-
Posts
68 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
SteveCox3D last won the day on October 17 2024
SteveCox3D had the most liked content!
Personal Information
-
3D printer
Ultimaker S5
-
Country
GB
-
Industry
Education
(Product) design
Engineering
R&D / Exploration
Manufacturing - On The Web
Recent Profile Visitors
2,987 profile views
SteveCox3D's Achievements
87
Reputation
1
Community Answers
-
Hi @DatDrunkDude As @gr5 mentioned I have had a lot of experience with printing the Ultrafuse metal filaments. Unfortunately there was a Cura issue a while back and the last stable release that didn't have any bugs for metal FFF printing was Cura 5.3.0. Users of these materials then started reporting strange issues especially related to depositing the layer support material. I was told that these issues were all resolved with the release of 5.7.2, however it makes me wonder if some bugs have crept back in to cause your issue. If possible I would recommend trying your print using Cura 5.3.0 and ensure that you have the latest material profiles installed for both the metal filament and the support layer material. If this resolves the problem we will know if there is an issue with Cura that needs reporting to UltiMaker. Because I know it works I always use Cura 5.3.0 for metal FFF printing because the material is too expensive to waste on printing errors like the one that you have seen.
-
Ultimaker/Cura Not Downloading Previously Added Ultrafuse 316L
SteveCox3D replied to kevinkar's topic in UltiMaker Cura
@kevinkar I would personally steer clear of using Cura 5.4 as there seems to be quite some issues with it. I'm still running Cura 5.3.0 and it's delivering good metal prints -
Ultimaker/Cura Not Downloading Previously Added Ultrafuse 316L
SteveCox3D replied to kevinkar's topic in UltiMaker Cura
I'm not an expert in the software side, so I can't really shed any light of the incompatibility of the material with Cura 5.2.1. As far as I know this hasn't been highlighted as an issue previously. Whilst I can suggest ways of manually setting up the material profile to work in 4.13.1 it would be much better to get the root cause of the problem sorted. This is because BASF have spent a lot of development time getting the 316L and 17-4PH profiles right, and I don't know what all of the tweaks are that they have applied to the printing profile. Also with Cura 5.X certain features were added which were targeted at improving mFFF printing that can't be replicated in 4.13. One of these was "Alternate Walls" which constantly alternates the printing direction layer by layer to even out the internal stresses in the part. The standard expansion settings for the part are X/Y 119% and Z 125% and other printing settings to set things up manually are included in the BASF Ultrafuse 316L guidelines : https://forward-am.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/UserGuidelines_2021_03_29.pdf -
Metall FFF for printing a wood building screw
SteveCox3D replied to toemmes's topic in Improve your 3D prints
@geert_2 The parts end up at 96-98% dense after sintering (providing there's no defect in the printing). I've not found these parts to be brittle, they seem to me to behave the same as if they've been made in any other way. That's not to say they won't break if they're over-stressed, in the same way that you can snap a standard fixing if it sees too much torque through it. -
@hearbob50 It’s a real shame that the support layer material isn’t available in North America because it really helps to unlock the ability to produce more complex geometries. If you are using Cura 5.1 and the latest material profile for 17-4PH from the Cura Marketplace then parts should autoscale when you slice them. You only see that scaling though in the Preview mode where if you click on the sliced preview you should see the blue outline of the original part silhouetted against the scaled up version. There is something important to be aware of though that will affect the scaling in Cura. Either the same 17-4PH material or Support Layer material needs to be loaded against Extruder 2 in Cura, or Extruder 2 needs to be disabled altogether. If Extruder 2 is active with a normal material assigned to it then the scaling factor is averaged across the two Extruders, so you get 109% X/Y and 112%Z instead of the 119% and 125% required. That’s an annoying thing, but I’ve been told it can’t be fixed. The shrinkage plate is generated by clicking the Raft option in the Bed Adhesion settings. Without the Support Layer material though you will need to pause the print and abort it after the raft has been printed. Where the Support Layer is available it puts a single layer of that material on top of the raft to isolate the part from the shrinkage plate. If you install the Suuport Layer material from the Marketplace and set it to Extruder 2 and select the raft option you will see how it works in the preview. For markets without access to the Support Layer material the shrinkage plate needs to be printed separately and supplied together with the part to the debind and sinter service provider who will manually apply a ceramic spray coating to the top of the plate to isolate it from the part that sits on top of it. Hope that helps, if I can answer any other questions on metal FFF printing then let me know.
