Jump to content
Ultimaker Community of 3D Printing Experts
Sign in to follow this  
weiin

Can your ultimaker/ultimaker2 print such quality?

Recommended Posts

So I was at Maker Faire New York a week ago, and was disappointed at what I saw at the UM booth. Made a post on the google groups https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ultimaker/rx4t5ADCc8U

Now I'm back in my lab with my UM, re-read those google posts, and decided, let's make it a challenge then. I have posted some pictures of the good sample I have (not printed with ultimaker)

http://umforum.ultimaker.com/index.php?/gallery/album/235-good-um-robot-sample-not-printed-with-ultimaker/

My camera is not great, but what I'm looking at is an overall good quality print. This is not just about the antennae, but also about the bridges on the belly, butt, and keychain loop. I hope the pictures show the following:

1. equal sized antennae, with little 'scarring' in between (retraction)

2. straight bridges on the belly, butt and keychain loop

So far, I'm only able to achieve one of the two using my UM. It's either the antennae are good, but there are dangling bits on the butt, OR the bridges are straight but antennae ends up in mush. This is consistent with what I saw at MFNY. All the robots had dangly bits on the belly/butt and poor retraction between antennae was obvious. Even the robot on the um2 had poor bridging as I watched it print.

Some in the UM community think it is a slicer settings problem, but my current thought is that the um/um2 cooling method of high volume airflow across the layer is not the right way. So I would like to confirm that stock UM/UM2 is unable to get overall good quality like the sample I have.

So here's your challenge: Print the UM robot with support (the first object that loads when you start a freshly installed Cura), no scaling. Common settings for baseline comparison: white pla, 0.1mm layer, 0% infill. 2 or 3 loops (0.8 or 1.2mm perimeter), depending on how much cooling you think is necessary.

Please post all round pictures showing especially the antennae, belly, butt and keychain loop. Please state if your UM is modified.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid your photos are all incredibly noisy and blurry. As we've discussed at length on the google group, the advantage of the Ultimaker isn't that it performs perfectly on any one model, but that its a strong general purpose tool that can get very close to perfection on a wide range of prints, and do it while printing relatively fast.

If you want to discuss specific aspects that your consider to be better, then you really need to provide some decent photographs that highlight the issues that you're seeing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you didn't see this one Weiin. Please read the posts that you didn't read yet:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/ultimaker/rx4t5ADCc8U/i6OO4H0qCVEJ

That one that nick printed looked as good as yours Weiin but it's hard to tell because I don't have yours in front of me anymore. I was going to print some better quality robots over the weekend but I forgot because you kind of stopped responding to the posts.

Weiin - do you have any friends with macro lenses? Do you have any friends into photography? It would be nice to get better pictures of that "good" robot.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I'm going to agree with the others here - if you want to initiate a quality contest, you need some better photos. Get a friend with a decent camera. Any low-end DSLR is fine. Probably most point-and-shoots would also be fine.

I'll take some more photos of my robot if I get a chance, but I'm headed to China for several weeks, so that may not happen for a while. Regardless of that, though, there are some prerequisites to me spending any more time on this 'quality test'. You need to post: 1) better photos, 2) the name of the other printer, and 3) the print speed, layer height, and material of the other printer.

So far, you've asked for a lot, and given a lot of criticism... but you haven't given anything back or offered any suggestions towards a better design. If you ask people to put in effort, you need to offer some reciprocity, otherwise, like I said before on the other forum: you're just an internet troll, lobbing baseless criticisms and making claims that you can't substantiate.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2nd try:

Front view IMG 1302

Back view IMG 1301

Top view IMG 1303

This is what I mean by the belly belly

This is what I mean by the keychain loop keychain

 

If anyone is able to print such quality on your UM/UM2 please post the 3 views here. Thanks!

If you have calipers, measurements of the two antennae would be great:

IMG 20130930 090448

IMG 20130930 090435

 

For the benefit of those who did not read through everything I wrote, I highlight the things I'm looking at:

This is not just about the antennae, but also about the bridges on the belly, butt, and keychain loop.

And the common settings: white pla, 0.1mm layer, 0% infill. 2 or 3 loops, no scale

 

 

I'm afraid your photos are all incredibly noisy and blurry. As we've discussed at length on the google group, the advantage of the Ultimaker isn't that it performs perfectly on any one model, but that its a strong general purpose tool that can get very close to perfection on a wide range of prints, and do it while printing relatively fast.

