text:
Do more retracts lead to extruder jams
This print failed a couple of hours in. I was wondering if the nature of the print surface, with lots of retracts (similarly the previous print which was OK) might have contributed to the clog, or if it's just bad luck? To be clear, the surface has lots of short dead-end, not just a wiggly perimeter.

The filament seemed to have stopped moving, and was cut through by the drive gear.
This was a genuine Titan Aero extruder, 0.4mm nozzle, 215C (on an Anet a8 printer)

Reading your question it's not clear to me if you are referring to filament retraction (which is a configurable setting) or surface recesses which seems what you are referring to when writing:

the nature of the print surface, with lots of retracts

If it is the latter, then the answer is "no".  The amount of complexity of the surface of the model does not correlate directly to the possibility of the printer head clogging.
If it is the former, then the answer is "possibly".  It is in fact not so much the amount of retracts that affects the likelihood of a clog but rather their speed and lenght.  If you retract too quickly and too much filament, you risk to have molten plastic being "sucked" into the cold end, solidify, and act as a glue, blocking the filament in place.
This is especially true for all-metal print heads like titan aero, as plastic sticks a lot better to metal than to PTFE.
However, with a properly calibrated retraction, you shouldn't experience problems regardless of how many times / how often you retract the filament.
In general, it is a common misconception that retraction should work as a plunger, actively sucking in plastic that would otherwise ooze out of the nozzle.  However all you need is to just release the pressure within the melting chamber, and in a direct drive (i.e.: non-bowden) extruder, this requires a very minimal retraction.
Finally: what material are you printing in?  The picture shows a lot of oozing for being PLA. If you are using a flexible material like nylon or ninjaflex, you should probably just let retraction alone: the hysteresis in such materials is very high, and retraction often does not work predictably.  If it is PLA, I would try to increase the movement and retraction speed, and probably lower the temperature 10 or 15 degrees.  As for the retraction lenght, I don't own a titan, but I would expect the correct amount to be somewhere between 0.5mm and 2mm.

Retract is 1.8mm, and yes, I did increase it from 0.8 because of stringing. Temperature may be the clue.

In addition to the retraction distance, in the case of this model, I was seeing some places where there were a lot of very close retractions. I think these were increasing the risk of damaged filament, so I reduced the 'maximum retraction count' which at 50 over a 5mm length seemed fairly high.


text:
Finding a reputable seller for CR-10S
After doing a lot of research, I've decided I want to purchase a Creality CR-10S as my first 3D printer. I'm trying to locate a reputable, local seller. Other than Amazon, which seems to have a bit of a mark-up on price, I'm finding several websites that seem to be located outside of the US. Can anyone direct me to a seller located in the US?

Sorry, this sort of question is not a good fit for this site, there are too many variables, and the answer will be biased by people's individual experience.

@SeanHoulihane - in general I would agree that this type of question is not a good fit. In this specific case the question is "Can anyone direct me to a seller located in the US?". The only variable is geographical location, and is independent from individual experience, it's a matter of location on the surface of the planet. :)

when I ordered mine from a site that rhymes with rangcud, they actually had a US warehouse origin and it got here in a few days...

"Shopping Questions" are out of scope on Stack Exchange because its primary intent is to build up a database of information that can referred to by others that have the same question.  Questions that have answers that change over time are not a good fit.

This might be "shopping", or it might be supply chain.  Finding a distributor for particular components is a source of frustration for people not familiar with the distributors.  As a newbie engineer, and everything else as one point, finding sources was often the hardest step in a project.  I would also note that this question is not formed as an opinion question.  The OP isn't asking for "the best" or "the cheapest", but instead is seeking a US source.  As to changing with time, yes, distributors change, but good ones change slowly.

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because we don't do Shop recommendations.

I’ve bought two printers (CR-10S and Ender 2)from Tiny Machines in Houston Texas.  They unbox them from China and assemble them and make a test print.  You get a checklist of the tests performed.  They will also flash a bootloader and updated Marlin for $10.
Yeah, you’ll pay more but if you spend any time in printer forums you’ll hear lots of complaining about missing/broken parts or DOA units.
They also stock spare parts here in the US.
Good luck to you!

I am afraid unless you are available to accept the mark-up, you won't find a reputable seller other than in mainland China.  The entire business model of Creality is "cheap-cheap-cheap B2C" and any step you add to the supply chain (like a reseller) will be:

An added cost that will be reflected on the final price you pay
A reseller-based initiative, meaning that it won't be part of a "creality global distribution network", but the project of that local entreprenour.

That said, I read in a couple of places that tiny machines (Houston, Texas) does a good job by testing each unit prior to shipping, and has similar lead times than good sellers from China (a couple of weeks).
Please note I am not affiliated with them in any way.  For that matters, I don't even leave in North America nor have purchased anything from them.

Thank you for the response. I continued to do research after I posted last night and I think I had my information backwards. I thought what I was seeing was a bunch of Chinese knock-offs and lots of varying prices with no understanding of who the actual manufacturer was. My understanding at this point is the company is Chinese and the suppliers outside of China are resellers. The mark-ups make more sense and I don't mind buying directly from China but will probably way delivery time with cost.

My friend found an Ender 3, basically the same thing as a cr-10, at Best Buy. I wouldn't be surprised if you came across a cr-10s there as well. Keep in mind if you are going to buy one, to also get a warranty as printers can come damaged and break later. It is better to be safe rather than sorry.

source: Stack Exchange

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

authors: พิเชษฐ์ อาจรักษา

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

sort: votes


text:
Prusa I3 - Burn marks on print
This is an issue that's started happening recently. This is a Prusa I3 using a 1.75mm pla filament
The settings for this print are as follows
Layer height: 0.2mm
Line width: 0.4
Infill: 60%
Infill pattern: Triangles
Nozzle temp: 190C
Plate temp: 60C
Retraction distance: 8.5mm
Retraction speed: 60mm/s
Print speed: 50mm/s
Cooling fan speed: 20%

This happened on a previous print, but not as much. The only difference is the other print was printed 10mm/s faster. I'm thinking it has to do with too much time in a certain area since it seems to happen in pretty small areas that don't required infill and print as two walls back to back

What's exactly the issue?  Is the brown spots on the print?  Are they burned plastic or some sort of extraneus material?

I have seen this after I reassemble the extruder heat block and then leave it too loose during the print.
Is your extruder above the nozzle coated in a brown or black film?
What happens is the liquid plastic oozes through the loose connection, travels around the outside of the block, where it is heated longer and hotter than normal turning it black/brown. Then it drips, or flakes, into the print where it is spread around giving it a diffused look that you see.
The fix is to tighten the heating block. Do this while it is at operating temperature (be careful!) because it fits differently when cold.
Another cause: I made a tiny sharpie mark on my filament.  I did not realize how concentrated it would come out in the print.  Perhaps you have ink or adhesive or something on your filament that you can't see that turns brown when heated.

it was coated in black film. my intuition proved correct then, cause this morning i realized there was an excess pouring onto the top of the block, so i replaced the throat and tightened it as tight as possible with the heat on. thanks for the detailed answer

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


text:
Lead screws - M8 instead of M5?
I am building a Prusa i3 MK2S (Dolly). I find it very difficult to find M5 rods for the Z axis, I have an M8 lead screw with 8 mm lead, So I thought since M8 is widely available online I could just use them instead of M5. What do you think about it? What should I keep in mind?

as long as you match the parts that is ok.
The m8 rod will give you more stiffness and will be harder to bend.
As the result, you will have to calibrate the steps/mm settings in the firmware.

Do I need modified dolly parts for m8 lead screw or the original dolly or standard parts would work with them????

Amazon has a few hundred M5 rods listed for sale, so I don't know where or what you've been looking through.
If you change the lead screw, you'll have to change the threaded parts on the gantry assembly to match.
More important, you'll have to adjust the Z-drive "steps/mm" setting to match the 8mm lead.  (with thanks to Professor for pointing out my error)

there is no need to change g-code. There is a need to update steps/mm settings

"Amazon has a few hundred M5 rods listed for sale, so I don't know where or what you've been looking through"
Hi Carl Witthoft, I am from India and Amazon.in doesn't sell the rods much, its hard to find one good seller.

You can use the screws and rods you can find easily, of course some dimensions will change and is needed to adjust parameters.
I used in my first 3D printer and standard screw of 9.5mm (3/8) the main problem was the coupling available in Mexico that werer none on that time.
You can buy the bearings on Ali Express, they can send from there to Mexico, I guess they can deliver on your country.
The bearings has these sizes:
where is Number ID, inner diameter, outter diameter, width.
608ZZ 8x22x7
607ZZ 7x19x6
6000  10x26x8

Don't try to use 6000 :D is a little complicated to reduce the size for a proper coupling if you don't have a lathe. My 3rd Printer will use this kind of thread because is easily to find with no warpage and now I will use a lathe to reduce the coupling area to 8mm or 5mm since I have on hand the couplers.

