text:
Order of solving printing issues
3D Printers (those who print, not the machine, dummy)!
I haven't been printing in a while, so when I returned to my Monoprice Select Mini VII, of course it had been sprung out of whack. Some of my first prints would not even come out of the extruder until I realized I had some pretty bad (and worse, unnoticed!) heat creep going on. After fixing that issue, it became apparent that many more persisted.
My question for you all is this: In general, what problems should be addressed first when looking at a complete disaster of a print?
I'm not going to specify any singular problem, but I am interested in seeing the "order of operations" for general problem solving when multiple issues exist. For example, "Fix bed height before anything else; this is a common problem that produces multiple others." Hopefully, this can help others with multiple printing issues, too.

Welcome to 3dPrinting.SE! I think you wouldn't be wrong to call people who 3d print, "Makers" :o)

@Pᴀᴜʟsᴛᴇʀ2 "The Makers" or even da'Makers ;)

Hi and welcome! In effect this is an interesting question, but I don't think there is a general solution strategy (unless you skip certain parts). It is far more effective to address the issue at hand. If the print does not stick, check level and nozzle-bed distance; if filament does not extrude, address the hotend and the extruder, it is useless to start leveling the bed then! ;)

@0scar I think it is about a general "order of checking for troubles" that is wanted.

for sure the answer could be dissertation or even a book because there is no simple way to address "all" issues - it's just to wide area
but as the simple troubleshooting i would list it this way

is your printer alive so is it

working at all (check power, cables)
communicate with the world (check app, drivers, cables)
moving HE and heating HB (check jams, end-points, belts, screws)
is it extruding (check heating, temperature, HE jams, filament path)

if all above is "yes" then

is your printer making printouts and are those printouts

starts and continues (check heating HB, HB adhesion, leveling, cooling)
finished at all (check all above again, stepsticks temerature)
keeping the shape (check screws and nuts, couplings, stiffness, stability, temperatures)

if all above is "yes" then in general you are half way ;)

common issues - printout is

bent or skewed (check geometry, stiffnes, leveling, belts, vibrations, stepsticks temerature)
wrapped or overextruded (check temperature, extruding, printout angles)
underextruded (check filament flow, filament path, stepsticks temerature)
stringy (check temperatures, app settings)

that is the main path i think. all above is more or less applicable to all DIY printers and all prusa clones and all clones of clones ;)
it can go wrong and fork in all possible moments as there is so many aspects to screw...

The obvious ones first
This is, well, obvious. It is, what a visual and smell inspection shows. Stuff like missing or ruptured cables, bent rails, ripped or very loose belts, burnt smell or hung up software that is easy to see that it is going on needs to be addressed first.
The not so obvious next
Next on the list are problems that have no obvious cause and effect. My order of operations to find these is like this:

Homing
movement of XYZ
Bed leveling
Heating test to 200 °C
Extrusion of some millimeters
Retract some millimeters

That solves the basic mechanical side, it shows that the machine technically could print. It is a visual as well as audial inspection. It also prepares the printer for printing.
A test print next
What's next, after having a machine that theoretically should be able to print is to print.
Start with a simple thing. A cube for example. It shows problems with bed adhesion, surface finish, extrusion,  temperature, layer shifting and layer adhesion.
Half of these problems are usually the result of temperature control. The rest but for layer shifting usually as a result of slicer settings.

Layer shifting, the odd one out, most often would either be caused by a mechanical problem are using speeds which the printer can't cope with.
Surface imperfections like blobbing shows too much extrusion and heat.
Ghosting so that the printer is resonating with its movement.

Assuming there's something on the print bed, I usually look at at what the result is to determine what to check on the printer next.
Before doing anything physical with the printer, check your settings. You should have a decent understanding of what changes what and how the different numbers affect the print, as well as what they "should" be. Review them and make sure there's nothing that looks out of whack.
Now for the specifics:
If it looks like the filament didn't extrude right, for example if it stopped extruding halfway, barely extruded at all, or there's gaps in the print, I would check the hotend. Reload the filament and push it through by hand to make sure it's not jammed. If the nozzle is fine and it still looks like you're having extrusion issues, I would check the following things:

Wiring to the motor
Excess tension on the filament before it goes into the extruder (bowden/guide tubes, etc.)
The nozzle itself. Nozzles do wear out and they're relatively inexpensive so if I can't solve an extrusion issue with reloading the filament, the next thing I do is replace the nozzle.

For mechanical issues, it's a little more complicated. The very first thing I do is pluck the belts on my printers and make sure they're tight. It should play a low note somewhere around a G. If it's a thud, the belt is too loose. If it's a really high sound, the belt is probably too tight. Another thing I check is to make sure all linearly moving parts (such as the print bed, carriages for the nozzle, etc.) only move in the direction they are supposed to. Wiggle them back and forth and make sure nothing is loose on the printer.
If you don't find anything that would obviously indicate what the problem is, run the print again and watch it closely. If it's only messing up in a certain part of a print, make sure you watch what the printer is doing when it gets to those areas. Make note of the nozzle distance to the bed at startup, retraction and hopping during prints, and making sure no wires or anything are getting snagged. Listen to the printer too, if it's making any new noises such as clicking or grinding then you most likely have a problem on your hands.


text:
BL-Touch bed leveling seems to produce tilted bed level around Y-axis
I have a Tevo Tornado that I've outfitted with an official BL-Touch auto level sensor. I can see the bed probing run, and I can see the Z axis slowly adjust during x/y moves, so it's doing something. However, you can see that there appears to be a systematic tilt:

Any ideas what could be causing this? The bed, gantry and print head is tight, no wobble. Here's my start code:
G28 ; home all axes
G29
G1 Z5 F5000 ; lift nozzle

I have mesh leveling enabled with a 5x5 grid and correct probe offsets. The bed itself is on PETG printed standoffs instead of springs to eliminate any jitter.

would be good to know how it was before you've installed BL device :) was it better or worse before? as i suppose it was better than it is so my first idea is that the "correction" your device is giving has the opposite direction so it roughly doubles the difference

@darthpixel not sure why you think this made it worse, i made no mention of that. the behavior with the bltouch is better than manual calibration without.

i've said "as i suppose it was better..." as i supposed the problem "appeared" after installation of BL

The problem with the Tevo Tornado design is that the design is as such that the Z-axis is powered by a single stepper (under the assumption that you have not added a second Z stepper).
This means that the level relies on the rigidity of the X-axis assembly, more specific the play on the guide wheels. Apparently the BL-Touch level determination suffers (the up and down movement while probing) from this design as can be seen from the tilt around the Y-axis direction. This effect causing the tilted level plane is called hysteresis. Now that the Z-axis moves up and down you experience much more problems than using a mechanical switch. The effect is more pronounced when the mass of the hot end carriage is furthest from the Z-axis lead screw.
Note that an extra stepper can also cause tilted level when the second stepper does not move in sync (e.g. missing steps). In such designs, a single stepper (geared) belt driven 2 lead screw has better performance in that respect.

So is that the solution then? Add a second stepper?

Also - wouldn't this effect be present during calibration too, making the whole thing compensate for this?

@kolosy The hysteresis causes the tilted plane and the effect is more pronounced the further from the lead screw. No, it will not compensate as it measured wrong due to the design and the movement during the determination of the bed level. Yes, a second stepper would be a solution, a belt driven second lead screw is even better. The single stepper/single lead screw designs are cheap, but low quality solutions for Prusa i3/portal style printer designs

Do you have any links to details on how to upgrade to a belt driven second lead screw? Web searching for that gives results on belt driven instead of lead screw z axis.

@T.M. You could design your own. Or try this mod.

I know this is incredibly old at this point, but in case anyone stumbles upon this post like I did, I wanted to point out that there is no semicolon behind your G29 code, so it's not being read properly

This answer is incorrect, there is no need to put a semicolon behind the G-code; G-code is parsed by line where the semicolon denotes that everything after the semicolon needs to be discarded.

You only need the semicolon if you'd like to leave a comment on the line.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


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

Hi Sebastian, and welcome to 3D Printing.SE! I would recommend that in addition to reading some highly voted questions to gauge the standard expected, that you take a look at the [help] section relating to asking questions, in particular [ask], and take the [tour] for more information on how stack exchange works. Thanks :-) E.g. this question might be closed as unclear what you ask and would benefit a lot from correct punctuation and addition of photos to support your text. Please update your question by [edit]. We all love to help out!

A photo or diagram would be a very helpful addition to the question.

Thanks I will take a Pic and post it. I check the belt and it seems that they are a bit loose I will correct this and try again.

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

Cura denies to slice objects that are in any part out of bounds.

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


text:
Printrbot Metal Plus with new Cura
I am still using the originally-suggested version of Cura (for Ubuntu) for my Printrbot Metal Plus (NOT to be confused with the Simple Metal).
My printer was one of the ones with two print heads, and I'd like to make sure that configuring the new Cura software (mine is getting a bit odd due to age and possible slight incompatibility with the OS after all this time) goes correctly.
However, the new versions of Cura no longer list this printer, only having the Simple Metal in the list of preconfigured options.
How much might the manual "add printer" option break my configuration, and will anything cause actual damage to the printer (head/bed collisions, wrong axis measurements, etc)?
Or is there a way to copy the preset options from the old version to the new one? (NOT the .ini file that has MY saved configs, but the default file(s) that the setup wizard uses when opening the program and choosing a printer.)
All the alt-text is showing as white, and I can't connect via USB anymore. I can't quite confirm that it's due to it being old, but it's probably a good idea to update it by now, I assume.
[EDIT: My computer died, and took with it that old edition of cura. I have a replacement now, but I can't get that version anymore (to run or to get the settings out of). Does anyone have a list of settings or a config for say, PrusaSlicer or modern cura?]