If you want to discuss specific aspects that your consider to be better, then you really need to provide some decent photographs that highlight the issues that you're seeing.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the first time I've tried to print a robot of higher or equal quality that Weiin posted. Here is my effort. I had to do a few "tricks" to get the antennas this good. It was more work though to get the damn pictures to be clear. White is definitely the hardest color to photograph when it comes to PLA.

Click on the image for higher resolution, then right click and select "view image" to see it larger, then click it again to finally see it full size.

DSC 5577

version 5F back

version 5f top half

version 5f flash picture back

DSC 5576

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other than the slightly warped base, this is a great looking print, George. Thank you!

I hope you did not do any manual gcode stitching to achieve this. I did some head-only and butt-only prints as well, but the settings that were good for one was never good for the other. I know if I manually put the good portions together, it might work, but that wouldn't be helpful for anyone else using Cura.

Anyway, if you were using only one set of Cura settings, it would be good if you sent Daid the .ini file. It could give new users a better first timers' experience when the default "normal quality" works well on the first loaded robot model.

 

This is the first time I've tried to print a robot of higher or equal quality that Weiin posted. Here is my effort. I had to do a few "tricks" to get the antennas this good. It was more work though to get the damn pictures to be clear. White is definitely the hardest color to photograph when it comes to PLA.

Click on the image for higher resolution, then right click and select "view image" to see it larger, then click it again to finally see it full size.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prints with narrow top parts (like the antennae) might always be better to print several at a time simultaneously, otherwise the time for cooling is not enough. I got this confirmed from Paul (Bluebot) who is the Ultimaker quality print master since a couple of years back :) though that example was with the OK hand model. I'm guessing this might be "the trick" here, but it's only a guess...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter, in your machine settings, set the "Printer gantry height" to be 0 (or smaller than the tallest item is the actual test in Cura I think), then it will print them in parallel.

The tallest items you could print "serially" is the same as gantry height, which for an Ultimaker 1 is 60mm.

You'll find more details in this thread:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ultimaker/mMrYI7Au1Dc

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn you Weiin for keeping secrets!!! :evil: You win. I can't do it any longer. Weiin will probably brag (in private) that he can get just as good quality on some other printer at 40mm/sec and I won't be able to say anything because I didn't try other speeds. It's hard to win your contest Weiin when you keep secrets and only post blurry pictures.

I did those white robots on the UM1. I haven't done much retraction on the UM2 but 4.5mm doesn't seem enough so I recommend 5.5mm retraction (which Illuminarti had good luck with on the UM2). Here are the UM original settings:

I printed on blue tape with no heated bed.

1) The trick to get antennas is to print 2 robots so they have time to cool (what a waste! without the antennas I could have printed only one robot, 2x faster and at 210C although when done you get 2 robots).

2) To minimize stringing (I had none. No cleanup!) I set temp to 190C (and enabled retraction and set retraction expert minimums to 0mm)

3) To get good quality at such a low temp I did 20mm/sec (I normally print at 100mm/sec)

4) I did 3 shells (1.2mm shell) to keep infill or other stuff from making the outer edge ugly.

5) .1mm layer height

I did this back on October 5 so I'm not sure what version of Cura was out then, probably 13.06.4. I still have all the settings in the gcode file so here it is converted to a profile:

 


