Jump to content

undeviljur

Dormant
  • Content Count

    17
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. Yesterday my brother and I spend the whole day figuring out how to compare the changes made in firmware on github, compiling them and localizing which change causes my problem. After flashing a lot of firmwares (and printing a lot of those test pieces) we found the commit that causes the problem: The date of this commit is: Apr 18, 2014 Committed by Daid Change text: Fix compiling with PIDTEMPBED disabled. Number: f1ec4aa9ad500ce98c206ea0fb8aab05e49ebce7 Link: https://github.com/Ultimaker/Ultimaker2Marlin/commit/f1ec4aa9ad500ce98c206ea0fb8aab05e49ebce7 Although we don't really know what this change does, we managed to recompile firmware 14.09 with the change rolled back. Now the surface quality with our recompiled 14.09 firmware is the same as with firmware 14.03. In file Marlin/Configuration.h we changed line number 218 back to the previous state, defining PIDTEMPBED which enables PID on the bed according to the comment. I'm not sure what this means exactly, so any insight on this would be helpful. The section of code which we changed: Marlin/Configuration.h:208-220 // Bed Temperature Control // Select PID or bang-bang with PIDTEMPBED. If bang-bang, BED_LIMIT_SWITCHING will enable hysteresis // // Uncomment this to enable PID on the bed. It uses the same frequency PWM as the extruder. // If your PID_dT above is the default, and correct for your hardware/configuration, that means 7.689Hz, // which is fine for driving a square wave into a resistive load and does not significantly impact you FET heating. // This also works fine on a Fotek SSR-10DA Solid State Relay into a 250W heater. // If your configuration is significantly different than this and you don't understand the issues involved, you probably // shouldn't use bed PID until someone else verifies your hardware works. // If this is enabled, find your own PID constants below. #define PIDTEMPBED //<<Uncommented line 218 again. // //#define BED_LIMIT_SWITCHING
  2. So i have tried the cura 14.10_RC5 firmware. (before i did a factory reset and changes no settings but the print temp) In the picture you can see that it did not solve my problem. I really like to use the new and improved features in newer firmware versions. But for now in going back to firmware 14.03 :( If someone is willing to do the same test, to see if this problem only occurs on my machine or not, I would be helped alot. .gcode file: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/22756276/test%20print%20v2.gcode
  3. Hey, Daid Thx for you reaction. This weekend I will test cura 14.10_RC5 to see if it helps me with this problem. I'll post te results here afterwards.
  4. I just did another factory reset, then flashed latest firmware (14.09) for me the problem is still there. to test it this time i made a print on 14.03 than flashed 14.09 and print that same .gcode file with the exact same settings and conditions. Can someone plz try the same and tell me if you are having the same experience? .gcode file: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/22756276/test%20print%20v2.gcode%C2%A0(same%20as%20used%20before%20in%20this%20topic) Edit: I made an error in naming the firmware that gave the good result. (14.07 changed to 14.03)
  5. Thx for tip. But I'm printing a lot lately on the older firmware (14.03) and not once i had the bad surface quality that like the 14.07 firmware produces.
  6. have you had time to make a better picture? I'm really curious to know what results of your blind test are going to be.
  7. your photo is not very good. but i think the two on the right are 14.06 and the two on the left are 14.03 But a better photo (of photo's) will be appreciated. I only tested with 14.03 and 14.07. So I'm curious why you chose to use 14.06?
  8. Hey gr5, I am really sorry that you think i don't work hard while asking help. I will try to do better. But if you look at my first post, you will see an album. with 3 photo's. That are the 3 gcode files that I posted later. The second photo will match with the "07dustfilter fork v2.gcode" file. After i read this, I opened the "07dustfilter fork v2.gcode" file in cure to look for myself. I see a pattern in the Z axis. But i see this pattern in all my gcode files (If i save them and then reopen them in cura). While slicing the part and looking a the layers it does not show this pattern.
  9. The part: "07dustfilter fork v2" gave the biggest difference in surface kwality. But it's also the biggest part. Here is the link again: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/22756276/07dustfilter%20fork%20v2.gcode
  10. here are the 3 gcode files i used. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/22756276/Test%20print%20v1.gcode https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/22756276/test%20print%20v2.gcode https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/22756276/07dustfilter%20fork%20v2.gcode
  11. Nope. the exact same settings and conditions.
  12. I did not use 14.06 because of the filament grinding problem.
  13. Sorry i mixed up left and right because some of the images ware upside down. I have corrected it.
  14. Oke I tried that. but the results are still the same. 14.07 is causing a less good surface.
×
×
  • 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!