PIB polybenzimidazole Isolator Coupler

[MTG 8]

Aaahhh.... great idea... With the use of PBI yo on the same track than me, but I'd like to apply the PBI parts to my beloved UMO :-)

My first thought was just to replace the PEEK and PTFE parts with PBI, but I also think it is not worth the invest...

Do you think that these parts will also work with PEEK or PTFE?

With PBI I was pretty sure about that, but I can't tell with PEEK or PTFE...

[drayson 75]

Aaahhh.... great idea... With the use of PBI yo on the same track than me, but I'd like to apply the PBI parts to my beloved UMO :-)

My first thought was just to replace the PEEK and PTFE parts with PBI, but I also think it is not worth the invest...

Do you think that these parts will also work with PEEK or PTFE?

With PBI I was pretty sure about that, but I can't tell with PEEK or PTFE...

Ok, maybe I was'nt so precise with my explaination :-)

I´l put it into German...

Servus,

der Ultimaker Original hat jene Teile, die das Hot End darstellen aus PEEK bzw. PTFE (sieh dir mal das Dasign an), der Ultimaker 2 hingegen hat ein anderes HotEnd design.

Ich habe einen Ultimaker Original, daher war mein Ansatz, die bestehenden Komponenten, welche aus PEEK und PTFE gefertigt sind, einfach gegen idente Teile aus PBI gefertigt zu ersetzen - leider zu hohe Kosten, daher verworfen...

Sooo, back to English :-)

For all non-German speaking guys in short, briefly desribed the design differences between UMO and UM2 hotends...

[neotko 1,417]

About the ideas of using PEEK

2 years ago in a far far away forum...

https://ultimaker.com/en/community/8024-teflon-spacer-replacement#reply-66427

[neotko 1,417]

Thanks @gudo ! Today installed one of the 3 kits you made me and the bed seems so freaking nice!

Will run proper tests before/after on the next umo+

[gudo 246]

Thanks @gudo ! Today installed one of the 3 kits you made me and the bed seems so freaking nice!

Will run proper tests before/after on the next umo+

Hi to all!

Hi Neotko!

Great ! that would damper well the bed vibrations and I hope that will improve your print results

[gudo 246]

It's the New Year now !

best wishes to all

[krys 206]

 

Thanks @gudo ! Today installed one of the 3 kits you made me and the bed seems so freaking nice!

Will run proper tests before/after on the next umo+

 

Hi to all!

Hi Neotko!

Great ! that would damper well the bed vibrations and I hope that will improve  your print results  

 

Hi @Gudo,

Are you sharing (or willing to share) your bed stabilizer publicly and/or are you planning to sell kits?

I would be interested in getting/making one too, if @neotko says it improves prints. I have M6 threaded rod so I do not mind making it.

Thanks and Happy New Year!

[neotko 1,417]

 

 

Thanks @gudo ! Today installed one of the 3 kits you made me and the bed seems so freaking nice!

Will run proper tests before/after on the next umo+

 

Hi to all!

Hi Neotko!

Great ! that would damper well the bed vibrations and I hope that will improve  your print results  

 

Hi @Gudo,

Are you sharing (or willing to share) your bed stabilizer publicly and/or are you planning to sell kits?

I would be interested in getting/making one too, if @neotko says it improves prints. I have M6 threaded rod so I do not mind making it.

Thanks and Happy New Year!

 

My first test showed improvement but I found a big flaw on my redesign to adapt it to umo that I need to fix in the following weeks. After changing basic stuff I'll do some tests again.

[krys 206]

My first test showed improvement but I found a big flaw on my redesign to adapt it to umo that I need to fix in the following weeks. After changing basic stuff I'll do some tests again.

 

Are you only testing it on UMO, or are you planning on testing it on UM2(+) as well?

@Gudo, yours is mounted on an UM2(+) right? How dramatic of an improvement did/do you see? (If you are willing to talk about your experiences with it, that is.)

[neotko 1,417]

 

My first test showed improvement but I found a big flaw on my redesign to adapt it to umo that I need to fix in the following weeks. After changing basic stuff I'll do some tests again.

 

Are you only testing it on UMO, or are you planning on testing it on UM2(+) as well?

