can't wait the see the the next moronic response you give it makes my day. It's always just so stupid it makes me laugh.

Let's see this new great invention of yours :) . I will comment there as there is no point commenting on your other craps as no one seem interested in them !

I ma perfectly fine designing inferior designs.. do t you have a few more Come ts to respond to? Hahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Must be nice not to care about your own nagitive comments lol...

in replay to Takeaway3DTech
Thanks for your detailed explanation how to connect stepper motors in series, it solved all my problems with z axis out of sync.

To mount the stepper motors in series is standard practice (even if to save on cables the vendors don't do it) as these a current driven but it won't prevent out of synch when powering on and off.

Profile photo and wall explains alot.

Presuming you do have useful information to provide, you would catch more flies with honey. Or even with mildly unfermented vinegar, if that be all you were willing to offer, were not deceptive about offering only vinegar. Assuming this is a language you are at least moderately fluent in, you come across as a 'blowhard', one who has a lot to say about nothing. If this is a language that you are completely fluent in, why do you bother to comment when you have nothing to say that could not be equally summed up as "thumbs down/up"?

Special case: If you are an adolescent, or an eldest male in a pre-information age culture that still merits such happenstance, you should understand that you're living in a culture bubble...unless your parents are affluent enough that you will never need to have a job, this bubble is going to pop some day, and you will regret everything you chose to anchor within that bubble.

You are so right on the money, but unfortunately he will never get it.

Bla Bla Bla.

"a lot to say about nothing", how funny, thanks for the perfect example.
And an account with nothing to show.

Speaking of honey, beware as what you buy is most probably corn syrup if not worse.
Mine, is 100% genuine, Same for vinegar etc.... I can afford it :)

Now, how about some technical discussion ? But are you able to carry one ?

PS: Send your TIPs to Wikipedia.

Comments deleted.

I'm not trying to insult you, I'm trying to help you. But I can't help if you refuse it.

Comments deleted.

Joining the hate gang ?
Like the others, not much to show either.
Just noticed Trump forgot YOUR s..hole :)

PS: If you are a Maronite I may "temper" my words. May be you just switched from khat to cannabis ?

Comments deleted.

Don't you have a dog to stone, or better, a goat to cuddle ? While you are at it, how about "designing" something smart and publish it ?
So far, both of you bring nothing but empty comments.

Yeah design something smart like a dremel gaurd that completely makes it impossible to see what you are cutting or grinding when you are using it!!!

Gosh ! You are definitively the funniest guy around !

Here, I developed facepalm injuries but you just helped soothe the pain.

Eager to see what your 3D printed "things" would bring.

PS: I plan to travel from Georgia to Minnesota then around the great lakes to Toronto then Quebec,if you happen to be in a state close by, you could show me :)

You could have just unplugged one of the Z motors. That motor would have become just a bearing pillow block for that screw while the other one would turn both screws with the belt. Look how I do that for the Anet A6 http://3dwrx.com/anet.html

By doing as I did, I removed one of the possible wobbling cause, the coupler, saved one motor, have the lead screws work in tension ...
Note I went further by removing all smooth rods and use the leadscrews as guides. Works quite well although 10mm lead-screw would be better to counter any movements due to vibration. So far Ok as the X moving mass, is less 250g with my new extruder.

Note that I also try to make exclusive use of my own bearings/nuts made with Igus filament. I can adjust them for no play, no backlash.

If you knew anything other than your own opinion, you would know that the accuracy or a lead screw is linear. It is a softer metal than the z rods. This because of machining. As they are cut, the center is not a accurate. So as it rides the follower, it is accurate in a linear direction but not left to right and can the center of the screw can move left to right. Print something at .1 layer height that has a later flat surface and put a ture straight edge to it. It will reveal a bit to you. Any knd of machine that uses a lead screw for accuracy, will never use the lead screw as a guide. They will all have some sort of rail. This is for good reason. You are better off letting the lead screws move and be allows to float, and use something made for a guide do that job.

This guy is 100% mental.... He goes around trolling and insulting everyone else design and when people don't like his design he throws up a warning calling people crooks and making up some fabrication.

I guess when you are faced with the reality you aren't as smart as you think you are you result to extreme measures...

