Jump to content
Ultimaker Community of 3D Printing Experts


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by JohnInOttawa

  1. JohnInOttawa

    Dimensional accuracy in Z

    I know a lot has been said about dimensional accuracy already, the solutions seem to vary somewhat by printer. Here's my issue: I am upgrading my UMO to TMC2100. Just before I swap out the drivers, I want to establish a baseline, in case something goes wrong, I at least have a reference. I'm printing a 20x20x20mm cube. Dimensions without any adjustment are 19.78 x 19.80 x 19.79. Small in all dimensions. 0.3 nozzle, 0.2 layer height, 0.25 line width, adjusted for print quality with this filament (eSun PLA), so I would rather not tweak that further. I can adjust horizontal expansion, but I am still short in Z. My next thought will be to print a cube with vertical and lateral holes through it, but I thought I should dial this in first. Thanks in advance! John
  2. I know this thread is getting very old, but I will finally be installing TMC2100 on my UMO today. I will change X, Y and hopefully Z but will leave the extruder alone for now. I can do everything in this (excellent!) thread, except adjust Z steps/mm to 1066.6666. As my leadscrew is not for the heated bed and I am not certain it is original ( I bought this second hand) I may just have to write down the existing number and double it. I'm trying to use the online firmware maker here https://bultimaker.bulles.eu/ I see the discussion above on modifying this with GCode, but as I seldom work at that level, would appreciate the syntax for setting, then saving the new steps/mm @gr5, would you be in a position to share this? Thanks! John
  3. Hmmm... I have an endurance laser and a UMO as well as a UM3. Im not sure I would want to hang a laser with that mass from those cross bars. Especially on something as pricey as an S5. It might work software wise but mechanically, as I say, hmmmmm. In my case I am going to mount it on a modified prusa design with a beefed up cross section and put an additional bracket on my gantry CNC for larger work. But in both cases the cross bar is either beefy extrusion (3d kit) or reinforced plate (CNC) John
  4. JohnInOttawa

    Printing with wood filament

    @ScienceDude you might find this thread of relevance. I found woodfill slightly less prone to clogging than copperfill. @SandervG has, I believe, made a relevant comment when discussing fibre enhanced filaments that may well apply to wood fill, and that is that a lot of retractions may contribute to clogging as the fibres or particles can realign crossways to the flow inside the nozzle at the orifice. I just had a job fail with that exact scenario, the first indication was intermittent extruder stalling and then layer quality degraded. I hope this is of some help.. Best of luck. Cheers John
  5. Good morning everyone. I suspect this question has been asked and answered in various forms but I'm just not finding it today. Here's the idea: On my CNC (Gcode driven of course), programming tool changes is routine. These can be implemented without an automatic tool changer, the machine goes to safe and waits for the operator to advise when ready to proceed (after the tool change is complete). In my software (Mach3), you can change the tool, reset zero and move the gantry position if needed (to the zero reference), and when you hit the continue prompt, the machine returns to the correct position at safe, then descends and continues the job with the correct bit. Soooo, let's say I want to run a 3 color job on my UM3, for example a name plate background in black, with two colors (say red and white) embossing a logo on top. I only need black up to the point I am going to start with color so there would be no overlap (but I would need to get the exact layer correct). I'm aware of 'Pause at height' but the last I heard about that feature it was not working correctly and it was unclear to me if one could combine pause at height with a filament change and get good results. Maybe there is a plugin somehere? Thanks in advance! John
  6. This thread should be a sticky - it's a great reference for that filament. Thank you for sharing. Cheers John
  7. JohnInOttawa

    XSTRAND GF30 PA6 Test Print

    Thanks for the verification @PaulK and @SandervG! Best wishes to you and yours in 2019! John
  8. JohnInOttawa

