Another overhang piece, stretching out into one direction; the lower part Z-planar, and the overhang conic (outside-cone mode) with an offset to align better with the lower segment:
Overhang Out No 5: 3 Segments: 2x Z-planar & Conic
Perhaps a more realistic approach using the conic part as a “balcony” just for the overhang part sufficiently thick to carry next segment and switching back to Z-planar:
Early tests have shown the thickness of the conic overhang “balcony” depends on the actual length of the in-air overhang, where print speed, part-cooling capacity and extrusion consistency determine the geometrical accuracy.
Unlike with ordinary Z-planar slicing, it may be suitable to dedicate a particular slicing method and orientation for sub-volumes in order to take advantage of the possibilities like avoiding support structure, particular strength properties or surface quality.
This of course opens a wide-range of possibilities and complexity therefore:
but I think it’s worth it, in particular when a piece is printed more than once like with small series manufacturing / production.
The examples have been produced with various slicers and combined with a new application coordinating the segmenting and dedicated slicing methods, which currently (2021/04) is in development; it also involves a new file-format describing the segmenting and its slicing settings. The segment positioning was done manually as a start, but I expect with more experience and research some cases can be detected automatically.
Sub-volume segmenting is just one approach to take advantage of 5-axis FDM printing, another is continuous slicing along the form.
Status: very early draft, inverse kinematics resolved
2021/02/28: added animation PAX printing a 4-axis/RTN sliced overhang model
2021/02/17: added two brief animations of inverse kinematics
2021/02/08: inverse kinematics working, printhead mounted on Ashtar K as draft
2021/02/06: machine vs nozzle coordinates, forward/reverse transformation requirements, heatsink fan and part cooler added
2021/02/04: starting with collecting ideas and first drafts
After I saw 5- and 6-axis printers at Formnext 2019 and particularly seeing the belt printers able to print 90° overhangs in one direction without support, and then RotBot by ZHAW, a Rotating Tilted Nozzle (RTN) printer, where the 90° overhangs in different directions (given some conditions) can be printed without support – so it was more natural to consider to make the tilting nozzle angle (trot) flexible as well, 0 – 180°.
0°: nozzle looking down, ordinary orientation with Z sliced layers 3D printing
45°: belt printer or rotating tilted nozzle (RTN) printer, printing 90° overhangs in one or more directions *)
90°: printing horizontally outward
135°: printing upward 45°
180°: printing upward entirely
*) Rotating Tilted Nozzle capability printing 90° overhangs depends on location and symmetric alignments, no slicing software yet available.
2 Axes with NEMA 17
Let’s look at bit closer to the new rotating axes implemented with direct drive NEMA 17 stepper motors:
Z rotation (aka Zrot) with
NEMA 17 39/40mm long (45Nm) or
NEMA 17 25mm/180g (13Nm)
Tilt rotation (aka Trot) with
NEMA 17 20mm/140g (16Nm) or
NEMA 17 25mm/180g (13Nm)
both provide 1.8° (or optionally 0.9°) resolution per full step, or
8 microsteps (20% force) 0.225° @1.8°step (0.1125° @0.9°step) per microstep
Z rotation 9 Nm (or 2.6Nm)
T rotation 3.2 Nm
16 microsteps (10% force) 0.1125° @1.8°step (0.0565° @0.9°step) per microstep
Z rotation 4.5 Nm (or 1.3Nm)
T rotation 1.6 Nm
For now, for sake of simplicity, both axes are in direct drive – if precision requirements dictate a simple reduction gear 1:4 or 1:5 (see below for some more details).
Taking Advantage of 5 Axis
In 5 axis CNC context there are multiple configurations possible such as table/table, head/head and table/head – as I came from the Rotating Tilted Nozzle (RTN) the extra 2 axis are added to the head, hence head/head configuration.
The Trot of 0° is the equivalent of ordinary 3D printer with top/down oriented nozzle, the 45° the belt printer or RotBot/RTN, and 90° printing vertical walls with the nozzle perpendicular, and 90-135° printing up-side down – I’m not sure if 135-180° is that useful, perhaps making underlying structures really smooth. For now I keep the tilt rotation from 0° to 180° even though I think I’m going to use 0-135° in real life application when the actual print procedure is developed, planar or non-planar slicing.
5 Axis Kinematics
LinuxCNC 5 Axis kinematics describes the notations and provides a starting point and I realized quickly that in CNC context the 5 axis operations is quite thoroughly explored, but much fewer focus on 5 axis additive manufacturing yet (see below at References).
In order to reflect the rotation per axis, the notion A, B and C are adopted, which can be described in OpenSCAD as
translate([X,Y,Z]) rotate([A,B,C]) ...
Further the CNC notion I, J and K are used as tool vector, the way the nozzle points away. G-code supports natively G1 X Y Z I J K which is machine independent. The machine specific firmware then computes the machine coordinates and rotating angles so the machine tool tip reaches those coordinates with that particular tool vector.
Tool/Nozzle vs Machine Coordinates
Absolute coordinates X, Y, Z of the nozzle tip and angles Zrot, Trot and given the Z rotation arm there is a mapping required to Xm, Ym, Zm with same Zrot, Trot.
The forward transformation in OpenSCAD:
translate([Xm,Ym,Zm]) rotate([0,0,Zrot]) rotate([Trot,0,0]) translate([0,0,-45]) sphere(0.1); // nozzle tip at X, Y, Z with I, J, K
or expressing it as a list:
at 0, 0, 0 (origin)
at X, Y, Z
The -45 is the 45mm vertical offset of the tilt rotation to the tip of the nozzle.
