yellowshark

Hi, recently I tried 645 for the first time and for a few prints everything went well. I was pleasantly surprise that it stuck to the bed on my first attempt. Then I got under-extrusion then an almighty filament jam that took ages to sort out. I read that many people have had problems using Taulman on Bowden tube printers and I was certainly suffering from sections of it being too wide and grabbing inside the Bowden tube. I heard the other day, from a reputable source, that Taulman have recently reduced the filament width by 0.05mm to try and help with the problems. Has anyone have on knowledge on this? Is it true? Have the new sizes fed through the supply chain yet to hit Europe? How do you know you reel is the new size?

I have 7 or 8 different colours from Colorfabb and they all match what I expected from the website, but I do not have the natural. I have natural from Faberdashery which I used for windows on an architectural project. Well they look like windows except of course they are not transparent. Your reel of natural looks duff to me - I wonder have they mistakenly sent you pale gold?

3ntr - pretty similar to the UM apart from dual extruders, all cnc machined alloys and the filament feeder drive is on the external rear of the casing whereas I get the impression on the UM, maybe wrongly, that the drive is located near the extruder assembly.

Thanks guys for your help, much appreciated. Yes Illuminarti I think it is fair that I have not fully understood what goes on and this has been caused by me using Slic3r when I started, as I have never known what this “0.2mm” line of code is and therefore assumed that slic3r wants to be 0.2 above the bed before accounting for the 1st layer width. I have just realised I still have slic3r on this laptop and I can now see that I am wrong. My reading now is that it is lowering the bed by 0.2mm to move the extruder from one location to another and then raising it back to the original position prior to extrusion. Sorry for the red herring. I use the z-offset to account for the glass tray that I lay on top of the print bed. IE I set the bed levelling by… Remove glass tray Heat bed to 60 Send code G1 z0.15 to the printer Use a sheet of paper 0.15mm thick Set the bed levelling so there is just the slightest amount of friction felt at the three setting points. Set the z-offset with the depth of the glass tray (now using Cura that is a line of start g-code) I then print the first layer of a test cube to ensure all is well and if necessary will tweak the z-offset marginally until I get the desired result. So I know what I am looking for in end result and I know how to achieve it but I did not know what the target gap was because I had been confused, in error, by what Slic3r was doing. I now know that theoretically is should be 0 J. Dim3nsioneer makes the point about heat expansion of the hot end. So with my average glass plate depth being 7.06 should I be setting my z-offset to between 7.12 and 7.16? This is a bit strange to me as I have always got my best results with a z-offset of around 6.91-6.95, which seems to be a significant difference. I have only just swapped over to Cura so I need to look at that carefully, which is why I posted.

So, you have levelled your bed, set your z-offset and start the print. What is the optimum distance between the nozzle and the bed for adhesion? George posted on the “Printing on glass” thread that …”The software assumes your paper is .1mm thick which is typical” - which I assume is referring to Cura. Does this mean the answer is .1mm? Slic3r adds .2mm to the z-offset. I do not see any adjustment to z-offset in the Cura g-code. Does the distance change depending on filament type? I.E. PLA vs ABS vs Nylon? I am suffering a little bit with adhesion at the moment and whilst I am using a setup process that has always worked for me, I would like to be sure that I have the target distance correct.

That depends; for real ease you need to move the bed out of the way so you can prime the new filament need the firmware to relocate the bed precisely to where it was when you hit the continue (or whatever it is) button to restart If you have that then its easy. I keep the extruder and bed temps running - actually I do not think the Pause switches them off anyway but I do not know what the new Ultimaker firmware does.

One aspect George maybe is on how tall the model is. My models were very low and to me watching it there was really no difference between my run and printing all models concurrently - you still have to jump between models when a layer has been done. The only difference is that the printer has to reset the Z-axis and on mine there was no perceivable delay; I guess with tall models there might be and that might be the issue. But it is not an issue for low models and the software should give you the option to choose multiple brims/skirts or not. 14.2 Daid? (choosing no should provided a bed wide skirt at the start if skirt has been requested). This aspect may not be important to most people but it is to my business if I am doing a production run rather than a single prototype. Especially if it is nylon!!!

Sorry George but re- priming is not an issue (using 14.01). I have just successfully completed a 4 model print. This time I was using a small brim rather than a skirt. On copies 2,3& 4 the filament just laid down perfectly from the start, each of the 3 brims was perfect. This supports my point that they are not needed - unless you want model brims, and that a single skirt at the start is all that is needed with 14.01. What do you think Daid?

Agree with you totally James. Like most things I think spools vs. loose is a matter of personal choice.

Good article and worthy campaign, perhaps he could tackle 12v adaptors too - how many have you got! Personally it is not a big issue for me as I use mostly Faberdashery loose coils (in preference to spools). He talks about fighting with 300m of loose coil - which is a bit stupid. Faberdashery let you buy as much as you want. I have settled for max of 50m. I find this manageable. On first use I lay it on the floor and recoil it to ensure there are no tangles, sometimes there are. After use I fit two cable ties and put the coil into the supplied polythene bag and it is 100% ready for the next use.

