Anders Olsson
-
Posts
252 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Forums
Events
3D Prints
Posts posted by Anders Olsson
-
-
Nice work! :smile:
It was something like that I had in mind when I wrote "magnetic kinematic mount" in the custom heater block thread.
We use Thorlabs kinematic mounts at work, you can have a look at how those are designed if you consider making a metal version: https://www.thorlabs.com/newgrouppage9.cfm?objectgroup_id=1546&pn=KB75/M
Using three ball bearing balls and steel rods like on the Thorlabs mounts makes it both very precise and durable.
There are many interesting possibilities that appear if you can switch heads like that.
For example you might be able to change filament in the parked head while the other one is printing. Or use more than two heads if they are compact.
With a more complex software you could even think of changing from extruding to machining tools, but the software for doing that probably will not be available anytime soon.
-
Thank you for your efforts comparing the printers opit78!
I would say that your last Ultimaker robot is about as good as it gets with the UM2.
For my projects, the print quality of my UM2 has been significantly better than what I really need, but it is still interesting to see that the Flashforge obviously can perform even better.
Do you get the same printing times for a certain object in both printers? (if you print at the same speed, layer height, wall thickness and infill level)
I was thinking, the light weight head of the UM2 is one of the marketing points, but is the Flashforge significantly slower at infill at narrow sections? For example if you print the torque wrench housing with 100% infill and 0.8 mm walls: https://www.youmagine.com/designs/nozzle-torque-wrench
A dual extrusion test would also be highly interesting, as I mentioned before.
-
The torque can be set reasonably well within a limited range by changing the number of springs.
However, as UltiArjans measurement showed, the torque varies with the type of plastic.
For the current model it will be between about 0.25-0.4Nm (ABS lowest, PLA highest), which is perfectly fine for the nozzle.
If you print it yourself using the same printer, settings and plastic I think you can get within 10% or so.
For high torque versions I would recommend the version with a hex hole instead of the square pin, as the pin is what is going to break first.
You could of course design a larger version for much higher torque, that is one of the things on my list of things to try, but it did not happen yet.
-
Is there a solution to this problem? Yes. Obviously there is. There are quite a few things that we haven't tried, because they would require a fundamental redesign of what is out there (Nozzle lifting, leaving one of the nozzles in the corner, etc). This is simply not feasible as an upgrade kit.
If one would come up with a simple and reliable nozzle lift+valve function, would that solve the main issues with dual extrusion?
Or are there other major problems like nozzle alignment, leveling, software constraints and similar that will still make dual extrusion a pain to work with?
-
1 x 0.3 x 55 x 1,2 = 19,8 mm3/s
the 19,8 is no problem at all , I'm sure you can speed it up more with no problem...
You are pushing it way more than I dared to try so far, impressive that it works that well! :smile:
I did actually test all threads on all the heater blocks before shipping, but as I said these blocks should be considered as a test batch.
The next batch will have the position of the holes corrected to require less torque on the sensor/heater screw and will hopefully have more of a mass production finish.
But you have to wait a bit longer to get one of those of course :smile:
I should have finished that hex hole version of the torque wrench by the way, but I did not have a chance to do that yet.
-
Another thing to keep in mind regarding the spacer is that Ultimaker is still trying to improve that part.
At this point it might not make sense for them to track down all UM2 owners and manufacture and send thousands of spacers of the current type, in case there is a more promising material being tested right now.
-
Nice :smile:
I was planning to make a video about how to install the heater block, but I did not have a chance to do that yet.
It seems like those of you who got the block so far managed to install it without any instructions though (or you found my previous post about it? http://umforum.ultimaker.com/index.php?/topic/7689-custom-heater-block-to-fit-e3d-nozzle-on-ultimaker-2/?p=89581) )
Anyway, I updated the first post in this thread with some crucial information for easier access and for newcomers not to have to read through all 10 pages.
-
The first thing I notice is that Cura 14.03 generates two decimals while 14.12.1 generates three.
Two decimals should more or less be enough, since the UM2 has an X-Y positioning accuracy of 12 micrometers and the second digit represents 10 micrometers.
