Datasets:

bigcode

/

stackoverflow-clean

like 5

Follow

BigCode 967

2017/01/23

<issue_start>username_0: I got a new MKS 1.4 controller board and it came with A4988 driver chips. But I can't figure out which way they install. I found something saying to match the printing on the back of the chip to that on the board. But I don't see anything that matches. Suggestions? [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dQers.jpg) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/RdjAB.jpg)<issue_comment>username_1: The below image was taken from [their AliExpress shop page](https://www.aliexpress.com/store/product/3D-printer-control-board-motherboard-MKS-Gen-V1-1-RepRap-Ramps1-4-compatible/1047297_2030818114.html). Unfortunately, I don't manage to find the datasheet or schematic to give more technical advice. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Hs1AF.jpg) Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I´ve seen some cards using A4988, and also I have designed my own cards and the most and useful pin arrangement is V Mot, GND, 2B 2A 1A 1B VDD GND, so stepper motor is conected close to 2B 2A 1A 1B. Never place this pinout oposite side to stepper connectors. Stepper connector are marked as X, Y, Z, E0, E1. The assembly picture from Ali express is correct. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: From [A4988 Stepper Motor Driver Carrier](https://www.pololu.com/product/1182), the rear of the breakout board, is identical to yours: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/8xpCF.jpg) Note the two square pads for the GND, whereas the others are round. Now looking at the top side: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qUSdb.jpg) and note the position of the *square* GND pins/pads, in relation to the trim pot. Now look at this hi-res photo of a populated MKS board [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/FZaJZ.jpg) Again, looking at the position of the trim pots, one can see that the A4988 breakout boards need to be oriented such that the side with GND pins need to be nearest to the top of the board. That is to say the GND on the *corner* of the breakout board, needs to be pointing North East, as it were. Here is a schematic of the MKS 1.4 as well, although it is not much use, from [MKS Gen 1.4 circuit and pinouts](http://forums.reprap.org/read.php?13,753796): [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2TyK6.jpg) Upvotes: 2

2017/01/24

<issue_start>username_0: I am making a "fun button", with a dome-shaped top. The vertical sides, top center, and raised lettering seem fine, but the more sloped outer parts of the dome are very thin, with some gaps and the infill pattern is quite visible. It's almost like the slicer isn't recognizing the sloped part as an exterior shell. What is causing this, and how can I fix it? [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/cU2IR.jpg) The model was made in Fusion 360, sliced in Repetier with Slic3r, and printed on a Monoprice Maker Select Mini. Edit: More information after checking values used and taking more photos. This was my second attempt, after increasing the shell count already. On my first print, I clearly had a low value for horizontal shells, top and bottom were both at the default of 3. I upped these both to 8. (Layer height is 0.13125.) The bottom of the button is now good. The "good" center area extends a little further out, so I think it's probably thicker up at the top of the dome. But the sloped sides are pretty much the same - this is why I'm thinking it's not being considered as a "horizontal shell". Comparison: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/6C7aX.jpg) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/SgwOd.jpg) There are some design iterations, but the top surface is the same shape. **Update:** I did a print using Cura, with 0.8 mm shells, and it looks great! [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/D4iC5.jpg) I cut the two bad prints with a hacksaw to see a cross-section. The bottom is clearly thicker. The top on the outer infill void is pretty much the same. The top on the other void is thicker most of the way across, but suddenly changes to thin. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/A27aV.jpg)<issue_comment>username_1: Slice with more solid top layers. I always use five with low-density infill. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You can either increase the shells, or you can increase the infill density. In addition different fill patterns will help. I would do 4 minimum for such a print. Upvotes: 1

2017/01/26

<issue_start>username_0: I have a Tronxy P802M (very similar to the Anet A8, but using a Melzi2.0V5 board) that seems to work fine (I just finished building, and axes movement and the integrated display work) but when I try to connect to the printer from my Simplify3D on Windows 10, I get the following: ``` [...] Connected to machine! SENT: T0 READ: ok 0 READ: wait SENT: M105 READ: ok 0 READ: T:24.44 /0 B:23.33 /0 B@:0 @:0 Connection failed. ``` My other printers all connect fine.<issue_comment>username_1: The [Simplify3D support site](https://www.simplify3d.com/support/faq/#faq-4630) mentions to disable the "wait for startup command" option in the firmware configuration for S3D. This allows me to make a rudimentary connection to control the printer, however e.g. during the bed levelling wizard of S3D, the connection still breaks off. It works reliably with Octoprint. I'll consider that good enough. Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you are using a USB 3 port to connect the printer to your PC, try connecting via a USB 2 hub. My Vector 3 will not work on a USB 3 port, only on a USB 2 or lower. The device correctly mounts and presents but serial communication fails. One of my laptops only has USB 3 ports on it, so to work around the limitation I connect via a cheap USB 2 hub. I have heard that many 3D printers use a similar USB to UART / serial connector chip and that they suffer from similar limitations as a result. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Try changing your port in the control menu. By default, mine is set to `COM 1` and I have to change it to `COM 3`. Upvotes: -1

2017/01/26

<issue_start>username_0: I received a Monoprice Maker Select v2 (I3 V2 clone) from my wife for Christmas. The sample .gcode files that came with the printer generally print great with no noticeable defects. However, when I try to print miniatures for use with table-top gaming (D&D, primarily), I tend to get a lot of oozing and stringing. On top of that, bridge supports don't cool in time and tend to get fudged by the print nozzle, which results in oddities like arms being only half printed, sticking to the nozzle, and getting relocated to some other part of the print. If I use full grid supports with the most modest fill settings (8%) they end up being stronger than the miniature and are a real pain to remove. My printer is calibrated, as level as can be (the desk it's on is slightly warped but I've got the printer in the center of the warp; there is no wobble or lean) and squared. The build plate is calibrated and set to the right height. I'm using the version of Cura that came on the SD card with the printer (honestly not sure which one and I'm not at home to check). I've fiddled with print speed, extruder temp (ranging from 185 to 210), layer cooling, retraction settings, and tried switching to Slic3r (didn't go over well -- couldn't even get past the first layer). I'm using Hatchbox silver PLA filament (1.75mm +/- 0.05mm). I don't have another filament I can test with to compare performance. Even when I import the profile settings from one of the sample .gcode files I tend to end up with blobbing, pulling, and stringing all over the miniatures, in addition to missing or deformed parts. Notably, arms and hands -- most often overhangs -- tend to stick to the hotend and get repositioned, sending the whole thing out of whack. I end up with similar problems when I use the Novice mode settings in Cura (Normal Quality, High Quality, etc). Is there something I'm missing that I can do to improve the quality of small, detailed prints, or is the I3, as an entry-level printer, simply not up to the task? I'm especially interested in answers from users who have experience printing miniatures and their experiences in tuning for that type of print job. A few things I've tried test printing: [Printer calibration test model v1](http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:704409) [Printer calibration test model v3](http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1363023) Both of these came out very stringy, with lots of blobbing and layer pulling, especially towards the upper portions of the taller elements. I have also tried printing these two models: [Knight with sword - high detail](https://www.shapeways.com/product/YDCPJF8KV/knight?optionId=59811831) [Elf monk - high detail](https://www.shapeways.com/product/4Y699HM6N/elf-monk?optionId=61531553&li=marketplace) All test prints of these two models had at least one missing hand due to it getting stuck to the hotend and pulling off the part, and both demonstrated lots of minor blobbing and pulling on otherwise smooth surfaces, with loss of detail in the more finely detailed areas. Here's a sample of the output for the knight model. Please ignore the fact that he has been dismembered, that was mostly my fiddling with it post-printing (I guess I don't know my own strength), though the left hand was not well-attached and fell off rather easily. He was printed with both hands and feet/base intact, but you can see the blobbing and pulling pretty well. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/T4pth.jpg)<issue_comment>username_1: I have an Alunar(Anet) Prusa i3 printer I bought from amazon 7 months ago. I have not done much for ultra high detail prints, but it does seem to print everything I've thrown at it quite well. It took sometime for me to get it dialed in. I've found that **Bed Level, Z-axis height,** and **Print Speed** are usually what makes the most difference. I have only used Inland PLA (Microcenter brand) and can get good quality prints. I would recommend double checking bed level, z-axis, and going through print quality trouble shooting. Re-measure your PLA thickness and make sure your print multiplier is adjusted appropriately, and try to slow down your print speed. If you could post a link to a sample file that you're trying to print It may be helpful? Simplify 3D has a wonderful trouble shooting guide you can check out [here](https://www.simplify3d.com/support/print-quality-troubleshooting/) Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I've not done much miniatures printing, but I have the same printer and I happen to have the exact same filament loaded. Also, I've been doing a lot of tuning lately, including [this z-brace mod](https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:921948) which has improved my overall print quality, so I thought I'd take a pass at printing the Knight from your photos and sharing my findings. First, [I've posted a series of pictures](https://i.stack.imgur.com/U7h8L.jpg) to show my findings. Overall, I'd say my print quality was better than what you showed in your photos, but still isn't good enough. I sliced with Cura 15.04.6, and printed from SD card. Here are my (Full) settings: ``` Layer height (mm) : 0.1 Shell thickness (mm) : 0.5 Enable retraction : Yes Bottom/Top thickness (mm) : 0.3 Fill Density (%) : 20 Print Speed (mm/s) : 20 Printing Temperature (C) : 210 Bed Temperature (C) : 67 Support Type : Everywhere Platform Adhesion : None Skirts : 3 Filament Diameter (mm) : 1.75 Filament Flow (%) : 100.0 Nozzle size (mm) : 0.5 Retract Speed (mm/s) : 40.0 Retract Distance (mm) : 7 Initial Layer Thick (mm) : 0.2 Initial Later width (%) : 100 Cut off object bottom (mm): 0.0 Travel Speed (mm/s) : 100 Bottom Layer Speed (mm/s) : 20 Infill speed (mm/s) : 50 Top/bottom speed (mm/s) : 20 Outer Shell speed (mm/s) : 20 Inner Shell speed (mm/s) : 20 Min. Layer Time (sec) : 10 Enable cooling fan : Yes ``` I do most of my printing with a later height of 0.2mm, but for a detailed mini, 0.1mm is probably the largest that will look good (and probably the smallest possible on this printer. I normally set most of my speeds to 50 mm/s, with first layer at 20 mm/s; for this I slowed it all to 20 mm/s due to the fine details, and I think it helped. Temps of 67˚C bed and 210˚C extruder are what I've found to work best on my machine for PLA, after much experimentation, but your machine may vary; I'm not sure how accurate the temperature measurements are on these machines. 67˚C gives me an observed bed temp of 60˚C, but that's at the top surface - I have PEI atop Borosilicate glass, adhered to the bare aluminum bed with silicone-based heat transfer pad. I think I miscalculated the top/bottom heights and infill. I'm not used to printing at 0.1mm layer height, but 3 top layers over 20% infill is clearly not enough - see the closeup of the mini's base in my linked gallery. Next print, I'll either try 0.6mm top/bottom, or much higher infill. The supports came off easily; I used [a pair of sidecutters from my electronics bench](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/B00FZPDG1K). A little more cleanup with a sharp hobby knife, combined with a better base top layer would probably produce an acceptable result. There were two major flaws. The first are the little blobs on many layers; see for example the inseam area on the picture of the knight's back. [<NAME> at Softsolder.com calls these "Reveral Zits"](https://softsolder.com/2012/01/26/reversal-zits-speed-acceleration-and-a-bestiary/), and I think the name is apt. These happen when the print head needs to quickly reverse direction or stop-move-print, but filament continues to extrude. I use fairly aggressive retraction settings, and I think my print shows smaller zits than yours, but still far too many. Ed has explored this topic in some depth; it's possible my extruder stepper isn't keeping up with my settings due to mechanical limits. This is an area I want to pursue, but I don't have time at the moment. I plan to read Ed's work and try some experiments on my machine to see if I can get better results; I will update this answer if/when I do. As it stands, most of them are quite small, and could probably be cleaned up with a knife; the worst are those around unsupported areas, such as the back of the shoulder guard. The second major flaw is the helmet. It's just... bad. I'm not sure the printer has much hope of nailing those horns, but overall the head is just bad. I'm not sure what can be done there. To summarize: @username_1's advice on Bed Level and Print speed are certainly the right place to start; You might want to try my Cura settings to see if you get similar results. Also, the Z-brace mod I linked to above has made a big difference for me; I rarely have to adjust my leveling anymore. I also plan to try slicing with Slic3r, which I haven't used previously, but have been looking into. You mentioned you couldn't print with Slic3r, was that USB or SD Card? I'd suggest trying via SD if it failed during USB printing. **Update 30 Jan 2017:** It took a little doing, but I managed to slice and print this model via slic3r. [I had some issues with the original STL in slic3er](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/3482/slicer-reports-1000s-of-errors-not-seen-in-cura-render-is-missing-big-chunks), which I ended up fixing with a free trial at makeprintable.com. I spent a lot of time fiddling with slic3r; it has a lot more knobs to turn than Cura, and I make no claims of having the best settings for this print. There are so many settings that rather than transcribe them here, I've captured them in my [pictures of the slic3er print](https://i.stack.imgur.com/eCTmT.jpg). [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/SdOHm.png "Layers and perimeters") [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/sIM3D.png "Infill") [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pvXlJ.png "Skirt and Brim") [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/cHSzp.png "Support material") [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/vT0pN.png "Speed") [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7QK3c.png "Multiple extruders") [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/0AITv.png "Advanced") [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/13mnS.png "Cooling") [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/60F2W.png "Filament") Overall, I feel like the quality is higher. The "reversal zits" are hardly noticeable; but the big remaining problem is one I didn't fully diagnose in the original Cura print - lack of support for areas such as the shoulders. Slic3r added more support than Cura, but it's also harder to separate from the base. The head isn't great, but much better than the Cura print; I don't think my photos show it as well as it looks. **This print has convinced me that there's plenty of quality still to be wrung from this printer**; I hope to make time to do some more slic3r prints of this model while tweaking the params to see what's possible. If I make any big leaps in quality I will update this answer. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]

2017/01/26

<issue_start>username_0: [In this answer](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/a/2820/5782) user [Barafu](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/users/4345/barafu-albino) says, > > Yet I manage to keep my tolerances +- 0.05 mm which is enough for everything but miniature printing. > > > I have asked for clarification on that answer regarding what is meant by "miniature printing" but in the meantime, I want to ask the general question. What impact does dimensional accuracy of filament have on final print quality, and why? Does it vary between different filament types?<issue_comment>username_1: Dimensional accuracy is not as important as dimensional uniformity. I can print with undersized (or oversized) filament, adjusting the flow appropriately, provided the filament has a consistent diameter. When creating filament in-house, without expensive equipment, it is difficult to maintain the same diameter throughout the entire extrusion. It is likely this extrusion diameter (when creating filament, rather than the output of the actual print head) to which Barafu is referring when he mentions his tolerances: +/- 0.05 mm *in diameter*. Which is reasonable. The "miniature printing" comment likely refers to printing miniature models for tabletop gaming. If the source filament becomes wider than expected, the output will have overflow, or more material than desired will be deposited, and this will certainly affect the quality of the piece. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Put it simply: they say 1.75 mm with a ± error of 0.05 mm. Which means your flow may vary ±2.9 % while you are printing creating blobs and such. The smaller the filament tolerance, the more expensive the production costs. Upvotes: 2

2017/01/29

<issue_start>username_0: Brand new to Slic3r, I've been using Cura for a while, so not sure is happening. I tried to load [this Knight model](https://www.shapeways.com/product/YDCPJF8KV/knight) into Slic3er (v1.2.9 running on OS X), and it's reporting "Manifold: auto-repaired (11430 errors)", and the model looks incomplete. Hovering the model with the mouse shows more details: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/hb2DY.png) Preview mode shows supports holding up the head, so I don't think it's just a screen rendering issue. But I loaded this same model into Cura earlier today, and it worked just fine; I've printed the resulting GCode. So I believe the model is fine. I wanted to print using Slic3r and compare the results. Is this a known issue with certain types of models? Not sure what to try next.<issue_comment>username_1: Dimensional accuracy is not as important as dimensional uniformity. I can print with undersized (or oversized) filament, adjusting the flow appropriately, provided the filament has a consistent diameter. When creating filament in-house, without expensive equipment, it is difficult to maintain the same diameter throughout the entire extrusion. It is likely this extrusion diameter (when creating filament, rather than the output of the actual print head) to which Barafu is referring when he mentions his tolerances: +/- 0.05 mm *in diameter*. Which is reasonable. The "miniature printing" comment likely refers to printing miniature models for tabletop gaming. If the source filament becomes wider than expected, the output will have overflow, or more material than desired will be deposited, and this will certainly affect the quality of the piece. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Put it simply: they say 1.75 mm with a ± error of 0.05 mm. Which means your flow may vary ±2.9 % while you are printing creating blobs and such. The smaller the filament tolerance, the more expensive the production costs. Upvotes: 2

2017/01/29

<issue_start>username_0: I have a Wanhao Duplicator i3 v2 (A.K.A. Maker Select, Cocoon Create). My extruder got clogged: I noticed that it wasn't extruding, so I stopped my print, removed the fan, heatsink and the extruder motor and I saw that the clog is at the heater block level. This is a what I have: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uDyF2.jpg) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/iL1mQ.jpg) As you can see, there is some PLA clogged at the very beginning of the 1.75mm hole in the extruder block. I can see there is something white inside (a stone? something that is **not** PLA?). I tried to heat up the extruder to 250°C and pushing with an hex tool but the block did not move. I solved a lot of clogged nozzle issues with the [cold pull method](https://printrbot.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/202100554-How-to-Unclog-the-Hotend-The-Cold-Pull), it always worked like a charm, this time I tried too but as a result the PLA filament broke and the "stone" is still there. Does anyone know if there is a way to unclog the extruder in this situation? Do I have to change it?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm sure this is not the best solution, and if you have some ethyl acetate you should try that before going "the hard way". Ethyl acetate is a solvent for PLA, so if you soak the extruder into it PLA should melt and free the extruder. That said, this is the "hard" solution that worked for me. --- You'll need: 1. A drill 2. A 1mm drill bit 3. A 1.5mm drill bit Insert the 1mm drill bit into the drill. If your drill has a setting to reduce the drilling speed, take this to the minimum speed. If your drill doesn't have such options, you'll need to push the drill button very gently. Put the drill bit on the pla block (be sure to not touch the cooling block, you might ruin it). Start drilling at the minimum speed and push very gently, until you get a side-to-side hole on the PLA (you know it because you feel no resistance at all while pushing the drill). Take the 1.5mm drill bit and repeat the same operation. At this point my PLA block literally exploded (now I have some broken PLA inside my room, don't know where) and the extruder was finally free. I hope this helps someone. Please notice that you need to be very gentle in order to avoid breaking parts of your extruder, but if I managed to do it, you can do it too ;) As previously said, if you have ethyl acetate try soaking the extruder into it to make PLA dissolve before trying this. Try this solution only if all other options didn't help. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Steps: 1. Take the tip off, assuming it has a tip. 2. Heat up the extruder. 3. Take a length of plastic and push it though the extruder. 4. If the tip is clogged, then take a micro hand drill to clear the blockage. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: This may not help, but I have a printrbot and when it clogs I heat up the extroder to 210C(for pla) or whatever the normal temperature is. Then manually push your filament through the hole till it's as far as it can go, then drop the hotend temp to 100 degrees C. When it is at 100C pull the whole filament out and hopefully your clog will come out too. After that just cut off the end of the filiment that has the clog on it. And you're good to go. Upvotes: 1

2017/01/30

<issue_start>username_0: I have seen many people saying on this site and many other 3D printing websites that 24 V systems are safer, compared to 12 V systems. By safer, I am talking in terms of fires or other electrical and component failures. Why would a 24 V system cause less danger? I would think that 12 V would be safer because it is very common (automotive) and many parts have been around for a while that use it. Although there are an increasingly amount of boards that support 24 V, many don't or need fuses or other parts that do support 24 V. Also, many parts that I have used are rated for 12 - 24 V. A 12 V power supply can go a bit over fairly comfortably. A 24 V power supply can't without partially going over the rating. If I had to build a printer designed with safety as a main priority, what voltage would be best?<issue_comment>username_1: From a pure safety standpoint there is nothing about a 24v system that is distrinctly more safe than a 12v system. I see you added comments about something involving wire sizes. This is not really a factor.. I would say not knowing what wire size to use is a whole other issue. There is nothing stopping you from putting on larger wires. The following websites verify the fact that a 24v needs smaller wires. Though again the system it self is not safer because the wires required are smaller. * [JamesTown](https://www.jamestowndistributors.com/userportal/document.do?docId=1098) * [SDC minimum wire gauge to distance chart](http://sdcsecurity.com/docs/PDFs/wiregaugecharts_ohmslaw.pdf) I will also note the size difference is negligible anyways. It is not a major difference. Now one exception to this. If you had a 24v and a 12v compatible board. I would pick a 24v. The reason is not that the wire sizes needed are different. But for the reduced danger of the CONNECTOR that the wires attach to. I see quite often in the flashforge owner group boards that have caught fire due to a cheap connector that can not handle the load for the printer. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: The most important "safety" advantage when using 24V (compared to 12V) is that to get the same power, you only need half the current. A 192W heated bed would need 16A at 12V, but only 8A at 24V. Since one of the most common safety issues is underrated screw terminals being used for the heated bed (just search for "3d printer fire"; you'll find quite a few pictures of charred plastic around screw terminals). For example, the screw terminals on RAMPs board are only rated for up to 12A. That would be okay at 24V, but well over the limit at 12V. Since the wire gauge is dependent on current, you can also use somewhat thinner wires with a 24V system (or equivalently: wires that would melt in a 12V setup won't in a 24V setup). The power dissipated in a wire scales quadratically with current, so the same wire being used in a 24V setup would only waste a quarter of the heat of that wire in a 12V setup. There is also less strain on switching devices (such as MOSFETs or relays). The same applies here: power loss is quadratic with current. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]

2017/01/30

<issue_start>username_0: I print on a glass bed covered with BuildTak. Prints stick well, release is difficult. They sell a mod, self adhesive magnetic sheet that holds a steel plate which in turn you put the BuildTak on making it easier to get your prints off by twisting the flexible steel as opposed to chiseling your print off a glass plate while attempting to not peel chunks of the expensive Buildtak off. Magnetic sheets have different strengths proportional to thickness in milimeters. I can get 0.03 mm locally which provides 85 lbs pull per sqft. and was wondering if this might work. It's hard to find the stronger pulls, 0.045 mm and 0.06 mm which can pull 115 and 145 lbs respectively. I'd prefer cut my own new bed sandwich rather than pay 90 bucks for one. * Has anyone made a bed using adhesive magnetic sheet> * What thickness magnetic sheet has worked for you? * What thickness steel are you using? Assume it has to flex easily to twist the part of and also flexible enough for the magnet to pull it flat. --- With respect to [the comment](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/3493/bed-design-for-easy-release-pla#comment4773_3493) by tbm0115: > > I don't think you need that much magnetic pull for this application. Adhering basic coin magnets to a material in a large array should secure the material appropriately for a desktop printer. > > > I see where you are going with coin magnets. Have you tried this? In the original Makerbot Cupcake this is how it was done though with larger build surfaces you get warp on metal plates. Most metal sheet comes from the plant on a roll. Though your metal looks nice and flat, temperature changes will cause it to warp and as you know with SLA printers, a changing bed can cause a failure. This happened on the original Makerbot replicator 1st release followed by using a machined plate as a replacement.<issue_comment>username_1: Follow up: I used the 6mil magnet, cut a sheet of thin steel, (about .5mm) to fit, added a layer of Buildtak and now it's much easier to remove prints, build surface is very flat. I assume you could deform the metal beyond the magnet's ability to flatten it but it works quite well. The metal was cut with sheet metal snips, risky as they can bend the sheet. Probably better done with a saw though. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Try using buildtak flex. <https://www.buildtak.com/product/flexplate/> or cheaper alternatives: <http://www.printinz.com/printinz-plate-3d-printer-bed-upgrade/> Upvotes: -1

2017/02/01

<issue_start>username_0: I am planing on printing something that will make contact with PCB boards. The print will be most likely to be in PLA. I don't want to fry the PCB board so I want to know if 3D printed PLA objects are conductive. I googled and found out about special non-conductive PLA and conductive PLA. But what about the conductivity of normal PLA?<issue_comment>username_1: Normal PLA is non-conductive. You can take an $\Omega$-meter to a test part if you're really concerned somehow you have some PLA that is conductive. There is a caveat that your color may include metal flake or graphite of some kind. Depending on the density it may be conductive. But I've tested my silver on hand and it gave me infinite resistance. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It's non-conductive, but I would check to make sure with any colored filament. Black may have iron oxide or carbon black which may give it minor conductance. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: PLA is non-conductive at room temperature, but when you heat it up over 70 C it is no longer as great an electrical insulator as the part will begin to fail. These temperatures could occur in electrical shorting situations or even increased electrical resistance in a circuit over time. I would hesitate to use PLA in electrical scenarios with a lot of load. As the resistance drops in the PLA (The resistance is still very high) and load begins to run through the PLA you have a recipe for a fire. <http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eej.21272/full/> The other problem with a printed PLA part is that many times they are permeable to liquids. This means that if you say you get salt on them say from your hands and condensation say from your humid living environment... current cant pass through your plug. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: PLA itself falls in the category of non-conductors, with a resistivity ($\rho=R\frac A l=\frac 1 \sigma$) in the order of $10^{16}\ \Omega \text m$ (see [here](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0ahUKEwiYpKTSw5PXAhXRKFAKHemUCsgQFghUMAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.www.ichp.pl%2Fattach.php%3Fid%3D1166&usg=AOvVaw2BgoK845Z6hvWEcIrRo6_x)), similar to other plastics. Following image gives an idea of the values of resistivity for usual conductors and isolators, insulating materials have resistivity greater than $10^9\ \Omega\text m$, conductors have it smaller than $100\ \Omega \text m$ (copper is about $10^{-8} \ \Omega \text m$): [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/yUUcG.png) However, PLA can be mixed with some amounts of a conductor as graphite, making the filament a conductive material (not as good as, by example, copper). This filament can be used to create some kinds of electric circuits. Other additions (coloring, ...) could also change slightly its properties. Obviously, if PLA reaches glass transition temperature or melting point, holes can appear in the surface, breaking insulation. Upvotes: 4

2017/02/02

<issue_start>username_0: I intend and would like to print a transparent hemisphere. I have a Taulman T-Glase clear 1.75 mm filament and I have XTC-3D. You can read this interesting page, [Hacking t-glase to look more like glass!](http://taulman3d.com/t-glase-optics.html) First question, what kind of printing settings should I use? Should I go for a low infill percentage or a high one? Should I go for line or hexagon? I would say 5% line but perhaps there is a better setting. Then, how should I use XTC-3D as mentioned on the above link? I'm a little bit confused how it can make the part more transparent.<issue_comment>username_1: Refraction of light is caused by changes in medium or angle of inflection. Any changes in medium will cause refraction, as such to be the most clear you would not want pockets of air. This means that if you are printing single layer 0% would work. The best appearance would most likely come from 100% infill as there would be no changes in the medium. The epoxy you linked to appears to smooth the surface, The smoother the surface, the clearer it will look. It is the same reason why you don't see clear textured mirrors or windows. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: First I would hedge your expectations.. I am very familiar with t-glase. It is very translucent but it is not clear and no amount of post treatment will make it 100% clear. Their example is the only exception where you have a simple print where it has only a single layer. By applying the clear coating they have normalized the wall and made the surface even. Thus no more light diffusion. You could likely get the same effect with good sanding but good luck sanding a 1 wall thick print. Also note they do not show any solid parts. If they cannot get a solid part to look good and clear, then really you shouldn't expect to be able to. Any infill will cause it to be non clear. Any extra shells will also create air pockets, lines, etc and make it non clear. If you really want clear, FDM is not the way to go. The only way I could imagine to print an item clear with FDM is to create a cast, then cast it with resin or glass.. If you consider how the plastic is applied, you can see there is no real way make it 100% air pocket free.. See below, [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/8gd6j.jpg) Image taken from [here](http://3devo.eu/guide-fdm-printable-plastics-3d-printing-filament/). The best I can recommend for settings. Make your temp spot on. If you boil the material you will have less translucency. Play with over extruding (too much material) in a Limited amount. Might reduce gaps. I would also try to print in BIG THICK lines. Less lines, less diffusions. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: You are never going to get perfectly transparent prints, even if you were using real glass. Because of the way FDM prints, you would have fissures where the layers bond to each other. You can get good results if you use 0 or 100% infill *and* sand, then smooth the outside shell. If you are expecting optical quality, look somewhere else. However, I have successfully printed *very* nice diffusers for LED's with clear filament. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You will not get perfectly clear prints with FDM because of the mechanics of FDM printing there will always be tiny gaps. But, you can get pretty close as demonstrated by a [ColorFabb tutorial](https://learn.colorfabb.com/lets-make-something-clear/). A clear filament and printing an object at an elevated temperature (more than normal) and enough material to close the gaps (e.g. 110%) should be able to produce transparent prints, for example: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Kmn2Q.jpg) Upvotes: 0

2017/02/02

<issue_start>username_0: Last night there was an error in printing that caused the printer to stop printing, but kept the hotend on. This morning I discovered that it had fused to what it was printing after remaining on all night - it took some time to remove. Prints afterwards showed signs of under extrusion. Now when I tell it to extrude a millimeter, it no longer extrudes a thin strand, but instead exactly a millimeter of filament comes out the same diameter as it went in. Cleaning the hotend has done nothing, cleaning the extruder has done nothing. I'm left with two conclusions, either: * this is what is supposed to happen, it was broken the whole time, I had calibrated it for the broken setting and just need to recalibrate everything, or; * something, most likely the nozzle, is broken.<issue_comment>username_1: When you have a disaster print like this you almost always get carbon in the hot end. I have micro hand drills (0.2 mm) that I carefully use on the tip of the nozzle. There are also atomic pulls where you add plastic, heat it up till it extrudes then let it cool. Once cooled to 70°C pull hard. Repeat until pulls show no black. Or, if your nozzles are cheap just replace them. Note next time this happens, turn the hot end on so you can remove it quickly. Sounds like you chipped away. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It also can simply be the PLA. I have had PLA that runs thick no matter what setting I use. I know it's the PLA because when I replace it then it goes back to normal. I have tried temp ranges from 200-220 °C; all with the same results. I even dried the PLA for 9 hours and still did it. Sometimes the PLA just sucks aka a bad batch. Upvotes: 0

2017/02/03

<issue_start>username_0: I'm not really sure if I'm asking the right question here, but I just made a noob mistake of buying 3 mm filaments instead of 1.75 mm. I have a Makerbot Replicator 2 which I've been using and so far it is pulling in 1.75 mm quite well. Is there any way I can still make use the 3 mm filaments, or do I need to use the filaments on different models? If it is the latter, which particular model is able to pull in 3 mm filament well?<issue_comment>username_1: This is not a definitive answer (and has turned into a ramble), as I have not yet had to change my filament size. However, initially, I would have thought that only the hotend and the hotend's nozzle would need to be changed, from one that can handle the 1.75 mm filament to 3 mm. If the extruder is spring loaded, then it should adjust itself to the thicker filament, without a problem. If not, then you may have to do a slight manual adjustment. However, after doing some further reading, there may be other factors that need to be considered, such as: * Extruder gearing; * Melt time (which would imply a different feed rate) It could be worth having a close look at the aperture of your hotend. If, in the unlikely situation, it looks as if the hotend would accept 3 mm (or if you could remove the lining so that it can), you *may* not need to actually change any hardware, but instead just try tweeking the **feedrate** in the software, because as your nozzle is less than the width of the filament anyway, then it will be fine for both 1.75 mm *and* 3 mm. A 3 mm filament would require more heating, and therefore a slower feedrate than a 1.75 mm feedrate. Once the filament has melted, so long as the pressure from the extruder is sufficient, then the molten filament should come out of the nozzle. However, this may be a less than satisafctory method and result in some dubious prints. There is an interesting thread on the RepRap wiki, [1.75mm Filament vs 3mm Filament](http://forums.reprap.org/read.php?1,128719,page=1), that discusses most of the points above. It should be noted that the advantages of 3 mm filament has over 1.75 mm are that it is: * cheaper * stiffer (less flexible) and thus "easier" to push through the hotend. As an aside, one interesting point raised in the thread, is that maybe a smaller extruder can be used, for the narrower 1.75 mm filament, thus resulting in a lighter print head. I am not sure how true that is. This article, [Converting a 3D printer from 3mm to 1.75mm](http://hackaday.com/2015/10/17/converting-a-3d-printer-from-3mm-to-1-75mm/), does the reverse of what you want, and comes with a [video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcMw-3RizIw). It states that, as you have already found, that the hotend needs to be changed: > > The printer [Thomas] is changing out to accept 1.75mm is the Lulzbot > Mini, one of the most popular printers that would ever need this > modification. The only required materials is a new hot end suitable > for 1.75mm filament, a 4mm drill, and a few wrenches and allen keys. > It would be a smart idea to get a hot end that uses the same > thermistor as the old one, but that’s not a deal-breaker as the > problem can be fixed in the firmware. > > > Alternatively, you could leave your printer as it is and use a [3mm to 1.75mm filament converter](http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:72336), which may be a bit of overkill for just one reel of filament1. ### The bottomline To be honest, is it worth the hassle, time and expense of having to modify and re-calibrate your printer (or worst case, change the model of the printer), just for the price of a reel of filament (assuming that you did not bulk purchase a bunch of reels)? It may be better to stick to one filament size (i.e. your original size) for all of your projects, and so resell the reel of 3 mm and stick with the 1.75 mm printer and buy the correct filament2. --- 1 See also [Conversion of 3mm ABS filament to 1.75mm](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/38/conversion-of-3mm-abs-filament-to-1-75mm) 2 See also [Tom's answer](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/38/conversion-of-3mm-abs-filament-to-1-75mm#answer-42) to [Conversion of 3mm ABS filament to 1.75mm](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/38/conversion-of-3mm-abs-filament-to-1-75mm) See also [Can 1.75mm filament be used in a printer that takes 3mm filament?](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/269/can-1-75mm-filament-be-used-in-a-printer-that-takes-3mm-filament) Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Well... Usually when one buys a 30 dollar roll of plastic they don't replace a 1k machine.. That said you can change out the extruder. The extruder is what matters. So if you have a Prusa i3, you can go and buy say a e3d hot end that is made for 3mm. Usually we see 3mm on Bowden printers like the Ultimaker. Everyone else has moved to 1.8. I would just toss this on craigslist and get the correct plastic. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Late to the party here but I am doing this exact thing. I stupidly bought like a dozen rolls of 3mm filament for about $6 a Kg. I think trying the switch should be fun...but I have 7 printers so its no big deal to tinker on one of them. What you need to do is modify the extruder. I have done this successfully using the crappy plastic extruders which come with most budget printers. You have to drill out the filament path to fit the 3 mm filament. It does get a little tricky to get the filament to run through nicely. You actually **do not** need to modify your hot end other than your Bowden tube and your nozzle. Regular Bowden tube is 2 mm ID and 4 mm OD, so you just order 3 mm ID and 4 mm OD tube. Please note that this plan **will not** work for an all metal 1.75 mm hotend. For the nozzle you can often find 3 mm compatible nozzles. Unfortunately they don't seem to be made for the MK10 hotend. So I simply ordered big ole 1 mm nozzles made for 1.75 mm and I am going to drill out the back for the 2.85 mm (3 mm) filament. I am excited to see how this all works. You can get some really good deals on 3 mm filament *and* I suspect that it will actually work much better for things like TPU since it is significantly more rigid due to the increased diameter! Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Any modern and decent drive gear (single or dual) is shaped round (concave) to better grip the filament. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/p8csV.jpg) Some are flat, but only the cheapest and least performing ones. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/nwrob.jpg) (from [Reprap wiki](https://reprap.org/wiki/Drive-gear)) The concave part designed for 1.75 mm filament will be too small to accept 3 mm filament, it will grip it so weakly that it will skip or skid very easily, especially given the increased grip required for 3 mm filament. 1.75 <-> 3 mm is a complete overhaul of anything related to the extrusion path. I did it so I know... Upvotes: 0

