Where Z-Axis binding is born

Martin 2017-03-20 09:37:31 UTC #1

On some pre-checks for parts for my huge scale FT-5, I got in a bad mood. The mounting holes in the three components of the Z axis are NOT aligned!
- Y upper panels (FT17/FT18) vs. Bed Plate (FT16)
- Bed Plate vs. Bottom Panel (FT23)

I could not belive it, but after triple-checking, it is obvious: I now know what cost me hours in Z-axis alignment on my first FT-5 build, and I now know that I will have to re-bore some of the melanine parts I plan to use in my build. So - a rant from my side, I'm not looking for advice on this specific topic. And hopefully some valuable info for people who are just getting into their build.

Bed Plate vs. Upper panel:

Detail of Bed Plate vs. Upper Panel:

Detail of Bed Plate vs. Lower Panel:

Guys, these parts are LASER cut, how hard can it be?

Ron 2017-03-20 19:44:48 UTC #2

That's awful.
I checked mine before assembly and they were aligned OK (I had read about something similar elsewhere while waiting for delivery).
I presume you have contacted them for replacements.
They need to know that there is a problem.

mstrauss 2017-03-20 20:09:54 UTC #3

Looks like a stepper is skipping or something. I will have to check mine tonight. I am creating an aluminum base and not using the top plates (just mounting the lead screw and guide rod supports directly to the 2020 rail).

Martin 2017-03-21 08:28:31 UTC #4

Hey @Ron , glad that yours were OK, so at least their CAD files seem to be OK. Since I live in Germany, the hassle of getting replacements shipped outweighs the modification work.

Best idea of the day @mstrauss, I'll do the same - thanks for sharing!

nselimis 2017-03-22 03:43:11 UTC #5

So I was having similar issues and followed your lead and disassembled my printer and found I had misaligned pieces.

I posted pictures on the FB group but I don't know what to do, sending an email to FT and hoping for the best.

Checking for this should be mandatory for any new build.

Ron 2017-03-22 13:27:50 UTC #6

I guess I just got lucky.
Probably mstrauss is right, or the raw material may not be clamped into position well enough during cutting, or perhaps FT used incorrect CAD files for some runs.
I don't know.

As previously mentioned, I had read about issues such as this during my "research" phase before purchasing the kit.
So this (and several other issues) were things I checked for well before starting the assembly process.

Yes, it should be a mandatory check for any new build, prominently noted in the build/user manual (which itself needs some work).

Walter 2017-03-22 13:52:28 UTC #7

after producing these parts.
Quality checks are the among the most important processes in a production process.
The damage done on company image and the incurring extra costs in repairing, replacing and so on are a manifold of the extra cost of a simple quality check.

mstrauss 2017-03-22 14:01:59 UTC #8

I don't think this should be part of the manual. It is a reasonable expectation that laser cut parts be within a .5mm tolerance. FT needs to QA the parts to provide better quality. Purchasing a kit does not mean you have to fix machining errors on something like laser cut parts. I would expect FT to send out replacement parts without issue. Has that been the case?

Ron 2017-03-22 14:11:40 UTC #9

Why not? I think that there should be a formal pre-build check list.
Yes I totally agree that it is a reasonable expectation that laser cut parts should be correct from the factory, but caveat emptor.

A sort of check list exists in the manual already in the form of the "inventory of parts" section at page 5 (or thereabouts) and there is a more formal one at page 69.
BUT, there are errors in the manual which leads to confusion!
On page 6 the quantities of FT5 and FT13 are reversed (and still wrong in the latest V11 manual for FT5) and I believe there is an error for thermistor connection placement in step 2 on page 69.
Plus, in the firmware section, what SD card?
I didn't get one. Was I supposed to?
It was implied on page 71 and mentioned outright on page 72.
I had to find and configure all the software and firmware myself which caused major delays and headaches.
Why wasn't that sent with the printer as clearly stated in the manual, pre-configured.
Other printer manufacturers provide that sort of thing to their kit builders.
Oh, and nothing was loaded onto the control (MKS) card, contrary to their explicit statement on page 71 that is was.
So even more confusion as I powered up for the first time expecting to see something on the screen but didn't. I fairly quickly figured out that the manual was wrong, but why have it that way to start with?

I am ranting now and shall stop.

And yes, they really, really, really need to do better quality checks.
It is indeed damaging to their reputation.

mstrauss 2017-03-22 21:45:12 UTC #10

I hear you , but where do you stop? Should the user have to check the length of each 2020 extrusion, the thread size of each M5 bolt, or the output voltage of the PS? That last one was an issue from what I have read. Some things are a given, and one of them is, a company should not be asking it's customer to do the companies QA work.

Ron 2017-03-22 22:01:30 UTC #11

I agree 100% with that concept. But they aren't there yet.
So in the meantime the user/builder needs to be advised what to look for IMHO.

I actually did check the lengths of the extrusions as I stripped off the shipping plastic, brushed out the chop saw chips and cleaned off the sticky adhesive residue (ummmmm........).

But that's me.

csorrows 2017-05-23 12:03:26 UTC #12

Reported this to John and the issue has already been fixed. Sorry I somehow missed this when it was posted.

