text:
Add brim everywhere, not just around the outermost line
I have a repair part that I need to print with ABS and I know that I have warping problems with ABS.
I'm now trying to mitigate this by printing a circle around my object and use more brim. You can consider this as a manually designed skirt, but I want the brim to be on both sides of the skirt.
However, when slicing the repair part with the ring, I get brim only outside the "skirt", not inside of it.
How would I get brim also in the area marked here?

When there's a cut in the outer ring (the manual skirt), Slic3r will fill the area as expected:

Prusa Slicer 2.2.0 in print settings
skirt and brim, set distance from object to zero
Other slicers should have same capability. As long as you have two parts on the bed that are not distinctly separated, you'll get only one brim.

I have installed 2.2.0 alpha, but that setting does not help

It's the two part aspect that's causing the problem. Move the outer ring off the bed and print it separately.

Sorry, I don't understand. If I print it separately, the ring will no longer help against warping of the main part.


text:
How to create a support structure in tinkercad?
I've created a case for my Raspberry Pi in Tinkercad and would like to 3d print it. However, I don't know how to create supports! I tried looking it up, but I got a model that I don't know how to import, and some best practices for supports. So how should I create them using Tinkercad?

If you're using the term "supports" to mean the extra material that the 3D printer needs to allow material to be deposited in "mid-air," your slicer will have a setting that permits this. Knowing which slicer is going to be used would enable someone to advise you directly of the location of the settings.
If you are going to be using a 3D printing service, you need not address those types of supports. The printing service will have qualified operators who will select the correct settings for your specific model.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Bolt hole terminology for "tight" and "loose" bolt holes
When a hole is created for a bolt, it might be "tight"; the intent is for the hole to be tapped. Or it might be "loose", and the intent is for the bolt to slide into the hole and attached to a nut on the other side.
What is the terminology for these two kinds of holes?

Hi Mark, has this been asked as a specific 3D printing question or should it be moved to Engineering.SE. As it stands now it is more a question fit for another Stack? I'd like to know the rational behind the question. Thanks!

Hey Oscar, I'm getting ready to ask a question about compensating for hole sizes when 3d printing and wanted to make sure I asked properly about a clearance hole (the "loose" one in my ignorance!).  If you think it's better to move, that's fine with me.

A hole designed for a screw/bolt to slide freely through is called a clearance hole. A hole that is designed to be tapped could be called a pilot hole.

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


text:
Any possible issues with adding heat/cool down cycle in the end of print (PLA)
I'm printing with anycubic i3 mega on an ultrabase bed. When I first got the printer the prints were easy to remove from the bed after it cools down, I didn't need to put any extra effort. However after I used 70% isopropyl to clean it it seems I removed some kind of extra coating as all next prints were sticking to the bed firmly even after the bed cools down. So I tried to heat the bed up to 100 degrees and then cool it down and wait until it gets to something like 35, at that point print comes off quite easily (really helped me with some big parts with huge initial layer) so I wonder if I should just add that extra heating cycle to the end of each print job.
Is there any possible problems with that?
PS my understanding is that PLA should be okay with short temperature spike since it is being melted with twice as high heat. However long exposure to that temperature might cause some deformation (eg if I throw the printed part into dishwasher).
Another possible concern is that extra heating cycle could potentially shorten life of the ultrabase, but not sure if it is the case.
UPDATE
so after some experiments I printed at least a dozen calibration cubes adjusting several parameters along the way as it seems each of them contributed to the issue

I decided to reset initial layer thickness which I noticed was set to 0.25 when normal layer was 0.2. Since it was thicker for better adhesion I thought I don't need it since I don't have problem with sticking to the bed :)
second thing was the flow adjustment and enabling some layer filling settings in cura (filtering small holes etc). Ended up at 91% flow rate which gave me much cleaner top layers as well as the bottom ones.
and finally I played with Z offset, I did bed leveling recently so it was flat (did single layer tests to check that) but it might have been a little bit too high, so adding an offset seems like a good way to compensate for it. The thing I was looking after as a feedback here is the squeezing bottom layers issue, so I stopped once I got initial layers a bit smaller than the ones on top, went back a few values and ended up with 0.125 mm which sounds quite big to me but it allowed to get initial layer very clean and consistent with next layer so I think I got it right.

I can say it is easier to remove the cube from the bed now (used to be very difficult and I was using a mallet almost every time in the beginning) but it still doesn't come off on its own. I also noticed that now all three dimensions are almost identical (Z was about 0.5 less). And all X/Y/Z are ~19mm after cube cools down (the model is 20mm) so I wonder if I need to fix that one now

I only know of layers added to promote adhesion, not release.

Heating PLA even to 60°C will make it pliable and may affect dimensional accuracy; 100°C is likely to make that severe. Being stuck to the bed and thus constrained by it might help some, but I think it's a bad idea.
If your PLA is hard to remove, you probably have bed leveling issues. PLA should remove easily after cooling from reasonable print-time bed temperatures of 40-60°C to room temperature as long as it has not been extruded against the bed with excessive force (from being too close and having nowhere else to go).

hmm, didn't think it could be caused by bed leveling since it wasn't changed when models stopped come off, I did check the bed level recently and it seems like it is at least flat so I will try to add some Z offset to compensate and check if it helps, thanks for the idea

Don't just poke at things, measure. Print a 2-payer square with 0.1 mm layers and measure with a caliper that it's within an acceptable margin of 0.2 mm (e.g. +- 10%).

I think I partially solved the problem with adhesion. Will add details to the body of the question. Thanks for your answer though, it made me think in another direction and look for the root cause which I think I found

You did exactly the right thing:

look,
see,
think,
evaluate and adapt
test
Back to 1. or continue to 7.
Solution found and applied!

Congrats!
Johan
Ps: I use the tape in paper, used to mask before paint jobs, I was not that keen as you! It always comes off, and I restart every time with a clean glass, no hairspray, glue or others. They cost nothing, and if you are handy, you can use 100mm wide stripes. (or just the amount needed for your part.


text:
Under extrusion caused by sharp turns(?)
I have been testing my brain for the last few weeks trying to solve this problem:

Some info:

Printers: Sidewinder X1 | Prusa MK3S
Extruder: Stock(Titan clone with volcano clone hotend) | Stock
Nozzle: 0.4 mm
Filaments: eSun PLA+ | 3DFillies PLA+
Slicer: Cura 4.6
Firmware:Marlin 2.0.5.3 (Manual Mesh Bed Leveling,S Curve
Acceleration,Linear Advance,Junction Deviation)
Firmware Settings:

Recv: echo: M92 X80.12 Y80.12 Z399.78 E425.50
Recv: echo:; Maximum feedrates (units/s):
Recv: echo:  M203 X500.00 Y500.00 Z12.00 E120.00
Recv: echo:; Maximum Acceleration (units/s2):
Recv: echo:  M201 X1000.00 Y1000.00 Z500.00 E10000.00
Recv: echo:; Acceleration (units/s2): P<print_accel> R<retract_accel> T<travel_accel>
Recv: echo:  M204 P500.00 R500.00 T500.00
Recv: echo:; Advanced: B<min_segment_time_us> S<min_feedrate> T<min_travel_feedrate> J<junc_dev>
Recv: echo:  M205 B20000.00 S0.00 T0.00 J0.06
Recv: echo:; Home offset:
Recv: echo:  M206 X0.00 Y0.00 Z0.00
Recv: echo:; PID settings:
Recv: echo:  M301 P14.11 I1.16 D42.77
Recv: echo:  M304 P244.21 I45.87 D325.08
Recv: echo:; Linear Advance:
Recv: echo:  M900 K0.15

Printed from USB Stick.
E-Steps calibrated
Flow calibrated
Bed warped(low in the center) but with manual mesh bed leveling calibrated until my BLTouch arrives.

At first I assumed it was related to linear advance, however, decreasing it did help it reintroduced bulging corners. Then I noticed the geared extruder clicking(only sounded like vibrations caused by fast print speeds) during the Linear Advance retractions/deretractions. I then tried significantly lowering the max extruder feedrate/acceleration/jerk (jerk wasn't actually listed in the M503 but I still tried sending the G-code to change it) in firmware, which did stop the clicking (skipped steps?) but not the under extrusion. Also im curious what the "Jerk Contol" settings in Cura actually do since I'm using junction deviation and if I should be using the lower values(0.02-0.1) that junction deviation calls for over the higher(5-30) ones that classic jerk does.
Things I have tried:

Filament path clear
Filament idler tension increased/decreased
Temp: 180-205 °C
Speed: 45 mm/s(25 mm/s Outer Walls)-125mm/s(75mm/s Outer Walls)
Flow: Increasing slightly helped but lost dimensional accuracy which I need a high as I can get
Retraction:0.05 mm-1.5 mm
Retraction Speed: 20 mm/s-80 mm/s
Combing, Wiping and Coasting: on/off
Changing filament colour
Changing filament brand
Cold pulls
Lowering Linear Advance(helped but reintroduced bulging corners)
Junction Deviation: 0.02 - 0.08
Seam: Expose seam(seemed to have the largest effect overall (but only
on the calibration cubes,the reciever seen above also has the expose
seem option enabled see:https://imgur.com/gallery/dRjptkp)
Using PrusaSlicer(Couldnt establish any worthwile comparisons as
something unrelated was causing major issues and my MK3 is currently out of order,
see:https://imgur.com/gallery/WxJs2Qk)

Im fairly certain it is a Cura specific setting causing this and not any physical failure,however I have tried so many troubleshooting solutions with little to no progress so at this time I am welcoming any suggestions(even if already listed above).
Cura settings with more examples:
https://i.stack.imgur.com/KIShE.jpg
My apologies if this seems like a raw data dump, I have mental troubles with explaining things.

Not sure if this is applicable to the X1 looks like it is direct drive but have you tried checking the Bowden tube couplers?

This might be a Marlin bug. There were several like this with JD, LA, and S curve and last I checked S curve with LA was not supported unless you do an experimental override.

It could also just be lost material inside the model from combing. Try turning combing off in the slicer or setting a very low distance limit (~1 mm) on it and see if the problem goes away.

Since lowering LA helped I'm guessing it's the LA+JD bug in Marlin.

