Datasets:

flax-sentence-embeddings

/

stackexchange_titlebody_best_voted_answer_jsonl

like 8

Pronterface won't connect to my Anycubic Kossel Linear Plus 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?

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

How to post-process G-code to make prints faster using splines and arcs? Recently (in 2017) there was a paper that got some publicity by researchers who are using a B spline algorithm to reduce vibrations in 3D printers. But before them, a B Spline implementation seems to have been first been made open-source by an alias named DeepSoic here. I would like to be able to print faster using the method described in the research paper, through post-processing G-code. I'm pretty sure these two sources use basically the same technique but I could be misunderstanding things. Basically instead of stopping and starting for travel moves, speed changes are done in a curvy fashion, so the head never stops and the printer never shakes. This makes the print smoother and also faster. I think printing 10 times faster is something that is really awesome once you try it. Laser cutting relies on cubic splines for a different reason; to create curves in space. But it seems like these techniques are doing something unique to to 3D printing -- using them to adjust head acceleration/de-acceleration to create smoother movement arcs of the print head. Since laser cutters have a constant head movement, this technique wouldn't help them much. The downside seems to be that it makes way more G-code commands, overloading the USB port, since it's sending all the points on a curve so quickly. I'm assuming a smart person today would really only use it through an SD card (which has disadvantages) or if they bought a 3D printer with a free Wi-Fi module thrown in (which also has disadvantages). Maybe a high baud rate helps. I was wondering if there are any more established ways to use this obviously extremely important and beneficial and simple algorithm. Initially I was thinking that this is obviously something that should be added as a checkbox in a slicer, and not something to be implemented in Marlin. But after writing this post I realized that a Marlin implementation would allow you to use this technique over USB, but only if the slicer steedleaders are also using its special G-codes for this optimization. I don't care if it's a post-processing technique like the research paper's or a special Marlin-friendly version, I just want to use this technique even if I have to use this Huawei Wi-Fi module. Basically I would like to know the best way to get started using this technique through a slicer or other software. I think there is a miscommunication between users of CNC laser cutters and users of 3D printers. In laser cutting the arcs are used to define the path of the cut, which would be equivalent to filament extrusion. In laser cutting, the motion of the laser itself is constant. But in 3D printing, arcs can be used to smooth the speed of the printhead as it moves across the perimeter, and then to infill. It is using arcs for controlling the head well which isn't a problem in laser cutting. Since it's about the head movement, and not the model itself, I don't see how the STL file really matters. It's really about using an arc to set head speed (a first derivative of position). Not anything about the shape of the model (which would just be position). At least that's my interpretation. The Wi-Fi module is interesting because it receives an IP address from my router, then my router stops listing it as a connected device. But it still connected, because I can access it wirelessly. I am going to look into it more once I can fix some other problems with this dual-head. But so far there's a reason to think it might be backdoored.

I would have liked to answer linking to credible official sources, but I cannot add references either on direct B-spline printing. So I'm writing down my thoughts. I've familiarized myself in B-splines to understand what they are and read into the 2 references given by the OP. Basically, the printer software only allows printing of straight lines. Yes I know we can give orders to the printer to print a curve (using G2 or G3), but these eventually will be converted to printing straight lines. There is no ready made printer firmware available to print cubic curves directly to my knowledge. If it would be possible, these curves should eventually be translated into smaller straight lines by the firmware of timed stepper rotational output. These extra calculations would demand a considerable effort of the printer board processor, most probably far more an 8-bit processor would be able to handle. Comparing the paper released in 2017 to the G-code pre-processing software reveals that although both seem to refer to B-spline techniques, they are implemented differently. For example, the pre-processing software aims to reduce the linear travel moves by replacing these with B-spline curves (and not affect the actual print object), while the paper focuses on the optimization of the actual printing curves being optimized by B-spline curves (also using a pre-processor). Both eventually would need to create a multitude of small straight lines to have the printer be able to actually print the object as there is no 3D printing firmware solution to print curves. Do note that the method in the paper has been questioned by the RepRap community, which demonstrated that they could print the same object way faster than the B-spline optimized example. Furthermore, do note that the Marlin community is probably moving in that direction as can be seen from e.g. this feature request and this G-code meta overview; G-code instruction G5. So, both methods rely on pre-processing G-codes by identification of sliced coordinate (print) moves, translation into Bézier/B-spline curves for (print) moves, which eventually are translated into normal G0/G1 (print) moves. It does not appear that the Marlin community/developers are aiming to implement Bézier or B-spline curves soon. This implies that if you want to pursuit printing B-splines, you need to make your own pre-processor, or dive into Marlin C++ development; an 8-bit based printer board would not be sufficient indeed like the OP mentioned, up-scaling to 32-bit or interfacing with USB might be the only solution.

What types of pigments can be used when making your own filaments? There are many types of pigments made for paint, food, fabric, cosmetic and finally plastic pigments. I guess we need pigments made for plastic, or at least pigments which won't decompose, burn or lose their properties at the temperatures inside the filament extrusion machines (around 240C). So what type of pigment are we looking for (does that type have a name?) and where can they be found (off-the-shelf from some specialized paint store or is it a more specialized pigment for plastics which is harder to source)?

The normal way pigment is added to filament (or any other extruded plastic product) is by mixing "masterbatch" pellets containing a high concentration of dye with the raw resin pellets. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masterbatch) This is significantly easier and more reliable than trying to mix raw pigments into the plastic -- the likelihood of clumping and other issues is greatly reduced. You can buy these masterbatch pellets and mix up colors in whatever ratios you want to achieve specific output colors. Just make sure the masterbatch pellet carrier material is compatible with your resin. There are a wide variety of vendors, including ebay.

How to create a very accurate STL file as well as the slices for a 3D printer? I have been using Solidworks and AutoCAD to create STL file of a 3D model I want to print. I slice the STL file using Freesteel Z level slicer (http://www.freesteel.co.uk/wpblog/slicer/) and save the slices in a bmp format. My 3d print has an array of circular channels, all of one radius. I expected the bmp slice to contain the circular shapes looking exactly identical to each other. However, I don't obtain the exact same replicas. Looks like the pixel-wise mapping has not been done uniformly. (View http://s24.postimg.org/p7w09zvkl/snippet.png for the image). I want each and every circle to be represented by exactly the same set of pixels in the bmp image, so that all of the circular contours are identical. (I do not prefer changing the pixel resolution.) How can I overcome this problem? Are there any better tools which would lead to a perfectly uniform pixel-wise mapping? Thanks! PJ

Your objective has a serious constraint regarding the pixel resolution. Within that limitation, the software (slicer) you are using will generate "best guess" images, particularly dependent on floating point math. There may be a single combination of circular shapes (radius) and spacing for these shapes that provides your objective, but that's likely not a practical exercise. You have not indicated if you've tried other slicers, which would be the primary direction. A list of choices can be found here: Free Slicing Program List Another option that you can consider, not included in this list, is to use OpenSCAD, import the STL file, then use the projection() command to manually slice and export the image file. I use the term "manually" but the program can be coded to perform this task automatically, and there is a command line feature to OpenSCAD that may be useful. Note also that the output of these slicers and/or OpenSCAD may exceed the resolution you desire. Manipulation of the image with a graphics editor could result in the same floating point disarray as you perform the changes.

Centering model with CuraEngine when creating g-code? How can I center a model at the middle of the printing area of the printer when creating a g-code with CuraEngine. Are there any parameters I can add to ultimaker2.def.json to achieve this? Thanks.

Found a solution. This need to be applied under "settings" "command_line_settings": { "label": "Command Line Settings", "description": "Settings which are only used if CuraEngine isn't called from the Cura frontend.", "type": "category", "enabled": true, "children": { "center_object": { "description": "Whether to center the object on the middle of the build platform (0,0), instead of using the coordinate system in which the object was saved.", "type": "bool", "label": "Center object", "default_value": true, "enabled": true } } }

Where did I go wrong by trying to add an extra motor to my board? I'd like to add an extra motor to my board and I'm not sure where I went wrong. The motor will be used to spin a rotating wheel/carriage of potential hot ends to switch to. Because it's just a motor it doesn't need a heatrod or a temperature sensor. I had just a MKS_BASE 1.0 board, so I purchased a RAMPS 1.4 board from Ebay to be its extender. (( **Warning ** this board is cheap because it was improperly produced and is a fire hazard: https://reprap.org/wiki/RAMPS_1.4 . I recommend using a CNC shield instead )) This red board is meant to fit an Arduino Mega, but I figure I can use the extra pins on the MKS_BASE1.0 and connect them with jumper wire to the RAMPS 1.4 board. It made sense in case I want to add other things to the original MKS_BASE 1.0 board (like more hot end heater cartridges). I connected the 5V and one GND pin from my MKS_BASE 1.0. I also connected some of the SERVOS pins from the MKS_BASE 1.0: D37 is the 'Dir', D35 is the 'Step', and D17 is the 'Enable'. I also connected the 12V power supply to the RAMPS 1.4 board too. When it came time to modify Marlin everything was a bit annoying because although Marlin makes it easy to add more extruders, adding just motors is a little more difficult. I had to change the number of extruders to be 3 (from dual extrusion to dual extrusion + extra motor), enable an extra temperature pin (which i am leaving empty) and also modify the pins.h file. I probably wouldn't have had simulate this motor as an extruder if I knew the raw Arduino commands for spinning a motor using calls to D37, D35, and D17, so I figured simulating an extruder would be better, but now I'm second-guessing that decision. Here's my modification to pins.h: #define E2_STEP_PIN 35 #define E2_DIR_PIN 37 #define E2_ENABLE_PIN 17 #define HEATER_2_PIN 17 //#define TEMP_SENSOR_2 3 in Configuration.h #define TEMP_2_PIN 3 // Marlin 0-indexes these pins, so "2" is actually for the "3"rd extruder First thing I have to do is allow for cold extrusions by using M302 S-80. The other (real) extruder motors will all move after this command, so I have that part working.. . In Repetier-Host I am just selecting Extruder 3 and trying to "push filament" through it but the motor isn't moving. I'm using an A4988 stepper driver on a Kysan 1124090. Actually, I did this whole process with two motors because I wasn't sure whether the hardware itself would be an issue, so with another set of pins I'm using a Suncor Motor and it also doesn't respond and I also don't know why. It would be really helpful to debug if I could run a single G-code command just to get the motor running at a speed, and take that out of the equation. it doesn't have to be a command to an "extruder" but just a command to a pin out, like M42 D35 S100 (but I don't know the raw command for just testing a motor's connections).

D35, D37, D17 are the pin labels on the Arduino Mega. These do not correspond to pin numbers within Marlin. I believe that D35 actually corresponds to marlin pin 49 and this is the number you should enter in your firmware. You can find the mapping in fastio_1280.h: Hardware Pin : 02 03 06 07 01 05 15 16 17 18 23 24 25 26 64 63 13 12 46 45 44 43 78 77 76 75 74 73 72 71 60 59 58 57 56 55 54 53 50 70 52 51 42 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 22 21 20 19 97 96 95 94 93 92 91 90 89 88 87 86 85 84 83 82 04 08 09 10 11 14 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 47 48 49 61 62 65 66 67 68 69 79 80 81 98 99 100 Port : E0 E1 E4 E5 G5 E3 H3 H4 H5 H6 B4 B5 B6 B7 J1 J0 H1 H0 D3 D2 D1 D0 A0 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 C7 C6 C5 C4 C3 C2 C1 C0 D7 G2 G1 G0 L7 L6 L5 L4 L3 L2 L1 L0 B3 B2 B1 B0 F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 K0 K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 K7 E2 E6 E7 xx xx H2 H7 G3 G4 xx xx xx xx xx D4 D5 D6 xx xx J2 J3 J4 J5 J6 J7 xx xx xx xx xx Logical Pin : 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx Look on the top row for the pin number (e.g. D35 corresponds to 35), then look on the bottom row to find the pin number to use in Marlin (in this case, 49).

Ender 3 Pro Extruder Stepper Skipping with a Chunk sound I have a relatively new Ender 3 Pro, stock except for adding a tempered glass bed. I've fed about 3 kg of PLA filament so far, all Solutech brand. Near the end of the last reel, I started hearing a chunk noise. It varies in rate, between several/minute to going 10-15 between chunks. This has continued into a brand new, just unsealed reel so I don't think it's associated with the filament. I was able to finally discover that the sound is coming from the extruder stepper area and was able to see that when this happens, the filament drive wheel snaps back maybe 30-40 degrees. (This happens in the middle of printing a line, not when the filament retracts between lines.) I'm assuming that the stepper motor is slipping. There is no sign of gaps in the printed model nor is the filament on the reel binding that I can see. I'm guessing maybe that the filament is being fed faster than the hot end can accept it, causing back pressure. I'm using Cura 4.4.0 as my slicer the whole time and while I have changed some settings, everything associated with speed, feed rate, hot end temperature and such are all stock. I did not notice this happening until recently. Has anyone seen this happen before? Anyone have any idea what could be causing this?

UPDATE 3-May-2020: I have now confirmed that the problem was the extruder. Specifically, the input port which was causing the filament to bind. The front of the input port is a metal ring but the back is just plastic and and has worn from the PLA filament, as seen in this photo: After some delay (see my other question here) I have installed the new, all-metal extruder (original stepper), the clacking is gone as well as the significant under-extrusion. (I also replaced the Bowden tube and print bed springs but I don't believe these were the problem). Having seen what a few km of PLA did, I highly recommend upgrading the extruder. Side point: immediately after the replacement, I started getting corners lifting off the bed which I hadn't seen before. I realized that the new drive gear was slightly smaller than the old so I checked the extruder calibration and it was about 10% low. I adjusted the extruder steps/mm from 93 to 99 to correct for this. Original: It appears the problem was the filament binding in the entry to the extruder assembly. I did start seeing signs of under extrudement such as the outer layer of a rectangular object separating of the rest of the body. Later, the problem became worse, with a lot of clanking, to the point that prints became quite fragile. I have ordered a all-metal extruder assembly and will update as I get new results. By the way, I'm really not sure why it's binding but running a strip of filament through the entrance hole, it sure seem to be binding. But in trying to disassemble the extruder and starting by removing the filament, I managed to get molten filament in the bowden tube. Without thinking about it, I pulled the blob all the way into the fitting for the extruder, plugging it so much that I cannot get the fitting off nor push it back into the tube. Anyway, I'm taking the opportunity to upgrade the extruder, tube and springs.

Anet A6's filament not feeding through the nozzle Whenever I try putting the filament through the nozzle it does not go through. I have searched everywhere online and have found nothing.

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.

Making a 3D printed surface easily cleanable I want to FDM 3D-print an object, and be able to effectively clean the surface with standard kitchen cleaning solutions. While the 3D-printed object would not come in direct contact with food, it would come in contact with utensils used with food (e.g. forks, measuring cups, etc.). One of my main concerns is with being able to adequately clean the object when layer lines and general material porosity create areas that dirt/germs may accumulate. I believe my general requirements are: No high temperatures are anticipated Common FDM materials (PLA, ABS, PETG) Coatings or post-processing is fine How do I make a 3D-printed surface easily cleanable and relatively food-safe?

There is a huge difference between "Certified food -safe" and "is actually perfectly safe for you to use at home" . – Carl Witthoft Sep 18 '18 at 14:54 Regarding certified food safe I point to Ender 3 is capable of food safe printing? - you probably can't get the certification with a 3D printer, but, as Carl said, you might manage a pretty safe at home. So let's assume you go for that. To make a surface easily cleanable, it is best to make sure that the imperfections of the print are filled up and that there are no undercuts that are not easily cleanable. If you need it smoothed, do it mechanically (e.g. sanding)! Heat or chemicals as a smoothing method are to be avoided, as they can damage the print and accumulate the chemicals used in smoothing in the plastic from where they are released over time. To make the material both smooth and more safe at the same time, a generous coating with a food-safe lacquer or similar coating would be possible. This also might alleviate the problems with possibly having contaminants in the printing material - we don't know always what is in the printed plastic.

Can I design or remix a model in SketchUp Make and legally share it via Thingiverse, MyMiniFactory or similar? 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 can be found on the SketchUp website. 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, MyMiniFactory and 3D Warehouse. 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 and Print a Thing which can be disabled per model. Obviously the SketchUp Pro license 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.

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 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.

Can I really throw failed PLA prints on compost? 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?

This question has been asked on just about every forum out there. Here's one example from filabot.com . 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.

Can any filament be used in with any 3D printer? I recently heard that the 3D printing lab at my college can do fused-deposition with ABS and PLA, but I would like to use TPU, for greater flexibility. Is it possible to feed a TPU filament into the same machine built for ABS/PLA? Or is there no difference? Assume the diameters of the filaments are the same.

Is it possible to feed a TPU filament into the same machine built for ABS/PLA? Or is there no difference? Assume the diameters of the filaments are the same. The question is not what the machine is built for but how it is built. Let's break stuff down some into why some filaments work better than others and the challenges with them. Temperature range The first obstacle is the temperature range of the printer. For example, if your printer's Extruder can't get over 220 °C, you can't print ABS. You need to make sure your printer can match your intended filament's temperature range. TPU usually prints around between the same temperatures for PLA and ABS, so it should work from that range. Heated Bed Most Filaments work better with a heated bed, but some are almost impossible to be printed without. For TPU, a heated bed should be used but is not absolutely mandatory. Heated Chamber Some filaments can't be printed without a heated chamber, others like ABS highly benefit from it. TPU is ambivalent on this as far as I know. Extruder Setup There's basically 3 extruder setups. Pellet extruders are super rare, so we don't concern about them. The other two are Direct Drive and Bowden. In a Direct Drive, the extruder motor is right over the hotend, and pushes the filament directly into it. In a Bowden setup, the hotend and the extruder motor are connected via a Bowden tube. Both have benefits and drawbacks: A Bowden makes for a lighter carriage, leading to faster printing speeds. A Direct Drive has much less trouble with elastic filaments and can do much better with retraction. TPU is one of the filaments that works much better with Direct Drive. Other considerations Some Print services do print in machines set up for one filament type and that only, because it prevents cross-contamination of the nozzles, especially when a high-temperature print material remains in it when a low-temperature print comes next. Having for example a little bit of ABS left in a printer that runs PLA next can lead to very very extreme clogging.

Making Polyurethane molds with PLA (or ABS) 3D printed master I want to make Polyurethane molds for concrete using 3D printed PLA or ABS master object. like this video: (this video is not about concrete of course!) I'm not sure if it will stick to PLA or ABS master or not! if it does stick, whick wax material can solve this problem... Do I need to print my masters with another filament?

Temperature As polyurethane cures (or hardens), it undergoes a chemical bonding reaction, linking the mono- and oligomer strings in the components into long polyurethane chains. The chemical reaction is exothermic, it creates heat. So, we have a process that heats up the polyurethane mixture as it hardens, but how much? Well, it's hard to find numbers for it, but I suspect it can easily reach 30 to 40 °C, depending on the mixture (fast curing) it could easily go higher. To combat the effects of heat softening of the PLA/ABS model inside the mold, I strongly suggest printing with extra shells and extra infill. While most items can get away with 10 %, in this case, I suggest 20-30 %. ABS would be the superior choice above PLA as it starts to deform at a higher temperature. PLA can start to deform at around 60 °C, ABS only at about 80 °C. The temperature of the PU curing depends on the speed of the curing process - it is safer for the masters to choose a slower curing mix as the heat is generated over a longer time and the maximum temperature is thus lower as a result (as excess heat is lost to the room) Surface To reduce the sticking to the surface from the material creeping into the gaps of the model, it has to be as smooth as possible and best also sealed. If you choose ABS, a quick acetone vapor bath would do the trick in this case. PLA should be lacquer sealed as it doesn't like to stick to most waxes. Adding a mold release agent isn't necessarily needed, but could help in removing the masters from the mold. Conclusion ABS might be the better choice in this application. It is advisable to use extra-thick walls (3+), a lot of infill (20-30 %) and a vapor smoothed surface.

