Slightly outdated but works well:

https://github.com/szTheory/exifcleaner

You probably want a material with the least creep

Deepseek models or Hermes models may be suitable

An update - I’ve created early designs with full theoretical functionality, including a short stroke system and a locking system. I need to refine many aspects and then fdm test parts as placeholders for the metal to stress the mechanical elements function.

I believe that any file release claiming to be “open” should provide the files in a way that allows anyone to easily edit the schematics without needing to modify (with difficulty) or manually reference the model.

I’ve been searching for jamming devices and have encountered many sketchy suppliers. I’m curious about how to DIY one, but there isn’t much information online about building signal jammers using a Raspberry Pi (for example) + the right hardware

Yeah that is a downside

Using major social platforms for 3D2A is not going to last, don’t rely on them

GF has quite a lot more creep than CF in testing so that should be factored in

Nice

I think for less load bearing parts it is better and the price is decent as well

Any experience with PET-CF?

You could multi-material to cover the outside in them

Seems like a high-risk item to purchase, higher-risk than any other bought component.

It does seem like an interesting route. Only thing is that it seems like it would put a lot more force on the receiver from the accelerator lever so a metal element would probably have to be inserted in the section of contact. I think my concern with that is that it would put a lot of stress on a polymer receiver, yes there are examples of higher caliber weapons in production with a blowback system but if the receiver is less strong then it could put too much stress on weaker components and it could be a safety concern. I’m still learning but this is my view right now.

By higher caliber I mean higher than current hybrids (9mm) so 5.56/300blk and 7.62x51.

Trying to think of a simpler mechanism than rotating bolt lugs. The lugs on a typical assembly could be made from a steel part with a rim on one side and filed down using a guide and then drilled through the middle for the firing pin. The main issue I think is the complexity of the bolt internals. It may be possible to FDM some of the internals that don’t take the brunt of the stress (maybe in a CF polymer) though again it may just explode.

If not using direct impingement the bolt can be simpler however it would still take many drill guides. The extractor and the breech face lock itself seem difficult to make unless they are changed.

I suppose if a barrel with taper could be successfully made with ECM then the breech face could be as well with the same principles? Maybe with 6 wires just inserted into the end so that it creates the pieces to lock into. I definitely need to do lots of experimentation so see if all of these ideas are possible.

QIDI seems to be better in terms of pricing.

I think a blowback can’t really be done at higher calibers without too much internal stress for these calibers. I think right now making a DIY gas system isn’t the priority, first is making a working bolt-action higher-caliber as it would still require a lot of development.

I think expectations need to be maintained when making higher caliber weapons. I think what would count as “DIY’able” to me is for the gun to be made in Europe with no special equipment or custom parts, only with FDM, standard tools and common metal parts (except the barrel). Without welding is ideal but not necessarily a requirement.

Delayed blowback does not really solve the problem because it wouldn’t work for stronger rounds (or it would likely be unsafe). For a piston system (for example) a steel block could be used, then one hole drilled that connects to the gas port hole and then one larger drilled hole containing the hammer system. The hammer used could be a common metal part that simply fits the diameter of the drilled section.

I think making the DIY barrel should be the first priority. For the chamber a usual method of ECM can’t be used so my idea is to use a linear motor that travels along the taper with precise timing to remove more material at the start and less at the end to create a smooth ramp. This paired with a copper ring that would selectively reduce one small section at a time. A lot of these DIY processes for ECM seem to have too many variables for failure, in my opinion it is more ideal to have a standardized system for ECM to prevent outside variables impeding accuracy. This can be done by printing everything (even the container) and making the motor/ECM process itself controlled with a microcontroller.

Just to note I’m not sure if this idea for ECM is even physically possible as I’m not experienced with it.