P.S. His designs don't work and you can just look at his print quality and determine that yourself. Browse through his designs and witness terrible print quality for yourself.

Well,,,, except you are wrong. Two Z axis motors can not possibly be kept in sync with each other, which will cause them to get unlevel. Prusa pointed that out years ago on his calibration page. Stepper motors are not designed to be able remain in sync, especially if you are running microstepping. The only way to guarantee constant, permanent level is by syncing the two Z axis screws with a timing belt - for millions of layers over thousands of print jobs. http://3dwrx.com/how.html

Don't bother answering these guys. They are not ignorant, just stupid.

He lacks a certain finesse. Ok, any...

I see both sides are crapshoot. As person who works at a 3d printing farm, I agree with him, not with his attitude tho.

WARNING:
Don't be misled by the negative comments found here. These WORKS ! Unfortunately some people either misunderstand or simply lack the proper knowledge to understand, others are just expressing their anger for my critics of their poor, flawed "things". Just check what these people published and demonstrated. Some even created accounts, nothing published, just to spit their hatred. Amusing :)

PS: Beware, some are crooks,as they try to call for funding or sell their wares I shot down ! See the post below for such a piece of garbage !

Lol, this is the one I was talking sbout. Don't you think if you didn't go around posting negstive comments on people's things, you probablly wouldn't have this issue? Lol. I nestle what do you expect?

WARNING: This doesn't work well, many other better solutions that offer better print quality!

Comments deleted.

The 'autoalign' feature that you are attempting to achieve by not fixing the bottom end of the lead screws suffers because of the rigid lead nut mount. A flexable mount that allows a degree of misalignment would reduce the lateral forces on the x axis due to imperfect components (offset rotation of lead screw or bent lead screw etc) something like this would improve your design: https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2441901 with the added benefit of decoupling your x carriage if it hits the bed

Hex Ball & Socket Z Axis Brakcet

It works and is a known principles in mechanic. Now, of course here the lead screws are pretty straight and misalignment is small otherwise I would have done something different. I know how this works, see my self aligning bearing for example. I could have used them but straight one have enough play (0.05) to allow for slight rotation). The nut has some play too. For a nut, rotation must be constrained of course. It is what you did but as I said, not necessary here.
In my set up, no problem if the the X carriage hits the bed, the lead screw is not constrained vertically going up.
In fact the lead screws are pretty much unconstrained (for a few 1/10 of course) except in tension.
Simple, effective as it should be, properly constrained as per theory and proven in practice.

These machine are not designed for sub micron accuracy !

Ah yes, "known principles of mechanic" lol, you talk like a 3 year old.

You seem to cite "known principles in mechanic" and "theory" but yet you never specify exactly what principals and how they apply specifically to your design. In some cases, such a ploy is a cover for a lack of understanding. You seem to believe that your design is the best possible and beyond criticism. In my experience this is always a barrier to progress.

I say it is currently the best compromise in Prusa and certainly far beyond the usual crap found here. The Prusa is not the best design anyway, a good, cheap, simple compromise fit for beginners. Not my job to teach you all the principles governing this design. What you think about me, I simply don't care. Just show your machine working with your nut. BTW. you could have made it a full nut, no brass nut In your design. Have a look how it is done in the industry.

I can make a better 3d print with a hit glue gun then your printer can.... any day you want to post a vid of it working....

Best based on what criteria? Surely your could make an argument for different designs based on different needs?
My printer can not print in any material that I would consider up to the task of producing a reliable lead nut. If you have references to industrial quality lead nuts made in materials that can be printed by the common home 3D printer then I would certainly be interested.

Dual z motors getting 'out of sync' is hardly an issue in our typical Prusa style machine. Yes when power is removed steppers do 'snap' to the nearest full step. Two motors driven from the same driver in series or parallel will always be at the same micro step as this is a function of the driver, not motor. So being at the same portion of a full step, both motors in all probability will 'snap' back to the same location. Even if they did not, we are talking at most half of one step out which is typically less than one degree of rotation in a lead screw which is significantly lower than the resolution in your typical x and y axis. During a print, the likelyhood of one z stepper missing a full step would be about as likely as any other stepper - how often do you notice this happening on x and y where it is much more obvious?
Additionally, in this day of auto leveling, any z axis misalignment between steppers would be cancelled out.

dual z motors do get out of sync with threaded smooth rods over time. If you are printing frequently you do need to keep them in sync but with one motor only not two. Even if you use auto leveling, you are hiding other issues aswell as possibility of binding the two z rods/extrusions over time.

