text:
How to set multiple draft shields in Prusaslicer?
Draft shields helped me a lot to get some usable prints out of ABS on a non-enclosed printer with a small printing bed, but I noticed that the shield cracks (it is affected by the issue that would otherwise affect the print itself), resulting in cold air leaking in and ruining the print to some degree.
See image for an example of a ruined shield which results in a chimney effect and cold air getting near the print.

How can I set multiple shields to enhance the protection? just a second one would be enough.
If the print is rectangular it's easy, I just need to add an empty box around my print, but when the models are more complex I would like to have shields which follow the shape more closely.
I'm using Prusaslicer but a preprocess step in other free software would be acceptable.

You could CAD a 1 layer thick cylinder, and add it to your print and place it around your object. You can create any number of cylindrical shells that way...

That can be done directly in Prusaslicer, but then the first one is not very close to the object as a normal shield


text:
Can a dual extruder printer print with multiple filament types?
I was looking at purchasing the Creality CR-X or another similar dual extruder (note, NOT dual nozzle) printer. I know it was designed to print two colors of the same filament, but is it able to print two different filaments?
I would be printing HIPS with ABS or PVA with PLA, so the two filaments would have very similar characteristics. It's ok if the printer doesn't know there's two different filaments, I can make it work by playing with the slicing settings.

Yes and No
Yes, if you have two full hotends, you can easily print with two filament types.
Yes, if you have one hotend and both filaments melt at a very similar temperature or are the same polymer, then you can use a Prusa MMU style or splicing machine.
No, if you have only one hotend and the two materials are very dissimilar in their print temperatures (PLA with 200 °C and ABS with 235 °C), then you can't use a MMU/splicing style printing. This does preclude PLA and PVA from the same nozzle: PVA needs about 230 °C according to my data.

PLA can be printed at 235, FWIW. I think the bigger problem is different viscosities and other properties leaving the remnants of the previous material in the nozzle rather than all coming out first on purge. I have that problem a lot switching between PLA and PETG.

@R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE at the cost of print quality, yes, you could print PLA at almost "cooking" temperature.

What you want is a dual extruder, dual nozzle, dual hot-end printer, a printer with two entire print heads.
That model is mostly for color, like a black and white panda, or a green and rainbow lizzard, of the same material.
Your problem is going to be the mixing of both materials in the hot end.
If I were you, I would invest the extra cash into a dual print head printer, so you can print with water-soluble support material, and that soft of stuff, plus if you print black and white pandas, you're going to have pure black, and pure white, with no grey, marbled parts where the two filaments were mixing in the hot end.

OP mentions HIPS/ABS and PVA/PLA combo.

I realize my argument isn't really based on materials, but I do think OP is going to be happier with a dual head machine, rather than a "dual feeder" machine...  I think that machine is manufactured specifically for people who want to print in two colors of the same material, and also kinda confuse people who want a dual head machine into getting it, thinking they're getting a deal...  OP might have a specific project in mind right now, but I think a dual head extruder might future-proof his investment, and make him a happier person on a long-term...  I'm not sure about price points, though...

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
Fusion 360 Design Best Practices Question (Am I on the right track?)
So I've designed a few components in Fusion 360, but I'm kinda new to CAD.  I did the tutorials AutoDesk have on YouTube, modelled an Arduino enclosure, a shampoo bottle, a lamp shade, etc. but what I'm doing now isn't as straightforward...
Before I used to create solids, but what I'm doing right now is essentially a flimsy plastic part, just a sheet of plastic with a rim, and some other "rib" features, and doing solids you have to make a sketch, and every line has to be doubled because of the thickness of the material.
Today I'm trying surfaces after being clued by the "Thicken" command, I figured maybe that was more efficient, but I'm not sure if I'm on the right track.
When I work with solids, I end-up with the option to join whatever new feature to the main body, but with surfaces I end-up with a bunch of bodies that are essentially supposed to be one, and I don't know how to join them together after.
I guess they could be put together in a "component", but I think components are more like a nut is a solid, a bolt is a solid, and a component is a nut and a bolt, not a bolt head, and a threaded cylinder...  So the way the software is made right now at this point, while it clued me to use surfaces, now it's cluing me that there's something I'm missing, or nor doing right...
There's no CAD Stack Exchange site, and I realize this might be a bit specific, but the part is to be 3D printed, I bought a new 3D printer not long ago for a project, but I need to get better at CAD before I can make it...
Attached is a screenshot of what I worked on, it's paths that I've extruded to create surfaces (tall edges), thickened those surfaces to create bodies, patched some surfaces to fill areas, thickened those as well (ended-up with stair-shaped corners that I fixed somehow), then I cut some bodies from the bodies below to end-up with that you see now...
I think I'm on the right path with surfaces, but I don't think my workflow is right, and I was wondering if anyone could help me...
Right now, there's supposed to be two screw wells in two corners of the circle, essentially wells with a hole in the bottom for a thumbtack to go through, and there's going to be a cap to cap it off, it's kind of the same process as what I've done so far, but like I said, I don't think I'm doing it right...

(source: 000webhostapp.com)

The question is very vague, I don't understand why you are talking about thickening surfaces, just draw a sketch and pull the component from the sketch surfaces, this should take about 2 minutes to draw this way (you might need an extra sketch to cut out the round parts). Do you imply that you need screw holes? Just subtract/cot out the holes and put threads on the cut-out surface. We are aware that there is no CAD or Fusion360 SE so some questions are allowed here. Note there is a Blender SE.

It sounds like you are on the right path. But as with most skills, experience is the best teacher. The more you work at it and the more mistakes you make, the more you will grow. Even if what you try isn't what you intend, you will learn something new that can be used later. Keep at it!

@agarza : I totally agree with you there, and I can entirely relate, but I'm bothering asking because I'm afraid to learn something that's either useless, or the wrong way, and sometimes I learn things on my own that are hard to un-learn afterwards because I built-up speed the wrong way, and it's hard to go back.  I just thought maybe someone might help me make some sense of things, I guess...  Or maybe even just narrow down what my difficulty is enough throigh discussing it so that I can look up tutorials, or videos or something after...  But I agree, you need some experience to learn well.

Nothing you learn is useless! Even mistakes are part of the learning experience!

Ok, let's go down the main two ways to a part, and in practice you usually use both to design for 3D printing. Only for machining, you try to keep to the cutting method only.

Cutting Method
Building Method

Cutting Method
You start with a piece of "stock". A cube or cylinder created by extruding the simple shape. Now you go and create profiles that you either extrude into the part or rotate around the axis - your profile "cuts" the "stock". When doing this, you think of parts like a machinist: you remove the material as a mill or lathe would.

Buildup Method
You start with the profile of the piece, then extrude it, then add the next detail and so on. I work a lot with that, and you can have a lot of sketches in the end:

What I was doing before was mostly build-up, but because the part I'm working on now is very thin - it's a mounting bracket - so just pockets, and thin walls, I remembered the "thicken" command that works on surfaces (rather than solids). With solids and thin parts you get sketch lines that are very close to each other, and it's kinda hard to work with at times; I thoight working with surfaces might be the right way because of that "thicken" feature that seems to be made to make thin walls from 2D surfaces.  It's something that would get injection molded, it's like making the inverse of molds.

After @Trish posted their answer, I went back to my design, and used substractive design, because I watch a lot of machining videos, and instead of the "thicken" feature that kinda did what I wanted, I used the "shell" command that did exactly what I wanted, see below.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Can I sell a handpainted large scale 3D model of a copyrighted 2D concept art?
The art in question is https://www.instagram.com/p/CIfsO2ZD7Rj/ . I Think the concept artist, Jean Giraud, is dead.

While better fitted to our friends at law.SE, the general gist is: No.
Art is protected by copyright, and any adaption (derivative work) requires the OK from the right holders per se. Only 70-75 years after the death of the author (or publication for company works), a work enters the public domain and the copyright expires.
There are some exceptions (fair use/fair dealing/...), but media transformation is not one of them.
Giraud died in 2012, his estate or heirs - or whoever he/they sold the commercial rights to - own the right to ok derivative Works till around 2087.

Yes, better asked at law se, however, if the work is a 3d model inspired by a 2 image then it can be argued that it's a new work. This concept came up when people were thinking about selling 3d prints of existing sculptures; in that case, the answer was a definite no.

@user77232 inspired by is ok, but  3d representation of a 2D art is not. There is a rather blurry line between inspiration and derivative

yes; and this is why we have lawyers  :)

This is something that might have a precedent, where the line is blurry, someone might have already tried, and in that case the judge's decision in that court case is the official interpretation of the law towards that specific scenario.
There might also be definitive laws regarding "derived works"...
Like the others, I would ask the Law SE for help.


text:
Print quality: possible Z wobble
The printer I am using is an Artillery Sidewinder X1. In the photos attached you can see that I am having a lot of inconsistency between layers.
The problem has never gone away and I always thought it was Z wobble but now I'm not so sure it is because we have tightened everything up, making sure everything is stable and tight.
Is this Z wobble or is it something else. Could it be the filament? Does it have anything to do with the slicer settings?

that marks are due heating problem vs quality filament vs speed printing. I had the same few years ago.

Thanks for putting me on the right track. I will look into those three things and post an answer if I fix it.

For me this also look like overextrusion and heat- notice the drops in the middle of boardside's lower part. Also, corners (booth, bow) seems emphasized - and if it's not filament (too much + too hot = pressure) then maybe too little jerk?

