the hole is a bit tighter now, made possible by having a bevel on the
inside for the lever to move
Signed-off-by: Brian S. Stephan <bss@incorporeal.org>
as in previous commit, this simplifies the build of the side frame piece
a bit. notably on this one, the preview of the piece is more performant,
so I'm thinking this is a good move. the object triangle count and
volume are slightly different (not sure why), but the object dimensions
are the same
still didn't get rid of any 2-manifold errors though :(
Signed-off-by: Brian S. Stephan <bss@incorporeal.org>
this saves one operation and removes a bit of the artifacts. didn't seem
to help the 2-manifold stuff I was looking at, but this is slightly
clearer anyway?
Signed-off-by: Brian S. Stephan <bss@incorporeal.org>
this allows for the traditional 8 buttons plus L3, R3, and TP, all on
one hand. I'm going to use this for the q2009 stuff, especially, but it
might be an interesting option for all arcade sticks
Signed-off-by: Brian S. Stephan <bss@incorporeal.org>
still working out all the kinks of this, but this would be something
that is part of a larger enclosure that is secured to a particular
vendor's pedestal
Signed-off-by: Brian S. Stephan <bss@incorporeal.org>
I need to refer to the math of these in laying out some panels, so best
to just parameterize it in case I fiddle with stuff in the future
Signed-off-by: Brian S. Stephan <bss@incorporeal.org>
the inner wall piece being the *whole* inner wall of the frame side
meant that the (now relatively thin) outer wall piece was not supported
by anything on the top and bottom, which combined with the already weak
piece because of the window, gave the edges a lot of give.
shrinking the inner wall piece slightly retains some of the material on
the outer piece, which should friction fit the top and bottom with both
the inner wall piece, and with the panels, leading to a lot more clamp
when everything is secured.
Signed-off-by: Brian S. Stephan <bss@incorporeal.org>
this was done for a probably-abandoned attempt at something, but the
parameterization is good anyway
Signed-off-by: Brian S. Stephan <bss@incorporeal.org>
in addition to renaming a number of the frame pieces, and adjusting the
pieces affected by those renames, this tweaks how the interlocking
pieces are designed by using 1/3 of the inner z of the frame rather than
dividing up the outer z. this is more consistent and might be a relevant
tweak in a later part I'm working on
Signed-off-by: Brian S. Stephan <bss@incorporeal.org>
previous design worked fine, but it's just so tiny, a slight breeze
would sometimes knock the stick off
Signed-off-by: Brian S. Stephan <bss@incorporeal.org>
still playing with these a bit, but test prints yields some promising
shapes, just need to do a build with them to confirm I like it
Signed-off-by: Brian S. Stephan <bss@incorporeal.org>
this undoes my work to simplify the bottom of the frame and move button
holes in the frames accordingly. the top and bottom are now symmetrical
in terms of their bevel, and the buttons are centered. this will make
the print of the frame difficult again, but I have an upcoming change to
modularize the frame walls and that will print far better, so I'm
thinking this is what I want. testing ongoing
This reverts commit ed031b9308b062b8900a40851dafac5f18aaa535.
This reverts commit f90fc095e04b46073f33681b6cbe94b3ac421256.
Signed-off-by: Brian S. Stephan <bss@incorporeal.org>
this just chops off the bottom entirely, essentially. this could be done
cleaner but this is the least disruptive change until I'm certain of it
Signed-off-by: Brian S. Stephan <bss@incorporeal.org>
mostly an aesthetic choice, but I think it helps mitigate the look of
the front relative to the need to have the case be deeper for some
levers, so (I believe) it's not an arbitrary aesthetic choice.
also maybe there's some benefit to have it be slightly less flush on the
surface, IDK
Signed-off-by: Brian S. Stephan <bss@incorporeal.org>
the bottom panel had a basin or tray to make room for taller levers,
namely the Seimitsu LSX-NOBI that I really like. per its specs, the
lever needs 43.70mm internally, and the old values were too tight (55mm
- 19mm from panels - 2mm from lever plate = 43) so the bottom panel was
arbitrarily given a sunken portion (somewhat arbitrarily 2.5mm) to
compensate at the time, because I already had frames printed.
adding 2mm to the frame Z covers the difference (57mm - 10mm - 2mm =
45mm) and thus we don't need the bottom panel hack anymore. I also
suspect the bottom panel basin was slightly affecting it structurally,
so this may help that.
Signed-off-by: Brian S. Stephan <bss@incorporeal.org>
license is still the same, this just saves duplicating the terms and
standardizes with what I've been doing elsewhere, style-wise
Signed-off-by: Brian S. Stephan <bss@incorporeal.org>
50mm - 10mm of panels was fine for some levers but not enough for the
LSX-NOBI, which I personally have a number of. I can't vet every lever
in existence, but I know at least that this was a problem that is solved
by adding 5mm, which seems like a fair trade and not a huge difference
in the final product.
this also helps the fact that at 40mm internal, some buttons + wiring
harnesses were getting pretty tight, mostly relevant at the frame
connection point where the inner bottom panel isn't a basin. this should
help that too.
additionally this has us go back to the 45mm M4 standoff recommendation,
which kinda sucks because it seems like 40mm are easier to find, but as
stated in the notes, the difference is somewhat negligible if you just
use 40mm with longer bolts.
this allows for:
include <parameters.scad>
// override a variable such as
frame_z = 60;
include <components.scad>
which will let individual components tweak settings, e.g. the height of
a frame