2017/02/03

<issue_start>username_0: I am wondering if it would it be feasible (at an affordable price) to 3D print a boat hull (small dimensions, maybe something like 60x40x20 cm). I am mostly concerned about: * **durability** (against salty water, UV rays, extreme temperatures (under the sun or in a cold ocean) * **strength** (the material should be able to resist some chocs and maybe a little bit of pressure if a wave was to smash on it). * **waterproofness** Those characteristics should *last* during extended periods of time in water (at least several months, maybe more, about a year or two). **Is there any easily accessible 3D printing material that would match those characteristics?**<issue_comment>username_1: Something similar has been done in ABS already, although I don't expect it gets left in the water for years. See the [video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odmFO7pJ-RQ), showing a kayak being printed in many ABS sections of about one cubic foot, then bolted together and sealed. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Probably feasible, Affordable or simple probably not. To start from an affordability perspective, kayaks normally weigh around 20 kg, they [kayak in the video mentioned in the other answer](http://www.grassrootsengineering.com/blog/2014/03/) weighs in at 30kgs. Assuming you print all your parts perfectly, your using \$15 a kg filament, and you use 25 kg of abs you are looking at a minimum of \$375 in material just to print the kayak. After this the cost would only go up because now you need the parts to fasten it all together, the seat ect... In other words, it will probably be no cheaper and a whole lot more time intensive then buying one. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I would give it a try, but dont expect it to be watertight. Print the hull and paint it with some epoxy and you will be fine. (outdoor paint job, epoxy is bad for you) Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: It is totally fine, it is what I did a lot at my previous job. I 3D printed cases for underwater stationary equipment, mini-submarines and simple buoys, and almost all of them work fine. In fact, most of the failures I had were the breach of sealant. Or someone forgot to close the lid. For example this [thing](https://www.sdelanounas.ru/blogs/63803/) I've made. To make watertight objects, follow the rules: * You may use PLA. Over the course of a few years in water it degrades only in color, unless exposed to direct sun heat for prolonged times. * Obviously, use several outer shells. * If you are making floating thingy, and there is a free space in your hull, do NOT leave it empty! Instead, make it solid in the model, and set slicer to use sparce hexacomb infill with a solid layer every 20-30 layers. This way, your model will be made of hundreds of isolated pockets of air, so a breach of a hull in some place will not sink it. You can also drop lead pellets into those pockets as they are made to weight the ship properly. * Set nozzle diameter to layer height ratio to more than 3. It will produce nice thick layers welded shut. For example, use 0.7 nozzle for 0.2 layer or 0.4 nozzle for 0.1 layer. The last one can be a bad choice if your extruder can't provide that little flow and tears layers. In general, obtain those bigger nozzles for technical parts. 0.4 nozzle is for toys, really. * Remember that wires conduct water just as well as electricity - water runs between the isolation and the copper core. No wires should go through the containment. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: You will really need to specify your constraints better because the short answer is **yes, what you describe *is* entirely possible**, but without knowing whether you are limited to a particular budget, process, or aesthetic, it's not a particularly useful answer. Some machines (ex. Stratasys Connex 1000) will print models up to 1m in length, so sure, you could print an entire hull with the dimensions you specify. **Pros**: * Monohull construction * Excellent surface finish * Many resin options are UV and salt water resistant with decent enough durability **Cons:** * Ridiculously expensive machine with decently expensive resins * It will waste plenty of support material in printing (which means added cost too) * Not really *easily* accessible, but some design studios will have them and will print things for you, for a cost Other machines (ex. Ultimaker 2 Extended) will print models up to 30cm along the vertical axis. It would require some assembly in the end, but you could segment your build and get a boat hull in the end. **Pros:** * Easily accessible * Fairly low cost (Maybe under \$1000 for the machine vs nearly \$1M and many filaments cost 1/10th that of polyjet resins or sintering powders) * The materials themselves can be UV resistant and salt water resistant **Cons:** * Joinery and seams create passageways for water ingress, so you'd need secondary sealant * The FDM process itself isn't always watertight, so you'd need sealant anyway * Low interlayer adhesion limits the tensile strength along one axis and the shear strength in one plane, so you'd either need composite hull panels with varying print orientations (in which case, just do a composite layup instead) or a fairly careful analysis of principle hydrodynamic stresses There's significantly more to the discussion as well, but without really understanding your design constraints, it's difficult to give any concrete advice. Upvotes: 3

2017/02/05

<issue_start>username_0: Many 3D printers employ a GT2 band for the *y*-axis plate and the printhead in the *x*-axis carriage. However, there seems to be the obvious disadvantages of: * stretching (and need for adjustment) and; * possibly slight inaccuracy, or "wobble" (for want of a better word (as wobble is often used in describing *z*-axis deviations)), due to the elasticity of the band. Is there any particular reason why GT2 is used over a straight forward rack and pinion system? [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/EUTlt.jpg) In particular, for the *y*-axis plate, as a rack would appear to me, be: * easy to install; * more accurate, and; * require a lot less adjustment1. If the rack is made from aluminium, surely *weight* can not be a major factor... or can it? Is *cost* a factor? A pinion seems to cost around \$10-\$15 (650 B\$, here in BKK, Thailand), which is obviously more than a reel of GT2 and a couple of GT2 pulleys. Would the *rigidity* of the rack be less forgiving of an imperfectly aligned axis, something which the GT2 band and pulleys combination would not be so affected by? --- ### TL;DR Which of these factors cause designers to use GT2 en lieu of a rack? * Accuracy * Weight * Cost * Maintenance * Tolerence of non-square axes, manufacturing errors. --- 1 Maybe constant adjustment is not required on an everyday basis, but the tension would still need to be checked now and again, whereas a pinion would not have this requirement.<issue_comment>username_1: With a belt system, the belt engages roughly half the pulley. This, and the tension in the belt, ensures the belt always engages the pulley tightly. A belt and pulley system is thus relatively forgiving. With a rack and pinion system, only a few teeth engage at any given time. To avoid backlash and get the same kind of "tight" engagement, both the gear and the rack need to be made with very high precision. The carriage also needs to be very well constrained, because any wobble of the rack relative to the gear introduces backlash (or binding). Moreover, you also need to keep the rack and pinion well lubricated lest they wear out prematurely. Given that belt and pulley work well enough, I don't see why you'd need to move to rack and pinion. The main advantage of rack and pinion is that the rack isn't elastic. The maximum length of a belt system is limited by its elasticity, but given we aren't building meter-long 3D printers anyway, that advantage of rack and pinion does not apply. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The answer so others can understand is that it's cheap and simple to run with a belt. Much of the 3D printers these days either stem from the sintering systems that were developed years ago and things that rose out of the RepRap community where a Lead Screw that had the precision needed to do proper 3D printing at decent speeds was out of reach for most of the community. It's a bit of, "we've always used belts," and then people come up with all sorts of stories to validate the dubious take to begin with. At one point in time (to be specific...around a couple of years BEFORE the question was asked here...) the costs of a lead/belt-screw system for anything other than a Z axis solution for a Cartesian or a Core-XY was prohibitive for a hobbyist or a system bought off shelf or build by them. It was too hard and expensive to get straight enough parts with precision to actually make anything other than small toy systems with those. We wouldn't get into racks as they were even MORE expensive. With the precisions we were previously working on and with in the community at the time this question was originally posed, it was something that only made sense for select solutions. As you scale larger (Hey, we're now professionally making HUGE parts with this stuff) it makes much, much more sense. For certain classes of manufacturing...it actually makes sense with certain filaments to make short run parts for almost ANYTHING, including things in the automotive space. At that juncture, prototyping, fixing "impossible" to repair situations on older cars, etc. makes some sense to get more precision or vastly larger size. Desireable becomes the ability to make printers with volumes up to 2 meters in size. Professional space? Maybe. But telling people that a pinion isn't making any sense? Heh...hardly. Same goes for lead/ball-screws. Several have made incredible printers fairly cheaply that can print seemingly impossible print runs (Hung at a 45 degree angle in mid air and print...) with some of this stuff. Is it cheaper? No. Does it make sense? Possibly. Especially if one wants to DIY a massive print volume printer (***waves hand***). I want a meter and a half cubed on a side print volume that I can enclose to crank out ASA prints of Smart body panels, for example... You're not getting that with belts- too stretchy, even with PU steel core belts. Frame it in from a relative cost perspective (It's only going to be about 25% more costly on a DIY or commercial product with a speed upside and precision that might make it WORTH that...but understand that an Ender 3 designed that way will run 350 dollars instead of the 200 or thereabouts it currently runs) and you're going to be more realistic and honest on the question's answer. Saying it isn't practical...even from when the post originated isn't being exactly forthright in this day and age- and disregards that a person MIGHT just be willing to spend the more money for the precision, etc. Upvotes: 0

2017/02/05

<issue_start>username_0: I have a Prusa i3 made by Geeetech. My 3D prints keep suffering from warping when printing with PLA. Whenever I print something with a base at about 10 cm x 10 cm, at least one corner of the print would warp up. I've read numerous articles about warping and tried all sorts of methods. My printer's bed is level, and heated to 60°C. My bed is made from clean glass. I've tried all sorts of adhesives. I tried blue tape, and used hair spray. The only way for me to combat this is gluing the base to blue tape with 502 Glue. I used brim and the whole brim just warps up. I sometimes leave the model printing over night. For the first few hours it's perfectly flat. When I go back to it the next morning I'd find one corner warped up. This is very dysfunctional to my prints. Is there a reliable way to stop this warping from happening?<issue_comment>username_1: For ABS it will warp unless you build a heat chamber. That said the tricks to reduce warping come down to: 1. Material, i.e. PLA is less likely to warp; 2. Use a fan, it helps so much; 3. Make sure you have temps calibrated well - Too hot is more warp; 4. Use a raft. The Makerbot uses a raft and no heated bed; 5. Make sure the room is not drafty. Having it by the window will result in warping; 6. Adding a large brim also helps; 7. I find good ol' glue sticks work the best at keeping the print to the bed; 8. SMASH the first layer. This one is controversial. I personally do first layer at 130% and print speed of 30%. You get elephants foot sure, but it's on the bed real good. Tom is right. It is very very hard to print that big of a piece without warping. That said I have done very large pieces on my Ultimaker, using a fan, glue stick, MatterHackers PRO PLA and no raft. But again that's on an Ultimaker. Note you can build a heat chamber pretty easily. Specifically a passive heat chamber. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: For PLA, I use a brim. The other thing that makes a big difference is obsessive care in levelling the bed and setting the Z-origin. Ideally, the first layer extruded (including the brim), should be almost "squished" onto the bed rather than being laid down at a height that allows a near-circular cross-section. If the extruder head is too low, almost no filament will come out. If it's too high, there'll be very little adhesion. FWIW, I think a heated bed helps here, as it slows the cooling of this first layer and improves the adhesion as the fluid-phase 'grabs' the surface. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Source (at least in part): * [SolidWorks 2015 Tutorial with Video Instruction, page 11-6](http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=MJqoBQAAQBAJ&pg=RA10-PA6), and; * [12 ways to fight warping and curling](https://www.makerbot.com/media-center/2011/06/23/12-ways-to-fight-warping-and-curling), June 23, 2011 by MakerBlock > > Curling > > > As printed plastic parts cool the different areas of the object can > cool at different rates. 1 Depending upon the parts being printed, > this effect can lead to warping and curling. Although PLA has a much > lower shrinkage factor than ABS, both can warp and curl, potentially > ruining a print. There are some very common ways to deal with this > potential problem, the most notable being a heated build platform. > However, sometimes that might not be enough. > > > 1. Use a heated build platform. A heated build platform helps keep the lowest levels of a print warm as the higher layers are printed. > This allows the overall print to cool more evenly. A heated build > platform, sometimes abbreviated as HBP, helps tremendously with just > about any ABS print and large PLA prints. > 2. Print with a raft. Rafts are a printing option in ReplicatorG and Skeinforge. They’re basically a large flat lattice work of printed > material underneath the lower-most layer of your printed object. > They’ll also help reduce warping and curling by allowing your printed > object to adhere better to your flat build surface. Other variations > on this are to print with a larger raft and/or a thicker raft > comprised of more layers. > 3. Calibrate your starting Z height. A good first layer makes all the difference. If your starting Z axis height is too high, the extruded > filament won’t be able to make a good bond with the platform. If you > think your Z axis starting height is too high, try lowering it by > 0.05mm increments until you find a good first layer. > 4. Get the right build surface. Some people have experimented with different surfaces such as steel, titanium, glass, different kinds of > plastic, different kinds of tape, and foam board. However, I find > both ABS and PLA seem to stick really well to hot or warm Kapton tape. > 5. Clean your build surface. ABS and PLA stick better to a clean build surface. Keep it clean of dust, pieces of old prints, and any > other debris. > 6. Print slower. Printing slower allows finer detail, better adhesion to the build surface and lower layers, and gives the printed part more > time to cool evenly. > 7. Print cooler. Printing at a lower temperature isn’t always an option. Ideally, you should be printing at the lowest temperature > required for extrusion and that allows good interlayer adhesion. > However, trying lower temperatures isn’t for the faint of heart. > Printing at a too low a temperature could cause harm to your extruder > motor or extruder. > 8. Eliminate drafts or enclose your robot. <NAME> found that having his 3D printer too close to an open window caused very uneven > heating across his build surface. This in turn caused the side of his > prints closest to the window to curl. Since keeping the window closed > wasn’t an option for him, he compensated for the window drafts by > adding a heat lamp. Cupcake and Thing-O-Matic owners might have an > easier time of eliminating drafts by simply enclosing two or three of > the sides of their robots. It will also have a fortunate side effect > of helping to control fumes. > 9. Design with mouse ears. <NAME>’s solution was to add little discs to corners of an object to help those corners stick to the > platform. These essentially serve as “mini-rafts” to give those > corners more surface area and better adhesion without having to print > an entire raft. > 10. Design with aprons to hold down corners. <NAME>gs suggested adding “aprons” around an object to be printed, while that object was > being printed on a raft. These low thick pieces of plastic help keep > the raft flat and help prevent any curling or warping from affecting > the desired printed object itself. > 11. Design with surrounding thermal walls. While Forrest Higgs’ apron approach provides a mechanical advantage of essentially holding down > corners with a chunk of plastic, Nophead has added thin surrounding > walls to his designs to act as baffles to keep warm air around the > printed object as it moves around. He’s postulated that a very thin > surrounding wall could have the same beneficial effect as printing > inside an enclosed build chamber. Interestingly, it seems that > Nophead suggests that designing objects with more rounded corners > might also help avoid curling and warping at those corners. > 12. Reduce infill. When printing a model you can chose to print it hollow, completely solid, or some percentage between zero and 100. > However, as Nophead points out even the plastic inside a model exerts > a force on the entire printed object as it cools. It stands to reason > that the more plastic you have, the more those pieces of plastic will > pull against themselves and the build surface as they cool. By > reducing infill there will a reduced amount of internal tension as the > object cools. Reducing these internal forces by printing with a lower > infill ratio can help reduce curling and warping as well. > > > Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: It might be useful you confirm again the bed levelling. I had warp on big pieces despite I thought my bed was properly leveled but in fact, for some reasons, the bed was too far from the head on one corner. If you face the same issue, you should see the bottom part of your print is showing the filaments not well melted to each others on the 1st layer. I really make sure the nozzle is gripping my paper sheet (almost scratching it when I move the paper). Upvotes: 0

2017/02/06

<issue_start>username_0: SketchUp Make is licensed for non-commercial work only. This includes the output from the software. > > Trimble Navigation Limited and/or its affiliates ("Trimble") gives you > a personal, worldwide, royalty-free, non-assignable and non-exclusive > license to use the executable version of the Software for > non-commercial use only. Non-commercial use means: you may not sell, > rent, lease or lend the output of the Software or the Services. > > > The above retrieved 2016-02-07. The full [SketchUp Make license](https://web.archive.org/web/20181005195026/https://www.sketchup.com/license/b/sketchup-make) can be found on the [SketchUp website](https://www.sketchup.com/). In what ways does this restrict my use of SketchUp Make generated material with sites that allow the sharing of models (and deisgn files)? This would include sites such as [Thingiverse](https://www.thingiverse.com/), [MyMiniFactory](https://www.myminifactory.com/) and [3D Warehouse](https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/?hl=en). --- For example, must I always set a non-commercial license for my designs? Thingiverse allows several different license choices to be selected. Can I permit the design to be printed by someone for money? Thingiverse has links to [3D HUBS](https://www.hubs.com/) and [Print a Thing](https://printathing.com/) which can be disabled per model. Obviously [the SketchUp Pro license](https://www.sketchup.com/license/b/sketchup-pro) makes many of the restrictions on what can be done with the output go away, which would be much simpler. However I do not expect to generate anywhere near the costs of purchasing a license ($695 US at the time of writing) by tweaking a few designs now and then. --- I want to comply with the licenses but I need to understand the limits of what I am permitted to do with SketchUp Make in order to do that. It may be much more prudent for me to invest my time in learning other tools that have no restrictions on what can be done with the output. As this is a legal question it might matter what jurisdiction I am in and what jurisdiction the sites I may share to are in. I am based in the UK. Thingiverse is based in the State of New York. MyMiniFactory uses the Laws of England as a base. 3D Warehouse selects the State of California.<issue_comment>username_1: IANAL, naturally, so take this with that in mind. From what I've read and been instructed, any software which is licenced as non-commercial cannot be redistributed or incorporated into any commercial software product. The other thing about "noncommercial" software licenses is that they can't be used for corporate design work -- as opposed to home user hacking. Now, all you need to do is ensure that the license restrictions remain with the mixup files you post. There is no doubt that, so long as you do that, you are free from any legal problems that a downstream vendor may incur upon trying to sell the hardware produced. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Again, I'm not a specialist in intellectual property law (or any other sort of lawyer), but I have a different interpretation. There is a potential difference between the use of the product, and the use of the derivatives of the product. For example, GCC has a restrictive (open) license, but its OK (in some contexts) to use the compiled code in a commercial product. Generally, you (as creator of a work) will own all of the rights to a work. The supplier of the tools you use does not *usually* gain any rights to the resulting work. So long as *you* don't gain from your use of the tool, it is probably OK for other people to profit from the use. Sharing with non-commercial should be your safest option if you're worried - but be aware that this doesn't prevent people from taking your design to a print service indirectly. Their [license](http://www.sketchup.com/license/d/sketchup) says: > > Non-commercial use means that you may not sell, rent, or lease the > output of the Software > > > This implies that they are not making any claims to restrict how other non-connected persons might use your works. Its specifically talking about use as part of employment, or you making a gain. I would also note that to me the language in the license does not look to have been drafted with a clear understanding of intent on this issue. Upvotes: 2

2017/02/07

<issue_start>username_0: I'm still putting aside money for buying my first 3D printer and I'm designing all the things I have to print. As I have **a lot of things** to print I would like to print as much of them as possible in a single print. I have some arcs of circle (between 90° and 320° and 10/30 cm of diameter) and I'm going to slice them so I'll be able to print many of them, vertically, in a single print. I read in the internet that I cannot print over 45°... but starting from where? The image below shows how I would like to print my (orange) things [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wNnOf.png) I suppose I can print my things without supports because from Y-start to Y-end they are <= 45° (as the green line shows) is that right? The red line, instead, shows a case where the angle, starting from a (Y: 50%) point, is higher than 45°. **So the question is**: Can I print my things in such way?<issue_comment>username_1: IANAL, naturally, so take this with that in mind. From what I've read and been instructed, any software which is licenced as non-commercial cannot be redistributed or incorporated into any commercial software product. The other thing about "noncommercial" software licenses is that they can't be used for corporate design work -- as opposed to home user hacking. Now, all you need to do is ensure that the license restrictions remain with the mixup files you post. There is no doubt that, so long as you do that, you are free from any legal problems that a downstream vendor may incur upon trying to sell the hardware produced. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Again, I'm not a specialist in intellectual property law (or any other sort of lawyer), but I have a different interpretation. There is a potential difference between the use of the product, and the use of the derivatives of the product. For example, GCC has a restrictive (open) license, but its OK (in some contexts) to use the compiled code in a commercial product. Generally, you (as creator of a work) will own all of the rights to a work. The supplier of the tools you use does not *usually* gain any rights to the resulting work. So long as *you* don't gain from your use of the tool, it is probably OK for other people to profit from the use. Sharing with non-commercial should be your safest option if you're worried - but be aware that this doesn't prevent people from taking your design to a print service indirectly. Their [license](http://www.sketchup.com/license/d/sketchup) says: > > Non-commercial use means that you may not sell, rent, or lease the > output of the Software > > > This implies that they are not making any claims to restrict how other non-connected persons might use your works. Its specifically talking about use as part of employment, or you making a gain. I would also note that to me the language in the license does not look to have been drafted with a clear understanding of intent on this issue. Upvotes: 2

2017/02/08

<issue_start>username_0: I have just built a Prusa i3 MK2 printer. One of its features is automatic XYZ axes calibration done using inductive probe which is located next to the nozzle. In my case, this calibration procedure failed with the message: > > *XYZ calibration failed. Please consult the manual.* > > > The [manual](http://www.prusa3d.com/downloads/manual/prusa3d_manual_mk2_en.pdf) on this problem reads: > > 1. **XYZ calibration failed. Bed calibration point was not found.** > > Calibration routine did not find a bed sensor point. The printer stops close to the bed > point, which it failed to detect. Please verify, that the printer is assembled correctly, > that all axes move freely, the pulleys do not slip and the print nozzle is clean. If > everything looks good, re-run the X/Y calibration and verify with a sheet of paper > between the nozzle and the print bed that the print nozzle does not touch the print > bed during the calibration routine. If you feel a friction of the nozzle against the sheet > of paper and the nozzle is clean, you need to screw the PINDA probe slightly lower > and re-run the X/Y calibration. > 2. **XYZ calibration failed. Please consult the manual.** > > The calibration points were found in positions far from what should be expected for a > properly assembled printer. Please follow the instructions of case 1). > > > My nozzle is new, therefore clean and I have already checked that all axes move without any problems. The manual does not seem to offer any additional advice. I tried to put the PINDA probe lower. It had helped the calibration, but at the same time the probe was lower than the nozzle, which means I couldn't print with it being on the extruder. What else can I check? How to find the issue? This is my first printer, so I'm totally clueless.<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest that you ask on [shop.prusa3d.com](http://shop.prusa3d.com) and click the Forum tab button. The folks there are very friendly and knowledgable. I'm sure you can get some help. You can also email support. There is also a question form at the bottom of [www.prusa3d.com](http://www.prusa3d.com) where you can ask questions. I'm sure you can get it going. I have a MK2 also and it has done very well by me! Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: One thing, and the one that eventually solved my problem, is to update the firmware. Firmware update instructions: [Upgrading firmware - Prusa3D](http://manual.prusa3d.com/Guide/Upgrading+firmware/66) The only thing you might get stuck on is selecting the right COM port. 1. Go to the device manager (run `devmgmt.msc`)  2. In COM and LPT section, you should see port for your printer by name. Select that port number in the firmware update tool. In my case, I had to run the calibration twice before it worked. I had no problems since then. Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]

2017/02/09

<issue_start>username_0: The problem ----------- When I print with my mElephant 3D printer from Makeblock, the prints come out with waved walls like in the picture below. I am using PLA filament from <https://makeblock.lt>  What I tried ------------ I tried changing temperatures 190-220, tried to change the flow rate. Also checked if the bolts are not lose. Everything seems good. My printer ---------- <issue_comment>username_1: Repeating patterns like that usually stem from issues in the Z axis. This is likely caused by bent screws which in turn cause the X axis to move around. Are the top of the threaded rods constrained? If they are, an easy fix may just be to let the top of the threaded rods float around by removing the constraint. Most Prusa i3's use 5mm threaded rod for the screws and 8mm smooth rod, does your printer use the same setup? If your printer has 8mm (or 5/16") threaded rod you could try to get some that are straight or the better solution would be to get the 5mm threaded rods and just print adapters to hold the 5mm nut inside the trap. This would require new couplers (aluminum or rubber/plastic hose), 5mm threaded rods, nuts, adapters (printed) and a small change to the firmware. This works because the 5mm rod is more flexible than the 8mm smooth rod and less likely to force the carriage around. If you already have the 5mm threaded rod/8mm smooth rod then I would look to make sure your X axis is tight and does not move around on the Z axis smooth rods. This would be easier to point out if you include a picture of your printer. Edit: If your printer is the mElephant from Makeblock then I would try removing the bearings at the top that constrain the threaded rods and try the print again. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Looks like something is catching on the z axis. A bent peice would likely cause much smaller deformations unless it was very obviously bent. Something could be loose, allowing the vertical play, perhaps the motor mounts. More likely I think is a level-difference between the z-axis worm gears, possibly caused by an obstruction, lack of lubrication, or possibly even the wrong lubrication. That's where I would look. Further, since it's a very consistent pattern, my guess would be your issue can be isolated to the tops and bottoms of the z axis worm gears. Even if it's not the issues I think, the issue most likely located at the top or bottom. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I have the same problem with a home made mini extruder. This happens only if the bearing stops rotating together with the extruder gear. I notice that: * The gear collects burrs of PLA while feeding, so reducing the traction to feed the PLA * The bearing stops rotating when the pressure is too high or too low. * The heat of chamber is too high and starts to smooth the PLA before arrives to the nozzle and needs to regulate the speed of the fan. This creates less force on feeding. * The PLA has a mixture of ABS * PLA has part hardened due overcooking, extremely dry, etc. * The PLA have irregular diameters, for example is nominally 1.75mm but some sections vary 1.8mm or 1.9mm * The nozzle starts to get cold due direct fan air flow. (maybe your main problem) :) I've been a Quality Engineer for 20 years for plastic and metal processes, so I've had to analyze why I've had lots of problems, especially in cold weather. I was thinking on buying a new extruder like you have, but if you have the same problem I do, the Extruder is not the problem. You need to check the points I described above. This is the extruder I have, <http://aprendiendo.laconeccion.com/mini-extrusor-3dp>. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I had a very similar problem once and the culprit was the relative position of the filament spool and the printer. The spool was standing on a coaster next to the printer and it turned out to be enough to create a pulling force on the filament. I have moved the spool to a shelf above the printer and the problem was gone. However, your printer seems to have a way more rigid Z axis than mine, so it is unlikely the issue here. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: Is your printer new? It could be that the factory settings for the step number per millimeter or inch on the "Z" axis stepper motors. I personally have not had this problem however you might want to check out <https://www.simplify3d.com/support/print-quality-troubleshooting/>. Hope this helps :) Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: I had the same problem with ABS, but printing different test objects I found out that the distance between the wavy structures depends on the cross sectional area of the object. Printing the testcube in 70.1% (1/sqrt(2) times of the original size) takes half the time per layer and the distance between two grooves doubles. I was printing ABS with 0.1 mm layer height and the simple bang-bang heat bed controller. The temperature is clearly wandering for 4° with a period of aproximately 2.5 minutes, which corresponds to the groove distances. After changing to a PID controller for the heated bed the temperature stayed within 0.1°C and the problem was gone. Several hundredths of a millimeter thermal expansion of the heated bed can have substantial impact at 0.1 mm layer height! You can enable the PID controller for the heated bed in Marlin or Skynet firmware by enabling (removing the `//`) here: > > `//#define PIDTEMPBED` > > > and disabling (putting `//` at the beginning of the line) here: > > `#define BED_LIMIT_SWITCHING` > > > in Configuration.h. Calibration of the PID controller can then be done with the GCODE Command: > > M303 E-1 S90 C8 > > > for 90°C. I had to preheat the heated bed before, otherwise the calibration would run into a timeout. The command will return parameters for the PID algorithm. The values can then be applied by the > > M304 P579.01 I100.87 D586.0 > > > GCODE command (here for example values). Everything can then be saved to the EEPROM with > > M500 > > > Bang-Bang controller:  PID controller:  Upvotes: 3

2017/02/10

<issue_start>username_0: We have a toy with some broken parts, an Executivity Gear Master. I don't think it's made anymore. Some tiny parts were easy to break and we'd like to 3d print some replacement parts. We don't have CAD or any other 3D drawings file, just a few of the unbroken parts. What's the best way to get some of these printed? Do I have to turn this into a 3D file first? (Is there a quick way to do that from the part itself?) Or is there a way to do it where I just need the part, rather like getting a spare key cut from a pre-existing key being used as the template? Here's a photo of the part I need to print. Placed next to a quarter for size comparison: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xZ6VN.jpg)<issue_comment>username_1: Repeating patterns like that usually stem from issues in the Z axis. This is likely caused by bent screws which in turn cause the X axis to move around. Are the top of the threaded rods constrained? If they are, an easy fix may just be to let the top of the threaded rods float around by removing the constraint. Most Prusa i3's use 5mm threaded rod for the screws and 8mm smooth rod, does your printer use the same setup? If your printer has 8mm (or 5/16") threaded rod you could try to get some that are straight or the better solution would be to get the 5mm threaded rods and just print adapters to hold the 5mm nut inside the trap. This would require new couplers (aluminum or rubber/plastic hose), 5mm threaded rods, nuts, adapters (printed) and a small change to the firmware. This works because the 5mm rod is more flexible than the 8mm smooth rod and less likely to force the carriage around. If you already have the 5mm threaded rod/8mm smooth rod then I would look to make sure your X axis is tight and does not move around on the Z axis smooth rods. This would be easier to point out if you include a picture of your printer. Edit: If your printer is the mElephant from Makeblock then I would try removing the bearings at the top that constrain the threaded rods and try the print again. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Looks like something is catching on the z axis. A bent peice would likely cause much smaller deformations unless it was very obviously bent. Something could be loose, allowing the vertical play, perhaps the motor mounts. More likely I think is a level-difference between the z-axis worm gears, possibly caused by an obstruction, lack of lubrication, or possibly even the wrong lubrication. That's where I would look. Further, since it's a very consistent pattern, my guess would be your issue can be isolated to the tops and bottoms of the z axis worm gears. Even if it's not the issues I think, the issue most likely located at the top or bottom. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I have the same problem with a home made mini extruder. This happens only if the bearing stops rotating together with the extruder gear. I notice that: * The gear collects burrs of PLA while feeding, so reducing the traction to feed the PLA * The bearing stops rotating when the pressure is too high or too low. * The heat of chamber is too high and starts to smooth the PLA before arrives to the nozzle and needs to regulate the speed of the fan. This creates less force on feeding. * The PLA has a mixture of ABS * PLA has part hardened due overcooking, extremely dry, etc. * The PLA have irregular diameters, for example is nominally 1.75mm but some sections vary 1.8mm or 1.9mm * The nozzle starts to get cold due direct fan air flow. (maybe your main problem) :) I've been a Quality Engineer for 20 years for plastic and metal processes, so I've had to analyze why I've had lots of problems, especially in cold weather. I was thinking on buying a new extruder like you have, but if you have the same problem I do, the Extruder is not the problem. You need to check the points I described above. This is the extruder I have, <http://aprendiendo.laconeccion.com/mini-extrusor-3dp>. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I had a very similar problem once and the culprit was the relative position of the filament spool and the printer. The spool was standing on a coaster next to the printer and it turned out to be enough to create a pulling force on the filament. I have moved the spool to a shelf above the printer and the problem was gone. However, your printer seems to have a way more rigid Z axis than mine, so it is unlikely the issue here. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: Is your printer new? It could be that the factory settings for the step number per millimeter or inch on the "Z" axis stepper motors. I personally have not had this problem however you might want to check out <https://www.simplify3d.com/support/print-quality-troubleshooting/>. Hope this helps :) Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: I had the same problem with ABS, but printing different test objects I found out that the distance between the wavy structures depends on the cross sectional area of the object. Printing the testcube in 70.1% (1/sqrt(2) times of the original size) takes half the time per layer and the distance between two grooves doubles. I was printing ABS with 0.1 mm layer height and the simple bang-bang heat bed controller. The temperature is clearly wandering for 4° with a period of aproximately 2.5 minutes, which corresponds to the groove distances. After changing to a PID controller for the heated bed the temperature stayed within 0.1°C and the problem was gone. Several hundredths of a millimeter thermal expansion of the heated bed can have substantial impact at 0.1 mm layer height! You can enable the PID controller for the heated bed in Marlin or Skynet firmware by enabling (removing the `//`) here: > > `//#define PIDTEMPBED` > > > and disabling (putting `//` at the beginning of the line) here: > > `#define BED_LIMIT_SWITCHING` > > > in Configuration.h. Calibration of the PID controller can then be done with the GCODE Command: > > M303 E-1 S90 C8 > > > for 90°C. I had to preheat the heated bed before, otherwise the calibration would run into a timeout. The command will return parameters for the PID algorithm. The values can then be applied by the > > M304 P579.01 I100.87 D586.0 > > > GCODE command (here for example values). Everything can then be saved to the EEPROM with > > M500 > > > Bang-Bang controller:  PID controller:  Upvotes: 3