In OpenSCAD it’s the reverse order, and enumerate matrices (used further below):
at X, Y, Z
translate([0,0,45]) aka M1
rotate([-Trot,0,0]) aka M2
rotate([0,0,-Zrot]) aka M3
translate([ Xm, Ym, Zm ]) aka MR, by inverting matrix the Xm, Ym, Zm can be extracted
at 0, 0, 0 (origin)
Each transformation can be represented by a 4×4 matrix, the sequence of transformations are the multiplication of such, and when multiplying symbolical a single 4×4 matrix will result. When keeping the symbolical notion the inverse transformation can be obtained with one operation and getting Xm, Ym, Zm from X, Y, Z, Zrot, Trot, and that very computation needs to be done in the firmware and controller in order to process X, Y, Z, Zrot, Trot as G1 X.. Y.. Z.. A.. B.. and the internally Xm, Ym, Zm is processed to achieve that tool coordinate; A = Zrot, B = Trot .
G1 X.. Y.. Z.. A.. B..
Zrot = A Trot = B Xm, Ym, Zm computed via reverse/inverse transformation on the controller
Numerical Inverse Transformation
Just for sake of confirming the reverse/inverse transformation utilizing m4.scad:
so MR contains the inverse matrix of the previous transformations, so I can extract the translation vector, the 4th column [ MR, MR, MR ] or m4trv(MR) to compensate X, Y, Z, Zrot, Trot -> Xm, Ym, Zm:
Testing Inverse Kinematics (IK)
Perhaps it’s worth to actually calculate symbolical forward and inverse transformation matrix using e.g. Matlab or alike to have transformations in one operation instead multiplying three matrices and inverting it – depending what hardware is used as controller multiplying individual matrices is faster than trying to have a complex single step matrix construct.
Although Marlin firmware supports Delta printer with complex delta inverse kinematics, not sure I can add mine as well, or I have to go with Duet RepRap firmware which seems more suitable (see notes below).
Nozzle Precision from Trot
The 45mm offset of the last rotation massivly contributes to the loss of nozzle position resolution:
s = 2 π * r / 360 = section length per degree
s = π * 45mm / 180 = 0.785mm/° which means:
8 microsteps with 1.8° full step: 0.225°/microstep => 176.7μm/microstep
16 microsteps with 1.8° full step: 0.1125°/microstep => 88.3μm/microstep
8 microsteps with 0.9° full step: 0.1125°/microstep => 88.3μm/microstep
16 microsteps with 0.9° full step: 0.0565°/microstep => 44.4μm/microstep
so the direct drive using the shafts of the NEMA 17 will provide OK resolution, but for anything a bit more serious, a reduction gear might be worth to use.
G-code & Firmware
As I likely will generate machine independent G-code as G1 X Y Z I J K, the slicer stage will likely operate in X, Y, Z and Zrot and Trot as well – so we end up with a data pipeline like this:
Slicer: X, Y, Z, Zrot, Trot
G-code: G1 X Y Z I J K
Firmware: X Y Z I J K => Xm, Ym, Zm and I J K => Zrot, Trot
Alternatively, instead using I J K notion use the G-code A and B as two rotational axes as Duet RepRap Firmware offers G1 X Y Z A B then it’s a bit simpler:
Slicer: X, Y, Z, Zrot=>A, Trot=>B
G-code G1 X Y Z A B
Firmware: X Y Z A B => Xm, Ym, Zm and A=>Zrot, B=>Trot
Reviewing existing slicer/printing software to see which notion is more suitable, and perhaps cover both to stay flexible.
Issues to Resolve
Bowden tube- & cable management: properly resolve it, guides etc.
Develop the transformation/inverse kinematics X, Y, Z, Zrot, Trot <=> Xm, Ym, Zm, Zrot, Trot as well X, Y, Z, I, J, K <=> Xm, Ym, Zm, Zrot, Trot as required for slicing, and firmware stage, done
Calculate the precision of X, Y, Z in relation of Xm, Ym, Zm and Zrot, Trot, whether or how the motor resolution affect axes => getting a grasp how the overall precision of the final setup
Direct drive mechanical precision with 8/16 microsteps, repeatability, and heat dissipation from motor (see tweet)
recognize rotational objects: print from inside out like with a lath but adding material
detect steep overhangs, find proper way to print them
collision detection, e.g. tilt rotation becomes available at a certain Z level as below the upside looking nozzle will touch the build plate with the opposite end – the slicing/print software must be aware of the printhead geometry to calculate what’s possible to print and how
many new ways to print in (almost) all directions
hopefully print 90° and more overhangs without support at all
significant mechanical complexity
mechanical limitations arise with new freedom of rotation of printhead
collision detection becomes essential which in Z sliced layers is not an issue at all
significant software complexity, no current 3D printing software available to take advantage of 5 axis printing
Ashtar K with 5 Axis (PAX) Printhead
Experimental mounting on Ashtar K to see how it looks, including display showing rotations of Zrot (A), Trot (B) too.
Note: the display shows original tool coordinates, whereas the firmware does tool translation aka inverse kinematics as shown in the screenshots with the display readable.
With all the freedom to angle the nozzle, all of the sudden the part cooler air nozzle shape becomes an issue, and has to become narrow as well; and overall geometry of the printhead becomes quite relevant when planning print sequences (collision detection).