rachael7
-
Posts
160 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Forums
Events
3D Prints
Posts posted by rachael7
-
-
6 hours ago, TimonR said:
…
We are still actively monitoring if we see issues coming up like this, and I can imagine transportation to specific sites with higher temperatures might indeed lead to brittle PVA. Did you report your experiences to our customer service? Can you also share (roughly) where you are located?
Oh yes, many conversations with Fbrc8, many posts in the community here. I was even given the fine knurl feeder kit, which I tried (and since reverted). I’m located in Massachusetts, USA, which is in the northeast part of the country, though I think my UM filament comes from a warehouse further south.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, MobyDisk said:
I want to know why we all have such different experiences. Could someone post a 3MF file and we can all test print the exact same model with the same PLA and the same PVA, and post videos of the print?
My working theory is that it is not moisture which is giving people different experiences. I mean yes, moisture can and will cause major issues and different results, and that is certainly some of the cases; but I think there are other overlooked aspects that could be at play as well.
PVA, when exposed to relatively modest elevated temperatures (over 55C) for a long period of time (a day or so, I think), will crystalize. Once it does, it doesn't un-crystalize by drying, humidifying, or anything else that I'm aware of. Crystallized material will still print, but it will be extremely brittle (the issue I ran into continuously) and not feed well. 55C is a temperature that could easily be reached in a non-climate-controlled warehouse in the summertime, in some locations, and it is my theory that some rolls have been exposed in that way, prior to ever getting to the customer, making them too brittle to use.
I even had two rolls of the stuff where I observed a brittle spot a few cm long on each wrap of the spool. I hypothesize that those spools were exposed to direct sunlight in the warehouse (or somewhere on the journey) and the part visible through the window in the box got heated just enough extra to embrittle only in that location.
Another factor that makes for such different experiences is the presence or absence of the Material Station. It has a tortuous filament path and brittle filament that might work okay feeding from a spool holder can and does snap in the long, winding path through the material station.
Of course, that's where things get really ugly. Broken filament fed from a spool holder is a nuisance, but there's a decent chance the machine will pause for a new roll and the print can be recovered. But when it breaks in the material station, little pieces can get jammed in inaccessible parts of the machine and it can be difficult or impossible to get them out. I've had to tear down the material station 3 times already, just to clear PVA fragments, and that requires first moving the giant heavy lump of a machine that is the S5 (a challenge for me) and then doing some very delicate service on the Material Station that Ultimaker would really rather us not do ourselves. To their credit, they did help with what documentation they had, but they were pretty hesitant to let me do it and it is not fully documented.
I'm normally a pretty tolerant and patient person when it comes to working through problems, but when that PVA kept costing me entire days of billable time to tear down the machine, it got old REAL fast. So on top of the real differences I outlined above, the frustration factor could also vary rather a lot depending on what setup your PVA is failing in and how much you depend on the machine.
At any rate, BVOH from BASF prints better than PVA, dissolves faster, is no more expensive, and to date (knock on wood) has not given me any difficulties at all, so it was quite easy to throw out my remaining kgs of UM PVA and make the switch.
-
1
-
-
I wanted to amend my comments about the flexibility a bit. Using the 1/8" thick Garolite, you actually CAN flex it a little bit. Not a lot, but enough that parts with large bases will be released. I had a part I ran yesterday into today, larger PETG part with the build plate maybe a wee bit hot. Adhesion was great, not even a hint of part warping; but I couldn't get a good enough grip on it to get it loose. So I tried flexing the Garolite, and while the flex was barely enough to see, it was enough to release the edges of the part (could hear it pop) and made it possible to remove the part. Still no visible damage to the surface, just for the record.
-
7 minutes ago, 3dprntz said:
Is the sheet flexible, in that you can bend it and the print pops off? Or is it pretty rigid?
At 1/8” and above, it is very rigid, barely more flexible than the glass honestly. You could use a 1.5-2.0mm sheet, with an appropriate spacer, and get the flex effect, but not on full thickness sheets.
-
2 hours ago, 3dprntz said:
Awesome! Did you have it cut by McMaster-Carr or in house? And do you have a link to the product?
