Ultimaker Mark2 - The Smart Dual-Extrusion Upgrade

[tinkergnome 701]

18 hours ago, mrsallen2000 said:

I checked all connections and they seem fine.

 

Show pictures or it is not true... ?

 

As you say "cooling fans" - is it related to the (small) hotend cooling fan or the two model cooling fans?

How have you tested it?

Be aware that (by default) the model cooling fans are only activated for the active toolhead, if you use the expansion board.

[mrsallen2000 0]

On 8/11/2018 at 8:27 AM, tinkergnome said:

 

Show pictures or it is not true... ?

 

As you say "cooling fans" - is it related to the (small) hotend cooling fan or the two model cooling fans?

How have you tested it?

Be aware that (by default) the model cooling fans are only activated for the active toolhead, if you use the expansion board.

Here are pictures of the connections. If you need more I can definitely do that. None of the fans on printhead 1 (hotend and model fans) are turning on. The hotend cooling fan of printhead 2 does turn on though. I have been trying to print a small bottle base with only printhead 1. I have not attempted any dual printed items yet. Thank you for the help.

[jofleck 0]

Finally I decided to order a few things to build my Mark2 machine?. I played around with the Cura profile and noticed that the build volume even in single extrusion mode is limited. Is there a trick to unlock this area when printing with only one extruder, or should I use the normal UM2+ profile when printing large parts with only one extruder?

 

 

Edited August 13, 2018 by jofleck

[tinkergnome 701]

17 hours ago, mrsallen2000 said:

None of the fans on printhead 1 (hotend and model fans) are turning on.

 

That's weird, but i have not much experience with the cables - because usually the wires for the first printhead are not touched during the Mark2 installation.

But you have changed a lot more things at the same time, so - who knows...?

I would check the voltage and polarity (!) with a multimeter on both sides. And perhaps disconnect the expansion board until the first printhead is back to normal operation (just to rule out things).

 

BTW: your printhead looks interesting. Is it made from aluminium? Did you made it yourself? What was the reason for the change?

[tinkergnome 701]

17 hours ago, jofleck said:

should I use the normal UM2+ profile when printing large parts with only one extruder?

 

yes, that's what i would do.

[ultiarjan 1,169]

8 minutes ago, tinkergnome said:

 

yes, that's what i would do.

 

I do the same, but (very obvious...) just be aware of the dock in the corner, you need to remove it ofc if you want to use that buildspace...

[mrsallen2000 0]

2 hours ago, tinkergnome said:

BTW: your printhead looks interesting. Is it made from aluminium? Did you made it yourself? What was the reason for the change?

 

Thanks for the suggestion I will see what I can figure out. As far as the printhead I ordered it from here https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Blurolls-Ultimaker-2-3d-printer-hot-end-full-kit-aluminum-1-75-3mm-Olsson-block-and/32761561574.html?spm=a2g0s.9042311.0.0.521e4c4dOZEAWG. 

[marrincia 0]

On 2/20/2018 at 5:37 PM, tinkergnome said:

 

I added two things to the "After print is finished"-script, retract the filament a bit (additional 11 mm as "end-of-print-retraction")
and home all axis.

I think Octoprint does this not automatically  - in opposite to the firmware if you print from sdcard.

Sorry to bring back this subject.  

 

I have been playing with Mark2 and Octoprint for a bit quite successfully, one of the issue I am facing is related to the PAUSE command.

 

I have added the relative pause script suggested by Gina:

http://docs.octoprint.org/en/master/features/gcode_scripts.html

 

But after the printer stop the target temperature of the hotend drop to 0 and when I press resume there is no command to bring it back to printing target.

 

I think the problem is related to the dual extruder configuration, how should I handle it? 

 

@tinkergnome I am sure you have an answer for this! ? thanks for your amazing job!!!!!!

 

Danke

 

Emanuele

[2diabolos 0]

I wanted to have my "single extruder" Ultimaker back, I though I just needed to place the 2nd Extruder (with magnets) outside my Ultimaker and config the firmware to disable 2nd extruder.

But for each print, it heat the 2nd extruder and some mm of 2nd material flows... is that normal ?

 

another question : since I changed the firmware, the adhesion for small part on the build plate is problematic (after the 10th test, I put some glue on my special coated aluminum buildplate which normally works with just pure aceton cleaning.
Is there really no printing difference between the original Ultimaker firmware and the mark2 firmware ?

 

Thank you

[ultiarjan 1,169]

if you want to print single extruder the only thing you need to do is slice the part in cura as a normal Ultimaker2(+) and thats it. Obviously if you want to use the full buildplate you need to remove the 2th extruder (hang it on the outside of the printer) and remove the dock.

There's no need to make any firmware changes. so if your 2th extruder heats something is wrong, I assume in your Cura setup. 