Can I use a metal filament on M3D Micro (or Pro)? Can I use a metal filament such as Copper, Zinc Alloy, Silver filaments on M3D Micro? The Pro hasn't come out yet but I assume it would if the Micro can since the Pro is suppose to be the improvement edition. An example of a metal filament that I found is this Silver PLA 1.75mm Filament. Here's one for Cooper PLA 1.75mm Filament. I would like to make small sculptures or bracelet beads/charms, and whatever else I could think of making using metal. And, I'm asking because I'm new to 3d printing, I want to learn how to work with a 3d printer and M3D is very affordable for me. So I'm making sure before I buy. Note that I've emailed M3D twice and I didn't get any reply. If not M3D, can any other 3D Printer comparable to M3D do this? The MBot Mini, maybe?

Most 3D printers that use non-proprietary filament can print exotic filaments, such as the ones you mention. One thing to be aware of, though, is that some of these filaments wear down the nozzle far more quickly than ordinary PLA, and therefore should be used with reinforced nozzles (unless you have extra nozzles to spare). Carbon fibre and metallic filaments are generally known to increase nozzle wear, while softer alloys such as wood and bamboo generally are less abrasive. A quick google search reveals that many people have used non-proprietary filament on the M3D Micro successfully, but be aware that using such filaments is not covered by your warranty. If you are going to use abrasive filaments with your Micro, I would check that M3D allows you to replace the nozzle first.

What choices do we have on Clear resins for DLP? I'm searching for a truly clear DLP resin which can polymerize between 400nm and 405nm. I found the unpigmented from FunToDo, but it seems to be yellow-clear: I'm trying to achieve something similar to this: Is there any resin out there which costs likely the same (about 50€/liter) which will give results like this?

Formlabs sells a completely clear resin that they've even made simple lenses from, but it's about $150 for a liter. I have no idea how well it would work with your DLP setup. Looks amazing in the pictures though. MatterHackers sells PhotoCentric UV Firm Clear for $90 for a liter as well. It's not quite as easy finding pictures of this stuff, but from what it looks like, it's still pretty decent. Assuming you've got a UV DLP Disclaimer, the PhotoCentric stuff says it's a UV resin (10nm to 400nm IIRC) and I have not the slightest clue what Formlabs designs their resin for, so YMMV.

Mixing (closed loop) stepper drivers on MKS main board Can I mix BIGTREETECH S42B closed loop stepper drivers on the MKS Gen L controller board with other drivers? Are the pins in the same position? Would mixing work?

As far as I know, that should work. You need to define the correctly used drivers in your configuration. For the closed loop drivers, the board (via a break out board) has to provide the pulses to the motor driver (on the back of the stepper). If you use such a closed loop driver you need to disable the stepper driver type in your Configuration.h file for those you plan to insert a closed loop driver. The firmware will assume the A4988 driver is being used: Now you need to set high enough values for the MAXIMUM_STEPPER_RATE (150000): and the MINIMUM_STEPPER_PULSE (3): in Marlin/src/inc/Conditionals_adv.h under HAS_DRIVER(4988).

Skipping Y-steps, only when using Ultimaker Cura In order to find out why my printer sometimes skips Y-steps (always in the same direction) only in Ultimaker Cura, I am digging into the G-code to understand the problem better. However, thousands of lines of G-code are hard to analyze. I am using a Mk2 heatbed with a glass sheet, and a NEMA17 motor in a P3Steel Toolson Edition printer. The axis feels reasonably easygoing in both directions. Reducing the acceleration to 4000 did not get rid of the problem completely - it might have relieved the issue, though. I didn't do quantifiable tests, sorry. Are there any other obvious things I might have missed? I know the acceleration might still be rather high, but since it works with Slic3r easily I would like to take advantage of some features in Ultimaker Cura with this printing speed.

You answered your own question in a comment. Yes, of course, increasing the maximum supplied current to the motor gets rid of the issue. Still, I'd rather go with lower current to limit heating up the motors. I was just wondering if there is something in the two slicing engines that makes cura provoke much harsher movements that cause the printer to lose steps... – kamuro May 21 '17 at 21:22 Motors are tough Motors are meant to be warm, some are made to be hot. Not all motors have the same specs, but I pulled one on Amazon (link) which shows a rated temperature rise of 60°C above a rated ambient temperature of 50°C. If these specifications stack, and they should because the insulation of the motor is rated to 130°C, you can boil water on the stepper motors. But ... other factors But, what are the real limits, and how much current should you run through the motors? First, many 3D printers have plastic mounts for the stepper motors. You don't want that plastic to soften. It can if the motors get too hot. I've seen it in a commercial 2D printer, and gnashing of teeth across the Pacific ensued. Even for PLA, that temperature is uncomfortable to human flesh. I soften PLA at 75°C when fitting tight parts, but PETG and ABS are good for higher temperatures. Low current hurts accuracy Motors are remarkably linear converters of current to torque, but they still have non-linearities at the limits. This matters most when micro-stepping, which (AFAIK) all 3D printers use for higher resolution. Two factors hurt accuracy at lower currents when micro-stepping. Non-linearities in the drivers result in magnetic fields that do not linearly align with the commanded drive strength. The torque is not exactly what is needed to position the motor between the poles at the correct angle. Static friction, sometimes called stiction, requires additional torque to overcome. In a slow micro-stepping move, this will result in the motion hanging back, then jumping ahead. Motion can be ragged rather than smooth. Extrusion can be pulsating rather than smooth. Both are improved by applying enough current to the motor to generate enough torque. More current gives more heat, but also better behavior and performance. Power up the motors! They can take it. Check their mounts to be sure the mounts aren't underdesigned. Why Cura and not Slic3r? A deeply detailed review of the g-code would be needed. It could be as simple as the direction of infill, or the preferred direction of your model compared with the direction chosen by the two slicers. It could be some limits coded into the "custom g-code" portion of the two slicers. I am not familiar with Cura, but Slic3r allows you to insert additional g-code under many situations. Something brought in with a printer profile may be limiting acceleration of jerk. Could be differences in fan setting, or almost anything. When you are dealing with a marginal situation, and it sounds like this is right on the edge, very small differences can cause dramatic changes in how the whole system responds. 3D printers are complex systems, with resonances, many vibration modes, non-linear friction. Knowing for sure may be beyond the scope of your and our engineering tools. Don't operate on the Margins Set the motors to the proper current levels. Set the bed to the proper height. Set the hot end to the right temperature. Try to always stay in the sweet spot. Your prints will reward you.

Calibrating a resin printer I have purchased a Creality LD-002R resin printer. It is solid hardware, with a good experience and great value for the price, but it comes with very little documentation. I am looking at calibration procedure of the print surface. I have read in reference to other printers that it is customary to interpose a sheet of paper when leveling the print surface against the pane of glass. Is this applicable? Are there any other setup recommendations?

First of all a caveat: Leveling an FDM printer ...is done differently than an SLA/DLP printer When calibrating an FDM printer, you align the bed with the X and Y axis, using a paper, metal shim or another tool (such as a feeler gauge) to make sure the plane that the nozzle moves in is parallel to the bed as much as possible. The paper, shim and gauge all serve in making sure that the nozzle does not push into the bed on the move and to be an easily measurable system. You need to do several measurements and repeat the process till the bed is level. This can take quite some time with paper or shims, which is why I use a feeler gauge in the micrometer area. Leveling an SLA/DLP printer when leveling an SLA/DLP (aka Resin) printer, you also want to align the bed, but you want to align it parallel to the screen. The process is rather simple: mount the bed and loosen the retention mechanism, have the printer move down and press the bed against the screen surface. Some printers need to have the (preferably empty and clean) vat installed, others need you to remove it. Tighten the retention mechanism. Move the bed up, you are leveled. Only now comes the resin (and vat!) back. Some printers have their leveling mechanism separated from the mounting screw - that allows removing the bed for taking off the part and keep the leveling intact. In the case of the Creality ld-002r there's a video Tutorial, the alignment screws are on the side of the carriage. Remove your resin vat before leveling. Loosen only those side screw, keep the top one fast! The reason why I suggest to level against an empty vat is to make sure that on the one hand the resin doesn't go bad (it should be exposed to as little light as possible), you are exposed to the least resin fumes as possible and to make sure that no pieces are inside the vat when your printer firmly presses the bed against the screen - it could damage the screen or surface would there be chunks of former prints left in the vat! Also, you don't want to contaminate your tools with resin, which means you want to work on the fasteners with no resin in the vat.

How to force Cura to walk through a layer in one run? I already tried a lot settings in Cura and try to search for a solution but without success. Maybe someone got this issue and solved it. I want to prevent Cura from printing such gaps at the wings to make it in one run. With ironing one run would (hopefully) bring better results. See the animation for what I mean. Why want to do this? I hope to prevent thes ironing issues shown in the following pic.

I am not aware of a general solution. For your specific issue, try rotating the object 90 degrees around the z-axis.

Getting PLA to stick to a cold bed Right now my heated bed is down and I had no time to try and fix it and I am trying to print something for a friend. I am having the PLA lift around the edges which I have NEVER experienced. The glue is not helping like it did with the heat. And I also tried rubbing alcohol on the masking tape I use, heard that helps and it was not that much better than the glue stick. What can I do to keep the plastic sticking to the bed during print. I will note that the lift is not super bad, but I do like the littlest of lift on any print.

Most of the same reccomendations that apply for adhesion to a hot bed apply for a cold one. The first ones to come to mind: really dial in the nozzle height make the first layer taller than the rest (e.g.: 0.2mm if the rest of your print is 0.1mm) print the first layer very slowly print the first layer at higher temperature use a brim or a raft (on my first printer, that had no heated bed, rafts gave the least deformation) turn off the part fan for the first layer adapt your model to reduce twisting forces (relief cuts, print it in parts, choose orientation wisely, etc...) If your slicer has this feature, you could also try to print with a shroud.

Is it possible to get higher resolutions by using high resolution encoders and custom firmware? So I was thinking about is it possible to reach higher resolutions with encoders and DC motors? I found a cheap high-resolution magnetic encoder that can be used along with a DC motor to access higher resolutions. The encoder has 8192 PPR meaning that it can measure up to 0.04 degrees if I have correctly calculated. So if for a stepper with 0.9 step angle and no micro-stepping with 20 tooth pulley and 2mm belt, the steps/mm is 10, it means every 9 degrees with this pulley and belt setup makes 1mm and so 0.04 degree makes 0.004mm movement that is about 4 microns. Is this correct and possible? If so, why don't big companies use this method? Link to the encoder: RLS RMB20 rotary magnetic encoder module

The mistake in your reasoning is assuming no microstepping. Most 3D printers use 16 microsteps, and in my experience with both cheap A4988 drivers and nice TMC2209 drivers, microstepping is quite accurate. As part of an answer to a question I asked, you can see a test print showing single-microstep features. My motors have 1.8° step angle, yielding 3200 steps per rotation at 16 microsteps, or 12.5 microns of linear movement per microstep. With 0.9° step angle you could get it down to half that, and you could probably halve it again going to 32 microsteps. Even if you can't get it as good as your 4 microns with stepper motors though, at 12.5 micron positioning resolution you're already to the point where extrusion error is going to play a much bigger role in dimensional accuracy than toolhead positioning error does. Going past that with FDM requires high resolution extruder axis movement, closed-loop control with a precise filament diameter sensor, direct drive with minimal distance between the extruder gear and nozzle, etc.

Which proximity sensor to use? I am building a dolly and I am confused as to which proximity sensor to use. Should I go for M8 or M12 and 5 V or 6-36 V? What should be the best detecting distance? Should it be 2/4/8 mm. Which one should I select?

Tomas Sanladerer has produced a nice video on this topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=il9bNWn66BY @ 7:31 you see an overview of the precision of various sensors, including the ones you mention. It appears that the M12-4 and M18-8 sensors are more accurate than the M8-8.

MOSFET burned and high heated bed resistance I am a newbie to 3D printing and I am making a 3D printer from scratch (Cartesian). I've got a RAMPS 1.4 shield and an Arduino Mega 2560 board. I have a few questions and it would be very nice if I can get answers. The onboard MOSFET (STP55NFO6L) for the heatbed is dead and I think that the reason is because of the high resistance of my heat bed (1.8 Ω). I have searched a lot and I am fully confused about what to do. I am thinking of buying an external MOSFET and wire it up with the RAMPS fan MOSFET (STP55NF06L) and use the same heat bed. Buy an external MOSFET and replace the onboard MOSFET (dead one) with the fan MOSFET (because of the underlying 11 A circuit) and use same heatbed. Same as 2., but buying a new heatbed also. Buying a RAMPS 1.6 and use old heatbed. I am totally confused because of lot of searching. Please anybody help me. What should I do?

The resistance of the heated bed being too high can not have caused the MOSFET to burn out. Only a too low resistance could cause that. Keep in mind that measuring relatively low resistances (such as the one of your heated bed) is difficult, and if you just used a regular multimeter it might indicate a wrong value (e.g. due to the resistance of the test leads or a poor connection between the probe and heated bed). Therefore, the actual resistance might be (slightly) lower. A 1.8 Ω heated bed at 12 V will draw around 7 A of current. This is well within the capabilities of the MOSFET on board of the RAMPS. So either the resistance of the heated bed is lower than you measured (if the resistance was 1.2 Ω or lower this could cause the MOSFET to burn out), or you simply got unlucky with the quality of your RAMPS board. The (supposedly) high resistance definitely doesn't make the heated bed compatible with 24 V. Using a 1.8 Ω bed with 24 V would cause a 13 A current draw and 320 W of power. This is a lot more than is sensible for a 214 mm x 214 mm bed. All of the alternatives 1 and 4 you have listed are reasonable options. There is no reason (option 3) to replace the heated bed as there is no indication it is faulty. I see no reason to take option 2 since it involves desoldering and resoldering the fan MOSFET for no reason (if you are using an external MOSFET the fuse is no longer a limitation). There is a chance you'll damage the MOSFET doing this and option 1 only requires a trivial firmware change. Option 4 (upgrading to RAMPS 1.6) is purely a matter of personal preference.

Ender 3 v2 won't read or recognize any SD cards I've just received my Ender 3v2 and tried multiple SD cards, all have been formatted to FAT32 with no luck. Under the Print selection, all I get is the back button. I looked and I have the V4.2.2 and the firmware is up to date, Showing 1.0.2 unless this is not right and this is why I'm having this issue. Even when plugging directly into the computer, nothing is showing up.

Format for 32 with MBR for ender 3d I had similar issue. Check Reddit

Monoprice i3 clone heat shuts off printing abs I have the Monoprice Select 3D Printer (i3 clone). I'm trying to print ABS. I set the temperature to 230°C for the extruder and 110°C for the bed. I can see the printer warming up to those temperatures and then when it gets there the bed and extruder set temperatures reset to 0, and the print does not start. I pulled the ABS out and went back to PLA and printed a part without any issues. Any thoughts on what the issue might be?

this could be connected to a thermal shutdown protection. Most firmwares requires a decent increase in temperature every few seconds. if you use Marlin then in the source code you can extend thermal shutdown timings. what to check: check every single connector to eliminate any fiddling or play - risk of fire !!! if any of wires goes hot - double check connections, replace wires/connectors note temperature change (how many seconds/degree) on the hotbead then increase voltage on psu (probably you have a led psu - so there is a small regulator next to the connectors) validate if that help

Estimating printing time from Cura I know that the actual printing time is longer than the time estimated by Cura, due to acceleration and jerk factor. However, I have printed a small pyramid for which Cura estimates 4.0 minutes, while the measured printing time is 2 minutes and 40 seconds. What reasons could produce this difference? For clarity, I'm using a Delta Wasp 20 40 equipped with a clay extruder for which parameters such as E-step (for E axis) are unpredictable since I have no filament.

If you properly define your own machine with a delta_wasp.def.json file you can fill in the acceleration and jerk settings of your printer, so that Cura will use the correct values for print time estimation. For example, take a look at how the Ultimaker 2 is defined. Exposing these settings to the Custom FDM Printer wizard hasn't been implemented (yet).

Print Nozzle Dragging and Smearing Filament while Printing I am building a Prusa i3 MK2 Clone and I am caught on this one. I have replaced the extruder with a MK8 adapted by myself to fit with most of the previous hardware from the E3D style extruder. My current problem is that the nozzle appears to be dragging on the top of the layers. I can't tell if it's over extrusion or a layer height issue or what. I am testing by printing the 20mm calibration cube. The dimensions appear to be spot-on, but the layers start building up too much filament such that it just gets re-melted and shuffled around: Anyone have a clue what this could be? Software, Hardware, Slic3r Settings? I have: 0.5mm Nozzle Diameter. MK8 Direct Drive extruder. Anything else you want to know? Thanks! --- UPDATE --- Thanks everyone for your help. Turns out it was seriously over-extruding, like 3x what it should have been! I ran through this instructable: http://www.instructables.com/id/How-to-calibrate-the-Extruder-on-your-3d-Printer/ Which helped me with what I needed to do to fix the issue, but just re-flashed Marlin on the printer with the updated setting. Here's the result! WAY better, I still have some z-wobbling issues but i think the frame just needs more support than it has now and that should fix up the slightly jagged corners.

You stated your print of a 20mm cube came out spot on so I will rule out any z-axis configuration issues. It clearly seems like you are extruding too much plastic. I use slic3r myself with repetier so I am familiar with the settings. Print Settings - Advanced All the values should be 0 except first layer sometimes is 100%-200% depending on your personal setup. Increasing these values may cause more filament to leave the extruder. Filament Settings - Diameter This should be set to 1.75 or 3 depending on your filament size. If you accidentally have it set to 1.75 when your filament is 3mm, it would probably be over-extruding since it pushing almost double the plastic with the same length. Filament Settings - Extrusion multiplier This should be set to 1 or slowly adjust it 0.05 increments to reduce overall amount of plastic leaving the nozzle. Printer Settings - Nozzle diameter This should be set to 0.5 since your nozzle is 0.5mm. Make sure your nozzle truly is this value. EDITED 10/19/17 - OP has solved problem and his own answer made me realize I made mistake on how to measure and correct extrusion steps/mm. Ignore this below and see what OP wrote in their edit. If all these Slic3r configurations fail or are correct and do not solve your problem, I think you may want to look into your motor step settings for the extruder. It may be too high pushing more filament than it should. To correct this, you need to do the length test where you will extrude 10mm or 50mm and measure the string of plastic. There might be some stretch so a 10mm may measure as 11mm but as long as your close it should be good. If you extrude 10mm and you measure 25mm, you need to recalculate your steps per mm. Also for your first layer, make sure it is not being smushed to the build plate. You want it to be flattened a little to provide good adhesion but not too close to the build plate where it would constrict the nozzle. Hope this helps, and good luck on your prints. May you never have to deal with thermal runaway error :)

Auto bed leveling: systematic slope I have a heavily modified DiscoEasy 200 from Dagoma, see picture: The heatbed is mounted on 4 springs, on top of the original plate. I made sure the X carriage was parallel to the table. I then tried to level the bed manually, with the 4 springs: I pushed the nozzle into each corner of the bed, and used the paper-gauge method to adjust the springs so that the bed would always be at the same distance of the nozzle. I then setup the Z-offset on the machine and tried to print a mainstream bed leveling test from thingiverse. I use a 4 points auto bed leveling. And I have a systematic problem. Every time I try the bed leveling test, it seems the right side of the bed is lower than the left one. The front and rear right corners seem to be lower than on the left side. I tried to expand the springs of the front and rear right corners, but the auto bed leveling at the beginning of my prints re-introduces the problem. The right side seems to be ~100 µm lower than what it should be. It's not a lot, but it's enough for prints to fail. I can't figure out what the problem is. Do you have any idea? it's driving me crazy to not understand where the problem comes from.

