yellowshark

Probably not if it has not been certified. Taulman has a number of nylon filaments that have been certified by the FDA

You take the two short walls off and it is OK!! So going back to your original model, starting at the top left, you go left to right along the short wall, then turn right and go top to bottom along the left wall which is having the problem. I wonder if it is that right turn that is causing the problem? Maybe it is positioning itself on the Y axis incorrectly as the turn is made. I suggest you do two things. 1. Turn off the printer and then move the print head across the printer on the X axis several times to see if you can feel any resistance. Then do the same thing along the Y axis. If it feels ok then position the print head at the top left corner of the model. Move the print head left to right above the wall and then turn right down the Y axis wall. If you have resistance on the X or Y then if you are not sure how to fix that I suggest you make a new posting asking for help. 2. If the axes are smooth then I wonder if it is something to do with acceleration away from the top left corner followed quickly by deceleration into the right hand turn. Take a copy of the long central wall on the X axis and paste it to replace the wall removed from the top left corner. So you model is back to where you started but now the top left wall is longer. Print the model with the same settings.

Well it can certainly be solved partially by setting the solid layers setting to the appropriate amount. Say you want the solid area at the top to be 10mm, set the "bottom/top thickness" setting to 10mm So you will get a solid 10mm at the bottom and a solid 10mm at the top and the area in between will be you infill %. I would actually make the setting "depth of solid area required" + (2*layer depth). In addition you need to consider the surface area of the posts. It might be a good idea to make sure that the first few top layers laid down get you a smooth solid surface before printing your 10mm. I am guessing that with a 10mm screw the screw and the surface area of the post are quite small. so an extra 1.n mm should be sufficient where n=0 for .100 and .200 layer depths and n = 2 for .300 layer depths. For total flexibility on this subject you would probably need to invest in the Simply3D slicer.

..... when I said "it is verrry flexible" I was referring to the new flexible nylon, not to PCTPE nylon. Which is not to say that PCTPE is not flexible too. I have found the Taulman nylons to be quite flexible if printed reasonably thinly. But I do suspect that if you are looking for a cushioning effect then the new flexible nylon would be the one to go for - based on the Taulman videos

PCTPE has been released for sale but I have not seen any indication on the Taulman site that the other new products have been released. It is verrrry flexible. I guess if you make it quite thick and then print and stick a PLA support structure underneath it may work very well. But of course at this stage that is very much guesswork. Uhm, I am sure I read that trying to glue stuff to nylon was verging on the impossible - that might be an incorrect memory but it rings a bell.

Thanks Nallath I can see where you are coming from. I have never used flow % but I assume I can mitigate against the way Cura does it by reducing the flow for the 1st layer. It will take some trial and error – or are you able to establish how much Cura over extrudes – but no doubt I can get there. Hi George, Nallath’s comments methinks make it four ways to get an elephants foot. And LOl we all use different methods. For nozzle to bed distance I use a digital method. I take a cube, change the z height to 1st layer height and often just double the x/y plane dimension. I print, in the centre of the bed, and then use a binary chop process; I add 50 microns to my z-offset and print and then subtract 50 microns from my z-offset and print. Then I compare the 3 prints. If subtracting 50 microns gives the best result I will subtract another 50 microns and print again. And I continue doing it until subtracting 50 microns gives a poorer result. That therefore then gives me a 50 micron range, say 150(better than 100) - 200(worse than150). I then add or subtract 25 microns and just keep repeating the binary chop until I can see no difference. If I know I am going to print something with a big base I will still follow this process. Then I will increase the x/y dimension of the "cube"up towards max. bed dimensions and print. I then use the bed levelling screws to adjust for a non-level as required.

Or if you have it. just press the arrow button on Repetier-Host

Looks like I stand corrected Why does it do that Nallath? It causes problems for users and with, it seems to me, a questionable benefit.