-
Metall FFF for printing a wood building screw
SteveCox3D replied to toemmes's topic in Improve your 3D prints
@gr5 I flattened it in CAD to provide the flat face to interface with the support when it's sliced. -
Metall FFF for printing a wood building screw
SteveCox3D replied to toemmes's topic in Improve your 3D prints
No problem @toemmes, we're here to help. I too have 3D printed polymer bolts in the horizontal orientation to achieve better strength. One thing that I have tested with that orientation is flattening the thread where it contacts the support to provide a better first layer on top of the support material, rather than just lots of small extrusion at the tip of the threads. With a threaded bolt I had a good result with this, it gave a more efficient print with no significant loss of performance of the threadform. I'm not sure how applicable this would be to a woodscrew though, so I have experimented to show you what I mean and the difference it creates when slicing. In the image where the screw is normal you can see the small areas of red extrusion in the first layer of the thread printed on the support structure. There is also a lot of small areas of support layer material also being printed. In the other sliced image where the thread has been flattened you can see a much better first layer being put on top of the support layer material, and the support layer on top of the support structure is also much better because it is a continuous layer, rather than a lot of small individual areas. I'd be happy to share the slice files for these if it helps...... I think that threads around the 6-8mm area are the smallest that would work successfully using a 0.4mm nozzle, I think it could go smaller with a smaller nozzle but the CC0.4 is currently the smallest nozzle that you can use with the metal filaments. I would always recommend the Air Manager for use when printing with these materials. It does keep the print area more stable and the added air filtration that you get is a good thing too. -
Metall FFF for printing a wood building screw
SteveCox3D replied to toemmes's topic in Improve your 3D prints
Hi there @toemmes, as @gr5 says I've hot lots of experience with Metal FFF. As far as printing threads go, it can work really well as I showed in this post on LinkedIn The key thing here is whether the thread is large enough size and has enough definition when sliced to print out nicely. The part gets scaled up automatically in Cura 5.1 when you select the metal materials to account for the shrinkage that occurs when the printed part goes through debind and sintering. That means that the part grows by 19% in X/Y and 25% in Z, so you can only get an impression of how the part will turn out by looking at the Preview of the slice where these scaling factors are applied, The thread angle on the picture suggests that no support would be required for this part and maybe at an M8 size the thread definition would be ok. It's not just about the 3D printing though, you have to consider the post-processing and the stability of the part when it goes through the final stages of sintering at around 1300-1400°C. The stability of the part and ability to support it's own weight is crucial here. This is a part that you would normally print upright but it is quite tall in relation to it's footprint, so may be unstable and fail at that point. There are stress analysis tests that you can run to carry out a virtual simulation of whether the part will survive which is something I covered here. The screw is also quite tall, and that also affects the costs associated with debind and sintering because of the way the cost is calculated for that processing. As a general rule of thumb Metal FFF works best with parts that can fit in the palm of your hand and have a Z height up to 50mm with a good size footprint for stability (25mm or less in Z is even better). There is lots to know to be effective in taking advantage of this process of making metal parts, which is why I shared some of my insights in a series on LinkedIn which you can find by searching on #MetalThursdays Let me know if you have further questions, I'm happy to help. -
@Nacho2707 I don't speak Spanish but I have tried to translate and understand your question. Do you have the latest material profiles installed for the 17-4PH material installed. The default setting for Top & Bottom layers is 0 rather than the 8 that is showing in that image. The reason for that setting is that the Infill is set at 105% so there is no need for a Top or Bottom layer Via Google Translate : "Tiene instalados los últimos perfiles de material para el material 17-4PH instalado? La configuración predeterminada para las capas Superior e Inferior es 0 en lugar del 8 que se muestra en esa imagen. El motivo de esa configuración es que el Relleno está configurado al 105 %, por lo que no es necesaria una capa Superior o Inferior"
-
Hi Milan, the size of the parts is a recommendation and is very much driven by the equipment used for the debind and sintering. The part has to fit into a tray during that process so the size will need to include the raft. I am in the UK and I know that the standard tray size used by the debind and sinter partner in this country is 200 mm x 300mm x 25mm, so anything with a footprint that fits inside that 200 x 300mm dimension can be processed. It very much depends on the post processing partner for each country, but to be safe I would say that the 100mm dimension recommended will need to include the raft.
-
For those interested in the way that you can now produce stainless steel parts using an S-Line printer I've produced a guide to what's in the newly launched Metal Expansion Kit. It's there to explain how all of the parts fit together into the overall Metal FFF workflow, and includes not just my experience of 3D printing with the BASF Ultrafuse metal filaments but also includes some additional insights gained from some of the first people who have bought the kit : https://www.linkedin.com/posts/steve-cox-b575b29b_ultimaker-metalfff-3dprinting-activ[…]474565582848-Ik5g?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop
-
lrodriguez started following SteveCox3D
-
SteveCox3D started following UM S5 belt replacement and assembly diagrams
-
UM S5 belt replacement and assembly diagrams
SteveCox3D replied to Andy308's topic in UltiMaker 3D printers
Invaluable @Smithy !! I should have taken note of the configuration before I pulled it apart to change the blocks. Knowing which spacer went where on the short rods had me scratching my head until I pulled up your reply.