Did you check if your bed is parallel to the gantry? It can happen that after leveling one side and moving to the other the adjustment there puts the first side out of alignment - I level my bed by doing some couple turns

Partial underextrusion in walls I'm facing weird "pillars" of underextrusion on outer walls of my XYZ test cube. On the pictures below I`ve printed PLA test cubes with a 0.4 mm nozzle, 0.2 mm height and 210/50 °C hotends/bed temperature. Gaps are appearing in walls parallel to both X and Y sides. The pictured side is parallel to Y face. I'm slicing with Cura, my printer is a homebuilt around Anycubic Kossel with Marlin 2.0 onboard. What have I tried already: 1. Temperature from 190 to 210 °C 2. Retraction from none to 6 mm 60 mm/sec 3. Tuning down Jerk in Marlin from [10,10,0.3] to [5,5,0.3] 4. Tuning down acceleration from 3000 to 1000 5. Tuning print speed from 60 to 30 mm/sec 6. Checking belts, nozzle and extruder. Now I just ran out of ideas. Delta is calibrated by G33 autotune. Mechanics looks just fine. What am I missing? UPD1: tried removing combing - it did not help. But I noticed that my printer accelerates strangely at this parts UPD2: could it be stuttering? I have 320 segments per second with block buffer size of 8 bytes(?) UPD3: lowering segments count to 120 and raising block size to 32

Localized underextrusion usually means you're oozing material somewhere it wasn't supposed to go. Since you have Marlin 2.0, linear advance might help solve that, and in general right retraction amount is important and turning off combing may be needed (combing over infill allows material to ooze). Also there are reported bugs in Marlin 2.0 such as https://github.com/MarlinFirmware/Marlin/issues/15473 that might be related, though I would think you'd not be using junction deviation since it's supposedly incompatible with deltas.

PLA 3D Print longevity after being printed I am curious about the longevity of a PLA printed part used in a commercial application. It would be a mounting bracket installed in an industrial enclosure. The internal cabinet temperature would be less than 100 °F, and have an internal air circulation fan to keep the control PLC cool. It would be in a steel enclosure, in an industrial environment, with no sunlight or UV exposure. Would the PLA hold up over time, or have any issues with delamination or brittleness?

I've had white Hatchbox PLA parts in use outside in direct or partial sun for 3+ years without issue. It may help if you paint the parts for outdoor use, but I suspect the environment you describe would be fine for several years.

Filament not feeding then eventually blocked I have an ANET A2 Prusa - which I've setup and performed a few prints on and they have various problems with the quality. I'm after some specific experience on what the flow of filament should look like or if my decription triggers someone I've been adjusting settings - In particular the temperature - as the filament seemed too fluid as I could easily cause a large spurt of molten plastic by manually pushing the filament with very little effort. So I reduced the head temperature to 195 and all seemed better However after a time - I noticed on a longer print that the feeding was sometimes failing with the filament jerking back as the feeder slipped off it The stepper did not appear to slip back just the gear skipped on the filament It appeared to cause a problem in the print with a few of the lines being missing before it started extruding normally again I increased the temperature back to 200 - however the issue continued intermittently however I left it and when I returned the head had become blocked with the final part of the succesful print consisting of very thin hair like extrusions and eventually stopping completely The head is flooded and I need to clean it out So my questions are - how runny should the filament look when the head is at the correct temperatures, is the extremely runny filament I saw at 200 obviously too hot - or is that normal or at least have people seen it looking like that when successfully printing? Initially , before I reduced the temperature, I doubled the skirt and that seem to make a good enough print Does anyone have experience of why it can seem to be printing but then slowly start failing until the head becomes blocked?

From my experience with mk8 extruders lower than optimal nozzle temperature or clogged nozzle can lead to an extruder's stepper motor overheating and partial burning out of a stepper It looks like “Achilles' heel” of mk8 extruders. I had to change 4 stepper motors for 2 3d printers with mk8 due to that First symptoms – skipped steps. You could also check a temperature of your stepper – next symptom is a high temperature of stepper motor after several hours of printing My fix for this issue – adding cooling fans to stepper sides and top (3 fans). It significantly reduced overheating and hopefully a life of stepper Another solution of this issue can be in using of a stepper motor with gearbox to increase torque on a filament gear, so no high torque needed from stepper itself About printing temperature, it depends on plastic which you are using I’m using ABS plastic with an optimal printing temperature from 230-260 Celsius degree. For my current plastic supplier optimal temp is about 255 Celsius degree To check the optimal temperature for your plastic you can print one box in different temperatures depending on Z position and found the optimal temperature by the z position of surface with the best quality. You can find code samples how doing it here If a temperature is too high then this part of the box will be bloated, if it's too low - you can see the gaps. Here is the video, which illustrating this for PLA UPDATE: The issue was in the low temperature of printing. After calibration and setting temperature by calibration outcomes to 200 Celsius degree printer started working well However, please be aware of the fact that wrong printing temperature can not only decrease the quality of printed things, but also can lead to wear of your printer parts and even can break it

Is 3D printing safe for your health? I would like to buy a 3D printer, but I'm concerned about the health risks that are associated with its operation. Some groups of scientists say it can be harmful for humans. What do I need to consider before buying a 3D printer if I care about my health? Are there any safe printers?

There is very little information about safety available, as home 3D printers are relatively new. However, plastics such as ABS have a long history in making plastic products, and a study found that at traditional manufacturing methods (such as injection molding and hot wire cutting) do not release dangerous levels of carcinogens and/or respiratory sensitizers in to the air. Of course, 3D printers are not among the processes covered in the study. In home 3D printing circles, this study that looks at ultrafine particle (UFP) emissions, is often cited. It finds that printing ABS releases relatively high levels of UFP's and PLA releases significantly fewer (but still quite a large amount). However, it is unclear whether/how dangerous these UFP's are in the amounts emitted. It is often suggested that PLA, partly because of the reduced UFP emissions is safer to print than ABS, partly because of its "natural" origins as it can be derived from materials such as cornstarch. I would caution against this line of reasoning since "natural" materials can still be poisonous (snake venom is natural, after all) and the cornstarch is heavily processed so it hardly resembles its original form. The lower UFP emissions may suggest it is safer, but the study is only quantitative, not qualitative. That said, PLA does probably pose less of a risk (despite my earlier argumentation against "natural" materials, PLA does play quite nicely with the human body), but I contend the risk with ABS is not too large anyways, given that it has been safely used in factories for decades. Another study is often miscited, supposedly saying that 3D printing ABS releases hydrogen cyanide. The study only looks at the thermal decomposition of ABS, which happens at significantly higher temperatures than are reached during printing (but a significantly malfunctioning printer might cause toxic gasses to be released, but I contend that at that point you should worry about your printer being on fire, rather than temporary exposure to some toxins). There are no printers out there that are fundamentally safer than others. However, some printers have an enclosure (containing the fumes) and some even have a carbon filter and a fan for fume extraction. If you would like to err on the side of caution, this might be a good choice (but again, it is not clear if a carbon filter is totally effective). Finally, as printers are generally quite noisy it tends to be preferrable to keep your printer in a separate room from where you usually work. In this case, fume exposure (during the few minutes that you go to check on your print) is minimal, and the potential advantages of a "safer" printers or using "safer" materials diminish. Incidental exposure as a hobbyist is probably not a big deal; workers in factories are exposed to the fumes of melted plastic their entire lives and they don't seem to be dropping dead. On the other hand, if you are going to be printing structurally then it is probably preferable to move your printer to a separate room, if not because of health and safety because of the noise.

How do I keep my extruder head from getting clogged? Using a thermoplastic MDF printer with a 0.4mm extruder nozzle, I frequently have trouble with the nozzle getting clogged. I am not sure what's causing the clog, but my guesses are dust and/or burnt filament (from leaving the hot end on without extruding). What can I do to prevent, or at least minimize, the extruder nozzle getting clogged? Bonus question: What other common causes of clogs are there? (ie what should I watch out for besides dust and leaving the hot end on?)

Different types of hotends and extruders can lead to different problems associated with clogging. Based on my personal experience the leading causes of clogs and jams are the following Foreign material in the nozzle (dirt, dust, low quality filament) Mixing materials in the hotend (running ABS at 220 then switching to PLA without purging the nozzle) Excessive retraction or "heat soak" in PLA (PLA expands when heated if your retraction is set to high you can actually push the expanded PLA high enough that it cools down and can no longer flow) To solve these issues I recommend using one type of filament, preferably decent quality (typically $40 per kg), if you swap materials be sure to completely purge your nozzle of the higher temperature material. Set your retraction as low as you can trying to minimize ooze (try .4 mm for all metal hotend or 2-3 mm for makerbot style). To minimize carbonized plastic in your hotend don't leave your hotend's heater on for extended periods of time. One way to keep dust from accumulating on your filament is to cover your rolls when you aren't using them, I personally use hairnets, you can buy a 12 pack for a couple of dollars and they last for a long time.

3D printing overhangs that are over .200 in I am new to 3D printing but have been in CNC Machining for a few years. I have a part I am trying to print that is a cylinder 1.000 in. in diameter and has a .200 in overhang starting at 1.300 in. In other words I am printing a 1.300 in. cylinder that is 1.500 in. tall that at 1.300 in. its diameter increases by .200 in. When I first printed the part the overhang had sunk or fallen out. Not by much and is still usable but made a crappy finish. What would I need to do in order to have the overhang not drop as the base layer extended outward .200 in. at 1.300 in.? I tried slowing the feed rate but that was worse. I also lowered the temp to 195 °C. I am using a Monoprice Select Mini running at 200 °C and a 1.0 Speed (Not really sure what that feed rate is in terms of mm/s). Based on what I've seen so far I would increase the speed and keep the temp at 200 °C. Any suggestions, I hope I have explained my problem well enough.

The world of 3D Printers usually uses the metric system, especially in nozzle sizes. 0.2 inches are therefore better referred to as 5 mm, which is a considerable amount: that's 11 to 13 perimeters from a 0.4 mm nozzle, depending on extrusion width (0.46 and 0.4 mm respectively). Furthermore, the bore of the item isn't supported either, it is bridging. To print overhangs and bridging without sagging, one should activate the generation of support material in the slicer. Generally speaking, PLA (judging from the print temperature) doesn't need to be printed with a raft and would be better served with a brim for bed adhesion, unless you have a perforated bed. If you have to print in the shown orientation, then you should activate support generation in your slicer. For this part, however, there is a better solution: it is of very simple geometry and it doesn't have to be printed as shown but equally could be printed "upside-down" by being rotated around the X-Axis by 180° in the slicer. This has two benefits: it removes all unsupported overhangs an avoids support structure, making the wasted material pretty much nonexistent. I strongly recommend taking a look at my 3D Design Primer and the excellent question on How to decide print orientation? and then delve into further reading: How to print an overhanging arc How can I improve the overhang angles my printer can successfully print? Is there any setting that could allow me to print this overhang without support?

Hotend doesn't maintain temperature I got an Anycubic Predator last month, and after resolving a few mechanical problems, I was able to get it printing decently well. The only significant modification I've made so far is a set of 8-diode TL Smoothers, and I'm now mostly operating it via Octoprint. However, during the last few prints, I've noticed the temperature dropping midway through the print. It warms up and cools down fine, but for some reason it's not able to sustain the temperature throughout the print. In this case, the print started out at the correct temperature (200 °C), held that temp for around 2 hours, then it dropped to a lower temp (174 °C). It eventually went back up to the target temp, then dropped again 5 minutes later. I tried manually adjusting it to see if that could fix it, but no luck. After this print completed, I restarted it to show how it is easily able to reach the target temp and hold it at the start of the print: Any tips on diagnosing and resolving this issue?

Safety First Let's look at the graphs. First: you should swap firmware for one that has Thermal Runaway, as, as it is, running about 15 minutes with 28 K less than the printer is ordered to work at is a clear indication that there is no Thermal runaway protection in place - it should have tripped over that long ago! But there is more! Problem But this graph and the lack of Thermal Runaway Protection also are typical for printers that have a design flaw: If the airflow from the part cooling fans or the coldend-cooling fan (that's the fan that always runs) brushes over the heater block, it cools it. This limits the achievable temperature. Luckily, such is easily remedied in one of several ways: Changing the airducts for ones that does not hit the heater block Adding a silicone sock around the heater block Kapton-tape and ceramic wool can be used to make a heater-sock too Adding an air-shield in the shape of a bit of tinfoil can redirect the airflow away from the heater block, but make positively sure it is mounted Fire-Safe and can't be lost into the print!

Heated Bed not heating on original Prusa i3. Using a Ramps 1.4 EFB So as the title said my heated bed stopped heating mid print. I'm pretty confident the bed itself is not the problem as I've ran continuity tests from the wires and a resistance check (which showed a total resistance of about 1.5 ohms, which is where it should be). I've done voltage checks across the input terminals which showed a successful output of 12 V. Finally I did a voltage test across the output terminal at D8 where the heated bed should be outputted to. The result came up with nearly 0 V. I then noticed that the LED that usually lights up for D8 was turned off. The weird thing is, I unplugged the wires from D8 and this time the LED lit up like it was supposed to. Due to this, I believe the problem to be with the MOSFET attached to D8. My proposed solution would be to move the heated bed terminal to D9 instead of D8. I wish to this because despite the firmware set up for a fan, I do not have a fan attached to D9. This leaves this terminal open and with a potentially unharmed MOSFET. Despite this I have found no information on how to go about accomplishing this. What do you guys think? Is that even a good idea or should the component (or board be replaced)? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

First you should check if the bed still works when applying 12V directly. You can then also check the voltage over the 12V output terminals to measure the power supply unit while it is powering the bed. It is unclear whether you measured the voltage of the PSU while it was powering a large load. It is also a good idea to get the external MOSFET board out of the equation (the less components you have, the less you need to troubleshoot). From the post can be concluded that you are using the so-called RAMPS EFB setup, e.g. in Marlin firmware defined by constant IS_RAMPS_EFB in your firmware printer setup (Extruder on pin 10, fan on pin 9 and bed on pin 8). In the pin configuration file pins_RAMPS.h you can find the following lines: #define FAN_PIN RAMPS_D9_PIN #define HEATER_BED_PIN RAMPS_D8_PIN To change the pin layout, switch the values of the constants.

XYZPrinting Premium Metallic PLA Conductivity I have a XYZPrinting Da Vinci Mini W+ that I got for last Christmas. I am looking at the filaments available for it, since the included PLA is running 'low' (according to it) at 21 metres remaining. The one filament type that interested me the most is the Premium Metallic PLA. My question, that the website doesn't seem to answer, is how conductive is this material? Does it have any conductivity that would make it realistic to use to carry a current from something like an Arduino or Raspberry Pi, or is it too insulated, meant to only look metal, to act as a conductor? Why I ask (Background - Not as Important) I ask this, because of an idea I had. Printing a pretty low quality PCB type circuit. Instead of being forced to keep my circuits on breadboards with wires jumping from here and there, I would take a conductive layer and sandwich is between to insulating layers. If I wanted two trace layers, I'd do the following pattern (with I being insulating and C conductive) "ICICI". Since I only can print in one filament type at a time, I'd print each layer in the thinnest thickness (1 micron, I believe), and have to fuse them together. I could do this in a few ways, using glue of some sort, or a hand-help filament pen to fuse the layers from the outside (the conductive layers would be slightly smaller, of course).

Most PLAs are non-conductive: they contain little to no metal in comparison to plastic and can't make a conductive path. Even metallic PLA does not contain enough metal to be conductive. There are some rare filaments that are conductive, they are sold as conductive PLA. I have yet to encounter a non-black conductive PLA. One filament I suspect to be possibly conductive but have no hard evidence is made by The Vitual Foundry and contains about 80% metal. It is intended to be treated in the oven to burn out the plastic part, leaving behind a somewhat pure metal structure, but might be conductive without this process already. I have no experience with this and all my exposure to it was this answer. It should be highly abrasive though.

Is there any reason not to clean nozzles with fire? Specifically using stainless steel nozzles, but I guess it's worth knowing about brass too. Is there any reason to be concerned about dimensional accuracy of the nozzle or anything like that as a result of repeated heating with a butane torch?

If you carbonize the filament or other particles that are clogging the nozzle, then you will never get them clean. In my experience, it's not worth cleaning the nozzle with anything other than cleaning filament. If that doesn't work then change the nozzle. Heating the metal nozzle with a torch will change the temper of the material. I used to try cleaning with a soldering iron; which was to no avail. Purchase a dozen brass nozzles and save your self the headache. Either that or a good quality set of stainless steel ones. They are easier to clean with the cleaning filament and aren't ablated by the filament as quickly, allowing for better dimensional accuracy over multiple prints. https://www.amazon.com/eSUN-CLEANING-Filament-Printers-Cleaning/dp/B00MVIYNFW/

Bed and nozzle temperature jumping During my last print I noticed this jumpy behavior during heat up (blue is bed, red is hotend): So I am wondering about the jumps. What could cause this? I do not think that it is a defunct sensor (it is in both sensors) and I also don't think it is real. Could this pose some sort of hazard as temperature might not properly be controlled? I use an Anet A8 printer with Marlin 1.1.9 and Octoprint

Since the terminal temperatures never exceed the setpoints, there's no apparent potential for disaster. Whether it's due to missing readings or to some sequencing of power (current) applied to the bed vs. the hotend, it really doesn't matter. If you have a similar graph of the temperatures over an hour of printing and you see signifcant anomalies there, that might be of interest.

print pausing during printing I got a new CR-10S 3D printer (I received it at Christmas). It has been printing just fine until yesterday, I was doing a print and it randomly paused, it did not restart on its own, I had to restart the print, then the item finished just fine. I am printing today, a very small item, the printer now stopped 3 times. How can I fix this, or do I need to return it?

The cr10s has a filament run-out sensor. If the microswitch doesn't function properly, or you have issues with the wiring, the print pauses.

Anet A8 frame replacement My Anet A8 frame are broken. I find frame project AM8 - Metal Frame for Anet A8. I like it but I can't find aluminum extrusion needed, like this: MiSUMi - Aluminum Extrusion - 5 series, Base 20, 20mm x 40mm. Maybe somebody knows where I can buy it in Ukraine? Or maybe another frame options?

There are lots of online sources for T-slot aluminum extrusions from ebay to McMaster. If you want more options do a Google Search.

.stl file is "not ready for printing" I have this .stl file and I sent it to a company for printing, they claimed that the file is not ready for printing and is charging me more money for them to fix the error. What can I do to make the file "ready for printing"

"Not ready for printing" isn't a very specific description of a problem. There are countless things that could be wrong with an STL file that could render it unprintable. An STL file is basically a collection of triangles in 3D. These triangles need to be manifold/watertight: they need to enclose a volume that represents the object to be printed. For instance, a very simple STL file could contain 4 triangles defining a tetrahedron/pyramid. However, if there is something wrong with the file - for instance, the edges of two triangles might not meet up exactly, then the file is not printable because the triangles, together, no longer enclose a volume. There are various free and paid tools out there that automatically attempt to fix your STL file. Depending on how bad your file is, you might be able to use one of these tools to fix it. If you do this, be sure to carefully inspect the result to make sure the tool did what you intended. Examples include MeshLab, Netfabb and various online services (Microsoft 3D tools, MakePrintable). If the problems with your file are so bad they can not be fixed automatically, then the only option will be a - potentially - very laborious manual process of fixing the file. This might mean rebuilding the model from scratch. It is not unreasonable that the company would charge you for this. Even if your model is manifold/watertight, there are other reasons it might not be printable. For instance, the walls might be too thin, or there might be certain features in the model that can not be printed. You did not specify the source of your model. Certain pieces of CAD software are more likely to produce unprintable STL files than others, SketchUp is a particularly bad offender. Also, 3D models from games are almost always unprintable. They're designed to look good on screen, but are not designed at all with printability in mind.

