inventabuild

Hi Neotko, did you ever develop Neosanding 2.0 with splitting the perimeters and top fill processes and verifying that it works great as expected.

A few questions about ironing to make sure I'm not harming my nozzle: 1. If the Ironing feature in Cura is used to iron a large surface for a long period of time while the nozzle is held at printing temps, for example 1/2 hour or longer at 220C, is there a risk that the PLA will start to crystallize in the nozzle and affect its future performance? 2. Is the default ironing extrusion multiplier of 10% meant to help prevent PLA from crystallizing in the nozzle or to help smooth out the surface or both? 3. Would it be better to retract the filament out of the hot end while ironing to minimize the possibility of the PLA crystallizing in the hot end? Thank you.

It' been a while since I worked on a solution for my original post (2015?). The last solution I remember trying is to make sure the old nozzle is wiped good on a purge pillar that is generated by the slicer and printed using the two nozzles. I never finished fully testing this solution (see my current state below). I did not like having to deal with setting the x y offsets with test prints and leveling the two nozzles against each other in the z whenever I removed / swapped extruders / hot ends. There are now automated systems to handle this, but in 2015 my printer did not have this automation. If you can build a silicone wiper and bolt it off to the side where the previous nozzle can travel and be wiped that might be a good solution. At the time my printer didn't have enough space for this on the x-axis so I never got to try out this option. I'm currently using multi-color single nozzle designs which can have the drawback of printing large purge blocks to clean out the old color depending on the print of course. Some prints will have small purge blocks which makes it a good solution. I'm going to start purging the old color off the side of the bed and wipe w/ a silicone wiper bolted to my x-axis as the nozzle returns to the print to speed up this process and reduce filament waste. I'll have to see how much better this is from a time perspective vs printing the purge block needed w/ single nozzle designs and how it compares to the two nozzle option. I think the latest two nozzle Ultimaker solution is designed to eliminate previous nozzle ooze on a print by lifting it out of the way. This is probably the most elegant solution, but it's an expensive option for many like myself.

Nice work! What software did you use to design the font? Can you post the font somewhere for download?

Edited

Hello neotko, I get gaps in my little letters using 25% Outline Overlap. What % do you use to get rid of the gaps?

Cura can eliminate seams by implementing the following process:: At the beginning of an outer wall the nozzle could start slightly in the interior of the print as it moves to position itself to print the outer wall, then when the nozzle completes the outer wall it could move inwards (at an angle) slightly towards the interior of the print all of which would drastically reduce the very noticeable seams on the outer walls. Just implementing the starting or ending paths as mentioned above will make a huge difference. Here's an article that describes this in more detail at the paragraph entitled "Intelligent toolpath generation": https://mattshub.com/2017/07/19/layer-seams/ It must be possible to implement such seam eliminating tool paths without infringing on the Makerbot / Stratasys patent mentioned in the article as Slic3r is using something similar called "loop clipping" with great results for minimizing seams.

Your 2nd step "2nd Sanding" should have the same start, stop values and layer height as the last layer that was printed. For example if you're printing 10 layers at 0.10 layer height then your last (printed layer) start value = 0.9, stop value = 1.0 and layer height is 0.1 mm. Thus, your first sanding layer would have a start value of 0.9 and a stop value of 1.0 with a 0.1 mm layer height. This will allow the hot end to neosand off any jutting imperfections.

My understanding is that sanding s/b done at the same height as the just completed layer, so if 1st real print stops at 1.55, then first sanding should stop at 1.55 also. The reason I mention this is because for all of S3D's greatness, sometimes if things don't line up just right with multiple processes (like your example of a 0.05 mm gap between layers of step 1 (print) and step 2 (sand)), then S3D can get a little quirky on rare occasion. It might have nothing to do w/ your situation, but if all else fails it might be worth a shot.