2017/02/11

<issue_start>username_0: I saw this cool [Nuka-Cola bottle opener](http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1231999). I made it: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ysVvW.jpg) As you can see, nasty gaps have appeared in the text. What could've caused them? I am sure I set the filament diameter correctly. So why did the Slic3er not generate enough paths here to fill the letters properly? I used Slic3er and Repetier Host. My printer is Prusa i3 MK2 1.75mm. The material I used was PLA.<issue_comment>username_1: I had a similar issue as described in [this question](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/3461/why-does-my-domed-print-have-a-thin-shell). Curiously, yours is almost opposite as my raised lettering was OK, but the surrounding areas were poorly filled. I came to the conclusion that Slic3r was simply not able to properly handle the geometry in my part. I tried with Cura and had great results! Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The proper term here is Under Extrusion. There are a lot of reasons this can happen. For my Ultimaker, over time it developed very bad underextrusion due to the build up of carbon. I had to do atomic pulls / increase the extrusion multiplier. I would ... 1. verify that you move exactly the amount of plastic you think you are. Mark 200mm of material. Extrude 100. Fix the firmware steps per mm for Extruder if incorrect. 2. triple check the filament measurements. Try all along the length. See if the plastic has bad variance. 3. Verify that it is not printing as expected. Is your slicer generating the gaps? Letters are hard for slicing programs. If it cannot print a full line, it often will print a gap. You can adjust this by allowing greater line overlaps. This is probably what is happening. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: If you look closely at the slicer output, you will probably see that these regions just have outer shells, and no infill. What is happening here is that the part thickness is between 2 and 3 nozzle widths (or possibly between 4 and 5). If you ask for a 1 mm thickness, but only have a 0.4 mm nozzle, it is not easy for the slicer to split this into 2.5 passes. One thing I found would sometimes help is to change the nozzle width setting in the slicer (to maybe 0.39 mm) and this sometimes helps (at the expense of needing to offset the extrusion rate to compensate). Here are some rectangles of width 0.3 mm to 1.2 mm (increments of 0.1 mm) sliced in Cura 2.31. The first is 'normal', with wall count set to 2. Next is an inaccurate (small) nozzle setting of 0.38 mm, and finally the correct 0.4 mm nozzle, wall thickness of 1. The last setting shows infill (in yellow) rather than an inner wall (green). [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/JHPmR.png) Normal has a gap in anything over 0.8 mm wide. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/lB0vc.png) If I reduce the nozzle width, I do get some inner walls, but only where there was already space for 2 walls. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/3jMF7.png) When I only request one wall, the rest infill, (even though I have 20% infill), then the result is as expected. This seems to be a bug in Cura (or at least something which is improved in the version currently in beta). There is a bit more detail in this question [Missing top layers in Cura](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/3121/missing-top-layers-in-cura) Upvotes: 2

2017/02/11

<issue_start>username_0: I am using a Prusa i3 printer and just recently I have been having problems with the first layer. Here is a picture of what it looks like. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ShfZn.jpg) I have tried levelling the bed and it seems to be level. I was using a glue stick before but it started bubbling on that, so I switched to tape and that worked once but it is not working now. I wiped the tape with rubbing alcohol and it happened again. What else can I do to get the first layer right?<issue_comment>username_1: Oh wow. You are way over cooking your PLA. It is bubbling because it is BOILING. I can tell you have it too hot because the lines are all blurred as if they are liquid and pooled together. That said I can't give you details because you didn't post settings. I would start by turning the temps to 170 °C for hotend and 60 °C for plate. Also the gluestick it self should never bubble. It is unclear if that is an issue.. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Either you are extruding way too hot, or your filament has absorbed too much moisture and the water absorbed inside the filament boils instantly in the extruder, resulting in a gap or "bubble" in the filament, leading to bad extrusion. What temperature are you extruding at with your PLA? Hope this helped! Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I had this problem and I had to adjust the nozzle temperature 10 °C below the minimum temperature of 190 °C! Upvotes: 0

2017/02/13

<issue_start>username_0: I´m currently writing my own firmware for a custom delta printer. Therefore I also need to read G-code from programs like Slic3r. Even with an small example like an cube I´m struggling to find out where the z-coordinate is hidden in the code. Here is a small example of the code. ``` ; generated by Slic3r 1.2.9 on 2017-02-13 at 15:08:01 ; external perimeters extrusion width = 0.50mm ; perimeters extrusion width = 0.58mm ; infill extrusion width = 0.58mm ; solid infill extrusion width = 0.58mm ; top infill extrusion width = 0.58mm M107 M104 S205 ; set temperature G28 ; home all axes G1 Z5 F5000 ; lift nozzle M109 S205 ; wait for temperature to be reached G21 ; set units to millimeters G90 ; use absolute coordinates M82 ; use absolute distances for extrusion G92 E0 G1 Z0.500 F7800.000 G1 E-2.00000 F2400.00000 G92 E0 G1 X-31.893 Y0.000 F7800.000 G1 E2.00000 F2400.00000 G1 X-31.893 Y-25.001 E3.57871 F1800.000 G1 X-31.496 Y-27.307 E3.72646 G1 X-30.350 Y-29.347 E3.87420 G1 X-28.588 Y-30.886 E4.02194 G1 X-26.413 Y-31.748 E4.16968 G1 X-25.000 Y-31.894 E4.25936 G1 X25.000 Y-31.894 E7.41663 G1 X27.306 Y-31.497 E7.56437 G1 X29.346 Y-30.351 E7.71211 F1800.000 G1 X30.885 Y-28.589 E7.85985 G1 X31.746 Y-26.414 E8.00759 G1 X31.893 Y-25.001 E8.09727 G1 X31.893 Y25.001 E11.25470 G1 X31.496 Y27.307 E11.40244 G1 X30.350 Y29.347 E11.55019 G1 X28.588 Y30.886 E11.69793 G1 X26.413 Y31.748 E11.84567 G1 X25.000 Y31.894 E11.93535 G1 X-25.000 Y31.894 E15.09262 G1 X-27.306 Y31.497 E15.24036 G1 X-29.346 Y30.351 E15.38810 G1 X-30.885 Y28.589 E15.53584 G1 X-31.746 Y26.414 E15.68358 G1 X-31.893 Y25.001 E15.77326 G1 X-31.893 Y0.075 E17.34724 G1 E15.34724 F2400.00000 G92 E0 G1 X-22.715 Y-22.716 F7800.000 G1 E2.00000 F2400.00000 G1 X22.715 Y-22.716 E4.86865 F1800.000 G1 X22.715 Y22.716 E7.73745 G1 X-22.715 Y22.716 E10.60609 G1 X-22.715 Y-22.641 E13.47016 G1 X-23.607 Y-23.609 F7800.000 G1 X23.607 Y-23.609 E16.45155 F1800.000 G1 X23.607 Y23.608 E19.43309 G1 X-23.607 Y23.608 E22.41447 G1 X-23.607 Y-23.534 E25.39128 G1 X-24.500 Y-24.501 F7800.000 G1 X24.500 Y-24.501 E28.48541 F1800.000 G1 X24.500 Y24.501 E31.57969 G1 X-24.500 Y24.501 E34.67382 G1 X-24.500 Y-24.426 E37.76336 ``` Here some configuration details: G-code flavor: RepRap Nozzle diameter: 0,5mm filament diameter: 3mm general: layer height: 0,4 mm perimeters: 3 solid layers top:3 bottom :3 [Here](http://pastebin.com/YW05y3ze) is the full G-code<issue_comment>username_1: It isn't hidden at all. It's just that the Z-axis position only changes with each layer change, so the Z coordinate is only passed at layer change. On line 17 of your example G-code, it starts the first layer at Z=0.5mm: ``` G1 Z0.500 F7800.000 ``` The next time you should expect Z to appear is on the next layer. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Your included code has a line which reads: ``` G1 Z0.500 ``` I checked a couple of my G-code files for some of the past prints and I was able to identify the bed movement relative to the layer being printed. My slicer (Simplify3D) provides for the bed to drop during certain movements. I found `G1 Z0.600` followed by `G1 Z0.850` for one of the layers. When that layer was finished the `0.600` changed to `0.900` and the `0.850` changed to `1.150`. This fit in with the model's layer height of 0.300 mm for that job. I did not find more `G1 Zx.xxx` codes in your sample, but a larger file would contain those lines. Upvotes: 2

2017/02/14

<issue_start>username_0: According to Wikipedia, Tetrahydrofuran dissolves PLA. It also apparently dissolves PET. > > THF is considered a relatively nontoxic solvent, with the median lethal dose (LD50) comparable to that for acetone. > > > Wikipedia further states that it's not particularly dangerous provided you keep it away from air circulation, so that it does not form peroxides. > > One danger posed by THF follows from its tendency to form highly explosive peroxides on storage in air. > > > So well, this seems acceptable compared to other possible solvents which are all ridiculously dangerous. The question at hand is now of practical nature: * Is Tetrahudrofuran actually viable replacement for acetone, which only works with ABS? I am asking because the fact that it does dissolve PLA does not really at all mean that it will work well. It could damage PLA structure, be more toxic than wikipedia says or not dry well.<issue_comment>username_1: From what I have read, THF is not super effective, it seems that Dichloromethane or DCM is actually a better solvent. Unfortunately I have no personal experience with either. It is rather nasty though, as the LD50 is just 0.5 to 5 g/kg[[1]](https://www.researchgate.net/post/Solubility_of_PLA)[[2]](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ultimaker/8s1bq_9LsRM). Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: According to <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME> & <NAME>: *Effects of various liquid organic solvents on solvent‐induced crystallization of amorphous poly(lactic acid) film* in *Journal of Applied Polymer Science*, Volume 129 Issue 3 (2013), p1607-1617[source](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/app.38833), Tetrahydrofuran is classified as a solvent for PLA. The specific entry on page 1608: ``` Group Solvent Solvent type dd dp dh dt Result Ether Tetrahydrofuran Polar aprotic 16.8 5.7 8 19.4 soluble ``` The values dd dp dh and dt are explained on page 1607: > > The effects of 60 liquid organic solvents on PLA are systematically > investigated using the Hansen solubility parameter (HSP). The HSP > is one of the digitizing methods for analyzing the interaction > between polymer materials and organic solvents. In HSP analysis, > all solvents have three parameters: energy from dispersion bonds > between molecules (dd), dipolar intermolecular force between molecules > (dp), and the hydrogen bonds between molecules (dh). All solvents > were characterized by a point in a three-dimensional structure > at which dd, dp, and dh are plotted on three mutually perpendicular > axes. Generally, if the HSP values of the various organic solvents > are near that of the given polymer, the solvent is considered compatible > with the polymer material. > > > The factor dt is the total Hansen solubility parameter - the bigger this is, the better it is a solvent. 19.4 is a rather good solvent but **extremely explosive**: in air 20000 ppm (2%) are explosive and thus the allowable concentration in an area is 2000 ppm[source](https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/idlh/109999.html) Alternatives ============ A similar potent solvent would be Benzene (dt = 18.6) which more easily available and less explosive, but more deadly (10000-20000 ppm fumes) and has an allowable concentration of 500 ppm[source](https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/idlh/71432.html) Ethyl-acetate is also a solvent (dt = 18.2) and more available. It is explosive at an equal concentration as Tetrahydrofuran[source](https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/idlh/141786.html), but it has just about half of its vapor pressure (73 mmHg[source](https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/npgd0260.html) vs. 132 mmHg[source](https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/npgd0602.html)), so can be stored more safely, and is less aggressive on the body. It is sometimes used to Smooth PLA via vapor chamber[source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polylactic_acid#Organic_Solvents_for_PLA), and only comes at a price tag of ca. 90 €/l for the pure stuff and also is used in some nail polish removers, put into a safe mix. Acetone is classified as a *better* solvent (dt = 20.1), and it is known to act as a glue and to soften PLA with some exposure time, but from experience, it can't smooth it. It is available most easy (nail polish remover and in the home depot), and is the least deadly option. Propylene-1,2-carbonate is classed as solvent and a far better at it with dt = 27.2. It has been used as an alternative to Ethyl-Acetate[source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polylactic_acid#Organic_Solvents_for_PLA) and its MSDS is rather gentle[source](https://www.nwmissouri.edu/naturalsciences/sds/p/Propylene%20carbonate.pdf). It comes at a price tag of 130 €/l for the chemical-grade liquid. Conclusion ========== Tetrahydrofuran is not a viable replacement due to its explosive properties. It is not an improvement above Benzene, which at least can be stored safely. Using Acetone as a benchmark, Tetrahydrofuran should not smooth the surface in a vapor chamber, as it is a worse solvent than Acetone. It should also take **longer** to soften and dissolve objects than Acetone, but a heated bath or coating the surface with it could help to generate the needed exposure times. However, its comparable ethyl-acetate has been claimed to be used as a cleaning, vapor smoothing, and brush on surface smoothing agent successfully and can be used better by helping the solubility via heating, which can be done much safer with ethyl-acetate than THF. In a proper chemical mix, its storage problem can be solved too. A better alternative is propylene-1,2-carbonate, which is a better solvent, and much less dangerous. **tl;dr**: No, Tetrahydrofuran is not able to dissolve PLA in a reasonable time1 without heat activation and it has worse characteristics than Acetone. It could arguably be used to weld parts, but Dichloromethane would be more effective. --- 1 - Sato, Gondo et al. in the aforementioned paper: *Solubility tests were performed for 24 h at 35+-1 °C.* which means we have a prolonged exposure of a thin film to a huge amount of solvent. how thin a film? **Very** thin: *The PLA films were prepared by casting 2 wt % dichloromethane solution onto a flat-bottomed glass Petri dish in a glass bell-type vessel and by drying under atmospheric pressure at room temperature. Each solvent was allowed to evaporate for 48 h. The dried PLA films were then thermally treated under a vacuum for 48 h at 70 °C to eliminate the residual solvent and to obtain amorphous PLA films. Afterwards, the thermally treated PLA films were cooled at room temperature under atmospheric pressure.* Upvotes: 2

2017/02/14

<issue_start>username_0: I have a cheap cartesian printer with the usual arrangement - X axis with three linear bearings, build plate moving as Y axis on three linear bearings as well, Z axis with lead screws. After about 2 kg of filament printed, I can see that one of the linear bearings (the single bearing on one side of the Y axis) is leaving an almost black residue at the front of the axis. I have thoroughly oiled all of the bearings before mounting them and repeated that after about 1 kg of filament printed. No other bearing is showing this issue, and the black goo appears only on the front side of the rod, not the back side. What might cause this goo - is the bearing breaking up or is it just some residue from the manufacturing process that is slowly being pushed out of the bearing?<issue_comment>username_1: After completion of the print job, I was able to perform a closer inspection. The black goo contains metallic particles, and the rail the bearings are riding on has a visible groove - which means replacing both the bearings and the rail. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Your new oil butted out the old graphite lubricant. Don't know about the metal particles though, might be dust, or your new oil caused damage to the bearings and/or rails. Upvotes: 0

2017/02/14

<issue_start>username_0: Using a 3D pen I printed a small box. However, I was doing it on plain paper and of course the paper didn't come off the plastic very well. It didn't matter for that specific case, but if I want to print something else, which non-sticky surface would you recommend? Is there any way to use transparent surface (so that I can put a paper with picture as a guide under it)?<issue_comment>username_1: You could use a piece of glass, that's what most people using 3D printers have as a build surface. An easy source of glass for pen use would be a picture frame but the edges are likely sharp so be careful. Acrylic would also work and is easily obtained in small pieces from places like Lowes/Home Depot, I used Acrylic for some time on my Kossel. The plastic can stick to Acrylic very well but I had no issues using it with my printer, just test it out and see what process works if you go that route. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Someone trying to get a surface to not stick. This is a first. I would try glass first. If you still have issues, I would look into coated surface, like an old tefflon pan (do not cook with PLA residue). I would suggest oil but you might start a fire.. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: You might want to experiment using Kapton tape. Although it's yellow-coloured, it is transparent and provides a good surface for hit-bed adhesion. You should be able to remove it from your print by flexing it. Attaching it to your paper sheet is a one-way process, but you can use guide marks on the paper below. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I use parchment paper, the kind that you buy on sheets for baking. It come off nicely but there are adhesion problems if you want to do sharp corners. I prefer using ordinary printer paper for that. You can simply soak any scraps of paper off in a sink. Upvotes: 0

2017/02/14

<issue_start>username_0: I've recently initialized OctoPi onto my Raspberry Pi, proceeded to connect it to my local internet, and then connected it to my FlashForge Creator Pro (2014 edition) Everything seemed to be going smoothly until I tried to connect to the printer; the Pi didn't seem to be able to pick up a usable Baudrate (after being trying out all of the usable ones). For example, when trying out 9600, I would get: > > Trying baudrate: 9600 > > > Send: N0 M110 N0\*125 > > > Recv: ��r># ���& � > > > What should I do to fix the problem? --- *Note that I got the same types of messages back (with garbled 'special' characters) when trying using the "**auto connect**" feature.*<issue_comment>username_1: I got the same problem. Auto-detect baud rate was not working too. So I manually tried every baud-rate and finally found one working, for me it was 115200. Good luck! Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Install GPX via command line. To do this, type `/home/pi/oprint/bin/pip install "https://markwal.github.io/octoprint-download/OctoPrint-GPX.tgz"` then go ahead and restart octoprint and try connecting again. Upvotes: 0

2017/02/15

<issue_start>username_0: I have a Prusa i3 that homes properly when you use the menu. After adjusting the bed and homing several times, it keeps the head at a reliable distance. However, when I try to print from an SD card, the printer buries the hot end in the heat bed. What needs to be adjusted to fix this issue? G-code from one of the 2 files ``` M190 S50.000000 M109 S200.000000 ;Sliced at: Mon 13-06-2016 15:39:25 ;Basic settings: Layer height: 0.2 Walls: 1.2 Fill: 20 ;Print time: 3 hours 47 minutes ;Filament used: 11.435m 34.0g ;Filament cost: None ;M190 S50 ;Uncomment to add your own bed temperature line ;M109 S200 ;Uncomment to add your own temperature line G21 ;metric values G90 ;absolute positioning M82 ;set extruder to absolute mode M107 ;start with the fan off G28 X0 Y0 ;move X/Y to min endstops G28 Z0 ;move Z to min endstops G1 Z15.0 F3000 ;move the platform down 15mm G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length G1 F200 E3 ;extrude 3mm of feed stock G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length again G1 F3000 ;Put printing message on LCD screen M117 Printing... ;Layer count: 446 ;LAYER:0 M107 ;LAYER:1 M106 S127 G1 F2400 E-4.50000 G0 F3000 X81.474 Y58.603 Z0.300 ;TYPE:WALL-INNER G1 F2400 E0.00000 G1 F2220 X83.063 Y56.456 E0.06663 G1 X84.277 Y55.080 E0.11240 G1 X84.836 Y54.444 E0.13353 G1 X85.799 Y53.476 E0.16759 G1 X86.755 Y52.587 E0.20015 G1 X87.179 Y52.244 E0.21376 G1 X88.836 Y50.911 E0.26680 G1 X89.285 Y50.610 E0.28029 ```<issue_comment>username_1: You didn't share much details, which is problem with any question. But let me give some recommendations - I have Prusa i3 MK2 1.75mm. The fact that it homes correctly does not at all mean that your Y axis is OK. * Verify that PINDA probe's bottom end is **maximum** 1 millimeter above the extruder head. * Double check that PINDA probe is correctly screwed and does not wiggle. * Manually check that the printer does not allow you to toutch heatbed with extruder, follow these steps: 1. Wait for both heatbed and hot end to cool down. 2. Put paper sheet on heatbed 3. Go to Menu - Settings - Move Axis - Z Axis 4. Move the axis down. If hot end toutches and presses on the paper, the calibration is not OK at all. * [Updating your firmware](http://manual.prusa3d.com/Guide/Upgrading+firmware/66) can't hurt if you didn't do it already. If this advice does not help you, please update the question to address the following questions: * How does your G-code beginning work? Ideally, share some short G-code, I could easily check whether it is correct with my printer. * Does XYZ calibration pass correctly in your printer? * Take a picture of your extruder so that both PINDA and extruder are visible Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: The correlation between the endstop switch -- or sensor -- and the surface of the bed is not known *a priori* . In your case, there are two possibilities. I'd say the more likely is that your g-code generator is not setting the Z-height offset from the bed correctly. The other is that your bed is tilted, so proper Z-home at one corner does not match the entire bed. Try this: first manually move the extruder head to all four corners and adjust the bed screws until the separation is identical at all times. Then let your gcode start up -- and don't worry if the extruder depresses the bed during homing, as that doesn't matter. See where the extruder is once the print starts. Adjust the endstop switch up or down to compensate until the print head **when printing** is just off the surface and the first layer adheres well. If all that doesn't work, then you may have the wrong printer profile settings in your slicing softwqre. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I had the same issue: Z-axis correctly homing manually but not when printing. What worked for me is disabling the following line in the Marlin configuration file: ``` #define Z_MIN_PROBE_USES_Z_MIN_ENDSTOP_PIN ``` Upvotes: 0

2017/02/15

<issue_start>username_0: So they say PLA is biodegradable. But I still don't know how much biodegradable. I live in a flat and we have composting trash can in the courtyard. However if I throw PLA in there and it does not decompose, neighbors are gonna be pissed since many of them are intending to use the soil for their balcony flowers. So can I really compost PLA, or does "biodegradable" just mean it falls apart *eventually*, eg. in years? And **if** it decomposes, is it safe to use for plants?<issue_comment>username_1: PLA products will take up to 6 months to degrade in commercial composting facility. In home composting facility, it may take longer time. Source: <http://www.biogreenchoice.com/category_s/1866.htm> Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: This question has been asked on just about every forum out there. Here's one example from [filabot.com](https://www.filabot.com/blogs/news/57233604-the-misleading-biodegradability-of-pla) . > > The reality however, is that this process will take several hundred > years in a typical landfill. To biodegrade, PLA requires a laundry > list of conditions to effectively break down. Specifically - oxygen, a > temperature of 140+ degrees *[Fahrenheit -- ed note]*, and a 2/3 cocktail of organic substrate. > Collectively, these are absent in any scenario outside of industrial > composting facilities. > > > I found similar comments -- tho' with perhaps slightly lower temperatures elsewhere. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: **TL;DR** - No... well, yes you *can*, but it won't decompose in your lifetime. --- Addressing this question fully - from the point of composting, rather than landfill: * From [Wikipedia - PLA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polylactic_acid) - [End of life](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polylactic_acid#End_of_life): > > **Composting**: PLA is biodegradable under industrial composting conditions, starting with chemical hydrolysis process, followed by microbial digestion, to ultimately degrade the PLA. Under industrial composting conditions (58 °C), PLA can partly (about half) decompose into water and carbon dioxide in 60 days, after which the remainder decomposes much more slowly, with the rate depending on the material's degree of crystallinity. Environments without the necessary conditions will see very slow decomposition akin to that of non-bioplastics, not fully decomposing for hundreds or thousands of years. > > > * According to [Is PLA filament actually biodegradable?](https://www.3dnatives.com/en/pla-filament-230720194/#!): It takes 80 years to biodegrade naturally. Although, how they actually know that for sure, seeing as PLA (for 3D Printing at least) hasn't been around for 80 years yet, is unclear. --- In addition, PLA can only be recycled at plants that have separate facilities that deal with PLA (as bio-plastics interfere with the recycling of other plastics if combined), and (as an aside) the fumes from PLA are not as harmless as many people think, due to the (up to 40%) additives. So, PLA is not such a "happy" plastic as many people are led to believe by the marketing folks... Upvotes: 2

2017/02/15

<issue_start>username_0: Is there anything to the process of 3D printing that might make the dice unfair/land on a specific side more frequently? Or will any imperfections be negligible, thus making the dice fair? I'm more concerned about making a d20 than anything else, so focus on that shape if need be. --- I am using a MakerBot Replicator+ with FDM, so take this into consideration if it affects your answer, and if you believe a different printing process would have an advantage over this don't hesitate to include it.<issue_comment>username_1: It probably won't be fair. -------------------------- Incidentally, I have a decent amount of experience with 3D printing. It depends heavily on the particular technology that you're using to do the 3D printing, but nearly all forms of printing aren't perfect--depending on the design you make (solid? honeycombed? hollow?), there will be slight, or not-so-slight variations across the faces, which will result in an unfair die. In particular, the faces that are parallel to the build surface will probably be different compared to the ones that are angled. You could probably deal with some of these problems with some kind of post-processing, but honestly at that point buying dice would be easier. 3D printing is for making custom or prototype objects, and isn't really suited to mass production of simple shapes like dice. Even manufactured dice have some imperfections, and a slightly unfair die probably won't make much of a difference in gameplay, but it will be hard for you to determine whether the imperfections from 3D printing are severe enough to make the die unfair without rolling it many times and looking at its distribution. Again, at that point, it's easier to just buy the dice. That being said, custom d20s can be super cool looking, and if you're going to 3D print something, might as well make it look cool... Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Custom 3D printed dice are distinctly lower quality than the dice from a FLGS you see in 'standard' dice sets, and around the same quality of die as the cheaper plastic dice available online. It depends somewhat on your printer, but you can get very uniform results in terms of material density with the issues in die fairness being limited to problems with the surfaces (e.g. the sides aren't usually all the same texture). You can fix this with statistical modelling and sanding to get a very good die, but it takes forever and is a huge pain and is totally not worth it from a practical standpoint. A quick sanding to get all faces roughly the same texture is usually good enough, in my experience. You can also just print the die so that the build-surface face and the face parallel with it (if it's not a d4) are unimportant faces, like the '10' and '11' on a d20-- being smoother they'll be rolled a little less often but the average roll will be the same regardless of what number pair that effects if you keep the 'opposite sides sum to die size + 1' rule. A quick sanding doesn't take too long and works well, though; that's definitely what I would recommend from my experience. As a note, the main *advantage* in 3d printing dice is that it's affordable, whereas otherwise acquiring truly custom dice (weighted to specification, unusual number of sides, etc) requires you to make them by hand or shell out [many thousands of dollars](https://www.awesomedice.com/blog/545/custom-dice-manufacturing/). 3d printed dice are particularly useful when you want to concoct biased dice, as you can easily alter things like the physical die size, weight (by altering how much of the interior is hollow), weight distribution (by altering *where* the hollow cavities are-- known as 'floaters' when these gaps are used to bias the roll, much less good than weighting), and number placement to conceal the differences between your die and a 'fair' die you 3d printed. In my experience, 3d printed dice work fine for RPGs, but feel a little light (at least with my feedstock). I used them for a bit with a group I GMed for while on a bit of a 3d printing kick, and they definitely have some niche uses, but beautiful high-quality dice with a good feel to them are so cheap nowadays I just don't see any reason to go to the expense and trouble when you can avoid it. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Well it is a bit more complicated than that. Changes are the d20 you buy in the store is a bit more favored as well. Now we are talking statically, it will like one side over the other. As the difference in weight distribution is not drastic if you print it solid, it will not matter. In use you likely will not see it. That said if you wanted to be extra sure.. I would use the 3d printed model, make a silicon mold with it. Then use Resin to make the dice. Now you can start making whole batches of dice as good as what you get in the store. My final answer is, technically it will favor but you will not notice. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Pretty much all die are unfair to an extent. If you are seriously concerned about accuracy then you will need to test what you produce and, if not satisfactory, modify the design reprint and retest. A simple/coarse test is to float your die in very salty water and note which face faces upwards, repeatedly perturb the die noting the upwards face. Any egregious bias should reveal itself after a handful of perturbations. Note that this test only reveals that a die has a bias, not which face it is biased to land on. It's also probably not massively accurate but should be good enough to let you gauge whether your printed die are any worse than your shop bought ones. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I've printed a few dice, and thrown them ~100 times each to check -- they were very far off from fair. One reason, I think, is that the inner fill (and thus a lot of weight) is oriented a certain way. It might help to do solid-fill or no fill, but I haven't compared yet. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: **Not likely.** Creating true 'fair' dice is fairly difficult to do even with high tolerance processes. 3D printing (hobbyist level) is much lower tolerance and will definitely be weighted incorrectly especially if the infill is anything less than full. Professional grade 3D Printers will be better and more accurate but will still likely be weighted slightly to one side. Regardless of process though it would be possible to create a fair dice using 3D printing as the primary means of manufacturing and then weighing, balancing and doing some post processing to even them out. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I have tried to make an **unfair die** by putting 100% infill in the conner opposite to 6, 5 and 4. When you float it, it always comes with expected side up. So with floating you really can check if somebody has **tried** to make it unfair. The real-life tests have unfortunately shown my complete failure :) After 104 throws the average is 3.49. Even less than "fair" 3.5! It looks like the weight of plastic is too low to compete with hitting and rotation. The next try could be to put something metallic into it during printing. Upvotes: 2

2017/02/16

<issue_start>username_0: I have [Ultimaker 2+ 3D Printer](https://ultimaker.com/en/products/ultimaker-2-plus "Ultimaker 2+") and I need to print a piece that doesn't fit within the build volume of the printer. Even though it would fit I'd still need to print it in two parts because I'll need to fit some equipment inside. I could use glue to put it together, but I'll need to remove the equipment later. So I'm trying to find some feasible solutions how to attach/snap it together. The wall thickness is currently 3mm. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/FFckZ.png "Cut Plane") Plane for cutting the part. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/L2hhV.png "Cut Cross Section") Cut cross section.<issue_comment>username_1: If the equipment has to be removable, then there's no point in trying to make a one-piece object in the first place. So it looks like you have two problems. The first is to decide what's the best way to split your container to facilitate both putting the equipment inside & removing it; the second is how to latch the two together. I can't answer the first since you haven't shown us the equipment. As to the second: there are a number of plans for spring-latching connectors (such as used with straps, backpack covers, etc) on thingiverse.com. If you have no constraints on the exterior of your container, I would just merge the latching connectors into the container wall (e.g. with meshmixer) . Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Thanks for your reply all. I think I have a solution for my need. Here are some figures! [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/BfZmN.png) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/BfyZt.png) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/hBYET.png) More picture of the clip! [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/S7WMO.png) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VGDQU.png) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/P74zp.png) Upvotes: 0

2017/02/18

<issue_start>username_0: This has happened a few times whenever I print with the white PLA (Hatchbox 1.75 mm). It seems that the print job produces smooth sidewalls for most of the part but at a certain point and above, the walls become rough as if the alignment is off or something. I've attached a picture to show the issue. Does anybody have any insight? [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/796O7.jpg) I'm using a Printrbot Simple Metal and some of the print settings are listed below: * Slicer: Slic3r * [First] Layer height: 0.2 mm * Perimeters: 2 * Solid Layers [top/bottom]: 3 * Infill: 25% * Fill pattern: Rectilinear * Top/Bottom Fill pattern: Concentric * Perimeter speed: 30 mm/s * Infill speed: 80 mm/s * Travel speed: 150 mm/s * Acceleration (perimeters): 1000 mm/s2 * Acceleration (default): 3000mm/s2 * Default extrusion width: Slic3r chosen * Print temperature: 220°C I've noticed in the Slic3r rendering that the affected area seems to be the point where the infill switches from 25% to solid as seen in the included picture. If this is the problem, is there any way to enforce solid infill a few layers below this to eliminate the awkward transition, or specify a smaller extrusion width at this point? [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DfWDP.png)<issue_comment>username_1: Slic3r has an option of ``` Solid infill threshold area ``` which is the area that when you pass it (and start printing smaller than it), the infill becomes solid. If you set it to a smaller number (or 0), then your infill won't become solid and the problem will vanish. Source: [Slic3r Manual - Infill Optimization](http://manual.slic3r.org/expert-mode/infill-optimization "slic3r manual") Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you want to change settings on some area of your part check out [modifier meshes in Slic3r](http://slic3r.org/blog/modifier-meshes). It looks like to0 much heat is delivered when solid infill starts and some melting occurs. See [3D Printing Problems #22: Extrusion Temperature Too High](https://all3dp.com/common-3d-printing-problems-3d-printer-troubleshooting-guide/#Extrusion-Temperature). You can try: * Lower extrusion temperature * Lower filament flow * Improve part cooling * Lower print speed Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]

2017/02/18

<issue_start>username_0: The question is how to scale an existing mesh without changing the thickness of the walls? I am using Blender to create STL files for 3D printing. Let's say I create a shell for a model railroad car. Since 1/87th is the most common scale I make the walls of the shell just thick enough to make it rigid in 1/87 scale. Now, if I want to print the same shell in a larger scale, say 1/48, the wall thickness will nearly double and it will waste material printing walls that are thicker than needed. If I want to print in 1/160 the printing may fail because the wall thickness falls below the minimum the printer will support. Any ideas?<issue_comment>username_1: Your question falls into two different categories, here at 3D Printing SE and there, at [Blender SE](https://blender.stackexchange.com/). I would consider that your objective would best be solved using some form of parametric modeling, an aspect that is rarely embraced by Blender. Even though the limitations of Blender make life interesting for you, there may be a couple of useful features within (and without) the program. On [Blender SE](https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/53293/is-blender-actually-useable-for-engineering), a question of similar format exists, with a somewhat open-ended answer. A quick search using The Google, with the terms "[Parametric Modeling with Blender](https://www.google.com/#q=parametric+modeling+with+blender)" results in a number of different approaches. According to a quick perusal of the search results, some of the solutions involve free plug-ins or add-ons for Blender. More complexity rather than less, perhaps. I'm familiar enough with the very simple basics of Blender to know I would not be able to make use of those answers. I'm also well aware that Blender's power extends beyond my own limitations with features supporting scripting, animation and so many other tools. Seeing the workflow diagrams/charts that make up some of the advanced portion of the program leads me to believe that one can accomplish your objective, but one must be a certified wizard with the program. As an alternative, one could engage any one of the many parametric modeling programs available. I'm a fan of OpenSCAD, although the text/scripting interface can be daunting for some. If you've become skilled in Blender, a non-GUI format isn't necessarily the best route, although the GUI options are no less confusing, in my opinion. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The minimum scale of your model The modeling of your 3D file doesn’t necessarily require that you work with a given unit or scale. It’s particularly true with software like Blender in which you’re able to give proportion but no unit. This job will be done after the modeling phase when you send your model to a 3D printer. That’s why you need to pay extra attention to both the scale and the size of your model at that point. Creating a 3D print in millimeters instead of centimeters might very well result in a bad 3D print. A powerful example of that can be found in architectural models. This is, in fact, one of the main issues we encountered while working with La Cité de L’Architecture on La Merveille’s reproduction. With architectural models, it can, for instance, be entirely possible to 3D print a scale 1/10 of something and just impossible to do the same at 1/250. After a certain level of miniaturization, the details (present in the digital 3D file) are starting to vanish in the physical world because the 3D printer itself is no able to create them (or will create very fragile one). Quite often for architectural models, human intervention is necessary to decide which details will be kept and which won’t so that the 3D file doesn’t contain information that won’t be printable. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Make your model solid, then during slicing: * scale your object * set infill to 0% * set desired number of perimeters (that will be the wall thickness) That way with just one model you may have any wall thickness independently of scale. Upvotes: 0

