Anyone got any tips for printing when the first layer has lots of tiny part?

[tonycstech 5]

Advise to slow down is no better then increasing the flow by 150% for 1st layer.

Not only i would have to use plugins to tweak 1st layer but it will also mess up 1st layer dimensions. It will also make 1st layer fill too much causing the nozzle get filament allover it on the next layer, unless i set 2nd layer to 50% and 3rd back to 100% to balance things out.

Ridiculous !

Absolutely have no clue what problem you talking about with the second video. It printed the layer perfectly. Skirt has some oozing but that has nothing to do with the layer print.

As for outershell speed, CURA does have that option but it effects entire shell, not the outer shell as it says.

Shell consists of 3 walls. Craftware gives option to slow down the external wall which would increase the external quality by allot if entire model is printed at high speed.

Am not sure why i even get emails about this topic, its unsubscribed.

 

[jweaver 2]

Advise to slow down is no better then increasing the flow by 150% for 1st layer.

Not only i would have to use plugins to tweak 1st layer but it will also mess up 1st layer dimensions. It will also make 1st layer fill too much causing the nozzle get filament allover it on the next layer, unless i set 2nd layer to 50% and 3rd back to 100% to balance things out.

Ridiculous !

Absolutely have no clue what problem you talking about with the second video. It printed the layer perfectly. Skirt has some oozing but that has nothing to do with the layer print.

As for outershell speed, CURA does have that option but it effects entire shell, not the outer shell as it says.

Shell consists of 3 walls. Craftware gives option to slow down the external wall which would increase the external quality by allot if entire model is printed at high speed.

Am not sure why i even get emails about this topic, its unsubscribed.

 

Tony.. Please keep debating this.. As you know I share the same issue/concerns and I don't have the knowledge or words to express my views.. I just know that I see exactly the same issue as you have demonstrated and its driving me nuts.

I am more than happy with a workaround.. But using Hairspray isn't an option for me, as removing the parts is already difficult enough... I don't think my problem is adhesion.. Its just that the perimeters are not 'closed' and the open ends have 'blobs' which catch on the next pass.. Thats why I believe that doing a few laps for each perimeter would be a good solution.

But I don't believe this is easy to fix and dont' expect anything to happen in CURA, so workaround is my only option!

 

[Daid 306]

Advise to slow down is no better then increasing the flow by 150% for 1st layer.

Not only i would have to use plugins to tweak 1st layer but it will also mess up 1st layer dimensions. It will also make 1st layer fill too much causing the nozzle get filament allover it on the next layer, unless i set 2nd layer to 50% and 3rd back to 100% to balance things out.

Ridiculous !

 

Yes, ridiculous. Ridiculous that you think that.

Naturally Cura adjusts all offsets and line distances if you change the line width for the first layer. So you do not need to adjust anything else, as it will put down wider lines but at a larger distance from each-other.

But I guess you assume I'm an idiot.

Also your math does not add up, if Cura was not as smart as it is. The first layer is thicker, so 150% of 0.3mm layer, next layer is most likely 0.2 for you, so that would mean 50% * (0.3/0.2) = 75% more material which would have ended up in the 2nd layer. So you would have to put the flow of the 2nd layer to 25%.

However, this is not the case, so I'll ignore that piece of flawed logic right there.

 

Absolutely have no clue what problem you talking about with the second video. It printed the layer perfectly. Skirt has some oozing but that has nothing to do with the layer print.

 

It's all down to nozzle shape. The way your nozzle is shaped greatly increases the curling up effect. Which you see as a "blob" at the start of the line. That's why you see no Ultimaker users complaining, as they have the "flat end" nozzle which forces the material more downwards into the tape, instead of giving it room to curl upwards.

 

I am more than happy with a workaround.. But using Hairspray isn't an option for me, as removing the parts is already difficult enough... I don't think my problem is adhesion.. Its just that the perimeters are not 'closed' and the open ends have 'blobs' which catch on the next pass.. Thats why I believe that doing a few laps for each perimeter would be a good solution.

 

Try the "initial line width" setting that I suggested above. Most likely it will make a difference. Changing the initial layer speed (which is tuned for an Ultimaker by default) could also help.

Your problem isn't the end adhesion. It's the adhesion while the material is still hot. That's a whole different set of mechanics happening right there.