Quality drop in vertical axis printing Dear experts and 3D printer users; I am a beginner in 3D printing field. I read couple of answers in forums and i cannot find exact answer to my problem. Printing quality dropped when i try to write vertical axis (i mean, columns). There is no problem in horizontal axis. My column width must be 0.5 mm, and printer nozzle diameter is 0.4 mm. I think I should write 0.5 mm column with 0.4 mm nozzle with ease. I added messy structure to this post and you can find writing details below. What do you think? What is your suggestion to overcome this problem? Printer:Ultimaker 3, Slicer:Cura, Printing Details; Nozzle diameter:0.4 mm, Profile:Fine 0.1 mm, Layer height:0.1 mm, Wall thickness:1 mm, Top bottom thickness:1 mm, Infill density: 100 %, Gradual infill steps:0, Printing Temp:240 C, Build plate Temp:65 C, Diameter: 2.85 mm, Dimensions of the material:10X10X5 mm

The main problem with your setup is the nozzle width. It is simply too big to accurately print a structure that tiny. An integral part of the filament deposition is the "smearing" of the molted plastic, that clearly can't happen if the structure is about the same size of the nozzle bore. Also the printed structure is too flimsy to resist the "suction" of such a big nozzle moving away. I would suggest to use a smaller nozzle and/or increase the size of your pillars. A good combo would be 0.2mm nozzle with 0.6mm or 0.8mm pillars. For these small details, it would be best to have a pillar size that is a perfect multiple of your nozzle diameter. Other settings that will help you: reduce the print dramatically (try 20 or 30 mm/s) use retraction (or increase its amount/speed) make sure your cooling fan is 100% use a sensible "minimum layer time" (try 10 seconds for a start) The first two settings should reduce the force/impulse applied by the nozzle on the pillar. The latter two should make sure your pillar is "solid" when extruding a new layer on top of it.

Problems with noise, heat bed temperature and no X / Y endstop sensor on Makerbot Replicator 2X I bought a used Makerbot Replicator 2X, and I have some problems printing with it. The first problem I run into is the first layer adhesion to the print bed, it seems like the temperature of the bed starts to drop directly after first heating it. Also, calibration seems to be a problem, because when using the Home Axes function, the extruder is moved to its home - but there seems to be like a missing endstop sensor, because the stepper motors starts making a whole lot of noise. Also, when moving the extruder manually using the Jog function, there is a lot of noise and also it's possible to move it out of its range (same type of noise as with the Home Axes function). I understand that the bot I bought is not to be expected to function as new, but I need to understand what the problem is and how I can fix it. Is there parts missing even? Trying the Home Axes and Jog functions resulting in a lot of noise: https://photos.app.goo.gl/j3HX9qHvZCEBnPru7 Printing with no adhesion and a falling Platform temperature: https://photos.app.goo.gl/PHVtheWCRRmhz7bu7

First, your Y-belt is way too loose! (seen at the beginning of the first video). It is so loose the idlers barely grip onto it! Second, the X-endstop metal pin is loose, seen at 1:22 of the first video. Could be that the endstop is not working. Maybe you can hook up your printer to USB, you can then send direct commands to the printer, e.g. M119 will report the status of the endstops. Sending this code multiple times will alternatively pressing the endstops manually you can find out if they work. From the second video can be seen that the nozzle to bed distance it too large, and if fixed and still not adhering you need to apply an adhesive (hairspray/glue stick/or 3D print adhesion spray). This printer is in need of some serious maintenance! Depending on your technical skills this may be a challenge!

How to programmatically resume a paused print in Marlin A print that is paused with an M0 can be unpaused with M108. That works with my Chiron running Marlin 2.0.7.2. However, it also has a display that uses its' own serial protocol to communicate with Marlin. I want that display to be able to unpause my printer when it has encountered M0 in the G-code. I tried injectCommands_P(PSTR("M108\n")); in the code, but it did not work. Perhaps I should not have a new-line at the end of it. What is the correct command to do this? void GcodeSuite::M108() { TERN_(HAS_RESUME_CONTINUE, wait_for_user = false); wait_for_heatup = false; } Above is the Marlin code for M108. Would be great if someone could decipher what TERN means.

The correct Marlin-command to unpause seems to be setUserConfirmed(). I have tested that it works.

3D printer manufacturers - sales statistics Are there any statistics regarding how many units each manufacturer has sold, e.g. in 2019? An article from 2016 claims Monoprice to have led the market back then - but all of the printers in that article have become obsolete since then. Some manufacturers also claim theirs to be "one of the most popular" - but that likely doesn't translate to sales, at least for the more overpriced ones.

Getting this data is not easy. Many companies that make 3D printers are either private companies that do not report results or are larger companies where 3D printers are one of many products they manufacture. Some companies study this information through mining public sources and surveying users for their opinions and experience. The result of some of these studies are available for a fee. Occasionally, a trade publication will survey data sources and produce an article. In other cases, a trade pub will publish an article generously offered by a commercial contributor. It is always difficult to know what is true when abstracting information from obscured, noisy, and biased information sources. Your question itself includes a bias. You use a words that include a value judgement: "but that likely doesn't translate to sales, at least for the more overpriced ones." The article you reference is not a deeply researched investigative piece. It is simply some product details for the five printers in 2016 which sold the most on Amazon.com. It doesn't include printers which were not sold on Amazon, so it leaves out any printers which use a different distribution channel. Also, the article include an link, probably which generate revenue back to the magazine, to each of the five printers sold through Amazon. To summarize, it is very difficult to aggregate this kind of information. Those who try to do so like to be compensated. A list of the top five devices on Amazon is a biased list.

How can I add an offset to the first layer to increase clearance? My printer is calibrated for a certain clearance from the heated bed, which is chosen based on PLA. I would like to try to increase it for the first layer for PETG, so that adhesion is reduced. The printer has M5 screws with 4000 steps/mm, so the resolution clearly allows that. I don't want to modify the printer, I would like a G-Code or another option that I can apply in Prusa slicer in association with the specific filament when desired. I don't want to change the flow rate of the first layer, only the "zero" distance. How can I do that?

Placeholders I don't know if you are familiar with the concept of placeholders? PrusSlicer is a derivative of Slic3r which uses this concept to insert placeholders (sort of constants, with the possibility to do arithmetic) into your G-code (e.g. start or end codes) which are evaluated just before the slicer generates the final G-code upon slicing. Unfortunately, although there is a constant for the filament type (filament_type), you cannot use a conditional expression as this does not work on string comparison (which should work with regular expressions...), but with some imagination you can fabricate a way to get past this problem. E.g. {if printer_notes=~/.*PRINTER_VENDOR_PRUSA3D.*/};Printer is Prusa{endif} M117 [filament_type] evaluates fine, but {if filament_type=~/.*PLA.*/};Filament type is PLA{endif} does not evaluate fine... Solving this using placeholders, the printing temperatures for PLA and PETG are different, so in a conditional statement of the first_layer_temperature you could add an additional offset to the code at the end of the start G-code. Start G-code A place to do this is the filament dependent start G-code section: You can always edit this start G-code to include a manually set offset by moving the printer to a certainly height: G1 Z0.15 and then redefining the zero level G92 Z0 Printer Z-offset Note that a z_offset constant exists, so it is configurable in the graphical interface, if so, than I assume this fixes your problem instantly as the offset is directly applied in the final G-code. The z-offset option is part of the "printer settings" interface. This extra offset is added to the initial layer height movement.

What's the best stepper motor for BMG with very high extrusion rates? I was recommended to buy a pancake stepper motor for a direct drive BMG extruder, however I would like to ask if the decrease in torque would still be enough to work with V6 Volcano or SuperVolcano. If so, where should I buy this pancake stepper motor and how should I configure my current setting when switching them?

A BMG extruder can be used in conjunction with the E3Dv6 hotend, the Volcano and the Super Volcano are upgrade parts for the E3Dv6 (see e3d-online), they are just differently sized heater blocks you can use to replace the normal heater block to increase the volumetric flow. In fact, it is just a v6 with a different heater block (and heater cartridge, longer nozzle threading, and often and a larger nozzle diameter). The increased heater blocks will allow for an enlarged melting zone. Although this increased melting zone, the extra length of walls will not significantly increase the resistance, most resistance comes from compressing the filament diameter to the nozzle diameter. Note that the BMG is a similar direct extruder type as the Titan, which is produced and sold by E3D; this extruder is capable of using the Volcano upgrades using their standard pancake stepper motor (according to E3D website). You can buy these stepper motors at their website. The reason a pancake stepper is recommended is because of weight reduction (direct drive extruders carry the extruder stepper on the X-axis carriage), these extruder types gear down the speed and thus increasing the torque, a normal stepper would be too heavy and too powerful. Note that this may be a different case for 2.85 mm filament; this requires more torque anyways.

Geeetech Prusa i3 Extruder seems to push more filament, gear slips/skips? I got my first printer, a Geeetech Prusa i3, and for the price I paid (160$) I am so blown away. As I saved so much money, I treated myself to a legit copy of Simplify3D, which I am happy with. I'm using white PLA filament (supposedly 1.75 mm) with a 0.3 mm nozzle. The hotend temperature range is 215-240 °C and the bed is usually at 90 °C (with hairspray it gives a nice shiny solid bottom surface). My goal is to print with 0.3, or with 0.2 if 0.3 is to big for the nozzle (ideally a 0.3 nozzle can print 0.3 layer height). The problem: It seems that, especially on the first layer with bigger prints, or any layer that continuously pulls filament through the nozzle (outside lining of a layer), the amount of filament that gets "printed out" isn't enough compared to the amount of filament that is pushed in by the extruder gear. This, in my theory right now, causes the new filament to stay in place until the melted plastic in the nozzle is used, which then makes room again for more filament to be pushed through. Until this happens, the gear slips/clicks and can't pull anymore filament. The mechanics seem to work well, and I don't think the nozzle is clogged. I would guess that some settings need to be manually adjusted to keep the amount of filament pushed through the nozzle equal or less than the amount the nozzle can actually push through, but what is weird to me is that this happens semi-randomly. I have searched online and the issue intermittently appears with other people, but I haven't found a solution yet. What settings would I need to test? Here is a link to some current successful prints and a layer mess up example(batman bust). My biggest print so far (Batman Bust) is amazing, but even here you can see certain layers where the gear couldn't push filament through and the gear skipped a few clicks, causing it to print less when it was suppose to print on the following instructions. This happens a lot more, but when it happens during an infill you obviously can't see it from the outside. The individual layer-height seems maybe a bit too small (0.1 for batman), and the times where the extruder usually skips and clicks appear when I print bigger sizes (0.2 and 0.3). I want to start printing more complex and bigger things, so using 0.1 seems like an overkill in detail and takes way too long. Edit: My filament is the generic Geeetech white PLA that I ordered together with the printer.

A nozzle with a nozzle width of 0.3 mm cannot print a 0.3 mm layer height. You could do that but you should not as you ultimately pay the price in the form of a less aesthetic finish. The general rule of thumb is to maximize the layer height at 75 % of the nozzle width, so a 0.3 mm nozzle would allow for a maximum of 0.225 mm. The rationale is that the filament leaves the nozzle as a tube and needs to be flattened to make it flat and adhere to the previous layer, too high layer heights increase the pressure in the nozzle (more filament is needed) causing a less than ideal extrusion and cause the extruder to skip; this is identified by observing a distinct clicking noise. Please lower your layer height (try 0.2 mm) and decrease the printing speed to see if this works better. Furthermore, for PLA, temperatures for the hotend (unless you have some sort of a special PLA filament) and the bed temperature are too high. Please aim to print PLA at about 200 °C with a bed temperature of 50 - 60 °C.

Horizontal lines on feature/geometry/density change I've had an Ender 5 Plus for a few weeks now. It's printing great and I've got my tuning pretty good at the moment. I've noticed some horizontal inconsistencies matching feature/geometry changes. It seems to be associated with maybe layer time(?) I only have a picture from two models, but the problem will appear in other places on different models, always matching some change in the layers. The problem is consistent all around the model and changes position with different prints, so I know it's not a mechanical problem. Say I printed a 2x2 cm tower 20 cm tall, it will not have any of these imperfections because every layer is identical. I highly suspect the layer time/temperature change, but I don't know how to fix this, I'm a bit stumped. They both were printed at 200 °C and I'm trying a new one at 210 °C (best temperature with the spool I have) and it has the same problem. All three models are from the same spool of PLA. Also, I use Cura with mostly default settings for the Ender 5+. Here are the pictures : I tried to highlight the idea, but every line matches with some change in the model On the benchy it's harder to see, but the hull line match with the solid floor of the model, and the top ones match with the top window sill starting.

This is varying underextrusion due to loss of material to oozing in the interior of the model. When printing the infill pattern, the nozzle doesn't follow a single continuous extrusion path, but moves from the end of one path to the beginning of the next, and under Cura defaults, does this without retracting the filament. This causes unpredictable amounts to ooze out during travel from one to the next, thereby desynchronizing the planned/intended amount of material extruded so far and the actual amount. This means, when the next outer-wall extrusion starts, there's an unpredictable deficiency between the amount of material at the nozzle to extrude, and the amount the slicer intended to extrude. The result is what you're seeing. To fix it, you need to eliminate oozing, not just outside the model where it appears as visible stringing, but inside too. Either disable "Combing" entirely in Cura, or set "Max Comb Distance With No Retract" to something very low (0.8 mm or less). Also set "Minimum Extrusion Distance Window" to 0 to ensure Cura doesn't skip retractions for other reasons. You may also want to play with extrusion length and speed. Too short or too long can be bad; 5-7 mm is the reasonable range for PLA with a bowden. Higher speed generally helps too; the printer should be able to handle 50 mm/s or faster.

How to calculate the approximate volume of material used in 3d print? Is there a reasonable way of approximating the volume of material used for 3D print by knowing only the STL file volume and infill percentage? Or what is the formula for calculating the exact volume and which parameters can be fixed to reasonable values? Can this be done easily using Slic3r or CuraEngine in command line? Note: Supposedly 3Dhubs use Cura[*] software to calculate the print volume. Any help is appreciated. [*] www.3dhubs.com/talk/thread/calculate-print-volume

Possible way to calculate the volume of material used is to multiply the filament length (calculated by CURA after slicing and displayed in lower right corner) and surface of filament tip. Volume = Filament_length * ( Filament_diameter / 2 )^2 * PI Of course do not forget to convert all values to the same order of magnitude (e.g. cm³).

Ender 3 home location I have an Ender 3 and I have a problem with auto home. I use auto home and then level the bed with the wheels beneath the bed. I then start a print and the first layer is well above the bed. Perhaps about a millimeter. If I stop the print at this point and level the bed so that the first layer prints the normal paper width above the bed, everything works fine. The stops for the 3 axes seem to be in the right places and there is nothing noticeable obstructing them. When I use auto home it does touch the stops at all 3 axes. My belts seem to be tight and there is no movement of the bed if I try to jiggle it with my hand. Is there a way to adjust the Z axis so that the auto home elevation and the elevation of first layer of the print will be the same? This is an example of the first lines of G-code: ;FLAVOR:Marlin ;TIME:4724 ;Filament used: 1.70716m ;Layer height: 0.16 ;MINX:96.551 ;MINY:96.545 ;MINZ:0.2 ;MAXX:138.448 ;MAXY:138.455 ;MAXZ:100.4 ;Generated with Cura_SteamEngine 4.5.0 M140 S50 M105 M190 S50 M104 S200 M105 M109 S200 M82 ;absolute extrusion mode ; Ender 3 Custom Start G-code G92 E0 ; Reset Extruder G28 ; Home all axes G1 Z2.0 F3000 ; Move Z Axis up little to prevent scratching of Heat Bed G1 X0.1 Y20 Z0.3 F5000.0 ; Move to start position G1 X0.1 Y200.0 Z0.3 F1500.0 E15 ; Draw the first line G1 X0.4 Y200.0 Z0.3 F5000.0 ; Move to side a little

The Z stop can be loosened and moved up but it seems weird that it would need to be moved and I don't think that would fix your issue. The Z height should be the same for the auto home and printing. I auto home then disable steppers and slowly move to all 4 corners. I have caught myself resting my arm on the X axis and moving it down. If that happens I manually move the Z until it just barely presses the Z stop in when I hear the button click. I have heard some say that they got a warped bed. I wonder if that's the issue. A glass plate would be a good way to be sure or maybe using a straight edge to check.You could also double check the tightness on the wheels is just right. Tomb of 3D Printed Horrors has a really good setup video called "Creality Ender 3 assembly and pro build tips" that has a few other tips that really helped me get set up well.

Are any 3D printed materials biocompatible (safe for implantation in the human body)? This question is similar: Are there biocompatible materials available to the general public? But appears to be for non-implantation use. This question is for materials intended to be implanted. Are any typical 3D printed (extrusion based 3D printer) materials, such as ABS or PLA (or slightly more exotic ones, such as kevlar, fibreglass, or carbon fiber), safe for implantation in the human body? Or in medical terms, are they biocompatible (biofunctionality is not topical for this question)? If not, why not? If most of them are safe, then please explain which ones are NOT safe. Highly relevant, and perhaps even more interesting is: Are there any peer reviewed medical papers that have investigated what materials are safe for implantation in the human body? A paper which answers this unambiguously would be the ideal answer to this question. Another concern is if the process of 3D printing itself adversely influences the properties of the material in the context of implantation applications. I've tried to determine the answer to this question myself, but I cannot find any papers or studies which answer it. I can easily find that ABS plastic is "non-biodegradable", but I suppose the issue of adverse host responses is more crucial, e.g. causing inflammation or it being a bacterial growth substrate to promote infections seems like plausible concerns. I'm sure there might be other dangerous complications too, which I'm not aware of. I found a paper dealing with corrosion issues for implantable metals: DOI: 10.1089/end.1997.11.383 I found a paper dealing with silicone-urethane being prone to breakdown: DOI: 10.1021/ma301965y I found a paper describing the properties and history of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE), which appears to be commonly used as implants: DOI: 10.1109/EEIC.2005.1566331 By extension, a 3D printer using UHMWPE might be safe, barring any adverse chemical or mechanical issues as a result of the 3D printing process itself. However, it is not clear to me if any 3D printers can actually reliably print UHMWPE. Furthermore, it is unclear if UHMWPE is a sane choice, as it appears to be useful in applications where strength is required, such as for joints. What about other applications where load bearing properties are not required (e.g. a simple enclosure for implantable electronics)? I'm aware that titanium appears to be frequently used for implants, and while titanium 3D printers do exist, they are beyond the scope of this question. The valid context is extrusion based 3D printers in the sub $10,000 range (arbitrarily chosen to make the question avoid being tagged as "too broad").

Perhaps more than biocompatible, which generally refers to a material that does not illicit a harmful inflammatory response inside the body, you should be looking at bioresorbable materials, which are materials that dissolve inside the body after a certain time period without needing mechanical removal. As an example, FDA approved poly (lactic acid) is available in pellet form from Corbion (formerly PURAC biomaterials) and can be extruded into 1.75mm filament for use with any desktop 3D printer (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214860416301385). Similarly, researchers have used poly (caprolactone) to 3D print scaffolds with using a stratasys FDM machine (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/1097-4636(200105)55:2%3C203::AID-JBM1007%3E3.0.CO;2-7).

Anet A8 One Z output only moves down (even on up command) I just finished assembly of Anet A8 (Prusa i3 clone). X any Y work fine, both Z motors move down just fine, when homed. On Z-stop trigger, right Z moves up, left Z continues to try to move down. When up command is given in Pronterface or RepetierHost, right Z moves up, left Z moves down. Switching cable plugs moves the problem: the down only moves are always on Z-Motor1 output. I have flashed the firmware with original Anet Omni firmware and problem persists. How else can I test if the problem is hardware- or firmware- related? I am reluctant to change to different firmware entirely, as I have not yet found out what the problem is.

From the data you provided I would postulate that the problem is likely hardware: either with the the general assembly of the motherboard or with the stepper drivers. The test you already performed excludes the stepper motors themselves as possible culprits. Common sense suggests that if such a show-stopper bug was present in the original Anet firmware, thousands of users would report it. Stepper motors are usually controlled by two signals (two cables): PULSE and DIR. The PULSE signal controls how many steps the motor needs to perform and the signal itself is normally a PWM or some other form of square wave. The DIR signal controls which direction the motor is supposed to spin (clockwise or counter-clockwise), and the signal itself is just a "high/low" voltage. Now, electronics is not exactly my cup of tea, but I would suggest what is happening is that the DIR signal of the broken output is stuck on either the high or low voltage (you can test this easily with a tester). If I am right, the likely culprit is either a dry joint (so a joint that does not let electricity pass and keep the DIR signal in its low state), or a short (so a place where voltage at "high" level is allowed to get onto the cable carrying the DIR signal). These kind of problems are typically related to poor soldering of the connectors, or to bridges between the pins of chips. You can visually inspect your board for such problems. Another possible culprit is obviously the driver for the stepper motor itself.

