Jump to content
Ultimaker Community of 3D Printing Experts

3dmaker4u

Dormant
  • Content Count

    102
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by 3dmaker4u

  1. I would recommend:

    - constant speed for any part of the print

    - slower speed

    - reduced acceleration

    - no retraction

    - greased Bowden

    The whole idea behind all the above is to have the filament being pushed though the Bowden as constant and soft as possible/acceptable.

     

  2. I used regular/cheapest filament they have for almost 2 years now. 1.75 mm. Neutral, gold, yellow, red, blue, green, silver, pink. There are some behavioral differences depending on color, but this is normal. Pretty consistent diameter, slightly lower: 1.70-1.72 mm. Simple and compact spool of 1 kg (I bought also some 2 kg spools). Works well at 250/110 Celsius (hotend/bed). Don't know where is produced, but I can guess is China.

    What else? :)

     

  3. ... So if your optimal print settings are say 210c at 40mm/s then if you print the first layer at 20mm/s you will get over extrusion, inevitable...

     

    Well, not really :) The fact that the plastic will ooze more at higher temperatures is one thing. On the other hand, while the printer is extruding (no matter which layer), the volume of the extruded plastic is controlled by any other parameters but temperature. It's true however that increasing the temperature can allow the plastic to slightly "expand" over expected shape and therefore producing an aspect similar to overextrusion.

     

  4. You can eventually use the bolt to create the nut in perhaps all 3D design programs (e.g. OpenSCAD, 123D Design, just to mention what I would recommend as an easy approach). It should be not so complicated too subtract the bolt from a hex prism of adequate size, and then scale it a bit on the XY plane, just to provide some play between the resulting nut and the bolt. Well, might not appear to be easy, but it's a way to solve the issue.

     

  5. How many topics of this kind users will have to open, and some of us to debate around?

    I think there are already 2-3 months since this issue has been reported. And in all situation it was about new printers.

    The same mysterious behavior that none of the experienced users could come to a solution.

    I would normally expect that UM people will post something about, at least something like "we are aware and do our best to come to a resolution, and we'll let you know about the outcome". But... :(

     

  6. Octoprint has no reason to know the height of the building volume. X and Y dimensions are eventually used for display purposes. The maximum travel on the axes should be normally solved by the machine itself, "hardware" (minim and/or maxim endstops) and/or software (firmware parameters).

    It is somehow dangerous and anyway confusing have the height configuration in the host software.The place for it is in the firmware, if not fully hardware implemented (with 2 endstops, one at each end of the axis).

     

  7. 1. I really appreciate the diagonal infill, but when it comes to debugging it would be much, much better to have the axes movement separated (i.e. 0 infill angle). It's easier to judge in one axis than in a square of two :) I suggested this once to Nicolinux, could we have the tests performed the same here.

    2. Extruding 0.5 mm trace width with a 0.4 mm nozzle at 0.2 mm layer height and 50 mm/s should not be such a big deal (for a printer that easily runs at 6-8 mm/s at nozzle width. Is the skipping philosophy implemented in UM really useful? I mean, does it pay all the issues with underextrusion for the very rare cases when the hobbed barrel may grind the filament? If we are looking back to the topics that were most debated and actually not completely solved, they all relate to the "ability" of the E motor to skip if it "seize" a... danger :)

     

  8. Just an issue that does not let me sleep :)

    It seems to me really peculiar to use at 240 C a material that is rated 190-210 C, even for workarounds. Actually I understand that 220-230 C are "normal" in UM world :)

    It also seems that UMs, in general, report higher temperatures than other printers. Could be more accurate readings, but that's the point, it means UM prints at considerable higher temperature.

    Why is that?

    I normally print ColofFabb PLA at 200 C for 40 mm/s, 0.4 mm layer width and 0.2 mm layer height (3.2 cmm/s) with no underextrusion. Hotend is either E3D v6 or a J-Head version.

     

  9. Yeap, ColorFabb PLA/PHA may require flow below 100%. I think this is because their very tight tolerances for the diameter. Most filaments have diameter below the standard. If you calibrate E with such a filament and then go to CF, then you will most probably over-extrude.

     

  10. Looks to me like over-extrusion. Since nothing changed, something had to have changed :)

    Since already checked for some possible causes, Could you also check:

    - the consistency of the filament diameter, and

    - that the hobbed barrel is clean?

     

  11. I cannot stay aside :)

    There is one clear difference between "blue" and "orange". While blue is equally spaced, meaning a well calibrated XY gantry, the orange shows signs of backlash or whatever causes the lines to come in couples. This is also visible on 0.1 mm print, but since the plastic is more squished, it almost look as normal, but it is not.

    I fully disagree that you cannot print traces that are larger than the hole diameter of the nozzle, except maybe if the nozzle is so sharp that there is very little metal around the hole so that extruding more plastic will make it curling around the nozzle tip, eventually leaving a space between traces. This definitely depends on the geometry of the nozzle tip, but I doubt that UM has no flat around the hole, at least some 0.1 mm that will allow for a 0.6 mm trace width anyway.

    Also, if the extruder could note cope with the actual extrusion rate the result will not be a trace of constant thickness for as long as the extrusion goes, but will start printing interrupted lines due to skipping steps.

    A constant width underextruded line could be produced only by a constantly insufficient extrusion rate.

    Since there is no proof in the Gcode that this happens, I cannot thing of anything else than the machine itself is... guilty.

    Assuming the mechanical calibration is correct concerning axes parameters (which has to be checked, not just admitting cannot be), the only other reason is the firmware. If the machine receives the instruction to extrude 1 mm3 to print a straight line 10 mm long, 0.5 mm wide and 0.2 mm high, but it is executing just 0.5 mm3, over the same distance, and at the same height, resulting in narrower 0.25 mm wide trace, how the helll this could happen if the "brain" of the machine is not somehow ill, 'cause the "body" is presumably healthy - forget about the backlash story for now :)

     

  12. My question is, if we cannot rely on microstepping on Z, why could we on X and Y.

    I accept that, in general, dimensions in X and Y are larger, hence the error is less significant.

    But the point is that everybody is calculating resolution taken into account microstepping as well.

    So, the 5 microns (perhaps 1/8 microstepping?) that UM2 specification claims on Z are reliable or not?

     

  13. Is this a new printer, I mean at most 6 month old?

    It appears to be the same behavior like that in the discussion here, and yet no resolution.

    Could you please slice a simple test "cube" (20x20x10 mm) and print it to be sure it exhibits the issue?

    Then post both the G-code and the configuration file (I don't know how this can be obtained in Cura, but should be a way).

    Of course, a picture would complete the... documents of the case.

     

×
×
  • Create New...