 

[jweaver 2]

Try the "initial line width" setting that I suggested above. Most likely it will make a difference. Changing the initial layer speed (which is tuned for an Ultimaker by default) could also help.

Your problem isn't the end adhesion. It's the adhesion while the material is still hot. That's a whole different set of mechanics happening right there.

 

Thanks Daid.. I will do just that.. I completely overlooked this option and have never played with it to see what effect it has...

I tried Craftworks and its nice.. But it can't print directly to my Printrbot, so its little use for me (And I don't want to go down the GCODE/SD route).

Fingers crossed.. This helps.

Jon

 

[tonycstech 5]

So let me get this straight.

Cura slicer was designed around the nozzle shape and thats why it works for ultimaker but not for other printers ?

Interesting.

Then let me request another feature.

Hardware or different nozzle capability.

Have you guys heard of filament extruders(makers) ?

I have one called filastruder.

It has a 1 speed motor and everything else is like everywhere else.

Because it has 1 speed motor, changing filament diameter requires to change things such as:

Angle at which extruder is positioned/Temperature/Ambient Temprature/Cooling/Height above the floor (seriously) and other things.

In other words, you have to change the world around the extruder for it to extrude 1.75mm filament.

What i proposed to them was to have an adjustable motor speed because speed also effects the diameter.

But please think about it, isnt it easier to change speed of the motor then changing the list of things that conflict with one another ?

It is easier, but just like CURA they dont like the idea.

So i didnt care what they said and i installed an adjuster. Now i dont care what ambient temperature my extrtuder is located or what angle its pointing at or how big of balls my cat has (that could also be a factor), because i can control the diameter with a freaking TURN KNOB !!!!!!!!!!!!

But i guess i am still an idiot who cant correctly express his thoughts even if they are pretty good and will benefit many.

For CURA i did the same, i switched to CraftWare. Simple ! But craftware does not (version 1.07) use vector slicer so for mechanical parts precision is off by about 0.5mmm

They are already working on vector slicing feature for mechanical parts and will release it with (hopefully) their new update.

I was the one who brought up the issue and some people agreed. Developers saw that it is infarct a problem and started working on it right away.

My last word to CURA developers.

Dont be like Microsoft, listen to users, some of them have pretty good suggestions that you should implement.

Have a good day.

 

[Dim3nsioneer 557]

My last word to CURA developers.

Dont be like Microsoft, listen to users, some of them have pretty good suggestions that you should implement.

 

I think there is actually a huge difference between the UM software people and Microsoft. As a matter of fact a large number of suggestions and pull-requests have been implemented in Cura since a few weeks ago. If you don't believe it, check the repository at Github.

It's the right and the responsibilty of a depository's owner - in this case Daid - to select what should be in the software - and what not. Not every pull request I made was accepted by Daid. At some point it was hard for me to understand. But I accept it. Because I know that my point of view is not the only truth in the universe. If everybody would be aware of his/her limited view, World would be a better place...

 

[tonycstech 5]

There is my way and then there is the right way. Which way should i take ?

World is getting worse as we speak because people accept their way instead of the right way which was outlined thousands of years ago, weather its the CURA feature for modern days or the gay orientation since the day of creation.

In my case, i cant accept either one.

But just like in the case with gay instead of accepting it, i will simply ignore it. After all, isnt it what we all do when they legalize things like that ?

I guess i am in a better state right now where it doesnt really matter so much. Craftware will release vector slicing very soon and they are loaded with features CURA will never have. All i got to do is wait few days. Meanwhile i thought that this feature would solve the problem. It would also prevent me searching for alternative slicers in the 1st place.

 

[Daid 306]

My last word to CURA developers.

Dont be like Microsoft, listen to users, some of them have pretty good suggestions that you should implement.

Have a good day.

 

The Cura developers to it's users that get the whole software for free even tough they did not pay a single cent for it:

Don't be an asshole. Thank you.

And yes, some people have good suggestions. And some people have awful suggestions. Guess what, I get to decide which is which! Which is fun! For me, not for you. Sorry.

Lots of great suggestions have been implemented already.

 

So let me get this straight.

Cura slicer was designed around the nozzle shape and thats why it works for ultimaker but not for other printers ?

Interesting.

 

Nope. It's designed, tested and build on Ultimakers. Because, that's what I have, at home and at the office. That's what started Cura. And that's what pays for my food&home.

