More ideas on LT back end PC frame changes for bracing; I'm sketching them in my working gdoc so far.
When the LT has a stable fit for the PCv18.01 then I'll readjust the size again; Maybe rebuild the part & assembly files more correctly.
I added a global .gitignore file so I can ignore FreeCAD's backup files. More files can be added as well and it well speed up adding files to git comitts since I use the terminal it is easier to do keep a clean working dir then do "git add *", "git comitt *", & "git push".
https://help.github.com/articles/ignoring-files/
Further diagrams and thinking on the LT framing around PC's has me wondering even after widening the area for the PC's if stacking the small ones down to the back is best for the lower center of gravity. The tradeoff is stacking 3 high (over 60") or 2 high with more mass on the back end is better. If there isn't a heavy implement on the front the back may be to heavy, but if there is it may balance it better. stacking 2 in front of the others reduces shelving complexity as well and may make it easier to remove modules because you don't need another tall reaching tractor to remove cubes.
=Wed Oct 24, 2018=
Still looking at LT and I have a few more ideas about redesign of the back frame around mount PC area. Custom shaped supports below the pivot point for the arms could help widen that space to 40". However, reviewing PC v18.01 it is 20.25" so it needs to be narrowed to less than 20". It's current width is to give plumbing working space around the 1240 cooler. It is 18" fittings add ~1" and side plates ~0.5", so outside could be 19.5"; ~19.875" might be safer. Even if the back frame is CNC cut with a more complex design it will be hard to get more than 40" of space.
I updated some files on v18.01 and I see a few more files and details to push.
I've been considering ways to redesign the back end supports around the power cubes on [[LifeTrac v17.10]]. The tubular framing is definitely strong, but as I recall expensive relative to CNC cutting. The near horizontal beams are also welded to the side of the front uprights, which is likely quite strong, but not as good as the back end post and beam style.
I added some files to the modules for the LT. The way the LT was built there aren't many modular files because that is easier, but it would be ideal to break it down more.
still catching up, but I watched many recent videos last night. Many interesting topics. Being busy and not getting a lot of hours in has at least given me some time to think larger perspective. Since the PC design seems 90%+ good, the priority is fitting this system on the LT and the hose routing is a sub-component.
I also checked size of PC v17.08 on the MC & PC v17.11 is 0.5" wider, 0.5" shorter in depth, & 0.25" taller. It looks like it will fit on MC ok.
I merged out the plumbing test branch because of confusion.
Pushing mostly minor changes and restructuring to github via git CL.
If I push to gitlab now I'll have to sync both so simpler to wait on that.
Reviewing [[LifeTrac v17.10]] CAD some changes were never fully clarified and I'm thinking there is more room for changes that use CNC Torch cut parts especially on the top-heavy & expensive tubing parts. I'm not so sure about CNC cutting the whole cab though, 2x2 tubing plus sheet reinforcement still seems ideal. Lots of CNC cutting will require good nesting though. If more CNC cut heavy long tube parts are done FEM analysis would be useful, but doing that on major portions of the tractor could be difficult/ time-consuming.
I'm considering restructuring the LT files and moving them to gitlab, but there are a lot to sort through.
=Tues Sep 25, 2018=
continuing to examine the draft WB wire & curve tools with more examination of the python console to try to see how it is setting points and the working plane. I'm still struggling with the curves in multiple planes. I think this is partly 0.16, but I've been trying to use B-Spline assuming it will be more flexible for editing, but the Bezier curves may be easier to edit.
I have yet to start rebuilding the PC repos on gitlab, but I'm definitely leaning towards keeping it as close to software dev as possible. Technically it is all software it is just used to describe hardware designs.
https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/workflow/releases.html
meeting prep.
=Sun Sep 23, 2018=
reviewing freecad draft WB from tutorials and experimenting with it on PC CAD. some progress learning to control the working plane, but there may be some differences and controls missing from 0.16 vs 0.17, which many tutorials are using. I'm able to edit the wires and splines, but not able to control direction in all axes as needed yet.
=Tues Sep 18, 2018=
freecad tutorials review.
Another concept that could be added to my tutorial is the extra settings in pads and pockets. Some are obvious, but the overall types or ways of how pockets are applied through objects hasn't been covered in any OSE tutorials. Maybe some online. There are more functions only in the menus and not in toolbar buttons like reorient sketch and create simple that I have not seen covered anywhere either.
created gitlab for power cube. https://gitlab.com/Abe_Anderson/power-cube
I don't have experience with gitlab yet, but from what I've seen I'm leaning towards trying to reorganize the files into folders for parts and assemblies with each versions freecad files comitted in order and set as a release with the existing version names. Rather than trying to modify the usual git workflow for hardware it will be best to stay as close to software so it is easy for everyone to use as is.
=Thurs Sep 13, 2018=
continued freecad research. reviewing other tutorials.
Also examined git repos more and further info about binary handling. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/52131250/how-does-git-perform-on-compressed-files
created gitlab test sand box for OSH binaries. https://gitlab.com/Abe_Anderson/test_sand_box
=Wed Sep 12, 2018=
continued work on a general FreeCAD Tutorial. The first tutorials are very thourough on almost all the basic tools and covering every possible interaction and use case between tools would be an nearly impossible. There are a few concepts I wished I'd understood sooner so I will attempt to make those apparent. I have created a gdrive folder for more tutorials and freecad files so they can be interactive.
I'm improving the outline, but so far my recordings are to slow and not concise enough to edit easily. Better to keep scripting it out and practicing until it is relatively clear with little need for editing.
I don't expect it to be short with demonstrations of complex UI interactions, but I need to talk faster and more clearly so that a speed up in kdenlive with minimal cuts will sound ok. I think segmenting the recording sessions and then editing the clips together to get fast repeated improvements will speed up the finale.
I'd like to get onto the advanced draft WB tutorial because that is what I need to learn now.
=Tue Sep 11, 2018=
continuing evaluation of freecad, the current status of tutorials, the PC plumbing, draft WB, and Flamingo WB.
Looking at current tutorials of freecad on YT I see quality and details are often lacking. I'm thinking of a short sketcher constraint tutorial to start, but want it to be thorough enough without going through every tool in many WB's.
The Draft WB should enable me to do the 3D curved wires I need for hoses, but the exact workflow/ order of operations evades me so far. Using the Flamingo Pipe WB with solid elbows and straight pipe sections seems to cludgy and not useful for visualizing or figuring out hose bend radii. The order of operations of I'm looking for is mainly how to change the working plane in Draft WB to any angle in multiple planes. I think this is possible, but maybe to make it easy there needs to be some macros or maybe eventually a hose WB.
As a test I uploaded my so far useless plumbing file to a branch in github. I think I should have added tags. This created a pull request. I did this mostly to see options related to branching and how the acceptance or in this case rejection of the commit would work since the file is not meaningful to the main branch I think the commit could be overwritten by a future correction or the entire branch rejected and deleted or not.
If I understand correctly Jose suggested even having major versions of the machines in one repo, which would mean each major revision is a branch itself I think. Feature suggestions, updates, and ongoing design would then be in sub-branches as teams and individuals work on getting them to an acceptable state. I guess the latest complete revision could then be merged to the master when finished to make for an easy. Any commits not on a node/branch of the graph get culled/deleted eventually depending on team decisions about what files/features to include. I also see [https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3601672/how-does-git-deal-with-binary-files git binary handling] git attempts to figure out delta changes for binaries if it is viable (I'm guessing expense check is storage savings? Not CPU? or maybe a ratio or cost-benefit is computed)
I attempted to make a sketcher tutorial a few times and then lots of editing in kdenlive to fix issues, but it seems more time efficient to practice the tutorial until I get closer to the outline. A full script seems overkill though.
Kdenlive would also not speed up audio+video as shown in a tutorial on YT I realized the version was 15.x and 16.x supported it. I think it was a version from the much earlier OSE Linux install that had not been updated. Version 17.x is latest and it much better.
=Sun Sep 9, 2018=
caught up on OSE videos while researching more freecad and thinking about how python might be most useful. In looking for the direction I should focus on learning I'm looking at docs on freecad 0.16 and realated WB's, freecad 0.17, and I even opened freecad daily 0.18 to get an idea of where it's going. The direction is probably more obvious to experienced CAD users; It does appear they are gradually adding features that increase interoperability of the existing framework and features. The learning curve looks less significant overall as many new features are designed to increase usability with better UI and more advanced drawing abilities. There is a need to add some simple and maybe broad overview videos on freecad. I can add some little things I've learned and generalize about what I don't know and the possibilities from those.
This [Microfactory Boot Camp - Every Hardware Build is a Fork] also got me thinking about the optimal use of gitlab for freecad files. The current issue with the powercube where I've uploaded multiple versions to the main branch is not ideal, but I've been indecisive about how to test other options. While storage is an issue for any system that is versioning files (especially binary) cloud storage is both cheaper by the second and likely partly because of data compression and deduplication in many cases. However, structuring branching so that it improves workflow could lead to more file creation at some points. But, the branching of sub/assemblies and discussion prior to any "merges" can reduce excess duplication of mistakes in large files.
=Sun Aug 26, 2018=
Researching FreeCAD methods to make 3d curves for piping.
The flamingo WB is ideal for solid plumbing with simple elbows, but I think positioning circles via the draft WB and using loft and sweep between them can make good piping with complex curves in 3d space.
I'm also catching up on understanding freecad 0.17 from some of these tutorials and how the body and plane functions work in the new Part WB. I see many tools that seem to be working much better in 0.17 that we've been wanting to use that have thus far been to difficult in 0.16. I'm also looking at python scripting since I have been progressing in learning python.
I'm also still thinking about how to restructure CAD files & folders for git. I lumped the 3 recent versions together because of common files, but with git hosting services redundant copied files don't matter so much and each version/repo needs to be wholly functional unto itself for users to download only that version. With CAD files in specific folder structures, it is easy to use the A2WB to import parts and subassemblies and the whole package will be easily editable and stay small with minimal redundancies.
Continuing to figure out the bezier or bspline in draft WB is proving difficult in multiple work planes. Adding other draft wires stepping in x, y & z, dirtections as guides seems like it should help, but the curves are still hard to control and unpredictable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ivzKZm_W7g
decent tutorial showing abililty to move curves into a 3rd axis, but not with external reference points or draft utils.
=Tues Aug 21, 2018=
I am starting to understand underlying functions of git and I see files can be managed, but there are limitations and complexity I don't get yet. I wonder given the modular OSS model of gitlab if more development on tools for managing different file types can be easily developed. New features and updates are to be made in separate branches just like software, but binary files can't be merged so there is more potential need for discussion of issues before merging updates. Good labeling is critical. At least it gives a clear history of development as long as someone can interpret the branching. This is one area a GUI may aid over the CLI. I installed gitkraken to look at its interface, but I am using the CLI so far, but I have yet to try making any commits to a branch properly. One issue with learning git is there are many different terms used for the same actions and not just by different platforms.
I created a gitlab account to explore the interface. I suspect moving to gitlab before getting to used to github is ideal. Groups there are equivalent to Organizations on github.
https://gitlab.com/Abe_Anderson
A good next experiment will be reworking the Power Cube freecad repo. The other issue there is my freecad knowledge and workflow needs significant improvements to work well with git.
http://www.sparkleshare.org/ is a git GUI for linux. It's distributed in a flatpack container. I'm installing it now for later testing.
I re-edited the cordless drill photos again less aggressively this time, but it was clearly still to much. It found features, but the exhaustive matching was only [1/1], [1,1] blocks and it finished quickly with results showing only several camera angles along one side. More unique background features for triangulation appear critical in this case.
=Sun Aug 19, 2018=
The cordless drill COLMAP test finished overnight. rather quickly I think. It ended with only 13 photos on one side being used. Clearly the rather aggressive selection masking of the background I did, caused it to find much fewer common points. There must be some tradeoff point though. I still think controlling the background environment white curtain or green screen would be interesting to test.
I'm looking deeper into gitlab while still learning git.
I created a gitlab account to get a better look at the web interface.
I'm nearly through reading Think like (a) git and reviewing some of the git command line as well. I think the CLI is sufficient and there are ways and tools to colorize and improve that interface. Maybe something could be added to freecad too, but there are many other files to add so automating committs could get confusing to some, better to keep is simple.
=Sat Aug 18, 2018=
Continuing to learn about git since it seems universally valuable to understand for software and potential use for collaborative work.
I see examples that scientists are using it for data logging and documentation. There has always been a lot of discussion about workflows and software for documentation and changes over the years seem to be the norm, which over the long term is to be expected, but there is a need for some static consistency. Git has been around long enough and is such an integral part of Linux and open source that it may be the ideal tool. It's recent popularity is likely a product of that and that popularity driving creation of easier to use supporting tools.
My current point in the PC freecad requires learning the pipe WB's and I think more of the draft WB will be helpful as well. I did a quick upload of folders to github when I started using it and that is wrong. I see from the example files Jose has setup that I need to learn git and substantially more freecad to be efficient using it, but it definitely looks worth it.
As far as github and MS concerns I see Jose thinks gitlab would not be hard to migrate to and is considering it since it is open source. Github has PR advantages due to it's popualrity, but from an OSS purist perspective it is the oposite. That said, I don't think there is anything that can prevent anyone including MS from using open data for training AI's to help closed development.
In fact if gitlab could work out a similar, but OSS friendly deal (OpenAI?) it may enable them to eliminate the limits on the free service. I do not yet understand the gitlab limits either or if how they may apply to a larger organization.
Marcin emailed link from Harman to drill photos for testing.
I'm part way through editing ~124 1080p photos from a video using gimp to test, but I haven't been prioritizing that given my experience so far. Mainly my lack of GPU, but I think starting quick CPU tests on different image sets and canceling as soon as I can see how many matches it has found to check may help determine any advantages to editing the images first.
The drill photos are hi-res only 41 and the lighting is fairly soft, but there are some reflections and glass in the background. As I recall from the point cloud Harman generated there was quite a bit of background points so I think I will try masking some parts out and running that as a test next.
I found a gimp script to save all files. It made it much easier to lasso select around the drill and not worry about so many shortcut keys or lack thereof.
I've been reviewing git, github, gitlab and interoperation with freecad workflows more based on yesterdays meeting suggestions. I was a bit surprised by Jose's points, but from what I can see they are reasonable. Although, he is choosing to make more compromises and use less open software in some cases. Looking at git further it has become incredibly popular for many organizations to use in a variety of ways beyond software development. It's distributed data concepts are also the basis of much of the new web 3.0 libraries like IPFS. The FreeCAD workflow definitely needs updates, but I still see the importance of prioritizing existing work and python for future changes. github seems to be the easiest solution and it is more popular for now. I expect most OSE devs well be aware of git to start, but if not it is so widely used in business and industry now it is critical to understand the basics.
Most of the tutorials also say the basics are all that is necessary and the advanced concepts are unnecessary and I think that easily applies to freecad and related data files. Much of the efficiency that can be gained from Jose's suggestions are more related to features technically external to git, but standard inclusions like issue tracking and maybe dev team management. Also freecad can be used more integral since it opens/exports or includes many other types of files related to CAD/CAM with its growing work benches and their increasing quality. I'm seeing there are more advances in freecad 0.17 than I thought. An important concept is using freecad in a way analogous to writing readable code versus comments so documentation ends up being part of the process and less time consuming in other applications.