Faberdashery is 2.85. Each to his own but I prefer their method of coiling. Just place it on the floor and come back 4 hours later without any concerns about filament jamming when it un-twirls the wrong way coming off the reel and then tightens. I also personally consider Colorfabb to be equal to UK companies in terms of delivery time and indeed postage cost is only a little higher

It was as I thought, although I am not sure what made me think of it because it makes no sense to me, come to that in a moment. Prior to trying the multi-model print (in PLA) I was using nylon and had set a skirt some distance from the model to give the pressure in the extruder time to equalise before starting the print. What CURA was doing was to take the skirt as part of the model and of course when I asked for four additional copies there was not enough room on the print bed to do this, hence the error. So I set the skirt to be much closer to the model and then the request for four additional models worked. But a skirt is not there for the benefit of a model, unlike a brim which is. It is there to get the flow regulated and working before starting to print, which is only needed for model copy one IMHO. There is no way you could use this print one at a time mode with nylon because the first copy would be a disaster on layer 1. CURA should take the overall shape & size of the multiple models on the bed and then draw a skirt around them all, as it does with a singlemodel. As it was I had to change the skirt to brims because even with PLA the first layer on model copy 1 had a minor defect (unacceptable for this print) because the flow had not settled.

thanks guys, I was not sure what the gantry was so I played it safe, the model is only 5mm high. But I will change it to 75 now. Actually I think I know what the problem is so I am going over to the workshop now to test and will report back.

Ok tried again, it did not work but slightly different. I reloaded the cube. This time the Tool menu setting was already on “Print one at a time”. I right clicked on the cube and selected 4 copies. It errored and said it could only make 1 copy or have 1 copy. I wonder if there is a problem with my Machine settings which is reducing the bed size. Settings are Printer head size =============== X min = 60 Y min = 25 X max = 80 Y max = 60 gantry = 15 I assumed Cura is asking about the clearances therefore how much space it must allow in the x-y vectors to fit the extruder assembly during the print. Perhaps I have got that wrong?

Thanks I did try changing another setting and then back again because of that, but I will try moving one of parts.

Hi I want to print 5 copies of a model but separately, copy1 then copy 2 etc. I loaded the model and duplicated it 4 times. Under the "Tools" menu I selected "Print one at a time" rather than "Print all at once". I used 2 skirts no brim. But it printed layer 1 for all copies, during which I cancelled the print. I tried again just in case I had picked up the wrong g-code file, same again. Has anyone done this before or is it a known bug or is there another setting I have missed?

Two important things missing from your settings. 60c bed for 1st layer then drop it. I went overboard on my first one and probably set it to 0 (cannot remember) and the piece came away from the bed later. So I then dropped it to around 40ish successfully. I also opened the door fully although I do not think George commented on that. Fans full on from layer two - again I am not sure if that is precisely what George said (i.e. which layer) but that is what I have done. I know Illuminarti rightly has concerns about some under-extrusion if you do that but I have not suffered from it so far, but with 20 m/s and 0.05 resolution one is not exactly taxing the system.

In my architectural experience it depends on whether the orientation of the piece on the print bed is flat or vertical. E.G. window frames, if printed flat, I can go to 0.8mm. I could go to 0.4mm but at that size I found them very difficult to handle. Printing vertically - I found it depends on the geometry. I printed a long straight length of "glass" for a balcony, about 4cm, at 0.4mm but again it had no rigidity and quite difficult to handle. I printed some support columns, supporting a 1st floor balcony, at 1.6mm square and printing real slow and with 4 of them on the bed to get the slowest layer time they were messy. I had to double up to 3.6mm square to get a decent result - maybe I could have gone between the two sizes but it was easy for me to double up as scale was 1:100 In my somewhat limited experience, the professionals I have dealt with, commercial or local government, tend not to go to 1:500 and would not expect great detail if they did. So if it is flat trellis that you will mount vertically against a wall I guess you could do .4mm, but you may actually find that .8mm could be visually acceptable. I do think though that at 1:500 it is difficult to go to that level of detail

Here is an example posted by George Posted 11 March 2014 - 01:53 AM You can cheat a bit and tell it your nozzle diamter is .3mm. This might be enough to get an okay print.

Hi Aaron, enjoyed this so far, very professional! Two observations. If you vary the resolution without changing any other setting, you are not likely to get the optimum result for an individual resolution. In GR5s posting on overhangs he talks about going thin on layers, going real slow, going real cold. I also recall Illuminarti explaining how the thinner the layer then the more the new layer would be supported, i.e. I think it was about relative weights or % of overall weight. I know I moved from .2 to .05 and saw a major improvement - and time to go to Macdonalds whilst it was printing, oh and the Moon too!

.... the statements in the previous post are NOT a recommendation, caveat emptor

Interesting, I went the other way when I started and was trying to print a spur gear. I.E I added more perimeters. My logic was that with one perimeter the infill was bashing against it at "right angles". Adding perimeters protected the outer perimeter. This was my logic (often suspect :mrgreen:) At one time I was even doing the infill first. I have learned a lot since then and have been using the data from GR5's thread which made an awesome improvement. I must go back to that spur gear one of these days with my additional knowledge.

If it catches on the nozzle and creates a loop I like to try and put the screwdriver through the loop (needs some skill) and then squash it as the nozzle comes into "contact" with the bed. An accomplished flick of the wrist takes it off the bed. Of course failure during the preceding means you then have to scurry after the nozzle with your screwdriver cleaning up the mess

Yup I only use hairspray with my glass plate. Certainly for something say 5cm * 5cm, I would not use a brim just a couple of skirts to get the extruder stabilised. That is extra strength hairspray - cheapest I can find with bed 50-60c. With PLA if I am doing a lot of printing I will wash the plate and re-apply every few days. With nylon I will refresh during the day - and Taulman say you cannot print on glass hehe

Sorry, I was coming in at a slight tangent. I have seen posts quite recently, if not on this forum then the Slic3r forum (I am now a Cura convertee btw), talking about using the nozzle width definition as a tuning parameter e.g. reducing or increasing (cannot recall which way around)your actually nozzle width to get finer detail on small prints. I did not understand precisely what would be going on if this were done.