I think you were right about oozing material. With combing off ,1.5mm retraction and 0.6mm Z-hop preliminary tests look to have solved this issue, however it did noticabley lower surface quality which is also not ideal. Im going to experiment with longer than 2mm retraction lengths even though it is commonly advised against for direct drive setups. Im guessing the retraction just isnt long enough for this Volcano/Titan clone.

authors: Иван Шевченко


text:
Do SLA printers have open source slicers available to use?
Does anyone know of a (manufacturer independent) software that supports different types of SLA printers?
Since there are many different SLA type printers around, I was wondering if there are any unified or open source methods for slicing in case the manufacturer drops support for the printer software (or my OS upgrades on me overnight and breaks compatability).

When you say "open source", do you really mean one where you can have the source code and edit how the program behaves, or do you mean something else?

Yes, more or less the wiki definition is what I mean; ideally I was thinking of some type of unified software or machine code that could work across most SLA type printers. Not sure if I am just over thinking this one though.

So then you don't want to edit the source code, you are just asking about a slicer that works for different makes of SLA printers - correct?

Yes, that's correct.

From what I have researched, each brand of printer has their own method of slicing objects for their printer to parse. For example:

Peopoly Uses a profile for Cura
Creality, Elegoo and Phrozen use CHITUBOX
Anycubic uses their Photon Workshop

There doesn't appear to be any golden ticket type of method (like G-Code) for slicing and providing instructions.

note that most SLA printers pretty much are a glorified slideshow with a little movement in between... and the trick is how they set up the firmware to do that. With the locked down firmware it is hard to make a standard protocol, thus making the slicers rather locked up.

That makes sense I suppose, do you know if there have been any attempts or movement to have standardize firmware across manufacturers?

That is a different question, but there are several printers that use the same slicer(s), so possibly use the same firmware base or a common protocol.


text:
Why is cupping bad in SLA prints?
Why is cupping bad? (I don't mean hollow parts)
Example:
Lets say that I want to print a simple cup without a handle.
There are two obvious orientations:

In one orientation it won't require any support, which I quite like, but it will then form a 'cup' which my 3D program tells me is bad.
In the opposite orientation it needs to be filled with support, but the resin can freely run out.

I don't want to add a drainage hole to my cup for obvious reasons :) Also, I am using a formlabs form 3, if it makes a difference.
A cup:

It seems you already answered: it's bad because resin cannot flow away easily (a sort of vacuum is created) when the already solidified object is slightly lifted to let further resin flow in.

The printer prints, then moves up, then down again. The print surface stays inside the resin vat at all times. As a result, we have this experiment:

The "bottle" is resting in a vat of liquid. As we raise it more and more, it does not drain until the lower lid is free of the liquid surface or some point of the shell delaminates. The release of the resin can happen in a rather violent way - which in turn could deform the print in the making. Delamination rips through the part till air can enter the enclosed space, destroying the print in the process.
Even if printing the mouth against the plate you'll have cupping if you have a solid plate to print against. This can be mitigated with a little angle but trap liquid in the print at the end or including a couple of small gaps close to the surface to allow air to get into the print - yet unless the resin can flow out at the bottom some will be trapped in any case.
To prevent cupping, I would turn the cup to print sideways, that way resin and air can be exchanged.


text:
CoreXY printer homes in the wrong direction, but moves correctly when moved manually
So I'm using TH3D firmware on my CoreXY printer and when I move it from the LCD it moves correctly, but when I try to home X or Y it goes in the wrong direction. It's set to home to min in firmware. When I set the endstop logic so its always triggered, it homes in the right direction.
Here are my motion settings:
#define MKS_PRINTER

// Build Area Size Settings
#define MKS_X_SIZE 300
#define MKS_Y_SIZE 300
#define MKS_Z_SIZE 300

// Endstop Logic Settings
#define MKS_X_ENDSTOP 0
#define MKS_Y_ENDSTOP 0
#define MKS_Z_ENDSTOP 0

// Homing Settings
#define X_HOME_LOCATION 0
#define Y_HOME_LOCATION 0

// Steps per MM Settings
#define MKS_X_STEPS 80
#define MKS_Y_STEPS 80
#define MKS_Z_STEPS 400
#define MKS_E0_STEPS 95
#define MKS_E1_STEPS 95

// Motor Direction Settings
#define MKS_X_DIRECTION 1
#define MKS_Y_DIRECTION 0
#define MKS_Z_DIRECTION 0
#define MKS_E0_DIRECTION 0
#define MKS_E1_DIRECTION 0