2017/02/18

<issue_start>username_0: A plastic gear of an older DVD player broke. I always read about being 3D printing a "repair revolution". So I looked for a template to give to some printing service, but I found none (and nothing close to it). Could you please explain me, what steps a layman should take to get the gear piece replaced using 3D printing?<issue_comment>username_1: If you have the remaining pieces of the gear and enough remains to determine certain measurements, one can either engineer the gear using a number of gear modeling designs, or one can take measurements directly from the parts and engineer a raw design. If the gear you have is not particularly peculiar, it is possible to use a gear generator plug-in, template, or library to make the "foundation" of your gear. The modeling software would then be used to add the appropriate bosses and key ways required to complete the design. If you are considering to create the part yourself, you have a wide selection of programs from which to choose. I'm fond of OpenSCAD, and it does have [a number of gear libraries](http://www.thingiverse.com/akaziuna/collections/openscad-gear-scripts). Simple bosses and key ways are easily accomplished using [OpenSCAD](http://www.openscad.org/). [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/jPb52.jpg) Another package available on the internet which includes the option of using a gear generator is [Tinkercad](https://www.instructables.com/id/Gearing-up-in-TinkerCad/) which has a reputation of being easy to use. You'll find many tutorials for this program as well. Tinkercad requires an "outside" program to generate the gear design which is then imported to the model workspace. Even a program as simple as Inkscape can create gear profiles to be imported into many design packages. Fusion360 is available free for hobby or non-commercial use, but may not be the easiest to learn in a short time. So many others as well. Use your favorite search engine for "[gear generator modeling software](https://www.google.com/#q=gear+generator+modeling+software)" or similar wording and be overloaded with links. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is not something "a layman" can do. If you want to replace that gear using 3D printing, you'll either need to go down the rabbit hole and learn a bunch of new skills, or hire someone to do it for you. You need to have a 3D model of the part you want to replace. While 3D scanning is in some cases possible, it won't give you the resolution required to reproduce the gear with sufficient accuracy. This means your only option is to manually model the gear in CAD software. You'll need to take a bunch of measurements (outer and pitch diameter, thickness, mounting hole diameter) and figure out the tooth profile, and then build a model according to those measurements. A caliper is very helpful when doing this. A neat trick that might help with a flat part like a gear is to scan it on a flatbed scanner, and then use the resulting photo to trace your CAD sketch over (but you'd still need to cross-reference it with measurements). Unfortunately, most CAD software is quite complicated and "How do I model a gear" is not a question that can be answered concisely. @fred\_dot\_u offers a number of suggestions for packages that might work, and even offer modules specific to generating gears. However, if you are not interested in learning CAD for its own sake and really get into 3D printing, learning it just for the sake of replacing a gear in a DVD player is a very inefficient use of your time. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The only 'layman's' option is to find an existing design which solves your problem. If you are lucky, and the product you have has a common failure mode, someone else might have a) solved the same problem already, and b) posted their design online. Sites such as [thingiverse](http://www.thingiverse.com/search?q=dvd+gear&sa=) have plenty of designs, but finding the right thing might be hard. If you find something, you can then look for someone to print it for you. Its not clear if you tried this already, but maybe the answer helps someone else. Upvotes: 1

2017/02/20

<issue_start>username_0: I have been trying to print an object that is 4 inches tall. About at 3 inches it falls off the bed. I am using tape on the heated bed and right before the print I am wiping the bed with rubbing alcohol. After the first time I tried hot gluing it to the bed when it was mid way through so that it wouldn't fall off but that didn't work. I am printing at 185°C and the bed is 55°C. I am using PLA to print. Should I increase the temperature of the bed or is there something else that is wrong?<issue_comment>username_1: Even though knowing the model of printer is slightly helpful, it's not critical to making your print work. Your PLA manufacturer should have recommendations for both the bed temperature and the nozzle temperature. Is your print bed glass or metal? As an example, my bed is glass and I set the temperature to 70°C for PLA, but the real temperature at the bed is slightly lower than that. I'm using 3M brand blue painters tape. What type of tape are you using? It will make a difference. I originally used cleaner on the tape, but found it was not needed. Blue tape means parts stick so well that you have to get them free before the bed cools too much, or you'll have to remove the tape to get the part free. My PLA nozzle temperature settings range from 190°C to 230°C, depending on the filament. I use the manufacturer's figures and vary them five to ten degrees depending on the results. Too hot at the nozzle will burn the filament possibly causing a clog, while too cold will cause extruder feeding problems. You did not reference having feeding problems, which implies your nozzle settings are acceptable. Consider to change your tape and to increase the bed temperature. At a 55°C starting point, you could jump five degrees at a time until you get a good bond. Also be certain that your bed is level and properly calibrated. The first layer should apply in a slightly "squashed" manner. Too close and the nozzle tears up the tape, but too far and the filament will sit on top and not properly adhere. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You might also try tweaking your settings to add a "raft", which is a wider area surrounding the first layer of your print. The added area is more area to "stick" to the build plate (or tape, or whatever). I've found that often helps. I've tried using crazy glue in a pinch, to glue down a corner that's coming loose, but as you reported for hot melt glue, it's a long shot. I did get it to work once or twice. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If you have a dual-extruder printer, your second nozzle could be hitting the part. As the print grows taller, each hit with the nozzle has more chance to knock the part off the build plate. This can happen from some of the following reasons: * Nozzles aren't level to each other * Build plate is not level * Material oozed and solidify on second nozzle. (Similar to nozzles aren't level) Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Well, I had the same problem like you. I tried some **raft** but the result was ugly and a little hard to remove it from final part. I notice that autolevel works fine but, if your printing on top lines are over warping the nozzle will collide until the part fall off the printer. So is needed to minimize this warping controling speed and temperature, maybe the PLA is getting glued to nozzle and creating the warping. I have set the printer from 185 and 190 to 210 for first layer to increase the adition to tape, the heat bed to 32 degrees to allow the first layer get cold faster to avoid PLA warping. *This may vary depending on city climate* Remember the heat bed is to control room temperature close the part, not to mold or to print the part. At least, that you are printing a turkey to be finished and cooked. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Check your Z-calibration. I have a similar problem that I'm about to investigate. I have a feeling the Z-axis pulses per mm may need to decrease ever so slightly. The cumulative error may lead to the extruder poking at finished layers as the part gets taller. Upvotes: 1

2017/02/21

<issue_start>username_0: I'm relatively new to 3d printing, and wanted to get a few things understood. Firstly, I am unclear on how Hexagonal infill is stronger than, say, diamond pattern. Can anyone explain how the different shape causes the structure to be stronger? I saw a few places that hex is stronger; usually, more vertices means 'weaker' shape (i.e. a triangle is stronger than a square), so how does that work with hex vs diamond? Also, in small objects, where the printer makes only a single dot as the infill (a dot instead of a line in larger objects), does the infill strengthen the object at all? EDIT: I am trying to understand the effect of the infill pattern on the *strength* of the print, regardless of print time.<issue_comment>username_1: Correction: I believe I found what you are looking for: [Report from EngineerDog.com](https://engineerdog.com/2015/09/02/mechanical-testing-3d-printed-parts-results-and-recommendations/) The author concludes that rectilinear infill with a zero degree offset is the strongest. However, I have not seen consensus for or against a certain pattern being strongest. I recommend more investigation . My original answer: > > I don't know that one pattern is significantly stronger than another, > provided they each bond well with other infill deposits as well as the > perimeters. > > > There are studies around. In 3D printing, strength is rarely the only > consideration; one must optimize for strength *where needed* versus > time to print. > > > See > [this](https://3dprinting.com/tips-tricks/how-to-choose-an-infill-for-your-3d-prints/) > as an example of a report which supports the hexagonal or honeycomb > pattern as the optimal balance between strength and print time. [This > one](http://my3dmatter.com/influence-infill-layer-height-pattern/) is > more detailed, but only compares linear infill patterns of varying > layer thickness and density. There are many such articles, some more > scientifically conducted than others, available with a simple search. > > > Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Hex grids are used for different reasons than triangular grids (such as you often see on bridges and roof systems). Triangles are especially good at being *rigid*, while hex grids are very material-efficient for a given strength. The second reason ($) is typically more important for 3D printing. Triangles do have fewer vertices than squares, but it's not always true that "fewer vertices" means stronger. Vertices are one kind of weak point. But in a triangle, vertex "angle-holding" failures simply don't matter. You can fasten 3 bars together with hinges or other joints that have little resistance to changing angle, and the triangle is still rigid. In contrast, rectangular grids can (and do -- <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5t9MpNTSbYg>) completely collapse if their vertices aren't rigid enough. That combines badly with the fact that vertices concentrate forces, so have to be much stronger than sides in comparable settings. A triangle cannot change without changing multiple things -- at least 2 angles and a side, or all three sides. Intuitively, the sides and vertices of a triangle work together for strength. This advantage of triangles doesn't transfer to hexagons, but hexagons have two other advantages: First, if you want to fill a space with a repeating shape, hexagons use less material than other shapes. And second, hexagons keep all the individual "walls" shorter compared to others shapes, which makes them less prone to bend. The material efficiency was proven by <NAME> in 1998, according to <http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2015/07/hexagons_are_the_most_scientifically_efficient_packing_shape_as_bee_honeycomb.html>. His paper "The Honeycomb Structure" is available at <https://www.communitycommons.org/wp-content/uploads/bp-attachments/14268/honey.pdf> Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]

2017/02/22

<issue_start>username_0: Marlin offers a bunch of different choices for auto-levelling and assisted manual levelling for bent build plates (mesh levelling), but for the moment I want to level things completely manually. That is, I want to move Z to 0, disable steppers, and then move around the print head and adjust the distance between bed and nozzle at various points with a piece of paper. With the old Repetier based firmware on my printer, selecting "home all axes" did not only home XYZ to endstops, but it also moved the head to position (0, 0, 0) afterwards. Then I could simply disable steppers via the menu and go on with my levelling. Note that in my case, the coordinates of the endstop positions are negative for all axes, so moving to the endstops alone isn't cutting it. With Marlin, selecting the "auto home" option merely moves to the endstops and then to some positive Z position (+10). This means I have to use the menu to manually move Z back to 0, which is quite inconvenient, unless I have a PC nearby that allows me to enter G-code. So, that leaves two related questions for me: Is there some simple way to move to (0, 0, 0) with the menu? Can I implement an assisted manual levelling (i.e. some procedure that simply moves the head between a number of different X/Y positions) easily? Does something like that already exist? If not, I wonder why.<issue_comment>username_1: Write a few pieces of gcode to do this. Place it on an SD-card (I assume you have a reader) and select the file you want to execute. Home all: ``` G28 G1 Z0 ``` Do you really want to home it directly? I would say you want to take it down slowly and adjusting end-stops incrementally. First: ``` G28 G1 Z10 ``` Then ``` G28 G1 Z3 ``` Then ``` G28 G1 Z1 ``` etc etc You can also move it around in the X and Y plane: ``` G28 G1 Z5 X50 Y30 ``` Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The way I manually level my bed is by connecting a computer to the printer via USB. As far as I am aware, if you have a touchscreen this should be available on the printer options as well for marlin. But if you connect a computer, simply run something like pronterface or any other manual control gui and: 1) home axes 2) disable motors 3) move printhead in x/y directions as necessary by hand 4) adjust z height manually with the GUI software. This should not affect your x/y positions or turn on their motors. Upvotes: 1

2017/02/27

<issue_start>username_0: I have a Wanhao Duplicator i3. I have done many excellent prints with this printer, and have first hand experience that it can do a pretty much flawless print. But... Recently, I am experiencing weird results. My "flow" seems uneven. When laying down the first layer of the raft, I can see it looks like it "beads" in some places. Thin lines with little "beads" here and there (which seem to be in a constant pattern) i.e. -------()-----()-----()------()------ etc. I initially thought, wet filament... But drying the filament had no noticeable effect. Further more, all my prints seem to be horribly laminated at a certain "height" of the print. This is really strange as it will print perfectly and only at a certain height, mess up about 5mm of layers (height wise), and then print great again. This seems to be a constant now. I dont understand how/why this could happen, as the whole z-axis is on a linear spiral shaft. Unless there is a gcode issue somewhere that I am not aware off. I am using CURA as my slicer and I feel that even if there was an isnturuction hidden somewhere at a certain height, it would possibly effect a single layer, and not 5mm worth of layers. Any ideas? I have tried: Different filament Pushing flow % to 105 and 110% respectively Cleaned extruder gears and print head Oiled z-axis shafts What baffles me, is the weird delamination (or rather lack of lamination) at a certain height. I have not measured this height exactly, but from guestimating, it looks like roughly the same height on every print where the issue is visible (about 3/4 up in the attached image). My support structures are also VERY messy, whilst they were very precise and perfect previously. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/epy7e.jpg) Thanks<issue_comment>username_1: Write a few pieces of gcode to do this. Place it on an SD-card (I assume you have a reader) and select the file you want to execute. Home all: ``` G28 G1 Z0 ``` Do you really want to home it directly? I would say you want to take it down slowly and adjusting end-stops incrementally. First: ``` G28 G1 Z10 ``` Then ``` G28 G1 Z3 ``` Then ``` G28 G1 Z1 ``` etc etc You can also move it around in the X and Y plane: ``` G28 G1 Z5 X50 Y30 ``` Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The way I manually level my bed is by connecting a computer to the printer via USB. As far as I am aware, if you have a touchscreen this should be available on the printer options as well for marlin. But if you connect a computer, simply run something like pronterface or any other manual control gui and: 1) home axes 2) disable motors 3) move printhead in x/y directions as necessary by hand 4) adjust z height manually with the GUI software. This should not affect your x/y positions or turn on their motors. Upvotes: 1

2017/02/27

<issue_start>username_0: I am wondering - of course if the 3D printer's bed big enough - printing multiple copies of the same print could save me significant amount of time in a small production line, excluding minor wastage such as setup time, post-processing time, etc. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/aQ1Zt.png) e.g. if my foo print takes 10 hours, printing 2x copies at the same time would take 2x times more, increasing linearly or it would be significantly less?<issue_comment>username_1: The proportion of production improvement is dependent on the size of the items being printed, generally speaking. Unfortunately, it's variable enough to make a precise answer difficult. Consider a single unit print. I'll use my printer as an example. Other printers may have similar sequences. The print is begun and the bed has to heat up to temperature. Once the set level is reached, the print head(s) also have to reach temperature. Ignoring for the moment the print duration, one then considers that the printer bed has to cool to release the print. If you have ten items to print, you gain nine times the above elapsed time. That can be a substantial portion of production time. On the flip side, there isn't going to be much benefit in time from ten prints opposed to one. You may lose some post-processing time if you have stringing between the items. Directly related to quantity printing is yet another complication. If you have a single print fail, you've lost that time. As an example, one print may take 18 minutes. Twelve minutes into the print, you have a nozzle clog and have to abort the job. That's an unfortunate loss. With ten prints on the bed, you are two hours into the print and have a failure. Much worse loss of time and productivity. Obviously, one would prefer to have a properly fully working printer and be able to operate with the confidence that these failures won't appear. Hobby grade printers can't provide that level of confidence, but industrial/commercial grade printers should, further improving the productivity time for printing multiple items on a bed. If you have hot-swappable print beds, maybe combined with the ability to pre-heat the incoming bed, you gain time-wise. I don't know enough of the commercial grade printers to suggest that such a feature exists. My printer bed is attached with magnets and could be hot-swapped if I exercised care. The bed would begin to cool quickly, making a pre-heated plate all the more valuable. I'll just print multiple items and hope for the best, instead. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Actually no. It will take slightly more for each addition. You also then have the point of failure, where one gets knocked off and ruins all the prints. The fastest way to print multiple objects is one at a time. In fact slic3r lets you do just that with their [sequential printing feature](http://manual.slic3r.org/advanced/sequential-printing). The reason is, the time it takes to lift 0.5mm, travel the few MM over to the next object, lower the 0.5mm back down.. Repeat for inner shells, outer shells, infill.. all add time. Doesn't seem like much till you do it 14,000 times. In the case of your example, it would be negligible. In more complicated or well spaced prints its another story. For extra extra fast, look into loss PLA casting... Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Yes, and no. It depends. For FDM printing, the printing time *mostly* scales linearly with the number of objects. However, some printers have a "minimum layer time" whereby smaller layers are printed more slowly, to ensure each layer takes at least this minimum time. This gives the print enough time to cool. Since the model shown in your example is quite small, it's quite likely that it will hit the minimum layer time. This means that printing one copy will take exactly as long as printing two copies, which will take exactly as long as printing three copies, until you hit the minimum layer time. At this point, adding more models will just add some constant number of minutes to your print time. If the model is large enough for minimum layer time not to be a factor, then printing the objects one at a time is generally faster because you save on travel moves between the layers of the two objects (and also results in better quality print, since the inter-object travel moves may leave behind stringing). This only holds for FDM printing. For DLP printing, the printing time for a (set of) models only depends on their total height and thus the number of layers required, since each layer requires the same amount of time regardless of the amount of material printed. Thus, the time for 1, 2, 3,...n models is exactly the same. There are many other types of printing process where the number of layers is much more important than the amount of material used, such as binder jetting, SLA and SLS,... Here there usually is some time cost involved for material printed, but the main factor in the print time is the number of layers (and for SLS, the amount of time it takes for the build volume to cool down after each print, which is quite significant.). Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Printing multiple parts *can* save you time. The issues pointed out by the other posters are all bang on, but one factor that has been neglected is the time it takes you to clear the build plate and restart the print. I found for smaller parts (under 1 inch cube) printing several parts at a time was more convenient, and minimally faster. The time saved came more from the fact that I could leave the printer for several hours and work on other tasks without having to babysit the printer waiting for it to finish each part. I printed about 100-200 parts in this manner. I did end up losing one 'batch' when one part came loose and started causing problems, but I found that was a small price to pay for being able to get a lot of other things done. It'll come down to the criticality of your deadline on the parts. If you're making parts for giggles and you don't need them done immediately, then i'd say one at a time. Less risk of failure, less wasted material and the time isn't super critical. If you're making parts for a prototype product that needs to be field tested in a few weeks, then i'd go with small batches of multiple parts. It'll give you more time to work on other things, less releveling, and you can check in once in a while to confirm it's okay usually without having to do anything assuming all is going well. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Actually the answer is yes and no. So I had to print 12 of the same small objects for a science experiment. Just some rocks I made from domes with some displaced faces, anyway my printers minimum wall width is 0.5 mm. The objects were 2 cm³. The first print failed because of them being disconnected but then I connected the 12 items by 1×1×5 mm solidified cylinders in blender and ran it through my cutter and it printed no problem. Afterwards I jusy clipped off the cylinder and was good to go. Just make sure you're object is connected at every point facing another. Based on your picture it should be connected something like this:  Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: It generally takes **longer** to complete the actual prints because of extra travel moves, but it **does save you time** in one important way: if you trust your printer, you can start a large batch and then just *walk away*. Instead of resetting every hour or so, you can come back after several hours, or over night. In this way, printing in batches can allow you to put more items through your printer in the same amount of time. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: It will save you and the machine time if done properly. Simplify 3D has a setting that lets you do multiple layers at once; as most slicers do. Therefore if the part is 10cm tall, then you can set it to move to the next one after 10 cm. The machine would then build each one in turn on the build plate in sequence. You won't have to remove the parts very often, and the machine won't have to take the time to heat up after each print. If done incorrectly, as in moving from one part to another for each layer, then yes it will require a large number of slow retraction and Z-axis moves, costing you more overall time. Upvotes: 0

2017/02/28

<issue_start>username_0: I'm starting to get familiar with 3D printers. I wish to know if printing details the size of 10-7 m (3.9\*10-6 in) is possible these days with metals or any other material. If anyone has information or articles as leads, I would really appreciate it.<issue_comment>username_1: Today, only SLA/DLP will give features of that size (if even these technologies do), and I am unaware of anyone using these technologies to print with metals today. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: There are no 3D printers (that I'm aware of) that can do 0.0001 millimeters, hobbyist or industrial, plastic or metal. For that matter I think you'll be hard pressed to find a CNC mill with that type of tolerances. Sorry! Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There's atom-based-printing 3D printers that only some universities have. There aren't other 3D printers that can get even 0.001 mm precision, you want 0.0001 mm, that's pretty dicey. Just breathing on the device will make it shift a layer. Just walking on the floor next to such a device would kill it. This one works with resins though, [Ultra-High Resolution 3D Printing at the Micro-Scale with Nanoscribe](https://3dprint.com/122337/nanoscribe-microscale-printing/). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You can get the 0.1 micron (100 nm) resolution with a 2-photon 3D printer, but only in a polymer resin. Nanoscribe, in Germany, pioneered this technology, see [Mechanical Microstructures](http://www.nanoscribe.de/en/applications/mechanical-microstructures/). Their commercial printer, the Photonic Professional GT, is about $350,000 US with software and accessories. There is some work being done to replicate the 3D printed polymer in metal using electroless plating or ALD (atomic layer deposition). Other techniques are in development. None of the direct metal 3D printing processes come close to your 0.1 micron resolution, although the field is rapidly evolving. Only a couple of years ago, direct metal 3D printing was all based on powder bed fusion. Now binder jet technology as been adapted to metals and, very recently, Xjet has developed a nanoparticle 3D printer. It prints "ink" composed of metal or ceramic nanoparticles suspended in a liquid. The minimum layer thickness is 1 to 2 microns. They have not released XY resolution data yet. A good overall reference for the various 3D printing techniques (including Xjet, but not Nanoscribe) can be found at [Explaining The Future - 3D Printing](http://explainingthefuture.com/3dprinting.html). Upvotes: 2

2017/02/28

<issue_start>username_0: I am doing a quad-copter now. I am not sure what color is the best to use for outdoor durability, especially in sunlight. They say PETg is the most durable material amongst cheap ones. But what color to choose: white or transparent? Or it does not matter?<issue_comment>username_1: Unless you plan to use your copter outside Earth atmosphere or expected lifetime is more than tenths of years, UV degradation should not be a problem for PETG. Some of the net sources indicate the **possibility** of degradation after significant time of **constant** exposure to outdoor conditions (mostly color change), which sounds mostly like absence of practical experience. Yet if there are any concerns about losing mechanical properties from the sunlight, any opaque lacquer car paint can help to absorb unwanted radiation and add some nicer view to the model. Acrylic paint will also work (tried this once myself) but it may not be suitable for outdoor. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: PETG might not be the best for long term UV exposure. According to Midland Plastics, PETG doesn't hold up well in outdoor applications, and is susceptible to UV degradation. Unless you have an outdoor or UV rated PETG product which will have additional chemicals added to it, it may breakdown more quickly than you would expect. (the link I used was : <http://www.midlandplastics.com/srtd_petg.htm>) Polycarbonate on the other hand does hold up better in outdoor applications and is better suited for long term exposure to UV light. Most quads and RC products you see that have a nice slick looking shell on them, are made from Polycarbonate. That stuff is usually vacuum formed sheets. It does still breakdown but it is a much stronger material. The downside is that PC requires a higher nozzle temperature, than PETG. (The reprap wiki has more info: <http://reprap.org/wiki/Polycarbonate>) That being said PETG is not going to dissolve in sunlight. It will likely last upto a year if not longer depending on usage. If this is your first quad you're making, then odds are you'll have a crash due to hardware failure before excessive UV degradation (at least thats been my experience with prototype aircraft). Good luck! Upvotes: 1

2017/03/05

<issue_start>username_0: When I am printing objects that have a lot of surface area on the first layer parts of that layer will rise up causing there to be gaps in the first layer. Here are two pictures. The first one was printing with a raft and the second one was without a raft.[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/yLnZA.jpg)[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/x6vXw.jpg) I am printing on 3M Painters tape, extruder temperature at 200, bed temperature at 60. I am using Hatchbox PLA Filiment.<issue_comment>username_1: 1. Too far from the surface for the first layer. Filament doesn't look flat enough 2. Possible slight under-extrusion (should be verified after fixing first issue) Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: You got a few things happening. First that temp seems low. I am printing PLA at 215.. but there are a lot of factors. Start with a simple calibration thin wall test. Which is just a wall, no body. From there your bed could be closer. Maybe. I don't think that's really the issue. Slower speed and heat will make more of a difference. That said. I take a piece of paper and calibrate it so there just a little, but not too much, friction. Make sure you are printing at 30% speed for first layer. Last use a glue stick. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Do things in this order 1) Make sure your bed surface is appropriate. (PET tape, or elmers glue on glass. must be applied every 3 to 4 prints in used area) 2)Make sure extruder temperature is not too low or too high. Generally I'll start at the minimum recommended manufacturer's range for your specific filament + 5 degrees. Then bed temp around 55c to 60c. 3) Your bed calibration might be off. Bed calibration should be performed at standard operating temperatures. I.e. turn everything on as if you are about to print and wait to heat up and then make sure your nozzle is almost touching your bed surface (however not actually touching. Alternatively you can use a normal sheet of paper and test that way. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: In contrast to the other suggestions here, I would like you to try to **slightly increase** the distance from the bed. The logic here is that the "thin walls" you are seeing during the first layer is is due to excessive extrusion as part of a too close bed leveling. The hypothesis is that the excessive plastic will "nudge" the previous laid down plastic, which will loosen it from the bed. In my experience, this issue only occurs when printing large, connected first layers - situations where the excessive plastic builds up with nowhere to go. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: I am having the same issue. I saw one similar post describe this as "baconing" and said it comes from over extrusion. Looking at the filament coming out I could imagine that if there is too much filament for the given travel speed, then it would buckle up. I tried decreasing the extrusion percentage. The Makerbot slicing program doesn't have a setting for that so I did multiple test prints and raised the filament diameter from the default 1.77 to 1.84 in the end, which is about at 20% decrease in the extruder output. I also slowed the prints speed. Both factors seemed to improve the quality, so over extrusion and speed both seem to be contributing factors, but the problem still hasn't gone away completely. It's happening with white Makerbot brand filament on large layers but not with green Makerbot brand and small layer heights (I haven't yet tried green coarse or white fine). I measured the white filament diameter with calipers and it is the proper 1.75mm, I'm just forcing it to extrude less by putting 1.84mm into the slicer settings. Upvotes: 0

2017/03/08

<issue_start>username_0: I have been playing around with creating scripts to generate some custom G-code for a Malyan M180 and I am having trouble understand what commands to use to switch nozzles. Sometimes I can get the nozzles to switch and it doesn't recenter but sometimes it does. I have been using: ``` G54 M108 T0; switch to left ``` and ``` G55 M108 T1; switch to right ``` Has anyone else looked into this and have any idea what commands or sequence of commands should be used to change nozzles?<issue_comment>username_1: No, M108 does not do that. You are looking for **T#**, where # is the tool position you want: ``` T1 ; switch to tool position 1 T3 ; switch to tool position 3 ``` This tells the processor to send all heating, cooling and flow commands to this tool until another tool change is specified, and invokes the X/Y(/Z) offset for the new tool position. See <http://reprap.org/wiki/G-code#T:_Select_Tool> Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As @tbm0115 has mentioned - it differs. Your `M108 T{index of tool}` command is perfectly fine on some FlashForge printers, a company known for its different sorts of proprietary code. It is indeed used for tool changing here. While on the common Marlin firmware (e.g. used on the popular Creality Ender printers), `M108` does a completely different thing-namely acting as a break sequence if the G-code parser is in a closed-loop-condition (after certain commands like `M109` that wait until a certain action takes place). Upvotes: 1

2017/03/09

<issue_start>username_0: In trying to understand 3D printers, I have watched some YouTube videos where the crafters make items with hinges. That in itself blows my mind. It is hard to grasp how something with moving parts can be printed. But specifically I am wondering if the concept can be extended to food printers to make, for example, a sugar or chocolate telescoping lollipop (sucker)?<issue_comment>username_1: No, M108 does not do that. You are looking for **T#**, where # is the tool position you want: ``` T1 ; switch to tool position 1 T3 ; switch to tool position 3 ``` This tells the processor to send all heating, cooling and flow commands to this tool until another tool change is specified, and invokes the X/Y(/Z) offset for the new tool position. See <http://reprap.org/wiki/G-code#T:_Select_Tool> Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As @tbm0115 has mentioned - it differs. Your `M108 T{index of tool}` command is perfectly fine on some FlashForge printers, a company known for its different sorts of proprietary code. It is indeed used for tool changing here. While on the common Marlin firmware (e.g. used on the popular Creality Ender printers), `M108` does a completely different thing-namely acting as a break sequence if the G-code parser is in a closed-loop-condition (after certain commands like `M109` that wait until a certain action takes place). Upvotes: 1

2017/03/09

<issue_start>username_0: I'm building an automatic warehouse system using three NEMA 17 stepper motor. My problem is to move the motors with precision, since I do not have any kind of encoder on the motor and so I cannot know the position of the axes. I thought that the system could be similar to a 3D printer, since neither 3d printers have encoder on the motor. Where can I find a sketch for Arduino of a 3D printer, to understand how they work? How do they move with such precision without any kind of sensor?<issue_comment>username_1: [For now] most of the open source 3d printer firmware written for Arduino-based hardware. This means you can just download the source and look through the relevant pieces of code. [Marlin](https://github.com/MarlinFirmware/Marlin) is the most obvious example. Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A stepper motor is different from a typical electric motor. Instead of being "on" or "off", or running a some approximate variable speed, the controller sends a series of pulses to drive the motor one step at a time. This can be driven forward or backwards. Based on how the motor and machine is designed, the machine will move a tiny amount. If for example, one step moves , say 0.1mm. If you send 150 pulses in the forward direction, the machine will move 15.0mm If you then send another 8 pulses in the reverse direction, the machine will be 14.2mm from the starting point. To know the absolute position, you need to establish the starting point. Most printers have limit switches at their "home" position. To initialize the position, drive the motor until it hits the switch, and then set position as zero. Then count the pulses up and down as you send them, you will will keep track of the machine's position. Upvotes: 0

2017/03/10

<issue_start>username_0: I've heard that using hairspray is useful for keeping the 3D objects from peeling off of the bed, but every example I have seen where someone uses hairspray, they use it on a glass bed. Is it okay to use it on a metal bed as well?<issue_comment>username_1: Do you mean bare metal or metal with some film on top? You can apply hair spray to bare metal, but you will have troubles cleaning it off. Solvents do not evaporate hair spray, they only turn it into thick sticky goo you will need to clean off. I recommend that you try glue stick or even beer (seriously) before hair spray. You should also know that *any* adhesive is required only when your printer has bed leveling issues. After I finally dealt with bed leveling, I print ABS, and even ABS/PC mix (nasty) without any adhesive, on a bare kapton film over a metal bed. I rub it with alcohol before printing. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I have been using a sort of a very strong hairspray called 3DLAC for about 2 years directly onto the aluminium heat bed of the Anet A8 printer I have. Basically, all those sprays contain copolymer constituents, PVA (PolyVinyl Alcohol), Vinyl or Acetate. These are also found in certain glue sticks or wood glues. For me this spray works perfectly! On day one I assembled the printer, the paper tape tore and I was too anxious to wait for new tape to arrive. This worked so well that I have not changed it for that printer. Cleaning is very easy as PVA or any of those constituents are solvable in water, so a moist cloth or paper towel over the plate is all to clean it. Furthermore, you do not require to spray before every print. To answer your question if you **should** use a PVA based spray like hairspray directly onto the metal build plate is a matter of preference, but you definitely **could** use it as I have been doing it for about 2 years. --- **To address the comments**: I spray the heat bed platform whilst it is attached to the printer. I do pull it forward and gently spray the bed or just the location where the print is going to be build. Note that you do not need to do that for every print. I recently did notice very little spray on the X guide rods (maybe I have been careless once or twice), but that has not been a problem for my Chinesium iGus ripoff plastic bearings. It is very easy to clean with a damp cloth. It also works great on the glass bed of my Ultimaker 3E, but I usually (unless when I'm lazy ;) ) remove the slate of glass before printing. You could consider shielding the rods with a piece of paper, but it has not been necessary for 2 years. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The adhesive that you use is determined by the type of filament that you are printing. For most types, PVA (White glue) will allow for adhesion to the build plate. Filaments like PETG will tear off the glue when it comes off the bed. PLA however does not. ABS requires ABS slurry, and Nylon sticks to PET film. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I have a home-brew printer with a 9.5 mm (3/8"( thick solid aluminum heated bed. The bed is bare, with no additional tape, plastic film, or glass. For PLA I use purple Elmers glue stick or Aqua Net hairspray directly on the aluminum. For ABS I use acetone/ABS solution. Yes, it is OK to use hairspray on an aluminum metal bed. Upvotes: 1

2017/03/11

<issue_start>username_0: I am wondering if anyone here knows of any 3D printers that work by assembling models from parts instead of extruding or setting material. The closest I have found is the [pixelstone](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtoqCrwr91bNH_hbPtBrprw) but it appears to only be a prototype and I haven't seen or heard of any progress on it in over a year. There is a similar house printer [fastbrick](http://fbr.com.au/) but it is also just a prototype. There is research papers on rapid prototyping with lego blocks and software for this ([brickify](https://all3dp.com/brickify-rapid-prototyping-lego/)), but these don't have machine assembly. And there are 3D printers that can do conductive filament in the model but none of these seem to do pick and place as well and they still need a human to add the electronics or to change the tool head. ([firepick](http://delta.firepick.org/)) So are there any 3D printers that work like pick and place machines and just stick blocks together?<issue_comment>username_1: I've prototyped a design that used beads similar to these <http://www.infostir.com/images/plastic-beads-350.jpg> on a rod with a heated tip and then you just press them off into the design. But it wasn't too strong and had some pretty specific requirements of the model. Labelled it a failure. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes and no ---------- **Yes**, there are machines, that assemble things from parts. For example, [SMT placement equipment & pick-and-place-machines](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMT_placement_equipment). Almost all electronics are made this way. In fact, a lot of items are made by using Pick-and-Place machines in the final assembly. On the other hand: **No**, there is no *3D-printer*, that works by *just* being a P&P machine: it simply is not inside the specifications of additive manufacturing to be *just* an assembly machine. That is an *assembly* or *pick and place* machine, no matter if they call it *printing*. It is not. #### combo machines? However, I have seen a recent (**2018**) [makerfaire video](https://youtu.be/jfopGYO0r-M?t=488) and [a talk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRkF-D0fEbQ) that was showing a prototype of an E3D toolhead swapper, which - in its idea - would allow to *combine* a 3D printer with a P&P machine. Their idea is to fully automate the manufacturing process, including adding non-printed parts with grabbers or the like. 2022 update ----------- Multi-Tool 3D printers based on the E3D-Toolchanger including a pick-and-place are in [small-scale](https://youtu.be/pBztvEJJGwA?list=TLPQMTIxMTIwMjKbAChud1cdqg) use in at least one fabrication shop in their prototyping stage. They also use conductive filaments in conjunction with their setup - but need to compensate for the considerable resistance of conductive filaments. Upvotes: 1

2017/03/11

<issue_start>username_0: I recently bought a 3d printer and right now i am printing a normal cube just to try it out. However I was wondering, when it has the last part left of the printing where it needs to create the roof, how will the filament stay there and not just fall down as there is nothing underneath? Will I need to check the "Support" function in the print-settings before hand or is there something else i need to do? Thanks a lot for the help/tips!<issue_comment>username_1: If you are printing a solid cube with infill, then the infill will support the "roof". If you are printing a hollow cube, then indeed, you should enable "support" to print a support structure under any overhangs. Depending on the angle, you may not need supports. Generally, FDM printers can print overhanging structures up to 45 degrees without the need for supports. The steeper (i.e. further from parallel with the print bed) the angle, the better the result. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Sometimes a "roof" can be accomplished using the bridging feature of the printer. Depending on your slicer and on your printer's capabilities, the filament can extend from one edge of a structure to another without using support. The slicer will "recognize" the endpoints and the distance between and speed up the travel and possibly increase the fan cooling, allowing minimal sag between points. There are resources available on many model sites to print bridging test pieces to help determine the limits of your printer. Expect some sag on the first layer, with a reduction for each successive layer. If you have, for example, five layers for the top faces, the last of the five may cover the sag of the previous ones. Support is commonly used when there is no opposing endpoint to handle the bridging or when the distance exceeds the capabilities of the printer. An example of a bridging test piece can be found on [Thingiverse](http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:476845), although there are many to be found with a simple search. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/BhWlz.jpg) Upvotes: 2