No I do not think so. If it is important dimensionally I remove .1mm all-round from the base layer during design modelling

My understanding is that fan shrouds should be printed in ABS. Whether that is "must" or "better to" I do not know. I have some shrouds I want to print but I was told they should use ABS, so fearing that the cr*p will muck up my nozzle, they keep getting deferred from the print queue!! I assume their proximity to the extruder dictates (or suggests) a higher melting point than PLA

Personally I would have approached that piece wanting to print vertically rather the horizontally. If the other side is the same as the facing side then I would just slice one side off and stick the two parts together, or maybe just slice it down the middle. Probably strength and visual looks requirements may determine if the approach is suitable. Actually I am starting to suspect that those sloping planes are also sloping inwards so a slice down the exact middle to get a flat printing base may be the better option

Hi Lance yes you are going in the right direction, I do not think with PLA you will get any advantage going hotter than 65, and indeed lower could be better, although I have never tried it. The part looks quite difficult in terms of 1st layer. Are you printing 1st layer slow, like maybe even 15mm/s? Unless your bed is absolutely spotlessly prepared I can imagine it may well be problematical. I think getting the right extruder temp. could be crucial also.

Glad to hear that one went OK You know I do think that bed levelling actually is quite difficult- after all how can you be sure that the paper slid out with exactly the same friction as it did on the other side, awfully hit and miss. There have been times when I have felt I have it right and ploughed on and then some time after done it again and it actually comes out better. So don't beat yourself up!!!

Maybe translucent is the wrong word. My experience is with taulman nylon and be it clear, blue or red that 1st layer looks thinner to me, I am guessing it is the way the material reflects light

i.e. thinner on the 1st layer

Our posts crossed. I asked the question because to me, translucent materials always look thinner. I have always assumed they are not!!!!!

Were you printing with XT before the software change?

Sorry, no I was just being light hearted. It must be very frustrating, sometimes you just have to smile

Sure it wasn't the new XTsuperglue material you were using, I thought it was still under Beta. Seriously, I have two comments. personally I find that the translucent filaments can be misleading. If you get external light shining into the build area, one part of the layer can look OK whereas another part can look really thin. If it is not that then I would say it has to be bed level/nozzle distance. Personally I would swap to a normal PLA, load up a cube and set it to 0.2 or .3 height and maybe set it to a 100*100 on the X/Y plane and then follow pm-dudes suggestion for levelling on the fly. Once happy go back to XT. I have never used XT, if it needs an adjustment to the nozzle distance leave the screws alone and use a z-offset to get it.

wow! I am staying away from 14.12.1; the next one will be it tore the bed off its mounts :eek:

The quality you want (printing slower will nearly always give you better quality) and the size/geometry of the model dictate the print speed. I doubt that the normal quality settings you are using will be slow enough for getting good quality overhangs. If your corners are raising 6mm, firstly I do not understand why the printer head is not relocating your model somewhere else and you have a bad setting somewhere in your hardware or software or on your bed; resulting in probably too fast and too hot. It will probably help if you do another print and then post a photo and your precise settings. We need to know Layer depth Wall thickness Print speed in mm/s Extruder temp. (actual, not what you put in Cura – yes they well be the same, but they may not) Minimum layer time – I disagree with some above, I never ever go below 10secs Minimum print speed If you have more than one model being printed simultaneously, a picture of the bed so we can see how they are laid out. Fan settings The filament being used; e.g. Faberdashery arctic white Infill % Top and bottom thickness Z-lift yes/no retraction settings … and leave flow rate and feed rate at 100% Armed with that we can probably solve it for you.

+1 on your posts George

Hi edit_mesh, no the improvement in dimensional quality was due solely to reducing the print speed from 50mm/s to 20mm/s. The print was using 0.4mm walls and 100% infill. Everything I had done up to that point was using your model file and slicing it in 14.07. This is not something I have ever paid attention to but yes the brim on the left side was quite larger than on the right side, by about 0.7mm which I find really surprising, although that part of the brim did separate slightly from the model when removing from the bed so the measurement could be misleading. I am not sure that the code is written with an intent to ensure the brim is the same width all the way around an object but with a simple geometry like yours that would be my expectation; someone from UM software would have to provide the correct answer I think. I have no answer to it but we seem both to be having the same left and right dimensional differences with different printers and different manufacturers of printer - wierd

Yes edit-mesh pics only. I had a Word doc with the pics and clearly was going to type in some of the comments in the postings but I guess I got distracted and forgot! I have just posted a new thread to try and get help on finding the original thread

Hi, about a year ago there was a thread (cannot recall title) which covered a problem where, for example, Cura settings were nozzle 0.4mm, walls 0.8mm, model with 1.6mm walls but the printed model was left with gaps in the wall thickness. Several people pointed out a fix by changing one of the related settings, e.g. set nozzle to 4.1, set wall width to 8.1 - whatever I just cannot remember. Does anyone recall the thread and where it might be? I have searched but cannot find it. TIA