Jump to content

msurunner

Member
  • Content Count

    274
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by msurunner

  1. Yeah, that's what was triggering a min temp error. After letting it sit for a little bit, I no longer have a min temp error (didn't touch any wires what so ever). However, the problem persists.
  2. I was using the menu's terminology (Nozzle 1 menu equaling 0 in the firmware). I just preheated 2 (1 in firmware) and it started feeding it power, and powered down. As I go to power it up again, the time to "failure" is inversely related to the time from the last power up. If I wait a couple of minutes, I can get it to stay on longer than if I flip it back off and on right after the failure. I am getting a MIN_TEMP on Nozzle 2 (FW 1) now on power up. I did have a runaway there when I first fired it up because of a cross in the umbilical cord that I didn't check for when I first assembled it until I smelled melting PEEK after turning it on (not heating it, just turning it on). I swapped the wires in the plug and grabbed the PEEK section from my older hotend and swapped them out and the hotend was registering the same 22 C as Nozzle 1 (FW 0) and wasn't heating without a command (or at least I don't think it was because it didn't get too hot in the ten-thirty seconds of life)
  3. The Arduino is okay, I even tried swapping it out with a freeduino Mega that is rated up to 23v to be able to say that the chipset isn't being overpowered. I tried the disconnected Z motor and I got the same result (I was able to target a PLA preheat in Nozzle 1 beforehand and then it pooped out. I didn't try the various other fail points, but I would bet money they will hold true still too).
  4. It does it's weird power down thing at various times, but almost always before I can even target a heatup. Sometimes when the card is unplugged/plugged in, sometimes when a menu item is press, or if you just wait it will "shut down." The 24v PSU stays lit the whole time. I thought maybe there was a cutoff on the board that was tripping because I had wired it incorrectly but I have disconnected the 24v and attempted to fire it up from the 19v and gotten the same response. I thought the jumpers I soldered over from the switch to the smaller PCB might be having an issue, but disconnecting that connector doesn't change the outcome. I inspected the unions on the switch to the main PCB to make sure I didn't overheat them soldering on the switch jumpers, and while it's difficult to say with 100% certainty on any electrical component, they appear to be fine (especially with the size of the lead and the amount of power it's used to carrying) and I don't think that I was in the area with the iron long enough to cause a problem.
  5. From poking around on the forum, it sounds like the general consensus is that when using both the Dual Extruder Upgrade and Heated Bed Kit, you need to use both power supplies to handle heating all three congruently. After fixing an issue in the harness and getting the new firmware uploaded, I flipped on the UM and was really excited... for about ten seconds. After initial power up, the printer seems to have a power flicker, the UltiController goes black/flickers and you can hear a motor click like it's getting powered up/losing power. Thoughts?
  6. I'm sure that PU Cura takes the massive precedence, and rightly so, but.... with the announcement that RPi is generating a new board to use a much more powerful quad core processor, I'm curious if there would be a call for a "Cura Lite" My thought behind this would be you could have the two control boards setup to run congruently like many do to take advantage of RPi for webcam and such. However, rather than simply using the Pi as a network interface for cams and whatnot, could a stripped down version of Cura be used to generate G-Code on the machine itself then? I'm thinking just a model previewer to confirm the model's orientation, and then G-code generation with a "material loaded" kinda like you see on the UM2. Then you could essentially print an .stl just like you would print a .docx file. Similarly, you could send the file with a "draft", "regular", and "precision" print type that could cue up the settings you would use for your layer height, print speed, and the lot. Thoughts?
  7. Wow, I'm a little blown away by the nature of this "conversation"... Bot, the feature you really want is not an autoslice disable it sounds like, but rather a lock on platform so that you don't "accidentally" bump anything... The fact of the matter is I'm with Daid and others, the autoslice is actually LOGICAL in that you are getting the code for what you have on the screen. Allowing the user to make changes and displaying those changes (like moving the part) without generating new code for it creates all sorts of pitfalls for new users. For experienced users, you should be able to understand what your part looks like before you bring it into the software and use some pretty good "approximate" settings to prevent five slices.
  8. We had talked about this a while back and I think there were a few people that really like the idea and some that thought retract while comb plugin fixed it (I personally don't like that idea), but a retract vs comb threshold. I'm totally okay with small combs, but I don't want the printer combing for 100 or more mm around the entire part when a simple retract would work MUCH better. I would even say stick it in the expert settings (are they still going away?) so that it doesn't mess with the GUI and most basic users wouldn't understand the difference between the two.