2017/03/12

<issue_start>username_0: I'm looking for a post processing method for increasing the functional strength of a 3d printed part originally made by FDM. I've tried printing my part with solid infill but the layer separation is still the primary failure point. I'm looking for a way to get something closer to a cast or injection molded part. Obviously less strength but there is a pretty big gap in material properties. The only method I've thought of that might work is drilling a small hole, or series of holes in my part to inject an epoxy into the part. Haven't tried it. I'm open to any possible ideas or advice if someone has tried something like this. Not sure if this is necessarily the best place but thought it's a good place to start.<issue_comment>username_1: Layer separation will always be the primary failure point of FDM. So your best action would be to design parts in such a way that forces are applied across the Z axis, not along it. If layer bonding is too weak, this is a problem that should be solved during printing. Possible reasons are: * Nozzle temperature too low * Filament contains moisture from the air * Filament covered with dust * Inappropriate ratio of nozzle diameter/layer height. We usually use 2 (0.4 nozzle for 0.2 layer) while theory suggests it should be more than 3. * Inappropriate cooling of part during printing, drafts. If all this things are set right, no post-process treatment will improve the part. If not, you could reduce inner tensions by blasting the part with hot air gun, but it is better to solve the problem, not the consequences. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Recognizing that the posting party feels that FDM constructed parts are of insufficient strength for his purpose and allowing for proper layer bonding, one can understand that the model can be perfectly constructed and not reach the strength objective. Filling a model with an epoxy or a casting resin will provide additional strength. Testing smaller, non-critical models is recommended to determine the level of increase. The design has to be re-engineered to provide for resin/epoxy flow within the model. Some epoxy and resin formulations generate heat when curing and may soften the model. The solution in such cases is to mix and pour small amounts, allowing for a pause between pours. An alternative to filling a model is to reduce the perimeter (if applicable) and apply a reinforcing layer. I've constructed satisfactorily printed models with insufficient strength for my purposes, but then applied fiberglass cloth and epoxy resin to the outside. A single layer provided the necessary strength in my case. One could apply sufficient layers to provide all the necessary strength, effectively turning the model into a positive mold. This is commonly done with amateur-built aircraft of the Burt Rutan design style. More recently, an article appeared on the internet of a model being printed with wash-away support material only, covered in carbon fiber. The wash-away was washed away and the wing structure became the product. For your application, it may not be necessary or practical to remove the inner model. Just as with the injection concept, one must re-engineer the model to allow for this type of reinforcement. Edges will have to be radiused or the sharp termination of reinforcement layer will become a weak point. Tight inside angles will have a similar problem. Fiberglass cloth comes in various weights, measured in ounces per square foot (US). The lighter cloth is more capable of "turning corners" and fitting into tight angles. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]

2017/03/12

<issue_start>username_0: Is there any way to test what kind your filament is? There are no labels on the spools and I don't know whether they are ABS or PLA. I got the plastic with the printer, which is no longer sold (Solidoodle 2). Since I bought it on eBay that is probably why it has unprofessional filament. The plastic filament came with the printer which is now off sale (Solidoodle v2). I set my extruder to 210 °C and bed to 50 °C and it printed fine (with tons of hairspray and painters tape). I figured out where I got it. I got it from Solidoodle (who have gone out of business) when I bought the Solidoodle 2 right after it came out. I bought PLA and ABS so it has to be one of the two. Any other ways without having to burn and smell plastic? I just have the roll with no numbers, works or anything on it. And how to I smell without breathing in the fumes?<issue_comment>username_1: [Using The Burn Test to Identify Plastic Materials](http://www.boedeker.com/burntest.htm) is one way. From the link: > > To initially determine whether a material is thermoplastic (meltable) > or thermoset (non-meltable) type, heat a metal or glass stirring rod > until it glows red or orange (to about 500°F / 260°C) and press it > against the sample. If the sample softens, the material is a > thermoplastic; if it does not, it's probably a thermoset. > > > Next, hold the sample to the edge of a flame until it ignites. If no > flame is produced quickly, hold the sample in the flame for about 10 > seconds. If the material burns, note the color of the flame, the > nature of the smoke, the presence of soot in the air and whether, > while burning, the sample drips. > > > Next, extinguish the flame and cautiously smell the fumes. To identify > the odor, samples of known plastic samples for comparison can be most > helpful. Finally, check your observations against the known > characteristics of each plastic as shown in the table below. Once you > have made a tentative identification, it is usually desirable to > repeat the flame test once or twice to confirm the results of the > original identification. Remember that additives may affect results. > For example: flame retardants can mask the polymer material's normal > flame & smoke burning characteristics. > > > [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/IDFnK.jpg) > > > However, remember ABS and PLA aren't the only types of filament. ABS and PLA have different melting points and smell different when melting. Maybe try melting little bits on a soldering iron or stove top. The smell could give it away. Just don't breathe in the fumes, it can be toxic, also molten plastic particles in lungs aren't great either. I'd recommend contacting the supplier. No markings complicates matters. Not very professional of the supplier. Smelling without breathing in fumes, just don't put your face directly over the fumes, just hold it away from your face and sniff sniff the air. if the smoke curls are going into your nose you are doing it wrong. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: ABS dissolves in acetone, you could try clipping a small section and leave it in some acetone for a few minutes and if it begins to dissolve it's safe to assume that it's ABS, if not then you'll know that it's not. This won't confirm that it is PLA, only whether it's ABS or not. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I can identify filament type by smell of it when it is hot. Touch it with solder or smth. * PLA emits a sweet smell resembling the burnt sugar. * ABS smells of chemicals. * PVC smells of chemicals too, but this smell is very acrid and makes you sneeze. PVC is toxic to burn and to print! * PC has a very peculiar smell. If you bottle that smell into air freshener and call it "flower meadow" it will work. * PET You know this smell. You experience it every time you unbox new gadgets. * HDPE and PP smell of church. Of hot candles. They are not easy to separate, but an experienced person can do it by sound and feeling of snapping filament. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I know this question is old, but the existing answers are all overly general relative to the question. If someone is in OP's same sitution, the "prints at 210/50" data point pretty much guarantees it's PLA. No subjective "smell tests" or playing with fire needed. The comments indicated some doubt that it's PLA due to lack of "sweet" odor, but PLA has very little odor at all, and whether you'd describe it as "sweet" probably varies by individual. Aside from "PLA" (usually blends of PLA of smallish amounts of proprietary ingredients), there's virtually nothing on the filament market that prints at these temperatures, especially not without adhesion and warping problems. TPU/TPE can also print at these temperatures, but you'd usually know if that's what you had just from the flexibility. These properties of PLA are largely why PLA is so popular. Upvotes: 2

2017/03/12

<issue_start>username_0: I have an stl with multiple parts that I want to split up. Cura 15 had an option to "split object into parts" but I can't find that in cura 2.4. Did it get removed?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think this feature was implemented at all with Cura v2.x. As the developers say on the v2.1 release, "Cura has been completely reengineered". Finding proper changelog documentation appears to be pretty hard because they have not posted any actual changelogs except the "user friendly viewable" changelogs which only list additions of new features but don't display what everything they changed between each version of their application. Here is the most complete changelog I could find. I do not see any mention of this feature. <https://ultimaker.com/en/products/cura-software/release-notes> Going through the Cura 2 manual or the Cura 2.1 FAQ, also does not mention this feature. <https://ultimaker.com/en/resources/20406-installation-cura-2-1> Furthermore, searching around for version 2 "split objects" lead to forum posts of people suggesting to use some other software to achieve this specific task. If you decide to go this route, I recommend Meshmixer from Autodesk to manipulate your models and then export to STL and import them to Cura either as a whole new position set up or separate model files where you can change them there as you need to (meshmixer allows for object repositioning around a defined build plate so you can just import the whole assembly into cura and then print). It might also be worth to put in a feature request on the UM forums. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think they removed it because it was inefficient (pretty slow). Still, I just started 3D printing and was a bit disappointed a seemingly easy task needed an other software (Meshmixer) to be achieved. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: You can split STL files in Cura 2.4 Just open your STL file in Cura and right click it. Select "Split object into parts" Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: Nope, not in my version 2.4+ Seems like something so useful and silly to have to get yet another program to make it work. Like that is somehow faster? I have no problem with slow. Can't believe it would be slower than hopping into another program, opening file, dividing file, saving stl file, then reloading into Cura again... Cura slicing it would need to be awfully slow for that to be faster. Upvotes: -1

2017/03/13

<issue_start>username_0: I know this is still gray territory and it is asked so many times within the 3D printing and maker community but I'm curious about the limits of 3D models and were it touches on Free Use and infringement. I'm not trying to push the envelope, I just want to be clear on the matter. Is it legal if a design is rendered in a CAD program of a copyrighted material for **no** purpose of using, distributing, creating, mixing, internalizing, re-licensing under GPL/CC, or any unauthorized use outlined by the owner of the original work? For instance, if someone is demonstrating the abilities of a particular CAD and makes a mock-up of Mickey Mouse just to show the limits of said CAD and the STL/OBJ isn't released or distributed and a letter of intent is given along with the demonstration regarding the original work (in this case, Mickey), is that infringement? In this example, no loss of revenue or sales will affect the original owner, no claims of ownership is implied or stated, and no physical model will be created. While considering all of this, I figured that it wasn't very much different than if an artist sat down and drew a picture of Mickey Mouse. As long as the picture isn't sold, distributed, or released, in my mind, that is the same thing as a 3D render. To further the details of the 3D model, the render would be made from scratch and not imported, copied, or reverse engineered from any other work. Bottom line, it will be a likeness that is created but it will be as close to the real thing as possible to demonstrate capabilities of a particular program (such as organic shapes, stitching, grouping, layering, or any other facet and characterization of 3D modeling). I already understand that it is recommended to err on the side of caution and steer clear of things like this but it is more of a curiosity than a request for legal advice regarding a specific case. Can this be covered under Fair Use? Since there is nothing to be made from creating the render, it isn't released or distributed to others, isn't re-licensed, and no ownership is implied/credit to the original owner is given, is this Free Use or copyright infringement?<issue_comment>username_1: Whether or not you sell, distribute, release, license, profit from, claim ownership, etc... of something does not matter for copyright law. Copyright prohibits the very act of well, *copying*. Specifically, if a work is protected by copyright, you can't (among other things) > > * make adaptations and arrangements of the work > * make reproductions in any manner or form > > > without permission (or a license) from the copyright holder. Just because you do something privately, don't distribute or profit from it, does not make you exempt from this rule. In some cases though, a fair use exception may apply. In the United States, uses that may be (but not necessarily are) fair are limited to: > > criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research > > > Note that in Europe, teaching is usually not considered fair use. So no, it would not in general be permitted to make a 3D model of a copyrighted work, even if you don't plan to do any of the things you listed with it. An artist would not be allowed to draw the picture of Mickey Mouse as you describe either. However, in the United States, your use could be construed as fair use for educational purposes. However, considering that you could equally as well have used some non-copyrighted work to demonstrate the limits of CAD (there's nothing specific to Mickey Mouse that makes him more suitable than any other model) I would recommend against this. An important argument in fair use is usually that there is no other option but to use the copyrighted work (e.g. in a class discussing pop music you have no option but to use excerpts of copyrighted lyrics). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: First, copyright laws are complex and depend heavily on the specific details. IMO, your question is really too broad to answer. An interesting example of how details and interpretation affect whether something is a violation or not is [Kienitz v Sconnie Nation](http://fairuse.stanford.edu/2014/12/22/much-photo-need-alter-avoid-copyright-infringement-hint-cheshire-cat/). In this case a copyrighted photo was clearly copied, modified, and used to make a t-shirt that was sold; but, it was not deemed a copyright violation. On the surface it seems like a violation; but, the court ruled it was not a copyright violation because of the specific details of the case. Using something as a starting point for a unique creative work that is clearly your own creation is not copying. I am sure you can tell the difference. Second, in your description you mention "Free Use". If the owner has granted "Free Use" of their product; but, they are still wanting to declare the item copyrighted, I would hope that they have granted that "Free Use" under a defined agreement. In that case, it would seem likely that the creator may just be trying to protect his design from being plagiarized and/or sold/used in a way that is against his intent. If you have a way to contact the owner, why not just contact them and ask their permission for what you want to do. If they have put it out for public use, they would probably be excited to have other people see their creation. Just make sure they gets the credit for the design. If it is a creation they are intending to protect (like Disney does with Mickey Mouse); then, the answer will be an unequivocal no. Note that one weird exception is that Disney has granted use rights for Donald Duck to the University of Oregon "Ducks". Finally, you state that that your intent is "for no purpose of using, distributing, creating, mixing, ..." and you list almost every way of making it public. If your intent is for what you make/copy to never make it into the public domain; then, how will your question ever be anything other than hypothetical? I know that there is presently no "private use" exclusion for copyrighted material. It isn't legal to copy someone's DVD for you to watch privately; but, in reality, no one gets prosecuted for a single private instance. It is abuse that gets prosecuted. In what you intend, it would seem that you be best suited to seek out first what would be the "right" thing to do rather than just focusing on what would be "legal". If you are concerned what you want to do may be wrong and/or illegal, it is probably best to not do it. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: > > Can a 3D model of a copyrighted work be rendered legally without > infringement? > > > The answer is yes, but only if you have the copyright holder's permission. Copyright covers intellectual property; the intangible. Patent covers material things; things you can build or invent. Trademark covers a logo, stamp, flag or other means by which an entity can be distinguished from others. If an artist draws mickey mouse because the design of that character is also use as the trademark of a corporation that could be a trademark violation. If you produce a physical form of a 3d model with a 3d printer, the process leaves marks on the output that would make is visually dissimilar to the original. However if it functions like the original was intended, then you could have a patent violation (as opposed to copyright). In short creating a "sculpture" of from a copyrighted work would be infringing, just as taking a photo of a sculpture would be infringing. <http://cjam.info/en/copyright-and-taking-pictures-of-sculptures-2/> Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Well I think it's a good question, but like what was already stated this question is extremely broad. I am however curious as well. If I take what has already been said literally and apply it to a 3D model of a palm tree, for example. From what y'all are saying, everyone that has ever made a 3D model after the first person in history made one is now in violation of copyright infringement... Not sure how that makes sense but I am going by what was said in the answers. Because if something is copyrighted and you make something that is similar in nature then I take it all foliage made in a 3D modelling program must be in violation of copyright infringement. Unless y'all are referring to unique cases where someone was to make a unique piece of art and then someone else was to come along and reproduce it? Tom said above that these would be copyright violations: > > make adaptations and arrangements of the work > > > make reproductions in any manner or form > > > Well, reproducing a palm tree someone else has made or a blade of grass would then technically be a copyright violation, since someone has claimed a copyright on it and sold it in landscape packages for example. Upvotes: 0

2017/03/14

<issue_start>username_0: I have an STL file and I would like to know how many grams would this print consume. Is there a software so I can get it or an online link that can say me that?<issue_comment>username_1: Some slicing programs will give this information. Here is the first comment at the end of the print, which gives volume and length of material used, from gcode generated by [Slic3r](http://slic3r.org): ``` ; filament used = 388.6mm (0.9cm3) ``` According to [ToyBuilder Labs](https://www.toybuilderlabs.com/blogs/news/13053117-filament-volume-and-length), ABS is 1.04 g/cm3, so 0.9 \* 1.04 = **0.936**, or just under one gram. In the G-code file produced by the slicer, search for "filament" or "M30" - it's right after the M30. You might need to use the verbose G-code option. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You can not tell this by looking at the STL file alone, because how much material will be used depends on the print settings (obviously, printing at 100% infill will consume much more material than 10%). The best way to check the material usage is to load the model into a slicer and slice it using your preferred settings. Most slicers will report the projected material usage, often in grams but sometimes in meters of filament (but the two figures are easily converted between each other if you know the density and diameter of your material). Here is an example in the Cura slicer: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/e23iM.png) Simplify3D (after you click "prepare to print!") also shows you the projected print time and material usage and even the cost of the material (if you have previously entered the material cost per kilogram): [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pjcxO.png) Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: This is a link I found that analyzes your G-code ( filament usage, time, etc.): [gCodeViewer](http://gcode.ws/) From the description (emphasis is mine): > > * Analyze GCode > + Print time, ***amount of plastic used***, layer height, etc. for whole file and for single layer > > > Here is a screenshot: > > [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pDsuL.png "Screenshot") > > > Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: [Slic3r](http://slic3r.org/) will calculate the weight after you have exported the G-Code. Normally, you'll only see the "Info" box. But after saving as G-Code, there's a "Sliced Info" which mentions the weight according to the settings you made (filament type and infill). That's how it looks like: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/cnZRE.png) Upvotes: 2

2017/03/16

<issue_start>username_0: I am wanting to buy a 3D printer to add to my shop. I am an engineer and enjoy making/building things so the kit idea sounds fun and economical. I see Tronxy has two different styles for their larger printers: * P802 (reprap frame) style * X3 (metal frame) style. As far as I can see, both printers have the same basic resolution, accuracy, and material specs. 1. What are the advantages/disadvantages/differences between the P802 and X3? 2. How important is auto-leveling?<issue_comment>username_1: Some slicing programs will give this information. Here is the first comment at the end of the print, which gives volume and length of material used, from gcode generated by [Slic3r](http://slic3r.org): ``` ; filament used = 388.6mm (0.9cm3) ``` According to [ToyBuilder Labs](https://www.toybuilderlabs.com/blogs/news/13053117-filament-volume-and-length), ABS is 1.04 g/cm3, so 0.9 \* 1.04 = **0.936**, or just under one gram. In the G-code file produced by the slicer, search for "filament" or "M30" - it's right after the M30. You might need to use the verbose G-code option. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You can not tell this by looking at the STL file alone, because how much material will be used depends on the print settings (obviously, printing at 100% infill will consume much more material than 10%). The best way to check the material usage is to load the model into a slicer and slice it using your preferred settings. Most slicers will report the projected material usage, often in grams but sometimes in meters of filament (but the two figures are easily converted between each other if you know the density and diameter of your material). Here is an example in the Cura slicer: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/e23iM.png) Simplify3D (after you click "prepare to print!") also shows you the projected print time and material usage and even the cost of the material (if you have previously entered the material cost per kilogram): [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pjcxO.png) Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: This is a link I found that analyzes your G-code ( filament usage, time, etc.): [gCodeViewer](http://gcode.ws/) From the description (emphasis is mine): > > * Analyze GCode > + Print time, ***amount of plastic used***, layer height, etc. for whole file and for single layer > > > Here is a screenshot: > > [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pDsuL.png "Screenshot") > > > Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: [Slic3r](http://slic3r.org/) will calculate the weight after you have exported the G-Code. Normally, you'll only see the "Info" box. But after saving as G-Code, there's a "Sliced Info" which mentions the weight according to the settings you made (filament type and infill). That's how it looks like: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/cnZRE.png) Upvotes: 2

2017/03/17

<issue_start>username_0: I am about to purchase a TronXY X3 or P802; but, my PC is running Windows 10. The spec sheet for the printers does not list anything above Windows 7. Is anyone using either of these printers with Windows 10?<issue_comment>username_1: Since the printer supports using an SD card, you don't *need* to connect it directly to a PC. Serial over USB has been broken in the past in various Win10 builds, I've not tried it recently and I've not tried connecting my A8 to my PC recently either. If you need to use USB, and can't make it work with Windows, there is always the option of using a Raspberry Pi single-board computer (which you can then connect to by VNC from your PC). Depending on the software you want to use, this might resolve any remaining issues you have. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Typically, (hobbyist level, FDM) 3D printers do not require dedicated drivers. They simply show up as a serial port (COMx), and you just need drivers for the USB-to-Serial chip used in the printer's electronics. This is usually an FTDI device, an AtMega32u or CH340. Drivers for those are readily available (and are usually even downloaded automatically through windows update). The P802 appears to use a variant of the Melzi board, with an ATmega1284p (the less-powerful cousin of the 2560 found in most printers) as the main processor and it claims to have an (FTDI) FT232RL serial converter (I could not find any information on the X3). You should be aware of this, as there are many fake FTDI chips on the market, and [FTDI has been known to "patch" their drivers to break the clones](http://hackaday.com/2016/02/01/ftdi-drivers-break-fake-chips-again/). However, this problem is not specific to Windows 10. You can pretty much count on any 3D printer that works in Windows 7 working in Windows 10. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Here's a tidbit that might be helpful to people. * 3D Printer: Tronxy X1 * OS: Windows 10 (PC) * SW: [Repetier-Host](https://www.repetier.com/) v2.0.5 The TronXY X1 boots at 115200 baud (you can change it in Configuration, but each power on it will reset to 115200). In Repetier Printer Settings I set the baud rate to match at 115200. My PC automatically recognized the USB device as USB-SERIAL CH340(`COM5`). But... I had to go into my PC's Devices and Printers, right-click the USB-SERIAL icon, go into Properties->Hardware->Port Settings: change Bits per Second from 9600 to 115200. All good now. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: For Windows 10 driver, go directly to the Microsoft update catalogue. <https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Search.aspx?q=USB%5CVID_1A86%26PID_7523> Download the .cab file, extract the contents. Using Device Manager update the driver for the partially installed device. After the update TronXY-2 now appears as a COM port. Upvotes: 1

2017/03/17

<issue_start>username_0: Laboratory centrifuges have buckets that hold the sample tubes in inserts. The buckets are the black things on the rotor in the upper left corner holding the bottles. Examples of inserts are shown below (the colorful containers with slots for tubes). These fit into the buckets and I'd like to print them since these are expensive. Is it safe to 3d print these using a makerbot given the g-forces these rotor inserts will be subjected to (potentially 150g's under our settings), or will the inserts deform and unbalance the rotors under the stress? Additionally, is the precision of the printing good enough that the inserts can be expected to be well-balanced (the correct weight, with a symetric design having even weight distribution)? We have a basic makerbot that makes little plastic robots. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VVFZg.png)<issue_comment>username_1: It's difficult to determine if the buckets are fully enclosed, but I suspect that they are. The enclosure into which the inserts are placed will provide some structural support. 3D printed objects have relatively low torsion strength, but a reasonable compression strength, especially with high infill levels. One could consider that the item placed into the insert will transmit force to the bucket, but likely not compress to the point of destruction. Allowing also that the forces on a swinging bucket centrifuge are "downward" or when in use, "outward," the primary location of force will be the bottom of the insert you create. It appears that the main function of the insert is to keep the tubes separated, rather than to keep them supported. Create your inserts, but leave an open bottom. Attach a suitably strong panel to the bottom of your created model with epoxy. Another thing to consider in this project is the mode of failure. What can go wrong? The tubes in the insert should not explode, but if they do, is it merely cleaning up that follows? I suppose one aspect of the inserts is to keep the tube walls in column, to keep all forces linear to the tube cylinder, rather than out of line. It's easy to keep pennies in a stack under pressure, but don't push on them edgewise. You can and should perform a test on a 3D printed insert. Make one that is relatively flimsy, say a six-tube unit and spin it without tubes in place. Test it prior to the spin for tube fit, then test it after the spin. If there is deformation, you would not be able to insert the tubes after the spin. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The primary printer I use is a makerbot, and my gut is saying no. 150G's of loading even in the XY axis seems pretty excessive for a part made on a Makerbot. Also, given that this is a rotational, the weight and balance will need to be held to a pretty high tolerance otherwise you'll end up having an off-balance centrifuge which could damage a pretty expensive piece of equipment. Admittedly I haven't checked the reliability for weight and balance of a part I've made for the loading condition you'd be going through but I'd be pretty hesitant about trying to run any FDM printed part under a loading case like that Makerbot or a high end printer given the speeds you'll be at. If it's your only option though, I'd suggest running your centrifuge at a very low speed first with the part in it and check it to see if you're picking up any transient vibration from it. Increasing the speed as you feel comfortable. My gut says that it'll fail before getting up to full speed from out of balance CofG of the part and the centrifuge starting to shake. Sounds terrifyingly fun to try though. IF you do try and run it,c an you post what happens? I'd be very interested in hearing the results. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: It is my understanding that you are looking to print the insert not the gimble bucket. The gimble bucket portion would be difficult and have high risk. Fdm 3d printing looks like it would be a good solution for the inserts. 3D prints have a high strength-to-weight ratio especially in compression and will easily hold their weight and 150g. If the insert is properly drawn in cad with good tolerances the wall and floor of the gimbal bucket will help support the insert. You can experiment with infills but i am sure anything upwards of 30% will do well. In my experience with printing on a reprap fdm printer, the same gcode and same fillament yeilds exactly the same weights. If you switch fillament types, have some extruder hangups, or modify the gcode and have some small variation; just hit the top of the heavy ones with a belt sander till they all measure the same. Make sure to not sand the bottom because the distance of the sample to the bottom of the gimble bucket needs to be consistent. Upvotes: 2

2017/03/19

<issue_start>username_0: Is there a commercially available fume and nano particle extractor for a 3D printer, like the Ultimaker3 extended? I'm looking for a safe solution, to use at home, for around $800.<issue_comment>username_1: To try to answer your question, I found these enclosures on [3DPrintClean](https://www.3dprintclean.com/store-1/), by browsing the Ultimaker forum. I'm not sure it fits your needs since you did not give any details about which Ultimaker you have, nor the amount of money you are willing to spend. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: At the current moment, commercial fume extractors are quite rare in the market, but there are companies releasing some this year (like the [3DKreator's SYNE system](http://3dkreator.com/en/blog/warning-typical-desktop-3d-printer-emits-hazardous-particles-and-compounds-during-3d-printing-are-we-in-trouble)). However all commercial forms of it are quite expensive. What I would do would be using an active carbon filter with a fan. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Following on from <NAME>'s [answer](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/3771/commercially-available-3d-printer-fume-and-ufp-extractor#answer-3977), to give a concrete example of a DIY filter, which uses active carbon, see [ABS 3d Printer Nanoparticle and Chemical Exhaust Air Filter](https://web.archive.org/web/20200514160332/http://www.3dprintfilemarket.com/140629194058.html): > > ###Description > Enclose your 3d printer and use this exhaust air filter along with a recirculating air filter to eliminate nanoparticles and chemical fumes. 95 to 99.5% of partilces up to 0.1 micron in size are filtered before air is exhausted into your 3d printing room. This is 3 times better than HEPA filtration. Chemical fumes such as phenols, hydrogen bromide, hydrogen cyanide, and styrene are also filtered out. The amount of chemicals filtered out depends on the amount of carbon filtration media you put into the unit and the strength of the fan you install on the unit. If you are using this for business purposes, you'll have to experiment a bit to have it pass inspection. If you are using it for personal purposes, know that the human nose is extremely sensitive. People who have the gene for hydrogen cyanide detection can smell it down to a concentration of 2 to 10 ppm. Suffice it to say, that if you can smell no evil, you are probably not experiencing evil. This has totally cleared my 3d printing room of nasty fumes. I invite you to try it out for yourself as the cost is very low since I've designed it to use surgical masks and aquarium activated carbon filtration media, which is very affordable. You should change the filtration media and surgical mask every month or 50 hours of printing, whichever comes first. I offer no warranty of any kind as this is an experimental device. > > > This filter is mentioned in [tbm0115's answer](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/513/what-are-the-best-air-filtration-options-for-enclosures#answer-539) to [What are the best air filtration options for enclosures?](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/513/what-are-the-best-air-filtration-options-for-enclosures) Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Dust collectors, fume extractors, and mist collectors for other industrial processes like welding, machining, and woodworking start at a few thousand dollars. The Allerair AirMedic Pro 6 (formerly 6000 series) is available from as low as $600. It is marketed in some places as an air purifier but others as a general purpose air filter. In any case it uses activated carbon and a HEPA filter. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: [Matterhackers](https://www.matterhackers.com/s/store?q=Print%20pro%20bofa) and [Printedsolid](https://www.printedsolid.com/collections/vendors?q=BOFA) both carry the BoFa Print Pro filters. The Print Pro 3 has the benefit of recirculating the filtered air so that it doesn’t drop the enclosure temperature as much. Printed solid has it for \$899 currently. The filters are about \$300 to replace the prefilter and the combined Hepa/carbon filter. username_3's answer gives a DIY solution that seems like a good option. Surgical masks won’t have a very high filter capacity though. None of the other answers give a commercial filter solution that is available without also buying an enclosure. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: There are two main options you could consider. The first being a diy filter and the second being a commercially available fume extractor. --- **Option 1** You could make a filter yourself. On Thingiverse, there are many ideas that you could implement. A few examples are these : <https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1992079> <https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2285882> <https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2105113> --- **Option 2** Buy a commercially available fume filter. An example that would be well below your budget ($178) would be the Zimpure (<https://www.zimple3d.com/zimpure/>). This is a device that will vacuum the fumes right by the nozzle and filter them. Additionally, you could get this filter from Matterhackers : [MatterHackers](https://www.matterhackers.com/store/l/3d-printpro-2-fume-extractor/sk/M148KJM4?rcode=GAT9HR&gclid=CjwKCAjw27jnBRBuEiwAdjQXDAJL0tK7g4mAGvHf1ThJigJ80j920qelXJXtdOLcufKXE2Dkd2ZfUxoCzdsQAvD_BwE). This could be an option if you are willing to go a little bit above your budget. If you would rather have a filter for 30 bucks, you can also look at this filter that attaches to your enclosure : <https://www.3dupfitters.com/products/fan-and-charcoal-air-filter>. Lastly, if you wanted to go all out, you could also get this enclosure : <https://www.3dprintclean.com/>. --- I hope any of these solutions named might be beneficial to you :). For even more options, visit this post : [What air filtration options exist for enclosures?](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/513/what-air-filtration-options-exist-for-enclosures) Upvotes: 0

2017/03/22

<issue_start>username_0: My printer just stopped working. It seems like it's working perfectly, but it gives me an error whenever I move the Z-Axis (Error: Printer set into dry run mode until restart) then, the bed temperature appears to be at 293ºC when it's actually at 95ºC. I suspect that the bed wires short-circuited since they got stuck behind the bed when the printer was moving Y-Axis to home (the wires blocked the movement). Since then, the error appeared. I suspect that the controller board could have been harmed by the supposed short-circuit, but despite the error, I can move perfectly any axis; I can heat the bed and the extruder; I can extrude filament; it is just the error which doesn't let me print. **Printer:** Anet A8 Desktop 3D Printer Prusa i3 **Software:** MatterHackers: MatterControl 1.7 **Update:** The bed temperature is stuck at ~95ºC, sometimes ~250ºC, even if I disconnect the sensor wires and restart the printer, so apparently, it's failing to read the bed temperature.<issue_comment>username_1: To try to answer your question, I found these enclosures on [3DPrintClean](https://www.3dprintclean.com/store-1/), by browsing the Ultimaker forum. I'm not sure it fits your needs since you did not give any details about which Ultimaker you have, nor the amount of money you are willing to spend. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: At the current moment, commercial fume extractors are quite rare in the market, but there are companies releasing some this year (like the [3DKreator's SYNE system](http://3dkreator.com/en/blog/warning-typical-desktop-3d-printer-emits-hazardous-particles-and-compounds-during-3d-printing-are-we-in-trouble)). However all commercial forms of it are quite expensive. What I would do would be using an active carbon filter with a fan. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Following on from <NAME>'s [answer](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/3771/commercially-available-3d-printer-fume-and-ufp-extractor#answer-3977), to give a concrete example of a DIY filter, which uses active carbon, see [ABS 3d Printer Nanoparticle and Chemical Exhaust Air Filter](https://web.archive.org/web/20200514160332/http://www.3dprintfilemarket.com/140629194058.html): > > ###Description > Enclose your 3d printer and use this exhaust air filter along with a recirculating air filter to eliminate nanoparticles and chemical fumes. 95 to 99.5% of partilces up to 0.1 micron in size are filtered before air is exhausted into your 3d printing room. This is 3 times better than HEPA filtration. Chemical fumes such as phenols, hydrogen bromide, hydrogen cyanide, and styrene are also filtered out. The amount of chemicals filtered out depends on the amount of carbon filtration media you put into the unit and the strength of the fan you install on the unit. If you are using this for business purposes, you'll have to experiment a bit to have it pass inspection. If you are using it for personal purposes, know that the human nose is extremely sensitive. People who have the gene for hydrogen cyanide detection can smell it down to a concentration of 2 to 10 ppm. Suffice it to say, that if you can smell no evil, you are probably not experiencing evil. This has totally cleared my 3d printing room of nasty fumes. I invite you to try it out for yourself as the cost is very low since I've designed it to use surgical masks and aquarium activated carbon filtration media, which is very affordable. You should change the filtration media and surgical mask every month or 50 hours of printing, whichever comes first. I offer no warranty of any kind as this is an experimental device. > > > This filter is mentioned in [tbm0115's answer](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/513/what-are-the-best-air-filtration-options-for-enclosures#answer-539) to [What are the best air filtration options for enclosures?](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/513/what-are-the-best-air-filtration-options-for-enclosures) Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Dust collectors, fume extractors, and mist collectors for other industrial processes like welding, machining, and woodworking start at a few thousand dollars. The Allerair AirMedic Pro 6 (formerly 6000 series) is available from as low as $600. It is marketed in some places as an air purifier but others as a general purpose air filter. In any case it uses activated carbon and a HEPA filter. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: [Matterhackers](https://www.matterhackers.com/s/store?q=Print%20pro%20bofa) and [Printedsolid](https://www.printedsolid.com/collections/vendors?q=BOFA) both carry the BoFa Print Pro filters. The Print Pro 3 has the benefit of recirculating the filtered air so that it doesn’t drop the enclosure temperature as much. Printed solid has it for \$899 currently. The filters are about \$300 to replace the prefilter and the combined Hepa/carbon filter. username_3's answer gives a DIY solution that seems like a good option. Surgical masks won’t have a very high filter capacity though. None of the other answers give a commercial filter solution that is available without also buying an enclosure. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: There are two main options you could consider. The first being a diy filter and the second being a commercially available fume extractor. --- **Option 1** You could make a filter yourself. On Thingiverse, there are many ideas that you could implement. A few examples are these : <https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1992079> <https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2285882> <https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2105113> --- **Option 2** Buy a commercially available fume filter. An example that would be well below your budget ($178) would be the Zimpure (<https://www.zimple3d.com/zimpure/>). This is a device that will vacuum the fumes right by the nozzle and filter them. Additionally, you could get this filter from Matterhackers : [MatterHackers](https://www.matterhackers.com/store/l/3d-printpro-2-fume-extractor/sk/M148KJM4?rcode=GAT9HR&gclid=CjwKCAjw27jnBRBuEiwAdjQXDAJL0tK7g4mAGvHf1ThJigJ80j920qelXJXtdOLcufKXE2Dkd2ZfUxoCzdsQAvD_BwE). This could be an option if you are willing to go a little bit above your budget. If you would rather have a filter for 30 bucks, you can also look at this filter that attaches to your enclosure : <https://www.3dupfitters.com/products/fan-and-charcoal-air-filter>. Lastly, if you wanted to go all out, you could also get this enclosure : <https://www.3dprintclean.com/>. --- I hope any of these solutions named might be beneficial to you :). For even more options, visit this post : [What air filtration options exist for enclosures?](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/513/what-air-filtration-options-exist-for-enclosures) Upvotes: 0

