calinb
-
Posts
305 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
3D Prints
Posts posted by calinb
-
-
I would take the AD597 board out, and check the solder joints under a loupe. it rare occasions solder joints had been a bit dry, or have become dry over time. resoldering the 5 joints to the 2 connectors would help in this context, maybe.
You have made an excellent suggestion, Joergen. Assembly defects could easily be the root cause of my temperature "jitters." I found two solder defects on my Ulticontroller main board that required correction before it operated consistently. The assembly on all these these UM boards (AD575, Arduino, UC) could be better, from what I've seen on my three boards and what others are reporting.
I also think AD575 jitters may be interfering with the PID autotune feature. I've run autotune under several conditions with several temperature targets and the result never works very well (not as well as the Marlin Builder PID defaults or the factory defaults).
When I tear my V2 hotend apart to install my higher temperature resistant custom upgrades, I'll check the AD597 board.
-
If I remember correctly from a talk with Erik the temperature read out is an analog signal that goes from the nozzle to the main board, so I think it's quite perceptive to noise. Maybe you can keep the noise down by not connecting via USB and doing the readout from the UC?
We had a lot of problems with noise inflicted from two separate grounds (from adapter and from USB) when I did some high detail temperature readouts with an Arduino and a separate ADC for another project.
That being said, I don't have any of the problems above, temperature is nice and steady with my UM, but I never connect a computer to the UM (except for firmware upgrades)
Yes--the thermocouple signal is analog and must be amplified before it leaves the extrusion head. I also never use USB except for firmware updates, but my Ulticontroller temp display jumps around a lot. Strangely, with the latest Marlin build, the readout is more steady with the fan on than off, but it still jumps when the steppers come online.
-
I was having similar problems early on. I had to change the washers on the knurled filament drive shaft around from the way the instructions said to do it. I had to put more washers on one side of the large gear than on the other side.
The deepest knurling is away from the big gear on the hobbed bolt. I used more washers and also turned the slot for the clip from 2mm wide to 4mm wide to permit a shift of the hobbed bolt. I would send links to the photos, because I spent considerable energy documenting many hardware tips with both extensive text and photos in the last forum but the photos are gone and the old forum is gone! :( The threads are nearly worthless without the photos. Guess I'm not doing that again!
-
Have you updated your firmware recently? It seems like every time I build a new version of Marlin, either using Daid's Marlin Builder or the Arduino IDE, I get a change in temperature control performance (sometimes it's better with a new build but sometimes it's worse). Most anything switching on and off in my machine (steppers, fan, etc.) causes the fluctuations you are seeing. When it's bad the nozzle reading typically gets up to print temperature nice and steady but then the steppers kick in. Then it jumps all around for the duration of the print. It seems like a noise issue to me but it's interesting the the Marlin build affects it with no correlation to any settings that I can see.
-
FR-4 and its predecessor, G10, can be very flat. They are used in printed circuit boards (PCBs) and, yes, there are many heated beds that use a PCB with copper traces as the heating elements.
Personally, I'd prefer not to have the hole pattern on the bottom skin of all my prints and would opt for a solid board. At one point, I considered using a thick piece of G10 instead of the MIC-6 tooling aluminum I'm now using. Aluminum conducts heat better (faster warm-up from my underlying silicone mat heater).
-
I've been on the road on business and I only had time to run a quick test of nf retraction using defaults. The results were very encouraging with little stringing. Yes--the retraction sounds violent, but it's just a stepper motor moving and it concerns me much less than some of the violent hot end movements I've seen using Kisslicer.
-
I had all white spacers for the controller. The length was correct. Are you sure you don't have some white ones somewhere? Or maybe the black and white ones you have should be swapped. Stuff like this seems to get revised quite often in the kit.
>One bearing hole was lasered to big, it moves in all directions
Obviously, bearings should not move radially. A pressure fit of the linear bearings in the hot end should locate and hold them radially.
>Nearly all x&y shafts could be shifted some 0,x mm if i push them manualy. Is that fine or should they be tightly fixed?