No, this is not Z-wobble, Z-wobble is usually characterized by a repetitive distortion, from the supplied images this repetitive pattern is not observed. A Z-wobble pattern is typically caused by the lead screws, or the Z drive where carriage follows the X/Y motion of the lead screw nut.
A typical image of Z-wobble on a Benchy would look like:

Your print doesn't look that bad for a low-end 3D printer.


text:
Parameterizable customer object in Tinkercad
Background: Basic shapes in Tinkercad have parameters like Sides, Segments, ... (see screenshot below).
Using codeblocks one can create custom shape. Within the code it is possible to define variables which can be used as a parameters based on which shape is created. This is not flexible solution because if I want to modify some variable I need to enter codeblock, change the value, export to Tinkercad and then I can use it.
Question: Is there a way to create custom object with parameters controlled from Tinkercad like in case of basic shapes?

Yes, there is such a way in Tinkercad. It is called a shape generator and it is very well hidden. you can find it here:

Open Tinkercad and select a model to Tinker or create a new one.
select the "Basic shapes" pulldown on the right and choose the last option: "shape generators".
choose "create shape generator"
choose "new shape generator" and select a template to start from
Here you have the javascript code to create a shape with parameters like basic shapes.

Unfortunatelly shape generators access has been limited. Authors encourage to use codeblocks instead. You can read more here: https://tinkercad.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/360035611434-Attention-Tinkercad-to-limit-access-to-the-Shape-Generator-code-editor-for-new-users

That's a shame to hear. Let's hope that codeblocks matures before the JS scripting is disabled.


text:
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.

max-switches are pretty much overkill - unless your machine prints insane speeds, doesn't know its size before homing or re-homes to the "closest" endstop ever so often to ensure the print is true.

Because it knows the side of the build volume, all it needs to know is one physical location to home from.  So knowing  {x,y,z} (0,0,0), and knowing x(max) = 230, y(max) = 230, z(max) = 250, and knowing 1 step (x) = 0.001 mm, it can know when to stop before hitting the other side.
Because it knows where 0 is, and because it knows the maximum value, it knows where the other limit is through math.
2-sided limit switches are used on industrial equipment that have open-loop control mechanisms, like a lathe with a DRO, the DRO won't stop the lathe, so you need to hook up a limit switch on the other side to stop the lead screw...  You could also have a maximum travel limit switch on a CNC router where if you send the spindle too far, you might break the equipment, or cause injury.
I hope this answered your question, and was also informative on how limit switches are used elsewhere...  It's not perfect or exact, but I think it should give you a broad idea...


text:
Ender 3 v2 Cura Profiles - Anyone willing to help/share?
I searched online, and found two YouTubers who shared their Ender 3 v2 printer profiles, and I've been having more or less better success with theirs than mine, possibly because I was basing mine off the Ender 3, and they were basing theirs off the Ender 3 Pro...
Would anyone here have the settings for the Ender 3 v2 for Cura, that's the printer definition, with the measurements, offsets, etc. and also maybe a few print profiles, one of my biggest problems is stringing, lots of my prints have stringing, and the new profiles helped with that, but I'd like to have some more, and also a solid baseline from which to build, and learn, and try to figure out what I'm doing wrong...

Ender3, Ender3v2 and Ender3Pro have the same base settings. The variance is more stiffening and different heatbeds....

Since you mention problems with stringing specifically, it might be good to ask a question about that showing the exact prints you're getting it on. It could be related to the wrong retraction settings I mentioned in my answer, or something else.

Since I found this board, and since people here seem pretty nice, helpful, and it doesn't seem overcrowded, I think I will do just that...  Seems like a nice place to get help, and help out
I don't have any on my desk right now, and it's not as bad with the settings I found from some YouTubers, but when I have another go at printing that particular part, I'll post the result, and my settings, see if anyone can help...

Use the profile for any Ender 3 model, or better yet just start from scratch and put in the important properties that actually vary per machine - bed size, temperatures needed, etc.
Cura profiles for specific printers, especially the ones Youtubers are promoting, are almost always misguided if not outright wrong. They're a mix something like 5-10% settings that are actually physical characteristics of the machine, and another 5-10% dubious settings that are tradeoffs that might help avoid common problems for the machine at the expense of making other (often worse) problems, and the remaining 80-90% personal preferences of the person who made the profile. For instance, looking at Cura's base Creality profile:

Machine max accelerations are all wrong, at 500 mm/s². The machine can actually handle at least 3000 mm/s², and unless you've updated firmware to have Linear Advance, increasing acceleration is the only way to avoid inconsistent extrusion.

Z speed limit and acceleration are very low. This makes seam more severe and has no benefit.

Print speeds are random and differ per type (outer wall, inner wall, skin, infill, etc.) which doesn't work right on a bowden machine without Linear Advance firmware.

Z seam type is overridden. This is purely personal preference and has nothing to do with the type of printer.

Gaps filling settings are overridden. Same issue.

Retraction settings are botched, especially increase of window for max retraction count from 4.5 mm (default) to 10 mm, which will cause severe omission of retractions (thus stringing, oozing, and failed adhesion) in any print with thin layers and fine detail.

Enabling skirt. This is purely preference.

Lots of support settings. What's needed here is 90% of a function of the object you're printing and 10% a function of your machine's properties and there's no indication that the settings in the profile have anything to do with properties of Creality machines.

Etc. etc. etc. Most of the above dubious/wrong stuff was added fairly recently in Cura, taken from the "Creawsome" profile popular on Youtube and Reddit. Before that they had a more minimal profile that at least wasn't wrong.
The actual properties you need to set in the profile for your particular machine are:

Bed size/print volume
Heated bed
Filament diameter
Nozzle size
Retraction length (depends on hotend and extruder type, bowden tube length if bowden)
Retraction speeds (depends on extruder capability & friction in path, etc.)
Fan speeds (depends on how powerful your fan is)

Setting max speeds and accelerations is also useful to get more accurate print time predictions, but not necessary.

the 3000 m/s² are handleable but there are several points that the less stiff versions can encounter resonance.

You see that's already quite helpful, most print settings have a max speed of 50 mm/s or something like that, but the machine is pretty stiff I think.  I received a new belt for the print head, and after I change it, I'll definitely up the speed.
Speaking of, what kind of acceleration control, and what kind of jerk control do you have at those speeds?  And what about Z and extruder speeds?  And do you have any recommendation for the Z axis lead screw lube?  I used a thin bearing I have from my skateboard, but I also have synthetic grease, and could get something else that might help...


text:
How do I reset the bed leveling data?
I have a Creality CR-10 S5 which is using Marlin firmware 1.1.6.
I recently got a level to level my printing bed, good high precision one.
Afterwards it was printing as if my bed was not level.
I assume that the 3D printer has old bed leveling data stored from its previous calibration.

How do I clear this old data?
Can I enter new data manually?

The printer doesn't have auto leveling with the current firmware.
I tried the old firmware, and the auto-leveling system didn't level the print bed.
I have no bed leveling sensors.

You are implying manual Unified Bed Leveling procedure of Marlin? Or are you using a bed leveling sensor? Or a bubble level? Please elaborate the question to include more information.

It sounds like you are literally leveling the bed to gravity (you said you used a level). This is not what you want. The actual definition of bed leveling is making the bed parallel to the XY motion of the print nozzle and an appropriate distance to the Z=0 position. It doesn’t matter (within reason) if the bed is leveled to gravity.

Using bubble level for the bed is useless (unless you level the whole printer frame, which you should not do), you need to level in reference to the frame, see this answer.

Apparently my floor isn't level, so I re-leveled it, making it as unlevel as the floor. Have to test it later tonight.  Any one recommend a good bed leveling device.  However, the side that was too high I had to tighten a lot so that's a good sign.

Do you send G29 to your printer or do you use G28 in print startup? I use a dial gauge to level my bed.

@cybernard Don't level with the bubble level you bought, level or better said tram the bed with the provided screws relative to the nozzle. The nozzle moving over the X axis is your level, make sure the bed is parallel to the X-axis. You don't need the bubble level!

@Trish G29 does nothing on my printer.  Yes I have G28 in the startup code.  I tried several variations and all it says is OK, but does nothing.

Did you customize your firmware?

@Trish I downloaded a new firmware provided by creality. 1.1.6.  Is this firmware considered custom?  So it is not the one it came with. How does it differ, I don't know except it is now compatible with OctoPrint Pi.

Please link to the firmware you downloaded. Some fimrware does not have G29 active. You need G29 to use mesh bed leveling.


text:
Selective laser melting and building near the road (vibrations)
Our company want to implement selective laser melting(metallic powders). But our building close to the road plus we have industrial machines near us, what vibration levels are dangerous in SLM printing? What numbers is admissible? Vibration are dangerous because of lasers? Or because layer of powder can be distracted during the build?

You should discuss that with the manufacturer of the SLM machine when you ask for a quotation (and discuss resolution with the end user you are creating parts for). The machine could be placed onto a pad to reduce the vibration. Our company had to produce space quality mirrors, we had the road closed during the fabrication for vibration reasons, but these mirrors were made with conventional machining techniques not SLM.