    Clicking during Y-Axis moves on S5

    So to be clear, the clicking happens mid travel, and not during a direction change of any kind? If it is mid travel, and once per rev, that suggests interference somewhere, two hard surfaces are contacting somehow. Barring something sticking out and hitting something, i'd wonder if there is a rod-end bearing behind that clicking. j
  9. That's discouraging to hear that the alternate print head is encountering issues. But at the same time, your testing methods seem robust to the point you can isolate it to the filament. It does sound like shelf life or humidity could be factors. I have not seen anyone try to chill filament and don't know what would happen if one tried. Certainly a refridgerator could be a low humidity environment and keeping the filament as cold as possible during print might delay softening just long enough to get the material through the 'danger zone'. Or it could just fail. I also don't know how rapidly the filament would warm to room temperature along the bowden tube. I have one of those electric coolers that should hold a spool. I may have to give it a try. Maybe colorfabb can lend some expertise.... John
  10. JohnInOttawa

    XSTRAND GF30 PA6 Test Print

    I'll be setting up for testing shortly. Thank you for the profile. One thing I am trying to locate in the threads is minimum nozzle size. I know the CC red is 0.6. Is that assumed to be the minimum nozzle diameter? I have a potential application that would go all the way down to .25 (hardcore/everlast). I appreciate this would be experimental. Thoughts? John
  11. While this filament makes for a pretty expensive 'try and see' test, running with 0.6 for a while to see how long it takes for trouble to recur would likely confirm your suspicions. If you are able to move volume at a rate that keeps up with heat creep and the heat absorption characteristics of the filament upstream of the nozzle, then it would seem certain that it's a cooling problem within the core and filament combination. I'm trying to think of other filaments that might print at that temperature but don't have as good heat conduction. maybe polycarb or high temp nylon without additives. I'm still trying to figure out the heat path - whether it is just along the metal path from nozzle through heat break then cooling tower and heating the filament the whole way, or if the primary contributor is within the filament itself. The rapid onset of problems suggests it's likely the former. I wonder why the number of cooling fins was reduced. Hmmmm. John
  12. That's an excellent analysis. I had not noticed the different cooling fin configuration. Are you heating both print cores for this work? I don't know of any way to get a temperature reading on the print core fins. A thermal imager would be best as it would not interfere with airflow like a probe would, but with the fan in place and lateral airflow affecting boundary conditions that's impossible. Indirect measurement like exhaust air temperature would be misleading if the problem is that the fins can't shed heat fast enough. A direct contact measurement would carry all sorts of risks, not least of which would be detachment and collision with one of the fans. I don't know of a practical way to feed colder air into that fan. It sounds like 3D Solex has been actively engaged, I know @gr5 would have a wealth of technical knowledge on these cores, hopefully there is a path forward from their help. Thanks again for sharing - it will ultimately help everyone. John
  13. Hmmm. That sounds like a frustrating challenge. So is the print core suffering excessive heat creep up the heat break, or is the filament loitering in the print core too long, or is the nozzle itself experiencing some sort of local clogging at the tip that is causing things to back up? I see Colorfabb recommends a minimum layer height of 0.2 which is a bit higher than you are using. I know when I printed Colorfabb Copperfill, I created a similar problem for myself when I went to a layer height below 0.2, of interest I was also using a 3D Solex print core, but with a steel nozzle. I was able to print for about 90 minutes before things clogged. I know there is a warning about copperfill conducting heat so one needs to keep it moving at a pretty fair clip. Maybe the minimum layer height and width for the 0.6 nozzle is intended to mitigate the heat migration by keeping a fresh supply of relatively cool material flowing into the heat break? Just curious, I imagine you are using an enclosure on the front. Anything on top? I wonder if there is any chance the bowden tube is pre-heating - not to nozzle temp of course, but even a delta of 10C would put it that much closer to its softening regime upon entry into the print core. Final thought, if this is straight up heat creep in the print core, any chance the print core cooling fan is encountering issues or blockage? Wish I could provide you something more definitive. Hopefully someone more knowledgable can wade in shortly. John
  14. Are you able to share your print settings? temps, layer heights, speeds? On the UM3, what is the extruder configuration? Standard? bondtech? something else? Thanks John
  15. JohnInOttawa

    NO Aluminum build plate.