=Tue Aug 14, 2018=
Meeting prep. reviewing COLMAP experiments and PC CAD.
=Thurs Aug 9, 2018=
COLMAP finished overnight not sure how long it took the timestamps in the log are confusing. I think it's waste to because at the end of log it reports canceling dense reconstruction due to lack of CUDA. So I'm not sure at what point it requires it. I know CUDA can be turned off for CPU only and I'd expect the GUI options to do that as shown, but some step must require CUDA. Interestingly at first I though there were more points in the model around the tape areas then I decided it might be the oposite. It is hard to tell. After reading more in COLMAP docs I think close-ups and higher res are useful for smoother objects. Most of the pixels are wasted on background since it is hard to frame shots doing video. I retook some more careful video while it was partly cloudy in case more data for testing is useful. I still think with a pro green screen the object could be scanned in hi res and even moved if needed, but I am uncertain if the software is designed to handle that. I ran the original video back through kdenlive at 1080p 60fps at 1000% speed it gave me 124 images. There must be ways to rapidly mask photos in GIMP so I will look into that.
Also found a site with scripts for automating photogrammetry processes. https://pfalkingham.wordpress.com/2017/08/14/automating-free-photogrammetry-scripts-i-use/
This overview of photogrammetry app demos is fairly thorough. https://youtu.be/ELHOjC_V-FE
With good images it seems it should be possible to create models with less processing from sparse reconstruction, but it may require more human hours if it can't be automated via scripts etc.
=Wed Aug 8, 2018=
Took so more video of the wood handle; First I added some striped masking tape on the handle put it on a white sheet of paper and took video under more artificial light, but it was overhead and shadowy. Finally, had a cloudy day so I realized it should be shadow free outside. I had to tape the paper down and the handle due to a slight breeze, but I didn't notice motion or many shadows, but there was some cloud variation. I took video in slow motion, which I think is 720p (no options), but I saw some interlacing artifacts in the playback. So, I tried smooth motion 60fps, which said it was 1080p again no camera options on res. It copying and uploading now. With the space outside to move around I think I got better angles distance & smoother shots this time. I also think picking a few of the best shots manually and erasing the background in GIMP is the next best test.
After erasing backgrounds of 50 images from the 60fps smooth motion 1080p video in GIMP I ran COLMAP and it went way to fast. It only used several images from a narrow band over the top and the length of the handle. I ran it on low quality and sparse so I try some other settings first. I'm wondering if I over-erased and/or there was to little detail from the white paper background.
I restarted COLMAP to run a dense high quality model on the other 50 unedited images to test those. I now see I technically made a mistake with kdenlive default output to 720p, but I don't see how that matters much. All the other examples say resolution/pixels are only important for detail and we want smooth CAD like textures for most parts not noisy bumpy ones. However, it is another test to run. I think it all comes down to image quality either it can find good matches or not and so far I think all the tests have said no good initial pairs found. It is unfortunate because the 60fps output looks much better. There are still some shadows at points due to cloud variation and maybe between that and a background or erased background it can't find the points it needs. More consistent distances and slighter angles may help. They should be in the video though. I thought maybe my overediting caused the 1/1 matching block issue, but with the other 50 unedited images it is saying the same thing so far.
COLMAP still running for hours now so I put it on low priority just to make sure I could run anything else without issues.
Propagated PC v17.11 frame changes to PC v18.01 frame.
Reviewing COLMAP progress and some more tutorials that clarify best practices.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDHJM6nAKtc This video suggests using video then extracting good frames using VLC then deleting the excess background around the object in a image editor (GIMP). This is somewhat the oposite I was thinking with having better background points to reference and it makes sense. I was thinking some background points around the object would triangulate shape, but really thsoe points need to be on the object itself anything else is excess noise and computation. So instead of grids around the object having adding distinct high constrast markings to the object. I have some striped masking tape, which would likely work well or just marking on some plain masking tape to add contrast. If a lot is needed it will make the pixel texture look odd if that is important later, but for most likely objects without distinct points the texture is unimportant. For something like an engine it would likely have enough distinct points adding markings should be unnecessary.
I saved the COLMAP projects and a ply file, but I can not open the files now. COLMAP says the project is invalid and the ply mesh file is recognized as binary. opening it as a txt file shows some basic ply file info then data. From reading COLMAP tutorials I think the sparse operation may not be generating the right data files. From the view I saw in COLMAP the sparse points looked sufficient to generate a low detail mesh object, which is what we want. The dense data may be needed for generating acceptable ply mesh files for meshlab. I'm tempted to think the software could just be tweaked for lower res object estimation.
In the end the question is how much human time does it take to edit the video/images & mesh to a final freecad acceptable mesh part. Is it more than just drawing it in FreeCAD from basic photos with measurements? Then there is the ideal mesh to parametric conversion for editable freecad parts.
=Mon Aug 6, 2018=
I see Harman is working on COLMAP. [[Photogrammetry 101 with Harman]] I just tested it with my photos and the suggested settings, but I have no dGPU since I removed my old nvidia card because it seemed to be failing. COLMAP simply closed and I assume that is why. Several hours of processing is alot. So, myquestions are if quality can be lower for inputs or more or fewer photos will help speed overall. Running COLMAP on my i5-4590 CPU @ 3.30GHz × 4 on medium quality inidividual images. Video frames didn't work, but might be interesting to figure out if there is some benefit. I installed meshlab via ubuntu software center I finally got it to run via terminal. It may be throwing some errors that need to be checked.
COLMAP just finished, which was surprisingly quick. The photo positions are from one side and obviously wrong.
I made a shared album for Photogrammetry from yesterdays media. https://photos.app.goo.gl/ojZ2UEZt3AQT6muG7
Note my first test used photos from the video extracted with kdenlive as described not my stills.
Reviewing the COLMAP & the log it says 57 images 3056 points, but it did analyze all 191 images. Further review and understanding why/which images are good may help. For more data I'm thinking more images from kdenlive. I think I'll try video input first.
I attempted to make a quick grid for backgrounds, but I don't have a laser printer handy. I wonder if background focus or lack thereof plays more of a role than focus on the part.
I created a crude grid with a paper and marker. I'm hoping the complexity and accuracy of the grid matters little, only that it is high contrast and static. I am shooting a new video of the handle because I think it is the best test case part.
I exported the new video from kdenlive at 500% so I got over 400 images, jpg's this time so size is ~50-175K. Lots of small blurry ones so I may try deleting all those, but COLMAP seems to determine image quality on its own. I immediately noticed the number of features it is seeing per image is much higher, 5-6k. COLMAP pegs all 4 cores at 100%, but the system still seems responsive.
I stopped COLMAP after less than 1 hour because it was taking to long on the matching. It got to 3/9 and in my experience things that take to long processing due to poor inputs aren't worth. Iterate try again. I did get some log data that is different though.
I think manually picking a few dozen jpg's will be a good test.
I manually selected 91 images from the ~400 I generated before. I picked out the images with as little blur as possible mainly on the object, but also its surroundings. COLMAP is only working with 2 matching blocks, but it is taking much longer towards the end. I suspect this is due to the blury shiny glare filled backgrounds at the low angles in the final photos. I will let it run overnight.
After reading more about the processes used I think the background is really important and a good identifiable camera model is probably helpful. I grid in the background may be very helpful as well I may try setting up some cardboard around the object and taking carefully focused photos next. Maybe strips of card board with grids taped to the edge of the stool at intervals so I can take shots in between without obscuring the object.
There are other apps like COLMAP to test, but I read comments COLMAP is better with low noise.
test 3 log https://drive.google.com/file/d/1D8LsISdWp0fP7v5WCnuyjaogMD1pFSqH/view?usp=sharing
It finished and has a lot more points in the background surfaces, but I'm not sure if there are enough on the part. Definitely, need to get more consistent photo spacing low-res focused stills with more grid or clear reference points around it should help.
=Sun Aug 5, 2018=
Took video and photos of objects for photogrammetry testing. UHD video seemed to be to slow on my old GS5 phone so I went down to 720p & kept 16Mpx for stills. I'm uncertain how much movement of the phone matters. Obviously movement of the object is not good. I also assume a checkered or grid background would help. I tried a few different odd positions and test objects. The media might finish uploading to google photos in a few hours if not then in the morning. How to process video into stills easily seems harder than it should be. I'm thinking quick edits of video clips in kdenlive for general cleanup and cut out movement mistakes etc. before generating a sequence of stills. I wonder if exporting/extract frames as images in kdenlive has to be done via plugin scripting. I see discussions about it for OSS and GIMP, which doesn't do it either. The only easy app looks like virtualdub, which is OSS, but is a windows app. Not sure about LivES; blender will export all frames as images and it should allow frame dropping too.
I figured out how to get an image sequence out easy in kdenlive.
step 1 add clip and drag to video timeline
step 2 select and right click clip and split audio
step 3 right click clip again and ungroup
step 4 delete audio track
step 5 Effects->Motion->Speed (1000% gives ~3fps)
step 6 Project->Render
Step 7 In rendering dialog window select Images sequence in right file format list (last item in list)
step 8 select image file format in right list (PNG?)
step 9 deselect Export audio
step 10 Make sure the radio button for Full prpoject is selected Render to File
I did this for a wooden handle I put on a stool and walked around taking 720p video while lowering the angle from above it. At 1000% speed I got 191 images from the 00:01:19:13 long clip. Most images are over 1MB and I noticed partly due to my poor camera handling there are some blury pics. I'm not sure how bad the quality of these might have to be to mess up the 3D mesh generation, but they are easy to spot and delete by file size. If more good files are needed then the speed can be reduced and to reduce the number of image files there should be an way on linux to delete odd or even files etc. Or it can be done manually if only a few dozen of the best angles are needed. My current test images are all 720p. I wonder if 1080p will make a difference. Lots of testing to do. I have video and images from 5 different objects wood, metal, plastic, and plant.
=Wed Aug 1, 2018=
Compile and Installation of COLMAP appears successful. https://colmap.github.io/install.html#linux
I also installed meshlab, but I'm not sure it is working or installed correctly. Searching for more instructions.
I'm trying to figure out how kdenlive can export a sequence of images from video. With kdenlive it shouldn't be difficult to decimate the frame rate down to maybe 2fps? from standard or low frame rate video with a high enough res probably 1080p and up and then export the frames as images for COLMAP. It might require a script to extract the remaining frames. This should make it easy to capture plenty of images by simply walking around a part with a phone camera a few times. If 2fps isn't enough or some needed view points are decimated out they can always be extracted from the original video.
In cases where an editable part(s) may be desired from the final output file, the big issue may be that it is mesh format and not directly editable by freecad; Unless the mesh to freecad conversion can be automated more it may still require alot of work in freecad, but at least detail and accuracy would be available.
=Tues Jul 31, 2018=
meeting prep.
next steps on PC plumbing, but will prioritize photogrammetry as discussed in meeting. So I need to finish installing COLMAP etc. (not sure where I left off on that before). Also look into the google vrxworks? framework for android I saw somewhere, which may be partly open source, but likely runs on google services.
=Sun Jul 29, 2018=
updated details on frame module and cleaned up PC assembly and added pump plumbing.
I think all changes needed to the engine module and frame are propagated through to the final assembly file. Now it needs cleanup and re-assembly and addition of plumbing.
meeting prep.
=Sun Jul 22, 2018=
I have to rework some of the pipe fittings assembly to the tank because I simplified to early and can't add parts inside the tank. I started by making a new 3/4" NPT 90 elbow. It is based off components generated by the OSE pipe WB, which doesn't quite work in 0.16 in the mode I need. It may be a little short, but close enough. Thinking about it now, it could be redone with a trajectory from a bigger elbow maybe 1". I keep thinking about changing the way I'm making and uploading files to Github, but it is much easier to work with different files for assemblies and simple versions instead of putting it all in one history to search through. Having uploaded the whole folders with the FreeCAD backup files is a task not to repeat though.
Next examining constraining the plumbing in the tank and fittings welded to the tank into the frame module instead of the assembly to reduce complexity.
adding plumbing parts with constraints to simple version of frame file.
meeting prep.
=Sun Jul 15, 2018=
added symmetrical top notch to cube sides. edited side lengths to make cube 30" deep, which should give a little (~0.75") room for movement too.
I had some trouble with re-constraining the sides correctly so best to just delete most of the constraints and redo them.
I've also been thinking of constraining at least some of the plumbing parts into the frame; Especially, since the welded parts and the plumbing in the tank is technically part of the frame. It will also simplify plumbing constraints in the editable full assembly.
Checking the engine-pump module in the frame shows quite a few needed changes. As expected the frame is to short vertically (~1") and in depth (~2"). The rubber feet in the base are currently 1" this increases the height once installed but at that point, the top being even with the frame isn't cause for concern. It is getting in the side of the frame that is difficult. The bottom mount plate is to small and the holes in the wrong position in general.
As discussed in the meeting searching more I found a makerspace local to UCA in Conway. It appears funded by an organization called The Conductor that promotes entrepreneurship and is funded in turn by local businesses. Both could be good contacts for finding students and organizations interested in promoting learning through making hands-on and open source tools.
http://www.arconductor.org/makerspace-2/
I also need to decide where to post a CAD rule about making sure parts are assembled from physical sub-parts such as those that are welded together.
In reviewing [[FreeCAD_101]] and rewatching some of the videos I see some potentially out of date info, but they are all good tutorials. I think the last tutorial by Manolis uses the A2 WB to import all parts, which was later changed to mostly merging all, but a base part as in Roberto's tutorials. I thought Roberto's more recent tutorials on assembly workflow were included, but I don't see them there so I am adding them. I'm thinking of adding a final Tutorial section with guidelines as text and as a placeholder for potential future video update(s).
=Mon Jul 9, 2018=
reviewing engines module specs to look for flaws before finalizing to update other modules.
I found the mounting base was backward because the elongated holes are supposed to be close to the back not the front. Reconstraining this proved to difficult for the solver and editing the original sketch was to slow. So I simplified the base separate from the rest of the engine and constrained the simple parts and uploaded that and the final version.
I also noticed github doesn't show the descriptions, but an ellipse button in the history. I also wonder how searchable the descriptions are for finding versions of parts.
Started to assemble into pump module, but found the holes for the sleeve coupler is rotated out of alignment. So editing the sleeve is easiest to make sure holes are correct distances.
In editing the sleeve I looked at SAE bolt patterns and went back through logs and parts on the wiki. The engine pattern may be a SAE B 4 bolt, which is 90mm (~3.54331 in sq, I used 3.5") I think while the pump is SAE 2 bolt pattern and the pump CAD should be correct according to previous data found to create that CAD. I made the holes on the engine side 0.3" diameter instead of 0.25", the accuracy of the CNC may be uncertain anyway.
The way the CAD is done on the sleeve is simple enough to editable, but isn't done realistic parts as the would be welded together. The method used is probably quicker and simpler though. It will not give correct 2D patterns and measurements for nesting and CNC cutting as is because the inner hole size for the end plates needs to be the outer diameter of the pipe.
I think a CAD rule to add somewhere on a FreeCAD page would be to always draw actual sub-parts and then assemble. This should be discussed in the meeting tomorrow.
on a trip the last week and can't make the meeting. I didn't get much done on CAD, but I have had a chance to listen to a lot of other educational media. Continued to learn a little python, and related info about tensorflow deep learning software tools. I noticed VRWorks tools for Android that allow measuring surroundings based on image processing (in cloud for mobile). I'm not sure how much of that software is based on open source, but the basic tools are open. I also reviewed info about Ethereum its contracts model and more. All useful open tools to learn to apply.
