how to apply MK4 upgrade on Bear 2.1 #138
Comments
|
It cannot be compatible - 10mm z rods for example are not compatible, the electronics and display parts are not compatible. Parts of it should be compatible: the motors for example:-) |
|
I'd think the Z rods could be easily accomdated with some minor Z rod mount alteration. The electronics and screen should also be easy to accomdated with a new electronics box and display mount alterations. I'm sure I'm missing something but I just don't see much standing in the way of supporting the Mk4 upgrade. |
|
I hope that too, that Gregsaun make a Update to go on the MK4 |
|
The MK4 4.0 upgrade may create a lot of interest in the Bear frame as the
parts removed from the MK3 in this 4.0 upgrade process will almost complete
a bear frame less what, a power supply?
…On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 1:38 AM Pyroschnueffler ***@***.***> wrote:
I hope that too, that Gregsaun make a Update to go on the MK4
I love the Bear Mod, and i hope so that the MK4 Update comes.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#138 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/A3AIDK3RV73E3LPOQ4A2W53XAUKALANCNFSM6AAAAAAWM2Y2GI>
.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message
ID: ***@***.***>
|
|
From what I can tell (we'll have to wait to see the final BOM for the Mk4 upgrade kit) the upgrade is essentially an electronics upgrade (main system board & control panel screen), a new extruder (Nextruder), and a new set of motors (the Mk3.9 is the same upgrade but without the 0.9 stepper motors). The only structural things that matter with the Bear frame is how the X & Z axis mounts might differ (and they can't change by that much - the X axis looks to stay the same), and how to mount the electronics. It appears to only need some minor alterations to a few printed parts (many of us already use custom printed parts instead of the stock Bear parts). We'll have to wait to see what Prusa actually delivers in the upgrade kit when it becomes available, but it should be relatively easy (far easier than what Greg did to create the Bear upgrade in the first place). I'm sure it's just a matter of time before someone figures out how to interface the new Mk4 parts onto a Bear. |
|
I started to work on updating the necessary parts (I do hope Greg will recover soon and can do a proper update @gregsaun get well soon). I don't have a MK4 yet but the original parts (STL only) are online. z_motor_mount From what Prusa said the y-axis should work without problems. But since the carriage and design changed a little bit, maybe the height did too? But since the upgrade kits work with the old MK3 frame it should not be necessary to change anything. So far I finished the z-axis parts. Greg's design is so well made, the z-axis changes were quite easy. The LCD and xbuddy case parts need a bigger update though. I'll try to finish the LCD supports today. Does anyone know how I can publish these? I guess I have to release the source files as well or can I simply release the stl and mark them as remixed? Never looked into these details tbh... |
|
I works on in it too, but i am not a CAD Profi. I switch all MK4 Parts from Prusa to Solid objekts in the Moment. |
That's great let us know how it goes! I am no expert either, just trying to make it work ;) Have you checked the new LCD cover and supports, yet? I noticed that on the original Prusa parts there is a collision when you align the mounting hole from the support part and the xlcd case (right side). Not sure if I am doing something wrong but aligning the holes should work? Anyway I updated the LCD_support_a and b. Looks okay so far. The right mount is around 2,5mm over the edge of the case, not happy with that ;-). The angle of the display is the same as on the stock MK4. and a little comparison between the new and old LCD case. The new one is actually more compact. |
|
so far very nice job, if any need i can help , i have modified several parts from the 2.1 bear for me , i redo a complete new rambo box as i wanted to use the Duet2wifi , apparently you work on fusion this is perfect for me ..the problem is i can't find even the STL for the new xbuddyboard ? there isn't in the printable mk4 ? any idea to find cad from this board or exact dimension size..... |
|
Hello when i am finished i can check the collision with the parts |
|
Yes u are right its a collusion, you not have made it wrong. |
|
Any new Updates here? i am thinking to bye the mk4 complete Kit and i will see what changes i must made. |
|
I purchased the MK4 KIT, but I’m going to dial it in before I do untested modifications (updates). 😊
Keith
From: Pyroschnueffler
Sent: April 30, 2023 10:50 AM
To: gregsaun/prusa_i3_bear_upgrade
Cc: Subscribed
Subject: Re: [gregsaun/prusa_i3_bear_upgrade] how to apply MK4 upgrade on Bear 2.1 (Issue #138)
Any new Updates here? i am thinking to bye the mk4 complete Kit and i will see what changes i must made.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
