Jump to content
Ultimaker Community of 3D Printing Experts

Safe Build size for the UM2+ in Simplify3D?


Recommended Posts

Posted · Safe Build size for the UM2+ in Simplify3D?

I know similar questions have been asked before and i read a bunch of them already, but I am still not quite sure and i'd rather be safe here.

I just found out the hard way that Simplify3Ds Ultimaker2 Profile isn't quite correct for the Ultimaker2+, as with its default bed settings of 230 x 225 my print head crashed straight into the right wall or the rails or something, I was not best pleased about this.

At least I was right next to it and cut the power rather quickly, just to screw up a 2nd time by homing the head without lowering the bed first, so it hit the glass clip on the way home.. Not my day today it seems.

2 Questions if I may:

1) Anybody know of some safe settings for Simplify3D so this wont happen again?

2) Is there some sort of test or things i should check to make sure i didn't damage the printer? To me, it looks ok, the next print was fine, but I am not quite sure what i need to look for..

Thanks for you input

  • Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted · Safe Build size for the UM2+ in Simplify3D?

    I have just upgraded my UM2 extended to a '+' using the upgrade kit and have been using X=230 and Y=225 since I had the machine with no problems at all - why did it go across to the far right??

    If you look in Cura, the values show as X=223 Y=223 - might be worth trying those??

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted (edited) · Safe Build size for the UM2+ in Simplify3D?

    Ok, yeah 223 * 223 sounds reasonable indeed. I don't have the first clue what caused it to slam into the right wall. The object was "scaled to max" in S3D. All i did see is that it was trying to print the first line of the brim when it did hit the wall, there was nothing unusual there i think.

    One thing i did notice that could be behind all this maybe?

    When Cura sliced objects start to print, the head moves straight forward towards me and it starts priming / depositing this small spiral of filament pretty much right next to the left next to where the front glass clip is located.

    If i print a S3D sliced object, the head moves slightly diagonal and deposits this a good 1 cm further to the right pretty much on top of the clip. Offsets maybe? I wish i had more of a clue ;-)

    Hmmm.. i guess that would indicate something with the Start code perhaps? But I didn't modify that (except for taking out the first line where it increases the stepper current, i was told that's not good for the UM2+..)

    Edited by Guest
  • Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted · Safe Build size for the UM2+ in Simplify3D?

    Even if the area is set too large in the slicer, shouldn't the firmware stop with an error instead of crashing into a wall? In tinkerware you can adjust the maximum buildsize directly. I guess that standard firmware has all the same parameters but just missing in the menus. Are those parameters set wrong? Or are they meant for something different?

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted · Safe Build size for the UM2+ in Simplify3D?

    I had an idea: I hooked up my notebook and started testing it in Simplify3D using their jog controls. At 227 mm on the x-axis, the metal fan chassis touches the wall of the printer.

    I guess 223 is good and safe.

    .. and the default of 230 mm was 4 mm too much.

  • Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted · Safe Build size for the UM2+ in Simplify3D?

    The new fans are much wider. The firmware surely should have a limit, but maybe that is not updated if you upgrade the firmware from old non-plus models?

    The S3D priming deposit is hardcoded in the startup script, as well as the wipe.

  • Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted · Safe Build size for the UM2+ in Simplify3D?

    the new 3.1 version of Simplify3D is now using the correct 223 x 223x 200 mm as dimensions in their new UM2+ profile. In short: the problem is fixed.

    (They also removed the line in the start code where the stepper current was increased.)

  • Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now
    ×
    ×
    • Create New...