=Tues Jun 26, 2018=
checked extents on engine and looking at best way to add bolt pattern for pump. reviewing logs to make sure I'm not missing anything else.
meeting prep.
continued adjusting distances on the engine. The tank and filter/covers are a technically a bit short in depth (front to back), but with the current design, it looks ok to leave it as is. I finally got distances to add up to 14" with the shaft cut short by 2" (pics show 16" total depth), which makes sense given the 5" thick cover, 5.75" base, 1.25" back (with oil ports), and the 2" shaft. I will add a 0.25" bolt pattern next, which makes the total thickness of the back cover 1.5" as measured.
I added a ring with 1/4" bolt holes at 3.5" center to center.
Need to review, but I think it is ready to simplify. Using GitHub even though it versions files I think it will be easier to identify if I just use separate files with simple in the name like I do locally.
The distance of extents for the top tank and cover look ok they might be a little small now, but I don't see anything that obviously matters. Need to double check extents though. The last thing I can think of is to add a pattern for the bolt holes on the back side for the pump adapter mount. I might add a thin part instead of editing the existing clone if it makes sense distance wise.
=Tues Jun 19, 2018=
edited engine constraints to get distances more accurate and made measurements to figure out top/tank positioning.
The tank+air filter compound needs to be redone since it is to narrow by ~1". Otherwise constraints are good. I also added a breather cap, but haven't got the pull cord handle right so it easy to constrain yet.
=Mon Jun 18, 2018=
I assembled most of the engine fairly close, but some angles changed so I need to redraw the muffler part or just redo the constraints. I was concerned the tank and cover compound I froze might be to different in size to fit the new larger body, but it looks ok so far.
Need to adjust total height and add the breather cap that sticks up.
Figuring out how to do re-assembly on the engine CAD. In order to make some symmetrical constraints I added hidden features just to use as constraint points. Still not quite enough, but getting closer.
working on engine CAD and updating to github https://github.com/Witz0/OSE-Power-Cube/blob/master/Power%20Cube%20v17.08/Xp16hp.FCStd
meeting prep. copied current meeting doc
=Sun Jun 3, 2018=
created github repo for power cube https://github.com/Witz0/OSE-Power-Cube
I think I successfully separated some sketches in the engine file from faces by choosing to reorient them (Sketch--> reorient sketch...), but it still breaks most other features.
I'm not sure what best practices are for the github repo's are yet and I think there is a list of preferred licenses in the wiki somewhere, but a quick search didn't find that.
So I uploaded all the power cube folders I have including the engine file and some other files that maybe could be referenced from other repos depending on how they can be setup.
I've been trying to edit the engine with some difficulty in finding the fastest way to make changes to the sub parts without breaking all the sketches and interdependencies. I've mostly given up and decided to break it down into simple components and reassemble them after redrawing the main body parts. This is an example of where I think the new Part WB in 0.17 will make editing easier. Sketches no longer map to faces and parts have more independent coordinate systems I think. Therefore it should make sub part merging and assembly easier.
The file is a mess though and I'm not sure the best way to clean it up perhaps parts will just need to be edited in the old version or redone if needed.
I'm also having trouble uploading it even though it is only ~500K. It is probably best to move it to github anyway.
<pre>Upload warning
It is recommended that files are no larger than 524288; this file is 540673.
A file with this name exists already, please check File:Xp16hp.FCStd if you are not sure if you want to change it. File:Xp16hp.FCStd
</pre>
=Tues May 29, 2018=
checking history on the engine model I see [[Josh_Log#Fri_Aug_18.2C_2017]] made a rough model on aug 18 and the photos are dated aug 19. So obviously they were not referenced as I thought. They are close, but not enough for CNC cutting parts.
=Sun May 27, 2018=
Looking for specs to redraw the quick disconnects to other sizes. 1/4" 1/2" and 3/4" are commonly needed.
The pump situation needs to be verified and BOM's updated.
Also modifying the engine CAD with fluid access points and pull cord.
Looking at OSE Pipe WB more I found I can generate the parts in FreeCAD 0.17 that glitch in 0.16, probably due to the part WB, but the design is still for PVC so I need to learn LibreCAD better. Getting the shapes shoud be possible with existing labels and code functions, but I'm not sure how much code reconfig might be required. I also think adapters like SAE-NPT could be done, but that clearly requires more coding and there are different ways to do it.
Added SAE -12 adapter. It would be nice to just generate these in a WB, but so far editing these is simpler. [[File:SAE 12 to 0.75in NPT adapter.fcstd]]
Added starter pull cord handle to engine in engine-pump module. [[File:PC v17.11 engine pump module.fcstd]]
A point to consider on the plumbing and BOM's it seems the demarcation point for parts to the PC versus the operating machine for plumbing may need to be the hoses simply because of hose length being dependent on installation to the machinery.
After further searching for an oil fill point besides the drains because I thought I understood there was one I found the stickers and tags show oil is filled through the drains as well. Tip it one way or the other after removing drains then level it and refill. Looks messy to service, but could be done while in the frame I think.
Further measurements in CAD and comparing to the [https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipMNKx0q8K3oWrlxlHi5A8qXvXVFdfrPtYv50ekm-UBXjsDltGRNf8OGkYdL5nwI2A?key=UU9mRlludWlfVkhUNVRFdTlOSGl0NEo5NW9zS3d3 photos] shows there are likely some size discrepancies for the engine model. The base mount holes look close on depth (front to back), but short on the overall depth of the base as well as on the width of the mount holes. The whole model may be an ~1"+ short front to back. I thought I checked this before so I should review previous notes. It is disconcerting and makes me think the 3D photogrammetry method is needed to get sufficient accuracy for the CNC cutting.
Further measures and checking old logs show the breather cap still needs to be added and is ~18.75", which will require top notches in the frame as well. The engine is short almost 4" front to back. The mount holes are close at 3.5" from outer edges, but from photos could be 4.75". The width of the base is 10" total, but not quite 9" in photos. Looking closer the mount for the pump coupler look slike the distance between the 4 holes is ~3.5", but somehow I got ~5". I need to review because this looks like a mess of errors.
=Fri May 25, 2018=
I think I found the right pump https://www.surpluscenter.com/Brands/Dynamic/0-61-cu-in-Dynamic-GPF2010S9C-Hydraulic-Pump-9-7789-A.axd
It has Inlet Port SAE 12 and Outlet Port SAE 10. The size looks a little smaller so it should be ok, but the ports and fittings need to be changed in CAD.
simplified [[File:SAE 10 to NPT 0.5in adapter.fcstd]]
The SAE 10 file is made is sections that should make it easy to edit it into many adapters including the SAE 16.
Fairly easy just sizes and renaming parts.
[[File:SAE 16 to 0.75in NPT adapter.fcstd]]
The difference in the way NPT versus SAE/JIC is measured relative to threads makes the sizes confusing and they look a little big and small relative to actual parts. Effectively SAE is including the threads while NPT is close to median because of the conical thread cut.
I have yet to try using the OSE pipe workbench much because these types of parts basically consist of three parts with the hex nut.
I also do not yet understand flamingo WB. There is clearly a learning curve to using to draw pipe between points.
I'm not finding a 0.61 cu in pump on surplus center; I also see the SAE ports on the lower displacement pumps are smaller despite the main body section looking the same. The other factor is the SAE 2 bolt pattern can vary.
I copied the text and highlighted the BOM issue on 17.10 and 17.11. The source and specs need to be verified and a link found. Also, need to know if parts are in stock or if these parts may change again in the next build. I wonder where in the process this info got lost; It would be good to minimize so inaccuracies don't creep into CAD. When using the CNC torch table to cut parts mistakes could become more difficult to correct manually in some cases.
=Sun May 20, 2018=
Looking up SAE charts to find pipe thread size for adapters on the pump etc. Most of the tables and charts are not clear or don't contain the specs needed. https://batamniagaperkasa.com/products/3/3-7/3-7-14/par14-8-2.html
Getting the O.D. and I.D.'s for all plumbing standards will help increase CAD accuracy.
Understanding the SAE JIC standards a little better I think. https://www.surpluscenter.com/images/techhelp/SAE.pdf
For the O-ring standard it looks like -10 is 7/8" O.D. with a no flare design such as here https://www.hydraulicsdirect.com/Fitting-Thread-Chart-s/1934.htm#SAE-STO-R
[[File:SAE 10 to NPT 0.5in adapter.fcstd]]
reviewed WebGL tutorials. Trying to decide what to CAD next given the difficulties of what is immediately good enough while trying to align that with good future design goals so there to create forward momentum and reduce double work.
=Wed May 16, 2018=
Created new gitlab project repos.
corrected ball valve size and added to the PC. It took two tries to get it right, but it isn't too difficult once you recall the patterns to edit and I keep trying to improve labels.
I've considered many possible ideas for kinematic style mounts that could be automated, but I don't think any have been viable yet. I need to look at more mechanical examples, hand draw some ideas and just try some experimental CAD. The round head bolts seem passable, but finding other generic bolts the right size may not always be easy. The shape of the plastic parts has to be complex to accommodate multiple features. A latching mechanism needs to work by moving along multiple axes and attachment of levers is not easy either.
=Tues May 15, 2018=
=Thurs Oct 10, 2019=
fixing dimensions on parts like the ball valve so I can continue assembly on PCv17.11.
Meeting. I reviewed emails and doc changes. It sounds like a lot of good progress on projects, but not a lot of uploaded files yet.
Meeting prep.
=Sat Oct 5, 2019=
engine mount points need to be adjusted to the right ~1-2".
more email with Chris & William. I exported and uploaded STL's for the [[Simple 3D Printer Extruder]] PLA parts.
details on engine for oil drains and fill need to be added.
[https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipMNKx0q8K3oWrlxlHi5A8qXvXVFdfrPtYv50ekm-UBXjsDltGRNf8OGkYdL5nwI2A?key=UU9mRlludWlfVkhUNVRFdTlOSGl0NEo5NW9zS3d3 see engine photos from 17.08]
I'm wondering if the engine rubber mounts might be too loose and enabling more shaking of the system than they inhibit because of their height or relative softness.
I added links diagrams to the STEAM doc and did lots of brainstorming about easy printable possibly kinematic tool mount.
I installed flamingo workbench, but I don't quite see how to use it to make pipe joining parts.
Also thinking about tool changing. Hoping there is some X,Y,Z dance the machine could do with a tool to release and latch it into a mount without extra motors/servos etc. A tool mount that could do that maybe complex would it might beat having extra motors easy if it is elegant and has great MTBF. No living hinges or flimsy push-push latches. Maybe it needs metal springs. I wonder if the mount mechanisms could actuate with 2-3 axes of motion if needed.
edited frame, suction holes, engine mount and notch.
=Fri Oct 4, 2019=
made more changes to the frame.
I responded to an email from Chris about the simple extruder. More thought and reading is needed on the quick coupling concepts...
At first I thought the import wasn't going to work. It did glitch a bit, but it worked and all the constraints updated good every time.
I updated the D3D v18.10 BOM with 3/8" nuts and resolved the comments. I selected what I thought was the most universally useful for the price. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1eCYxQkOZ6GKS5zkTIKQneVsXDnhAc99Twsm2upWlFn8/edit#gid=0
The slow downs with modularity are in the chain of complexity to make edits. Files saves have to be done in order to preserve editable files while updating the editable and simple files. The import function would work locally for more parts, but the simplification step interferes with that and the file links are local as well.
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
Reading more about kinematic coupling and I looked up William's extruder work from today as well. I wonder how accurate 3d printed plastic couplings could be if bolted together. That appears to work for camera mounts, but I question the repeat accuracy. I also wonder about embedding 3 nut catchers in the carriage in such a way they would be compressed and not move much post assembly. Adding the requirement of complex off the shelf metal parts like balls and grooves would likely add cost. In the long run, they could be milled, but the accuracy requirements are likely higher than what will be achieved soon.
The ball valves are still wrong and the engine needs to be moved back a little for shaking, which means I can reduce & shift the notch again too.
=Sun Sep 29, 2019=
=Wed May 9, 2018=
Doing a little more research on kinematic coupling and tool changers.
Immediately the need is just for a quick couple, but it would be nice if it was at least partially scalable for future tool changing needs.
I've found the slowness and difficulty editing the PC is based in various issues in the file. Extra constraints not being removed automatically and occasional glitches where the sketches seem to get delinked from their pads. I had to delete and redo the constraints, clones, and pads. Then reproduce them from the sketches to get everything editable again. I've taken the opportunity to separate the frame into its own module. This creates problems of its own but reduces constraints in the full model. I think I'll try importing the frame with the A2 WB like I did the back tank wall then lock it so other constraints don't move the frame. The frame is close to done, but I see the engine mount hole pattern looks backward now. This way takes time to measure and transfer those between files, but at least I'm not sitting waiting for the solver to drive me crazy.
I think there are ways to make a dock that effectively catches and releases tools without extra servo or stepper motors by using the force of moving the head in/out of the dock. I also think 3D printed plastic parts might be accurate enough for most printers if the design is good enough. I'm not familiar enough with the mechanics of kinematic coupling yet.
[[File:Powercubeframe.fcstd]]
I uploaded a simple frame version though more changes may be needed.
I started adding new constraints between the frame the engine module and plumbing parts.
=Sat Sep 28, 2019=
I'm curious to see if using the frame as a locked imported part in the A2 WB will allow changes to it without disrupting constraints. Before this seemed to work only partially without errors.
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
emails about added links, simple extruder, and the printer manual docs.
=Tues May 8, 2018=
Reviewed more STEAM Camp docs and made requests on the gdocs for the printer manual to fix the missing nuts.
correcting the ball valves on PCv17.11. SAE parts need to be made next, but for simple plumbing parts that can be generated in the pipe workbench I will make spreadsheet CSV lists.
Added more links and better organized some wiki pages since the previous ones I made were fairly bare. Adding one base starting wiki page for each project would help the new team get started on the wiki quicker and I see new templates using wiki code.
The engine fit through the frame is still a concern as well. Increasing the sides 1/4" and moving the top up will give a little. The question is how much of a puzzle will getting the engine through a side holes be. According to the CAD the engine height is over 16.5" and the holes now are 16". I think reduction of the bottom side widths from 2" to ~1-1.5" will fix the issue and the frame strength should be ok. The only significant weakness is in the monolithic nature of the tank-frame. If it takes a hard hit while on top of the back of the LT and the bending of the frame results in tank leaks that is a major loss or total rebuild.
I updated PVC assembly with 10mm nuts and adjusted the heat bed relative to them to compensate for the ~0.5mm difference of 3/8" nuts assuming that is a better fit. The JB Weld method well always cause some variation. I think the heat break on the simple extruder could be shorter yet, but plenty of feedback is needed on the simple extruder assembly before assuming anything.
meeting prep.
https://gitlab.com/Abe_Anderson/d3d-mini-pvc
I uploaded an update for the meeting, but the ball valves are still wrong.
I think it would still be best to migrate the simple extruder and assembly to its own repo or something similar.
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
=Fri Sep 27, 2019=
There are number of changes to make to the frame, so now I'm thinking separating the frame into its own module for simplification will make editing some things faster even if I have to edit the module more.
