Ironing Ironing only working on part of the model

[Vvix 0]

I was printing a base for a tabletop miniature and this happened.

Ironing is enabled, but only the initial 1/3rd is properly ironed, the rest of the ironing looks under extruded, except the nozzle extrudes just fine. There's no clog or anything. The properly ironed part is where the ironing started, then the quality deteriorated as it went on. I'm using an Ender-3

This is my first time using the forums, so if you want me to attach my G-code or preset or anything, just tell me

EDIT: I attached the G-code along with the post. I can't find anything wrong with it myself.

LargeBase.gcode

Edited June 6 by Vvix

[GregValiant 1,410]

I agree, the gcode looks to be correct both in the Cura preview and in the PrusaSlicer Gcode viewer.

That pretty much just leaves either the SD card (bad memory sector and part of the gcode was in the bad sector) or the printer itself.

The under-extrusion is troublesome and needs to be addressed.  

 

 

[Vvix 0]

8 hours ago, GregValiant said:

I agree, the gcode looks to be correct both in the Cura preview and in the PrusaSlicer Gcode viewer.

That pretty much just leaves either the SD card (bad memory sector and part of the gcode was in the bad sector) or the printer itself.

The under-extrusion is troublesome and needs to be addressed.  

 

 

I can't really address it since nothing else produces these results. I actually re-made the g-code with the same model and the same settings, also thinking it might be some file corruption, but no. The ironing broke in the exact same way, only covering 1/3rd of the model and stopped in the exact same spot. I can't blame the printer for it, since if the printer clogged or something, the results wouldn't be uniform

[Slashee_the_Cow 483]

First thing my expertly nitpicking mind with a graphic design qualification goes to: the inset isn't uniform.

Makes me think hardware. Have you tried slicing it in a different position on the bed and printing that?

[GregValiant 1,410]

• I read the gcode into AutoCAD and all the ironing is in there across the entire top of the model.
• The Cura preview shows the ironing across the entire top of the model.
• The PrusaSlicer preview shows the ironing across the entire top of the model.
• I also read the gcode into MS Excel and there are extrusions across the entire top of the model at about a .01 line width.
• I air-printed the top layer of the gcode and the ironing is across the entire model.

The gcode is correct in all respects so the problem must lie elsewhere and there are only two choices.  It's the SD card, or it's the printer, and the SD card is the most likely suspect.  Save the files you want to keep and format the SD card.

[gr5 2,267]

Did you actually see it suddenly stop the ironing?  I think Greg is assuming that you saw it stop or that he agrees it stopped by looking at your photo.  But is it possible it didn't stop but just looks like it stopped?  I guess my question is: Did you actually see it stop before completing the ironing?

 

I've seen problems with printers like this where they ignore the end of the gcode file.  This is a lot to ignore though.  A test is to add several large comments at the end of the file - each comment should be 100 characters and add maybe 100 lines of this.  See if it gets a bit farther in the ironing.

 

Although I have to admit, I've never seen it throw away more than 256 bytes or about the last 25 gcodes.

[Vvix 0]

2 hours ago, gr5 said:

Did you actually see it suddenly stop the ironing?  I think Greg is assuming that you saw it stop or that he agrees it stopped by looking at your photo.  But is it possible it didn't stop but just looks like it stopped?  I guess my question is: Did you actually see it stop before completing the ironing?

 

I've seen problems with printers like this where they ignore the end of the gcode file.  This is a lot to ignore though.  A test is to add several large comments at the end of the file - each comment should be 100 characters and add maybe 100 lines of this.  See if it gets a bit farther in the ironing.

 

Although I have to admit, I've never seen it throw away more than 256 bytes or about the last 25 gcodes.

It didn't stop, it actually moved the nozzle all the way trough the print, it just didn't iron the layer. I assume it just didn't dispense any plastic on the top layer and simply dragged a hot nozzle trough it. Sorry if I didn't make it clear enough

Edited June 7 by Vvix

[Vvix 0]

3 hours ago, GregValiant said:

• I read the gcode into AutoCAD and all the ironing is in there across the entire top of the model.
• The Cura preview shows the ironing across the entire top of the model.
• The PrusaSlicer preview shows the ironing across the entire top of the model.
• I also read the gcode into MS Excel and there are extrusions across the entire top of the model at about a .01 line width.
• I air-printed the top layer of the gcode and the ironing is across the entire model.

The gcode is correct in all respects so the problem must lie elsewhere and there are only two choices.  It's the SD card, or it's the printer, and the SD card is the most likely suspect.  Save the files you want to keep and format the SD card.

 

4 hours ago, Slashee_the_Cow said:

First thing my expertly nitpicking mind with a graphic design qualification goes to: the inset isn't uniform.

Makes me think hardware. Have you tried slicing it in a different position on the bed and printing that?

