Like etfrench, I reckon the design ignores the method of manufacture. Why not glue/chemically weld the parts together? Why not clip tabs? Why not make the seam a nesting socket? If the parts don't need to separate, bolts seem ill considered here.
ok, so stepping back a bit, since you seem interested, here is the back story..
@TrippyLighting will remember me around here a couple of years ago trying to use Fusion 360 as a CAM engine for CNC carving replicas of works of antiquity. I had a X-carve CNC and was trying to flatten scans of busts and carve them out of firewood.
At some point i decided that it would be good if the flattening part could go away, so I upgraded the CNC with a rotary axis and now I'm trying to carve 360 degree versions of models; my current carving target is still https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:456203 . As an aside, Fusion 360 is still not a good Cad/Cam solution for this: I'm using DeskProto for generating the G-code from the STL.
When I started carving using the rotary axis it quickly became clear that the dust collection strategy you use for flat surface sign carving was not going to work on a rotary axis machine. I ignored it for a while, and now I'm circling back on it to figure out a capture strategy that will work for this particular implementation. I bought the 3d printer specifically to make parts to enable this.
The CNC implementation I am using looks like this:
The design I am working on is to replace the initial 'TJMAXX back with a hole cut in it for a vacuum hose' implementation, which has worked about as well as you would expect and has many more issues than you have collectively identified with my drawing.
A vertical view is like this:
you can see in this picture I am also prototyping and printing some small perimeter shielding as well.
To answer your specific questions:
- I've had a 3D printer for ~10 days and am still learning how to use it.
- before last Thursday I had not used Fusion in ~> 1year and I'm still coming up to speed on it again
-the printer bed is 300 x 300 x 400 and the part I am working on has to be printed in pieces or it will not fit
- printer has a specific limitation of 50degree overhang without supports. need validate that in a test print.
- the CNC throws dust and debris in specific patterns based on cut direction etc: I expect I will need to replace specific sections of perimeter or collection pan with refactored prints shaped specifically to be more effective in capturing/transporting them in a locationally specific way, implying that I need sections which are easily swapped in and out. This eliminates the idea of gluing the pieces and making a permanent installation.
- The tabs I built in the design could easily be used with alligator clips to hold the whole thing together; I put screw holes in because you never know when you will need screw holes, and they work for cable ties as well..
- the design is to manufacture, recognizing a 50degree minimum vertical print angle without supports, and the need to print in sections to fit the printer. As noted above, it was a conscious decision to build tabs for mechanical joining instead of gluing as I expect to rapidly prototype this based on actual / observed performance... You may argue there are better designs for this aspect and I agree there may well be, but it took me two days to figure out how to do the simplest possible thing that you are saying is not done properly, so patience with the new guy here please. I'll get there.
Could this design be a lot better? Sure, and you guys are pointing out things I can implement in the next pass.
Rather then endlessly tweak, I'm going to print a couple of pieces, and see if it fits together, and if it does, I'll put one on the table and see how it performs. From there, in the next major refactor I can add/fix a bunch of things and try again.
(*muttering to self* "don't do it- don't design editorialize... just don't")
We all do it. Really, it's cool.
