Any interested parties in seeing the tear down and innards of an XY craft cutting machine that uses an Atmel micro as it’s controller?
You can get some background on the project from my website: http://www.thetazzbot.com
Included in the discussion would be reverse engineering the PCB, the overall functional areas of the machine, and an introduction to writing new firmware for the Atmel chip.
Cheers,
Mark aka thetazzbot
I’m a hardware nut, but absolutely not a programmer. I’d be VERY interested in repurposing one of these machines for doing vinyl cutting and PCB drawings, plus whatever else could be thought up. (Laser etching/cutting, etc…)
That would be interesting. I’d be more interested in learning how you modify the Cricut than in the actual teardown; I have no problem tearing down anything.
Yeah I’ll have three cricut’s on hand. One original, one modified, and one torn down, so we don’t actually have to do the tear down, but it’s interesting to see how they are constructed in order to do the actual work of reprogramming it.
I was originally looking at a Cricut as a replacement for doing die cutting but the lack of modding info (and being forced to use proprietary shapes/cartridges stopped me). I’d certainly be interesting in this.
-the purring dork
I have the Cricut Explore and LOVE IT now that you can import your own images - not limited to the ProvoCraft proprietary stuff any more. I’d be interested to know what can be done with my older Cricuts though. I have the Expression and the one before that one.
Bump this one up. 
Mark, how goes the project?
Why not buy a US Cutter for $220 instead of trying to reverse engineer an expensive Cricut?
my cricut cost $100. Can buy them on craigslist cheap.
The project was err is waiting for interested folks 
@paulstaf said “Why not buy a US Cutter for $220 instead of trying to reverse engineer an expensive Cricut?”
Especially considering that reverse engineering the cricut is almost certainly a DMCA violation. Which in and of itself isn’t likely too much of a concern. But any attempts to publish your work will likely mean a visit from some folks in dark suites.
Technically it is not reverse engineering. It is simply engineering a new firmware that has nothing to do with cracking someones source or reverse engineering.
Btw someone publish the same thing 2 years ago and its still on github but its for the personal version.
Anyway, not going to argue the merits of reusing old tech to someone who clearly misses the point.
Not to be too argumentative, but without you or someone reverse engineering the specifications for the machine, just how did you manage to create your own firmware? As I said, publishing your work on this will probably open you up legally to DMCA violations.
Your already building a rep rap printer. It isn’t really all that difficult to replace the hot end/extruder with a cutting assembly and performing the same function. And with that you would have no issues publishing your work and letting other people benefit from it.
Deriving the specifications of a system does not constitute a DMCA violation. The DMCA is only violated if you circumvent a digital system that is in place for the purposes of preventing the copying and/or distribution of copyrighted works. Thus, if you erase the firmware on a chip and write your own, there is no copyrighted work remaining. Technically, the schematic of the PCB may be subject to copyright (it’s debatable), however there are no digital systems preventing you from inspecting it. In the same line of reasoning, copying a (red book compliant) music CD is not in violation of the DMCA as there is no copy protection scheme present on the disc.
I doubt the company and its lawyers would agree. And right or wrong they can afford to fight in court. Not many individuals can.
it is my understanding that these machines had a system in place to prevent what the op is doing. I believe the company would have a dmca case.
That said I dont really care, my original point was that there are better/cleaner ways to create this type of tool.
Yes, you have a valid point. It was an excercise of learning how to write the various code to talk to the hardware without having to build the hardware.
I do not believe that DMCA applies, since hardware is not protected by DMCA. DMCA applies to defeating protection measures, and since that is not applicable here, i am not worried.
Anyway, I still believe it is a legitimate learning tool. Just as taking apart an engine to understand how to repair it or modify it to make it better.
The cost / ability of one to fight a legal battle notwithstanding, those terms of use are for their website, software, and possibly firmware. By replacing their firmware and not using their software, you are under no legal restrictions or obligations from the company. Their EULAs mean nothing, and are wholly unenforceable under these circumstances. I would be confident that any lawyer would be able to have a case thrown out without you spending a single moment in court.