I linked a few things in the STEAM Camp doc and added links to connect pages better on the wiki.
=Sun May 6, 2018=
=Thurs Sep 26, 2019=
I finally got freecad-legacy 0.16 installed functionally. I expected it to be faster to edit with, but it seems to be running the same. Slower than usual and crashing on basic functions. Maybe its some missed incompatibility with newer libs or the way I'm editing the chain of parts for the grate.
I've been reviewing the STEAM Camp material and thinking about critical feedback I see in some of the interviews. So I made some notes on collaboration efficiency in my general working doc.
The slowdowns and bugs with the Assembly2 WB seem to be universal across systems so it must be the file itself.
I've also been thinking about a better tool head attachment. Even for the PVC frame. It probably isn't stiff enough for heavier milling, but tool head quick attaches and even automated tool changers are important for making the D3D more of a small universal micro-factory CNC machine. One issue I can see is mounting to the U-Axis carriage currently requires mounting around it on both sides. The other open-source solutions [[kinematic coupling]] with three points and this seems ideal. Given there are already open-source designs by lulzbot, e3d, and others we should be able to adapt something without reinventing the wheel. Maybe even just pick and existing standard. The question is how best to mount it to the carriage. If it is feasible I can see reasons to add some bolt holes to the carriage if it makes it more universal it is a win.
I edited the grate for simplicity, but kept using the same methods then recalled I wanted to consider making the front holes more useful by cutting a pattern of rectangular strips drawn more simply in the sketcher without the multi-transform function, which may be overly complex and causing issues.
https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,622267,622362
I need to move on to fixing the plumbing mistakes now though. I'm thinking about how to finalize the frame as a module, but plumbing parts that get welded to it make sense to include and positions still depend on many other external components so simplifying the frame separate seems problematic for editing. Despite the fact it may speed freecad work up.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinematic_coupling
I reworked the 1/2" NPT returns and re-constrained them and the 3/4" return. The A2 WB and other operations continue to be slower than before. There is a short period of no apparent activity before the app greys and takes several seconds or more to process the changes even when clicking certain things that without making changes.
http://download.lulzbot.com/
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
=Wed May 2, 2018=
[[kinematic coupling]]
Finally got the frame grate for PCv17.11 ewdited in FreeCAD 0.16 using virtual box feels a little slower, but mostly the same interface issues and constraints behaving odd again.
[[D3D tool changers]]
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
=Mon Sep 23, 2019=
Now looking at the hole pattern now it is a little excessive and should be reduced. To much of a CNC Torch table torture test. Instead of hex holes 2 to 4 columns of slots ~4" long several rows high would be less wasteful. In fact 1" square strips would be more useful as scraps.
I made comments to multiple D3D files about the lack of M10 nuts required to fit over the 8mm rods for JB welding the heat bed as shown in the printer manual.
=Tues May 1, 2018=
Looking at other printer BOM's...
Reading the PartDesign Workbench User Manual is interesting, but not detailed enough. I am experimenting with basic examples in freecad and reviewing the functions individually. I'm also experimenting with the migration and its parameters to see how it affects the existing file.
=Sun Sep 22, 2019=
While the new version of freecad is important to figure out I'm thinking of finishing the PC v17.11 CAD in FreeCAD 0.16 by running OSE Linux 4.3 so it done and it may be easier to start with a fresh project to learn 0.17 better. I still think migrating the old files to 0.17 is important, but the learning curve may take time and dedicating time to developing new tutorials on how to use 0.17 and migrate as needed may be a better use of time.
I responded to an email from Marcin about the Simple Extruder assembly and STEAM camps.
Meeting prep.
uploaded photo of the simple extruder assembly.
Considering the freecad and Assembly2 WB version situations it is a good time to discuss software dev version compatibility and how to develop most efficiently with the rest of the freecad and open source dev community.
Working out more PVC assembly details with the heat bed mounting (JB Welded nuts). I recently changed most of my Freecad installs over to the app image packages and just had to reinstall the fastener WB for some reason.
=Sun Apr 29, 2018=
Another relevant side topic I researched recently is battery packs. We have a retired nomadic friend that visits the farm in winter who is science-oriented and recently shared a video of a battery pack build and said he would like to try a build this winter. His goal is to design a small solar and battery pack system for periodic portable cooking because the cost is now low enough it might save him money over gas tanks. I'm skeptical of it, but I learned quite a bit from him before about such topics so I will document anything that comes of it. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1iUEES6Pqmc6Fz3nmrmUMhBxXQI_egm7yCMXfZ0wrr-0/edit#slide=id.p
Testing migrating to the new part design WB is a bit confusing and appears to create chaos with the model most likely in constraints. I'm not sure A2 WB works at all after migration. I can see definite benefits to the new functions and methods, but it is a more significant learning curve than I expected.
The printer manual appears to reference and BOM that does not include large enough nuts to go over the 8mm rods. It looks like it needs to be 4 x M10 nuts. Further investigation is needed.
I'm looking into the FreeCAD file migration issue more. I think it is not a problem because a few people were using the 0.17 daily before and I have yet to notice any signifcant problems. For the record freecad daily 0.18 has not executed and loaded for me yet.
edited meeting doc again and added reevaluation of meetings to the agenda to see if we can get more attendees at a different time if needed. The meetings tend to be more broad brainstorming that veers off focus some, but individual progress reports are useful for the big picture. I think we need to create more jitsi meets as needed in case of overlapping meetings. https://meet.jit.si/OSE_Dev_Team_Meeting
Assembly WB development https://forum.freecadweb.org/viewforum.php?f=20
I'm trying to adjust the filament path angle more, but having trouble rotating or attaching the sketch to a datum plane correctly.
more progress on BOM lately and now I'm attempting to update the CAD, but having some more issues with constraints and the way FreeCAD 0.17 is running seems to have changed. editing sketches and constraints feel slower and updates cause application pauses and hangs more. Other than that I find the interface changes ok and see some new functions to explore.
I added the nema 17 motor mounting bracket. I think the simple extruder should be moved and restructured under it's own gitlab project, but the gitlab site is glitching at the moment.
Waiting for the constraint solver is making me wonder if re-assembling all the parts again would help. It may also lead to a better process and method of organizing the tree view. Having more simple parts would also reduce the number and complexity of constraints, but this model is not that complex and I keep needing to edit the frame relative to other final parts.
Considering A2WB is technically no longer maintained and regardless of whether it can be made to work now, I think for long-term FreeCAD use a new workflow needs to be found before it is completely deprecated.
I made repeated small changes to the simple extruder parts to find ideal alignment of the plastic parts, bolt holes and filament path. At first I expected to leave the bolt points alone, but after fixing the symmetry in the filament path and experimenting with the angle/spring tension it was clear the bolt point on the tension arm didn't look right. It is a concern to experiment with the bolt points because of post-print shrinkage. General experimentation done on the original may effectively need to be redone since the CAD is redrawn from measurements anyway. I made notes on a possible mod to the spring design, but making it more compact looks like it has tight tolerances and will require a lot of experimentation with prints so that is something for later.
This makes me want to rethink prioritizing learning more internal aspects of FreeCAD and workbenches. FreeCAD is a critical app and we need to work with that community as the project moves forward.
Tips and recommendations for assembly and issues with 0.17 https://forum.freecadweb.org/viewtopic.php?t=16697
“part design next” WB is asking me to migrate my file to 0.17
Official FreeCAD Project for collaboration and PLM https://www.freecadweb.org/wiki/Resource_framework_project
=Tues Aug 27, 2019=
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
made adjustments to simple extruder including the plastic parts. I'm trying not to change most of the original metrics since they appear to be accurate caliper measurements, but somethings seem way off around the filament path. So I'm centering some holes symmetrically and I added measurements in spreadsheets based on the NEMA17 standard.
got some parts updated, but need to migrate the file to 0.17 to use the new functions I need to modify the frame front. I see a new larger learning curve for 0.17 and I noticed other more advanced freecad tutorials with good info, but even they are out of date.
I added a "spring" for more visuals. I think I can use datum plants and lines to help find the right positions for the filament holes. I increased thickness of the spring base bracket as well. It would be nice to countersink a standard hex socket M3 instead of the countersunk head style screw. It also seems the bolt in the spring could be eliminated, but that may require some prints to refine the fit due to shrinkage etc. I'm also thinking some of the CAD needs to be bigger due to measurements of the original PLA due to shrinkage. Changing the angle of the bearing bracket only made it look worse.
I keep finding more slight alignment issues. Looking back at the recent photos there appear to be a known issues. Most of these details will never be that perfect when cut by hand and there must be enough slop in the PLA parts they bolt up anyway, but it is nice to get the CAD close to check all the measurements. The filament path definitely looks like some updates would help feed.
with the prior discussion on software tools integration websites etc. I was thinking of https://www.wevolver.com/projects again and it looks like the site is slow to progress, but I think the v2 with versioning is a new concept there. Wevolver essentially looks like an attempt to create a closed source web interface for online collaborative engineering. It is interesting to imagine what could be done with an open source version using all the open source software tools.
=Sat Aug 24, 2019=
=Mon Apr 23, 2018=
Reworking at the simple extruder mounting bracket assembly. https://gitlab.com/Abe_Anderson/d3d-mini-pvc/tree/master/Hardware/Simple%20Extruder
Looking at what pipe fittings can be used to mount through the tank wall to clarify the BOM and fix the CAD. I was thinking about this differently before in tank plumbing to prevent air entrainment. The photos of prior builds show the elbows welded to the inside tank wall, which means nipples must thread through the wall into those. With 1/4" plate and ~3/4" of thread length question is will a 1/2" thread contact seal ok. Cheap black iron pipe can be used in the tank, but corrosion resistance is important outside.
The current simple mounting bracketing style is similar to the e3d bracket. In photos the original looks like a black metal angle bracket. The new printed version that looks possibly warped a little. So, something in between would be better. Also, because it mounts between the base block and the motor there may be thermal issues. This seems likely given the melted appearance of the spring bracket in photos. To prevent possible warping and given the need to push the temps up for materials other than PLA some insulating material like PTFE adhesive tape may help. PTFE tape appears to be used on the threads in the original photos already. I suppose a longer heat break could help as well, but it already looks to long in the current CAD. For flex filament I was assuming a custom Al milled design would be difficult, but for testing, I wonder if just using a longer heat break threaded up through the base block and ground on a wheel to shape would be good enough.
created cad with spreadsheet for nema motors with some mounting details for adding to the simple extruder assembly.
I watched the Thurs meeting.
I only entered data in the spreadsheet for nema 17, but it could probably be designed with more automated selection options depending on how much more hidden complexity is available in the freecad spreadsheet WB.
I'm prioritizing rectifying any difference in the PC v17.11 BOM (copied form v17.10) with the [[Power Cube Conceptual Design]] in order to make sure some of the final plumbing parts are correct before I draw/assemble them in CAD.
A priority change I think could be better with the documentation is potentially eliminating or reducing the importance of the VBOM's by replacing them with more the accurate CAD diagrams and BOM's generated from those. The VBOM concept seems useful as scratch pads for developing layout and general interconnection of components but tends to lack detail and the files are harder to keep up with requiring more editing time. In general, it is another separate layer that needs to be updated frequently.
Potential tools like OpenPLM need to be reviewed again and if not up to standards new code development would be beneficial.
tested simple extruder assembly and adjusted simple extruder metal part dimensions.
Coding tools like Work Benches to reduce the overhead between design and documentation will result in more productive focus in the long term. Developing good tools now is important. Finding more developers interested in software should be easier than some of the other development team needs.
Getting the documentation methods streamlined will help speed development. There is a lot of instruction and text on the wiki and whether it is up to date or not it is so much it will always be difficult to follow guidelines for new and old developers.
I've just noticed the updates to FreeCAD. It looks like 0.17 is official now. I liked a lot of the new features I saw in 0.17 before and I hope the transition is smooth.
=Fri Jul 26, 2019=
Another documentation file related issue is the Development Template Simple version is shorter, but still has many other sheets in the workbook this is making it slow to load. Lots of useful looking sheets, but if they aren't being utilized extensively they might as well be separated into other documents.
I think I resolved the freecad error with the nozzle file. I may understand it partly. <pre>The error message is: Object can only be in a single GeoFeatureGroup</pre> I rebuilt the pads from the sketches, but first had to remove the body and part containers and re-add everything in the right order and place. I tried detaching the hex sketch and reattaching it, which kept giving the same error primarily because I kept clicking the wrong function. I was mistakenly clicking the negative loft button instead of additive. I explored the new additive and subtractive functions before with interesting results but frequently forget.
I went to finish the nozzle and the file is somewhat corrupted. Using the compound function may have caused the problem. That workflow did not look good so I tried to delete it to do a fusion instead and that is when problems started. The part design WB then detected issues and started suggesting migration to the new part WB. I tried auto migration and other ways. One fix suggests separate part bodies for each pad. Maybe that is a more correct workflow in some cases, but I think using different functions from other WB's including the loft changes the tip or creates a separate feature without a body by default causing confusion. I may also have attempted moving different features to the body or part containers at different times by dragging them that caused issues as well. I need to understand the suggested workflow for bodies and part containers better. I may need to delete the pads and recreate them by reattaching the sketches. Or it may be faster to try redoing it in a different order.
Updating the VBOM and BOM for PC v17.11 I'm not finding ideal cheaper solutions for cutting pipe nipples in half like https://fastfittings.com/products/1-inch-npt-lead-free-brass-nipples compared to the previous hydraulic nipples such as https://www.surpluscenter.com/Hydraulics/Hydraulic-Adapters-Fittings/NPT-to-NPT/NPT-Male-to-NPT-Male---Hex-Nipple/3-4-NPT-Hex-Nipple-9-5404-12-12.axd
added image <gallery>File:Power Cube v17.08.png</gallery> for [[Power Cube Library]]
I also looked at and experimented with the heat bed size, the printable area and how it is defined in Marlin.
=Tues Apr 10, 2018=
I also added some info to [[Analysis of PLM Software Conflict Resolution]]. Generally improving the collaboration software abilities seems important, but with few contributors, it remains a lower priority. However, this is somewhat a paradox since ease of use would encourage more users to engage in prototype development.
Given likely slight changes in the BOM's etc. I think it easier just to make copies so they are ready to edit correctly. In fact, Iimportance'm thinking it will be better just make a copy of an entire "package". That being a google doc's folder and/or wiki pages template code etc.
=Tue Jul 23, 2019=
Unfortunately, even if an entire folder of gdoc's for a particular project can be copied and edited they still need to be published individually on the wiki.
added simple extruder files to https://gitlab.com/Abe_Anderson/d3d-mini-pvc/tree/master/Hardware/Simple%20Extruder
When copying docs they also need to be labeled clearly as such somehow until edited differently from the previous version.
I'm guessing the dimensions from the photos & using spreadsheets so these can be changed easily later.
I got most of the spreadsheets & CAD done for the metal parts of the simple extruder. The sheet values are approximate on a few things, but I tweaked them to look close.
The spreadsheets and values are surprisingly easy to edit. I wasn't really able to break them. If you move alias cells it clears them in the sheet, but not in the CAD values, so it is fairly easy to fix. It is time-consuming with all the data entry but looks worth it in the long run.
