I’ve tried 3 times so far in Python/gradio/Oobabooga and never managed to get certs to work or found a complete visual reference guide that demonstrates a complete working example like what I am looking for in a home network. (Only really commenting to subscribe to watch this post develop, and solicit advice:)

The only review I care/cared about is when someone actually uses the thing. I don’t care what they review. I care about all the projects they do later using a machine. When I was buying, everyone was defaulting to a Prusa. When everything else broke they used a MK3, so that is hat I got. Also, only people with Prusa’s seemed to be actually printing while only owning one printer. Everyone yapping about cheap printers had a half dozen of which only one or two ever worked at the same time. That is way more expensive than buying one machine.

Since then, Prusa has gone less and less open source and community driven. I still value true ownership without strings attached more than any other feature. To trust someone else’s proprietary scam and potential manipulation is to sell yourself to rent a product. Prusa is now selling a proprietary printer too. I would be very cautious about them going forward. The real open source community is with Voron and many projects supported by LDO kits.

But it doesn’t happen when plugged in and the thing is powered but no SD card? If that is the case, it is likely software… If you take out the SD card you could use a 4k7 resistor between 5v and the gate of the MOSFET to test triggering the FET and if it then turns off. A 4k7 resistor at 5v is just over 10mA and shouldn’t hurt anything.

5v logic triggered MOSFETs are tricky in practice when designing circuits. Back when I was getting stuff from AliEx, I got a bunch of overburden FETs that were supposed to be logic level gates and only around a quarter actually worked right. It is to be expected and they were like a penny each. Many work at slightly higher voltages of 6-7 volts though. They are often labeled like old part numbers but they don’t have the same specifications as the old parts. Things like this have become kinda ubiquitous and very hard to track down.

Removing the SD card shows whether there is a burned or shorted connection somewhere, but does not show if a gate is staying high after it is triggered. HCT logic is translating CMOS threshold voltages on the input to TTL levels at the output. Still while the window of where bit logic high and low are specified, the actual logic zero voltage is relatively high. You also have to remember that all chip manufacturers have an error rate distribution curve and send bad parts or parts that are right on the edge of acceptable. It is quite possible that you happened to get a FET with a low gate threshold voltage and a logic gate with abnormally high logic zero threshold. I would just tack on a through hole resistor between gate and source similar to how Fan 2 MOSFET control is configured and see if that solves the issue.

I’m not effectively able to help with the software, so this may still be a red herring, but I do not think removing the SD card effectively addresses the question of whether the gate is driven low correctly.

Is the FET gate floating? Maybe try adding a pull down/up resistor as a sanity check. I have no Duet experience. Based on what you are saying, I would troubleshoot that hardware first. Cut the trace and see if the gate signal is going off as expected… things like that.

These guys seem to imply taking out a non load bearing wall does not require a permit: https://remodelingdoneright.nari.org/homeowner-resources/questions-to-ask/when-do-i-need-a-permit

That implies all the electrical, flooring, ceiling, and attic work is not a factor either. Altering a load bearing wall would require permitting. That is how I’ve always heard it said too. It is not a great primary source, bit I don’t care more than a basic search and first link I see reply either, so it is confirmation biased as such.

There is usually a dollar amount involved for what can be done before a permit is required. You’re allowed to make minor changes required in the spirit of maintenance. So something like replacing a refrigerator and the old width being too small. If you cut the countertop to accommodate, no permit is legally required. The same can be said about almost every aspect of the home. That margin of what exactly is considered maintenance versus modification is what varies by area.

The other factor I’ve heard is that the changes must fall into what’s undefined on the blueprints of record. If it is not specified in the blueprints, you are free to make the changes.

Again, I’m no expert here. I really wish I had the option to remove the mod badge when I only wish to post as a user. I could certainly be wrong. This is intended as a helpful but just water cooler talk amongst friends level conversation. When it comes to house mods and permits, this is how everyone I know does things.

Maybe chemistry is an issue too. Septic is what, methane/(?)?

Generally, regulations are for construction contractors. You likely won’t pass some kind of plumbing inspection if you hired a contractor to do something that requires a permit, but otherwise you’re free to do whatever. I’m no expert here, and you should be doing due diligence. My old man does inspecting type work in another type of industry and this is how it was explained to me, but that is an unrelated field. Different regions may have very different regulations.

I use Graphene. I like the Auditor app and the ability to verify that the ROM is unaltered because you can never trust an orphan kernel like all mobile devices. If I ever give up possession of my device, I can verify if it was altered. I also have a way to wipe the device on locked login with no indication that the ROM is being wiped as provided by Graphene.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

https://invent.kde.org/graphics/okular

I like Okular’s ability to scan and convert tabled data in PDFs too. There is an option to turn off DRM nonsense. That can do page edits and stuff. If you want to create pages with images you need an office suite.

Cool! I love that you are engaged on my level. Today I had a new idea. I thought of the pop-tube kid’s toys randomly.

I was combining that with an idea I had yesterday. Yesterday, I properly measured my ear after I glued up a print and actually tested it by listening to music for a few hours.

