text:
Heat bed troubles
I am currently building my own 3D printer, it is all set and ready to go but I seem to be having issues with the silicone heat bed I purchased.  The motherboard I use is from the Flashforge Creator Pro for it allows me to use dual print heads.
The silicone heater bed I purchased has 3 leads with the capabilities to be run three phase which was something I did not ask for nor did I expect. Now I've noticed that when I plug it into my board, the board says that it is sending power to the bed but it doesn't seem to heat up. Also when I wire its thermistor, in it keeps reading around 110°C at initial startup and would not recognize room temperature.
One last thing, my power supply is a 24v rather than the standard 12v. I'm stuck because I have no idea how to resolve these issues. Do I need a different heat bed altogether or should I make it 3 phase and if I do how would I go about doing so? The pictures are too large so here are the links:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fNCc2aKJic9ACn1d8CVDnzHJbwI_SPab/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/15RtSgFpN_p6zr2ynQqLlLJ-FU4XQ7G67/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2mY70_iFEAGckloR0RyRENNYW8/view?usp=sharing

A 3 phase bed sounds suspiciously like one meant for mains power. Are you sure this is a 24V bed?

This is what I purchased https://www.aliexpress.com/store/product/110v-220v-Silicone-Rubber-Heater-Bed-600MM-x-600MM-24-X24-For-3D-Printer-With-100k/709519_1847472742.html

"110 v 220 v Silicone Rubber Heater": perhaps one pair of wires gives you the 110V version, whereas the other pair would give you the 220V version? In any case, hooking up a bed meant for 220V up to 24V will only give you around 1.2% of the designed output power, so it's not surprising that it doesn't heat up noticeably. Try measuring the resistance between the various pairs of input wires to figure out what voltage they're meant for.

Don't use this for a 3d printer. The seller has specified the wrong part for the job.

Did you trim the bed to fit?  The FFCP doesn't have a 600mm bed...

Do any of the answers helped you to get an answer on your question or helped you come to your own conclusions then please do vote and accept an answer. This helps us reduce the unanswered questions list. Found an other answer (then the already posted) yourself? Please add that answer (and accept after 48 hours) to share your experience with the community. If you have not been able to address the problem please update your question.

What you purchased is probably a bed that can be configured for either 110V or for 220V, depending on how you hook up the wires: the bed contains two heating elements, hooking these up in parallel gives you the 110V version, hooking them up in series gives you the 220V one.
If you attempt to use this bed with a 24V supply it won't work. The power dissipated by a heater is proportional to the voltage squared. Depending on which way you hook up this bed, you'd either get 1.2% of the designed power (220V mode hooked up to 24V), 4.8% (110V mode hooked up to 24V) or 2.4% (one half of the 110V circuit hooked up to 24V).
If my assumptions are correct (which you could verify using a multimeter to measure the resistance between the various pairs of wires), then the only way to use this bed is to connect it to mains power and use a (solid-state) relay to control it. However, please get advice from somebody experienced in working with mains electronics before doing this. Do not attempt this on your own.

Excellent answer.  If your printer has a moving bed, I'd further discourage you to use a heting mat running on mains.  The cables feeding into the mat will be subject to continuous mechanical stresses and - in the mid-long run - will fail.  This is true for any cable/voltage, and this is why there are so many mods to prevent heated bed cables for bending too much.  However the danger posed by a a 240V AC cable failing is orders of magnitude more severe than that posed by a 24V DC one.

@mac: not inherently, with a grounded chassis and properly-rated fuse.  1A @ 240v is less fire-prone than 10A @ 24v, fire will be the result of frayed wires from flex.  Strain relief is a solved problem for moving cables, just cost-cutting printers don't tend to use it because not using zip-ties is cheaper than using them.  That said, the FFCP only moves the bed in Z, so it's mostly moot :)

@BryanBoettcher - I was more thinking to the copper breaking near the connector and the live wire touching the metal build plate,  rather than frayed cables, but I get your point nevertheless. :)

So if I were to take 2 smaller heat beds designed to run off of my motherboard, wire them together and attach each one on the very ends of the bed would it properly heat the whole bed or would that just lead to unequal heating? The bed is aluminum

@LDF How large is the printer you're building? Is it a 600mm X 600mm build plate (the one you linked to)? In that case, it's not a good idea to try running it off that board. The power required is too large; you're going to overload the motherboard and set something on fire. Please be careful, it doesn't really seem like you know what you're doing.

I designed and built it myself. Everything runs. The bed itself is controlled by a NEMA 23 stepper motor which is controlled by a larger stepper motor driver I adapted in. The only issue I have is attempting to find a heat bed that works without it costing me $400 or more.

The silicone heater you have now is probably your best option, but it requires mains power and a (solid-state) relay to control it. You can't run a heated bed this large off the heated bed output of your motherboard; it requires too much power/current.

My only other thought was a transformer to connect the board to the heat bed. But I'll definitely order a solid state relay

if you use a mains powered heater, you should earth the bed with a cable that is able to carry the fault current for long enough to blow the fuse (i.e. some ~100A for a few seconds).

Thank you everyone. I wired it through the mains and now my heatbed works with no issue. Thermistor it has does not work with my bed but I attached an additional one on to read the temperature


text:
Removing pla from extruder
I read that the best way of removing ABS was to let the temperature at the hot end to drop to around 190deg c then a sharp pull. This worked really well. I am trying to print with PLA but no matter what temperature I drop the hot end to I get left with a length of PLA in the feeder tube. OK I can heat the hot end and poke the excess down with a wire but that is a pain. I think the technique is right but the temperature is wrong. Any help great fully appreciated.

At what temp are you pulling? Btw this method is sometimes called the Atomic Pull.

Looks like I had a gap between the hot end and the screwed rod. A gap filled with cool pla. A sort of washer for want of a better description. Will let you know if heating above temp is the answer

Friendly reminder, I would edit you question when you a update, don't put it in the answer area. Personal experience :)

Forgot to add that I am not sure for that, I don't have the experience... but maybe you can take it apar and clean it up real good, then a washer or something to close the gap. Heating it to 210*c will melt the pla, maybe you can brush it out with something?

What is the screwed rod?

One resource you can use is called the nylon cleaning method. It works by setting nylon filament temperatures, pushing nylon filament into the nozzle until only nylon is extruding, then cooling the hot end to a specific temperature. The page linked suggests a hard yank, but I disagree. Brutality is not a recommended action for 3D printers, in my opinion. When I use the NCM and the hot end reaches the correct cooler temperature, I use pliers and lever them against a suitable surface. The lever action is slower, yet the mechanical advantage is increased, making removal easier.
Some 3D printer users disagree with the expense of nylon, which is, on the surface, excessive. I've found that I am able to see light through the hot-end after using this method, however, so I find the expense justified by a completely clean filament path.
The above linked page also includes the modification of this method for use with the same type of filament to be cleaned, in your case PLA.
Consider that you should be able to use ABS to pull PLA from the nozzle. Heat the nozzle to the lower end of your ABS filament temperature and push or extrude until you get the ABS color. Allow the hot end to cool to the low end of PLA temperatures and reverse the extruder/pull out the filament.
If you use contrasting color filament (for example, white PLA, black ABS) you should be able to see the ABS collecting the other color as you remove it. Eventually, you would have no contrasting color, indicating that the previous filament has been removed.

In line w/ Fred.U's answer,  I've been pretty comfortable with the following sequence.  Assume a cold start with a filament in the feeder (and cold gunk in the hotend).
1) bring the hotend up to 5 degreesC over your usual extrusion temp for the filament currently in place.
2) If the filament doesn't pull out easily (possible clump at the end), push the filament down and hold it there so the end fully softens/melts. Then remove the filament.
3) Load the new filament desired and push it down until the new material flows freely out of the nozzle.

Thanks, what comes out is pointy with a very fine "hair" of filament (same as when I use ABS) but it does appear to be leaving a thin strand of PLA in the feeder (roughly a third of the diameter of the original 1.75mm filament). I suspected that I was going too cool before removal so will give this a try as well.

So with my PLA I heat the nozzle to 180*C, just enough to get it to melt. Push the filament through a little, maybe until a half-inch or so comes through. Once I got that I pull it out as quick as I can. It should not be forceful, meaning no resistance, should just come right out. I have never had a issue doing this and I can switch to a new color or plastic without problems, only having to extrude 4" to get the leftover PLA out of the nozzle.
Hopefully this will help you out a little with this issue.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

sort: votes


text:
reducing cross-sectional area
Some filaments suggest "reducing cross-sectional area" of the print. Is this referring to the vertical plane or horizontal plane? In other words, if I were to print a rectangular prism, would I want the long side of it printed in the vertical direction or parallel to the print bed?

@TomvanderZanden https://www.makertree3d.com/collections/filament/products/high-temperature-polycarbonate-abs-filament

Beginning "Processing is more challenging"

Based on your link in the comment, the cross-sectional area is the one on the X-Y axis (horizontal).  The least area, the least material there is "pulling up" (curling) the layer when the plastic cools down.
When it comes to your specific question:

if I were to print a rectangular prism, would I want the long side of it printed in the vertical direction or parallel to the print bed?