Neosanding is nice when a matte finish is desired. When printing with PLA Is there a technique for making a shiny finish either with the toolhead or a secondary operation like wiping with wd40 or something else that will give a lasting shiny finish in neosanded areas?

neotko, Kudos to you for developing your neosanding techniques and processes for improving 3d print surfaces! It's not often a game changer is invented!!! You mention you print a fair amount of small text. Have you tried printing the text directly against the print surface with much success? I've been practicing this with mixed results. Sometimes I pull off a beautiful clean print with shiny text and sometimes I get stringing or a small (deposited) blob in the space between the letters. It seems these imperfections occur when traveling from one letter to the next. I can print string free and blob free on the surface of the part, but for some reason printing against the build plate presents these artifacts. My bed is level to within 0.1 mm across the glass and I'm using a 25 point auto bed leveling to ensure my nozzle knows where the surface is. It just seems that printing letters (12.7 mm or smaller) against the print surface presents me with a different dynamic than printing letters on top of the part. Any suggestions?

Cool, thanks for the info; however I'm a little confused as to why other slicers might perform worse with dual extrusion? 1. Can I use another slicer and still lift the unused head out of the way? 2. If I use the correct settings for prime, retract, travel speed etc in the other slicers can I expect good results assuming the other slicers are good slicers? 3. Can I just load the gcode from another slicer, including any required initial start gcode, into the Ultimaker 3 and hit print?

I'm using a skirt around the part which is 120x110 mm so the exruder is fully primed when it starts printing and the under extrusion happens when filling in other letters as well, but not all of them. In fact some O's get completely filled in and others have under extrusion. This is what is such a mystery to me and the reason why it seems Cura might be the reason for the under extrusion. Under extrusion does not happen with KISSlicer and Simplify3D when filling in the letters.

Is it possible to use a slicer other than Cura in the Ultimaker 3? I would like to buy an Ultimaker 3; however sometimes I get a better printed part with a different slicer, for example KISSlicer or Simplify3D, so I would like to be able to use those slicers as well. For example, here is a post I made showing Cura is under extruding in small areas of some text I'm printing: https://ultimaker.com/en/community/50035-cura-under-extruding?page=last KISSlicer and Simplify3D print the letters perfectly so if I buy an Ultimaker 3 I will not be able to print this part if I'm locked into using Cura; hence the reason I would like to be able to use a slicer other than Cura with the Ultimaker 3. One of the vendors selling the Ultimaker 3 told me I'm locked into using Cura. I'm hoping someone here can tell me otherwise. Please advise.

This is definitely a problem with Cura 2.6 under extruding in some small spaces like the center of the "O". It also happens in the center of "B". The weird thing is that it doesn't happen in all small spaces, just some of them. Does anyone know if earlier versions work better for small spaces or if there is a special setting to deal w/ the issue? Is anyone else printing text size 9.5 mm and having problems (or success)?

Thank you for the information. I think the problem is that I was installing Cura on my D drive. I installed it on my C drive and now I see Cura. exe

Please let me know if anyone has any suggestions for why Cura is under extruding in the middle of the "O" in the word "You". You can actually see through to the tan table in parts of the middle of the "O". This is after two layers of printing. Coast is turned off. Here's Cura's slicer view showing that Cura does want to print a solid in the center of the "O", but as shown above for some reason Cura is under extruding there. Any help is appreciated.

Thanks, I'm running dual extruders and I want both extruders set to nozzle wiping temperatures (160C for PLA), not print temperatures, because I wipe the nozzles right before I run the auto bed leveling code. It would be nice for Cura to have a checkbox to run Startcode before everything. As is stands now, I have to go into the gcode and delete the nozzle printing temperatures that Cura sets (200) and use my startcode to set the nozzle wiping temps (160C) and the printing (200C ext0) / keep warm (150C ext1) temps.

How do I run the Start G Code before Cura starts heating up the bed and the extruders when I start a print?

That was the original reason for my question. Can you please confirm that you see the Cura.exe file in the Cura folder.

On a Windows computer I could not find the Cura.exe file in the Cura folder.

Where is the equivalent of a Cura exe file located and what is it's name if I don't want to use a shortcut to open Cura?

Can you post a picture of one of your polished prints?

It would be nice if someone developed a way to dry the filament as it's feeding into / through the Bowden tube essentially drying it in real time...I may start thinking about it if no one else developed anything viable.