[profile]
layer_height = 0.1
wall_thickness = 1.2
retraction_enable = True
solid_layer_thickness = .4
fill_density = 20
nozzle_size = 0.4
print_speed = 20
print_temperature = 0
print_temperature2 = 0
print_temperature3 = 0
print_temperature4 = 0
print_bed_temperature = 0
support = None
platform_adhesion = None
support_dual_extrusion = False
filament_diameter = 2.85
filament_diameter2 = 0
filament_diameter3 = 0
filament_diameter4 = 0
filament_flow = 100
retraction_speed = 50
retraction_amount = 4.5
retraction_dual_amount = 16.5
bottom_thickness = .3
object_sink = 0
overlap_dual = 0.2
travel_speed = 150
bottom_layer_speed = 30
infill_speed = 0.0
cool_min_layer_time = 0
fan_enabled = True
skirt_line_count = 2
skirt_gap = 15
fan_layer = 1
fan_speed = 100
fan_speed_max = 100
cool_min_feedrate = 0
cool_head_lift = False
solid_top = True
solid_bottom = True
fill_overlap = 15
support_rate = 75
brim_line_count = 6
raft_margin = 5
raft_line_spacing = 1.0
raft_base_thickness = 0.3
raft_base_linewidth = 0.7
raft_interface_thickness = 0.2
raft_interface_linewidth = 0.2
fix_horrible_union_all_type_a = False
fix_horrible_union_all_type_b = False
fix_horrible_use_open_bits = False
fix_horrible_extensive_stitching = False
plugin_config = (lp1
(dp2
S'params'
p3
(dp4
S'pauseLevel'
p5
V.4
p6
sS'parkY'
p7
V190
p8
sS'parkX'
p9
V190
p10
sS'retractAmount'
p11
V5
ssS'filename'
p12
S'pauseAtZ.py'
p13
sa.
object_center_x = -1
object_center_y = -1
[alterations]
start.gcode = ;Sliced at: {day} {date} {time}
;Basic settings: Layer height: {layer_height} Walls: {wall_thickness} Fill: {fill_density}
;Print time: {print_time}
;Filament used: {filament_amount}m {filament_weight}g
;Filament cost: {filament_cost}
G21 ;metric values
G90 ;absolute positioning
M107 ;start with the fan off
G28 X0 Y0 ;move X/Y to min endstops
G28 Z0 ;move Z to min endstops
G1 Z15.0 F{travel_speed} ;move the platform down 15mm
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length
G1 F90 E6 ;extrude 3mm of feed stock
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length again
G4 P2000 ; pause 2 seconds
G1 F{travel_speed}
M117 Printing...
end.gcode = ;End GCode
M104 S0 ;extruder heater off
M140 S0 ;heated bed heater off (if you have it)
G91 ;relative positioning
G1 E-1 F300 ;retract the filament a bit before lifting the nozzle, to release some of the pressure
G1 Z+0.5 E-5 X-20 Y-20 F{travel_speed} ;move Z up a bit and retract filament even more
G28 X0 Y0 ;move X/Y to min endstops, so the head is out of the way
M84 ;steppers off
G90 ;absolute positioning
start2.gcode = ;Sliced at: {day} {date} {time}
;Basic settings: Layer height: {layer_height} Walls: {wall_thickness} Fill: {fill_density}
;Print time: {print_time}
;Filament used: {filament_amount}m {filament_weight}g
;Filament cost: {filament_cost}
G21 ;metric values
G90 ;absolute positioning
M107 ;start with the fan off
G28 X0 Y0 ;move X/Y to min endstops
G28 Z0 ;move Z to min endstops
G1 Z15.0 F{travel_speed} ;move the platform down 15mm
T1
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length
G1 F200 E10 ;extrude 10mm of feed stock
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length again
G1 F200 E-{retraction_dual_amount}
T0
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length
G1 F200 E10 ;extrude 10mm of feed stock
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length again
G1 F{travel_speed}
M117 Printing...
end2.gcode = ;End GCode
M104 T0 S0 ;extruder heater off
M104 T1 S0 ;extruder heater off
M140 S0 ;heated bed heater off (if you have it)
G91 ;relative positioning
G1 E-1 F300 ;retract the filament a bit before lifting the nozzle, to release some of the pressure
G1 Z+0.5 E-5 X-20 Y-20 F{travel_speed} ;move Z up a bit and retract filament even more
G28 X0 Y0 ;move X/Y to min endstops, so the head is out of the way
M84 ;steppers off
G90 ;absolute positioning
support_start.gcode =
support_end.gcode =
cool_start.gcode =
cool_end.gcode =
replace.csv =
nextobject.gcode = ;Move to next object on the platform. clear_z is the minimal z height we need to make sure we do not hit any objects.
G92 E0
G91 ;relative positioning
G1 E-1 F300 ;retract the filament a bit before lifting the nozzle, to release some of the pressure
G1 Z+0.5 E-5 F{travel_speed} ;move Z up a bit and retract filament even more
G90 ;absolute positioning
G1 Z{clear_z} F{max_z_speed}
G92 E0
G1 X{object_center_x} Y{object_center_y} F{travel_speed}
G1 F200 E6
G92 E0
switchextruder.gcode = ;Switch between the current extruder and the next extruder, when printing with multiple extruders.
G92 E0
G1 E-36 F5000
G92 E0
T{extruder}
G1 X{new_x} Y{new_y} Z{new_z} F{travel_speed}
G1 E36 F5000
G92 E0

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

umm.. ok, I must have missed something. What secret were you expecting from me? :???:

I remember mentioning 80mm/s print speed, 0.1mm layer height, 200C white PLA on my friend's rep2. I only know he fixed the extruder to make sure the filament went in straight (the fix provided by MB was just as bad as the original). I do not have a high def video to show the printing in action, so I have nothing beyond the print to prove that it can be done by other printers.