...the answer is not as simple as "long side vertical", as you want both little warping and strong parts and the two may be better achieved by differen orientations.
Personally I would base my choice on the intended application: as the difference between the Z and the X+Y axis is their behaviour under load is substantial.  FDM artefacts are anisotropic: they resist very well to compression along the Z or tension along the X & Y axis, but are weak along the same axis if you invert the direction of the force applied. Again: this difference is not marginal but substantial.
Keep in mind that "area" is actually "printed area", so you could have a model with a large footprint but a small printed area (think to the bottom of a Tour Eiffel model, or to a pipe standing up).
Were I to experience warping or poor adhesion with a specific model, I would reduce the cross-sectional area in the model (by adding relief cuts and/or cavities) or in the slicer (by decreasing the density of the infill) or would tackle the issue fror another angle, for example by switching the bed  material (some specialised surface with good adhesion for the type of filament in use) or creating the object I wanted with an assembly rather than in a solid piece...  But again: it would be a second-order consideration for me, and I would worry about it only if the problem were actually manifesting for that specific model.
For example: say that I were to print the head of a hammer.  I would print it with the surface that hits the nail parallel to the printing bed so that the compression force resulting from hitting a nail would be along the Z axis.  The link of a chain?  Flat on the bed, so that the pulling forces from stretching the chain would be aligned with the X and Y axis.

https://www.makertree3d.com/collections/filament/products/high-temperature-polycarbonate-abs-filament

Beginning "Processing is more challenging"

@DavidReed - see my edited answer (edits are in the full text, not just the beginning)

My guess is, based on the fact that this is ABS and the same paragraph recommends an heated bed, that they mean you should avoid layers with large continuous areas because those can be problematic with ABS if your heat is not very well controlled.
Basically while you are printing the upper part the lower part is cooling, and ABS shrinks as it cools, short strands shrink by a little and apply little force to the print while long strands shrink by a lot (same percentage, but more length - because they are longer to begin with) apply a lot of force and pull the edges of the print of the bed
so they suggest the shorter sides be on the X and Y and the longer side be on the Z axis.
Note that this will make materials with high shrinkage and low bed adhesion like ABS easier to print - this will not make the resulting part stronger or in any way better

authors: มาแบบ ไหน ไปแบบนั้น

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
What size is the lead screw?
I built a 3D printer kit a while back but now I want a large printer to play with. I would like to build a 300x300x400 mm clone of a 3D printer. But I am not sure what size lead screws to buy. They come in 300 mm length but once you connect the coupler and the to the screw that takes 20 mm's that the axis can not travel too so isn't it more like 280 mm length? Or do most people round up to the next size?

If your printer is 200x200x180, how much you need to add to get 300x300x400? So that simple.

You'll need to do some calculation to figure out how long of a lead screw you need. The best solution would be to mock up the entire printer in CAD so you can visualize how everything fits together. Not only is the coupler going to take up some space, but the nut also takes up some space, and perhaps (due to design constraints) you won't be able to have the nut go up right against the coupler so you'll need some more space. Unfortunately, there isn't a general "just take the length of your Z-axis and add X millimeters"-type formula.

Thanks for your anwser Tom life took over and forgot I had posted on stack exchange about this. When Life gets done with me I will give that a shot

CAD visualization like mentioned in this answer is the safest route. If you are not equiped with CAD skills you could do some manual calculations as well.
You already confirmed that you need 20 mm for the coupler, and you have to include space for the distance between the coupler and the trapezoid nut, this should be added to the travel length you want.
You can buy the screws in virtually any size you want (many far Eastern vendors, you can ask whatever length you want). You could even buy oversized and grind them to the final desired length.
I once bought oversized screws but was a little too lazy to grind them down, so they are still sticking out, no problem.

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


text:
Which is the difference between MK6 and MK8 and even MK10?
I made and assembled my own 3D printer two years ago and I notice that some extruders are MK6 and MK(*whatever). Some of them has the block fuser horizontal and others vertical, then uses a nozzle longer.
The block heater that I made was an aluminum block 20x20x10 mm using the M6 short nozzle. Then adapted the radiator to upgrade to Jhead heater.
So I wanted to know to which group belongs my printer, as base is a prusa clone with direct extrusion.

All credits for the following go to user "vermon" who posted in this thread.
The following is a heavily amended version from his longer answer there.

Makerbot did start its hotend series using MK as iteration designator (for Mark). The first commercially available version was the [Makerbot] MK4 on the Cupcake circa 2009. MK4 was hand built with nichrome wire heaters and prone to all kinds of failures. They only worked with ABS and 3 mm filament.
Following here, Makerbot was skipped as a manufacturer and that it is the hotend we talk about. The correct nomenclature would be Makerbot Hotend MK#
MK5 was a complete redesign and had huge nozzles and a thick PTFE liner. It used 2 large power resistors in parallel for heating and was also prone to failure.
MK6 was the first hotend sold as a kit that I know of (however Repraps had also started using them probably before).
Mk6+ was the first cartridge heater hotend sold in kit form. The MK5/MK6 heater block was stainless steel, where MK6+ upgrade kit was an aluminum block that was slightly smaller, a lot lighter, and had the now standard 1/4 inch heater cartridge.
MK7 was the first hotend you folks would think looks familiar. It was the first move to 1.75 mm filament dedicated extruders. While a MK6+kit had parts to adapt to 1.75 mm filament, it never worked well at all and was really a failure.
Again, this is all Thing-O-Matic and Cupcake era. Other than a few clones, there really was no third party market in the US at this time. You either had a MakerBot or some other Reprap based kit. Wanhao, FlashForge- they didn't even exist and if they did, weren't talked about like now.
MK8 was the all new dual extruder hotend setup on the MakerBot Replicator. The cooling bar was thicker than the MK7 but the same all metal thermal barrier and supposedly, the MK8 has slightly different nozzle geometry internally and externally.
MK9 was a MK8 hotend, cooling bar, thermal barrier, and nozzle, but the new feeder with spring lever we know on all current models. This is why it's confusing, MK9 was a feeder upgrade, not a hotend change.
MK10 was a complete change of the hotend. MK10 uses smooth OD thermal barriers with a larger 4 mm OD 2 mm ID PTFE liner. MK10 also uses M7 threads, vs the M6 of all previous models. This is because a 4 mm PTFE liner is barely enough metal to make the outer tube with M6 threads. MK10 is completely incompatible with all previous hotend parts. Every part is different. MK10 still uses MK9 feeder parts.
MK11 on the D6 is just an MK10 nozzle and thermal barrier, but a different heater block and the cooling bar is part of the D6 central cross. Again, the only real difference is MK11 is a different heater block, and that's to adapt a different and longer heater cartridge and slide in the thermocouple. MK11 still uses MK9 plastic feeder parts.

I wanted to know to which group belongs my printer, as base is a Prusa clone with direct extrusion.

This question seem difficult to answer concretely, as the number in the series seem to be assigned based on a combination of heating block technology and format, the feeder geometry and the nozzle shape and thread that was adopted on the MakerBot printers.  Your actual combination of those three may not exist in the MakerBot universe.
I suggest you read the full, unabridged version of the post linked above though, as more details relevant to your inquiry may be disclosed there.

Thanks mac, this will help a lot, I know that my model could not be considered to Makerbot universe, but on startup display says already "Fernymaker Ready" and the nozzle is MKfer. I just wanted to ask my first student question.

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


text:
In Fusion 360 how do I select an entire 3D object, not just its sides or faces?
I'd like to mirror a triangular prism I made. However, whenever I select it I am only able to select the faces or sides.
Is there a way to select the whole 3D object to move or mirror it?

Yes, there is a "select" tool in the toolbar next to "make". You can use select filters to select components, bodies and faces.

Selecting the body in the browser will select the entire body. Clicking on the body in the viewer will only get you faces or edges.
A long click (click and hold) on the model will give you options on what to select. You can choose a face or body under "Depth" or choose a body or feature under "Parents."

In the top left of your workspace (still inside the editor) you will have a dropdown, in that dropdown there is a folder called bodies, open that and select the body you want. You can then move the selected body.


text:
E axis vs Z axis
When using G1 command in G-code, what is the difference between Z- axis and E- axis?
I see all E, F and Z in
G1 Z0.350 F7800.000
G1 E-2.00000 F2400.00000
G92 E0
G1 X96.753 Y95.367 F7800.000
G1 E2.00000 F2400.00000

G-CODE can be confusing as historically it was developed for machining tools rather than FDM printers, and thus:

not all available commands make sense for a 3D printer
some of the command do slightly different things than those one may intuitively think they do.

Typically, Cartesian printers use 4 "axis": X, Y and Z for moving the printhead in space and E for "extruder".  The "extruder axis" is not in fact at all an axis in the geometrical sense of the word: it refers to the amount of filament to be moved into (extruded) or out of (retracted) the printing head.  The reason why it is considered an "axis" is that it is used in conjunction with the codes G0 and G1 which are for movement.
Confusingly, the letter E is used for the precision feedrate of lathes but in the 3D printing world we rather use F to that purpose.  As a non-native English speaker, I was further confused, because for the longest time I thought "feedrate" was referring to the amount of filament fed to the printing head, while in fact it is the speed at which the printing head moves (in mm/minute).
So to summarise, your example code "translated" would look like this:
G1 Z0.350 F7800.000           ; move up 350 microns at 7.8 m/min
G1 E-2.00000 F2400.00000      ; retract 2mm of filament at 2.4 m/min
G92 E0                        ; reset the extruder position
G1 X96.753 Y95.367 F7800.000  ; move to X,Y (without changing Z) at 7.8 m/min

Should you wish to dig deeper into the topic, the RepRap wiki page on gcode is rather comprehensive.  Mind that several manufacturers add their own "special codes" to the common ones....

z-axis refers typically to vertical movement
F references are feed rates/movement rates
E references are for the extruder, referencing the amount and speed to eject filament, negative e-values are retraction commands


text:
Will lowering print temperature help warping?
I realize this issue (warping) has been repeatedly addressed on this site. I've just graduated to high-temp filaments (PC in particular). I don't know much of the physics of this. I'm wondering whether the degree to which the filament contracts is proportional to the amount that it cools. If the answer is yes, then wouldn't it suggest that a lower printing temperature might reduce warping-as the temperature interval over which the filament cools is smaller? Or perhaps the difference is negligible?
Also, I see a lot of emphasis placed on good first layer adhesion. Is this still an issue if you are printing on a raft?