I did have McMaster cut it, so much easier than dealing with it myself. They have an 11" width, which is close enough to what we need, sold by the inch. I had them cut it to 14 1/8" long, which is the closest 1/8" increment to what we need. It fits well and it was great not to have to deal with the dust. The one I am using is at https://www.mcmaster.com/6275N133. I also used a piece of 6061-T6 from online metals underneath, which I also ordered cut to size, to bring it up to a thickness that is pretty close to the thickness of the glass. That product is at https://www.onlinemetals.com/en/buy/aluminum/0-063-aluminum-sheet-6061-t6/pid/1242. Although looking at it now, the 1/8" Garolite plus the 0.063" aluminum actually adds up to the same thickness as the 3/16" Garolite that McMaster sells. I don't remember why I did it that way, could have been a mistake or maybe I was going to put it on a magnet or something. Anyway, it would actually be a little less costly to just get the 3/16" Garolite, which is at https://www.mcmaster.com/6275N158. Don't worry too much about the thickness being a little different than the glass - the clips are pretty accommodating and you can easily bend them a bit to tighten or loosen them as needed.
EDIT TO ADD: One other note - I did lightly scuff the surface of the Garolite with 0000 steel wool before the first use, just to knock down the gloss and make sure it was clean. Probably wasn't necessary, but seemed like a good precaution. Oh, and you can use both sides of the Garolite equally well, so you can always flip it over if it gets damaged.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, 3dprntz said:
How easy does it release from the build plate, and does it fit well in the clips? I wondered too if the auto-bed leveling would damage it.
if you mean the Garolite, release is good. Many parts fully release on their own, some need a slight pull. The only thing that's given me any trouble is prime tower brims. I never use brims on parts, but the prime tower ones are stuck a little more than I'd like. but even at that, they still come free with a bit of gentle scraper action, nothing difficult at all. Build plate temperatures are in the same general range as with the glass plate.
As far as durability, it is holding up very well so far - at least up to the 260-265C printing temperatures I've been using lately, I'm not seeing any damage or residual part imprints on the build plate. Nor am I seeing any damage from the bed leveling at that material temperature, even in that one spot next to the nozzle switch location that it uses more frequently. If you're printing up closer to the 300C point, I don't have data at those temps yet, but I will say that I've seen YouTubers using it with Nylon and polycarbonate, so it must work up to at least the 280C range. The other good thing is that you can sand the surface if it ever gets damaged, assuming you're using the thicker material. It is a nasty material in terms of dust inhalation, so you'd want to wear a mask or maybe wet sand, but you can definitely renew the surface if it gets messed up.
I'm using 1/8" (3.1mm) Garolite from McMaster-Carr, which is loose in the clips by itself. You can easily bend the clips closed a bit and it will work fine or you can do as I did and put a piece of sheet aluminum under it to bring it up to the same 4mm thickness as the glass. Alternatively, you can get a thin sheet of Garolite, bend the clips open a little bit, and put the Garolite on top of the glass. I'm not a fan of that approach though, as the Garolite won't really work well at anything less than 1.5mm-2mm thickness, which is more stretching of the clips than I'm comfortable with. A thin piece applied to a flex plate, along with a magnetic base (either on top of the glass or instead of the glass) is another possible option, which also gives you the benefit of assisting the release when you flex the plate. As a side note, you can also use glue or tape on the Garolite if you have some special application where it doesn't work bare.
Suffice it to say, I'm a big fan right now and it's my everyday build plate. I've been running mostly PETG lately, so my data is a little limited; but I do print with engineering filaments fairly often and I'll continue to update the thread as I get more data. I just love that with PLA, Tough PLA, ABS, and PETG, I don't need to do any build plate prep beyond wiping with alcohol when it gets dirty.
-
1
-
-
Just to add a bit more data to this thread, while the smooth PEI never did work for me the way I wanted it to, the powder coated PEI works great. I often don't mind the texture it imparts and adhesion has been stellar for PLA, tough PLA, and ABS.
More recently, I've been using a Garolite (aka G10 or FR4) build plate. I got a 1/8" piece from McMaster-Carr, pre-cut to the right size, and it has been working a treat. PETG sticks perfectly and releases without drama, and it is one of the tougher filaments to use on a glass plate (due to taking chips out of the glass). No issues on the Garolite at all, and no need of glues or other treatments. I'll be trying it on Nylon and PC soon to see if it can handle the really difficult stuff - all the testing I've seen on YouTube and such says it will, but the proof is in the pudding, as they say.
-
7 hours ago, Andrew_W said:
Hello all, I've been having trouble with our PVA support coming out looking like sugar crystals on some parts of the print and not supporting the PLA. Have also experienced some filament breakages in the lines from the material station (it seems very brittle?). I tried drying out the spool at 55°c in our oven for a few hours and this didn't make any difference. The spool is a few months old and has always been kept in the material station. Thanks.
I’ve had nothing but problems with UM PVA. I literally threw out three spools of it because it kept breaking, jamming, and otherwise failing to print. I switched to BVOH filament from BASF and I’ve never looked back. Night and day better performance and no breakage.