If they move axially, like this, they might start to move under operation, which results in pulley alignment deviations (and perhaps ticking sounds, which is often the result of pulley misalignment). I printed thin, round plastic spacers and installed them under the caps--with the shiny, low friction side toward the axes. You can sand the other side (might be difficult w/ PLA but my spacers are ABS) to get a custom spacer. Or just experiment with printing a variety of thicknesses.
-
Another thing to consider while installing the stepper motors is the possibility of upgrading to a heated bed in the future. Although the standard placement of the motors will function with a heated bed, they will run considerably warmer than without a heated bed--especially if you use bubble wrap or other material to make walls to retain heat in the build chamber (often worthwhile when printing ABS).
If you might possibly install a heated bed someday, you should consider installing the stepper motors to the outside of the UM frame during your initial assembly. The only downside is aesthetic but the extruder motor is mounted externally, regardless. You can choose an appropriate screw/bolt length and even install a short spacer, if that helps with noise (I didn't). The pulleys are easily positioned in appropriate location on the motor shaft to keep the drive belt running square. The two pairs of four wires in each of the two motor wiring bundles must also be swapped. Swap the red wire with the black wire in the plastic white connector shell of each motor's bundle and also swap the other two wires (I don't recall their color).
There is strong motivation for doing this on initial assembly. In order to re-route the wires, they must be pulled through the sleeves. You may as well remove the white connectors and do this during initial assembly. I think removing the white shells is easier than trying to push or pull the shells though the sleeves regardless. Document the wire positions and use a sharp dental pick or very small screwdriver to depress each metal connector tab to disengage it from the white shell and pull the wire out. By wrapping a small piece of blue tape around only the wire bundle (without the white shell) while also capturing another small wire or string in the bundle, the wires can be pulled through the sleeves much more easily.
I drilled a 1/2 hole next to the motor on the left side of the frame to route the wires. Use a wood drill and drill slowly to not break through the plywood, damaging the edges. The motor on the back can use the same hole the hot end and extruder wires use.
-
Alexander responded to my ticket and advised resetting to defaults. I'm not looking forward to re-entering all my custom build style and materials definitions and had hoped to avoid a reset, but I'll try it once my UM is back together with its new and larger heated bed.
-
I'm late to this thread, but I'll add a bit to what Joergen said about my commercial application of the Ultimaker. My company is not just selling printed things. It is using the UM to make small and quickly printed parts for our start-up company's products, which include some electronics and firmware content too. Most of our BOM cost is in the electronics, by far. I'm also making some of our physically larger, but very low volume parts. They take a day to print but the selling price is over $300 for our product so it pencils-out, We delivered large silicone-molded urethane parts to our first customers along with my smaller printed smaller parts, and we are now shopping for injection molds for the large parts. Two or three Injection molds will cost several tens of thousands of dollars--just to get us started! The expense of injection molds is why we plan to continue to use the UM for our lower volume parts and perhaps some of the smaller parts indefinitely. Once demand drives a new part into significant volume, we will buy another injection mold.
We are leveraging the areas where 3D printing makes sense (low volume, small parts, prototyping, and parts where mediocre finish quality is acceptable). Don't get me wrong, our engineering integration and assembly house told us my printed parts rivaled the ones made on their supplier's commercial machine, which cost at least ten times more than a UM! However, our customers are picky about the quality of our product's external appearance and injection molding can produce amazing quality and support high production volumes. It's the gold standard in plastics but it's very expensive.
-Cal
-
Also, the new version keeps setting print quality to "2C High Quality Vase." Even Settings >> Settings >> Save will flip it!
Very irritating and I think they introduce more bugs than they fix in every update! I've gone back to the old version. I don't print vases.
-Cal
-
P.S.
My settings were
Pull-back: 732
Push-on: 732
Travel: 0 (and 732)
Initial Reverse: 1 turn
UPDATE:
Pull-back: 200
Push-on: 200
Travel: 0
Initial Reverse: 0.1 turn
results in no retraction at all. Again, only the "Travel" setting produces a reversal of the filament, and it's worthless alone!
-
Maybe I'm doing something wrong but my initial test indicates that nf just gave us a lump of coal for Christmas (WRT retraction).