The answer already provided by @fred_dot_u at the time of writing is good, so I won't rehash what they already said, but will try to answer your questions from another angle:

I'm wondering whether the degree to which the filament contracts is proportional to the amount that it cools.

Yes.  This is generally true for any solid material.  This property is linked to the fundamental nature of matter in the way we understand it today.

If the answer is yes, then wouldn't it suggest that a lower printing temperature might reduce warping-as the temperature interval over which the filament cools is smaller?

Shrinkage is the root cause of 3D prints warping, however warping itself happens because of the differential in temperature between layers: when a hot layer is extruded on top of a cold one and begins to contract, it will apply a compressing force on the layer underneath, bending it.
In fact - if warping were a function of shrinkage - an enclosure would do no good: sooner or later the print would cool down to room temperature, and would warp.  The reason why - contrarily - an enclosure works, is that it limits the differential in temperature between layers (which causes warping) and lets the entire print too cool uniformly and slowly afterwards.
So, would...

...a lower printing temperature reduce warping? [...] Or perhaps the difference is negligible?

Nothing beats real world data, especially when the issue has so many variables that are difficult to account for, as in 3D printing, so I would invite you to simply try to print the same model twice, only changing the printing temperature (and of course making sure the environmental temperature is the same), and see if it does.
From a theoretical standpoint, I could argue both ways.
On one end, I could argue that this is nothing different than using an enclosure set at a slightly warmer temperature than the environmental one, so it will reduce warping (even if by not much).
On the other hand, I could argue that until the filament is solid enough, it won't be able to "pull" the layer below, so it doesn't matter if the extrusion temperature (fluid state) is 230°C or 210°C, if until 190°C the filament won't begin to "pull".  So warping will be identical.

Also, I see a lot of emphasis placed on good first layer adhesion. Is this still an issue if you are printing on a raft?

Yes, as also the raft has a first layer that needs to adhere to the build plate.  Rafts typically have a discontinuous and over-extruded first layer over a large area, which definitively helps with adhesion, but you still have to make sure the raft sticks well.  In my experience it is far easier for a raft to come off the build-plate than for the model to come off the raft.  YMMV though, as the material of the build-plate, and the slicer can dramatically affect this.

I can't address polycarbonate specifically, but can provide a general overview of the higher temperature filament considerations.
Printing on a raft means that the adhesion temperature of the filament is accomplished. This temperature is the factor to be considered if you are thinking of dropping the printing temperature. If you drop below recommended minimums, you risk losing adhesion to the build plate and also inter-layer bonding. That alone means one should use caution when dropping printing temperatures.
Printing with a raft usually means the model's individual parts have such a small footprint that they would not remain bonded to the build plate. Rafts are also used on printers with an uncertain planar surface or irregularities in the surface. That's not applicable to this question, generally speaking.
Your question about contraction being proportional to the amount of cooling is perhaps misdirected. One could consider that the printing temperature is a manufacturer specified value and the cooled temperature would be generally considered room temperature. Room temperature would be addressed as a range, rather than a single value, but even as a range, there isn't going to be a big percentage of variation in the calculation involving the print temp/room temp.
My experience with the higher temperatures is more related to the volume of material per cross section (in all three dimensions). A printed model of substantial height with a relatively small horizontal cross section (think cylinder) is likely to have much less distortion in the x/y plane and greater distortion along the z-axis. The mass of filament cooling in the z-direction generates greater force than the smaller mass on the x/y axes.
Another factor in such thought processes is that layers are on the x/y axes and the strength of the extruded plastic is more homogeneous through the nozzle, while the z-direction creates inter-layer discontinuities, making warping and delamination easier.
I've found that I can reduce (but not eliminate) warping and delamination if I am able to maintain chamber temperature for longer periods and reduce temperature slowly. Unfortunately, I have a semi-enclosed printer and the heat loss is dependent partly on the ambient air temperature. A fully enclosed heated printer with auxiliary heating under some form of control may give you the best results.

Thanks! I actually wasn't speaking about lower ambient temp, but print temp. I think this material has a recommended range of 235-275 or something on that order. So to clarify, would cooling from 235 to room temp result in less contraction then 275 to room temp? 40C is a significant temperature variation.

The warping you are experiencing it the cylinder example is likely due to uneven cooling and/or asymmetries in the model, but not to "more mass cooling on the z axis".  In fact the height of the print subject to cooling at each given moment is probably 2-3 layers, and the extrusion of new material on top will compensate for any shrinkage of the layers below.  That said: good answer, +1! :)

So basically: it's a misconception to think the warping along the Z axis is due to shrinkage on the Z axis.  It's still due to shrinkage along the X and Y axis, where longer portions of continuosly extruded filament are cooling, and where the tension between layers will build up at each layer.


text:
is possible to send printing with mach3?
I was wondering if is possible to send printing using the software MACH3 for CNC since this software can handle up to 3 axes: X,Y,Z,A,B and C.
Of course the CNC needs an extra control for temperature which I already have it; My CNC handle a Z axis with 150mm height, so I could print higher parts than normal CNC.

Well, few years ago I could set the software Mach3 for printing doing the next:

Set a profile for 3D printing for the faster movements that your CNC can support; for example some CNC uses standard threads, others ACME threads and other GT2 belts like the 3D printers. If we try to use a feed rate too high the motors will shake. For this profile is not needed the torque for machining or routing, so we will sacrifice force to gain speed.
Create the proper gcode. Mostly Gcode maker generate the code to send pulses to Extruder E but Mach3 takes as invalid E instructions, so the extruder will never move. To avoid this there are 2 modes:

a) Find and replace all E instruction with A to enable Motor A or
b) Create the Gcode with an interpreter to output A instead E
    like Slicer 0.71 as you can see in the image below. I haven't tried with other software

3.For controlling the extruder temperature is possible with any other controller like REX-C100/C400 any PIC or Arduino. The accuracy will depend on your design.

authors: Эдуард Калачев


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

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


text:
Filament is not stuck
That's my first 3d printer. I'm using Repetier Host as the brand recomends, and set all the configuration as the recommended one. I decided to print one STL file but the result is not the best one.
That's what I was trying to print:

and that's what I've got.

Here you have a video of the impression. it is a G2S pro rostock mini

From the video it is very clear there is a major problem with bed adhesion.
It also looks like you are printing on bare metal (aluminium?) which I never saw anybody doing. I must admit I don't know it is impossible or simply very rare, but the first thing I would try in your case is covering the bed in painter's tape and wipe it with some alcohol.  This is a surefire method to get good adhesion with PLA, which - from the temperatures shown in the video I assume is what you are using.
If you haven't tried this before, you should know that:

some brands of tape work well even without being wiped with alcohol
you may need to readjust your nozzle height after having applied the tape

Unless you have already done this, I would also suggest to print some test cubes and possibly some stress tests as your first prints, in order to check that the basics (extrusion rate, dimensional accuracy...) are working correctly, as well as getting familiar with the limitats of your printer.

Printing on a bare metal surface is perfectly fine. Just keep it clean. But the reason why its not working here is because the bed leveling is terrible. You can see in the video that the nozzle goes from very close to the bed to very far from the bed during the print. Also it is printing WAY to fast for it to adhere properly. Slowing down and doing a proper bed level will most certainly fix this problem :)

@Granny - thank you for the input, from your comment it seems printing on metal is similar to printing on glass (i.e.: unforgiving material).  I would argue that for a beginner it is advisable to get printing with the help of some surface prepping: much less frustration while you get to learn the ropes and appreciate what "perfectly level" means. :)

@mac I myself started printing almost 1 year ago, I just sat down for 15 min when i got the printer trying different amount of friction on the a4 paper until i had just the right squish. You don't have to be a advanced "3D printerer" to get the perfect bed leveling. If you know the perfect amount of friction, bed leveling is a easy, no matter what surface you are on :)

@Granny - yes, but I'm not the one having adhesion problems here! ;)

@mac Ik :) I was talking about it in general for everyone that considers themselves "beginners".

I would suggest buying Buildtak, which is a high-quality adhesion surface. This surface is almost guaranteed to make your prints stick to your bed. If Buildtak is outside of your budget, I would suggest using a relatively high grade painters tape combined with either purple gluestick or hairspray applied to your bed before each print.

Just buildtak or painting tape will not solve his problem. The main problem here is that his nozzle is too far away from the bed so its not getting good bed adhesion. You can make your prints stick on mostly anything if your bed is properly level.

Than an elongated nozzle should help. You can buy them from Amazon. I don't believe that the name of it is actually "elongated nozzle", but looking up 0.2 mm nozzle and scrolling through, there will be some that are vertically larger than others. That should fix the problem.

Why would buying a different nozzle be easier than just properly leveling the bed? Or is the printer that he has not equipped with a bed that can be manually leveled?

If the bed is auto-levelling then he needs to buy a nozzle from the supplier of the printer he has so that it will be the same size. If his bed can be levelled, than I don't know why he would even post this question in the first place.

He posted the question because he is a beginner. And why would he need a new nozzle if he has auto bed leveling? I have auto bed leveling on all my printers of different kinds and they all have a feature where you can calibrate the z-offset. No need to buy a new nozzle at all.

If he is a beginner who doesn't even know how to level his bed then how would he know how to calibrate for the z offset?

Because calibrating the z-offset is done through the screen of most printers. But I am 100% sure that his printer is not making use of a auto bed leveling sensor so the direction where this discussion is going is highly off topic.