  9. I had that problem a while back. I ended up uninstalling all my previous versions and installing the latest RC and it fixed the problem. Not sure what caused, though I had fiddled with some things to delete the settings string generated at the end of the g-code file.
  10. I like the idea of the eliminating the expert settings. Sounds like a solid plan. I am against declaring the retract while comb as the final solution, though. That still will cause the nozzle to follow a combing path, and yes it should help with face scarring and material loss, but it still is not ideal. If I am executing a retraction, I want the nozzle to then move as quickly as possible to the next location, not work itself to the next location along as many perimeters as possible. Just my two cents, as that should be a simple "If/then" in the logic sequence that should provide a lot of benefits I think. And again, please please please on internal brim count! Thanks Daid!
  11. Didn't know about the plug-in, but I still would maintain that if it were a user entered value rather than a post-script plug-in, it would be better in the long run. Regardless, I would still like to see the internal vs. external brim line count option. Also, I have looked for like fifteen minutes trying to get the same one you're looking at Dim3nsioneer... I'm apparently on the wrong internet too.
  12. Okay, so I've got a couple thoughts for you Daid that I think would greatly improve some prints for Cura 14.4. First, a comb vs. retract variable would be awesome. I.E., I don't mind if it wants to comb on an infill around the steeply angled portion of a circle where it would be combing less than 10 mm, but I don't want it to comb all the way across the 200 mm part. That should be a fairly easy one I think, just comparing the two values and generating the appropriate move based upon the user variable (probably in the expert settings so the newbies don't accidentally mess things up). Second, I'm still not 100% sold on the current internal brim setting and think that an additional option for internal brim count would be awesome. Again, in the expert settings next to the current brim count. I think that would actually speed up the work flow through the slice depending on the algorithm you are using to determine if it has closed the gap or not, but I could be wrong. I know Cura is supposed to be a simple GUI for beginning to intermediate users, so I would totally understand if you wanted to keep those out of the equation to avoid the over-variablization that made SF give birth to Cura, but if they are kept in the Expert Settings, I think everyone wins still. Thanks for everything you have already done!
  13. I was thinking of something the other day that was bothering me, and I think it ought to be fairly easy to address. When doing a brim/skirt (mainly skirt), I would think that eliminating the skirt on inner islands would be ideal. Brim you may or may not want it, so perhaps having it as an option would be beneficial, but as skirts/brims don't seem to utilize retraction, I would say that inner skirts in particular are actually counterproductive to the priming effect and can have a negative impact on first layer print quality if they are oozing across an area of the print. Thoughts?
  14. Found a problem in Cura intermittently trying to re-position models a little over a half a million mm in the negative x and y directions. I'm guessing it has something to do with the circular bed parameter, as it never occurred with the square bed only candidates.
  15. The ability to run two heated beds along with the 8 steppers would have me envisioning a multiplicity system, with a single controller running essentially two printers. Although, you would need 8 to be running a Kraken at full potential with dual z- motors as well...
  16. http://www.panucatt.com/Azteeg_X3_Pro_p/ax3pro.htm Is another one to consider, more expensive, but IMHO, having the blade style fuses versus the goofy little ones that the Megatronics looks like it has is almost invaluable. I can't count the amount of frustration the little brick fuses in the Rambo have caused. Ended up ordering a bunch of higher amperage ones to counteract the over-protective nature of the hard to find fuse...
  17. Foehnsturm, any chance you want to share your side panel design? I'm feeling lazy..
  18. That kinda answers my question then I like the idea of the UBIS, but I'm not looking at buying another hotend just yet.
  19. Out of simple curiosity, and swapping over to a cross-flow setup, I started looking at some of the minimalist printheads for the UM1 with the V2 hotend. The common thread I'm noticing is that everyone except MoonCactus' butterfly mount http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:159390/#comments keeps the aluminum plate in there. I can see a couple of benefits of keeping it (strength, heat spreading), but I can see a weight drop in eliminating it. Thoughts? Anyone tried a head without the plate for the stock hotend?
  20. Alright you two... I'll bite. Looks like I'll be doing a combination "Nick Foehnlord's Concoction" on the UM... Foehnsturm, while I've got the purchase card, any chance you have another set of pulleys lying around?
  21. The UlitController does also come with an enclosure on it, where as what you see is what you get on the RepRap. I believe there is an option to select the RepRap controller in Marlin and it uses the same ribbon cable connections (I have one on my Rostock)
  22. Here's a video of use of a brushless motor being controlled by an arduino using PWM.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to the Ultimaker Community of 3D printing experts. Visit the following links to read more about our Terms of Use or our Privacy Policy. Thank you!