vincentp

that's correct. If I use 4 mm, the extruder has trouble getting in pressure again and I have underextrusion as a starting point, which make my part above even worse. Around 2mm seems to be right, with very little stringing (nothing I cannot deal with, and the hotend isn't really oozing). I suspect the filament isn't sliding well enough in the tube, or hot end, hence it has issues with retraction even with the clip. It's been like that since day 1 but I'm happy I have working settings now. For most items I print, stringing isn't an issue, those are functional part, not beauty parts.

allright, fine tuned the parameters, my Extruder Vmax was already set to 25 in the firmware settings, adjusted speed to 25 in cura but I got the amount of retraction down to 1.8mm, now I have a good trade off between having the hotend back in pressure and oozing / stringing. Travel speed set to 200 mm/s, no issue there. the new retraction clip suggested above is also a must, it's really strong and with the ziptie, it won't go anywhere. thanks everyone !

all right, thank you ! so it seems I'm close to have a totally tune UM1. I'll work on retraction when I'm back to the lab on monday

all that is very helpful thanks a lot. I'll print that new clip and experiment with retraction (again). I'll just make a fake part that simulates the travel between 3 little rectangular piles / poles and see how it goes. I might increase the travel speed too. I don't want to print slower in the sense that MANY people are able to achieve at least that speed without insane tricking or custom firmware. I went to the point where the extruded volume seems to be compatible with the printing speed and it works great even on the infills (which are indeed printed slower). Oozing sees totally spot on as the rest of the part is just perfect, even with support active and all. It's a very contextual problem where, as mentioned, retraction should be used. Overall I want the good stuff (like everyone). I own another (expensive) CNC and when I got it, it was moving at half speed, previous user had tons of problem and instead of actually fixing them and getting deep in the rabbit's hole, he took the cheap bargain, which is again understandable when you need to just get things done. I was happy to go the extra mile to understand and find out what the issue was, then be back in business at full speed and above. Same here. All the above is very logical and makes sense to me, so I'd rather fix it. Same if I need to upgrade my extruder drive to have it more retraction friendly (but the V2 springloaded should work fine) my bad I guess for not understanding implication of not using it. I'll give it a shot. I'm now at a FAR CRY from what my pathetic situation was back in the day lol. Now I can't stop printing ! regarding gcode flavor, which one should I use with my UM1 ? marlin or ultigcode ? thanks again

dang ! It totally makes sense, I've never thought about retraction that way. Yes, it's totally possible that the hotend oozes a bit then it's partially empty. Two things : it looks like it's sitting on fluff but I've checked. Under is 50% infill, and it's fairly correct. The pattern looks like it's under extrusion, like my earlier prints. regarding retraction: I disabled it as it was worse with it. The upper part of the leg on print #1 had the curve wrong plus many holes along the way, but not everywhere. So I just removed it to reach my goal and get an overall correct print. So I suppose I now have to tune retraction. questions : - is there a part you'd suggest to print to test /calibrate it ? (youmagine / thigiverse #) - I was using default settings, 40mm/s and 4.5 mm of retraction I think. I haven't tried playing much with the new cura 14 settings to deal with the minimum amount of extrusion etc but the areas where retraction should occur on that print are totally relevant and not "abusive", sections are very distant and it should occur Is it possible that my filament was not sliding well in the bowden tube, hence having trouble to go back in pressure in the right amount of time ? I've check the "bite" / toothing on the filament and it looks ok to me, but I admit that I haven't played much with retraction so far, so I don't know much about what to do. I've hear that it tends to grind a lot the filament and that print failure could come from that too. [edit] I'm reading other posts of illuminarty regarding a bug in the firmware (for retraction). I have updated my UM with the firmware provided with cura 14 but that's it Do I have to play with a Vmax setting somewhere ? do I need to compile my own firmware ? I use the regulard reprap marlin/sprinter code flavor. Do i need to move to ultigcode ? also, my UM1 has the standard filament drive & gear + the v2 springloaded system (which came with a V3 bolt I think). Is there something I must adjust there ? replace the drive unit to have a better retraction ? I do have a small added retraction clip on the extruder side. Do I need something else on the hotend side ? (I have a v2 hot end)

thanks a lot. For the very least it tought me about repetier host that I have just downloaded. It's a weird issue for sure. I'm not sure it's the Z seam. What you see there is the stringing (I had removed most of the strings as initial cleanup). After that section, it moves to the other side of the leg you are right, it starts by doing that small rectangle section, it should be filled up but it's not. Then after that it does the rest of the perimeter and infill. you might be right, and it could be exposing underneath layers as it's slowly taking up the curve. Sort of "inverted overhang". So what, in this case ? design issue (not mine). Has to be adapted ? printed with more density (I'm at 50% right now) ? print slower ?

