A different multi-extrusion approach - UM tool / printhead changer

[foehnsturm 969]

Not sure why Cura (and btw S3D as well) generates this support on top of the wings. But at least we now know that Polysupport bonds very well to PLA.

[foehnsturm 969]

Not bad at all. Removing support took 30 sec.

top

bottom

[neotko 1,417]

S3D does that with thin stuff. Try lowering the horizontal expansion (orsomething likethat mm) I don't have a computer here but if you lower that it will not generate supports that go beyond the limits of the object.

Edit: Found it. It's called Extra inflation distance

Edited July 14, 2016 by Guest

[foehnsturm 969]

Good call! Might be the same issue with Cura.

[neotko 1,417]

Wow quite clean for something that thin! I might put that polymax stuff on my shopping list. Also that flexible that @DidierKlein linked looks very sexy for the colors and specially because it's eco-friendly (and goes up to 102C).

[foehnsturm 969]

Polysupport is really super-easy to print with.

The tip of the helix is 1.0 mm in diameter. Cura 2.1.2 with 0.15 mm layer.

If there's any possibility to reach all the support structures for (easy) removal this will be my first choice from now on.

Edited July 15, 2016 by Guest

[neotko 1,417]

Very impressive!

[ultiarjan 1,223]

 

@foehnsturm does the changer firmware support a +feeder and an old feeder combination already? Or do we need to set e-steps every change?

[foehnsturm 969]

@foehnsturm does the changer firmware support a +feeder and an old feeder combination already? Or do we need to set e-steps every change?

 

Afaik a gcode for setting e-steps would be required with every tool change at the moment. But I pass this to @Tinkergnome

I agree, using a different, probably already existing feeder is a nice option especially for tinkerers. However, professional users will most likely want to run identical drive trains.

[ultiarjan 1,223]

I was thinking of people using there old head and feeder after the + upgrade.....

[foehnsturm 969]

That's what I had in mind as well.

[neotko 1,417]

 

@foehnsturm does the changer firmware support a +feeder and an old feeder combination already? Or do we need to set e-steps every change?

 

Afaik a gcode for setting e-steps would be required with every tool change at the moment. But I pass this to @Tinkergnome

I agree, using a different, probably already existing feeder is a nice option especially for tinkerers. However, professional users will most likely want to run identical drive trains.

 

The only think that worries me about 2 esteps it's that Marlin has a bug (at least on all umo/umo+) that was never fixed. And it kicks in as soon you change esteps and move the motor.

https://ultimaker.com/en/community/19301-calibration-error-marlin-ultimaker-original-plus

Basically everytime you change the esteps the first next move of the feeder will be absolutely 'nuts'. Also @Dim3nsioneer saw this bug in person

[Dim3nsioneer 557]

Yes and I still should report that... :(

Edited July 15, 2016 by Guest

[foehnsturm 969]

Ok, don't want to put too much stress on Tinkergnome. (But he should be well rested anyway )

[zerspaner_gerd 382]

Hello,

can you describe me times the error.

I Prints with 2 different feeders and change the e-steps with M92.

A section of my change of nozzle:

 

M109 S240 T0 ;Druck TempT0 ; New ToolM92 E369.000 ;E-Steps T0 TOOL 0 neue FeederG92 E-20.000G1 E-4.5 F2400G1 X148.800 Y169.700 Z0.350 F3000G1 E0.000 F1500

 

thanks

[ultiarjan 1,223]

Hello,

can you describe me times the error.

I Prints with 2 different feeders and change the e-steps with M92.

A section of my change of nozzle:

 

M109 S240 T0 ;Druck TempT0 ; New ToolM92 E369.000 ;E-Steps T0 TOOL 0 neue FeederG92 E-20.000G1 E-4.5 F2400G1 X148.800 Y169.700 Z0.350 F3000G1 E0.000 F1500

 

thanks

 

so I understand you've never seen an error?

[zerspaner_gerd 382]

so I understand you've never seen an error?

 

I print only two weeks Dual, could see no error. What should I look?

[tinkergnome 927]

I print only two weeks Dual, could see no error. What should I look?

 

It's only a suspicion a.t.m., but i think the M92 confuses the planner and a subsequent G92 is the correct 'workaround'. Good work!

Edited July 16, 2016 by Guest

[foehnsturm 969]

First test with HD Glass ( PETG) and Recreus FilaFlex.

FilaFlex on a Machtless block with 0.6 mm race nozzle @ 30 mm/s, 0.15 mm layer height

Not that bad. Considered it's FilaFlex, toolchange retractions worked surprisingly well.

[Labern 774]

30mm/s on a race nozzle???

[foehnsturm 969]

Well, most people fail completely to print the super-soft FilaFlex with the bowden setup.

I'm sure I could go considerably faster but I want to keep temperature as low as possible cause dual extrusion needs working retraction.

[Labern 774]

Yes it's a very good result.

It just sounds funny to be using a race nozzle at 30mm/s.

[foehnsturm 969]

That's true

Btw where are you atm, Berlin?

[Labern 774]

In Amsterdam ready for my flight home tomorrow

[foehnsturm 969]

Oh, how time flies. Have a save trip home.