20mm t-slot 90 degree joint

by jamesglanville, published

20mm t-slot 90 degree joint by jamesglanville Dec 3, 2012

Thing Info

6645Views 676Downloads Found in 3D Printer Parts
Report Thing


I'm upgrading my prusa2 to a mendelmax, and I didn't want to drill the holes in the t-slot at the top (at uni, no access to decent tools). I saw a 90 degree joint on thingiverse (the one listed as a parent thing), but I wanted to make some improvements:

Built in support - with such a simple part I much prefer designing in support, then printing with no support in the slicer. I find this uses less plastic, and is easier to remove.

The ridge that sits in the t-slot is continuous between the two rods - guarantees perfect alignment.

The scad file is horrendous - not parametric at all, I just wanted to throw it together quickly.



Snap off the support with pliers or a knife.

Push into t-slot, and bolt in.

I printed mine a little too hot, so I had to slightly file the ridge to get it to fit, and the overhand at the top drooped a little bit, but it works perfectly.

More from 3D Printer Parts

view more

Thing Info

6645Views 676Downloads Found in 3D Printer Parts
Report Thing

Liked By

View All


Give a Shout Out

If you print this Thing and display it in public proudly give attribution by printing and displaying this tag. Print Thing Tag

i just printed the original at 45 degrees, no support needed, and no warping. like this ^

DOH, that's the much cleverer way to print this. Ah well, it was a useful exercise in designing support.

yeah i tried to print it like straight up, but it got all warped, and then i came across one that had been printed at 45 degrees and realized it haha. if i do need support though in the future i will use your method though.

Simply perfect :) Small enough to print without worrying about warping too.

You might also want to take a look at http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:24061http://www.thingiverse.com/thi... and its derivative...

No Drill Top Vertex for MendelMax
by jib

ooh that's cool. Once again the x y problem strikes :(