I can’t help but imagine this on an epic scale using trains and train tracks with crane arms, printing out entire warehouses and other industrial buildings
Better to buy 3 CNA or Robotdigg rails and build a Delta, honestly, that's gonna be so much simpler and cheaper. This is just a proof of concept, it's just there to learn more, not to make an actual machine.
@@machinerin151 Real honest question.. did you realize it was a joke? Because the joke was pretty obvious, so it would confuse me if you said no. But if you said yes, that'd also confuse me, as then I wouldn't understand why you explained how they were wrong 🙄
I didn't at first either but I think I do now. Think of a solid fixed belt and motors attached to the arm slides and then they each run back and forth on the shared belt not hitting each other.
@@ConsultingjoeOnline I don't think the small teeth on the belt could support 3 independent motors accurately. Generally the end of the belt is attached to the motor block, so the belt is locked with the pulley. I would recommend just having 3 separate belts, parallel with the linear rail, but the belts are just above and below one another. The blocks won't interfere with the belts if they have a hole gap on the block for the other 2 belts, if they were to interfere.
That’s absolutely astounding. I wouldn’t go with a belt, however. I worry that high accelerations at one arm will introduce slack at some of the other arms, or other strange ringing effects. Instead, maybe a toothed linear gear rail and the steppers have gears that engage with that. Since that part doesn’t move (and doesn’t go over pulleys), there’s no need for it to be light or flexible. Downside is that a gear rail isn’t a commodity item like the toothed belts are. Would be a shame to have to put steppers on the carriages, though, since that’s a lot of weight to sling around. I think I’d maybe try a trio of cables running alongside the rail, the steppers underneath, driving the cables, and each carriage tied to one cable. What would be really sexy would be to have the cables running through three parallel holes through each carriage, and each carriage “selects” the cable to follow with some kind of clamping mechanism, like a grub/set screw.
this isn't a delta. or a cube printer or whatever. this isn't even a design that would be worth building on anything other then a large scale. the system to move the 3 rail carriages independantly would be way too complicated to make it worth the effort the only way it would work is on large scale with self powered carriages
i don't think belt slack is any more detrimental to this geometry than it is to most others, as there's not much amplification of motion by the linkages here. What i am worried about is the tightness of knee joints - any flex/slack there will have a massive effect on precision.
as to how you would really do this. is have a ballscrew (but in reverse.) where the screw doesn't rotate. but you have a guide rail that the thing actually rides on. and the "nut" part of the ball screw is rotated on the moving arm.
because of stiffness issues. a triangle is the most stable stance known to physics. A line only supports in one dimension, whereas a trinagle supports in 360° summarized. But its a good concept. I admit.
The concept in theory is really elegant, but builing it would be a pain. You save two rails, but get 6 radial bearings in return. For this load-case tapered roller bearing would be a fine choise, but if you choose quality ones they'll cost a lot. Also the angle of attack of your forces is kinda suboptimal. To achieve small amounts of displacement your arms and bearing need to be very beefy, what leads to higher weight, counteracting the whole idea of a highly dynamic machine. If you want to scale it up and make it massive, a scara-robot or an articulated robot on a rail do the same job but with less hassle.
I think the moments on the rail will not be as bad as they seem. Only the middle arm will transmit vertical forces. Right now, part of this arm is already on the other side of the rail, acting as a counterbalance. Not sure if this is intentional, but you could tweak/optimize this of course. But I agree, the stiffness of this concept is its weakest point.
@@tulpjeeenIf the entire assembly linear (Y axis) weight distribution is always 50:50 in motion like a boxer engine. thats would only be the case if the robot draws a line. A parallel second rail is the correct answer here ;)
@@peterwilson7497 It's a CAD model right now. But I'm sure the inventor can do a bill of materials and estimate a material cost for a prototype. The cost of a final commercial product will depend on a much larger number of additional variables. Labor costs, initial investment, finance costs, marketing costs, the size of the market, reliability, warranty costs, profit margins for starters. That's if the product is viable and offers some advantages over existing designs. Stability and repeatability may be challenging based on the geometry.
This 3D printer could easily be made to self-assemble and print itself by having two of the arms be detachable from the print head and thus able to be used as "hands" to autoassemble the 3D printed arm parts, or belt track parts. The screws would have to be a bit different to be 3D printed. If it 3D printed its water wheels it could also gain energy... If the arms had a "third" joint section you could also have only two arms instead of one?
@@mrbusiness9214 dude, literally use pressed earth. It turns into stone. So some sort of extrusion similar would be a perfect and environmentally friendly use of resources. There're literally whole deserts full of fucking sand.
It seems like this would be pretty useful in large-scale mass production assembly lines for items that are not too heavy but potentially awkward or unsafe for humans to carry & hold. Very interesting!
I love this. It is mesmerizing, and even though I didn't quite get all the subject-specific talk when you explained it, it still mostly made sense! And your enthusiasm about the whole thing is just really heartwarming. Always such a joy to see someone work on something that they genuinely love! Take it sleazy man, you rule! :)
I have a full continuous rotation scara in the works with all static steppers. (Interested in joining our RepRap discord? We have a few scara projects going.) Your praise means a lot!