Have you tried installing the new version and add a custom 3D printer? It is not very hard to set up. You need a few parameters like printer volume sizes, filament diameter and firmware flavor. It shouldn't be that difficult. Why not install a new version  next to the old and update the question when you run into setup problems? Note that limits and printer configuration are in the firmware.

atp that, cura allows to export printer settings. from which version do you want to switch zto which?

I've never had to migrate before, and I also didn't know how that data got stored. I did somehow cause the print head to crash into the print bed hard enough to render it permanently dented in one corner once, so I was a bit leery to take my chances.
Still, is there no way to add "default" printers to modern Cura?

You can add any printer to Cura or any other tool you want to use. It just need same basic settings as bed volume, firmware flavor, amount of extruders and bed center options. It isn't that difficult to add yourself.

I don't need to worry about microstepping or Z-increases per layer, etc? How much is it safe to leave default? I also know that it used custom start/end gcode...


text:
Using extruder motor as 4th axis
I am currently working with a hobbyist robotic arm (uArm Swift Pro) which runs a modified version of Marlin 3D printing firmware.
The arm can be used as a 3D printer as well thus it has an extruder motor. I am not using it as a 3D printer, instead I am reusing the extruder motor as 4th axis to move the arm along a rail. The problem I have run into is that the extruder motor is accelerating in steps, that is accelerating up to a certain speed holds that speed for a while (1-2 s) and then accelerates up to a higher speed holds that for a while. It then decelerates in the same fashion.
So my question is where in the Marlin code is planing made for the E-axis and is it any different from planing the speed of the other axis?

Movement of the steppers is controlled by the jerk and acceleration settings. Both are controlled/set in the Marlin configuration file.
/**
 * Default Max Acceleration (change/s) change = mm/s
 * (Maximum start speed for accelerated moves)
 * Override with M201
 *                                      X, Y, Z, E0 [, E1[, E2[, E3[, E4]]]]
 */
#define DEFAULT_MAX_ACCELERATION      { 3000, 3000, 100, 10000 }

/**
 * Default Acceleration (change/s) change = mm/s
 * Override with M204
 *
 *   M204 P    Acceleration
 *   M204 R    Retract Acceleration
 *   M204 T    Travel Acceleration
 */
#define DEFAULT_ACCELERATION          3000    // X, Y, Z and E acceleration for printing moves
#define DEFAULT_RETRACT_ACCELERATION  3000    // E acceleration for retracts
#define DEFAULT_TRAVEL_ACCELERATION   3000    // X, Y, Z acceleration for travel (non printing) moves

/**
 * Default Jerk (mm/s)
 * Override with M205 X Y Z E
 *
 * "Jerk" specifies the minimum speed change that requires acceleration.
 * When changing speed and direction, if the difference is less than the
 * value set here, it may happen instantaneously.
 */
#define DEFAULT_XJERK                 10.0
#define DEFAULT_YJERK                 10.0
#define DEFAULT_ZJERK                  0.3
#define DEFAULT_EJERK                  5.0

/**


text:
Add a laser module to Reprap Guru Prusa i3
I have a Reprap Guru Prusa i3 v2 3D printer. Here is a link to the 192 MB manual. And here is the link to the resources page for the Reprap Guru. Page 58 of the manual discusses electronics.
I purchased a 5.5 W laser from an online resource (AliExpress). It has its own controller module. It has one connector with 3 pins

12 V
Gnd
PWM

I want to now connect the laser module in-place of the 3D printer nozzle. I have been able to install it physically, but not sure how to connect it to the Reprap Guru Prusa i3 board.
I am not an electrical engineer, but I am capable of connecting wires with clear instructions. Any pointers on how to connect this module to the 3D printer board is appreciated.
Updates:

The board of my 3D printer is an Arduino Mega 2560 board.
I have been able to power the laser on using the fan connections and it can burn stuff (so it works). I have connected to the D9 pins
Now need to figure out where to connect the PWM from the laser module to the Arduino Mega 2560 board

Welcome to 3dPrinting.SE!

Ensure that you have correct safety glasses for the frequency of your laser diode. There are many versions of laser safety glasses, but you must match your laser to the glasses, when using such a high power diode laser. Ensure also that anyone within view of the machine has these glasses as well. Reflections from a five watt laser will destroy tissue without the awareness of the victim. You may already be aware of this consideration.

Yes glasses are covered. Have gotten the setup work without PWM. Need that to achieve grayscale

The ideal would be to change out all the plexiglass in the enclose with the equivalent of the safety glasses for the frequency of you laser.  Otherwise, you need to restrict access during laser operation.

By connecting to the D9 output header (see RAMPS 1.4 shield schematic below) you only have 2 wires that represent a scheduled load and ground. You actually need to connect the positive (red) lead to the power supply 12 V and the negative (black) lead to the ground. The third wire (usually a different color) needs to be connected to the actual D9 in your example; note that this one is connected to the MOSFET! And as such not readily available, it is far more easy to use an other free pin.

Just use the PWM pin (attached to the MOSFET) of the print cooling fan (that schedules the MOSFET), you can then schedule the laser power with G-code M106, e.g. M106 S127 to select half the power (S255 would be max power). Alternatively, and probably a much better solution is that you can use any free (but exposed) pin of your microprocessor; you can set the value of that pin using G-code M42.

M42 switches a general purpose I/O pin. Use M42 Px Sy to set pin x to value y, when omitting Px the LEDPIN will be used.

The only electrical wiring you need to do is to attach a wire (solder or connect to a header) to bundle that with a power and ground wire and route that to the laser module.
Note that the PWM pins of the Mega are numbered D2 through D13. Also, D44, D45 and D46 are also PWM capable. Checking the RAMPS 1.4 (the board/shield of the Reprap Guru) pinout, you will see that D8, D9 and D10 are used for the MOSFETs (and as such not easily available and would require soldering). E.g. D2 and D3 are used by the X max/min endstops (note that most printers don't use an X-max, so pin D2 may be free on your machine).
For your purpose, any of the following pins can be used: D2, D4-7, D1112-13 and D44-46.
Best option would be the D11 pin (on second thoughts, D4 might be a much better option as the timer associated with PWM on pin D11 is internally used in Marlin for generating interrupts); it has a pin you can connect to the SERVO header pin.
The image shows the location of the pins:

An example to connect a laser module is seen in this image:

Great details and I can confirm the the board in your image matches what I have. Are you referring to D2, D4-7, D11-13 and D44-46? Also seems like the cooling fan was only connected to D9 (power), so I am not sure how it's PWM connection can be leveraged her

There are plenty of other pins to use, just look them up in the schematics, you can edit the schematic yourself if you want to encircle them, but that is not necessary for answering the question. Do not use the +/- under D9, you could use the pin that is attached to the MOSFET, but don't bother, there are plenty more free pins to use! The answer explains what you can use. I would not solder if I were you, but you could, it would work! Best option would be the D11 pin; it has a pin you can connect to the SERVO header pin.

Okay that helps. Clarifying my understanding. (1) connect the PWM wire from the laser to D11. (2) connect the power wires to 5A power supply in pins on the ramp 1.4 board.

I was able to control the laser by sending the M42 P11 S0 and M42 P11 S255 codes. The laser does not turn on with any other SXX value. Saw this article (https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?147,651203) which says that D11 is being used by a timer. Changed to pin D4 and am able to control any power level by sending M42 P4 SXX. Now testing if printing in grayscale actually works, the purpose behind the question.


text:
Why is the center of my glass print bed lower than the corners?
I have a new Creality Ender 3.
I suspect that I have not adjusted the eccentric nuts correctly, on the X-axis head carriage mounts.
Even after a glass bed upgrade, using the Level Corners routine of the TH3D firmware, I can get the head to scrape a sheet of paper all 4 corners but that same sheet of paper does not then scrape the head in the center, unless I fold that paper in half.
I could understand this if the rail on which the hot end travels is very slightly higher at the side opposite the extruder.  I have tried turning the eccentric nut on that side until the head does trap the paper, but when I then repeat the Level Corners routine, the gap at the center has come right back.
I already adjusted the eccentric nut on the extruder end because the wheels on the hot end carriage were showing an accumulation of brown dust in a ring around each wheel, which I heard was likely a sign that the carriage was "too tight."
So basically, I am messing around with the eccentric nuts at both ends of the X-axis rail, chasing two problems at the same time, but I don't really know what I am doing.
Recommendations?

Could be a bent x axis rail? Are the gaps at center x independent of y?

Is the glass flat? Put a metal ruler on its side to check. There are known slates of glass that are not flat. A BLTouch sensor could help out in such cases. Please [edit] your question to tell if the glass is flat or not. Else you need to look at the X carriage linear support rail!

I'm voting to close this question as it appears to be abandoned by the OP as repeated requests for information are not answered. This question is not answerable without more information.

Try flipping the glass over, and see if it now bulges up in the middle.  You may simply need to replace the glass or try another build surface.

This seems to be a common problem with ender-3 and cr-10 printers from Creality. Mine is the same way but not enough to keep prints from adhering.
Typically the aluminum bed is not perfectly flat. If it’s not the glass may be able to flex enough that it can make a difference. There are a few ways to try to fix it.