When I read daid's response that you shared your trick with him, yet he did not put those into Cura "normal quality" settings, i already knew your method won't be helpful to new users (wrt their first print in cura). No one else did try to show pictures with measurements like I did above, so I thought there was little interest in printing um robots in the community, hence i just looked elsewhere for help improving my um.

Anyway, there had been quite a few changes in my life the past few months, so I no longer have the lab I was working in previously - no more better cameras for taking photos with :-( . But the good news is, I'm now at a place with even more printers from different parts of the world to play with. The bad news is, I start to see how bad my um prints compared to some of the more obscure brand printers.

We just had a printer face-off yesterday (http://3dprintingindustry.com/2013/12/06/singapores-simplifi3d-hosts-3d-printer-face/) where lay consumers (ie totally new to 3d printing) voted for the best prints in a blind test. The stock um that took part did not do very well. Neither did the stock Rep2. I have given my friend the challenge print to try out on his modified Rep2, and once I get permission from the designers, I hope to post that stl on youmagine for everyone else to challenge their printer (and maybe slicing skills?). All printers used 0.2mm layer heights. The print that got most votes was sliced with KS, printing at 45mm/s.

In the mean time, I'm testing out Nick's tapir fan shroud (still needs some modifications) and may even try changing to impeller fan once I finish my printing list.

 

Damn you Weiin for keeping secrets!!! :evil: You win. I can't do it any longer. Weiin will probably brag (in private) that he can get just as good quality on some other printer at 40mm/sec and I won't be able to say anything because I didn't try other speeds. It's hard to win your contest Weiin when you keep secrets and only post blurry pictures.

I did those white robots on the UM1. I haven't done much retraction on the UM2 but 4.5mm doesn't seem enough so I recommend 5.5mm retraction (which Illuminarti had good luck with on the UM2). Here are the UM original settings:

I printed on blue tape with no heated bed.

1) The trick to get antennas is to print 2 robots so they have time to cool (what a waste! without the antennas I could have printed only one robot, 2x faster and at 210C although when done you get 2 robots).

2) To minimize stringing (I had none. No cleanup!) I set temp to 190C (and enabled retraction and set retraction expert minimums to 0mm)

3) To get good quality at such a low temp I did 20mm/sec (I normally print at 100mm/sec)

4) I did 3 shells (1.2mm shell) to keep infill or other stuff from making the outer edge ugly.

5) .1mm layer height

I did this back on October 5 so I'm not sure what version of Cura was out then, probably 13.06.4. I still have all the settings in the gcode file so here it is converted to a profile:

 