Not true. Plenty of people here experience this out of sync leading often to binding. Besides, the way I do it is cheaper, simpler and gives better results over all than using two steppers.
Auto bed leveling is an attempt at compensating a crappy design, poor quality machine. It just solve ONE problem BTW. All crappy designs include it as a sales point.and it works, most buyers know nothing in mechanic. This Thinkvesre is the best proof.
If you build a proper Cartesian machine, you simply don't need it.

Auto bed leveling is not auto bed leveling. It's auto bed level compensation. It is a wonderful invention too. Unless you are making your printer like a large CNC mill, I don't see how you can keep the build plate perfectly level without ever having to level it. With auto level, you can get it close, or not even close, and not have to worry about leveling with paper or a gauge. Yeah, you wouldn't need a seat belt or airbag when you drive if you just drive well and everyone else drives well too, is not a reason not to have something that makes something better.

Just a quick note Auto bed levelling isn't to compensate for crappy design, but really to ease setup and use which is always a net benefit. Yes you can build everything perfectly square and have no need for auto levelling but most people either don't have the money, time or understanding to achieve this. But that said even with a well set up machine Auto levelling can still help to remove any inconsistencies and make life easier when swapping out nozzles, changing bed surfaces etc.. which might induce small changes that can be catered for with an initial auto levelling routine.

Plus one benefit of dual z steppers is doing auto levelling using both steppers to compensate.

Bla Bla and utter crap on the last sentence ! BTW which software do that on these two separate motors ? In fact luckily, your machine is flexible and has a lot of play to allow this.
See all the problems people are having with auto bed leveling.

See he is not ignorant....lol...

Quite simply RepRapFirrmware, it's something dc42 has been working on for a while now. If you are using any branch of firmware these days eg... Marlin, RepRapFirmware and Smoothieware then Auto levelling of some form is basically something that takes zero to little thought or effort to implement. Especially the work dc42 has done which is superb.

And if Bla Bla is your response to people then i don't understand how you ever hope to learn anything, No one knows everything thats why good Engineers listen and continue to learn throughout their careers.

Indeed DC42 and you missed his point ! Reread what he wrote and the warnings about it ! BTW, this kind of "leveling" has been used for age for ex. super accurate mirror used in telescope !
SO LISTEN and BUILD YOUR GODDAM simple 3D printer PROPERLY !
See in reprap, the very few guy who know something and build proper machine, eg. digitaldentist, have the same opinion.

Do you ever stop and wonder why everyone other than you is an idiot?

Um....is that english? Wtf are you trying to say? Godamn man... your gonna need that ex. Super accurate mirror in your telescope to find you balls because you don't have any big enough to post a video of your printer at 150mm/s so we can see that it cant.

First i did not say that it was the best way, but it is something that can work and does work in other systems.

Second i have been building and playing with 3D printers for nearly a decade.

Thirdly i am an Self Employed Engineer of nearly 25 years experience and have built and designed systems used in industry in multiple countries.

And for you to suggest to someone you know nothing about that you know better is arrogant and and just plain stupid. Maybe when you grow up you can take suggestions and comments without being as obnoxious.

That it does work, we know it, is not the point. That is used to compensate for a crappy design and construction is THE point I raised !
Looking at what you publish here, hard to guess you have such an extensive experience :)

And what is your ignorant bullish "I am better than everyone" attitude compensation for? No balls?

And this is where you seem to miss the whole point, RepRap and everything that it is, is about enjoying what you are doing and seeing what you can do with what you have.

Just designing and building the best machine you can isn't hard it's easy. Working within the constraints of finance, materials and what you can design and print is what makes 3D printing and RepRap so much fun.

Just because a design is shitty who cares, there is a reason the Prusa is so popular not because of its Engineering prowess but because it just works and it is cheap to reproduce and that is all most people want.

And you may have a better understanding than others that might post comments about your designs but again RepRap and it's forums are based on helping others not belittling them. That is why there is such a huge community and it is alo why places like Thingiverse work.