Well if it isn't using an auit bed levelling sensor than it's a simple matter if either buying a longer nozzle or simply levelling the bed.

A new nozzle is never a solution for being to high above the bed because you will have to buy a perfectly sized nozzle to make a good squish on the bed. And unless you are a wizard, that won't happen. So yes properly leveling the bed and making sure the surface is clean is the way to resolve the issue. Maybe even slow down the layer alot aswell.

Well then it is simply a matter of bed levelling. I couldn't tell that his bed wasn't level from the start because it sounded to me like there was something actually wrong with his machine, rather than a matter if not reading the manual and knowing to level the bed.

You both are right, one problem was the tape as now a could print something with very low quality but it could grab on the bed. The second problem is the calibration, while printing I realised that the nozzle is too far away from the bed, mainly when it is not in the centre of it. I'll try to recalibrate it and see how it goes.


text:
How to avoid warping when using supports
I find when printing with supports there will almost always be cracking/warping where the object intersects the support material (i.e. the areas that needed supports). Is there a way to avoid this?
Here is an example of one of my first ever PLA prints that exhibited this behavior. As can be seen, the top part printed fine; the bottom part that had supports attached--not so much.

Whta material/temperature/settings are you using?  How does the part looks like?  Add a picture, if you can! :)

@mac Sorry for the delay, am a little under the weather. I've thrown out all examples, but is PLA 190/60/ 50 mm/s, support pattern generated by Cura- type: lines, density 15%.

are you sure that is really a warping and cracking what is happening? PLA is not really the material that behaves so.  Could it be a failed/collapsed support structure instead?

If I am iterpreting your picture correctly, what you are referring to as "cracking and warping" is simply the irregularities of the plastic where it rested on (and partially bonded with) the support material.
Unluckily, apart from upgrading to a dual extruder printer (and use water-soluble filament for the support) or switching printing technology entirely (e.g.: using a sintering printer) you can only mitigate the problem, but the defects will remain, and will require post-processing to be rectified.
So, in no particular order, here's a list of the most common way to tackle this:

Use a slicer that allows you to place support only where strictly needed.  I have never used it myself as I am a FLOSS enthusiast, but - at the time of writing - among the mainstream ones only Simplify 3D offers this feature.
If your slicers does not support that, tweak your support material settings.  In Cura (and for my printer/filament) - for example - it helps using "support interfaces" and leaving quite a XY gap between model and support.
Instead of printing your model in one go, print it in multiple parts that you can then glue or assemble together.  For example: the spaceship you took pictures of could be printed without any support at all if you were to cut it in half (back and front of the ship, the cylinder connecting cockpit and wings also cut in two).
Use a material that can be chemically smoothed.  Traditionally that would be ABS + acetone vapour, both of them cheap and toxic, but more recently it polysmooth has hit the market with a safer (and way more expensive) system.  This approach will also improve the look and finish of the rest of the print (as also the layer marks will be smoothed out).

Again though... support material marks are sort of part of the game, when using FDM technology, so you should expect some sanding in most prints that required support.


text:
Is it advisable to use additional external fan(s) for printing PLA?
I was wondering if adding (an) extra fan(s) (not connected to the printer, but blowing on the print area) could improve the quality of PLA based prints(printing at 210 C). The printer already has a built in fan with a fan shroud that directs air to the hotend, but is it beneficial to add an extra fan in order to get better results on overhangs, fine details, etc, or does extra cooling negatively/not affect print quality?

Adding extra fans to cool the print down faster during printen will most certainly cause more problems than it will solve. If the print cools down rapidly, the chance of it warping and/or falling off the bed is more likely. Also aiming a fan directly at the print will add more stress on the hotend because something (the fan) keeps cooling it down, making it work harder than needed.

Thanks for the comment. Just for clarification, did you mean "aiming the fan directly at the hotend" will result in more stress on the hotend, instead of "aiming the fan directly at the print"?

Well if you are blowing colder air at the hotend the hotend will struggle more to reach the desired temp. Just like when your fan shroud is blowing on your heatblock or hotend causing it to drop in temp. Aiming it at the print itself can cause it to warp.

The printer already has a built in fan with a fan shroud that directs air to the hotend

Unless your printer is defective, it may look like so, but the airflow should really be directed towards the print, not the hot-end.  Cooling the hot-end will at best just waste energy, requiring extra heat to keep it hot, at worst affect your print quality negatively.

is it beneficial to add an extra fan in order to get better results on overhangs?

The issue with external fans, not connected to the printer, is that you can't properly direct their ariflow, so:

you will direct some of it on the hot-end itself (see above on why that's not good)
you will potentially cool your print unevenly, which - depending from how much, how fast, and what type of filament you are using - may warp your prints

That said, depending from a number of factors, including your ability to position the fans appropriately, you may gain some benefit from them (I saw people doing this to help with PETG stringing), but I would recommend instead to upgrade the part fan of your printer (e.g.: larger diameter, higher RPM) and your duct (better focus on the extruded filament), as these upgrades will have no drawbacks and will perform consistently on each part of the print.
For most common printer, there are printable mods that allow to do both, often available off thingiverse or on dedicated user community forums.

Thanks for the insightful and detailed answer. Maybe the fan shroud is the cause of the under-extrusion my printer has been experiencing lately? Or it could just mean that I need to replace the nozzle (or worst case, the hotend).

@zack1544 - everything is possible depending from.a myriad of factors, but if your printer is undersextruding, I would start investigating the nozzle, I would say the possibility for the fan to cause underextrusion are limited.

@mac The Tronxy X5S hot end duct is notorious for blowing directly onto the base of the nozzle, rather than the part - to the point where the extruder would begin skipping because the temperature at the nozzle had drop significantly, even when the heater block itself is still at set point temperature.

Fan blow at hot end is necessary because hotend needs cooling.
For PLA it will yield better result with a seperate controllable fan direct airflow across the print head, but just like everything with 3D printing, you will need to test out every possible configuration to get the best for your setup.


text:
Make smooth curves in GCode
I am getting started with GCode, and I don't know all the commands. Is there a way to smooth a path between two points? I wrote a program which makes GCode from a silhouette. Problem is, when it looks at the individual pixels, its path becomes a bit choppy. Is there a command that will make a more natural path. Attached is a close up picture of the path simulation.

Curves are normally approximated with straight-line segments. However, some firmwares (e.g. Marlin) support arc commands. See:
Marlin: Controlled Arc Move
RepRap: Controlled Arc Move
Note that the RepRap Wiki is not always accurate in its list of supported commands.


text:
Heat bed won't heat above 70°C
I am currently heating a silicone heat bed through the 110v/220v AC mains and for some reason it only seems to heat up to 70°C, but it is heating the bed evenly. The power supply I am using is 24v power supply with the power turned up. The SSR has not been heating up at all during use, so could it be that it's not getting enough power even through the mains?

You should provide more context, link your original question (@mick - The heat bed of this user was already subject to scrutiny, if you want to read more: https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/q/5422/9134) explain what have you tried of the suggestions given there, etc...  otherwise it's unlikely you will receive much different input that you already did.

What voltage is mains power in your country? 2. How did you hook up the heated bed? 3. Please don't hook stuff up to the mains unless you know what you're doing. Seriously, "this combination of hooking the wires up didn't work, so let's try this other combination" isn't how you deal with mains electronics.

I am voting to close this question as "unclear what you're asking". At a minimum, we would need to know the mains voltage in your country, a wiring diagram of how you hooked things up and it would also be useful if you measured the resistance of the bed with a multimeter (between all possible pairs of wires, if applicable).

Possible duplicate of Heat bed troubles

Preface: Working with mains voltage is dangerous. I'm writing this answer based off limited and incomplete information about your situation. Mains voltage can kill. Be careful, and get help from somebody else if you're not 100% certain of what you're doing. Make sure to connect to protective earth any exposed metal surfaces of your printer.
I think that the heated bed you have is a dual voltage bed, meaning it can be used with either a 110V supply or with a 220V supply. It has three wires, and internally, these are connected as follows (resistances are a guess, this would correspond to a 1000W bed):

Because this is a dual-voltage bed, there are three wires. You need to hook up the correct combination of wires to get the correct power rating - and this depends on the mains voltage in your country.
The formula for power P dissipated by a resistance R across a voltage V is P = V2/R. We can see, that if we apply 220V across wire 1 and wire 3 we get a power dissipation of 2202 / 48 = 1000 Watts (because the resistors are in series, we get a resistance of 24+24=48 Ohms).
So, in a 220V country, the wiring is easy: just connect wires 1 and 3 to live and neutral. Note: in a 220V country, don't make the mistake of connecting any other pair of wires. If you instead connect wire 1 and 2 to the mains, your heated bed will draw 4000W. This will (should) trip the circuit breaker/fuse, and possibly damage the bed or start a fire.
So, what does a person in a 110V country do? What happens if you connect 110V across wires 1 and 3? You get a power dissipation of 1102 / 48 = 250 Watts. That's only a quarter of the bed's power, so it's not going to get very hot (not even up to the 70 degrees you observed, I would think).
So what if, instead, we hook 110V across wires 1 and 2? In that case, we have 110V across a 24 Ohm resistor, so we get a power dissipation of 1102 / 24 = 500 Watts. Better, but still not enough to get a bed this large up to temperature.
So, how are you supposed to get the full 1000W rating of this bed in a 110V country? You need to connect the two resistors in parallel!
If you connect wires 1 and 3 together, and connect wire 2 to one side of the mains supply and wires 1 and 3 to the other, you get two 24 Ohm resistors in parallel, each dissipating 500W, giving you the total output of 1000W (or equivalently: two 24 Ohm resistors in parallel make a 12 Ohm resistor, which will dissipate 1102 / 12 = 1000W).
You should use a multimeter to measure the resistance between the wires. Out of the three possible combinations, two should give roughly the same reading (in the 20-40 Ohms range), and one combination should give roughly double that value. This latter combination identifies wires 1 and 3. These wires should be connected together in a 110V country.