 

So, I took both advice. I formatted my SD card, backing up only the EEPROM file after which I took the model back to Cura and changed its position from 0:0 to 19:-28, moving it towards the upper right which is the part of the model where ironing worked before stopping. I don't know which advice was the correct one, but the ironing was successful this time, the only problem are these minor under extrusions on the surface, but I assume these might be caused by either my filament being moist or my ironing settings not being fine tuned enough, unless there are other suggestions.

Either way, the suggestion of either GregValiant or Slashee_the_Cow was correct.

Edited June 7 by Vvix

[gr5 2,267]

1 hour ago, Vvix said:

t didn't stop, it actually moved the nozzle all the way trough the print, i

Good to know!  Then you can ignore Greg's advice.

 

I think you just have simple underextrusion.  Underextrusion occurring before you even get to the ironing step.  Try printing at half speed just to see if it's underextrusion.  Your printer should have a TUNE menu.  Or maybe you have some infill layers and then the layers above the infill just aren't numerous enough to get a good, underextruded layer just before you start the ironing.  So you could add one more layer to your top skin.  So my suggestions:

 

1) Set print speed to 50% in your tune menu on the printer as the underextrusion could be caused by 100 things all of which are improved by reducing the print speed/volume.

2) Add one or two more layers to your top skin thickness in Cura.

[dhscord 1]

I realise this is an old post but I thought I'd raise an issue which many people might not know about... apologies for the long message but I include a TLDR; if you just want the outcome.

 

TLDR;

If you have always used 10% ironing setting in Cura (since before 5.x), you should probably now be using 40% ironing setting (dependent on nozzle size and ironing line spacing... see below)

 

At some point in Cura's history the calculation for Ironing Flow (as a %) seems to have changed.

 

Ironing is not a very well used feature so, probably, doesn't get much attention or love. But I use it a LOT in my prints for very specific quality reasons. At some stage in the history of my usage of Cura, somewhere between 4.6 and 5.x I noticed inconsistent ironing even though my settings had seemingly not changed. I had always run 10% flow with 0.1mm line width (the default) but, suddenly, I had to increase my flow substantially. I settled on 25% flow but I guess I still occasionally had some issues here and there.

 

More recently I created a new print and I had this issue again and, for whatever reason, I decide to investigate it in more detail instead of playing trial-and-error. This is what I discovered.

 

[As context, I always print with 0.4mm nozzle and 0.2mm layer height. Over time my printing speeds have varied slightly but my ironing speed has remained consistent (20mm/s)]

 

On old GCODE that almost always seemed to iron successfully (marked as coming from Cura 4.6) I measured the E movement values across normal printing and ironing to compare them. The profile was 0.1mm line spacing and 10% flow.

 

- For normal printing, the movement of E per mm of head movement was 0.03326

- For ironing, the movement of E per mm of head movement was 0.00333

 

This made sense to me because the ironing flow rate was 10% of the normal flow rate. As I said, this is measured from the GCODE, not the settings.

 

To compare, I took a recently created GCODE (from Cura 5.6) where I was getting under-extrusion at 25% ironing flow rate.

 

- For normal printing, again, the movement of E per mm of head movement was around 0.033 (measured as 0.03322)

- HOWEVER... for the ironing part, the movement of E per mm of head movement was only 0.00208

 

This equates to 6% flow rate, compared to the 10% from my old GCODE... How could this be possible? I had a 25% flow rate setting in Cura!

 

So I tried the experiment again, but this time went back to 10% flow rate. The result was that my ironing E movement was 0.00083 per mm of head movement... which is 2.5% flow rate compared to normal printing

 

It was here that the penny dropped. This is exactly 1/4 of the old flow rate... as measured in actual movement from the GCODE compared to my old GCODE...

 

I don't know exactly what changed or when but my assumption is that, at some point, they started including the Ironing Line Spacing in the calculation... mine is 0.1mm (and has always been), which is obviously exactly 1/4 of the 0.4mm lines the normal printing uses. So, now, when they are calculating the ironing flow rate, the % is actually the % of what your flow would have been for a 0.1mm line, not a 0.4mm line.

 

I confirmed this, by changing the Ironing Line Spacing to 0.4mm (not recommended) while having the Ironing Flow Rate at 10% and, bingo, the E movement was 0.0033 per mm of head movement. 10% of normal extrusion.

 

I also examined the GCODE attached to the OP's issue and confirmed it is not true 10% flow rate but actually 2.5% flow rate (in old Cura terms). So, I would try 40% Ironing Flow Rate and see how you get on. 

 

For reference, the values from the OP GCODE are approximately this (I say approximately because I didn't try to account too much for the circular shape of your print).

 

Standard printing: approx 0.03680 E mm / mm of head movement

Ironing: approx 0.00091 E mm / mm of head movement (i.e. 2.5% flow compared to standard)

 

Hope this helps someone...