Jump to content

P3D

Member
  • Content Count

    178
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

P3D last won the day on October 23 2018

P3D had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

31 Excellent

Personal Information

  • Field of Work
    Manufacturing
  • Country
    AT
  • 3D printer
    Ultimaker S5

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Stiffer? That's not really my experience... in my experience, it becomes less stiff and more impact resistant after absorbing humidity. I found some interesting Nylon degradation test results here: https://www.toray.jp/plastics/en/amilan/technical/tec_003.html I find this quite shocking, especially the extreme brittleness (total lack of impact resistance) the samples showed after only a year of exposure...
  2. I'm so sorry, my fault - I accidentally loaded the same file twice. Now I see it. I could reproduce the behaviour, but I also arrived at the results you wanted (at least in the Cura preview). What you want to do (part of the surface just 0.05mm above the build plate) is only possible with an initial layer height of 0.05mm, otherwise it will be either -rounded up to the layer height (possibly making the plastic curl) - that is the case if your initial layer height is 0.05<=0.1mm (or, more generally, more than the depth of your pocket, but less or equal to twice the depth) -ignored (making your object stick firmly to the build plate) - that is the case if your initial layer height is >0.1mm (or, more generally, over twice the depth of your pocket) So to sum it up: Just set initial layer height to 0.05mm, then it should work - but only if your printer can reliably print such thin layers. Otherwise, it won't be possible, because everything in a layer has to be on the same z height by definition.
  3. Hi, I loaded both files and sliced them, there doesn't seem to be any difference - is it the same file, perhaps?
  4. Cool developments, I have to say - this time it's really things that are quite unique, and if they work as intended could make desktop 3D printing a lot more hassle-free. Curious to see how well the completely enclosed build volume works out, especially if it's integrated with the rest of the printer like that. Though I have to say that until the core job of printing with exact tolerances, easily removable supports etc. is implemented way better, for us it is hard to justify spending even more money on the UM ecosystem (may be a whole different story for many other people). A printer that is capable of near-automatic 24/7 operation, but is underutilized (because other printers get the job done without all the experimenting that would be neccesary for doing it with our S5) wouldn't be the wisest investment. I recommend taking a good look at said "stateside offering", and what they are capable of sqeezing out of the FDM process in terms of dimensional accuracy and general print quality.
  5. Naja, da kann man sich als Hersteller ganz gut absichern, deswegen gibt es ja die ganzen Warnhinweise... es geht ja nicht nur um das Gefühl bevormundet zu werden, sondern dass die Nutzbarkeit der Geräte teilweise drastisch eingeschränkt ist (siehe das nicht abschaltbare Active Leveling beim S5, was teilweise die Verwendung anderer Druckoberflächen unmöglich macht). Es ist schwer einzusehen, dass bei einem Gerät, das mit "open ecosystem" beworben wird dem Nutzer derartige Einschränkungen auferlegt werden, ohne irgendeine Möglichkeit "auf eigene Gefahr" doch über das vom Hersteller "allgemein Freigegebene" hinauszugehen...
  6. No, since (if I understand this correctly) Cura is directly sending the G-Code instructions to the printer in real time if you're printing over USB.
  7. Regardless of how well the Autoleveling normally works for some people, depriving the customers of the option to turn it off is not very smart. One of the appeals of UM printers is the open ecosystem. When you can't, for example, print with a different build surface that the UM leveling approach isn't compatible with, then that negates that whole appeal, meaning you'd probably be better off buying some other printer, as with the S5 you're pretty much restricted to the original glass plate. By the way: I don't even want to begin to count all the times a print just didn't start because some stupid plastic drooling out of the second nozzle during the (quite lengthy) leveling process ruined it all!
  8. You're right (see this thread: https://community.ultimaker.com/topic/23706-disable-automatic-active-bed-levelling-for-ultimaker-s5)... that's bad, how on earth did UM get the idea that such behaviour (just not offering customers this option) would be acceptable? The more you know, the less appealing UM printers look. Apart from the easy-swap cores, of course.
  9. The PPrint material you mention is quite interesting, so that material is approx. three times as stiff as the UM PP, if I interpret the data sheets correctly. Can't you just disable automatic leveling and use manual leveling?
  10. We have a Mark Two in our company, which is (apart from the extra fiber extruder in the Mark Two) mechanically identical to the Onyx One. It delivers very consistent and accurate results. Of course, it isn't perfect either, but the printed dimensions are always very close to those in the CAD file, holes for centering pins or screws also being very accurate out of the box (which they'd better be, since you have no control over the printing profile at all). Of course, MarkForged is in a comfortable position - they only have to deal with two materials, due to their closed system they can charge you quite some extra money for the filament, and they can control every single part of the printing process (apart from the user badly leveling the printer or improperly cleaning/glueing the build plate). On the other hand, Ultimaker can also control every part of the printing process. They make the printers, the software and the filament, so it should be possible to provide high-quality profiles that "just work" (instead of just being a starting point for tinkering). Back to Topic: One build plate "material" I really like is Anycubic's Ultrabase. I print PLA and PETG of various manufacturers with my i3 Mega, and I had close to zero adhesion issues while being able to just pick up the parts from the print plate with my hands after it had cooled to ambient temperature. Unfortunately, I am not aware of any possibility to buy such a plate seperately (it is glued to the heating elements), for example to replace the glass plate in an Ultimaker with this.
  11. Ummm no, maybe more like comparing a 4k printer to a 6k printer? (Onyx One vs. UM S5). Of course the build volume is bigger with the S5, and the material costs are quite a bit higher with the Markforged, but still I think this is a valid comparison, as it is about how accurate the profiles are (how dimensions come out when printed when compared to CAD.
  12. I stopped upgrading Cura right after the release quite some time ago, precisely because of such stupid bugs (and to think what would have happened if I upgraded the S5's firmware when the new version came out *shudder*). Seems like "agile" development isn't the best suited strategy for such a complex piece of software...
  13. I have to disagree. As shown by MarkForged and their printers, it is indeed possible to create profiles that are accurate for all models and not much slower than the default Cura profiles. Yes, MarkForged has complete control of their ecosystem (printers, software, materials), but so does Ultimaker.
  14. I tried the settings you recommended, the dimensions are better, they are not quite there yet but better than I am used to. I don't really care about maximum speed if my parts come out with reasonable tolerances.
  15. Thanks for providing these settings, I will certainly give them a try! Do similar settings exist for CPE, perhaps? That is the main material apart from ColorFabb's XT-CF20 that we print with right now. However, I will also second @NBulls question - if these settings do improve the accuracy, why aren't they included in the standard profiles, perhaps as an "accuracy" or "engineering" profile, as opposed to a "speed" or "general usage" profile? Since using Ultimaker Materials on an Ultimaker printer should ensure that Ultimaker does have complete control over all aspects of printing, there would certainly be a possibility for the UM profile authors to make really accurate profiles for these materials?
×
×
  • 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!