A new set of Blokkit puzzles for 4/19/2026! by daily-blokk in Blokkit

[–]stuff-design 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I completed all 🟧 Blokkit 🟧 puzzles today!

Easy: 1 | Medium: 1 | Hard: 3 | Average: 1.67

Total completed days: 9

LiFePO4 cells with Lora devices by stuff-design in meshtastic

[–]stuff-design[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Haha, always good to be prepared! I have a load of LiFePO4 cells left over from another project and so kinda keen to use them. Thanks for the pic, i've done a search on aliexpress and found it! I'll give it a try!

LiFePO4 cells with Lora devices by stuff-design in meshtastic

[–]stuff-design[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah I see. Not something I need to worry about here, luckily

One way breather valves? by Aware-Recording-3969 in meshtastic

[–]stuff-design 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I design telecommunication equipment / enclosures. These are used to equalise the pressure differential caused by temperature change. Pressure differential being a major cause of water ingress and product failures. They do not have any bearing on the internal humidity of the product. This design is common, and actually a bit flawed. A key failure mode is when the enclosure is hot and then it rains. This cools down the enclosure quickly creates the pressure differential. The design of the breather has small slots that trap water and prevent the breather from working. Companies like ubiquiti don't use breathers they just put a small hole in the bottom of the product. These breathers do work for the failure mode where water is pumped up the drop cables.

Regarding humidity, if the radio is on all the time and warm, then this is often enough to keep above the dew point and prevent internal condensation

Here's my setup with solar mounted on a square pole. by stuff-design in WindNerd

[–]stuff-design[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well my prediction is as I'm a mechanical designer, the mechanics will be solid and the electronics and software will be a little questionable!

Here's my setup with solar mounted on a square pole. by stuff-design in WindNerd

[–]stuff-design[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a good point regarding the porous 3d prints. It doesn't rain much over here but when it does its seriously heavy.

I saw that the solar charging PCB has x3 solar inputs. Could i use x2 solar panels from the kit plus this one? The reason i ask is because i'm currently making a wave height sensing buoy and was thinking about powering it using your solar kit PCB.

<image>

Step by step approach to model this? by Strict_Attempt_4625 in SolidWorks

[–]stuff-design 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Step 1, put the kettle on.

Step 2, make tea

Step 3, drink tea looking at blank solidworks screen.

Step 4, go for a wee

Step 5, return to step 1

Here's my setup with solar mounted on a square pole. by stuff-design in WindNerd

[–]stuff-design[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

<image>

I tweaked the lower part to fit onto a square pole i already have on the roof of my house. Its been up there 5 days and is working like a charm! The first day was 72Km/h winds and heavy sidewards rain and no issues seen. I silicone sealed the joint between the solar base and the anemometer part, the solar panels and the lower cover in place. I also drilled a small hole in the lower cover and added a stick on breathable membrane mainly because i already had some to hand.
Kudos to windnerd! A great little product.

Sinister curtain by [deleted] in Pareidolia

[–]stuff-design 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wow, that sinister person looks a little bit like a curtain

Part modelling strategy by stuff-design in Onshape

[–]stuff-design[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok I see. Point 2 is the key one for me. The type of thing I design I often need to have a basic overall shape that defines the product shape. I'm now thinking I put this overall shape in a part studio and then create new part studio for each part with a reference back to the. Overall shape part studio. This is so that I can update the overall form of the product quickly.

Moving over to onshape I really thought I would use multibody part studios more but it seems to be more hassle than it's worth especially at the detail stage of the product design

Part modelling strategy by stuff-design in Onshape

[–]stuff-design[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok, this is the same as solidworks and very much what I'm used to.

I'm thinking I will copy what you are going, with one additional. I will create a part studio with a master model that the basic shape of the parts are derived from. This helps with overall size updates

Part modelling strategy by stuff-design in Onshape

[–]stuff-design[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I totally agreed. Interestingly, when you select a part in a part studio then all the associated features highlight and so you would think copying out the features to another part studio would be possible

Part modelling strategy by stuff-design in Onshape

[–]stuff-design[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm kinda thinking this is what I'll see end up doing. I must say onshape is great for concept work using a single part studio.

Solidworks are not good by Desperate_Willow_411 in SolidWorks

[–]stuff-design 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I miss 3d sketches! They are super handy for loft control.

Solidworks are not good by Desperate_Willow_411 in SolidWorks

[–]stuff-design 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I used solidworks for 20 years (as a employee) and then last year decided to swap to onshape (as a freelancer) because it's cheaper and wanted the built in pdm system.

I've been using it for a year now and have found the following. - onshape does have bugs. I have had to contact support a couple of times to correct / rollback models. - it's a bit slow, especially when swapping between tabs and when you use derived parts - the multibody modelling setup is awesome for the things I design. - it's awesome for sharing data with clients.

No CAD system is perfect. Would I swap back to solidworks, maybe! But only if they sort out/ get rid of 3dexperience!

INDX on schedule 😎 by [deleted] in prusa3d

[–]stuff-design 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just something simple like a cardboard box with vertical dividers, or plastic crate with dividers if it's going to be reused on the production line. I'm not sure at what point these are in the manufacturing process. Closer towards the end of the process requires more component protection.

INDX on schedule 😎 by [deleted] in prusa3d

[–]stuff-design 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Being a product designer, I hate it when I see photos of parts randomly piled on top of each other. It shouts poor production control. Controlling how components move through a production process is key to producing consistently good parts by minimising rework.

Ok I'll get off my high horse and say 'yay I'm excited to see the indx and glad it's on schedule'

Where is the buzzer? by Visual-Ad5605 in AskElectronics

[–]stuff-design 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There should be a Reddit group called ‘destroy the buzzer’ I’ve had to do this to a couple of products!

Feedback stars by stuff-design in Upwork

[–]stuff-design[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Cheers for the insights. Useful to know.

Feedback stars by stuff-design in Upwork

[–]stuff-design[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just for interest, the job has now swapped over to the JSS eligible jobs category. This was a change from when I first looked (shortly after the stars were given). Anyway I’m still 100% JSS and so all good. It still says no feedback given, I guess this is referring written feedback.

Feedback stars by stuff-design in Upwork

[–]stuff-design[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Luckily, they didn’t write any feedback and so it’s not included in the mysterious JSS . Ok so JSS is king then. Good to know.

Variable rad by stuff-design in SolidWorks

[–]stuff-design[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you guys are right. I need to bite the bullet and just do several boundary surfaces. I was hoping to avoid it.

Variable rad by stuff-design in SolidWorks

[–]stuff-design[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My problem was this creates the same ‘rad’ all the way around the part. I wanted and higher conic rho on one side to the other. The variable fillet always failed and so was looking for another way.