Jump to content

JohnInOttawa

Member
  • Posts

    368
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by JohnInOttawa

  1. Good afternoon everyone. I hope this finds you and yours well. Like many here, I'm pushing my printers to supply the front line. Watching my better half don her scrubs and head into the clinic is a powerful motivator. Speed is important but so is accuracy, so I am looking at ways to improve. There are many mods that aim at reducing the translation of shaking from rapid moves into the table or as noise. Looking at my CNC bed, the solution there was the opposite. Go as heavy as possible on the supports and immobilize the base. It was even suggested that we fill the aluminum extrusions with concrete or sand to add weight and inertia. So back to my UM3. I am thinking the box is pretty rigid, but perhaps it could be more so. I'd like to hear your thoughts on the base and ways to mitigate vibration and shaking. Thanks and stay healthy! John in Ottawa.
  2. Bump! I have a UM3 and am just finishing a spool of ultimaker PLA, would like to reuse this roll for another brand, the main reason is that the other brand spool is incompatible with the rear holder. That means, I think, that I have to reset the material amount. I don't know what hardware I need to write to this NFC tag or whether a UM3 can do that. I have to think it can as it updates the material amount? Thanks John
  3. Thank you both. @burtoogle, thanks for sharing your link. One question - do I need to upgrade my firmware to the latest version in order to use your updated Cura load? Much appreciated. John
  4. Good afternoon everyone. I have a rather pressing question. I am printing visor holders - over 3 hours with a 0.4 nozzle, but I have a 0.6 (hardcore) available. The problem I face is that Cura 3.4.1 cannot recognise the 0.6. I believe 4.5 does. I have been following the stability issues with firmware and Cura. I can't afford to brick my printer at the moment. I would like to know if there is a way to recognise or otherwise use a 0.6 in Cura 3.4.1 or, alternatively, install 4.5 in a way that does not screw up my 3.4.1 install. I also don't know what firmware level 4.5 requires. I have been printing with my 0.6 successfully with other materials, but I am concerned that, as this print has a narrow slot for holding a plastic visor sheet, that the 0.6 nozzle may lay down too wide a line and so make that slot gap too small. Thanks for your help. John
  5. Good morning everyone. I'm looking for advice. After a successful test print of a visor 'hoop' (remix of the Prusa RC2 which was the pick of the doc near me) in PLA, I need to print a number of these in a material that can withstand a bleach solution or alcohol spray. For some reason all of the print recommendations reference PETG. I have some nylon on hand, three rolls of T-glase and of course lots of PLA. I will stay away from the PLA, just because it's not recommended by anyone, but don't want to waste the filaments I have experimenting and have never used the t-glase (the rolls had just arrived in December). So, I would dearly love input from those who have successfully used T-glase on a UM3. What print settings work, how should I prep the bed and at what temp should I run it. I do have some Ultimaker print adhesion sheets, it looks like these have been recommended elsewhere as a way to prevent glass bed chipping. Open to thoughts. My wife's clinic is already running low on visors so the sooner I can print these up the better. Thanks!! John
  6. Completely agree. More a question on how we might verify a supply of what is needed before we take on a product request. I appreciate this is coming together quickly and we'll fill in the blanks as we go. What's the normal time frame from signing up to appearing on the map? You are probably already dealing with a backlog, at least I hope so! 😉 Good on you John
  7. On a related note, there are probably a number of ultimakers out there potentially sitting idle for one reason or another. Is there a way to put out a public call to check for eligible printers and perhaps connect with the nearest active hub that can put the printer to work? I know there are many complexities with doing so, not the least of which is social distancing requirements, but given that these printers wipe down pretty well and we already use isopropyl on the print beds, this might be a way to multiply the number of printers we can bring to bear. One further thought - some of the business where there are bound to be many of these printers, are shut down. If there is an essential service that these printers can provide, perhaps limited access to employees, again, respecting social distancing, can be granted to permit the printers to function. John
  8. I've tried to fill out the form as best I can. As for materials, I guess it will depend on the need. I have lots of PLA but limited nylon, a fair bit of PETG. Maybe we can put together a chart of what materials are best and safe for what medical applications, any other info like tendency to promote static electricity or things that might interfere with medical devices would be good to know too. Here we go! John
  9. Ditto here in Ottawa. Form is flagged. Happy to help! I can't see the form so this next question might be answered, but if we can be connected to sources of filament that are remaining open and known to work with the parts we need to make, that would be excellent.... Great initiative. Best wishes to all and your loved ones. John
  10. I don't have an S5 but have looked at this off and on since its release. Not to be too picky here, but how did we get to the point where one needs a distributor to correct a firmware update? I don't live anywhere near a distributor. This would be a big deal. I get the hazard warning with stored charges and the advice to avoid exposure is wise. But the philosophy behind such a creation, coming from Ultimaker of all places, surprises me. Now, this place is full of people waaay smarter than me. Is there any possibility down the road of creating an interface unit that can allow a field recovery without risk of death? I mean, seriously, what will we do when the S5 is no longer supported by distributors? J
  11. Hi! Where in the US are you? Thanks and best wishes for a successful listing. John
