krys

Well, I have not even got to playing with my 0.25 nozzle yet, and I have a 0.15 to play with, so a tree frog is in my future, but I think I will see what I can get out of my UM2+ feeder before I go blowing a bunch more money. (Though that matchless nozzle looks sexy!) Thanks again for the thoughtful insights.

Oh! I did not know that. Thanks for the details! Heh, Noe and Pedro do seem to do a lot of that!

Hi avogra, Thanks the insights! It is a good point about flexible materials. I have not yet tested them on the UM2+ feeder. I have original Ninjaflex and super soft Filaflex (and even PCTPE) to test. With my old Robert's feeder setup I could do them all, slowly, no problem. With the new feeder, as you say, it seems it can work too. But I have not yet tested it. I am wondering about an auto-oiler for the new feeder like I had with Robert's feeder. But you are suggesting that the Bondtech feeder might do flexible filaments better/faster. That is interesting. I guess I will have to see if my UM2+ is good enough, or if it is fixable, or if it is too annoying to live. Thanks very much!

Hi eldrick, Thanks for the feedback! So, are you suggesting finer layer heights (0.03, 0.02, etc.)? Or finer resolution for unusual layer heights (0.043, 0.046, etc.)? ... Or are you just suggesting the print surfaces will be nicer because the extruder can more precisely match whatever feed rate is requested?

Hi gr5, Thanks for the feedback. I do already have an acrylic front plate, and I have been recently working on top covers. I found a couple cardboard boxes that fit very well (one from my new Siglent function generator and one from Amazon). They definitely help with ABS, so I assume they will with PC too. I also just (yesterday) found a plastic box (for storing papers) that fits really exceptionally well too, and is more sealed, so I am going to play with that. I did not think about preheating and letting it sit for a bit, though. That is a great idea! So, thanks very much!

Hi gr5, Thanks for the insights. That is exactly the kind of info I was looking for. So, you are suggesting that the Bondtech is quite a bit stronger, but if I am not looking to push speed over quality, then my UM2+ feeder is perfectly fine. But if I want to go whole hog on speed, then the Bondtech feeder is yummy. Is that correct? Thanks again!

I just found this: https://ultimaker.com/en/community/19984-bond-tech-versus-the-new-designed-um2-feeder Not sure how I missed it before. But reading it all, despite it's title, there is no actual comparison with the UM2+ feeder. In case anyone else is wondering.

I have not done this myself, but the 3D printing guys over at Adafruit.com have a tutorial for converting a UM2 to 1.75mm. https://learn.adafruit.com/using-1-dot-75mm-filament-on-ultimaker-2/overview I have no idea if it makes life easier or harder, but they seem to like it. I find it easier just to stick with 2.85mm. I have run into any limits on my filament choices, that's for sure! Anyway, hope it helps. YMMV. Good luck.

The latest Tinkerware has that issue fixed, it seems.

Another thought: I've never used Pronterface, but maybe it has the capability? People seem to use it to look in detail at the layer by layer tool paths, so I thought maybe it might. just a thought.

Hi Labern, Thanks for your insights! Wisdom from the master! So, versus the original, yours is better enough to be worth it. Versus the upgrade, the improvement would be marginal, and metal is more reliable. I was considering printing yours in polycarbonate, like I did last time, if it was worth it, since it worked so well. But if there is not much improvement, and I plan on printing more in polycarbonate for other stuff, then sticking with the metal one might be the wiser idea. Thanks very much for sharing! And thanks for the shroud! If anyone else has additional insights, I would love to hear them too.

Hi olebor, Thanks for your insights. It's really appreciated. I have found that in practice, the UM2+ extruder does not slip or give under-extrusions, at least not yet in my usage. It really is significantly different and better than the original. It is a different stepper motor, is, as you say, geared which gives it more torque, and uses gear teeth instead of a knurled bolt for biting into the filament. Now that said, I have not yet done speed tests. And the Bondtech design might be even better, despite the UM2+ improvements. So that could be a reason to upgrade when/if I want to push my machine even further. But I still wonder if anyone has directly tested both? Are they actually reasonable equivalent in real practice? Is once actually significantly better than the other? Thanks again!

Hi folks, With my UM2, I was using Labern's fan shroud and liked it very much. When I upgraded with the Extruder Upgrade Kit, I have been using the new UM2+ fan shroud and it seems to work decently too. So, I was wondering: Which one is better? Is there even any significant difference that would make me choose one over the other (other than metal is better than plastic)? I guess a related question is are there any newer designs that I missed that seem better than Labern's or the UM2+ shrouds? I am not asking another "which fan shroud is best" question. I get that everyone has their favourites. I am just wondering about specific comparisons between Labern's and the UM2+ shrouds. Anyway, any thoughts/insights would be much appreciated. Thanks!