I ordered a MK4 kit but I guess it won't be here until june (earliest). So I can't test anything. Another thing, can anyone say anything on how warm the new board/case gets? Prusa uses the case as a heat sink and I guess that's why it is also directly connected to the frame. This won't be possible for the bear, as far as I can see. So it would be good to know if the case gets warm and even needs the frame to dissipate heat (I think this won't be necessary but you never know). |
|
I guess the case as heatsink is more than enough. The new board uses the same Trinamic 2130 as the MK3 which had no heatsinks for the drivers. |
|
I design this for the rambo https://www.printables.com/fr/model/153464-the-ultime-einsy-rambo-case-for-the-bear-frame/related since i added other part for cable with the stock part housing cable i can post it and i presume !! the xbuddy board will fit in but it's seems that not easy to get the drawing design at least dimension of this buddy board which is made by prusa itself !! so far can't find any cad files on internet !! |
|
It seems to me, if you can make due without the new motors and Z axis components, the Mk3/S/+ to Mk 3.9 upgrade should be a much easier upgrade to apply to a Bear. It will provide the new electronics and extruder/hot end with only needing to create mounting bracket solutions for the metal Buddy board case and the new screen (actually they don't even need to be mounted to get operational). The Nextruder should fit directly without any changes at all. Support for the full Mk4 upgrade, especially with it being only an additional $80 for the new motors and Z axis, would be very nice to have. But upgrading to a 3.9 model should be very quick and simple to accomplish without much effort at all, and would still a be very a useful and significant upgrade. |
|
The 3.9 upgrade reuses the frame, power supply and motors. The Z axis is
apparently replaced in the 3.9 upgrade. The only addition in the 4.0
upgrade is the motors. At least that's the way I read it.
…On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 3:01 PM PRGeno ***@***.***> wrote:
It seems to me, if you can make due without the new motors and Z axis
components, the Mk3/S/+ to Mk 3.9 upgrade should be a much easier upgrade
to apply to a Bear. It will provide the new electronics and extruder/hot
end with only needing to create mounting bracket solutions for the metal
Buddy board case and the new screen (actually they don't even need to be
mounted to get operational. The Nextruder should fit directly without any
changes at all.
Support for the full Mk4 upgrade, especially with it being only an
additional $80 for the new motors and Z axis, would be very nice to have.
But upgrading to a 3.9 model should be very quick and simple to accomplish
without much effort at all, and would still a very a useful and significant
upgrade.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#138 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/A3AIDKZ2FAVQNVX4FMTF3X3XGAAENANCNFSM6AAAAAAWM2Y2GI>
.
You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
|
My interpretation is slighting different than yours. It looks to me that the thicker Z axis rods are not part of the 3.9 upgrade (why would they be without the new Z axis motors?). So from my take, it should not require any new parts for the Z axis, or any other truly functional parts (I don't consider Buddy board case or display board mounts as functional). I ordered my 3.9 upgrade under that assumption. We will see if how I am interpreting ends up being correct or not when it arrives whenever Prusa is able to fulfill the order. |
You are correct, on the Prusa website they added what will be kept from the MK3 and it states the z-rods. I haven't checked yet but my assumption is that the whole x-axis assembly stays the same then and the nextruder just fits. So upgrade kits 3.5 and 3.9 need parts for the LCD and electronics (if you want them on the frame) Let's see if MK4 kits starting shipping soon. If there are any volunteers to test the parts I updated (at least until my kit arrives), let me know. I'll hopefully finish the xbuddy case mounts this week. |
|
I see now their descriptions are inconsistent. But they do state that Z
rods and bearings are part of the motors-only Mk4 upgrade. :)
When I compare prints from my well used Mk3 and my new Mk4 the quality
difference is noticeable. But I don't know how much of that is the extruder
vs the worn bearings, belts, etc. I would consider replacing the
bearings at a minimum during the upgrade. The larger Z rods would likely
have more impact on speed (input shaping) than on VFA, so they should be
upgraded if speed is the goal or input shaping with standard values is
planned. If the bearings are being replaced anyway the cost of
changing diameter and new rods is small. Hence people doing 3.9 upgrades
may also be doing Z rods on their own.