That depends...
Among the fact that can influence if vibrations could be the problem in this case, I see the following s is the most prominent:

Powder grain diameter
Powder composition
Powder shape
Aimed for resolution

The grain diameter and composition are the more influencing factors: fine powders of low-density metals will be much more affected by vibrations and almost behave like dust or fluid under resonating vibrations. On the other hand varicose powders of high-density metals will more easily settle down and have much higher thresholds for how much vibration affects them.
The shape mainly influences how particles coagulate: very coarse particles, think snowflakes, will interlock and bond to one another creating flakes of several powder particles. Vibration can influence the formation and compactness of such flakes and such influence the resolution.
If you want to print very coarse with rough, large powders, vibrational mitigation might be not needed. But should you want to print pretty much in aluminium dust... you need to take it into account.
Vibration mitigation
If the Vibrations influence your prospect machine placement, you'll have to inquire about at your machine manufacturer, best with a seismometer measurement of the places where you want to build. By placing special fasteners and vibration dampeners (springs or rubber feet) in between the machine and the floor, anchoring it to a separate foundation that is not connected to the surrounding building, or even by having the machine float, vibrations can be mitigated.
It's often much easier to install larger vibration mitigation equipment on lower floors and mounting it directly to the foundation of a building (ground floor and basement) is often preferred.
In case of special projects, the local municipality might allow banning (heavy) road traffic or even pedestrians from areas that affect the manufacturing in such a way - the Cologne Opera is partially under a public space right next to the cathedral, and during events, pedestrians may not use a chunk of it. In my city, the use of one road with trucks is banned due to vibrations they can cause in a nearby old building.

Our electron beam microscopes (they also don't like vibrations) are placed on a separate structure that is not part of the office building, but directly onto the earth surface, probably on a gigantic slab of concrete or something. When accuracy/resolution matters, vibration may be an issue, it is how you mitigate the vibrations or what the end user requirements are.

Someone experienced with building wafer fabs and installing fab equipment would be an expert at eliminating vibration.

Without modifying facilities usually vibration is lower on your lowest floor, especially in basements.

@PerryWebb Unless the road (or footwalk) is right over the equipment, then you get the cologne opera effect.

Many fabs would have a separate inner foundation from the foundation supporting the outer walls.

indeed most do. Most big factory halls I know are a concrete slab with either a corrugated-metal-tent (not literally, figuratively speaking!) Or a brick-shed. So the walls might rest on the same foundation, or have an extra foundation reching through deliberate holes in the ground slab.


text:
Why is pressure advance usually implemented in firmware rather than in the slicer?
Recently I started looking at pressure advance and how it works and I'm a bit confused about where it is usually implemented.
My idea of 3D printer was that its firmware is fairly dumb and only replays G-code, not knowing anything about the object being printed, material used, or even the printer itself.
But with pressure advance this whole thing changes and now the firmware needs to know the linear advance factor which combines information about the filament and filament path used. In addition, the E axis is no longer controlled directly by the G-code, but its motion is almost independently determined by the firmware.
Why is this? Is there a reason that slicer (or a post-processor) can't compute all this and directly store the needed extruder axis  movements in the G-code?
Does the printer have some additional information that the slicer is missing?

Short answer: G-code can alter variables in the firmware, if needed.

In addition the E axis is no longer controlled directly by the GCode, but it's motion is almost independently determined by the firmware.

This is the case even without linear advance. G-code does not directly control the movement of any of the axes. G-code only specifies the path the axes should travel, but not the acceleration and deceleration associated with following that path. If you are printing a cube, then the G-code might specify that the extruder has to extrude a square. It will specify that the 4 sides of the square should be printed, but it does not specify how the transition from one side to the next should be handled.
The printer cannot instantly transition from extruding one side of the square to extruding the next side, because the direction of the extruder cannot change instantaneously. It needs to smoothly decelerate and accelerate. This is handled by the firmware, which translates the straight line commands from G-code to smooth acceleration and deceleration of the extruder.
This is exactly where linear advance comes in. It is coupled to the acceleration and deceleration. There is no way to "implement" linear advance in G-code, because G-code does not even have any notion of acceleration and deceleration. The G-code (and slicer) has no idea how the firmware is handling the acceleration and deceleration, so therefore it is impossible for the slicer to know what linear advance is required to match.
Then you might ask: "why is acceleration and deceleration not implemented in G-code (rather than in firmware)?" This is simply a design choice. G-code is meant to be a very simple file format, and it simply allows you to specify straight line move commands. Representing smooth acceleration curves would either require breaking them down into many discrete, small steps, but this would greatly increase the file size. You could suggest a more complex G-code specification that would allow a more "compact" representation of acceleration and deceleration curves but then you're just shifting the computation back to the firmware (albeit with a more explicit specification in the G-code).

This is a really good question that sheds a lot of light on 3D printer software/firmware architecture, and Tom already said a lot of the things I wanted to say before getting a chance to write an answer. The basic problem is that, to do pressure advance accurately (and in a way that doesn't get it horribly wrong when inaccurate), you need to know the actual feedrate of the extruder at all times, and that's not available until applying the acceleration profile, which by convention happens in the printer firmware.
With that said, there were primitive and even somewhat advanced attempts to do pressure advance in the slicer. The first seems to have been "coasting", which, along with extra-priming after coast, is pretty much just "pressure advance, assuming a constant feedrate". It gets things horribly wrong if you mix different extruder feedrates (different print speeds or line widths, etc.) or if you have slow acceleration, but if your acceleration is so fast (relative to max speed) that it's approximately instantaneous, it might work okay.
Modern Cura also has Flow Rate Compensation, which is something like pressure advance. It's rate-sensitive, so in theory it can give accurate results with varying line width and print speed as long as acceleration is close enough to instantaneous. Since it appeared after Marlin added linear advance, I never bothered trying to play with it, so I can't speak to whether it actually works decently. There are still a lot of subtleties to when the advance is performed that it could get wrong, and I think you'd want to do some test cases just to read the gcode output and evaluate whether what it's doing is sufficiently close to reasonable.
If you wanted to do full pressure advance in the slicer, you'd need to let the slicer handle acceleration profile, breaking lines up into small segments each with nominal feedrate matching the rate they should end at, and sufficiently close to the rate they should start at, with the firmware acceleration limits set to accommodate the change. Then, knowing a very good approximation of the actual toolhead and thus extruder feedrate for each segment, you'd know the advance to apply, and could apply it as an additional subdivision at the end of the previous print move. And then in theory, it all works out. But this would make the gcode a lot larger/bulkier, and more demanding on the serial link speed and microcontroller's ability to keep up with parsing/planning. So it's almost surely a bad idea.
The Klipper firmware does this differently. It does the gcode parsing and planning (including pressure advance) in Python software (with some C for critical paths) running on a much more capable computer, and sends the precise generated stepper motor timings over the serial link to the microcontroller operating the printer hardware.


text:
Thermoelectric cooler for part cooling fan?
Is there any research into use of thermoelectric cooler along with part cooling fan to get quicker cooling without strong air currents that apply pressure to the still-soft material? I experimented with custom fan ducts in the past trying to get better cooling and avoid warping for printing thin layers of PLA at high speeds, but found that the concentrated stream of air blowing on the part actually deformed it before it could cool. At the time I wondered if using significantly colder air, at a much lower flow, would work better. But every time I've searched for thermoelectric (peltier) coolers with 3D printing, I've found results that are about cooling motors or the heatbreak (especially inside heated enclosures), nothing about part cooling.
If there is no research on this and I want to experiment myself at some point, are there constraints I should consider for how to mount it (in my case on an Ender 3, but also in general)? Perhaps on a separate intake duct before the cooling fan? Or between the cooling fan and hotend assembly to let the waste heat dump into the assembly that the hotend fan is already cooling?

The room temperature air that the fan would normally provide is already much, much colder than the molten filament. Even if you manage to cool the air by 20 C (which would be quite impressive using a TEC) that's only a ~10% increase in cooling performance. TECs are very inefficient and I think you will have a hard time cooling the air by more than a few degrees; trying to piggyback off the hotend cooling fan is foolish -- you will need a much larger heatsink and fan than that.

You will still need a way to remove the heat from the hot side of the Peltier cooler.  If not a fan then liquid/water cooled.

And a water-cooler would mean a huge mass and the trouble with sealing a system right next to a 12 or 24V heater cartridge...

What if. instead of blowing air across the print, you suck the air out the top of the box with side vents allowing an even flow of air?

I noticed running a box fan on low next to the printer cools way more than the little fan on the head, yet exerts less air pressure due to lower windspeed. It's also cooling all the time instead of just as it passes by. Might be all you need to push the speed up. You can also print two prints at a faster rate than one, since it's cooling for twice as long per part.

On the printhead?
TECs or Peltier Elements are incredibly inefficient compared to airstream coolers. Their only benefit is perfect temperature control, from which you will have nothing because there is no firmware that cares for the temperature of cooling air or the cooling body of a Hotend. Also, a TEC creates a lot of heat on its output side - which means you heat the air just millimeters away from where you want to cool the air!
To get the heat produced by the TEC away, you either need a rather large cooling body - which is a lot of weight and space you need. As a result, you reduce the maximum print speed a lot. A water cooler isn't necessarily that much lighter, but it also gets us the trouble of having a highly conductive liquid right on the printhead.
lighter alternative: compressed air
You'd have much better efficiency by having compressed air decompress (as in: get out of a slim nozzle) slowly just a few millimeters in front of the air intake of your part cooling fan - expanding air cools down a lot, and running a compressor for a few moments takes less energy than running a Peltier element with the same temperature drop. In a pinch, a CO2 canister could provide the needed high pressure air, and a nozzle like you have it on an airbrush would work.
Move it off the printhead?
As the weight of the necessary secondary equipment is an issue, it might be better to move the Peltier element off the printhead. For example, by using a flexible hose that supplies the air to the cooling fan, and feeding that with precooled air - and now a Peltier element can shine: by having the weight be no longer a matter, we can use a rather large cooling body on the outside and cooling fins on the inside.