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


text:
ooze shield vs priming tower, do you need both?
I've been experimenting with two color prints. In my first test, I enabled a priming tower and the print came out OK, but there was definitely some oozing from the non-active head and left a lot of blemishes on the print.
I'm trying another print now and I also enabled an ooze shield.
This got me to thinking, if you are going to print an ooze shield, do you need a priming tower?
I'm using a lulzbot Taz6 with the dual extruder v3

I have the same printer you do.  I recall that the ooze shield is printed in alternating layers; first from E0 and then the next layer from E1.  But on a given layer, I don't think that there is a guarantee that the ooze shield will be printed in the filament about to be laid down for the part of the layer.  (But I might be wrong on this.)  But when it comes time to print the ooze shield, what will happen if the filament has already drizzled out during the print of the last layer?  The first part of that ooze shield won't get printed properly and might end up causing a print failure.
As a separate issue, I found that an ooze shield is only helpful if the overall XY diameter of the print is not too great.  This is because it only helps when the print head crosses the perimeter.  If the print head spends a fair amount of time inside the perimeter, then the idle head can still continue to ooze out unwanted filament.
So for many of my prints, I started using the priming tower, but skipping the ooze shield.

authors: نواف الشمراني


text:
Hall Sensor Diagnostic
I'm looking for some help with an ID3 Glacier Point 3D printer that I currently use. The hall sensors on one end of the X and Y axes have stopped functioning. I need to diagnose and confirm that the hall sensors are faulty before I can replace them (work stipulation.) I'm wondering if anyone can point me in the direction of some diagnostic technique to detect faulty hall sensors? Google hasn't been much of an aid here, unfortunately.

A photo of the sensor might help. Does the firmware show any diagnostics for this sensor with the axis positioning information?

I am. I was able to isolate the bad sensor using a continuity test (simple, but I'm new to this.) Attached is the bad sensor that I took out. It's a long shot, but I don't suppose you'd know where I can find a replacement sensor?
https://imgur.com/a/Y5Oki

It's really pretty easy to diagnose a Hall effect sensor. If you plug the sensor into the board (so it has power), then wave a metal object (screwdriver tip should work nicely) very close to the head of the sensor, the light should go on if it's reading. If the light doesn't come on, there's an issue. An issue would most likely be the wiring. You may want to test the same sensor by plugging it into a known good port on your main board. Any of the axis stops should behave the same, but since it's both the x- and y-axis sensors which are not functioning, I'd try attaching them to the z-axis stop.

authors: Андрей Салей


text:
Seemingly random lines on the surface
I'm getting seemingly random lines scattered across the top surface of my prints:

Printer: Anycubic i3 mega
Slicer: Cura 3.2.1
Printer chosen in Cura: Prusa i3, Gcode flavor changed to RepRap
Cura Profile: Fine, "Outer before inner walls" enabled
What might be the reason?

Try turning off "Combing Mode" in Cura. I had the same issue. I turned off combing mode and the issue was gone. I do not understand why. The tool tips seem to point me in the other direction. So my advice can only be to give it a try.

Thanks to the answers of fred_dot_u and Sean Houlihane, I did some more research.
There are three features involved here:

Combing (follow the already printed path when travelling)
Retraction (pull back the filament while travelling)
Z-hop (move the nozzle up while travelling)

The relationship between those settings is like this:

Retraction is only done when not combing*
Z-hop is only done when retracting

Therefore to lift the nozzle when travelling, one must disable combing and enable retraction and z-hop. This prevents the nozzle from scratching the surface.
* it was deemed unnecessary, but that might change in a future version; there is also a plugin that changes this

This is the result of travel moves passing through/over the top surface. The combing setting can prevent this type of move (for walls, infill or top), and z-hop can avoid making any mark during these travels.
Both settings will affect speed. Z-hop will be active on every layer, for example.

z-hop is used only when transiting locations on a particular layer. If the print is mostly contiguous, as in the images provided, z-hop will be used only when needed. In the case of the photos, the lines represent when it is needed, very few times and with little affect on the speed of the print.

I would also subscribe to the notion that apart for uber-complex models, the speed penalty will be negligible.

@mac, for example the models I posted in my last question, where the texture means that no mitigation was needed. I also saw in my research that z-hop causes wear to the machine, but I'm undecided on that.

Our local library has a genuine Prusa i3 Mk2.5 that recently had this problem. Because of the number of fingers engaging such a system, it was not immediately discovered that a different profile had been selected in which the Z-hop was turned off.
Z-hop is a feature in which the nozzle lifts slightly (and is height-adjustable) as it moves from one portion of the print to another.
According to my brief research, Cura supports z-hop in the settings. Either it has to be activated or perhaps slightly increased. The aforementioned Prusa works great with 0.5 mm lift.

It seems like the issue may only be that your nozzle has developed a bit of oozing.  The g code likes to repeat the same patterns for at least a few layers every time it changes patterns and if it does the same pattern on the top 3-4 layers than by the time it reaches the last layer on the top that pattern will actually be the slightest bit raised above the rest of the layers because of the ooze building up along the same pattern for how many ever layers it followed the same pattern. Your nozzle is than rubbing on that raised pattern when it completes the last layer.  This explains the randomness like OP said because the g code may not repeat the same pattern for 3 or more layers at the surface but without reading the gcode it would seemingly be random when and where they occurred.  And truthfully if its a small oozing you could reprint this and it could be gone if you changed almost any setting in cura because the g code would be recalculated differently and new patterns would be chosen but so long as the new gcode did not have the same pattern repeat itself on the top 3 or so layers you would not have these raised patterns for the nozzle to rub on when finishing the top last layer.

I don't think the problem is what you think it is, but as a side note: it would be great if you could revisit your answer and use paragraphs, commas and other punctuation to make it more readable! :)

Okay @mac since the OP shows no pictures of a successful reprint.  I stand by what I said. If he chooses to change any settings and recalculates the g code he may not have these issues appear on this print because his issue is "oozing".  And as you so kindly pointed out my answer only has one real grammar mistake and I have fixed that but the 16 other mistakes are advanced issues and  I do not think they are of any concern for a reader.  I'm not aware of the advanced grammar mistakes in my answer.  Feel free to correct it however lets not spam this page anymore. pm is fine


text:
Adding a filament sensor
I have the Anet A6 and I was wondering if it is possible to add a filament run-out sensor. I would feel better having something to stop the filament before it runs through and I have to take apart the extruder.

what firmware do you have on your a6?

With marlin firmware:
source here: filiament sensor config
//#define FILAMENT_RUNOUT_SENSOR
#if ENABLED(FILAMENT_RUNOUT_SENSOR)
  #define FIL_RUNOUT_INVERTING false // set to true to invert the logic of the sensor.
  #define ENDSTOPPULLUP_FIL_RUNOUT // Uncomment to use internal pullup for filament runout pins if the sensor is defined.
  #define FILAMENT_RUNOUT_SCRIPT "M600"
#endif

With this feature, a mechanical or opto endstop switch is used to
  check for the presence of filament in the feeder (usually the switch
  is closed when filament is present). If the filament runs out, Marlin
  will run the specified GCode script (by default “M600”). RAMPS-based
  boards use SERVO3_PIN. For other boards you may need to define
  FIL_RUNOUT_PIN.

and this is a nice piece of hardware: run out sensor

Gorgeous!  i was going to suggest the disastrous panic-stop by having the runout switch kill main power.  That pretty much ruins the print in progress.  I"m off to see if my driver board has those pins available.

Great! Now I will design the sensor.


text:
What is the difference between STL and OBJ files and which one should I use?
One of the CAD programs I use is called TinkerCAD, which lets you export your design in either STL or OBJ form. What is the difference between these two file types? And which one is better to use?

STL is the de facto standard in consumer-grade 3D printing.  It is a bare-bone format that describes the shape of the object by defining the coordinates of all the vertices of all triangles that a surface may be subdivided into.
This means that in STL any curved surface is represented with an approximation of many very small faces.
OBJ is also somewhat common, but it was originally developed for computer graphics, not manufacturing, and as such is capaple to store information like the texture images to be applied to the surface, which are of no use in the 3D printing world.
In terms of geometry description, OBJ is more capable than STL, as it can describe "real" curves, without the need to approximate them to a series of polygons.  The benefit of this feature is however more theoretic than practical, as:

most entry-level CAD software don't make use of that feature and create a STL-equivalent OBJ file (so, still with polygons)
a typical STL model for 3D printing will have enough resolution to give the illusion of perfect curves (the same way a high-res screen gives the illusion of perfect curves, despite its pixels being arranged in a squared matrix),
the slicer/printer's firmware may themselves approximate an accurate curve to a series of segments

Short said, I would suggest you use STL unless you have a specific reason not to.
If you would find yourself in need to accurately describe curves I would rather use the STEP file format, as that has been specifically created for manufacturing, rather than "borrowed" from computer graphics.

Two important points regarding TinkerCad:

The OBJ file format,...is also gaining traction in the 3D printing industry as the industry moves towards full color printing.

STEP also supports "Constructive Solid Geometry" which primarily how TinkerCad works.

source: article on All3DP (thanks @tmartin )

@DavidLotts - Mmm... I think you misunderstood slightly either my answer either the article. :)  "Constructive Solid Geometry" is how all modern CAD software work and the sentence "the STEP file format has been specifically created for manufacturing" refers to that.  OBJ support colour, but let me state it again: it has not been designed for manufacturing and lack flexibility and features. For what I can see all people who have multi-material printers prefer the AMF format (which stands for "Additive Manufacturing Format", so specific for 3D printers).

@DavidLotts - Bottom-line.  Feel free to use whatever you prefer, but when it comes to geometry description OBJ does not offer any substantial advantage over other formats that are much more established (like SLT), and when it comes to extra features (materials colours) it falls short over other designed-for-manufacturing standards (like AMF, STEP). :)

I agree with all your points!  Mostly my comment was to add color since you did not mention it in your answer.  The OP asked about STL or OBJ only.  I don't know if Tinkercad can add texture/color information to OBJ -- but if you find a source, it might be a good addition to your already awesomely practical answer.