Shim the low spots in the aluminum bed with aluminum foil or another thin material. Then the glass will sit on a flatter more well supported surface.
Bend the aluminum bed until it is flat.
Add a 5th leveling point under the middle of the bed. You could either make it adjustable which would be tricky to get to or create a support piece accurately or get one close and shim it.

The shimming process is probably the easiest and the one I may end up doing. But whether you shim it or do the other trick you need to measure for points that are out of flat.
If you get a decent straightedge and some feeler gauges and/or or shine a bright light from the other side and look for spots of light between the straightedge and the aluminum bed you can see where you need to shim or otherwise adjust it. You’ll need to move it at various angles through the center and other spots on the bed. That way you can see whether it is just the middle or if the edges are an issue too.
Also, once you check the aluminum bed, check the glass as it may not be flat either.
There was a YouTube video on the cr-10 I think that showed part of the shimming process and checking for level. I’ll try to see if I can find it to add a link here.
I still didn't find the video I was looking for, but here is a useful related one that talks about tramming the bed (what 3d printing people call leveling)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcAmZqb-ZEE
And here's a reddit thread about the issue. Someone incorrectly says the glass plate can't flex that much but it certainly can. We're talking small tolerances. Even granite slabs flex small amounts.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CR10/comments/7d7gyh/aluminum_bed_warped_cant_get_it_to_do_anything/

I used 6cm squares of foil in the center. Foil is ~10x thinner than paper, so I ended up using about 24 layers (6 strips folded in half twice) to get mine dialed in.

I had the same problem with an Ender 3 out of the box. I ended up adding a thin raft under each print. This would solve it if you don't want to do the manual adjusting.

I had the same exact issue, you have to make sure all of your printer is leveled, start with the base, than the poles that hold your x axis gantry. there are numerous youtube videos on how to do that.. make sure it's all leveled and try again.. this tip helped a few people already

I'm not sure why people downvoted my answer, it's what made my printer and numerous others work, i had 2 weeks of researching till i found out this is the actual problem, you have to reset it all


text:
Could you use ultrasonic vibrations instead of a roller with an SLS/SLM printer?
I've been thinking, SLS/SLM printers currently use a roller to spread 3d printing substrate, but wouldn't ultrasonic vibrations spread the substrate more cleanly, accurately, and with greater density than a roller?

No
The problem is twofold. Resonance and Granular convection
Resonance
Let's start with an empty box. We toss in some powder to create the first layer and use an ultrasonic to create a first layer. What happens? The bed starts to resonate depending on the sound you send into it in patterns - and the powder starts to form valleys and ridges along them as one can see in this video.
Granular Convection
What happens if one shakes a box of fine granulate that contains larger items? Granular convection happens! All items raise simultaneously and the small items start to fall first, resulting in them getting under the larger ones, so as a result end up pushing the large items up.
Because of both effects, there won't be an even layer and it would raise the items printed, even if we managed to get good layers.


text:
Entwined fiber-filled filament stops extruding after a few layers
I recently took my first shot at printing with specialty filament -- Entwined by 3-D Fuel -- on a Lulzbot TAZ having an 0.5mm nozzle. (Note that this is the original Entwined, not the mid-2018 "v2" with smaller fibers; Just purchased from MicroCenter this weekend, and saw a 2017 production date when reading the label).
While the filament in question can be reliably and consistently extruded at full speed (as with the "Continuous Load" button), I've repeatedly had it stop extruding partway through my prints. This is much worse with lower layer heights. Even when this has happened and several MM have been "printed" with no content, pausing the print, going to the load/unload menu, and telling it to extrude filament at full speed indicates that it's not by any means fully clogged, but only failing to extrude at the configured speed.
Where should I start in tuning to try to get a reliable print with this specialty material?
I'm using Cura LE 3.6.9 for slicing. The center item of the three below was printed at 210C, with the most successful at 0.25mm layer height (Cura's default of 0.1mm had far worse results -- not included in the below photo -- with the base layer almost not being there at all; 0.175 did somewhat better).
I'm using the bed heated to 45C, in line with the manufacturer's guidance (that a heated bed is optional, but should be set to 45-60C).

Welcome to 3dPrinting.SE! What extruder/bed temps are you running? When you say it "repeatedly" stops printing, is it in the same place or anywhere close to it? What layer height are you using? Can you give us the rest of your settings as well as possibly a pic of what it looks like when it stops printing?

@Pᴀᴜʟsᴛᴇʀ2, thank you for the welcome! I didn't retain the GCode for every print attempt, so I haven't been able to exactly replicate all my settings; that said, I've added some photos, and what settings I could find.

"Entwined hemp filament can be printed on any machine capable of printing with PLA using standard PLA settings." - this suggests to me it is best to he treated as a fiber filled PLA, which means usually large (0.4mm+) nozzle and thick layers to prevent fibers clogging the nozzle.

@Trish, thank you! I'm already at a 0.5mm nozzle, so we're good on that count. Needing to use thick enough layers is pretty clearly part of my problem; advice from someone who's had success with fiber-filled PLAs (and thank you for pointing out the wording there; I'll edit the title to be more specific) on what constitutes good layer size might well be the core of what I need.

I've found that fiber-filed filament is much more reliable through a .8mm nozzle.

Much later, I also found out that when I was encountering this issue my machine had a faulty thermistor, and thus was not consistently holding the correct temperature. That likely had more than a little to do with the problem.

I've managed to get a successful print! The key was to keep the material moving quickly. The settings I've customized are as follows:

Print Speed: 70 mm/s
Layer Height: 0.4 mm
Default Printing Temperature: 215C

...and perhaps not as necessarily:

Shell Wall Thickness: 0.8 mm
Wall Line Count: 3
Alternate Extra Wall: True

Also, I've found it important to print a skirt (perhaps a double-walled one), and watch the first-layer closely and be willing to push more material through and restart: The material in the hotend can easily form a partial clog while the printer runs through its auto-leveling / head-cleaning routine, thus needing to have more material pushed through before the job starts in earnest.
By the way, the model is https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1993747, by Holodrio on Thingiverse.

with th ethickness, nozzle size is important.


text:
Why does the painters tape have to be blue?
I have been looking at getting some painters tape to use on the glass plate for better print adhesion, and everything I read suggests the blue painters tape, such as this:

However, this white tape is considerably cheaper:

This looks like normal masking tape to me.
Is masking tape ok, or is the blue painter's tape preferable? If the latter, then why is that so? What is so special about the blue tape? Is it a different material?

I don't have a "sure" answer for you, but I bet it's because it doesn't leave residue on the bed. The masking tape would work fine, because it's the texture which gives it the grip. You just don't want to have all that goooooo on your bed. BTW, there's green painter's tape as well, though I haven't tried it in printing ... used it for painting and it's great for getting off of the working surface ... better than even blue.

Interesting. So, it is to do with the adhesive side, rather than the side that will be printed upon..? I hadn't thought of that.

Do note that many Chinese printer kits include heatbeds with "white tape", so it is possible to use. Personally I'm no fan of tape at all, lots of work and maintenance, I rather print directly onto the aluminium bed or on glass using a proper adhesive like 3DLAC (or alternatively strong hairspray, Dimafix, etc.),

The colour of the tape denotes it's use. E.g. duck tape tends to be grey.

I always thought the tape was blue so that it would stand out against the material it's used on, so you can make sure to remove all of it after the fact.  This of course would be problematic if your material was also blue, in which case you'd want some other color.

@Pᴀᴜʟsᴛᴇʀ2 - Do you mean this extra strong adhesive green tape? Scotchblue 20602A Masking Tape for Hard-to-Stick Surfaces, Green, 48 mm

No, what @Trish mentioned in her answer, Frog Tape.

Try some on a small area. I just started 3D printing two weekends ago, finally getting good results this weekend.  PLA on name brand blue painters tape is working well.  Good adhesion and the tape can be peeled up to start lifting the part after the bed cools from 60C to about 55C so that a new pieces can be started (chess set, lots of pieces).  Other tapes may not adhere as well, or be removed as easily after being heated for hours at time. (I've also been able to lift the piece slowly and left the tape intact, getting 4 or 5 pieces printed at the same spot. 6th piece lifted after 5 minutes)

My blue tape is 3M brand, and it leaves no residue on my AL bed when peeled off. Outer packaging on the roll is marked "Scotch Blue Original" and the inner cardboard roll says 3M.

Yes, it's cheaper, and has the added advantage that it doesn't work too well, and leaves amazing amounts of crud on your build plate.  I ran out of blue tape one winter weekend and, instead of braving the snow and slush, substituted ordinary wide masking tape.  It took me hours to get the crud off the build plate when I removed the tape a few days (and about six prints) later.

Some people report that blue painter's tape doesn't leave residue nor damage surfaces, whereas masking tape does: http://reslife.umd.edu/global/documents/halls/drywallsurfaceguide.pdf

Of course, I don't know what kind of tapes you have. My experience with blue tapes is, that they seem in general softer and "nicer" than white tapes. Their structure appears denser and they seem to have longer "furs" while the white ones are "dryer" and "sharper"
This surface makes the blue tapes I sourced more suitable as the molten filament catches more furs.
Here are magnified photos of my comparable tapes. Unfortunately, my microscope is pretty lame but at least we can take a look on closeups:

This comparison shows the lower density of my white tape better:

to complete the picture here goes angle photos which reveals some more details

above shows that this white tape is made out of flat plastic fiber as they shine when illuminated from different angles
this could lead to another question
is such tape melted in any way in contact with extruded filament?
worth to analyse...