  12. The Modix is an interesting machine. Still relatively rare so you might be a bit of a pioneer. Can you provide a bit of info as to where (generally) you're located, what print nozzle size(s) you are working with, filament type, etc? Cheers J
  13. Good morning. I've been very reluctant to upgrade either Cura or the firmware on my UM3 due to the severity of the issues over the last few releases. I understand that for many, the changes are all working, but one cannot tell in advance if they are going to have a smooth or destructive upgrade. Hard to accept this kind of risk while offering a commercial service. While I appreciate the changes have been introduced with great intent and in response to user feedback, also that the Ultimaker team is working flat out to fix things, perhaps this is a case of trying to put too much capability into the software (and firmware). It just seems to me as though finding all of the bugs and maintaining things is overwhelming the technical resources of the team. Before the current phase of trouble, we had a very capable of printer, perhaps capable of doing much more. Some users no longer have the level of use they had before the upgrades began and no 'downgrade' path to a solid firmware/software environment. I am wondering if there can be consideration given to an upgrade branch that re-establishes a less capable, but more reliable, version of Cura and firmware. Not as fully featured as the latest releases, perhaps, but solid. Yes, this is a load at a time when the team is fully tasked, but at the end of the day, this comes down to promises made, and kept, to those ordering prints. In my line of work, if we can't get something stable enough to meet our required reliability spec, we are required to roll back to a solid state, hence the suggestion. Thanks for your consideration. John
  14. Welcome! Can you advise where this printer is located? Thanks John
  15. I've been holding off updating cura or the firmware on my UM3 for months, it just seems the newer releases have a lot of issues. Can anyone running a UM3 with current firmware and also Windows 10 64 bit with Cura 4.4 advise how it is going? Thanks John
  16. Thanks Morghan. I'm in Ottawa, probably not cost effective to try and ship it across the border. That said, it looks like a good system, I'm sure it will get a lot of bites. Cheers John
  17. I'm looking for one of these - where are you located? Cheers John
  18. Thanks! I'll give that a try. All the best John
  19. That's good to know, of course disappointing to miss out on something with such significant potential. While I've been a programmer most of my professional life, I have steered clear of messing with anything below end user interfaces on the ultimaker line. Maybe once this intent feature is proven, there could be discussion of implementing some of what it delivers via other means on older printers. Is that possible? -John
  20. Thanks for your reply! That does make sense and also offers an explanation as to why we have been seeing so many wrinkles in software over the past couple of years. A lot of members in the family and the permutations grow geometrically. In your opinion, would it be realistic to expect these features to be limited to a couple of models in the initial beta test, then expanded outward to include the rest of the production series? John
  21. Same concern regarding the omission of the UM3 from the intent profiles. The engineering tolerances would solve a major issue here - one of the reasons I am looking at options like the markforged as an addition is to try and deal with the existing tolerance variation. Can someone from the team explain why this is limited to the s3 and s5? My hope would be, if you still buy a new version of the printer (and with the UM3 this is the case), it should be supported.... Thanks for your thoughts. John
  22. nallath, thank you for your great response! It's always the same with making and innovation - there is the curve of what is possible and another curve of what is practical. The challenge is finding where the curves intersect. ( In my case, it's often not curves, but scatter plots, but perhaps that is another thread ;-)) The wear-out from retraction is something I hadn't considered. I can see the attempt to run multi-colours on one layer as a bad corner case. What I was thinking about was more along the lines of permitting a two - material print that also needed support. If running a BB core in position 2, the only real option to do this is permit material change on the fly. How to do that without grinding up filament might require a combination of user awareness and Cura smarts. The custom color option - I see a possible interface with a technology like Mosaic. I'm likely dreaming in technicolor here (pun intended), but having multi-spools in a controlled environment and ready between prints would sure be nice and elegant with a system like that in use. I guess the essential message is that this announcement is both a step in its own right, and a platform for future steps. While we are in the dreamscape, now that you have a captive material handler, how about a print core that can handle continuous kevlar, glass or carbon fibre like a certain stateside offering? 😉 What a world beater that would be. Thanks again for supporting this discussion. Greatly appreciated! Cheers John
  23. Didn't really have the control interface understood. Thanks! John
  24. I like the material station for what it allows, now, but perhaps more importantly, next steps. I'm not clear on a few things, so permit me to ask a few questions that might already have answers (but I can't find). 1) I can see that the material handler works with NFC coded spools. How does it work with generic materials? 2) I can see that the material handler will automatically find a new spool of the same material when the first spool is exhausted. How big a leap would it be to allow material switching (to another color or even material type) mid job, something akin to a CNC automatic tool changer? To me, this would be reason enough to buy the S5 pro bundle 3) next steps - leveraging the automated material handler and the print core technology, what prevents Ultimaker, in perhaps the next design cycle, from creating a filament color customizer, where several spools feed a integrator, either at the print core or upstream of it? Thanks in advance for your thoughts. John
×
×
  • Create New...