From my tests, it appears that only the "Travel RPM" setting produces retraction. If it is zero, the gcode is unaffected. None of the other settings make a difference.
Even worse, about 10% of the way through my test print, nf retracted the filament all the way out of the Bowden tube!
Maybe someone else can figure out how to get something useful out of it.
-Cal
-
RPM is a PITA, but only arithmetic is required to convert from the more customary and familiar units of mm and seconds used by Cura and KS.
If someone could check these UM constants and my arithmetic, I'd appreciate it:
UM stepper motor: 200 steps / rev.
UM motor control: 1/16 stepping
866 e-steps / mm
the above constants yield:
3200 e-steps / rev.
0.271 rev. / mm
My Cura settings are:
Minimal travel: 4.0 mm (1.08 rev.)
Speed: 45.0 mm / sec. (732 rpm)
Distance: 2.0 mm (0.54 rev)
Extra length on start 0.0 mm (0.0 rev.)
My KS settings are more aggressive (4.0 mm retraction instead of 2.0 mm):
Suck: 4.0 mm (1.08 rev)
Prime: 4.0 mm (1.08 rev)
Destring Speed: 45 mm / sec. (732 rpm)
Destring Min: 4.0 mm (1.08 rev)
nf uses a somewhat different concept in retraction. It's obvious how the speeds should be mapped but
nf also has "Travel RPM" which is described in the nf manual's description of retraction settings:
The Jump Speed is the speed of the horizontal movement of the extruder between two hatches. The Z-Jump Speed is the speed with which the extruder moves up before the jump and down after the jump. The Pull-back Speed and the Push-On Speed determine the RPM rate with which the material is pulled back before the jump and pushed forwards again after the jump. The Z-Offset is the distance by which the extruder moves up for the jump. The Travel RPM is the rate with which the material is pulled further back during the jump.
There is also a new setting called "Initial Reverse (turns), which is not documented yet.
So is the amount of filament pulled or pushed "baked into" the Pull-Back and Push-On speeds and "Travel RPM" and "Initial Revers" can be set to zero, because they are "extra" add-ons?
Now I'll go make some nf gcode and inspect the result to see if nf still gets retraction backwards.
Edit:
I'll wager that "Initial Reverse" is the amount of material that is pushed and pulled. I'll try 4.0 mm (1.08 rev.) worth to start.
-
i just got a netfabb popup. There's an update available, which I downloaded. I'm in the "manage materials" screen and I'm trying to figure out what numbers to try for retraction. If anyone gets some good results (or bad) please post your settings and results.
-
We know the Arduino works with the AD595 amplifier and a TC, as used in the UM hot end. Is there any reason other than cost not to use an AD595 and K-type TC for heated bed control?
-
I did notice some things changed in my UC after I downloaded my custom Marlin firmware (settings for ABS and PLA preheat with fan, retraction capability, and no more "stuttering" after manually controlling X-Y-Z with the UC). I guess that means all the UC code is embedded in Marlin, but somehow the nozzle limit was overlooked and does not get changed in the UC code?
The good news is I can still run gcode from the SD card with higher temps, as long as I don't touch the temperature setting with the UC. As soon as an attempt is made to adjust the nozzle temperature using the UC (after commanding temps over 260 with custom Marlin firmware and gcode) the limit becomes 260 (unless the gcode sends another higher setting during the print, I assume),
-
Did I post the info about the new Prusa hotend already?
http://prusanozzle.org/index.html
http://hackaday.com/2012/11/27/prusas-nozzle-prints-polycarbonate-peek-nylon/
Yes--I looked at it after you posted too, Joergen. Thanks!
I might try a simpler, cheaper, and quicker path to printing these hotter materials. I have an extra PEEK. I will simply bore it out and build-up a good wall of Hi-Temp Lab-metal around the tube to protect the PEEK. I might turn a stainless or titanium tube on my lathe, but will probably just try the V2 brass tube first and hope it's not too hot at the cold end for the V2 Teflon connector. I just ordered a 24 oz. can of Hi-Temp Lab-metal, because i have other applications in mind for it, regardless.
http://www.jdindustrialsupply.com/labmetal.html
http://www.alvinproducts.com/Products/Products.asp?ID=2
I'll let everyone know what melts (hopefully filament) and what doesn't melt (hopefully PEEK and Teflon) once I find the time to get it up and running.