Any other printer support is just extra. It's me being a nice person, and Ultimaker being a nice company.

The readme used to say "Cura is developed on and for Ultimaker 3D printers, but can be used on other printers as well"

Now, you can print just fine with Cura on a printrbot, but you need to make some adjustments to settings that you are unwilling to adjust. And because of that you think that I need to make very complex changes to my code that does not add a huge amount of value and does not actually solve your main problem just hides it a bit more. (Same for my suggested setting change, but you can do that without me needing to add a lot of complex code)

 

[jweaver 2]

Thanks Daid.. I will do just that.. I completely overlooked this option and have never played with it to see what effect it has...

I tried Craftworks and its nice.. But it can't print directly to my Printrbot, so its little use for me (And I don't want to go down the GCODE/SD route).

Fingers crossed.. This helps.

Jon

 

Tried increasing the first layer "line width" and it didn't really help.. I have to agree with Tony about the cause of the issue, as his video shows exactly what I see.

BUT. I have to distance myself from the 'way' that he is going about this, as I recognise CURA for what it is.. And thats 'free'.. Anything you give us is a courtesy, so I just have to hope that you recognise this as an issue, and have a plan to address it at some point in the future.

Jon

 

[Daid 306]

Tried increasing the first layer "line width" and it didn't really help.. I have to agree with Tony about the cause of the issue, as his video shows exactly what I see.

 

That's a shame. But thanks for trying. Maybe slowing down the first layer even more will help? (As CW is definitely printing the first layer a lot slower then Cura)

I don't think I'll be changing this anytime soon. The required changes for it in the engine are complex, as it's a complex problem. Explained it to a fellow software engineer and my intern, and they both agreed with the complexity for a problem as a whole. But it's hard to explain in text without a whiteboard to draw things on.

So I rather see some other setting that can be adjusted to prevent your issue. As I do hope we can work around the problem that you're having.

 

[jweaver 2]

That's a shame. But thanks for trying. Maybe slowing down the first layer even more will help? (As CW is definitely printing the first layer a lot slower then Cura)

I don't think I'll be changing this anytime soon. The required changes for it in the engine are complex, as it's a complex problem. Explained it to a fellow software engineer and my intern, and they both agreed with the complexity for a problem as a whole. But it's hard to explain in text without a whiteboard to draw things on.

So I rather see some other setting that can be adjusted to prevent your issue. As I do hope we can work around the problem that you're having.

 

Thanks Daid.. I am under no illusion that this is a simple fix.. This is down to the "logic" of they way that CURA slices and changing this, even if it could be done, would surely have a MASSIVE knock on effect.

My problem is simply that when CURA layers the perimeters down in one pass, my extruder often doens't lay the first few mms.. So the 'shape' that it creates is left open.

This is why CW helps, as it does several "laps" for each perimeter, closing them, even if the first pass wasn't complete.

Increasing the first line width certainly did something.. But it still leaves shapes open with a blob.. And they can still snag..

I have tried slowing down.. But the problem remains.. As it layes a shape, it often extrudes are for a few mms.

In truth, I think this is a problem with the design of my printer, than an issue with the software.. But it just seems that the way CW went about their first layer logic, helps for people like me.

Jon

 

[Daid 306]

This is why CW helps, as it does several "laps" for each perimeter, closing them, even if the first pass wasn't complete.

 

I understood that CW does that. However, actually doing this is a bit more complex then it sounds.

My code currently calculates a number of "insets" these are the lines that you call perimeters. These are calculated with an offset from the outer model boundary.

So there is an offset at 0.2mm and one at 0.6mm (for 2 lines). With the example of a plate with 4 holes, that means both the 0.2 and the 0.6mm offset have 5 "lines" in them. However, at this point, I do not have the relationship between those two sets of lines. So I do not know which of the 0.2mm inset belongs to the 0.6mm inset.

To make the problem even more complex. It's not guaranteed that what was 5 "lines" at the 0.2mm is still 5 "lines" at 0.6mm offset. It could be that lines touched each-other and where merged into a single line. So suddenly there are 5 lines at 0.2 and only 1 at 0.6mm. So you have a complex relationship there.

Now, for print quality reasons, you always want to print the outer walls from the inside to the outside (this helps with overhands as well as outer skin quality)

So the problem is:

* Finding the relationships.