// Stepper Driver Settings
#define MKS_X_DRIVER A4988
#define MKS_Y_DRIVER A4988
#define MKS_Z_DRIVER A4988
#define MKS_E0_DRIVER A4988
#define MKS_E1_DRIVER A4988
```

Hi, welcome to 3DPrinting.SE! For which brand/model printer are you using this firmware? If it is a self built you should use vanilla Marlin.

There is a setting in marlin to invert the home direction.

@user77232 That is e.g. #define X_HOME_DIR -1, but TH3D firmware has wrapped this up and buried this under a few hundred lines of code. That is why I prefer the Marlin repository. I do understand that for some people with a popular and supported printer the TH3D firmware may be easy and convenient, but for advanced users this extra layer has no added value.


text:
Delamination issue Ender 3 Pro PLA
I recently bought some SUNLU PLA black filament and was attempting a small print with it and it started to come out in strings and lumps and was incredibly inconsistent. Before this I'd been using some Eryone PLA and those prints were superb, been printing back to back successfully but after using the SUNLU all of my prints since have been having layer separation issues. I've cleaned the extruder, taken off the fan and cleared out the hotend of some wisps of filament, then flushed it through with some more reliable filament which looked better and replaced my magnetic bed sticker with a new one as the adhesion on the initial layer was poor even though the bed looked level. Once I replaced the sticker, the adhesion on the first layer is excellent. I thought I'd fixed the problems so tried an XYZ cube and still getting serious layering issues and the infill is thin.  Any ideas what else I could do to fix this problem? I've put slicer settings below:

Hot end temp: 210 °C
Bed temp: 60 °C
Fan speed: 100 %
Print speed: 50 mm/s

No custom modifications to the standard Cura profile for the Ender 3.
My filament diameter setting in Cura is 1.75 mm and so is my filament.

Have you measured in multiple places for average diameter, and compared that to your initial filament?

I'm afraid since I'm quite new to 3D printing, I don't have any kind of calliper to measure that level of detail.

what setting for diameter is in your slicer?

Check diameter of filament on printer and extruder settings. If you using cura, maybe automatically set to 2.85, but you have 1.75.

Nozzle setting should not be 1.75 mm! It's 0.4 mm. Only the filament diameter should be set to 1.75 mm. Cura (some versions at least) is notorious for flipping your filament diameter back to 2.85.

Just to update on this, it wasn't directly a configuration setting, it was actually a blockage in the hotend (I suspect because the PTFE tube had become unseated from some black filament that was stated as 1.75 mm but I think it had a larger diameter). After clearing through my hotend with some PTFE tube, I found a disk of the black filament I initially started having this problem with. The issue was resolved once I cleared through the hotend and I now check all my filament with my digital callipers to be sure it's the correct diameter before running it through to save me heaps of pain.

This is under extrusion, not delamination. Delamination is the result of the under extrusion.
It typically happens when the wrong filament diameter has been set in the slicer (a larger diameter than used, e.g 2.85 mm instead of 1.75 mm). Another option is that you accidentally put the printer in volumetric printing mode which is accessible through the display of the printer:
Control -> Filament -> E in mm³ -> Disable
Other solutions may be found in the extrusion process, e.g. the extruder may be skipping.

Hi thanks for replying! I've checked my material profile and my machine settings and both are set to 1.75 mm. I've just replaced the nozzle as I wondered if that could be blocked but it doesn't appear to have fixed the problem. The extruder doesn't sound like it's skipping.

@user3573036 have you tried extruding 100 mm and measure how much it extrudes. Pay close attention to the extruder, it can even skip without making noise.

This is definitely the answer. The photo in the question is classic "wrong filament diameter setting".

@R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE or a massive blockage.

@Trish Indeed, but I would have expected that we heard from the OP that the extruder was skipping. The filament has to go somewhere, if not through the nozzle it must come out the other end.


text:
In FreeCAD, how do you copy a sketch from one plane to another?
I'm using FreeCAD, and I would like to duplicate a 2D sketch on another plane, but I can't seem to find an obvious way to do this.

I’m assuming you are working in the Part Design workbench. Select the sketch and click Edit > Duplicate selected object. Make sure that only the sketch is copied (depending on the version, either deselect the plane or click don’t include dependent objects). This will produce a duplicate sketch in the active body (if you want the duplicate in a different body, make sure it’s active first by double-clicking it if necessary). You can then click Sketch > Reorient Sketch to move it to a different plane.
By the way, FreeCAD has a very active and helpful forum at https://freecadweb.org. I highly recommend asking FreeCAD questions there.

Is it possible to move it into a new plane that is not XY XZ or YZ plane?

Yes, you click on the plane, then click "Map sketch to face" and select the sketch.


text:
Temperature sets to cooling when print starts CR10s Pro v1
I've got this second hand printer today, but, when I want to start printing, the temperature sets to cooling mode and the print never starts.

This is what I've done so far...

Upgraded firmware for the board and screen to Tiny Machines latest version.
Check temperature manual for bed and nozzle and works fine
Level the bed
I used Cura with several profiles, even with an Ender 3 profile from my other machine to see if the slicer is the one giving issues

On other G-codes that i tried, the message changes to in the pause and completing percentage is set to 218 %...
Any ideas?

Ok, to make things weirder, i try printing using pronterface, so i could get the logs, and its working with the same gcode, i used 2 different sd cards, so could it be the sd card reader?

When i use the sd card, still connected to pronterface, it fails sgain and the only error is a warning about homing division something

sounds like in flashing your firmware there was some error and you need to re-flash it properly... did you install a bootloader first?

So you check gcode in notepad++. Try find commands to set cooling in code. Maybe it is start gcode on cura or one of value in settings

@trish The cr10s pro doesnt need a bootloader, i followed the directions from tinymachines and did it twice

Like i said earlier the same gcode prints using pronterface, so its not the gcode, the issue is either the sd card or the reader

@frenciaj the CR10S had versions that came without a bootloader. If you suspect the SD reader of SD card, please test a different SD drive with a known to be working code.

File name is too long, I had the same issue, shortened the file name and now printing perfect

Do you know what the maximum number of characters allowed is?


text:
Why can't my Ender 5 Pro remember its axis position or move back to home anymore?
I am completely new to 3D Printing. I got my first printer, a Creality Ender 5 Pro, yesterday.
My problem
I shutdown the printer without the axis being in home position (X: 0, Y: 0, Z: 320 instead of X: 0, Y: 0, Z: 0). I thought this should be no problem but after turning the printer on again the info screen showed the axis position as 0, 0, 0 again.
So, I can't move the Z axis up now because the printer thinks it's already at 0.
NOTE: On the Ender 5 the bed lowers for increasing values of the Z. So 320 is the lowest and 0 the highest. I know that the motor works because it tries to go down further if I increase the Z position, but I am scared of damaging the motor because it can't move further but it tries to (judging by that weird sound).
My question
Is this a normal behavior that the printer axis cant remember its position? Because I think when I built the printer the axes were also not at the 0, 0, 0 position and on the first start they moved back without any problems.
Does anyone have any ideas on how to solve this? Or is this a broken printer?
PS: I could replicate this behavior on X and Y as well (moving them with prepare->move axis and then shutting down the printer). But in this case, I can easily disable the motors and move them manually back to 0, 0. This isn't the case for the Z Axis.
I hope I explained that understandably.

Once you pull the plug or disable power to the stepper motors, the printer forgets its location. That is perfectly normal and exactly how it is supposed to work.
The printer knows where the printer volume is once you have "homed" the printer. Homing is done prior to printing with G-code G28 which should be present in your start G-code script of your slicer. Once homed, the offsets from the endstops determine where the origin of the printer is and the maximum dimensions determine the build volume.
After you switched on the printer, the printer doesn't know where the origin is and movement is limited. E.g. when the following constant is defined: #define NO_MOTION_BEFORE_HOMING no movement at all is possible before the printer is homed, this can help prevent destroying the printer.

I don't know about the Ender-5 but the Ender-3 series has a front-panel command to "Auto Home" under "Prepare". I assume the 5 has similar.

@DoxyLover Marlin has a default option in the LCD menu to home all axis (the Ender 5 has the default reprap 12864 graphical display as the Ender 3), you can also activate homing of each axis separately in the Configuration.h, use: #define INDIVIDUAL_AXIS_HOMING_MENU.

(Summed up from several entries in this thread.)
It is an untrue statement that the printer can't move back to home anymore, until the G-Code G28 is executed. The printer can home, but must be ordered to do it.
There are several ways to home the printer (LCD hints are for Marlin firmware):

Start a print, which (by the book) includes G28 in its initial part

Use the LCD menu option to home all axes: Prepare > Auto Home

Use the LCD menu options to home single axes, for example: Prepare > Auto Home Z, after they are activated by adding the following to the Configuration.h file:
#define INDIVIDUAL_AXIS_HOMING_MENU

Add your own options to the custom menu in the LCD: Custom Commands > Your command - for example to have more complex scripts at hand, like a custom sequence of axes, multiple repeats, different back-off behavior, or move to center of bed (G-Code snippets)

The current position may be updated with G-Code G92, and this hack may be useful when a print gets stuck (e.g., power outage, thermal issue) and there is no space any more to home Z, but its actual position is known from the print file (the remaining part?) Set the known position of Z (G92 Znnn) and let X and Y home the standard way (G28 X Y)

Slightly unscrew the motor. Manually rig the Z-axis above its lowest point. Rescrew the motor back into place tightly. Then auto home it.

I disagree with this sugesstion. Z homing is often. Acting like this would quickly lead to wear of hardware (e.g. coupler's thread) or to introduce errors like too loose screw (we had this before). Much more useful would be to enable homing axes individually or Z with custom menu, or even ad-hoc update current position with G92 Znnn (hacky).

@octopus8 - you should post the last sentence as an answer (as it really is an answer), and expand upon it. The first half (the first three sentences are good though).

Good point. I added the answer summing up homing options.


text:
Is the Vref trimmer relevant on TMC2208 in UART mode?
I'm going to use TMC2208 stepstick in a printer and the firmware can control via UART the current during printing and during holding (static, no movement): the firmware has an explicit setting for running current and for holding current.
In this case, should I care about the physical trimmer which controls the Vref?
I tried to understand the TMC2208 datasheet (page 50) when it's talking about current control but I don't understand whether the Vref becomes superfluous or it still acts as a maximum value which the UART must obey.

The potmeter does not work in UART operation, see e.g. this quote:

You don't have to fiddle with jumpers to set your micro-steps, just
change it in the firmware, and you can dynamically change the amount
of current going to each stepper motor (no more adjusting that small
potentiometer on the driver board) just by sending a GCode command
(M906).

So, you cannot change the Vref of a UART operated stepper driver, setting the current directly is the way to go on UART operated stepper drivers; in fact that is actually what you are doing on non-UART operated stepper drivers, you change the Vref to change the current through the stepper motor, the higher the voltage the higher the current through the stepper the more torque the stepper has.

You are right. I found now in the datasheet on page 5: "STEP/DIR Driver with Full Diagnostics and Control" ... "This mode allows replacing all control lines like ENN, DIAG, INDEX, MS1, MS2, and analog current
setting VREF by a single interface line. This way, only three signals are required for full control: STEP, DIR and PDN_UART. Even motion without external STEP pulses is provided by an internal programmable step pulse generator: Just set the desired motor velocity." This means that I may be able to use only three data lines per TMC! I have to check Klipper


text:
FlashForge Finder turns off mid print and is unable to reset or update firmware
I am new to 3D printing and am trying to get started with a FlashForge Finder. Unfortunately, the printer keeps shutting off mid print, and I am unable to find a cause. Here's what I have tried thus far:

System Settings

Factory Reset - When I attempt a factory reset, nothing happens (the menu closes, but usage stats & wifi do not get reset)
Firmware Update - Updating the firmware from the touchscreen immediately fails every time

Printing

I can start a new print, but the machine turns off after about ~10-15 minutes at temperature
The transformer on the power cable remains lit green even after the machine fails and turns off
I have tried printing multiple files from Thingiverse with no edits (an elephant and an owl)
Temperature is set to 220 °C

Observations

One of the times that the print failed, I noticed that the temperature had dropped to ~204 °C prior to failing. I don't know if that's normal behavior or not

Maybe not related, but, what material do you print? A temperature of 220 °C is pretty hot for PLA but on the low side for ABS or PETG.

@0scar - I believe that I am using PLA. So far, I haven't adjusted any settings - just printed exactly what's in the file I download

Same problem occurred to me, now twice. How much is the Finder's memory able/allowed to register? After erasing all but the print job, things go smooth.

Just providing an update: I've gone back and forth with FlashForge support and they're now providing suggestions of parts to replace (in ascending price). If it requires trying everything, I'll likely spend as much as a new machine.

If the commanded temperature is 220 °C and falls to 204 °C and cannot recover in time, a proper firmware would typically report a "thermal runaway error". Are you seeing this?

Try unplugging the USB lead as soon as the printer starts to print (I had similar issue and this worked for me).

No USB is plugged in during printing


text:
What can cause Z height loss in the first few layers?
All my prints come out about 1 mm too short in the Z dimension. So for example a 20 mm cube comes out 19 mm high. A 10 mm cube comes out 9 mm high. The X and Y dimensions are fine. There's a little bit of visible elephant's foot at the bottom, so I assume whatever is happening is in the first couple of layers. The problem is fairly consistently around 1 mm even for larger prints.

The printer is an Ender 3 Pro with a glass bed and BLTouch for automatic leveling, but otherwise stock.
I had a similar issue with another Ender 3 Pro that was resolved thanks to a link to this question about problems in the first 3 mm. The solution was turning the eccentric nuts on the left and right to loosen the rollers that connect the X-axis gantry to the vertical posts. There the Z issue was not as pronounced, and I was getting really messy prints in the first few Z layers. Here that is not an issue; the first few layers look fine while they're printing. Loosening the rollers did not resolve it.
Things I've tried:

Tightening and loosening the gantry rollers using the eccentric nuts. They're currently just tight enough that turning them moves the gantry, but loose enough that I can turn them without moving the gantry if I hold it still.
Tightening and loosening the two little screws that attach the extruder mount to the Z-axis lead screw. Currently I made them just tight, then backed off 1/4 turn.
Adding a shim between the vertical post and the Z-axis lead screw. The lead screw is now pretty much parallel to the post.
Slowly turning the lead screw by hand to raise and lower the gantry. There's no noticeable catching or increased resistance anywhere.
Varying the brand and type of PLA filament.
Varying the temperature from 190 °C to 210 °C.
Obsessively leveling and re-leveling the bed. Manually leveling, auto leveling with the BLTouch, and adjusting the z-offset.

I'm using the stock Ender 3 Pro profile in Cura, and printing at 0.2 mm layer height. I've kind of run out of things to check. What else can cause Z height loss in the first few layers like this?

1 mm is a lot that is missed, certainly when you use a layer height with a multiple of full steps. Have you checked movement without printing? So measure the height after a move from Z0 to Z100.

@0scar At your suggestion I did. I auto-homed, moved the head down to 0, measured the height of the top of the gantry, moved it up 100 mm, and measured again. It was dead-on 100 mm difference (as accurate as my ruler can be). So if that's working, what else should I look at?

Your question is very well formulated, but, to be honest, I've no clue at the moment. What I would do is write a script to generate G-code to move the printer from Z0 to Z100 in 0.2 mm steps to see if that makes a difference. I can't grasp why while printing it doesn't progress Z as a move. Look for play in the Z axis. Do you use Z-hop?

@0scar I don't think so. "Z Hop When Retracted" is turned off in the (standard) Cura profile I'm using, so unless there's another setting somewhere I'm not using Z-hop.

Did you ever solve this? A new user without comment privileges just attempted to post such a question as an answer. I'm curious too, since I've had various Z-axis problems in the past on an Ender 3 and want to know what could cause such an awful one as you've experienced in case I encounter similar in the future.

If it's still a problem, are you sure the gantry is square with the Z-axis? It's possible to mount the roller brackets non-square and that makes lots of problems similar to this.

@R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE I haven't really solved it. I just avoid prints where the first 1 mm is critical (adding rafts or support helps). I have checked the gantry and it appears square - I rolled it to the top and measured the distance to the top extrusion, and it's less than 0.5 mm different between the left and right. I'd still appreciate any suggestions!

@Robert: Have you checked that the Z beams are parallel to each other (not closer at one end than the other, or bent somewhere in the middle)?

@R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE No bends that I can see. I just measured between the Z beams at the level of the build plate and at the top. The difference is within 0.5 mm. So not perfect but pretty close. Do you think that could be it with such a small difference?

@Robert: I wouldn't expect an error within 0.5 mm to be a problem especially if that's without the gantry at the height being measured; aside from being a very small difference I'm pretty sure it's within the amount the beams should be able to deflect under tension. If, even with the gantry positioned at the height where you're measuring, there's still a difference and it's not a measurement error, it might indicate something mechanically wrong, but I'm not sure what.

Is that elephant foot ?

OP reports leveling the bed but no mention of adjusting the Zoffset height. The bed can be perfectly level but still too close to the nozzle.

@Kezat That's part of the bed leveling process. I'll update the question to make that explicit.

Creality Ender 3 Pro-"Z" axis issues: Browsing through earlier comments I don't really see any clear, verified solution for errors in the Z dimension when printing. I don't have a solution, but I'm experiencing a pretty similar problem. To not "muddy the waters" with the specific observations of my problem I'll open a new question/topic, Creality Ender 3 Pro: Problem with Z-axis inaccuracy (squashed layers?). I leave this note here in the hope that perhaps somebody following this thread who has valuable info will be look at the new thread.

Do you have any “slop” on the right side (non motor) of the gantry?
I’ve noticed that my gantry will settle on the right side and lag behind the motor driven - ever so slightly - when it starts to drive up. It will, after that first lag, move fine for the rest of the time. Z axis travel seems barely affected but all my prints are consistently about 0.5 mm short.

N.B. "Slop" is a common term for looseness or play -- what machinists used to call "shake".  In this context, it would mean the Xmax end of the gantry lags behind the Xmin end when the gantry starts to move up.

I think this is it. You've described what I see perfectly - a slight on the non-motor side. Is this something that's just endemic to the Ender 3? What can I do about it?

It's probably endemic to any single Z drive gantry type printer.  The most reliable solution might be converting to some kind of dual Z drive -- I've seen single-stepper belt drive Z conversions with all printable parts (other than the belts).  I hope that isn't what's needed, though; I have the same problem with an Ender 3 (the cheap one).

I have the exact same issue on my Ender 3 V2, perfect bed level using a dial gauge,
perfect first layer test prints (printing 9 squares all 1 layer high).
I can only get rid of it two ways:

Using a Raft as you have said (annoying).
Adjusting the Z-height Just exactly as the 1st layer finishes. I raise the height by 0.15-0.20 mm (in my case), and the resulting elephant foot is about 80-90 % better.

I recommend you follow Luke Hatfields guide on Ender 3 rework for The X-Gantry, as well as his other sections. Youtube channel "Edge Of Tech" does a decent job covering the rework in video form. Following most of these reworks I have made everything else in the print absolutely perfect, unfortunately EF remains.

I have edited your answer down to just the solution/workaround. The additional questions in the last two paragraphs could merit a new question. Please ask a new question, using the last two paragraphs as the contents, and refer back to this question, using the URL, as they are related. Hopefully someone will be able to provide you with a solution.


text:
How does an H-bot printer work?
I’m thinking of building a diy H-bot printer but I have some questions...

How can I tell the firmware that the printer is an H-bot one? I just need to uncomment the CoreXY option? Is it the same?

Does the print bed need to be square (for example 300x300) or it can be also a rectangle?

Are the steps/mm the same of the ones on a Cartesian 3D printer?

How can I recognize which motor goes on which connector on the motherboard? (The X and Y connectors I mean).

In terms of the motor motions, isn't h-bot the same as corexy? As I understand it, only the belt routing differs.

As I though, and so, what I have to change in the marlin firmware?

Then you should just need to setup Marlin according to the instructions for corexy.

The CoreXY kinematics can be seen as an evolution of the H-bot kinematics. In Marlin, you both need to configure the printer as a CoreXY machine. Note that your steps are determined by the pulleys in the steppers and need to be the same for the steppers. With testing you will find out if you have the correct value.
There are many popular designs out there; e.g. the Hypercube and the Hypercube Evolution (I have built the latter myself).
I would not recommend building an H-bot, these have an inherent design flaw in that the load is asymmetrical causing the carriage to be stressed by a torque causing racking. To minimize this racking, you would require more expensive tight tolerance hardware like proper linear rails (usually not the kind that you find on typical auction or Asian vending sites, but actual pricy Japanese or German hardware). The CoreXY kinematics stress the carriage symmetrically. Note that the difference between an H-bot and a CoreXY printer is only the length of the belts, nowadays good quality belts can be bought for any length you need.
Note that a square or rectangular bed is a non-issue, just specify the dimensions in the configuration. The only thing you need to find out is how to wire the steppers. I connect one stepper to one driver and the other stepper to the other driver. I then did some tests and found out I had to flip one stepper motors connector to get the correct movement. I could have reversed this in firmware as well.

Ok, i really appreciate your help, now, I think I’m going to build a core xy rather than a h-bot. Fortunately I have bought 3 decent linear rails which I have already tested on another printer (Cartesian). Now I would like to try a different way printing, so I’m going to try with the corexy

@Valeri0S You can also go for a Cartesian Ultimaker style... :-) I can recommend the Hypercube Evolution for your build.

Yes, I know but I wanted to try something different. As I sad I have already built a Cartesian printer with the structure of a corexy (with the bed moving up and down and the nozzle on the top), but it seems much heavy and there are too many motors. That’s the reason why I wanted to try something minimal like the corexy

Do note a CoreXY is also a Cartesian printer!


text:
What is the thinnest hotend?
I have a few 3D printers and now want to start building a custom 3D printer.
I want to build a 3D printer with multiple nozzles, and I want to make the hotend thin so the nozzles can be closer together.
What is the thinnest nozzle avalible to buy?
Are there any guides or details on how I could make a custom nozzle or modify a nozzle if I can't buy a thin nozzle?

How many nozzles? Do you need a lifting device? Multiple nozzles at the same height is not easy to align and can easily tip over you print during printing. There are also multiple in, one out hotends.

what is the "thinnest nozzle" in this regard? Would you fo so far as to machine a custom part?

@0scar I've had issues with mutliple nozzles not being at the same height. Planing to set them up so they can move independently.

