Yes, it seems that the current system may just be operating very close to its limits: for many people it works fine; for others having problems it's not clear to me that there is one particular cause - it seems to be a combination of small effects: perhaps the solution is as you say to simply move the envelope, rather than trying to reliably eek out the last 10% of performance in each of half-a-dozen areas?
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
52
47
38
37
Popular Days
Feb 27
30
May 6
28
Mar 6
24
Mar 3
24
Top Posters In This Topic
illuminarti 52 posts
gr5 47 posts
schafe 38 posts
Nicolinux 37 posts
Popular Days
Feb 27 2014
30 posts
May 6 2014
28 posts
Mar 6 2014
24 posts
Mar 3 2014
24 posts
Posted Images
foehnsturm 970
I've been following this discussion since the beginning. If I would own a UM2 and think about changing the extrusion stepper motor and the feeder design I would go for a NEMA 23. In the reprap community it seems to be common sense that a direct driven 3 mm bowden extruder pushes even a high-torque NEMA 17 to its limits. It's a deadlock: limited motor torque asks for a knurled wheel as small as possible but its minimum size is limited due to the increasing risk of slipping and grinding.
Link to post
Share on other sites