Greetings, it's been a while since I have posted some news about my UM1. Now news good news as we say here. I've printed many part with great success, mostly 0.2mm layers at low speed, then I wanted to both improve quality and printing speed, so I tuned the settings to finally get there. First I'd like to thank illuminarti for his tutorial on max printing *volumes*. It's both "obvious" and also not detailed much elsewhere, most studies focussing on feerate or moving speed. Once I understood that printing thicklayer doesn't match with high speed, I finally warped my head around all this and could conclude on my initial prints failure which had : - non constant extrusion due to printing support (very early versions of cura) - printing thick layers with not enough temp and/or too fast I've now settled to those parameters - printing speed : 80 mm/s - infill : 50 mm/s (not faster or I don't have perfect flatness / 100% fill on solid faces) - moves : 150 mm/s (unchanged) - temp 230 to 235° - fan set to 12% (with max to 100%). The fan changed everything. Probably because my stock cooling duct isn't perfect and cools the hotend too but this settings works fine (suggestions ?) I could clearly see the limits in terms of printing speed vs temp & layer thickness. Of course, you can increase the temp again and again but I think my extruder is definitely limited at some point. Overall I can do 100mm/s for outlines without issues BUT I won't have perferly flat surfaces and infills lack of density of material applied. Perimeter lines tend to not bond as well as at 80mm/s as there's less material extruded so they aren't touching / overlapping 100% correctly (but close). I've been able to print bigger and more complex parts (VERY HAPPY) such as this drone leg. Now finally coming to my question : I still have a small lack of extrusion on a very specific section of the part. Retraction is disabled It's printing nicely until it reaches the moment where it has to travel between 3 different printing location. On each location it's printing small areas. After the big travel / move from the left side (the lowest section of the pact) to the section where it starts to climb, it's like it's having issues to extrude. I'm wondering what I could do to improve that. The bed is fully level, solid faces are extremelly well printed. All I can explain is that it's due to the fact it's travelling on a long distance and stops extruding during that time (but it's a really short time). Strangely enough, front and back of the under extruded section are missing matter while sides are correct. Infill is set to 50% support 15% IIRC that is not appearing in other places of the print (even where it's using support). Overall, this happens for a short time in the curve of the leg, then as soon as printing stays in the leg area and doesn't travel much, it's back in business. any idea ? gcode is here http://www.plecterlabs.com/Media/Ultimaker/ArmTall3H.zip

hey there joatrash ! glad to see you here. mmm... so... more LG parts in the burner ? :mrgreen: good luck with your machine tuning, I do have a UM 1 and got a lot of configuration issues but it's not working allright !

another topic about this, I apologize if it's a duplicate, I've search for recent topics matching my question and couldn't find any. First off, I'm very happy with my UM, I've been struggling a lot at the beginning with both SW setup and understanding parameters, and some HW issues (I have the first gen UM and needed to upgrade both extruder and drive). Now I've reach the "click and print" situation which I'm so happy with, get a model on thingiverse or design something, slice with the profile of my choice, put on the SD card and print, I get consistent results. now for the question : When I was trying to get different results with wall thickness and filling density, I realized cura had troubles filling certain areas. From what I understand, cura uses the wall thickness value ALSO for the filling pattern, so if you have a thick wall value and a thin contour, cura will print the outlines but won't fill with anything. you can off course make the wall thickness smaller (I used 0.8 initially and tested 0.4 mm) but then the quantity of material for filling is much less and it doesn't look as "filled" a with 0.8, density looks affected by that. The classic example is a drilled standsoff. If the OD is 5mm, wall is set to 0.8 and the center is drilled (empty I mean) with an ID of 3mm, you get 2 outlines of 0.8 which = 1.6mm then the remaining gap inside the 2 outlines is 0.4m and cura considers it can't fit anything there. As a result, you get 2 cylinders, one inside the other, and they are unconnected. I've tried with cura 12.12 and 13.03. I've been told I should use another slicer, like kisslicer (?) but I don't see myself getting into learning again all the parameters and testing forever PLUS I love cura. is there a way to tell the slicer to fill those gaps. I mean, I can think about walls and thickness when I design a model eventually, but if I print something designed by someonelse then realize it has failed after 45 minutes of printing, that's not good. maybe the new version of cura (different slicer) improves this ? happy to hear your experience with that issue. thanks !

fixed (sorry). Couple of things, sorry if it's been detailed elsewhere, I'm trying to find a straight forward way to compile the source code without making a arduino specific (at least not too much) version of it. This is supposed to help people like me which are make-impaired (windows based env.) issue with the LCD lib : for some reasons, having the lib included where it's requested isn't enough to have the cpp file compiled. Various articles I've read this morning say that you need to request it in the main file (sketch). Therefore, I took the inclusion code from ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h and copied it in the marlin.ino file, right after the inclusion of the SPI code. This worked and forced the compilation of the LiquidCrystal class. I suppose we could get the same result using a #include "LiquidCrystal.h" (with quotes) with a local lib along with the rest of the source code but that would kill the link with the stock arduino lib I suppose (dirty fix). I suppose that the following code has to be added after marlin.h is parsed as it includes configuration.h where you can definde the language of your choice. #if DIGIPOTSS_PIN > -1 #include <SPI.h> #endif #if LANGUAGE_CHOICE == 6 #include "LiquidCrystalRus.h" #define LCD_CLASS LiquidCrystalRus #else #include <LiquidCrystal.h> #define LCD_CLASS LiquidCrystal #endif