Ka-Boom, great answer! :)


text:
The bottom of the printed objects has waves after replacing the nozzle
I had a problem with my nozzle on my homemade printer. The problem was that the nozzle with a 0.4 mm diameter wasn't putting out any plastic. I replaced the nozzle with a 0.2 mm one and now the bottom of my model is looking like this:
I tried to change flow,temperatures and speed.
But nothing helped it keeps making this waves. At the old 0.4 mm nozzle there everything was okay.

You need to solve the problem (lack of extrusion from nozzle) rather than randomly switching to a different diameter.  Since you're getting output from a smaller nozzle, clearly the 0.4 mm one is clogged.

@CarlWitthoft - no need to be so harsh! :)  it may be that he did not manage to unclog it and only had a 0.2 mm readily available...

@CarlWitthoft Why I should stay at the stock nozzle diameter if I want to get different printing quality? That's not what you call randomly

@Coder_fox because you asked a specific question and implied that you were trying to figure out why your 0.4 mm nozzle wasn't working.   My point is that you should find the root cause or there'll just be more trouble down the road.

This is a flow issue between speed and temperature, the temperature seems to be too high.

Replacing your nozzle will allow for more flow. This means that your extruder is now able to push out more filament on the same extrusion multiplier. Slowing down the first layer and turning down the extrusion multiplier with steps of 0.05 will most certainly help fix this problem.

Okay, there are a few potential issues here:
1: your belts are not tight enough. This will cause your bed to shake during printing, giving you wavy first layers.
2: your filament is bad. If you have an inconsistent filament diameter, thus can lead to inconsistent extrusion rates, and cause a wavy appearance.
3: your nozzle is jammed. The nozzle you bought may have something stuck inside of it, leading to underextrusion, which, in some cases, can lead to a wavy appearance.

If the belts are not tight enough than will speed decreasement help?

Sure, decreasing the speed would help, but the best solution is to retighten the belts.

Without more detail is difficult to say with certainty what the root cause of the problem is, but it looks like too much material is being deposited on the bed.
A few things to try/check:

Make sure the nozzle is not leaking.  If it is, you should see fused plastic coming out from the seal nozzle/hot-end and/or hot-end/heat break and trickling down.  This is often the case when the nozzle hasn't been tightened enough, or it has been changed with the hot-end being cold, or if the internal PTFE tube has been dislodged upwards (does not apply to all-metal hot-ends).
Make sure you changed the appropriate setting for the nozzle diameter.  This is not "flow" it is a separate setting.  If you haven't, your printer is now extruding ~4 times as much filament as it ought.
Recalibrate your nozzle height.  This should be done at each nozzle change, as each nozzle is slightly different from the other, and it is possible your new nozzle now sits too close to the bed.

EDIT: also, the picture is too low-res to be sure, but looking at the skirt, it looks like the extruded plastic comes out in blobs.  If it is not due to leakage, then I would suggest to also check that the filament is not slipping through the gears of the extruder.  If you have access to a suitable thermometer, you could also check that the hot-end temperature is stable at the level it should.
Final thought: have you ever succeeded printing with that filament spool?  It is unlikely, but it may be for example a defective one, or a mis-labelled one (so your printing temperature may be wrong).

The nozzle is not leaking. 2. I changed the nozzle diameter in the slicing software 3. I recalibrated the bed. I have done this when I installed the new nozzle so that's not the problem.

@Coder_fox - Maybe obvious question, but... have you also re-calibrated your extruder (https://www.matterhackers.com/articles/how-to-calibrate-your-extruder) in the process?

Yes I recalibrated it a few times.

@Coder_fox - see my edits.  Just additional ideas, I may be off-track

The filament is not slipping and the temperature is ok.And yes I did succeeded with this filament spool all the times with the 0.4mm nozzle. Also I changed the level hight to 0.1mm and now it looks much better. Any suggestions?

The layer thickness should not be more that 75% of your nozzle diameter: Wavy lines on 1st layer only


text:
Cura 3 speed selection
I printed thingiverse minion Dave and after 2 failed attempts (1st tore of from bed, 2nd had jitter at about 50%) I slowed the print speed down. The final result was amazing. However the reported print time, 3hrs, was in reality 7hrs. The speed reduction was small and I would not have expected such a dramatic change in time. Did I miss a step somewhere?

No you didn't do anything wrong.
The problem with time estimates in slicers is that they don't know anything about the printer's firmware and physical limitations, so they estimate time based on the (whoefully wrong) assumption that the printer will do only and exactly what told to.
So, if the gcode says "move 100mm at 1m/s" the slicer will assume your printer will take 100ms to perform that action.  In reality though, your printer will take some time to accelerate, and it may actually be unable to reach the target speed of 1m/s altoghether, taking a lot longer to perform the full action.
Typically, Cura estimates are OK for makerbots, and Slic3r PE for Prusa printers, as the software is mainly developed towards those machines, but for most other printers the estimates will be sensibly off.
You may also be interested in trying to use octoprint to feed the GCODE to the printer: octoprint monitors the actual elapsed time against the gcode and try to adjust the estimate of the remaining time accordingly, also telling the operator how reliable that estimate is.


text:
Raft warping (Makerbot Replicator+)
Quick thing: Please tell me if I misuse any of the terminology
On a replicator+, I have been printing successfully for a while, when suddenly the raft started to warp. I was doing a bunch of models that covered the whole tray, so I shrunk to just a small area, but It still warped I read up on how to fix, but most covered how to fix warping in the model itself, not the rafting. Some said to lower the temp, would that work? smart extruder at default settings, 215 C. The printer does not have a heated base, nor have I treated it with anything, and I am using it with the stock program (makerbot print). Otherwise, I am using it as it came out of the box.

you can consider the raft and the part to be one and the same. A raft will not necessarily prevent warping, as you've discovered. Please consider to edit your post to indicate your heated(?) bed temperature and surface treatment (glue, blue tape) and bed material (glass, aluminum, PEI).

@fred_dot_u Jake Faulkner said "The printer does not have a heated base".

@Ljk2000 I added that after he suggested it

@fred_dot_u Looks like I own you a apology. Sorry! Thank you Jake Faulkner for telling me!

I'm not sure I am reading your post correctly, but if you are doing a batch of small prints, I would recommend to space them enough so as each of them has its own mini-raft, rather than all of them sharing the same large one.
If you are using cura, you can tweak how much the raft goes past the footprint of the part.  Unless you are printing very small parts, you don't need that to be a lot.
In general, you should think to a raft as a print in and by itself: the larger it is, the more prone to warping, although the way filament is layered with gaps makes the raft bend and warp a lot less than a regular print of the same size.

Currently I am using the stock program(makerbot print). Are there advantages to using cura over it? I think I will try the mini-raft

@JakeFaulkner - I don't have experience with Makerbot Print, Cura and Slic3r (Prusa Edition) are two solid choices when it comes to FLOSS though.  Cura expecially has very granular settings that allow for a lot (somebody say: "too much") tweaking.

Lowering the raft temp to 200 degrees C should help. You should also apply hairspray and purple gluestick to your entire printed to help with raft adhesion to the bed.


text:
Anet A8 mainboard dimensions and hole offsets
I'm trying to get a clean set of measurements of the Anet A8 mainboard and determine the exact positioning of the holes in both the board and frame.
The frame and the board are cut to accommodate an M3 bolt.
Here are the measurements I have currently:
Mainboard

Overall Width 100 mm
Overall Height 95 mm

Frame (main board holes)

Lateral (measured with calipers)

Hole (3.4 mm) Distance +
Inner edge hole to hole (83.07 mm)
= ~86.4 mm

Vertical ~90 mm (not measured 100 % correctly)

I was hoping to just find a PCB layout for this board with the measurements and offsets but have found nothing.
I am attempting to provide a mount adapter frame for a PSU with a 50 mm x 150 mm mounting footprint.

Why don't you download one of the many casings that are found on Thingiverse that house the Anet electronics board and take measurements from those cases.
I measured it from my own casing I designed a while ago:
Hole distances are 86.3 mm and 91.3 mm (center to center)

Great idea. Unfortunately, my skills at importing/analyzing STL files in the software I have on hand are rudimentary and limited at best. For reference though, the lateral (long edge) holes are, in fact, 86mm apart.

I updated my answer to include measurements and added a figure with dimensions.

thanks for the updated answer and the brilliant drawing!!

@0scar, what is the size of the hole?

@user77232 It fits M3 screws, so it is slightly larger.


text:
Anet A6 heat bed stopped working
Just last night the heat bed stopped working. It was fine up to 75 % of the print, then when it was done the bed was not on anymore. The display said it was set to 50 °C, but it was at 18 °C. I did try moving the pins, and that is not loose (very simple thing to try).
I want to know what could have happened and what to look for when I try to fix the heat bed.
Please note: I do have a multi-meter. I do not use a MOSFET (I do have plans to install on)
Upon further investigation, I tested the mother board for any voltage were the bed hooks up and there is nothing. I had the printer trying to heat the bed when I was testing. But the thermistor is working, when I unhooked the connection the thermistor went to 0 °C, when plugged in it went to 18 °C.
Is it the motherboard? How can I fix this knowing no power is being supplied to the bed from the motherboard? Do I need a new motherboard?

So when you preheat your bed through the menu still nothing happends?