"blue tape" is just one product, while most other painters tapes are of various construction.

what do you mean by "one product"? a market-name?

@Trish did you just downvote? would you please elaborate why?

Blue tape is just a descriptor that describes exactly what is on the tin: it is blue. But nothing more. There are many many different types of painters tape. There are several of them that are blue. ScotchBlue is what is meant most often. Nothing makes a tape in blue better than for example green one or bleached one.

if you are able to generalise the question this way the question is why you are not able to generalise the answer the same way? i've compared two tapes explaining my observations in context of the question. blue/white was mentioned in the question so i did refer to them as i also have them at hand. would you please be so kind and explain why this answer deserved downvote? is it false or misleading? is it not-in-subject? is it incomplete? does it fulfil any aspect which should cause a downvote?

With the blue tape I have experience with this is the case as well. It is higher quality, denser fibers, and a better quality adhesive. It has nothing to do with being blue other than being a higher quality tape that was the color blue and that became known. At this point I’m sure you can buy a lower quality blue tape as well.

I have experenced the contrary:  ScotchBlue was good, but other blue tapes were worse than the yellow ones. you can't generalize the answer without adressing the difference

@Trish i think i did point it exactly and i did refer to the differences >>"all my blue tapes" >>"are denser and they have more longer furs" >>"this makes blue tape more adhesive as filament catches more furs". if you have opposite experience - it's better to write own answer or comment than downvote the other just because you disagree - this leads to nonsens - when you downvote because in your country there is no blue tape available or you've never used it so both question and answer are wrong

"all my blue tapes are X" could be any manufacturer. it is like saying "all my blue pants have pockets". You easily see that the blue pants of other people might not have pockets. You might improve by stating which ones you use or have tested.

@Trish you are right - now i know where is the only proper version of the world - i think there is no point to continue. feel free to review all my answers and downvote as many of them (for sure) don't match such world... ah... and my english is also good cause to downvote. whole society will benefit for sure

That would be spiteful, and I won't do that. All I would like you to improve on this answer is to add where you source your tape, making it less generic as there are tons of different tapes out there. The Grammar I fixed up for you.

The photos are very useful indeed. I had been looking at super cheap unbranded tape from China, which now seems to not be such a good idea.

@Oscar - hard to say. in fact MY white tapes seem to be coated. maybe that's why then seem to be dry and "slick". i'll try to make microscope photos from some angle

Leading on from your final comment, see Does cheap “plasticy” blue painter tape actually melt when printed upon?
Ask

read first
When you use painters tape, you need to level your printer with the tape applied. You need to relevel if you change the tape type.
Basics
It's not any blue tape that printers love. There are basically two factors that make a tape useful:

It has to stick during printing.
Its surface has to allow the filament to stick to it.

Let's look at some different tapes and their suitability - from my own experience.
ScotchBlue
The original blue tape is actually ScotchBlue for delicate surfaces by 3M. It has a good surface to stick to and at the same time an adhesive that does not degrade to unsuitability by heating. The delicate surface one is just as good as the all surfaces type. But don't use the outdoor type, it is sealed too much.
FrogTape
FrogTape has an adhesive that has no problems with heating, the surface is sometimes a little smoother. Its green variant is about as useful as ScotchBlue, while the yellow variant is easier to remove - which can be an issue when the printhead is not calibrated correctly.
Generic painters tape
Generic painters tape is a can of worms - there are so many different ones it is hard to describe. I have had very good off-yellow rolls from the dollar store of the 'fine surface' type - as in the tape had a fine surface - and their adhesive was good and didn't degrade too much under heat. The followup roll was a little thinner of material and released under heat so it can be a hit and miss - it's ok for starting out though.
I also tried a roll of UHU painters tape of the easy remove type and it was horrible, as it didn't want to stick after the nozzle went over it once even on an unheated bed.
Generic blue colored tape
I even tried two blue colored tapes from different dollar/hobby stores. One was ok-ish and had a similar result as the good dollar store tape in look, but left a blue shadow on the base of the print after two or three prints. The other was showing similar behavior to other mild-adhesive/easy peel tapes.
Conclusion
It's not color that matters, it is the formulation. If you must use blue tape, spend the extra bucks for quality. Some bloggers compared other tapes, tested ScotchBlue vs Kapton, discussed the benefits of either, discussed the ScotchBlue tape in depth.
While in general, I prefer to print on the surface of my (blue) BuildTak (clone), I occasionally whip out painters tape on an unheated surface for very delicate prints: I remove the print together with the tape from the surface, which allows better handling. Sacrificing a layer of tape only costs some cents after all while breaking a print is hours and filament for much more  money wasted.

I like this comparison of the blue tapes. Very useful. It would appear that branded tapes are superior - that is good to know. The Frog tape looks most interesting, especially as  Pᴀᴜʟsᴛᴇʀ2 also mentioned it.

To answer your question, it doesn't have to be blue tape!

To be honest, tape is not my favorite bed adhesion solution, there are plenty other options that work better than tape.
Often you'll see references to blue painters tape (of a certain brand) to be used as a bed adhesion layer because many people have good experience with that. I have tried several tapes, white/cream to blue from various vendors but found that neither of the tapes satisfied my personal needs. To name a few: cleaning, application, preparation, repair, tear-off, no glossy first layer, color of tape sticking to printed part, etc. did not make tape a favorite bed adhesion solution. Instead I've been printing directly onto aluminium and glass using an adhesive (3DLAC or DimaFix) to stick filament to the bed. Use a wet cloth to wipe residue off, spray can to apply a new layer, et voila, just print, it always sticks! Glue stick is also a possibility.
So while the community screams "use blue tape", you just cannot use any blue tape from any tape manufacturer. There is no standard to which blue tape has to comply. Generally, speaking from painting experience, many blue tapes release much more easily after use while the white/cream paper tape sticks better and often tears (but this is frequently the tape that is already applied on heated beds of many Chinese printer kits, see image above). Not all tapes are equal: I have used blue tape from a local cheap source that will not stick to the build plate when it heats up, even if properly cleaned.
I'm more inclined to think that the color of the tape is just a way to distinguish yourself from the market back when the first manufacturer introduced the tape. Now that it is more common, others have adopted the color mimicking the tape they want to copy. It is more about the adhesive than it is about the surface of the tape (as in: "tape is rougher than the substrate you stick it on"), also you read that many people using blue tape need to prepare it by cleaning it (remove waxy layer) and sanding it.
IMHO, you just need to experiment yourself with several solutions and see what works best for you, could be that the white/cream tape from a local source also does the job. So basically, your tape does not have to be blue, it has to work!

to my knowledge, one of the first blue tapes was ScotchBlue by 3M, which has good results, while I had better results with cheap dollar store tape than some no-name blue tape.

I've used generic and 3M blue tapes for many purposes other than printing (painting, holding finished woodwork together during repair, ...) and they've all consistently nit damaged the surface with their adhesive, whereas normal masking tapes always do damage it. For printing however the non-adhesive surface is probably what you care about. Adhesives won't harm glass anyway and probably won't harm aluminum.

@R.. isn't every (paper) tape rougher than glass or aluminum.... the adhesive surface is very important, you don't want it to come loose and form bubbles, I've seen that happen with a blue tape brand.

Well yeah but they differ from tape to tape I'd think. I'm spoiled to have joined the fun post-buildtak so I've never had to fight with adhesion myself. My point was just that the motivation for using blue tape might not apply with common surfaces it's used on for printing.

@R.. Indeed new type build surfaces make printing way more easy! :)

3DLAC seems to be the way to go then - if not using branded tape.

@Greenonline See e.g. this answer.

The second image isn't exactly painter's tape. Both images are types of masking tape, but the common manila/cream-colored masking tape vs the blue or green painter's tape typically has three features that make it less desirable for bed adhesion:

Stronger glue holding the tape to the bed, that will make it harder to change later.
Narrower strips, so it's harder and takes longer to place the tape on the bed.
Thicker, softer material. This is good for filament adhesion, but bad for separating from the filament after the print and accurately leveling the bed.

Again: those are only typical arrangements. You can get blue painters tape at the same narrow width as manila masking tape, and you can get wider or thin manila tape. It's more a matter of what you'll commonly find for sale, and in all probability the manila/cream-colored tape will work just fine.

I was looking at getting 50 mm wide tape. There are sheets 200x200 but they are rather pricey, and the brand isn't specified.

authors: ปิยพงษ์ จันทร์ขาว


text:
What is the correct way to export SVG in order to convert to STL?
I made a simple logo using Inkscape, after saving as an svg file, but when I export that file into Fusion 360 something strange happened.
Multiple times I convert some images (png, svg) to svg file. The process I use is this:

Scan logo image (scanner or smartphone)
Open image with Inkscape
Using the stroke, generate the shape
All process for generate and save

This process explained above always works for me, when I copy the shape using the stroke in Inkscape.
However, when I was do the process using the shape generator - for example, rectangles, circles, squares, etc. - and export the file into the Fusion 360, it doesn't work.
1 - Inkscape logo

2 - Logo import to Fusion 360

In the example above, the first word does not appear.