    @SandervG, you have a tough job some days. I think it is great to show transparency that the attempt to create this feature simply did not go as expected. I think it is also appropriate to thank those who have purchased the S5. In terms of understanding, it is a two way street. The users of the S5 are, from what I can tell, able to understand the technical challenge. The other side, for UM leadership to truly appreciate what this change means to the user base, seems to still be a work in progress. At least I hope it is still in progress. A second glass plate might have been an appropriate goodwill offering for the delayed aluminum plate, at least for the early adopters who have been waiting the longest. Holding the price constant going forward and substituting with a second glass plate? Well, that gets complicated. Considering that the S5 was aimed at professional users, I presume that, as in my case, there would have been a cost/benefit analysis behind nearly every purchase of this unit. Why an S5 and not a UM3 or UM3 extended for thousands less? We still see that discussion as active this week. I can't speak for anyone else. My own decision for the S5 was very much a 'wait and see' cycle. Honestly, what I was waiting for was whether the aluminum plate offered damage-free printing of certain materials that tend to chip my glass, or better adhesion of some of the exotics that the S5 also supported. I had not yet made a case for the extra build volume. It really came down to that plate. So, in my case, the $3300 (CDN) premium of the S5 over the UM3 ($2200 over the UM3X) just does not add up. And believe me, I wanted it to. I imagine you guys will still sell many S5's, one more sale here or there will not affect the bottom line. I fully get the frustration the technical team must be feeling and you are sandwiched as the messenger. Still, to me, it feels like the marketers still want a price premium without offering the level of premium content any more. I wonder what that means for the future. I'll leave it there: again, I know this is not an outcome Ultimaker desired and I have no sense that this is anything other than an honest effort that ended in frustration. The discussion is really, how best to move forward. I know you are listening and I hope you're supported as you pass the feedback up the line. All the best John
  16. JohnInOttawa

    Aluminum build plate update

    Well. pricing strategy is yours to choose. It's your product. If it were up to me (and it is not), I would consider at least throwing in a CC red print core or something on that scale. That would be a bit closer to the enhanced mission of the S5. That said, the existing S5 community probably has a much better idea of what the S5 brings to the table. Thanks for engaging on a tough subject and staying in the discussion. Best of the season to you and yours! John
  17. JohnInOttawa

    Aluminum build plate update

    I appreciate this has been a tough road for Ultimaker technical. That said. Ultimaker marketing has some explaining to do. I am pretty certain that part of the pricing strategy / premium of the S5 was based on having technology the 3 did not. The builld plate was really the stand-out there. Yes, the interface was improved, filament handling and hardened extruders, size clearly, but did those changes alone justify the price delta? It didn't quite, for me at least. I have been procrastinating on the S5 since its release. Now? Ultimaker should consider whether the asking price for the S5, now that the build plate will be glass only, is fair. It may be that a price drop is in order. Other manufacturers have done this (The Sinterit Lisa comes to mind) without a loss of capability. Those who purchased on the reasonable (but regrettably not deliverable) expectation of an aluminum plate may need to alter their intended long term plans for this machine. IMO it would not be outrageous to offer these purchasers a rebate equal to the delta between the old and new price. If, on the other hand, Ultimaker elects to retain the price, I would not be surprised to see a goodwill impact on sales. The Cura issues are not that far behind us. None of this changes the fact that an entire team of people at Ultimaker likely feels pretty badly about their efforts and the decision to halt progress. Any maker or techhie here can and should take a moment to send some good karma their way. It would not be the first time that operations picked up the tab for marketing. So let me close with a shout out to the tech team, thanks for trying. I am sure a great deal has been learned and will come back around in a future product. Better days ahead! John
  18. JohnInOttawa