I see the continuing work on the OSE Simple Extruder. https://photos.app.goo.gl/fWUX8ynAdqcn6Fvs6 https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17BLyvyk1EbrMOhkCfeSwByAq86SemSLX
embedded new copies of docs to [[Power Cube v17.11]]
While there is a lot of flexibility in the PVC and clamp design one of the less exact remaining details is the mounting if the extruder and its position relative to the bed. A mod of the E3D bracket should work fine, but a better quicker modular system would be useful. I'm curious to see what open solutions lulzbot uses.
and to [[Power Cube v18.01]]
Lulzbot has cat guards, which must be open source. This seems similar to an "enclosure". Reprap forums suggested while it may be legal for many to build enclosures individually it should not be discussed due to the yet unexpired patents.
=Sat Apr 7, 2018=
In order to run Printers indoors or outdoors, animal guards would be useful. https://ohai.lulzbot.com/project/cat_guard/accessories/
Reviewing Development Template use for burndown charts. Currently, the burndown charts show work as mostly incomplete, which is not the case.
Moved the extruder mount underneath the carriage this gets it much close to the bed. The Simple extruder might be close to long enough. However, I'm uncertain about wiring and cable chain logistics.
Some of the old files like BOM's and VBOM's appear ok, but there could be small changes or less purchases for certain items if parts are replaced with other off the shelf or shop fabbed parts.
Many of the additionally needed links to work in the development template will be to future work such as the CAM and cut lists. Others like software appear unnecessary.
=Tues Apr 3, 2018=
adding plastic 3D printed parts section to BOM and sections in wiki/part gallery to note printing tests and recommended parameters. Tested print settings could also be individually listed in STL file pages.
Looking at OSE pipe workbench [[OSE piping workbench]]. I see a few examples with more detail to the pipe fittings like the NPT style. It would be nice to differentiate visually in case a project contains both PVC with a smooth injection molded look or metal cast with thicker ends like NPT. I see some info about color so all PVC could be white unless some other color coding is desirable for assembly. I've been curious how the flamingo code draws the parts to some extent. I'm guessing it uses underlying FreeCAD code and is less similar to OPENSCAD in that it draws sub-parts and effectively assembles them into a compound.
=Thurs Jul 18, 2019=
meeting prep.
reviewed more CEB soil mixer info and returned Aidan's email.
Updated OSE Pipe WB and reviewed the files and structure. I see DXF's that look like they are being referenced for the base shapes and the CSV tables for dimensions and angles. Testing the create elbow dialog just seems to create Base->Sweep, Trajectory, and elbow_group folder.
=Wed Jul 17, 2019=
=Mon Apr 2, 2018=
got email from Aiden yesterday whom I missed in the jitsi meet. Added some scribblings to the soil mixer doc. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1RJg3LyG_jI_gmUwBFuwNjbAMVUmuYUo7uQVjLDV9Qiw/edit#slide=id.g5dc8542d49_4_0
[[File:0.5in NPT elbow.fcstd]]
It is a little hard to visualize in 3d so far. The height logistics of loading design over a press as well as the feeding and exiting of materials seems difficult. Rotating it 45 deg is a half solution. Maybe a more complex drawer design would be worth considering. I can imagine the drawer system will need cleaning due to cement. I think the cement access will need a cover to keep water out in case that is sprayed into the soil hopper as well.
The elbows are designed with longer sweeps than standard parts such as on McMaster-Carr https://www.mcmaster.com/#44605k114/=1c5lahe There are different ways, possibly simpler to shape more accurate since the sweep was hard to work with. The loft tool may be easier, although positioning the end rings relative to one another via constraints seemed infeasible, but maybe hidden primitives could be used. Redoing these doesn't seem like a priority currently.
I like the metered/dosing concept for 1 block at a time. I think that will reduce the need for raw horsepower frequently seen on big batch mixers. A good hammermill is important to since soil types vary. With test SCEB's here I think many of the poorer higher cement content ones have chips, slight crumbliness, weakness due to poor mixing. If the clay is moist it clumps and can't mix well with sand. Here the soil is mostly silt, sand, rocks, & sandstone often on top of a hard moist clay layer 18" down or so. Even if there is enough material in some areas on location digging the right amounts and thorough mixing are a challenge. In fact, in some cases I can see it needs to be dug, then dried some then milled so it powders and mixes better.
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
=Tues Jul 9, 2019=
constrained in 1/2" elbows and pipes on return lines in the tank.
cleaned up meeting doc for next week. Reviewing D3D BOM's trying to decide which parts & features to drop or add.
More significant prioritization needs to be given to the file management, documentation, wiki, and process so that the burndown and other data collection works correctly. The template and files really need to be done first and prioritized over getting work done so the order of work operations is correctly organized and processed for the burndown.
Continued reviewing workshop info and the D3D CNC Mill CAD, which is impressive.
=Tues Mar 27, 2018=
I see improvements all around in the workshop media. The hard part seems to be getting critical feedback from workshop participants, especially less technical people for which more feedback is needed to refine the educational media. I think the technical peoples perspective is generally it's nice to review the detailed engineering info and it is great for the average person to learn lots of STEM. But, what is most useful from the less technical persons perspective?
meeting prep.
At first, I was thinking a lot of the info is also geared towards more visual learners and maybe other styles need to be covered as well, but I also see the OSE Design Manuals have outlined lists even though they are in slides, so there is room to consider more of both. Obviously, the hands-on shop parts are probably everyone's favorites, but since the lectures are likely precursors to specific shop work getting everyone up to speed is helpful to the swarm effect. As usual to refine all that practically requires a whole other team.
resizing 3/4" elbow to 1/2" for the majority of returns into the tank.
Also getting part counts into https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1lgtDWFMfNn7fEidPdlap_8PqSDXJFyM_AKvdjq6KSWs/edit#gid=0
=Sun Mar 25, 2018=
In order to do the plumbing inside the tank, I searched for CAD for elbows to use as a reference to create an editable FreeCAD version. The sweep util was giving me some trouble, but I think I have nearly solved it.
=Fri Jul 5, 2019=
[[File:0.75in NPT elbow.fcstd]]
I listened to some videos from the workshop and glanced over the 2" U-Axis doc, but still, don't have a clear picture of many concepts. I'm surprised at the size of the CNC Mill if I'm understanding correctly it may have about a 2' working area/volume? I figured for a precise mill for small metal parts that several inches would be sufficient.
Assembled the 3/4" elbow and a pipe into the tank on the filter return.
A question: Given that much of the OSE workflow tends to bias towards visual learning styles how might the guided learning style in workshops be done to enable those of other learning styles to better understand existing visual documentation tools and apps?
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
Individuals can choose different tasks that suit their style, but we need people to learn freecad from whatever approach suits them. There were other requests for more vocabulary definitions and a glossary was a suggested solution that would be ideal. There are also existing wiki's and docs for apps like freecad, for which more links could be provided and reviewed in the lectures.
=Tues Mar 20, 2018=
Updated my working doc (top right) with a pros/cons list of using another spreadsheet to speed swarm work of part spec collection prior to CAD drawings.
I think it might be faster in ways, but I'm uncertain about the overall flow and hangups. Current methods in design sprints and workshops are to lookup the links in the BOM and find specs for parts you pick. There is some double work looking up interfacing parts specs even in a workshop where individuals can directly communicate it requires more time and interruptions. This should leave more time for needed for discussion of clearances/tolerances and understanding interactions between parts.
meeting prep.
=Thurs Jul 4, 2019=
Looking at burndown chart situation. Definitely a need to add chart creation as the first task when starting a new project.
away from my Linux workstation still without a good laptop, but I've reviewed some of the active steam camp materials. Interesting to see the development and discussion as usual.
I'm trying to understand the details for the [[2" Universal Axis]]. It looks like they need a number of changes to be ready for printing.
added template for [[LifeTrac v17.10]]
I added a spreadsheet to [[File:2axismotorpiece.fcstd]] because I think Williams [[FreeCAD Workflow]] seems ideal for sharing consistent data values across many similar parts quickly.
Maybe a gdoc sheet would be good too. It could be sectioned with values shared across parts and changed in real-time. It should be easy to copy/paste those cells to freecad sheets then there is less data entry for each person and values remain consistent. It should also reduce typos. When values are uncertain it is also easy to copy lists of needed dimensions to keep dev's on the right track and remind people what data is still missing.
edited [[Power Cube Conceptual Design]] to add info on elbows and pipes inside the tank for return lines to prevent air entrainment.
I finished cutting up the PVC sch 40 pipe a while back for the D3D PVC Mini. I'm traveling for a few days but hope to figure out how to collaborate more during the workshop.
See photos of previous tank work https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipM3mvI1hki8vMh9vrCPgQcvjZKkq2o2IfSWjqRuSwSdyFqUSMVOok-MkSQaUYGnbQ?key=SUVSSTl4WXpBV0lHWjMyQ2c5a1I4REZXMDlyV0d3
For the D3D PVC Mini I need to do more precise CAD of the simple extruder for which some CAD is not yet done. I think I can approximate a placeholder good enough.
The inner tank wall will probably need a little rework to make sure the elbows weld on the inside good and the pipe nipples thread through the tank wall into them easily.
I also need to further research the sources from existing BOM's. Jon reported issues for D3D Ohio parts and I'd like to avoid those.
=Sun Mar 18, 2018=
I'm not far from ordering parts, but some of the little details are going to be important to verify first.
Busy lately with spring coming. Looking at the oil filter assembly position it seems to clear the frame sufficient to rotate 360 degrees so it can screw on over 3/4" without hitting the tank wall.
I'm glad to hear the STEAM Camp chose to do the Torch Table project. I think the priority order is Torch Table, CNC Router, Metal Printer. Because the Table has been in waiting for a while and well accelerate other projects significantly. The CNC Router is next because it can take lower precision parts and make them higher precision via subtractive work. The metal printer is relatively unknown and creates small low precision parts initially. Empirical testing is needed to find the hangups for the metal printer, but the use cases are more long term.
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
I adjusted constraints on the plumbing fittings to realistic estimates for threading depth and added a 3/4" pipe piece for the filter input.
=Tues Jun 18, 2019=
Plumbing details are mainly what is left in the PC CAD itself. I think drawing and adding 1/4" FPT parts for the quick couplers on the case returns, the pump fittings and checking the cooler fittings are obvious next CAD steps.
Busier than expected with farm guests lately, but I am continuing on the D3D PVC Mini. I've cut sch 40 3/4" PVC to ~10.66" for testing. I already observe at such short lengths it is quite rigid. At 2ft it has noticeable flex under force, but infills could reduce that significantly. Vibration is harder to judge, but when supported well at both ends peices don't visibly vibrate much.
=Tues Mar 13, 2018=
=Fri Jun 7, 2019=
started to prepare for meeting and my internet went down. Checking current meeting docs.
added a bed holder to the assembly. It still needs a different design because of the offsets with the frame. To keep the bed holder length short it would be better to move the Z axis inside, but it also doesn't look like that will fit with the clamp.
editing the tank wall plumbing holes keeps altering the way the constraints work. Errors result after and resolving has tended to result in incorrect assembly. Redoing more constraints seems to have improved constraint function now though.
=Tues Jun 4, 2019=
I reassembled most it with new constraints, edited the inner tank wall and added holes for the smaller case return lines.
Busy with farm guests so likely to miss the meeting.
I also started using some different plumbing parts and sweeps representing hose to visualize arrangement.
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
Next steps trying to get good enough measurements of the simple extruder to create an assembly to help determine which way is best to orient the extruder on the X-axis.
It looks like the harder hose connection might be the suction line to the pump in the main PC, since it is short and needs to bend alot or loop around a bunch of other connections.
=Sat Jun 1, 2019=
made tank filler and breather cap based on welding 2" NPT over 1.5" NPT with a screw cap on the 2".
attempted FEM in FreeCAD on rods some trouble at first, but finally succeeded on the tube as well. I'm uncertain how easy it would be to add complexity and multiple part assemblies and materials. It seems to only work well in simplicity, but part of that is technical experience as well. At first I was concerned with following tutorials closer and in the same order, but I think the errors were fixed by resets of freecad and finer mesh when needed. Attempting a realistic large scale 4ft gantry of the Universal axis may not be worth the time. I'm uncertain yet if it can model the compression and stiffness concepts.
Need to consider angle of operation on slopes for spill over and fill level. Breather section of cap may need to be taller. I'm also thinking the filter will go in the 1.5" section below the breather part for smaller print and so it is closer to the tank, although this still doesn't seem to like it would allow for overfill visibility.
I added more plumbing fittings to the suction lines on the ball valves then added some sweeps for hose examples. I also added the 1/4" NPT pipe sections for case return lines and constrained those. I made and added the engine rubber feet as well. Everything seems to be constrained ok.
=Tues May 28, 2019=
Reviewing [[Power Cube Conceptual Design]] to double check anything else easy I'm missing. There are still a few possible tweaks to frame size and assembly for ease of construction and plumbing.
Added more notes.
The overall assembly and interconnection of cubes onto the LT will need more consideration as well.
Working on CAD assembly. moving X axis alignment. Further grouping and labeling all parts and axis' as similar to exiting OSE D3D machines as possible.
=Sat Mar 10, 2018=
updated inner tank wall plumbing holes into a staggered pattern to test arranging plumbing.
=Mon May 27, 2019=
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
Reviewing simple extruder and researching many other CNC/3D printer related ideas. Notes and documentation in Working Doc above.
=Sun May, 26, 2019=
editing the inner tank wall again mixed up the constraints on the PC differently this time. It insisted on deleting a main engine constraint and then solved the plumbing and hole constraints correctly, but pulled the frame apart strangely. I do not see the underlying causes of this behavior, but it is not entirely inconsistent.
Lots of printer research, YT videos, reprap.org, and OSE are all helpful. I can see 24V is a tempting mod given most of the electronics are designed to run at even higher voltages, but starting with a small printer I doubt there are many power or performance issues. I have not found any better info about PVC with cement in small pipes so I am skeptical but hopeful. Even #2 (1/4") rebar won't fit in 3/4" sch 40 PVC. I'm getting 20ft of sch 40 PVC because it comes in 10ft sticks and the extra I can use for testing. Hoping to see some operational data on [[D3D Ohio v18.02]] soon too. I've been thinking about the mounting of all components & wiring. It would be nice if a single box for the components can be made slim, distribute mass & add bracing to the structure as well. It is hard to add angle braces without blocking access to the bed.
=Sun Mar 4, 2018=
I'm also reviewing the simple extruder, which is indeed simple. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1PRpAmQNzDs5laibZo86weuMaEYJLBIvFwt3KOx8DPn8/edit#slide=id.g51b7c7f1c2_0_4
I'm uncertain of mounting options. It doesn't look like I can just use existing parts. My first thought was the hot end should be mounted towards the Z axis so the bed rails can be as short as possible, but there is the clamp to clear. I'm curious about bed size, mass, & Z motion. Is it reasonable to imagine an 8" print area with only 1 Z?
I added groups/folders to the CAD assembly for easier axis motion. https://gitlab.com/Abe_Anderson/d3d-mini-pvc
adding a burn down appears simple, but requires an admin login to OSEDev and the spreadsheet cell total ID from the URL's below.
fascinating thread on composite frames PVC is mentioned. https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,578597,579248
searched for more info on cement in PVC and I found some interesting links, but nothing similar. Listening/watching many 3d printer build videos, reviewing BOM's and looking at part options and prices.
started mod of extruder motor mount. https://gitlab.com/Abe_Anderson/d3d-mini-pvc/blob/master/Hardware/extruder%20motor%20mount.FCStd
I removed the extra crossbars from the bottom plates.