Considering the simplicity of your sample design - i.e. basically only two different Z-levels, easily distinguished by color - I'd recommend one of the online image-to-3D model converters.  Here are two I've used now and then.  You may have to save your image as png or jpg instead of svg.
selva3d   and 3dp.rocks

Thanks for your help, but is so limited. The results are these, model's link

It seems you use Fusion 360. So I will answer for that, based on Autodesk Help:
Make the SVG
You need to design your SVG to be just the outlines of your logo. That you can easily do in Inkscape by setting the fill to transparent. Then you need to define a size before exporting it properly.
Import the SVG

Insert Menu

Insert SVG

Select the plane you want to put the SVG on
Select the folder icon

choose the SVG

adjust the sizing and positioning
OK

Thanks, but i do that, i think the problem come from the method i do for make the logo. I go to see some videos about to use inkscape.

@PedroMiguelPimientaMorales it might be your process of creating and exporting the SVG that is flawed. Exporting is rather straight forward.

Thanks for your recomendation, i will try to use the save as copy option.

authors: ไวยวิทย์ ชมจันทร์


text:
Material for autoclave-able part
I’m designing a part that will need to be autoclaved—it will be under steam at 121°C for about 15 min per job and I will want it to be able to go through the autoclave repeatedly. I ran a test PLA part through the autoclave and it warped noticeably; based on their glass transition temperatures, ABS (105ºC) and PETG (80ºC) would probably also not hold up. For a consumer-grade FDM printer, what filament materials that could be used for parts that could be autoclaved?

What do you consider common filaments? This PEEK filament specifically lists its resistance to autoclaving up to 250C. https://www.3dxtech.com/carbonx-carbon-fiber-peek-3d-printing-filament/  The other PEEK and PEKK filaments there also list high continuous use temperatures and glass transition temps. It takes nozzle temperatures in the 400C range and bed temp above 130C, but it you want high temperature resistance you're going to need to be able to print at fairly high temperatures.

Doesn't PLA need >180C to melt? My spool from MG Chemical is labelled 200-210C. 121C is way below that. https://www.digikey.com/products/en/maker-diy-educational/3d-printing-filaments/944?k=pla&k=&pkeyword=pla&sv=0&pv2053=1&sf=0&FV=ffe003b0%2Cfffc01d9&quantity=&ColumnSort=0&page=1&stock=1&pageSize=25  I don't see any under 185C as the lowest temp. I've only been 3D printing about a week (after solving several assembly issues), but I would think 60C below the lowest material extruding temperature would be okay.  ABS is even  higher, I recall 230 being the lowest extrudable temp.

@CrossRoads: I had PLA wine charms that "melted" in the dishwasher, which doesn't even get to boiling...

Huh. I haven't tried doing any heat tests with the few pieces we've printed, will have to look into that for durability.

@CrossRoads I edited my question to correct it: the problem isn't that these materials melt at 121ºC, it's that they soften and warp at below that temperature.

@T.M. I was afraid that the problem was that if I wanted something temperature resistance, I'd need to be able to print at higher temperatures than my printer can accommodate. I have a Prusa i3 MK3s which used an E3D v6 hotend.

I don’t have the expertise others here do but the e3d v6 can reach high temps especially if it has a higher temp pt100 thermocouple and compatible heater block. The bigger problem would be the heated bed that might not be hot enough. Also if you autoclave at 121C, there must be some filament in the middle between that and peek that can handle that temperature.

Anything that prints that hot also needs an enclosure.

I'm also considering 3D printing a mold that could accommodate a material suitable for autoclaving or using another fab method altogether, such as CNC milling.

Either of those would work too. It looks like you tested with PLA and it warped some but not too bad. Did you test PETG? The glycol is supposed to keep the PET from crystallizing and it may work for you. I’m curious if you have a chance to try it.

@T.M. I do have a spool of PETG that I haven’t even tried. Good tip.

It might seem that common 3D printer materials such as PLA and ABS should be capable of being autoclaved—unfortunately. However, although their melting temperatures are higher than autoclave temperature (typically 121ºC), their glass transition temperatures are below that limit so they can warp or undergo creep deformation.
Sterilization of numerous plastics is described here, with PLA, ABS, and PET all being described as "poor" for autoclaving. For each "good" material on that list, I looked for filament by Googling and consulting material guides from Prusa and Matter Hackers.
Polypropylene (PP) or acetal (POM, also known as Delrin) are the best choices. Filament is available for PEEK, PEI (ULTEM), FEP, PPSU, and PPS but these filaments are expensive (>$100/kg) and require high extruder temperatures (>300ºC).
In contrast, PP is about $50/kg and uses an extruder temperature of 254ºC; POM is similarly priced and uses an extruder temperature of 210ºC. Nylon (depending on the exact type) and HT-PLA may also be worth considering.
"High temperature" filaments are not worthwhile for this application. Again, they're expensive and, more significantly, do not work well with consumer-grade 3D printers. For example, the upper limit for a Prusa i3 MK3s is about 280ºC—the thermistor only is good up to that temperature. Higher temperatures would require swapping out sensors and modifying firmware and building an enclosure. It's been done. Printers designed for high-temperature filaments easily cost thousands of dollars.
This question was previously asked on Reddit a few times but this analysis is more comprehensive.

At  work, colleagues print PLA parts and cycle them in an autoclave session. But for high temperatures and long exposure and frequently reuse, they print them in aluminium.

@0scar Yeah, my test part is still functional after going through the autoclave but it warped enough that I don’t think it would remain useful after multiple cycles. I wish I could print aluminum!

TIL POM is a low-print-temp solution for high-temp parts, wow. Seems, like TPU which is also a candidate but flexible, it's a glass way below room temp and transition isn't relevant.

You need to order the part printed by an SLA machine in PA, preferably with 10 % mineral or glass content. The heat deflection temperature is suitably high for any autoclaving you'll do, and the material will resist most every that your lab and throw at it. I also went down this road with a part for my own lab and found no reasonable solution from a consumer level FDM printer.

You might want to tell people what PA is, and what additive manufacturing technologies it is used with. And that its heat deflection temperature is under 100 ºC, so only simple shapes will live up to repeated autoclaving.

PA is Polyamid, aka Nylon. SLA Printed Polyamid is generally not auoclaveable due to the structure: it is not solid but porous and soaks in water.


text:
3D Printing bevel gears
This is not entirely a 3D printing question, but closely related since I want to print parts for a prototype.
The problem : I need to create a mechanism with 2 parallel shafts, at some distance apart, rotating in the same direction, either clock- or anticlock-wise.
The distance (> 1m) makes it impractical to set a chain of gears between the shafts, so my approach is to have a third shaft at 90 degrees with bevel gears; the driving motor will attach to this third shaft.
Not being a mechanical engineer, I tried to understand a bit more about bevel gears, and found out there are straight, spiral and other types. For printing I came across a very good OpenSCAD script that creates bevel gears with angled teeth.

So here's the 1st question : for any type of bevel gear except the straight ones, does the geometry of the teeth impact on the direction of rotation ?
Since I don't want different rotation speeds on the parallel shafts, and there is no constraint of the rotation speed of the third, my plan is to create gears with identical sizes.
2nd question : Should I use larger or smaller gears ? What's the impact of the number of teeth on the gear operation for the bevel gears ?
And last, but not least, any hints, comments or suggestions on printing the gears is appreciated.
Thank you all in advance.

Hi Stefanu, welcome to 3D Printing.SE! Unfortunately the question has nothing to do with 3D printing and as such will likely be closed. This would be a question to ask at Engineering.SE. Note, you could do it way more simple using a belt and pulleys! That is how I coupled the 2 Z lead screws of one of my 3D printers.

Thanks for the tip; before posting, I looked for a more appropriate place to ask, but I finally posted here because I am also looking for printing tips for the gears.

As for the belt and pulleys, I was afraid it may cause tension problems and vibrations may cause the belt to slip or even come off the driving wheel. That's why I was looking into bevel gears.

@0scar I would say that questions about designing gears suitable for 3D-printing is highly on-topic, and should not be discouraged. Perhaps the OP needs to re-focus his question, and also split it up into several questions -- one topic per question.

@Mick, indeed and I certainly agree, good point to notice! But all questions address gear design, the final only states that it should be printable. It would be better to first find out what type of transmission is best (ask at Engineering) and then ask here if it is feasible to print. Otherwise, the options are just too many.

Thank you all for the comments. I will ask the same question minus the 3D printing on Engineering, then re-phrase the question here.

Sure looks like an exact dupe of one we closed a couple weeks ago!

Wouldn’t a bicycle type chain and gears work? Or a toothed belt? I agree here though you should edit and refocus the question to the 3d printing part.


text:
No extrusion, but manual extrusion works
I just bought and build my first 3d printer (HE3D K280 with Marlin) and I'm encountering some problems with Cura 4 and Repetier. When I load and slice a part, the printer does not extrude anything during printing. However, when I manually extrude like 100mm (G1 F100 E100) it does work. Now I'm suspecting the problem lies with the gcode file which is generated with Cura since it contains very small values for E:
 ;Layer height: 0.2
 ;Generated with Cura_SteamEngine 4.0.0
 M140 S60
 M105
 M190 S60
 M104 S200
 M105
 M109 S200
 M82 ;absolute extrusion mode
 G28 ;Home
 G1 Z15.0 F6000 ;Move the platform down 15mm
 ;Prime the extruder
 G92 E0
 G1 F200 E3
 G92 E0
 G92 E0
 G1 F1500 E-6.5

;LAYER_COUNT:250
;LAYER:0
M107
G0 F3600 X-7.753 Y4.378 Z0.3
;TYPE:SKIRT
G1 F1500 E0
G1 F1800 X-8.127 Y3.918 E0.01115
G1 X-8.35 Y3.57 E0.01893
G1 X-9.088 Y2.287 E0.04677
G1 X-9.348 Y1.754 E0.05792
G1 X-9.483 Y1.376 E0.06547
G1 X-11.413 Y-4.956 E0.18999
G1 X-11.547 Y-5.534 E0.20115
G1 X-11.602 Y-6.124 E0.2123
Etc...