2017/03/24

<issue_start>username_0: I'm having a similar issue to [this one](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/1207/how-to-remove-a-pla-print-stack-to-a-buildtak-sheet): I have retrofitted my printer with a BuildTak sticker. I'm printing PLA at 60°C bed temperature - currently using a 0.3 mm nozzle, but I had similar issues with the 0.4mm nozzle before. If I bring the nozzle close enough to the print surface to get a reasonable first layer, I need excessive force to remove the parts afterwards - so much force that I already have damaged the BuildTak in one or two places. If I lower the bed (the physical bed using the screws, not the temperature!) so that the parts come off easier, the first layer is very uneven and it takes 5-6 layers until the layers start to stack onto one another the way they are supposed to. What can I do to influence the adhesion of the printed parts to the BuildTak surface - especially to lower it in a controlled manner without changing the nozzle height?<issue_comment>username_1: Try printing with the heated printbed off. Heat makes the pla stick more to buildtak Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: When I was using BuildTac on a Monoprice Select Mini, I had to print with a hot bed (50 C or so) and then wait until it was cooled before attempting to remove the parts. I used [a set of very thin removal tools](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/B073TRYH1G) and a lot of patience to remove my parts. I would be careful to push only parallel to the BuildTac with one of the sharper tools. Once I was under the part, I could usually slide the tool under the part like a knife to separate the part from the BuildTac. I was only using BuildTac on that machine because I damaged it's original yellow surface when I removed my first Benchy from that machine. Since then the BuildTac has lasted for months. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: These are more like backups for when the part gets stuck, but you could try spraying that part where it meets the bed with liquid computer duster. The shrinkage from cooling usually helps to release the part from the bed. You could also try heating the bed very hot to save the bed at the expense of the part. Upvotes: 0

2017/03/24

<issue_start>username_0: I've been 3D printing as a hobby for a couple of years now, and have always heard how 3D printing is great for prototyping, but once you get beyond 10 or 20 pieces it's just not cost competitive with other technologies. I just accepted this to be truth, and have even told some of the customers I've gotten through 3DHubs and other marketplaces the same thing. Now I'm creating an item for resale and am 3D printing the case. As I'll need 40 - 50 cases at a time I thought I would shop around for other options. But I just received some quotes back on injection molding. The mold price (for half the case) was \$15k, plus \$10 per unit at a quantity of 50 and \$4 per unit at a quantity of 500. Even in the case of the latter, the cost of tooling plus production is \$34/piece. 3D printing the same part myself costs $7 in filament, and paying someone else to 3D print it cost \$28. Keeping in mind that 3D printing allows me to make changes to the design on the fly and print the exact number I need without having to worry about volume discounts, I now wonder if I've just been repeating a common misconception. Is 3D printing really noncompetitive for medium (10-500 pieces) production runs? If so, what makes it noncompetitive, given the extremely high up-front cost of IM?<issue_comment>username_1: Some small start ups (mainly 3d printing companies) do in fact use 3D printed parts for the production printers they sell. So, at least in some instances, 3D printed parts may be satisfactory for production products. That being said, other manufacturing methods (such as injection molding) currently have several advantages over 3D printing. **Injection Molding** **Pros:** It can produce parts of different sizes ranging from small, to rather large (like a plastic chair). It provides superior inter-material bonding, takes only a few seconds to produce a single part, and can huge quantities of parts (possibly millions) in a single week. Typically injection molding is often entirely automated, with few moving parts. Small details can be repeated well and parts can be made with many different polymers. **Cons:** Some geometries (like a hollow sphere) which can easily be produced with 3D printing, are impossible to produce with injection molds. Start up costs very be high. A typical machine can cost hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars. Mold cavities are costly to produce and require injection molding artifacts to be designed into the part (like ejector pin notches). Also, the mold produces edge lines on the part where the two cavities meet. Defect trouble shooting can be very complex and the ability to produce satisfactory parts can depend on heat flow (which can be affected by things like the weather). This can require climate control to eliminate to reduce waste in scrap parts due to warping and other malfunctions. Sometimes advanced statistics are required to measure dimensions and detect developing problems too complex to deductively trouble shoot because they stem from a fluid thermodynamic issues. Once 3D printing has time to develop further (as injection molding has), we may see it used more and more for production parts. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: TL:DR ===== 3D printing is great for low quantities of items, but terrible for large quantities of items. This is a continuous scale and as your quantity grows, the drawbacks of 3D printing become more pronounced. In your situation, you seem to be dancing in the nebulous zone where there isn't really a good answer as to which production method is better. It's more of a question of price vs speed. --- There are several factors that limit additive manufacturing technologies (in this answer I'll just talk about FDM since you're asking about a plastic item) from being practical in large scale manufacturing. Time ==== Compared to injection molding, 3D printing takes a very long time. An injection mold can make [72 plastic caps in 3 seconds](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHwTHarf8Ck). While I don't have a source, I would expect a similar item to take at least 5 minutes to be printed. In order to produce an average of 24 caps/second, you would need 7,200 3d printers working without down time. That doesn't take into consideration ... Labor ===== Every 3d printed object needs to be removed from the print bed by hand. That requires a person to be there ready to remove the item. It's possible to have [automated print removal](http://www.3ders.org/articles/20150419-automate-the-removal-and-3d-printing-of-multiple-objects-with-the-echodrive-add-on.html), but for now I've yet to see it as a standard option on any machine. An injection model machine can just pop the parts out into a box. Even with the capability to remove the parts extra labor is still required for 3d printing because ... Quality ======= Injection molded parts are as smooth as the mold they were made in. While failures still exist even for molded items, their relatively cheap production cost and very quick production time ensure that an occasional failure won't be problematic. 3D printing on the other hand is still prone to [variations](https://all3dp.com/common-3d-printing-problems-3d-printer-troubleshooting-guide/) in the final product. For a few items, it's sensible to hand finish the parts with filing, sanding, or other reductive manufacturing techniques, but for many items this quickly become burdensome. Also, given the long production time compared to injection molding, even 1 discarded product will result in a long time required to produce a replacement. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Short Version ============= 3d Printing is generally the most expensive method for building things mainly because it takes a long time to do. Compared to other methods it's by far the slowest. The few machines that can do parts quickly typically have very small build volumes so they're limited to only a few parts. Compared with injection molded parts you can make a dozen parts in a few seconds 3D Printing is closer to a few hours for one or two parts. Unless there is a change in the process or the technology or philosophy of the process 3D printing will always be delegated to small runs. Unspecific Answer ================= You implied something in your post that you didn't explicitly ask for which I might be able to help. 3D printing is small scale, Injection molding is a large scale, but you've glossed over the medium scale production methods that might be worth considering given your project. If you're wanting to make small runs (20-500) units, your time could be well spent looking into cast-urethane parts. A mold will run around 200-500\$ depending on manufacturer, complexity, and size of the mold each mold is typically good for about 20 parts and then materials are roughly 20-30\$ for smaller sized parts. One of the more attractive aspects of cast urethane is that the material properties are very comparable to an injection molded part and the surface finish looks fantastic In my experience, my workflow for a new part design is 3D print a few models to get from revision 0 to something you're confident should work, cast urethane a few batches to get functional field testing completed, and possibly even sell while the injection molding side gets set up. Injection molding takes 5-6 weeks about as a minimum for the first article, 3D printing is a few hours, and cast urethane is 2-3 weeks tops, less if you pay a bit more. **edit** Forgot to mention that by using cast urethane as an intermediate you still have the flexibility to change your design without resulting in huge mold redesign costs. Because the mold is only good for about 20 parts modifying you can modify your part and update without incurring huge re-molding costs. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Break even points have always been dependent on the part. If the goal is to make a rod or filament-like piece of your extrusion nozzle diameter, your extruder may be pretty competitive. Additive manufacture has come a long way already so the break even points may have shifted. Interestingly a great use for additive is to produce tooling. You could for example use the 3D printed part (with non-stick coating) to make a 600 deg F silicone mold from high temp RTV. Presuming you have the heating equipment, that mold can then be used to produce tens of the part at slightly lower quality. As silicone is flexible, it isnt good for high speed/pressure of injection molding. If you are willing to accept lower quality (3d printing with filament is pretty low so that's likely a yes) and your injection molder is willing to go for DMLS molds with minor smoothing/drilling post-operations, your tooling costs may be significantly lower than your original estimate. Chances are this isn't happening unless the injection molder is also an additive enthusiast, and often will have to be one and the same as the person who designed at least some of the 3d printed part. Upvotes: 0

2017/03/26

<issue_start>username_0: I have a makerbot, and am using their slicer program. The part I am printing has an extremely coarse thread, 5 threads per inch with a 2 mm thread height. The thread face is at a 30 degree angle (15 degrees of overhang) I have printed external threads like this without issue and without support material before for various gardening tools (a flow straightener for example). I'm now trying to print an internal threaded part however the rest of the part needs to have support. I've played with the settings in the makerbot software but can't find a combination that will acomplish my goal. I'm looking for an idea, a setting, or an alternate way of printing the threads without support, but still have supports for the other sections of the part that I know do need them. Perhaps there is an alternate software that can do something like this, or is best practice to modify the part to have weak structural elements to support the extremely overhanging sections that I'll then break off afterwards and print the part with no supports?<issue_comment>username_1: Consider to create an externally threaded part to mate with the internally threaded part, perhaps with a tenth of a millimeter clearance. If possible, configure that part to have minimal structure, making it easier to break away. The externally threaded part will possibly provide support for the portions of the main body while preventing interference with the internally threaded part. I believe it's not possible to segment a multi-part print for different levels of infill, but if the above fits your requirements, it would be a thin-wall cylinder, thick enough only to support the mating threads. This would allow easier break-away. An image, sketch, drawing, model, link of your project would make this answer easier or possibly invalidate it completely. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There are some software tools that let you manually design support structures so you can target the areas that need them, and avoid others. For example, Meshmixer can be used to add supports into your STL. I believe you still use a separate slicer. Some slicers also have the ability to manually add support. I have found that CraftWare and Simplify3D have this kind of feature. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I feel a little ridiculous that I didn't try this earlier, but in the Makerware software you can set a minimum overhang to print support material. I've been working to this point (3 years now) assuming they've been measuring the angle from the vertical, not the horizontal. I was wrong. The solution that I came up with was to calculate the maximum overhang of the internal threads inside the helix, and then not use breakaway support below that angle. Not the prettiest print I've ever done, but the threads came out useful at least. I'll need to lay with the settings a bit to make sure the part isn't going wonky from the minimal support but as of now it seems to be working well. A better slicer would've made this whole process MUCH easier, and I'm going to look into them pronto Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Try using simplify 3d. It's a very powerful slicing software compatible with almost every 3d printer. It does cost 150 dollars, but that would be the only drawback to using that software. You can manually place supports around your model without having he software mess it up. I think this is exactly what you're looking for. Upvotes: 0

2017/03/26

<issue_start>username_0: I replaced the controller board in my Monoprice Select Mini with an Arduino/Ramps setup and compiled an uploaded Marlin 1.1.0-RC8 to run it. I've got most everything calibrated and working with one exception. I tell the printer to home for xyz and then level my bed with a piece of paper then start a print and the nozzle consistently drops too far down into the bed and nothing can extrude. If I adjust the bed and put 1-2mm gap between the nozzle and bed then it prints fine. I can't find anything in Marlin to adjust for this and I'm kind of stumped. I'm printing the original cat gcode that came with the printer that should just work fine as it always has and shouldn't have anything that a slicer would put in there to screw things up. Can anyone point me in the right direction? This is the output of M503 ``` Send: M503 Recv: echo:Steps per unit: Recv: echo: M92 X93.00 Y93.00 Z1097.50 E99.00 Recv: echo:Maximum feedrates (mm/s): Recv: echo: M203 X300.00 Y300.00 Z5.00 E25.00 Recv: echo:Maximum Acceleration (mm/s2): Recv: echo: M201 X3000 Y3000 Z100 E10000 Recv: echo:Accelerations: P=printing, R=retract and T=travel Recv: echo: M204 P3000.00 R3000.00 T3000.00 Recv: echo:Advanced variables: S=Min feedrate (mm/s), T=Min travel feedrate (mm/s), B=minimum segment time (ms), X=maximum XY jerk (mm/s), Z=maximum Z jerk (mm/s), E=maximum E jerk (mm/s) Recv: echo: M205 S0.00 T0.00 B20000 X20.00 Y20.00 Z0.40 E5.00 Recv: echo:Home offset (mm) Recv: echo: M206 X0.00 Y0.00 Z0.00 Recv: echo:Material heatup parameters: Recv: echo: M145 S0 H180 B70 F255 Recv: M145 S1 H240 B110 F0 Recv: echo:PID settings: Recv: echo: M301 P26.15 I2.74 D62.35 Recv: echo: M304 P231.09 I45.21 D295.34 Recv: echo:Filament settings: Disabled Recv: echo: M200 D3.00 Recv: echo: M200 D0 Recv: ok ``` I also wanted to test whether the nozzle is actually moving closer. I did a G28 and manually put a piece of paper's width gap between the nozzle and the bed at all points. Then I started a print with no filament but with the sheet between the nozzle and bed. When it got to temp it homed all the axis and moved the nozzle to the first position. I would expect the paper to maintain the same gap but it tightly presses into the paper. The first gcode move that includes the Z before extruding is : ``` G0 F3600 X42.228 Y46.985 Z0.3 ``` Which you would expect would put even more space between the nozzle and bed for the first .3 layer of filament but it isn't. I printed directly from the SD Card to hopefully rule out Octoprint running gcode before the print so I really think the culprit is Marlin at this point.<issue_comment>username_1: If nozzle sets lower than it should, after heating up, then you may need to calibrate with heater turned on. Another (although less likely) reason can be an incorrect Z steps number. However, if the print, after adjusting the first line height, does well, this should not be the case. Fast track solution is to use `M206` (something like `M206 Z0.3`) command to adjust nozzle offset, in your case Z position. This does not fix the root cause but should allow you to mitigate the problem. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I found the issue. When the hotend and bed are at temps for PLA everything works fine but at temps for ABS the Z offset would get all messed up. After a bunch of testing I was able to track it down to a single gcode statment `G1 Z15.0 F6000` At the higher temps my Z stepper skips steps at that feed rate. The "Custom FDM printer" machine settings I used for my printer in Cura had that statement in it and so did the cat gcode that was on the card from the factory. I changed the feed rate to 200 and was able to print in ABS. I was surprised Marlin didn't have a 'limit the feedrate for Z to this number' setting. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]

2017/03/29

<issue_start>username_0: I spent the last days trying to make the best gears I could but they are not "smooth" nor good. I searched at thingverse with "gear" but I see no set of gears. I would like someone to point me a good set of gears (with 5, 10, 15... teeth for example) so I can use this STL file with Google Sketchup. Do you guys know any good matching gears that I could print? I will be using this gear in a fast spinning matching so it would be nice these gears to be well designed to support some fast moving. Also, I think in my case I would like to use gears with this shape (the white gear). Any idea why is this gear design better than the usual? [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7mHxj.jpg)<issue_comment>username_1: This type of gear is known as a "herringbone" gear. A traditional straight-cut gear is strong, but can cause more vibration as each tooth engages and disengages. A helical gear (slanted tooth) reduces that vibration as the tooth engagement is more uniform. However the angle of the teeth causes a sideways force that may be undesired. A herringbone tooth design effectively cancels the sideways forces but gets the uniform tooth engagement. A search for "herringbone" on Thingiverse comes up with many gears of this type. Regarding the quality, if you are not happy with the results of your own design, that's OK - gears are shockingly complex, and people make careers of gear design! However, if you have a good CAD model that just isn't printing well, it's not likely a bad STL. An STL from a different source is likely to have similar quality with the same slicer/printer setup. You might be able to improve print quality of your design by changing settings on your slicer or adjusting your printer. I'd suggest asking a question with your current setup and specific print quality issues. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As for high speed gear ideas why don't you design your own if there aren't any good ones. I will admit sometimes there will be surprising lack of content in some areas and I dont know what you expect, sometimes you do have to do some things your self to bridge the gaps. Maybe try looking into automobile transmission or even jet engines which use two shafts for high speed compressor and low speed fans. Jet engines spin pretty fast over 35k RPM. They may end up using a planetary gear I would think, the forces are well balanced. But you haven't said the purpose of this gear, is it power transmission on separate parallel axis? Speed reduction/change? In engineering, structurally things which use pointy edges can perform poorly under stress, the stress is highly focused geometrically. Instead if manufacturing constraints and design volume allows it, rounded, chamfered, or filleted edges reduce high stress points. Also adding material distributes loads where possible. Smaller teeth may increase vibration frequency but reduce amplitude. Ideally you would want to minimize the relative velocities of the contacting surfaces to reduce waisted force from friction converting to heat. Also heat can reduce strength and increase wear, decreasing life span of the gear. Upvotes: -1

2017/04/01

<issue_start>username_0: Lately I'm having some issues with white PLA. It sticks nicely to the print bed, but the very last layer of the print comes out really ugly. I'm not a native english speaker, I don't know what is the proper term to describe what I see, so I'm attaching two pictures instead: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/4A8Gn.jpg) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/76KNF.jpg) As you can see, the surface has wrinkles. If you touch it, it feels like a [jaggled surface](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ab7vc.jpg). What is causing this? I've never had this kind of issue before with the same PLA roll, what can be the issue? I have a prusa-style printer, 45°C printbed, 225°C hotend, 10% hexagonal infill, 30mm/s print speed. The object stays on the surface without warping, I can tell for sure that it isn't detaching from the bed and coming up towards the extruder. It happens only for infill, perimeters are just perfect. What can be the issue here?<issue_comment>username_1: This appears to be the result of your hot end (nozzle) temperature being slightly too high. I'd recommend lowering your nozzle temperature by a few degrees and retrying the print. If the quality improves you're good. If it doesn't improve significantly try lowering a few degrees more. If you lower the nozzle temperature to the point that you start having other adverse effects, try going back to the lowest temperature that works and check your infill and shell settings. The top shell of your part may be too thin given the span (top surface, maximum travel length). i.e. the strands being printed on the top of your part are sagging between your infil hex's, by thickening this part in the slicer settings the next layer on the roof won't sag as much as the previous. By increasing your number of shells or shell thickness (or roof thickness, i'm not sure on the exact terminology) you could effectively hide the effect you're seeing by thickening this section of your part. Best guess though is nozzle is a bit too hot. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This looks like the air trapped inside the print is expanding, causing wavy surfaces. This can be solved by lowering nozzle temperatures, and turning on the fan. Upvotes: 0

2017/04/04

<issue_start>username_0: I am facing a problem with my 3D print. Whenever I am printing any object, the print from the top is shifting to the right hand side - it is symmetric at the bottom but not at the top. Checkout the photo below: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uocCD.jpg)<issue_comment>username_1: The usual cause here is a loose belt on the X or Y drive, leading to hysteresis and a shift in the perceived origin of the system. Try tightening the belts and adding tensioners. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: You appear to have a couple of issues here, First off your nozzle appears to be a bit hot for your filament (you can see this be the drooping and sagginess of the layers on the outer shell) Second issue is it appears as though your belts are loose. You can tell if your belts are loose if your parts seem to be shifted in one way. Third issue (maybe). You may want to try slowing down your nozzle speed slightly. The faster the extruder moves, the more inertia that is generated which in effect makes your belt act as a spring and will cause it to bounce along the axis while it's printing. Slowing it down will result in your belt acting more like a rigid member and help to clean up the outer layers of your print. Also, it's easier on your belts. The downside is that your parts will take a bit longer to print. In my experience, parts that look great but take a bit longer are well worth the wait. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Make sure you are using cura 15.02.1, also download the configuration file from the 101hero website, and upload it to cura using the" open profile" button. Make sure your extruder temp is set to 198. I use a 113% flow rate on my 101hero. Upvotes: 0

2017/04/04

<issue_start>username_0: I've never gotten a 3D printer, nor do I know very much about them, but I'm thinking of buying a delta 3D printer kit for around $450. When I looked online of some disadvantages of Delta printers I found that they typically don't have Bowden extruders. I'm wondering what are the advantages of a Bowden extruder and should I spend more money in a 3D printer just to get one.<issue_comment>username_1: My FLSUN Kossel 3D Delta printer ($224) has a bowden extruder. It works really well too. The main advantage of having one is that it reduces the mass of the hot end. That means less inertia, and it's easier on the driver motors as well. All this leads to (hopefully) greater and more precise control at the extruder tip, and, best of all, faster printing. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The only advantage of Bowden extruder is a reduced mass of moving parts attached to the effector. All other differences from direct extruder are to the Bowden's disadvantages. Generally speaking, Bowden-type extruder has much worse control of filament extrusion than direct one. Since most of the modern consumer-grade printers suffer from low rigidity, reducing mass seems as a good trade-off to the printers' manufacturers. Unfortunately, for the Delta printers trading speed for quality may not be so effective. Delta construction is used with the only goal to achieve highest possible speed of printing. As a contrary, Bowden extruder becomes less precise with the speed increase. This makes it unreasonable to increase print speed at some point when printing quality degrades below acceptable. As a result, at this moment of time, Delta printers with Bowden extruder is a clear sign of under-performing device. To answer your question: there is no reason to pay extra for the Delta printer with Bowden extruder, although I doubt that a printer with similar characteristics and a direct extruder would be cheaper. Upvotes: 1

2017/04/10

<issue_start>username_0: Why does the Ultimaker 3D Printer has a Heater + Heater transfer plate (aluminium) + Glass? I wonder why a glass plate, and if is possible to remove the glass and print directly in the aluminium plate adjusting the heating. [Link to the ultimaker](https://ultimaker.com/en/products/ultimaker-3). Pictures: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/hBsTd.jpg) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uf2vc.jpg)<issue_comment>username_1: Printing directly onto aluminum is something I've never seen before, likely due to the fact that PLA (and other materials) do not adhere reliably to aluminum. Instead, many opt to use blue tape, kapton tape, PEI, buildtak/commercial build surface, or an additional build surface, such as glass. When heated, clean glass can be directly printed on. The use of a glue stick, wood glue, isopropyl alcohol, the above adhesion aids, and others can help adhere your part better hot or cold. Can you remove the glass, add any of the above to the aluminum plate, and print on that? So long as it's a clean, flat surface, yes. But it'll be more work for you to replace or clean the build surface, as you won't be able to simply remove the glass and replace it. You're not gaining much by taking out the glass. A slightly faster bed heat-up, perhaps. As for *why* Ultimaker went with an aluminum transfer plate, that is a slightly more [engineering](https://engineering.stackexchange.com/questions/14722/why-does-the-ultimaker-3d-printer-has-a-heater-heater-transfer-plate-aluminiu/14725#14725) oriented question. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: According to [this page](http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/thermal-conductivity-d_429.html), heat transfers more evenly across an aluminum build plate than with just glass. But as username_1 pointed PLA adheres better to glass because it doesn't flex as much as aluminum under heat. The link above shows that aluminum has a much higher thermal conductivity at 205 ([W/(mK)](http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/conductive-heat-transfer-d_428.html)) vs glass at 105 (W/(mK)) at 25 °C (77 °F). Because of this conductivity difference, you may find that it takes longer to heat the glass plate, but it should heat more evenly. Upvotes: 3

2017/04/11

<issue_start>username_0: I'm considering removing the driver motor from the extruder assembly, and placing it on a stationary mount point instead, and then using a flex-shaft type connector from the motor to the extruder assembly to actually drive the extruder. The motivation for this change is to reduce the overall weight of the extruder driver and hot end assembly, allowing for quicker movement of the carriage on it's associated axis(one of X,Y). Would it be better to run a pair of drivers (one for each direction) to manage reversing the filament pressure or would it be better to use just one driver and reverse the motor as usual?<issue_comment>username_1: If you're talking about a common 3D printer stepper motor and driver, then one driver is perfectly capable of driving the motor both forward and backward. The flex tube setup you describe sounds like a [Bowden extruder](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowden_cable). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Very cool idea, One motor would definitely be more than capable of producing the required torques even through a flexshaft connector. For any normal sized 3D-printer the torques required, and the speeds you'll need for rapid response are well within the capabilities of any off-the-shelf stepper motor. Just a note on the idea though, with a normal, 'rigid', connection there is essentially no winding or unwinding, and only the backlash between the gears and the filament to consider, and that is effectively zero. With a flex-shaft though, the stack-up of twists and flexing will be much greater. The system will require more rotations at the source to effect the same amount of torque at the end effector as the flex shaft flexes and bends under the load. For tiny torques with short flex shafts, this wont be an issue as filament pressure is pretty minimal. But if you scale up this project or start working at much higher speeds, you may run into some issues with this design. I have no idea how big or fast you'd need to be working at for this to begin to become a problem. I'm imagining pretty big though. Just something you might want to keep in mind if you try turning this into a huge, super fast 3D-printer. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]

2017/04/11

<issue_start>username_0: In a discussion about motors with a friend who used to work in the robotics industry, he told me that he despised stepper motor systems, as every stepper based system he had worked on required a bunch of hacky software fixes to make the system perform to the required level. He said that servo motor based systems had their own foibles, but at least they could generally be tuned out and you always knew that if the encoder said you were in a given place then you would be (to within the constraints of the backlash compensation). Because of this, I was wondering if there were any options for using brushless DC motors + encoders + drive electronics instead of steppers + drive electronics.<issue_comment>username_1: I think using these technologies is possible, and may be better than stepper motors, but by using these you loose the main advantages of the steppers : the simplicity and the cost. When you use steppers, you assume your motors are strong enough to don't loose any step, and you "just" command them. Steppers are not so expensive and are compacts, so your 3D printer is "simple". If you use separated motors and encoders, you can do better job, but your 3D printer will be a lot more expensive, harder to tune, and harder to program. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: You can get "stepper replacement" servo drives that supposedly put all the needed control in the drive, and accept ordinary stepper inputs. Those should make the servo-drive a "drop-in" option on anything that uses stepper drives. That said, I've seen an affordable CNC router system based on steppers turned into a much more expensive system based on servos, and I still have the "obsolete" stepper version, as the servo based system is MUCH more expensive and I could not keep up with the "upgrades" and never would have bought it at the price it now goes for. I'm in fact considering changing that to a reprap control system (still as a router, not as a printer, as I currently think.) Given some practical limits to printhead speed in additive 3D printing based on the material solidifying, there may not be a lot of benefit in the considerable added expense of servos. They can move faster, but how much of that will translate to actually printing faster? How fast can you melt and pump plastic and have it stay where you put it? Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]

2017/04/13

<issue_start>username_0: The backstory: I'm installing a pigeon net in my home. Because of the shape of the opening I'm installing the net in and the material on the sides it's difficult to anchor the net using the normal means but I can print clips that will hold the net in place. The clips will be outside and will be exposed to the weather and direct sunlight, the weather here is relatively hot (up to 30C) with a lot of sun most of the year and rain in the winter. I only have PLA, ABS and PETG available, anything else will take too long to arrive. I don't care about the parts changing color and mostly I don't care about them deforming a little bit - only about breaking. If the parts have to be replaced after a year I'm ok with it, less then that will be annoying, longer will be better. So, under those conditions, which of the 3 materials is more durable?<issue_comment>username_1: PLA would be a non-starter for outdoor use as it's biodegradable and can breakdown in sunlight. Albeit slowly, but won't be useful for long term project. ABS would be a good choice for longevity, as it can last in outdoor situations for quite a while. Its glass transition temperature is above 100 degrees celsius so it'll last in most climates. As for strength ABS is one of the better choices out there, also it's slightly softer than PLA meaning it will flex before breaking, PLA is much more likely to shatter. ABS is well known for warping while printing though. Not a huge problem though, if you're used to printing with it. PETG not a bad choice either. It has a glass transition temperature around 80-90°C. So if you're building in a hot place with direct sunlight with some reflection, you could have deformation issues, though not that likely. It is stronger than ABS and it's also easier to print (less warping issues). PETG is also supposedly 'food safe' meaning if the outdoor animals start pecking at it, it'll probably not kill them... I wouldn't recommend trying to taste it though. Finally PETG is a bit closer to PLA in terms of brittleness so it may shatter before flexing. ABS is less brittle than PETG. If it were me I'd go with ABS despite its issues with warping while printing. If you're newer to printing, then probably better to go with PETG. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Ok, I tried all 3 materials. PLA failed after less then one day, I believe it deformed from the constant pressure and fell out (I didn't find the part but I didn't really search for it, there's some tall grass below the window) ABS lasted about a year, it fell strait down and I found the part, it looks ok if probably deformed by just a few mm so it doesn't pressure fit anymore. PETG still going strong as I write this Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: We use PLA in an outdoor environment, non-direct sunlight. PLA seems to be just as strong as day one. It has been about six months now. Of course, you must seal coat to protect from moisture. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: What colour was your PLA? PLA will soften around 60C and a dark colour will easily get hotter than that in direct sun on a 30C day. Clear PLA seems to have much, much better temperature resistance, but any sort of PETG will kick it's butt in that regard. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: I might be late to the party, but I have a suggestion. Why not use ASA filament, it's the kind of plastic used in car cup holders, lawn rakes and sprinkler heads, it is both heat and cold resistant, as well as solar stable and weatherproof. As far as printing with it it is similar to printing in ABS as far as I am aware, I might be wrong though. I personally am surprised how often this kind of question pops up and literally No One mentions ASA filament. I think I might buy some because I like the idea of printing something that can be left outside. Upvotes: 3

2017/04/16

<issue_start>username_0: The overall goal is to create a print of the liberty bell. No clapper is needed. The support beam is not needed. I am just looking to mimic the outside shape of the bell. After an application of Google-fu I found this image. It has been cleaned up and cropped a bit. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HTg2W.png) In OpenScad the surface function was applied to the png to generate a height model. I subtracted out a few cubes, and eventually got it down to a layer of about .1 height. My Evil (pun intended) plan is to get it down to a 2d model. Then by shifting a copy of model from itself, and subtracting the two. That should leave just the curve. Then rotate\_extrude the curve to generate the actual bell at the desired thickness. I see the problem coming. If the model is layered down to zero height it will vanish. Leaving me nothing to rotate. So on to the question. **Is there any tool or technique to turn the image into a 2d openscad object or failing that is there another way to approach the problem?** [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/0joh6.jpg) The direction that fred pointed me at is viable. I didn't use the actual image shown here, but a manually generated one from OpenScad. As a proof of concept the technique works well.<issue_comment>username_1: As you are already familiar with OpenSCAD, consider to use the [projection() function](https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/OpenSCAD_User_Manual/3D_to_2D_Projection) to accomplish your goal. If you allow for an interpretation that one can cast a shadow of the part on a surface below, it becomes a 2D representation of the part. This is effectively how projection works in OpenSCAD. Note that the part image below is centered in x, y, z and the cut/projection action takes place at the z = 0 plane: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7USA0.png) When the function is applied to this model, the result is a non-contiguous 2d image: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/COw50.png) When the cut parameter is ignored or set to false, the image which results is effectively an orthogonal shadow of the entire object, rather than a selected slice: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ffOe7.png) It gets better, of course. In OpenSCAD, the translate, rotate and scale functions apply. One can tip a model over, resize it, spin it around, combine with the cut parameter and get any combination of 2d image from the original model: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/cU1sN.png) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HlXSF.png) It's important to note that OpenSCAD does provide non-zero thickness to these projections when rendered, or maybe when previewed. I always get those two swapped around. As your objective is a 2D result, you may be able to select from PNG (save as image) or Export as DXF or SVG. Re-reading your post, I also missed part of a more useful answer. Once you have the profile you desire, you can use the [rotate\_extrude function](https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/OpenSCAD_User_Manual/2D_to_3D_Extrusion) on the profile you generate. Despite the non-zero thickness, it uses the zero-thickness aspect to create the model from that function. That aspect of the answer is left as an exercise for the reader, as the options are many and results can be complex. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Two options: 1. Use `TRACE2SCAD` (<http://aggregate.org/MAKE/TRACE2SCAD>) 2. For the more adventurous: Dig up the old pull-request for the suggested `trace()` module: <https://github.com/openscad/openscad/pull/1110> Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You could have done that with OpenSCAD, there are instructions for extruding. Personally, I'd just do a 1 altitude copy with [Image 2 STL 2 Heightmap Mesh Converter Generator](http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1981938), then rotate in OpenSCAD. It's called `rotate_extrude()` and is used for seashells. In MeshLab you can use *Laplacian Smooth* to depixelate/antialias it. Upvotes: 0

2017/04/16

<issue_start>username_0: I am doing laboratory experiments and need to print some components. I am working with different aqueous (water) solutions containing sulphuric acid (H2SO4), hydrochloric acid (HCl), and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), separately and in combination. The pH of the solutions are in the range 0 to 7. Temperatures don't exceed 40° Celsius. In another application we have aqueous solutions containing high concentrations of FeCl3, HCl and in some cases H2O2 at temperatures of up to 180° Celsius. Which 3D printing filament materials can you recommend for these applications?<issue_comment>username_1: There are two issues you have here, one is temperature stability and the other is chemical reactivity of plastics. I can't help you with the chemistry side, but I can help with the temperature. Application 1 (Temp < 40 °C) ============================ Any FDM plastic will perform reasonably well under these temperatures. I would suggest trying a Nylon, PETG or a PolyCarbonate filament as I know these are more resistant to acids than PLA or ABS. As far as strength of the parts, all FDM plastics will work well Application 2 (Temp > 180 °C) ============================= This temperature range is above the glass transition temperature of the PLA, ABS, PETG and Nylon are all well below 180 °C and therefore aren't worth considering. Your best option is PolyCarbonate, or PolyCarbonate-ABS which are both fairly high (roughly 140-150 °C). However, are both below your minimum temperature threshold. My conclusion is to try a polycarbonate sample and see how it reacts to the chemicals you're working with, though it doesn't look hopeful. For Chemical reactivity, I did some Google-fu and found a few links that look helpful for PolyCarbonate: * [Chemical resistance polycarbonate](http://www.perspex.co.uk/Perspex/media/Media/Technical%20Library/Chemical%20Resistance/Polycarbonate-Rod-and-TubeChemical-Resistance.pdf) * [Polycarbonate Chemical Compatibility Chart](https://www.calpaclab.com/polycarbonate-chemical-compatibility-chart/) Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Polyoxymethylene (POM) filament (known as Delrin or acetal) is [suited](https://all3dp.com/2/delrin-3d-printing-filament/) to applications involving chemicals: it is chemically resistant to solvents, hydrocarbons, and neutral chemicals. Upvotes: 2

