Optimised Pegs, Concept Connectors, and Test Panel (for QUBE 500)
Obliczymy ostateczną cenę na podstawie wybranego pliku. Sprawdzisz ją i zaakceptujesz przed płatnością.
Zapisane na tym urządzeniu.
Redesigned and optomised peg mount for the "Cooler Master QUBE 500 - PC Case Accessories" contest.
- Ocena
- 0 / 5
- Polubienia
- 29
- Pobrania
- 68
- Wydruki
- 0
- Wyświetlenia
- 473
- Oceny
- 0
Aktualizacja u źródła:
Informacje o modelu
- Źródło
- Printables
- Kategoria
- Computers
- Licencja
- Creative Commons — Attribution
I made a Peg Redesign for Better layer orientation strength & flexability. It also easier to print with and without supports. Also made connectors designs to attatch the pegs after printing to allow for better compatibility and replacement.
This started off as a test to supplement other projects but please adapt these to your own designs.
Notes:
- Everything has been printed and tested on a well calibrated Ender 3 & Ender 2-pro.
- The Fit Test models are sized with a 0.2mm clearance for a general release. I found better fit with 0.1mm clearance for personal settings.
- A 0.4mm Nozzle is ideal because of the small parts.
Printing Instructions | ||
| Part | Layer Height | Reccomended settings |
| Test Panel | 0.2mm | - Print as orientated.
|
| Simple Peg | 0.16mm | - Print as orientated. - No supports needed. - Thin part prone to heat, please print at lower end of temperature scale i.e. 190°C for PLA. - Print with minimum layer time. - Brim adheasion reccomended. - Disable Initial Layer Horizontal Expansion settings. |
| Simple Dual Peg | 0.16mm | - See Simple Peg. |
| Rail Peg | 0.16mm | - See Simple Peg. |
| Rail Connector | 0.16mm | - See Simple Peg. |
| Inline Peg | 0.16mm | - See Simple Peg. |
| Inline Connector | 0.16mm | - See Simple Peg. |
| Screw Peg | 0.16mm | - Print as orientated. - Higher part cooling for threads. - Disable brim if you have trouble removing brims |
| Screw Connector | 0.16mm | - Print as orientated. - Higher part cooling for threads. - Disable brim if you have trouble removing brims |
Design Considerations | |
Note: Please download the .step Files provided for personal edits. Some minor areas of the design are not cohesive to one another but shouldnt affect performance and can easily be modified as .steps are provided. Connector .steps are not provided. Just pegs. | |
| Type | Use case |
| Rail Peg | - Strongest and most reliable connection due to its squarer profile. - Design a track to allow for the rail to be inserted then slid into place. Adding a deformable lip to capture the rail in place. - Slope is 45° for a sharp profile that doesnt slip out of the track. - Tolerence of 0.2mm if fine but design for 0.1mm for a tighter and semi-permanant fit. - Insipred by Picatinny / Nato rails. |
| Inline Peg | - Low profile and ideal for flat & long objects. - Same as Rail type, requires track to install. Track may need alot of bridging moves if printing with overhangs. - Slope is 30° more prone to sliping - A tighter tolerence is better due to a shallower slope. A 0.1mm tolerence might be default. |
| Screw Peg | - Best for attaching Round objects. - Peg thread is designed as M14x1.5x5mm / M(Diameter) x (Pitch) x (Length) - Internal thread should be designed at M14.4x1.5mm for a good fit. - Diameter and Length should be changed to whatever necessary for design. Increase Diameter by 0.1mm increments if threads are too tight. - Pitch should not be changed unless you are changing it on both external and internal thread. |
This redesign scope was to:
- Optimise the Print Orientation; The original distributed 1x peg model was prone to breaking between layers, especially with poor adheasion. By orientating the layers correctly the risk of breaking should be reduced and allows a better printing experience for everyone.
- Improve Flexability/Reliability; This comes as an added benefit to a optimised print where the model strength is dictated by continous material strength rather than layer adhesion. The flexing parts of the pegs should last longer as the joint layer is continuous. This also greatly benefits parts printed in PLA which is more rigid and is less flexible of a material.
- Allow Simpler Supports; A flat bottom design, the support interface should ideally be alot simpler to print and remove as there is no longer a need for the interface to build around variable Z-heights.
- Reduce reliance on hardware; One of the sub goals was try to make each concept as 3D printable as possible, inlcuding a decrease in extra hardware needed. This may mean multiple styles for seperate uses.
Design Thoughts:
- The first challange was the stability of the peg once mounted as this design has two sides removed which orginally assisted with lateral movement. Luckily the removed areas caused less movement than previously thought. The single peg fitted snuggly but roatated with less effort than the original model. The double peg was much more stable as it had the second hole to stop rotational movement.
Alternatively, the cutoff overhang would be reduced from 45° to 40° which allows for a greater contact surface at the cost of a steeper overhang at the base of the print (more elephant foot prone).
Update: I had played with 40° and 35° cutoff designs but was not reliable as the increased curvature made it very difficult to insert. Thinning the walls down didnt help and only caused breakage.
- One of the first thoughts I had during the design phase was if too many pegs could inhibit airflow through the panel cuttouts. A suprise feature to this redesign was as that the cutouts would actually provided a clearer airflow path.
- I was not expecting on making 3 variations of the peg mount when I came in to just make one variant. I started with the rail design where I realised the profile stuck out alot and was not suitable for connecting to a round object. The Inline design came to solve the high-profile rail, and the Screw type to solve attatching to the rail. Ultimately, the Rail still has the strongest holding force in the three so it was not scrapped.