Does anyone know how to fix this?

How many heads is your printer capable of supporting concurrently? Have you tried entering a line with only T0 before your first G1 move? Do you know if you're slicing for linear or volumetric E values, and which your printer requires?

I does supprt 2 heads, however I'm using just 1. I just added T0 but unfortunately this did not work.. I'm slicing for linear but i tried with both and it did not extrude with either option

First thought volumetric flow, but on second thoughts: "What is the filament diameter in the slicer?" It looks as if the diameter is too large.

Please edit this additional info into your question for future readers.

I think that you have the incorrect diameter specified (e.g. 2.85 mm instead of 1.75 mm) in your slicer; this also appears from a calculation, see below. Note that you can calculate from extruded volume entering the hotend, or deposited volume. For the first you could calculate the line width of the deposited line and verify that with the settings; from the second you can verify if the volume for the extruded filament equals filament volume based on extruded filament going into the hotend for an assumed line width. Do note that (certainly for first layers!) modifiers may be in place. This is merely to get a ballpark feeling for the chosen filament diameter.
If you look at the first move from:
G0 F3600 X-7.753 Y4.378 Z0.3

to:
G1 F1800 X-8.127 Y3.918 E0.01115

You can calculate the travelled distance $ s = \sqrt{{\Delta X}^2+{\Delta Y}^2} = 0.59\ mm$. Also, from these moves you can see that $0.01115\ mm$ of filament enters the extruder $(E)$.
The deposited volume ($V_{extruded_filament}$) of the printed line  equals the cross sectional area $\times$ length of the deposited filament path. Area could be defined as taken from e.g. the Slic3r reference manual to be:

Basically (as we apply conservation of mass) the filament volume $(V_{filament})$ entering the hotend need to be the same as the extruded filament volume $(V_{extruded_filament})$ leaving the nozzle; so $ A_{filament}\times E = A_{extruded\ filament}\times s $.
This latter equation can be solved for $w$ by filling out the known parameters. From this calculation follows that for $1.75\ mm$ filament you get a calculated line width of about $0.22\ mm$, and respectively for $2.85\ mm$ filament you get $0.46\ mm$ line widths.
As the nozzle diameter has not been specified in the question, but most commonly used nozzle diameter often is $0.4\ mm$, and modifiers for the first layer are at play to print thicker lines; you most probably have the have the wrong filament diameter set if you have a $1.75\ mm$ extruder setup. Basically it under-extrudes.

I'd have thought that at least a little material would get pushed out in this case -- perhaps the retraction commands (for the wrong diameter again) keep material from ever getting to the nozzle output?

@CarlWitthoft That would be in case the g-code is in relative coordinates, this is absolute. Not always after retraction, the nozzle is fully primed with the same length extrusion.

This was indeed one of the problems! Another problem was that it didnt save the option that I wanted to slice volumetric (which was needed for my printer after all, manual of K280 sucks). Thanks for your help! :)


text:
PID autotune fails under all conditions so far. Any ideas I haven't tried?
I got some Prusa i3 clones with Melzi boards with Marlin, or nearly so. One of them performed very well (considering that the board would reboot whenever power was applied to the build plate. But I digress) until finally the hot end failed, possibly due to me running it for two days with little respite. The replacement, a typical MK8 clone, installed almost painlessly but failed to start due to over-temperature conditions (we're talking as much as 45 °C over set temperature).  I tried the known solutions, continually reducing my P value (got down to 7 before I gave up) and attempting autotune. I also tried autotuning to both higher (230 °C) and lower (150 °C) temperatures.
None of these seemed to produce an autotune successfully, and the same error message temp to[sic] high appeared in all cases. Can anyone suggest something besides a new hot end (I have one on order, but what if I have the same problem with another new one)?

Maybe you can find some hints in this thread?

Nope. It pretty much tells me to do what I did (and wrote about above). I may have left out a few hours of details, though.  I am going with the idea that my replacment is a 12V hot end, and the requirement is 24V hot end.  I bagged one and will try it this evening...and tomorrow will update.
Watch this space.

You can manually tune the PID.

Yes I know. Turns out I'm using a 12V hot end and should be using 24V.  I looked up the resistance to be sure; so no amount of tuning the PID would fix that

You can always just limit the maximum PWM rate to supply to your 12V heater, via #define BANG_MAX 64
64 would have a 12V cartridge run in a 24V system as it if was a 12V system.
Make absolutely sure to enable thermal runaway protections, since a 12V cartridge on 24V can get very hot.

I like this idea, but I do not know how to change #defines (do I take it that I need to find the source code, modify the #defines, recompile and upload the code to the board?), as I only use either the front panel or gcodes to change PID values. #define BANG_MAX 64 64 sounds like it would open that sucker up all the way, though. Besides not understanding my #defines, did I misunderstand what BANG_MAX does?

Turns out I'm using a 12V hot end and should be using 24V. I looked up the resistance to be sure; so no amount of tuning the PID would fix that.

A 12V hotend with 24V supplied to it? That just means it's producing about 4x the power it should be. Not recommended, but I'm doing exactly that with my Fleabay machine. It's been a while since I messed with that machine's firmware, but you should be able to set the PWM of your hotend to a much lower value (start at 1/4th of what it should be for 12V) and then retry the PID tuning. See if that gets you anywhere. If you meant that you're running 12V through a 24V hotend though, you might just be S.O.L.

Just so. Rather than adjust my PID any further, I swapped out the 24V parts for 12V parts. My Prusa clone is now functional and I have made quite a few prints with it, all to my current satisfaction.
My thanks to the many helpful people here.


text:
Marlin Bed-Leveling Vs Skew Correction
I've added a G29 command in my starting script to do bed leveling process before every print. It works fine and compensates my bed during prints. But when I print larger models, they're all skewed in both XZ and YZ plane. So I decided to use Marlin's Skew Correction option.
I printed Calibration Squares and entered measurements for XZ and YZ plane. I left XY corrections as default (Because I have no problem in this plane).
Unfortunately it sounds like Bed-Leveling and Skew-Correction don't get along! Many different problems happen!!!

I get "Probing failed" error.
Z-axis doesn't move (moves for compensating but not for new layer)
Bed-Leveling process fails sometimes.
bed center (X=0,Y=0) gets shifted...

Is there a bug in Marlin? Or I have to find another way to correct my XZ and YZ skew-ness ?!?

It's probably best to notify the developers and open a bug report to report your findings. Do note that a print, made on an unlevelled bed, levels out in the first 10 layers or after about one cm. A cube printed on an uneven bed is therefore never perfectly square.

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because this should be answered by the developers after a bug report has been submitted. Otherwise it would be speculation on the implementation and the solution.

OK, I haven't got any response to my report...  close it. It's Allright.

You can always reopen it and answer it once you have gotten a response. Note that closing a question is not bad, it prevents the system to pop-up the question once in a while. Re-opening will be possible by community re-open or moderator intervention. Thanks for your understanding!

Could you add a link in your question to the bug report that you filed?


text:
PLA infill/perimeter-layer to mimic real bone hardness
I friend of mine is in need to have human bone printed for educational purpose. Of what I understood they will use it for practicing drilling in it and thus need the printed bone to mimic a real bone. He specified that he wanted them as hollow as possible and with the same (or close to the) density of real bone
Is there anyone who had done a similar print, what material did you choose and how much infill/perimiter-layer did you use.

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because this is a biomedical question

What you need to know is what the range of bone densities you'll run into, sorted by age, diet, gender, ... .  You will also need to know the macro-structure of bone, since it's not a uniform grid as produced with nearly all 3D-printer infill patterns.   This will not be easy.

I am voting to leave it open as it is a materials question.  Many/most of us are familiar with the hardness and density of bones.

Generally, if you care about achieving a specific structure inside the "interior" part of a model to be printed, that structure needs to be part of your model rather than generated by a slicer. If it were me, I would programmatically generate a generic pattern for the pockets of hollowness in OpenSCAD over a region slightly larger than the bone, then subtract it from the solid bone. After that, slicer settings will be mostly irrelevant since it will be constrained by reproducing the layer outlines with lots of holes in them.
I haven't done this, or anything really comparable, but it should work.

authors: Роман Гриднев


text:
Are SLA prints also susceptible to say microbes like FFF prints are with the microscopic flaws?
Say if one were to use foodsafe and or medical grade materials, would (m)SLA print be any less hazardous than one created with FFF printer, being eventually suscectible to bacteria buildup?

Food-safe has nothing to do with ability to harbor microbes.  It merely means that ingesting the material is not harmful.  "Medical grade" depends on the use cases.  Medical instruments designed for invasive procedures are subject to drastically different requirements than, e.g., an autoclaved tongue depressor.

@CarlWitthoft Food safe is  more general than that. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_contact_materials#Food_safe_symbol and the article I linked in my answer.

The question would be more helpful to future readers if  you mentioned in more detail the problem with FFF printing you hope to overcome with SLA printing.

The best information I could find was this article from Formlabs about food safe 3d printing. It has a fairly detailed discussion of the different food safe requirements and the conclusion basically is that SLA prints are not food safe by default and can create conditions for mold and bacteria growth. SLA resins are toxic when uncured.
The article goes on to list a few options that can increase the food safety of printed objects.