* The relations ships are not 1 to 1. But [n] to [n].

* With that relationship you want to print them inside out.

 

[tonycstech 5]

Sorry for being an ass. I an no where near the talk i should be when it comes to making requests or illustrating a problem.

I have no excuse talking like that expecting you to do what i think is right as if i payed you.

But i've done enough research and many slicers and kilos of filament to learn that solution is one and one only.

Yes glue will help, yes hair spray will help, yes abs juice will help, but all of those will only help to adhere better which is not the issue.

PLA sticks to blue tape just enough to stay on it yet light enough to allow easy removal, but its needs perfect initial contact which can only be achieved with retraction prior to move.

Even if CURA will continue to print each wall at the time for the entire perimeter (instead of the whole thing) it should still retract as it switches around.

Maybe ill work extra hard to get those numbers into variables that i could use to calculate the last known extrusion value and come up with a number to retract and prime.

 

[aviphysics 9]

One of the things I noticed in the videos was that CW looked like it homed and kept the tip in contact with the bed during heat up (bad for plastic beds, but not a huge deal). Cura on the other hand has thr head up during heat up. That appears to allow a lot more oozing, and in the vids it definitely looks like the head takes longer to fully prime with Cura.

I know that my head often has to make a few perimeters for the skirt before being fully primed. Maybe it would help to adjust Cura's code to remove the raising of the head during heat up. (This is pretty easy for the user to adjust).

[tottenham12712 1]

My last word to CURA developers.

Dont be like Microsoft, listen to users, some of them have pretty good suggestions that you should implement.

Have a good day.

 

Attacking UM/Daid is not going to get you anywhere. And that sentence right there is where I lost all respect for your arguement/you. Dont be disrespectful, you get a lot more with sugar than you do salt. How many developers even talk with customers? Yeah not too many, im glad he is here, contsantly getting into discussions about the product because thats the only way its going to get better than it already is.

Daid,

Heres what I notice. I make many parts with small holes for screws or zipties. Initially I wanted my shell thickness to be .8mm(stronger hole), what Cura does is the first shell and than the second shell later on in the layer. The nozzle will eventaully cross over the shell or rub into it and if there are any areas that are a bit too high it will grab it and pop it off the bed.

Now if I only use a .4mm shell its compeltely fine. Changing any other settings has zero effect unless I go insanly slow which is just not practical.

I typically print at 20mm/s on my first layer now, and anywhere from 50-70 mm/s afterwards depending on layer height with colorfabb XT.

If you would like a couple of test files to run yourself please let me know and I can come up with something.

 

[tonycstech 5]

Yah i dont care anymore.

Craftware listened to me and implemented vecror slicer in just couple of weeks so doesnt matter what daid does or doesnt.

I was trying to get the stupid retraction before perimeters implemented for over a year with no luck.

It turned out that ultimaker does not need retraction so badly as other printers do so daid ignored my suggestions becuase they didnt make sense to him.

Dont waste your time on my issue, no settings in the world will fix anything because problem is not something that can be worked around, its at the ground of the code.

Even plugins cannot help becuase the code is not generated in a way that would allow any plugin developer to identify where perimeters jump from one to another, i already tried and confirmed that its useless.

 

[aviphysics 9]

You could make a plugin to handle this in the following way.

Step 1) Rasterize all G1 moves in the first layer.

Step 2) Draw each G0 move in the first layer on top of the raster and compare for differences.

Step 3) Convert any G0 move that alters the raster into a retract move.

If your only concerned with the first layer, it shouldn't even be very computationally intensive. Probably not even too terrible to do it to all the layers.

 

[Daid 306]

You could make a plugin to handle this in the following way.

Step 1) Rasterize all G1 moves in the first layer.

Step 2) Draw each G0 move in the first layer on top of the raster and compare for differences.

Step 3) Convert any G0 move that alters the raster into a retract move.

If your only concerned with the first layer, it shouldn't even be very computationally intensive. Probably not even too terrible to do it to all the layers.

 

... that's silly. As that's what this line of code is already doing:

https://github.com/Ultimaker/CuraEngine/blob/master/src/gcodeExport.cpp#L485

 

[kenzu 0]

I just found raft to be very usefull for a good first layer every time and even with a lot of small details in the first layer.