@Gudo, yours is mounted on an UM2(+) right? How dramatic of an improvement did/do you see? (If you are willing to talk about your experiences with it, that is.)

 

I have 3 umo+ and one um3. So I can't test it on um2

[krys 206]

I have 3 umo+ and one um3. So I can't test it on um2

 

Lol! Fair enough! Though, I should think that a UM3 test would be comparable.

[neotko 1,417]

 

I have 3 umo+ and one um3. So I can't test it on um2

 

Lol! Fair enough! Though, I should think that a UM3 test would be comparable.

 

Not really. UM3 has a different bed design and has the bearings rotated on some degrees making the bed much more stable than umo+/um2

[krys 206]

Not really. UM3 has a different bed design and has the bearings rotated on some degrees making the bed much more stable than umo+/um2

 

Lol! Well, what do I know? Never mind then! Thanks for letting me know.

[gudo 246]

 

 

Hi @Gudo,

Are you sharing (or willing to share) your bed stabilizer publicly and/or are you planning to sell kits?

I would be interested in getting/making one too, if @neotko says it improves prints.  I have M6 threaded rod so I do not mind making it.

Thanks and Happy New Year!

 

 

Hi Krys ! Thanks Great New Year for you also

I had done this tinkering initially without really thinking about sharing it

Why I did this ,

First, because before when I calibrated the bed I noticed that on especially the 2 front points, the bed had move down only when I slide the UM calibration paper sheet between the nozzle tip and the bed glass without get much friction, so the setting may be distorted if not pay attention to it.

Second, In such a way that the bed is fixed without reinforcement on such a large overhang, it is obliquely too flexible, it is closer to the swimming pool plunger than to a stable platform !

The reinforcement arms do not make the bed completely rigid but have made it possible to calibrate the bed with more precision and also that it is less sensitive to the printer vibrations and possibly allow it to better withstand the pressure during extrusion, especially in its front thirds area.

By being less flexible, the nozzle crushes better the possible small blobs which sometimes occur during the extrusion without pushing the bed down too much, which is seen on the layer concerned. To keep a little flexibility nevertheless has the advantage of preserving the nozzle in the event of a collision on a somewhat too large blob

This is what has improved on my UM2 Extended

I could share the bed stabilizer without guaranteeing that it is a miracle solution, it will be up to everyone to appreciate or not .

[neotko 1,417]

Indeed I forgot to test the front corners, I'm such a noob!

When I redesigned the part that attaches to the bottom of the bed I did the mistake of making weak spot, so it flexes too much instead of making it more tight (if needed).

I need to run tests on the front corners, but just by eye, the bed doesn't 'wooble' on the fronts, when doing big fast Jerk movements. Also, for me is quite nice because two of the printers are one near each other, and I got on the past quite a few troubles on top layers quality on one printer if the other was doing fast Jerk movements while the other was doing a top layer.

Anyhow, I just finished a very rough new version and I'll attach it probably tomorrow night to run some tower tests full of zig-zags.

[krys 206]

First, because before when I  calibrated the bed  I noticed that on especially the 2 front points, the bed had move down only when I slide the UM calibration paper sheet between the nozzle tip and the bed glass without get much friction, so the setting may be distorted if not pay attention to it.

...

I could share the bed stabilizer without guaranteeing that it is a miracle solution, it will be up to everyone to appreciate or not .

 

Regarding the front calibration, I too see that. If I want to get a similar resistance on the calibration card/paper/feeler gauge, the bed has to get pushed down and the nozzle basically touches the bed.

Also, I find the front of the plate easily flexes up and down if I put any amount of pressure on either side. While I cannot say that this has ruined any prints or anything, it has bothered me for a while now. And I have had some adhesion issues because of over/under calibrating the front.

So, all that being said, if you decided to share your design, either publicly (preferred) or just with me (and @neotko obviously), I would certainly be grateful.

I would even post back about any advantages/disadvantages I see.

I think you have something here that many in the community would be interested in, especially those are that particular about print quality.

Thanks for sharing your experiences with it!

[krys 206]

Anyhow, I just finished a very rough new version and I'll attach it probably tomorrow night to run some tower tests full of zig-zags.

 

So, is your version specifically for the UMO, or did you just do some generic improvements?

