It’s weekend! Time to do some printing Today I’m busy with some fine tuning and tried to print 2 small calibration-cubes of 10mm to see what to results I come up with. I repeated the test twice: on 0,15mm layer height and on 0,25mm layer height. These are the results:
What kind if precision can I expect? Are these already good results or is there room for improvement? I printed it in 2 different layer heights but in theory the width and depth should not change, still with larger layer height the width and height were more precise. The height is more precise with a lower layer height. Any thoughts?
Something else I noticed is some sort of X/Y wobble, clearly visible on this picture:
Once again sorry for upsidedown picture (happens when uploading via tinypic). Does anyone know why these waves show up? Something I noticed is that the waves are more visible on one side. So it’s not as bad on the other side…
the error should be lower than 0.1 mm in any lateral direction. The Z height will of course only match the design as close as half a layer height. However, there could be many effects than make the print seem larger than it actually is, e.g. any wobbling along the sides …
The pattern looks like it’s from the belt. Does it repeat in 5 mm intervals?
Why don’t you just turn them around before uploading?
When I measure between the wobbles I get an error below 0,1 in X and Y direction but the Z-direction is flat offcourse. Is this common that with the standard rod there is an error as big as 0,31mm?
[quote]The pattern looks like it’s from the belt. Does it repeat in 5 mm intervals?
[/quote]
between 2 low points there is a distance of ±2,3mm on the sides. On the front there is a slight (almost invisible) wobble of 5,2mm. What can be causing wobble from the belts? I think it is weird that the pattern is often only visible on 1 or 2 sides and not all the way around. What I see is that the wobble mostly occurs when both the motors (X and Y) are moving simultaneously. (when laying diagonal lines, circles, …
On my PC the pictures are the right way up, when uploading to facebook there are no problems, when uploading to tinypic they are upsidedown
When I measure between the wobbles I get an error below 0,1 in X and Y direction but the Z-direction is flat offcourse. Is this common that with the standard rod there is an error as big as 0,31mm?
[quote]The pattern looks like it’s from the belt. Does it repeat in 5 mm intervals?
[/quote]
between 2 low points there is a distance of ±2,3mm on the sides. On the front there is a slight (almost invisible) wobble of 5,2mm. What can be causing wobble from the belts? I think it is weird that the pattern is often only visible on 1 or 2 sides and not all the way around. What I see is that the wobble mostly occurs when both the motors (X and Y) are moving simultaneously. (when laying diagonal lines, circles, …
Edit: I checked some of my other prints and the distance between the wobble lines get as small as 1,3mm. It’s not really always the same distance, it varies from object to object. Strange…
On my PC the pictures are the right way up, when uploading to facebook there are no problems, when uploading to tinypic they are upsidedown[/quote]
do you use the “lift on retract” setting? This would introduce some errors due to backlash. Apart from that, all standard settings should not produce such errors.
I can’t remember, did you already check the steps per mm value? It should be at 2560 for the M8 rod.
Also check the first layer height / Z endstop screw. Stop a print at the end of the first layer and measure the height, compare with your settings in Slic3r. If the first layer is too high, this will obviously cause the whole print to be too high, too.
When you do testprints like your two cubes, check the Z height setting for the last layer in the G-code editor to find out the set value.
between 2 low points there is a distance of ±2,3mm on the sides. On the front there is a slight (almost invisible) wobble of 5,2mm. What can be causing wobble from the belts?[/quote]
Depending on tension and speed, the belts can vibrate. The reason for this is the variation of the effective radius at the point where belt and idler surface “meet”: the bearing does not support the lower, i.e. gap portions of the belt, and the belt will therefore due to its pretension move a bit up and down with each tooth and gap.
Vibrations in the carriage are also possible. Lowering the acceleration settings a bit can reduce this effect. E.g. see here (old thread about this, not really solved the issue but may contain some info anyways).
[quote=“KLucky13”]
On my PC the pictures are the right way up, when uploading to facebook there are no problems, when uploading to tinypic they are upsidedown[/quote]
You’re probably using a camera that can sense whether it’s used in landscape or portrait (or upside-down) orientation. This information is embedded into the image. Some programs can interpret this tag and turn the picture automatically, others don’t do this and display the image data like it is present in the file. Some image editors have a feature “turn according to EXIF orientation” or similar to do this with one click.
[quote]do you use the “lift on retract” setting? This would introduce some errors due to backlash. Apart from that, all standard settings should not produce such errors.
I can’t remember, did you already check the steps per mm value? It should be at 2560 for the M8 rod.
Also check the first layer height / Z endstop screw. Stop a print at the end of the first layer and measure the height, compare with your settings in Slic3r. If the first layer is too high, this will obviously cause the whole print to be too high, too.