By the way, I've built "hotter" firmware on Daid's Marlin builder page (thanks for that link, Joergen). Can someone please give me a quick pointer or link to upgrading my Ulticontroller to support temperatures over 260 C?
-
SG has said the most important thing I was going to respond with - having learnt from bitter experience (re-made the head about 7 times now) the brass inner tube to PFA tube is key and having an insulator around it (PEEK or otherwise) simply exacerbates the problem.
You mean brass to stainless, right?
1) brass tube -> SS tube
2) press fitting the bowden against the tube -> introduce an air gap of a few mm
3) PEEK -> AL block.
I already have plenty of stainless and aluminum so that's an easy list to try (far cheaper than Macor). I would actually try running my hybrid hot end with polycarbonate (or maybe run the V2 configuration to reduce the temperature of the PEEK slightly), if PEEK were an acceptable material for use with temperatures above 260 C.
My design ideas are focused on simply changing hot end materials to handle slightly higher temperatures, while retaining the design concepts of the UM hot end. I find the current design to work well and it's simple to maintain.. Given that Macor is still a much better insulator in comparison to any metal, I suspect that simply making a PEEK out of Macor with no other changes would safely permit the higher temperatures I need--especially if an air gap is provided at the aluminum block, like the V2. The limit becomes the temperature at the Bowden tube, but higher temperatures will only be present when printing materials requiring higher temperatures to melt. I suspect that backing-off temperatures to PLA levels will result in performance and behavior very similar to the current hot end using PEEK.
Sure--too much heat at the top just causes jams, but the UM designers must have had a reason for insulating the brass tube/filament "furnace") when they designed the printer. Then they retained the PEEK, however unpopular in user opinions, when they revised the design with the V2. They must have their reasons.
It might seem difficult to make a case for PEEK in the UM given that:
1. The PEEK doesn't help to protect the Bowden cable (or Teflon tube in the V2) from heat, because the brass tube runs all the way up to the Bowden tube (or V2 Teflon tube) junction anyway and brass conducts heat well.
2. The PEEK doesn't handle extended temperatures itself. Like the other plastics used in the hot end (Teflon, Teflon PFA, or PFA), PEEK is limited to 260 C maximum continuous service temperature.
3. The PEEK might make the "cold end" too hot and exacerbate jams.
I think the case to be made for the PEEK is that it insulates a significant portion of the heat chamber (barrel/brass tube) from the air, which improves the speed at which plastic can be extruded and reduces the duty cycle on the heating element necessary to maintain temperature. It probably increases the maximum rate that plastic can be melted and extruded over bare metal plumbing.
Similar to the situation with exposed metal plumbing, I've heard that the V2 might be inferior to the V1 in maximum extrusion rates possible. In the V2, the PEEK does not contact the aluminum heater block, which slightly reduces the heat conducted to the brass tube. However, in the V2, UM Ltd. was interested in reducing the temperature at the top of the PEEK to reduce the likelihood of jams. I believe UM retained the PEEK but reduced the temperature of the cold end slightly with the air gap at the aluminum block. It was a simple design change to tweak the temperature at the cold end a little.
-
Yes--stainless or titanium would be better for the hot barrel/pipe and I have both of these materials on hand. And yes, Macor is somewhat worse than PEEK. (Low thermal conductivity is the main benefit of PEEK, because it's not particularly resistant to high temperatures.)
Nevertheless, many printers use a brass tube right up through the middle of the insulator, including the UM (it goes nearly to the top of the PEEK too.) It's only necessary to keep the temperature of the Bowden tube or Teflon tube below 260 C to prevent hardware failure. Depending on the material extruded, too much heat at the Bowden tube can cause jams, which is what inspired some of the UM V2 changes but, if a printing temperature appropriate for the material is used, I hope that this is not a problem with the increase in thermal conductivity incurred by using Macor.