@Granny Correct, I have tried pre-heating, restarting the printer just to see what happens but it still is not heating. It must be a physical thing. The printer does say 50*C when I pre-heat for PLA. Just the bed not heating. The red LED does not even turn on like it should.

And you are sure all the wiring is still properly connected? On the board and the plug on the heatbed itself? Almost always the plug on the heatbed of the anet printers can burn out. May even cause a fire. Thats why a mosfet for the bed is one of the most recommended mods to do as fast as possible.

@Granny I did make sure the connections are all in place, but I might try directly soldering the wires to the heat bed, maybe that would help?

Soldering directly to the board is also recommended. But it is not 100% needed (if of course nothing is actually broken on the plug). Just make sure your solder is strong and a good connection is present. If everything is properly connected but its still not working, soldering it to the bed directly is a good next step.

@Granny So I will make that a goal for tonight, but what if that still does not work, the connection was fine on the mother board and everything... is it possible that the bed got burnt up or something since I have no mosfet yet?

Keep in mind that you do have a "chinese printer". That is not me saying that all chinese products are terrible and dangerous but like everyone knows, the quality is not amazing.
if it turns out that your bed is in fact broken. I suggest getting a anycubic Ultrabase with Heatbed. The prices range from 30 to 50 euro's but they are good and are super easy to install.

@Granny If it is indeed broken I will not hesitate to spend extra money to get a quality bed. But this still means I should get a mosfet if I am not mistaken.

Oh yeah mosfets are a must, no matter what hotbed you get.

@Granny Figured, will still order one then. Thank you, until later I don't think there is too much more to be said... I have to do some testing.

Yea, the mosfets I use for my AM8 are aroun dthe 3,50 euro mark. So defenitely not a pain in the wallet :)

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

@Granny I have modified the question, can you take a look and give input on my problem. Thank you!

This is a shot in the dark, but the vast majority of problems with a heating bed stopping to work is usually at the cables/connectors interface.
This is because in printers like the A6, the cable/connector is subject to constant mechanical stress, and - since metal fatigue is a thing - either the solder or the cable core cracks.
You should make good use of your tester to verify the integrity of the circuit in the bed and if it is not toasted you should be able to just repair the connection.
For many printers there exist "strain relief mods" to prevent this type of failure to happen.  The first one showing up for the A6 is a full chain, but normally is enough the have a small enclosure for the connector like this one for the CR-10.

I have seen those strain relief mods, but I had the cable in a way that I thought would keep the stress little to non on the connectors. I might have been wrong not printing the upgrad/mod. I might solder and if that fixes the problem then for sure will print off the upgrade/mod. And thank you for the links, I will be looking at them right away.

@Ljk2000 If your bed works again and you start printing this strain relief mod. A simple ziptie to one of the bolts that hold the bed down is a simple and quick temporary solution to keep it nice and safe.

@mac Could you look at my little update and perhaps modify your answer? I really need some help on this issue, thank you very much!

@Ljk2000 - I'd like to help, but I'm not very experienced when it comes to the electronics, the only thing I can think of is checking if your MB is equipped with a fuse for the heating circuit,, and checking that's not blown...

@mac Understandable. I did not see a fuse though, never looked for one.

The bed stopped working yesterday. I used the multimeter on the bed plug. The bed heater reads 1.7-1.8 Ohm.
There was no 12 V supplied from the mainboard and I read its terminals. There were 12 V there. I tightened the screws and the plug received 12 V.
The bed heated for one print. Today I repeated the troubleshooting and found that the bed plug still had 12 V. When I pulled it, the Red terminal was burnt and melted into the plug. After cleaning it by inserting and removing it several times, the bed started working again. The Red and Black wires are hot to touch though.
This is the troubleshooting procedure one should follow. What remains to be confirmed is whether the resistance of the bed heater is correct; 1.8 Ohm at 12 V is about 80 W. Sounds about right, so the wires should not overheat.
I suspected a possibility of the shorting to the aluminum bed, but then the bed would be heated only in some areas, but mine is heated evenly across the entire surface area.
Edit: For now I ended up cutting the Red wire's terminal from the plug and soldering the wire directly to the bed. I might order the new bed harness from Anet, or not.

i suspect the plug to be unerengineered.

I agree. The plug uses 1x hot and 1x ground clamp while the bed has 2x each. It should be trivial to add wires between the mainboard and the bed either by adding terminals to the plug, or soldering wires directly to the bed.

authors: عصام الصاروخ المحمدي


text:
Belt Tensioning
I have printed off some upgrades for my Anet A6 for tensioning the belt on the Y and X axis. I was wondering how much deflection the belt should have. I would think being to tight will stress the machine.

It should be tight but not to tight. If you overtighten your belts it can do more wrong than good. Also if you are using a acrylic frame of some sort, can cause the frame to flex and bend. This may cause it to snap further into the future. As for the perfect amount of tension, i could not tell you. use common sense whilst feeling the tightness of the belt. It should be tight enough so its not sloppy but lose enough that it can still move up and down when you push on it.

@Granny is there a good way to tell how much tension would be perfect? I press on the belt and I am think maybe a 1/2" of deflection is good... maybe?

I edited my comment just after you made the above comment. Please read what I have written over there :)

@Granny Sounds fairly easy, I just don't want to go to tight, but I don't want that it to loose, but now that I have gotten this upgrade set in place I am getting more circles than ovals :), thank you for the comment.

I wanted to know the proper deflection I should have on the belt. What I have read is for every inch of belt (25.4mm) it should deflect 1/64 of a inch (.4mm).
I found this information on this Website.


text:
Spiky hotend and bed temps
I recently rebuilt my A8 printer to have a metal frame and replaced the board with a GT2560 reva+. I'm having problems with the temp readings from both my hotend and hotbed. Using marlin 1.1x and Its possible I have something configured incorrectly. I can get successful prints with good quality but sometimes I get thermal runaway during a print.
Both cold and at temp (200c) have fairly large temp spikes. I didn't have this problem with my old board. I had much smoother temp curves. I'm using the default PID values for Ultimaker Kp 22.2, Ki 1.08, Kd 144.
I have tried to use PID autotune but get drastically different values every time I run it and using the results gave worse results (sometimes giving a heating error during the autotune). I checked all the wiring and nothing looks frayed or damaged.
First pic is cold temps. Second is trying to do a PID tune. Third and fourth are during a print.

Are you sure the fourth is during a print? Looks like PID auto tune to me.

I had a similar problem and there could be three reasons(if the connections are ok):

thin wires to the hotend
one of the MOSFETs was fried
the termal sensor wasn't good enough insert into the hotend

Try to measure the hotend heating element voltage while printing.

One of the mosfets on the board was bad. Just replaced the board and the problem was solved.

This really looks like a bad connection, so try with your old board to see if the broken connection is on the board, or it's the temp sensor or the wires.
I had exactly this problem with a bad connection from the temp sensor.
If you didn't break anything, it's the board that's fried / badly connected.


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

Point a hair dryer at the underside of the bed :D

Most of the same reccomendations that apply for adhesion to a hot bed apply for a cold one.  The first ones to come to mind:

really dial in the nozzle height
make the first layer taller than the rest (e.g.: 0.2mm if the rest of your print is 0.1mm)
print the first layer very slowly
print the first layer at higher temperature
use a brim or a raft (on my first printer, that had no heated bed, rafts gave the least deformation)
turn off the part fan for the first layer
adapt your model to reduce twisting forces (relief cuts, print it in parts, choose orientation wisely, etc...)

If your slicer has this feature, you could also try to print with a shroud.

Note that modern Cura has a "brim gap" option that makes brim a lot less offensive. By leaving 0.1 mm or so between the model and the brim you make it removable without damage to the print.

Fresh 3M blue painter’s tape coated in a watered down solution of Elmer’s white glue works wonders - even when cold - for PLA.
The tape needs to be re-applied and coated for each print for it to really stick, but it beats every other print surface I have tested for PLA other than PEI @ 70 °C. I’m guessing it has something to do with microscopic surface fibers on the tape...
(I like to print PETG as well, and that sticks too well to PEI, so I use blue 3M tape for both.)

I print onto painters tape on my unheated bed... so yes, this works, but the gliue is overkill XD

I often eschew the glue if I’m printing a part with low risk of warping, but if I need the overkill for a higher-risk part (e.g. long narrow structural elements) then the glue can make the difference between low-warp, and no-warp.


text:
Regular over-extrusion..?
Can anyone explain to me why I'm getting regular over-extrusion patterns on this extrusion calibration cube?
Just upgraded the extruder from stock to Flexion HT on my Balco Touch (Wanhao i3 plus) and now I'm getting a strange pattern on my prints.
The photos below show me trying to calibrate the extrusion multiplier after completing the extruder install.  The first is with a factor of 1 and the second with an adjusted factor of 0.86 (which I suspect is the reason for the change in pattern?).
I guess this is some kind of mechanical issue causing the over-extrusion?  Any ideas?

Note: during the second print (below) I was playing with the Flexion extruder's Cam set screw hence why it stopped extruding all together.  I tried it set tight and loose and other than when really tight and stopping the extrusion there was no real difference in the pattern when extruding.

Help..!

Mine is a shot in the dark, but the fact the overextrusion is so regular let me think it is due to something rotating going around in cycles.
The fact that the pattern changes with the flow parameter make me think the culprit is the stepper motor pushing the filament (as different flow means different number of rotations for the same lenght of printed wall).
A possibility could be an irregularity in the cobbed wheel biting it the filament: a longer tooth would push more filament into the hot end, for example.
Another cause could be a problem in the actual stepper motor, in which a failure in the coils causes it to move to steps instead of one, at some point.
There are possibly other suspects in firmware settings and stepper dirivers, but that's not the area of 3D printing I am most expert in.
Much more unlikely, it could be a defect in the filament, but that's easy to test: just swap it for another one!