2017/04/17

<issue_start>username_0: I have a reprap printer with 0.3mm nozzle. It prints quite well, I am really surprised with quality of all the surfaces and the general precision of the parts printed. BUT I HAVE a problem: when making (for example) a 10mm x 10mm x 10mm cube with a 2.8mm diameter hole from top to bottom (to fit a screw) after I print it gets a size of 3mm diameter. I know this is related to extrusion width but cant the slicer software (I am using s3d) know that it is using a specific extrusion width and compensate for that in order to get the diamter right? OBS: this printer is supposed to get 0.05mm precision.<issue_comment>username_1: It's a generally accepted fact that FDM/FFF printers will have [deviations when it comes to holes and perimeters](https://innovationstation.utexas.edu/tip-design/). Typically, holes print smaller than designed and external surfaces end up larger than designed. In your case, it seems to be the opposite: the hole is too big. It could be that you're just printing too big overall. You might want to make sure that your printer is printing the 10mm X/Y dimension in you example correctly. If it's too big, part of it may be just the typical oversized perimeter, but some of it might be due to incorrect firmware X/Y 'steps/mm' or extrusion like you mentioned. See also: ["Are you printing undersized holes?"](https://www.deltarap.org/printing-undersized-holes/) Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a common problem with many different types of 3d printers. When ever you print something the physical object will never be the exact same size as it is in the computer. However, you can get it to be very close to what you need. By tweaking certain things you can get the sizes almost perfect. It could be something slight like your stepper motors are mis-calibrated even a little bit. The distance between the build plate and the extruder could be off causing your print sizes to vary. Also the temperature of your extruder and your build plate could be affecting your overall size after printing. How long your print takes to cool and what temperature it is at at when it prints can affect sizes of your print. This link could be of some assistance: ``` https://ultimaker.com/en/community/11526-problem-with-correct-size ``` Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: For one thing, the entire part generally shrinks, as it's printed (at whatever precision of nozzle location) as molten plastic, and then cools and solidifies. Given that you are getting a bigger hole in the finished part, I'd start by measuring the part's actual overall outside size, as printed (is that 10mm, or might it be 10.5 or 11mm?), and suspect some calibration tweaks are needed. If the outside of the cube is actually 10mm, then you may simply need to find the right fudge-factor for hole sizing - if 2.8 is becoming 3, you might need 2.65 to get 2.8 as printed - or 2.63, or... Alternatively, plan for drilling when a precision hole is needed, and print a deliberately undersized hole with a thick shell so it can be drilled out precisely. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Simplify3D has a feature that makes holes a little bigger or smaller (for adjusting tolerances). I don't remember what it's called, I think it's something-offset (if someone can help me with this in the comments I'll update the answer). It's possible your silcer is set to enlarge the holes and the printer is just fine. Upvotes: 1

2017/04/17

<issue_start>username_0: What does the pink color in Slic3r preview mean? Yellow is my model, green is support, and pink is..? If the pink color is some kind of warning, how do I fix it? [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2PIRU.jpg)<issue_comment>username_1: Having had direct experience with Slic3r, I can offer up this information. Your model is composed of bottom layers, top layers, outside layers, infill, rafts, brims and perhaps something I've missed. The program provides for color coding of these features. In the case of your image, the pink represents a top layer, but may also represent a type of infill, depending on "context." Consider to slice the model, select the preview tab, which you have showing here, then using the slider control to the right of the image window. As you move it from bottom to top, you can observe the construction of the model and each feature as it appears, layer by layer. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In slic3r preview, salmon (pink) represents infill, yellow represents perimeters, and green represents support material, including skirt and brim. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]

2017/04/17

<issue_start>username_0: Whenever I try putting the filament through the nozzle it does not go through. I have searched everywhere online and have found nothing.<issue_comment>username_1: My first step would be to cut the filament at a bit of an angle. This will help the filament enter the extruder correctly. If you're still having trouble, you may have a clogged nozzle. This article by Lifewire -[3D Printer Extruder Nozzle Clogged? Here Is How To Unclog It](https://www.lifewire.com/3d-printer-extruder-nozzle-clogged-2289) has some good info. I've also heard stories about the Bowden Tube (the PTFE tube that guides the filament from the extruder to the hotend) becoming warped or melted in cases where the printer's temperature control went awry. This is rare as PTFE doesn't melt until 320°C. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Many printers have a problem with inserting filament into the extruder. Cutting it at an angle is a huge help. It is also very possible that you have a cog or a bad extruder nozzle. This link could be of some help: [Extruder is not feeding](https://www.thingiverse.com/groups/prusa-i3/topic:7469). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think my PTFE shaft is in reverse when it was assembled and sent out. One side is the metal shaft only the other side the PTFE inner shaft. I read about filament shavings from poor feeding, so it wouldn't make sense initial feeder takes on hard metal where it might shave it and obstruct ease, also the nozzle and the filament must need well heat so it doesn't make sense the PTFE is screwed in nearest the nozzle, rather the metal should conduct against it. Thus also the thermal reading would be off from it not applied to the actual filament just around it. In bike breaks it's to prevent the scraping of the metal chord against the metal housing upon where it exists the housing. One of the video's suggested using twisty ties for the belt as well, with four extra pieces same as two which are used on the track at the bed, a non one time use disposable clamp can be made with extra screws, for each instead of the twisty ties, so it stands to reason likely however it maybe the sales/distribution form manufacture has poor communication or not at all instructions is how these discrepancies arrive. IN MY OPINION. Reverse the shaft from extrude to the nozzle if you don't see Teflon at the extrude part, I have not tested it myself yet, but I'm going to. My unit as well seems poor ability to print at all. Upvotes: 1

2017/04/18

<issue_start>username_0: I apologize if this is in the wrong section, but it seems relevant. I am an absolute noob at 3D printing, but recently my need for a specific, small part intersected with access to a 3D printer at work (Zortrax M200), so I figured now was a good opportunity to get into printing. I am designing a clamp for smaller can capacitors that will hold them upright from a mounting surface. I would like the capacitors to snap into the clamp, but I am struggling to find information on how wide the opening to the clamp should be. It clearly needs to be smaller than the diameter of the clamp, but I'm not sure how much smaller it can be without snapping the clamp arms. Is there a rule of thumb or general guideline for this type of geometry? I am using Z-ULTRAT, which is some proprietary filament made by Zortrax. It seems to be similar to ABS in terms of strength properties, but stiffer. I don't have an image at the moment, but I can provide one tomorrow when I have access to the part files. The best analog I can think of is a LEGO figure's hands. Thanks. Edit: Per requests for additional information: * I am not sure what is considered a "thin" wall; currently, the clamp walls are 2mm thick at the thinnest point (where the push-in opening is). * I would like the walls to be just flexible enough to allow the cap to be seated without breaking - it is more critical that the cap is not loose in the socket. * The clamp is not going to be subject to repeated stress cycles - by the time the cap needs replacing, it's likely I'll need to print a new clamp as well. * With my estimations for cooling, I do not expect the clamp to see temperatures above 100C. Edit 2: Based on the link in the comments below, I came up with the following design: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/6vJ0A.png) The little nubbins in the back fit into the "neck" at the bottom of the capacitor to provide some positive lock. 220 degrees of surround with 4mm thick arms - I think this should work.<issue_comment>username_1: My first step would be to cut the filament at a bit of an angle. This will help the filament enter the extruder correctly. If you're still having trouble, you may have a clogged nozzle. This article by Lifewire -[3D Printer Extruder Nozzle Clogged? Here Is How To Unclog It](https://www.lifewire.com/3d-printer-extruder-nozzle-clogged-2289) has some good info. I've also heard stories about the Bowden Tube (the PTFE tube that guides the filament from the extruder to the hotend) becoming warped or melted in cases where the printer's temperature control went awry. This is rare as PTFE doesn't melt until 320°C. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Many printers have a problem with inserting filament into the extruder. Cutting it at an angle is a huge help. It is also very possible that you have a cog or a bad extruder nozzle. This link could be of some help: [Extruder is not feeding](https://www.thingiverse.com/groups/prusa-i3/topic:7469). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think my PTFE shaft is in reverse when it was assembled and sent out. One side is the metal shaft only the other side the PTFE inner shaft. I read about filament shavings from poor feeding, so it wouldn't make sense initial feeder takes on hard metal where it might shave it and obstruct ease, also the nozzle and the filament must need well heat so it doesn't make sense the PTFE is screwed in nearest the nozzle, rather the metal should conduct against it. Thus also the thermal reading would be off from it not applied to the actual filament just around it. In bike breaks it's to prevent the scraping of the metal chord against the metal housing upon where it exists the housing. One of the video's suggested using twisty ties for the belt as well, with four extra pieces same as two which are used on the track at the bed, a non one time use disposable clamp can be made with extra screws, for each instead of the twisty ties, so it stands to reason likely however it maybe the sales/distribution form manufacture has poor communication or not at all instructions is how these discrepancies arrive. IN MY OPINION. Reverse the shaft from extrude to the nozzle if you don't see Teflon at the extrude part, I have not tested it myself yet, but I'm going to. My unit as well seems poor ability to print at all. Upvotes: 1

2017/04/19

<issue_start>username_0: I am creating a 3D printed part which will act as an attachment between a plate (actually a strain gauge) with two M2.5 bolts and a 2kg load with a single M4 bolt. I wouldn't be happy with tapping a screw thread into the print itself so I want to try embedding the nuts into the print itself - so I'll pause the print at the right layer and then insert the nut and, hopefully, the print will resume. I'm wondering is it worth also including washers? It's a major pain because, while a nut can be captive in a hex space, a washer is circular. So it needs to be glued down on insertion in case it rotates while the printer is printing on top of it. For a 2kg load I don't believe the nut will attempt to pull through the part but there isn't a whole lot of support between the bore hole and the edge of an M2.5 nut though, only about 1mm. Edit: I'll add an image of my initial design. The strain gauge is one of a set pulled out of a weighing scales (from Lidl, €5.99. You can buy each separately on the internet for 20 euro, so I saved 74 euro!). The gauge itself is mounted on the narrow "neck" of the gauge. The whole block will drop into a holder that grabs the outer edge of the gauge. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Bdelf.png)<issue_comment>username_1: It could depend on how well your printer-filament type combination can bridge. If you can generate bridges wider than the washer diameter, then print not only the hex recess but a disc recess for the washer, then print over both. However, my preference would be to redesign the part so that the washer&hex nut are on the far side of the part so that you don't need to deal with printing over&around them. This has the added advantage that you can replace the nut if it ever gets worn or stripped. Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There isn't any structural issue with having it allowed to rotate. If you were to print the part without the washer embedded and then put it on afterwards the washer would still be free to rotate. Friction from clamping would hold it in place. Ideally you want your washer to be in contact with your nut to properly spread out the loading of the bolt compression to a larger area (the purpose of a washer). If you put the part between the nut and the washer then the washer is effectively acting as a spacer and your part is being loaded only where the nut contacts it. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If your nut will be exposed, you can simply insert it into the printed cavity and then seat it in place by heating it with a soldering iron. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I've had good luck with just leaving a hex-shaped hole in the print, and press-fitting in the nut afterwards. You'll want the axis of the bolt to be along the z-axis, and to use a fair amount of infill and shells. I usually use PLA, so YMMV slightly. You may also want to consider your strain gauge setup carefully. If you're doing something like making a hook out of the ABS and the plate is acting as a lever arm, you need to make sure the lever arm length is the same every time, or your calibration will be wrong. Upvotes: 2

2017/04/19

<issue_start>username_0: I had this idea for bulky parts for just printing the shell (PLA) then pouring in some kind of filler in to make up the bulk/strength. Printing bulk .2mm at a time line by line is slow and subject to warping! So I though precision print a shell and fill it with 'something' - has this been done by anyone? What is a good something to use? Yours hopefully!<issue_comment>username_1: Or you could use a second head to do low-density infill with very thick layers, like a 1.5mm nozzle and 1.2mm layers. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Not exactly the same, but MakerBot Industries is making improvements to their programs by allowing users to do away with standard infill practices (patterned infill). Their approach is to treat infill similarly to how they treat outer support structures, the "infill" only exists in the interest of supporting roofs. [Check out MakerBot's article about it](https://www.makerbot.com/media-center/2017/03/20/introducing-makerbot-minfill). This method achieves the same time-savings that you describe in your question, but will not necessarily provide as much structural integrity, depending on your approach. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I've looked into doing something similar to this before and love the idea, never had the chance to follow through on it yet. This is sort of a hybrid method between cast molding and 3D printing. The accepted answer to a question I had a while back had some very good points by fred\_dot\_u [Post processing FDM for strengrh](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/3720/post-processing-fdm-for-strengrh) Short version, Epoxy is a good option but you may have to consider heat generated from it. Urethane is another really good option (cast urethane is a pretty standard process). Chem-Eng isn't my area of expertise but there is a huge range of material options out there that can be mixed as two parts. I think there are enough options out there right now that you can choose your material properties you need and then select the material from there. You could also consider going the chopped-fiber composite route. (carbon, glass, etc) and then combine with whatever the appropriate resin is for those materials. I see the most difficult part of this is getting the shells to print properly. When I had looked into doing this, I considered modeling my part then hollowing it out completely. Then going back into the hollow part and designing in minimal internal structures for the purpose of supporting the thin-walled shell model. Printing that, and then drilling and filling the part after the fact. This approach I see as being a good option however the location of the drill points would be critical otherwise you could get voids as your fill material is injected in. And, the additional modeling time wouldn't be insignificant, however the saving I expected would come from having a ridiculously strong part, with complex geometry and be significantly cheaper than even a cast-urethane part. If you get some good results, please post a link to them! This is a huge interest of mine! Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]

2017/04/19

<issue_start>username_0: So when my Prusa I3 is heating up, a small bit of filament is coming out of the nozzle, forming a small string at. When the printing starts, this results in a small plastic ball on the bed, impacting the overall printing process. How can I avoid this?<issue_comment>username_1: On my Kossel Mini I programmed it to go to the edge of the bed and purge a small amount of filament which creates a dot. I purge enough to get the dot to stick to the bed and then go on with printing, when the head moves the dot stays attached and usually pulls excess material off the nozzle. This can be added to the "Starting G-Code" section of your slicer. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I normally print a skirt. This acts as a quality check for: flow rate; bed adhesion; bed level; and proper zero position in the Z. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I just go and pull it off the print head with pliers when it's about to start and sometimes shortly after it starts printing, but its probably not the safest way to deal with the problem. Printing a skirt, brim, or raft should help to fix the problem. Upvotes: 2

2017/04/21

<issue_start>username_0: I mean 3D forms like these? In a small scale (height: 1-2 cm, width: 0.5 cm). [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Yd8Cl.png "Detailed 3D form#1") [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qV4Np.png "Detailed 3D form#2") I want to keep all the form's details. If it is possible, what printer do you advise? How much does it cost to print one piece like that in terms of ink? And what is the most permissive software for this kind of printing?<issue_comment>username_1: Best option for something like this would be to use an SLA printer. They can do sharper image detail compared to FDM style printers. That being said, printing something like this poses its own set of challenges. In order to print a part, some surface needs to be in contact with the built platform, and depending on which surface chosen, you will end up with having some amount of overhang, or undercut. Not an issue in and of itself as these can be supported with support structures. For the size that you're looking at printing though, removal of the support material will be a bigger challenge. As for costing of this, that's not something that this forum is used for, but these structures don't look absurdly difficult to print. If you were to contact a local print shop, or check on Google for an online print house, they will be able to give you costing on printing these. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You could use something like a Stratsys Objet 30 Pro. The printer uses layers of liquid deposited on a bed and cured with UV light, instead of extruded plastics. This just means that the level of detail you can achieve is far higher than that typically achieved by a conventional ABS or PLA printer. That being said, the materials and machine hours tend to be more expensive than conventional printers (about 40% higher in the specific facility I am exposed to). If you are well versed in 3D printing, you could play around with the air-gapping (forced overlapping of layers due to z-axis head positioning in ABS and PLA). Can cause wear on the head, and takes some playing with but in some cases has yielded me a higher perceived level of detail. Also, makes some part features stronger. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Sla printers would be the best, but if you are using an FDM printer, set it to a lower speed and male sure you get the orientation right so that most of the edges don't get ruined by supports. You should also get a higher quality 0.2mm nozzle and set it to the lowest layer height you can achieve on your slicer. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Don't waste your time on SLA or FDM machines. If you use SLA, it might print but you risk breaking the sharp edges during support removal and FDM is just a another level of pain for support removal. Print this using SLS and Polyamide 2200 or PA 12, they both are the same material. Should come out of the machine exactly the way you need with those sharp edges intact. SLS technology does not require any support material. You should be able to get it printed at any professional service bureau near to you, just google to find them. Upvotes: 1

2017/04/21

<issue_start>username_0: What are the "magic numbers" people refer to regarding print resolution on the Monoprice Select Mini?<issue_comment>username_1: The "magic numbers" are optimal values that work particularly well for the layer height. <NAME> derived these numbers by reverse engineering the [mechanics of the Z-axis stepper motor](https://hackaday.io/project/12696-monoprice-select-mini-electro-mechanical-upgrades/log/44772-x-y-z-a-motors-stepper-driver-investigation). Using these values as your layer height will generally improve your print quality over using round layer heights such as 0.15, 0.2, or 0.25 by eliminating quantization errors. To see an example of this, print a copy of [3DBenchy](http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:763622) at 0.15 and 0.175. On the 0.15, you will see some wavy patterns on the curved bow portion compared to the 0.175. This is the result of inexact rounding. ``` Layer Height (mm) 0.04375 (results may vary)* 0.0875 0.13125 0.175 0.21875 0.2625 0.30625 ``` Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Though this approach is logical on paper, in the real world it doesnt work as well. Even if you do choose a magic number for the layer height, you cant gurentee that your print head, once homed at the beginning of a print, is using a full step of the motor. Its more common to be on a half step than a full step with a motor Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: This is an issue with homing. It is not synced to the stepper motor so it may occur on something other than a full or half or even quarter step. That said, it always does this so moving up from there, the first little bit may be off but I would expect once the motor runs freely, the error will go away. Also keep in mind with microstepping, you can have 1/16 or 1/32 steps as well. Using the magic number ensures the new position you request is within the limits of the stepper/controller to reach. Its like rounding numbers. if you don't, as you increment, the numbers will always be consistant. If you round, the numbers will dither around. At least thats my $45 (inflation) and stickin to it. Good luck everyone and have fun. Upvotes: 0

2017/04/23

<issue_start>username_0: I've done *some* research on this matter however I cannot find any clear answers. How does a SolidWorks CAD file get 'converted' into a file format suitable for 3D printing, in detail?<issue_comment>username_1: When you convert it to, let's say, a .stl (3d object file) file, I believe it converts the geometry of the parts into binary and saves the sets. These matrices can be used by the software of 3d printer in order to give the appropriate Trajectory for the extruder. And then the motion of the extruder is 'divided' amongst the available stepper motors and it generates equations of motion for the motors in electrical signals. That's what I've learned so far by using a 3d printer. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Any and all CAD files can be converted to STL (Standard Triangle Language). In this file format, surfaces are parsed to be combinations of triangles. For example a flat rectangular surface gets represented as two triangles in the same plane. As the complexity of the solid increases more triangles are required to adequately approximate the surface. Flat surfaced models are simpler to convert and will have smaller file sizes whereas curved solids will be more complex and larger file sizes (for the most part). The dimensions of your part do not translate to the STL file technically. The STL version of your part is based on unit vectors and a scaling factor is included in the file. So none of the vertices of the STL file are dimensioned, but the file is then scaled appropriately when opened. If you think of something as simple as a large diameter cylinder, you would need a relatively large number of triangles to approximate the curved surface. With a low number of triangles the curved surface would come out quite blocky, however increasing the resolution and the number of triangles used the blocky surfaces begin to approximate a curved surface. In theory if you had infinite resolution your curved surface would be exactly represented. The resolution of the file is something that you can choose when you save the file in STL format. The higher the resolution the more triangles will be required and the file size will also increase. The specific algorithm on how to complete this task will be proprietary to each CAD software, however if you're just curious on the math involved or the general process of converting them, I did a quick google search for "STL format algorithm" and found several useful links on the first page that could be useful. Here are a few links to a few sites with good information: * The TL;DR version: [15-294 Rapid Prototyping Technologies: STL Files and Slicing Software](https://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/academic/class/15294-s15/lectures/stl/stl.pdf); * A Published paper on the algorithm: [A method for slicing cad models in binary stl format](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Okan_Topcu2/publication/259843304_A_method_for_slicing_cad_models_in_binary_stl_format/links/0deec52fd258c68deb000000.pdf), and; * A rehash of what I wrote above: [STL File Format for 3D Printing – Explained in Simple Terms](https://all3dp.com/what-is-stl-file-format-extension-3d-printing/). Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]

2017/04/23

<issue_start>username_0: I'm having an issue where the first layer of my support structures isn't sticking on the edges and causing the print to (eventually) fail. Any ideas on how I can fix it? I'm using Slic3r. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/XD4AX.jpg "Photograph of first printed layer")<issue_comment>username_1: There are many things you'll need to check and/or confirm to ensure that you will have a good bond to the bed. The first is to confirm that you are using a genuine Prusa printer as it appears in the photo. Having built one recently makes it easier for me to guess that is the case. Have you performed the bed calibration sequence? The manual provides a series of steps which results in a zig-zag pattern of filament being placed on the bed, while the z-height is adjusted from the panel. You want to have a filament trace that is only slightly squished onto the bed, not flattened so much that it's cutting into the PEI and not so high that it's nearly cylindrical. The bed must be of the correct temperature for the filament selected. If in doubt, raise it five to ten degrees C. I recently assisted with the aforementioned printer that had a peeling problem and the bed temperature had to be raised to 70°C from the "standard" 55°C generated by Slic3r. It is critical that the bed be clean as well. Denatured alcohol is recommended, with application of a clean cloth. Your photo is somewhat out of focus, making it difficult to determine if the brim is being created at an excessively high z-level, which will cause peeling. The main body of the print, also out of focus appears to be heavily flattened, but that could be an artifact of the photo. The reflections on the bed appear to indicate that some gouges in the surface exist. If your PEI is damaged, you will have the problem you described. I've seen videos in which the bed is not quite as gouged and was refreshed with very light sandpaper or very light steel wool or both. Of course, after using such material, clean the surface thoroughly. I understand the PEI that is applied by the manufacturer is quite thin and can be further damaged if too much pressure is applied while refreshing. It is far better to apply too little pressure if you plan to perform this task. Consider to read through the manual and address all of the calibration aspects of the printer to establish a base point for the problem you are experiencing. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you are using PLA, putting blue painter's tape down on the print bed will really increase adhesion. You can also lightly sand the blue tape with a piece of fine sandpaper to further increase bed adhesion. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I had a similar issue where slic3r generated supports that attach directly to the bed, but didn't put enough material around the thin supports on the first layer, so they didn't stick to the bed. To solve this I added a brim, see "skirt and brim" under "print settings". This puts more material around both the part and also the supports on the first layer. I didn't need the brim round the whole part as it was sticking to the bed just fine anyway, but this was the only way I could find to give the thin supports the wide base they need to stick to the bed. I used a 5mm brim, but I am sure it would work with less than this. Upvotes: 0

2017/04/25

<issue_start>username_0: For a university project, my partner and I need to print the robot Poppy. This is an open source robotic project, [poppy-project.org](https://www.poppy-project.org/fr/). We are printing it with a double extruder SpiderBot with PLA and HIPS as support material. Our principal issue is the weakness of the pieces we print. It prevents us from removing the support material without damaging the piece. We don't have the chemicals to dissolve HIPS. Have you some advice to make the pieces stronger, or a more gentle method to remove the HIPS? Thanks for the replies<issue_comment>username_1: Why not try using PVA(Polyvinyl alcohol) for support material. I use it for my support material with PLA, and it dissolves in water. here is a link to some on Amazon. <https://smile.amazon.com/eSUN-1-75mm-filament-natural-0-5kg/dp/B00MVIQASU/ref=sr_1_3?s=industrial&ie=UTF8&qid=1508539512&sr=1-3&keywords=PVA> Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Having a bit more experience since my comment post above, I can offer up a possible solution. If your printer is able to print ABS, it works great with HIPS as support material. I've been printing boatloads of ABS models. When support is needed, the HIPS supports will bond reasonably well to the ABS, but when cooled, flick off with a sharp pointed instrument such as a razor knife point. As an additional reference, a good bond to the print bed is required for both ABS and HIPS and if your slicer allows support density adjustment, increase the support in that manner. My slicer (Simplify3D) would print an accordian type of support unless instructed otherwise. I set up for alternating 45° patterns making a denser but also more vertically rigid structure. If you cannot print ABS, PLA and PVA as username_1 suggests is about your only option. I see from the 'net that the SpiderBot Pro supports ABS, which implies the basic version might not have a heated bed. Upvotes: 1

2017/04/25

<issue_start>username_0: I have just built my Anet A8 and it won't print. I will preheat it (190°C 60°C) and then press "`Print File`" and select, then it starts for a second, gets to around 11% and stops and shows "`Preheat PLA`". The PLA is already preheated - it is coming out of the nozzle. Any help would be appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: I had a similar problem last week where the thermostat's heat shrink was being melted by the block and the two wires were touching. I fixed this by securing the thermistor and putting a thermal insulator between the block and the wires. I also put a small piece of heat shrink between the wires to insulate them so they will never touch. Thank you and I hope this helps. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The Anet A8 files that come preloaded are `.stl` so if you try to print those it will say printing zero percent and then just switch right back to preheating PLA without any error message. Download a free slicer tool if that's the case. Upvotes: 0

2017/04/26

<issue_start>username_0: I broke up my electronics and now the output for X is not working. The stepper is OK. There is any simple solution to remap the output pins? I want the E1 output to act as the X output.<issue_comment>username_1: you can find pin.h in marlin directory and in pin.h file change # define pinout of z motor and extruder motor Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: When using [Marlin firmware](http://marlinfw.org/) you could easily change the pin layout of the extra extruder (E1) with the broken X stepper pins by changing the [pins\_RAMPS.h](https://github.com/MarlinFirmware/Marlin/blob/1.1.x/Marlin/pins_RAMPS.h) file. [Download](http://marlinfw.org/meta/download/) the firmware and open the firmware project in [Arduino IDE](https://www.arduino.cc/en/Main/Software). Navigate to the "Steppers" section of the [pins\_RAMPS.h](https://github.com/MarlinFirmware/Marlin/blob/1.1.x/Marlin/pins_RAMPS.h) file and replace: ``` #define X_STEP_PIN 54 #define X_DIR_PIN 55 #define X_ENABLE_PIN 38 #define X_CS_PIN 53 ``` for: ``` #define X_STEP_PIN 36 #define X_DIR_PIN 34 #define X_ENABLE_PIN 30 #define X_CS_PIN 44 ``` and also change: ``` #define E1_STEP_PIN 36 #define E1_DIR_PIN 34 #define E1_ENABLE_PIN 30 #define E1_CS_PIN 44 ``` to: ``` #define E1_STEP_PIN 54 #define E1_DIR_PIN 55 #define E1_ENABLE_PIN 38 #define E1_CS_PIN 53 ``` When the file is changed an saved, [build and upload](http://marlinfw.org/docs/basics/install.html) code to your board and plug the connector of the X stepper into the E1 header. Upvotes: 3

2017/04/27

<issue_start>username_0: I have a 3D printed object that I'd like to print on. Adhesive stickers are an option, but as the surface is rounded it's difficult to get a good film to stick well. Is there any system to print on a 3D object (e.g. ink jet). I need at least 300dpi. Black in the first instance, but color would be nice for future projects.<issue_comment>username_1: There are printer types that can print images into the material as it's being printed. SLA and SLS type printers are capable of this but I believe Polyjet printers are the best suited. At 300 dpi though you might be pushing the edge of what is capable. to get that fine of detail your best option may be to look into getting a vinyl wrap for your part that is applied after it's printed. If you've seen cars with really high detail images on them, a vinyl wrap is typically how they're done. ### Note I should state that the SLA and SLS embedded images are still in the R&D phases and being experimented with. Possible now, but not in production phase. The SLS version essentially ran another print head over that worked similar to an ink jet before sintering the layers. The SLA version I saw worked somewhat similarly, but had some 'unique' clearing processes. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Rather than post a series of links for various services and vendors, consider to use as a search term "hydrographic film at home" to find results to suit your purpose. The first search results I found excluded "at home" and indicated it was not suited for home/hobbyist use, but the modification resulted in vendors supportive of home users. In advanced circumstances, the image printed on the film is topographically matched to the model to which it is to be applied. For home users, I suspect that is somewhat out of reach. Most of the products aimed at the home user are patterns or solid colors, although with care, one could combine films in sequential applications. Effectively, the process involves a colored film floating on a water filled container. Certain products are applied to the film and to the prepared model to ensure bonding. Additional processes are required to protect the graphic-coated model after removal from the bath/container. As with the other responses, it's not likely one will achieve 300 dpi resolution without resorting to the topographically matched commercial methods. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: A possible alternative, depending on the resolution limit of your 3Dprinter, is to embed the text into your design so the final result has the text raised a mm or so above the surface. You can then easily (!!) paint just the raised surface to highlight the lettering. This is not going to work for 300dpi, though. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: One option is to hire a painter to paint the image onto the surface. With a skilled painter, you could have a very photorealistic finish. Not sure if this would cost more or less than other routes. Upvotes: 0

2017/04/29

<issue_start>username_0: I'm struggling with my new printer, and I just want to make sure that I have the basic configured correctly. What motherboard ID in [`configuration.h`](https://github.com/MarlinFirmware/Marlin/blob/1.1.x/Marlin/Configuration.h) is appropriate for MKS BASE V1.5 in Marlin Firmware?<issue_comment>username_1: Marlin appears to support older versions of the board (and possibly this one) according to this line ``` #define BOARD_MKS_13 47 // MKS v1.3 or 1.4 (maybe higher) ``` in `boards.h` which can be found [here](https://github.com/MarlinFirmware/Marlin/blob/RC/Marlin/boards.h). The company also has a [guide](https://web.archive.org/web/20180223090126/http://osoyoo.com/2016/06/30/mks-1-4-3d-printer-board-marlin-firmware-installation-guide/) and looks to provide pre-configured (but not fully configured?) downloads of Marlin. They have different links for different displays but then ask you to change lines manually but don't mention changing the board so I have no idea what they are doing or what is different between the downloads. It appears either way you go (Marlin from Github or from Osoyoo) you will need to change some lines to get each axis to behave correctly. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: A more recent version of Marlin Firmware (*version 1.1.9 is the last release of this branch, new developments are done in the 2.x branch*) nowadays has a separate board constant for the MKS BASE v1.5 board (`BOARD_MKS_BASE_15`) as can be found in [boards.h](https://github.com/MarlinFirmware/Marlin/blob/1.1.x/Marlin/boards.h). The following line quotes the constant for this board from the file: > > `#define BOARD_MKS_BASE_15 405 // MKS v1.5 with Allegro A4982 stepper drivers` > > > Upvotes: 1

2017/04/30

<issue_start>username_0: ### TL;DR Is ABS a better material to use for structural parts of a 3D printer, as opposed to PLA? --- I have been looking at various suppliers of printed parts for a [Wilson II](http://reprap.org/wiki/Wilson_TS#Wilson_II), on eBay. [One supplier](http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/252871697915) supplies all of the parts printed in ABS, whereas [another supplier](http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/182099145671) provides the structural parts, which form part of the frame, in PLA, and the remaining (non-structural) parts in ABS. The second supplier states the following: > > This kit is printed in two materials, the structural parts are printed on high-quality PLA to provide the necessary rigidity, and the others in premium ABS. > > > MJRice, who developed the printer, also supplies [the printed parts](https://www.tindie.com/products/mjrice/reprap-wilson-ii-plastic-parts-kit/), which are made of PLA. Is PLA really a better choice for structural components? A quick google lead me to [ABS or PLA: Which 3D printing filament should you use?](http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/abs-vs-pla-3d-printing-materials-comparison/) > > **ABS is going to give your projects better structural integrity and will be more suited to mechanical use** given the material can better withstand the elements, but it will also require specific types of printers and printing surfaces. On the flip side, PLA will give you more precise prints and better aesthetic quality, as well as more flexibility with printing conditions if you can do without the **strength and resilience of ABS**. > > > Another link, [What's stronger? PLA or ABS?](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/makerbot/JiPjCMt0-Bc), also implies that ABS is stronger than PLA: > > The strongest ABS is stronger than the strongest PLA > > > and > > ABS is much less brittle than PLA > > > although warpage could be an issue... > > I choose ABS for it's strength over PLA. *I would love to avoid the warpage/shrinkage problems of ABS*. > > > Heat seems to affect PLA more than ABS (obviously, due to the lower melting point), > > FWIW, I know a guy who had a reprap using PLA-printed parts. He was taking his machine around to do demos and he left it in the car mid-day once. It melted the parts enough that prints were coming out very poorly even after his best effort at recalibrating the machine. > > > and as I am in Thailand, my room gets up to 50°C some days (it is unbearable), I wonder if that would be cause for concern? So, from the above nuggets of information, wouldn't ABS be a better choice? I am surely missing something, as both the second supplier, *and* MJRice, use PLA.<issue_comment>username_1: 50°C is hot for you. PLA's glass transition temperature is 65°C. A car in the mid-day sun can get very hot indeed. As to the question of "stronger" - if the part is designed to be *strong enough* for its use in PLA, it will be no better in "stronger" ABS. If the PLA part will be "more precise" and "less warped" - that may well make it better for its use. Other than a widespread community dedication to self-replication, (or mostly self-replicating with some metal parts) there's plenty of arguments for making most printer parts out of machined metal, for that matter - much stronger than ABS or PLA. Brittleness likewise might matter if you were planning to drop the printer; but should not matter in use if the part is designed for the forces it will see in the material it's designed for. Looking at older technology, many machine tools are made of cast iron, which is quite brittle, rather than steel, which can be less brittle depending on how it's processed. If the part is designed for the job and used/handled in a reasonable way, "brittle" is not an inherently bad thing, and a thin steel part that flexes is a worse thing than a thick cast iron part that flexes less. As for > > withstand the elements > > > that appears to be a reference to outdoor use where PLA will break down - but if you are not leaving your printer out in the rain (which will be bad for many other parts unless you do a lot of engineering to protect them) that should be of little concern. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: To answer the main question "Is ABS better for structural parts of a 3D printer as opposed to PLA". The answer, unfortunately is it depends. ABS has lower yield and ultimate strengths compared to PLA. This means that at room temperatures, ABS is weaker than PLA. However the difference between yield and ultimate for ABS is much larger than PLA, meaning that ABS parts will deform, noticeably so before breaking. This *can* be a good thing. If your ABS part is highly loaded, you may want to be able to inspect it for overloading. The plastic deformation that occurs in ABS may be sufficient for you to identify, and modify your parts before a catastrophic failure. With PLA though since the two strengths are quite close, your part would more than likely fail completely without any warning or deformation before it. So in terms of strength, it's a design consideration. Would you rather have a slightly weaker part that shows signs of load failure, or is a catastrophic failure acceptable. There are use cases where either may be better. As username_1 pointed out, PLA has a lower Tg (glass transition temperature) compared to ABS. If your printed parts are going on a 3D printer and aren't sufficiently isolated from the hot parts (print bed or extruder) then you may end up having some localized deformation. That being said, the extruder is generally pretty localized and likely won't cause you too many issues assuming you're using any of the already available 3D printer designs out there, same for the print bed. However by the sounds of it your 'room' temperature is a fair bit higher than here in North America, by a factor of almost 2! This *could* cause you some issues if you're printing parts in the high heat with PLA. Your best option would be ABS, but even with it's higher Tg (roughly 90C if I remember correctly) you may still run into issues. The warping and shrinkage issues mentioned in the question seem to be more about parts being built by a 3D printer. Once the parts are built warpage and shrinkage are essentially a non-issue unless you've heated parts back to within their melting temperatures. Depending on where you're getting your plastic parts, there may be a third option. By the sounds of it you're looking at building your own printer. You may be able to get the STL files of the printed parts you need and then have someone print them for you in a stronger material such as Nylon. Assuming alternative materials aren't an option I would personally suggest going with ABS for your use case. My reasoning is purely due to the potential operating temperatures. While 50C is below the Tg for PLA it's getting very close. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: To answer your question, ABS is better than PLA for parts however I wouldn't use ABS for that, I would use PETG for structural parts. PETG is more durable than ABS or PLA. PETG is more flexible than PLA and it not brittle like ABS. What makes PETG so good is the G! G stands for Glycol, this is added to prevent the material from crystallizing when over heated. While some companies say it is "Food Grade" you really need to be careful as note every factory produce it the same. When I started printing I only used ABS, I thought it was better because it was stronger than PLA, so I just put up with the smell of ABS. It wasn't until I bought my second printer that I found out about PETG. They guy that makes my printer used to work in the plastics industry, so he gave me some info on the filaments on the market. Now I use PLA and PETG. PLA for testing and playing with different models and PETG for anything I want to last or will be used in hot environments (like in the car). **Printing with PETG** is very easy, a lot easier than ABS. It sticks to the bed very well (I still use Glue stick though) and no smell. Temp depends on your printer. I use an ExtraBot, I run the Extruder at **220°C** and the glass bed at **80°C** There are a lot of write ups on PETG, many different settings/temps they recommend. Honestly, watch while you print. Start off at 220°C and if you see bubbles, drop the temp in increments, if you see it not sticking to the bed or the nozzle is clogging up, increase the temp. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Actually, Both PLA and ABS could use for structural parts. PLA has high strength and is brittleness. ABS has better thermal resistance and durable. [PLA and ABS](https://ecoreprap.com/pla-vs-abs/) are the main types of 3D printing material, each has cons and pros. If you want to choose which type, you need to know the detailed application. Upvotes: 1

