So, did you solved your problem? I have the same problem with my f430.
GregValiant 1,410
You could add the post-processor "Search and Replace" twice. If you set the print temperature in Cura to 300 but you really want 450 - then the first Search and Replace would be set to find M104 S300 and replace it with M104 S450 and the second would be set to find M109 S300 and replace it with M109 S450.
There could be other issues frinstance if you had multi extruders and they needed to drop to a standby temp, or if you were using an Initial Print Temperature or Final Print Temperature. In most cases the above should work.
You could also have Search and Replace set to find just M104 and replace it with "M104 S450 ;". The semi-colon would cause the rest of the line it is on to become a comment. Ex: M104 S450 ; S300. In that case it would change any Initial Print Temp and Final Print Temp but not erase them.
You should change this in the definition that your printer uses (printer definitions can override settings that they get from fdmprinter)
But if a printer definition doesn't provide it, it's assumed that the printer won't be able to handle it. If a printer isn't able to handle it, it could lead to very dangerous situations if the value is set too high which is why we chose to limit it.
GregValiant 1,410
Good call. The Max temp on the Ender is listed in the documentation I could find as 260°C. I just sent it an M104 S275 and it would have tried to get there. That's scary. I would have thought that there would be a firmware Max Temp but it appears that there is not in Marlin 1.8.1.
This is from the Marlin forum on RepRap and is in regards to Marlin 2.x.x:
"#define HEATER_0_MAXTEMP" is the setting in Marlin. The max you can set a hot end temp is HEATER_0_MAXTEMP - 15. People were attempting to get around it (to print PEEK) but weren't having success going past 400°.
Edited by GregValiant- 6 months later...
On 11/11/2020 at 3:29 PM, nallath said:But if a printer definition doesn't provide it, it's assumed that the printer won't be able to handle it. If a printer isn't able to handle it, it could lead to very dangerous situations if the value is set too high which is why we chose to limit it.
IMHO it was a really bad decision to set a hard limit on the nozzle temp. HT printers are getting more and more common these days and that 365°C limit is kind of arbitrary. IF one normal printer (without a reasonable FW limit set) would be operated at 350°C or 360°C doesn't matter. It would probably be dangerous to the same extent in both scenarios.
And overriding the limit is really a PITA. I'm testing a lot of cura versions and different printers and constantly I have to set up new printer definition files + no-limit extruders. It's not documented (at least not in a way I as a non-programmer would understand) and if one kind cura dev wouldn't have provided me aforementioned files, I'd have to change slicer because I wouldn't know what to do. Which is also the reason why I currently recommend HT printing people to choose a different slicer... and I as a cura fan am even thinking about changing to prusaslicer myself.
Wouldn't it be a better compromise to only set a limit for machines with a known limit? Or have the user choose a limit in the "create custom machine" dialog? Or at least have a "create custom machine" + "create custom no-limit machine" as separate options... hell, even an annoying warning message like "you're about to set your house on fire!!! by clicking ok, you legally refrain from claiming any compensation" would be better than the current state.
GregValiant 1,410
"IMHO it was a really bad decision to set a hard limit on the nozzle temp. HT printers are getting more and more common these days and that 365°C limit is kind of arbitrary. IF one normal printer (without a reasonable FW limit set) would be operated at 350°C or 360°C doesn't matter. It would probably be dangerous to the same extent in both scenarios."
"(without a reasonable FW limit set)" That requires an assumption that isn't in evidence. The word "reasonable" itself is subjective.
It appears you have found a niche for yourself working with, and developing definitions for, High Temp printers. Cura is open source and highly customizable. One of the tools in your toolbox should be the knowledge of how to customize it to your needs and I would think some knowledge of programming would be necessary. Are you doing hundreds of these - or a couple here and there?
I spent 33 years fighting and investigating fires and consequently a lot of time in court trying to clean up the aftermaths. The 16 year old who clicks on (your) "Allow High Temps" box (because he saw on Reddit that he can print aluminum wire filament on his YockShaMosh Pro printer) cannot sign off on the rights of the old lady who dies when the smoke fills her upper flat.
Along with "reasonable" the word "responsible" should be considered. In my (never humble) opinion, 365° is too high given the number of completely clueless home hobbyists getting involved in 3D printing. No matter what temp was picked as a limit - it would still be arbitrary. PrusaSlicer is a fine program. I use IdeaMaker sometimes too.
- 1
With your background in firefighting I can understand your point.