Many people saying about the compact size but I think it really shines when dealing with high velocities! It seems that this design reduces a lot of ressonance and vibrations, meaning that for a high speed 3d printer it could work great!
Wow, can you show a state, lets call it "storage" mode , where all the arms are flat and the end effector is below the "working" plane? I have an idea for a portable machine that fits in a hard case, and needs to go somewhat flat when the case is closed. Exploring designs and this looks really cool.
To add to Nicholas, I think if there were just a couple more points of actuation as far as pivoting of the arms on their hinges it could help improve flexibility as well as form factor. For instance, a pivot point for the arm where it will connect to the motor assembly. And then maybe just a hinge built into the arm a few inches away from the extruder or tool piece.
@@NicholasSeward id imagine you could also have a "station" arrangement of rails made for optimal storage. Youd still be disconnecting one of the arms from the primary rail, but since you have two other arms on the rails you could use them to help "push" a switch segment of rail from one rail track to a side track. At least, id imagine so.
This looks pretty cool, could mount it on a wall and have it print on swappable beds in a sort of 3D print commission factory so there's minimum downtime between prints and allows extra care for removal of the print. Or you could print on a conveyer belt.
Tbh i would rather put a line of moving beds in front of it, so you won't have to carry around the motors or have to build some weird crazy belt system to keep them stationary while moving the "arms", but i get what you mean
I could imagine that on huge scale to print houses. It should be easier as printer would only be on one side instead of surrounding it, Als the Rail length could easily be adjusted. You could even get multiple to vastly improve speed
I think this actually is a very promising idea for a printer. Think of the easiness of how you put the three motors outside a hypothetical enclosure. Cable management a pure dream on that one. And honestly, the coolness factor just wows! A great way to showcase how many ways there are to describe a cartesian coordinate system. No issues to make a rigid z-height. At least for not so high z-dimension printers, this one clearly has its upsides. And of course, only one of those expensive rails. You could also easily (at least when it comes to industry solution money) put such a thing on a kind of carriage and build very long prints. It is one of those ideas where I feel stupid I never thought about it myself after hearing it but would have never had in a life of 500 years. Simple genius!
This will be a game changer for printing houses. Put a temporary rail on the road, print a house, side down, print another house, keep going until you run out of road!
I have been tempted to update GUS. All the hardware and software are there now. The problem is that my design goal are better solved by HELIOS. I might update him anyways.
@@NicholasSeward It's certainly not intuitive for a layperson like me that one extended arm is better than three tied together :) Could you share what the goals are? Ease of build, reliability, straight forward controller (thankfully 32-bit controllers today), ...? If anything my #1 wish is for far more sensors and corresponding intelligence in the controller.
@@tommythorn My goals are some mixture of large print area, small, and easy to use. For the ease of use GUS needs custom auto calibration. Stick an accelerometer on the effector and we should be set. HELIOS doesn't need much ongoing calibration. They are both about the same size. My new HELIOS is going to have a print volume at least 6 times that of a prusa. SCARAs can break out of their frame for some huge work envelopes.
Another alternative is through-type lead screw stepper motors on the same screw, or with slightly more complexity, two through-type and one larger stepper driving a captured lead-nut and two steppers. The latter means you could drive all one axis quite quickly.
this looks awesome! you can even extend the capability of this thing by having rotating anchors to the fixed point on the rail and extendable double arms.
@@NicholasSewardwhen you mentioned the belt drive, at first I thought you should use a rack and pinion, but then I got to thinking... you could have a ball screw system with the exact same setup! A single long screw with three individual ball nuts! Imagine that! -- A three axis system using a single bearing rail, and a single ball screw!!!
Real interesting! I see that both Y and Z motion move the 'motors' closer together, which makes me expect that the effector area of motion decreases with higher Z slices. Is this correct? What shape does the effector volume of motion take?
I talk about it a little in one of the other comments. Trapezoidal area from the top. Triangular from the side. z increase as you move away from the rail.
We need a prototype ASAP! This looks incredible! The working range seems to be somewhat limited, like a semi-sphere area, but it looks so promising. No need for axis alignment, just a single rail and somewhere to screw it to. Awesome.
Backlash and elastic play is going to be a nightmare with only one rail supporting the structure. The heavy arms are going to generate serious torsional force on your runners. The pliable variance between homed and extended is going to be exponential in every literal sense. It doesn't need three linear actuators such as the physical model shown in the green room, however two parallel rails would stabilize the rig. Two locomotors on primary and the third on a second rail. Very clever idea
@@NicholasSeward i have a small flsun delta with linear rails that'll doesn't work, i could see myself converting it to this! Thought i don't know if I have the coding skills for marlin to make it happen 😅
How long did it take you to realise, that the center arm has to be on an angle? - Seing this this angle is the most fascinating part about this invention.