I once selected "Preheat ABS" on my UM Ulticontroller by accident when running PLA. Not noticing the high nozzle temperature, I rammed a new spool of PLA filament into the head by hand to get it "primed" and... instant jam! If the correct temperature is selected for the material, I don't think the UM design needs to change much to support plastics with higher extrusion temperatures. My goal is to select hot end component materials that can withstand the higher temperatures and then deal with the higher thermal conductivity with a longer hot end insulator That's my hope, anyway. Yes--air gaps, and a stainless or titanium barrel/pipe would help too.
-
260 C is the maximum PEEK long term service limit. I'm running a hybrid V1/V2 now, but I start worrying about the PEEK when printing much above 260 C. My black Ultimachine ABS doesn't even bond well at 260 C at modest print speeds, though it's very good when printed at elevated temperatures. Other ABS works fine at 240 C. It's amazing how variable ABS (and I assume PLA) can be! For piece of mind and also looking forward to printing higher melting point plastics, I have:
I can easily double the total length of the PEEK with a Macor insulator (MI) and a Macor rod long enough to make to MIs costs $50. I'll do the machine work myself. The top part of the MI will fit into the existing hot end by cutting out the corner of the wooden hot end box. (It's already partially cut-away in the V2 hot end.). I'd like to try to use Thurmalux Hi-Temp Lab Metal to bond a long 6mm threaded brass pipe into the threaded bore of the MI, though theading should not be essential if the Hi_Temp Lab Metal holds well. The section of brass pipe protruding out the bottom of the MI will be long enough to create a small air gap between the MI and the aluminum heater block.
Assembly will be to drop the MI assembly (brass tube already bonded in place) though the hole in the aluminum mounting plate. Then thread the aluminum heater block onto the bottom of the brass tube until it contacts the MI. Next, a nozzle (MakerGear BigHead) should be selected and tightly threaded onto the brass tube (the brass tube is turned down at the nozzle end and seals nicely inside the BigHead nozzle). After tightening the nozzle on the brass tube, the aluminum heater block can be screwed back down tightly against the nozzle, establishing the air gap above and locking everything in place on the threads. The TC and heater connections and the rest of the assembly is conventional.
One advantage of the design is it eliminates many junctions where plastic can leak into threads (and even out of the hot end). I don't know if I'll use a Teflon tube on the top of the MI, install a Teflon Bowden tube, or just use an air gap. I don't know how readily molten plastic sticks to Macor and I don't know if it'll be too hot for Teflon (and every other commonly used Bowden tube material) up there.
-
snowygrouch: I'm not motivated to ditch active cooling because of concerns over adding mass to the hot end. Rather, I prefer to not add more wires and powered elements that have the potential to fail more often than a simpler design that features attention to the selection of materials and mechanical details. One fan is inconvenient enough (and I often wish it were not in the way). I'll try to find time to run some numbers but I suspect I can get by with much less than 2.5" of Macor. The goal is not to reduce the temperature of the cold end by dissipating heat, as with active cooling. The goal is to select a material that can withstand the higher temperatures while minimizing heat conduction in the first place. Though you are right; materials with greater thermal conductivity must dissipate the additional heat somehow--either with active cooling or more surface area. Macor is not as good as PEEK for minimizing conduction, but it's still much better than titanium and stainless steel.
alaris2: Again--I'm reinventing the wheel to realize a passive solution for printing at 300 to 320 C. I already have Makergear nozzles (both smaller and larger than my original UM nozzle). They can be easily adapted to the UM on my lathe or mill and I'm currently running a modified UM V1 nozzle in what I call a "hybrid V1/V2" configuration. Finally, I would not pay E3D prices, especially after shipping charges to the U.S.. I often order from McMaster-Carr. I can add a small Macor rod to an order and the shipping will cost me little, if anything. I plan to reuse all my UM components, except the PEEK and the V2 Teflon tube I could still use the V2 Teflon tube, if I find hot plastic sticking way up at the Bowden tube / Macor insulator interface.