[profile]
layer_height = 0.1
wall_thickness = 1.2
retraction_enable = True
solid_layer_thickness = .4
fill_density = 20
nozzle_size = 0.4
print_speed = 20
print_temperature = 0
print_temperature2 = 0
print_temperature3 = 0
print_temperature4 = 0
print_bed_temperature = 0
support = None
platform_adhesion = None
support_dual_extrusion = False
filament_diameter = 2.85
filament_diameter2 = 0
filament_diameter3 = 0
filament_diameter4 = 0
filament_flow = 100
retraction_speed = 50
retraction_amount = 4.5
retraction_dual_amount = 16.5
bottom_thickness = .3
object_sink = 0
overlap_dual = 0.2
travel_speed = 150
bottom_layer_speed = 30
infill_speed = 0.0
cool_min_layer_time = 0
fan_enabled = True
skirt_line_count = 2
skirt_gap = 15
fan_layer = 1
fan_speed = 100
fan_speed_max = 100
cool_min_feedrate = 0
cool_head_lift = False
solid_top = True
solid_bottom = True
fill_overlap = 15
support_rate = 75
brim_line_count = 6
raft_margin = 5
raft_line_spacing = 1.0
raft_base_thickness = 0.3
raft_base_linewidth = 0.7
raft_interface_thickness = 0.2
raft_interface_linewidth = 0.2
fix_horrible_union_all_type_a = False
fix_horrible_union_all_type_b = False
fix_horrible_use_open_bits = False
fix_horrible_extensive_stitching = False
plugin_config = (lp1
(dp2
S'params'
p3
(dp4
S'pauseLevel'
p5
V.4
p6
sS'parkY'
p7
V190
p8
sS'parkX'
p9
V190
p10
sS'retractAmount'
p11
V5
ssS'filename'
p12
S'pauseAtZ.py'
p13
sa.
object_center_x = -1
object_center_y = -1
[alterations]
start.gcode = ;Sliced at: {day} {date} {time}
;Basic settings: Layer height: {layer_height} Walls: {wall_thickness} Fill: {fill_density}
;Print time: {print_time}
;Filament used: {filament_amount}m {filament_weight}g
;Filament cost: {filament_cost}
G21 ;metric values
G90 ;absolute positioning
M107 ;start with the fan off
G28 X0 Y0 ;move X/Y to min endstops
G28 Z0 ;move Z to min endstops
G1 Z15.0 F{travel_speed} ;move the platform down 15mm
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length
G1 F90 E6 ;extrude 3mm of feed stock
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length again
G4 P2000 ; pause 2 seconds
G1 F{travel_speed}
M117 Printing...
end.gcode = ;End GCode
M104 S0 ;extruder heater off
M140 S0 ;heated bed heater off (if you have it)
G91 ;relative positioning
G1 E-1 F300 ;retract the filament a bit before lifting the nozzle, to release some of the pressure
G1 Z+0.5 E-5 X-20 Y-20 F{travel_speed} ;move Z up a bit and retract filament even more
G28 X0 Y0 ;move X/Y to min endstops, so the head is out of the way
M84 ;steppers off
G90 ;absolute positioning
start2.gcode = ;Sliced at: {day} {date} {time}
;Basic settings: Layer height: {layer_height} Walls: {wall_thickness} Fill: {fill_density}
;Print time: {print_time}
;Filament used: {filament_amount}m {filament_weight}g
;Filament cost: {filament_cost}
G21 ;metric values
G90 ;absolute positioning
M107 ;start with the fan off
G28 X0 Y0 ;move X/Y to min endstops
G28 Z0 ;move Z to min endstops
G1 Z15.0 F{travel_speed} ;move the platform down 15mm
T1
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length
G1 F200 E10 ;extrude 10mm of feed stock
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length again
G1 F200 E-{retraction_dual_amount}
T0
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length
G1 F200 E10 ;extrude 10mm of feed stock
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length again
G1 F{travel_speed}
M117 Printing...
end2.gcode = ;End GCode
M104 T0 S0 ;extruder heater off
M104 T1 S0 ;extruder heater off
M140 S0 ;heated bed heater off (if you have it)
G91 ;relative positioning
G1 E-1 F300 ;retract the filament a bit before lifting the nozzle, to release some of the pressure
G1 Z+0.5 E-5 X-20 Y-20 F{travel_speed} ;move Z up a bit and retract filament even more
G28 X0 Y0 ;move X/Y to min endstops, so the head is out of the way
M84 ;steppers off
G90 ;absolute positioning
support_start.gcode =
support_end.gcode =
cool_start.gcode =
cool_end.gcode =
replace.csv =
nextobject.gcode = ;Move to next object on the platform. clear_z is the minimal z height we need to make sure we do not hit any objects.
G92 E0
G91 ;relative positioning
G1 E-1 F300 ;retract the filament a bit before lifting the nozzle, to release some of the pressure
G1 Z+0.5 E-5 F{travel_speed} ;move Z up a bit and retract filament even more
G90 ;absolute positioning
G1 Z{clear_z} F{max_z_speed}
G92 E0
G1 X{object_center_x} Y{object_center_y} F{travel_speed}
G1 F200 E6
G92 E0
switchextruder.gcode = ;Switch between the current extruder and the next extruder, when printing with multiple extruders.
G92 E0
G1 E-36 F5000
G92 E0
T{extruder}
G1 X{new_x} Y{new_y} Z{new_z} F{travel_speed}
G1 E36 F5000
G92 E0

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember mentioning 80mm/s print speed, 0.1mm layer height, 200C white PLA on my friend's rep2.

 

I don't remember that at all. That's a pretty amazing print speed for 200C. I had NO IDEA it was a makerbot. I was assuming all this time it was a reprap.