Would using a leadscrew with 1 or 2 mm lead, en lieu of 8 mm, result in a better printer? 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. 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.

From 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 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 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) 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.

Help with Repetier firmware (probably locked and licensed) I'm in the process of tweaking the firmware (Repetier 0.92.6) because of some problems mentioned here: Delta printer printing incorrect dimensions in X and Y directions. Z dimensions are correct But I found out that the printer manufacturer has locked the firmware (probably) and I cannot edit it. So I have to burn a new one (I guess? Correct me if I'm wrong) Printer name: Dimension Dual Delta Manufacturer: J Group Robotics Website: http://www.jgrouprobotics.com/dimension-dual-delta I have the slicer (Simplify3D) configured with the FFF profile as my printer was working completely fine up until a few weeks ago. I just want to know that if I change the firmware, would I have to change/update the profile as well? If yes, how do I do that? Here is a screenshot of Repetier host. The "JGR" continues indefinitely: Here is the actual log text 22:56:00.216 : OpenGL version:4.2.0 22:56:00.218 : OpenGL renderer:GeForce GT 540M/PCIe/SSE2 22:56:00.218 : Using fast VBOs for rendering is possible 22:56:06.634 : Printer reset detected - initalizing 22:56:06.661 : start 22:56:06.662 : Info:External Reset 22:56:06.662 : Info:Autoleveling enabled 22:56:06.662 : Transformation matrix: 0.999994 0.000010 0.003587 0.000000 0.999996 -0.002727 -0.003587 0.002727 0.999990 22:56:06.865 : N1 M110*34 22:56:06.865 : N2 M115*36 22:56:06.865 : N3 M105*36 22:56:06.865 : N4 M114*35 22:56:06.865 : N5 M111 S6*98 22:56:06.869 : N6 T0*60 22:56:06.870 : N7 M20*22 22:56:06.871 : N8 M80*19 22:56:06.872 : N9 M105*46 22:56:08.706 : Free RAM:1002 22:56:08.706 : Autoretract:0 22:56:08.706 : X:0.00 Y:0.00 Z:0.000 E:0.0000 22:56:08.713 : N10 M220 S100*80 22:56:08.713 : N11 M221 S100*80 22:56:08.714 : N12 M111 S6*84 22:56:08.714 : FIRMWARE_NAME:Repetier_0.92.6 FIRMWARE_URL:https://github.com/repetier/Repetier-Firmware/ PROTOCOL_VERSION:1.0 MACHINE_TYPE:Delta EXTRUDER_COUNT:2 REPETIER_PROTOCOL:3 22:56:08.714 : Printed filament:32.75m Printing time:0 days 6 hours 0 min 22:56:08.714 : PrinterMode:FFF 22:56:08.714 : N13 T0*8 22:56:08.745 : X:0.00 Y:0.00 Z:0.000 E:0.0000 22:56:08.745 : Begin file list 22:56:08.746 : End file list 22:56:09.726 : JGR 22:56:09.960 : N14 M105*18 22:56:10.972 : JGR 22:56:11.979 : JGR 22:56:12.969 : JGR 22:56:13.016 : N15 M105*19 22:56:14.028 : JGR 22:56:15.035 : JGR 22:56:16.025 : JGR 22:56:16.072 : N16 M105*16 22:56:17.085 : JGR 22:56:18.091 : JGR 22:56:19.081 : JGR 22:56:19.134 : N17 M105*17 22:56:20.157 : JGR 22:56:21.163 : JGR 22:56:22.154 : JGR 22:56:22.189 : N18 M105*30 22:56:23.202 : JGR 22:56:24.208 : JGR 22:56:25.199 : JGR 22:56:25.245 : N19 M105*31 22:56:26.253 : JGR 22:56:27.261 : JGR 22:56:28.267 : JGR 22:56:28.307 : N20 M105*21 22:56:29.319 : JGR 22:56:30.326 : JGR 22:56:31.316 : JGR 22:56:31.363 : N21 M105*20 22:56:32.376 : JGR 22:56:33.382 : JGR 22:56:34.372 : JGR Edit: Since it is advisable to get a new controller board and keep the current one as it is, I'm attaching a picture of what my printer is controlled by. The black box on the green board reads HRD 12008. Google says its a DC-DC SMPS module but mine has some extra connectors than what I could find online. The black board is a MKS Base v1.3 The other box is a solid state relay. This is more intimidating than I thought it would be. How do I proceed now? If I get a brand new controller board to play with, which should it be? Also, I can't seem to locate any RAMPS shield.

The firmware is not really locked by the OEM1, you just need to upload (or, as you say burn) a new version. This is not unusual2. Repetier is just like any other firmware that uses Arduino boards. While it may seem intimidating at first, it really is quite easy to regularly upload new firmware to the Arduino Mega 2560 board3. If you are not familiar with Arduino programming at all, then there are a good number of Repetier oriented guides out there, for example, from Repetier's own web site, Repetier-Firmware Documentation. If are you familiar with Arduino programming, then it really is the same as uploading the Blink sketches, but the base code is just bigger, that is all. There is too much to detail in a simple answer here and, as I stated above, there are a lot of online guides. However, en bref: Download and install the Arduino IDE to your Mac/Wintel/Linux PC; Download the latest Repetier firmware to your Mac/Wintel/Linux PC4; Connect the Arduino Mega 2560 to your PC using a USB cable; Change the settings, i.e. Boards and Port settings, in the Arduino IDE, so that your PC can "see" the Arduino Mega 2560; Open the Reptier firmware, that you have just downloaded, in the Arduino IDE; Configure the Repetier firmware source code, i.e. make some edits in the Configuration.h file5, with the tweaks that you require (which you mention in your question)6; Compile the firmware using the Arduino IDE. and (finally); Upload the firmware to the Arduino Mega 2560. That is it. Once you have done it a few times, it will become second nature. Watch a few online youtube videos, as well, before you start, so that you have a better idea of what to do. For example: Repetier 0 92 8 Firmware Configration. or; Kossel Mini 3D Printer Repetier Firmware and Calibration. As an aside, for gaining a basic understanding of the configuration file of Marlin, not Repetier, I found this video #18: Calibration extremely useful. If you feel like changing the firmware completely, this may come in handy. With respect to the Slicer's profile settings... I am not sure about that at all. The reason that you have no RAMPS board is that, on your MKS board, the RAMPS and the Arduino are merged into one. Any new controller would work, as they all run the same firmware. There are many to choose from. As you are just experimenting (and reverse engineering) at this stage, I personally would buy a cheap Chinese Arduino Mega 2560 (€6) and RAMPS (€4) board on eBay, for a total of only €10 (if you buy them separately - don't get a combination "deal" as they are generally more expensive - although compare the prices first, you may find a bargain), to test your settings. Once you are happy with those settings, then you can spend more money on a better board, should you feel that you need it. Footnotes 1 If you have to get around the licensing, then it sounds like you could/should recompile the firmware, or use some other firmware, i.e. Marlin. However, wait to see what other people suggest. 2 There really isn't much risk in uploading new firmware. The only risk, which I guess Mark is referring to, is that you may/will not have the correct firmware settings for your make of printer, and therefore the printer may not work correctly, until you get the firmware settings correct. So, in that respect, it is a good idea to buy a secondary Arduino Mega and RAMPS1.4 board to play with, for just $10 (Chinese clones work just fine). But, as you say that your board already has bad settings, and you do not wish to pay for more licensing, then you haven't much to lose by uploading new firmware to it, except the warranty. So, if I were in your position, and I did not want to pay the licensing, I would set aside the supplied controller (for possible future use/reference), and use a Arduino Mega 2560/RAMPS 1.4 combination to control the printer. That said, if your printer is still under warranty, can't you ask the manufacturer to supply you a new controller with the correct settings? 3 There is no way of extracting the code from an Arduino and then modifying it. You need the original source code files. See Is there any way to download a sketch from an Arduino? OK, you can obtain the machine code, but unless you are an expert, or guru, modifying it is impossible. 4 The installation order, of the Arduino IDE and Repetier, will not matter. You probably need to rebuild the firmware, I would guess, but I am not 100% sure. It might be a good idea to contact the vendor to see what they recommend, before overwriting their code (assuming that the control board came pre-programmed) 5 I found this video #18: Calibration extremely useful, for configuring Marlin, and understanding the firmware settings in the Configuration.h file. 6 You may find this link useful for your "tweaks": Repetier-Firmware configuration tool for version 0.92.9 version

How to effectively eliminate stringing in 3D print I'm having this stringing problem that happens when the machine moves and when it's not supposed to print that I still haven't effectively solved. I will try exemplify with the following image. We can see it leaves some prints when it's not supposed to. I know we can try to solve it with the retraction properties, but is there a way to calculate the right levels of it? How do you guys do it? My setup is: Ender3 printer Ultimaker Cura sw BQ filament Info about this particular filament, from store.bq.com DIMENSIONS AND WEIGHT Weight - 1 kg Filament diameter - 1.75 mm Coil size (diameter x width) - 175 x 77 mm Spool axle diameter - 44 mm Enclosure - 187 x 187 x 83 mm MATERIAL Composition - 100% PLA (Polylactic acid). PRINTING FEATURES Optimum printing temperature - 205 ºC Printing temperature range - 200-220 ºC

Note: The image in the question was changed after the question was asked. This answer is out-of-date with respect to how the question has changed; I'll update it when more information is available. These don't look like strings, which I'd define as material deposited outside of the model, but rather damage done by moving the hotend through already-printed material without retracting. In Cura, this is called "retraction combing", and it defaults to "all", which is way too aggressive and visibly harms the surface finish. Switching it to "noskin" or even "infill" only will make this go away and greatly improve your print quality, at the cost of some speed. The cost can be severe in worst case with certain kinds of fine detail, but usually "noskin" is cheap and suffices.

What's the best way to pull out fillament from an all metal print head Since retractions above 4 mm can cause jams due to plastic sticking to the cold half of the metal print head, what's the best way to avoid jams when swapping filaments? Cool down and yank out, rapid pull out while melted, pull out at partial heat but not completely melted, or something else?

Cold/Luke-Warm pulling can cause damage and wear to the hot end, and should only be used in cases where you suspect there's a jam in the nozzle. Pulling the filament out at a few degrees above its normal printing temperature and pulling quickly is what I use, and what I've seen other's also say, and the procedure most machines use.

Adventurer 3 3D Printer doesn't extrude correctly I am a noob at 3D printing which we all are/was at some point. I have no clue how to address the issue which likely is reason why I haven't found the solution yet. So if you see that this question has been posted elsewhere, please link it! Thanks! I have had this issue for a while, however right now, one minute ago, it worked kind of. The text below is a description of the problem that very often occurs! So the issue is basically the extruder. I have a Flashforge Adventurer 3. In it's software you have a "Load" and "Change" option which you change and load filament with. When I load filament it goes through the tube but it never exits the extruder. The common answer is that the nozzle is clogged. I have honestly checked this, it isn't the problem. I have cleaned it as Flashforge says and I have also been using really small metallic pins to push out all the filament. So that isn't the issue. Sometimes the filament also gets stuck inside the tube. Or the Bowden tube I think it is called. I did a test 10 minutes ago, it went through the tube smoothly. No filament came out at the other end however. I then changed the filament, which means I pulled it back. I then saw that a part of the filament had gotten stuck at the end of the tube. It didn't pull all the filament back, a very small bit of the filament had somehow gotten stuck? As it doesn't extrude filament when I load the filament it has nothing with the calibration to do what I know. So my own conclusion would be that something between the tube and extruder is going crazy. And I know, that isn't a good conclusion. However I don't know how to address it as I said before. I know that it's hard to troubleshoot a text, so I will upload a video for you guys reading this. I really just want my 3D printer working again as the company said it probably isn't anything wrong with the machine.. When the machine starts working again it prints, but not good. Here is a video of how hit prints a big "F". Link. Sometimes it stops extruding filament for a while then it starts to extrude again.. There is also an image of the print below The machine is printing at 195 °C! I appreciate all the help I can get, I just want my machine fully working again. Thanks! EDIT: Here is a video of the Bowden tube: Link EDIT Here is a video of the extruder issue: Link EDIT Here are two videos regarding the cold pull, I "try" to speak english so you get more information this time! Link Link 2

There are a number of different ways to narrow down the problem. Your printing temperature is likely too low. Raise it up about ten degrees, but don't try a print just yet. Ensure that the Bowden tube is firmly pressed into the hot end assembly. A gap below the tube is asking for future problems. If the tube is clear, remove it and examine for a squarely cut end and re-insert firmly. I'm not familiar with the specifics of your model, but you should be able to disengage the Bowden tube from the extruder motor and manually push filament through the hot end and out the nozzle. For obvious reasons, raise the carriage above the bed before doing this. Start with the 205 °C temperature and heat the nozzle. When it reaches stable temperature, push filament through. If it moves smoothly and extrudes cleanly, you're more than half-way home. If not, raise the temperature by another five degrees. At some point, you'll have a good idea of the temperature to use for that brand and color of filament. Once you've checked those two items, you may have it solved, or you can edit your question to address any new developments. Once you have the temperature determined, note that it may have to be increased to match a higher print speed. It is easy enough to push filament manually at the equivalent of a slow print, which allows the hot end to transfer the heat at a sufficient rate. When printing normal speeds, if it can't move the heat fast enough, you have to raise the temperature or lower the speed. The former is preferable, of course. Who wants a print that takes two or three times longer? EDIT: more info added You may have more than one problem. I think your next step is to focus on the hot end/nozzle area. With the Bowden tube removed, insert a length of filament and raise the temperature to around 200 °C and push the filament downward. You probably won't have filament passing through the nozzle, based on the limited information in the video. Once you've confirmed that, reduce the temperature in the nozzle to about 125 °C, let it hold there for a bit. You should note that the additional filament has now fused with that in the heat sink/heat break area. Increase the temperature again to 200 °C and apply gentle upwards pressure. This is not a typical cold-pull process, but close to it. If you had nylon filament available, I'd recommend to use the nylon cleaning method. I suspect that your hot end is clogged at the point where the bowden tube should have been flush into the bore. I did not see both ends free on your Bowden tube. Your second problem may be related to that aspect. Consider to manually feed filament through the tube (after first clearing it) and if that doesn't work, the bowden tube is internally damaged. The additional videos are helpful. Two items come to mind. The temperature may be too low at 200°C. You can't hurt things by going a bit too high, even as high as 225°C or 230°C but don't make big jumps to get there. Bring the temperature up to 210°C and see if you can force filament smoothly through the nozzle by hand. Keep on this practice until you find a good temperature. For the second item, it's possible that your e-steps need to be checked. Feed filament through the bowden tube with the tube removed from the nozzle assembly. Feed a few centimeters beyond the end and make a mark where the filament is at the edge of the tube. Using a terminal program or your printer control software, command a 100 millimeter filament feed. When it is completed, mark the filament and determine if you have extruded the correct amount. The second part of the second video certainly presents well the frustration you are experiencing. Many of the people in the 3D printing community have had similar frustrations. For the lock-up portion, check the manufacturer's web site for firmware upgrades, as sometimes there will be a correction to a problem such as yours.

GRBL: inaccurate on X axis by ~4 mm on 400 mm This is GRBL-related. I have a laser-engraver type machine, Chinese, ~550 mm X axis, aluminium extrusions, 2mm-pitch T belt, Nema 17H3430 motors, one mechanical homing switch for X, Arduino-based. The X-axis accuracy is not up to par. When I make a mark on the X axis and jog to that mark (after homing), depending on the day, the position varies within ~4 mm or so. Sometimes I have to use G00 X-418, others G00 X-422. I checked the belt tension, it seems OK, not too tight, not too loose. Is there something else I should check? Another idea I have: put a homing switch on the other end of the X-axis, then home both ends of the X-axis, measuring the difference in machine position, then modify the steps/mm value for each session to force the command that puts me on the mark to be constant (e.g. G00 X-420). Any other ideas? Thanks.

This seems to be either a case of either belt slop or missed steps or it is a case of the accuracy of the limit switch. If the limit switch moves even a little into either direction, you have to account twice that as the maximum error. So the 4 mm error could come from 2 mm into either direction from the 0-position. However, there is a silver lining: Laser engraving, just like CNC, usually first dials in the 0 regarding the workpiece instead of the 0 of the machine. As long as the machine's movement is ok, you should be fine even without tightening the mounting of the X-endstop. I suggest to run the following test to find out what kind of error actually hounds you though: Mount a waste piece Go to a position on the workpiece Run the laser for a split second X10 Run the laser for a split second Repeat 4&5 till you have 10 points Measure the real distances between the dots engraved If the distances are always the same but short, you have the wrong steps/mm set and need to adjust them accordingly. If the distances are inconsistent, you have either lost steps or a sloppy belt. To fight lost steps, carefully up the signal to the motor a little. If the results don't change from that, tighten the belt a little - it should sing like a guitar string.

Which kinematic system has the highest quality? I am going to design and build a 3D printer. I want the highest quality and accuracy so nothing except that is important for me. Which cartesian design has the highest quality and accuracy? CoreXY, Prusa, or Gantry (Ultimaker)? Also, is it better to have a nozzle that moves in just direction "X", directions "X and Y", or "X, Y and Z"?

The tradeoffs in these systems are all about quality achievable at particular speed and acceleration profiles. If you really don't care about speed at all and want maximum accuracy, you probably want some type of Cartesian setup with no belts, only rigid lead screws which you can take to as fine a pitch as you like, and you can make all the parts as rigid as you like because mass doesn't matter (since acceleration doesn't). Note however that extrusion accuracy is the limiting factor to quality and dimensional accuracy in even a half-decent printer. Rather than trying to design something with "perfect" spatial kinematics for quality from the outset, I think you should look at existing printers, figure out what about them isn't meeting your quality needs, and start from there to improve. You should also figure out what your speed constraints will be, even if they're only minimal.

How to interpret Trinamic driver continuous debug reporting? In Marlin one can enable continuous debug reporting of Trinamic drivers with the command M122 S1 This sends lines similar to the following over the serial connection: X:93/28/0|| Y:35/14/-|IF| Z:54/28/0|| E:176/25/0|| Each driver appears to report three integer values and some flags. I understand the F flag indicates an error state, for example the overtemperature pre-warn condition (OTPW). What do the other values mean? How can this information be interpreted to debug printing problems or improve performance?

In the Marlin source code I found the function responsible for the report logs: report_polled_driver_data in Marlin/src/feature/tmc_util.cpp. The values indicated appear to be: <Axis>:<PWM scale>/<Current scale>/<StallGuard>|<Flags>|<OTPW count> Where possible flags are as follows (where “debug” indicates that they only appear if TMC_DEBUG is enabled): E: Error O: Over-temperature W: over-temperature pre-Warning G: stallGuard (debug) T: stealthChop (debug) I: standstIll (debug) F: otpw Flag

Cura 4.4 missing object parts I have this image in STL But it seems cura skipped the lower panel entirely when slicing the STL. The base is thick, as you can see here, but it is still missing in Preview, and Cura seems to ignore the base. I have tried to decrease to 0.1mm for width or initial layer, but cura still ignored the base panel. I also found this odd behaviour in a number of my models.. such as this: or this Notice those missing parts? It is like some parts are floating in the air. Can someone help me out here? What kind of setting I have to modify?

Using the preview feature as you have is a good method to determine that the original model is flawed. It's not unusual to discover detailed models have reversed normals or non-contiguous surfaces, which will not print. In a simple example, consider a cube for which five of the six faces are properly described by the design software. This would result in all eight vertices being present, allowing the software to present the "missing" face, but the slicer is unable to create this aspect. The cube is no longer solid and is presented as seven zero-thickness panels, which can't be printed. It is necessary to repair the broken models, by closing gaps and reverting/recalculating normals, but that requires skill in other software. Some slicers will attempt to repair damaged models, but some are so severe, the results you've experienced are the result. If you want a confirmation of a failed model, load it into free Meshmixer, run Analysis/Inspector and expect a "pincushion" of highlighted failures.