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, JASON128 said:
what an incredibly stupid implementation by the design team - speed control on the fan for cooling is obvious, and like you say- cheap to do. I can only guess its a way around patients in heated chambers?
I couldn't agree more. When it was first released, I saw some posts indicating that might be the case, so I thought maybe they just rushed it to market. But several years have gone by and I simply can't believe they haven't finished the implementation in that time. Heated chamber patent is a good guess, actually. There's no other logical reason not to implement something so trivially simple, when all the pieces and code are already there.
-
5 minutes ago, JASON128 said:
i would suggest just a simple temperature controller- and use a signal off the case fans in the bottom- as they only run when the machine is active.
Since I already have the Air Manager, if UM would just give me the pinout, I could pick up their signals and use them in my own controller. Would yield a nice tight solution, perfect fit on the machine, still using the nice filter setup, pick up enable/disable signaling, etc. But I've been waiting a month already and it appears that information is not forthcoming, so I expect what I'll eventually do is just rip out their electronics, install a thermocouple, and bring that and the fan leads out to my own controller, which might also be controlling auxiliary chamber heaters as well.
-
11 hours ago, Smithy said:
@rachael7 I am sorry to hear that you have problems. I don't have a Material Station so I was not able to test it...
No worries, Smithy, certainly not your fault! The materials are supposed to stay loaded, pulled back about 5cm from the printhead, for an amount of time defined in their material profile, called the "maximum park duration". It shouldn't matter if the build plate is still hot or not and it doesn't retract them when the build plate is cool to touch or when it is marked clear, so I did not think this simple change should have effected it. I was just reaching out to see if anyone had the same symptoms. I'll probably end up doing a reset on the printer and then trying the temperature change again to rule out that I did something else accidentally while i was in there. Thanks!
-
Has anyone noticed any unintended side effects from altering the cool to touch temperature? My S5 recently started unloading the filaments back into the material station immediately after the print, even when the profile has a significant park duration set. The only thing I can think of that changed was that I set the safe to touch temperature to 135C using Ultituner. I took it out of developer mode after and I even disabled the permanent SSH, and of course I rebooted several times, but it still insists on unloading the materials immediately, regardless of the specified park duration. I'm not suggesting a flaw in Ultituner, it does what it says, I'm just wondering if changing that setting could have had this other effect.
-
Yes, I am running the newest firmware on the 'latest' channel. The printer has been taken out of developer mode and SSH disabled. Yes, I'm sure that the printer has the right material profiles loaded - I looked at them through the API and verified their contents.
With all due respect and appreciation for the assistance, who is "we" who are "trying to figure out what is causing the problem"? Are you affiliated with UM?
-
2 minutes ago, Ogge500 said:
Does this happen when you are using deafult material profiles without any prior modification?
Yes. My only modification is that I've changed the "safe to touch" temperature to 135C using Ultituner.exe.
-
17 minutes ago, GregValiant said:
Close, but no cigar. I don't think it will work. It looks like the Jerk only changes when "TYPE:FILL" is there. For the outer and inner walls the Jerk doesn't appear to be inserted.
Dang. Heck of a good effort though. I'll put in a feature request on Github and hope the Cura gurus manage to work it into the schedule at some point.
-
2 minutes ago, GregValiant said:
Somebody mentioned changing the cooling based on the feature. That isn't all that hard to do as the features are in comments throughout the gcode.
Unfortunately within a gcode file you won't find anything that says "overhang starts here". It would be really tough to code for. If a support blocker could be configured...hold on... I feel a workaround coming on.
...
I like it. Now it's up to you to prove why I shouldn't.
I have to admit, that is pretty darn clever. I do use the jerk settings and could easily make them all the same, so that could work. The challenge will be to make the support blocker shape right to get the jerk changes to happen at the right points. Then again, once one has gone that far, why not just use the different settings for overlaps feature to change the fan speed directly? It would work the same, but without even the search/replace, right?
-
1 minute ago, GregValiant said:
I usually open the gcode file and add fan lines manually. You can try the ChangeAtZ post processor. It had a couple of glitches if you were using "By Height" and there were Z-hops in a file, but without Z-hops and using "By Layer" it should be OK. You would need one instance to turn the fan on and another to turn it off again.
Thanks for the ideas, got me thinking! Unfortunately, I do have (and need) Z-hops and it's not a by-layer situation for me. The parts I'm working on are quite large, most of the area of the build plate, and only have overhangs in a few small portions of the perimeter. The fans need to stay off for the rest of the layer, to ensure good layer adhesion, and only come on for the actual overhanging portion. I suppose I could theoretically do it by manually editing the g-code, but that would really be a prohibitive editing process without much chance of automating it.