Hmm, makes sense to me.  I've been in a support call with Flexion and they've suggested it could be a problem with the drive gear as well.  They're sending a new one to see if that fixes it..  Will update when I learn more.  Thanks

@Drammy - so?  How did it go? did the new drive gear fixed the issue?

Its been a bit of a nightmare tbh.  So it wasn't the gear extruder as the replacement did the same so next I went to replace the stepper motor as the driver is part of the board so not easily replaced.  I did a noob thing (all this is new to me) and must have altered the motor connection whilst it was live and blew the stepper driver (yeah, I know!).  So I've now just taken delivery of a Duet Wifi and am looking to replace the main board.  So a costly lesson learnt but hopefully we're on the right tracks now...

@Drammy - ouch... sorry to hear!  Hopefully your question will helps other not making the same mistake! :-/


text:
Mending filament?
While I don't think this is easily possible I am wondering if it can be done. So my spool of filament had a tangle and got pulled into the printer head. Some got melted together and after cutting I have a few strands. Would it be possible to mend the ends together to make one continuous strand instead of many small strand?

How much are we talking about? A 1 kilo 1,75mm spool holds around 333 meters, is it really worth it? Interesting question though for other uses.

@Valmond No particular amount, size, or material. I am asking more in a general stand point. But knowing there is a way I might gather the little pieces I have left from spools and mend them together, I like to waste as little as possible after all.

Sure, but you need to be careful not to have wide or narrow spots. A fixture for this is probably better than freehand welding.
See some ideas for a homemade fuser at https://rigid.ink/blogs/news/how-to-join-or-fuse-filament-together

That is actually really neat, I will have to give it a try! Thank you

As @davo says in his answer, this can be done rather easily, but the main problem with this kind of approach is reliability of the joint: sure, it must last only a short time, but during that time it will have to survive bending through your bowden tube (if applicable) and withstanding the grinding of the hobbed gear pushing it through the extruder.
I personally only used the PTFE method (plus heat gun), which is substantially identical to the tinfoil one outlined in the link provided by @davo but here's a couple of observations:

Freshly cut filament seem to work best.  I guess this is because there is less chances for contaminants like dust, skin oil etc... to find their way to the surfaces you are trying to bond.
I had no problem melting together PLAs of different brands.
You may have to tune the flow "on the fly" via the knob on the printer to accommodate for different diameters between the two spools you spliced (not applicable to your specific case of "plastic surgery" (pun intended!) on the same spool.
I find the bond works best if the two filaments are cut at an angle (so that the actual bonding surface is larger)
A light sanding to smooth out any seam and reduce the diameter of melted part a bit is in order


text:
Has anyone encountered this type of strange print patterns?
I am noticing strange print patterns ever since I upgraded to the Prusa multi material print head.  The patterns are consistent printing upwards but inconsistent amongst each face.

I am using original Prusa PLA filament, and have tried to different extruder temperature settings (200C, 205C, 210C, and 215C) but they all have similar patterns.  A different color and roll of Prusa filament is doing the same thing.
Any ideas or suggestions as to what to check next?  Thanks for any input!

Your pictures are no longer available.

The photos have disappeared again. Try posting them using the image button in the editor rather than hosting them externally (on dropbox, etc.)

It is always very difficult to debug a printer remotely, but here's my best shot.  I may be totally wrong though!
Zooming-in your picture seems to show like little bumps (inwards or outwards) that offset the extrusion in the XY plane.

The fact the bumps occur on both the X and Y axis, and both inwards and outwards, and that the patterns are not fully regular make me think the problem could be as simple as the new printing head having some play, and some combination of forces waking bumping it momentarily off its intended position.

Any ideas or suggestions as to what to check next?

Check for play.
Play which is due to a static feature (like a loose bolt, a clamp not holding firmly enugh or a cracked heat break) can be usually be detected with the printer switched off, by holding the nozzle between your fingers and shacking it gently.
Play that is dynamic in nature (for example a roller with an irregular diameter or screwed parts becoming loose only when hot) can be more tricky to detect.  The procedure is the same, but tou may have to heat the extruder (and use gloves, doh!) or to repeat it at different positions on the X and Y axis.


text:
Printing with HDPE plastic
Just out of curiosity is it possible to print with HDPE?
Would it be easy or hard?
I know they don't make HDPE filament* but I know people with a filament extruder could make some HDPE because it is a common plastic, which means it can be given a second use or something.
*To my knowledge

It can be done, although PE is not the best material to 3D print, as it has very low melting point (HDPE is just over 100°C), it is unpleasantly waxy to the touch and needs specialised paints and glues.
I never tried myself, but I know the RecycleBot is supposed to be able to use PE waste to produce a filament.

does it warp easily like ABS?

@Ljk2000 - According to https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/linear-expansion-coefficients-d_95.html PE has about twice the thermal expansion of ABS, but since the delta between extrusion and room temperatures is half of that of ABS, my educated guess is that it will probably behave similarly.

That is good to know. I have never printed with ABS so to print with HDPE would be a real learning curve. But since the temperature is so low I am sure it would be easier to keep the area warm enough while it is printing.


text:
Tuning line width and flow compensation in Cura
I'm currently in the process of fine-tuning my cheap CTC i3 clone. I'm using Cura 3.1 for slicing.
After calibrating the extruder steps, I wanted to optimize the line width and flow compensation parameters. I am using a 0.4 mm nozzle and therefore set the line width parameter to 0.4 mm in Cura. I then printed a cube with 0% infill, 1 wall line and no top layers (basically an open cube with 4 bottom layers). The wall width I measured on the printed result is 0.52 mm. To correct for the difference I set the flow compensation to 80% and repeated the print. The wall width I got from this was 0.45 mm, which is much better than before. There is only one problem: the parallel lines in the four bottom layers do not touch, so the print is not watertight. Up to now I assumed that Cura would calculate the distance between the lines from the line width setting. So with 0.45 mm lines and line width set to 0.4 mm there should even be some overlap.
Why am I seeing this effect? Am I getting something fundamentally wrong here?

Did you get to the bottom of this? I'm having the same issues and I have your same questions. :D

That is very bizarre.  Since GCODE describe each movement of the printing head (so, the printer does not get to decide anything in terms of printing strategy, it just executes), I can only see three possibilities that would explain what's going on.
The print is being scaled up at printer level.  This could for example be due to your firmware having your steppers improperly calibrated and moving them too much for a given unit of measure (say you say 1mm, they move 1.5mm instead).  This is easy to check: if this is the case, your cube will be scaled up (so - using the example above - if your cube is 10x10x10 it will come out 15x15x15).
You are printing with a raft.  Then there is no problem with your set-up, the first layer(s) of a raft are not solid, but intentionally "grated".  Check your settings to verify.
Cura is producing the "wrong" gcode.  This could be really wrong (as in "you found a bug", in which case you should report it on their github), or just look wrong (as in "you found a weird combination of setting producing that gcode", in which case you should reset the settings to their default and see the problem disappear).  Either way, if the gcode is "wrong", you should notice the gaps in the gcode preview mode in Cura.

Hm. I can rule out #1 (the steps/mm are calibrated) and #2. To check #3, I sliced the same object in slic3r with settings comparable to those in Cura. The print came out with 0.40 mm walls (nice), but also here, the lines in the bottom layers do not touch...

@SvenFestersen - so you are positive the dimension of the final cube are the same of the model?  If that's the case, I'm puzzled.

yes, the edges of the cube (designed 25x25x25 mm) are 24.9+/-0.05 mm. Even more interesting is the fact that i was able to pull one line from the bottom layer and measure its width: 0.45 mm. The next thing I'm going to try is reducing the first layer height a bit to spread the first layer lines.

It's impossible to get a true measure with  calipers because of the bumps from layer lines. The printer/slicer is working on an average of the peaks and troughs but the calipers only measures the peaks. Thus, after measuring and compensating, you told it to under-extrude and it did.

This is probably the closest answer.  Your measurement will not be the width of the line, but the distance between the greatest outliers in either direction.  You are getting 30 microns of deviation in each direction, which is not unheard of.  When you pulled one line away and measured that, you eliminated the deviation.

Yes, I suspect OP has significant Z-wobble or other issues making the line position deviation a significant factor in the effective line width. You should never need a flow correction as severe as -20% to get correct width, assuming the extrusion length was already calibrated. Typically it's more like -5%.

Cura does not adjust line width to account for lower flow (aka extrusion multiplier), they are independent settings. Therefore, if you have to reduce extrusion to get the correct wall thickness, then as you said, the lines may not be close enough together to fuse properly and you'll have a weak part. Try reducing the line width. First though, I would take the below troubleshooting steps:

Calibrate e-steps in firmware
Calibrate the actual diameter of the filament you're using
Calibrate flow for the correct wall thickness
Adjust line width in Cura if needed to get proper fusing

Lastly you might want to check for a partial nozzle clog which can cause under-extrusion, though that is usually not consistent

I'm not clear what you're claiming they're doing wrong. Lines requested to have 0.4 mm width should be (and are) printed with their centers having exactly 0.4 mm between them, independent of flow setting. Changing flow should not (and does not) change anything about how the lines are positioned.

True, it's not really a problem, the functionality just works differently than expected. It makes sense that flow could be set independently from line width. I have edited my response accordingly


text:
How can I get PLA or PETG to stick to a glass bed permanently without adhesives?
3D printing gurus,
I've read on several forums that people have had issues with printing with PETG or even PLA on glass and it sticks so well to the glass that chunks of glass rip off due to thermal stresses from the glass/plastic bond thermally contracting at different amounts.
I'm looking for a way to actually increase the adhesion to that point (or beyond) so that I could get a watertight seal on a plastic to glass interface. A lot of the forums mention that these problems occur when the extruder head is too close to the glass build plate and thus "bonds" the plastic to the glass somehow. Is this the case or are there other methods (with just the filament and the glass) that could make this happen?