And it is what I do, give simple solution using the cheapest yet fit for the job (and that is the key point, not just cheap !) components. No expensive bearings, no linear guides (besides, when I see how they are mounted ????) ....
Just compare the parts of my mod here, extruder .... even filament guide ! Simple, yet effective. Your printed parts are far too complex for the job. The most horrible extruder, the Toronado is an even worse example and shows no great performance BUT it looks great ! Fact is, the "community" is more sensible to the look than to the functionality.
As for the Prusa, you are wrong, the design is smart as it is a good compromise. In this sense, it is an engineering prowess even if t is not the best design. I selected it because of this, improved it and now time to look for something better, more complex too.
As for helping, I help people who have potential. You welcome to help the others :) The one I belittle, are little, can't be improved. So far not one came back with something working to prove me wrong :) Worse, some were trying to sell their crappy ware !
OK, I am done with you. Share a design I can use eventually. :)

I am going to print you some prosthetic balls, you can definitely use those. Lol

I am sure that people do encounter binding but am not so sure that this is attributable to 'sync' issues as you describe. If you believe this then you should follow your own advice and build the dual motor version and demonstrate the failings that you attribute to this setup. There are many people using dual motor z axis that do not report this problem and have perfectly acceptable results. You could certainly do worse than follow your design if building from scratch but it is not necessarily 'simpler' for someone with limited skills (perhaps the majority?). Auto bed leveling is a 'fix' for failings that should otherwise be fixable with sufficient knowledge, resources and ability. However, if the use of auto bed leveling achieves better results for more people then is that not a positive thing? For most people, all that really matters is the end result.

The Geeetech is supplied with two Z motors. Easy to demonstrate out of synch, just a few marks on the frame and coupler.
I am loosing my time with you. Again, demonstrate YOUR machine !
Same as for the few people here who have questioned my design, still waiting for their better system. So far, all have failed and what they have to show is pitiful, kid's stuff.
Others seem to be happy. I asked to give the tips to Wikipedia BTW.

From what I have seen, you design and print garbage. So I am not sure where you are coming from with this. Surely, how can all these people be wrong. The masses have it, your designs and printer are crap.

MKSA, I am unsure as to the Geeetech reference - you have some specific interest in this brand, or have one yourself? For something that is so easy to demonstrate, you would think that there would be some reliable information about the issue you describe on the web to link to... I never 'questioned' this design as such, rather I pointed out one small aspect that could be improved. I did not jump on here and label the design 'useless' and not offer any explanation at all as to why - all the while proclaiming how good my design is (once again without any technical explanation). I am happy at this point to leave it to those reading this to make their own judgments.
PS - You do realize that Wikipedia is an OPEN encyclopedia? The fact that you can contribute is hardly impressive as anyone at all can do the same.... In fact, I may go create a page on my hex ball and socket...

Not true. Plenty of people here experience this out of sync leading often to binding. Besides, the way I do it is cheaper, simpler and gives better results over all than using two steppers.
Auto bed leveling is an attempt at compensating a crappy design, poor quality machine. It just solve ONE problem BTW. All crappy designs include it as a sales point.and it works, most buyers know nothing in mechanic. This Thinkvesre is the best proof.
If you build a proper Cartesian machine, you simply don't need it.

My Z Steppers do not get out of sync because my Z steppers Are connected in Series, not in parallel so both have exactly the same drive current of 1.3 Amps (This is the optimal current setting for the stepper drivers with heatsinks fitted.)

Having the Z stepper Motors in parallel gives two distinct problems:-

1/. The Stepper Driver drive current is halved (An analogy is demonstrated by resistors in parallel)

2/. A slight electrical difference between the stepper motors means that the current split will not be exactly equal. Just the different length of wires connecting them is one difference alone.
This is in addition to the motors having on average of a Plus or Minus 5% tolerance at manufacture.

This simple solution of connecting your Z stepper motors in Series ensures equal current in both stepper motors and the full current of the stepper driver is used in both steppers thus they both drive higher torque.

