Jump to content
Ultimaker Community of 3D Printing Experts

foehnsturm

Ambassador
  • Content Count

    1,798
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    61

foehnsturm last won the day on December 2

foehnsturm had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

950 Excellent

2 Followers

About foehnsturm

  • Birthday 09/15/1964

Personal Information

  • Country
    DE
  • 3D printer
    Ultimaker 2 Mark2
    Ultimaker 3
    Ultimaker Original
    self-built corexy

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Test assembly, now casting silicone, then final assembly and test.
  2. @jffry7, any news on a possible UM3 integration?
  3. @laverda @henry-tong @Ace1992 @wimismith @3dprinting_guy @Ramzes777 Please send me a PM with your address details and add a remark if you want more than one sensor.
  4. Update, you guys want one: @laverda @henry-tong @Ace1992 @wimismith @3dprinting_guy @Ramzes777 Correct? I'm going to order parts by the end of next week.
  5. Hey guys, sorry for not beeing responsive lately. So, currently interested: @laverda @wimismith @3dprinting_guy Please feel free to correct or add yourself to the list.
  6. foehnsturm

    Another take on ringing

    Printed at 50mm/s, 30mm/s jerk; bottom half: 20mm square, top half: same square with tiny bulging / ringing corrections. Could a slicer or even a post-processing plugin apply those corrections to the path in a generic way? I think yes!
  7. foehnsturm

    Another take on ringing

    Well, at and least in theory, you could counteract against the ringing with smarter slicing. If you know the resonance frequency / wavelength, the slicer could alter the path in a way that e.g. at at corner it stops the moving axis like 0.1mm earlier to compensate for the belt stretch and then add this 0.1mm to the axis position again after half of the resonance wavelength to compensate the back swing / contraction of the belt.
  8. foehnsturm

    Another take on ringing

    Here is what I found so far: The resonance (ringing) frequency of my UM3 is around 26 hz; corner bulging and ringing is affected by wall speed and jerk; you can mostly ignore acceleration, as (at least with usual settings) it happens in a different time scale. As commonly known, the bulging happens due to overpressure in the hotend. This will inevitably (pressure advance algotrithms could probably help here) build up when printing with more than very modest speed (like 20-30mm/s). "Slow" deceleration doesn't help to release the pressure, because our "slow" like 500mm/s2 or even 100mm/s2 is way too fast. Deceleration still happens in a timescale of less than 0.1 sec, which is one or two magnitudes too fast to show any helpful effect on the extrusion system. So, if you want to print with more than very low speed, you're like going downhill in a car with very weak breaks. If you want to go fast straight you have also to corner fast: I got the same perfect, almost bulging-free pre-cornering surface with standard 20/5 speed/jerk as with 50/30. With a speed-jerk difference above 20 the bulging starts, irrespective of acceleration (tried from 100 mm/s2 to 2000mm/s2). But fast direction changes will produce ringing after the corner. The printhead and the belts form kind of a resonating mass-spring system. The amount of "bad" energy stored there, again monstly depends on the speed difference between the two adjacent paths, which is defined by the jerk setting. However, there's is some positve effect (less stored ernergy) when decelerating very slowly but this is ruined by the increased bulging. The ringing may possibly be reduced by some kind of hardware measures for low frequency damping. E.g. somehow decouple the belt vibrations from the printhead. Another approach, which could show some positive effect, is to measure the ringing frequency (print speed / distance between the ripples) and find a specific deceleration rate as explained in the Duet3D forum. Left (standard): wall speed 20/30mm, acceleration 500/1000, jerk 5/10 | 30 min Right: wall speed 40/50, acceleration 526/789, jerk 20/20 | 22 min
  9. I check if I can do a test on the UM3 with 0.6
  10. To my experience with different nozzle sizes, it's - unfortunately - almost impossible to compare different sizes. It's not just the reduced resolution with bigger nozzles, but the entire extrusion system loses some controllability, especially with 0.8 and above.
  11. could you share a link to your test part file (stl, step)?
  12. foehnsturm

    Another take on ringing

    Could a few people share short (ideally < 1hr) real life prints where they experienced serious ringing issues with the UM3 and the settings they used? Or the other way round, prints that suffered from the massive reduction of accelleration and jerk (rounded corners etc.) I'm testing a UM3 mod and the usual ringing tests show some improvement. But real life prints might be a whole different story.
  13. As for the material question.Its operation temperature should provide a reasonable safety margin to the bed temperature you are typically using. E.g. if you print ABS with the bed at 100°C you should look for something with a really high softening point. Other requirements are not that demanding, but as the magnets are glued, the material should work well with serious glue.
  14. @3dprinting_guy, for an UM2GO with the old black feeder you would have to design an adapter. Not sure about the firmware (@tinkergnome ?).
×

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!