I am not sure how the UM2 interprets the third decimal, but if simply ignores it, positioning accuracy will suffer since the third decimal was then not properly rounded off to the second decimal.
So if Cura rounds of the numbers properly in both 14.03 and 14.12.1 but the UM2 ignores the last digit in the 14.12.1, I could see potential for decreased surface quality.
-
Compact and lightweight extruder modules which are detachable from the printhead. Only one at a time is picked up for printing. No oozing over the print no unused nozzles nocking down something. "Just" use some printing space for a tool magazine and implement the mechanics and firmware for a locking/unlocking mechanism.
You could do that fairly easily with a magnetic kinematic mount for the extruder modules and a Cura addon lo change module.
It is a bit tempting to try now when I think about it :smile:
I guess it should be discussed in another thread though.
-
It really seems customs are a bit too curious about those heater blocks.
They have spent an awful lot of time in delivery so far.
I hope things are sorted out so you can get them delivered soon.
Regarding Saab Automobile I actually spend quite some time and effort reverse engineering the APC-system for the early turbo models many years ago. There is still a pinned thread at the Swedish Saabturboclub-forum about that project :smile:
I think the engineers at Saab used to have too much power, which suddenly changed into the economic people having too much power when GM bought it. Neither of those situations were good for the sales.
When it comes to my heater block design, it was not that difficult to design it with all those constraints. There are simply not many ways you can design it, it was more a matter of getting it done.
Dual extrusion is a completely different challenge and may require design solutions that I have not seen yet in order to work really well.
If it has moving parts it has to be both reliable and accurate and at the same time one should try to minimize the number of components needed.
I hope that many more than me are trying to solve this problems, because we need new innovative ideas for this one I believe.
-
I think the problem is partly in the conversion from CAD to STL-file.
You loose resolution as you end up with a number of flat surfaces instead of one curved surface.
Cura interprets this as a large number of straight sections with varying wall thickness.
Due to the loss in resolution in the STL-conversion wall ends up a bit thicker than 0.8 mm every now and then.
The easy way to fix this is to design a solid vase instead and use Cura to create the walls.
Just load your solid vase in Cura, select 0.8 mm wall thickness, 0% infill and uncheck the "Solid infill top" under the "..."-button.
-
Thank you for the photos and the video!
Flashforge Creator Pro seems impressive, I have to say.
I have also had better Ultimaker robots than your UM did this time, but it is certainly not easy to get them that much better I think.
In my opinion, the Ultimaker robot is a good example of the disadvantage of having the feeder far away from the hotend.
When switching between infill and walls, or retracting, there is a bit more delay before the plastic flow settles at the new speed.
The impact this has becomes quite remarkable when you print something with thick walls,100% infill and no retraction, like this one for example: https://www.youmagine.com/designs/nozzle-torque-wrench
The torque wrench in the photo was printed with 0.15 mm layers compared to the default setting of 0.1 for the Ultimaker robot at the SD card.
I used some really cheap Chinese ABS and just printed at default settings.
Still, the surface and detail of that kind of object is way better than of an average Ultimaker robot printed by my UM2.
If you print something using both extruders I am very interested in pictures!
-
You just have to modify line 174 and/or 175:
#define MAX_HEATING_TEMPERATURE_INCREASE 10
#define MAX_HEATING_CHECK_MILLIS (30 * 1000)
The first line is the minimum temperature increase in degrees and the second line is the time in milliseconds.
Compiling the firmware is not that difficult, but you need the right version of the arduino environment installed, some settings done the right way and so on. There should be an instruction somewhere on the forum.
I did compile my own firmware when the first version of the sensor detection code was released and it turned it was a bit sensitive for my heater block.
The sensitivity has been decreased since though, from 20 degrees in 20 seconds to 10 degrees in 30 seconds, which is quite a difference.
So I would probably try with the latest firmware and make sure the sensor is properly fitted before modifying the firmware.