It might be more obvious when you have the model in front of you to drag around. As for Nicholas, I'm going to give him credit for potentially already knowing, given his past experience with creative designs like this one! With the center arm straight, moving the center arm (ignoring the others) simply moves the carriage along the X axis (I think this also would overconstrain the system as it's now fighting the other two?) Also, check out 2:07 , if your middle carriage is straight on and only has direct influence over X (Can't transmit any torque through the joint as it's perpendicular), you lose the ability to move in Z! That's mostly assumptions though, I don't have much experience with kinematics so it could completely throw a wrench in things. I'd be honored to be corrected by Nicholas!!
My guess is that it was obvious to him because of how the design works. The end effector is at the intersection of three planes, so the normals to those planes cannot be coplanar. (The three arms effectively lie on these three planes.)
@@cyrfung I'll have a go! Remember that the jointed arms are not actuated, they're "floppy" and it's only the carriage where the arm is attached to the rail that is controlled. So if all three arms were vertical, the payload would be unsupported vertically and would just fall. The angle of the arm is a compromise between actuation and support. If the arm was horizontal it would provide plenty of support but the Z height would be fixed - no amount of moving the carriage would affect it. At low angles, moving the carriage would affect the height but large carriage movements would result in small Z movements, which would result in a very short Z travel because the carriage would run into the other two before the payload had moved much. At higher angles there's more "gearing" so the Z travel range is larger, at the cost of rigidity. The way of thinking about it that's closest to the mathematical explanation is to visualise the three arms as lying on three planes (flat surfaces). The carriages control where the three planes are, and if they meet at a single point then that's where the payload must be located. If the three arms were all vertical then the three planes would be too, and they'd meet at a line rather than a point so the payload would be unconstrained in Z. The payload is most rigidly supported when the planes intersect at angles near 90 degrees, which is not really the case here and is one of the sources of comments from people concerned about rigidity (the other being that the weight of the payload is transferred to a torque on the rail, trying to roll it over). Mesmerising design though.
When i see this a portable ploter comes to mind. You can keep it simple and make a sharpie adpater in the head, they are light and need no power. It does not fight against the concept weakpoints like the tension you will get on the angled bearings, you probably can make a cool toy out of it.
Or similarly a big ol screw and a nut of some kind on each mount that you spin with an attached motor. You could make the arms just roll along on some rollerblade wheels. That could give you an infinite z axis assuming you could use a counterweight to balance the arms.
Flip and with that you could do multi material by adding another bot to the screw. Would just need to have some way to calibrate xyz on both bots to the same point.
@@NicholasSeward I can't believe I wasn't already subscribed! I need to come visit one day. I keep meeting your old students, they are all brilliant of course. They all love Mr. Seward!
In principle thats true, however.... 1 - i am unsure if 1 long linear rail is cheaper than 3 short ones 2 - i am not sure you can buy rails with 3 slides. Inserting slides onto a rail is a PAIN. (Even if you can buy them separately.)
I'd be concerned about how long a single rail will last with all of the weight continuously applying torque to one side and the load having plenty of leverage too, probably going to need a beefier rail to handle that with the same reliability and accuracy as triple-rail setups. You also have three bearing sets in each arm (drive block to first segment, first to second segment and second segment to head assembly) and any wear, play or sticktion (extra force to break static friction) in those will add inaccuracy too. Neat concept in theory, though getting it up to the same print quality standards as more conventional setups will be challenging due to extra moving parts in critical paths.
That's a great deal ! I think it's not going to be easy to dimension the structure to counterbalance the moments ... but this design makes it possible to build stadium-shaped rails that would allow a very large direction while knowing the position perfectly! It would just be necessary to compensate for the curvature of the stadium rail in the kinematics calculation, but it seems quite simple ! It's much more fun than the car circuits of our childhood!
CNC will pose rigidity difficulties. Everything is mounted on two bearings connected to a linear rail and the arms are also quite long. 3d printing and drawing should work great though. Maybe also a vinyl cutter or something like that.
This screams "please don't use me as a cnc router!!" This construction has a huge lever in the Z direction and only a single point of contact. Any force in the z direction would cause huge deflections
This has all the simplicity of a linear design while keeping all the functionality of a six-axis design. truly brilliant!!!!! PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PATTENT
It is an open question if this infringes on the Tripteron patent that expires September 2022. If it doesn't , I might get a provision patent just so I can lock others out from doing the same. I plan on having an open license.
This looks like it would be especially awesome in huge scale format, like for 3d printing house out of concrete; just build one on a truck, you drive it next to the emplacement and you're basically ready to print. Of course, it has the problem that enlarging something increase the mass even more.
This is so cool! Nice model! I'm already imagining the rail on a lift for more range in z and the whole thing on a vehicle that is mobile on a factory floor
This video is great, thanks for sharing! I really like your idea. For the movement belt look at blue flexirack. I've used it on my CNC after discovering it in a sewing shop. works great and is strong. Its a rigid timing belt that you can bolt to a flat surface. Worked out better than a regular t2 timing belt in my case. I do not know what the industry calls this type of gear tooth strip. edit: Oh its a flexible rack, should have seen that coming!