Perhaps this is an opportunity to upgrade to rails instead of, or
provide the option. That would differentiate the Bear from the Mk4 and
close the gap with the Switchwire to some degree.
…On Sun, May 14, 2023 at 1:25 AM Dennis Schuldt ***@***.***> wrote:
My interpretation is slighting different than yours. It looks to me that
the thicker Z axis rods are not part of the 3.9 upgrade (why would they be
without the new Z axis motors?). So from my take, it should not require any
new parts for the Z axis, or any other truly functional parts (I don't
consider Buddy board case or display board mounts as functional).
I ordered my 3.9 upgrade under that assumption. We will see if how I am
interpreting ends up being correct or not when it arrives whenever Prusa is
able to fulfill the order.
You are correct, on the Prusa website they added what will be kept from
the MK3 and it states the z-rods.
[image: image]
<https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/26366384/238175325-1fd5b32c-cfea-4789-a431-198ee825d41d.png>
I haven't checked yet but my assumption is that the whole x-axis assembly
stays the same then and the nextruder just fits.
So upgrade kits 3.5 and 3.9 need parts for the LCD and electronics (if you
want them on the frame)
and full MK4 needs additional upgraded z-axis as well.
Let's see if MK4 kits starting shipping soon. If there are any volunteers
to test the parts I updated (at least until my kit arrives), let me know.
I'll hopefully finish the xbuddy case mounts this week.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#138 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/A3AIDK2JIGPPFNJRI4JNVKTXGCJGRANCNFSM6AAAAAAWM2Y2GI>
.
You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
|
I suspect the Z axis and motors will allow some increase in speed, although the Z axis has the least effect on speed with this type of machine. I also suspect that the larger rods together with the 0.9° steppers should have a significant affect on quality, and the $80 price difference for the full Mk4 upgrade is a better bang for the buck in my opinion. But it will require much more effort to get it running (properly) as a full Mk4 Bear upgrade. My previous comment was only intended to point out that a 3.9 upgrade is still a significant upgrade which should require very little Bear side design effort except for a few non essential mounting brackets. I agree that it would be a neat Bear exclusive to use linear rails instead of the rods, but again I suspect the Z axis would gain the least benefit from rails on this type of machine and might not end up being worth that extra effort. From an economic view, the Mk4 upgrade appears to be the better deal, but the Mk3.9 upgrade looks to be a pretty simple plug and play upgrade option for a Bear. |
|
Glad to see this topic, indeed I have a mk2 and was prospecting to replace it.
