3D Printed Mod Corners - For 2D Panel Construction

[Thehack]

Kind of but not quite. There will be near zero bed contact surface with it like that.

The design needs to be changed to have a flat bottom, like this -

But of course then you won't be able to use nut traps.

Of course, I'd extend it out and tamper it it to have a flat plane.

 

[Thehack]

I see what you're saying, but the corner on the outside can't have a fillet because the panel won't sit flush, and the corner on the inside can't either unless the outside one is

I wasn't proposing the outside corners be filleted at all, as that would create obvious gaps. Is the inside corner needed for stability? I would have assumed that the nub would have been there more for guidance and alignment with the friction of the larger surface preventing rotation through friction, as is the case with a lot of screw/bolt affixed things.

The neck is mostly for aesthetic purposes. It works similarly to how "mod cubes" work - simplify joining panels.

I'm thinking that you're referring to the corner where the 3d print meats the edge of the 2d panel right?

 

[ElinaNguyen]

Hmmm....try this to make corners smother

 

[Thehack]

Hmmm....try this to make corners smother

Interesting stuff. It is ABS though, I'm aiming for PLA first. It's funny that I felt his voice recognizable then I checked his videos... whatcha know, it's that guy who put a CPU cooler on a GPU!

 

[Josh | NFC]

I might be missing something, but why print this? This is the kind of part that makes sense to get professionally made in the 10s of thousands.

I'd buy hundreds of them. The only real problem I see is how you deal with panel thickness. Obviously you have to limit your ply, but the problem is it is VERY difficult to buy metric ply plastics and metals here in the US. You have to pay a premium for them. I am assuming the reverse is true for the rest of the world? I dunno.

It costs me less money to buy a 1/4" sheet of aluminum than it does a 5mm sheet by as much as 20%, and that is pretty crazy considering how much more metal you get over 16' x 8'

Love the concept, though again, the 3D printing turns me off immediately. I want to pay a buck a pop in a bag of 100, and I want them made out of nylon or something.

Peace!

 

[Thehack]

I might be missing something, but why print this? This is the kind of part that makes sense to get professionally made in the 10s of thousands.

I'd buy hundreds of them. The only real problem I see is how you deal with panel thickness. Obviously you have to limit your ply, but the problem is it is VERY difficult to buy metric ply plastics and metals here in the US. You have to pay a premium for them. I am assuming the reverse is true for the rest of the world? I dunno.

It costs me less money to buy a 1/4" sheet of aluminum than it does a 5mm sheet by as much as 20%, and that is pretty crazy considering how much more metal you get over 16' x 8'

Love the concept, though again, the 3D printing turns me off immediately. I want to pay a buck a pop in a bag of 100, and I want them made out of nylon or something.

Peace!

Hey. I love your enthusiasm.

It's open source. If you can help *us* hook up with a machine shop who can protype and produce these in the 100s, yes I'd support that. Heck with metal, we can do an M3 tap easily, and make it even more compact.

To be honest, I don't know how interesting this concept is, and how many people willing to push an order of it. With 3d printing, we can do it at home. There's very little barrier cost if we get this out.

(Also, you can get it in nylon, because shapeways' SLS uses a nylon type plastic)

 

[Josh | NFC]

just as an FYI I wasn't being negative; I was offering feedback because I am interested. I realize it takes work to make ideas a reality.

 

[Thehack]

just as an FYI I wasn't being negative; I was offering feedback because I am interested. I realize it takes work to make ideas a reality.

No, I got the vibe that you are being supportive.

 

[Thehack]

V2!

A couple of changes:
- Chamferred inside edges
- I added a slightly cutout for the neck. It is .6mm removal.
- Increased neck cross-section
- Increased size from 13x13x13 to 14x14x14 (bounded size)

STL file here

Future possible changes:
- M2.5 nut version
- Screw point from edge from 9mm to 10mm, to accommodate different screws and M2.5 screw+nut

 

[jottwehh]

as I mentioned before, didnt have time (and srews) for some proper testing right now, but anyway spent an hour in my basement for some little testings.
This is from STL file v1.0 and actually pretty solid. cube is 30x30x30 cm. But actually I would prefer a M2.5 nut version.