@Trish I would probably test with 3D pen nozzles first if I can't find a thin 3D printer nozzle. I don't have the tools to machine it myself, but would like to get something custom made once I have the design and software working.

The size of the nozzle usually isn't the main factor for how close you can put nozzles together.  To keep the filament drive gear system from being the limiting factor, you would need Bowden extruders. "Then, the heat sinks and fans would be your limiting factor.  Have you considered a single nozzle with three extruders?  Otherwise, you need custom angled heat sinks similar to the three heat sinks on a single nozzle, and still a way to orient the nozzles at the same Z-height.  That would be difficult if all the nozzles are on the same heater block.  It still seems that nozzle size is the least of the issues of putting nozzles close together.
If you search for smaller nozzle sizes, you will get nozzles with smaller openings, not smaller overall size.  The threads on the nozzles are a standard size.  Thus, the smaller opening size can't be put closer together than the larger opening size.  Otherwise, you have only small variations between different types of nozzles and need room to screw them in to the heater block if you put all of them into one block.  You can get a nozzle using a 6 mm hex wrench that is smaller than one using a 7 mm hex (E3D).

One of the thinnest hotends I've seen are those from a Chinese factory Mellow Store, the heatsink is smaller than the top flange to mount the hotend. I don't know the quality of these hotends, the image below shows the basic layouts of available options:

Ultimaker uses high quality hotends which are pretty small 2.85  mm hotends they call "cores", they house 2 next to each other and use a lifting mechanism:


text:
I mistakenly used 90% ethyl alchool to scrape some PLA off my bed; did I ruin it?
I just printed my first cube from my newly arrived Artillery Sidewinder X1. I am totally new to 3D printing but I managed to correctly unbox, assemble and prepare it for printing.
I used PLA filament and the cube ended up great. I removed it using a cutter gently pulling it up from the first layer and it popped right off.
A little layer of material was still stuck on the bed and, I don't know why, my dumb brain decided to use ethyl alchool 90 % to scrub it off on that little surface. I immediately used some water to wipe the alchool off but it was too late.
Now on that portion of the bad all I see is a matte area that I can't fix.
Did I irremediably ruin my bed? I am so bummed I can't even describe it. All went great but I decided to do this on my own and I failed. I do know that the bed is replaceable but I just hope is not very expensive.
Here's a couple of pictures to give you a look of the damage.

First of all, let's look at what kind of bed you have. According to a review, it is a "porous ceramic coated glass surface."
Your bed is fine...
Glass and almost all ceramics are virtually impervious to most liquids, be them alcohol or even most acids unless that acid is hydrofluoric acid. So on a chemical standpoint, your bed is most likely ok, just the alcohol managed to leech some of the coloration or deposit dust in the surface - which is no problem usually. The matte might even just be PLA stuck in the surface, so if this happens if you print in a different area, you know that is not damage per see it's a normal sign of use.
So from that standpoint, I see no problem.
...but there are safety issues with the bed design
Where I see a problem though is the construction of the bed itself: it runs on mains voltage and is heated directly, which can cause all kind of problems, especially breaking off the cable as there is no proper strain relief on the cable! Atop that, the review points out that the bed heats uneven, which can very quickly lead to stress and breaking of the bed.
Because of this construction, I strongly advise to refit a strain relief and use utmost care no to touch the bed during operation. Make sure not to hammer onto it and don't overheat it to prevent thermal cracking.

It's glass with a coating though, no?

@R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE yes, apparently a ceramic grid, somewhat porous.

Hey Trish, thanks for your answer. That's exactly what i am worrying about. It has some sort of coating on top and i am afraid I just swiped it away with the alcohol.
In the meantime i printed another object on the same spot and it sticked wonderfully. Now i'll be sure to clean the bed with the proper substance.

I want to add some new details that I came to know contacting artillery official support by email. They told me that with PLA is sufficient to use a clean microfiber cloth with just some water to wipe the residues off the bed. Which is what i am going to do from now on, at least, again, when using PLA.

" I strongly advise to refit a strain relief and use utmost care no to touch the bed during operation" - this is NOT needed if you attach grounding and do some relay wiring, OR run the whole heatbed through one of those special fuses you use for bathrooms (which basically trigger IMMEDIATELY when the electricity goes somewhere else. But something MUST be done.


text:
Extruder increase temperature
I bought a month ago the Artillery Genius. Everything was pretty good until today, I was printing a test cube and it stopped pulling out filament, when I looked the temperature it was -15 °C, a few seconds after the thermistor sensor broke and got stuck on the extruder creating a little bit of smoke. I had bought a thermistor sensor and a heater cartridge original replacement. I changed both and turn the printer back on. As soon I turn it on the extruder start to increase the temperature, almost 300 °C and then change to -15 °C. I checked the connections multiple times, I even change the sensor with another one, but nothing works. I checked the boards, cables but everything looks great. Don't know what else can be. I already contacted customer support but just want to look for another opinion while waiting for there answer.

Your printer does seem to have a firmware problem and lack important safety features - it should have stopped the moment it went 300°C measurement, beeped like hell, and shut down with an error message about Thermal Runaway Protection. Immediately stop using the printer!
Before you try to print again, you need to make a proper firmware for your printer, one that has both Mintemp, Maxtemp as well as Thermal Runaway Protection actiive and flash that. While setting up your firmware, make sure you use the right temperature table for your thermosensor. How to do that is detailed here.


text:
Should I Opt For Linear Rails With Belts OR Linear Rails With Ball Screws For A Cartesian Style Printer?
I am building a medium-sized printer which needs to produce super-precise parts at a moderately fast print time. I frankly don't want to deal with belts or their tension issues but on the other hand, having ball screws on each axis will increase inertia...right?. I'm using Rexroth rails and will use (depending on what I decide) name brand belts or name brand ball screws.

Can you clarify what "super-precise" means? Are you building this printer to get precision you can't get at an affordable price in commercially available printers, or because you just want to do it yourself?

Yes printers at my price range don't really provide what I'm looking for, that's why I'm saving that labour cost and putting it into quality parts.

I'm not sure if this is entirely agreed upon, but I think it's largely the case these days (even with cheap printers like the Ender 3) that print precision is limited more by extrusion (accuracy of filament diameter, extruder stepping granularity, errors due to compressibility of filament, material oozing in the wrong place, etc.) than by axis positioning. In other words, to be able to take advantage of better axis positioning, you'd need to invest a lot of effort in getting the extrusion exact too.

For example, see the 0.0125 mm positioning example in my self-answer here: https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/a/12075/11157 You can clearly see that the positioning is fine, but even with tuned linear advance etc. there's some bulge at one of the corners due to extrusion-related issues that better positioning won't help with.

I am aware that kinematics are not the only variable in a perfect print but having a solid base does help a lot and simple tweaks and hacks can be done afterwards. These cheap printers are great but need a lot of babysitting to work right. I'm planning on making a minimal maintenance printer (fingers crossed)

I'm not trying to convince you to buy a cheap printer just that you're probably going to have to put a lot more work into perfecting the extrusion setup before spatial kinematics are the dominant factor.

You didn't even touch a discussion about steppers and servos. Current printers print within 0.2 mm accurate, what are you looking for? h6/H7 fitting? Do note that using ball screws for X and Y gives you a reasonably penalty towards speed.

In many years of building printers I only used ball screws for the Z-axis, and even then only for larger Makerbot and Ultimaker style designs that had a heavy platform.
Even for the Z-axis, a good thick trapezoid screw with the right anti-backlash configuration is often enough because most printers are light and most slicers only print upwards.
Modern belts are also very accurate, and if they are not load-bearing, and you stick to good closed-loop ones, they can be incredibly stable over time.
I tended to base my X-Y configuration around the available sizes of good quality closed-loop belts, and sized everything else to be compatible.

At the limit, precision is limited by the achievable positioning accuracy of the motors and the mechanical reflection of that precision into a linear position.
With a belt drive, the mechanical precision for a stepper-motor system is the circumference of the drive pulley divided by the number of distinct step positions.  A 1.5 degree stepper with 10::1 microstepping (assuming everything works perfectly) with a 1 cm pulley gives a maximum precision of 0.013 mm.
The same stepper motor with a 5 turns/in ball screw has a maximum precision of 0.0021 mm.  The precision is better.
Other advantages may include:

A stiffer drive system with a higher resonant frequency

Ability to transmit more force to the mechanism

More precise slow-motion controls

There are several disadvantages.

The rotating mass is increased.

Rotating ball screws have a maximum rotation rate depending on how the ends are supported.  This limits the maximum movement speed.

The most economical ball screw size (at McMaster-Carr) is the 5/8"-5 ball screw with appropriate ball nuts.  This is fairly high mass.  It also stiffer than thinner ball screws, and will have a higher maximum spin rate for a given support system.

For a particular linear speed, the motors must spin faster.  Unless a more complicated, variable micro-stepping drive method is used, the I/O load on the drive firmware will be higher -- about 5 times higher in this example.

Other advantages of ball screws are less relevant in a 3D printer application.

Ball screws can generate and support higher forces

Ball screws are not subject to the belt stretching and skipping a tooth

Ball screws work well with human-controlled knobs and hand-wheels

If this is a larger bed size then a typical printer, you will probably be printing larger objects.  To keep the printing time reasonable, you may want to print faster, which means higher acceleration and higher extrusion rates.
For your particular application, you need to evaluate the tradeoffs.  Either could be your answer.  If the analysis is too complex, you could default to belt drive.  You could put the money you would have spent on ball screws, ball nuts, and extra bearings into wider belts, higher torque motors with smaller step angles, and better (higher voltage, faster switching) motor drives.


text:
MK8 versus E3d V6 nozzle
I have an Ender 3 and Prusa MK3S using MK8 and E3D V6 nozzles respectively.
I've read some difference between these two nozzles in question "E3D V6 nozzle vs MK8 nozzle, first layer adhesion".
Can I use an MK8 nozzle in the v6 heater block and vice versa? I know both have same M6 thread but what tolerance do they follow?

To be successful you would need to ensure that the geometry of the two nozzles are compatible. It is not just the external thread. It includes thread length, internal diameter of the nozzle, whether the hot-end is configured for a PTFE liner, or is an all-metal hot-end, how the back end of the nozzle couples back to the heat-break, how the internal geometry of the nozzle sits in relation to the heater block etc.
The original designs that spawned many of the clones were usually highly researched and sophisticated holistic balances of thermal and mechanical properties designed to prevent clogging with the widest range of filaments within the design spec of the hot end.
Randomly swapping parts could alter that balance and cause all sorts of printing problems - including leaks, burned filament within the nozzle, clogging, oozing, poor retraction control, poor thermal control etc.
But, if the geometries of the two nozzles are close enough, you might be ok...

"hether the hot-end is configured for a PTFE liner, or is an all-metal hot-end, " is not a parameter of neither Makerbot MK8 nor e3Dv6 nozzles.

True, but it IS a parameter of many of the cheaper clones that market themselves using the names of these hot-end models. I have used a number of genuine E3D V6s and the actual E3D ones were all all-metal hot ends and very nicely made. I have also encountered a number of clones from Ebay and elsewhere that, while they claimed to be a "V6", and looked like a V6, also contained a ptfe liner... I have also seen a number of MK8 "clones" that all share the same basic shape and configuration, but are each their own unique beast. Most of these used ptfe liners too.