While the STL-format can only describe your object aproximatively by those well known triangles, OBJ-files can describe parts of your object parametrically by curves. This can lead to a higher precision and be a huge advance with regard to scalability.
Which data format to choose depends, as always, on the application and the processes it contains. E.g. if you want to print large objects, you might consider the OBJ-format if your slicer can translate it to usable g-code.
You might want to read this article on All3DP to get a brief overview.

+1 for the article link, detailed coverage and comparison of a whole bunch of formats.  Also, you omitted obj does color, which is becoming more important.

I would go even further. IMO texture images will get an asset, as first printers allready combine FDM with inkjet technologies.


text:
How to re-program Prusa firmware to accept a taller Z axis?
Machine specs: Prusa MK3, firmware version 3.1.2.
Facts: I have designed a new Z-axis frame for my printer, so I can print models up to 360mm high in stead of the standard 210mm.  The plan has worked and the printer is functioning normally with a new, taller z frame.
However... To calibrate, the Z lead screws carry the X carriage all the way up and bump it against the top frame mounts, to make sure the X carriage is level.    On the taller frame, the X carriage stops its ascent at 220mm and descends back toward the bed.  Because the X carriage goes up farther than it was 'supposed to' and didn't bump into anything, the calibration fails.  When the X carriage bumps into something at 210mm (like my fingers) and descends from the 'normal' frame height, the printer calibrates the bed levelling normally.
The Prusa MK3 is so 'smart', it still thinks the frame will only ever be 210mm high.  How do I tell it that when calibrating, the X axis must rise to 360mm instead of 210mm?  The calibration is an integral part of the firmware... is there any way I can edit it?
I've looked at the .hex firmware file, this is the first line of a huge text file -> :100000000C947D320C94AE320C94AE320C94AE3221  It means nothing to me, but I'm guessing there's a way.  After all, a cap height of 210mm had to be written in there somewhere to begin with...
Any suggestions would be appreciated,
fairfarren.

Interesting -- another case of "new fancy feature makes something else really difficult" .  My vanilla clone just does the usual HomeX,Y,Z and presumably will follow Z-height commands until I reach the moon.

@CarlWitthoft By default Marlin refuses to travel past axis limits (software endstops), so this is not just the fault of the fancy features.

A .hex file is of no use to you, because it consists of compiled firmware which is very difficult to edit. You need to go to Prusa's GitHub and download the source code. Then, find the header file for your model of printer, and change Z_max_pos to the correct value. Finally, you need to compile and upload the firmware to your printer following the build instructions (see README.md). You will need to have the Arduino IDE installed to do this.

Ok, thanks Tom.  I think this is the correct source code, from Prusa Github and titled for the MK3.  I will follow the rest of your suggestions presently.  Thanks for the help :)  https://github.com/prusa3d/Prusa-Firmware/blob/MK3/Firmware/variants/1_75mm_MK3-EINY03-E3Dv6full.h

FYI, Using Arduino IDE is optional, that is upon user choice, firmware (.hex file) upload could be done simply from PrusaSlicer.


text:
Extruder motor does not turn
When printing from Cura on my laptop via USB, my extruder motor does not turn to extrude filament. However, when I use the "move axis" command in the firmware (on the little screen on the printer), it seems to work fine, extruding plastic smoothly. The nozzle temperature is where it should be (230 degrees or so for ABS) while printing and I get no error messages in Cura.
What would cause the extruder to not function when printing even though it seems to be fine electrically, mechanically, and in firmware? Is there g-code from Cura that could be incorrect?
I'm not sure where to look for problems.
This is my first 3D printer. It is a Alunar M508 (a Prusa clone) that I got for free in a partially disassembled state. The firmware seemed to be screwed up when I first started using it. The firmware that came on the SD card with the printer would not compile in my Arduino software, so I used a Marlin firmware from here:
https://github.com/camalot/alunar-prusa-i3-marlin-i3-firmware
I had to make one change to the configuration file to reverse the X home direction, but otherwise I have not changed the firmware settings or anything. The new firmware does not recognize the SD card slot at all, but that's a different story.
I'm using Cura to print via USB. The printer is set up as a Prusa I3, using the "Marlin" GCode flavor. Nozzle size: .4mm, Compatible Material diameter: 1.75mm.
Start Gcode:
G21 ;metric values
G90 ;absolute positioning
M82 ;set extruder to absolute mode
M107 ;start with the fan off
G28 X0 Y0 ;move X/Y to min endstops
G28 Z0 ;move Z to min endstops
G1 Z15.0 F9000 ;move the platform down 15mm
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length
G1 F200 E3 ;extrude 3mm of feed stock
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length again
G1 F9000
;Put printing message on LCD screen
M117 Printing...

End Gcode:
M104 S0 ;extruder heater off
M140 S0 ;heated bed heater off (if you have it)
G91 ;relative positioning
G1 E-1 F300  ;retract the filament a bit before lifting the nozzle, to release some of the pressure
G1 Z+0.5 E-5 X-20 Y-20 F9000 ;move Z up a bit and retract filament even more
G28 X0 Y0 ;move X/Y to min endstops, so the head is out of the way
M84 ;steppers off
G90 ;absolute positioning

Edit to Add some Gcode from the beginning of the test print:
;LAYER_COUNT:127
;LAYER:0
M107
G0 F3600 X86.923 Y86.649 Z0.3
;TYPE:SKIRT
G1 F1800 X87.522 Y86.134 E0.03941
G1 X88.17 Y85.683 E0.0788
G1 X88.861 Y85.299 E0.11824
G1 X89.586 Y84.987 E0.15762
G1 X90.339 Y84.75 E0.197
G1 X91.113 Y84.591 E0.23642
G1 X91.898 Y84.51 E0.27579
G1 X92.3 Y84.5 E0.29586
G1 X117.7 Y84.5 E1.56307
G1 X118.489 Y84.54 E1.60248
G1 X119.269 Y84.659 E1.64185
G1 X120.034 Y84.857 E1.68127
G1 X120.774 Y85.131 E1.72064
G1 X121.483 Y85.479 E1.76004
G1 X122.154 Y85.897 E1.79948
G1 X122.778 Y86.38 E1.83885

do you have single extruder device?

Two things: what's in the body of your gcode file, where extrusion (motor drive) is turned on and off every time the extruder head "jumps" to a new position?   and, try loading same gcode onto a memory card and running directly off that, just incase something really goofy is going on with your usb connection.    Oh, and I do not know whether the change in firmware requires a corresponding config change in Cura.

@profesor79 Yes, it is a single extruder device.

@CarlWitthoft  I've added the beginning of the gcode for the print (the skirt, really) to my question. I don't know what it is supposed to look like. Unfortunately, the new firmware does not seem to recognize the memory card slot, so I can't print from a card right now.

if you are using merilin and uploading via arduino ide, uncoment '#define SDSUPPORT'  to get your sd card back.

Can  you describe what does work when you print?

Try this:  1. Reset the printer using the button or power on.   2 find in Cura or other app where you can send commands directly to the printer. (Cura:  printer control panel)  3 Manually send ONLY this G-Code, see if it extrudes:  M82 ;set extruder to absolute mode
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length
G1 F200 E20 ;extrude 20mm of feed stock

You guys are awesome. @profesor79 - The SD card menu is back! I haven't tried it yet, but thank you.
@DavidLotts - I can't find that in Cura, but I have Printrun/Pronterface and can send commands in that. It looks like the E values are inverted. G1 F200 E20 turns the motor but does not extrude. G1 F200 E-20 does extrude. So now I'm trying to figure out where in the Configuration.h I can reverse that.

Got it! It's extruding now. It's still uneven and messy, but I think I've got the weird part sorted out. Thank you all!

@DavidLotts - As your comment provided the solution, maybe you should posted it as an additional answer? It would make the question shown up in the search results better. Thanks.

It turns out the problem was a firmware issue. Using the gcode below (from David Lotts in the comments), I was able to determine that the extruder was running backwards. A flag in the firmware reversed it, solving the problem.
M82 ;set extruder to absolute mode
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length
G1 F200 E20 ;extrude 20mm of feed stock


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

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


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

Either the material is FDA-approved or it isn't.  Really no other metric matters.

@CarlWitthoft - It is not that simple: FDA approves load of stuff that in Europe is deemed unsafe, for example.

@mac  Europe is even more paranoid than the FDA?  oh, dear.

@CarlWitthoft - Paranoia doesn't play a role, but yes - in EU food safety standards are generally considered better. Most of it boils down to science playing a larger role here than commercial interests.  You can read more on: http://www.precautionaryprinciple.eu/

None that I know of, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. A real critical part of the question that's missed is implantable for what purpose? UHMWPE is  a good choice for some applications but you wouldn't want your femur made of it.  Biggest problem with anything being for implantation is sterilizing it and voids. Some medical grade implants have passed sterilization but then managed to cause an  immune system reaction despite the cells on the device being dead. Also voids are a pretty bad problem for FDM printers.

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

Yes. I have worked with people who have printed implants of PCL, loaded with antibiotics, for delivery at the infection site: https://www.google.com/search?q=pcl+medical+approval
Also look at PPSU: https://www.google.com/search?q=ppsu+medical+approval
And PEEK: https://www.google.com/search?q=peek+medical+approval
These are currently used for appliances; I'm not aware of them being used for implants yet.


text:
Understand what CR-10S fans are cooling
I am designing a fan mount for the CR-10S printer to hold the E3D All-metal v6 HotEnd and BLTouch sensor.
The CR-10S printer has two fans.
One on the front:

and another one on the right:

I need to know what the two fans are actually cooling in order to make a perfect mount.
When powered on, the front fan seems to be on 100 percent of the time. The right fan can only be on via gcode when printing.
I removed the fan mount to study it and it looks like the front fan is cooling the hotend heat sink.