-
Would it be possible to add a function to change the fan speed for overhangs of a certain angle? Perhaps it could be rolled in with the (currently experimental) Overhanging Wall Angle and Overhanging Wall Speed function? I'm printing a lot of ABS, Nylon, and Polycarbonate these days, and those materials need to run without a fan for best layer adhesion. But the lack of fan makes overhangs come out less than pretty, even when they are only 10-20 degrees off of vertical. I got some improvement using the Overhanging Wall Speed adjustment, but if I could turn on the fans just for the overhangs, that would allow me to improve the print quality of the overhangs, without as much compromise of the layer adhesion (and hence strength) as I would get from running the fans through the whole print.
-
For some reason, my S5 Bundle (w/material station) is no longer respecting the maximum park duration specified in my filament profiles and is instead unloading both filaments immediately after every print. I'm not sure what triggered this change in behavior or how to correct it, but it's putting a lot of unnecessary wear on the filament and feeders, and adding time between prints to unload and reload the filament. Any idea what's going on? Or how to even start diagnosing it?
-
So I've been fighting with chamber temperature control on my S5 w/Air Manager, and after consulting with fbrc8, I've been informed that the S5 does not actually do active (closed loop) chamber temperature control. All it does is take the chamber temperature set in Cura, look that up in a static table, and pick the corresponding fan speed. It never varies that speed or monitors the chamber temp to confirm that the selected fan speed is correct. So as you would expect, this sometimes results in chamber temps too low and sometimes too high, depending on your ambient conditions, nozzle temps, bed temp, and other factors. The prints I am working on require reasonably accurate chamber temps, so this just isn't working for my application.
I'm more than a little disappointed that closed loop control is not enabled for the chamber temps, but I need it to work, so I'm working on how to do my own chamber temperature control. My first thought is to use the air manager as it exists, but instead of running it to the UMB port on the printer, where I am limited to the UM firmware's lack of control, running the Air Manager to my own control device. It's easy enough to build a PID temp controller these days, so that seems like the short path to a solution. To implement that though, I need to know the pinout of the Air Manager connector, or possibly the pinout of the SMB connector, which I guess would be the same thing. Does anyone have that information? Or any information about the I2C protocol to communicate with the Air Manager?
-
Happens on my newer (U on the side) S5 as well, usually during period of inactivity.
-
Also, can anyone confirm if the Air Manager actually does close loop chamber temperature control? As near as I can tell, it just picks a fan speed at the beginning of the print and keeps it the same, regardless of what the chamber temperature actually does. @SandervG ?
-
So I know the S5 is limited to 50C chamber temperature with the Air Manager and I know higher temps will damage components. What I don't know is what temps people are actually getting. I'm printing polycarbonate and I really want the chamber temperature at the safe maximum for the machine, but even with the bed at 120C, I never get the chamber even close to 50C. The most I'm seeing is about 35C, which is about 15C over ambient in my office. I'm sure if the machine was in a heated closet or something I could get it hotter, but that's what I'm getting in a normal (if slightly cooler than average) office environment. What max chamber temps are you seeing? Has anyone added an auxiliary chamber heater to get the chamber up to the machine's maximum of 50C?
-
Has anyone decoded how these identifying number are structured? I'm curious to figure it out, since I'm using 3D Solex cores that have available nozzle sizes other than the UM standards, like an 0.50mm, for example. It's easy enough to make up a new core variant, by adding it to the user directory, so I was curious if I could actually reprogram my cores to match and avoid the mismatched core warning at the start of the print. Looking at the above, it would appear that the AAs all have the first number ending in 4141 and the BBs end in 4242. From another source, I believe the CCs all end in 4343, so that makes sense. The nozzle size seems to be the first digit after 'E3' in the second number - all the 0.4mm cores have a 4 there, the 0.6mm have a 6 there, and the 0.8mm have an 8 there. But on the 0.25mm, it has 235 following the 'E3' and I'm struggling to make sense of that. 235 isn't hex for 25 in any way that I can see, nor do any other explanations appear obvious. Perhaps 235 is an error? If not, there's something more to the schema that I haven't figured out yet. Or perhaps some of the numbers are just arbitrary?
Idle Nozzle Oozing
in UltiMaker 3D printers
Posted
I'm using an Ultimaker S5 and I am having difficulty with the idle nozzle oozing when printing with certain materials. I know lowering the standby temperature will address that issue, but on short layers, the idle core never really gets to cool off enough to stop oozing, and even on longer layers, the idle nozzle keeps oozing long enough to be a problem. I am already using a prime tower and I know about ooze shields, but other than the standby temperature, prime tower, and ooze shield, are there any other settings I can adjust to minimize the oozing? Nozzle switch retraction or something? Thanks!