2017/05/01

<issue_start>username_0: After I updated the firmware on my Prusa i3, the Bed won't switch off anymore. It worked perfectly before the update, but now, the moment I power up my printer, the LED on the bed turns on and it starts heating up. The manual control in Repetier Host doesn't turn if off or on and I even tried g-codes `M140 S0` as well as `M0`, but it does not switch it off. **Edit:** I have an Arduino Mega2560 with a RAMPS shield. The Marlin firmware came pre-configured from the store I bought the kit from.<issue_comment>username_1: 50°C is hot for you. PLA's glass transition temperature is 65°C. A car in the mid-day sun can get very hot indeed. As to the question of "stronger" - if the part is designed to be *strong enough* for its use in PLA, it will be no better in "stronger" ABS. If the PLA part will be "more precise" and "less warped" - that may well make it better for its use. Other than a widespread community dedication to self-replication, (or mostly self-replicating with some metal parts) there's plenty of arguments for making most printer parts out of machined metal, for that matter - much stronger than ABS or PLA. Brittleness likewise might matter if you were planning to drop the printer; but should not matter in use if the part is designed for the forces it will see in the material it's designed for. Looking at older technology, many machine tools are made of cast iron, which is quite brittle, rather than steel, which can be less brittle depending on how it's processed. If the part is designed for the job and used/handled in a reasonable way, "brittle" is not an inherently bad thing, and a thin steel part that flexes is a worse thing than a thick cast iron part that flexes less. As for > > withstand the elements > > > that appears to be a reference to outdoor use where PLA will break down - but if you are not leaving your printer out in the rain (which will be bad for many other parts unless you do a lot of engineering to protect them) that should be of little concern. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: To answer the main question "Is ABS better for structural parts of a 3D printer as opposed to PLA". The answer, unfortunately is it depends. ABS has lower yield and ultimate strengths compared to PLA. This means that at room temperatures, ABS is weaker than PLA. However the difference between yield and ultimate for ABS is much larger than PLA, meaning that ABS parts will deform, noticeably so before breaking. This *can* be a good thing. If your ABS part is highly loaded, you may want to be able to inspect it for overloading. The plastic deformation that occurs in ABS may be sufficient for you to identify, and modify your parts before a catastrophic failure. With PLA though since the two strengths are quite close, your part would more than likely fail completely without any warning or deformation before it. So in terms of strength, it's a design consideration. Would you rather have a slightly weaker part that shows signs of load failure, or is a catastrophic failure acceptable. There are use cases where either may be better. As username_1 pointed out, PLA has a lower Tg (glass transition temperature) compared to ABS. If your printed parts are going on a 3D printer and aren't sufficiently isolated from the hot parts (print bed or extruder) then you may end up having some localized deformation. That being said, the extruder is generally pretty localized and likely won't cause you too many issues assuming you're using any of the already available 3D printer designs out there, same for the print bed. However by the sounds of it your 'room' temperature is a fair bit higher than here in North America, by a factor of almost 2! This *could* cause you some issues if you're printing parts in the high heat with PLA. Your best option would be ABS, but even with it's higher Tg (roughly 90C if I remember correctly) you may still run into issues. The warping and shrinkage issues mentioned in the question seem to be more about parts being built by a 3D printer. Once the parts are built warpage and shrinkage are essentially a non-issue unless you've heated parts back to within their melting temperatures. Depending on where you're getting your plastic parts, there may be a third option. By the sounds of it you're looking at building your own printer. You may be able to get the STL files of the printed parts you need and then have someone print them for you in a stronger material such as Nylon. Assuming alternative materials aren't an option I would personally suggest going with ABS for your use case. My reasoning is purely due to the potential operating temperatures. While 50C is below the Tg for PLA it's getting very close. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: To answer your question, ABS is better than PLA for parts however I wouldn't use ABS for that, I would use PETG for structural parts. PETG is more durable than ABS or PLA. PETG is more flexible than PLA and it not brittle like ABS. What makes PETG so good is the G! G stands for Glycol, this is added to prevent the material from crystallizing when over heated. While some companies say it is "Food Grade" you really need to be careful as note every factory produce it the same. When I started printing I only used ABS, I thought it was better because it was stronger than PLA, so I just put up with the smell of ABS. It wasn't until I bought my second printer that I found out about PETG. They guy that makes my printer used to work in the plastics industry, so he gave me some info on the filaments on the market. Now I use PLA and PETG. PLA for testing and playing with different models and PETG for anything I want to last or will be used in hot environments (like in the car). **Printing with PETG** is very easy, a lot easier than ABS. It sticks to the bed very well (I still use Glue stick though) and no smell. Temp depends on your printer. I use an ExtraBot, I run the Extruder at **220°C** and the glass bed at **80°C** There are a lot of write ups on PETG, many different settings/temps they recommend. Honestly, watch while you print. Start off at 220°C and if you see bubbles, drop the temp in increments, if you see it not sticking to the bed or the nozzle is clogging up, increase the temp. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Actually, Both PLA and ABS could use for structural parts. PLA has high strength and is brittleness. ABS has better thermal resistance and durable. [PLA and ABS](https://ecoreprap.com/pla-vs-abs/) are the main types of 3D printing material, each has cons and pros. If you want to choose which type, you need to know the detailed application. Upvotes: 1

2017/05/01

<issue_start>username_0: For the Anycubic Kossel Linear Plus I have to upload data to the 3D printer from a software called Arduino and then close it. Then I open Pronterface and put in the right port and baud rate that is in the Arduino files and then click "connect". Afterwards it says ``` connecting... ``` and that is all it does and doesn't fully connect to the printer. I've tried changing the baud rate and port in Pronterface, Arduino and the bit rate in the Device Manager but nothing works. Any suggestions on how to fix this?<issue_comment>username_1: I know this may be a little late, but I bought the same printer and found that I had problems also. To fix this connection issue I first made sure I had no arduino programs open that were trying the connect to the printer. These would not allow Pronterface to connect to my printer. Then if I still had issues I opened up task manager on my computer just to make sure I had no other programs trying to communicate with the printer. Then if it still can't connect I closed Pronterface and reloaded it a couple of times. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Only one application can access the Arduino Mega board, via the COM port, at a time. Sometimes, the software can get confused, and keep hold of the COM port, although this is unusual. For example, if you are connected to your board via Pronterface, and without clicking on Pronterface's Disconnect button first, you then try to upload some code to the Arduino via the Arduino IDE, the Arduino IDE will just sit there complaining that it can not connect - usually with an error, or a timeout message, like this: ``` avrdude: stk500v2_ReceiveMessage(): timeout ``` See the video tutorial, [#18: Calibration](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuEhQU8vGZk), by [BuildA3DPrinter](http://Build%20A%203D%20Printer.eu). It is a long video, but extremely informative. At 2:20 he has this exact problem. In fact, throughout the video, the instructor *constantly* reminds the viewer to disconnect from Pronterface *before* attempting to upload new firmware via the Arduino IDE. Now, I know that this is the opposite of your issue, as your can not connect using Pronterface, after using the Arduino IDE, as opposed to the other way around, as shown in the video. However, the solution is most probably the same... Momentarily, disconnect the Arduino board from the USB (i.e. unplug the USB cable for a few seconds and then reconnect it). Then, *without* using the Arduino IDE, now try to connect Pronterface. It should now work - assuming that you have selected the correct COM port, baud rate etc. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I recently purchased and assembled the Anycubic Kossel Delta printer and ran into the same issues. I found that if I tried to connect with "COM 1" first, it would error out, then when I switched to "COM 4" (the correct port), it connected. Weird, I know, but it works. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I know this is coming very late, but I'll post anyway in hopes that it may help somebody else experiencing the same frustration. I received all of the same suggestions again and again on the forums -- about baud rate, COM ports, and a lot else which failed to get Pronterface to connect. At last I posted to the Anycubic User Group on FB, and quickly received what was in my case the solution -- and so ridiculously simple. I was told to hit RESET two or three times on Pronterface after hitting CONNECT. Yup, that did it! Good luck!! :D Upvotes: 2

2017/05/04

<issue_start>username_0: I have recently purchased an Anet A8 but have been wondering why the prints look squished and have tiny balls on them. I am using 1.75 mm cheap PLA bought from eBay and have also had problems of filament oozing out of the print block. ][1](https://i.stack.imgur.com/9bEPO.jpg "Photos of squished prints")<issue_comment>username_1: It could be that cheap filament has inconsistent diameter, or your calibration is over extruding, or you have something loose that needs to be tight. It's hard for me to tell precisely from just these images. In your shoes, I would print 20mm x 20mm x 10mm, 100% infill boxes until I got it dialed in so that it is square, fully filled in, but nice and flat. If they're coming out square and staying stuck to the build plate properly, but are bumpy and overfilled, then you're over extruding and you'll want to either recalibrate e-steps or if they're correct, adjust your flow rate in the slicer (down). If they aren't square then you need to square up your frame and tighten it and the belts. Etc. But my first guess is that you're extruding too much plastic since I'll bet they were flatter when they were still on the build plate, yes? On the question of ooze: you'll always get some ooze. Molten plastic and gravity means some will ooze out pretty much no matter what. What you need to worry about is when this results in stringing or unwanted lines on the surface of the print. These things you address with retraction (which reduces the pressure on the nozzle during travel moves, but can't stop gravity) and for the surface problem various travel, z-hop and combing strategies depending on your slicer. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You may be having an over-extrusion issue, you should check the flow rate in whatever slicer you use. You should also check to make sure that the filament diameter you are using matches that of the diameter setting in your slicer. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: So, I think iv diagnosed the problem with the help from you and some guys from Thingiverse <https://www.thingiverse.com/groups/anet-a8-prusa-i3/topic:15005>. I think it is a combination of over extrusion and the hotend. The Hotend was leaking so I have fitted a new one. Unfortunately, the thermostat has broken so I have bought a new one. I will keep you updated and thank you for all of the support, Thomas. Hotend Leaking: <https://i.stack.imgur.com/yYqd1.jpg> Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: First, I would check for bed adhesion issues. I would then check the hot-end, when it is warmed up, for any loose parts. I have fixed such issues with a piece of PTFE tape. I would also check the filament cooler parts, or proximity sensor (if you have one), for possible drag on the printed sections during printing. Upvotes: 0

2017/05/05

<issue_start>username_0: I´m currently working on a custom delta printer running Marlin 1.0.2 firmware. To control it I´m using the Repetier Host software with the onboard Cura software to slice my objects. The printing works fine but it takes the nozzle nearly 5 minutes to move from the homing position at 250 mm to the starting position of the print near z=0. I already tried to increase the travel speed but nothing changed. Can you guys please tell me how to increase the speed of my nozzle to move down to my starting point of the print?<issue_comment>username_1: Try changing the travel speed in you r slicer, if that doesn't work , try changing out the motors for newer ones. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I had the same problem, and I solved it by changing the *Z-Axis Feed Rate* to a much higher value (1000 mm/min.) in Repetier Host via *Config -> Printer Settings -> Printer*. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: 1. I would guess (without G code) to change start G code. You should find it in Cura, the feed rate should be low there. 2. Try other slicer and print from SD card. 3. Try using other software. Try Cura it self if SD card printing is not available. Picture is just an example what to look in Repertier or Cura. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/4tQ7R.jpg) Upvotes: -1

2017/05/08

<issue_start>username_0: TL;DR - For a given Kossel frame size (w.r.t. the vertical and horizontal frame lengths of the aluminium extrusion), what would the length of the carbon fibre rods be? --- A case in point, from [RepRapWiki - Kossel](http://reprap.org/wiki/Kossel), there is an intriguing note about a scaled down Kossel: > > Optionally scale down to a Traveling RepRap that fits within IATA hand > luggage size limit (see transportation): > > > * Frame height: 550 mm. > * Footprint: triangle, 270 mm width, 250 mm across (210 mm 15 x 15 mm aluminium extrusion like OpenBeam + printed corners). > > > However, there is no mention of the length of the carbon fibre rods (carbon tubes). Now, as per my previous question, [For a larger build volume, what lengths of 2020 aluminium do I need?](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/3965/for-a-larger-build-volume-what-lengths-of-2020-aluminium-do-i-need), is there a formula or ratio by which one needs to abide? Whereas in my previous question, the answer was along the lines of: *Not really, you can use any lengths, within reason, and account for it later in the firmware*, I would imagine that the Delta aspect of the printer is somewhat more exacting. I have tried googling for further information on this Travelling Kossel, but found nothing, except for the information of RepRapWiki. Looking at the corresponding lengths (vertical/horizontal) of the aluminium versus those of the carbon fibre rods for the Mini and XL: * 600/240 mm versus 180 mm * 750/360 mm versus 300 mm I really can not see what the (trigonometric) relationship is, and therefore can not deduce the lengths of the carbon rods for the Travelling Kossel. Unless it is simply that the carbon rods are 60 mm shorter than the aluminium horizontals? Is it really as simple as that, or is this just a coincidence? In which case, would the carbon rods be (210 - 60 =) 150 mm? By extension, imagine if you wanted to build a Kossel XXXL, with a horizontal aluminium extrusion length of, let's say, 1000 mm, would the length of the carbon rods be 940 mm? Any ideas?<issue_comment>username_1: Try changing the travel speed in you r slicer, if that doesn't work , try changing out the motors for newer ones. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I had the same problem, and I solved it by changing the *Z-Axis Feed Rate* to a much higher value (1000 mm/min.) in Repetier Host via *Config -> Printer Settings -> Printer*. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: 1. I would guess (without G code) to change start G code. You should find it in Cura, the feed rate should be low there. 2. Try other slicer and print from SD card. 3. Try using other software. Try Cura it self if SD card printing is not available. Picture is just an example what to look in Repertier or Cura. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/4tQ7R.jpg) Upvotes: -1

2017/05/08

<issue_start>username_0: I'm using Marlin 1.1.0RC8 to control an MPCNC, using a RAMPS1.4. We've just added a touch-plate to do Z-probing, which works nicely for a single probe (I just want calibrated height for variant bit-lengths, not bed-leveling, but I think it amounts to the same thing). I've set it up in Marlin as *FIX\_MOUNTED\_PROBE*, which seems closest. I can make it do a `G38.2 Z-50`, `G92 Z12.6` (which sets Z to the height of the touch-plate, 12.6mm), which is ok to be going on with, but it seems I'm having to hard-code the Z offset, which I'm sure should really be set by eg `Z_PROBE_OFFSET_FROM_EXTRUDER` or `M851`. My feeling was that I should be able to invoke a G-code `G30`, and it would do a nice fast-slow double tap, do the equivalent of a `G92 Z+zzz` to set that height and then withdraw to a safe height. And after a bit of config, it does exactly that... ... except it doesn't do anything with the height that it measured! Seems odd. The `G30` code seems to be an elaborate way to move the head up by the clearance amount, via a touch-plate (with the added excitement of being able to crash the bed if anything goes wrong)! What's the point? Have I misunderstood what `G30` is meant to do? I've read [the docs here](http://marlinfw.org/docs/gcode/G030.html), and traced through `Marlin_main.cpp` and there really is no "outcome". Unless I've missed something?<issue_comment>username_1: I believe `G30` is a carry-over from CNC (G-code originated for CNC not printers) I believe it is for going to a secondary reference (home) position and includes an optional by-way-of address that can be included in the command. Looking at Marlin 1.1.0-1 (latest release), it seems to do what you said: 1. Move to the requested position (if selected in command, else N/C) 2. Deploy probe 3. Go home 4. Stowe probe 5. Report the requested position and probed Z position 6. Report the current position (home?) It appears that for Marlin, there is only one reference address (home); so, it would seem a `G30` would be the same as a `G28` (go to primary reference); but, not so. It looks like `G28` is a home of a different color. It looks like it homes the axis one-at-a-time and does not support a by-way-of location. Note that you can select which axis to home by adding the letters 'X' 'Y' and/or 'Z' to the command. I am not sure what benefit this command has for a 3D Printer other than allowing you to alter the printer's path to home. Note: Unfortunately I do not have Marlin code up and running on my printer now so I cannot confirm what I am seeing in the code. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I’ve recently had a need to use Z-probe touch plate on my MPCNC + Ramps 1.4 + Marlin 1.1.5 setup. Thought I’d share what ended up working for me. In Marlin `Configuration.h`, I made the changes to enable Z-probe: ``` #define USE_ZMIN_PLUG #define Z_MIN_ENDSTOP_INVERTING true #define Z_MIN_PROBE_ENDSTOP_INVERTING true #define FIX_MOUNTED_PROBE #define PROBE_DOUBLE_TOUCH #define Z_MIN_POS -100 ``` However, the following might be the key to your issue. `G30` did not do anything for me as well, until I changed these values to 0. The `G30` now lowers Z until the Z probe is triggered. I needed to send a `G92` to set the new Z value. Works like a champ! ``` #define X_PROBE_OFFSET_FROM_EXTRUDER 0 #define Y_PROBE_OFFSET_FROM_EXTRUDER 0 ``` In case you’re interested, in ultralcd.cpp under lcd\_prepare\_menu(), I added the a menu item to perform the probe. This way I don’t need a computer to setup the machine and launch a gcode file from the sd card. ``` #if HAS_BED_PROBE MENU_ITEM(gcode, MSG_PROBE_Z, PSTR("G30\nG92 Z19.05")); #endif ``` Hope this is helpful for you, even after a couple years late. Upvotes: 0

2017/05/09

<issue_start>username_0: I have a Tevo Tarantula 3D printer. I'm trying to print a calibration cube. The slicer is Cura and is set for a 1.75 mm filament extruded by a nozzle of 0.4 mm, with a heat bed temperature of 60°C and extruder 200°C. As seen in the image I stopped the printer after a minute, when I noticed that the filament wasn't sticking to the hotbed. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/zdPaw.jpg) I've also made other tests, but the result is the same - the upper right part of the print lifts and touches the moving nozzle. How could I resolve this? Any advice?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't have this specific printer but this used to happen to me as well on my D-Bot. The reason being bed not being leveled properly. Ensure that your bed is leveled such that the distance between the nozzle and bed is about 0.2mm after homing. Also coat your bed with something sticky like glue or hairspray. You won't need this if you are using a PEI sheet. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Check the following: * Is the print bed clean? On glass, you can use a few squirts of window cleaner. * Is the print bed actually reaching the correct temperature? * Have you manually calibrated the printer (at both the center and the edges), such that you can just about get a sheet of paper between the print bed and the hotend nozzle, at z = 0? This last check ensures that the first printed layer of extruded filament is actually touching and "presses on" to the print bed. See the video [#18:Calibration](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuEhQU8vGZk) for a great explanation on the use of the paper. Whilst this video is for a Delta printer, it clearly demonstrates the height that the zeroed print head should be at, and how to check using a sheet paper. * Maybe the filament, for the first few layers, should be heated at a high temperature, than the rest of the print, to ensure adhesion. If all of the above are checked and OK, then (as [username_1](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/users/5113/username_1) points out in [their answer](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/4018/filament-lifts-from-the-hot-bed-while-printing#answer-4019)) try making the print head more grippy. This can be achieved by simply adding a *thin coating* to the glass with one of the following: * Wiping the glass with a glue stick or wood glue * Using hairspray Both use PVA as an adhesive/stiffener. Or by adding an additional *print surface*, such as: * Using blue painters tape * Using PEI tape * Using Kapton tape * Using [BuildTak](https://www.buildtak.com/) If adding tape, then the printer may require a small re-calibration, due to the thickness of the tape adding a few microns to the print bed height. This can be done in the firmware. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I've cleaned the heated bed as suggested using ethanol, then I've tested the Z distance of the nozzle from the bed with a paper sheet and it was ok. Lastly, I tried to raise the temperature of the extruder for the first layer to 215°C. I think that this did the trick. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: With PLA I normally run the bed at 70 and the extruder at 190. Make sure the bed gets to temperature before you start and use gluestick on the bed. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: material sticking problem can be due to following reason: * bed level * bed temperature * z motion calibration (ex if not calibrated layer height is 0.2 and z move 0.4 then material cant stick on bed) * bed surface (for sticking first layer on bed what you use) remove all above reason step by step * first confirm bed level * bed temperature according to material (pla - 70 , abs - 100 ) all above option are good but warpping chance are higher for last bed surface you have following option to use * use paper tape * use Kapton tape * glue stick * use paste (accetone + abs) abs melt into accetone and it become like cream and you can apply on bed after bed heating if you are using last option then just confirm bed level again before start print Upvotes: 0

2017/05/09

<issue_start>username_0: I'm using `M80` and `M81` G-codes to power on/off power supply. Is there a G-code to know the actual state of the power supply?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't have this specific printer but this used to happen to me as well on my D-Bot. The reason being bed not being leveled properly. Ensure that your bed is leveled such that the distance between the nozzle and bed is about 0.2mm after homing. Also coat your bed with something sticky like glue or hairspray. You won't need this if you are using a PEI sheet. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Check the following: * Is the print bed clean? On glass, you can use a few squirts of window cleaner. * Is the print bed actually reaching the correct temperature? * Have you manually calibrated the printer (at both the center and the edges), such that you can just about get a sheet of paper between the print bed and the hotend nozzle, at z = 0? This last check ensures that the first printed layer of extruded filament is actually touching and "presses on" to the print bed. See the video [#18:Calibration](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuEhQU8vGZk) for a great explanation on the use of the paper. Whilst this video is for a Delta printer, it clearly demonstrates the height that the zeroed print head should be at, and how to check using a sheet paper. * Maybe the filament, for the first few layers, should be heated at a high temperature, than the rest of the print, to ensure adhesion. If all of the above are checked and OK, then (as [username_1](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/users/5113/username_1) points out in [their answer](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/4018/filament-lifts-from-the-hot-bed-while-printing#answer-4019)) try making the print head more grippy. This can be achieved by simply adding a *thin coating* to the glass with one of the following: * Wiping the glass with a glue stick or wood glue * Using hairspray Both use PVA as an adhesive/stiffener. Or by adding an additional *print surface*, such as: * Using blue painters tape * Using PEI tape * Using Kapton tape * Using [BuildTak](https://www.buildtak.com/) If adding tape, then the printer may require a small re-calibration, due to the thickness of the tape adding a few microns to the print bed height. This can be done in the firmware. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I've cleaned the heated bed as suggested using ethanol, then I've tested the Z distance of the nozzle from the bed with a paper sheet and it was ok. Lastly, I tried to raise the temperature of the extruder for the first layer to 215°C. I think that this did the trick. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: With PLA I normally run the bed at 70 and the extruder at 190. Make sure the bed gets to temperature before you start and use gluestick on the bed. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: material sticking problem can be due to following reason: * bed level * bed temperature * z motion calibration (ex if not calibrated layer height is 0.2 and z move 0.4 then material cant stick on bed) * bed surface (for sticking first layer on bed what you use) remove all above reason step by step * first confirm bed level * bed temperature according to material (pla - 70 , abs - 100 ) all above option are good but warpping chance are higher for last bed surface you have following option to use * use paper tape * use Kapton tape * glue stick * use paste (accetone + abs) abs melt into accetone and it become like cream and you can apply on bed after bed heating if you are using last option then just confirm bed level again before start print Upvotes: 0

2017/05/09

<issue_start>username_0: I have had many problems with my heat shrink for the thermostat on my Anet A8 melting from the heat block. Is there a way I can insulate my wires from heat but still have enough room to put the thermistor into the block?<issue_comment>username_1: You could use Kapton tape to tape the thermistor. It is usually the best option for sticking something onto the hotend or on the heat block. You will also have less trouble since it is very thin. Note that if you use Kapton tape, you should use several layers of it for added insulation. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You can use kapton tape, [small PTFE tube](https://www.seemecnc.com/collections/parts-accessories/products/small-ptfe-tubing-per-foot), or [silicone tape](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/B00KBSWRDO). I use PTFE on my delta printer (I do have a silicone tape wrapped around my heat block, but that's to help with keeping the heat in the block, not for eletrical insulation (although it would work for that)). These will all handle the temperatures of your heat block fairly well. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: For an illustration of how to employ the Kapton tape, that is mentioned in the answers from <NAME> and username_2, watch [How to build a RepRap Prusa i3 (Assembly 7)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EIFIAWiPdU&t=1290) at 21:30: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/IEr3y.png) From [15:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EIFIAWiPdU&t=910) the heater and thermistor is connected up, you may find this also useful. Note that, at [20:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EIFIAWiPdU&t=1245), the heatshrink is only used over the soldered connection, and *not* all the way up to the heatblock: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/i2k2W.png) Also, more pertinent to your printer, from [Anet A8 Review – Best cheap 3D Printer?](https://pevly.com/anet-a8-3d-printer-review/), see that the thermistor wires are also wrapped in Kapton tape in this photo: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/mjVNQ.jpg) Note that the Kapton tape is wrapped around the wires, almost right up to the thermistor, and will be touching the heating block, when the thermistor is inserted into the hole - there is no problem of it melting, due to its high melting point. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Ok, so I think I have found the answer. You can get cotton wraps for print heads with some Kapton tape on them, see [10Pcs 3mm Thickness 3D Printer Heating Cotton Hotend Nozzle Heat Insulation](http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/10Pcs-3mm-Thickness-3D-Printer-Heating-Cotton-Hotend-Nozzle-Heat-Insulation-/391778166929). I think this will work best as long as it doesn't catch on fire. Please let me know if there is a better alternative but for now I will use these. Upvotes: 2

2017/05/10

<issue_start>username_0: By "better" I mean "more precise"... With respect to a RepRap P3Steel or Wilson II, I am getting some 330 mm T8 leadscrews for the Z-axis movement. There seems to be a choice between a *lead* of 1, 2 or 8 mm - the *pitch* is 1 mm in the first case and 2 mm in the last two cases1. However, there is precious little information about the advantages and disadvantages of each lead size in [RepRapWiki - Threaded Rod - Leadscrew](http://reprap.org/wiki/Threaded_rod#Leadscrew). It seems to me that using a leadscrew with a 1 or 2 mm lead could result in a more precise Z-axis movement, as one rotation of the stepper results in a smaller increment in height. Therefore the layer thicknesses could be smaller. However, is the minimum layer thickness not, also, dictated by the thickness of the filament, horizontal speed of the print head, nozzle size, etc.? Thus, at some point there would be no need for a super fine vertical resolution from the leadscrew, as it may be constrained by other limiting factors. Of course, conversely, the use of a 2 mm lead would mean that the stepper would need to "work" four times as hard, than when using 8 mm, in order to raise the print head the same distance, as well as making the movement, during a "home", take four times as long (or, if you will, four times slower). In the case of a 1 mm lead that would become eight times... --- ### TL;DR Is it worth getting a leadscrew with a 2 mm lead, or is 8 mm sufficient? By extension, would a 1 mm lead be even better, or just overkill? --- ### Footnote 1 Nomenclature: * **Pitch** is the distance between the adjacent threads; * **Lead** is the distance that a nut will turn with one rotation, and; * **Start** is how many starting (or thread entry) points at either end. So, for a leadscrew, with a *pitch* of 2 mm, if there is only one *start* to the screw then the lead is the same as the pitch. However, if there are four *starts* to the screw, then the lead will be 8 mm. If there are two *starts* to the screw, then the lead will be 4 mm. And so on. For more information, see [Wikipedia - Lead, pitch and starts](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screw_thread#Lead.2C_pitch.2C_and_starts).<issue_comment>username_1: Based on what I've learned over 8 months of printing: What matters the most is getting a very accurate zero relative to the bed surface. An offset of 30 or 40 microns can strongly affect first-layer adhesion. Now, unless you put in some of the advanced auto-levelling sensors, the repeatability of the Z-axis limit switch may outweigh the precision of the lead screw itself. But if you've got a good limit sensor, then the more precision in the lead screw, the better you can set (and repeat) the position of the first layer. I don't see a significant difference in strain on the drive motors if they have to run longer per mm of z-drive - just make sure the lead screws are clean :-) Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: From [Accuracy vs Precision and Threaded Rod vs Leadscrews in 3D Printers](http://www.protoparadigm.com/news-updates/accuracy-vs-precision-and-threaded-rod-vs-leadscrews-in-3d-printers/). I have highlighted the relevant parts: > > In general, FFF/FDM printers use relatively infrequent, small, precise > movements on the z-axis and consistent, fast movements on the x and y > axes. **A single start leadscrew with the tightest pitch possible > (highest thread density, smallest pitch) is generally going to be your > best bet for the z-axis**, while you may or may not need something a > little steeper to get the speeds you'd like from your x and y axes. > While this may seem somewhat arbitrary given the precision of movement > you can get from a stepper motor, an important factor to remember here > is torque. > > > **A more aggressive leadscrew will require more torque to drive**. We have > one kit printer we bought a couple years ago that has an overly > aggressive multi-start leadscrew for the z-axis. The small motors > included in the kit do not have the torque required to reliably start > upward movement of the carriage, leaving it sitting there skipping > steps until the carriage is given a little upward nudge to get it > going (no, it's not a lubrication issue or a driver that needs turning > up). > > > So, a 2 mm lead is preferable to a 8 mm lead, as not only is less torque required, but also more precise movements are obtainable. --- With respect to the layer heights, I found this nugget of information, from [Ditch the threaded rod in your RepRap 3D printer and upgrade to a lead screw z-axis](http://www.3ders.org/articles/20151127-ditch-the-threaded-rod-in-your-reprap-3d-printer-and-upgrade-to-a-lead-screw-z-axis.html) > > It's always better to use layer heights that are a multiple of your > full step. If you trust in your micro-stepping you will get poor > results because torque is very poor and the motor won't stop very > precisely. Best approach is to use a lead screw (whose longer step > allows the gravity to work for you and eliminate backlash) and a > stepper driver configured to 1/4 micro-step for low noise, but not for > micro-layering. I always use multiples of my full step and have > printed 0.040 (1 step), 0.080 (2 steps), 0.120 (3 steps and so on), 0.200, > 0.600 and 0.800 mm (of course using 2 different nozzles). Do you need > more than that? > > > See also [Reddit - Lead screw opinions](https://www.reddit.com/r/Reprap/comments/4yd9t7/lead_screw_opinions/) * the general consensus is that a 2 mm lead is preferable to a 8 mm lead: > > * Lower the lead the better for an Z-Axis screw to allow for more precision. > * No need for anti-backlash nuts for a Z-Axis if it has a decent amount of mass/weight to it. > > > * 1 mm will slow the printer down, but provide 0.005 mm (5μm) vertical movement: > > That's going to be awfully slow when homing. While you really don't > need speed for the z-axis, there's not much point in going with such a > low pitch... you won't be printing anywhere near the layer heights > that can achieve. In the end I guess it's not a big deal, but I don't > see any reason to go below about a 4 mm pitch. A 1 mm pitch with a 1.8° > stepper gives you 0.005 mm increments. Anything under 0.02 mm (which is > sort of ridiculous anyways) is just unnecessary. Just my thoughts. > > > * (As Tom [points out](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/4031/would-using-a-leadscrew-with-1-or-2-mm-lead-en-lieu-of-8-mm-result-in-a-better/4038#comment5535_4038)) An 8 mm lead can result in the weight of the X-axis gantry (especially in a P3Steel) overcoming the idle torque of the stepper. As a result of this, the X-axis gantry can end up sliding down the leadscrew, in particular at power down: > > I have lead screws on my Z and it readily falls down if you kill the power. Regular threaded rod is much better at keeping it in place without power. > > > and > > That's one of the problems with 8mm lead ;) With 2mm lead it will hold itself. The stepper motor provides a fair amount of resistance even when powered down. > > > --- ### TL;DR Be wary of leadscrews with a *lead*, as opposed to a *pitch*, of 8 mm, as there are disadvantages, when compared to a lesser lead of, say, 4 mm, or 2 mm (or 1 mm for leadscrew with a pitch of 1 mm): * Higher torque may be required * Less accuracy * Possibility of slippage, of the X-axis, once power is removed, or stepper is disabled1 * Anti backlash nuts required However, their major (if you can call it that) advantage is a higher maximum movement speed. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: **Longer lead** Pros: 1. Faster movement (mostly benefits homing) 2. More standard 3. Weak motor friendly 4. Might be slightly more stable (sideways) than shorter leads because of more starts creating more contact with nut (?) Cons 1. Backlash 2. Less resolution (unless using 0.9 degree motor but see note1) although this is ignorable since it's still very high. It's already around 5x higher than xy axes using the longest leads2. **Shorter leads** Pros 1. More accuracy if you turn off microstepping. it can give you more resolution, but it's useless resolution unless you print with < 0.01 mm layer heights3. Turning off microstepping trades away this useless resolution for increased accuracy. But this comes at the cost of (much) louder drivers. 2. Less backlash Cons 1. Stronger motors maybe needed 2. Slower homing The reason why companies prefer longer leads is because shorter leads simply add useless resolution and slows down movement. **Footnotes** 1 It makes more sense to use higher degree motors to drive shorter leads than vice versa because of higher torque. 2 0.0025 mm vs 0.0125 mm 3 or using a probe to autolevel, which causes the z axis to go up and down in very small increments Upvotes: 2