it's a setup of the whole hotend, not the nozzle itself. Only the Makerbot MK10 is different in that it requires a liner. Heatbreaks are not nozzles!

True, but I have had nozzles where the ptfe extended into the top end of nozzle itself, and the top of the nozzle was bored-out to accept the ptfe. When I upgraded the throat to be all-metal, I also had to change the nozzle so that it's bore was consistent with the bore on the throat.

Those are extreme outliers, because that would be an Makerbot Mk10 in M6 formfactor which is WAY out of the spec.

Exactly! My original point was merely intended to convey the concept that, at the end of the day, you need to make sure, on a case-by-case basis, that the internal structure of the parts are compatible just as much as the external threads. I learned very quickly that looking at part names as a way to determine compatibility was not enough on its own, and it was also necessary to understand something about the engineering of the part if I wanted to start swapping things around. Either that, or I would buy parts from the same manufacturer if I wanted them to work together.

Interesting discussion relevant to this topic... https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/wanhao-printer-3d/TEdslEknny4.  “It was called Mk8. It is different from the MakerBot MK8 in almost every way.
The thermal barrier was PTFE lined with a 3mm OD, 2mm ID liner that extended into the special nozzle that looked like MK8 but had 3mm internal bore for the liner.”


text:
What are the pros and cons of writing nozzle size vs using e3d style dots on nozzle?
e3d uses this scheme to mark the size of their nozzle:

How do I read this scheme? Do we read the second row of dots after completing the first row of dots or we read 1 dot from row 1 and second dot from row 2 the again 3rd dot from row 1 and 4th dot from row 2?
It can be seen here in the nozzle:

Other nozzles usually have size engraved on the hex flat face:

Which one of these is a better scheme to designate a nozzle? is one cheaper to machine than other?

dots
First of all, reading the dot pattern: for all but the 0.15, the total number of dots is read, and there is only 1 dot per side. So a .5 nozzle has dimples on all sides. The only outlier where the dots are not all one next to another is 0.15, which has 2 dots but they are interspaced by one blank side.

0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.6
0.8
0.5 (which was added after the .6 and .8 had already been established)

2 interspaced ones - 0.15, also added after the 0 to 5-dot group had been established.

dots vs. inscription
The inscription is, compared to the dot pattern, much more shallow and can vanish under scratches. Also, the dots are easier to recover from being caked in plastic.
On the flipside, the dot pattern isn't easy to read intuitively, it doesn't follow an easy pattern (the 6 and 2-interspaced-dots are later additions into the setup).


text:
For making V6 or Mk8 nozzle what tolerance specification we've to follow?
Both nozzles use M6 threads, which ISO thread specification do these nozzles use?
And what should be the tolerance and surface finish (internal/external) of the nozzle bore?
I found the drawings but nothing about the tolerances.
I've found the V6 nozzle drawing here and the Mk8 nozzle dimensions as depicted below:

The short answer is it really doesn't matter. None of these surfaces are interfacing with other rigid parts. They're conducting filament that's being melted. The specifications are likely optimized for favorable flow properties, and following them as closely as your tooling allows is probably a good idea, but there's no hard tolerance cutoff.
CNC Kitchen has a video producing a working nozzle with a mini lathe and had good luck without any rigorous process for tolerances.
It should be noted that the exactness of the nozzle orifice size and other dimensions are for the most part not relevant to the accuracy of extrusion; that's pretty much all on the filament diameter and extruder motor motion, which determine the volume of material extruded. In practice you can produce 0.4 mm extrusions pretty much equally well with an 0.3 mm orifice or an 0.5 mm orifice; at most you'll have some minor differences in behavior on overhangs. And presumably your error is not going to be anywhere near 25%.
As Trish noted, the threads do have to interface with another rigid part. However they're governed by ISO standards for metric threads not this particular design. I use this tolerance calculator site: https://amesweb.info/Screws/metric-thread-dimensions-calculator.aspx

there is one part that needs to be in spec: the threads. It' also be better if the hex is in spec, but with an adjustable wrench that is ok.

Indeed. I'll edit that in.

I went to tolerance calculator you posted by it asks for "tolerance class". So, what tolerance class we must use to make our nozzle compatible with other v6 nozzle hotends?

@Alex, as noted there, unless specified otherwise, 6g.


text:
Marlin keeps restarting when I push the LCD controller button
I am new here and also new for the 3D printers world.  I have built a 3D printer myself. Everything seems okay, but, when I install Marlin firmware I can't use the printer.
While my printer is connected to my power supply (12 V; 30 A) and when I push the button on the screen for selecting the menu items, Marlin is restarting.
But, when I connect my computer with USB and power supply together, Its working fine
I am using RobotDyn Arduino Mega 2560, RobotDyn Graphic LCD controller, RobotDyn DRV8825
Any help will be highly appreciated.

Hi welcome to 3DPrinting.SE! To be clear, you aren't pushing the reset button but pushing the rotating button?

Yes, I am pushing the rotating button for entering the menu.

Sorry, had to ask :-) Indeed a strange issue, I haven't seen that before!

Yes. Its strange. When I install repetier its work perfectly but with marlin I have this problem.

Normally the firmware beeps the speaker when you press buttons. Perhaps it's defective and shorts, drawing too much power and resetting the board.

@R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE, that is what I was thinking as well. The description sounds like a short to me as well.

If the trouble was just a short between 5 V and ground, the board probably would restart whenever you pushed the button, with all kind of power sources.
The fact that the Arduino restarts only when powered from RAMPS makes me wonder another cause for this problem.
It's well known that most of Arduino clones don't have a good voltage regulator onboard. This causes trouble when you power Arduino from RAMPS, because RAMPS sends 12 V to Arduino through Arduino's Vin pin, and this 12 V goes to Arduino's voltage regulator, which should reduce it to the 5 V used by ATMega MCU.
The question is, probably the Arduino's onboard voltage is running almost at its capacity and, when you press the button, the extra processing load or the redrawing of the display makes Arduino reset.
The solution would be disconnect diode D1 in RAMPS, and power Arduino from USB, or feeding 5V directly to Arduino's 5 V pin (not Vin).
A third option (more complex) would be feed about 7 V to Arduino barrel power-connector. This lower voltage would reduce the task of Arduino's onboard regulator. My 3D-printer uses an Arduino clone, but, as I discovered about this problem before building it, I've never powered it from RAMPS. I dessoldered D1 on RAMPS and, since the first day, Arduino was powered from USB, or from a DC-DC buck converter that reduces 12 V to 7.2 V.

You are right! This thread help me solve a 1 year old problem. I had to buy a new LCD(different model) because I had the same problem. Every time I press down the controller button the system resets. Your clue about it having something to do with the speaker helped solve this mystery.
I had to comment out #define SPEAKER and it is now working.
This is a strange bug that only occurs with a the SKR-E3mini V2 and the most basic 12864 LCD AND Marlin 2.1.1. I have 2 printers so I can pretty much confirm in my case it only occurs in this particular configuration.


text:
How to feed the filament through the material shortage sensor?

I'm just finishing the set-up of a CR-10 Max. It is a new printer.
I don't manage to feed the filament through the material shortage sensor.
I can hear the micro switch click; the LED turns blue, then a few millimeters after that (33 mm total from the entry point), there is something that prevents the filament from going forward. I don't see any switch on the outside of the sensor, and I applied a reasonable amount of force on the filament.
Can you tell me how to troubleshoot this ?

I've designed similar sensor casings, sometimes the filament catches a ridge/ledge or part of the cavity, even when it is chamfered or rounded. The arm of the limit switch pushes the filament up, away from the filament straight path.
Have you tried cutting the filament under a very sharp angle, that may work.

Thanks. I found the ridge, it was on the side opposite to the microswitch. Cutting at a sharp angle helped. I know it's on this side because that's the only place it still catches something. In the documentation, they don't really tell us why we have to cut he filament,

Here is 3D model that better explains why it was catching and how to remedy the problem:

The filament is likely to have some twists and the bevel you create may not be in the correct orientation once it catches the ridge.
The out hole is not chamfered on the inside, as it is drilled from the outside, and I guess a chamfer on the inside is not available at this price range.
I found that twisting the filament 90° at most one way or the other always helps the filament finds its way. It can be tricky because of the small diameter/stiffness of the filament, with the spool still attached to the other end.


text:
Can I use different sized steppers for different axes?
So basically, I have 3 different types of steppers.

A NEMA 23 stepper for the Z-axis,
a good quality NEMA 17 for Y-axis and
another lower quality NEMA 17 for X-axis.

This setup should work right?. I'm using TMC2209's stepper drivers and all are well within the drivers rated phase current limit.

Each axis is fine using a different stepper size and/or quality. You will still need to tune their operating current and steps/mm for each of course. Make sure your motor mounts fit too.
Where it might become challenging is if you wanted two different steppers on the SAME axis. As in, a NEMA17 + NEMA23 for a dual Z axis. I don't think this is what you intend though.


text:
Smoothers for TEVO Tornado printer
I have a TEVO Tornado (bought quite recently) and I want to know what is the best type of smoothers MKS smoothers or TL smoothers? Are they the same thing?

What makes you think you need them? have you experienced printing issues? a printer is sold as a working design, it does not require smoothers in principle.

The use of smoothers totally depends on the stepper drivers you are using! Note that the TL and MKS smoothers do exactly the same thing. Both use an arrangement of 4 or 8 diodes. Details of the problems with drivers and the working of the smoothers is explained in this blog post. The problem is that some stepper drivers are not able to produce low currents as of the present dead-zone.

if we had a way to modify the motor so that with a voltage of 1.4 V there would be no current flowing, then the driver would be able to generate all the currents because it would always be spitting out more than the minimum voltage

The diodes prevent current to flow at the cost of a voltage drop; a 1.4 V voltage drop (2 diodes) would prevent current to flow, as such you see diodes in series on the smoother boards.
These MKS/TL smoothers help with smoothing out the signal going through stepper motors; e.g. the notoriously noisy DRV8825 motor drivers are known for a stepped sine curve rather than a smooth output.
More modern chipsets such as the TMC21xx, TMC22xx, and TMC51xx do a much better job at providing smooth signals, and surprisingly, so do the cheaper drivers like the A4988s!
So if you are using stepper drivers that do not produce a smooth sine wave, like the DRV8825 stepper drivers, you could potentially benefit from installing smoothers. This could help with salmon/zebra skin/moire and ringing print artifacts/defects.
To quote the popular All3DP 3D printing site from "TL Smoother: Should I Add One to My 3D Printer?":

It’s a yes if you’re running DRV8825 stepper drivers. This was
what TL smoothers were designed to do: fix a design flaw in the
DRV8825. Your mileage may vary based on your printer’s power supply,
but you’ll likely see noticeable improvements in print quality.
It’s a no if you’re running newer Trinamic stepper drivers.
Trinamic drivers have many “smart” features built in that don’t suffer
from the same issues as the DRV8825 and already counter electrical
noise. As a post from Trinamic notes, adding TL smoothers doesn’t
provide any significant benefit; it only increases power consumption
and heat generation.
It’s a maybe if you’re running other drivers. Other stepper
drivers might not have the DRV8825’s design flaws, but they may
benefit from the slight electrical dampening created by the TL
smoother’s circuit. Considering the smoothers’ low cost (~\$8-15 for
packs of 3 or 4), it doesn’t hurt to try it out and let the results
speak for themselves.