PaulS 2017-05-23 17:01:30 UTC #13

i believe we are seeing a pattern (before, during and after my printer...)here and the default " problem with laser cutting" is getting old! Ever heard of QA? someone needs to step up quality control and keep from releasing bad parts when they supposedly already know they are having issues...maybe go to some sort of batch numbers so they can keep track? bad juju here IMHO. You probably want to replace those parts any way so consider it extra incentive LOL the good news is, you can get away with out the upper parts pretty easily...

Ron 2017-05-23 21:46:06 UTC #14

Yes, there are a lot of people who are replacing the melamine parts "just because".
That doesn't seem like a good default condition for a product.

I received a box full of aluminum corner and tee pieces, a line voltage bed heater and a bunch of other things from RobotDigg today.
I couldn't resist the temptation to replace all the corners and tees with hopefully prettier ones (after I try anodizing them, sorry, off topic).
Contrary to the experiences of many others on the forum I didn't have any issues with the melamine ones on mine, it is just for grins and giggles.
But that said, others such as photo evidenced earlier in this thread do have problems with the melamine parts and quality control.

csorrows 2017-05-24 10:33:44 UTC #15

It was not a laser issue, it was a file issue. Either way, it was resolved quickly.

PaulS 2017-05-24 11:51:29 UTC #16

bad parts are getting released to the consumer repeatedly, Doesn't matter that they found and fix the problem quickly. What matters is the impact to the customer.This should be a no brainier for every business. bad parts = bad press = bad rep. This has been the death of more than 1 company. Don't get me wrong, i am still madly in luv with my FT5 (just finished a 47 hour dragon print this morning, feel like a kid at Christmas LOL) but i do believe FolgerTech has some serious lapses in quality control as demonstrated again here.I could not in clear conscious recommend this printer to anyone without mentioning the difficulties many of us have had with the parts provided and the apparent lack of concern by the manufacturer. How many times do they have to get caught shipping bad parts to the consumer before they start any effective QC processes.Especially after a known issue. Why are they not learning from their mistakes.It is almost like they hide behind the excuse "it's a kit" Henry ford started the production line. I highly recommend FT leadership read up on him as he clearly understood the process of constant improvement in production. As we all know, things go wrong in production some times. The issue i have is FT apparently does nothing about it other than fixing new production. I recast my parts in fiberglass and aluminum, i had a hell of a time getting things to line up. I found dozens of places where cut out or hole was wrong.and unfortunately i replicated the error in my new parts That was from the Oops back in Nov \ Dec and i had already heard of at least 2 prior issues.Not to mention those that came after as mentioned here. I fear FT is earning a bad rep and with all the competition out there these days may well suffer the consequences.

Ron 2017-05-24 13:44:29 UTC #17

47 hours.....! OMG. That is awesome.

FWIW, this is NOT a rant against FT, because I love my FT-5 too-

I can tell you for certain that the public reputation that FT has gained for these kinds of issues has cost it at least one sale and perhaps more.
People I know at a local business were looking to buy a large format printer recently to replace a smaller one and asked me about mine.
I told them that I love it and would recommend it for what they need to do.
But in the course of discussions I also told them of some of the concerns (not in a disparaging way at all) and asked them to please research it for themselves.
They did so and came back with lots of questions and concerns of their own.
They then bought something else instead at a much higher price (A CreateBot I think).
There are two people who work there who are also enthusiasts and were looking to upgrade their existing small printers and were eyeing the FT-5 based upon our discussions.
Last word I have is that they too are now looking elsewhere.
It is what it is.

PaulS 2017-05-24 14:10:11 UTC #18

Agreed! , for me the ft 5 was a good fit but i have 30+ years of EE experience so a "Tinker's Printer" works for me.I have been asked for recommendations many times and in the course of discussions, bad parts always seem to come up, sound like they are getting a reputation and not a good 1 DIY or finished product, it should still have quality standards. @csorrows do we know if FT is doing any QA? Maybe they could post that they are aware and what they are doing to resolve the issues? I suspect a PR like that would go a long way to softening the impact. I have no doubt they are doing something but have to question the effectiveness of their approach LOL

Ron 2017-05-24 14:23:41 UTC #19

Yeah, me too (I have 30+ years of EE/ME and machinery design experience).
I was quite disappointed that they didn't end up with an FT-5 to be honest.
I was really looking forward to comparing notes and working with them on mods to it as needed.
I did my best to allay their concerns, even mentioning this forum as a highly valued resource and reference.

In the end their business decision was that they could not tolerate the sorts of issues that were popping up from many sources regarding the FT-5.
Two things worth mentioning in particular are the 12 volt PSU which was a HUGE (!) negative for them, and they didn't care for the way the framing was assembled (feeling that it might loosen and drift in the course of their daily usage of it).
I haven't talked with the other two potential buyers to see what has discouraged them specifically.
FWIW.......

mstrauss 2017-05-24 16:26:57 UTC #20

These were the exact concerns I had. However, I know going in that I would be dealing with them, yes at an increased cost and time. I don't understand why they don't offer a 24v version, or a version with aluminum brackets. They sell the brackets now. As a small company, they should be nimble enough to do these kind of things, and quickly. I don't know if they monitor this forum directly, but they should. They should consider having a representative offering support and advice when appropriate.