Jupiter Box - Print in place screw-bolt closure! (Patreon)

Hey there, wonderful people!

The Jupiter Box was inspired in a way by the Operator Box in that I really like the way the screw closure locks it securely.  The screw part on that container is a separately printed part, though, and I wondered if I could come up with a similarly-secure mechanism that was completely print-in-place.  Since you're reading this, it was a success! 

 The Jupiter Box incorporates a threaded bolt that is captive within the lid, but it can both slide back and forth as well as rotate, allowing it to screw into the box body itself to fasten things securely. 

The fact that there's a print-in-place hinge barely rates a mention these days, but that's clearly a key part of the design.  The first pass of this box had a lid that flipped right over, with a bolt that only went part-way along it.  However, a change to the current setup meant that the bolt could be larger in all dimensions, which made it much easier to print. 

The lid, not surprisingly, prints in the open position, so that both it and the bolt are in contact with the bed, which is a prerequisite for this kind of support-free print-in-place stuff!

Dimensions

The interior dimensions are 72mm wide, 92mm long and 45mm deep, though there are some protrusions into that volume!

Printing Tips

The Jupiter box prints sitting on its base, with the lid open, like so:

As always with articulated designs you'll want to make sure your first layer is neat and that there isn't anything like stringing that might bind moving parts together!  

It shouldn't matter overly much what direction the box is facing.

The rotating bolt is fairly tall, but in test printing on an Ender 3 and a Prusa MK3S it came out just fine.  I did pay attention to my first layers, though ;)  

File Location

You'll find this on Dropbox under 812 Jupiter Box

Final Thoughts 

Threaded closure mechanisms are something I've been using a lot recently, because they work so reliably even in the face of slicing and printing variability.  Their very nature means that any looseness can be taken up in the process of tightening, which solves so many problems. 

By contrast, friction-based approaches very easily become either impossible to close or just overly loose when subjected to the variability of different printing processes.  They also potentially get looser over time as surfaces wear.  However, what those approaches lose in robustness they gain in simplicity.

Either way, there are so many options to work with, and that's a great thing!  Where we might be headed next with these, though, I have no idea... time will tell! :)

xoxo

Sven.