authors: القرش الاسود


text:
What tolerance class does E3D uses for their metric thread nozzles?
As we know E3D nozzles use M6 threads. These are metric threads, so they've different tolerance classes but which tolerance class are they using?

Does this answer your question? For making V6 or Mk8 nozzle what tolerance specification we've to follow?

The tolerance of the threads are not really of interest, it is the top of the nozzle and the bottom of the heat break that needs proper care, these are screwed together forming the seal; when properly machined and installed/tightened, no filament will leak to the threads.


text:
What is the next step after measuring the bed levels?
My Creality CR-10 Max is equipped with a BL Touch sensor for bed leveling.
The bed size is 450 mm x 450 mm.
Here is the 16 measurement points taken from a 4x4 grid:
float  v[] = {-1.15625, -0.7625, 0.1525, 1.13,
-1.1150, -0.5150, 0.2125, 1.650,
-0.8525, -0.215,  0.510, 1.4425,
-0.4125, 0.2649, 1.0350, 1.9050};

Which looks like this:
The bed doesn't look flat or level.  To what extent should I try to make the bed flat and level?
It's now a day later, and the bed looks like this (image below) after turning the four knobs using AUX leveling (a helper to locate the nozzle above the knobs), so that the nozzle barely scratches a sheet of paper:
float  v[] = {0.0849, 0.0599, 0.1549, 0.2874,
0.2674, 0.0624, -0.0425, 0.0699,
0.3374, 0.1199,  -0.0150, 0.0199,
0.5399, 0.3349, 0.1899, 0.2074};

I also notice that the bed is slightly concave in its center: using a straight edge (a steel ruler on its side), there is enough room in middle ninth (center square) under the ruler for one sheet of paper.

Have you leveled the bed before starting ABL? You should level the bed first, the best you can. Also, could you please explain what is X and what is Y? The pattern is pretty consistent except for one outlier (+1.65 mm). If the printer had a single Z stepper this could be explained by the cantilever arm, but I think this one has 2 Z-steppers, right? As it is now, you should not print. Once you get it leveled better, just add G29 after G28 in your start G-code.

are those 16 values just to assist the user leveling the bed, or are they somehow used by the printer to compensate for the imperfect level / flatness of the bed ?

They are just for information, they are used internally to compensate Z during the first few mm of printing (depending on the fade distance).

Now that you have leveled the bed you are ready to start printing. To enable leveling for printing, you need to add G-code G29 directly after G28 in your start G-code of your slicer.
The array values you reported are just for information or visualisation of the level of the bed. Although you have ABL you always need to provide a bed that is as level as best as you can, the ABL will take care of the final dents or skewness.

My prints are doing well. After setting up Ultimaker Cura to output for my CR10 Max, here is the relevant portion of the G-code: G28 ;Home
M420 S1 Z2 ;Enable ABL using saved Mesh and Fade Height


text:
Displayed temperature jumping while printing for a long time
I have a Felix Tec 4 (Single Extruder) and at the moment I print for a relatively long time compared to my other prints. Recently I noticed that after a few hours of continuous printing the displayed temperature jumped by up to 10 °C, which is almost certainly not true. Since it is the temperature that jumps, it will probably be the thermistor that is broken, but what is broken that this only happens after several hours and not immediately?
I think it does not have to do something with the G-code, because the temperature makes jumps of up to 10 °C in one second and back again. I had 2 pretty big prints to do. It happend on both of them, but I forgot to take screenshots on the first print which was much worse that the second one. Here is how it looked in OctoPrint on second print:

For comparison I have entered the temparatures manually in OctoPrint and made a screenshot of the temparature

I searched the GCode for M104, M109, M140 and M190, but only found M190 one time at the beginning, which I think is normal.

This question could be a possible duplicate of "Hot end temperature varies during print"

Your temperature is not just bumping up 10 °C. Your hotend is fluctuating in temperature, it drops under and increases over the "set" temperature. The hotend temperature is a result of the amount heat you put into it and how much heat you pull from it (e.g. filament heats up and draws energy from the heater block), apart from a too large printing speed for the heater to follow the energy off-take, this can be the result of one of the following (or combined) issues:

Your print cooling fan position is too high/not low enough, it cools the heater block/nozzle
Your PID settings are not correct

Many hotend designs come with silicone "socks" insulating the heater block and to shield airflow from cooling the heater block.

If it goes away in the next shorter print and if the start of each print is ok. then it probably is the air from the print cooling fan that gets diverted towards the nozzle by the print itself. Bad PID settings can increase the effect.


text:
What type of kinamatics is 3D Gence One using?
I was looking at some end high 3D printers (drooling just a little bit) when I found this.
Now, this was a 3500 \$ printer when new back in 2016. I'm relatively to the 3D printing (well... kind of) and have not seen this type of design before. What is it? Cartesian? CoreXY? This style, from my limited knowledge, looks like a best of both worlds kind of scenario because if you look at it - it has that traditional simple Cartesian design, but with a light head of a CoreXY type printer (Exclude the circuitry behind the stepper, that is something else). This was designed to be used in a mechanical application, so it has to be precise. Is this a good configuration and does Marlin support it?

I'm can't say for sure, since this is my first time seeing this type of 3D printer configuration too, but I think this is a cartesian style printer. If you think about it, it is similar to a Prusa-style printer, but instead of an x-gantry being raised and lowered by a leadscrew, the heated bed is being lowered and raised with two leadscrews. Software-wise, the printer you mentioned should be configured exactly like a Prusa-style printer, but with a reversed Z-axis, since to make the heated bed move closer to the hotend, it must be raised instead of lowered.
I personally do not think this printer is a CoreXY configuration since a CoreXY printer relies on two motors that work simultaneously to move the X and Y axis, while the printer you showed has the X and Y-axis moving independently of each other (as can be seen by the belt under the heated bed and the belt that moves the hotend left and right). At least, in my opinion, the way the X and Y-axis operate on a CoreXY is what makes the CoreXY unique, instead of the raising and lowering of the heated bed.
You can read about the variations of Cartesian 3D printers here. If you are interested in other styles of 3D printers, you can check the Delta and Polar style printer section of this article.
Hope I piqued your interest in 3D printing :D
Feel free to comment on this if you have more things to ask, and I'll get back to you as soon as I can :)

This is correct. From the pic it's clearly cartesian.

IMO this is a much better version of the traditional Cartesian. It has a lighter x-gantry which will reduce ghosting and speed up print time. Do you agree?

and YES! is just like the Prusa!

Do you mean carriage? The gantry doesn't move. But it's got a stepper on it (direct drive) so it won't be terribly light...

Generally, to reduce vibrations of an operating printer, one should focus on reducing the mass of suspended moving parts. In the case of a Prusa printer, it has an X-carriage that moves around, but in the case of the printer you mentioned, it's more like it has a Z-carriage. Since a heated bed weighs more than a hotend, the vibrations will be more apparent on prints. (At least, this is how I imagine the design to function). As for print times, it is more heavily dependant on motor quality and the max extrusion rate of the hotend than the actual design of the printer.


text:
Why does my TMC2208 only rotate my stepper motor in one direction?
I have two TMC2208 stepper drivers, both with the exact same problem. They both only allow the motor to rotate in one direction. They are currently used inside a CoreXY style 3D printer. In my case, both the Z motors have this problem. (For example, if I lower the build plate, the build plate lowers, but when I want to raise the build plate, the motors still make the build plate go down).
I have isolated this is a hardware problem by switching the defective motor drivers with my X and Y motor drivers, and after I did, the Z motors were able to raise and lower the build plate properly. However, the defective motor drivers seem to be able to turn the motors, so I don't understand where the problem originates from.
Possibly relevant details:

I have been using Pronterface to control my 3D printer manually.
Vrefs on my stepper drivers are set at X,Y,Z,Z2 on 0.9v, and E0 is on 1.1v
My stepper motors are these
The TMC2208 are configured in StealthChop2 mode.

If there are any details I missed, please notify me.


text:
How to address bed scratching on a Creality Ender 3
So bed scratching seems to be a real thing, and not a single post I've come across (I've looked at more than 30 by now) actually answers the question on exactly how to stop this.
Now, I have an Ender 3 and this is becoming enough of a headache that I want to just give it away. I thought that the old bed was just wrecked so spend £30 on a new glass bed .. Guess what .. Wrecked that too.
Please don't suggest I level the bed - it is levelled, not gravitationally, but mechanically.
I have tightened everything up.
I have tried altering the XYZ axis on the actual printer.
I have tried adding some numbers to the Z axis in Cura, but it just snaps back down to zero.
I have played with base layer thickness, with no difference.
I have run nine different test prints, with every single one coming out perfectly.
I have ABS at 250 °C and bed at 90 °C. Sticking to the bed is not a problem.
Why .. Why, why why, is it scratching the bed when I then go to print something? Nothing has changed!! I even zero'd the test prints in Cura the same way I did my parts prints.
Would seriously appreciate some help before I just toss this thing.

Hmm, can you take a picture of your test prints? Also, are your test prints just pure GCODE, or are they also sliced by Cura the same way you slice your normal prints? I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "tightened up", but I'm assuming you mean the heated bed screws. In that case, if your heated bed is tightened down all the way and the hotend is still scratching the bed, you can try physically moving the Z endstop up a little bit. Sorry if I asked something unnecessary, I may have misinterpreted some parts of your post.

This is a complete shot in the dark from me, but another thing you can try is updating the firmware on your Ender 3 (if it is not already on the latest version), and then using mesh bed leveling, also make sure to save after leveling.

An issue that I have with my unit (which only auto-bed leveling fixed) is that the aluminum build plate (which your glass/synthetic bed sits on) does not heat evenly and expands and contracts unevenly. Which in my case created consistent scratching as well. If you have the money try using the auto-bed leveling kit from Creality or TH3D: https://bit.ly/2ZY9Qr4.

You almost surely have mechanical problems in at least one axis affecting positioning reproducibility. Maybe gantry not square with Z axis, or X or Z rollers with flat spots or insufficiently tightened eccentric nuts.

Most likely your print surface is uneven. You can try rebuilding your firmware with mesh bed levelling that allows you to manually probe and store n*n grid bed mesh setting the height offsets at each point manually (however, on stock setup you might need to disable certain features for the compiled firmware to fit). Other option would be to use some kind of ABL as mentioned above. You can also try installing Z offset plugin on Cura and raise it up a bit.
The last thing to check would be comparing the test gcode to your slicer generated ones (via any text editor) looking for differences in G0/G1 Z movement in the beginning of the gcode. If there are ant differences, that would give you a hint where to progress further.


text:
Blender file not slicing properly in Cura
I need help with a blender file not slicing properly, the results seem very strange to me.    I'm pretty new to 3D printing, I have an ender 3 pro, using Cura for slicing.    I have been using blender for a few years, but only sporadically so i'm still somewhat of a novice.     I am trying to build a chain guard for an electric motorcycle, fairly simple cylinder with a cutout for the chain, a couple holes for bolts and my logo on the top.    I'm not having very good luck with the solidify modifier so i've traied duplicating the mesh and closing the faces to make it solid, still not working.
What I find strange about the slicing is that Cura builds all the supports correctly but doesnt print the cylinder, it also prints the logo fine.
My blend file is a mess, please help.
Thanks

Does this work for sharing my .blend file?
https://www.dropbox.com/s/vkpxfgvs0f7gy2g/Chain%20Cover7.blend?dl=0

It is not uncommon for Blender to produce STL files that have incorrect normals on the faces. Have you tried repairing the file through an online service like e.g. Netfabb?

