Jump to content

Dim3nsioneer

Ambassador
  • Posts

    4,297
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    33

Posts posted by Dim3nsioneer

  1. Tea time small talk by Daid... :lol: No, really, thank you for sharing this. It's really interesting to read about!

    I once thought of writing a plugin which could double up whole layers in the case of a purely vertical structure. Did you double up only the infill or everything except the outermost shell for which one can now set a separate speed in Cura?

     

  2. I use 0.06mm distance with clean and cold nozzles. I measure it with a feeler or with the eye. This distance gives a very nice first 0.2mm layer with optimal adhesion. At least on my UM1.

    Approx. 0.1mm ist the distance you should have with a cold nozzle as the thermal expansion of an UM1 hotend between room temperature and 200°C is 0.1mm.

     

  3. As drayson pointed out, during bed levelling, the second nozzle should be a bit higher up in order to avoid collision with the unlevelled bed. After having levelled the bed with the first nozzle, you adjust the height of the second nozzle with the long screws. Be aware that by turning one of the long screws you might also change the height of the first nozzle again. A perfect levelling procedure is therefore iterative.

    One important thing: Both nozzles should have the same temperature when you level them against each other. I recommend bed levelling with a cold but clean nozzle. I level them to a distance of 0.06mm (in the meantime, I do this by eye in most cases). Together with the thermal expansion of the hotend in z direction by 0.1mm between room temperature and 200°C this gives a very nice first layer thickness which adheres nicely to the bed.

    Other people recommend levelling with a hot nozzle. You can do that but you would have to really put it down to the bed surface in order not to get a too large gap between nozzle and bed.

    Another thing you should be aware of: If you have the standard plexi bed, don't be confused if you perfectly levelled the two hotends against each other in one position of the print head, move the print head to a different position and realise that your precious mutual levelling has gone. The plexi bed is not flat. However, I usually managed to have a resonable mutual levelling. A small trick of mine: I once printed a three or four layer area on the plexi bed. The surface of such a print is quite even if you used correct print parameters. Then I did the mutual levelling (after letting the nozzle cool down) on top of this printed surface and it was perfect.

    I guess this is more information than you actually wanted... ;)

     

  4. @ pause, retract is possible as the same value can be defined for resume. Furter there will be limited oozing using e.g. 16 or 20mm.

    I'm very interested in how this can be done in Marlin.

     

    I once had a very bad experience (clog) with a retract value larger tan 12mm... so I would stick to a smaller value...

     

    @ Dim3nsioneer, could you please give me a quick hint where I can find the corresponding sections in Marlin...?

     

    For the UM1, part of it is in marlin_main.cpp and part in ultralcd.cpp. Of course, language.h is also engaged... for the UM2 it's even more distributed.

    EDIT: I forgot one important point in the recent discussion. What about temperatures?

    I guess the bed should stay on in all cases, but what about the hotend(s)?

     

  5. It waits for the buffer to be empty, it does not throw away anything. Other then that, seems you're right.

    I use the G10, G11 commands in the Ultimaker2, but I did had to fix a few things in there. I think those fixes have made it into the main Marlin branch by now. However, by default, support for them is not enabled! So be warned about that.

     

    Thank you for clarification and for checking. I actually meant it exactly in that way, but it was misleading. I edited it in the post above.

    About G10/G11: I saw it is labelled as 'ONLY PARTIALLY TESTED' in standard Marlin. Thus I set it to second priority. The other catch with it is that the retraction/priming amount has to be set with an M207/8 if it shouldn't be 3mm which is quite small for an UM1 (maybe 3mm is a quite reasonable value for other hotends).

     

    The only important addition for the change filament option, to me would be the fixing/locking of the X,Y, steppers.

    and perhaps +20mm of extra retraction, to be extra sure the new inserted filament has passed the bowdentube fitting.

    But for only a pause function that is not necessary.

     

    I suggest to test changes one after the other and not to do too much at once. I didn't have a look at the change filament option so far. At the moment I think it is important to have a consensus about how the options should work. Otherwise we might get a I-am-not-happy-with-the-new-print-dialog-effect... :shock: if you know what I mean... ;)

     

  6. Ok, this is what the UM2 is doing (derived from the firmware).

    pause print:

    - stores the current position of all axis

    - empty buffer continue until buffer is empty

    - retracts predefined amount

    - lifts head by 20mm if z<170mm, by 2mm if z<200mm or not if z>200mm

    - moves head to park position

    - disables extruder steppers

    resume print:

    - moves to saved position

    - continues printing

    abort print:

    - stop printing

    - retract filament (by 20mm^3)

    - home all (really all? also z?) axis

    - release steppers

    Maybe an UM2 user could check this list?

    Question is, what should Marlin(1) do?

    In the case of aborting the print, I don't see any serious issue.

    Case 'pause print': I see a consensus about lifting the head if possible, move to a (fixed!) safe position in x/y (not homing, because it would destroy any settings made by G92 commands) and holding the x and y stepper active.

    I see an issue with the retract. As the standard UM1 settings do not know a preset for retraction there are three possibilities:

    1) hard coded amount for retract

    2) using the experimental(!) G10/G11 commands if firmware retract amount is defined, if not defined: 1)

    3) no retract

    What do you think?

     

  7. Although I'm printing exclusively with SD card, I think there is a simple answer to the question why people want to print over USB and with Cura: They are used to have ONE software which does EVERYTHING AUTOMATICALLY or by pushing ONE button and in maximum ONE cable to connect. Greetings from inventions like cloud computing and plug&play... ;)

    It's what is expected from a modern device. Nothing wrong with that. One has to keep in mind that not every Ultimaker user is a tinkerer (anymore).

    I have the impression Ultimaker is well aware of that trend. Otherwise I could not explain why Cura is such a handsome application and very easy to start with. And I'm pretty convinced that the print dialog will improve again. But everyone has to be a bit patient right now. Let's continue to trust this great community of Ultimaker users here in the forum.

     

  8. Is this a correct intrepretation and rewrite?

    "A small gap here, compared to no gap, makes it easier to remove the support but makes the print a bit uglier."

     

    I think this interpretation is correct. If you have the small gap, printed lines above the gap will hang down a bit and make the print looking uglier at this spot. The alternative would be to have no gap at all. Then you will have to cut the support away with a knife.

  9. Make 5, then it's a whole new set also for the extruder drive :smile:

     

    Let me put it this way: priority on further brave tests with stepper drivers has significantly decreased since yesterday... :shock:

     

    Are you going to get them from Ultimaker? Lots of people sell these. I assume they are compatable but I don't know - I guess I'd have to look at the pin out diagram. Try googleing "reprap pololu"

    http://www.banggood.com/3D-Printer-A4988-Reprap-Stepping-Stepper-Step-Motor-Driver-Module-p-88765.html?currency=USD&utm_source=google&utm_medium=shopping&utm_content=miko_ruby&utm_campaign=all-us&gclid=CKO39rP4pL0CFchQ7AodlQoAtA

     

    Thanks for the link. For now, I think I stay with the little bit more expensive UM drivers as I need them a.s.a.p. But the thought of compatible drivers crossed my mind when I read about Nick Foley's tests with Pololu DRV8825 . If I buy some other stepper drivers in addition, I still have the UM stepper drivers as a fall-back solution.

     

×
×
  • Create New...