    How to 3D print with reinforced engineering materials

    That's great! Thanks! John
  19. JohnInOttawa

    How to 3D print with reinforced engineering materials

    Sadly I will miss this, would dearly love to see it. Will the webinar be available as a podcast or something similar afterwards? Thanks! John
  20. Thanks. I think perhaps you answered a different question (or questions) though. I'll try to think about a better way to ask this question. John
  21. Good morning! This might have been covered elsewhere, but my search didn't reveal it, so apologies for any repetition. I've got a range of nozzle sizes with my HardCores as well as a number of non UM materials that don't neatly fit the mold, such as hi temp PLA, etc. I've read at least some of the threads that provide guidance on selecting layer width based on nozzle size, but in most cases there seems to be a bit of a recursive loop as one determines the correct temperature, layer height and print speed to go along with that width. Some here have already done the homework and identified filament volume for a given nozzle diameter and temperature. I'd like to understand the process for finding that volume for any filament. My hope is that having this volume would allow me to dial in the correct combination of line width and layer height for given applications - for example, if I want a strong part with simple geometry in a carbon fibre filled nylon filament, I probably want the widest lines I can manage - so what would be the correct layer height to avoid under or over extrusion? Knowing this would probably have saved me the fun of unclogging my print core after my last Copperfill print. Thank you in advance for your thoughts and forebearance in the case this is a re-hash. John
  22. JohnInOttawa

    Gyroids and how to do them

    So I printed a cooling hood for a fan today...*sigh* You guys are on a level I can't even see. I feel like a termite watching an aircraft take off. Still, it is inspiring and like our own private art gallery. Thanks for sharing! J
  23. JohnInOttawa

    Copperfill and Woodfill experience

    I know there have been a few question about user experience with Colorfabb Copperfill and Woodfill. I thought I would post my experience. First off, surface texture for both filament is excellent. Copperfill density adds a nice feel to parts. I started off with a 0.6 nozzle on the woodfill, that went fine, so I dialed back to 0.4, still fine, but the detail needed finer yet. At the same time I decided to switch to Copperfill as the model (earrings) would benefit from that. So my results on Copperfill are from a 3DSolex Hardcore, 0.25 steel nozzle. 0.05 layer height. Copperfill print settings and retractions were used, I did slow the print speed down, and am now running Bondtec feeders, which for reasons that became clear later, made quite a difference, especially with the copper. First, the good news. The detail with Copperfill at 0.25 was better than even stock Ultimaker white PLA. I had to leave an area on the underside to accommodate an earring post, so used PVA for support. The earring on the left is straight off the printer, the one on the right has only had light sanding and a couple of mild runs with a copper scouring pad. The 'other news'. As expected, clogging is a significant issue with this fine a nozzle. Each earring took about an hour. The first print went as planned, clogging occured about 30% of the way through the second attempt, a significant clog that took a number of techniques to clear. I suspect a combination of the particulates and heat creep. Clearing copperfill using the standard 'hot pull' maintenance setting did not work as the temperature was not high enough. I finally had success with some high temp PLA at between 230 and 240, working relatively quicky so I didn't soften the PLA too much. What I then decided was to do this modified hot pull after each print, and again at the end so there was nothing contaminating the nozzle for the next job. This actually worked very nicely. I've included an (obsolete) Canadian penny for reference on size and colour. My bride is very happy, which means so am I 🙂 John
  24. JohnInOttawa

    Copperfill and Woodfill experience

    My experience with the 0.6 was woodfill only and I didn't get finer than 0.1 with that particular run - that said, I had no problems with standard speeds. I'm still learning what I can expect from these Bondtech feeders, but I ran at 50 for everything with a print temp of 205 with no issues. In terms of clogging, this is probably the most severe case I have encountered on my equipment, and I'm still unsure if it was just down to the nozzle diameter. I suspect dialing down the layer height might have played a role. I was running with an 80% infill as these were extremely thin and I needed as much strength as I could get. I would not recommend more than that, I get the sense that having some space for any ooze to escape internally helped delay trouble. I kept the print that clogged, will post that, along with a woodfill example, next time I'm at the printer. Good luck, will look forward to seeing your results! Cheers John
  25. JohnInOttawa

    XSTRAND GF30 PA6 Test Print

    That's encouraging progress! I know the manufacturer is recommending XSTRAND for the supports as well, but given all of the issues, I'm wondering if another material that is known to do well as a support would work better. I haven't worked with Breakaway and I'm not sure if PVA could tolerate the temperature environment without just degrading. Would PLA be a possibility? John

Important Information

Welcome to the Ultimaker Community of 3D printing experts. Visit the following links to read more about our Terms of Use or our Privacy Policy. Thank you!