The right fan is attached to the mount and there no hole there to let the air from the fan go through. It seems to be cooling the metal it is bolted to and that doesn't make sense.
Am I correct about the front fan? What's the right fan cooling?

is the part cooling fan output PWM or TTL.

@SergioDeJesus Part cooling fans are scheduled (can run at different speeds), so PWM

The function of the front fan is keeping the cold end well... cold. :)  It should be spinning as long as the printer is turned on.
The right fan is known as "part fan" and its function is to cool down the plastic that has been just extruded, the idea being to solidify it as soon as possible.  As you noticed it is controlled by the gcode and it can be turned on, off and even made spin at any speed in-between still and full throttle.  It normally stops spinning at the end of the print (with some plastic like ABS it may be set not to spin at all even during the print).
If you take a closer look at your CR-10, you will see that the receptacle the air is blown into by the part fan has no bottom: that slit is where the air passes through, before being deflected 90° towards the nozzle.
On the CR-10 the standard deflector for the part fan does not do a good job (the air is not  blown where it should) and replacing it with a custom part is one of the most common upgrades performed on the printer.
Personally on my CR-10 I used a custom mount with an integrated "fang" that blew the air from both sides and worked really well.  It also had the advantage of reusing the hardware from the original assembly (= you don't need to buy anything, just print the part).

That makes sense. The first custom part you linked is very useful and explains the right fan well. Is the air from the right fan supposed to be blowing on the nozzle or under it where the plastic comes out to harden it?

@Programmer - under it: you want the nozzle to stay hot! :)

This hotend config is btw shared with the Ender-3.


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

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.

From the data you provided I would postulate that the problem is likely hardware: either with the the general assembly of the motherboard or with the stepper drivers.
The test you already performed excludes the stepper motors themselves as possible culprits.  Common sense suggests that if such a show-stopper bug was present in the original Anet firmware, thousands of users would report it.
Stepper motors are usually controlled by two signals (two cables): PULSE and DIR.  The PULSE signal controls how many steps the motor needs to perform and the signal itself is normally a PWM or some other form of square wave.  The DIR signal controls which direction the motor is supposed to spin (clockwise or counter-clockwise), and the signal itself is just a "high/low" voltage.

Now, electronics is not exactly my cup of tea, but I would suggest what is happening is that the DIR signal of the broken output is stuck on either the high or low voltage (you can test this easily with a tester).
If I am right, the likely culprit is either a dry joint (so a joint that does not let electricity pass and keep the DIR signal in its low state), or a short (so a place where voltage at "high" level is allowed to get onto the cable carrying the DIR signal).  These kind of problems are typically related to poor soldering of the connectors, or to bridges between the pins of chips.  You can visually inspect your board for such problems.
Another possible culprit is obviously the driver for the stepper motor itself.

Thanks Mac.  I was able to trace down the issue to a cold solder joint on the Z-Motor1 board connector.  Resoldered and Z travel works properly.  Now to reassemble and get on with the rest of the troubleshooting.  Thank you.


text:
Cooling fan noise when head is moving in the X axis
I have this fan model, it is a SUNON model number MF50151VX-B00U-A99
and it is a blower type.

When the head is moving in the X-axis it makes noise.
I think this type of fans is not suitable for rapid movement and rapid changes in directions.
I think the noise is coming from the axial of the fan because I think there is a clearance in the axial for moving up and down.
When I put my finger on the fan body(the rotating part) the noise stop!
My question, What type of fans suitable for rapid movement and rapid direction change? and if this is not the problem what is the problem in my situation?
I have tried searching but I can really find a direct answer!

Julging from the picture, I'd guess the very small area where the blower is attached to the head may play a role, as it let it free to vibrate and resonate.

I have realized this just after wrote my questions but still not sure about it, I think this fan is not suitable for rapid movement changes!

well you said the noise stops when you put the finger on the rotating part (so, I guess stopping the fan), but what happens if you put the finger on the case (so, the fiked part of the blower)?  if the noise stops or decrease dramatically, there you have it: the problem it's not the fan but the way is mounted on the printing head. :)

I did that and it is not making any noises, good observation, thanks

As discussed in the comments...
The problem with the fan seems to be its flimsy attachment to the printer head.  The fact the fan chassis is not firmly kept in place allows for it to act as a soundboard, amplyfing whatever vibration nomally occurs in the motor.
You could probably get a fan that is more silent in the first place (noctua is a known brand for silent fans, and it is used on the Original Prusa MK3 for example), but since there's nothing inherently wrong with your current fan, I would simply design a custom, more beefy mount for it.  For added dampening effect you could also use small o-rings as washers for the screws.

MagLev fans with Vapo bearing are (like the name suggests) magnetic levitation bearings - the rotor "floats" in the air, it's not press-fot like in ball bearings, therefore it has movement in perpendicular to the axis.
MagLev fans are great at low acceleration and low jerk (or in stationary applications) but their bearings will bang on sudden movement changes. Just take a MagLev (with Vapo bearing - VX, V1, V2..), there actually are Dual Ball Bearing versions of MagLev fans (BX, B1, B2..) which are way better suited in moving applications.

In response to the answer from mac above. The Sunon Maglev Fan is actually an exceptional fan that is superior in all aspects: static pressure, CFM, Decibels et cetera. Far superior to that of a radial fan like a Noctua.
Sunon - DC Brushless Fan & Blower
The noise probably comes from the way it's been attached to the printer.


text:
RAMPS won't PID tune and shows unreal temps
About two days ago, I started seeing that my hotend was heating up erratically. I first noticed this while printing a part in PETG and the temp jumped to 260 °C. I shut down the printer at that time and first started checking the hardware. I noticed that the E3D V6 thermistor had been tightened too much. I disassembled the entire hotend, cleaned everything and then reassembled everything. I thought to retune the hotend and when I tried tuning it at 240 °C.
This is where the strange behavior occurs. The hotend steadily climbed up till about 200 °C. After that it just went nuts. I started seeing unreal temps such as 646 °C and such. At this point I thought the MEGA might be at fault. I replaced it and the hotend (an E3D V6 clone). This had the screw on glass thermistor. Again the same erratic behavior and unreal temp readings.
What could be wrong here? What am I missing? Can this be the heater cartridge?

You sure the thermistor wasn't damaged?  You may have it misconfigured -- see for example this old thread  http://forums.reprap.org/read.php?4,260150

Good call. One of the thermistor leads had separated from its extension wire.

Have you found and fixed the problem? If so, have the answers below led you to the solution? Please vote to accept an answer (using the green tick button next to the question) 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.

One of the thermistor wires had come loose from the crimp ferrules. I re-crimped it and it works fine now.

This can come from several sources:
Hardware
The thermistor or its connections might be damaged, and the fault is only observable when the hotend is hot or moved to a certain area. Start by checking the wiring! You may be able to repair a bad connection easily, but depending what was broken, you may need to replace something. In some cases squishing a thermistor cartridge too much can destroy the internals, so a replacement is needed.
A mainboard failure is more likely to just show a static temperature, and a heater failure would show as maybe not getting past a certain point.
Firmware
If it had not worked before or you changed the firmware, the firmware should also be a suspect. The firmware can 'fail' when using the wrong thermistor type/table which can result in a very big offset or bad slope, resulting in wrong or unaccurate readings.

authors: ศิริชัย ปัดทุมฝาง


text:
RAMPS 1.4, 1.5 or 1.6?
I'm about to build a Prusa i3 dolly. I am confused whether to use RAMPS 1.4 or 1.5 or 1.6.
What is the big difference? Is it only the MOSFETs and the poly-fuses? If that is the case, would it be advisable to upgrade a RAMPS 1.4 board (replacing the MOSFETs, connectors, and fuses)?

The biggest issue with RAMPS 1.4 (and 1.5) is the power connector is prone to melting/burning, this appears to be fixed on 1.6 with the use of screw terminal blocks. I've used RAMPS 1.4 with both 12v and 24v power supplies and never have had any issues with the fuses or the power connector but mine have only come from Ultimachine or RepRapDiscount.  A RAMPS 1.4 with power connectors and fuses replaced with those from a reputable dealer (Digikey, Newark, Allied) will likely be fine, you can even remove the power connector and solder the wires directly to the board if you don't need the ability to unplug them.
Whichever you go with, make sure the screws are tight and never tin the wires going into the power connectors.

Looks like the 1.6 has a heatsink across the high current mosfets as well.  Considering the cost difference is so negligible, I would just grab the 1.6.  (Is all that time sourcing parts and resoldering worth saving less than $5?)

The drawback of RAMPS 1.5 and 1.6 are that they use SMD polyfuses which are a little more difficult to replace (for some people) than the large fuses from the RAMPS 1.4. However, the fuses of the RAMPS 1.4 are sticking out, then tend to bend once in a while when you work on the board and could therefore become prone to metal fatigue and break.

Adding on top of this answer about cable wiring:
For these type of connectors:

please use ferrules on the cable ends for wires that transport high loads/currents and use screw terminals:

For these type of connectors:

please use y-type or fork connectors:

... and use a proper crimping tool.  Crimping with a $20 tool versus some random pliers you picked up is not only much faster, but it makes a night and day difference in the quality of your crimps, and they will be MUCH less prone to failure. (so far, I've never had a properly crimped connector fail).


text:
Why the Anet A6 can't do .05 layer height
So like I sayed in the title, Why can't the Anet A6 do .05 layer height? I found that some printers can do .05 layer heights, but the Anet A6 can't? I am interested to know if it is the stepper motors or the threaded rods or something. Maybe this is something I can do a small "test print" on?

