Jump to content

V3DPrinting

Member
  • Content Count

    75
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by V3DPrinting

  1. @burtoogle Thanks for the answer. In the mean time, I've been through the Gcode file, the old way, with Repetier. Indeed when the Z hop only over printed parts is on, there is a z hop inside the part, but no between two parts with the S5. I will check the gcode file generated for the UM3E, as the print is good.
  2. Hi @burtoogle So basically I need to tell the printer to make a Z Hop all the time and it should work, making a Z hop with each retraction ? Then I have two questions : 1) Why the Cura simulation is correct, making the Z Hop with the S5 ? 2) Why the S5 is not performing the Z Hop instructions a least on the first layer ?
  3. Hi to all I have a job which is dual extrusion (ColorFabb XT and Ultimaker TPU) which runs smoothly on UM3E. Unfortunately I can only print 6 pieces at a time for approx 8h print. I need to speed up the order, so I have tried to print 12 pieces at a time on my S5, so I've duplicated the settings on the S5. If I look at the print simulation on Cura, the first layer looks perfect, with a retract + Z Hop when moving over the already printed part of the first layer. Printed on the UM3E, the behavior is the same as simulated in Cura, but on the S5, the second extruder (Blue TPU) is not performing any Z Hop on the first layer, so there is an unacceptable pollution of the white first layer done by the first extruder. My settings : Cura 4.1.0 UM3E FW : 5.2.11.20190503 UM S5 FW : 5.2.11.20190503 Attached the projects on both printers and the result of the first layer on S5. It seems to be a FW issue on S5. As usual, I have a customer order pending with that issue. Thanks for your quick feedbacks Best David UM3E_Parts x6.3mf UMS5_Parts x12.3mf
  4. Indeed, very close to the print I get. Except the top layers seems to be fine on my prints.
  5. I have done some more testing on a calibration cube. First I have printed a cube using the CC 0.6 profile instead of an AA 0.4 with modified line width. The result is a bit better after tuning the print temp a bit, as speeds are much lower 45 mm/s default speed instead of 70 mm/s in the AA profile. There is a pretty standard elephant foot at first glance. Not as good as the prints done by @smartavionics, but better. Then I have printed another cube with the AA profile, with 0,55 line width, to match the 0,6 nozzle, and same speeds as in the CC 0,6 profile. So the two profiles were the same regarding line width, temperatures, speeds and of course shell and infill. The cube now show a bulge as in the first attempts. So there is something to do with the parameters and the slicer maybe. Are all the features of the CC or AA profile editable in Cura ? Thanks for the feedback David
  6. I have cleaned my extruder, but it was pretty clean already. Nearly no deposits on the knurled wheel. Yesterday night, I have printed a big flat part (300 * 190 * 10 mm), using the same settings as the last posted for the calibration cube. No bulging nor elephant foot at all. I am still using the same spool. I am not convinced it is an extrusion issue. Though I must admit your prints were really good. I will try to use the CC printcore setting on a calibration cube....
  7. @smartavionics Indeed it is way better than my prints. Maybe a calibration issue As far as I know, e steps are an average value, part of the firmware (I have QR3,0 Bondtech extruders on UM3E, so I have to tweak the FW at each upgrade). But is there an easy way to calibrate it and set it on the S5? Usually we have to send an extrude command of x mm of filament, then measure the real length of filament that have been through. Tweaking the FW should be close to the UM3 procedure. Other option is : the extruder is dirty ... I'll have a look tomorrow when my print job has completed.
  8. Just to confirm that it is not a standard elephant foot, but a slicer issue, I have printed a calibration cube with a 2 mm bottom layer thickness. And the issue is on 2 mm height from the build plate .... UMS5_Cube plein test.3mf
  9. I have printed a 30 mm calibration cube with the same settings as in the cura project. the wall and infill layers + top skin layers measure 30,04 mm, but the bottom skin with the "elephant foot" is 30,58 mm. The issue is only on the 5 bottom skin layers, as my settings were 5 bottom layers, after that, the layers tend progressively to reduce to the target size. Given the fact the line width has been set to 0,55mm, there is nearly a full line width added to the bottom skin layers.
  10. HI @smartavionics I have done some more testing, as in my customer project I need to make some text insertions into a board. As I don't want to file / sand every letter in order to fit the board, I am trying to get rid of the "elephant foot". First I confirm it is not a classical elephant foot, but the skin layers being larger than the walls + infill layers. Second, I have the issue also printing with a 0,6 mm nozzle. I have double checked the filament diameter and flow rate. In fact the filament is 2,82 mm for 2,84 mm diameter set in Cura, so the real flow rate is 99%. Third, the issue is on small parts, not on larger ones. See picture : I have printed both parts on the same print job. On the larger one, I don't have any elephant foot, only a first layer a bit too squished and not fully compensated by the -0,3mm first layer horizontal expansion. But on the letter, which is only 25 mm wide, I do have the issue with the skin layers. I am currently printing a calibration cube in order to have a precise measurement of the "elephant foot" with a 0.6 mm nozzle. David UMS5_Test dimensionnel.3mf
  11. OK thanks a lot. So I shouldn't have that issue. Again, printing with a 0,6 mm nozzle with a 0,55 line width on the same printer / hardcore with the same spool / material flow / profile (except line width) / part doesn't create to a larger part on the skin layers.