I see you are a new user around here, so I hope you don't mind if I bring to your attention that you should upvote any answer that helped you along the way, eventually accepting the one that was closer to solve your problem or - in case none of the answers made it for you - write your own answer and accept it (so that others will be able to benefit from it when searching). :)

I am having a similar problem- need to make sure that the print sticks to the glass with a water tight seal. Could you share what worked best for you in the end?

Have you found and fixed the problem? If so, has the answer below led you to the solution? Please vote to accept the answer so this question is not bumped up once in a while and can be removed from the unanswered question list. You may even add your own solution and accept that after 48 hours! If you have not been able to address the problem please update your question.

There are seven factors that I can think of, that contribute to the adhesion of the first layer onto bare glass:

glass cleanliness: dish soap and hot water, dried by patting down with quality kitchen paper is what seems to work best for me.  Beware of fingerprints.
glass roughness: a common way to increase adhesion to glass is to rough-up its surface by scratching with some fine sandpaper.  This works best if you take care of sanding in multiple directions (so that you have grooves crossing each other).  I suppose an experiment you could try is printing on frosted glass (the side that has been sandblasted or etched of course).
tuning of the bed: your bed should be super-flat and perfectly leveled.  Use an indicator gauge if you can.
filament chemistry: that is not only to say that certain plastics, like PLA, stick better than others, but also to say that certain brands work better than others (as the additives each manufacturer adds to the plastic influence how the strength of the interface with glass).
printer settings: typically a slow speed, no active cooling and a bit of overextrusion work best.
area of the interface: the larger the area of the interface, the better.  But also: for large uninterrupted interfaces, problems with curling begin to appear.
temperature: each filament has it's own sweet spot, but typically some heat make prints stick better.  However this is true until the print is in progress, once the print is done and the printing bed cools, prints tend to separate by themselves, so in your case you may want to print with a cold bed (which is totally feasible with PLA).

All that said, this would not be a complete answer without a strong warning: any functional part which integrity depends on this kind of adhesion is bound to catastrophically fail very quickly, if working at all.
For one this "assembly" would be extremely susceptible to change in temperature.  While I read too of broken glass due to too good bonding, I only recall this having happened to people using some sort of substance on the glass.  Usually the differential in shrinkage is exactly what makes the print come off the glass (a common tip for stuck prints is to put them in a freezer).
Secondly, as soon as some air (or other fluid) will begin seeping between glass and plastic, it will take very little for it to separate the two completely.  It's a bit like using a crowbar: as soon as there is a crack you can stick the tip in and use for leverage, it is very easy to pry things open.
Finally, be aware that managing to print watertight shapes with FDM printers is relatively difficult.  You can help your luck by extruding at slightly higher temperature than required.
It's difficult to advise on alternatives solutions without knowing what you are trying to achieve, but I would be very surprised if there was not a better alternative. :)
EDIT: the "nozzle too close to the bed" is the wrong way to achieve what you factually achieve with setting the flow rate so as to overextrude during the first layer: you want to increase the pressure of the molten plastic beyond what you normally would do so as to really "squish" it on the glass.

Those are very good points. My goal is to 3D print a microfluidic chamber on glass. Basically this, but 3D printed with a glass slide on one side: https://www.elveflow.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Microfluidic-foundries-short.jpg
I considered 3D printing a mask, then spraying with hair spray, removing the mask, and printing on top of the unmasked portion, but that's just time consuming so I'd rather not. (Note: I know for a fact that this method works)
To prevent the fluid from opening the chamber, I thought I'd add some nail polish or glue to the outside edges to compensate.

I'm not sure I understood the technology your are trying to emulate, but I would say that at that scale, you actually have some chance of succeeding as - relative to the contact surface - the entire print will be tiny.  Again... not sure I understood how you want to build the chamber in its entirety, but from the pic it looks like you could get away with a single layer, which would greatly improve the chances of water tightness.

Exactly. Basically I want to print a single or maybe two layers onto glass. To seal the top I use kapton tape or cellulose tape with the back of an eraser and honestly, that part works great. If you do it correctly you can even print on top to seal the kapton tape inbetween layers of a print so that it becomes a monolithic chip. (It's basically just a small channel on a microscope slide that you can flow liquid through for scientific evaluation. Think glucose meter tests or pregnancy tests, that's essentially what this is.

Additional comments: A) Layers can be as high as ~70% of the nozzle diameter, you may therefore prefer switching to a larger nozzle rather than printing 2 layers.  B) A technique used for finishing is heating a glass to 200°C and squishing it on the top of the print.  Maybe it could work as a more durable replacement for kapton tape?  C) Probably you know this already, but beware FDM prints are porous and a perfect breeding ground for micro-organisms. Also, you may consider using a steel nozzle to prevent lead from the brass leaking into the plastic, if toxicity is a thing in your application.

I'm going to use these as low pressure (syringe pump) disposable flow cells and as for microorganism growth, I actually want that, so yea... haha. The lead leaching is a good point. As for the top of the print, I'll keep that in mind, but for my application I actually need a plastic-like material for the top. A glass top actually won't work because it will reflect the acoustic signal that I plan on getting using this. (It's complicated but it involves lasers and sound and glass reflects a lot of sound, etc.)

@BenjaminSamuelGoldschmidt - I could think of another tip: roughing-up the surface. I edited the answer with more details.

Yea, I would do the roughness part but once again that requires a multi-step process. I can't really use totally frosted glass as that would defeat the purpose of the microfluidic aspect, etc. I thought about sandblasting, but I don't know of any small sandblasting cabinets/methods that wouldn't be rather intrusive in my current lab.
One thing I considered was using poly-l-lysine coated glass to bind the PLA to the glass, but I haven't tried it yet so we'll have to see if that works.


text:
3DTouch triggers way too close
Today I finished building and adjusting a Prusa-Clone printer. The brain is a 32-bit board with Smoothieware on in. To run the auto bed leveling routine I installed a 3DTouch (BLTouch clone, sorry low on cash).
After many headaches, I got everything working fine and I'm happy with the result. Except for one thing...
When the 3DTouch is probing, it is triggered when the nozzle is about 1 mm from the bed. If I set the probe higher, the nozzle crashes onto the bed. If I set the probe lower, the probe would be on the same level of the nozzle, not so good for print time.
Anyone with similar experience or how to sole it?

So guessing from your story, you are running Marlin? Have you changed the Z-offset on the printer itself?

No, actually I'm not. I'm running on a Smoothieware powered board (no flag found about that). The question is not about the software, which I know how to manipulate with the offsets, but regarding the hardware, the 3DTouch (also no flag)

I installed a 3D touch yesterday on my Anet A8 and i had 0 problems setting it up. Are you sure you wired it correctly? And also set it up correctly in the firmware? How are you sure its not firmware related?

The probe works ok and it does what it's supposed to do, it justs triggers way too late. The pin has to be introduced quite a bit before it triggers.

Probably something wrong with the probe itself then. Cause i have a clone aswell and it touches very lightly.

That it triggers when the nozzle is about 1 mm from the build plate is how it is supposed to work. The installation manual describes how to setup the sensor.

The mount needs to be adjustable so that the distance between the bottom of the sensor (not the pin) needs to be 8.3mm above the tip of the nozzle.

When taking the above distance into account, the probe should be hitting the build plate first when it is extended. When the probe triggers, it triggers at a certain distance from the nozzle. It is this distance that you need to add as an offset so that the printer knows where the actual Z=0 is. To determine the offset, you home the printer, make sure the Z-offset is zero (with command M851 Z0), then lower the head until a piece of paper gives a little drag when pulled under the nozzle. From the display you can read the offset, e.g. -1.4. With command M851 Z-1.4 you set the offset between level and trigger point. Use M500 to store the new settings.

This is good advice. I'll add that I have found that I get better results if I do a M851 Z0 to clear the previous offset before I start the homing process. Otherwise, you have to do some math. But I have found that the math never results in an accurate offset. Starting from M851 Z0 always does. I even bought a feeler gauge because I thought variability in paper thickness might be throwing me off. Oh yeah, make sure you add in the thickness of your paper/gauge. Teaching Tech has a great video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BV11-VOQjMc

This is the best Z offset calibration video in my opinion because they do everything in pronterface making it printer/firmware universal. https://youtu.be/y_1Kg45APko?t=66

@BrunoBronosky Only purists take the paper thickness into account, you generally shouldn't or have a need to do that.

Oscar, in most slicers if you have a layer height of 0.2, the first layer height is 0.3. Paper is about 0.2 also. So, if you don't account for the paper, you are getting a first layer of 0.5 (or 166%) which is pretty excessive. If you are not extruding above 100% to compensate for that, you are likely to have adhesion problems.

@BrunoBronosky Paper thickness is closer to 0.05-0.1 mm, so that is pretty neglectable, if you use 0.2 mm thick paper or a thick feeler gauge I can imagine you might want to compensate, but standard copy paper is not that thick. If you are a purist, compensate, if not don't. I think about 99.5 % of the people with printers don't compensate for the paper thickness. In all my years I've never done this, besides, I never use a 0.3 mm first layer, even not with PETG and never have adhesion problems. You also forget that default extrusion for the first layer is always out of the box more than 100%.

@0scar that would explain how I gouged my bed when I was using paper! I wish I knew which YT video I watched so I could comment on it. #sigh