Some further thought exchange in chat?.

Just to quantify how terrible peltier coolers are: cooling the output from a 40mm noctua fan from 25C to 0C would require 68 W of cooling. You can expect a COP of about 0.5 so you'd need 136W of electrical input power to the peltier, and need to deal with 204W of waste heat. That's three high-end CPU's running at full blast. Imagine needing to strap three CPU coolers with two 120mm fans each to your hotend to cool the peltier. Only for a ~15% increase in how much colder the cooling air is than the molten filament.

Adiabatic cooling is worth considering.

A primary consideration with adiabatic cooling is if the gas isn't dry you will get condensation or even ice crystals.  An inventor tried to use adiabatic cooling for car air conditioning using the cabin air, but ice crystals made his invention useless.  However, if the gas expansion is close to the heat sink so that the air never gets below the ambient temperature, then condensation isn't an issue.

Whether or not there's any way to do this that makes sense, I think the estimate of benefit is erroneous. The difference in rate of cooling at the moment the material starts cooling is low but not relevant; what matters is the difference in time to drop below the glass transition temperature which is significantly higher than the ambient or cooled-air temperature. Some possibly wrong back of the envelope math suggests that time to go from 180 to 60 is reduced by 21% if your air is at 0 instead of 20, and by 23% if you want to get all the way down to 50.

Note: if you precool air below the dew-point, you will get condensation.

@PerryWebb which depends on the humitity.

For cooling the printed object:

Combined with air compresser

What seems the most practical is to use an air compressor with a tank large enough to ensure that the air in the tank has time to cool off.  This gives you the option of adding an air dryer if needed.  You could cool the compressed air just before blowing on the print though a Peltier cooler and get additional cooling as the air releases toward the print.
Information link:
https://labincubators.net/blogs/blog/peltier-vs-compressor-based-cooling
https://labincubators.net/blogs/blog/peltier-vs-compressor-based-cooling

Printer Ceiling

You could put a Peltier cooler on the ceiling with a heatsink/cold-sink covering most of the inside ceiling and fans only on the external (outside the ceiling wall) heated part of the Peltier.  Convection would move the air.  Without and enclosure, positioning the Peltier to use convection would be good because the fans, especially those removing the heat would not be fighting convection.

Printer Bed

You could use a Peltier cooler to both heat and cool the print bed.  All you need for stitching is to change the polarity of the voltage on the Peltier.  A Peltier could handle those temperatures well.  While Peltier heaters/coolers aren't energy efficient, because they can do both, they have good and quick temperature control.
If you wanted to get fancy, you could have multiple Peltier devices across the bed, so that you could keep heat under the print and have all the other devices cool.  You would need to know the fastest rate you could change temperature without cracking the glass on a glass bed.
Cooling the heat sink on the extruder. (answering a different question)
The most practical way to use a Peltier cooler is to take advantage of its temperature differential over a short distance.  One could put it between the heater block and the heat sink, requiring a hole in the cooler for the filament to feed through.  The Peltier effect has a limit of a 70°C maximum differential between the hot and cold side.  Another limit is manufactures list a maximum temperature of 200°C on the hot side.  This is usually because of solder joints.

The Peltier cooler would need to be customer made to fit between the heater block and heat sink a) hole in the middle, b) designed to withstand heater block temperatures >200°C.

The heat sink probably still needs a fan due to the maximum temperature differential of 70°C.   A 70°C maximum temperature differential makes it difficult to be the only source of cooling.  Rarely are Peltier coolers the only source of cooling.  Only when they are in an insulated barrier such as in the wall of a ice chest.  Other wise the heat from the hot side mixes with the cold side. Peltier coolers move heat from one surface of the material a short distance to the other side of the material.  If you don't cool the hot side of the material, when using it in an open area such as an extruder, the heat will circle back around to the cold side.

Its main advantage would be a fast drop in temperature between the heater block and heat sink.  However, it is an expensive project, and one needs to evaluate of this could be better achieved by other methods.
Links using Peltier cooling with 3D printers:
https://www.thermoelectric.com/3d-printing/
https://dyzedesign.com/2020/02/water-cooling-and-peltier-cooling-in-3d-printers/
https://www.reddit.com/r/3Dprinting/comments/bmwepl/has_anyone_tried_peltier_cooling_for_the_part/
https://hackaday.io/project/26369-better-cooling-for-3d-printer-extruders
Visual example:
Cold plate

I don't see how this answer pertains to part cooling.

I don't see how your comment pertains either.

Since you seem to have misunderstood, this question is about cooling the extruded material after it's deposited as part of the print, not cooling the part of the toolhead above the melt zone.

This hopefully fixes my answer.

I still don't understand how you intend for it to be relevant. You do not cool the bed to cool the print. Bed must remain at the same (usually heated) temperature you started at to prevent loss of adhesion, and cooling it wouldn't help cool anything beyond the first few mm of a tall print anyway.

The answer still had the idea of putting the Peltier on the ceiling of the box, and let convection move the air. I moved this to the top to be more visible.

I think you're still misunderstanding what the point of part cooling is. You're trying to get the material quickly down from the temperature it's at right after it leaves the nozzle to below the glass transition temperature so it doesn't warp/curl/etc. You don't normally do this in an enclosure unless you want to count the entire room as an enclosure.

Without an enclosure, have you already tried putting a fan above the print blowing away from the print to pull the heat away?  That should cause less air currents, but keep the ambient around the print near room temperature.

It is true that if you try to do bridges with a very hot filament the cooling air will deform or push away the hot filament if it's set at high speed, or it won't cool it enough if you run the fan slower.
I experienced it with PETG at 245 °C while performing a parametric optimisation as described in:

Still, the TEC are inefficient and they require a bulky heatsink to cool the hot side. Not only that, you also need a heatsink with thin fins to cool the air, which cannot be too small too because the air is flowing relatively fast.
Overall, it's clearly not practicable so I doubt you will find studies to confirm what is obvious.

I find it happens not just in bridges but in moderately steep overhangs.


text:
Does the resin vary from a printer to another?
I am using a clear resin to print parts using a Formlabs printer. At the moment, I am using the resin from Formlab which comes in a cartridge that fits in the printer. However, I would like to move to a cheaper option if available. I would like to able to refill the cartridges that I have rather than buying a new cartridge.
Is it possible to buy some clear resin from an outer source or would that damage the printer?

According to Formlabs (at least their FormLabs Form 2 and 3 models), their resin is 405 nm which is a fairly standard resin.
There's a wide variety of resins our there that are compatible with 405 nm, and many resin makers/resellers advertise what brand, make, and model of printer they are compatible with. I have an AnyCubic Photon v1 and it uses the same 405 nm resins. You might have to do some testing to see what specific brand or style works for you, including changing your settings (if possible in the software you use). FYI, I use a version of CHITUBOX which does allow settings for exposure time, raise height, pause time, and a few others.
Knowing that it uses 405 nm UV also allows you to know what kind of UV lights to get for easy indoor curing, too.
I'd like to say that it's not likely for these resins to damage the printer, but FormLabs seems to use a plastic tray, instead of the aluminum tray I'm used to so I don't know if there would be a chemical reaction, though I'm skeptical if there would be. I'm assuming it's using a similar FEP clear film for the bottom to the AnyCubic, but I can't confirm this, since the FormLabs film seems to be integral to the tray, rather than replaceable.
I can see why you are looking for other resin options. One place I saw online has a 1 L FormLabs cartridge for \$150, when 500 mL on Amazon is usually between \$20-30. I've seen special resin, such as flexible, as high as \$60 for 500 mL and ABS-like resin for $40, though. Water washable resins seem to be in the \$40-50 range. There's also "natural" or plant based resin for about the same price as regular resin, but might have a different reaction to your tank.
I'd assume that every brand of resin (except for the rebranded stuff) has their own chemical makeup besides the various types of resin, so you might have to some testing, although I realize that messing up a tank that's \$150 to replace is not exactly something you want to do every day.
I can tell you that I've used at least 6 different brands of resin and they all react differently to the UV. I mostly have tested clear, and just that produces a variety of results, from how easy/hard it is to cure to what color it turns when it over cures. (I'm still trying to find a clear that fully cures actually clear.) Where I was going with this is that with all these resins I've used, I haven't had any that caused damage to the FEP film. Some have stuck really hard and I had to be really careful pulling it off. However, I've only had 1 film need to be replaced due to clouding, and I have 4 Photons and used all resins I've tested with all my machines.


text:
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?

Using the older Ender-3 Pro1.1.6BLTouchV3.1PowerLossContinueEnglish bios as the newer ones left my touch screen blank.  Still have not seen this issue reported anywhere

I went and ordered the new board as I have the 8 bit one still, hope that resolves most issues.

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)


text:
How to log each G-code line read from the SD card to serial on marlin firmware
I would like to log each line of G-code to the serial port as it is processed.
Steps to achieve:

the printer reads a file from the SD card
each line it reads will be serial logged (this I can't figure out)
those lines can then read via the serial monitor on a laptop

So by the end of the print, on my laptop I would have the reconstructed G-code file (plus whatever other logs the printer outputs).
The printer runs the Prusa Firmware. Ideally I would like to achieve the logging from altering the firmware rather than adding an extra plugin/server (For understanding and experimenting purposes).
What I tried
I have looked in code and found the print functions and examples of them in use in the code. This line is the "command, which is to be excecuted right now", but I think that would be the just one command not the full line.
The cardreader or SdBaseFile are where I would expect a G-code line to be read such that I could add a print statement after it but I did not see where.
Would it be as easy as setting this card.logging bool to true?
I imagine this is quite an easy thing to do and that I have just overcomplicated it by trying to understand the firmware. Any advice would be great!