  12. HI @smartavionics Using wider lines for the infill doesn't save any time, just more material and weight on the print. And yes I have used wider lines : 0,75mm line width for a 0,8 mm nozzle. I've also made a test with a 0,8 mm line width, but it doesn't change the behavior. I may have a go on your suggestion for a 1,00 line width with the 0,8 mm nozzle, but it will increase the pressure in the nozzle so retraction and coasting tuning might be a bit more tricky. Generally, I am setting a lower line width than the nozzle size for these reasons. I think there is an issue in the line width calculation / parametrization for the skin and bottom layers.
  13. UP ! I still have the issue with the bottom layers being oversized using a 0.8 mm nozzle. As there is no issues printing the same part with a 0.6 mm nozzle it may be related to the slicer. I need to print a big flat part in many chunks and a 0.8mm nozzle would save me a lot of time. Has anyone a workaround ? Thanks in advance
  14. I have completed my order, but with some quality issues on the S5. I have played with the combing to realize that retraction was a good culprit as with no combing, I still have the issue on my cylinders and lots of stringing. So I have increased it to 8mm and 35 mm/s, and the result was much better. I have also decreased the temp by 5°C. These setting provide an acceptable but not good print due to striging and still over sized cylinders. Advice much appreciated !
  15. HI to all I am printing a casing for a customer of mine, but as there are many of them ordered, I print on 2 UM3E, 1 UM S5 and a highly modified Mankati XT Plus (Duet3d, Bondtech, E3D V6) All printers are using 0.6 nozzles with ColorFabb PLA Economy White (3dSolex Hardcore for the Ultimaker). I use Simplify 3D for the Mankati slicing and Cura 4,0 for the Ultimakers. I have an issue printing 2 small 2mm pins which are a bit touchy to print with a 0,6 nozzle, but I manage to have something acceptable : Pretty good results on the Mankati Acceptable on the UM3E after a bit of trimming with a scalpel (not done on the picture). Clearly unacceptable on the S5 even after a bit of tweaking. Too much over extrusion and striging First I have set the UM S5 with the very same parameters as the UM3E, except travel speed and equalize filament flow. But the results were even worse than on the picture. UM3E_boitier repaired.3mf So I have tweaked a bit (lower temp, combing within infill to force Z hop, infill line width to 0.55, Outer before inner walls, removed equalize filament flow) but still it is not acceptable. There is a retraction before the move from the frame to the pin and from one pin to another, but no z hop and the head is crashing into the print. Increasing the travel speed might be an option as it seems to work on the UM3E with 250 mm/s, but Cura prevents increasing the travel speed even to 200 mm/s on the S5. What's the maximum travel speed on the S5 ? Nothing on the tech specs... UMS5_boitier repaired.3mf Thanks for your feedback David
  16. Thanks for the feedback Yes I've checked the filament diameter and it was the right one. I have also played with the flow rate, dropping it to 90%, but with no success. BTW, the very same filament (same spool, same diameter, 100% flow rate as it's PLA) on the same printer, with the same printhead, but a 0.6 nozzle printing the same part does not create the "elephant foot". I have just swapped the nozzle on my 3d Solex Hardcore. So I believe there is something not properly handled in Cura on the solid infill feature.
  17. Here it is ! Thanks for your expertise. UMS5_Cube plein test.3mf
  18. Hi to all I am trying to print with a 0,8 mm nozzle on my S5, using Cura 4,0. I have used the printcore AA 0,8 profile and printed a calibration cube in PLA, 200 microns resolution I have done some tuning on the temps (nozzle and bed) and material flow, but whatever I set, I still have an elephant foot on all the solid infill layers. So the 5 first layers are consistently at 30,5 mm for a cube of 30 mm side, for the rest of the layers I have a 30 mm +/- 0,05 cube. See picture I forgot to mention that printing with a 0,6 nozzle with a profile derived from the AA 0.4 works fine, no elephant foot at all. And yes, I am using 3D Solex Hardcores, so I am able to swap nozzles. Also I have noticed an excess of material on the top layers Has anyone a clue ? Thanks for your feedback David
  19. Topic can be closed. I have recreated one in the Cura section, which is more appropriate.
  20. I forgot to mention that printing with a 0,6 nozzle with a profile derived from the AA 0.4 works fine, no elephant foot at all. And yes, I am using 3D Solex Hardcores, so I am able to swap nozzles. Also I have noticed an excess of material on the top layers Has anyone a clue ?
  21. Hi to all I am trying to print with a 0,8 mm nozzle on my S5, using Cura 4,0. I have used the printcore AA 0,8 profile and printed a calibration cube in PLA, 200 microns resolution I have done some tuning on the temps (nozzle and bed) and material flow, but whatever I set, I still have an elephant foot on all the solid infill layers. So the 5 first layers are consistently at 30,5 mm for a cube of 30 mm side, for the rest of the layers I have a 30 mm +/- 0,05 cube. See picture Thanks for your feedback David
  22. Yes aluminium plate would have been great ! But the project was cancelled at Ultimaker, so we would get an extra glass plate. I am thinking of having some glass plates done by my local supplier for my S5. It's not cheaper, but I suspect quality is better as far as I can see on my Mankati.
  23. Sorry I clarify my point. Printing ABS with PVA doesn't work well for warping, not consistent compared to Dimafix spray.
  24. Hi Kman Being a service provider, PVA is a PITA to manage (application, removal) so I use sprays mostly. Printing ABS with PVA doesn't make the trick, generally I go with Dimafix, but for that specific grade 3D Lac is sufficient. I use glass plates from my local supplier on a Mankati Full-scale XT Plus, 4mm heat tempered glass made to measures, without chipping issues so far. What's why I'm wondering if there isn't an issue with the genuine Ultimaker S5 glass plate.... BTW it would have been good to have the aluminium build plate.
  25. In addition, finishing the print run, I had another time the same chipping issue. Hopefully it was on the same glassplate. So now it is really dead on both sides. Has someone had the same issues with the S5 glass plates ?
×
×
  • Create New...

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!