-
I'm interested in printing stronger parts that can also handle elevated service temperatures. ABS is fine for now, but I'm designing a new hot end and would like to resurrect this forum thread. I'm not interested in more fans or active cooling unless absolutely necessary. It seems to me the associated additional complexity can be avoided by selecting more expensive materials. I already have a bunch of grade 2 and 5 titanium, but I think the much lower thermal conductivity of Macor is the way to go.
It's interesting that UM Ltd. chose to use PEEK instead of designing a single piece PTFE/Teflon part for their V2 hot end. Both materials have similar maximum operating limits (about 260 C for long term exposure). They also have nearly the same thermal conductivity. It seems to me that the PEEK and V2 Teflon tube could have been integrated into a single part. Perhaps the parts UM Ltd. selected were "off the shelf" and therefore machining or fabricating a new integrated part was avoided. Looking at the McMaster Carr site, Extreme-Temperature Slippery PTFE is actually less expensive than PEEK. PTFE has poor tensile strength, but I think it could handle the mostly compression forces in this application.
Regardless, Teflon and PEEK can only reliably handle the temperatures required to extrude ABS and I want to get beyond the 260 C service limits and extrude materials like polycarbonate at 300 C or nylon at 320 C. I think I'll machine an extra tall version of the PEEK insulator from Macor (pricey stuff). I can design it to accept the V2 Teflon tube on the upper (cold) end but, more importantly, I can use an internal diameter that's slightly smaller than the brass tube ID on the hot end. This will reduce the likelihood of plugs forming at this hot junction of the parts. The Macor insulator can be designed to be quite long (up to 2.5") and still fit in the Ultimaker hot end wooden box. The PEEK is 0.674" long so there's a lot of heat-dissipating improvement room available for reducing the "cold end" temperature by making the conductive path to the cold end and Bowden tube longer.
I can bore, tap (I hope), and turn a new Macor part on my lathe. Carbide tooling is apparently required, which I have, but I don't have a threading tool sufficiently small in carbide to cut the internal threads. I might have to make one. 3" of 0.625 round Macor rod is $48.61 or I could buy 6" and machine two Macor insulators for $79.58 and have an extra part to sell.
I plan to install V1 nozzles in this high-temp hot end. They are more commonly available with different size orifices and I don't think the extra heat isolation provided by the V2 brass pipe (with the circular flange contacting the PEEK insulator instead of the aluminum heater block) offers a significant heat transfer reduction--especially if I maximize the Macor insulator length to 2.5 inches. However, the V2 setup should work with my Macor part too.
From top down, I'm planning:
1. Bowden tube (PFA, Teflon/PFA, or Teflon--doesn't really matter much).
2. Macor insulator (Bowden tube will slip-fit into the Macor part and I'll dispense with the V2 Teflon tube).
3. V1 brass pipe (or equivalent made from a Maker Gear "heater barrel").
4. Aluminum heater block.
5. V1 nozzle (or Maker Gear "BigHead" nozzle milled down to correct height).
Again, the V2 nozzle and brass pipe should fit too.
Macor has higher thermal conductivity than PEEK, PFA, Teflon PFA, and Teflon so I hope 2.5 inches of length will be sufficient to keep the cold end temperatures below the melting point of the filament. I guess I could calculate the predicted temperature. If the cold end temperature is too high, the next design complication would be to stack a PEEK section on top of the Macor section. The Macor part would withstand the temperatures required for polycarbonate and nylon extrusion and the PEEK would provide better insulation for the cold end. The Macor part would just need to be long enough to keep the PEEK under 260C.
-Cal
Edit:
>If the cold end temperature is too high, the next design complication would be to stack a
>PEEK section on top of the Macor section.
No--this strategy would not help, because all the plastic materials (PEEK, Teflon, Teflon/PLA, PLA) have a similar maximum temperature limit of 260 C. The Macor part will need to be long enough to obtain 260 C or less at the Bowden tube. I don't think it will be difficult to achieve--only expensive (Macor)! According the UM Ltd. discussions of the V2 hot end, the more thermally isolated aluminum heater block (due to the V2 brass tube design) would help a little and reduce the minimum length of Macor required..