This is how to connect your Z stepper motors in Series:-

Assuming the standard wire colours for the stepper motor windings are:-
Winding A Red & Blue
Winding B Green & Black

Z Left Motor Black connected to Ramps
Z Left Motor Green connected to Z Right motor Black
Z Left Motor Blue connected to Ramps
Z Left Motor Red connected to Z Right motor Blue
Z Right Motor Red connected to Ramps
Z Right Motor Green connected to Ramps

MKSA

On my Huxley Seedling printer, I only use one stepper to drive both of the Z threaded bars the threaded bars do however have bearings at the bottom and one at the non-motorized Top.

I'm looking at this design but I can't quite understand how the top part of both of the threaded bars kept absolutely vertical in relationship to the Z axis slide bars.

Could you show some close-up pictures, please?

True it is an other design mistake of these printers, to have them in // but even in series, they can get out of sync !!! Mainly at power on/off ! Known problem for 50 years !!!!!

You do not need ball bearings at both end and in fact you make alignement more difficult because of this as you have an overconstrained set up. My solution here is better, done on purpose, lead screws auto align themselves.

You say you dont need ball bearings at both ends but most lead screw manufacturers i have seen over the past 30 years always support the screw a both ends, normally in conjunction with flexible couplings of some sort.

I don't need them here because the Igus bushing does the job. The proto used ball bearing BTW.
Go back to see these lead screws and check how they are mounted and the type of bearings used. Analyze the constraints and ask how the alignment has been made.

Looks like amature hour. I am game... how is the alignment made...

If you say so !

I appreciate that some of the exchanges so far have been passionate, but I'm very interested in this approach.

I have a JG Aurora A3 which is essentially a Prusa i3 variant with a metal frame. It suffers from lost steps on the Z axis (not sure which motor) so the left and right Z-axes rods get out of sync. I have to regularly adjust the right-hand stepper manually to re-level it to the bed.

My understanding is that the original design uses two stepper motors so that the load to lift the platform is shared between the two motors and there is no rubber in the Z axis mechanisms that can stretch over time and during printer operation. The drawback is that the two motors need to be kept in sync... and clearly this is a problem on a lot of printers of this design.

This solution only has one motor so you can't have two motors getting out of sync, but there is a certain amount of stretch / play in the belt. If the Z movement isn't completely smooth then this will cause the two lead screws to move different amounts because the belt will stretch or contract to accommodate the friction on the Z axis on that lead screw. (If the Z axis was completely smooth then you could use the original 2-motor design without any problems because they wouldn't get out of sync).

Does anyone know how much stretch to expect in the belt under normal operation and how this would relate to variation in the Z height between the two lead screws? Also, I would expect that moving to a wider belt would reduce the belt stretch... but does anyone have any estimates as to how much?

Thanks in advance and please don't flame - I'm genuinely curious and trying to understand better...

There is absolutely no stretch with this Z GT2 belt and properly done. As shown here the two lead screws, smooth rods runs smoothly. I proved it.
You have far more binding possible with the classics 2 Z motor worsened by wrong improvements like putting a ball bearing at each Z lead screws.
Refer to constrain theory in mechanic.
Don't overestimate the people who design these kits, most have not much background and experience in mechanic. The fact the majority uses two Z motors, doesn't make it technically correct, that is all ! Proof, you can see they can get out of synch. Which is obvious for any one who knows steppers, control system, open, closed loop systems. Two Z motors is a bit simpler and looks more elegant. In a design bureau, it is a kick in the ass and the pink slip.

PS: Regarding some of the "passionate" posts here, just check the level of competence of the posters.

Prove it on video.....

If there were "absolutely no stretch" then it would not be possible to push on the belt in between the pulleys and cause some deflection. Is this the case with your belts?

Thanks for the quick response. I agree - the GT2 belt is supposed to be Kevlar reinforced (if of good quality) and therefore shouldn't stretch at all after being properly tensioned... I just wanted to check.
I'm going to see how to apply this to my JG Aurora A3 printer - I may post a remix if the changes are significant and work well.
Thanks again for your work on this.

Having looked at this A3, it should be easy, the frame looks fine. Just keep the mod as simple, it is why it works fine ! Reread more than once what I explained and why I did things that way.

Half the power with three times the slop and stretch!

Please don't use technical words you don't understand. You illustrate the failure of the current education system.