Seems like a great design to help improve the printing of curved materials to help get soft round edges. Its movement seems very smooth. Would love to see it actually printing something.
@@NicholasSeward haha dont get me wrong I definitely dont have the mind to model that all out but the mechanism speaks for itself honestly great job man you got a sub out of me looking forward to watching these other vids on this channel :)
Hi Nicholas, this is Guizmo, I hope you remember me. I'm happy to see you still design crazy printers. I still do as well, but more traditional cartesian ones. Have a nice day, great to see you again, keep the good work!
Наука
I can’t help but imagine this on an epic scale using trains and train tracks with crane arms, printing out entire warehouses and other industrial buildings
Trains is a different but potentially really great and uniquie use for this. Nice thinking!
With a moving counter balance, it might be possible!
Or a portable system printing out houses
holy fuck, this is genius. maybe the balance could be solved with a parallel track and mirrored tripteron arms
Only issue with this is that the weight off set wouldn't work on that scale.
I don't know why RUclips recommend me this but I'm not disappointed
Same
Mood
наверное предлагает тем кто уже пересмотрел почти весь ютуб
Yep same here. Odd but neat
I'm kinda liking the algorithm at them moment really :)
when you so broken you can only afford one hiwin
Better to buy 3 CNA or Robotdigg rails and build a Delta, honestly, that's gonna be so much simpler and cheaper. This is just a proof of concept, it's just there to learn more, not to make an actual machine.
@@machinerin151 this is a joke on his creativity being so motivated.
@@machinerin151 Real honest question.. did you realize it was a joke?
Because the joke was pretty obvious, so it would confuse me if you said no.
But if you said yes, that'd also confuse me, as then I wouldn't understand why you explained how they were wrong 🙄
Hiwins are trash compared to Misumi.
@@edenassos Rexroth. Just that.
When you've mentioned "single rail" to me I couldn't remotely think how that would work.
Really, really awesome! 🤘
Thanks for checking it out.
I didn't at first either but I think I do now.
Think of a solid fixed belt and motors attached to the arm slides and then they each run back and forth on the shared belt not hitting each other.
@@ConsultingjoeOnline I don't think the small teeth on the belt could support 3 independent motors accurately. Generally the end of the belt is attached to the motor block, so the belt is locked with the pulley. I would recommend just having 3 separate belts, parallel with the linear rail, but the belts are just above and below one another. The blocks won't interfere with the belts if they have a hole gap on the block for the other 2 belts, if they were to interfere.
Every once in awhile, you see something come along and think that is going to change the world in a small way.
That’s absolutely astounding. I wouldn’t go with a belt, however. I worry that high accelerations at one arm will introduce slack at some of the other arms, or other strange ringing effects. Instead, maybe a toothed linear gear rail and the steppers have gears that engage with that. Since that part doesn’t move (and doesn’t go over pulleys), there’s no need for it to be light or flexible. Downside is that a gear rail isn’t a commodity item like the toothed belts are. Would be a shame to have to put steppers on the carriages, though, since that’s a lot of weight to sling around. I think I’d maybe try a trio of cables running alongside the rail, the steppers underneath, driving the cables, and each carriage tied to one cable. What would be really sexy would be to have the cables running through three parallel holes through each carriage, and each carriage “selects” the cable to follow with some kind of clamping mechanism, like a grub/set screw.
this isn't a delta. or a cube printer or whatever. this isn't even a design that would be worth building on anything other then a large scale.
the system to move the 3 rail carriages independantly would be way too complicated to make it worth the effort
the only way it would work is on large scale with self powered carriages
i don't think belt slack is any more detrimental to this geometry than it is to most others, as there's not much amplification of motion by the linkages here. What i am worried about is the tightness of knee joints - any flex/slack there will have a massive effect on precision.
as to how you would really do this. is have a ballscrew (but in reverse.)
where the screw doesn't rotate. but you have a guide rail that the thing actually rides on. and the "nut" part of the ball screw is rotated on the moving arm.
It is a moving system used in heavy machines and some old cars, rack and pinion !
Absolutely love it! Very compact and elegant. Once you see it you think: why didn't anyone think of this before?
because of stiffness issues. a triangle is the most stable stance known to physics. A line only supports in one dimension, whereas a trinagle supports in 360° summarized. But its a good concept. I admit.
Yeah, the linear guide would need to be massive, or you'd need at least 2 spaced far enough to counteract the moments without causing crazy wear.
The concept in theory is really elegant, but builing it would be a pain. You save two rails, but get 6 radial bearings in return. For this load-case tapered roller bearing would be a fine choise, but if you choose quality ones they'll cost a lot. Also the angle of attack of your forces is kinda suboptimal. To achieve small amounts of displacement your arms and bearing need to be very beefy, what leads to higher weight, counteracting the whole idea of a highly dynamic machine. If you want to scale it up and make it massive, a scara-robot or an articulated robot on a rail do the same job but with less hassle.
I think the moments on the rail will not be as bad as they seem. Only the middle arm will transmit vertical forces. Right now, part of this arm is already on the other side of the rail, acting as a counterbalance. Not sure if this is intentional, but you could tweak/optimize this of course. But I agree, the stiffness of this concept is its weakest point.
@@tulpjeeenIf the entire assembly linear (Y axis) weight distribution is always 50:50 in motion like a boxer engine. thats would only be the case if the robot draws a line. A parallel second rail is the correct answer here ;)
This could make a really compact printer. Very cool. Looks like a delta that broke out of it's circle.
It's been freed, but at what cost?
Seriously, how much does one of these things cost?
Like a Portable! You can stay together the arms and carry around!
the build area is quite constrained. It may not be that compact compared to printers with comparable printable volumes
@@peterwilson7497 It's a CAD model right now. But I'm sure the inventor can do a bill of materials and estimate a material cost for a prototype. The cost of a final commercial product will depend on a much larger number of additional variables. Labor costs, initial investment, finance costs, marketing costs, the size of the market, reliability, warranty costs, profit margins for starters. That's if the product is viable and offers some advantages over existing designs. Stability and repeatability may be challenging based on the geometry.
The coolest thing about this is how easy it is to make it. All of the parts are incredibly simple.
This 3D printer could easily be made to self-assemble and print itself by having two of the arms be detachable from the print head and thus able to be used as "hands" to autoassemble the 3D printed arm parts, or belt track parts. The screws would have to be a bit different to be 3D printed. If it 3D printed its water wheels it could also gain energy...
If the arms had a "third" joint section you could also have only two arms instead of one?
Seems like awesome design to print houses since you could literally mount one on a truck or like a train
With the right parametric design, you could do each house unique for about the same price. It could be amazing.
But what material are you gonna use??
@@mrbusiness9214 concrete.
@@jeffreymoffitt4070 but then you need to use a kind of wood to stabilize it
dont know the exact name of it in english sry
@@mrbusiness9214 dude, literally use pressed earth. It turns into stone. So some sort of extrusion similar would be a perfect and environmentally friendly use of resources. There're literally whole deserts full of fucking sand.
It’s so amazing that no ones made a single Simpsons reference about it yet.
This got on my reccomended, and I am so happy that I found this. This will help me when I enter college and major in mechanical engineering
You might want a wide rail to keep the rocking down on the endpoint.
2040 then
It seems like this would be pretty useful in large-scale mass production assembly lines for items that are not too heavy but potentially awkward or unsafe for humans to carry & hold. Very interesting!
I love this. It is mesmerizing, and even though I didn't quite get all the subject-specific talk when you explained it, it still mostly made sense! And your enthusiasm about the whole thing is just really heartwarming. Always such a joy to see someone work on something that they genuinely love! Take it sleazy man, you rule! :)
Simply amazing. Grate job Nicolas! I was always drawn to your table during RepRap festivals.
I hope we can get back there soon!
Im subscribing because I NEED to see this working, looks so cool.
Incredible work.
Each carriage could have a magnetic position sensor, and all sharing the same magnetic strip running along side the rail.
You get the point!!
Amazing. This is the kind of engineering content I love to see. Keep up the great work.
This is genius. The kind of design that would not come about by iterations made by a community. I love it.
Thanks. The funny thing is that this came from talking to my friend in discord about Tripterons. I wish I could take all the credit.
Love it!! Such a tight design, I have no words, just praise. Well done!
I have a full continuous rotation scara in the works with all static steppers. (Interested in joining our RepRap discord? We have a few scara projects going.) Your praise means a lot!
@@NicholasSeward Sure, I'm on discord
Great to see @Evezor supporting.
Thank you
Can anyone point me to the reprap discord? Couldn't find it, thank you.
Many people saying about the compact size but I think it really shines when dealing with high velocities! It seems that this design reduces a lot of ressonance and vibrations, meaning that for a high speed 3d printer it could work great!
I fear that the opposite may be true. Since all three arms hang off one rail it would likely be prone to torsional vibrations around that rail.
@@maninalift That's true. Maybe some kind of dumper on each joint would reduce that
Looks like a pond skater! Absolutely mesmerizing, great work
That's crazy, I Love it! 😉
So glad RUclips decided to feed me this gem😍instantly subbed
Amazing! Certainly useful in many applications.
WOW, Really amazing and inspiring kinematics idea
Wow, can you show a state, lets call it "storage" mode , where all the arms are flat and the end effector is below the "working" plane? I have an idea for a portable machine that fits in a hard case, and needs to go somewhat flat when the case is closed. Exploring designs and this looks really cool.
The arms are always a little ungainly. You would need to disconnect the effector if you want the most compact arrangement.
To add to Nicholas, I think if there were just a couple more points of actuation as far as pivoting of the arms on their hinges it could help improve flexibility as well as form factor.
For instance, a pivot point for the arm where it will connect to the motor assembly. And then maybe just a hinge built into the arm a few inches away from the extruder or tool piece.