 

[Thehack]

It seems there is a strong preference for a M2.5 version. I'll push out a revision with it soon.

It'll have to take a few more tries as we'd have to refine the locking mechanism to keep the nut from popping out.

 

[EdZ]

If there is limited volume for a cutout to hold an M2/M2.5 nut, why not use threaded press-inserts? Unlike PEMserts you do not need the force of a press to install them, and in softer plastics just finger pressure is sufficient to get them seated well (most are designed with barbs rather than to deform the material to lock in).

 

[K888D]

Metal threaded inserts work really well, here is a test part I made using M2.5 inserts:

Once inserted they are rock solid, I would say you need a bit more than finger force to insert them, but it can be done quite easily with a pair of wide jaw pliers.

 

[Phuncz]

Do want ! With all the parts you're revising, I'm almost up to a completely new case

 

[Thehack]

If there is limited volume for a cutout to hold an M2/M2.5 nut, why not use threaded press-inserts? Unlike PEMserts you do not need the force of a press to install them, and in softer plastics just finger pressure is sufficient to get them seated well (most are designed with barbs rather than to deform the material to lock in).

Availability is my main concern. I want to make the standard design as accessible as I can.

That is a good idea if my other options fail. There is nothing stopping from anyone make adjustments to the parts either.

 

[Thehack]

New version! V2.1 - testing the waters
Changes
- Increased tap point to 10mm from edges
- Increased size to 15x15x15 (bounding)... We just keeping getting bigger! :/
- Added lock tabs for M2.5 hex nuts
- Increased chamfer size on corner, should look a lil' bit nicer since it is bigger.

STL For Download

Test for nut retention. Using different sizes rentions

STL Here

---

A word of thanks for everyone who has helped me with the 3D printing so far! I'm looking towards purchasing a small printer for my own testing purposes but it's a while away before it's in stock again.

 

[Thehack]

After much thought, I decided to go with M3 as the final design for the nut retention system. Using M2.5 will cause conflicts with other screw styles/designs so I went with M3. It'll be a lil' bulkier but the penalty from M2.5 to M3 is very small, and the overall package size is still 15x15x15.

Above is the expected cost for a set of 8 corners. I'm waiting on my shapeways prototype of the retention system so I can finalize the design on that.

 

[iFreilicht]

Above is the expected cost for a set of 8 corners. I'm waiting on my shapeways prototype of the retention system so I can finalize the design on that.

That is a very good price, even with a bit of margin that's very affordable.

 

[Ceros_X]

After much thought, I decided to go with M3 as the final design for the nut retention system. Using M2.5 will cause conflicts with other screw styles/designs so I went with M3. It'll be a lil' bulkier but the penalty from M2.5 to M3 is very small, and the overall package size is still 15x15x15.

Above is the expected cost for a set of 8 corners. I'm waiting on my shapeways prototype of the retention system so I can finalize the design on that.

Just because some of us (me) are dumb, do you think you could include a corner template with your cube? i.e a little triangular piece we can place over a normal square corner and scribe out for a perfect fit when cut? I know a lot of people will be AUTOCADing it up or whatever, but some people will still doing it the old fashioned way and eyeballing it. Ideal design would be a triangle that is tapered on the bottom edge to the ideal thickness of the panels to be used (i.e) so we could bring it to the store and use it to quickly check material thickness.

 

[iFreilicht]

i.e a little triangular piece we can place over a normal square corner and scribe out for a perfect fit when cut?

That's a very good idea, but I think you'd need a few different ones because unless the corners are designed for a point-symmetric panel configuration. (Which they aren't, because that would look bad on the front)