What do you mean by "but the Anet A6 can't?".

What size nozzle do you have? Some slicers don't support layer height larger than nozzle diameter.

@mac just going off the spec sheet. And I am slightly worried that if I tried I might screw something off. But the spec sheet say it can go as low as .1mm layer height, and I want to know why it can't go lower than that.

@Davo I am using right now a .4mm but I would just like to know in general if the Anet A6 can pull off a .05mm layer height.

I'm not familiar with the Anet A6 specifically, but as many other things in a 3D printer, the minimum layer height is co-determined by a number of factors.  For the Z-axis the factors I am aware of are:

The number of steps in the stepper motor
The geometry of the lead screw
The tolerance with which the lead screw has been machined
The microstep settings
The quality of the stepper drivers
The amount of play and flexibility of the X-axis gantry
The ration between filament and nozzle diameter
The precision of the extruder's stepper motor
...

Many printers that claim to have ridiculously low minimum Z-layer height do so by relying on the mathematical model only.  It goes something like this: the lead screw has an offset of 1mm per revolution, the stepper motor makes 200 steps and is set for 32 microsteps per step so the minimum resolution should be...
1mm / (200 * 32) = 0.0002mm

The reality is however different.  For example: the lead screw may have been machined with a tolerance of 0.002mm, so to make sure a layer has a thickness >0mm its heigh should be >0.004mm (20 times the theoretical limit computed with the microsteps).  But to make sure layers have the same height ±10% you would need to increase the minimum layer heigh of an order of magnitude, bringing it to 0.04mm.  A similar reasoning applies for the amount of play in the gantry, while the ratio between filament and nozzle influences the minimum volume of plastic that can be extruded per step (for very thin layers you want to be able to extrude a minimal amount of it).
At the end of the day this is a typical case of "a chain is only as strong as its weakest link": the minimum layer height of a printer is affected much more dramatically by the limitations of the most imprecise component in the printer than by the performance of its best one.
As for your question about breaking the printer by issuing g-code with very thin layers: should you issue gcode that requires layers below that limit, the firmware will simply print at the same z-height (see comments, credits to Tom).
I'm unaware of people having permanently damaged their machines by issuing code with too thin Z-layers.  But given how the firmware operates, I'd expect the quality of the print to be negatively affected, the filament to be possibly chewed by the cobbed wheel and in extreme cases cloggig of the printer head.

but my understanding is that manufacturers encode in the firmware a sensible minimum layer height, and the firmware itself has strategies to cope with gcode that requires layers below that limit (like throwing an error or simply ignoring some layers altogether). This is incorrect. Firmware generally is dumb, and it will try to print the file you throw at it to the best of its abilities. A "0.1mm printer" will print a 0.05mm file just fine, but if you throw a file at it with layers thinner than the minimum Z-step, it will simply print over the previous layer without moving the Z-axis.

@TomvanderZanden - thank you for the correction! :) I modified the answer to reflect your input. Am I correct in thinking that in your second scenario the gantry will move up only when the delta between the computed absolute Z position and the current physical one will be above the minimum Z step? (e.g.: min z-step is 10, layers are 5 --> the gantry will move up every second layer, printing two layers on top of each other)

@mac Yes, that is what would happen. manufacturers encode in the firmware a sensible minimum layer height is still incorrect. The firmware doesn't know anything about layers. All it knows is that sending a single step pulse to the stepper driver will result in the Z-axis moving by 0.0xxxmm.

Your question is based on an incorrect premise. Just because the specifications list "minimum layer height: 0.1mm" does not mean the printer is unable to print thinner layers. It just means that the manufacturer is willing to guarantee that printing 0.1mm layers is possible, or that - for whatever reason - the marketing department decided to list 0.1mm in that table. 0.1mm is a nice, round number and seems to be the "gold standard" for 3D printers, but rarely is 0.1mm a limit that is inherent in the printer design.
The theoretical precision of the Z-axis is usually at least an order of magnitude better than the advertised minimum layer height. Of course, the precision of the Z-axis is not the only limiting factor (at a certain point, you need to extrude so slowly that you start to be limited by the resolution of the extruder stepper), but often even impractically thin layers print just fine.
In many cases, printers are capable of printing layers far thinner than the manufacturers officially advertise. More often than not, minimum layer height is limited by your patience and the fact that doing a print with thinner layer heights takes much longer for a rather limited gain in quality. Just give it a try and try to print 0.05mm layers, and you might be pleasantly surprised by the results!
(Note: it is advisable to choose a layer height that is a multiple of the distance for a single (full) step of the Z-stepper. For my printer (which has a very coarse leadscrew on the Z-axis), this is 0.02mm so - for me - it would be better to print with 0.06mm or 0.04mm layers than with 0.05mm layers).

I have an Anet A6 and once you get your settings dialled in, bed level accurate and belt tensioner correct you can do 0.05 mm very well (although I for some reason went with 0.06 mm and never tried the extra 0.01 mm lower but it shouldn't have an issue). Note: I did this using all the stock parts so 0.4 mm brass nozzle.
I highly recommend you print and install a front Y axis frame brace and a Y axis belt tensioning mod as well as an X axis belt tensioner. It will allow you to print at these layer heights much more accurately if you can adjust the tension correctly.
The kit out of the box makes it almost impossible to get good/correct tension on the belts.


text:
Why does the prusa i3 sometimes put the layer more right or left as they should be?
I often tried to print sth in the prusa i3-mk3 but in most time he prints at the middle of the object more right or left. Can someone please tell me why that comes?

Can you add a diagram, or photo? Your question is not clear. Are the prints damaged, or just in an odd location?

I'm not sure if I read your question correctly, but if I do, what you are referring to is called "layer shifting" and looks like this:

This happens when the stepper motors fail to perform a step upon receiving the signal from the firmware.  Since stepper motors do not have any way to know their actual position (differently, for example, than servos) they will keep on printing as if nothing happened, and thus the subsequent layers will be shifted of the amount of steps they missed to perform.
Moving on to why this happens in sth...  I don't own a MK3, but I take it that sth is short for stealth mode, the new silent mode that has been widely showcased in reviews and articles on the printer.
That mode of operation is made possible by the Trinamic TMC2130 stepper drivers.  Normally these drivers monitor the power consumption of the steppers and are capable of deduce a missed step by sudden changes in that.  If they do, the MK3 will actually re-home the X and Y axis to fix the problem and resume printing normally.
However when operating in their StealthChop mode, the TMC drivers provide less energy to the motor themselves (to keep them operating quietly) and - more importantly - are unable to detect missed steps.  Less power will make much more likely that any sort of resistance to the print head movement will cause missed steps, the absence of detection will cause the printer to not even notice and cause layer shifting.
Again, I don't own a MK3 and I have no direct experience with it, but I would suggest updating the firmware to the very last version: I read in an article some weeks ago that a recent version addressed exactly your problem, by progressively increasing the power output along the Z axis (as the likelihood of layer shifting increases with the height of the print).


text:
Prusa i3 MK2 doesn't accept the printing material
We have a Prusa i3 MK2 and we've changed for a print with another colour material but when I pressed "load filament", it didn't make anything.
Often after five times doing that the printer works. I don't have any pictures but the filament is in the hole and the printer holds it. However, it doesn't push it into the extruder and the remains of the old filament do not come out, so I wonder why the motors just stop and don't work.
Sometimes there are no problems - sometimes more and sometimes less. I hope someone has the reason for this problem.

i think you have a clogged extruder see this: https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/a/3490/9730
other questions: what material?  what temperature is on the hotend when you are trying to change the material?

My 0.02c:

Cut the tip of the new filament at an angle so that it is pointed enough. This will ensure that it easily enters the hole leading into the hot end beneath the extruder drive gear. A lot of times the curl in the filament (from being wound on a spool) will cause misalignment and lead to it not entering this hole properly.
Check filament debris lodged in the extruder gear teeth. Sometimes this will prevent good grip on the filament.
Finally you can try increasing the nozzle temperature. Often times any residue inside the nozzle will be cleared by elevating temperature and pushing in new filament.

First make sure that the hotend is hot enough.
Second you need to check your extruder if it is clean.
Third try to push the filament by hand and look if it comes out. If yes than the problem should be in the motor.
The motor connection wire could be loose.

I would agree with PR90, cutting the filament tip at a 45% angle before inserting might help. If the new material has required a different temperature to the previous, then you could have burnt the old material clogging the nozzle (take nozzle off by unscrewing, if it a brass hex nozzle) - if the new material requires a lower temperature, then it will not melt the materiel old pushing it out.
See if you can go into Move Axis (manually) and then go to 0.01 mm then Extrude and see if that works.
If you hear a slipping or backlash sound coming from the extruder stepper motor, look at motor gear and check for clogging.
Please check the heat requirements of the new and old materials


text:
Connect to 3D printer via internet without router
My problem:
I need to connect to my 3D printer via the internet from an Android app (using IP address and API key).
My 3D printer is based on Marlin firmware latest and connected to a Raspberry Pi running OctoPi. I don't want to use a router and port forward it, because the Raspberry will be connected to internet via a Wi-Fi hotspot.
My question:
Is it possible to control the printer using a cloud platform or a server (another Raspberry Pi) if my OctoPi Raspberry Pi can access the internet? If it is possible, how can one do it?
Any suggestions or solutions are welcome.