So first off, my empirical hypothesis is that the sealing properties and the air volume are the primary factors that determine the perception of frequency response. The design pictured in this post adds a little bit of volume overall compared to the original. It doesn’t have quite the same bass response but it adds a lot of crisp clarity in the ~200Hz+ range. I think this is just due to the spacial volume.

After measuring my ear and looking at the CAD and print, my first prototype adds enough fore to aft clearance around my ear. It added around 3mm of extra depth. This clears my ear depth by about 1.7mm too far and is primarily from designing in a stiffer material than the original pad. The original pad touches my ear in several places which gets hot and annoying, especially in the summer.

So I started thinking about how I can alter the print to shape it and completely clear all of my ear. The printed pad is already cooler, but adding full clearance could make it even more comfortable. I was perplexed about how to accomplish this though because it would likely require me to replace the base plate if I am going to shape the print further. My present design is just a 9mm single instance of the tube shape with the pattern repeated and a little underlap sleeve added at the end. What I really need is to vary the spacing of each conforming section to control where and how each bend happens. This would likely make the unsolved clasping connector issue worse.

The pop-tube idea might solve my problem though. I don’t need to think about the bend joint like a spring. I need to think of it like a bistable switch and design the bends to snap into shape. I’m still mentally sorting out the idea before trying to design it. I’m essentially decoupling the bending from the shape itself. The challenge is how to do this in a continuous print without gaps in a vase-mode like mindset. I’m adamant on the vase-mode approach because I think I can better tune the pad conforming behavior based solely on single wall extrusion properties. Also, TPU is always more ugly for me if I allow z-hops and travel.

Anyways, if I introduce this disconnected level of complexity to my next iteration, I can likely also add something like a recess for glasses too. I have the same issue with my reading glasses and just use ear buds instead when I need them.

I also want to thin all of the walls of the tube and use a mathematical spreadsheet based pattern to stiffen some sections, but that is a secondary objective. My next step is to make a bistable bending action. I’ll see if I can make it tunable for a 4 corner topology so that it can work for oval and rectangular designs – not that you should wait or anything like that. I’m fundamentally unstable and unreliable due to my physical disability. Like yesterday was my big cooking day for 2 weeks of food and I’m mostly recovering so far today. I don’t know if my back will settle down enough for me to spend competent time designing today, but maybe after lunch and Adderall I’ll get an hour or two to mess around if I lay on a heating pad.

I thought about doing it like this for a long time but never tried it because I think it has several issues. The horizontal layer deposition lines are aesthetically ugly IMO.

Then there is the issue of how you are going to create compliance. If you are going to rely on some super soft filament, I think it kinda defeats the point. Replacement pads are much cheaper than buying some specialty filament.

By printing and bending a tube, it becomes possible to design for both bending into a loop and for the properties of a soft pad.

Lastly, the majority of pads require a sleeve like retention ring that barely slips into a groove around the plastic enclosure body of each side of the headphones. There is a open pocket sewn into the back side of each headphone pad that is a stretchy layer of vinyl used to slip into the groove. It is possible to replace the plate that is used to form this slip ring retainer groove, but then you’ll have exposed screws.

I’m not looking to replace any parts of the headphones, so I need a way to retain the pad using this existing groove. In the pic for the post, one of the test prints is oriented to show the way I incorporated the retaining groove into the design.

Of course, not all headphones are designed like this with the same pads. However, these style pads are used on most low and mid tier headphones because they are all contract manufactured in the same place with only minor variations and where these semi universal type pads are a major cost cutting factor. So designing for this type of pad is designing for the most common style of headphones. One might argue that these are the cheapest pads to replace, and they are. But, knowledge about how modern contract manufacturing works is rather rare, and no one is advertising that their products are the same as everyone else with just a different sticker and color applied or a single variation of molding dies added to create a slight variation in appearance. These pads can be found for $10-$15, but you have to know they are universal and be willing to gamble a bit by buying from whatever middleman has too much stock of these or dies not see them as a profitable thing to market at a markup.

The problem is that the infill layers are not well fused and the lack of alignment means they will only cross at angles. This post design can be made solid and turned into cubic with no anchor. That might work with a softer material, but there are still overhangs and the infill pattern is likely to create non linear twist to the bending. At least on my headphones, the tightest part of the bend needs to obfuscate around 60% of the vertical distance on the other side. In other (poor) words, for ever 10mm of vertical height, 6mm is folded out of the way. That is a lot of bulk to push out of the way. Even in this instance I posted, the back side has sections with thinner walls in some areas to make the flex work in such a tight bend without buckling.

Unless you’ve got a way to mathematically generate the change in infill, don’t bother. Lining up infill patterns and logarithmic strategies are hard. The solid parts are just as important as the flex. Keeping things straight is a challenge.

This is a major curiosity of mine too. Just the shell seems to be pushing the amount of flexibility of this material in my present design. I’m not using any infill. I can alter the shape a lot. I have a cheap pair of thermal cycling bib shorts that were way too small and I never sent back. Those may become a covered print experiment. That material is thick, dense, and still conforms a lot.

I’m most interested in exploring wave shaping. It would be trivial to add more complex shaping in the center cavity. I can imagine making a print support that sits inside the tube and enables me to create some more complex voids in places.

My main goal right now is to com up with an integrated clip that allows one end to open and close easily while looking pretty. Then I can move on to more audio quality tuning.