What about the failure of you learning proper english? In this case you shouldn't use words at all.

Oh my God!
What a crappy construction!
This is the best example of a misconstruction.

Seeing your wonderful creations, I understand you can't understand.

lol,,, Best post I’ve read in a while,, Thx Guys I needed a good laugh,,,,

PS.- Nice R&D work,,,,,,

Is there any irony? :^)

You're making this way more complicated than it needs to be. If you're going to use one motor anyway, why not just use one of the nemas already in the printer? Then instead of the whole laser printer stepper mount, you can just connect them directly, maybe add a tensioner inbetween. Also, you didn't mention gear ratios. The two pulleys you're driving the lead screws with are larger than the stock pinion that's now on the laser printer stepper. This will change your Z speed, doesn't really matter, but should be mentioned when it looks like speed will be cut in half. Still, awesome idea.

You fail to understand my set up.

Reread and think a bit more. The answers are in the text.

As for gear ratio, I assume the person who will implement this can compute the right values to put in the firmware. It is not my job to teach basic arithmetic. Besides, I said that now I use the same pulley for the motor as it gives me a value for the displacement per step better suited for the layer thickness I am using.

You fail to speak english.

Jesus Christ you're insufferable. I completely understand your setup, it's quite simple. And I'm telling you that you're making it more complicated than it needs to be. Which is totally fine, I was just pointing out a fact. And I meant complicated as in more parts and setup than necessary, not difficult to understand. Using one motor a belt and two pulleys is simpler than a motor, a belt and three pulleys. There's some simple arithmetic for you. Yes, it would be driven differently, and in a different manner, but it's the same concept, and you get to the exact same result, with a less complicated set up. That's all I was saying.

Get off your high horse, nobody gives two shits about how smart you think you are.

I repeat, you don't understand OK ! So I will try to explain for you, how do you connect the motor to the leadscrew ? With a flexible coupler WHICH IS THE MAJOR CAUSE OF PROBLEMS (poor alignment and despite its flexibility yet causes wobble). and cost about the same as a pulley.
Where will you find a closed belt that is the correct size (good luck to make it) and how you adjust the tension ?
Oh BTW, did you notice that my set up designed for a ready available 760mm belt allows belt tension adjustment without an idler, yet fulfill belt set up rules ?
Reread my text for full explanation as obviously you DIDN'T READ !
Did you notice that the leadscrews hanging from the top self align and slight misalignment won't matter ? In your "set up" how are the forces applied ?
But, I wonder, ever heard about degree of freedom and how to design this type of system ? With that in mind, check your simpler "set up", and why don't you do it BTW ?
You wouldn't be the first to try and then :)

Oh yeah, the Tevo black widow uses a similar approach as mine just that they use idlers to have the motor centered, more complicated then but nevertheless OK.

Now, sorry but unless you come up with something valid, don't bother me again, I hate loosing my time like that.

Maybe if you knew proper grammar people would understand you.. I will translate this extremely poor excuse for grammar so other understand what your are saying. " I am dumb and I am compensating for having no balls. I can't really design anything and I want desperately to feel special. So I go around bad mouthing everything and everyone just to get some attention since no one will make me feel special..... and that's how my setup works..."

Should be clear to everyone now

lol you hate "loosing" your time but you have plenty of time to type insane tirades that would be fitting if smeared in shit on the walls of a padded cell.

2 suggestions:

  1. Go back to school and take English again, you obviously failed.
  2. Kindly go fuck yourself, you insufferable dickbag.

misterstig - you said it.
image

Comments deleted.

I'll put this is bullet points to make it easier to understand, because through what you've said, you've shown that you lack a fundamental understanding of how these work.

  1. First of all, belts are very easy to resize. It takes less than 5 minutes.

  2. You would adjust the tension with literally anything. Print out a little wheel on an arm, hell use just the arm and adjust it against the belt. If you can't use your imagination to come up with a way to tension a belt, you shouldn't be messing with pulleys in the first place.

  3. The flexible couplers are flexible for a reason. People on this site seem to focus on the lead screw when they get z wobble. This is not right. The rods are what aligns the Z axis, the screw is just for linear motion. If you lock your lead screw in place, you can get Z wobbl, because you're not allowing the screw the move with the misalignment in the rods. You've clearly never worked with any machinery that uses lead screws if you're trying to lock them in place.