Dipping in a food safe coating such as a food grade epoxy or polyurethane. But it does note that this may not make the object food safe as the coating may be compromised.
Making a mold from the 3d printed part and using the mold for food contact.
Electroplating the printed object with metal.
Printing with ceramic filled resins, burning out the resin in a kiln, and glazing the part with food safe glaze.

authors: มาย พันธุศรี


text:
Ender 3 stock Bowden tube inner diameter? Worth upgrading?
I recall hearing claims that the Ender 3 (maybe only newer units?) has a narrower Bowden tube than some printers that helps with flexible materials, but I can't find any authoritative figures. Does it come with a standard 2 mm ID tube that would likely benefit from replacement with a 1.9 mm or smaller (Capricorn one seems popular), or is the stock tube already comparable with these lower-clearance ones? I'm looking to improve speed and quality with flexible filaments and trying to determine if upgrading (and at the same time, shortening) the Bowden tube is a worthwhile direction.

Doesn't directly answer your question but if you are looking to print a lot with flexible filaments I would consider a direct drive hot end and extruder (something like the E3D Titan or an upgrade kit.)

Direct drive is a big tradeoff, affecting acceleration limits and ringing, unless you get one of those remote direct drives. I'm actually having really good results with Marlin 1.1.9's linear advance feature - flex PLA seems to be able to reach normal PLA speeds with no stringing, minimal underextrusion.

I disassembled the hotend side of the Bowden setup to check for deterioration (and found an actual hole in the tube!) for the first time since getting a decent caliper, and after making a clean cut to remove the damaged part, measured the inner diameter at 2.19-2.21 mm. I'm not sure if that's enlarged from wear or the original size it was manufactured as, but either way this suggests that upgrade to Capricorn at 1.95 mm (±0.05 mm) inner diameter should make a significant difference vs my current Bowden tube.

Capricorn may be stretchier than normal tubes. You may use a normal one (1.9 mm ID) and then use pressure couplings: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAHMAojpZvo


text:
Grayscale laser engraving with Ramp1.4
I have a Reprap Guru Prusa i3 v2 3D printer. To this I added a 5.5 W laser that I purchased online. The board of my 3D printer is an Arduino Mega 2560 board with Ramp 1.4.
I have connected my laser power to the 12 V power supply on the board and the PWM pin to D4 pin on the Ramp 1.4 board. I am now able to control the laser with M42 P4 S0 (turn off) and  M42 P4 S255 (turn on).
I have not had any success is being able to burn a grayscale image. Everything I am burning just looks like random strokes. also nothing is ever grayscale. The laser always runs at full power. Here is what I believe my issues are:

The software I am using is not adding the SXXX to control the PWM (I am using Inkscape with Raster 2 Laser Gcode generator plugin.
Maybe I'm not using the software correctly
I've tried using LaserGBRL but could never get it connected and I have no idea if my Arduino supports GBRL.

My Questions:

How do I properly control the power output of my laser for burning grayscale images.
Is there a "good" software that you would recommend for a beginner?

Please add a picture as an example which part should have been "gray scale", also post a snippet of the G-code. Why don't you make a test file of a hatched square and print that at various values of "gray scale" or laser power. It looks as though your "slicer" doesn't produce alternative power settings.

Please [edit] your second question, it is unclear which software you mean, I guess you mean the equivalent of a "slicer" not firmware. Note that this is a highly opinionated question, so it could be beneficial to ask this differently.


text:
Printer cover for noise abatement, cleanliness, temperature control
Has anyone made a cover for their 3D printer?
Edit: What kind of Max temperature should be allowed? From the comments, I understand the control board and power supply should be outside the enclosure.  I don't see a way to have the stepper motors outside. I do have a thermocouple probe and can monitor the temperature inside the enclosure; what can the motors be allowed to go up to?
I have a Migbot i3 (prusa clone), looks like it will need a 24" x 24" x 16" cover (leaves room to put a spool on a holder inside also).  I bought some 18" x 24" polycarbonate sheets to make a square box, but it's looking like it will be a bigger project than it was to get the printer running! I need to cut one down to 6" and join it length wise to  get a full 24" for the top. And then print a bunch of corner blocks and drill holes for screws/nuts to secure it all together. Maybe make the front hinge up to lay on top to access the bed and the reel and the finished pieces.
I'm  hoping the cover will block out some of the fan and motor movement noise, and as a side benefit keep cat fur & dust out of the mechanism, and perhaps even help keep the ambient temperature a little more even. I'm not sure that ambient temperature drifting makes much difference with PLA, but ABS is allegedly sensitive to that, and perhaps other materials as well.
Edit 5/25/19: Well, I went ahead built one, it's nearing completion. Found 18x24" Lexan polycarbonate sheets, and printed up corner brackets from thingiverse. Top back has a 6" wide space I can hinge up like the front cover to allow more airflow should things get too warm from the power supply or the 0.4mm nozzle. Have been printing PLA on a cold bed with Vertex PEI material clamped on it (waiting for WhamBam system with spring steel and PEX material, couple weeks out on delivery).
Will be securing it to a base so it doesn't get knocked off the folding work bench (again). Some wood added inside for some stiffness, the Lexan is kind of wobbly in big pieces like that.
Looking at some magnets to replace the wing nuts/screws on the front cover, they're kind awkward to undo.
Taking off the Lexan protective film soon, might wait until securing to a base piece of wood is worked out. Think I have some thin OSB in the garage left over from another project.
Edit 5/26/19:  Printed an hour+ component with doors closed and thermocouple hanging below the LCD screen. Minimal temp rise seen, just 3-4 degreeC, with ambient room temperature also rising some as the sun rose. Printing PLA on unheated bed.
Also changed door closure to have magnets hold closed door in place, works very nice. Wing nuts worked well, but screws stuck out and were hard to open once the screws went thru the door.
(not sure why these are rotated right 90 degrees, they looked fine when I cropped them on my PC)

Welcome! I'd like to help, but is there an actual question here that is definitively answerable? I can't see it.

You should be aware that covering up your printer completely can result in overheating of the electronics (board and steppers drivers) and the steppers. Preferably, these should be outside the box, or properly cooled and the box ventilated and regulated.

Seems sort of related to Enclosure, things to pay attention to?

Hi and welcome to SE.3DP. Your post looks very interesting... but it's not really clear if this is a question or a blog... Is the question Has anyone made a cover for their 3D printer? or What kind of Max temperature should be allowed?. The answer to the former is probably yes, the latter should be answerable. It is probably worth re-wording the text into an answerable coherent question.

It started as a question. There was no answer as to how to build an enclosure except to suggest using a server rack.  I have been monitoring temperatures, highest seen was 32C, with ambient air temps also rising with summer heat, so nozzle heat and power supply heat are not adding much. I guess running the bed unheated is helping to not elevate the temps more.

If you want to have an enclosure without actually building one, you can try a server cabinet. Just take out the server racks and use it as an enclosure. And, as there are many server cabinets available, you could probably find one that suits your needs. Currently, I have my FlyingBear P902 3d printer enclosed in a server cabinet. And, although the doors and removable sides might have air gaps, you can always just tape that off (or use an insulation strip). Hope this works.
You could also look at this website: Perfect 3D printer enclosure for Prusa i3 MK3

That sure is one fine cabinet..!


text:
Set the overhang parameter in Blender 3D printing tool box
I'm  working on a cube in Blender. I just deleted one of the faces (the top face) of the cube and added solidify to avoid non manifold edges.
In this case, when I check the design it shows that the bottom face is an overhang face (shown with yellow color). However, if I change the overhang parameter in 3D printing tool box from 45 to 90° and then check the model, it doesn't show any overhang faces and it seems that everything is okay. I don't think increasing the overhang parameter could be a good idea. However, this is my first time that I'm trying to design a model for 3D printing. Can this model with the overhang parameter equal to 90° be printed using a 3D printer? How can I fix the overhang problem in this simple model.

Today I tested another simple model. I used a fill circle and added solidify to the model. Although the model is really simple, check the model shows the same as the previous design - the bottom face is an overhang face. It seems that adding solidify to a shape leads to this problem. I don't know how can I fix this problem. Changing the overhang parameter fixes the overhang problem but it seems that this not a good idea for printing models.
Unfortunately, I can not test the print myself as I do not have a printer myself and I need to outsource the print job.

welcome to the 3D Printing Stack Exchange site.  I hope you find find this a valuable location both for questions, and to help others with answers.  Your question woule be better if you added a picture of the model.  I am not a Blender user, and although your description may be perfect, I have trouble visualizing the model you are asking about.

It may not be a problem. Technically, the bottom face is an overhang face, but if it is sitting on the print bed, it doesn't matter. Have you tried printing a model?

Unfortunately, I do not have a printer myself and I need to outsource the print job.

Hi Sara, and welcome to SE.3DP. Do you know that there is a Blender Stack Exchange site..? Should I migrate your question there for you? However, after re-reading, your question is actually about printing an overhang, so maybe it is better suited here. Let me know what you think :-) Also, when you take a screen shot, maybe zoom in closer so that the model isn't so small. Also, please add information in the question and not the comments. I have put the additional info from the comments into the question.

Thank you very much for making changes. I did not know the blender stack exchang. But so far I have received good answers in 3d printing stack exchange and I am very grateful for that :).

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it's about modeling, not printing.