And I think it is no longer necessary for the Z axis because the steel rod is a more suitable diameter. For the X axis I started on a rail + the steel rod but I have the impression that the mk4 extruder is more compact, with a center of gravity that does not induce rotation. So one rail will suffice. Here I am in full reflection on the bear chassis + mk4 kit + rails. Hope I am in the good thread, has I will apply the bear chassis on the mk4 full kit and not do an upgrade. It is my first post on git... Regards |
|
Hi Everyone, Thank you so much for your interest in the Bear frame, it is very nice to read those posts We already have mods for 10mm Z axis and X ends made by Shaun Doe, you can find them on bear-lab.com -> Community -> Community's Optional Parts: The biggest problem is that I am pretty sure the MK4 Z rods are longer than the MK3 rods as the specs says 220mm Z axis where the MK3 was 210mm. I don't think it will be possible to accommodate this difference and modifying the firmware involve breaking the tab on the main board. Unfortunately, as usual with Prusa, source files are missing for everything, including the Z rods specs and the Z frame, so it is hard to get the length. I guess it is 335-340mm (nextruder has more room under like the bearexxa and they added 10mm over the MK3). Regarding the rails, I highly recommend to keep going with 10mm Z rods instead of rails on Z as this is the widest axis and the most difficult one to align. Also you are not going to see print improvement between Z rails and 10mm rods, unless your rails are not aligned well enough and then it will be worst than 8mm rods. For Y axis I recommend to check some mods with single rail in the center (no alignment issue, easier to assemble and maintain, cheaper, more than stable enough) but you then need a rail with light preloading or you will have some play. I am not yet recovered unfortunately but I am slowly getting better 🤞. I can't wait to be back on the project! Happy bear print! Edit: some typos and mistakes (writting with my phoney sorry) |
|
Mmmh I might be wrong, 3.9 keeps the rods and frame of MK3 but has 220mm Z axis. So how they went to 220mm? Did they made the two bottom bearings of the X axis even closer to the bed? Did the made the Z top higher up a little (I mean the printed part only)? |
|
Hi Greg, I had not heard you had a health issue, but I wish you the very best and ultra speedy recovery. I think the 3.9 upgrade 220mm Z axis spec must be be related to the Nextruder and a difference in height where the cable bundle comes into the extruder in relationship to the nozzle. I can see how they might gain 10mm there without changing the Z axis, since the extruder cables could provide more clearance at the top of the frame. There is no way of telling until we can get our hands on the upgrades, but if this were true it should work fine on a Bear with not only the 3.9 upgrade, but also the full Mk4 upgrade (obviously with upgraded Z axis parts), without the need to customized the firmware. At least I hope that is the case, and I can't think of any other way the 10mm gain could be possible without changing the Z axis. |
|
Prusa has said additional Z range is due to Nextruder.
The thicker Z rods allow greater accelerations in X. Together with input
shaping can improve speed.
I could measure the new MK4 Z rods length if that's helpful, when I get to
the printer next, day after tomorrow.
…On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 9:05 AM Grégoire Saunier ***@***.***> wrote:
Mmmh I might be wrong, 3.9 keeps the rods and frame of MK3 but has 220mm Z
axis. So how they went to 220mm? Did they made the two bottom bearings of
the X axis even closer to the bed? Did the made the Z top higher up a
little (I mean the printed part only)?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#138 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/A3AIDKYEYXI5JB7K7MB7J6TXGOQWLANCNFSM6AAAAAAWM2Y2GI>
.
You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
|
I look at few pictures and it seems the distance between the nozzle and the X bottom bearings is very close. We can see this here: I think this is a dangerous choice from Prusa, the bottom of the carriage might grab stuffs, get warm and deform a bit and affect the bearings, the arm leverage is big with the heaviest part higher on on the axis and single bearing on top, etc. I am wondering if when you upgrade to MK3.9 you have to swap the Z tops and motor mount, and even maybe the X ends. First thing is that the double bearings is now on the bottom so we will need to remove x ends anyway. Second, on this picture it looks like the Z tops might be a little higher up which could also help to get few mm more: Finally, when looking at the X carriage STL, the spacing between the two X bearing is wider, meaning this extruder is also wider and so maybe the X ends are shorter: While searching for pictures I could note a weird position for the top bearing: @akbiocca would be nice if you could measure, like we would beb100% sure. No stress with this. |
|
@gregsaun good to hear from you, all the best and stay positive! Good to hear your input. I do hope that there will be no collisions with the frame due to the nexttruder, especially with the cable coming out of the carriage so high now (corner plates might get close). I guess the weird position for the top bearing is only to have it centered to the stepper/hotend (even load on the bearing?). But I also noticed that the x-carriage must be slightly tilted because the top bearing is slightly offset to the lower two bearings. Not sure what's that about :). @akbiocca would be great if you could measure how high the nextruder is over the top edge of the frame, when the z-axis is at the top. Personal question of mine because my enclosure height is a bit limited ;). EDIT: It also appears the the x-axis rods are 4mm closer together, so that means MK3.9 needs new x-axis end stops. I guess they will release a version for the old bearings then. |
|
@DesC21 thank you very much for those info! I wish I could be able to work on my computer but it is impossible at the moment. The top bearing should ideally be aligned with center of gravity, maybe it is not that far but the motor is light and there are a lot of things on the left side (nozzle fan, wires, bottom bearing, etc.). Anyway probably not the biggest issue. Those bearing alignement you show is also very curious. Are the X ends rods aligned the same way? For your scaling issue it is probably because Fusion took cm instead of mm or something like, not very important. |
me too :-). Bear y-axis should be about 0.3mm shorter than stock prusa MK3 y-axis right? I just triple checked dimensions between my MK3, my Bear MK4 and CAD. Granted I am missing a stock MK4 right now ;). For me right now, there are to many variables/combinations which might contribute to this issue.