thanks a lot I'm having issues compiling with arduino. I took the ultimaker branch archive, copied the source code in my arduino subdir. Edited a few things for the heated bed in the configuration.h file (really a few things). Renamed the ultimaker-main file to .ino opened it with arduino 1.01 compiled, got errors. Any ideas ? missing a file / dir location ??? The SPI and liquid crystal libs are part of arduino, so including them with #include should find them but I have a no go with LCD class. In file included from ultralcd.cpp:27: ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h:27: error: 'LiquidCrystal' does not name a type /ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h: In function 'void lcd_implementation_init()': ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h:113: error: 'lcd' was not declared in this scope /ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h: In function 'void lcd_implementation_clear()': ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h:126: error: 'lcd' was not declared in this scope /ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h: In function 'void lcd_printPGM(const char*)': ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h:134: error: 'lcd' was not declared in this scope /ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h: In function 'void lcd_implementation_status_screen()': ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h:194: error: 'lcd' was not declared in this scope /ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h: In function 'void lcd_implementation_drawmenu_generic(uint8_t, const char*, char, char)': ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h:305: error: 'lcd' was not declared in this scope /ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h: In function 'void lcd_implementation_drawmenu_setting_edit_generic(uint8_t, const char*, char, char*)': ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h:327: error: 'lcd' was not declared in this scope /ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h: In function 'void lcd_implementation_drawmenu_setting_edit_generic_P(uint8_t, const char*, char, const char*)': ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h:349: error: 'lcd' was not declared in this scope /ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h: In function 'void lcd_implementation_drawedit(const char*, char*)': ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h:400: error: 'lcd' was not declared in this scope /ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h: In function 'void lcd_implementation_drawmenu_sdfile_selected(uint8_t, const char*, const char*, char*)': ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h:414: error: 'lcd' was not declared in this scope /ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h: In function 'void lcd_implementation_drawmenu_sdfile(uint8_t, const char*, const char*, char*)': ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h:434: error: 'lcd' was not declared in this scope /ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h: In function 'void lcd_implementation_drawmenu_sddirectory_selected(uint8_t, const char*, const char*, char*)': ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h:454: error: 'lcd' was not declared in this scope /ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h: In function 'void lcd_implementation_drawmenu_sddirectory(uint8_t, const char*, const char*, char*)': ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h:475: error: 'lcd' was not declared in this scope /ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h: In function 'void lcd_implementation_draw_line(uint8_t, const char*)': ultralcd_implementation_hitachi_HD44780.h:503: error: 'lcd' was not declared in this scope

I'm in the same situation, I'm going to try the above. However, I didn't see defined on WHICH temp sensor input the heated bed is defined ? ultimaker wiki suggests that you can use either temp sensor input #2 or #3, is there one set by default in the firmware ? or something to change in the config.h file ? thanks !

update time. now printing correctly. First off temperature : sticking to 220° which is becoming my "number" for PLA I guess. At 215°, the bonding is less quality and it's possible to tear the part off (the half-sphere is thin). I solutioned a lot of things in the past 2 days. I reduced my wall to 0.4 mm instead of 0.8 which allows a real filling in the thickness of the half-sphere wall. I also printed with no support and I changed the design of the part. Having a continuous flow exclusively on the part gives really good results. Now testing with high quality (0.1 mm layers), so far so good. I'll move to heated bed and ABS right after that.

nope. After the filament started to flow a bit, and a good 30cm has passed thru, I tuned the temp down with the ulticontroller and extrusion stopped working properly at 245°. I tried 3 times, filament was barely extruding properly at 250°. I disconnected the resistor and extrusion started to work again at 215-225° like before. there's no op amps on the analog inputs of the arduino. Analog inputs go straight to the internal mux of the ADC, which has the same defect as ALL multiplexers, internal resistance and capacitance, which equate a low pass and increases switching time (or you get wrong readings). Floating inputs have less impact on the muxing as they are hiZ, but the 4.7k could definitely change the reading. I think there's a serious design flaw with this particular point. I've been designing sensor front ends and MIDI converters for the past 15 years and at least a voltage follower is required if you care about what you're reading & digitizing.

Greetings, finally a moment to give it a go. First results with the new hot end were a catastrophy, lack of extrusion. I had to crank up the temp to 250° (!) with like no reason as... the alu block, heater, thermoccouple etc, are the same. I started investigating about the temp itself, then though about the mod I did last time, in order to prepare for the hotbed : the additional 4.7k resistor on the controller. bingo. I removed it, I have my "normal" temp at 220 or 225°C. This is a side (and ANOTHER) issue but I started to think about the temp sensor and the readings. Looking at the controller, there's simply NO opamp on the analog inputs to read the temp, right ? So no impedance adaptation. Not surprised then that the results vary depending on the load on the arduino MUX inputs. I still have to confirm this but it could explain why people have big temp offsets when trying to print ABS (therefore, after installing the heating bed temp sensor) does it make sense ? trying the new firmware + cura 13 with the half sphere tonight, I'll see the result on thurday.