That file is borked - it's blender's fault. Before exporting any blender file you need to Recalculate normals!

haha, yes it is borked.    I was able to re-draw and make it print ok but i will use recalculate normals in the future, thanks


text:
Updating an Ender 3 V2
I recently got an Ender 3 V2 and when I go to Info -> Version it says V1.0.0. However online, there is V1.0.1 available.
How can I update the Ender 3 V2. It is different as it isn't a ATMEL chip like the ATMEGA 2560 but rather an ARM processor. I own many arduino boards but apparently the chip has the bootloader already on it.
So how can I update the board, through some uploader, specific software or what exactly.

Just copy the firmware to a blank microsd card.
Turn off the printer and turn it on.
Board will flash it automatically and wait the screen to up.
Make sure the name of the firmware file always unique or different from the last one, otherwise you will get the blank screen.
If you do, just re-flash by using a rename (different) file of firmware.

thank you very much, CHEP on youtube just made a video about it showing your method. Putting it on a micro SD card should work the next time I need to update and it so much easier than plugging it in

After looking around for a bit in Cura. You can update it via Cura.
Start by going to your printer -> Manage printer
Then there is the option to update firmware. You must plug the printer in first.


text:
OpenSCAD / FreeCAD splitting, hollowing and threading model
I had a thought the other day that it's 100 % waste to have either a solid or hollow 3D-printed model in relation to utilizing the space inside of it for different modules, e.g. secret compartments, modules like salt/pepper shakers, etc.
So I thought the best way of achieving this in a streamlined semi-automated manner is creating a simple script in OpenSCAD / FreeCAD and I would love some professional input on how to achieve this exact process:

Split any given model at X height with Y angle Z times (eg. slicing a model in half & keeping both parts separate)

Make a hollow compartment inside the model with working 3D-printable threads sticking out from one part fitting into the other with definable shape, tolerance & size in relation to the parts size (eg. a cylindrical hidden compartment or a space where specific user-made modules fits into)

I'm thinking a few simple yet potent lines of OpenSCAD code or a FreeCAD script should do the trick but my knowledge is limited in this field at the moment so any input is highly appreciated.

OpenSCAD lacks any facilities to perform computations on the resulting geometry (derived from CSG or directly imported). It has a decent functional language for expressing geometry in terms of parameters and functions/modules, but the road is one way; geometry is an output only and doesn't loop back into input. So automation of this entirely in OpenSCAD is really not an option.
On the other hand, doing it manually is rather easy. You can use CSG operations (intersection or difference) to cut the model, cut a compartment out of it, cut threads in it, etc. as well as (union) attaching external threads. You just have to decide how to size and position them for your model yourself.
Note that there's no canonical module for doing threads in OpenSCAD. You can either derive the cross section for your thread profile (can be done with OpenSCAD code) then linear_extrude it with twist (needs really fine division to be accurate though) or skin a polyhedron for the thread. There are a few published modules for the latter and I have an unpublished one I prefer.

Perfect answer!
Do you know any simple way to create that simple streamlined process for converting solid .stl models into having a let's say secret compartment within them?
Could csg.js be a viable option maybe?

You may be able to get OpenSCAD to output the CSG AST and process that with external tools, or just output the STL file (probably easier) and process it to make decisions about where to put cuts, etc.

Alright. I'm thinking along the lines of creating a simple web-form where solid model files can be uploaded and automatically get overhauled so there's a module of choice that fits perfectly inside of it when 3D-printed.
Currently looking into ported OpenSCAD libraries for OpenJSCAD, seems promising but I'm not that experienced in this field just yet so I'd love any clues to help put it together.


text:
SeemeCNC Rostock V2 in 2020
Looking to get into 3D printing without spending too much up front for now. Found an assembled seemecnc Rostock V2 for sale at a very good price considering its MSRP is 1k for the kit pre-assembly.
My question is, will this 4 year old printer be significantly lacking in any way compared to a new lower-end printer from 2020? I know the technology moves so fast.
Thanks so much in advance,
Alex

I don't see where it's lacking compared to newer less expensive printers, but I wouldn't pay anywhere near the MSRP for it, as it doesn't look like it has any advantages over printers 1/5 its price.

I don't own a delta mechanical printer, but from what I've seen is that it can be more complicated than a Cartesian printer in troubleshooting. You should ask yourself if you have the skills (or want to develop the skills) to operate such a machine. Certainly if it is a printer assembled by someone else with unknown quirks?

I definitely wouldn't start with a Delta printer.
Cartesian printers have become "the norm" for a good reason - they're very easy to use and tune, so I'd recommend getting an Ender 3 or Biqu B1.
It'll still print just fine, but that MSRP is in no way realistic in 2020. If it's offered under maybe 100$, it might be interesting as a secondary machine, but I wouldn't pay more than that.

In theory delta is awesome and can be extremely fast, but I think you need really precise & rigid mechanics plus really fine stepping (or gears) to get quality comparable to cartesian. With same steps/mm as what suffices on cartesian you'll get artifacts from the delta kinematics.

@R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE I agree - I got myself a cheap EZT T1 to get a hang of the kinematics, and it's pretty tricky to get them to work properly without a bed probe (which the Rostock does have though). The RAMBo in the Rostock seems to be AVR-based though, so I'd definitely expect better quality on a cartesian printer.


text:
Ender 3 Pro goes to one location on the bed and extrudes
I'm having trouble with my customized Ender 3 Pro. It's running an SKR v1.3 board with Marlin and OctoPrint on a Raspberry Pi 4. My problem is that sometimes when the printer goes to print, instead of drawing the first line to prime the nozzle, it goes to max X and Y and extrudes what appears to be the full amount of plastic that would be extruded in a layer. It then proceeds to execute its Z-moves like it would in a print, without changing X and Y. The result is a lot of plastic being extruded very quickly in one location. There's also a BLTouch sensor on the machine. I've also come across the error while it's in the middle of a print. It'll just stop what it's doing on a layer, go to max X and Y and start extruding and raising the Z-axis.
What I've tried to solve it:

Turned it off and on again. This sometimes works. After leaving the printer off for a while, I start the print again with the same exact G-code, and the print works perfectly. Sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn't.
Looked around in the Marlin firmware for errors. The Ender is running a version of Marlin I customized from the stock version to fit my hardware.

what's your start G-code? Have you checked if your endstops are in the MIN or in the MAX endstop pins?

How complex would it be for you to go back to a stock setup? That could at-least help you identify if the bug is hardware or software related (albeit it sounds software to me).


text:
How to start a print in the center position after a change in parameters using M92 and M500 G-code
I have a Core XY Custom DIY Printer, but actually I have a problem with the measure in Axis X and Y. When a print a test cube with the measure 20 mm x 20 mm 20 mm, the object printed result with these dimensions.
Z = 20 mm
X = 15 mm
Y = 15 mm
Well, I know how solved this problem, because of long time ago have the same problem, do a question, and that was answered, and this moment solved my problem. answer old question
Now I use the same process

Connect the printer to my pc

Use Simplify 3D for send gcode to the machine

M503 for get the set values

M92 for change the values X and Y

M500 for store the new values for default in the memory of the printer

M503 for check the actual values, and these are the correct

So, I print the test cube, the measure are right, but with two problems

Every time I.m will go to print, if turn off the machine, the process to be need repeat, in other words, the gcode M500 doesn't work.
the nozzle doesn't start the extrusion in the middle when the parameters were changed.

Send M503 for known the parameters. These parameters are the set by default At this moment in the printer.
G21    ; (mm)
M149 C ; Units in Celsius
Filament settings: Disabled
M200 D1.75
M200 D0
Steps per unit:
M92 X80.00 Y80.00 Z400.00 E100.00
Maximum feedrates (units/s):
M203 X100.00 Y100.00 Z2.00 E10.00
Maximum Acceleration (units/s2):
M201 X2000 Y2000 Z50 E5000
Acceleration (units/s2): P<print_accel> R<retract_accel> T<travel_accel>
M204 P2000.00 R2000.00 T2000.00
Advanced: Q<min_segment_time_us> S<min_feedrate> T<min_travel_feedrate> X<max_x_jerk> Y<max_y_jerk> Z<max_z_jerk> E<max_e_jerk>
M205 Q20000 S0.00 T0.00 X5.00 Y5.00 Z0.40 E5.00
Home offset:
M206 X0.00 Y0.00 Z0.00
Material heatup parameters:
M145 S0 H180 B70 F0
M145 S1 H240 B110 F0
PID settings:
M301 P13.70 I0.71 D65.64

After sending code M92 X106.64 Y106.64
G21    ; (mm)
M149 C ; Units in Celsius
Filament settings: Disabled
M200 D1.75
M200 D0
Steps per unit:
M92 X106.64 Y106.64 Z400.00 E100.00
Maximum feedrates (units/s):
M203 X100.00 Y100.00 Z2.00 E10.00
Maximum Acceleration (units/s2):
M201 X2000 Y2000 Z50 E5000
Acceleration (units/s2): P<print_accel> R<retract_accel> T<travel_accel>
M204 P2000.00 R2000.00 T2000.00
Advanced: Q<min_segment_time_us> S<min_feedrate> T<min_travel_feedrate> X<max_x_jerk> Y<max_y_jerk> Z<max_z_jerk> E<max_e_jerk>
M205 Q20000 S0.00 T0.00 X5.00 Y5.00 Z0.40 E5.00
Home offset:
M206 X0.00 Y0.00 Z0.00
Material heatup parameters:
M145 S0 H180 B70 F0
M145 S1 H240 B110 F0
PID settings:
M301 P13.70 I0.71 D65.64

Red circle, the middle of the plate or surface printer, in this position, start to print with actual parameters by default, and respect the limits(black square), but, with the measure in axis X and Y wrong after printed the model.
Green circle, the nozzle start in this position when changing the parameter in axis X  and Y, printed with the measure correct, but by taking a position that is not the right one, it assumes other limits and spends almost half of the print surface area.

Every time I.m will go to print, if turn off the machine, the process to be need repeat, in other words, the gcode M500 doesn't work.

This tells me that your firmware has the EEPROM support needed for the M500 command disabled.
Fixing the firmware
You need to update your firmware to enable storing the information in the EEPROM: the line should read as follows without any leading //
#define EEPROM_SETTINGS // Enable for M500 and M501 commands

When you are already updating your firmware, you should also fix your firmware to have the correct steps/mm, as those are off in your build. An example for the line you look for is
#define DEFAULT_AXIS_STEPS_PER_UNIT   { 106.64, 106.64, 4000, 500 }

Workaround
automatic setting of the Steps/mm fix
There's a way to fix it on the user side though: When slicing, your Start-G-code needs to include M92 X106.64 Y106.64, best before homing. That way you make sure that your printer sets the correct Steps/mm whenever you load a printjob.
Home position
via offset
If the home offset is wrong, you can fix it as the next line before G28 - if the home position is for example 10 mm of the trigger in both X and Y, you'd add M206 X100.00 Y100.00 Z0.00 - If your printer has "home" properly defined in the center of the build plate and your slicer is set up to respect that, this should do it. You need to
via move and 0-ing
Another way to get the printhead to the center is to use first G28, then insert a movement to the center of the bed (G0 X100 Y100 for a bed 200 mm across) and then order G92 X0 Y0, defining that point as the origin.
necessary next line!
In either case, the setup of Marlin also prevents you to move to the "negative" area due to the software endstops by default. So you need to add M121 after it to be allowed to go into the negative space.
Start G-code in bulk
M92 X106.64 Y106.64
G28
G0 X100 Y100 ; move to center
G92 X0 Y0
M121

Ok, I'll try, some like that gcode script

Man thanks for all, your answer solved the measures and dimensions, now printed test cube right, but now still homing in the position where the green circle like image post in the question. Do you know how solved that?

@PedroMiguelPimientaMorales Managed to trick around the whole software endstop problem by just turning them off after homing, positioning in center, and 0-ing.

ok, let me understand, after execute M92 ..., need to center the nozzle using gcode too?

@PedroMiguelPimientaMorales other way round: First get the nozzle to the center, then send M92 X0 Y0 which tells the printer "this is (0,0)" - M121 is needed afterwards to allow moving into the negative room

Ok, i check your edit answer, and do this, new script

that should work

Don't work the last script