This product looks interesting. If my arithmetic is correct (and it probably isn't
) the thermal conductivity spec works out to 5.7 to 11.4 W/mK. Though not designed for joining parts, it might work for gluing threaded pipes to nozzles to aid component dis-assembly (the parts separate where desired).http://www.stovepaint.com/Products/Prod ... #Technical
Data
Now I'm leaning toward building it with a V2 style nozzle and brass tube, made from shortened Maker Gear BigHead nozzles and barrels that are glued together. The BigHeads come in a wide variety of orifice sizes and ship cheaply within the U.S..
-
I've noticed what I think are a couple of Ulticontroller bugs. I might as well bring them up here:
1. Sometimes when scrolling past the end of the file names in the file menu, all the file names disappear from the listing and it's impossible to select a gcode file. Refresh doesn't work. The only way to get the file names back is to remove and replace the SD card.
2, Sometimes (often/usually) after manipulating the machine via the Ulticontroller menus and knob (usually Z-axis height adjustment to clean the nozzle or do a test extrusion using Prepare >> Axes >> Extrude) a problem arises after a gcode file is selected for printing. As the stage seeks home in Z (stage rises), it doesn't move smoothly. The Z-stepper motor starts and stops periodically all the way home. The only way to stop the stuttering is to power down the Ultimaker and start over. :(
Obviously, I find #2 to be the bigger PITA!
Has anyone else seen these problems?
Thanks,
-Cal
) the thermal conductivity spec works out to 5.7 to 11.4 W/mK. Though not designed for joining parts, it might work for gluing threaded pipes to nozzles to aid component dis-assembly (the parts separate where desired).
Temperature sensor is acting strange
in UltiMaker 3D printers
Posted
I'm too busy printing stuff right now. That will have to wait.
In the meantime, I can build Marlin code and upload it to the printer before each print and I've discovered something significant. The official Marlin .hex file that's included with Cura ("Marlin-Mon, 11 Jun 2012 17:33:42 +0200 - b67dacdc8f1bd489e058e16d92ba29c364b2a8e5") results in significantly more stable temperature control than anything I've ever built using Marlin Builder or the Arduino IDE and Erik's code tree--even when I use the Configuration.h file that is included with Marlin!
Something has changed in the code tree since 11 June, 2012 that affects temperature stability. I've noticed that other LCD display fields have become glitchy, of late, and while the PID LCD fields appear to work in the Official Cura Marlin, Daid informed me that all but P are not displayed correctly and, based on my observations, I think this bug has crept-in since 11 June, 2012. I think there may be more at play than just how I and D are displayed and I also think there might be a change that make the machine more noise sensitive. In fact, everything is glitchy in the newer builds (in addition to LCD display value jitters, user selections are sometimes missed, requiring re-clicking, and fan speed changes are significantly delayed, etc.)
For now, what I need is the exact build tree that was used to make "Marlin-Mon, 11 Jun 2012 17:33:42 +0200..." Using the code tree for the released version of Marlin, I can just change the PID values to match what autotune advises, and also increase the HEATER_0_MAXTEMP to print the materials I have that don't work well at 260 C (even my Ultimachine ABS tests at 270 C prove 260 C results in weakly bonded layers) and hopefully it will work as well as the official Marlin.
-Cal
Update:
There are plenty of code trees from around the June 2012 time frame on
https://github.com/daid/Marlin
and
https://github.com/ErikZalm/Marlin
but I'd like to grab the exact one that was used to create ultimaker_115200.hex and ultimaker_250000.hex
if Daid or Erik can tell me where to find it (or which one on github is the right one).
Update 2:
I built Marlin-test-2 with and without my custom PID values and they both work.
https://github.com/ErikZalm/Marlin/tree/test2
I also increased the max temp limits anticipating my hot end upgrade.
More importantly, the nozzle temperature excursions and jitter, poor fan response, z-axis stepper glitching, and keypress misses are gone too. I don't know why all these problems have crept into more recent Marlin builds--at least on my machine, but the old Marlin works significantly better for me. It works like the day I got it again!