Still I don't believe it makes a lot of sense to have some random limit and don't provide a way to override it that doesn't require creating your own printer definitions from scratch for semi-closed source machines. For me THIS is a safety issue... who knows what else I, as a simple printer operator, could mess up with these def files?
And if that teenager you mentioned before would really be into aluminum wire extrusion and home combustion, he'd most probably reckoned that there are various alternatives out there allowing for higher temps without having to jump through hoops.
One other suggestion to ease the pain would be to have cura migrate existing printer definitions when installing new versions. Or store them in some common folder which multiple cura versions would access. This might be beneficial in other scenarios too.
Oh, here's the final, the best suggestion: Cura allows for controlling of a heated enclosure - which is a fact and which I'm very thankful for. There's no limit set to the build-volume temperature; I just set it to 9999999999°C and cura just goes like "Yeah, whatever... print hotter than the sun, I don't care. Just let me paint this value here in orange so it better matches the sun.". Obviously cura trusts operators of printers with heated enclosures. So why not conjunct the addition of a heated chamber in the machine settings with a limitless nozzle? I'm a genius!
8 hours ago, GregValiant said:Are you doing hundreds of these - or a couple here and there?
It's more like a couple here and there. Still annoying each time.
9 hours ago, ungutknut said:Still I don't believe it makes a lot of sense to have some random limit and don't provide a way to override it that doesn't require creating your own printer definitions from scratch for semi-closed source machines. For me THIS is a safety issue... who knows what else I, as a simple printer operator, could mess up with these def files?
But at that point it is an explicit action by you, right? The point is that it having printers that can go above 360 are pretty rare. 99%> of the machines simply can't reach those temperatures and if they did, it would cause safety issues.
To give a bit more information about this; We have a security company doing regular audits for our software. This was one of the things that they noticed. They came up with the following scenario: If a malcious actor makes a project file / profile with extreme high temperatures, they could use that to cause a lot of damage to the machine (or even burn it down). Certain materials are even toxic at this temperature. So in order to decrease the impact of this attack vector, we set the max to what Marlin itself sets, which is pretty much what most firmwares handle.
9 hours ago, ungutknut said:One other suggestion to ease the pain would be to have cura migrate existing printer definitions when installing new versions. Or store them in some common folder which multiple cura versions would access. This might be beneficial in other scenarios too.
Cura should do that already. It doesn't upgrade quality files, but the definition files should be migrated.
9 hours ago, ungutknut said:Oh, here's the final, the best suggestion: Cura allows for controlling of a heated enclosure - which is a fact and which I'm very thankful for. There's no limit set to the build-volume temperature; I just set it to 9999999999°C and cura just goes like "Yeah, whatever... print hotter than the sun, I don't care. Just let me paint this value here in orange so it better matches the sun.". Obviously cura trusts operators of printers with heated enclosures. So why not conjunct the addition of a heated chamber in the machine settings with a limitless nozzle? I'm a genius!
The reason that this isn't an issue for the build volume enclosure is that it can't actually reach those temperatures. But you are probably right that we should add a max temperature there as well.
Anyhow; If it's one printer that you constantly print for (and others use that same printer as well), the best option would be to contribute those files. That way they are always there and everyone can use them.
- 2
Thank you, Nalath, for the background information. Very appreciated.
Similar experience with a company I'm working for... as soon as there's a safety audit, you can be sure, they'll find something and turn your office into a kindergarden where people have to use dangerous workarounds in order to accomplish their daily work. Best strategy is to evenly distribute hundreds of safety hazards across the office so the auditors get distracted and with some luck only find some minor ones. Just kidding (...kind of).
6 hours ago, nallath said:Cura should do that already. It doesn't upgrade quality files, but the definition files should be migrated.
Hm. Strange. Maybe because I normally don't do an upgrade, but just a parallel install. I always have several cura versions installed in parallel on most machines.
6 hours ago, nallath said:But you are probably right that we should add a max temperature there as well.
That moment I posted this "genius" idea, I knew it will be used against me. I need to rephrase my previous conclusion: I'm such an idiot!
6 hours ago, nallath said:the best option would be to contribute those file
As mentioned before: I actually have no idea what I'm doing here on these definitions. I also have multiple no-limit extruder files which I have absolutely no idea what they do and why I need them... but I have them and migrate them on each new install and send them to people who'd like to use my project files. They seem to work for at least 2 different (none DIY) types of HT printers but I'm pretty sure they're just templates and there's all kind of stuff missing. Probably they're even dangerous; I wouldn't dare to release them to some wider audience.
Recommended Posts
ahoeben 2,012
See this discussion:
Link to post
Share on other sites