  4. Also, you're making the couplers and Z axis alignment an issue I never said anything about that. I never said that I thought yours would be misaligned, so why are you arguing about something I never said?

  5. You're asking how the force would be applied in my setup. This means only one thing, you don't even understand the set up I'm proposing, so why the hell are you getting all bent out of shape? So I'll say it again, but in simpler terms.

Leave everything stock. Disconnect one Z motor. Attach pulley to the top of both lead screws. Attach belt to both pulleys. Now, when the single motor turns, it will turn the other motor at the exact same time. Though, there is a reason why there are two motors. Just like there is a reason the couplers are flexible. If you're not an engineer, don't assume you know better than the engineers that designed this machinery. 3D printers may be new, but every single part of them is made from components we've been using in industry for a hundred years.

All I was saying was that doing that achieves the same thing that you're doing, but with less steps. I wasn't insulting you, I wasn't giving you my opinion. I was stating a fact.

Again, you fail to fully understand my set up and what I wrote.

So DO and SHOW WHAT you propose ! Then make what I propose and compare :)

As a starter, as it takes 5min., show us how you compute/measure the GT2 belt length required and make it :)

PROVE IT till then, JUST SH.... UP. I won't answer anymore.

I don't even see any "thing" here from you ! So what about a spool holder, a filament guide to begin with ? :)

You overestimate the people designing these 3D hobby printers, many are making mistakes engineers wouldn't have done 100 years ago !
Just going through here proves it. Sadly enough not many new, original or good ideas, so far. Or may be the best ones are not published for fear to be copied by unscrupulous "vendors" ? Which is OK to me but I doubt you fall in that category :)

Same to you.. show it. Show it working. In a video...

So ignorant you really can't take any critic staying on your argument that everyone not agreeing to your solution is in fact dumb? Just crawl under your bridge grumpy troll

I can't believe people like you exist. You're the type of person that makes me worried for the future. I'm very sorry you lack reading comprehension and critical thinking.

For starters, why would I have to show and prove shortening a belt? If you know how to use google you'd see that it is incredibly common and very trivial to cut and shorten a belt. I don't have to prove everything I'm saying when things are common knowledge that you can google if you weren't so goddamn stupid.

And why the fuck are you going on about designs on thingiverse. You lack a fundamental understanding of engineering anyway since you can't understand the INCREDIBLY simple thing I'm proposing. I'm proposing disconnecting one Z motor, and then connecting the two with a belt. How fucking stupid are you that you need to shown how to shorten a belt? Seriouslly, I'm surprised you even put this together since you are so ignorant on the subject. "I underestimate the people designing these printers?" Where the hell did you get that I said something related to that? You also missed where I said that every part of these printers have been used in industry long before 3d printers were copied badly by the chinese. So you, and everyone else using things like the Z-wobble piece are proving that they have no knowledge of these things since lead screws are not meant to be locked.

And why do I have to post what I've made to thingiverse to be able to be believed by you? I am never posting anything to thingiverse because I'm either making something that has already been made a million times, or I don't want anyone else to have the design. Once again, that doesn't mean anything I say isn't valid, you can just look anything up. Or do you not know how to use google?

All I said was this: Instead of taking a third motor and connecting it with three pulleys to the two lead screws, you can get the same results putting pulleys on both lead screws, and driving it with one belt.

Though, I don't even know why I'm typing all this. The way in which you type, as well as what you've said has both prove that you are so ignorant that you really shouldn't have children. Everything you've said proves that I know the exact type of person you are, and I'm sorry your parents didn't read to you as a child. You should go read a book right now, it's never too late to get up on the level as the rest of the world. I can't believe how stupid you are. I could go on for hours about how stupid you are, but that would be mean.

Comments deleted.

Hi, thanks for sharing this solution.
I will try to build that, too.
Yet, I have one question: Is there any bottom fixation for the lead screw or is it hanging "freely"?

Comments deleted.

No need to fix it. Hanging freely, it autoalign itself. No wobble too. You could even use a thin lead screw but not recommended of course. Should you fix it, you would have to perfectly align the lead screw with the smooth rod !

You can't fix something that stupid anyway...