Do you know how he got the antennas so good? With such a small area the nozzle never lets the plastic cool long enough - maybe he has a better slicer for antennas - cura prints 2 layers on one antenna, then 2 on the other. Instead of alternating. Saves time but you get more melted antennas.

So Weiin - how did my robot photos compare to your sample from the rep2? You never answered that question.

Please compare the pictures in post #6 above to the rep2 made robot in your hand. And realize that if my pictures don't fill the screen you aren't zooming enough - first click on a picture, then right click and select "view image" then click again to get full size. They look about the same to me - I don't see either being better than the other.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So... here's the thing....

I was at the Makerbot store tonight, thinking about some of these tests and the print quality comparisons. I was astonished with how slowly the machines were printing - it looked to be around 20mm/s! The print profile they were using, however, was the "high quality" in Makerware.... which is supposedly 90mm/s. Hah!

Anyway, that prompted me to download Makerware when I got home and compare some print time estimates in Makerware vs. estimates in Cura vs. known print times on my Ultimaker. The results were pretty clear - When setting up a print with identical print speeds, layer heights, and travel speeds, the Makerware was predicting times which were more than double the actual print times I achieve on an Ultimaker. (Using the latest beta of Cura, in which Daid has supposedly greatly improved the print time estimates, the estimated times were very close to my actual print times).

I'd love for someone who has both an Ultimaker and a Rep 2 to do this comparison with real prints on both machines. (Actually, I now have access to both, come to think of it... Maybe I'll do this test sometime soon.) Either way, I think the Rep 2 is drastically overstating its actual print speeds by a factor two or more. It may achieve those speeds if you're printing long, straight lines, the full length of the bed... but I suspect that the firmware acceleration values are so low that it never gets close to achieving those speeds when printing anything with curvature or even medium length lines.

Anyway, not hating on Makerbot. Just saying that doing a side by side comparison between machines is more complicated than setting the same print parameters. In order to do a proper comparison, a print needs to be done with identical layer height, perimeter thickness, and print completion time. Otherwise the machines are not printing on truly the same quality settings at all.

(Also, just a sidenote - we should all be happy that we get to use Cura as our primary slicer and not Makerware - that thing has a crazy laggy UI and is so painfully slow to slice. Thanks Daid!)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my own experience, high speed settings are an illusion. Even between my CubeX Trio, my Ultimaker, and my Ultimaker 2, there seems to be far less difference in actual print speed than the settings numbers imply. The real limiting factor on speed seems to be the complexity of the pattern it's laying down. I can set the UM at 100mm/s and the CubeX at 50mm/s and on complex paths they print layers at virtually the same speed. The only time I see a noticeable speed difference is on long straight paths. Then, the UM leaves the CubeX in the dust.

Personally, I love the "click load then click print" simplicity of using Cura with my Ultimaker. That said, I do think bridging and layer to layer cooling on small layers are the two weak areas for printing using the Cura + Ultimaker combo. On the UM2, using Cura is much less of a benefit because of the SD card shuffle adding several extra steps to printing. Hopefully the WiFi mod will arrive soon for the UM2. Sadly, the twin tiny fans on the UM2 don't seem to improve bridging performance at all. I don't think they move enough air to be helpful. They're also disturbingly loud when they kick into high gear. They sound like they're vibrating apart. I don't anticipate them lasting very long like that.

In other words, I generally agree with the criticisms about the UM(2) print quality under those specific conditions, but I find those conditions don't occur often enough in my use for it to matter much to me. I don't print UM robots all day. I also generally design my parts within the bridging limits of my printers or with easy snap-off supports built-into the design. I think the Replicator 2 does handle bridging slightly better. On the other hand, I just can't stand the major limitation of a "skinny loaf of bread" shaped build area. That arbitrarily limits your ability to rotate a largish object to the orientation which prints the best. Because of that, I would never consider buying a Replicator 2. I can't see ever buying another printer without a heated bed, either. I'm so hooked.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're also disturbingly loud when they kick into high gear. They sound like they're vibrating apart. I don't anticipate them lasting very long like that.

 

Some users have had issues with the fans not being fixed rigidly enough. While printing, try putting your finger on the fan casing and see if the rattling goes away. If so it's likely that it's simply vibrating and needs to be fixed in place (this happened often on my UM1 with custom shroud). Tightening the screws may help if they have shaken loose.

 

Share this post


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
Sign in to follow this  

×

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!