=Thurs May 23, 2019=
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
Reviewing lots of 3d printer info lately and it seems RAMPS has a lot of potential upgrades or issues to fix depending on how you look at it. It looks like RAMPS is still used mostly because it is somewhat robust or at least cheap to burn out. I suspect I'm going to want Trinamic drivers just because of the noise factor since I've set up the printer space next to my desk. TMC2130's are apparently all around more efficient too. It looks like it is better to run them at 24V though, which would require even more customizing. I don't see many variations in the RAMPS with quality components & heat sinks etc. there is the cheap and the expensive.
[[File:PC17.11 auxiliary.fcstd]]
Adapting a quick attach looks complex without more experience and a working 3d printer to test PLA parts with. Adapting the titan bracket looks easy to start, but it is different. It is thinner than the previous mk8 style bracket and may not offer enough clamping force or strength if it gets warm? So, I'll try merging the old and new together in CAD.
Editing the tank wall hole positions is proving a little harder with a more complex pattern needed. I think a redesign of that sketch is in order if possible. But, to contrain the plumbing the holes will just cause issues so constraining from the edges and just doing some math to position each part should work better.
=Tues May 21, 2019=
=Tue Feb 27,2018=
Thinking about the power cube hooks and balance for lifting I'm wondering if a third hook point is needed or at least some consideration for weight.
Edited the ball valve for a 90 deg handle option to aid in more detailed plumbing arrangement.
thinking about the alignment part and axis length. I don't think it needs much space to work. Also considering extruder attachment methods.
[[File:Ball Valve 1in NPT.fcstd]]
Updated Small PC with latest version of single stage pump-engine module.
[[File:PC17.11 auxiliary.fcstd]]
meeting prep.
meeting prep.
=Sat Feb 24, 2018=
Looking at the old Mk8 Style extruder motor holder for potential modifications.
redrawing PC top plate with hook points sill needs to include tank top.
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
I've had some issues getting that sketch to constrain that I'm not seeing immediately. There are many small parts and details yet to be done from the basic concepts, but after seeing how the plumbing fittings unconstrain to the holes everytime that is changed and how many edits I keep having to make to the frame I think prioritizing doing the plumbing by the numbers (maybe with constraints to edges instead of holes) will be the next best step since the plumbing could create a need to adjust the frame slightly.
I lost time on the top plate sketch due to stray components I didn't know were there. Finally, redrew it better and found them in the process.
I re-added the engine-pump module and put ball valve clones on the suction outlets. Clearly, the handles will be a complex alignment issue and it is hard to know ideal pattern without also knowing hose positions. Best guesses can be made and handles cut off, but clearances for getting vice lock pliers on to the handles would be needed anyway. It may help to make a closed version of the ball valve. The bottom plate also needs to be edited for strength and possible turning the handles downward below the cube.
=Wed Feb 21, 2018=
added shaft coupler into engine coupler pump module.
[[File:PC v17.11 engine pump module.fcstd]]
=Tues Feb 20, 2018=
detailing single stage hydraulic pump to update engine-pump module and to check more possible frame adjustments.
meeting.
simplified the LT with the PC's for checking position options.
[[File:LT master cad.fcstd]]
added ports to single stage pump
[[File:Hydraulic Pump.fcstd]]
edited engine coupled to pump module.
[[File:PC v17.11 engine pump module.fcstd]]
edited coupler to add 1/4" key under set screw on 1" engine shaft end and reduced 9 spline pump shaft end to 5/8".
[[File:PC 1708 coupler.fcstd]]
=Mon Feb 19, 2018=
reviewing needed changes and more models of ball valves.
created ball valve from references of with NPT size of 3/4". This should be easily scaled to 1" as well.
[[File:Ball Valve 0.75in NPT]]
Not a perfectly editable workflow, but easily modified to 1".
[[File:Ball Valve 1in NPT.fcstd]]
added some hook points for hoisting auxiliary PC.
[[File:PC17.11 auxiliary.fcstd]]
=Thurs Feb 15, 2018=
checking the pump-engine distances and simplifying the power cubes for checking stacking on the LT.
joined jitsi meet for call with Marcin about PC's and LT v17.10.
[[Power Cube Conceptual Design]]
Lots of details to update. Vent Cap assembly, suction line 1" ball valves, add four 1/4" case drain returns, re-arrangement of all holes for lines, single stage pump is about 1" shorter, filter adapter needs clearance perpendicular to pipe (~4" diameter?).
Power Cubes do not fit well on LT. There is only 32" width between the LT frame. It would nice if the PC frame could be narrowed, but the cooler configuration currently prevents that.
=Tues Feb 12, 2018=
Still working on a few pipe fitting details such as making CAD for 3/4" NPT pipe section for hose suction lines. Overall the next details are related to ergonomics or logistics of use on the LT. Therefore I'm looking at connections and common accessibility needs such as fueling and engine control. A rail system or bracket structure for mounting on the LT may increase modular usability but adds complexity overall.
How heavy are a main PC and a auxiliary? Can two strong humans lift the main cube up on top of the others without another machine to assist?
There are also still measurements needed to verify extents such as the engine-pump module height and length.
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
getting a bug constraining the red color-coded 3/4" NPT pipe sections
Planning to meet with Marcin on power cube stacking logistics for [[LifeTrac v17.10]] on Thursday evening at 6pm CST.
http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Power_Cube_v17.08#Other_Parts The pump in the current CAD is the two-stage log splitter pump, which was never used. The correct one is probably [[File:Hydraulic Pump.fcstd]] or something close enough it can be edited to match.
I also see a few errors in the vBOM's showing incorrect pump kits.
I created a section of 3/4" NPT pipe for the 1" suction hoses to attach to and added it to the [[Hydraulic Part Library]] (redirected to [[Hydraulic Fitting Library]] probably named so for less generality) [[File:0.75in x 1.5in NPT suction pipe.FCStd]]
updated [[File:3Quarter NPT Hex Nipple.fcstd]] to standard NPT dimenions and larger hex nut specs that appear more accurate.
I resolved the FreeCAD constraint bug for the fittings. It was a pre-existing solver issue probably due to editing something like the tank wall holes. [[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
added and edited https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Y3mnDo3gNi2-OrdrrmILmlIr6i0l6xJOi-jZsefcEu0/edit#gid=1 to [[Power Cube v18.01]]
I edited the [[File:Hydraulic Pump.fcstd]] to fix a glitch and check the measurements. The extents seem close, but the corresponding axis for the magnitudes listed were never clear until the 8" measurement.
So I increased the body length to 5.125, the body width needs to be increased to 4.5 square. This will require a significant re-edit on the sketch, which currently doesn't appear to line up with that given the bolt pattern.
=Sun Feb 11, 2018=
Looking for more specific dimensions for fittings I'm finding it hard to find similar versions of the NPT to hose barb adapters on McMaster-Carr. They stock the more complex expensive types compared to the surplus center parts. Different types and materials may be close but have slightly different shapes and thicknesses. The most important dimension is the NPT end for the CNC hole cut, which should be an easy standard to work around. Also, the 3/4" pipe method is cheaper than buying adapters so I'm assuming the 3/4" NPT nominal OD pipe size + 1/8" is a good hole size.
1" NPT to barb https://www.mcmaster.com/#5363k73/=1bj2lm6
3/4" NPT to barb https://www.mcmaster.com/#5363k72/=1bj2p8x
1/2" NPT to barb https://www.mcmaster.com/#5363k71/=1bj2tdu
=Sat Feb 10, 2018=
corrected engine-pump module with updated coupling parts
[[File:PC v17.11 engine pump module.fcstd]]
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
[[File:PC17.11 auxiliary.fcstd]]
added shorter engine pump module to both versions of PC and corrected tank hole sizes on main PC. sizes should be close, but will further verify OD of 3/4in pipe for the 1" suction lines.
=Tues Feb 6, 2018=
catching up adjustments on PC CAD parts.
[[File:G22 Hydraulic Pump coupler sleeve.FCstd]]
The flange patterns need further adjustment, but the current fits the CAD so it must be close.
[[File:PC 1708 coupler.fcstd]]
shortened length to 2in as best guess given measurements of sleeve and shape of engine in CAD.
[[File:PC17.11 auxiliary.fcstd]]
adjusted grate/mesh, cooler and mount holes.
adjusting PC v17.11 outlets and inlets/outlets. The VBOM's for 17.08 and 17.10 have some differences in nip and barb sizes and part links as well as 17.10 suggesting 1in instead of the 3/4in in 17.08.
Going with 0.5in for returns except the 3/4in needed for the filter.
The [[File:3Quarter NPT Hex Nipple.fcstd]] fitting CAD size is not actually 3/4in and requires editing.
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
updated with 1/2in nips for ports except the 3/4in part redraw for the filter.
=Wed Jan 31, 2018=
[[Power Cube Genealogy]] can be updated with references to [[Solar Power Cube v17.10]] and [[Power Cube v18.01]]
I got a little lost because PC v17.10 has no CAD file. I think some things got lost over the holidays and with the MC build. As I recall PC v17.10 was built around or after the MC build and a newer modified version of PC v17.08.
=Tues Jan 30, 2018=
meeting prep.
May need some good measurements and a better idea of PC interconnection on LT for adding finishing details to PC's.
Searching for CAD models for fittings before drawing from scratch...
Clarifying Auxiliary PC version as [[Power Cube v18.01]]
The engine-pump coupler needs to be adjusted to 3" long x 2.5" OD. I assume the shaft coupler also needs editing. The accuracy on this matters since it determines the total distance needed for the cube frame. Currently the gap between the tank and pump back end is narrow, this should help increase that or even allow the cube frame to be shortened ~3" wasting less metal.
=Mon Jan 29, 2018=
Reviewing plumbing parts on previous PC's CAD, BOM's, and Part Libraries in order to check what I'm should be adding into the holes in PC V17.11.
PC v17.08 uses [[File:Barb to nptm.stp]]
But a Note says:
Initial upload is 3/4" barb. We need 1" barb for Power Cube v17.08
So, I'm thinking a redraw is needed as I don't see a 1" barb.
I'm thinking the STP's are from McMaster-Carr though...
1" seems necessary given the volume of flow and amount of hose needed (and therefore friction) with the modular design.
BOM for 17.08 has 3/4 hex nip. I'm guessing these are what is easy to weld in.
effective thread diameter is about 1.25", but I'd guess for easy fit and weld that 1.3" is tight for the CNCed holes.
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
I'll have to review media for comments on sufficient size for return lines. As I recall one return through the filter is sufficient, so probably just multiple return holes for 3/4" fittings.
3/4" NPT OD is just over 1.001", so more return holes need added and all adjusted to ~1.1"
=Sat Jan 27, 2018=
working on adjustments moving the cooler to the front requires since it changes the engine position. There isn't a lot of clearance at the front or back of the engine-pump assembly, but I think that is ok. Optimal positioning of cooler in front of the engine is also not exactly clear, but minor adjustments can be made as needed. The bottom plate engine mount point has to be moved and that is a good time to add the bolt holes.
Continuing to add details to PC. There are many holes and to add for bolts and piping yet.
[[File:PC17.11 auxiliary.fcstd]]
added holes for bolts on the front of PCv17.11 and created an editable inner tank wall with holes arranged for plumbing.
I just realized the front mesh grates may need to be halved for access to engine throttle etc. relative to ideal cooler placement. Bolt holes will need adjustment as well.
=Tues Jan 23, 2018=
Meeting prep.
Measurements are likely needed to verify some details still.
Next main details are plumbing. Verifying specific parts are accurate enough in CAD and adding to the hydraulic plumbing library will help overall.
=Sun Jan 21, 2018=
edited grate and added to [[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
=Sat Jan 20, 2018=
trying to edit details into power cubes. getting some FreeCAD crashes. Added Grate from PC v17.08 to auxiliary, but needs more editing.
[[File:PC17.11 auxiliary.fcstd]]
Still looking back through PC BOM's for rubber feet. PC v16.8 looks like the earliest version with a similar engine, but an order of rubber feet could have been for any previous engines as well.
Reworked grate to mesh and positioned it in the auxiliary CAD. The mesh is larger in data size and unnecessarily complex.
=Wed Jan 17, 2018=
Looking at previous PC CAD and BOM's to check for missing parts and the correct fittings for the tank and other plumbing.
=Tues Jan 16, 2018=
I'm still attempting to constrain engine pump module in auxiliary PCv17.11.
meeting prep.
I am concerned about FreeCAD methods and the easy editing of the files because the process has become more complex and likely not clear to others possibly including team members familiar with freecad. There are instructionals, but the process is not linear or straight forward and bugs are still an occasional problem. The logic to avoiding the bugs or correctly using the constraints is some complex decision tree I'm not sure is thoroughly documented enough anywhere other than maybe the underlying code.
This is one reason I plan to start going through a Python course again soon.
Still many details to create for the PowerCubes engine feet, holes and fasteners, plumbing fittings, hose representations, cooler screen.
added [[Hydraulic Fitting Library]] and links between PC Library and specific versions.
=Mon May 20, 2019=
Not seeing the rubber feet in any PC BOM's back to v16.8, but I found an editable grate/screen to adapt [[File:PC 1708 Grate.fcstd]].
changed x axis and added to assembly. needs more alignment.
=Mon Jan 15, 2018=
=Sun May 19, 2019=
updated [[File:PC v17.11 engine pump module.fcstd]] with simple and positionally correct version
and constrained that into [[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]].
Attempted to constrain the engine pump module into the Auxiliary PC as well, but I'm getting more bugs with it. I think it is not constrained as well as the main PC somehow. It also was not positionally correct due to the cube size difference, although the auxiliary is a derivative file of the main PC some changes or references in the copied data are causing issues. It would be good to understand what process mistake was made.
found the angular misalignment of the carriages and constrained them further. I started to add the extruder, but the 3.5MB size is a bit much and I don't see any easy way to reduce it. I think the X axis needs customizing to length first anyway.
=Fri Jan 12, 2018=
https://gitlab.com/Abe_Anderson/d3d-mini-pvc
In trying to edit the engine assembly and add the coupler sleeve I've found it is missing from assemblies all the way back to PC v17.08. This also highlights the need for clearly organized modules in the wiki PC Library. So, I think correcting the final assemblies and then separating the engine, shaft coupler, and sleeve coupler parts into a module would be ideal. It also begs the question if the CAD for the sleeve coupler is correct and how that worked out on the previous PC's. It does not appear in the PC v17.08 photos.
I keep running into bugs/crashes with the constraint solver attempting to assemble the sleeve coupler into the PC v17.08 master CAD file. Creating a separate module and reassembling later may work better.
=Thurs May 16, 2019=
[[File:PC v17.11 engine pump module.fcstd]]
https://gitlab.com/Abe_Anderson/d3d-mini-pvc numerous updates and simplifications of axis' parts. Much smaller files in some cases, but with enough features to position parts in assemblies accurately. Testing of newer freecad versions.
Note: module is positionally correct to [[File:PC1708 Master.fcstd]] since that was the last readily editable version.
<gallery>
Testing A2P WB and it works much better than A2 WB just because there are no long hangups, but I do think I've run into some other issues. It is much faster and simialr enough it is easy to use though.
