Jump to content

yellowshark

Expert
  • Content Count

    1,749
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

yellowshark last won the day on February 7 2018

yellowshark had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

148 Excellent

3 Followers

About yellowshark

  • Birthday 01/01/2015

Personal Information

  • Field of Work
    (Product) design
    Engineering
  • Country
    GB
  • 3D printer
    heated bed and enclosed housing which were not offered by Ultimaker.
  • On The Web

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. It would be interesting to see what the result would be if you reduced the number of walls to 2 and increased the infill to say 40%. I am not saying you are wrong but I have always used 2 walls and tailored the strength of the part by the density of the infill. I quite often print at 100% infill and have found on certain sizes/geometries that 100% infill is faster than using a lower density - important to us as print time is by far the major influencer on pricing whereas material has a small influence. .Also you do not say what print speeds you are using for infill and for walls. If they are all the same it surprises me that you are not seeing a gain but maybe my brain is missing something.
  2. If you are printing layers over low density infill it just means you need more top layers to get a decent surface, say 1.0mm thickness plus.
  3. Maybe it is back to basics, If you are printing top layers over infill why do you want to use bridging when it is not bridging. I do not have the latest Cura and do not know what bridge mode is, lol so probably should not be commenting!
  4. Very impressive @Safety_Lucas. What size fount did you use?
  5. Yes spot on. Depending on thickness dims I might use more walls if it proves faster to print that using infill. FWIW I also always use 15% infill overlap.
  6. One option is to use the "Ironing" function. From my very limited experience of this function its success will depend on the shapes contained within the top layer. An alternative is to design and print the model with an extra top layer, which has NO holes in it, i.e. just a complete rectangular shape to use your example. Then just cut the layer away with a craft knife where it is covering a hole.
  7. I use Repetier Host for my printing which basically provides this. I recommend that you also lower the print bed during the restart process to provide easy access to the material on the bed and then of course raise it back to its starting z position. I assume the restart will start with command 1 in the g-code so that the bed will be raised back to its start position including any z-offset command.
  8. Indeed, I am only concerned with the length in terms of configuring the e-steps
  9. I have never used wall overlap and never had zits. I only print my designs and designs all have the same wall width, irrespective of number of walls, i.e. measured nozzle extrusion width. I do not know what this thin wall lark is all about as I have never found a need to use a non standard design as I design to my environment.
  10. Hi @rob0213Rob, for future reference, especially if you have a lot more than 5 layers, inserting a z-offset command into the start g-code section of you 2nd(text) file is an easier way to do it, rather than changing all the z commands
  11. Thanks for that @geert_2, riddled with common sense and as you say, fundamentally it is your end result that is important not the method you used to get there
  12. No, I fine tune by printing a length of filament and measuring the filament on the print bed. Lol as you say you cannot get that accurate with a pencil! Well yes, the nozzle is attached to the extruder but the point of measurement is the nozzle tip before the move and then after the move No I do not say that. I tell Cura my nozzle is 0.45 and then change all my line widths to 0.45. I am not sure there is any point in telling Cura to print a line width different to the physical extrusion. People do but lol I have never understood why. That can only potentially introduce inaccuracies although admittedly at those dimensions it is probably not important.
  13. It would be helpful I think if you reprinted with 0.3 layers. This would clarify the question mark over whether these really thick layers are or are part of the problem and also we could then evaluate some of your other settings
  14. Lol @geert_2 that is changing the rules, I guess you could do an even better cooling job by putting the printer into a chest freezer 😁
  15. Thanks for that @gr5. I am not sure the sonotube/shute point is relevant to the point I was trying to make, which is that firstly you need more concrete to build a rectangular column than a circular column of the same dimension. A 15ft circular column with a diameter of 2 ft needs 47.1 cubic feet of concrete . A 2 ft square column needs 60 cubic feet. So if Cura uses a rectangular profile when doing its calculations – which was the stated point that I was questioning, it was not my point – then with a circular delivery profile (fine maybe it is elliptical but lol it looks circular to me) then are you not over-extruding by 27%? Also I remain dubious that 0.8mm nozzle would draw a 0.4mm line. A couple of years back I discovered my printer was drawing 0.45mm lines - with everything in Cura setup for 0.4mm lines - which I assumed was due to either wear and tear or manufacturing tolerance and so I changed Cura to 0.45 nozzle and line width and improved my prints.
×
×
  • 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!