Jump to content

kfsone

Member
  • Content Count

    47
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. That's a tricky print, but a pleasing result, but btw the "Printing Guidelines" link just takes you to the product page now. Question: Would this be a good candidate for the BB print core? Also, it would be awesome to have a way to leverage the way these kinds of filament react to temperature variations to produce grain effects. You can do that with post-processing but that's just flat layer-by-layer and the end result is an mdf/plywood effect rather than grain.
  2. @Matioupi It's controlled by this, if you don't have it visible, search settings for it: Infact, search for "horizontal expansion" to make sure you don't have the regular one set too.
  3. I've been noticing "random" behaviors. The other day I did something routine and it suddenly started unloading printcore 1. @gr5 told me there is an issue preventing printing the calibration chart because the printer over-retracts print core 2, but then support told me that he's wrong, the bug prevents anyone printing a calibration chart. Except, I've been able to print a calibration chart by doing nothing more than print->power cycle->print. I was able to print once and then it lost the calibration (even tho it has the settings). With active leveling set to manual, it will occasionally still do active leveling on me. There's just this long list of weird things the printer has been doing since the last firmware. I know I could downgrade, but physical, forced, firmware kludges have bricked too many devices for me in the past, and I can get about 70-80% of the prints I want with single extrusion, and I haven't seen any kind of disclaimer that if I brick my printer following the firmware recovery instructions I won't be out of warranty... @SandervG I'd rather than they put the old firmware up on the testing channel and let people choose to "up"-downgrade to it.
  4. My solution was just to reduce the first layer height and width. TPLAs inherent adhesion is good enough without needing to crush it against the plate. Also results in a more consistent glossy finish. No curling, no elephants foot. The line width may not even need reducing but I found it made the gloss a little less shiny-polished, and for the piece I'm printing that was a better look. The other thing you might consider: if you have one of the newer build plates, the side of the plate with the heat sticker on it has better adhesion. Flipping the build plate with give you slightly less adhesion, but again, TPLA is already good.
  5. Guys - fuzzy skin has only one thing keeping it from kicking ass: there doesn't seem to be any way to restrict which surfaces get fuzzed. For example: it doesn't hurt, but you might not want to waste print time on fuzzing the never-to-be-seen underside of your model; or you might not want to fuzz joints/connections. Ironing likewise would be nice to have finer control - perhaps the option to paint which surfaces you want each applied to? Hats off to you on both of those features, btw, printed a set of steps for our 15yo cat to get in/out of the litter pan with a bit of dignity, and she'd have nothing to do with the test print, but the fuzzed skin version she liked so much I printed her several other steps and pieces 🙂 They also look spectacular with some materials. LayStone with fuzz keeps fooling people into thinking they're touching a chunk of limestone or pumice 🙂
  6. I hadn't, but that looks interestingly close to what I was considering, except I'd want it all the way thru the height of the model. In Simplify3d I'd probably just have multiple processes and split the high-fidelity parts out to a separate process.
  7. PS: - "def __init__(self) -> None:" init doesn't return None, it actually doesn't return anything, so at some point having the "-> None" will break your code. - if you make your function-entry comments into strings, python will automatically use them as the function's __doc__ property, so that they are documented by help(function_name, and will the life of anyone who looks at your code as well as your own a lot easier 🙂 > ipython Python 3.7.1 (default, Dec 10 2018, 22:54:23) [MSC v.1915 64 bit (AMD64)] Type 'copyright', 'credits' or 'license' for more information IPython 7.2.0 -- An enhanced Interactive Python. Type '?' for help. In [1]: def getSettingDataString(self): ...: """ You may either use the normal getSettingDataString function or the getSettingDataStringWithInfo ...: the latter will add a comment setting in which you can enter any relevant information ...: you want to insert at the beginning of the GCode file """ ...: pass ...: In [2]: help(getSettingDataString) Help on function getSettingDataString in module __main__: getSettingDataString(self) You may either use the normal getSettingDataString function or the getSettingDataStringWithInfo the latter will add a comment setting in which you can enter any relevant information you want to insert at the beginning of the GCode file In [3]: If you'd like to experiment with gcode without always having to remember the gcode names ... it's very preliminary, I've only been hacking at it for a few hours: https://github.com/kfsone/pymcode. If you have a UM3, there's a "ultimaker3.py" script you can run that drops you into an ipython repl with "um3" configured as a connection to your printer and "ops" having all of the command aliases. Or you can then type "repl()" and it will go into a mode where you can basically either type '"M104' to send raw gcode, or you can just use the command names: Cmd> "M105 Cmd> set_bedtemp 65 Cmd> "T0 Cmd> set_hotendtemp 200 Cmd> wait_hotendtemp 190 Cmd> go There's a "help" command to list the repl commands.