It would be cool if you two combined your efforts or at least both reference each other when/if you share your results. That way the vast majority of the UM community would be covered by this mod. ... Just thinking out loud.

[neotko 1,417]

 

Anyhow, I just finished a very rough new version and I'll attach it probably tomorrow night to run some tower tests full of zig-zags.

 

So, is your version specifically for the UMO, or did you just do some generic improvements?

It would be cool if you two combined your efforts or at least both reference each other when/if you share your results. That way the vast majority of the UM community would be covered by this mod. ... Just thinking out loud.

 

Indeed. But I'm using Gudo's design to adapt it.

[neotko 1,417]

Well today had some time to print the prefinal version of the adapter for umo+ bed, and used the opportunity to print a test 60mm/s constant 3000accel/20yerk 0.2 layer height Colorfabb Signal yellow.

Left No Bed Frontal Reinforcer / Right  @Gudo Bed reinforcer attached

Left

Right

Left

Right

Edited January 9, 2017 by Guest

[ataraxis 51]

@gudo Is there any reason why you have deleted your wonderful bed stabilizer from youmagine? ? I would really like to to give it a try :) 

[conny_g 251]

Does anyone manufacture the PBI coupler to buy yet?

[MTG 8]

54 minutes ago, conny_g said:

Does anyone manufacture the PBI coupler to buy yet?

 

I could produce them in any quantity, I have a lathe. But I don't want to order it just for me, that would be too expensive. If there are enough people interested, we could buy the material together and split the parts that I get out of it

[gr5 2,167]

3dsolex makes something called the i2k.  I don't know if it's made from PBI or Polyimide or what.  But it can handle temps well over 300C and it is like a small washer that you put between the heater block and the teflon part.  Even though it's only about 1mm thick the temperature at the teflon drops by about 100C.  So 100C on one side of the i2k and 220C on the other side are typical temps.

 

I'm not a big fan of the i2k - it's just one more placed for filament to get hung up.  But I've sold quite a few and people seem to like them.  You should cut off about 1mm off the bottom of your PTFE.

 

Anyway if you do this the PTFE will last much longer - probably decades.  The wear and tear will no longer be from temperature but instead from, well, wear and tear (filament grinding it slowly away over the course of thousands of spools of filament).

 

The problem with PBI, polyimide, steel and other things is that PLA sticks to almost anything if you melt the PLA and then resolidify it.  So it's easy to get the filament stuck in the coupler.  PTFE is one of those wonderful materials that PLA doesn't stick to.

 

Because the i2k is only about 1mm thick it's kind of okay if PLA sticks to it because it's a small spot and you can power through it (the feeder can push with 5 pounds of force and break the filament free of it once again to start printing again).  This is the same sort of design on the UM3 where you have about a 1mm long heat break made of steel.  It's short enough that even though the PLA sticks there, the feeder can power through it and get things moving again.

[conny_g 251]

1 hour ago, gr5 said:

3dsolex makes something called the i2k.  

 

 

I have all my head with the i2k and the corresponding coupler of 3DSolex.
But it seems that the PBI can handle even higher temperatures and would not need the I2K.
But of course if PLA sticks to it that would be bad.

[meduza 191]

The I2K is made out of Tecasint 2000 series material (guess where the 2k in the name origins), and that material is rated for 280-300C long-term usage (depending on exact version) and up to 350C short-term. Tecasint 2000 is a Polymide and other materials in the same family is for example Vespel.

It is about as expensive as PBI, but quite a bit easier to machine.

PBI is a higher performance plastic, that can be used at 345C long-term and up to over 500C short-term, but it is harder to machine.

I have a early generation I2K somewhere, i took it out because of too many feeding problems with PLA where it increased the feeding pressure quite a bit compared to the stock PTFE. PLA does stick a bit too well to PI for it being a one-stop solution for printing if you ever want to use PLA.

I also got one of the IPM Couplers, i don't know what plastic the IPM is made out of or what the real temperature limit is, but it really does not work at all with PLA, even if it did work flawlessly with ABS on the one or two prints i tried with ABS (i am not a ABS guy...) I don't think these are sold anymore.

Edited May 13, 2018 by meduza