In cmdqueue.h the CMDBUFFER_DEBUG macro is defined (see here) which will log lots of information related to the commands being processed. Probably more information than you need...
To log only the commands as they are processed (i.e. when the printer moves and extrudes etc.) you need this line from marlin_main.cpp: SERIAL_ECHO(cmdbuffer+bufindr+CMDHDRSIZE);.
You can copy this outside of the #ifdef CMDBUFFER_DEBUG condition and compile the firmware then when you connect to the serial port each G-code line the printer processes will be logged.

If you have the hardware at hand, you can use OctoPrint to collect the data you require. It's common for users to create an OctoPrint server on a Raspberry Pi, but it can be installed easily on a Windows or Linux machine as well. Once in place, logging is available for various types of information.
From the OctoPrint blog:
The logs are crucial instruments of analysis and debugging, so it's usually in your best interest to provide them when asking for help or reporting a bug, even if not explicitly prompted for them:

octoprint.log: OctoPrint's main application log file. Contains a
general log of everything that happens while OctoPrint is running.
Includes version information, installed plugins and a myriad of more
data points.
This must always be included when reporting a bug 47 to allow for
further analysis and reproduction. It is also a very good idea to
provide this when asking for help :wink:
serial.log: A log of all of the communication going on between
OctoPrint and your printer. Usually disabled for performance reasons,
enable it through Settings > Serial Connection.
Either that or at the very least the output in OctoPrint's Terminal
tab is crucial for analysis of any kind of communication issues or
misbehaviours observed with your printer, so it's important to include
it when discussing such issues.
plugin_pluginmanager_console.log: A log of the command line activity
of the plugin manager. Very important for analysis of such questions
like "Why can't I install plugin $xyz?", so if you have such a
problem, best include this.
plugin_softwareupdate_console.log: A log of the command line activity
of the software updater. Very important for analysis of such questions
like "Updating OctoPrint always fails, why?", so if you have such a
problem, best include this.

Third party plugins might also have special log files here. If a plugin author asks you to provide a special log created by their plugin for further analysis, this should be where you can find it.
The above selection is from the linked site, which also includes embedded links for more information regarding the log files. Note that serial.log is specifically referenced to collect data between OctoPrint and your printer, although it defaults to disabled on install.

I was aiming to do it directly from the firmware as part of this project I'm doing is to understand more about 3D printers. I believe Octoprint controls the printer via the USB which I didn't want. It also adds another system that I would need to understand before I can start fiddling around and experimenting.

@NickDGreg if you don't print from the serial, the serial is pretty much ignored in most things.

@Trish What do you mean? The printer prints from a file on the SD card, I connect my laptop to the printer via the serial port and can process its logs in a program running on my laptop. Its just a project I'm doing, so the serial isn't ignored in this case

and your proposed operation just reset the board mid print: Connecting anything to the serial port triggers the reset of the board to establish some things, You can log some things (temperatures) but not all.

I was unclear then, I connect to serial port before beginning the print so that it doesn't reset


text:
Printer halted! Psu dead?
My Anet A8 Plus worked normally, but after the weekend and changing for new bearings on the rods, it is not working anymore at all.
I experience random reboots, the nozzle can only heat to about 10 °C away from the target and then starts to drop, the printer gives the halted error.
Example: Target is 240 °C, the nozzle temperature goes to like 232 °C and then starts to drop pretty fast. The Bed heats good otherwise.
troubleshooting so far
The PSU gives 24 V and the supply voltage switch is 220 V like it should. No matter if I try print it through OctoPrint or Cura, the same thing happens.
How it can break this bad just from replacing a few bearings is not clear to me. Do these reboots mean the PSU is dead and not giving constant voltage? Reboots come even idle or just bed heating etc.

Reboots happen in 2 cases on a printer:

If the board power has been below a the operational threshold (~3 V) and the capacitors on the board are empty, the power dip can result in a reboot.
If a device connects to the serial-USB port, it reboots.

If you power up the printer not connected to any other device, it should run continuously. If it flickers and reboots, the power-lines to the board or the PSU are bad. Check those in reverse.
If it only reboots again and again when connected to a serial port (PC, Octoprint etc), your problem is the cable - it might be jiggling or be defective, or otherwise de- and re-connect again and again.


text:
How to get superglue off PLA filament?
So I'm making my friend a Monado sword replica and I've printed the handle in 2 pieces as to fill it with electronics and then superglue the 2 halves together.
I seem to have put too much on and it's leaked out and spread as shown in the picture..
Does anyone know how to get the dried glue off?

Thanks,
(PS. The glue is called "NO NONSENSE SUPERGLUE")

Relevant Reverse: What Glues For PLA

In agreement with what Akriss said, pretty much all "super" glue is CA (cyanoacrylate) glue, which is soluble in acetone. PLA itself is does not dissolve in or react with acetone, but the pigments, additives, etc. likely do, so you should wipe with a paper towel or cloth (the latter might be better to avoid getting fibers stuck on the glue) soaked in acetone rather than pouring it over the piece or submerging it, to limit the effects. Also, test first on a scrap piece printed with the same filament to ensure the results aren't unacceptably bad.

The caution of not soaking is it could unglue your parts.  A good idea is to combine polishing after lightly painting with acetone.  Use eye protection and good ventilation.

@PerryWebb: Indeed that's also a consideration, but the issue I described applies even if the glue was just dripped on a PLA part that wasn't broken and didn't need glue.

I've used Acetone before. However that said I've not had the need to remove it from PLA. Not sure how PLA reacts to Acetone.
A link that may be of use.
https://www.art-us.com/how-to-get-super-glue-off-almost-anything/

Acetone hasn't worked at all for me, if anything it made it worse by stripping the PLA of the sheen its supposed to have. I have tried various types of Acetone as well, all with similar results.
I know this will sound crazy, but I have been doing this for about 6 months. I use Sesame Oil, applied generously with a Q-tip, and then I "rub it in/dry it off" with a paper towel. This has worked on various sheens of PLA and PLA+ and completely removes any evidence of super glue. I haven't seen the oil dry out yet either. At first I thought the oil would wear off or dry out, but it has not yet and its been 6 months since I've been doing this.

Try wiping with Vaseline petroleum jelly. It effectively removes the white haze that sometimes forms around a joint glued with cyanoacrylate. It may remove or diminish the color of the glue residue, though will not remove the glue itself.


text:
What is causing the extruder stepper on my Ender 3 to skip steps?
I have a problem most likely similar to some reported by other users: the extruder stepper is visually skipping a step occasionally. It rapidly rotates in the direction opposite to the one it is supposed to turn.
I noticed the following:

The extruder stepper jumps randomly - nothing specific in the pattern printed, position, etc.
Stepper jumps more often on the infill, rarely on the walls.

Details about print:

PLA (Devil Design - various colors, they don't matter)
Filament guide installed on top, but not yet before the extruder (it is printing right now; I'm waiting for the ball bearings too)
Filament mounted on the top - in the place defined by Creality
The extruder is already replaced with the aluminium one
The mainboard is SKR E3 mini V2 (replaced recently)
95% flow set in Cura
Printing on glass, leveled bed (the jumping occurs on all layers, not only first)
215 °C hotend temperature, 60 °C bed temperature
Stepper motor current settings (from Marlin menu): 580 for X, Y & Z, 650 for E1

Other observations:

What's interesting is that the extruder motor jumps even if I manually unwind some filament, so the only force it has to overcome is pushing filament into the head.
I made a quick DIY wooden spool holder to feed the filament almost horizontally. This seemed to make things worse - stepper jumped more often. I moved the spool to the top again, reducing jumping a little.
Prints are done beautifully (after changing the motherboard) - no lost lines or layers, walls connected with infill, perfect first layer, etc.

What may be the cause of stepper motor jumping? How can I solve it? Does it pose a threat to the motor or stepper? I need to print the filament guide and spool holder with ball bearings to minimize the force required by the extruder motor, but then the stepper will probably jump during the prints. I already damaged the original mainboard because of the stuck filament, and I don't want to destroy another one.

This is how regular extruder retraction looks:

 (10 seconds)
This is how stepper skipping looks:

 (13 seconds)

Today I replaced the whole heat block (radiator, heater, thermistor and nozzle) to a new one (original, for now) and the motor stopped skipping - at least on the calibration cube. I will see, how will it perform on more complex prints.
However, even having the prior one in hands, I couldn't find the reason, why the motor was skipping - other than the fact, that I couldn't extract the bowden tube from the radiator (so maybe some filament was dripping inside?)

How did you damage the mainboard from stuck filament?

@R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE, stuck filament increased resistance on the extruder - the extruder's gear's teeth became flattened at the level of filament. I suspect, that this might have caused the engine to stop sometimes and this - from what I know - would cause shorts on the engine controller. In the end of original motherboard's life the extruder was barely rotating - even if there was literally no resistance on filament (I was holding it in the air).