Best way to deal with Resin Printers in your living space I know I did something stupid. I just had to have a SLA 3d printer. The issue being I live in a one bedroom apartment. In the months of owning it I have made lots of amazing pieces, I also for the first time in my life have not only allergies, but sever allergies. I thought I had the flu, and has been most of the last 2-3 months. After making the connection to the symptoms appearing after I got the printer, I sealed the resin vat and removed all cleaning station items from my living space. I had thought I had done "enough" by sealing the printers door, and making sure I could not smell any chemicals, and getting a chemical grade air filter. It's been 2 days, and I'm instantly recovering from my symptoms, and have discontinued allergy medication. Other than not own this type of printer, what kind of setup do I need so that I can safely use this printer? Does anyone sell enclosures or setups for businesses or homes that will solve this issue? I can move the cleaning station to my balcony, as it also has a sink and space. Placing the printer even in an enclosure outside would be hard due to the humidity and extreme pollen we get here.

One of the options you have would be to create a negative pressure in your working area. This would be accomplished by installing a fan with the flow direction to the outside. The inside portion of the fan should have ducting that terminates near your printer. You could place your printer in something elaborate, or in something as simple as a large cardboard box and attach the ducting to the box. As the fan operates, air would be pulled from an open window elsewhere in the room and travel into the cardboard box. It would carry fumes from the printer to the fan and out of the building. I have a CO2 laser which generates large amounts of smoke. Part of the installation includes a powerful blower not placed in the window, but with ducting from the machine and to a panel in the window frame. I used scrap plastic to make a baffle that accepted the ducting while blocking the rest of the window. Squirrel-cage blowers provide powerful airflow but you may not need something as expensive as a laser cutter blower. A boat bilge blower might be sufficient to provide clearing airflow for your printer. Additionally, a small bilge blower such as that shown above will use smaller diameter ducting, which would be easier to find and less expensive. The bilge blower in the picture provides for an in and out attachment, while the not-really-a-laser-cutter blower in the picture does not. A true laser cutter blower has ducting attachments for input and output. One characteristic of this type of clearing system is that outside air will possibly change the temperature of the room/building. During the winter, the rest of my house got noticeably cooler while the exhaust fan was operating.

Sudden deterioration of print quality on Prusa i3MK3S+ I've had my Prusa i3MK3S+ for a couple of months now, and done 100+ prints, and other than a few issues with first layer adhesion (which are pretty much solved now), have been getting consistently good results. That is, until the day before yesterday. My last six or seven prints have either failed altogether (items that I have successfully printed previously have failed, seeming to collapse midway through printing), or completed with such poor quality as to be useless. I haven't changed any of the slicer settings, and am using the same filament that was working three days ago (and has been stored in a low-humidity environment). Initially, the printer had not been moved, nor had anything changed in its immediate environment (temperature and humidity are the same, as best as I can measure them). (the above part was printed successfully about a week before, using the same filament and the same slicer settings, however here it printed with gaps between infill and outline, and circles printed as ellipses) (the calibration cat at https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1545913 -- I have never printed this before, but it does clearly show the kind of problems I'm having) I've performed regular maintenance tasks and recalibrated the printer, but this hasn't made a difference. I've reinstalled Prusa Slicer with default settings, which didn't help either. I did think that maybe it was an issue with tension on the y-axis belt, which does look a bit loose, however, according to the printer's diagnostics, the tension in both belts is fine. Any help/suggestions/ideas would be much appreciated! EDIT: I decided to ignore the diagnostic report from the printer, and re-tension the Y-axis belt, and that has substantially improved things, although it is far from fixed. So that's resolved some of the issues. The remaining layer shift appears to be only happening parallel to the Y-axis (i.e. the layers seem to line up perfectly along the X). Have I managed to fix one problem and introduce another??

Figured it out. One of the grub screws that hold the motor shaft onto the belt drive pulley for the Y-axis had come loose, and the other had fallen out altogether. I've tightened the remaining one (and ordered replacements), and my prints are perfect again. Well, as good as I can expect, given that I'm using cheap filament. Two points that might be useful to bear in mind; firstly, the printer was consistently reporting that the belt tension was fine, but clearly it was not. I'm not sure if this is an issue with these printers in general or mine in particular. Secondly, the printer was able to figure out that the pulley was slipping, but did not do so as part of its standard test/setup wizard. It's under Calibration > Self Test.

How do I decrypt messages on my Repetier firmware? I need to send a complex password to my machine. The machine needs to decrypt it and run it. I have not found enough resources for such an operation. More detailed description: I am developing a new feature for my 3D printer which runs on Repetier. (It may be on a different firmware that I can do this job). I want to change my 3D printer so it can understand special encrypted G-codes alongside normal g-codes. Lets describe it with an example: Normally, 3D printers can read and apply standard g-code files like: G28 G0 X10 Y20 E30 . . . etc. But I am developing a g-code encryption method which encrypts any g-code and turns it into a text like:   M999 !4#^ M999 ^s+.&&/..* …. . . etc. I want to change the firmware for my printer so it understands if the related g-code is encrypted by checking every line if it stars with M999 (or starts with some other pattern character which I will decide later). To do is, I need to understand how Repetier works, especially how command debug works and how I can parse my encrypted code from my encrypted g-code file. I could not understand how repetier.h / command.cpp works and how it parses the line and redirects to functional cases.

Looking through the source I found Commands.cpp that has a loop. void Commands::commandLoop() { while(true) { ... Commands::executeGCode(code); } } If we find the executeGCode method, we see that it calls: processMCode(com); And finding the processMCode method, we have the switch case you can add your own logic to. void Commands::processMCode(GCode *com) { switch( com->M ) { case 3: // Spindle/laser on ... case 999: // Your custom logic After decoding your encrypted string, I think it would be best to call back into the first method mentioned, and let the process start from the top with the unencrypted command. case 999: // Custom logic executeGCode(unencrypted); break;

Marlin Z-probe Failure! I'm using Marlin. Recently my Z-probing randomly doesn't work. Sometimes during Z-Homing it goes up instead of going down to sense the Bed! In Bed Leveling it goes higher and higher every time. It got frustrating so I ignored Bed-leveling. Sometimes I get a fine Z-homing but it always starts printing in the air!!! I have no Idea why it happens. All home and axis offsets and setting are fine. I had no problem last time I used my printer. Why my printer starts printing 5 mm in the air?

I found the problem. I'm using an aluminum structure for my gantry. My Chinese power supply was in contact with this structure. There was a current leak from my power supply that was messing with the Z-probe signal. I detached the power supply, everything's gotten back to normal, except it had my board and TMC2100 drivers fried a week ago.

How to modify 3D model of body? I'm relatively new in the field of 3D printing and design. By now I've created and printed some technical objects with TinkerCAD, but now I've a task, which I don't know how to solve. I have the following model as STL-file: Now I want to "adjust" the arms of the model, as shown in the picture. I want the arms to hang besides the body. I know that I could cut and rotate the arms and then merge them again with TinkerCAD but the outcome dosn't look good and the workflow feels wrong. So what is the right tool/way to get this task done? *Disclaimer: I'm not Denis Almaral, but he released this model unter CC license. So I kept his name on the image to credit him, as requested via CC.

The correct/good method to achieve this is called "rigging", but it is not an easy feat (as pointed out by others), as it requires plenty of knowledge about the software being used to edit the model, and a good understanding of the theory behind it. Skeletal animation requires the designer to set up a skeleton (also called "rig", hence the slang term "rigging") for the mesh and define the variables controlling the motion range of the joints and and the geometry and deformation of the mesh. It's quite some job to perform, so - unless this assignment is the first in a series of assignments having to do mesh movement for this model, or you have a keen interest in the topic - I would suggest you to take a shortcut and edit the mesh directly in a "one off" not reusable fashion. (Rigging would conversely allow you to create a "rag doll" or at least a "rag arm" to freely and intuitively move around as you please). The tool I would use for either task is blender. If you want to take the shortcut, maybe a less complex software like meshmixer could also do the job (I don't have direct experience with it, though, so I'm not 100% sure). The blender foundation have a nice series of videos on the topic, called "humane rigging".

What causes these blobby corners Contrary to a lot of other corner related problems (where the corners are bulging), I seem to have a different problem where the corners (ONLY) seem to stick out and appear blobby in the x/y plane. This only happens for corners/edges with a fillet radius greater than 3-4mm and only in the x/y plane. Anything smaller than that radius (such a sharp corner/edge) seems to be fine. Any ideas what could be causing this? Conditions CR-10s Ultimaker Cura v4.2.1 Material: ABS Nozzle size: 0.4mm Bed temp: 80 °C (I can't go any higher than this) Nozzle temp: 250 °C What I've tried already increasing nozzle temp from 240 to 250 °C (seemed to help slightly?) reduced flow rate from 100 % to 80 % - had a negative effect on overall print quality Thank in advance for any ideas/suggestions

I suspect you are printing through a usb or network connection, and the communication rate it's to slow for any of many reasons. A curve consists of many tiny linear movements, each requiring a command exchange between the PC and printer. If you can, try printing from an sd card plugged into the printer (I'd the printer is so equipped). This could be worse if the uses a Bowden extruder, since there is now compression and windup in the filament.

How could I print a large sphere-like object? I have a STL file with a rather large roughly-spherical object. I'd like to 3D print it to be fairly large, and hollow inside. Since the printer I'd be using has a max size of (18–20 cm)^3, I'd have to print this in pieces and then reassemble them into the sphere-like shape. The textured surface of the object is important, but small seams would seem unavoidable. My Question How could I 3D print a hollow sphere or sphere-like object that's too large for the available basic 3D printer? Because this would need to be done in parts, it's more complicated than the designs I've made. Because the final product is roughly spherical and hollow (i.e. nothing is nicely angular), it's trickier than some other designs. (I have little experience with 3D modelling/CAD, so I'd somewhat prefer solutions with minimal advanced steps such as designing my own joints and whatnot...but advanced steps are definitely okay if part of a great solution!) My Ideas So Far I know I could cut the sphere roughly in (e.g.) eighths via planar slices, print the eight pieces individually, but then the question is how to attach them. I am also concerned that the seams might be too noticeable. (Perhaps there's a better way?) I could just glue the pieces together. My fear then is that it would lack internal structural support if they were attached only at the outer layer (unless the skin thickness were excessive, at least near the boundary). I imagine I could give the pieces internal supports with dowel joints or snap-fit joints (e.g. these), but I lack knowledge of how to do that and don't know whether that would even work well.

A sphere can be put together quarters easily, but those need support in the center. However, there is a slightly different cut is more economic: Cut a top and bottom "plate" off, print them separately, the lower one "upside down" Cut the remaining piece into quarters For more equal printing, maybe even cut them along the equator too and print the lower half "upside down" This way, the support material can be reduced to a minimum - only the top and bottom will need any support, and it is easily accessible to smooth it away. If the walls would be something like one millimeter thick, any good glue should work. If you want to reduce the visible seam, you might bevel the faces, so that the wall has a little gap on the inner wall. As most glues shrink as they harden, it will flatten into the "gap", evening out the internal face.

Anet A8 with Marlin firmware: Auto Home is crashing into bed I got things moving from the answer to a previous question. Now, since the base-video I'm following is non-English, I want the next phase fixed: Probing failed Auto Homing showing failing Z-homing After the final adjusted firmware upload, and bringing the sensor up, I see that the extruder pushes the bed down a bit when I auto home and then the LCD screen says probing failed. If compare to the latest (v1.1.9) Configuration.h file from GitHub, here are the changes: #define FIX_MOUNTED_PROBE // Line #0719, Uncommented #define X_PROBE_OFFSET_FROM_EXTRUDER 16 // Line # 0779, Was 0 #define Y_PROBE_OFFSET_FROM_EXTRUDER 58 // Line # 0780, Was 0 #define Z_HOMING_HEIGHT 5 // Line # 0870, Was 4 // #define MIN_SOFTWARE_ENDSTOP_Z // Line # 0907 Commented #define AUTO_BED_LEVELING_LINEAR // Line # 0977, Uncommented #define LEFT_PROBE_BED_POSITION (X_PROBE_OFFSET_FROM_EXTRUDER + MIN_PROBE_EDGE) // Line # 1027, Uncommented #define RIGHT_PROBE_BED_POSITION (X_BED_SIZE - MIN_PROBE_EDGE) // Line # 1028, Uncommented #define FRONT_PROBE_BED_POSITION (Y_PROBE_OFFSET_FROM_EXTRUDER + MIN_PROBE_EDGE) // Line # 1029, Uncommented #define BACK_PROBE_BED_POSITION (Y_BED_SIZE - MIN_PROBE_EDGE) // Line # 1030, Uncommented #define Z_SAFE_HOMING // Line # 1144, Uncommented From the above changeset, lines 1027-1030 are from the other SO question I mentioned above, the remaining are following the video. After completing the steps up to the point where I push the firmware and have to lift the ROKO up I followed instructions in this video, my "Auto Home" operation is failing. Update 1 I used Pronterface as recommended by @dgrat in comments below and got this result: >>> M119 SENDING:M119 Reporting endstop status x_min: open y_min: open z_min: TRIGGERED I did not get the Probing failed message this time. What's next? Update 2 I also went ahead and tried out the second answer, where @0scar is recommending to uncomment #define MIN_SOFTWARE_ENDSTOP_Z. The results are exactly the same: The head hits the hotbed and goes back and then comes down slowly hitting and compressing the spring a bit before stopping. I did not get the Probing failed message this time.

You should un-comment the following line to get rid of the Probing failed error message: // #define MIN_SOFTWARE_ENDSTOP_Z // Line # 0907 Commented to #define MIN_SOFTWARE_ENDSTOP_Z You have basically disabled the use of the minimum Z endstop, while in fact you are using one, the difference is that it is a sensor now, not a mechanical switch. Please note the distance of the sensor to the bed, it looks as though it is pretty far away. Before sending an auto home command, it is better to test the endstop triggering beforehand; an external application (e.g. Pronterface, Repetier-Host, OctoPrint, etc.), USB cable and a laptop/computer can be used to send G-code commands through the terminal of the external application. Code M119 will output the endstop trigger status to the terminal.

Ender 3, why only 3 limit switches? Why does the Ender 3 only have 3 limit switches instead of 6? How does it handle crashes on other sides? Is it worth adding them with a new mainboard?

You only need 3 switches to determine/fix the position of the carriage (carrying the hotend) with respect to the printer frame (for X, Y and Z i.e. 3 dimensions). Firmware setup, by defining the offset and the traveling distance on each axis, determines the minimum and maximum displacement. By default the printer carriage will not go outside the boundaries and will not damage anything. That is sufficient for most printers, but, for those printers that have weak steppers and printers that produce prints that suffer from layer shifting, the coordinate system might be messed up, and the carriage may travel outside the initial boundaries, this can damage your printer, using maximum endstops will prevent the printer from destroying itself. Why use only 3 switches? The reason for this could also be related to costs, you need half the amount of switches, cables and a less extended printer controller board. I've had one printer setup with max limit switches, but they never got triggered (unless self triggered for testing), never had a layer shifting either.

Marlin on Arduino Mega 2650 and RAMPS 1.4 I have been messing around trying to flash marlin 1.1 onto my Arduino Mega 2650 and RAMPS 1.4. I have Managed to get it to upload fine however it will not upload with the LCD I want. I am trying to upload it and have it set to a "RepRap Discount Smart Controller". When I uploaded the firmware it was on the stock Anet LCD, however when I try to change this in the file and verify it I get an error that I do not understand. I have done some digging on google but haven't really been able to figure out the answer. Here's the error: sketch\ultralcd.cpp:4860:3: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault DEFINE_MENU_EDIT_TYPE(uint32_t, long5, ftostr5rj, 0.01f); ^ Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See for instructions. lto-wrapper.exe: fatal error: C:\Program Files\WindowsApps\ArduinoLLC.ArduinoIDE_1.8.21.0_x86__mdqgnx93n4wtt\hardware\tools\avr/bin/avr-gcc returned 1 exit status compilation terminated. c:/program files/windowsapps/arduinollc.arduinoide_1.8.21.0_x86__mdqgnx93n4wtt/hardware/tools/avr/bin/../lib/gcc/avr/5.4.0/../../../../avr/bin/ld.exe: error: lto-wrapper failed collect2.exe: error: ld returned 1 exit status exit status 1 Error compiling for board Arduino/Genuino Mega or Mega 2560.

Running it as admin fixed the issue.

Setting the startpoint of the EZABL 3x3 mesh How do I set the startpoint of the EZABL 3x3 mesh. The startpoint is hitting my bed clip.

The "EZ" company (TH3D) is trying to make flashing firmware easy by making choices in the configuration for people to set based on printer type. While this makes the flashing more accessible to more people, it does not help people to understand what actually happens in the firmware or what is meant by certain settings. See it as an automated process to add automatic bed levelling to a number of printer models. To change the bed probing area, you need to modify some specific lines that specify the probe area. How you should change this is explained in this answer on question "How to set Z-probe boundary limits in firmware when using automatic bed leveling?". It would be best to set or increase the constant MIN_PROBE_EDGE. This effectively makes the probe area smaller so you will not hit the bed clips.

The BLTouch is hitting the bed on the double-probing When double-probing, sometimes the BLTouch will hit the bed before the z-axis goes down: The BLTouch deploys The bed goes up The sensor triggers The BLTouch stows The BLTouch deploys and crashes the bed before the z-axis goes down for the second probe It happens only on the second probe of double-probing (slow speed) - the bed can't move out of the way fast enough. This happens in 2/16 probe points. Probe Accuracy Test result: Mean: 0.023075 mm Min: 0.018 mm Max: 0.027 mm Range: 0.008 mm Standard Deviation: 0.002584 mm

First, make sure to check if stow, deploy and the trigger are working correctly. Second, check the pins files to make sure you put it in the correct pins. Black and White probe pin might need to go to Z-min or probe pin depending on. Make sure to check that. Third, add "BLTOUCH delay". It might be triggering too slow or too fast for the next one to react. So after the first trigger, there should be a time for it to "re-setup" for the second. But if there is no time to do that then it won't trigger. To add examples: If you have SKR 1.4 Turbo, then use BLTouch probe pins (black and white) on the board. IT will NOT recognize. You have to use Z-min endstop pins. Reason for this?: #define Z_MIN_PROBE_USES_Z_MIN_ENDSTOP_PIN If this has been used, Z-min probe will use Z-min endstop pin instead of Z-min probe.

What is the next step after measuring the bed levels? My Creality CR-10 Max is equipped with a BL Touch sensor for bed leveling. The bed size is 450 mm x 450 mm. Here is the 16 measurement points taken from a 4x4 grid: float v[] = {-1.15625, -0.7625, 0.1525, 1.13, -1.1150, -0.5150, 0.2125, 1.650, -0.8525, -0.215, 0.510, 1.4425, -0.4125, 0.2649, 1.0350, 1.9050}; Which looks like this: The bed doesn't look flat or level. To what extent should I try to make the bed flat and level? It's now a day later, and the bed looks like this (image below) after turning the four knobs using AUX leveling (a helper to locate the nozzle above the knobs), so that the nozzle barely scratches a sheet of paper: float v[] = {0.0849, 0.0599, 0.1549, 0.2874, 0.2674, 0.0624, -0.0425, 0.0699, 0.3374, 0.1199, -0.0150, 0.0199, 0.5399, 0.3349, 0.1899, 0.2074}; I also notice that the bed is slightly concave in its center: using a straight edge (a steel ruler on its side), there is enough room in middle ninth (center square) under the ruler for one sheet of paper.

Now that you have leveled the bed you are ready to start printing. To enable leveling for printing, you need to add G-code G29 directly after G28 in your start G-code of your slicer. The array values you reported are just for information or visualisation of the level of the bed. Although you have ABL you always need to provide a bed that is as level as best as you can, the ABL will take care of the final dents or skewness.