I take it you don't have control over the wifi hotspot? Because a wifi hotspot is able to port forward just as well as a wired router is.

yes i dont have control over the wifi hotspot and it can come from android or even a laptop too

There are a few solutions, but each one needs to match same criteria: an open network socket visible outside the local network.
So from TCP/IP protocol theory, we don't even need to have an IP address to send a packet to another computer as we can use layer One which is just the MAC address to identify the receiver. But things become more complicated when we have to provide a link to two separate endpoints.
Basic requirements:

We need to know public accessible IP address and port that server is exposed (listening) on
We can have a DNS entry that will be translated to public IP, but that assume that public IP is same all the time (or we have a dynDNS service)

Solutions:

Have the RPi exposed with public IP address and routed properly;
Create a VPN bridge from RPi to your home/cloud network and connect Android to the same VPN;
Do a port forwarding to RPi from public IP and expose that in the firewall.

So at this point, if you don't have admin access to network devices then only solution '2' is viable, IMHO.

The controlling organization of the network to which the printer is connected has not been defined.  If it is a home network, you can usually open a port and have it forwarded to your internal device.  One is unlikely to be able to install a VPN on the printer, but one could expose the network port to the external internet by this method of opening the (or the few) ports required.

As OP says there is no access to router (I had assumption that it could be university printer). That is the reason I'm suggesting 2nd proposal.

I understand.  The OP would need then to have another RaspPi (or something similar) implementing the VPN, and routing traffic to the printer.  OpenVPN can do that, but I found the setup to be difficult.


text:
Painting an STL file
I have an STL file that I want to add a tribal tattoo to with the end goal of getting it printed in colour sandstone from Shapeways, or in full colour on an Mcor Arke at some point, but I'm not really sure where to go.
I've looked at Microsoft Paint 3D. It's ok, but I cannot get the paint job symmetric. It outputs the .3mf format which the Arke will eventually handle with their Orange software, but it won't export into anything Shapeways will accept.
I've looked at UV unwrapping in Blender, but it seems I have to create the image in another graphics program and then import it... but I can't really work out where the images will be applied to the object, and then when I'm done it seems I cannot export the bits I'm expecting. On the plus side I have the mirror function so I can just paint one side and it's symmetrical.
I've looked briefly at Maya and 3Ds Max, but they are eyewateringly expensive, way out of my league.
Blender with some form of layers for the image might be really useful so I can make the tattoo in bits and then apply them to parts. I've kind of seen how you can split the model into panels but my brain is struggling to get round this as it's really quite hit and miss... and exporting seems to be a problem, although DAE and the texture will go to Shapeways, assuming the DAE has the texture layout embedded. FBX seems to go into Paint 3D and then I can export it to 3MF for the Arke.
Has anyone got any helping pointers for this confused noob?
Thanks

This is barely a 3d print question, so my recommendation would be to search for Blender forums and YouTube tutorials.

@CarlWitthoft - I have asked the Blender mods whether they would accept a migration of this question. Unfortunately, it is rather too broad for them as written. The OP could ask how to color an stl in Blender. But as the question currently stands it can not be migrated.

It is indeed more related to the blender forum  than the 3d printing one.
You can start by looking at this post from blender.stackexchange.com which explain how to unwrap and paint on a 3d object. You can also paint the texture on a 2d software like Gimp and then put it in the UV Image editor of Blender. Then you should be able to export your project (with the texture) in a suitable format for 3d print.


text:
Does anyone know the thread size (pitch and lead) of the Anet A8's lead screw?
I bought a new printer, and unfortunately the left nut for the lead screw isn't tapped.
Does anyone know the thread size, w.r.t. both pitch and lead, of the lead screws?

I have the Anet A8, I confirm the threads are Tr8x8(p2). This is explained as "Tr" for trapezoidal thread followed by the nominal diameter in mm. The digits after the "x" denotes the lead of the screw (how much does the nut advance per revolution). The value between the brackets "p2" denotes the pitch. This means that the screw has 8 (lead) / 2 (pitch) = 4 starts.
More information on threads is found on Wikipedia.

I don't own the printer, but the intertubes identify it as a "TR8X8 T" (8mm diameter / 8mm offset per revolution).

The pitch no matter the screw is the distance between the threads. The lead can be different based on a one or two start threads.

Hi Darron, and welcome to 3DPrinting.SE! Whilst your answer may be technically correct, it is lacking detail, and, as such, it has been recommended for deletion, unfortunately. If you could expand it then you may get a more positive response. I would recommend that in addition to reading some highly voted answers to gauge the standard expected, that you take a look at the help section relating to answering questions, in particular [answer], and take the [tour] for more information on how stack exchange works. Thanks :-)

... or even four start threads...


text:
What setting is this defect caused by?
I am attempting to print the Benchy boat but every attempt so far has been unsuccessful. The print has a sort of slope/blob on the nose of the boat, which emerges after the first 30 layers.

Here you can see the front of the boat already arching up:

I have tried decreasing speed to 40 mm/s but the issue remains.
Printer: Geetech Prusa I3 Pro B
XY Accelleration: 1000 mm/s2
XY Jerk: 20 mm/s
Retraction Accelleration: 2000 mm/s2
Extruder Jerk: 5 mm/s
Printing Speed: 50 mm/s
Travel Speed: 120 mm/s
Layer Height: 0.1 mm
Infill: 60% (Lines)
Material: PLA, 200 °C, 1.75mm filament, retraction enabled.

A picture would help tremendously in diagnosing the problem! :)

Also information regarding your printer, slicer, and type/brand of filament would be useful.

@NomadMaker Thank you, i have edited the question as you suggested. I was in a bit of a rush yesterday.

You don't mention cooling, could you elaborate on that in your question? It looks like you are not cooling the deposited filament enough so that it curls up.

200C could be way too hot depending on the exact filament and the cooling setup. I'd try 185C and work up from there.

Looks like curling from to much being extruded and no cooling I had the same problem added part cooling and problem was gone

You address the part cooling part, but you also suggest over-extrusion. Maybe that aspect would be better as a second point. Can you elaborate on part cooling a little to make the answer a little more comprehensive?

The lines along the length of the boat also appear to be wobbling, can you confirm this? Have you used this material before? The layers should look straight and equal.

I have 2 candidates:
If the lines indeed wobble it may be over extrusion. The excess material pushing the extruded line over the edge. (check the diameter of the filament with a caliper and adjust the extrusion rate if needed)
Or it can be shrinking. 60% infill is quite high. You could try 20 or 30% (less material and more air => less distortion), or adjusting cooling.
Hope it helps, good luck!


text:
How to connect a NEMA 17 stepper to RAMPS 1.4?
I have an NEMA 17 stepper motor 17HS4401 and a RAMPS 1.4 driver unit.
The motor pinouts are:
RED   A+
BLUE  A-
GREEN B+
BLACK B-

while the RAMPS board has the following:
2B 2A 1A 1B

Could someone point me in the right direction? How can I connect the driver to the motor? I have a feeling I already messed things up.

There are very many combinations that will work. A bipolar stepper has 2 coils. Swapping the coils, or reversing the polarity of a coil, will simply cause the stepper to rotate in the opposite direction.
On RAMPS, one coil should connect to 1A and 1B, whereas the other coil should connect to 2A and 2B.
On the stepper, one coil is A+ and A-, the other coil is B+ and B-.
A possible wiring is A+ to 1A, A- to 1B and B+ to 2A and B- to 2B, but there are 15 other possibilities. The only "wrong" way is one that connects a coil of the stepper to two different coil outputs on the RAMPS (so connecting, for instance, A+ to 1A and A- to 2A wouldn't work).

Wow, thank you for your feedback. If i have A+ to 2B, A- to 2A and B+ to 1A, B- to 1B is also correct?

Yes, that also works.


text:
MK8 extruder showing 500+ °C on temperature sensor?
I just finish building a Graber i3 printer from mixed parts (a MDF clone of Prusa i3 MK2). For the hotend, I've bought the Greetech MK8 extruder. However, the temperature sensor is driving me up the wall.
I've already checked the wires and connections, but the darn thing keeps showing a steady 500 degrees Celsius. In Marlin, it shows it right up (I'm using the 1st option for a 100k thermistor), in Repetier Firmware (using the same one), it shows 0.00°C, until I tell the printer to heat up, when it shoots to 500°C just like before with Marlin. The documentation for this extruder only lists it as a "100K NTC Thermistor", so I tried to select one of the NTC options on the list for both Marlin and Repetier and the temp sensor reads steady 3.600°C!!!
Measuring it with the multimeter, it shows around 60k, it's 31°C outside.
Is it broken or am I selecting the wrong thermistor type?
Documentation for MK8

A brand new thermistor shows about 95-105k ohm (depends on the multimeter quality), so it looks like that one is out of the range.
To be sure that it is a thermistor, you could connect a 100k potentiometer, play with it and see readings on the lcd. If the readings are OK, then mainboard is good so replace the thermistor.
A 100k thermistor curve

Thank you! I'll buy a new thermistor tomorrow and test it out, if that's the problem, I'll mark the question as answered.

The thermistor was fine, however there was a slight cut on the protective sleeve around its legs, so it was shorted against the metal block of the hotend. Used some thermal tape to unshort it.
For those that use that type of hotend (MK8 from Greetech), the correct option in Marlin is 11 (Beta 3950). Thanks a lot!