The bottom video shows that there is too much pressure build up (by compression of filament) for the stepper to handle, once over the tipping point, the stepper rotates back. Probably the initial resistance to overcome the stepper to rotate back is larger than when it has been set in motion, hence skipping back quite a distance. You should check your hotend, your temperature looks already quite high for PLA, or reduce print speed (don't know what that currently is).

@0scar, the print is done at rate 50mm/sec with nozzle 0.4mm. However, this issue started when I replaced the motherboard and the extruder. At the beginning, with stock motherboard and extruder, printer printed even with speed of 60mm/sec without any issues. I bought a spare extruder motor to check, if the original one is not damaged.
Which part of the hotend do you suspect to be faulty? Clogged nozzle? Some other issues maybe?

Could be that the stepper doesn't get enough current?

@0scar, how can I check that and possibly fix?

I have a problem most likely very similar to some reported by other users: extruder stepper is visually skipping a step from time to time. It rapidly rotates in the direction opposite to the one it is supposed to rotate.

These two sentences are saying something totally different, and the latter is not what a skipped step looks like. It sounds like retraction, which is totally normal.

Skipping happens regardless of the retraction. Also, retraction is fluid (stepper rotates) and the jump is rapid. Finally, jumps happen during drawing infill (like, in the middle of the line), so I hardly believe this is intentional behavior of the printer.

@Spook: Can you post a short video clip of it happening? From your question it sounded like the print still comes out ok. Is there underextrusion where the skip happens?

I just edited my question. Sorry for the delay. There are two videos: one with regular retraction and one with skipping. You can even clearly hear the "thud" sound when it happens in the second video.

I had same issue. It is because filament broken inside mostly. If you are not using printer much, filaments effected from humid and broken easily.


text:
Where to find "Heat deflection temperature" , "Impact resistance Charpy" and "Tensile strength" for a specific brand Filament PLA?
I have an MK3S 3D printer, and I use this table as a reference on how to tune my printer for a specific Filament
brand.
https://help.prusa3d.com/en/materials
I am trying to find a few missing parameters for a specific brand Filament PLA in the table.
The missing parameters are listed and shown in the image below.

Heat deflection temperature
Impact resistance Charpy
Tensile strength

Where is the best place or reference to find such missing data?

Unless the Manufacturer offers them, you have to extrapolate from other brands. Most PLAs are very close and hit within 10% of one another.


text:
Can't get bed to level properly
I am new to 3D printing and just purchased an Ender 3 V2 about two weeks ago. Since I've got it, I've been having trouble leveling the bed. I've tried watching videos, but they don't say how much friction on the paper is good or bad. I have even tried foil, playing cards, and a business card but still can't tell if it's good enough or not. Then when I would try printing calibration squares and adjust as it prints, but when it prints all looks good when printing the outside ring, but when it gets to the square parts there are bumps on the print from the nozzle being too close. Also when I seem to have corner perfect, when it gets to the center it's too close to the nozzle and doesn't even print. I'm using the stock glass bed so I'm not sure if that could be the issue. This is getting frustrating as I really want to start printing. And I want to save money for other parts and try avoiding purchasing a BL Touch if I don't need to. Am I doing something wrong? How can I get this resolved?
Forgot to mention, I upgraded the springs to these yellow ones on Amazon.

Hi, welcome to 3DPrinting.SE! What makes the yellow springs an upgrade? From the description found on Amazon these are pretty stiff, this makes you bed compress less than with softer springs, but when you start this endeavor, you might be better of with softer springs, this may save you slate of glass from accidents where the nozzle goes down too far.

The videos that I watched recommended those springs for that reason which is why I got them

Step 1: stop using paper and get some feeler gauges. The gauge should be able to just barely pass under the HEATED nozzle.
Step 2: What are you using for bed adhesion? I use Elmer's white glue. After you think you've trammed (aka levelled) the bed, apply a generous layer of the glue in a coat on the bed. Let it dry.
Step 3: Verify bed level with a large square print that will cause the head to move to the outermost parts of the bed. Stop the print after a few outlines. Try to remove the print. If some areas are easier to remove than others, apply another coat of Elmer's glue to those areas.
Note: Do not hold down all four (4) corners of the glass bed. The aluminium plate is not going to be flatter than the glass. Only attach the glass to the bed on one side of the bed. I use the side that is furthest from the nozzle.

Feeler gauges are good, but I prefer a drop gauge I mount to my printhead. I level one screw to where I want, lift the printhead up and measure that screw, then I level to that measurement.

I use a feeler gauge for initial Z-height and course leveling, then a drop gauge for final leveling.  However, some may not want to purchase a drop gauge.

First, make sure the slate of glass is straight, this can be checked with e.g. a metal ruler on its side against the glass surface. If the glass isn't straight (which should be per the production process of glass, but there have been reported bad glass beds) you never get a perfect level over the whole bed. Also make sure the glass sits on a clean heated bed plate (no debris between the heater and the glass).
Second, level the bed, start with powering the printer. You need to sequentially do the following as adjusting the one corner (screw), affects the other corners (continue this until the bed is level and the one corner doesn't affect the other corners anymore):

Home the machine,
heat up the bed and nozzle to e.g. PLA printing temperatures,
move the nozzle close to a corner (a different one than the previous corner),
put a piece of plain printing paper on the bed,
lower the nozzle to Z=0,
adjust the screw in that corner until the piece of paper can be dragged under the nozzle with a slight resistance,
repeat by starting with homing the printer.

After several rounds of leveling and having a level/straight bed to begin with, you should have a leveled bed that has been leveled against the printers' X-axis.
Now, when printing something it should be level, the only thing that might not be correct is the distance between the nozzle and the bed. E.g. some users prefer a larger distance between bed and nozzle when printing PETG (not my personal experience, but a generally accepted truth). This distance can be tuned without having to re-level your bed; you could if you want to use a thicker or thinner paper, but you can easily change the Z=0 by redefining the Z=0 level at e.g. 0.10 mm height if the nozzle to close. Some slicers even allow you to add an offset (e.g. the "Z Offset Setting" plugin in Ultimaker Cura from developer "FieldOfView").
When you have dialed in the distance also correctly, you should get perfect prints.
Do note that a common issue with these over-constraint "cantilever" printer designs is that by powering a single side, the opposite needs to follow exactly, that is a challenge with that many parts. My preference is using dual lead screws, preferably driven by a timing belt for Prusa type printers.
Addressing the BLTouch part in your question; before you wander in the world of automatic bed leveling (AB) you should first master getting a level bed, or fix the X-axis rollers on Z beams. For ABL you also need to level your bed first else you get non-square prints. The roller solution is one of the major drawbacks of these printers, you need to make sure the X-axis (aluminum extrusion bar) stays level (or better trammed) in relation to the bed level, loose rollers should be properly tensioned.

Should I use the paper method still or is there another method you’d recommend?

The paper method works quite well, provided that your printer doesn't suffer too much from being powered with a single Z lead screw. It is known that the unfortunate design of the Ender 3 causes many problems with leveling when the rollers aren't properly aligned tensioned.

I wonder if that’s it cuz the Z roller feels a little loose. How tight should it be? And I would tighten just one or all wheels? Also just curious what is your opinion on BL touch?

If you find the bed on an Ender 3 doesn't seem to "take" a level - in other words, if you keep trying to level it and things seem right, but then it's obviously wrong when you actually start printing, and checking the leveling doesn't seem to match what you set before - the problem is most likely in the Z axis mechanics. The Z assembly (including the X axis gantry) is highly overconstrained, between the 6 wheels, the lead screw nut, and the 4 screws attaching the gantry to the Z carriages. When it's not functioning properly, whether from fighting constraints, overtightening, undertightening, etc. you can end up with really bad reproducability* of position in the Z axis, so that homing and moving to a particular Z coordinate gives different results each time you repeat, due to which components bind and which ones give.
If this is your problem, I don't have a good system for solving it. I've fought with it on and off over 2 years of owning one of these machines. At least you should check that the 2 screws holding the left side of the gantry to the Z carriage are very tight (note: they're hidden and inaccessible without taking off the top bar and raising the assembly off the Z extrusions) and that the gantry is mounted level to the carriage bracket, since any play here will ruin everything. One easy thing you can try to confirm whether you have leveling reproducability problems from Z axis problems is disconnecting the right side carriage entirely and tying it off at the top so it doesn't interfere; you can do this without disassembling anything else. This lets you operate the Ender 3 "as an Ender 2", i.e. with a cantilever setup. It's less rigid and probably not a good choice overall, but if it solves your problem then your problem is almost surely something in the overconstrained Z system and now you know where to look.

Don't worry too much about it. If you print with a first layer height of 0.3mm, bed levelling only needs to be approximate. If that doesn't work, and you cannot get good bed adhesion, try printing onto blue painter's tape (ScotchBlue). This makes a very forgiving build surface. You will need to clean it well with isopropyl alcohol (or acetone), since it is coated with a wax-based release agent that may prevent the filament from sticking. Once you have got used to printing, you can then refine your bed-levelling techniques.

This depends on the material printed.  ABS needs to be pressed down on the bed to prevent warping.  PETG needs to not be pressed down, or it is hard to remove from the bed.


text:
3D model with errors when exporting to Cura
I 3D modeled a cartoon car using Blender, mostly using add and subtract with boolean tools. When I export to Ultimaker Cura, I get these cuts along the model. Does anyone know why this is happening? Appreciate any feedback on the model.

The blender file: https://github.com/dantedaiki/jQuery-File-Upload/blob/master/Cartoon%20Car.blend

That is not uncommon for Blender created files, look into these questions. It probablyhas something to do with the normals of the surfaces being inconsistent, an online STL fixing utility like NetFabb may help.