For me I am using only stock Prusa MK4 parts on y-axis (bearings, metal bearing holders and new MK4 carriage) and stock Bear 2.1 parts for y-axis. This combination only threw the error on FW 5.1.0 otherwise it works without any issues. I would love to figure out where this ~1-2mm offset comes from... |
|
yes but be careful in my previous tests the Y Belt holder is shortened by 2.5mm in order to reproduce the original prusa to start on the same basis and try to understand. In summary here is a test with all the original bear parts but only the Y belt holder enlarged by 1.2mm on the Y motor side (the bearing no longer hits and the Y stroke is shortened) :
I think that each machine will be different depending on the degree of precision of the user assembly and for those who have a problem on Y they will have to enlarge or shorten the Y stroke with the Y belt holder part. I also notice that the tension of the Y belt has a huge impact on the result, especially if the tension is lower. For my part the problem is solved and at least it is not the bearing which is affected for calibration. |
I can now assure you that a difference of around 1mm will cause tests to fail on any axis as I did.
|
Sorry but it still doesn't make sense 😅. It is a little hard to follow you because you write "Y holder" and we don't know if it is belt, motor or rod holder. Could you edit your message and make this clearer? |
Sorry for the inaccuracies I'm French and I use Google translate at the same time lol I corrected it. By the way, thank you to everyone who made this project incredible! |
|
waou really it's all crazy and so weird, i had this Y axis problem on 2 diff Bear printer and as said the both passed the test w the 5.0 that was ok then 5.0.1 dead and then i have to modify the Y holder then 1st test negatif i just touch a little the holder and see if my bearing were ok then test all green !!! but now it's not enough !!! why there isn't a constantly test on each printer !! |
|
@DesC21 What do we need for measurements? I have someone that can take measurements for me on his mk4. |
well you will notice that on the Y axis we can move the Y carriage from -4 to +211, so total travel of 215mm
|
Hi desc21 i now bought an MK4 3.9 upgrade kit to get also the 0.9° Steppers i have so far made all good except LCD Mount ,.. i just finished now so would it be possible to tell me if this lcd files are avail or i need to draw them myself. And if i am finished with tuning i can post my results but where is is best placed thx happy 2024 thomas |
Thanks for further investigating this issue. I also saw this on my bear, but I think this is also happening with a stock MK4 (maybe someone can confirm this?). I need to check what my max is though, maybe we already see a difference there.