@@NicholasSeward id imagine you could also have a "station" arrangement of rails made for optimal storage. Youd still be disconnecting one of the arms from the primary rail, but since you have two other arms on the rails you could use them to help "push" a switch segment of rail from one rail track to a side track. At least, id imagine so.
"The ring fell off my pudding can!"
"Take my pen knife, my good man!"
Is there a chance the track could bend?
Not sure how or why I'm here but I'm sure glad I am! This is one hell of a design! Great job!!
Wow! What a brilliant design!! 😊
This looks pretty cool, could mount it on a wall and have it print on swappable beds in a sort of 3D print commission factory so there's minimum downtime between prints and allows extra care for removal of the print. Or you could print on a conveyer belt.
This is perfect for pick and place robots! They usually hang down to cover this area, you can stay at the side of an belt!
Irs simplicity in terms of structure and accessibility of the build plate are really appealing, best of all it looks super cool
It's the most beautiful thing I ever saw!
Imagine putting this rail alongside multiple beds and having it pump out prints all night 🤩
Tbh i would rather put a line of moving beds in front of it, so you won't have to carry around the motors or have to build some weird crazy belt system to keep them stationary while moving the "arms", but i get what you mean
Cool idea!
Perhaps a setup akin to the Servobelt Looptrack would be worth looking into for this.
That is simply amazing. You are so creative! I've never been here but I'm subscribed now.
Definitely, I want to see this!!!
I could imagine that on huge scale to print houses. It should be easier as printer would only be on one side instead of surrounding it, Als the Rail length could easily be adjusted. You could even get multiple to vastly improve speed
This is really cool. Great way to organize a lot of the theory from your other bots!
I was just about to share this with you, Luke! Apaprently you already know.
I think this actually is a very promising idea for a printer. Think of the easiness of how you put the three motors outside a hypothetical enclosure. Cable management a pure dream on that one. And honestly, the coolness factor just wows! A great way to showcase how many ways there are to describe a cartesian coordinate system. No issues to make a rigid z-height. At least for not so high z-dimension printers, this one clearly has its upsides. And of course, only one of those expensive rails. You could also easily (at least when it comes to industry solution money) put such a thing on a kind of carriage and build very long prints.
It is one of those ideas where I feel stupid I never thought about it myself after hearing it but would have never had in a life of 500 years. Simple genius!
Crazy idea man go with it, I believe in you
Looks interesting. I'm curious to see how all the joints will hold up if you build this.
Bro it would be so cool to make this into a 3D printer
Just amazing, respect for that idea
brilliant work.
This will be a game changer for printing houses. Put a temporary rail on the road, print a house, side down, print another house, keep going until you run out of road!
printed houses will never ever be a thing. ever. not even close.
@@DieselRamcharger NowI'm waiting for those replies 20 years from now saying "this aged like milk"
Another outside-the-box design, impressive. I just wish one of them ends up getting massive adoption (was a big fan of GUS)
I have an update coming (not fast) on HELIOS. He has the best chance IMO.
I have been tempted to update GUS. All the hardware and software are there now. The problem is that my design goal are better solved by HELIOS. I might update him anyways.
@@NicholasSeward It's certainly not intuitive for a layperson like me that one extended arm is better than three tied together :) Could you share what the goals are? Ease of build, reliability, straight forward controller (thankfully 32-bit controllers today), ...? If anything my #1 wish is for far more sensors and corresponding intelligence in the controller.
@@tommythorn My goals are some mixture of large print area, small, and easy to use. For the ease of use GUS needs custom auto calibration. Stick an accelerometer on the effector and we should be set. HELIOS doesn't need much ongoing calibration. They are both about the same size. My new HELIOS is going to have a print volume at least 6 times that of a prusa. SCARAs can break out of their frame for some huge work envelopes.
@@NicholasSeward Glad to hear Helios isn't dead. I don't see much news about it in the last 3 years. Am I missing something?
Bloody awesome mate! Build it. Please build it 👍👍👍
This is awesome, I'd love to see one actually working
Instead belts I would use 3 fast leadscrews. It looks mechanically easy to make with a Hiwin rail, 3 carriages printed parts and some bearings.
I am considering screws.
@@NicholasSeward rotating nuts that make all three carriages ride on the same screw and the same rail
@@destroyer2012 yes yes yes 👍
Use a gear rack bolted beside the rail, with carriage mounted steppers with gears preloaded again the rack to remove all backlash.
@@joshbridges8410 I might do that. Ideas on slick ways to preload?
Rack and pinion with this setup could work really well.
was thinking the same
Very cool design!
Super neat idea
Instead of belts, a rack and pinion set up seems ideal for this
Gear wiggle/lash will be detrimental to performance i think
Could use a single stationery ball screw with motorized other thing
Another alternative is through-type lead screw stepper motors on the same screw, or with slightly more complexity, two through-type and one larger stepper driving a captured lead-nut and two steppers. The latter means you could drive all one axis quite quickly.
The ring came off my pudding can.
this looks awesome! you can even extend the capability of this thing by having rotating anchors to the fixed point on the rail and extendable double arms.