Hi there, I have am UM2+ with an I2K and TinkerGnome firmware. I am playing with polycarbonate filament. Not Polymaker, not PC-ABS, the plain old classic polycarb. This means I am struggling with bed adhesion and warping. I've done searching in the forum and looked on reprap.org, but I would like to know: Does anyone have a "one true ultimate super duper solution" to polycarbonate bed adhesion and warping? Or even something that mostly works? Should I just go with Buildtak or Wolfbite, or is there something better/cheaper/easier? I am currently hovering around the settings of 300 C head, 120 C bed, ABS juice and brim, Cura 2.x Normal profile, but I am still not getting things to work completely. So, any settings suggestions are welcome also. Basically I am looking to solve PC once and for all on the UM2(+). I am even willing to write up the results so everyone can benefit. Any thoughts/insights would be much appreciated. Thanks so much!

Hi folks, I have recently upgraded my UM2 to a UM2+. So far I like the new feeder and everything seems to work. I see many people raving about the Bondtech feeder, however. So I wonder: Has anyone compared them head to head? Would it be worth getting the Bondtech, given I have the UM2+ feeder already? Why is the Bondtech so yummy? If anyone has thoughts/insights on this, I would appreciate hearing about it. Thanks very much!

Hi there, A not fun option would be to use layer view and then Print Screen each layer by hand. But maybe that is obvious and you were hoping to avoid that. Anyway, hope this helps.

Hi there, Generally slower printing produces better results, but the is a limit. It is possible to go too slow. The speed also depends on the material used. For PLA and most other common material, 50mm/s is good and 30mm/s is the most common slower speed I have seen used by others. For weird filaments like Ninjaflex, Woodfil, etc. the optimal speeds and any slower speeds can/will be very different. Temperature too can affect printing speed. To me, 15mm/s for PLA seems *very* slow. I suspect you will get diminishing returns below 20mm/s. But that is just my impression. YMMV. Conversely, printing faster than 50mm/s can give good results too, depending on how well you have calibrated your printer and the part you are printing. (and the material too, of course). Anyway, hope this helps. Do some experimenting and see what happens.

I disagree. Clearly aliens have invaded LePaul's printer.

I read, I think in the tool tip, that the Z distance is rounded up to the nearest multiple of layer height. So, with 0.2mm layers, 0.15 distance would get rounded to 0.2 anyway. So, I am not sure it would make a difference. Give it a try though! Though, I think I would attempt 0.3mm as a test first. Also, I just remembered another unrelated but helpful tip I learned a while back. When testing, use just a small section of your model to cut down on time and plastic. Just thought that might help too. Good luck!

Hi there, I have been playing a bit lately with the new supports, though not extensively. I have noticed 2 things that might help: 1) Keeping Zig Zag, there is an option to add a roof to the supports. This uses more plastic, but I found it helps quite a bit with removing the supports and keeping a decent surface quality. 2) Without the roof, when removing the Zig Zag supports, I have had some success with pre-cutting any joining bits that are not part of the zig zag pattern (i.e. the first layer grid pattern), and then pulling the support off horizontally, like stretching the zig zags like a spring. This has given me a cleaner surface, though not perfect. I hope I am explaining that last part clearly enough. Finally, maybe try increasing the Z spacing of the supports to 2 or 3 layers to reduce bonding? That might negatively affect surface quality a bit, but it might also be better than fighting strongly bonded supports. Just thought. Anyway, hope this helps.

PolyMaker has their PC-Plus polycarbonate. It does, or used to ship with Buildtak included. So, I think Buildtak can work well for polycarbonate. I have not tried it myself yet though.

For example, on my UM2/2+, I have printed in PLA, PLA/PHA, ABS, T-Glase, XT, Nylon (Bridge), NinjaFlex, SemiFlex, FilaFlex, WoodFill, Lay-Brick, Polycarbonate, Bendlay and I have some Poro-Lay Foam to try still. While some materials are harder to work with than others (ABS, Polycarbonate, NinjaFlex), with the right modifications and settings, the UM2/2+ handles it all like a champ (or at least adequately enough to be usable) That's just my experience so far, though. YMMV.

I use 2.1.2 for the new supports capability and I like the concentric top/bottom fill patterns. I only do PLA and ABS with it though. For everything else (other materials, no supports needed, etc.) I use 15.04.6. It's more complete, faster, and just works. But supports are terrible. Once 2.x grows more, I can see transitioning to it fully, but certainly not yet. It's just a baby, give it time to grow strong before you put it in the work force. Just my $0.02.

Bonjour, J'utilisais https://www.youmagine.com/designs/um2-filament-straightener avec mon UM2. Plutot, j'utilizais une version modifie, compatible avec le feeder to Robert et qui utilize des 626 au lieu des 608. Ca fonctionne tres bien a resoudre le problem, je trouve. Maintenant, j'ai le upgrade a UM2+ et je n'ai pas eu ce problem encore.

I saw a wile back that the guys at Adafruit.com have done tumbling and put up a guide: https://learn.adafruit.com/copperfill-filament/ See the Usage and Tips pages. It seems they also made their own tumbler: https://blog.adafruit.com/2015/07/16/affordable-rock-tumbler-3dthursday-3dprinting/ I have not tried any of this yet, but I hope this helps.