When you do testprints like your two cubes, check the Z height setting for the last layer in the G-code editor to find out the set value.[/quote]
-I don’t use lift on retract
-Those steps (2560 per mm) do I have to check these in the EEPROM? I still have to reload the firmware because I have all 0’s. I’ll try that later. But I have not changed anything after loading that “V2” file on vellemans site
-That first layer height, I have not checked that manually yet. I have just set the nozzle so the first layer is placed as ideal as possible (so it sticks well but is not spread out to much)
So the only way to fix this is with finer belts or slowing down the print?
Edit: I also checked my larger prints like the motherboard cover and my “filament garbage bin”, and on these prints there is almost no wobble visible. This can be explained in 2 ways i think. The first one is the fact that these prints are done very slow because of the thin walls. So the belts don’t move fast and will not vibrate that much. The second (maybe a bit less important) is that it has no curves or anything. At all times the motors work independent, the X and Y motor don’t have to work at the same time (unless for infill). Maybe when working simultaneous the bed itself starts to resonate at some speeds resulting in bad wobble… I think I will start be disassemble the bed and check the bearings first (I have to straighten the allu plate anyway because it is bent allot resulting in allot of space in between the bed and my mirror=slow heating)
I just printed the same object and sliced it with Cura. My prints look smoother but the x/y wobbling got much worse. I think my prints where done quicker, so probably is speed the reason for the wobbles.
yes, the steps per mm values are in the EEPROM, but also in the firmware that you loaded. So if you didn’t change anything via the (effectively disabled) EEPROM dialog or any manual M commands, the value should be as set in the Configuration.h.
The first layer height could be a good thing to look at in your case. The layer will look ok if the combination of several parameters (set and actual layer height, extrusion width and multiplier etc.) produces “enough” extrusion. If one paramter is off, it can still be compensated by another parameter.
You can stop a test-print at the end of the first layer and measure the height, or (a bit more “professional”) design a special object with e.g. four or five steps with heights corresponding to your layer height settings.
yes, the steps per mm values are in the EEPROM, but also in the firmware that you loaded. So if you didn’t change anything via the (effectively disabled) EEPROM dialog or any manual M commands, the value should be as set in the Configuration.h.
The first layer height could be a good thing to look at in your case. The layer will look ok if the combination of several parameters (set and actual layer height, extrusion width and multiplier etc.) produces “enough” extrusion. If one paramter is off, it can still be compensated by another parameter.
You can stop a test-print at the end of the first layer and measure the height, or (a bit more “professional”) design a special object with e.g. four or five steps with heights corresponding to your layer height settings.
Cheers,
kuraasu[/quote]
Ok, I will check this later on. Thanks for the info
This object clearly needs support material, but when checking this in slic3er, it seems to fill up the intire area under the pins coming out on the side. What settings would be best for this object? I never printed support material before.
-Already thank you for the help. Is it a problem that the object is not manifold? I never really thought about what this means, I had object before giving this “error” that printed without issues.
-I have version 1.0.0.2RC, When I click on “search updates” no updates are found?
-I filled in the settings you suggested and this is the result:
[quote=“KLucky13”]
If you look closely you can see a gap between the support and the first and second pin, so the pin will still be printed “in the air”[/quote]
This was done on purpose. If the interface between support and object is too solid if will stick to your object and you’ll damage the pin when trying to remove the support. A small gap doesn’t change much the result but the interface is thinner.
You can change this by setting the “Interface layer” parameter to 0. There will be no gap then but you’ll have to cut out the support as it will be part of your object.
[quote=“raby”][quote=“KLucky13”]
If you look closely you can see a gap between the support and the first and second pin, so the pin will still be printed “in the air”[/quote]
This was done on purpose. If the interface between support and object is too solid if will stick to your object and you’ll damage the pin when trying to remove the support. A small gap doesn’t change much the result but the interface is thinner.
You can change this by setting the “Interface layer” parameter to 0. There will be no gap then but you’ll have to cut out the support as it will be part of your object.[/quote]
Ok, I understand that, but I mean there is a vertical gap. So the support goes up, leaves a gap and then starts printing the part (still in the air because of the gap). Maybe I’m just not seeing it clearly now, I’ll try to print it, maybe I’ll understand it then. Thanks for the help btw
Edit: I checked the sliced profile layer by layer, here on this closeup you can see what I mean:
Your gap is one layer high (0.2 or 0.25mm if you use the same setting as I do). As the extruded filament is 0.5 mm in diameter there is no actual gap when printed but the layer doesn’t stick (or less) to the support layer underneath.
looks good, doe everything work fine now?
Did you see improvements at every step you made?
I also bought the e3d hotend, but at the same time I want to upgrade to an aluminium direct drive extruder.
Today I’m busy with some fine tuning and tried to print 2 small calibration-cubes of 10mm to see what to results I come up with. I repeated the test twice: on 0,15mm layer height and on 0,25mm layer height. These are the results:
