danluc

I had the same issue. I didn't ended up trying the sowing machine oil to be honest. It is a mechanical issue for sure and not stepper motor crosswie interference. I just cut the timing belt for the axis it was slipping in tensioned it with zip ties. 2 loops at each end secured with zip ties and another zip tie to bring them together. I already had a tensioner installed inside the wooden block but I guess the belts stretched even more. Problem was solved right away.

I still didn't try the different oil to replace the grease that I added. I'll have a look at the wires and twist all pairs while keeping them away from each other. Right now for large objects as well as speeds over 50mm/s forget about it. I had prints do this even at 50mm/s and anything above right away it happens. In all honesty I'm liking the Replicator 2 and its ready to go/industrial look to it. MB looks set up to be more more like a product.

I will have to try this out. It happened again today on an iphone stand. Thanks for the idea.

Joergen, Much appreciate the much needed software pointers. I'll have to learn tons more on the software side before I make the switch to the new printer. It does look like I won't be able to keep the software side of things unchanged. Oh well more work then. Daid, I know I'm on my own and still like certain feature of the UM which I will keep. Thanks all.

So as I mentioned before I do have the specks on the belts. I also found a variety of OD sized pulleys for the same exact belts except the ones used in the ultimaker for some odd reason. And from what I was told Cura is not open source (told this by UM staff) and there isn't any real way to change those particular settings. Since I'm trying to keep the same software settings and such I'd have to modify the hardware. So yes Joergen it doesn't look like I would be able to change the XYZ values in the UM Cura version so to speak. But if you do find this post a bit to whiny for your taste please ignore it especially coming from such a new user of 3d printers such as myself. I will pay closer attention when I start Cura next time and see the values you speak of. Don't scratch your head too much on the how and where, its simple. I'm not a fan of the belt system at least on my UM. And having so many rewraps out there I wanted to stick with the UM software config, since for me at least its easier to modify hardware then software. Again, thanks for your input. Cheers.

I don't want to be rude, but the specs for the motors are well known and documented. And yes calculating how manny steps per rotation isn't hard either. Since I can't seem to find the specks on the pulleys use (found the ones on the belts) and the pecks on the Z axis screw and brass nut, how can I find out the pitch of the system? That depends on the outside diameter of the pulley, number of teeth etc etc etc. Can someone help? This is so i can use Cura and the current Ultimaker electronics when i change the belts system.

So the steps per mm are referring to mm of linear travel of the print head then. I wasn't sure about that bit. Thanks

I was wondering if anyone know how much does the printer head move linearly X&Y per revolution of the motor. Also know as the pitch. I am not talking about the specks of the motor since adding a pulley with different number of teeth and diameter can change the pitch of the system. Also I was wondering the same thing about the Z axis which is coupled directly to the shaft but I don't know the pitch of the shaft either. Any help will be greatly appreciated. The reason for all this is simple. I'm trying to get rid of the belt system the UM uses.

I didn't look in the right place thats for sure. Thanks for the link. I will put teflon at the nozzle, below the flange and above it just in case. Printing with white look like crap when you get the leaks of black burnt PLA. Also there is no way I will be replacing the wooden parts and taking all that apart lol especially since I'm making another printer. But I will give it a try soon. PS: The easiest way to make sure the tube doesn't pop out is replacing that collar with any quality one like from a 1/4" SMC push connect pice so I think above the PEEK it will stay the same for now.

So apparently there is only one way to mount this according to UM. I am assuming the flange part has to be flush with the aluminium block when mounted. If this is true then the nozzle with screw part stick out the bottom and is not flush with the bottom of the aluminium block as before. And vice versa, if you mount the nozzle flush, the flange is not flush on the aluminium block. My questions is which way is this "one way to mount" the correct way? And honestly I think I will still use teflon tape just in case its as good as the original "easy to mount" hot end.

Mine does the same thing. Its an issue resolved by printing at 70mm/s or slower. The design is a bit patchy in wood and you will get grey hairs trying to align your axis perfectly. Also i noticed that the axis themselves move inside the bearing since the caps are not flush with the bearing and axis.

I would assume that this would not be resolved by a heated bed would it? Especially on taller parts. I am building another 3D printer out of profiles and currently deciding to salvage ultimaker parts or not. The arduino board is easy enough but the extruder I'm hating and would like a MakerBot style extruder.

So when i print the 20mm cal cube its comes out at about 19.6 ish not 20. I am using Cura and I do calibrate the filament extruder as part of the setup and its very precise. I am curious where that error comes from? Any ideas? I thought it has to do with the steppers or their drivers.

Forgive my ignorance but from what I've seen the pitch for an UM belt is 2.03mm, the one I will be using is 2mm spot on. My next question is about the pulleys and their size and number of teeth. Since the pulleys are different I want to make sure I get the same amount of linear travel per full rotation as the original UM. Any chance I can change that in the software if I can't get the right ratios?

I will try Cura asap then. I only used ReplicatorG and the Slic3r within-it to print and create g code. I thought that would be enough. PS: the calibration cubes come out perfect hence why i am a bit puzzled and think its Slic3r that messes up on anything more complex then a cube. Thanks for the idea by the way.