That's about the most beautiful thing I've seen in a long time! Just wow...
Ahhhh. Thanks!
@@NicholasSewardwhen you mentioned the belt drive, at first I thought you should use a rack and pinion, but then I got to thinking... you could have a ball screw system with the exact same setup! A single long screw with three individual ball nuts!
Imagine that! -- A three axis system using a single bearing rail, and a single ball screw!!!
@@berylliumltd3681 that would be very slick
Real interesting! I see that both Y and Z motion move the 'motors' closer together, which makes me expect that the effector area of motion decreases with higher Z slices. Is this correct?
What shape does the effector volume of motion take?
I talk about it a little in one of the other comments. Trapezoidal area from the top. Triangular from the side. z increase as you move away from the rail.
Im IN!
We need a prototype ASAP! This looks incredible! The working range seems to be somewhat limited, like a semi-sphere area, but it looks so promising. No need for axis alignment, just a single rail and somewhere to screw it to. Awesome.
The top view of the area is a trapezoid. The side view is a triangle. The z increases as you move away from the rail.
Backlash and elastic play is going to be a nightmare with only one rail supporting the structure. The heavy arms are going to generate serious torsional force on your runners. The pliable variance between homed and extended is going to be exponential in every literal sense. It doesn't need three linear actuators such as the physical model shown in the green room, however two parallel rails would stabilize the rig. Two locomotors on primary and the third on a second rail. Very clever idea
Hot damn that’s cool. The first thought that came to my head was “I can make a 3d printer out of you”
That is the plan.
@@NicholasSeward oh dang I guess I didn’t watch the video all the way through, my apologies ^^.
@@NicholasSeward i have a small flsun delta with linear rails that'll doesn't work, i could see myself converting it to this! Thought i don't know if I have the coding skills for marlin to make it happen 😅
@@lilypower A modification of the corexy/corexz code should get you there. I would like to say that I can help but I am targeting RRF.
How long did it take you to realise, that the center arm has to be on an angle? - Seing this this angle is the most fascinating part about this invention.
It might be more obvious when you have the model in front of you to drag around. As for Nicholas, I'm going to give him credit for potentially already knowing, given his past experience with creative designs like this one! With the center arm straight, moving the center arm (ignoring the others) simply moves the carriage along the X axis (I think this also would overconstrain the system as it's now fighting the other two?)
Also, check out 2:07 , if your middle carriage is straight on and only has direct influence over X (Can't transmit any torque through the joint as it's perpendicular), you lose the ability to move in Z!
That's mostly assumptions though, I don't have much experience with kinematics so it could completely throw a wrench in things. I'd be honored to be corrected by Nicholas!!
My guess is that it was obvious to him because of how the design works. The end effector is at the intersection of three planes, so the normals to those planes cannot be coplanar. (The three arms effectively lie on these three planes.)
to prevent singularity in mathematics model. It is quite obvious but this model require a very good bearing joint.
Is it possible to explain why it has to be at an angle to someone not familiar with the field?
@@cyrfung I'll have a go! Remember that the jointed arms are not actuated, they're "floppy" and it's only the carriage where the arm is attached to the rail that is controlled. So if all three arms were vertical, the payload would be unsupported vertically and would just fall.
The angle of the arm is a compromise between actuation and support. If the arm was horizontal it would provide plenty of support but the Z height would be fixed - no amount of moving the carriage would affect it. At low angles, moving the carriage would affect the height but large carriage movements would result in small Z movements, which would result in a very short Z travel because the carriage would run into the other two before the payload had moved much. At higher angles there's more "gearing" so the Z travel range is larger, at the cost of rigidity.
The way of thinking about it that's closest to the mathematical explanation is to visualise the three arms as lying on three planes (flat surfaces). The carriages control where the three planes are, and if they meet at a single point then that's where the payload must be located. If the three arms were all vertical then the three planes would be too, and they'd meet at a line rather than a point so the payload would be unconstrained in Z. The payload is most rigidly supported when the planes intersect at angles near 90 degrees, which is not really the case here and is one of the sources of comments from people concerned about rigidity (the other being that the weight of the payload is transferred to a torque on the rail, trying to roll it over). Mesmerising design though.
Huzzah! Here's to more crazy ideas. Good job.
When i see this a portable ploter comes to mind. You can keep it simple and make a sharpie adpater in the head, they are light and need no power. It does not fight against the concept weakpoints like the tension you will get on the angled bearings, you probably can make a cool toy out of it.
What about a rack gear with gears on each arm with steppers
Considering it!
Or similarly a big ol screw and a nut of some kind on each mount that you spin with an attached motor. You could make the arms just roll along on some rollerblade wheels. That could give you an infinite z axis assuming you could use a counterweight to balance the arms.
@@JordanDavidson3102 rack and gears would be easy to print but wheel idea is great
I just realized I said infinite z. I meant infinite x
Flip and with that you could do multi material by adding another bot to the screw. Would just need to have some way to calibrate xyz on both bots to the same point.