-
One thing I have noticed -pretty quickly- with the 0.8mm nozzle is that I'm having to tweak my cooling fan speeds especially when printing at 0.6mm layer heights, as the extruded material retains it's heat for much longer staying soft, than the stock 0.4mm nozzle produced at 0.2mm heights. Hardly surprising really.... but something I hadn't factored in at the time. I am so, so loving this block!
At what speed did you print 0.6 mm layers? (If 50 mm/s, we are talking about some serious extrusion rates :smile: )
I played a bit with the thermal camera last time used the 0.8 nozzle and just as you say, the plastic cools much slower when printing thick.
It seems that layer adhesion is better with ABS too, so for large structures that has to take some load I really recommend going for the 0.8 nozzle and thick layers.
Another thing that is quite interesting is that at 10mm3/s you can empty a 750g spool of filament in less than 24 hours. :smile:
Oh and it's not just costumers that are interested in what people cook up in their basement. If you have something that works well, don't hestitate to gloat in our face when you show it to us
There should be a heater block V1.2 and a few nozzles somewhere in the Ultimaker HQ.
So if you want to play this too, go find it! :smile:
-
When Anderss say's "80% difference" he means e3d nozzle should have 80% as much pressure needed at a given speed versus the original nozzle. That is really more like a 20% difference.
Thanks, edited my previous post so it is easier to understand :smile:
-
Here is another more extensive comparison :smile:
The Ultimaker Original nozzle should fit the custom heater block, as I mentioned, in case you want to run comparisons.
I also mentioned before that there are rumors that Deltatower nozzles, which looks very similar to E3D-nozzles, have an different internal design: http://shop.deltatower.ch/Extruder-und-Hotends/0-4mm-nozzle-with-M6-thread::206.html
Would be interesting if someone bought and tested one of those.
You could actually even fit the Makerbot nozzles :???: :smile:
I would recommend turning down 1.5 mm of the hex grip to 5 mm diameter if you try though, for the sealing surface to reach the seat inside the heater block.
The Makerbot nozzles are smaller inside too (2.38 vs 3.2 mm), so it probably does not work that well unless you use 1.75 mm filament or drill the first 10 mm of the nozzle to 3.2 mm.
I designed the heater block to be as flexible as the design constraints allowed and I had in mind to test several nozzles including the Delta tower and the Ultimaker Original.
This did not really happen yet though as E3D nozzles appears to work just fine for what I do and as I had other things to keep me busy.
I encourage you to test other nozzles though, I am as curious as many of you probably are about if there are any differences in printing quality!
Just remember to level the bed when you change nozzle! (yes, i mentioned it before, but it is worth mentioning again :smile: )
-
1
-
-
The 0.4 mm hole is actually 1 mm long on the UM2 and 0.8 mm long on E3D.
So
80%20% difference as gr5 mentioned was quite accurate :smile:However, the internal shape is quite different too (left is E3D, right is UM2):
-
The software already supports dual extrusion, as the UMO does have an (experimental) dual extrusion kit. Removing it would mean that those people can't use their product anymore.
That being said; the new version of cura will actually make it more easy to code (and maintain) aditions like multiple nozzles. So even if we would no longer support it, it wouldn't be that hard for anyone in the comunity to pick it up.
Ok, that's good news, thank you for your reply!
That means I hereby accept the challenge to invent a properly working dual extrusion for the UM2 :smile:
From the information so far it seems like Ultimaker did not consider nozzle lift systems or changed heater block/nozzle design to be an option?
In that case I think the chances of getting flawless dual extrusion appears slim in my opinion.
May I ask if the dual extrusion design limitations are due to the CE-approval rather than due to technical difficulties?
Anyway, I have some ideas, but it will take a while, and I hope more people see this as a challenge rather than a disappointment.
That video of the water cooled dual head was interesting, but videos of dual color printing would kind of be necessary to determine if that is a way forward.
I imagine that a much more simple nozzle lift system, working a bit differently, might work better actually.
-
Crap, that was exactly what I suspected would happen. :sad:
I really need that dual extrusion, a well working one, for lab projects.
In fact it dual extrusion was one reason I bought the Ultimaker 2, as I probably mentioned before.
Anyway, not much to do about it it I guess.