In blender, you can occasionally have faces with flipped normals. Those areas then are "inside out". Such areas are just ignored in Cura. Fixing the files is as simple as recalculating the normals, but you'd best use a program like NetFabb for for that.


text:
BLTouch Stopped Working
I was five hours into a six hour print and got a 28 mm X direction layer shift. No idea what caused it. I stopped the print cleaned the bed and (via Pronterface) went to home the bed (G28). The gantry homed X and Y and then I got the following message:

Error:Printer stopped due to errors. Fix the error and use M999 to restart. (Temperature is reset. >Set it after restarting)
[ERROR] Error:Printer stopped due to errors. Fix the error and use M999 to restart. (Temperature is >reset. Set it after restarting)
Error:!! STOP called because of BLTouch error - restart with M999
[ERROR] Error:!! STOP called because of BLTouch error - restart with M999

Entering M999 followed by G28 just reproduced the error. I powered down and then checked the BLTouch connections. The white signal wire seemed a bit loose, so I tightened that. All other wires are secure. Powering back up, the BLTouch did not do its normal probe up and down routine. The main red light flickered for about three seconds, it then flashed 7 times and then came on fully. At the end of the flashing, the blue LED on the circuit board also came on. Testing, the black and white signal wires gave a reading of 0.975 kΩ.
I had homed and levelled the bed (G28, G29) then saved the data (M500) prior to starting to the six hour print print earlier with no problem.

Printer: Hypercube Evolution (CoreXY) with KFB2.0 board running 24 V.
Genuine Antclab BLTouch v1.0.

Anybody any idea what has happened?

Turned out that the BL Touch had packed it in. Replaced with a new BL Touch v3.1 and everything works.


text:
How do I fill missing corners in Cura
I'm trying to print a gear for a robovac deal.
The issue I'm having is with gaps between the walls of the top part of the gear. It needs to have the corners filled to provide stability or else the tabs easily snap. I've tried adjusting the nozzle size, line width, filter gaps and print thin walls but seems to slice with variations on the same issue. Is this a Cura issue? Is there anyway to slice and print this to fill those gaps?

What does the original model look like? It looks like they took a cylinder object and binary subtracted a cube leaving the walls too thin near the corners. This looks like an extremely small part...

Hello, thanks for the response. I've messed around with it a bunch more today and I believe that the wall is simply too thin on the corners to be printed correctly. I ended up loading the model into blender and extruding the edges along normals to make it thick enough. Once it printed, I threw it on a little spindle and then used a drill and some sand paper to slowly remove material till it fit the bearing it needed to go into but left just enough to connect the edges. The bearing does compress all the sides so I guess it could work even with the little gaps.

Using smaller line width may work, but Cura has a bug whereby it makes no difference unless you also enable printing outer walls first.

@R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE - thanks for the response, I will give that a go. Good user name!

also, print thin walls can help...or Thickening the area in the model.

The problem isn't Cura, rather its the precision of the 3D model. If parts of the model is smaller than the line width the model cannot be printed. A solution to this would be to increase the thickness of the cylinder, decrease the size of the square or reduce the line width to allow that region to be properly fabricated, another solution would be to decrease the line width (line width option) however, keep in mind that you should not reduce the line width beyond the nozzle hole size (nozzle hole > line width). As mentioned before, if the model requires sections that are smaller than the line width, Cura will ignore it. From the image you provided it would seem that the corners are extremely close to the wall of the cylinder which prevents Cura from making a extrusion path, the reason of which I explained above.

Welcome to 3DPrinting.SE! Please remember this is not a forum of threaded messages, so I've removed the comment as an answer. The Ultimaker printers default profile have line width smaller than the nozzle hole size, this is not an error but is used for a better quality (explained in their forum), so although I agree on the line width not to be smaller than the nozzle hole size, you can do that to some extend. Depending on the model, tuning the line width might be very useful but take care in not making the line width too small.

I personally prefer to print 10% wider than the nozzle.

You can fix it by changing Experimental > Slicing Tolerance > Exclusive


text:
Thermal Runaway E1 at Layer 2
Before I start, I'll give you my setup:

Ender 3 Pro
Marlin 2.0.7.2
Material/Nozzle: PETG 0.4 mm @ 215 °C
Bed: Glass @ 80 °C
Default printing speed: 70 mm/s
Standard part cooling fan

Since I've updated the Marlin FW on from factory default to 2.0.7.2, my printer stops printing and gives out an thermal runaway exception message.  Note that, after the firmware flash, I performed a PID-Tune multiple times.
The problem is absolutely repeatable and happens always on beginning of layer 2 (more precisely: 40 seconds after beginning layer 2). Changing PID values doesn't change anything to the moment of the error occurring.
I managed to run it longer by repeatedly dropping the temperature set-point and making a photo of the temperature plot. First photo is right after the initial drop from 215 to 205 °C. Second is when the temperature started rising slowly again.

After this temperature drop, the hotend temperature seemed to be much less stable and reached only 205 °C.
At Layer 12, the same thing happened again. But dropping the temperature far too low for PETG and having the "same" issue again, making me stop the print.
This problem is pretty urgent and I haven't found any suitable solution by now. Do you have any ideas of what may cause this trouble? New heaters and thermistors are on their way right now. But I fear that this is not a hardware problem since none of the components are damaged and dysfunctional, nor the moment of failure is random.

I even find 215 °C very low for PETG, care to share the brand? I'd rather go to at least 230 °C How much part cooling are you using? PETG requires very little, to none unless you print very delicate thin objects, e.g. like point of a rocket. What is the reason for updating the firmware? You could go back by flashing the original firmware. PETG doesn't like high printing speeds, lower to 30-50 mm/s first.

I fear I can't do that... That's pretty bad no-name stuff, having heavy bubbling issues above 230°C (even after drying with silica gel in an oven for hours). Between 205 and 220 happened to be the sweet spot with almost no stringing or bubbles and good strength. The problem is not related to the printing temperature or speed, since the error I'm trying to solve occurs completely out of a sudden. But I'll try again at 235°C and hope for the best

I started again, printing at 235°C. Before the print failed again, I recognized that the hotend never reached the setpoint. At first sight, I'd would guess that the P-Value of the Controller may be set wrong. But looking at the heater signal (led on the mainboard) tells me that it is on full blast. Maybe a damaged heater lacking power wasn't a bad Idea at all. If changing the heater is a solution for my problem, I'll let you know.

can you show me a photo of the extruder? Possibly the airstream from the fan brushes over the heater block...

It's the stock Ender3 fan, i'm also certain, this wasn't the Problem at all

It turned out, it was a faulty heater, that wasn't able to reach and maintain temperatures over 195 °C in a stable manner. The order came, had a new 50 W heater, thermistor and a PTFE-Bowden tube. It works just fine again, now!

Please post information on the "order" that you placed so others can follow the same solution.

I find my Ender 3 Max has "phases" where each and every print will end in a thermal error, always at layer 2. During these phases, I disable retraction to keep the flow of filament constant through the hot end and into the nozzle. While my prints are a little messier than I would like, more often than not they actually finish.
Another thing that helps is to lower the initial bed temperature as much as possible, or even have it at room temperature (Max has a carborundum glass bed with blue tape over the top) and raise it as the hotend moves away from the bed. I feel that layer 2 is the "transition layer" where the hotend is no longer using the heat from the bed to maintain its temperature, so the controller lets it have a big burst of energy to compensate for any temperature variations and more often than not gives it too much, resulting in our beloved E1 error.
I may be wrong, but I would love to try a thermal camera to see if it's true!

Could this be filament dependant? Maybe it is that you have a different brand?

Wrap all the heat system (above nozzle) with heat tape. I solved my problem with this!

Hi and welcome to SE.3DP. Could you [edit] your answer and explain a bit further? What do you mean by "heat tape"? Do you mean kapton tape? Maybe include a photo of your solution and why you think that it helped your issue. The more info that you provide the more upvotes you will get.  Also, please don't forget to take the [tour].


text:
Ender 5 Underextruding
Recently I cleaned up the bowden tube and the nozzle, after that I noticed the 3D was underextruding because the walls of the prints were weak and the first layer didnt adhere on the bed.
I watched some youtube tutorials on how to fix this and pulled the bowden tube until the nozzle, cleaned inside the tube and removed clogs.
My temporary fix is setting the flow on Cura to 200%.
I added a extruder visualizer and it seems to be working just fine.
Any ideas why it is underextruding?

I'm using PLA at 200C, bed at 60C

If you pulled the Bowden tube out of the hotend and then got this, you almost surely installed it wrong, leaving a gap between the tube and the nozzle for molten filament to fill and jam in. Remove it again with the hotend hot, and if there's a mess inside, look for guides on cleaning it. Then, to reassemble, loosen the fitting from the heat sink by 3/4 to one full turn, press the tube in as far as it will go, then tighten the fitting down to compress the tube against the nozzle.


text:
Ender 3 nozzle moves through previous layer on lithophane
I'm trying to print lithophanes and having an issue with the nozzle moving through the previous layer and basically "drawing" through the print.
I've printed 3 lithophanes before with zero issues. Here are the settings for those:
0.4 mm nozzle

PLA
Temperatures

nozzle temperature 210 °C
bed 70 °C

0.12 mm layer height
manual bed leveling
30 mm/s speed
stock Ender 3 mainboard

Here's the settings for the prints I'm doing now with the 0.2 mm nozzle:

PLA
Temperatures

nozzle 210 °C
bed temp 70 ° C

0.12mm layer height
BLTouch auto bed leveling
20 mm/s speed
BigTreeTech mainboard

Here's what I've done and looked at to fix it:

Calibrated extruder
manual bed leveling, then ABL
calibrated Z offset
checked for flat spots on rollers, there are none
tried including a Z hop with little success.