X axis appears to be unlevel from the side I think some of the clamps may be at slightly different levels due to constraint picking.
I had an issue with Ubuntu after reboot likely due to a failed update. I followed iunstructions for the issue using a boot stick to run apt update and upgrade. Realizing my stick was probably out of date still I'm trying new versions of OSE Linux.
Corrected the cooler positions in PC. I moved it to the front bottom right for air flow off the fan in the pull start.
=Tues May 14, 2019=
I also noticed the [[File:G22 Hydraulic Pump coupler sleeve.FCstd]] was not included. I tried adding this for visualizing possible ducted fan designs using this part. However, further adjustments need to be made to the original engine pump coupling or length of the sleeve.
[[File:Powercube v17.11.fcstd]]
reviewing [[File:Xy bracket.fcstd]] and [[File:D3Dfinalassemblyv1902.fcstd]] recent changes to consider part use overlap or versioning.
[[File:PC17.11 auxiliary.fcstd]]
=Sat May 11, 2019=
=Tues Jan 9, 2018=
more re-assembly of D3D with new XY bracket.
Reviewing Power Cubes, LT, wiki, and YT for meeting @2PM CST.
Note for the changes to [[File:Xy bracket.fcstd]] I reworked the part off measurements and in doing so thought I'd see if just drawing half of it and mirroring would be faster. In hindsight I doubt this helped much. Checking & copying measurements or sketches from other parts takes about as much time and there may be reasons to break the symmetry. Also, the mirror function being in the part WB makes the workflow seem a little confusing. The newness of the body & part structures and how it shows in the tree are primarily what made it seem odd.
I'm still thinking about slots versus holes and I'm curious if it can be used to offset the bed (with another part) up to reach the nozzle from the overhead X axis.
Reviewing old photos from 17.08 to try to see where exactly the air mover or fan is on the engine is to be used for cooling.
Something weird is going on. Every time I try to adjust the length of the rods in the axis' the length between the top and bottom Z clamps measures slightly shorter as if the frame is adjusting smaller as well for some reason!!? Oh, missing constraints allowing movement of clamp.
From experience, I'm thinking there is an effective fan behind the pull start mechanism. It is however at the very front of the motor and I'm skeptical it is sufficient air flow, but mounting the 1240 cooler low and in the corner near the front shouldn't interfere with the pull start.
My only other thought is integrating some kinda of fan into the engine shaft to pump adapter, but that would increase the complexity of making that part and maybe cost of materials. Such a solution could, however, eliminate the need for stock off the shelf fans in general.
If the XY Bracket gets slots the X axis ends can be made flush with the back of the brackets. It is only 0.2" off one way from that now. With slots lining up the position correctly is the only major potential point of error in the assembly I can see now.
=Tues Jan 2, 2018=
=Fri May 10, 2019=
Meeting Prep.
Writing return email to Marcin. Looking at X-Y axis alignment on D3D Mini PVC. The X-Y angle bracket isn't quite symmetric, but the holes line up with the larger U-Axis parts, but not the holes in the short idler. I'm wondering if a slotted XY bracket would help make mounting various designs easier. Keeping to the universal parts is still a challenge given various sizes of frames and axis length possibilities.
Catching up and refamiliarizing with PC.
The bed height to the extruder nozzle needs to be solved as well. Bolting some existing parts together should work as in similar designs, but I don't see what is easiest yet. For some aspects it looks like changing rod length and/or mount points would still be easier.
I'm trying to understand the XY bracket misalignment more thoroughly to decide what is the more future proof universally compatible part to change. Making slots seems more future proof except that it creates the possibility of slip and error in physical assembly. I see the v19.0x use the half-carriage, but that doesn't make sense for this design and simplicity would be nice all around. I see the XY bracket sketches aren't constrained and look off, but they appear to constrain and align well in assembly. The asymmetry is only the first issue to fix. The length for this printer is different from the original use, which is why I'm considering slots. If more holes are added it will work for only the current build designs, but slots will give flexibility for future size variations.
cleaned log. For next year I think it will be more searchable to dump the monthly logs into one page of old logs.
=Sat May 4, 2019=
adjusted some specs on pump for 17.10
reworking D3D Mini PVC full assembly https://gitlab.com/Abe_Anderson/d3d-mini-pvc
I'm not sure this will be re-used for 17.11, but good to the correct for 17.10. Editing the tree on this part requires some rework, but it is simple enough. With further corrections changing the editing order or using simple component copiues with unions might be more efficient to edit in this case. Some inaccuracies in the extents, shaft, and general shape still exist since I can not find any detailed CAD diagrams from surpluscenter or Eaton.
[[File:Hydraulic pump Eaton 0.92 cu.fcstd]]
=Fri May 3, 2019=
=Wed Dec 13, 2017=
catching up on FreeCAD status. https://forum.freecadweb.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=35546
FreeCAD 0.18 is technically officially released to source code at least. 0.18 includes mostly backend updates like python 3 support and other good long term under the hood fixes. So effectively skipping 0.17 may be fairly easy.
Back from a trip that took longer than expected. Reviewing where I am with Primary and Auxiliary PC.
I see the issue I noticed before with a FreeCAD version not fully loading is 0.18.1, which is the current official stable version. FreeCAD Daily 0.18 loads ok. 0.17 is running from an app image I think. I see many new interesting workbenches I haven't tried before in the add-on manager.
Ready to finish the power cubes and move on to the next thing.
=Sat Dec 2, 2017=
Reworking the D3D Mini PVC with more separate parts like the carriages on the axis' also makes the assembly more complex. I see that the freecad assembly forum thread suggests for most simple assembly needs the part and body containers relative and absolute positioning is good enough.
Reviewing large PC and figuring out likely dimensions for the smaller cube.
Did a quick re-edit of the Main PC for the Auxiliary smaller cube.
=Tues Apr 30, 2019=
[[File:PC17.11 auxiliary.fcstd]]
improving CAD for the full assembly of https://gitlab.com/Abe_Anderson/d3d-mini-pvc
=Fri Apr 26, 2019=
=Old Logs=
Almost done with the 3D Printer shelf I think, but I'm more busy with spring planting etc.
==2018==
*[[AbeAnd Logs 2018]]
==2017==
I found some interesting 3D printed garden seeding tools and companion planting patterns. I've been hoping to find simple tools and ways to automate more complex seeding patterns. There are many plastic seed tools I've seen that might be 3d printable, but accuracy is probably important for small seed tools. Maybe adjustable tools could be designed as well. If the print quality is low precisely drilling holes ends up being needed anyway.
*[[AbeAnd Logs December]]
*[[AbeAnd Logs November]]
*[[AbeAnd Logs October]]
*[[AbeAnd Logs September]]
*[[AbeAnd Logs August]]
*[[AbeAnd Logs July]]
*[[AbeAnd Logs June]]
*[[AbeAnd Logs May]]
*[[AbeAnd Logs April]]
*[[AbeAnd Logs March]]
*[[AbeAnd Logs February]]
==2016==
https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:23466
*[[AbeAnd Logs 2016]]
http://organic.kysu.edu/CompanionSpacing.shtml
[[Category:Logs]]
Besides having shelf done for a printing workspace I need to RTM, develop and go through checklists for what 3D Printer parts I need to order f
reviewed WebGL tutorials. Trying to decide what to CAD next given the difficulties of what is immediately good enough while trying to align that with good future design goals so there to create forward momentum and reduce double work.
I've considered many possible ideas for kinematic style mounts that could be automated, but I don't think any have been viable yet. I need to look at more mechanical examples, hand draw some ideas and just try some experimental CAD. The round head bolts seem passable, but finding other generic bolts the right size may not always be easy. The shape of the plastic parts has to be complex to accommodate multiple features. A latching mechanism needs to work by moving along multiple axes and attachment of levers is not easy either.
Thurs Oct 10, 2019
Meeting. I reviewed emails and doc changes. It sounds like a lot of good progress on projects, but not a lot of uploaded files yet.
Sat Oct 5, 2019
more email with Chris & William. I exported and uploaded STL's for the Simple 3D Printer Extruder PLA parts.
I added links diagrams to the STEAM doc and did lots of brainstorming about easy printable possibly kinematic tool mount.
Also thinking about tool changing. Hoping there is some X,Y,Z dance the machine could do with a tool to release and latch it into a mount without extra motors/servos etc. A tool mount that could do that maybe complex would it might beat having extra motors easy if it is elegant and has great MTBF. No living hinges or flimsy push-push latches. Maybe it needs metal springs. I wonder if the mount mechanisms could actuate with 2-3 axes of motion if needed.
Fri Oct 4, 2019
I responded to an email from Chris about the simple extruder. More thought and reading is needed on the quick coupling concepts...
Reading more about kinematic coupling and I looked up William's extruder work from today as well. I wonder how accurate 3d printed plastic couplings could be if bolted together. That appears to work for camera mounts, but I question the repeat accuracy. I also wonder about embedding 3 nut catchers in the carriage in such a way they would be compressed and not move much post assembly. Adding the requirement of complex off the shelf metal parts like balls and grooves would likely add cost. In the long run, they could be milled, but the accuracy requirements are likely higher than what will be achieved soon.
Sun Sep 29, 2019
Doing a little more research on kinematic coupling and tool changers.
Immediately the need is just for a quick couple, but it would be nice if it was at least partially scalable for future tool changing needs.
I think there are ways to make a dock that effectively catches and releases tools without extra servo or stepper motors by using the force of moving the head in/out of the dock. I also think 3D printed plastic parts might be accurate enough for most printers if the design is good enough. I'm not familiar enough with the mechanics of kinematic coupling yet.
Sat Sep 28, 2019
emails about added links, simple extruder, and the printer manual docs.
Reviewed more STEAM Camp docs and made requests on the gdocs for the printer manual to fix the missing nuts.
Added more links and better organized some wiki pages since the previous ones I made were fairly bare. Adding one base starting wiki page for each project would help the new team get started on the wiki quicker and I see new templates using wiki code.
I updated PVC assembly with 10mm nuts and adjusted the heat bed relative to them to compensate for the ~0.5mm difference of 3/8" nuts assuming that is a better fit. The JB Weld method well always cause some variation. I think the heat break on the simple extruder could be shorter yet, but plenty of feedback is needed on the simple extruder assembly before assuming anything.
I think it would still be best to migrate the simple extruder and assembly to its own repo or something similar.
Fri Sep 27, 2019
I linked a few things in the STEAM Camp doc and added links to connect pages better on the wiki.
Thurs Sep 26, 2019
I've been reviewing the STEAM Camp material and thinking about critical feedback I see in some of the interviews. So I made some notes on collaboration efficiency in my general working doc.
I've also been thinking about a better tool head attachment. Even for the PVC frame. It probably isn't stiff enough for heavier milling, but tool head quick attaches and even automated tool changers are important for making the D3D more of a small universal micro-factory CNC machine. One issue I can see is mounting to the U-Axis carriage currently requires mounting around it on both sides. The other open-source solutions kinematic coupling with three points and this seems ideal. Given there are already open-source designs by lulzbot, e3d, and others we should be able to adapt something without reinventing the wheel. Maybe even just pick and existing standard. The question is how best to mount it to the carriage. If it is feasible I can see reasons to add some bolt holes to the carriage if it makes it more universal it is a win.
I made comments to multiple D3D files about the lack of M10 nuts required to fit over the 8mm rods for JB welding the heat bed as shown in the printer manual.
Looking at other printer BOM's...
Sun Sep 22, 2019
I responded to an email from Marcin about the Simple Extruder assembly and STEAM camps.
uploaded photo of the simple extruder assembly.
Working out more PVC assembly details with the heat bed mounting (JB Welded nuts). I recently changed most of my Freecad installs over to the app image packages and just had to reinstall the fastener WB for some reason.
Another relevant side topic I researched recently is battery packs. We have a retired nomadic friend that visits the farm in winter who is science-oriented and recently shared a video of a battery pack build and said he would like to try a build this winter. His goal is to design a small solar and battery pack system for periodic portable cooking because the cost is now low enough it might save him money over gas tanks. I'm skeptical of it, but I learned quite a bit from him before about such topics so I will document anything that comes of it. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1iUEES6Pqmc6Fz3nmrmUMhBxXQI_egm7yCMXfZ0wrr-0/edit#slide=id.p
The printer manual appears to reference and BOM that does not include large enough nuts to go over the 8mm rods. It looks like it needs to be 4 x M10 nuts. Further investigation is needed.
edited meeting doc again and added reevaluation of meetings to the agenda to see if we can get more attendees at a different time if needed. The meetings tend to be more broad brainstorming that veers off focus some, but individual progress reports are useful for the big picture. I think we need to create more jitsi meets as needed in case of overlapping meetings. https://meet.jit.si/OSE_Dev_Team_Meeting
I'm trying to adjust the filament path angle more, but having trouble rotating or attaching the sketch to a datum plane correctly.
I added the nema 17 motor mounting bracket. I think the simple extruder should be moved and restructured under it's own gitlab project, but the gitlab site is glitching at the moment.
I made repeated small changes to the simple extruder parts to find ideal alignment of the plastic parts, bolt holes and filament path. At first I expected to leave the bolt points alone, but after fixing the symmetry in the filament path and experimenting with the angle/spring tension it was clear the bolt point on the tension arm didn't look right. It is a concern to experiment with the bolt points because of post-print shrinkage. General experimentation done on the original may effectively need to be redone since the CAD is redrawn from measurements anyway. I made notes on a possible mod to the spring design, but making it more compact looks like it has tight tolerances and will require a lot of experimentation with prints so that is something for later.
made adjustments to simple extruder including the plastic parts. I'm trying not to change most of the original metrics since they appear to be accurate caliper measurements, but somethings seem way off around the filament path. So I'm centering some holes symmetrically and I added measurements in spreadsheets based on the NEMA17 standard.
I added a "spring" for more visuals. I think I can use datum plants and lines to help find the right positions for the filament holes. I increased thickness of the spring base bracket as well. It would be nice to countersink a standard hex socket M3 instead of the countersunk head style screw. It also seems the bolt in the spring could be eliminated, but that may require some prints to refine the fit due to shrinkage etc. I'm also thinking some of the CAD needs to be bigger due to measurements of the original PLA due to shrinkage. Changing the angle of the bearing bracket only made it look worse.
I keep finding more slight alignment issues. Looking back at the recent photos there appear to be a known issues. Most of these details will never be that perfect when cut by hand and there must be enough slop in the PLA parts they bolt up anyway, but it is nice to get the CAD close to check all the measurements. The filament path definitely looks like some updates would help feed.
The current simple mounting bracketing style is similar to the e3d bracket. In photos the original looks like a black metal angle bracket. The new printed version that looks possibly warped a little. So, something in between would be better. Also, because it mounts between the base block and the motor there may be thermal issues. This seems likely given the melted appearance of the spring bracket in photos. To prevent possible warping and given the need to push the temps up for materials other than PLA some insulating material like PTFE adhesive tape may help. PTFE tape appears to be used on the threads in the original photos already. I suppose a longer heat break could help as well, but it already looks to long in the current CAD. For flex filament I was assuming a custom Al milled design would be difficult, but for testing, I wonder if just using a longer heat break threaded up through the base block and ground on a wheel to shape would be good enough.
Tues Aug 6, 2019
created cad with spreadsheet for nema motors with some mounting details for adding to the simple extruder assembly.
