That is encouraging to hear. I can’t wait to get started on the next one. I haven’t got all my idea sketches out, can’t wait to do some testing.
Sign me up!! 
2 Likes
GP you are a glutton for punishment, all beta all the time?!
2 Likes
Wouldn’t be fun otherwise
I just don’t have the space for a full sheet setup anymore, half of my garage has been taken by Pallet fuel for the Pallet stove
2 Likes
Here’s a ball screw that failed. Chips and dirt eventually work there way up into the balls and chew them up, causing failures. This one bound up tight causing the servo to fault. Others developed lots of play . Evey with sweeps on both ends.
2 Likes
Very useful info!
How are the belts secured? Wondering if there was less wrap around the drive pulley if steel braided belts would work? Is that what they use in the big machines?
1 Like
I see I am late to the party but again. That is a lot to read through but there are some good ideas in there. But don’t worry I wrote a LONG post of my own.
As far as general strategy for V1 I like the idea of keeping it simple to attract entry level new users. As stated previously the $600-$900 entry point is very appealing for new hobbyist. And I know that it has been said that some people want features offered on some $3K to $8K machines. But if you think about it many of you and other users have been able to mod the V1 machines to have several of the other desired features. Some people just don’t always know where to look to find these mods. And if they do find them then they don’t always know how to recreate them.
One possible solution would be to offer a “User Mods” wiki for each v1 machine. Some place that a user could post Pros and Cons to their mod, What features it adds/removes. What is required, Estimated costs, and instructions. It should also have a rating/review section though
Ryan mentioned that none of these machines are what he designed them to be. That is frustrating but at the same time that is why I chose V1 machines. So I could mod it to my own liking. I have made mods that would get a one or two stars. But I have seen some AMAZING mods that would earn 5 stars easy. The MPCNC tool changer, The joystick remote control for Jogging, fourth axis to name a few of my favorites. The Forums are great but most of these 5 star gems are lost in the history. They should be easy to find from each machines main web page.
New or existing users could be comparing a V1 machine to something else online wishing it had one extra feature offered by another vendor. If the V1 website could easily show them where to find these Mods then they might convince themselves V1 is the shizzle.
It may also help some new users make choices as they build their first machine. For example double endstops for the MPCNC really is an upgrade/mod. It could be removed from the build instructions for simplification and moved to a feature upgrade or Mod set of instructions. If a mod is really good then it could be given an official endorsement as a “Supported Upgrade.” Meaning V1 Endorsed it and will support it with Firmware etc.
Some of the features requested in this thread are legit next version upgrades to be considered. But some of them are not necessary for the average user and would be better suited as a documented “User Modification” or “Supported Upgrade”.
For example. At my previous house and current temporary rental. Space is a big issue even though I want a full sheet sized Lowrider. So I have considered vertical/angled designs. I have considered fold up for storage designs. Those are really just modifications and probably should not be considered for the next version. But if I build one of those I should share how I did it and the pros/cons. That would be a “User Modification.” But something like a touch plate could be considered a “Supported Upgrade.” It doesn’t need to be anything more than a linked suggestion on the machine’s build pages. But it would then have its own wiki page with full details.
I know that we want to make things easy to maintain on the website and not add more work on Ryan. but I suspect setting up a wiki would be low risk. I cannot be sure of that but I think the ROI would be well worth it in the long run.
In theory the users would handle all of the documentation, instructions, testing and reviews. So you would end up with a more engaged (and in theory more loyal) user base. You could easily review the mods to see if you wanted to incorporate their concept into the next base design. Like you did with the MPCNC belt tensioners. But the main idea is that MOST of these Mods are specific to a users needs and not everyone needs them. They should still be captured and encouraged instead of getting lost in the forums and other random websites.
Ryan you have an amazing community here that is creative as hell and willing to help.
7 Likes
This is a great idea. I think it encapsulates a lot of the desires I see pop up and addresses a lot of the frustrations with finding “improvements” that not everyone needs, all while giving V1 the flexibility to choose when to support a mod and when to say “hey, it’s in the community and it’s not my ball”.
2 Likes
Typical clogged timing belt with nylon, not steel.
Cogged…not clogged…
1 Like
That is a great idea. I can focus on the most common base machine and have links to specific mods for specific purposes.
That said, I have some simplifications in the pipeline Heffe suggested long ago. One in particular is coming very soon to help new users get started with less decisions.
2 Likes
That said…what if we just had one machine that could do both well…hmmmmmm
3 Likes
I doubt that you will divulge more but your bait has worked and I am eagerly waiting to know more.
1 Like
No that was honestly me realizing I can do half the work if I just made one machine do it all.
1 Like
Also i’m gonna throw this out there as a new idea for easy to source materials that could be cheap but strong. This is a potential Rail idea. It could be used with aluminum or steel angle extrusion.
2 Likes
I have completely forgotten all of them. 
. I’m glad you have a good memory. I am intrigued 
2 Likes
100% agree about improving the organization of user mods, and it’s an interesting idea to “demote” dual-endstops to the same pool of mods.
Although I’m thinking a wiki might not be the right format. A wiki page for a user mod is not as good as a forum thread IMO but thats a bit beside the point because the real difference would be in providing a catalog of some sort. Somewhat like the gallery, the catalog of user mods could really sell a machine to a prospective builder.
Each mod could have a short summary and approximate cost and difficulty rating, and a link to click through to the forum thread.
Depending how broad the definition of “mods”, they could even be instructions for mostly firmware, like setting up a metal corner cube and G38.2 to probe in X and Y, not just Z. What I’m thinking of is anything that can show off the capability of what the machine can be extended to do.
4 Likes
Please avoid the Swiss army knife design mentality… or should I say illness…? Stick with refinement of the base design. I’ve worked with other engineers who try to make machines that do too much and ends up doing all poorly with high amounts of downtime. As others have said, welcome and foster other mods, but focus primarily on the base machine. Love your designs. Keep it simple and user friendly.
2 Likes
Now that I think about it… that pulley idea Jamie brought up in post 70. Might be useful for the Z axis. Since the belts and pulleys attach in multiple locations it would make sure the Z lifts evenly. It shouldn’t twist, torque or rack to the front or back. Unlike the threaded rod that pushes up from the center the pulleys would even out the lift. Plus it would act as a gear down.
1 Like
Oh boy! Sounds like fun!
1 Like