Jump to content

zumfab

Dormant
  • Posts

    238
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by zumfab

  1. A feature I would very much like to see return is the progress showing in the task bar. Before, in Cura 14.01, I could see how far the print was coming along by looking at the task bar. Now I need to open the printer window dialog to see progress.
  2. I seem to have some trouble bridging. The first few layers are simply empty, the printer typically builds a little more of the bridge with every pass. This is much different than what I understand from others should happen, in that the printer should be laying a full string the first pass. Right? Even in a short span (5 mm) there seems to be little proper bridging going on. I am not sure how to fix this. When I look at I feel they are nothing like what I am seeing. Come to think of it, that is probably why I have had some trouble printing proper top surfaces when the shell is too thin.
  3. Thanks for the info. I will try these numbers and report back. What most people do is print everything twice. After printing it the first time measure all the dimensions and if a side is off by say .3mm then change the dimension of that side by .3mm to compensate. Wouldn't you also have to do that by percentage? If you add 3 mm to something that is obviously not calibrated correctly you still do not know what you end up with, although the error should reduce every time you do this. Up to a certain point where other inaccuracies take the overhand.
  4. That's funny, I would say the opposite - the reduced resistance on the drive train should reduce strain in the motors. Of course, the rapid change of direction is also less dampened, but I feel those effects should be minor compared to what the motors need to fight in a regular setup. Any flex in the couplings also seems a bad thing, as play also means loss of accuracy. Maybe removing all that flex proves to be too much as forces are more concentrated, but remember that the gantry is never directly attached - there are always rubber belts dampening the movement ever so slightly.
  5. I get that However, this does not detract from the fact that you are just trying to fix two parts together. The flex joint is not needed as an integral part of the design like the motor or the axis, it is just there to compensate for the lack of accuracy when aligning the parts. If you could either eliminate the potential misaligment in a cheap way or mitigate the problems caused by any wobble through a motor mount you could remove the coupling. I do like the pancake steppers, but their holding torque seems not up to par, unsurprisingly. Maybe not the most relevant for the gantry steppers, but less than ideal when looking at performance upgrades.
  6. Solidworks does seem to run on older hardware, but things like rebuild time are going to suffer. In more complex parts or assemblies this is going to be notable. Good single thread performance is going to make life a bit easier there, but that does not necessarily mean you have to get a top of the line i7. I have seen Solidworks being run on really old hardware and that seemed to work out decently until largish assemblies came into play. It is a complex program though, so if you can avoid old hardware it would probably be best. Compared to the price of the software hardware is not that expensive. Let me guess, a SSD with a Sandforce controller, not unlikely one from OCZ? Those numbers are highly inflated, as they come from benchmark tests under ideal conditions writing strictly perfectly compressible data to the drive in the form of zeros. Consumers fall for those in droves, but the truth is those drives perform no better than other popular options. Especially the Vertex 2 and 3 seem to have some reliability issues. Making backups is always a good idea, but even more so if you own either of those series. I case of a PCIe slot in drive I said nothing
  7. My main gripe with this upgrade is the extra space it takes and the vulnerability of the motors of the outside of the frame. Going right back to the start the options are limited however. Using gears or cogs would mean other problems, just replacing one issue with another. Placing the motor somewhere between the ends of the axis rod is also not possible. That pretty much leaves putting the motor on the end of them, which is exactly what people are already doing. It does seem however that about half of the extra space needed is used up by the coupling. Not really a part that you explicitly need or want - it just happens to be used to fix two parts you do need together. If it were possible to come up with a solution that fixes the motor right to the frame that would not introduce additional slop or backlash, possibly with rubber dampening in between the motor and frame to lessen noise, I think the biggest problem would be fixed. Add an appropriately designed bracket to shield the motor from any bumps and you have all the benefits and barely any drawbacks.
  8. As I look at GT2 pulleys the prices of the pulleys discussed here are not even that much higher, though I have not looked around extensively. With a concurrent direct drive upgrade the cost can be limited as only 8 pulleys are needed. That just leaves that I find it hard to judge just how much of an impact this upgrade should make. I did notice soms nonlinear resistance when moving the printing head manually and I feel this could be caused by the pulleys. No clue how much of an impact this has on printing quality.
  9. The reason I am asking is that I printed some Lego compatible blocks. When simply using the default Lego dimensions it does seem to work, but the block seems a little smaller and the fit is not optimal. The difference is small though, so I was wondering whether this is due to shrink or other inaccuracies. Most prints tend to end up slightly smaller than intended, but despite attempting to make sense of it with calibration objects designed for that purpose it seems hard to get a common denominator or simple factor. I am sure I am not the first to meddle with this though. I have had my share of warping shrink too, but I am slowly but surely getting a grip on that. In my mind those are two somewhat different matters
  10. PLA shrinks a little less than ABS, but as is visible when corners on a print lift, it does shrink. Is this something you can take into account and, if so, how do you do that? Is it a matter of simply scaling your model or is it something a little more complicated - and what factor should that be? I have been searching around for technical data with some more or less exact numbers, but so far I have not been able to turn anything definite up. I understand different blends and brands have different numbers, but there should probably be at least a range. I would love to hear your input
  11. Why do I get a sense that most of these websites do not know what they are talking about? Stating things like You'll also need a high end graphics card, particularly if you are doing renderings. raises doubts whether they are knowledgeable. Solidworks is a program that mainly loads the CPU - a single thread when doing normal work and more threads when simulating. This goes even more for rendering, which is a strict CPU matter. Having an anaemic GPU might hurt work performance, but with the power of even modern IGP's, that can rarely be a real problem any more. Performance problems are pretty much always going to be due to a lack of CPU power, or else enough RAM. Only when rendering with third party software like Octane Render you need a beefy GPU, but when using other software like Keyshot you could also do with just a CPU.
  12. Why are you guys all cooling the motors with heatsinks? They do not seem to need extra cooling in the original setup and are even better cooled outside of the Ultimaker.
  13. Are they supplied with belts, or do you need to buy those seperately? It seems an intersting upgrade. I understand why the pulleys cost what they do, bu the price is somewhat prohibitive.
×
×
  • Create New...