I have one important question though:
- Does this mean that future software will not support UM2 dual extrusion, not even for experimental purposes?
In that case I will just have to give up my ideas on how to solve the nozzle valve/lift system for the UM2 and go for another brand.
If you keep supporting software options to use the UM2 in experimental mode for dual extrusion though, I will continue working on this, since my boss is willing to pay for some workshop time for testing my ideas.
-
The melt zone on my custom heater block is about 4 mm longer than on the original heater block.
I have been using various iterations of the custom heater block for four months and about 500 hours now and what I can say is:
- I basically use the same settings as I did for the original heater block and I can not notice any major differences.
- It appears like the custom heater block can sometimes tolerate a bit lower printing temperatures, like 5-10 degrees, but it is nothing that I use.
- When pushing it, I mean far beyond what you would do with a 0.4 mm nozzle for normal printing, it seems the custom heater block can tolerate a bit higher extrusion rates.
All things above are consistent with the longer melt zone I would say.
The mass of my custom heater block including one 0.4 mm nozzle is about 40% higher than the original heater block.
This makes heating it up slightly slower, and potentially makes the temperature a bit more stable, but should not have any other effects. (As Daid reduced the sensitivity of the sensor monitoring function a lot lately)
I am probably not going to put more effort on calculations and measurements on the custom heater block, since the ones I have been using so far basically works as good as or better than the original heater block.
For the nozzle design, I encourage people to test different nozzles and report back their findings! :smile: (Just remember to level the buildplate when you change nozzle!)
There seems to be almost as many nozzle designs as there are printer models, all slightly different. Some probably can tolerate a bit higher flow, others have better oozing properties, and so on.
Which is better on what is quite difficult to get any information about though.
I agree with previous replies that the teflon spacer is the main thing to focus on when it comes to underextrusion issues.
-
I have been using a Trinamic motor with integrated driver for a science project, and as you say it gets extremely smooth and silent at 256 microsteps.
However, another option that I have been tempted to try is five phase stepper motors: http://www.orientalmotor.com/technology/articles/2phase-v-5phase.html
Those are more rare and more expensive and I am not sure if there are compatible driver boards for the arduino.
Five phase steppers are incredibly smooth and silent though and should still potentially have both better performance and higher resolution.
We use these a lot on scientific instruments, so I have certainly seen what they can do.
-
Would you mind posting some photos and videos of objects printed with the Flashforge, like the Ultimaker robot or some other reference model?
Photos/videos of a more complex dual head print would also be hightly interesting!
We are looking for a printer that can create flawless dual heat prints preferably at decent speed and with at least with UM2 quality for scientific projects at work, that is why I am curious.
-
Whether you can save that teflon coupler or not depends on if it is deformed on the inside or not.
If it is just that burnt edge, you can probably get it back in working condition with a 3.3 mm drill bit.
Under certain conditions the teflon couplers deform though, which makes them unusable (for PLA at least).
Check korneels photo of how a badly deformed coupler looks when cut in half and try to determine if yours looks the same way inside: http://umforum.ultimaker.com/index.php?/gallery/image/11465-wp-20150107-014/
-
I think swordriff is just about to ship them, if he did not already do it.
Shipping the heater blocks from Sweden to Norway took one week (!) for some reason this time, that is why you have to wait a bit, sorry for that.
I need to catch a plane at 6 AM, so I hope swordriff can sort things out.
Custom heater block to fit E3D nozzle on Ultimaker 2 ("The Olsson Block")
in Third party products & modifications
Posted
I change the nozzles at full temperature too, just like swordriff.
It is quite convenient to use the "move material"-function when changing nozzle, since you can continue priming the new nozzle immediately, not having to go through the menus again.
You don't have to use the atomic pull to clean the nozzle before changing. I did it the first few times but lately I just change the nozzle and move material for some time to get rid of the remains of previous filaments.
I normally insert the nozzle and quickly turn it a few turns with my fingers, let it heat up a few seconds and then I use the tool to tighten it.
I haven't had a single leak in the four months I have been using this heater block.
That does not mean it can not leak of course, but I would be surprised if leaks turn out to be a common problem.