If your printer is a cheap one that uses a ribbon cable or other combined cables, verify your thermal sensor's polarity. I know, I know - it's a resistor (in most cases) and that means there's no such thing as polarity. Bear with me - I just helped a friend diagnose his printer (Geeetech, for the record) for showing 500C on one sensor and 'def' on the other, after replacing the mainboard with a different/more capable model. Turns out, they SHARE PINS, which suddenly makes polarity important. Swap the pins in the connector, and it might just work. First time I've run into this. We swapped only the Ext0 sensor and left the bed disconnected - Ext0 read normal, so we swapped both, and everything's been perfect since.


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

I'm using  LJ18A3 - 8-Z / BX DC6-36V to 12V works great!

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

I saw it, that is what made me more confused and i asked this question.

It depends on your surface. Inductive works for Aluminium heat beds, but not when covered with glass. Capacitive sensors are inaccurate and should be avoided. The touch sensor types work with all surfaces.

5v or 6v-36v  which one should I use???

I'm using the LJ18A3 - 8-Z / BX DC6-36V 8 mm Inductive Proximity Sensor NPN @ 12V using an OptoCoupler module.

What is the surface of your heat bed? Glass or aluminium with tape?

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

My bed is mk3 Aluminium. What is an optocoupler???Why do we need it???Can you share the wiring diagram?

@JoseBen Actually, that recently became a question of its own: https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/6358/inductive-sensor-in-24v-machine

As always cost will be a factor.  I found the M4 sensors to be be just not good enough, they have to be too close, and eventually it's going to catch on your print and damage sensor mounting and/or the hot-end assembly.
The 8mm range sensors seem like a good distance, but you'll need to decide between a wider, heavier but cheaper model or the think, lighter more expensive model.
If your goal is to optimise for speed, go the lighter version.
In terms of sensing accuracy, if your layer height is typically 0.2mm then I don't think there's much point paying for more accuracy.

Duet3D has a very nice overview. It totally depends on your demands. e.g., accuracy, different build surfaces, tolerance. Personly I realy like the piezo. It actually uses your nozzle to 'touch' the bed. So 0 height is absoluty 0. This eliminates the need for Z-offset.

You still need to set up z-offset for the piezo.
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/e08222_ae707c20a0cf418b8393b44368370576.pdf
Whilst there is no x or y probe offset as the probe is the nozzle, and this is one of the most advantageous features of this system, there does need to be a slight Z offset as the assembly bends slightly on probing.


text:
1st layer problems with .1 layer height
I re-read my question and realized I made a confusing one, so I am rewording a LOT.
So the software I use is Craftware. When it comes to the first layer I have it set to .25mm, with the following layers being whatever I specify otherwise. And because of this there shouldn't be a difference with the first layer even though I choose different layer heights based on the project. But for some reason it is not the case.
When printing .2mm layer height everything works great. The print adheres amazing, the nozzle is at a really good height. Everything simply works.
When printing .1mm the first layer does not stick. A lot less plastic is coming out the nozzle. And it is a disaster. Have tried increasing the amount of flow a bit, but didn't help (I might need to raise it a lot more)
So I don't understand what is going wrong. The first layer is supposed to be set at .25mm no matter what the layer height is otherwise. What do I need to do or look at?

No need for fixing issue. I took the first layer extrude adjustment from 100% to 200% and now the first layer is looking as it should, yay.  It does what I need it too. Understand that when I try to adjust the z axis with the .2mm layer height. So I would rather go 200% when I do use .1mm layer height because otherwise I use .2mm much more often

Did any of the posted answers solve your issue? If so, please mark it as the accepted answer. If not, then either refine your question or please post your comment above (which appears to contain the solution) as an answer, and then mark it as accepted in 48 hours, in order to remove your question from the unanswered queue. Answers are not allowed in comments, and may be deleted. If your answer is posted as an answer then it becomes searchable and may help others with the same issue.

You likely need to re-calibrate the Z-height of your nozzle. The reason that a lot less plastic is coming out of the nozzle at 0.1mm is that the actual gap is likely smaller than 0.1mm. This makes the print bed act essentially like a partial "lid" on the nozzle which occludes the outflow of molten plastic.
Simplify3D has information on their website regarding the issue which can be found here: https://www.simplify3d.com/support/print-quality-troubleshooting/#not-extruding-at-start-of-print. Hope this helps!

Assuming you are using a 0.4mm nozzle, 0.1 layers are very close to the edge of what you can do. As @PR90 said, a Z adjustment will probably help.
My process for this:

If you have a heated bed, preheat before levelling.
set a large brim on the print, slow-ish first level (about 40mm/s)
start with the bed levelled normally, and start the print
wait for plastic to be extruding, then adjust the bed until it starts bonding

This does require adjusting the bed with the print in progress, so make sure you are safe and don't get your fingers in anything hot or otherwise dangerous.

You have asked several questions here.
"why is first layer set to 0.25" -- check the gcode file, opening it in a text editor, to see what layer values are specified.
"looks like under-extrude" -- please show a picture.  If it's purely that the print failing to adhere, you may need to adjust the Z-zero point slightly. Or perhaps When you printed at 0.2mm, for whatever reason the transverse stress on the base layer is less than when printing at 0.1 mm (e.g., linear speed adjustments needed).
 Is the second layer somehow not adhering to the first layer?  It is possible that the linear speed setting for the first layer is too high and that should be adjusted.  Or perhaps the z-height for the second layer is inconsistent with a 0.1mm layer setting, so check the gcode there too.
In general, adherence problems can be dealt with by adding a raft or brim. See if that suffices.

I re-worded my question with the intention to help you and others understand my problem better. Thank you for the answer, I will look at those Gcode files once.


text:
Music from the printer?
Harking back to the days of "singing disk drives," I am wondering if anyone's written music to be performed on a 3D printer. Most of us have noticed in passing that the servo motors for X and Y drive generate a different pitch depending on motion speed. With some care and experimentation, one could write g-code to produce not only a tone but even a 2-tone chord.  So -- has this been done? Does anyone want to do so? (Note that there's no need to simultaneously produce a print, but that would be even classier).

Followup: an actual object that is musical while it's printing?

Yes, it has been done before, see here and here.
The README file of the first repository linked above contains a detailed explanation of the basic idea/calculations involved.  A short excerpt:

As you can set the parameters of G1 in such a way as to precisely control the velocity and the distance of a movement along a certain axis, you can control the operation frequency of the stepper motors as well as the actual time to complete a movement.

On another note (pun intended), you can also play music by using the code M300.

I actually did this, on my Malyan M150.
After not that much experimentation at all it turned out that the frequency of the produced tone scales linearly with the speed of the motors. Due to the nature of the way humans perceive music, the actual frequencies do not matter at all, just the relative difference in frequency between the tones. This means that it is actually really easy to let a 3D printer play a tune, you just have to make sure that when the next tone needs to have a frequency that is for example 20% higher than the last one, the motor needs to move 20% faster, no need to actually measure at which speeds the printer produces which tones.
One of the main issues turned out to be the maximum speed of the motors, which wasn't high enough for some of the higher notes, but this issue could be solved by multiplying all the speeds by a number lower than 1, thereby lowering the required speeds while still maintaining the original melody. Playing two tones at the same time proved to be a bit too difficult for my not that great programming skills, while not being worth the effort because somehow there was quite a large difference in volume between the motors.
In the end, I made a MATLAB script that converts MIDI files to G-code with the following result: 3D-printer playing popcorn song

You could have had 3 instruments at the same time or 3 different volume levels by using the 3 motors


text:
Is possible print this level of detail?
I'm new at 3D Printing. I made a model of what I want to print using blender, but it's really small with a little system that must be very precise to work.
What I have is like a hollow cylinder with a diameter of 11mm, and a thickness of 1mm. This goes inside a counter part, that is carve with the cylinder shape, but with a little extra gap so it can rotate like an axis. Maybe this picture explains better:

And this should be the front view of the counter part:

So, I need to know if it's possible to print that cylinder hard enough to work as an axis. And what should be the gap size between the cylinder and the counter part's hole to rotate properly? If it's is like 0.05mm, can I print that level of detail with a 3D printer too?
What hardware and material should I use to do this?
Thanks in advance.
Sorry for bad english, I hope you understand!
EDIT:

(6mm is the depth of the hole)

The tolarences for a extruder printing might vary from the accuracy of extrusion feed; you can have the values you are expecting, but a gap of 0.05 wont be enough to do a working assembly; in my case I´m using 0.15mm for one printer and 0.3 in other. Remember that is melting feed printing instead an injection molded (more controlled).

@FernandoBaltazar I can't add so much gap because I have really limited space. What could be the smallest amount of gap to get a nice rotation?

you need to test your printer. If you need to print 3, 5, 8 prints with different gaps to get the best choice then do it.  Gaps can be as bigger than the part allows, or as narrow as the mind limits.

Do you have to use an extrusion printer?  What about one of the light-curing resin layer printers?  What's your budget, as spending 10X the money will get you a huge improvement in tolerances.

It is definitively possible to do what you want, but your questions are samewhat problematic:

So, I need to know if it's possible to print that cylinder hard enough to work as an axis.

"hard enough" is a mysterious quantity.  What is the intended application? The load of the axis, the rotation speed, the medium in which the part will be in, its operating temperature... they all affect the answer.

And what should be the gap size between the cylinder and the counter part's hole to rotate properly?