 

There should be no difference between normal firmware and mark2 firmware afaik but I have not used the original Ultimaker firmware for years, so I compare only with @tinkergnome single extrusion firmware. I don't see a relation between firmware and small part adhesion, as in both firmware's you level your bed manually....

 

Edited August 28, 2018 by ultiarjan

[yyh1002 52]

Hey guys,

I'm trying to separate the movement of XY and Z during nozzle change because the noise of XYZ moving at the same time is very loud and different. 

In a nozzle switching action, my goal is:

1. Lower the build plate

2. Move head to the dock

3. Head to wipe position

4. Raise build plate

5. Head to print position. 

Looking at the firmware, I'm guessing this part in Marlin_main.cpp is what I should change:

        if IS_TOOLCHANGE_ENABLED
        {
            if (IS_WIPE_ENABLED && (printing_state < PRINT_STATE_END))
            {
                // limit fan speed during priming
                printing_state = PRINT_STATE_PRIMING;
                check_axes_activity();
            }
            // execute toolchange script
            current_position[Z_AXIS] = destination[Z_AXIS];
            if (nextExtruder)
            {
                cmdBuffer.processT1(moveZ, IS_WIPE_ENABLED);
            }
            else
            {
                cmdBuffer.processT0(moveZ, IS_WIPE_ENABLED);
            }
        }

But I'm not sure how to change the processT1 line to separate the moveZ from T1. Or maybe I'm looking at the wrong place. 

I don't have programming background. Please help me with it. 

Thanks

[tinkergnome 701]

12 hours ago, yyh1002 said:

'm trying to separate the movement of XY and Z during nozzle change

 

Interesting... the goal was to make the toolchange moves as smooth and direct as possible.
Actually all 4 axis are moving simultaneously - the retract of the e-axis also takes place during the move to the parking dock.

 

I'm not sure if it will be less noisy if you separate the z-move, but you can try it of course.
Although... it's perhaps surprisingly complicated, if you have no experience with the Marlin planner. The functions you have found do prepare the coordinates, but the actual "magic" happens in the planner - each call of "plan_buffer_line" prepares a move and adds it to the buffer.

 

I think you can achieve, what you want, if you add two separate calls of "plan_buffer_line", in each case right after the calculation of the z-offset. But i have not tried it - so no guarantee that this does the right things...
And it would affect both: the nozzle offset and the z-hop.

 

I marked the inserted lines with (1) and (4) from your list

 

https://github.com/TinkerGnome/Ultimaker2Marlin/blob/Mark2/Marlin/Marlin_main.cpp#L3734

 

            // execute toolchange script
            current_position[Z_AXIS] = destination[Z_AXIS];

            // (1)
            plan_buffer_line(current_position[X_AXIS], current_position[Y_AXIS], current_position[Z_AXIS], current_position[E_AXIS], homing_feedrate[Z_AXIS]/60, active_extruder);
            
            if (nextExtruder)
            {
                cmdBuffer.processT1(moveZ, IS_WIPE_ENABLED);
            }
            else
            {
                cmdBuffer.processT0(moveZ, IS_WIPE_ENABLED);
            }

 

https://github.com/TinkerGnome/Ultimaker2Marlin/blob/Mark2/Marlin/Marlin_main.cpp#L3810

 

            // reset wipe offset
            current_position[Z_AXIS] += wipeOffset;

            // raise buildplate if necessary
            if (zoffset > 0.0f)
            {
               current_position[Z_AXIS] += zoffset;
            }

            // (4)
            plan_buffer_line(current_position[X_AXIS], current_position[Y_AXIS], current_position[Z_AXIS], current_position[E_AXIS], homing_feedrate[Z_AXIS]/60, active_extruder);

 

[yyh1002 52]

7 hours ago, tinkergnome said:

I marked the inserted lines with (1) and (4) from your list

  

Thank you! 

I tested the code and half of it worked properly. The (1) lower build plate action is now exactly what I'm looking for. However the (4) raising has problem. After the tool change and moving to wipe position, the build plate would lower further instead of going up, resulted in printing in the air. 

I removed the (4) code and now it can successfully print with half implementation. 

I feel like that the pure Z move creates less vibration with the frame, and Z move speed and duration is not affected by XY movement, therefore result in a more constant noise. But it does add extra time to the print. 

[artistebot 3]

 

I just joined the Ultimaker club with the purchase of a used UM 2+, whoo hoo! The UM joins my Taz 6 (w itworks3d titan head), Cube 3(unlocked), and Anet AM8. I am really interested in adding the MkII upgrade and am impressed and grateful for all the hard work and creativity of this community. 