You are looking at overhangs in the design tool.  What matters are overhangs when printing.
When designing the object, the coordinate system is convenient for working with the object.  Before slicing, the object can be rotated and repositioned for better printing.  Only after is it positioned for printing can the actual overhangs and bridges determined.
Unless you wish to limit yourself to the design tools coordinate system, I wouldn't have the design tool generate support material, and I would ignore its comments about overhang angles.  First, bring the object into your slicer, position it on the print bed, and only then evaluate the need for support material.
To be honest, I often have a printing strategy in mind while I am designing an object, but when the object hits the printer I sometimes completely change my plan.

Overhangs that are substantially greater than 45° to the vertical generally require supports, and overhangs of 90° will definitely require supports, unless they are bridges (supported at both ends). Depending on how well you have your printer and filament "dialled in", it is possible to print overhangs up to 70° without supports. However, if your model is a simple cube, it will have no overhangs, so it doesn't really matter what value you give the overhang parameter. Supports are usually generated when the model is sliced, but some modelling software will generate supports as part of the model.

I'm a regular user of Blender and the 3D Printing add-on to design and print stuff. It will always consider the bottom of your model as an overhang, and it should pose no problem when you send it to print.
The add-on will say the bottom is an overhang because, in the virtuality of Blender, the object you're designing, like the cube in your picture, is floating in an empty void and the add-on has no setting to tell it 'this face is a bottom, don't check it for overhang'. I guess it could be programmed, but I'm not sure that it would be a good idea since it would then keep considering this face as the bottom even if you turn the object 180°.
You can safely ignore that particular warning from the 3D printing add-on when you send your object to be printed, as long as it is printed with the same orientation than in Blender. And it should be, since the export in STL will keep the orientation of the object along the X, Y and Z axis.


text:
Limit to extrusion volume
Assuming heat transfer to melt the filament is not an issue, what’s the bottleneck in pushing more filament through the nozzle? Is extrusion volume per time proportional to applied extruder torque?

What is your end goal? If you push a ton of material thru, then you need equivalent speed control on the X-Y drives to place the material properly.  See, for example, modified setups which allow extruding soft clay (5 mm nozzle or bigger)

The molten plastic in the extruder becomes a hydraulic fluid effectively when it gets melted. You're pushing on a fat piston (1.75 mm or 2.85 mm, depending on filament type), and shoving fluid out through a 0.4 mm or so hole. There's a limit to flow rate at a given pressure, but the bigger issue actually tends to be friction. Molten plastic really loves to grab on to metal, and the ratio of surface area to volume is fairly high in the long, skinny tube that is the inside of an extruder. To make matters worse, the not-quite-molten section of the melt zone up at the top normally doesn't make a lot of contact with the walls due to lower pressures not deforming the plastic all that much, but at higher pressures you get much more deformation, increasing the linear distance that the plastic is dragging against the tube walls, and the pressure with which the two surfaces are bonding together. Especially in cheapo clone extruders you'll find roughly bored inner surfaces with many circumferential grooves which exacerbate this issue - this is why most extruders have a PTFE lining as far down as they can go. I had this issue in my $3 "all-steel" extruder barrel, where even printing PLA was an issue because of how readily the plastic formed huge plugs and grabbed the inside of the extruder.
So what you end up with, is that increased torque mostly linearly translates to increased pressure, which results in linearly increased friction inside the barrel, plus a little bit extra due to extra deformation in the top of the melt zone. You can polish the inside of the barrel (heatbreak? seen both terms) to help alleviate internal friction somewhat.
To make things even more fun, there's obviously a limit with how much force you can exert through the mating surface of a single hobbed bolt and the side of the filament. Too much force and the teeth will simply rip off the side of the filament and then you'll have no feeding torque whatsoever. To get much higher torque you'd need to design an extruder that both supports the filament much better than modern designs do, and spreads the force out over a larger surface area, either by using a much larger diameter feed gear, or multiple tightly-coupled feed gears.
I went into some degree of detail on the feed mechanism in this answer that another user asked about using a commercial extruder for plastic injection molding, which overlaps somewhat with your question here.
I know the original question assumed perfect heat transfer that was not a limiting factor to the process, but how that actually works is relevant to the question as well. E3D took one approach with their Volcano design, simply by making the melt zone much longer to increase heat transfer; the downside is there's obviously substantially more friction when you've got 4x the linear distance of molten plastic against metal, assuming you're not using a PTFE liner. This does have the advantage of letting the plastic take its time to reach the target temperature, decreasing how far over your target plastic temperature you need to have the heating element. One thing not often discussed in 3d printers is the fact that the plastic asymptotically approaches the temperature registered on your thermistor. If you're printing very, very slowly, your plastic will nearly be exactly at the target temperature. If you print very quickly with very high volumes, you'll tend to have slightly cooler plastic than intended because it simply wasn't in contact with the heater long enough to come up to temperature. The solution for very small designs might be higher temperatures, but the drawback there is that if you slow down even for a moment, say moving to thinner line widths or picking up and moving the extruder, you'll overheat the plastic. So there's practicality questions that need to be answered to determine how you'll actually heat that much plastic to the right temperature. Increased distance improves reliability at the cost of increased friction (and therefore extruder torque required), and increased temperature mostly bypasses that question at the cost of reliability.
TL;DR Increased extrusion speed requires increased pressure, which increases friction dramatically and in a non-linear fashion and results in stripped filament.

Could you theoretically do an "all PTFE" hotend? Something like nonstick cookware, all the way through the nozzle.

This is a super useful answer, thank you very much! Most interesting bit is  "increased torque mostly linearly translates to increased pressure, which results in linearly increased friction inside the barrel". I think flow rate is about proportional to delta-pressure, but how does it relate to friction?
So optimally we'd probably want a metal hotend with a very,very thin PTFE lining all the way down?

All PTFE would reduce friction to be sure, at the expense of limiting how hot you can get the entire assembly. PTFE starts breaking down not far past ABS printing temperatures. As far as friction vs flow rate, I'm honestly not 100% sure how they correlate, because I'm not well versed in hydraulic fluid physics, but I can tell you that hydraulic friction through tubes is well documented and you could probably do some reading on Wikipedia to get a decent idea.

"shoving fluid out through a 0.4 mm or so hole"  Larger hole diameter nozzles are also available. One would have to determine if the heater could keep the plastic molten if more plastic was being pushed thru a larger hole. A search on Amazon shows nozzles with up to 1.0mm hole (vs the more commonly supplied 0.4mm nozzle).  If one had a printer that used 3mm filament (vs the smaller 1.75mm), that printer might have  a larger diamater nozzle hole as well.

I think your analysis is too pessimistic - consider a design that takes 10-mm diameter input filament, with appropriately sized drive gears.

10mm diameter filament would have some additional issues; ABS and PLA are not nearly as thermally conductive as aluminum, so you'd get a sheath of molten plastic surrounding a solid core as the plastic moved down through the extruder. You'd have to keep the plastic inside the heater block for even longer to get the whole filament molten. You'd have a larger surface area of plastic melting but the solid core would clog the nozzle, and more surface area is more friction..


text:
Uploading files using Octoprint REST API
I'm trying to upload a file using Octoprint REST API - it seems to be possible as per the document described here, Upload file or create folder, but I can't figure it out how to do it with the Python request lib.
Currently what I'm doing is
 import requests

 def def Upload_File():
       fle={'location':"j:/max.gcode"}
       url='http://localhost:5000/api/files/{}'.format('local')
       payload={'select': 'true','print': 'false' }
       header={'content-type': 'multipart/form-data','X-Api-Key': 'FD550BD4DA2442BA906AD1850539D6DB' }
       response = requests.post(url, files=fle,data=payload,headers=header)
       print(response)

if __name__=='__main__':
    Upload_File()

The response returns status is 400
My working env is:

Windows 10 and Octoprint running on virtual environment.

FWIW the user posted this identical question on Octoprint's community.

I installed octoprint locally to help debug this problem.

Your code snippet says "def def Upload_File" which is a syntax error.
If you go into Octoprint, under Settings -> Logging, and download octoprint.log, you'll notice it says "WARNING - 400 POST /api/files/local (::1): No multipart boundary supplied". A quick google search led me to this StackOverflow question, which states to remove the custom content-type header to fix this problem.
You actually need to open() the file, and assign that value to the 'file' field in the fle object definition, not just tell it where it's currently at on your machine. Additionally, you need to provide a filename field in the fle object.

I got your code snippet working as below, went ahead and swapped your API key back into it. You'll need to point the open() call to the actual location of your file on your hard drive, which I assume is j:/max.gcode, rather than mine which is just opening max.gcode from the running directory of the script.
import requests

def Upload_File():
   fle={'file': open('max.gcode', 'rb'), 'filename': 'max.gcode'}
   url='http://localhost:5000/api/files/{}'.format('local')
   payload={'select': 'true','print': 'false' }
   header={'X-Api-Key': 'FD550BD4DA2442BA906AD1850539D6DB' }
   response = requests.post(url, files=fle,data=payload,headers=header)
   print(response)

if __name__=='__main__':
   Upload_File()

Finally, if you're going to be doing a whole lot of REST API shenanigans with your Octoprint server, may I offer a prebuilt library?

Not sure how much the REST API has changed in the last several updates, but I'd assume it has and that library hasn't been updated in a year.

I actually used that library to fix the code snippet above lol. There may be issues with it, but generally speaking REST APIs tend to be largely the same - from a development standpoint it's almost always better to simply add new functionality rather than changing old functionality, because it breaks less downstream code. The only time I'd go against that is if there's a fundamental problem with the old stuff and it needs to be totally overhauled.

Removing the  custom Content-Type header seems to working .now everything works smoothly Thank you ..!