ABS Filament safety concerns I have the XYZPrinting da-Vinci-1.0 with ABS filament. I am concerned about ventilation. If this is used inside, what safety precautions are necessary, which are recommended, and/or which are optional?

Yes... The issue with all 3d printing materials. Not just ABS, but worse with ABS is the fine air particulate and Ultra fine it creates during the 3d printing process. PLA is considered safer than ABS. But I fear people will use this as justification, it is like saying I only smoke one cig a day instead of two so I am safe and healthy. No it really should be taken seriously. There are a number of scientific papers and articles proving that this is an issue. Specifically that 3d printers release ultra fine particles into the air. Which can damage the lungs over time. I would STRONGLY advise not using a 3d printer around children, or at least putting it in the garage where you will not contaminate your homes air supply. I.E. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231013005086 http://built-envi.com/portfolio/ultrafine-particle-emissions-from-3d-printers/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11139166 http://www.3ders.org/articles/20160201-new-study-shows-health-hazards-of-3d-printing-suggests-pla-could-be-your-safest-bet.html Lot of these have some scary looking graphs. Note that I am being a bit sarcastic when I say "scary looking graphs" the take away is ABS has twice the Fine Partical emission as PLA. However should you be worried, is still up to debate. The idea is that FPE can maybe contribute to cancer or other illnesses. FPEs are thought to irritate the lungs. These graphs are of the ultra fine particle emissions. as you can see PLA is MUCH safer in this regard. I cannot find the paper at the moment, but the recommendation is a full air cycle several times an hour. As someone that lives in a Cold state I personally just use PLA and am rolling the dice. There is another SO where I cover my future plans for an air scrubber. I will note that other materials such as Polycarbonate should just be plain avoided. I also want to provide these links on WHY ultra fine particles are bad. In summary they really upset your lungs and are thought to cause lung cancer over time. Wikipedia on Ultra fine particulates. White paper on ultra fine particulates.

Ender 3 X-axis belt orientation What is the correct orientation for the X-axis belt? I first thought to place the smooth side down to match the tensioner bearing, but then changed it to match the motor pulley.

Sadly, the Ender-3 assembly instructions were not clear on step 7, what the right direction is (teeth on inner side of the loop): The Belt has teeth that need to engage the teeth of the hobbed gear on the motor, just like in the preassembled Y-axis. The teeth have to go aim to the "inside" of the loop. This way, the belt will not slip on the motor side and the movements will be repeatable.

How does this multiple-curve-beam flexural pivot work? I found this in Handbook of Compliant Mechanisms (2013), page 162, or at the start of "Chapter 11, Elements of Mechanisms," subsection 11.1.2 Revolute I don't understand how it's supposed to go from 1 to 2 when b rotates around c. The description reads: This element is a rotational flexural pivot constructed by three curved beams to achieve a large range of motion. Theoretically, this element will rotate without axial-drift motion, because of the symmetric arrangement about the axis. (1) Rigid body a is fixed. Rigid body b rotates about c-axis. (2) Deformed configuration (3) Photo of the device. It's unclear which part of the beam is attached to what. I can understand how one curved beam could switch its curvature (in general, like they do in bi-stable latches), but I don't see how they could both at the end of of the rotation end up curved in a way that's opposite to how they started. How could c2/c3 go from the configuration in 1 to the configuration in 2 ? Or could they be two different iterations of the same idea ? I can see how (1) or (2) would resist rotation of c around b, and snap it back to its original position. The text claims (2) is the deformed configuration though. I can also see how (1) with just c1, c3, c5 would deform to (1) with c0, c2, c4 if (b) was turning anti clockwise. Also, what would be an ideal material to print this kind of compliant mechanism ?

The picture looks as if there is a printed back surface to which the central part is attached. This can not be the case, since otherwise the curved members would not be able to flex. Everything inside the outer ring must be detached from the back shell. Like all couplers, especially flexible couplers, there is a limit to the amount of torque the coupler can transmit. Within the elastic limits of the material this looks like a good design, and a good match for 3D printing. The forces are along the layers, not across the layers. This looks like a good design for a rotary coupler. I'm resisting calling it a "shaft" coupler since neither side is equipped with any connection to a shaft. One could modify the design to have a larger central hub with a shaft hole (and set screw(s)). As it is, there is an implied method to hold the outer ring, and a fairly explicit three-pin adapter to drop into the open slots in the arms which connect to the center. I would use ABS rather than PLA, although it depends on the stiffness you require and ability to sustein abuse. PLA is stiller than ABS, while ABS, within the elastic limits, is more compliant. I am not confident that either of these plastics would stand up to thousands of millions of flexures. I would prefer to print this of TPU or Nylon. Both of these are tougher than ABS and PLA. They withstand greater flex with fewer problems with micro cracks and degradation. I have printed another shaft coupler of TPU, and it was both compliant and still. It isn't possible to really nail down a material without knowing the application. As to your question about one example being a transform of the other, I don't thing they are. The A and B drawings are similar in function, but are not stressed and unstressed versions of the same part. Either will work as a coupler.

How to build the extruder motor holder for the Kossel Mini I'm building a Kossel Mini, and I'm stuck on the extruder motor holder. My Kossel came without instructions, I was given a set of instructions by a friend (the "Kossel Build Guide" by Blomker industries). I also found some instructions on the net. However, my components are different from those in the build guides. The question is how these components fit together. I'm pretty certain the stepper motor should be connected to the big black components (labeled (1) and (4) in the picture). The 4 holes in these components correspond to openings in the stepper motor; and the stepper motors for the vertical carriages, were connected in a similar way to their respective holders. The round thing, second from the left on the bottom, (labeled (2) in the picture) presumably goes on the axis of the stepper motor. Once again, a similar procedure was needed for the motors that will move the vertical carriages. The screws on the right, labeled (3), are 1 cm long and 3 mm wide. The other screws are 2 cm long and 3 mm wide. The stepper motor is a Wantai Stepper Motor Model 42BYGHW811 . I have e-mailed the company where I bought my kit and am awaiting their answer. Meanwhile I'm hoping to get some advice here. Apparently the usual stepper motor for a Kossel Mini is Nema 17. Searching on "42BYGHW811" I mostly find datasheets. Using "Nema 17 mount" or "Nema 17 mounting screws" as search terms, I find a lot of images with a component like (1). But nothing on how this and the other components should be put together for the motor holder for an extruder for the Kossel Mini.

Have a look at the image provided in this seller's part description. it probably says more than my words could (which would also only rely on images - your parts just looked like I saw them somewhere before). 3D printer parts right hand Bowden Extruder kit set no motor compact extruder aluminum alloy for

What is the benefit of using an ARM based electronics? Most electronics use micro-controllers like an AVR, but I'm seeing ARM chips in new electronics. ARM chips are said to be more powerful, but in what areas related to 3D printing could this help? What are the features that the AVR struggles with and where an ARM could be better? High Speed movement? Delta printers? Graphic display? And is the AVR really the limitation there?

3D printer controllers have to do a lot of stuff very, very fast. Performing kinematics and dynamics calculations while sending many thousands of precisely-synchronized step pulses per second is really, really hard. The 8bit AVR line of microcontrollers used in older 3D printer controllers is basically a late-1990s era Mr Coffee processor. They are completely, utterly maxed out on processor time just executing basic printing functions in simple (eg Cartesian) printers, and adding additional calculation load will bog them down and cause slowdowns, stuttering, pausing, and so on. "But my 8bit printer works fine," you say. No, it doesn't. Your print performance is limited by it, whether you realize it or not. Slicers now automatically hide a lot of the firmware's performance shortcomings from you. For example, the standard practice of greatly slowing down print speeds on perimeters is largely a result of 8bit processors having inadequate resources for two things: Performing centripetal acceleration calculations for curves across multiple gcode segments Keeping up with gcode transmission/processing and motion planning for gcode with lots of very small segments, such as in organic models or smooth arcs When presented with a series of very small segments in a smooth arc or complex curve, the 8bit firmware will likely choke on the required command processing rate and introduce stuttering to the print. These incredibly brief pauses allow residual pressure in the extruder to push out some extra plastic, making a little zit on the print. So most slicers automatically decimate curves and output gcode with reduced resolution to lighten the load on the firmware. Problem solved, right? But there's another issue -- the GRBL motion control algorithms underlying all the major open source 3D printer controllers were designed with lots of shortcuts and hacks to allow 8bit processors to execute fast enough. For example, the basic algorithm only looks at the speed or velocity change at the corner between two segments, and uses that to decide when to decelerate/accelerate along the direction of motion. It does not calculate or consider centripetal/radial acceleration whatsoever. This is a really effective hack when printing boxy, low-res models, but it fails miserably on smooth curves with lots of little segments. The firmware does not detect any appreciable velocity change at the corner of any two nearly-linear segments within the faceted curve, and thus does not slow down for the curve. So complex geometry is effectively printed at constant velocity, with no acceleration. Printing complex perimeters unaccelerated means the commanded feedrate must be very low to get good quality. Most printers are limited to about 40mm/s or less on complex perimeters, despite being able to run perhaps 80-120mm/s on low-complexity infill before hitting other speed limits. Between the command processing rate limits and motion planner shortcomings required by low power processors, print speeds must be much lower in practice than is strictly required by the physics and printer hardware. This all comes from 8bit processors. The workarounds and best practices to deal with this problem are so deeply baked into the toolchains and ecosystem that very few people realize there is even a problem. But it's a real limit that can be overcome: a high-speed processor running a more rigorous motion planner could generate higher average print speeds with better print quality. That said, the ARM-based firmwares are only slowly moving towards more advanced motion planners. This is a big development area right now that is actually driving an upcoming shift away from low-end ARMs like the Cortex M3 towards even faster processors. It's actually not all that hard to max out an 84 MHz Arduino Due by piling on a bunch of firmware features. The use of 8bit processors also makes printers LOUDER. The biggest consumer of processor time in a typical 8bit printer is the stepper interrupt that fires the step pulses to make the motors move. It is quite typical for >60% of all clock cycles on an Atmega AVR to go to firing step pulses. Because this occurs as an interrupt, other processing tasks that the printer must perform -- like acceleration calculations and heater control -- get squeezed into the brief spaces between stepper interrupt events. Without careful firmware design, the step pulses will completely "crowd out" other functionality like LCD display updates and acceleration calculations. In order to allow higher motion rates without using all the processor resources, 8bit firmwares have a mode called "step doubling" that fires two (or four, or eight) step pulses per stepper interrupt so that half (or a quarter, or an eighth) as many stepper interrupts can be used to produce the same motion speed. This practice de-bottlenecks the processor, but it causes rougher and louder motor motion because the step pulses are fired in bursts rather than a constant frequency. In effect, the microstepping level of the motor is functionally dropped to a coarser mode when the stepper interrupt fires double or quad steps. So the motors get louder, less precise, and in extreme cases may have problems with resonance. An interesting side effect is that if you switch a Marlin-based printer from 1/16 microstepping to 1/32 microstepping, and keep the same print speeds, the firmware will simply start step-doubling, dropping your effective microstepping level right back down to 1/16. ARM-based firmwares also use step doubling, but the allowable step rates are typically ~8 times higher before double/quad stepping is used. That can mean higher speeds and/or smoother motion. Another issue with 8bit AVRs is the lack of hardware floating point and need to spend many clock cycles on high-precision calculations or handling very large numbers. Delta kinematics, auto-leveling functions, calculating moves with extremely high step counts for large printers, and other advanced functionality all take a lot of clock cycles on an 8bit processor. Poor firmware design or carelessly adding a feature that requires a few extra square roots and trig functions can completely bog down the processor. This kind of feature creep and code bloat has seriously impacted Marlin's performance over time as people ask more and more of the old AVR. In comparison, a 32bit processor doesn't just have a faster clock and more clock cycles, it is also able to do much more complex math in fewer clock cycles, because it has dedicated hardware functionality that takes care of many of the steps an 8bit processor must do in software. Do 8bit processors work? Sure, they work surprisingly well for what they are and what we ask of them. But they unquestionably limit the performance and features of modern 3D printers. Even today's current generation of 32bit processors is already being maxed out by high speed printers and math-heavy features. The 8bit processor is already two generations behind what would qualify as a "modern" 3D printer controller.

Thermistor reading 190 °C constantly So to set the backdrop of this post, I was cleaning the hotend of a printer (Powerspec i3 Mini v2, which is a Wanhao i3 Mini rebadged and heated bed added) I picked up for cheap. There was some stubborn residue so I decided to warm the end. However, while it was still plugged in and warming I saw a spark while using the brass brush on the nozzle. Not sure where it actually sparked (thermistor or heater cartridge wires) but now the board constantly reads 193 °C for the hotend whether or not it is hot (or even plugged in for that matter.) Looking around this seems to indicate either a bad thermistor or a messed up mainboard. The thermistor will read ~120k resistance at room temp and fluctuate based on temp changes (ice will cause it to go down, heat will cause it to rise), so can I take that to mean the thermistor is most likely still okay? Doing some probing on the board, it seems the resistor that makes up the voltage divider on the thermistor circuit is out of spec (when probing it with a multimeter it reads only 470 ohms instead of 4.7k). Is this reading while in-circuit valid? Could this have been caused by a short in the thermistor? Can I build a small adapter to splice in a new 4.7k resistor? or will this just throw everything off more? If I were to build a new version of Marlin could I adjust something in there to get the temps back to something recognizable? I figure since I got the printer for 40\$ I may as well use it as a learning experience. Also, if anyone has the original firmware from this printer I would appreciate a copy.

Yes, in newest Marlin (v2.0) there are configurable thermistor parameters. You need to set custom thermistor: #define TEMP_SENSOR_0 1000 for your only extruder (suffix _0) in Configuration.h, and in Configuration_adv.h modify related section: // // Custom Thermistor 1000 parameters // #if TEMP_SENSOR_0 == 1000 #define HOTEND0_PULLUP_RESISTOR_OHMS 4700 // Pullup resistor #define HOTEND0_RESISTANCE_25C_OHMS 100000 // Resistance at 25C #define HOTEND0_BETA 3950 // Beta value #endif But in Marlin 1.x I couldn't find this section, so change would need to be done somewhere in thermistor definition source files. I mention this older Marlin following the discussion on Wanhao Duplicator i3 Mini & Rebrands Support, which refers to some Wanhao source code, but I cannot judge about value of it. For resistors in the circuit I have similar observations: sometimes they do not give exact readings using multimeter, especially next to capacitor. Isn't heatbed temp probe's circuit the same? - can you compare? But instead... I would suggest doing following things: open circuit test: disconnect the thermistor and check readings (I could then see -19 °C) closed circuit test: connect the heatbed's thermistor instead (in place of hotend's) and check if these readings are reliable (I would try to heat the bed for few seconds to check if changes are noticed, but not too long because it will be uncontrolled process) thermistor test: connecting the hotend's thermistor as heatbed's probe and check on-screen readings for heated bed; are they again 193 °C? do they react to changes? (powering hotend for few secs or warming in fingers?) you may consider to setup USB connection with serial terminal to directly read measurements using G-Code, just to exclude errors in post-processing of the temperature readings before putting it to screen (I know, it's a bit paranoic) The worse thing I can imagine is that you could short wires of hotend heating circuit with the temperature probe circuit, which should be galvanically isolated. Then it could damage readings of the mainboard for this probe when received 12V/24V. I found that the mainboard is most probably all-in-one i3mini 0ne+ motherboard, some revision still available in Wanhao store for another $40. I googled for few photos, there are problably few versions of this board. If you are lucky and skilled then you may find some other pin (connected to ATMega) to reuse. Otherwise you would need to replace steering electronics with new board, which could be of great benefit for future improvements: more ports for extra fans, probes, more memory, better stepper drivers, etc.

Communication is dropping when printing on my Tevo Tarantula I am experiencing communication drops when printing from mp raspberryPI (using octoprint, repetitier server). Moreover when printing from Cura (on Windows), the programs freeze (have to kill the window) and sometimes stops the print job. I was changing the serial0 speed in Marlin from 225k to 9600 and still no luck. Mainboard MKS 1.4 all in one. please let me know if you need any more details

As per long article Marlin firmware it looks like my system is a victim of closed ground loop via USB connection. It is now clear to me that printing from laptop (connected to different socket) was a ground loop separated case and therefore the connection was stable. Connecting my raspberryPi from same socket using long unshielded cable is the main reason of connection drops. Will try to run raspberryPi with short shielded cable and also will test raspberryPi powered from power bank.

Are large format prints more brittle? Recently on one of her videos a YouTuber stated that prints from large format printers are more brittle than if you were to print them in parts and glue them together. This seems to contradict the testimonials from the customers of a large format printer, who say that they get good prints from those printers (which print have a print area of a meter square). Would a print form a larger format printer be more brittle than a print made of smaller pieces super glued together? (with all other aspects being equal e.g. the nozzle, the temps, the material and the shape of the object). The YouTube didn't cite any source information to back up her claim.

If you break up a large piece into multiple smaller pieces and properly glue them together, you basically add stiffeners (as a result of printing walls). This could lead to a more stiff model; this might have been confused by calling large prints more brittle opposed to constructed models. If printing is conducted at similar conditions on large printers, there shouldn't be a reason why the model becomes more brittle unless the conditions aren't the same. But that would be true for printing at small printers too, e.g. if one print was printed in a draft.

Is there a reason for the z-axis M5 drive nut to be super loose on the lead screw? So I bought a prusa i3 kit from a company called folger tech off of ebay. I've built it and even printed out a few parts, but I noticed that a lot of noise seemed to be happening only while the x-axis motor was moving the extruder. Then I noticed if I put my finger lightly on the plastic part of the x-carriage I could dampen the vibrations and pretty much eliminate the noise I noticed. Then I took apart that part of the printer and examined everything and all I could notice that seemed to be loose was that nut that allows the z motor to push up the x carriage. I don't know if I got a bad nut, or a bad screw, or is it's just supposed to be this way? I thought it was kind of a weird way to build things with a screw turning a nut, because I thought that it would bind up. But now I'm wondering if that is why it was so loose fitting (to reduce friction)? So does it need to be that way? Or could I get a different nut? Or is there some better way to go about fixing this issue? Or perhaps it's not even an issue.. idk.

It's probably intentional. Threaded rods are almost never perfectly straight. If the nut is rigidly coupled to the carriage, then the slightest deviation in the screw will either cause it to bind up or appear as artifacts (e.g. z-wobble) in the print. By making the nut slightly loose, it can move around a bit to compensate for wobble. See e.g. this design and this design for how this is commonly implemented in other printers.

Cloning the Marlin git repo while keeping my configuration.h settings? I cloned the Marlin repository and changed all my settings in configuration.h to match my old settings. Now when the RC branch gets updated, is there a way to upstream pull the changes without losing my settings?

Based on this answer, you need the following procedure: Stash your local changes using git stash Pull from remote repository using git pull Merge your stashed configuration file using git stash pop Of course, if there are changes in the configuration.h file on the remote repository and cause conflicts, you will need to resolve them, but it should be straight forward.

Ender 3 X-Axis Layer Shifting I've been having a problem lately with some minor layer shifting with my Ender 3. It just started recently and I've made no changes to the printer since it was working fine. The layer shifting is always on the x-axis and its not a large amount. Just enough to render my prints useless. The shift can happen in either direction on the x-axis. See attached photo. Things I've tried: 1 Retensioning the belts 2 Printing at slower speeds 3 Checking all bed connections to make sure the bed is solid 4 Reducing the jerk setting 5 Activating Z-hop 6 Reducing acceleration 7 Increased retraction. The problem occurs on multiple STL files that used to work fine Any help would be appreciated

OK I found the answer. I removed the extruder cover and found that the 2 screws attaching the extruder assembly were loose. A very simple fix to a very irritating problem.

RCBugFix what is it? I've posted an issue on GitHub and I have been advised to load RCBugFix. I have never used it and I do not know what is about. What is it? How does it work?