  8. Have you looked at iPython/Jupyter? iPython is basically the original repl on steroids and the "console" versions of it are a great way to merge IDLE and the REPL in one shot. Jupyter, originally called IPython Notebook - takes it a step further and abstracts the backing interpreter so that it can be housed in a web-service, where a "notebook" is basically a webified version of a repl with "cells" containing blocks of code that you can tweak/re-execute, iterate on. The back-end abstraction they called "a kernel" and because of this they're able to actually service pretty much any programming language as a back-end, it's even possible to have different languages in different cells. It brings a lot else to the table, including "magics" - additional commands that start with "%", e.g. %time and %timeit for benchmarking, "?" and "??" for querying objects/modules etc, ? being an abbreviation for "help(...)" and "??" giving generally better info, There are various debugger features too, but for me the most convenient is "%load_ext autoreload" and "%autoreload 2" so that as I make source-file changes they get auto-reloaded in the running interpreter.
  9. When you're printing a piece that is mostly solid but with delicate connectors or prongs/pins/etc, it'd be really nice to be able to have something like adaptive layers that works based on the size/circumference of the section of the piece it's printing, so if it's printing a section of a part with a very narrow radius, alter the speed? See the stands in the attached example SampleShell.stl
  10. << This was supposed to be an edit, not a quote
  11. @gr5 Please see above: it refused to extrude the second head on 18 of my 21 attempts to print the calibration chart today. The pattern of behaviors I saw today was entirely consistent with the C/C++ concept of "Undefined Behavior". I was beginning to suspect this earlier today, so I sat and repeatedly power-cycled the printer, asked it to print a calibration chart, and observed the results. Multiple behaviors were random. And yes, a 100% fail rate *is* a legitimate random sequence, if taken from a large enough sample of samples. It's also why you have a smattering of users who can't get auto-level to work at all, a majority of users for whom it is presumably working N/M times and a bunch for whom it works every time. Undefined Behavior often "works in dev" - in my experience it often works in qa and staging, too. UB is frequently non-deterministic If you want - I can take a look at the change log on github of the commits that went into this firmware and see if I can spot anything that would introduce a UB issue? I'm happy to trawl the code, but I'd rather not have to find it in the first place 🙂 -Oliver
  12. Here it is not-printing. I have no idea why, I primed it before starting this print, you can see the residue on the left nozzle. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1sHU1varPzn2ZhSmLYm0944waA3W3S2Rj It did, though, print the very last line of the y chart: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1pfEOWTcIpbX7_dKPMpPN_HNFPY5rrKcS And then the right filament also failed to be extruded. I've manually leveled the printer and printed a successful 1-layer test print, now I'm going to try printing a calibration print again.
  13. I got down to my last spool of PLA for the left head, but I managed - after 3 days - to get a calibration chart printed. In the end, stopped adjusting anything and just kept rebooting the printer and starting a new calibration print. On the 9th run, it printed this: (I'd run out of the other PLA so I had to use black...) After I'd entered the values, without doing anything else, I asked it to print another calibration print: it did the entire print without extruding anything, when it was done I went straight into Material 1 and moved it, and it instantly extruded some material... *shrug*
  14. No: I was diagnosing an unrelated issue when I updated the firmware and after that the auto-level affecting issue prevented me from diagnosing it until I switched to manual leveling. But having said that, I think the problem is not specific to auto-leveling. I think you have some Undefined Behavior in your firmware: I'm unable to print the calibration test because the printer randomly Does The Wrong Thing for me in terms of selecting print head and priming that print head. I've tried about 15 calibration prints just today and I get a random combination of it lowering the wrong print head, unpriming the right right head so much that it only prints the last few lines of the chart, and occasionally - even though I have active levelling set to off - occasionally it will do an "active leveling" at the start of the calibration print and then it fails to print because its trying to ram the print head into the bed. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1_IOhDMBvyE8HEV6LdnkMypM2NjZdwQD9 It also keeps trying to either print the calibration print with the wrong heads (e.g it has the right head lowered while trying to print the left chart) or it over-retracts t1 at some point (I tried to make sure the heads were primed before trying to print) and I only get the last few lines of the t1 chart.
  15. Half the time I try to print a calibration sheet, my UM3 insists on first lowering the right head, and then totally failing to extrude anything during the print. Or, on the rare occasion I can get it to print the left head's chart, it will then attempt to *raise* the right head and end up doing this: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1KY-CuhyAt7FI4ShHEz7ieyVXQ3sM9yY3 A reboot of the machine often convinces it to stop doing this. Sometimes it will say it's doing an auto-level but immediately continue with the calibration; when this happens, the print head gets pushed hard against the bed and nothing prints unless I manually pull the bed down. About 1 time in 6 I get a successful print of the left-head's calibration, but then it fails for one of two reasons: a- About half the time so far, it actively tries to raise, instead of lower, the right head. So, of course, the right head doesn't print anything. b- There seems to be a retraction that occurs resulting in the right head not extruding any material until the last half of the upper scale. Could probably be fixed by having a G280 or skirt line before the calibration print. Anyone had similar problems and managed to overcome them?
×
×
  • 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!