 

I am hoping to hear about anyone using Chinese parts, instead of a genuine UM2+ extrusion upgrade. My experience with the Anet has made me wary of Chinese parts, so using the official upgrade is not out of the question.

 

Regards

 

JH.

 

 

 

 

[tinkergnome 701]

On 9/4/2018 at 6:57 AM, yyh1002 said:

However the (4) raising has problem.

 

Ah, ok - it's probably not that easy...

Take a look at the gcode file - i think the first move command (G0 / G1) after the toolchange will move all three axis simultaneously anyway. I assume this could be changed with the help of the postprocessing script (Mark2 Tweaks), but that's not my field of expertise...

 

[Benfish65 0]

Can this tool changer be adapted to any printer?

[ultiarjan 1,169]

On 9/5/2018 at 6:05 AM, artistebot said:

I am hoping to hear about anyone using Chinese parts, instead of a genuine UM2+ extrusion upgrade. My experience with the Anet has made me wary of Chinese parts, so using the official upgrade is not out of the question.

 

 

out of curiosity I got some aliexpress stuff  at the beginning of the M2 project and the experience was mostly not too good.

 

electronics: a copy UM2 board worked fine, but you have to be carefull and compare to the real one as some connectors were mounted upside down (polarity issue on leds if I remember correctly)

 

the metal parts of the head were usable but not great, holes not lining up properly. Could all be made to work however the original ultimaker parts are not much more expensive so i would not go chinese here.

 

Olson block and steel coupler: get the real thing, too many issues with part not fitting

 

 

 

 

Edited September 16, 2018 by ultiarjan

[ultiarjan 1,169]

On 9/13/2018 at 3:57 AM, Benfish65 said:

Can this tool changer be adapted to any printer?

 

"any" is impossible to answer ?     but it should be possible for sure if you put in the time.

biggest issue could be the firmware. Unless you also change out electronics for f.e. a duet3d board.

 

out of curiosity, which printer would you want to adapt ?

Edited September 16, 2018 by ultiarjan

[Benfish65 0]

I’m making my own Core XY printer. I have a Duet WiFi board ready to go. I’m looking for ideas on a tool changer.

[artistebot 3]

Thank you for your feedback.

 

Your comments reflect my experience with upgrading my Anet A8 ( w MKS Gen 1.4 mainboard, 12864 graphic lcd, TEVO "titan" extruder and "V6" nozzle etc from Aliexpress). The mainboard is fine, the display board has upside down connectors, the nozzle is questionable, the extruder is junk.  I think I will use a genuine ultimaker extrusion upgrade.

 

Would you have pictures of the UM2 extension board with connectors that are upside down in comparison to the real one?

 

What material is recommended for printing out the plastic parts, having read the whole thread, there is a mention of HTPLA, but not much else? I am thinking of using ether Esun PETG,  Makergeeks Raptor HTPLA or ABS?

 

Thank you for your time and effort

 

JH

6 hours ago, ultiarjan said:

 

out of curiosity I got some aliexpress stuff  at the beginning of the M2 project and the experience was mostly not too good.

 

electronics: a copy UM2 board worked fine, but you have to be carefull and compare to the real one as some connectors were mounted upside down (polarity issue on leds if I remember correctly)

 

the metal parts of the head were usable but not great, holes not lining up properly. Could all be made to work however the original ultimaker parts are not much more expensive so i would not go chinese here.

 

Olson block and steel coupler: get the real thing, too many issues with part not fitting

 

 

 

 

 

[foehnsturm 956]

As for the material question.Its operation temperature should provide a reasonable safety margin to the bed temperature you are typically using.  E.g. if you print ABS with the bed at 100°C you should look for something with a  really high softening point.  Other requirements are not that demanding, but as the magnets are glued, the material should work well with serious glue.

[marrincia 0]

Good morning 

 

Anyone tried Cura 3.5 with Mark 2 yet?

 

Any feedback? Can I upgrade no problem?

 

Thanks 

 

Emanuele

[tinkergnome 701]

The "variant" files need a change (similar to the last one).

This time the "setting_version" has to be increased to 5.

The beta version worked without this change, but there are appropriate warnings in "cura.log".

 

 

[conny_g 250]

17 hours ago, tinkergnome said:

The "variant" files need a change (similar to the last one).

This time the "setting_version" has to be increased to 5.

The beta version worked without this change, but there are appropriate warnings in "cura.log".

 

 

 

 

Could we add a blog / news section on magnetictoolchanger.com where we collect this info about compatibility / fixes for newer Cura versions etc.?
I typically have issues to find such information in this gigantic thread when I need it ... ?
 

[Dim3nsioneer 479]

Another suggestion: Why not making a Cura plugin out of the Mark2 files? When it works with a new version, it can be made available through the Toolbox. So everybody can see if the Mark 2 is ready for a certain Cura version.