It refers to a specific branch of the current project, named RCBugFix. It's basically the most up-to-date, bleeding edge version of Marlin that contains all of the most recent fixes (it is more up-to-date than RC). However, as it's so up-to-date, it's also not thoroughly tested and possibly quite unstable. The latest Release Candidate lives in the "RC" branch. Bugs that we find in the current Release Candidate are patched in the "RCBugFix" branch, so during beta testing this is where you can always find the latest code on its way towards release. Use with caution.

What parts are suitable replacements for an Ender 3 Pro? I'm new to 3D printing and I recently got my first 3D printer, an Ender 3 Pro by Creality. I've tried to find information about the type of nozzles should I look for. I'm trying to find stainless steel nozzles but there are so many models (M7, M8, etc.) and I have no idea what nozzle type I should get. I've tried searching on Google but the only info I could find is that the extruder is an MK-10. I am also looking for a heating cartridge for the hot end, but I still cannot find no information about the size that I need (15 mm/20 mm/30 mm). Also looked for info about the heated bed so I know what kind of thermistor I need (I found two types and no clue which one to get). Where can I find some technical information about these?

The Ender 3 takes an M6 thread (metric 6 mm diameter). Measurement of stock nozzle shown. Most sellers will list compatible printers Ender 2, Ender 3, Ender 4, CR-10, CR-10S, CR-10 Mini, CR-10-S4, CR-10-S5, CR-8, CR-7. Will Also Fit Any Other MK10 Heater Blocks. I recently bought some titanium alloy nozzles as the brass one got closed over after crashing into the glass bed.

X axis stops working sometimes on my Tronxy X5SA This is regarding the circuit of my 3D printer Tronxy X5SA's stepper motor for X axis. I had an observation: It has a cooling fan (40X10 24V) which is having issues lately - it stops working sometimes, and when pushed to rotate, spins back. Problem: Now one of the stepper motors (NEMA 17 ~3.5kgfcm) in my core XY has been malfunctioning, where it misses rotation sometimes out of the blue, which shifts the whole print. I thought this is due to the driver limiting the current to the motor, so I rotated the screw terminal clockwise a bit more to allow more current for the motor. This works fine for a while, but the problem comes back. Now, I also noticed a few times that this issue occurred when the cooling fan for the drivers stopped working. Can the stopping of the cooling fan cause the stepper motor to falter? Another observation is that the stepper motor which is faltering is placed close to another stepper motor. Although I know stepper motors can work in extreme conditions, can this cause the issue? If you require any more info to investigate the issue, please do let me know

It might be cross-talk with back-EMF from the fan confusing the stepper-motor driver. Do the cables run together, and have you tried separating them?

Prints coming out very stringy So these past few days I have been 3D printing again with my Ender 3 with PETG and 0.4 mm nozzle and while I have been using the same setting as usual I am seeing an unusual amount of stringing between the prints. Does anyone know why? If you're wondering regarding the settings here they are, I'm using Cura for slicing, see options:

The travel speed of 160 mm/s is a big red flag. PETG is not tolerant of a hot nozzle moving over it at high speeds, especially unretracted (combing). The nozzle will drag material in a stuttering pattern, every so often, marring the surface and pulling what it dug up into strings. Lower the travel speed to the same as the print speed, and then experiment with whether you can increase it without problems. I would not try going over 80 mm/s and probably not even over 60. For what it's worth, this sounds like softened/molten PETG is a non-newtonian fluid, where at low stress (slow moving nozzle pushing/pulling) it deforms gracefully, but at high stress (fast moving nozzle) it strongly resists deformation and has a discontinuous breaking point. A quick Googling turned up this article, Thermal, Rheological and Mechanical Properties of PETG/rPETG Blends, which might explain what's happening.

BLTouch Z offset needs changes Just installed a BLTouch sensor on my Ender 3 Pro (using firmware version: Ender-3 Pro1.1.6BLTouchV3.1PowerLossContinueEnglish), it all works great but each time I set the Z-offset I need to add it again. I home it, it requires -2.9 mm to get a paper sheet thickness from bed so I added that to my 0.00 Z-offset. When I did a test print, the nozzle was way above bed, so I home the head, moved the Z axis and once again it is 2.9 mm to the correct location. Added this to my Z-offset again... been doing this now for a while and my offset is current at 11.2 mm! I did it on the screen and saved, hence up to 11.2 on the z offset now. If I power off and back on it once again is 2.9 mm from the correct location?

I can't really follow the information provided but I've read that Creality had some issues with saving settings if there was no SD-card in the printer when saving, could this be the issue? I would recommend trying another firmware (not from Creality but something like Smith3D.com (https://smith3d.com/ender-3-v2-bltouch-firmware-installation-guide-by-smith3d-com/) which I've used before with success. If you're willing to pay for precompiled firmware (and support the Marlin developers) I can also recommend https://marlin.crc.id.au/ (which I use now)

How to tell if a nozzle is truly stainless steel? Normally stainless steel is magnetic. But whenever i order stainless steel nozzles from Amazon, they are not magnetic. This makes me think they could be brass coated in something like aluminum. However, there are many types of steel. I've attached an image of someone who reviewed these nozzles. He says they are not stainless steel because they are not magnetic. But whenever I order "stainless steel" nozzles, even from other sellers, they are not magnetic. i already returned one pack from another seller and just received a nonmagnetic one from a third seller. So that's it? Amazon just sells junk now? Or is there a way I can easily tell whether these are something other than colored brass / good for abrasive or high temp printing. Here is the product that was reviewed: AUSTOR 13 Pieces Stainless Steel 3D Printer Nozzles 0.2 mm, 0.4 mm, 0.6 mm, 0.8 mm, 1.0 mm Extruder Nozzle Print Head for E3D Makerbot https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07CHZMGRH/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_XtrNDbRMVH8SW

Let's preface, that there are a LOT of metal identification methods. For example, I found this guide helpful and I had been at the scrapyard lately, where I have been told that 90+% of the time, steel objects that are non-magnetic are the more valuable stainless steels. The kitchen sink I dropped off? Stainless, non-magnetic steel. Tempering/Annealing behavior The very fact that the nozzles do change color to a brassy color that is commonly called straw is proof that it is indeed steel: heating up a piece of steel does alter the steel and also alters the surface color in a process called tempering. The color is only the surface, and the mild straw color would become orange-brown, purple, pale blue teal and yellow if you were to heat it higher. Take a look at the tempering colors of steel here: In contrast, brass acts differently when heated and tempering is somewhat different. Subjecting the piece of brass to heat you will not temper but anneal it and you get colors differently. Instead of becoming straw before blue, Brass becomes dark, starting with its pale gold to go over a dark "antique" look to before going green, teal, purple-blue, red and then losing its color like this piece of a polished brass plate shows: Hardness/Chip Another test that would be easy to conduct is hardness. The base idea of hardness is: An item can scratch a piece of equal or lower hardness, but not of higher hardness. If you have a chisel handy, then you have a piece of steel at hand. Most chisels are rated as HRC 58-62 - which is the Rockwell hardness scale. Brass could be all over the place, depending on work hardening. But the identification is not by the hardness but by how the chisel - or better a graver - cuts. We expect Brass to get a smooth cut with saw tooth edges while stainless cuts smoothly and has sharp edges to the cut. Sparktest If you want to scrap one, get an angle grinder or another power tool to grind at the nozzle. Steel sparks red-orange to whitish and depend on the mix, Carbide sparks very short and orange. Stainless creates a HUGE shower of sparks, yellow-white and dense, no burstes and branching. Copper, aluminium and Brass do not spark. Titanium is very bright white. It can tell you what kind of steel you have. Drilltest As we are at destroying a pair of nozzles, why not drill them? we should have done that before subjecting it to heattreating and the grinding, but alas... Basically, we clamp the piece down and take an HSS drill to drill out the center. Brass needs a different drill type but can be drilled and machined without coolant. Typical HSS drills from the home depot have a positive rake, brass wants neutral or negative rake to drill or machine smoothly. If the piece grabs, creates short spials and dusty small flakes with an unmodified, new drill (or under positive rake machining), it drills like brass, as you see here from a Clickspring video on drilling brass: In contrast, stainless steel doesn't want to be machined without cooling at all and using high speed creates smoke quickly and nearly no chips at all. A moment later your tool starts to glow and gets a dull edge. If your drilling experiment turns a new drill blunt on high speeds or uncooled, you have stainless at your hands. To get chips, you need to work slow and have some sort of cooling. It is still a painfully slow process that needs a lot of pressure, but it gets larger, nesting chips like seen here from a Wayne Canning steel drilling tutorial:

What is the MightyBoard 1280 IO used for? While I've worked on fixing my voltage regulator on my MightyBoard, I've noticed an extra set of pins available labeled Atmega 1280 IO. I've tried finding documentation on what these pin can be used for to no avail. I'm curious if there is any use for them within the scope of MakerBot's Conveyor service or even what sort of functionality with regard to the board itself. Any links to documentation on this subject would be greatly appreciated.

If you check the Mightyboard RevE files on Thingiverse (http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:16058/#files) you will find the schematics and PCB files (.sch and .brd) for the version of the board used in Replicator 1s and (with some minor mods) most clones. The Atmega 1280 IO header section is a bunch of breakout pins for debug functions. There are eight sets of signal/5v/gnd groupings. Four of them are currently driving debug LEDs that show flash codes for particular firmware failure modes. The other four are unused as far as I'm aware. The ninth and tenth pins shown in the schematic are located on the opposite end of the board, near the 8U2 chip, to give some hacking access to that chip as well. (The 8U2 handles USB comms and firmware flashing the Atmega 1280.) If desired, you can build your own firmware using these pins for other purposes, such as signaling to external equipment. But building Sailfish is a little more difficult than just running the latest Arduino IDE (for compiler stability reasons) so the vast majority of Mightyboard users never bother modifying their firmware.

Anycubic Chiron does not print correctly I recently got my Anycubic Chiron. First I was very exited and set up the printer. I started the first manual leveling as described in the instuctions. After that I did the Autoleveling and started the test print - so far so good. After adjusting by 2 mm, further down I saw the round circle in the middle is not round and it seems that in some areas the printer does not position the nozzle correctly. As I printed a cylinder I saw the circle has two flat areas opposing each other when the build plate moves towards its end position. Does anybody now how to fix this? Is there anybody with a Cura 4.0 Machine setting and a 0.05 mm with 0.4 mm nozzle profile?

It is impossible to give a definitive answer without photographic evidence, since your description of the problem does not give enough information. The most common causes of "circular objects not printing correctly" are loose belts and loose grub screws on the belt drive pulleys. However, you should note that the printer's firmware will not allow the print head to be moved outside the defined maximum printing area under software (g-code) control. This will cause large objects to be truncated if they extend outside of the defined maximum printing area, and I suspect that this is what is happening.

Prusa MK3 heatbed marks I've got some curious marks on my heatbed. It appears to be from my black Sunlu PLA+ (I can just feel it if I scrape my finger nail over it) but I can't scrape it off with the metal spatula. When I try and print over it the filament won't stick. Any suggestions as to what it is and how you get rid of it?

Prusa ships (or has shipped) with two types of PEI build plates. The original (and what I was shipped in February 2019) is a PEI sheet held in place with an adhesive. The marks I've gotten seem to be places where the adhesive has been displaced slightly from long term pressure by the object being printed. In your case, it actually looks like scratches in the PEI. If, after cleaning with water, then 95% Isopropyl alcohol, and finally acetone the scratches still appear, I'd check if they are a problem. Do they transfer onto objects printed on the plate? If you decide you have a problem, I would use a mild kitchen scrubby sponge to "sand" out the scratches. I have two types in my kitchen. The yellow ones are too abrasive. The blue ones are better. Gently use one to make the surface uniform. If you have an adhesive based plate, Prusa sells replacement PEI sheets, with adhesive. The process of changing them seems onerous. Although I bought two spare sheets when I got the printer, I have never been tempted to use one. When my build plate becomes unusable, I will buy another one. Prusa3D also offers a textured build plate, which is more expensive and in short supply. These are a powder-coating process and from pictures and their blog, I infer they are particles of PEI which are melted onto the steel surface. I have no experience with these. I don't know if they are making the current smooth plates with a powder coating process, or if they are still using the adhesive. The adhesive is the weak link in the heated bed. It is only rated for 110 degrees C, which is the temperature limit of the bed. I find that when I print with a hot bed (such as for PETG), the visible ripples in the surface are worse than when printing PLA on a cooler bed.

Incorrect inner dimensions of 3D prints with Ender 3 I have problem with my Ender 3. Whenever I print, I have proper outer dimensions (accuracy usually better than 0.1 mm, sometimes a bit worse), but every hole, pit or any inside dimension is inaccurate (0.6 - 0.8 mm never less or more). I have tried extruder calibration. Calibrated extruder voltage and e-steps (in Ender firmware), but this does not change a lot. Here you can see test dimensions I modeled: And it will come out with these dimensions: Aaand the final print looks like this: As you can see, my estimation (second picture) was almost perfect. 19.3 mm and results are weirdly consistent. Always holes are 0.6 - 0.8 mm smaller than holes in model. Do you have idea why this is happening? Specs: Printer - Ender 3 with original circuit board Printer software - Marlin 2.0.5 Model cutting software - Cura 4.8.0 Modelling software - Fusion 360

There are 3 effects at work, and you misread your micrometer: the measurement is 19.35 in the picture. You have a little lip There's a little lip at the top and bottom of the print. You'd need to clean that up with a sharp knife or sandpaper. That is the biggest part of the error you measure. Movement errors accumulate Errors also collect on the center of holes due to the order in which walls are usually placed, resulting in outer walls having the correct diameters but inner holes having a small offset. Plastic shrinks when it cools A smaller part of the error is the plastic shrinking as it cools, but that can be compensated for by the slicer - if your printer allows for it: Under Materials, there is a Shrinkage Ratio setting. There's compensation for that in Cura The option is under Shell and called Hole Horizontal Expansion. Setting that value to 0.6 mm to 0.7 mm should solve the hole sizing error.

What kind of paint and varnish can be used with ABS? I know that acrylic paint, the same kind that is used to paint miniature figurines, works best for PLA. Does it works on ABS pieces as well? Can I also use the same kind of varnish that is used for miniatures on my painted ABS prints? If not, what kind of paint and varnish works on ABS prints?

ABS is more soluble in solvents than is PLA. Acetone will dissolve it, which can be a benefit because it allows vapor smoothing, but can be a problem with some paints which have solvents other than water. Try out any new paint on a scrap piece. Apply a thick dot of the paint, let it sit for a couple of minutes, and then wipe it off. If there is a change in the shape or color where the dot had been, the paint may be dissolving the ABS. Acrylic has a water base and does not attack ABS. A paint that attacks ABS may be fine, but there may be some color bleeding of the ABS color into the paint. A translucent (or clear) ABS would minimize the problem, since does not contain any pigment. Spray painting may work better because the paint is undisturbed once applied. Brushing on paint will mix the dissolved layer with the unaltered paint.

Creating a heated chamber from a very large heated bed In this instructable, a user creates a heated bed from a wooden plank, some nails, insulated copper wire, and a DC switch. He does place an aluminum bed on top of it, but for our heated chamber, we won't use any aluminum on top of these wires. We aren't trying to heat an aluminum bed, but an entire chamber. Assume I place a wire loom like this underneath my 3D printer. (I might place some aluminum foil between the wood and the copper wire, to reflect heat upwards more? Is that safe?) Then assume I have a cardboard box that has aluminum foil lining the walls on its inside. Assume the total size of my printer is 500mm x 500mm x 500mm. When I place the cardboard box over my printer, do you think it would take less than 1 hour for the top of the cardboard box to reach 60 degrees Celsius? Do you think there are any other hazards here I am not considering? Could I, theoretically, do this entirely with cardboard, and no wood? Could I, theoretically, line the inside of my cardboard box like this? Or might the cardboard ignite? I'd like to use cardboard because it is both lightweight and insulative. I can remove it easier to check all areas of my printer, unlike an enclosure.

Cardboard is fundamentally paper. Paper ignites - just as Ray Bradbury claims - at around 233 °C or 451 °F. A thin heater wire usually glows red hot under operation. Not dark red, not blood cherry, not dark cherry, it's usually medium cherry to dark orange in operation, as one can easily tell by looking into a trusty toaster oven, which also shows us how powerful of a heating element this is. In a typical toaster, heater wires are mounted in a metal frame and backed by some non-flammable material that looks like paper but is not. In a 2004 patent for such a method, they use a sheet of mica. But how hot is our wire? Well, under mains power, the wire of a toaster reaches 700-900 °C within seconds, heating the inner chamber of the toaster despite the slots to about 200-250 °C so quick that the bread roasts deliciously... until the heat controlling bimetal strip releases it up. We operate these wires for at best a few minutes. In an electric forge, pretty much the same wires with a little more thickness to them are run at lemon glow for hours... and they are embedded in firebrick material to prevent them from igniting stuff touching them by accident! How we know the temperature? Incandescence charts of course: Conclusion Paper or cardboard backing on heater wires is a bad idea. Mounting the heater wire to a metal frame that is as nonconductive as possible and without a chance that something accidentally touches it is needed. Fiberglass or rock material would serve as a good carrier, an aluminium block with radiators would give a good heating-to-surface mix, especially is precautions are taken to make the wire surface nonconductive. Even using wood close to such a heater is a gamble I would not want to take. It's also best to mount the heating element into an enclosure that can't touch the wooden outer chamber and that stays put if the enclosure is opened or removed.

Slicer line width vs. extrusion multiplier for layer adhesion? My question would like to address what would be better for adhesion and general quality and possibly strength: either increase the slicer line width option or increase the slicer extrusion multiplier for layer to layer adhesion? This question has a relation to "Why is it conventional to set line width > nozzle diameter?". This answer on that question addresses a phenomenon called die swell to explain that the extrusion width is generally larger than the nozzle diameter even if the line width in the slicer is set to the nozzle diameter. Basically, increasing the line width increases the extrusion multiplier, so why not set that directly?

Generally speaking, both settings result in the same1: The feed rate of the filament gets adjusted. Either you set a general multiplier, or you demand a wider line which does make it set a higher multiplier hidden in the software. 1 - if you don't look at any other factor that is! But... There is always a but, and this one is big: While we can work with the extrusion multiplier to get wider lines, wider lines do change another setting: it changes the distance between the lines too. Let me show you: If you print 100% at 0.4 mm line width, lines are about2 0.4 mm wide at 0.4 mm distance. If you print 100% at 0.5 mm line width, lines are about2 0.5 mm wide at 0.5 mm distance. If you print 121% at 0.4 mm line width, lines are about2 0.5 mm wide at 0.4 mm distance. 2 - ignoring die swell effects The result is pretty clear: the theoretical lines do overlap, which will lead to the polymer goop getting squished and pressed around to bulge up. Luckily, that stuff usually ends in the infill on the lower layers, but it can result in very messy sides. You pretty much deliberately chose to massively overextrude! To say it blatantly: line width changes the overall geometry of the slicing to account for the extra material getting extruded, extrusion multiplier does not. What is the extrusion multiplier for THEN? Well, using the extrusion multiplier can be done for many reasons, but mainly 2 are interesting: Troubleshooting. You can just amp it up or down to test your mechanical properties. Like if your gear ratios on the extruder are correct. Or if your print needs a thicker line to get the first layer sticking. Dialing in Filaments. In its core, it is meant to allow to change the flow because different polymer blends might have different thermal properties. For example, the filler and paint could lead to more thermal expansion and die swell, or they could reduce it. This behavior can be tackled directly by adjusting the extrusion multiplier. This is one thing you should do when getting a new type (color&manufacturer) of filament. While some manufacturers try to keep the properties along their lines similar, some won't. It might not look too obvious at first, but I once had printed a model from one roll of white PLA that came from China. Then I got my fingers on some other PLA that was transparent from the same warehouse. I tried to print the exact same .gcode with it again and got a hyper fragile object that just could get squished, every time I used it with the same settings as the white PLA. I had to increase both the extrusion multiplier and change the temperature to get the same strength as with the other PLA.