I can see this for on-orbit manufacturing in space.
I want one, love the design
Nicholas, you never cease to amaze me.😄
Good to see you lurking in the comment section.
@@NicholasSeward I can't believe I wasn't already subscribed! I need to come visit one day. I keep meeting your old students, they are all brilliant of course. They all love Mr. Seward!
@@joelgordon9804 Any time. Would love to have you!
Linear rails are expensive parts. This method could save allot of money.
In principle thats true, however....
1 - i am unsure if 1 long linear rail is cheaper than 3 short ones
2 - i am not sure you can buy rails with 3 slides. Inserting slides onto a rail is a PAIN. (Even if you can buy them separately.)
I'd be concerned about how long a single rail will last with all of the weight continuously applying torque to one side and the load having plenty of leverage too, probably going to need a beefier rail to handle that with the same reliability and accuracy as triple-rail setups. You also have three bearing sets in each arm (drive block to first segment, first to second segment and second segment to head assembly) and any wear, play or sticktion (extra force to break static friction) in those will add inaccuracy too. Neat concept in theory, though getting it up to the same print quality standards as more conventional setups will be challenging due to extra moving parts in critical paths.
Thanks Nicholas, but this seems more like a Shelbyville idea.
I love the reference!
That's a great deal !
I think it's not going to be easy to dimension the structure to counterbalance the moments ...
but this design makes it possible to build stadium-shaped rails that would allow a very large direction while knowing the position perfectly!
It would just be necessary to compensate for the curvature of the stadium rail in the kinematics calculation, but it seems quite simple !
It's much more fun than the car circuits of our childhood!
Great idea! As always.
That to me just screams "everything bot". 3D Printer, CNC, auto drawing, probably more.
CNC will pose rigidity difficulties. Everything is mounted on two bearings connected to a linear rail and the arms are also quite long. 3d printing and drawing should work great though. Maybe also a vinyl cutter or something like that.
@@flyingby3703 maybe also pcb printing and driling if its accurate enough.
This screams "please don't use me as a cnc router!!" This construction has a huge lever in the Z direction and only a single point of contact. Any force in the z direction would cause huge deflections
Interesting to have one overhead on a beam in my garage...🤔
This has all the simplicity of a linear design while keeping all the functionality of a six-axis design. truly brilliant!!!!! PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PATTENT
It is an open question if this infringes on the Tripteron patent that expires September 2022. If it doesn't , I might get a provision patent just so I can lock others out from doing the same. I plan on having an open license.
@@NicholasSeward totally. It is in your best interest to keep it on record. If all else fails, this video serves as a sort of publication!
Pretty sick design. Also great music!
This is a beautiful idea!
This would be the COOLEST 3D printer! 👍👍👍 so mesmerizing!
This looks like it would be especially awesome in huge scale format, like for 3d printing house out of concrete; just build one on a truck, you drive it next to the emplacement and you're basically ready to print. Of course, it has the problem that enlarging something increase the mass even more.
Thanks for posting again.
Love how your x axis is nearly infinitely scalable!
Y axis could be literally infinite if a belt fed from under the rail, allowing for immensely large prints on a very small form factor.
Eccellente idea, well done a novelty kinematic, will be nice to study one on a circular rail!
The joints at the effector from the outside arms will need to be swapped out for ujoints. That would be fun to see.
This is so cool! Nice model!
I'm already imagining the rail on a lift for more range in z and the whole thing on a vehicle that is mobile on a factory floor
Pretty cool... I can see this just in every 3D printer
This video is great, thanks for sharing! I really like your idea. For the movement belt look at blue flexirack. I've used it on my CNC after discovering it in a sewing shop. works great and is strong. Its a rigid timing belt that you can bolt to a flat surface. Worked out better than a regular t2 timing belt in my case. I do not know what the industry calls this type of gear tooth strip. edit: Oh its a flexible rack, should have seen that coming!
Such beauty!
This is so cool holy crap!
This is so cool. I want to build it some day.
*THAT IS INSANELY CLEVER*
Original idea. Very nice.
Seems like a great design to help improve the printing of curved materials to help get soft round edges. Its movement seems very smooth. Would love to see it actually printing something.
WOW! This is so cool!
Hoping to see this print soon, good luck.
the moment ii saw the thumbnail i was like " MY GOODNESS! it makes so much sense!" beautiful job sir
Hahaha. Probably not too many people in that camp.
@@NicholasSeward haha dont get me wrong I definitely dont have the mind to model that all out but the mechanism speaks for itself honestly great job man you got a sub out of me looking forward to watching these other vids on this channel :)
Hi Nicholas, this is Guizmo, I hope you remember me. I'm happy to see you still design crazy printers. I still do as well, but more traditional cartesian ones. Have a nice day, great to see you again, keep the good work!
So glad to hear from you. Would you mind emailing me. I don't seem to have yours. firstname.lastname@gmail.com
really cool, looking forward to see an real version moving.
Thanks for sharing your project :) keep going!
You bet!