I only entered data in the spreadsheet for nema 17, but it could probably be designed with more automated selection options depending on how much more hidden complexity is available in the freecad spreadsheet WB.
I think I resolved the freecad error with the nozzle file. I may understand it partly.
The error message is: Object can only be in a single GeoFeatureGroup
I rebuilt the pads from the sketches, but first had to remove the body and part containers and re-add everything in the right order and place. I tried detaching the hex sketch and reattaching it, which kept giving the same error primarily because I kept clicking the wrong function. I was mistakenly clicking the negative loft button instead of additive. I explored the new additive and subtractive functions before with interesting results but frequently forget.
I went to finish the nozzle and the file is somewhat corrupted. Using the compound function may have caused the problem. That workflow did not look good so I tried to delete it to do a fusion instead and that is when problems started. The part design WB then detected issues and started suggesting migration to the new part WB. I tried auto migration and other ways. One fix suggests separate part bodies for each pad. Maybe that is a more correct workflow in some cases, but I think using different functions from other WB's including the loft changes the tip or creates a separate feature without a body by default causing confusion. I may also have attempted moving different features to the body or part containers at different times by dragging them that caused issues as well. I need to understand the suggested workflow for bodies and part containers better. I may need to delete the pads and recreate them by reattaching the sketches. Or it may be faster to try redoing it in a different order.
I also looked at and experimented with the heat bed size, the printable area and how it is defined in Marlin.
I also added some info to Analysis of PLM Software Conflict Resolution. Generally improving the collaboration software abilities seems important, but with few contributors, it remains a lower priority. However, this is somewhat a paradox since ease of use would encourage more users to engage in prototype development.
I'm guessing the dimensions from the photos & using spreadsheets so these can be changed easily later.
I got most of the spreadsheets & CAD done for the metal parts of the simple extruder. The sheet values are approximate on a few things, but I tweaked them to look close.
The spreadsheets and values are surprisingly easy to edit. I wasn't really able to break them. If you move alias cells it clears them in the sheet, but not in the CAD values, so it is fairly easy to fix. It is time-consuming with all the data entry but looks worth it in the long run.
While there is a lot of flexibility in the PVC and clamp design one of the less exact remaining details is the mounting if the extruder and its position relative to the bed. A mod of the E3D bracket should work fine, but a better quicker modular system would be useful. I'm curious to see what open solutions lulzbot uses.
Lulzbot has cat guards, which must be open source. This seems similar to an "enclosure". Reprap forums suggested while it may be legal for many to build enclosures individually it should not be discussed due to the yet unexpired patents.
Moved the extruder mount underneath the carriage this gets it much close to the bed. The Simple extruder might be close to long enough. However, I'm uncertain about wiring and cable chain logistics.
It is a little hard to visualize in 3d so far. The height logistics of loading design over a press as well as the feeding and exiting of materials seems difficult. Rotating it 45 deg is a half solution. Maybe a more complex drawer design would be worth considering. I can imagine the drawer system will need cleaning due to cement. I think the cement access will need a cover to keep water out in case that is sprayed into the soil hopper as well.
I like the metered/dosing concept for 1 block at a time. I think that will reduce the need for raw horsepower frequently seen on big batch mixers. A good hammermill is important to since soil types vary. With test SCEB's here I think many of the poorer higher cement content ones have chips, slight crumbliness, weakness due to poor mixing. If the clay is moist it clumps and can't mix well with sand. Here the soil is mostly silt, sand, rocks, & sandstone often on top of a hard moist clay layer 18" down or so. Even if there is enough material in some areas on location digging the right amounts and thorough mixing are a challenge. In fact, in some cases I can see it needs to be dug, then dried some then milled so it powders and mixes better.
Tues Jul 9, 2019
cleaned up meeting doc for next week. Reviewing D3D BOM's trying to decide which parts & features to drop or add.
Sun Jul 7, 2019
Continued reviewing workshop info and the D3D CNC Mill CAD, which is impressive.
I see improvements all around in the workshop media. The hard part seems to be getting critical feedback from workshop participants, especially less technical people for which more feedback is needed to refine the educational media. I think the technical peoples perspective is generally it's nice to review the detailed engineering info and it is great for the average person to learn lots of STEM. But, what is most useful from the less technical persons perspective?
At first, I was thinking a lot of the info is also geared towards more visual learners and maybe other styles need to be covered as well, but I also see the OSE Design Manuals have outlined lists even though they are in slides, so there is room to consider more of both. Obviously, the hands-on shop parts are probably everyone's favorites, but since the lectures are likely precursors to specific shop work getting everyone up to speed is helpful to the swarm effect. As usual to refine all that practically requires a whole other team.
I listened to some videos from the workshop and glanced over the 2" U-Axis doc, but still, don't have a clear picture of many concepts. I'm surprised at the size of the CNC Mill if I'm understanding correctly it may have about a 2' working area/volume? I figured for a precise mill for small metal parts that several inches would be sufficient.
A question: Given that much of the OSE workflow tends to bias towards visual learning styles how might the guided learning style in workshops be done to enable those of other learning styles to better understand existing visual documentation tools and apps?
Individuals can choose different tasks that suit their style, but we need people to learn freecad from whatever approach suits them. There were other requests for more vocabulary definitions and a glossary was a suggested solution that would be ideal. There are also existing wiki's and docs for apps like freecad, for which more links could be provided and reviewed in the lectures.
Updated my working doc (top right) with a pros/cons list of using another spreadsheet to speed swarm work of part spec collection prior to CAD drawings.
I think it might be faster in ways, but I'm uncertain about the overall flow and hangups. Current methods in design sprints and workshops are to lookup the links in the BOM and find specs for parts you pick. There is some double work looking up interfacing parts specs even in a workshop where individuals can directly communicate it requires more time and interruptions. This should leave more time for needed for discussion of clearances/tolerances and understanding interactions between parts.
Thurs Jul 4, 2019
away from my Linux workstation still without a good laptop, but I've reviewed some of the active steam camp materials. Interesting to see the development and discussion as usual.
I'm trying to understand the details for the 2" Universal Axis. It looks like they need a number of changes to be ready for printing.
I added a spreadsheet to File:2axismotorpiece.fcstd because I think Williams FreeCAD Workflow seems ideal for sharing consistent data values across many similar parts quickly.
Maybe a gdoc sheet would be good too. It could be sectioned with values shared across parts and changed in real-time. It should be easy to copy/paste those cells to freecad sheets then there is less data entry for each person and values remain consistent. It should also reduce typos. When values are uncertain it is also easy to copy lists of needed dimensions to keep dev's on the right track and remind people what data is still missing.
Mon Jul 1, 2019
I finished cutting up the PVC sch 40 pipe a while back for the D3D PVC Mini. I'm traveling for a few days but hope to figure out how to collaborate more during the workshop.
For the D3D PVC Mini I need to do more precise CAD of the simple extruder for which some CAD is not yet done. I think I can approximate a placeholder good enough.
I also need to further research the sources from existing BOM's. Jon reported issues for D3D Ohio parts and I'd like to avoid those.
I'm not far from ordering parts, but some of the little details are going to be important to verify first.
I'm glad to hear the STEAM Camp chose to do the Torch Table project. I think the priority order is Torch Table, CNC Router, Metal Printer. Because the Table has been in waiting for a while and well accelerate other projects significantly. The CNC Router is next because it can take lower precision parts and make them higher precision via subtractive work. The metal printer is relatively unknown and creates small low precision parts initially. Empirical testing is needed to find the hangups for the metal printer, but the use cases are more long term.
Tues Jun 18, 2019
Busier than expected with farm guests lately, but I am continuing on the D3D PVC Mini. I've cut sch 40 3/4" PVC to ~10.66" for testing. I already observe at such short lengths it is quite rigid. At 2ft it has noticeable flex under force, but infills could reduce that significantly. Vibration is harder to judge, but when supported well at both ends peices don't visibly vibrate much.
Fri Jun 7, 2019
added a bed holder to the assembly. It still needs a different design because of the offsets with the frame. To keep the bed holder length short it would be better to move the Z axis inside, but it also doesn't look like that will fit with the clamp.
Busy with farm guests so likely to miss the meeting.
Next steps trying to get good enough measurements of the simple extruder to create an assembly to help determine which way is best to orient the extruder on the X-axis.
Sat Jun 1, 2019
attempted FEM in FreeCAD on rods some trouble at first, but finally succeeded on the tube as well. I'm uncertain how easy it would be to add complexity and multiple part assemblies and materials. It seems to only work well in simplicity, but part of that is technical experience as well. At first I was concerned with following tutorials closer and in the same order, but I think the errors were fixed by resets of freecad and finer mesh when needed. Attempting a realistic large scale 4ft gantry of the Universal axis may not be worth the time. I'm uncertain yet if it can model the compression and stiffness concepts.
Working on CAD assembly. moving X axis alignment. Further grouping and labeling all parts and axis' as similar to exiting OSE D3D machines as possible.
Mon May 27, 2019
Reviewing simple extruder and researching many other CNC/3D printer related ideas. Notes and documentation in Working Doc above.
Sun May, 26, 2019
Lots of printer research, YT videos, reprap.org, and OSE are all helpful. I can see 24V is a tempting mod given most of the electronics are designed to run at even higher voltages, but starting with a small printer I doubt there are many power or performance issues. I have not found any better info about PVC with cement in small pipes so I am skeptical but hopeful. Even #2 (1/4") rebar won't fit in 3/4" sch 40 PVC. I'm getting 20ft of sch 40 PVC because it comes in 10ft sticks and the extra I can use for testing. Hoping to see some operational data on D3D Ohio v18.02 soon too. I've been thinking about the mounting of all components & wiring. It would be nice if a single box for the components can be made slim, distribute mass & add bracing to the structure as well. It is hard to add angle braces without blocking access to the bed.
I'm also reviewing the simple extruder, which is indeed simple. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1PRpAmQNzDs5laibZo86weuMaEYJLBIvFwt3KOx8DPn8/edit#slide=id.g51b7c7f1c2_0_4
I'm uncertain of mounting options. It doesn't look like I can just use existing parts. My first thought was the hot end should be mounted towards the Z axis so the bed rails can be as short as possible, but there is the clamp to clear. I'm curious about bed size, mass, & Z motion. Is it reasonable to imagine an 8" print area with only 1 Z?
searched for more info on cement in PVC and I found some interesting links, but nothing similar. Listening/watching many 3d printer build videos, reviewing BOM's and looking at part options and prices.
Reviewing lots of 3d printer info lately and it seems RAMPS has a lot of potential upgrades or issues to fix depending on how you look at it. It looks like RAMPS is still used mostly because it is somewhat robust or at least cheap to burn out. I suspect I'm going to want Trinamic drivers just because of the noise factor since I've set up the printer space next to my desk. TMC2130's are apparently all around more efficient too. It looks like it is better to run them at 24V though, which would require even more customizing. I don't see many variations in the RAMPS with quality components & heat sinks etc. there is the cheap and the expensive.
Adapting a quick attach looks complex without more experience and a working 3d printer to test PLA parts with. Adapting the titan bracket looks easy to start, but it is different. It is thinner than the previous mk8 style bracket and may not offer enough clamping force or strength if it gets warm? So, I'll try merging the old and new together in CAD.
Tues May 21, 2019
thinking about the alignment part and axis length. I don't think it needs much space to work. Also considering extruder attachment methods.
meeting prep.
Looking at the old Mk8 Style extruder motor holder for potential modifications.
Mon May 20, 2019
changed x axis and added to assembly. needs more alignment.
Sun May 19, 2019
found the angular misalignment of the carriages and constrained them further. I started to add the extruder, but the 3.5MB size is a bit much and I don't see any easy way to reduce it. I think the X axis needs customizing to length first anyway.
https://gitlab.com/Abe_Anderson/d3d-mini-pvc numerous updates and simplifications of axis' parts. Much smaller files in some cases, but with enough features to position parts in assemblies accurately. Testing of newer freecad versions.
Testing A2P WB and it works much better than A2 WB just because there are no long hangups, but I do think I've run into some other issues. It is much faster and simialr enough it is easy to use though.
Note for the changes to File:Xy bracket.fcstd I reworked the part off measurements and in doing so thought I'd see if just drawing half of it and mirroring would be faster. In hindsight I doubt this helped much. Checking & copying measurements or sketches from other parts takes about as much time and there may be reasons to break the symmetry. Also, the mirror function being in the part WB makes the workflow seem a little confusing. The newness of the body & part structures and how it shows in the tree are primarily what made it seem odd.
I'm still thinking about slots versus holes and I'm curious if it can be used to offset the bed (with another part) up to reach the nozzle from the overhead X axis.
Something weird is going on. Every time I try to adjust the length of the rods in the axis' the length between the top and bottom Z clamps measures slightly shorter as if the frame is adjusting smaller as well for some reason!!? Oh, missing constraints allowing movement of clamp.
If the XY Bracket gets slots the X axis ends can be made flush with the back of the brackets. It is only 0.2" off one way from that now. With slots lining up the position correctly is the only major potential point of error in the assembly I can see now.
Fri May 10, 2019
Writing return email to Marcin. Looking at X-Y axis alignment on D3D Mini PVC. The X-Y angle bracket isn't quite symmetric, but the holes line up with the larger U-Axis parts, but not the holes in the short idler. I'm wondering if a slotted XY bracket would help make mounting various designs easier. Keeping to the universal parts is still a challenge given various sizes of frames and axis length possibilities.
The bed height to the extruder nozzle needs to be solved as well. Bolting some existing parts together should work as in similar designs, but I don't see what is easiest yet. For some aspects it looks like changing rod length and/or mount points would still be easier.
I'm trying to understand the XY bracket misalignment more thoroughly to decide what is the more future proof universally compatible part to change. Making slots seems more future proof except that it creates the possibility of slip and error in physical assembly. I see the v19.0x use the half-carriage, but that doesn't make sense for this design and simplicity would be nice all around. I see the XY bracket sketches aren't constrained and look off, but they appear to constrain and align well in assembly. The asymmetry is only the first issue to fix. The length for this printer is different from the original use, which is why I'm considering slots. If more holes are added it will work for only the current build designs, but slots will give flexibility for future size variations.
catching up on FreeCAD status. https://forum.freecadweb.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=35546
FreeCAD 0.18 is technically officially released to source code at least. 0.18 includes mostly backend updates like python 3 support and other good long term under the hood fixes. So effectively skipping 0.17 may be fairly easy.
I see the issue I noticed before with a FreeCAD version not fully loading is 0.18.1, which is the current official stable version. FreeCAD Daily 0.18 loads ok. 0.17 is running from an app image I think. I see many new interesting workbenches I haven't tried before in the add-on manager.
Reworking the D3D Mini PVC with more separate parts like the carriages on the axis' also makes the assembly more complex. I see that the freecad assembly forum thread suggests for most simple assembly needs the part and body containers relative and absolute positioning is good enough.
Almost done with the 3D Printer shelf I think, but I'm more busy with spring planting etc.
I found some interesting 3D printed garden seeding tools and companion planting patterns. I've been hoping to find simple tools and ways to automate more complex seeding patterns. There are many plastic seed tools I've seen that might be 3d printable, but accuracy is probably important for small seed tools. Maybe adjustable tools could be designed as well. If the print quality is low precisely drilling holes ends up being needed anyway.
Status - Done: more D3D Mini PVC assembly To Do: quick couple Blocks: time