Jump to content

Torgeir

Expert
  • Posts

    1,224
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    26

Posts posted by Torgeir

  1. Hi @Dragon41673,

     

    Surface mode is simply printing the walls (inner and outer) without top/bottom and no infill.

    This mode normally print the outer and inner side nicely and takes "lot of" pressure out of the feeder..

     

    As you have this issue with your printer, -use Cura 4.13.1 -the best stable version of the Cura slicer!

     

    Prusa slicer is not a dirty word in here.  In addition to Cura, that I've a number of versions of -on my PC. I'm also using S3D (Simplify 3D Slicer). This S3D slicer are used to monitor gcode files just in order to spot an error if there's any, a super nice tool for this issue!

     

    I can see there's "some" signs on the model you're printed with the Prusa slicer -and this is why I'd ask to see your project file of your print. Just save your model as a project file (*3mf). This save us/you lots of time and may find a solution to your problem.

     

    I'll suppose that this last pictures is printed with the same firmware version as printed with Cura above, right?

     

    Thanks

    Torgeir

     

     

  2. Hi @Dragon41673,

     

    Sorry to see this mishap. Sometimes a firmware updated can indeed go wrong..

     

    The pictures you've added tells a story -and this is a "special" kind of under extrusion IMO, (As @GregValiant mentioned)!

    As you've explain, this issues occur exactly at same places over and over..

    I'll suggest that the feeder cannot deliver the "commanded flow" at those points due to too lo current to the feeder stepper during printing in such areas. The interesting question is, does your main PCB have a manual current setting or does it have software current settings?

     

    The firmware versions have a huge gap in between, sometimes can be an issue..

     

    It would be much easier to evaluate the problem if you share the project file of this object.

     

    Edith. It would be very interesting to see your model printed with your printer in "Surface" mode.

     

    Thanks

    Torgeir

  3. Hi @tkramer91

     

    Welcome in here.

    I'll second @gr5 for sure, -if you're dependent of production making things that's matter, stay with the stable versions of Cura. But if you're experimenting and want/need possible functions coming with newer versions, test and be sure this is working for your needs, -but still keep your stable version of Cura.

     

    I've looked at your project and see that you need "extended" support, well -everywhere support.

    The later versions doe's not do this well, so you will benefit much using Cura 5.2.2 with your existing project file.

    This as this version of Cura produce a cleaner support and looks very nice.

     

    Just my 5p..

    Happy printing.

    Thanks

    Torgeir

     

    Almost forgot, here is a picture of your model sliced with Cura 5.2.2

     

    image.thumb.png.24f2ffa5c43a5028d6683c2d054542f0.png

     

     

  4. @mowijo

     

    Hi Morten

     

    I've assume that you'll know that the temperature is selected by the firmware (when a given type of filament are selected), or by directly adjusting the bed temp on the printer during printing.

    You may also test this directly by using the advanced menu found under the maintenance menu.

    If you can see the "heat bed" temperature, -should be close to the nozzle temperature then we may consider the temp sensing ok.

     

    So, if this is true we may suggest the heating of the bed "circuit" is to blame.

    What happen if you try to rice the temperature? Did you get any warning?

     

    Problems often found here is the contact block, either of the heat bed, or the contact block at the main PCB.

    The contact blocks, may look burnt (brownish), or simply have an open line on the heat bed. This latter happen due to expansion/retraction when the bed is heated/cooled due to use over times.

     

    As you now have the diagram, you'll sure find the circuit block. etc.

     

     

    Good luck.

    Thanks

    Torgeir

     

  5. Hi @Turtlestein,

     

    Welcome in here.

     

    The hat is not joined to the I and it is also leaky (not watertight).

    Your project can only be opened as a project, I.E with your printer.

    But if you select "surface mode" it will be opened with other printers!

     

    If you use Cura 14.13.1 and make some more selections in the "Mesh Settings" as here, you will see the most of your hat.

     

    Wizzard_project_v2.thumb.jpg.6cfcaa496113b0aa8fdf76d01a7510f8.jpg

     

    The "funny" thing is that, at some other settings you can see the missing part of your hat but not this part grayed out.

     

    Thanks

    Torgeir

  6. Hi @kinginnovator,

     

    I'll see you're using Cura 5.3.1, the "new" Arachne engine. Have you ever tried the old slicer like Cura 4.13.1? This is the last stable version of the old Cura as far as I know (well it's a version 4.13.2 enterprise version).

     

    The old version is more predictable for various reasons. There are fewer small corrections/movements that can benefit your printer.

     

    In your printer definition setting there is only one 3mm filament, I assume you fix all this in the firmware.

    You are using 900mm for X/Y, so how many steps/mm? Of course, since the Z height is 1000mm, how many steps/mm here? It's a bit hard to understand your problem without these numbers.

     

    Thanks

    Torgeir

     

     

     

  7. Hi @kinginnovator

     

    As I'm looking into your printer, the extruder has a double feeder a'la Bondtech with only one stepper driving both feeders right above the extruder, right? Further the cold side of the upper part of the extruder is of water/liquid type.
    Then we'll see the two "heaters" connected to each side of the Y connector supplying the nozzle.

     

    This is a "huge" printer based on Ultimaker gantries, -so I wonder what kind of steppers are you using here? Also, -what kind of main board etc.?

     

    Edit; This is a really nice way to change / improve things the way you want!

     

    Thanks
    Torgeir

  8. On 6/29/2023 at 9:26 AM, djorn said:

     

    I'm confused too, I'm definitely using retraction, from what I've observed it seems as though the retraction just don't kick in, or isn't effective because the spokes are too close together 🤔.

     

    I've printed over 20 samples with various retraction settings. Even minimum travel set at 0 all the way up to 0.7.

     

    I've even tried going a 5mm z hop, super slow speeds, and using a 0.25 nozzle which actually is worse.

     

    This is indeed a good observation, -also the specs from Ultimaker state this fact as an UM S5 and S3 have:

     

    ------------------------------------------------------------------

    Layer resolution

     

    0.25 mm nozzle: 150 - 60 micron
    0.4 mm nozzle: 200 - 20 micron
    0.8 mm nozzle: 600 - 20 micron


    And XYZ accuracy 6.9, 6.9, 2.5 micron

     

    ------------------------------------------------------------------

     

    I've digged a little into this and think that the flatness around the nozzle opening is just a little to big cause filament hang a little on this flat part.  But think this is done to make the nozzle last longer, -but relative resolution is better.

     

    Just my 5 p.

     

    Thanks

    Torgeir

     

     

     

     

     

     

  9. Hi @rickyg32,

     

    This might happen with the kind of "special" models we try to print, this as the slicer "cannot" fill the holes that's appear at every crossing lines/cut on the model.

    We may have a more correct "assuming" if you share your model in here as a project file.

    If this is the problem, you may try to adjust the layer height and there will be an improvement on this issue.

     

    Thanks

    Torgeir.

×
×
  • Create New...