My raft settings peel of really easy for my PLA. Maybe not with other brands.

I use raft every time now. Okay i waste some pla on the raft, but all my prints works on the first layer.

My settings is like this.

Extra margin = 5.0

Line spacing = 2.0

Base thickness = 0.35

Base line width = 1.0

Interface thickness = 0.25

Interface line width = 0.4

Airgap = 0.215

First layer airgap = 0.0 (why both airgap and firstlayer airgap?)

Surface layers = 2

Surface layer thickness = 0.25

Surface layer line width = 0.7

My temp is 180 degree for raft and first layer and then use the plugin change at z to set temp to 200 at layer 1 so layer 0 is 180.

Then in advanced settings i set first layer to 0.25 heigth en 0.5 width.

In my start gcode in set fan on 100% for the raft

And fan settings to be on 100% from layer 0.

A small video to show it all https://fbcdn-video-b-a.akamaihd.net/hvideo-ak-xpf1/v/t43.1792-2/10810908_10152821049117954_317418998_n.mp4?rl=1500&vabr=960&oh=8fe024d0d7dcb9cb1ca2a10510cb999c&oe=54ABDAF3&__gda__=1420548519_f0867c389e4d5d96eb586d6de4560f08

And another video of a larger object.

Jesper

ps. this both works on heated glas and on kold bed with blue tape.

 

[bagel-orb 61]

@Jesper:

sounds interesting!

I will try out these settings, to see how well they work with Ultimaker PLA.

The link to your video seems to be dead. Can you fix that? I am eager to see it all!

 

[kenzu 0]

@Jesper:

sounds interesting!

I will try out these settings, to see how well they work with Ultimaker PLA.

The link to your video seems to be dead. Can you fix that? I am eager to see it all!

 

Okay jeg made a new link. Hope it works.

 

[jweaver 2]

This is really annoying me now.

I was trying to print the NASA Spanner:

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:608397/#files

And the very first layer has a tiny part of the ratchet mechanism.. Which simply won't stick.. Gets rolled up as a blob and then gets merged into the rest of the print.

I have tried everything I can "mechanically" to get this to stick, and its simply impossible.

Now I need to start looking at playing with CURA (perhaps using the raft as suggested above) to see if any of the settings will help.....

Jon

 

[smedsgenbo 0]

Sorry if I pay in a bit late here. Part of the reasons may be the 3D software that generates the stl file.

I have several 3D drawing software and they all have their pros and cons. And they all generate the transfer to STL diffidently.

I come from machining, so g-code isn't news to me. To say it frankly, we should not rely on STL to generate the g-code. Which in fact is more M- code . Smartcam used to be the preferred code. I'm not sure who's in game nowadays. A couple of years ago I touched Delcam. Wouw, what a powerful tool..

Well, we may have to give 3D printers for free to a bunch of 3d software programmers in order to get slicers that are capable of turning filaments off and on per perimeter.

[tottenham12712 1]

This is really annoying me now.

I was trying to print the NASA Spanner:

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:608397/#files

And the very first layer has a tiny part of the ratchet mechanism.. Which simply won't stick.. Gets rolled up as a blob and then gets merged into the rest of the print.

I have tried everything I can "mechanically" to get this to stick, and its simply impossible.

Now I need to start looking at playing with CURA (perhaps using the raft as suggested above) to see if any of the settings will help.....

Jon

 

First off grab the file straight from nasa, never know if someone messed with it: http://nasa3d.arc.nasa.gov/detail/wrench-mis

I was able to print this 3 times with no issues in XT and Nylon (Bridge). What settings are you using, filament, and are you using glue or anything to keep the print down?

 

[jweaver 2]

First off grab the file straight from nasa, never know if someone messed with it: http://nasa3d.arc.nasa.gov/detail/wrench-mis

I was able to print this 3 times with no issues in XT and Nylon (Bridge). What settings are you using, filament, and are you using glue or anything to keep the print down?

 

Its not a problem with the Wrench.. Its a problem with my printer and the way that CURA lays down the first layer..

You need to go back to the start to understand if you are interested.. Basically, after retraction, my Printrbot lays down a tiny bit of air when doing new perimeters leaving them open.. And they get snagged and ripped off.

I struggle with the first layer when there are very small parts... So in the case of the wrench.. That tiny little rectangle on the first layer, gets ripped up..