I've referenced the following articles without solving the problem.
Nozzle rubs on previous layers
Ender 3 nozzle gets closer and closer to the previous layer as the print progresses
Below are the two lithophanes, the first one successful and the second the failure. I have tried going back to the 0.4 mm nozzle and the old settings but I'm getting the same failures. The biggest difference is the mainboard switch and adding the BLTouch. I don't have any issues with my other prints (more traditional 3D models) only lithophanes. Any help and ideas would be appreciated.

lithoophanes are printed standing, not laying.

Wouldn't it tip over from being too thin? Every reference I've seen has it lying flat on bed.  I tried to generate supports in Cura and supports would barely touch it and didn't branch out far enough.

in any case, the lower print does show a lot of overextrusion. like... wrong steps/mm setting.


text:
Question about viewing molecular structure of 3D printed objects
I'm writing a research paper about the implications of additive manufacturing for space travel. As a part of this paper, I'm going to illustrate some of the drawbacks of 3D printed objects such as how the strength of an object depends on the direction of the force relative to the layer arrangement.
I was wondering if, alongside a practical demonstration, I could somehow use some high definition equipment to image the bonding of the plastic vertically and horizontally as a result of the 3D printing process?
Would anyone know what kind of equipment I would need for such a thing(or if there are any studies about it)?

If I had to guess, some low temperature polishing to prevent creep and a scanning electron microscope. But I would ask a university’s polymer department, they might have some experience with it.

I'd try to cast epoxy around the object, sand and polish the surface down to a mirror finish, rinse it in an ultrasonic cleaner. Then I'd use a standard metallographic microscope first to make images of layer-to-layer and shell-to-shell bonds. If you then need still more resolution, you can still fire electron beams on your specimen.


text:
Help fixing Prusa i3 MK3 print jams
While printing a paint rack from thingiverse I keep getting jams. Other prints (shorter) work fine. Can anyone give me a clue?
Here's a video of the printer
I thought it was heat creep so I increased the speed and decreased the hot end temperature. It generally prints for several hours then jams.

I hear extruder clicking. What's the material and the temperature you have set?

I set to 0.3 layer height, changed the temperature to 205 from 215. Increased the print speed by 10 mm/sec. These were suggested for reducing heat creep. The filament is Maker Geeks Maker Series PLA. I just noticed this filament recommends 235. Much hotter than any other PLA I've used. I'll try running it at that temp

When I started printing ABS with my Prusa i3 MK3 MMU2+ printer, I started experiencing jams on some longer prints, which was heat creap, possibly combined with old filament.
I improved the cooling by filling the gap between the sides of the heat sink and the plastic extruder body. I think I stuffed it with some soft foam rubber, but anything that can handle the (what should be fairly cool) temperature should work.
My hypothesis is that with gap allowed too much of the air to pass without engaging the heat sink, compromising the cooling.
With that change, I haven't had heat-creap jams.
You aren't printing ABS, but the temperature is high, and PLA softens as a low temperature. IMO, it would still be worth making the change.
It is the gap on the front and rear sides that I blocked.  The heatsink fins are fully open for air flow.
Some people here have changed out the Noctua fan for one that is noisier and pushes more air, which should also work. I appreciate the quiet fan, so I tried to get more work out of the fan I had.

I found the answer was the maker geeks formulation of PLA requires much hotter temperatures. Great idea on the airflow. Did you let Prusa know?

The maker geeks formulation of PLA requires much hotter temperatures. The plastic was not melted enough for good flow.


text:
Over extruding and feeding gear is grinding Ender 3 pro
This issue is completely leaving me lost, my printer extrudes too much and leaves blobs yet the gear will just suddenly start grinding as soon as it begins to fill in the outline of my print. The grinding keeps going and the filament coming out just continues to blob leaving my prints a complete disaster. What confuses me is the fact that if the gear was grinding it would no longer feed more filament. The blobs proceed to then harden leaving my end essentially stuck dragging across cooled filament and pouring out even more of it into a disaster.

It sounds like a setting mismatch between your slicer settings and the physical printer configuration. Diagnostic and informational questions follow:

Can you provide more details of your machine configuration and your slicer settings?
Are you using the Creality Slicer?
Can you also provide more information about what you are attempting to print?
Are you printing a downloaded design or your own?
Have you printed successfully before? If so, the key question would be to ask what has changed.

There are a number of settings to check, but the first one that comes to mind is the filament diameter setting in the slicer. Secondary to that would be the flow percent. Check the diameter of your filament versus the setting in the slicer. The grinding of the gear makes me think that the physical filament diameter is larger than the slicer setting.  This could explain extruding too much material and producing "blobs" and also the grinding.

I am using cura as the slicer, I am attempting to print a extruder calibration test cube and I have tried several other prints to see if it is constant (it is), I have sucessfully printed the stock pig print on the ender with no problem twice now, so something tells me its the slicer yet I cant tell what the issue is.

I think that you are on the right track with looking at slicer settings. I am less familiar with Cura, but it has a filament diameter setting under "Materials." There are many possible settings to play with in Cura. As your issue is related to Cura, it could be good to mention it or use a tag for it in your question.

ive made sure the filament setting is the same as whats being fed to the printer, this all started recently on my last print.

Someone with more experience with Cura may be required to help troubleshoot. If you can print with a gcode from the Creality Slicer with the settings that you want (short of Cura's level of control/optimization), you could eliminate a hardware issue.

I made a unorthodox fix I just installed the creatility slicer and it works without any issue. Thanks for the help!

I'm glad that works. Happy printing.

Hi @chad and welcome to SE.3D Printing. SE websites are driven by questions and answers, your answer is inside a comment. This is not what the comment section should be used for. Please create an answer and read the [help], accessible through the button with the question mark at the top right menu. Please take the [about] and also have a look at the questions and answers to understand how SE works.


text:
What tips are there for using 1.75 filament with a machine designed for 2.85 mm?
I have a Lulzbot Taz 6, which takes 2.85 mm filament.  A few months ago I ran into a filament (Spidermaker Matte PLA) which produced some really nice prints.  After experimenting with the white, I went looking for more and discovered that they have apparently discontinued all 2.85 filament.
I discovered this page on the Lulzbot site which says it is possible to print using 1.75 filament, and I decided to try this out.  The settings used:

Diameter - 1.75 mm
Retraction speed 3 mm/s (instead of 10)
print speed 30 mm/s (instead of 60)

This fails, but it is tantalizingly close.  At first, I could get only a couple layers before the filament stopped extruding.  I tried increasing the temperature by 10 °C (to 215 °C), and this seemed to help, but I would still see it stop extruding after 10-20 layers.  It feels tantalizingly close to working, and I'm wondering what else I might try.

Lowering the retraction speed makes no sense. If anything you should greatly increase it.

Can you see what’s causing the filament to stop extruding?

My tip would be to not do this... There are other premium filament manufacturers that still produce 2.85 mm filament, rather than fighting an issue caused by incorrect filament diameter you should buy some more correct diameter filament.

I'm already surprised that an extruder (not hot-end) for 2.85 mm filament gets enough grip on a thin 1.75 mm filament.

@frog It's not clogging or blockage.  I can manually extrude after canceling the print.  I guess FarO's comment may have something to do with it.  Maybe it's slipping.  I wouldn't have tried this at all if the manufacturer's site didn't say it would work.

I’d certainly agree that’s the most likely place to look.  I wonder if it would be possible to modify the feeder to improve this, perhaps increase spring the pressure or close up the gap somehow - it’s hard to say how exactly without seeing the extruded close-up


text:
Why use G29 during a print?
Why do printers, like the Ender 5 Plus, execute the G29 routine prior to every print?  I understand the purpose of this step when MANUALLY leveling the bed since you are presented with the 16 measurements and can adjust the four corners of the bed.  However, from what I can tell, there is no way any of the printers out there (Creality, and others) to actually level the bed.  Since there are only TWO Z-axis motors... one on each SIDE of the bed... then, at most, the only thing the printer COULD do at this stage is to gradually TILT the bed from side to side to adjust the height of the left or right side.
Now, all of that aside, I guess, in theory, it WOULD be possible for the printer to use these 16 measurements to dynamically ADJUST the height DURING THE PRINT based on where the head is SUPPOSED to be versus where the ACTUAL height of that spot actually IS.  However, I cannot find anything that claims this is what happens.  From everything I find, the G29 routine is run and is done.  This means you can only benefit from it during the manual leveling process.
Am I missing something?

Now, all of that aside, I guess, in theory, it WOULD be possible for the printer to use these 16 measurements to dynamically ADJUST the height DURING THE PRINT based on where the head is SUPPOSED to be versus where the ACTUAL height of that spot actually IS. However, I cannot find anything that claims this is what happens

This is actually what happens. This behavior is clearly specified in the firmware documentation:

Mesh leveling measures the height of the bed at several points to generate a 3D mesh representing bed imperfections. With compensation enabled, the nozzle follows the bed contours by dynamically adjusting the Z position (using bilinear interpolation between the measured points). The nozzle follows the contours of the bed more accurately with more mesh points and/or finer segmentation of moves.