Reading at the question and the comments, I think you may have the wrong representation model in your mind.  There are four different concepts at work here:

Accuracy is the maximum dimensional variation between parts.
Tolerance is the amount of random deviation or variation permitted for a given dimension.
Allowance is a planned difference between a nominal or reference value and an exact value.
Clearance is the intentional space between two parts.

So: what you want to achieve for the object to rotate is to have at least some clearance once you have the parts printed.  Therefore, you want to design your part with an allowance which is at least as much as the accuracy.
Note that a machine cannot produce parts with a tighter tolerance than its accuracy.  So you must design your part with a tolerance equal or greater than your printer accuracy.
The correct number will therefore be entirely dependant from the specific printer you will be using.  You can find out the specific accuracy of a printer by printing a tolerance test (I know, I know... why isn't it called "accuracy test"?)
See this unrelated answer - from wich I took the above definitions - for learning more about the above and a concrete example.

If it's is like 0.05mm, can I print that level of detail with a 3D printer too?

I hope it is now clear why this question makes no sense: clearance is a variable which depends  from accuracy (and the application), not the other way around.

I can't add so much gap because I have really limited space

This comment too is incorrect: the "gap" (clearance) can be very very small.  You have to have the correct allowance in your design, and allowance will not intrinsically make a part larger.

What hardware and material should I use to do this?

Again: this is entirely dependent from your application (load, operating temperature, orientation, speed...)
A consumer-grade FDM printer (easy accessible, cheap and cheap to operate) will allow you to print a rotating part, a SLA/DLP printer (less common, toxic resins, more expensive to operate) will allow to print the same part with different materials and tighter tolerances...

I don't worry about breaking, but it cannot be flexible

Again: without an explanaton of the intended use (or the numbers associated to it) it's impossible to answer this comment conclusively.  Resins tend to harden to more rigid solids, but you have thrown around tolerances as small as 0.05mm in your writing, and over 12mm of axis, that is a deviation of less than 0.5% from "perfectly straight".  I'm hard pressed to think you will find a printable material with such a rigidity.

First of all, thank you for the proper vocabulary lesson. I don't own a 3D printer, this is my first project. I was looking for some 3D printing service around my region, and found a SLA one, but when I asked them about their machine tolerance, they didn't know what I was talking about.
The entire project is a little necklace, with a small system that allow it to rotate and make a new figure. So, about speed: manual rotation; and temperature: environment is fine I guess. It don't have to be "perfectly stright", just enough to keep all together. Should I ask this guys for a tolerance test?

@JuliánPera Many 3D printer owners has their own printer like a hobbie to print some stuff and make funny his projects, probably  they don´t know about accuracy, tolerances and repeatibility. Why don´t you try to search a profesional printing service giving the specification you need to get. If you are asking a question is because you need to know how accurate can be your printer instead looking for someone do your homework or even playing to be a desing engineer.

@JuliánPera - no problem, I learnt the proper English words recently myself.  The key is that you get the reasoning, not the words, though! :)  Jewelry and dentistry are the typical cases where SLA/DLP are dominating the market: they typically have small volumes and very high accuracy, which is important tr get a fine level of detail.  Typically jewelers print with a material called "castable resin", which is a resin that vaporises when touching liquid metal (so you put the print in silicon or other medium, pour liquid metal on top of it and voilá: "3D printed" metal!

So my suggestion: reach out to a goldsmith or jeweler that does this kind of stuff and ask if he could print/fabricate the thing with your own design.  He will be probably  able to guide you through a precise set of restraints for your design (allowances, overhang angles, minimum size of a detail...).

"3D printer" metal sounds cool, but expensive too, haha. I'm fine with plastic by now, but cannot find a place that offer the service I need. I was checking some 3d printing service online, like Sculpteo and Materialise, but they offer up to 0.4 of clearence, even using SLA. Am I missing something? Because I was waching people doing Tolerance Tests on Youtube, and they got nice results with 0.1 using FDM.

@JuliánPera - no direct experience, can't really say for sure. I guess it may be a form of "stay on the safe side" or a limitation applicable to complex profiles, linked to the size of the laser dot (and that would not apply to your design).

It is considered good practice to limit your post to one question at a time. The question about hardware and material is too broad to be a good question and I will set that aside.
Equally unfortunate, your drawing is ambiguous. I suppose if English is not your native language, I'm not helping things either.
The drawing has some errors that make it challenging to be certain of a correct answer, but I can provide you with some useful information as a direct result of a test print created today.
The test print for my printer creates a series of spool shapes within retainer shapes. More complex than a simply cylinder making the test that much more difficult.
My printer is able to print without problem parts that are 1.0 mm apart, 0.8 mm apart and 0.6 mm apart. The test failed at the 0.4 mm spacing and the 0.3 mm spacing, telling me that I need to perform some tuning.
Your question asks about 0.05 mm spacing. I think you will not find an FDM  printer that will manage such separation without bonding together the individual components. FDM printers use filament.
You may also not find that an SLA or DLP printer can provide such tight tolerances. It is the most likely source of a success, however. I have only minimal exposure to tolerance in this type of printer. SLA/DLP printers use lasers/light and liquid resin. They can accomplish 0.05 mm layer thickness, even as small as 0.025 mm layers, but I do not know the figures for horizontal precision/accuracy/tolerance.
SLS printers use a nylon powder and a laser to fuse the powder together to form the model. My SLS printer uses 0.050 mm powder. To accomplish the separation you require would mean a single layer of powder will separate the individual segments of the model. This is not practical for this type of printer.
Your best bet would be to consult with a 3D printing service that uses SLA printers. SLA is likely to be more precise than DLP due to the method of exposing the resin, although that is not a universal truth.

By material and hardware I meant this, what kind of technique should I use, you answered what I wanted. SLA/DLP results are hard enough for 1mm of thickness? The piece must be rigid to work as an axis. I don't worry about breaking, but it cannot be flexible. I updated the original post with a 3D picture, maybe it can orient you better.

The updated image is excellent. SLA material, once cured, is quite hard. According to a comprehensive article: https://formlabs.com/blog/ultimate-guide-to-stereolithography-sla-3d-printing/ you may see Shore hardness above 70 in the parts. Strength is subjective, however. SLA is going to be no stronger than any plastic with 1 mm wall. SLA will create well at that resolution.


text:
TEVO Tarantula under extrusion
I've built and done some simple tests on a TEVO Tarantula but I've noticed some pretty dramatic under extrusions.
My equipment:

TEVO Tarantula;
Jim Brown's easy config fork of Marlin;
Titan extruder (came with printer).

I've updated the firmware with the 400 steps as advised and calibrated the extrusion with the 100 mm method:

When I run the calibration with the Titan extruder, only the 400 steps is fine and works as expected;
When I connect the Bowden tube to the hotend and calibrate (at 200, 225 and 250°C), I see only ~50 mm of extrusion.

I've disassemble the hot end, changed filament and I can't see any signs of blockage. The Bowden tube in the hotend is not showing any signs of melting etc. and it is pushed all the way down to the hotend, as per the instructions.
So, what's going with this?

are you measuring an extruded amount of filament?

i followed this: www.instructables.com/id/How-to-calibrate-the-Extruder-on-your-3d-Printer/ Basically, measure the filament going in, mark it for 100mm, extrude 100mm and see where you mark is (on the incoming filament).

how long is the ptf tube? do you hear any clicks during extrusion?

ptf tube is pretty long. And i don't hear clicks.

are you sure the gear attached to the extruder stepper motor is screwed tight? I had an under-extrusion problem with my Anet A8, which was caused by a loose extrusion gear that was slipping over the motor shaft.

Summarizing for correct understanding: you measured 100 mm without the hotend heated and attached and about 50mm attached and at temperature but not hearing any clicks using a pretty long Bowden tube?
Bowden setups require a little more torque to push the filament all the way to the hotend. I've experienced this with my own 2.85 mm setup when I converted a 1.75 mm BullDog extruder to accept 2.85 mm filament. Your problem is most probably caused by filament not being gripped by the extruder gear and causing slipping on the filament (this does not necessarily mean that you hear clicking!). The Titan is a geared extruder so you should get more torque than a direct setup; this is exactly why you don't hear clicking, the gear turns but does not move the filament. Please inspect your filament after the extruder by removing the Bowden tube; ideally this should show you a regular pattern of the extruder gear.
What you can do to prevent this is to put more pressure on the filament by adjusting the pressure of the spring. In my setup I use some screws to get the spring out of the equation and clamp it directly only tightening the screws by hand (when switching filament I need to unscrew these).
You should also PID tune your hotend to be sure that the heater is optimally tuned to keep the hotend at a certain temperature level.

I did a test on 50cm ptf tube, and according to result I had to increase steps/mm to 440.
Thet tube have a straight connection between extruder and hotend.

Please verify that there is no bends on the the ptf tube as that is huge obstacle to push for extruder
If you have a short piece of ptf tube - please calibrate and compare results,
Validate electrical connections as a very little loose can lead to missed steps
Put a marks on the plastic gear on titan and observe if there is a smooth movement during extrusion
Put a marks on the filament in about 5mm and observe how it is consumed
Very that filament is easily provided from spool, and spool rotates freely
Do a test on prepared piece of filament to validate previous
There is a thing on tingverse that is cleaning filament and oiling it to decrease the inner tube tension, or just put some drops kitchen oil on the filament and in the tube
Replace stepper motor with one of the axis as there ale all same shiped with tarantula
Increase hotend temperature by 5,10, or more
Add more tension on the extruder regulator

I think I exhausted my check list, as I was struggling a lot with my tarantula, and found it very brittle to use.

authors: Алексей Захаров