oppass

very helpful. great photos. Really appreciate what you're showing us. Thanks cloakfiend.

Mario indeed looks very finished. Impressive. Yes, it would be great to see your acetone method on the original poster's model that I printed too. Here's the link again for you. Cheers. https://www.youmagin...ad-section-test

"I can show you some ultra close ups... cloakfiend, could you? It would be great to see your version of the 30mm head I posted. I for one am a little skeptical that an acetone dip will smooth out the wrinkles too much. Old man wrinkles are beautiful!

Thanks for planning to volunteer.

I get it. Yes, build volume is pretty tiny for SLA. And material cost is important too. Another thing for me: material choice makes FFF the most attractive option too. By "not much in it" I meant not much difference between our prints. And, like you, I wouldn't be swayed to switch printers unless I see an improvement. Let's see if someone takes your challenge and posts an awesome UM2 print that impresses us. Swordriff?

I agree there's not much in it. Although I still think MBR2 has your Flashforge beat here . And I built mine with 1 shell and 0 infill (looks like you did 20%, why?). Maybe someone else can judge. Yeah, let's see how much UM2 can out do us both. I think some of the banding we're both experiencing could also be due to filament diameter variation. If you really want good resolution, take a look at what the Envisiontec machines can do. Although I personally think the B9 Creator is pretty much at the same level -- and not that much more $$$ now than UM2. Any reason you're sticking with FFF?

0.1mm, PLA. MBR2, one of my kids (but I love my UMO more).

It seems that there's a Goldilocks number for shell/wall thickness. In the case of this part 16mm was "just right" to merge the two shapes with no gaps. Here's the results (Cura 14.07, Layer 0.1, Shell 16, Fill 0%, Speed 90): Thanks 3 and UU for your input. I did spruce up my belts which certainly didn't hurt things, thanks. Hope my log here might help others too.

"And make sure the long belts are tight enough to produce a tone/note of low pitch. But audible (>50Hz)." Do your belts sound like 50Hz here? Seems really low to me. http://onlinetonegenerator.com/

Thanks UU. I will go through your tips on healthy belt tension and lubrication. (would be great if someone could upload an mp3 to youtube maybe so we can hear happy belt plucking music!). I switched from .4 to .3 nozzle just to follow a 9/16/12 Joergen NYC tip. Willing to try anything! He said then: "It is a known issue (if you have rules out belt slack and good enough infill/overlap) with cura and slic3r. less so with cura, more so with previous releases of slic3r. you can try a couple of things: reduce the number of outlines or the wall thickness, to trigger cura to use infill at that point. or increase the wall thickness and reduce the nozzle size until you see an extra inner loop filling the gap. kisslicer doesn't have this problem, and I can't remember seeing this issue from netfabb, so you could give those 2 a try. " Will go back to .4mm now since .3mm didn't seem to solve my issue anyway. Yes, wall is infact 10mm (you can see in photo too) not 1mm. Having super high wall thickness is my way of having concentric circles in some parts and avoid any transition to infill at all. Doesn't work with this geometry tho. Following up on my own slow printing idea for reduced delamination of the nylon. I started printing at 10mm. So slow... Happened to walk by after only a couple of layers and saw this: Cura seems to build in these gaps which allow/promote the shrinkage problem that I see as the key. UU, I respect that you don't think shrinkage is really the core problem. But how to explain then that the gap was worse when the part was printed more solidly (via 0.3mm nozzle setting)? Thanks.

You're right 3, this has nothing to do with Cura (moderator: can we move this topic to the correct forum? sorry). But I think it's due to material shrinkage not belt tension. Here is the latest output (in Cura 12.08, not that it matters) with nozzle 0.3 to give more flow and solidity. Also now have 10mm wall vs. 0.8mm yesterday. Here is the key in my opinion: the material is nylon: Nylon = shrinkage. Solid nylon = extra shrinkage. The interior rectangle "part" shrinks away from the round outside part on cooling causing these (now more dramatic) gaps. OK, if that is the problem, what might be the solution? I'm using a non-heated garolite platform which I realize isn't helping. Printing at 250C and 50mm/sec speed..but maybe a higher temp or lower speed would help?

Hello, Any Cura ideas on how to tackle my strange gap problem outside this rectangle hole shell would be greatly appreciated. I really need this part to be 100% solid. (I know, the rest of the infill isn't there either but I can fix that) Infill overlap #1 is 10% Infill overlap #2 is 50% Result: no difference Using rev.14.07. I tried changing the nozzle from 0.4 to 0.3 but the gap around the hole persisted. (Did give me a much better infill elsewhere tho ) Cheers.