Maslow Writ Small

These are great thoughts, but my fellow Maslowians, what about the hobbyist who wants to engrave his pogs? What about the poor Yorkshireman who lives in a paper bag by the side of the road?* A 4’ x 2’ build area is too big for them. You know what they say, “Go small or go home!”** So just how small can we go with the Maslow design?

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe1a1wHxTyo
**Okay, I don’t know anyone who’s actually said that

Modulair to the MAX! that’s somehing to look forward to. :smiley:

I’m also thinkng of a frame that needs less space. My shed is kinda small, though I should just be able to squeese full size maslow inthere. So i will need to figure out something flexible to get the most out of that little space. I eventually could temporary move outside on a sunny day. :sunglasses: And then that autocalibration will make the difference.

Where can i find drawings or pictures of that pantograph kinemetics approach???

in the topic “throwing my hat…”

I also thought of hanging a router on 3 chains on the ceiling and use the floor as workspace. :slight_smile:
This then could do many other tasks… in full 3d space
or inverted 3 chais floormounted and a 4th chain for z axis. In a tetrahedron space. :slight_smile: That would make the machine big in respect to the effective workspace, but open up a range of possibillities.

you should look at the hangprinter project

1 Like

The “Throwing my hat…” thread is huge, if you don’t feel like sorting through 500+ posts I think this post specifically might help (post 292): Throwing my hat in the sled modification ring - #292 by pillageTHENburn

It should at least get you started in the right direction.
The design is pretty simple so you can certainly make the linkages yourself! Or, if you don’t want to deal with making accurate parts I make laser cut kits too that come with all the needed hardware (link).

I especially love seeing other people’s version so if you do make one please post pictures!!

Yorkshire is too wet to be keeping them, or the accompanying Yorkshireman, in a paper bag. You’d never be able to get your pog disk to your pub pog.

O, ok i misunderstood thatone, what i had in mind was pantographe arms instead of chains :smiley: but that just add new hurdles

Oh! Were you picturing linkages only without any chains? That’s an interesting thought…

@bdillahu has posted pictures of his finished and assembled linkage set-up that he built using one of the laser cut kits. So you can see how it actually looks on a real Maslow:

So it still uses the chains and motors to control the sled location but the way the chains interact with the sled means that instead of having a mathematically quadrilateral shape and trying to calculate where the router bit is (which is how stock Maslow works) the linkages make it so that the chains always point directly at the router bit. This means we now have a mathematical triangle! We always know the exact length of all three sides so it becomes much much easier to calculate and drive sled location. Plus the sled itself is more stable and not prone to wobble.

1 Like

The Yorkshireman said to me, “If you tell that to young people today, they won’t believe you.” I guess he was right.

He’s a smart man. The young often must learn through mistakes rather than the advice of their elders. It’s why they haven’t earned the right to take their pogs to their pog

Here’s the thing though: the main value of a vertical CNC is in space conservation. If you’re looking for a micro-CNC, is there really a need for a vertical CNC at all anymore? If not, then something like an OpenBuilds MiniMill would suffice, no?

I’m not trying to stray off topic, merely pointing out Maslow’s strength lies in large-size CNC without requiring a large horizontal shop space.

1 Like

Yup,
I did a little research and came across this:

Not sure how feasible this is, But it looks interesting enough.

“Polar kinematics”

thats another, one arm option…

2 Likes

that’s one strength, there are others (ability to use cheaper motors, not
needing precision rails)

now, as you get smaller, these matter less (smaller means lighter, so motors get
cheaper, you don’t need long lengths of precision rails, etc)

it all depends on how small you want to get.

doing a 2’x2’ machine, it’s probably still worth the maslow approach

doing a 1’x1’ machine, it’s probably not.

1 Like

You might be able to adapt a pantograph mechanism like this one

Polar kinematics could work. I’ve seen people build such things (or at least in
the process of building them :slight_smile:

fixed length arms, variable angles, the math isn’t too bad.

Like Bart’s Bot?

http://www.buildlog.net/blog/2017/08/a-polar-pre-processor-for-the-pen-bot-written-in-python/

Yes thats about the same as this gadget:

Would be cool to scale thatone up.

Hmm. I thought the main value of a vertical CNC was cost.

Asking why one would want to go very small with the Maslow is definitely on topic. Keep asking good questions!

this is what I had in mind, but then vertical, but now I see that this still has the issue of needing a bearing around the actual tool tip. But maybe someone else can see a way around that.

Another issue with this is that the whole thing sits in front of the workspace.

But for a ultra small machine this kind of construction could be just right…

1 Like

To bring idea’s together, i’d like to add this ER11 chuck on a BLDC outrunner motor idea. Like mentioned in this theread:

AFAIK another modern alternative design, Shaper Origin cnc -handheld router with computer vission corrected router bit track uses this double hand kinematics to compensate the imperfections of human hand movements.
I have a little doubt about the longevity of this (double handed, not usual x-y or triangulation like Maslow) mechanism, even at the usd2300+ price for high tech device. https://www.jeremyblum.com/2018/06/03/ifixit/

1 Like

That’s not the biggest issue with the Shaper Origin, though. Most people who bought one are discovering how tedious and tiring it is to push the router around, manually following the path.

1 Like