Відео

I am pretty sure that I used a #8 screw. At the time when I filmed the part in the video where I was taking it apart (@5:45), I had not yet figured out precisely what screw would be needed to replace the rivet. The intro at 1:04 was filmed last, so it would be most accurate. Sorry for the confusion!

No worries ! Also, do you recall the length of the #8 screws ? I assume it should be as short as possible to avoid potential contact with the cord.

I used whatever length I had on hand. Yes, use the shortest screw possible, but just long enough that it will hold.

Links to the purchased items are in the Description on the Thingiverse posting.

I am not aware of a spring mechanism above the tilt axle. I have the collar-tilt type, and I can’t say how it might differ from the auto-tilt type. I did this operation on two umbrellas and both lower sections slid out just like in the video. Try to slightly rotate the lower section (as if the umbrella was beginning to tilt).

The vacuum trick is a great idea! I don't know much about the auto-tilt mechanism. Yeah, try loosening the M5 bolt. My presumption with auto-tilt is that since the tilting begins when the umbrella is nearing it's full-open, that there must be some kind means for the "full-open" to trigger the tilt rotation. I'd try to figure what is supposed to trigger the tilt, and go from there.

Popping the bracket off wasn't necessary on mine. Not sure why he did that. - I was able to remove the handle and spindle without removing the bracket. Drilling out a rivet can be easy if you have the right tools. Make sure you are using a drill bit for drilling metal and not for drilling wood.

I was glad that I removed both brackets since the crank rod was stuck with part of the old knotted cord still wound around the rod. I was able to hook out the loose end of the cord through the hole opposite the crank, which then freed the crank for removal.

I purchased my cords from Casual Furniture Solutions (New York State, US). My contact there is Nick. The invoice shows this part number: “P-UMCORD12N - 807 Replacement Cord”. I did not measure my cords before I installed them.

Try searching for “3d print service”. You send them my models… they send you the printed parts. Ask for PETG as the material of choice. While not the strongest material, PETG is durable enough for this application, and it is dimensionally stable (assuring that the parts will fit as designed). Good luck.

My rough guess is 50-100 hours of printing ABS (which seems, by my senses, to be one of the worse materials, emissions-wise).

@@duaneanderson8641 Great! Thank you for the prompt reply!

There are images showing measurements of the complete unit at the Thingiverse post (link in the description). Eg. The unit (with 4 charcoal chambers) is 43.5 cm tall. Good luck! My unit is going strong; four years and counting!

@@duaneanderson8641 I see it now, thank you!

Sorry, I am not setup to print/kit/assemble. You could try a print service, such as Craftcloud. The Thingiverse listing has links to the non-printed parts that you will also need to purchase.

I am not interested in posting my source files. The STL models, available on Thingiverse, are all that I am publishing at this time.

Most welcome

There are several photos of the unit in my enclosure, shown on the Thingiverse post. The link is in the description.

You are most welcome! Thanks for the tip for folks with the auto-tilt version! Enjoy the shade! Cheers.

I had the same issue. I think that 5m bolt interferes with the auto tilt mechanism. oh well doesn't tilt, still gonna save me 600$ for a new umbrella. cord cost $11. great video

File down any extra bolt length extending beyond the nylon lock nut. I did two umbrellas. One was fine without needing to file down the bolt, but the second umbrella’s bolt needed the filing.

On my Treasure Garden umbrella the bolt AND the nut have to be flush with the rounded pole or the central hub will not move over the nut/bolt. Any other suggestions?

@@p.andrewwill3523 What did the ends your original rivet mount against? For the ones I have seen, there is a flat recess on both sides of the hole, if it is the tilt type. The tilt mechanism puts the pivot axis off-to-the-side of the pole center line.

@@p.andrewwill3523 I used a phillips (flat-headed) M5 bolt (35mm in length) with a very small flat-head screw driver to hold the lock nut stationary... looks almost factory and works like a charm!

Hi Jeremy- For a list of fan alternatives, check out this Thingiverse listing from user @jmillerfo: www.thingiverse.com/thing:2394452 I use the Sunon unit, and am happy with it for managing the printer emissions. I use the San Ace in another project (cooling an electronics enclosure) and that works well. I use a temperature sensor to keep the loudness of the San Ace to a minimum, but it does get noisy when the ambient temperatures are elevated. Good luck!

I didn’t examine the tilt mechanism too closely, so I am a little vague on how it might fail. One suggestion I have is to take a look at the two pins that are driven up/down by the turning of the collar. Those pins are held in place by the collar and one or both could have dropped out of the collar thread when you took off the crank shroud.

Thanks for your tips! Good stuff, there! B) My old cord had frayed so badly and formed a tightly tangled ball that I needed to access both sides of the spindle to be able to tear it apart; otherwise yes I agree, you would only need to remove the crank side of the spindle holder. C) I *think* it will be okay to have those sharp screw tips inside the pole. The spindle only takes up about 4’ of cord, and the cord is always under tension when the spindle is fully loaded. So it’s unlikely for the cord to come into contact with the screws. However, if I’m wrong, your bolt suggestion is a good idea, or file down the tips of the screws so almost nothing sharp extends into the pole.

Re: B) , I have the collar type tilt version like Duanes. I did remove both brackets, since the crank rod was stuck with part of the old knotted cord still wound around the rod. I was able to hook out the loose end of the cord through the hole opposite the crank, which then freed the crank for removal.

Thanks! The cord is 3mm wide, and at least 9’ is required. The cord is very stiff (because it has a tight weave) and very smooth. Eg. You should be able to take a 12” section, pull it straight, and it will not bend/sag if you pick it up in the middle of the section.

@@duaneanderson8641 Does the hex-head M5 and nylon nut sit inside the travel of the collar? The video ended before opening the final result. Hoping the collar doesn't catch on the nuts or bolt head. Thanks again.

The bolt head and nut do not catch on the sliding ring. I used a “button head” style bolt that was 35mm long before I cut it down to 33mm. I filed the cut end so that it would be rounded and just barely grip the nylon part of the lock nut. The nut does slightly protrude outside the envelope of the pole, but since it’s rounded the sliding ring goes past it easily.

@@duaneanderson8641 Just completed the project thanks to you.

Have a cold one in the shade!

Sorry mate but this is not in production. I take your question as compliment though, so thanks! I put this design on Thingiverse with the primary intent that owners of 3D printers may be interested in printing this for their own use. There are service providers that will print a part from an STL file (see my Thingiverse listing). You will still need to do the assembly however.

Glad you like it!

Depends on the infill percentage, also its recommended to finish it with primer and paint for durability. I’ve 3d printed a water sprinkler with 100% infill and had no leaks.

Good point. Adjust your slicer settings to minimize air gaps between layers in the Z axis, and between your walls. You can up the extrusion percentage a bit, and/or increase extrusion temperature, to force layers to bond better. Also, use 3 (not the just the usual 2) walls. Use "random" start points for each wall run so that gaps will be unlikely to overlap. You can test your slicer settings by printing a cup, and then see if it will hold water. Also, some filaments bond way better than others, so if the cup leaks, try another filament. User @justtestingonce has good suggestions too. I have successfully used spray-on sealer for a design that needs to hold water (my ant-proof pet food bowl holder).

Not to take away from your comment but,,, You would still have a leak with push if it leaks, so it doesnt matters. You always want to pull air not push

If so worried about leaks use teflon tape on threads and caulk anything else.

Thanks! I am glad that you like the design. Push v. pull was definitely something that I, and others, have given upfront consideration. Ultimately, I sketched an implementation for both approaches and there were a couple of drawbacks that were unique to Push: 1) Placing the fan at the front would require extra maintenance to clean dust that would build up on the fan blades. 2) I wanted a vertical free standing solution (vertical saves space and vertical leverages gravity), and putting the fan up top would make the unit top-heavy. I agree that potential leaks around the HEPA chamber should be evaluated. The air pressure inside the HEPA chamber is low relative to outside and the concern is that dirty air will bypass the HEPA filters and enter the chamber. My primary mitigation solution for this is what led to multiple HEPA cartridges. Multiple cartridges decreases the differential inside-to-outside air pressure and thus reduces the proportion of air that might bypass the HEPA filters. Now consider the three leakage points: a) the gap around each filter cartridge; b) the gap around the threaded exit hole; and c) the gap at the top "lid". Gap "b" is mitigated by the nylon mesh that is squeezed between the threads. Gap "a" is mitigated by the flexible gasket that is found on each HEPA cartridge. Gap "c", I agree, should be looked at for how particulates might bypass the HEPA filters. The lid is a press-fit arrangement. If the top-bottom parts do not warp, the press-fit solution is mitigated by the low pressure inside the chamber which will tend to pull the surfaces evenly together. Another mitigation to "c", required if there is warpage, is to put gasket material on the points where the lid meets the bottom of the chamber. In my build, I can visually verify that the seam is tight all the way around, so I don't think that I need the gasket. My parts list for the enclosure (on Thingiverse) includes self-adhesive gasket material.

I took a wild guess that, for each charcoal chamber, two "layers" are sufficient, where a "layer" is defined as enough pellets to prevent a direct line-of-sight path through the layer. The goal is to maximize the air-to-charcoal collisions without introducing excessive airflow impedance. Additionally, the air cavity at the top of each chamber induces eddy currents which further multiply the collisions with charcoal pellets. Also, multiple chambers instead of one deep chamber prevents the possibility of the pellets crushing down and degrading airflow. My multi-chamber design approach is supported by observations of water flowing through a series of pipes and chambers. In each chamber, there is a window to watch the flow. Particles in the water flow in a continuous forward direction in the pipes. Then, when entering the chamber, the flow spins about before exiting the chamber and entering the next pipe. That is the idea behind each charcoal chamber: to allow the dirty air to have more opportunities for the charcoal to adsorb the particulates suspended in the air.

@@duaneanderson8641 wow, very interesting. I can't wait to start on my own filter system.. I'm getting an E3N small 18.5x19.5x18.5mm 3d printer. Meaning I'd like the filtering system to also be as small as possible. It's PLA so I'll be monitoring the difference in Ultra Fine Particles pre and post filterering. Thank you for your insights!

I read those guidelines also. For the HEPA filter portion, I go by these guidelines, which in a commercial lab was found to be 7 years: www.labrepco.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/How_Long_Do_HEPA_Filters_Last_1447854983.pdf. For the activated charcoal, I did not find any applicable research, but it is certainly much more likely to need changing than the HEPA filter. I go by the smell test: if I detect any amount of ABS odor in the room with my enclosure, I swap out the charcoal. In my case I have done that twice, or about once per year.

@@duaneanderson8641 - As someone with anosmia (no sense of smell) the literal "smell test" will never work for me. 😞 You mention that you're swapping out the charcoal about once a year. Do you have a rough estimate of how many hours of ABS printing that is for you?

This indeed a nice system to have. There are few additional air filtering options available out there, such as odourcube( odourcube.com ). I came across this lately and it is a must system to have, at least in terms of keeping yourself healthy...

@@3dpp959 Can't find a single review of this thing... It's also not readily available. I'll build my own for now, who knows they'll be bigger in the future. Would be great if they can strike a deal with printer manufacturers.

You are most welcome, and thank-you for the nice comment!

I have not done any testing with a resin printer. From what little that I have heard about the resin fumes, I am optimistic that my design should work with resin printers. Please read my response (3 weeks ago) to user @KyleKatarn145.

HEPA filters and activated charcoal are widely utilized for air purification in many types of situations. I use this solution because it is the best available, and it is at least better than NOT using an air scrubber. I have not yet seen a scientific study that quantifies how to sufficiently scrub the air around a 3D printer. I have read the studies that describe the types of particles that have been detected emitting from 3D (FDM) printers; and HEPA + activated charcoal are known to be effective filters for those types of particles. I have not read any studies on the types of particles emitted by resin filters. You could do a qualitative test with a commercial gas mask (3M 6200 - Half Facepiece). These masks are HEPA+activated charcoal, so they will approximate the results of the air scrubber. If, when using the mask while printing, you notice no fumes, then we could predict that the scrubber will help clean the air around a resin printer. Just as with an FDM printer, you will need an airtight enclosure to house the scrubber + resin printer. The scrubber cleans the air at a gradual rate, which means it will take some time to clean the air in an enclosure after the emitting is concluded.

@@duaneanderson8641 do they stop the smell?

This is something that I monitor, and so far, it has not reached the glass transition point of PLA (60 C). The GTP of ABS is about 100C. However, a big factor is how air-tight is the enclosure. The design approach of this air scrubber forces a fraction of the scrubbed air out of the enclosure through an exhaust port, which results in a small amount of cool room temperature air to continuously enter the enclosure by whatever path is possible. I have very small air gaps around my enclosure door, which is sufficient to allow enough clean/cool air to enter to keep the interior at <<50C. If I were to print a 24 hr long ABS job, AND my ambient room temp was not cooled, AND on a hot day, AND I closed off the room with the printer... then I would be need to consider steps to protect PLA parts within my enclosure. IF your configuration results in higher temps, then I suggest that your options would be to lower your room ambient, and/or to open your enclosure door just a crack. Keep in mind that one of the benefits of an enclosure is to stabilize printer ambient temps at higher-than-room ambient so that you can predictably get better quality prints. 40C to 45C is desirable.

@@duaneanderson8641 Ah, I see. If there are gaps for air to leak in, I would want to have the scrubber turned on, so that any fumes from ABS/PC wouldn't leak into the environment. Are these fumes lighter or heavier than air? I'm assuming they would collect at the bottom of the enclosure?

@@macsogandares8383 Some VOCs are lighter than air, some heavier. The air turbulence of the filter's re-circulation nozzle, combined with the turbulence of fans on the hot end, serve to stir up the compounds in the enclosure. So, the filter intake (high vs. low) position does not matter so much. If I let the filter run, with the enclosure door closed, for 15 minutes after an ABS print, I cannot smell any trace of fumes when I stick my head into the enclosure. If I open my enclosure during an ABS print, the fumes are very intense. My reply to @Travis7919 (about a year ago) provides some details that might help you to quantify your expected results based on my observations.

Not sure how true this is but I heard that the particles are in nanometer range so it wont be detected. Idk how much this helps (for UFP) either, the hepa might not be effective at this size.

Steve - Thank-you! The multiple smaller chambers gives three advantages: a single tall chamber might cause the charcoal to compress at the bottom, the air space between layers might provide an eddy effect which extends the time that the air is moving over the surface of the charcoal, and multiple chambers allows for extending the chamber volume. -Duane