It's a neat idea, especially because you don't need big reamers of different sizes any more. I think the biggest improvement would be adjustable height, so you don't have to remove / add bearings for the multi-step grinding.
Adding and removing bearings are for the length. Maybe switching to the rods, which can slide, and fixing them like set screws, can achieve what you want. It would be more like an XY-plane movement. Thank you for your suggestion.
Clamping the rods might be another way to make them easy to use. However, I am concerned about the rigidity of this method. The rods should not move during the grinding process. What do you think?
@@SlowEngineering My first guess would be to print something like a tongue and groove mechanism for Z (direction of the spindle) with one or two locking screws to lock the mechanism. If you dont need free adjustment, which i guess it doesn't, you can integrate like two interfacing gear racks to increase the rigidity. The mechanism for the radial adjustment and the bearings would be on the moving part. This might be a bit bigger overall, but i think the adjustability is worth it. Also, prototyping is obviously very fast and easy with 3D printing. Edit: To answer your question: Clamping the rods should be stiff enough for this application if you don't use the smallest rods you can find (like 4mm and up should be fine) and you're clamping on a long enough stretch of the rods.
@terl0th The slide for the radial adjustment should be interchangeable for different hole sizes. Building another direction of movement should also be as easy as possible. After some deep thinking, I change my mind about sliding the rods. Sliding makes the tolerance, which affects the circularity. I prefer to replace the slide with different rod lengths. The tight fit between the rods and the printed slide is the key to keeping the circularity. A slight change to make the slide be replaced at the end should be okay for quick swapping.
I think the same concept of forming two bearings and a grinder bit can still solve the problem. A kind of spool rack supports the filament spool on the edges instead of the center. It features two-point contact with the spool. This concept can be applied to the idea I showed in the opposite way to make the cylinder slim with a 2-stage process, too.
![[Tool changer] How I Built a Floating Bar for Tool Changer](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cUdHXiwNcLs/mqdefault.jpg)
![[Tool changer] How I Built a Floating Bar for Tool Changer](/img/tr.png)
It's a neat idea, especially because you don't need big reamers of different sizes any more.
I think the biggest improvement would be adjustable height, so you don't have to remove / add bearings for the multi-step grinding.
Adding and removing bearings are for the length. Maybe switching to the rods, which can slide, and fixing them like set screws, can achieve what you want. It would be more like an XY-plane movement. Thank you for your suggestion.
Clamping the rods might be another way to make them easy to use. However, I am concerned about the rigidity of this method. The rods should not move during the grinding process. What do you think?
@@SlowEngineering My first guess would be to print something like a tongue and groove mechanism for Z (direction of the spindle) with one or two locking screws to lock the mechanism. If you dont need free adjustment, which i guess it doesn't, you can integrate like two interfacing gear racks to increase the rigidity.
The mechanism for the radial adjustment and the bearings would be on the moving part.
This might be a bit bigger overall, but i think the adjustability is worth it. Also, prototyping is obviously very fast and easy with 3D printing.
Edit: To answer your question: Clamping the rods should be stiff enough for this application if you don't use the smallest rods you can find (like 4mm and up should be fine) and you're clamping on a long enough stretch of the rods.
@terl0th The slide for the radial adjustment should be interchangeable for different hole sizes. Building another direction of movement should also be as easy as possible. After some deep thinking, I change my mind about sliding the rods. Sliding makes the tolerance, which affects the circularity. I prefer to replace the slide with different rod lengths. The tight fit between the rods and the printed slide is the key to keeping the circularity. A slight change to make the slide be replaced at the end should be okay for quick swapping.
Very cool. I'd recommend checking our adjustable reamers. A 3D printed version might produce some great results as well.
Adjustable reamers are options, too.
看起來滿好用的，我都直接用寶塔洗過:D
那也可以 只要能達到目的
Very nice, Can you think of a variation that could slim down the diameter of a cylinder? I find this very hard to do manually. Cheers
I think the same concept of forming two bearings and a grinder bit can still solve the problem. A kind of spool rack supports the filament spool on the edges instead of the center. It features two-point contact with the spool. This concept can be applied to the idea I showed in the opposite way to make the cylinder slim with a 2-stage process, too.