@tkamsker you can find all the parts here https://www.printables.com/model/502515-bear-upgrade-for-prusa-i3-mk4-mk35-mk39 |
@jerem2st I just checked on my bear and I am getting the exact same -4 to 211mm but my printer is passing the test without issues. Maybe instead of the length, the rods are not aligned properly and the resistance is to high (but sadly it's just guessing right now)? Compared to my stock MK3s the bed is really easy to move by hand on the MK4... Just as a test I checked on my stock MK3s, this goes from -4 to 212mm. Maybe someone can check the readings on a stock MK4, but I think this is totally normal. Maybe @gregsaun knows why it starts at -4mm?? I have never looked into this (so far). |
|
I think it is made for the purge line that is outside the printable surface. For the smoothness I think it is just a question of alignement and/or distances between rods. The new Y carriage isn't really better for that. |
With my Y rod holder that screws and unscrews I have never touched the spaces between the Y rods, so I don't think the problem is with the spacing, maybe I'm wrong |
|
As I mentioned, it seems that spacers around 1.5-2mm solve the problem for many users. |
Thanks for the info, it confirms it is a firmware issue then and unrelated to Bear frame and @DesC21 design. |
Yes, the work carried out by @DesC21 was incredible ;) |
|
He rocks! |
and I think it must be said, Prusa did not at all make the right decision to use their Y axis bearing as a limit switch, people will regularly have problems with this on their original Prusa especially if the firmware is very sensitive |
Ahh now I can sleep again :-), so it is quite a widespread issue on the stock MK4. Nothing to do with the Bear parts! Let's hope they figue this out soon... @gregsaun @jerem2st thanks guys ;-)
Coming from the reliability of the MK3 I guess it is not a huge issue but not perfect (I guess that's why we have the bear ;)). The real issue is the firmware, I didn't have time to look into the code but from a small glance at the posts on the Prusa forum and Github page, it appears that the selftest changes where more than rushed for whatever reason.... |
|
Does the new firmware (5.1.3) correct the X/Y calibration problem or not ? Is it safe to upgrade from my working 5.0.0 bear to the last one or should I stay as i am for the moment ? |
|
The link to the last firmware. https://github.com/prusa3d/Prusa-Firmware-Buddy/releases/tag/v5.1.3 I will try it tomorrow, it seams that this update is for the calibration issue. "This is a stable release of the firmware 5.1.3 for MK4/MK3.9 with improved troubleshooting. This release is meant as a base for future releases. If your printer is already calibrated and printing, you can skip this update." |
|
I wait then for your feedback ;) |
|
I have quickly look at the changes in the code and I do not see anything related to the axis length. It seems to correspond to the release description. |
|
Hello Bear group i just finished the MK4 Bear x-end-idler-Right , really hard as we don't have any cad files so i spend times to measure all part then i create the tensionner , trying to do same as Greg did for the Bear .. sure it's not same , because we have the 10mm rod and the big lm10u bearing . i didn't want to modify all the X axis but just add the tensionner as the stock prusa is still boring and complicate to adjust the belt ..i didn't install it so far just print and it's work so if u want to try on ur side and let me know ur comment..! i modify some axe as for printing is not perfect i know , we'll have use support but only at the beginning, where the nut heads. I never understood why the slicer always starts at the center of the round pieces instead of printing the outside first! and even set up the external wall 1st is not practical at all ...all you like ! the best would be to redesign the both idler but you may saw that the 2 rod are not on the same vertical axes !! so that mean to redesign the nextruder too ...eheh then forget me ... |
|
will give some update files i have to modify some and 1 part was wrong |
|
voilà , Greg j'espère que tu vas bien? et dis-moi ce que tu en penses ! ça n'a pas été facile , car parfois je ne comprends pas vraiment le design prusa et surtout à l'intérieur c'est assez bizarre ils ont dû rajouter des extrusions pour éliminer des artefacts car le trou des tiges lisses et autre laissaient des petits bouts de body !!bref , et surtout leur façon de faire les chanfreins !!! alors là, c'est compliqué pour refaire pareil et il rajoute des éléments après !! Enfin il est copié et fonctionne, c'est déjà ça malgré le peu de place que j'avais et sur les 2 axes et comme écrit je ne voulais pas modifier la pièce originale...bon print A + |
|
For information the y axis work now. On my Bear with rails.
With a nut at the end of the rail, the y test pass. |
|
I've tested the 6.0.0 RC1 without any success ... pass X/Y but fail homing, then it detect a crash during the X/Y recalibration on the begin of the print ... |
I am running 6.0.0 RC1 without any issues, passing all tests. Still very strange that there are so many issues... |
|
just installed yesterday and works very good , so nice and fun the touch screen ..have some issue w P connect but then solve it ..many new option now like the filament and other are good upgrade ..touch is enjoy on the menu with the icone but then after to scroll and touch the list it's not easy .. |
Hi, it's more a question: I have a bear 2.1 mk3s with bondtech extruder. Will the MK4 upgrade work outofthebox ? Or do I have to comeback to the original frame design and wait for bear 3.0 design ?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: