zkaplan wrote:Hi dibloff,
Zach from Inventables here. I am sorry that our pictures didn't clearly show the shaft on the other side of the motor. The shaft length was indicated in the technical specs but that is no excuse because after reading your story and looking at the pictures I think this is clearly an error on our part. I have asked our photographer to take another picture that clearly shows the shaft coming out of the back.
I'd like to offer you a $50 gift certificate to our store as a way of saying sorry for your hassle. To redeem it please send an email to help at inventables dot com and we'll hook you up.
Sorry about that.
Regards,
Zach
The official OrdBot design uses a combination of 0.125" and 0.09375" aluminum plate in both 6061 and 5xxx series. I modified the design of the parts slightly to allow for using only a single thickness and grade of material across the board to reduce price and increase rigidity. Specifically 0.125" 6061-T6 aluminum was what we used for the group buy. The only visible difference was thicker parts in places and a wider radius bend in the extruder carriage. The extruder carriage was 5xxx to allow for a tighter bend without weakening - we had to go for a 0.25" inside radius rather than 0.125".dzach wrote:The only difficulty I had with the OrdBot, which, I think, also exists with all of the RepRap designs using similar Z axis arrangement, is aligning the Z axes with the motor axes. Having the mounting plates thinner helps dissipate misalignments right at the motor by allowing the mounting plate to flex slightly. Thicker plates do not allow that and misalignments may show up in prints. This is a different issue than bent threaded rods, for which lead screws and nuts may be a solution.
With that said, I flat out disagree with what you are saying. I just don't accept that the solution for misalignment is to let things wiggle and flex.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests