text:
Perimeters/shells not properly fusing - delamination
I come to you all in my time of need, as I have nowhere else to turn. I’ve been a 3D printer for about two years now. I have an Ender 5 Plus.
Up to this point, all of my prints were fine straight out of the box; no need to calibrate anything besides the bed.
I have just recently upgraded to an all-metal dual gear extruder. Before I did anything, I made sure to calibrate my extruder E-steps and my material flow. After that, all my calibrations said that my printer was ready to go.
Let me preface this with: I have been struggling with this issue for about a month. I looked up all the information I could but to no avail. I could not fix the walls of my print delaminating from one another.
As far as exterior appearances go the prints seem structurally “fine“. But the moment I try and give them a nice sanding to post-process them, the top layers begin to come off. Similarly, if I print a regular calibration cube or something like it all I need to do is put my fingernail in between the walls and the outermost layer will start to peel away from the body after all my test prints.
It feels like the material wants to bond together, but it never does. I have done everything from leveling my bed as close as possible to the nozzle, slowing down the print speed to about half of what I normally print at (mind you I’ve never had this problem even when printing at my original speed), even disable compensate for wall overlaps, and not to mention I’m printing pretty hot with my PLA at about 230 °C and even that doesn’t seem to work.
I could increase the material flow slightly, but then my walls would not be calibrated anymore; increasing the possibility for over-extrusion.
I figured this all out by printing a mask that would take 2 to 3 days to print.
It took me a while to model all the miles, so you could imagine my dismay as I begin to process the mask for painting. When I was sanding, the layers kept lifting up. It’s not like I was putting excessive pressure or anything. I figured I could put somebody filler on the affected areas, but it quickly grew out of control.
As I’m sure some of you could relate, I bought a new roll of filament just for that project; to have it wasted.
During printing, I’ve noticed a type of “salmon skin” effect going on. It seemed like those areas suffered the worst delamination.
I’ve also noticed on some larger prints, that the consistency of the outermost perimeter is rather non-uniform at certain layers. What I mean by non-uniform is that it seems like the type of “banding” is going on.
If it’s any help, I am using Cura slicer.
Here are some links to the pictures of a print I just started to test if I fixed the issue, unfortunately, I have not.

As you can see in the pictures, it was delaminating. Unfortunately, it was just from some gentle pressure I applied with the edge of my fingernail.
I’m at my wit's end right now and have no other ideas of what to try to rectify this issue.
Edit: 6/23/2021-
So after a test print, for some reason the perimeters I have not delaminated, at least yet, but I have found other oddities that I have not seen before.
Do you have any suggestions?

I calibrated my E steps by following this video tutorial

I did it hot and with the nozzle on

From the pictures, your prints look highly underextruded. Can you describe how you calibrated the steps-per-mm/extrusion rate?

Also, is it possible you have your filament diameter set wrong in your slicer? These pictures look almost as bad as what you get with the filament set to 2.85 on a 1.75 mm machine...

@R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE I came to the same under extrusion conclusion, do note the pulsating extrusion pattern. Seen this before in a question, when found I'll update the comment. It looks as if the stepper isn't powerful enough to lay down a consistent flow path. Be sure to look out for friction in the extrusion path.

If the bottom of the print is pointed up in the images, your initial z height may be too high.

The bulge at one corner is also abnormal. How did you calibrate the E steps (elaborate in your question please by [edit]), with the nozzle attached and hot or without the nozzle attached.

It can't be a coincidence that it started right after the extruder upgrade. Did the nozzle also change? Any chance it's a smaller diameter now? Any shavings in the extruder gear?

Do you use the same thermistor? Maybe the resistance changed and it's not reading the temperature properly. If you have an external thermistor, you could check the nozzle with that to verify.

Did you ever figure out how to fix it?

I also swapped my Ender 5 plus hotend with the all metal swiss one and I am having the same issue.
I increased my wall overlap in increments of .04 until I got to .20.  I increased my print temp from 210 to 220, and I increased my wall flow rate by 30 %.  I believe my walls are sticking on a bit better now but not quite as well as they should.

Hi Daniel and welcome. Friendly tip: It is best to leave out questions such as "did you ever figure out how to fix it?" from an answer, and just put that query in a comment under the question instead (when you have enough rep), otherwise the answer could be flagged as NAA (not an answer)... However, you seem to have provided a workaround as a temporary solution, so +1 :-) Meanwhile, I'd suggest that you [edit] your answer and remove that question from it ([later...] Actually, I have moved the question to the comments section as NAA flags were being raised). Good luck!

Welcome Daniel.


text:
How to add tolerances/gaps in OnShape?
When printing parts that fit together, there's a need to offset them from each other with a slight gap to provide for the printer tolerances. It's possible to take that into account from the very beginning when designing parts, but it makes the initial design far more complicated. Is it possible to effectively "offset" all faces of a part, the same way you' offset lines of a sketch?
Essentially, asking the same question as this, but for OnShape:
How to add tolerances/gaps in 123d Design?

OnShape has a "Move Face" tool that can do exactly this: select the relevant faces to move, and then choose "offset" as the "Move Type". You can do all your offsets at once, but because I'm often selecting a lot of faces, I find it easiest to create one offset per part, and hide the other parts to be able to drag to select groups of faces at once. (and then I use a variable to hold the amount by which to offset). I find this makes it easier to fix the offsets when making changes to the parts earlier in the part history.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Elegoo Saturn: artifacts which looks like a slicer bug
I have Elegoo Saturn for few days and it makes sometimes artifacts as in the image:

Elegoo Saturn's support supposes that it is caused by the model support. But to me the artifact looks very "digital". Might a problem with Chitubox in the case of 4k displays.

The density of the support structure is typical for default values in Chitubox 1.9.1. More than this and resin sticks between the
support, makes it difficult for the air to flow, suction appears and
makes holes in the model.

Once the bottom of the cone is printed, it also becomes a support of the higher layer next to be printed. So the
discrepancy would self-correct itself and disappear in higher parts of the model. But it goes up the cone without any change.

The raised part has very sharp borders which form a perfect, precise vertical plane. It looks nothing like a mechanical problem
with the support.

The raised part is very thin, about 0.5 width. A discrepancy between two parts of the model caused by a weak support would create
a single, possibly wide deformation and not two close, razor-sharp discontinuities
which precisely continue forever and have a perfect surface between them.

The bottom of the cone does not show the arching
characteristic for a weak support and for a reason: I made the bottom surface slightly
diagonal to have the layer self-support effect.

The problem shows rarely, in about 10% of the cones and if they are accompanied by a large, complex model placed nearby. When I changed the complex model to its never version, the cones printed all without any problems.

If you look at the close-up, the layers are perfectly horizontal to the built plate and thus do not show any mechanical problem with the
support. There is a normal layering visible even on the vertical two shear surfaces.

What you think about the possible cause?

I hope someone answers, but I would say that the proper place to ask is https://www.elegoomars.com/forum/index.php

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


text:
Automatic Bed Leveling (ABL) with a sensor (BLTouch, inductive, capacitive), how does it work?
A frequently discussed update to a 3D printer is the so-called leveling sensor; this sensor can be inductive, capacitive, optical or mechanical (i.e pressure or physically touching, like a BLTouch).
It is supposed to level your bed, providing  improved first layer adherence and thus less failed prints.
How does this automatic bed leveling work?

The issues/questions raised about the automatic bed leveling using e.g. a BLTouch probe at this stack require a more in depth description of the automatic leveling functionality in general, this answers aims on describing how this works.

Definition of "bed leveling"
Let us begin with saying that such sensors systems alone will never level your bed, this is a misconception that is easily concluded from the terms being used (terms like Auto Bed Leveling, ABL). Using such sensors will not physically change the "level" of your bed.1) Furthermore, the process of leveling your build surface/heated bed is commonly known as tramming.

Tramming is the process of adjusting the build surface to be parallel to the X-axis and Y-axis of the 3D printer.

But, when do you need such a functionality2)? What if the bed surface isn't completely flat/square? Tramming such a surface is difficult and that surface will not be perpendicular to the X-Y plane of the nozzle... Why a bed is not perfectly flat can be caused by the manufacturing process, handling (during shipment, dropping tools on the surface, etc.), the way the bed is mounted and thermal stresses of non-uniform heating.
Basics
Many printers use endstops to determine the origin of the printer, these aren't essential for the printer, but very useful for the operator. Endstops allow for setting the reference from a known position to the origin of the printer. In fact, the sophisticated leveling sensors are nothing more than the simple Z-endstop except that the sensor is mounted onto the print head, it allows for probing the bed in more positions than an endstop limit switch mounted on the frame’s Z-axis.
In order to be able to print consistently, you should provide a bed that is properly trammed (to aid adhesion/prevent objects to not stick to the build plate). But, if for some reason, the surface contains imperfections, the normal tramming of the build surface using just the Z-endstop and the leveling screws might not be sufficient.
What does this so-called "leveling" do?
Using the ABL features from firmware will enable the use of a sensor to scan the surface of the build surface/heated bed to create a digital representation of the topology of the surface. This scanned surface includes the imperfections of the surface (this is depending on the option to process the measurement points of the scanning process, the more probing points the better the geometry can be mapped). E.g. just scanning 3 points will only result in a tilted plane (e.g. Ultimaker), but, scanning multiple points in a grid style process, the surface can be mapped to a complex surface describing the shape. So, if a surface isn't fully flat/square, the scanned surface provides a digital copy of the shape of the build plate.
How is the scanned surface applied?
Note that this scanning of the surface is generally done at a distance from the actual nozzle (except for pressure sensor systems where the nozzle is used as the probe), the images below show this for a BLTouch sensor and an inductive/capacitive sensor. For an inductive sensor this is the distance of detecting metal (minus the distance to the nozzle), for a BLTouch this is based on the triggering point of the extendable probe, see this answer (the image below depict the terminology). The operator of the printer needs to determine at which distance this bed has been scanned. This is commonly known as determining the Z-offset. The Z-offset can be set using a terminal or through the display. Setting this Z-offset is described in detail in "Specifying Z offset in Marlin firmware".
Once the shape of the bed is captured (G-code command G29) and stored and the correct distance (Z-offset) set with M851 Zx.xx (or through the display), the use of the shape needs to be activated in the starting G-code section of the G-code file of the print.
The nozzle will now be following the bed shape to improve the bed adhesion, this compensation is by default set to be smeared out in 10 mm, but can be disabled or changed to any other value using M420 Zxx. The nozzle will print in the X-Y plane without compensation after the compensation distance. If you do not tram the bed correctly, the bottom of that print object will thus not be square to the height! See question "Does auto leveling result in sheared prints?".

1) Do note that actual leveling the bed is possible in some firmware flavors, but this is only possible if more individual controlled Z-steppers are used to move the bed/nozzle assembly!
2) Please note that firmware development has progressed over the years, e.g. using a recent version of Marlin, you can change the firmware to use UBL (see question What is ABL or UBL? Is this the same?). With UBL you technically do not need a leveling sensor, but, this is a laborious process to do this manually.

This is an excellent answer, and I'd give it more than one upvote if I could.


text:
Ender 3 bed level issues along Y axis
I have an Ender 3 Pro with a magnetic bed. Recently, I've come across an issue I've never had before. The printer bed is higher on the front and back edges, along the Y-axis. It's okay in the middle of the bed from left to the right, but when I start moving the Y-axis nozzle gets closer to the bed. I've drawn a picture of the close areas approximately. Red areas are the areas in which the nozzle starts touching the bed.

I'm not used to fixing problems on my printer, but I tried loosening side screws to check bends on extrusions. I've tried it several times but it didn't solve the problem. Then I've removed the bed to tighten the screws on the part moving on the Y-axis. It didn't work either. I'm not sure if I did things correctly but I assume that I did. I also think that the bed may be warped, but I'm not sure because it wasn't not a long time ago. What could cause this problem?

Welcome to 3D Printing Stack Exchange!  Please be sure to take the [tour] and read over the [FAQ] to better understand how Stack Exchange sites work -- but this is a pretty good first question!

A bend in the frame extrusion won't affect the bed this way on an Ender 3 -- the bed rides on a carriage with (IIRC) four V-groove wheels, similar to the Z and X axis carriages.  If your bed is the same front and back, but that's higher (relative to the nozzle) than the middle, it's because the bed itself has a curve.  This is more common (in my experience) with the right and left edges high relative to the middle, but the mechanism is the same.
First, preheat the bed and let it stay hot for ten minutes or longer, then check again.  Mine flattens out almost completely when the temperature is fully equalized; if this does the trick, you'll just need to remember to preheat the bed several minutes before starting each print.
If that doesn't fix the problem, then either you'll need to shim up the center of the bed by an appropriate amount (tissue paper or typing paper work, though they tend to get thinner over time), or you'll need to install a rigid build surface (the Creality polymer coated glass one costs barely more than a spool of basic filament).  Do be aware that a glass build plate will raise your build surface, and may require adjusting the Z-stop to prevent dragging the nozzle even with the adjusting springs fully compressed.


text:
PLA for Dactyl Manuform print | Which material for printing the shell
I bought PLA Wood for my planned Dactyl Manuform. But now the question is whether this will melt or deform in the sun.
I live in Germany, where we reach some days at times 32 °C. However, the keyboard will stand on my desk and will also be directly exposed to the sun.
Now I am worried that this could already be deformed after a few days/months.
Should I rather buy PETG or ABS and print the parts with it?
Or does anyone have experience with PLA in the sun?
Filament: Giantarm PLA Wood

I can't comment directly on Giantarm PLA Wood, but I can give two endpoints: I have an antenna sleeve (for the amateur radio antenna on my car, to keep it from folding when it shouldn't) printed from black generic PLA; it stands in direct sun and has so far withstood air temperature of 37 °C (in direct sun, remember) without any visible deformation -- and I printed a cell phone holder for the interior of my car which failed, softening and sagging under its own weight when it was nowhere close to that temperature outside (but the car was in the sun, so the interior likely approached 50 °C).
Based on that, I would expect PLA to remain fine as long as the temperature of the material stays below about 50 °C, which is its glass transition (approximately).  If your office gets warm enough for the keyboard to reach that temperature (even in direct sun), you'll have multiple other issues with computer overheating, plants dying, etc.

Thank you for your quick and detailed reply.
I will try my luck with PLA.
It should never reach 50° in my office :D

Just so you don't try to use the keyboard in a sauna...  ;)


text:
"SD Init Fail" on Ender 3 Pro with BTT E3 RRF v1.1
The background and printer
I have an Ender 3 Pro that I have made all sorts of modifications to, the important ones being:

Replaced control board with BTT E3 RRF v1.1
Flashed BTT's firmware that I compiled (only change I made was to allow my BLTouch to work)

The problem
I keep getting the error message "SD Init Fail".  Sometimes it's right away when I plug the SD card in, sometimes its 5 hours into a print.  The print will just suddenly stop and that error will pop up.
Things I've tried
I had previously asked this question here and most of the suggestions were to "take it out and plug it back in again" or to get a new sd card.  I've tried it with new, name-brand (Sandisk) cards, and it doesn't work any better/worse than the card that came with the Ender.  I've seen various suggestions around the internet (like on Marlin's website) that adjusting the SPI speed can possibly help with "Volume Init" errors, which I assume to mean the same thing:

I have tried the firmware at both normal speed and half and quarter, haven't tried eighth yet.  I didn't notice any different behavior for any of them.
I'm at a loss!  Help!   I'm eventually probably going to jump to Octoprint via a Raspberry Pi, but given the printers location in an area without wifi, is there anything I can do in the meantime?  Any other firmware tips? Or suggestions?
Do you think bad hardware could explain a print that goes for a few hours and then errors? I.e. is it reading the SD card during the course of the entire print (its never done?) and then the connection could fail after a few hours of being good?

This is happening with multiple SD cards that work in other ports (your computer, for instance): that tells me the problem must be in the mainboard hardware or firmware.
You're using the stock firmware for that board, with the BLTouch enabled but otherwise original -- assuming you only had to change a compiler directive to enable BLTouch, that pretty strongly points to hardware.  And the hardware that's likely at fault here is the SD port on the mainboard.
It's hard to verify, hard to repair (aside from simply replacing the board with another of the hardware revision), but not impossible.  With the right tools, you could connect a second SD card port parallel to the existing one (hook jumpers from an oscilloscope?), run the board from the external SD card, and reproduce the error by momentarily disconnecting one of the jumpers.
Repairing the problem might only require reflowing solder connections on the board for the SD port wires, or it might require replacing the port itself.
One thing to check before you do all of that, however: clean the contacts in the port.  With power off (of course!) slip a utility knife blade or similar with a sheet of printer paper wrapped over it into the port, work it in and out a couple times to scrub the paper over the spring contacts, then pull it out and carefully vacuum the port.
If that fixes it, good to go!  If not, all it's cost you is a few minutes before trying the more drastic stuff.

Do you think bad hardware could explain a print that goes for a few hours and then errors? I.e. is it reading the SD card during the course of the entire print (its never done?) and then the connection could fail after a few hours of being good?

The movement of the machine frame while printing infill or fine detail may jostle the SD card or port when the firmware is trying to read the next line (or batch of lines) of G-code from it.
If you do determine that the SD socket is at fault due to connection problems, it may be worth considering installing an off-frame mainboard housing (I've seen these in printable form for Ender 3 class machines, though if this is your only printer you might have to buy one, since they'll be 10-16 hour prints) to insulate the mainboard from movement induced by bed and hot end/extruder motion. Doing that would be easier than repairing or replacing the SD socket.  This has the downside that it requires additional space near the machine, but the upside is that it may solve your "SD Init Fail" problems.


text:
3D printer clog. Nozzle keeps getting screwed in crooked
My 3D printer has got a clog, and i think it  is because the nozzle hole has just recently started to only screw in crooked. I’m not sure how this happened. I have tried with multiple nozzles, but they all screw in crooked. Is there a way to fix this? Or is my only option to get a new hotend.
My 3d printer is an Ender 3

The technical term for this is "cross threading".

Note: if the threads on the heater block and /or nozzle have residual filament material on them it is easy to cross--thread the nozzle, especially when cold..   In this case it is easier to attach the nozzle with the heater hot so the filament material is soft.

You should be able to purchase only the heater block for your hot end. The nozzle should thread in by hand without undue force. Having to use a wrench at the outset is an indication of a problem which should have stopped the attempt.
There are many sources for the "heater block for Ender 3" when used in a search. One such result is an Amazon seller of three pieces for US$11.99

Image via linked site.


text:
Ender 3 Pro stopped and not heat up
While taking a print today, the Ender 3 Pro suddenly stopped. I tried to restart printing, but the heater cartridge does not heat up. I tested the thermistor and it senses heat. Next, I checked the voltage of the heater cartridge.
I think there is a problem here. Because even if the nozzle is at 0 degrees, it constantly shows 24 V. What is the cause of this problem?

How are you measuring the "voltage of the heater cartridge"? And you're reading 24 V across it with the nozzle turned off/set to 0 degrees and yet it's not heating up? That would imply two simultaneous failures (of both the cartridge itself and the control circuitry) which seems unlikely.

I measure the heater cartridge with a multimeter. And yes, despite being 24v, the nozzle does not heat up. As you said, there are faults on both sides. Guess I'll have to spend some money :)

Yes, of course with a multimeter, but I meant: what points did you measure across? Most 3D printers use low-side switching so you cannot measure from the positive terminal of the heater to any ground point (which will always measure 24 V), you must measure to the specific ground connector for the heater.

Yes, now I understand. But I'm not good at electronic components. Can you tell me exactly where I should measure?

Follow the two wires of the heater to the control board. Where they make contact with the control board is where you should measure.

I'm tried but still the same. There are 3 transistors on the motherboard and the middle one is measuring incorrectly. I think the cause of the problem may be the transistor. I will try to replace it and of course the heater cartridge as well. Thank you very much for your help.


text:
Can a sustainable material like mycelium be used in place of thermoplastics for fused deposition modeling?
If it cannot be directly injected in a molten form, is there any way on how to do this?
When I was exploring about this, I mostly found thermoplastics.
Please note that I am not trying to contrast "sustainable" with FDM materials.
When I saw this video, Is Mycelium Fungus the Plastic of the Future?, I was curious to know if mycelium can be a good material candidate for 3D printing.
Fellows here suggest that there are available options such as Polylactide/Polylactic Acid/PLA which is derived from corn starch.
Still it is better to have as many options for materials to be used as feed in 3d printing, as it is one of the most disruptive tech of this decade, thus if we don't repeat past mistakes, we can reap as much benefit from this without causing enormous ecological damage.

Are you trying to contrast "sustainable" with FDM materials? I'm not sure there's a good reason to believe it would be more sustainable than PLA (a corn product).

No, I'm not. And Thank You for PLA, it is promising but I was not aware about it and don't know if it is actively used in 3D printing.

PLA is the most common material used in 3D printing.

Polylactic acid, or polylactide (PLA) is a thermoplastic polyester...

If it can be emulsified, it can be selectively deposited; however, what will cause it to bind and harden? Would you add a photoinitiator, or a thermoset, or some other agent?

@Davo regarding PLA, I read on this website that it is brittle and has sharp edges when it breaks according to this website: https://www.think3d.in/buy-3d-filaments-in-india/, what would you like to say?

From personal experience, PLA is less brittle than ABS or PETG. I don't know what bearing that has on printability, though. I've printed with porcelain, which is quite brittle after it is fired.

I think the word "brittle" isn't being used in any precise sense. PLA has high tensile strength and doesn't break easily, but breaks suddenly and destructively when it does. Other materials tend to stretch/tear first.

no, it's mostly water, shrinks when it dries, rots easily, and is not structurally strong.

The question is vague and likely highly speculative, but I would say that an biological material (coming from living organisms, not from a chemical plant) won't tolerate high temperatures without severe damage, and also will probably have an internal structure which won't work properly with the FDM (pushing molten material) concept.
Maybe you could print via resin printing a matrix structure (FDM is not optimal for that) and then have biological material grow on it. This could work.
See Wikipedia:

3D bioprinting for fabricating biological constructs typically
involves dispensing cells onto a biocompatible scaffold using a
successive layer-by-layer approach to generate tissue-like
three-dimensional structures


text:
I think my extruder is hosed
I put a new glass bed on my Ender 3.  After playing with the baby-steps and bed temperature I thought I had it ready to go.  I started to print some rocket kits for the Cub Scouts and the job didn't stick.  I ended with a giant blob on my hot end.  I thought I cleaned it up, made some more adjustments and started again.  I watched it this time and noticed some times I had under extrusion, other times over extrusion, a sometimes perfect extrusion.  Since I just upgraded to a new metal drive for the extruder and that looked good I decided to look at my hot end.  Here is a pic of what I found.

I think my Hot End is now toast.  Any suggestions on how to fix the hot end?

Welcome to 3DPrinting.SE! Please note that this is a hardware recommendation question, such questions attract very opinionated answers and therefore should be closed. This question can be saved if you have no idea which hotend this is and what type it is or how it is called - and you require help identifying the hotend. Please edit the question as such.

If the feed tube fell off, it would be unhosed, requiring you to rehose it.  (Sorry, coudln't help it.)

This looks a lot like you didn't do hot tightening properly. you have to heat up the end to above printing temp, then tighten the nozzle and then let it cool, the difference in the coefficient of expansion of the metals then causes them to seal against each other. This is not optional and can't be replicated just by tightening harder, the expansion/clamping is vital to prevent this sort of leak...

Hi @JohnMeacham - please could you post your answer as an answer. Comments are intended for requesting clarification only and are ephemeral in nature and tend to be deleted. Also, answers in comments can not be ranked by votes. Comments are not recommended for any of the following: Answering a question or providing an alternate solution to an existing answer; instead, post an actual answer (or edit to expand an existing one). Feel free to post an answer instead. Thanks.

@user10489 - please could you post your answer as an answer. Comments are intended for requesting clarification only and are ephemeral in nature and tend to be deleted. Also, answers in comments can not be ranked by votes. Comments are not recommended for any of the following: Answering a question or providing an alternate solution to an existing answer; instead, post an actual answer (or edit to expand an existing one). Feel free to post an answer instead. Thanks.

This is filament leakage.  It's generally due to the nozzle and heat break not being correctly tightened against each other (if you've ever disassembled or upgraded the hotend you'd have needed to do this).
Presuming that you can heat the hotend and (carefully -- extrusion temperature is close to that of a medium-hot oven!), peel off most of the mess, and get it disassembled, you should then be able to finish cleaning up and correctly reassemble.
You need to install the heat break into the heat block, heat to 20 °C or so above your highest printing temperature, then tighten the nozzle against the heat break.  If the nozzle bottoms against the heat block before coming tight, you'll need to back it out, screw the heat break in another turn or two, and tighten the nozzle again.  Let everything cool, then reheat and retighten the nozzle.
N.B. Do NOT use teflon tape, pipe dope, or anything else on the threads of either nozzle or heat break: these threads need to have metal to metal contact for heat transfer, and the seal is between the nozzle face and heat break face, not the threads in any case.
After everything is cooled again, you can finish reassembling the heat sink (if you had it off during the nozzle installation), silicone sock (which should replace the kapton taped insulation wadding your photo shows), shroud and fan -- and you should then find you've stopped the melted filament leaking around the heat break threads as in your photo.
And no parts needed!

"new metal drive for the extruder" doesn't seem to mean all-metal hotend. Most likely replacement of Creality's cheap plastic tension arm with a metal assembly.

I have both the "metal extruder" -- supplied by Comgrow (Creality's sales organization, at least for Amazon sales) under warranty after my plastic tension arm cracked -- and a "metal hot end" that, as claimed, has no non-metal parts, but still runs the PTFE tube all the way to the nozzle.  My machine came with a silicone sock, however, leading me to think OP got a knockoff or an older machine.

OP didn't say anything about having replaced the hotend. A hotend where the PTFE runs all the way to the nozzle is NOT an "all-metal hotend". All-metal means that all the parts that get hot are metal, and other materials (if any) are across the heatbreak on the cold side. Further, from the picture OP's hotend (what we can see of it at least) looks exactly like Creality's stock hotend.

@R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE Agreed, hence my edit to remove reference to replacing the hotend.  The primary distinguishing feature of "all metal" hotends is the PTFE tube (present with either Bowder or "direct drive" extruders) contacts the cooled end of the heat break, vs. going all the way to the nozzle in the original Mk. 8 hotend.


text:
Bioprinter does not extrude Anet A8 Marlin
I have a modified Anet A8 that is supposed to print hydrogels
(paper : Ultra-Low-Cost 3D Bioprinting, Kahl M et al. 2019).
For this to work, we do not need any temperature-related settings, however, I cannot seem to understand how to turn them off. If I try to set the extrusion temp to 25-40 °C, somehow the extrusion servo does not move at all.
Probably I need to enable cold extrusion, but when I tried to add the M302 P1 or M302 S0, it does not work. The printer goes in the path determined by the slicer but the syringe does not extrude the gel.
Unfortunately, the paper did not have anything about the exact settings.
Once in the past I managed to run it, however, that was pre-COVID and the G-code files are probably lost due to me having to reinstall my laptop. If I remember correctly the solution then was to just have the hot end hang from the cross-section of the printer(temps were set at 190 °C?), however, I doubt that it is OSHA approved.
Do you have any proper workarounds?
Current G-code :
;TIME:270
;Filament used: 1.61099m
;Layer height: 0.25
;MINX:102.269
;MINY:97.063
;MINZ:0.3
;MAXX:122.736
;MAXY:117.524
;MAXZ:4.8
;Generated with Cura_SteamEngine 4.8.0
M140 S30
M105
M190 S30
M104 S25
M105
M109 S25
M82 ;absolute extrusion mode
G28 ;Home
G1 Z15.0 F2000 ;Move the platform
M302 S0
G92 E0
G92 E0
G1 F1500 E-10
;LAYER_COUNT:19
;LAYER:0
M107
M204 S1000
G0 F6000 X105.03 Y100.305 Z0.3
;TYPE:SKIRT
G1 F1500 E0
G1 F600 X105.246 Y100.082 E0.697

What board / firmware are you using?
Marlin and Klipper, by default, enable the idiotic feature of only allowing the extruder to move above a certain temperature. This can be disable in the firmwares configuration, e.g. https://github.com/MarlinFirmware/Marlin/blob/2.0.x/Marlin/Configuration.h#L691

Your use of M302 to enable cold extrusion is entirely correct. I do not think the issue is related to this. To verify, you could try running the same G-code with the extruded heated up just as a test. A safer workaround would be to replace the thermistor with a fixed resistor to make the printer think it is always hot, but you shouldn't need to do that as your current G-code should just work.

@towe I was suspecting something similar.
I am using the factory firmware however the few related clues that I found on the internet were pointing me towards a firmware update as well. I think I'll probably bake something custom and flash it on.

@TomvanderZanden, That could be the reason why it worked back a while ago. Indeed I did not try it with 210 or something degrees recently, because I did not want to heat up but try to make it work at normal temperature. I'll get to the labs tomorrow, or the day after, and try it with both heated up, and a new firmware!


text:
Silicone socks for nozzle only?
Is there a readily available silicone sock that goes just over the nozzle, to supplement an existing sock around the heat block body? I've seen a product for the E3D V6 that goes around the entire assembly and only exposes the tip of the nozzle:

but it's for a specific block shape and doesn't facilitate easy nozzle change. What I'd like is a piece that fits over just the nozzle, with a friction fit to the existing block sock. The benefits I'm looking to get from this are:

reduced radiative heat transfer from the nozzle to the already-printed material
more consistent/stable temperature in the nozzle under air flow from cooling fans
eliminating sticking of PETG to the nozzle body

When you change the nozzle, do you end up having to take the sock off the heat block to get a wrench on there anyway? Is there something with your setup where you can’t slip the sock off?

You only need a wrench on the heat block if the hotend is not structurally sound (using the heatbreak structurally). Otherwise you just use a socket or open end wrench on the nozzle.

What nozzle system do you use? The official procedure with the E3D nozzles like you pictured the socks for, is to hold the heat block with a wrench or pliers, so you aren’t torquing the heat break or the aluminum cold end’s delicate threads: https://e3d-online.dozuki.com/Guide/Changing+Nozzles/45

If you have a concept that could improve on existing designs, you could potentially cast your own, by 3D printing a mold and using a high temp RTV silicone like this stuff for engine gaskets: https://www.permatex.com/products/gasketing/gasket-makers/permatex-high-temp-red-rtv-silicone-gasket/?locale=en_us

@ChinchillaWafers: I'm not using E3D. I just showed those as an example of a similar product. I'm using MK8 style hotend, but whatever I use in the future will also have proper structural bolting of the heat block to the heat sink and toolhead body, not relying on the heatbreak as a structural component like E3D and many others do.


text:
How can I fill in the gap in this model without this tessellation/deformation occurring?
To start off my apologies if this question seems somewhat unclear. For context I am attaching the images of the model and the modified version in TinkerCAD. My issue is that I cannot fill in the gap on in the left arm of the gripper without these deformations happening.

What I would like to do is to fill in the gap and then make a hole that fits the servo motor head. At the moment the printed model loosely fits on top of the servo motor and when screwed in place does not have the range of motion I need.
I would be extremely grateful for any suggestions on how to fill in the gap without the problem occurring in TinkerCAD. I know I may not have tried the most sophisticated solution by just filling in the gap with another shape but I could not modify the model in any other way.

Imgur link seems broken.  However, welcome to 3D Printing Stack Exchange.  This seems like a good first question, though I'm not certain 3D CAD software is on topic here.  You should take the [tour] and read through the [FAQ] to better understand how our site works.

Please always embed images instead of linking to external content, SE has their own imgur that retains the image as long as SE exists. I've updated the question for you. Embedding graphics will cause graphics and question to be together, saving the readers time so they can put more time in answering.

"Embedding graphics will cause graphics and question to be together, saving the readers time so they can put more time in answering."  Not to mention preventing the question from showing a dead link if/when the hosting site deletes the image, goes down, etc.  Likely not a problem with Imgur as such, but still a potential issue.


text:
What reasons are there not to convert Ender 3 to direct drive extrusion?
A Bowden tube extruder (like the stock one on an Ender 3) is known to have issues with printing the most flexible TPU, and with filaments that (either due to composition or condition) don't take well to too much retraction -- though the latter can be ameliorated somewhat with slicer settings.  Direct drive extruders, on the other hand, by reducing the extruder to hot end distance to the practical minimum, greatly reduce the amount of retraction needed as well as the effect of filament compression and stretching.
One potential down side I'm aware of is that putting the extruder stepper and drive on the X carriage adds mass that the X drive motor has to both accelerate and decelerate; this could in theory have an effect on print quality, increasing ringing and overrun on the X axis (though this isn't generally a problem with the steppers used on the Ender 3 and similar printers).
What other reasons might there be to prefer a Bowden tube over direct drive?

Would you keep the ptfe tube with a direct drive extruder as a filament guide? With the filament exposed, the X axis moves back and forth it pulls on the reel, rather than the reel advancing smoothly as the extruder pulls in the filament.  No personal evidence it affects print quality, but I wonder if it’s a good idea.

The option certainly exists to keep a PTFE guide tube from near the spool to the extruder inlet side.  My initial expectation was to rearrange the stock (top, behind the frame) spool location to be on top and in front of the frame; this would put it almost directly above the extruder's path along the X axis and motion would be in line with winding -- this would almost eliminate the need for even a hoop guide.

Have you considered the alleged benefits of a remote direct drive such as the Zesty Nimble? You get the advantages of direct drive without the mass of the stepper motor on the carriage.

Not familiar with that -- flex shaft from stepper to extruder?  For an Ender 3, that's a bunch of stuff to buy and add, vs. a printable bracket to mount the extruder and its stepper, literally fifty cents worth of filament and a couple hours of printer time.

direct is noisier, slower, wears the stepper/belt more, and uses more power.

Direct drive is always worth it, especially since it enabled you to use Linear Advance / Pressure Advance, which improves print quality much greater than the added mass might reduce it. If ringing is an issue, go with Klipper and its Input Shaper.

There are really no reasons not to convert to direct drive, provided you use a good one. Many of the direct drive kits, especially the ones that reuse the existing giant NEMA-17 stepper, are not very good and have tradeoffs due to excessive mass on the toolhead, imbalanced mass, interference with frame reducing print volume, etc. The modern way to do direct drive is with a "pancake" stepper far smaller and lighter, and gearing between 3:1 and 6:1 reduction to get the needed torque - look at the Orbiter, Sherpa Mini, etc. - or even a remote direct drive.
Teaching Tech recently posted a video on this very topic, titled Why direct drive is not automatically better than bowden tube but then pretty much concluding that all the old reasons not to go direct drive no longer apply.

So, essentially, "the only reason not to go direct drive is to avoid spending more."  Because the advantage of literally just moving the existing extruder to the X carriage is that all it costs is a dollar's worth of filament and a couple hours of machine time -- plus the disassembly and assembly.

@ZeissIkon: Yeah that sounds about right. Just moving the motor/extruder has some of the disadvantages I described (not to mention the stock extruder just being really bad), and if you want to get a new motor, gears, hob, etc. you'll spend some more money.

So it's back to where everything else is -- if you want decent stuff, you can't afford it, and if you can afford it, you'll be futzing with it every other time you use it.

@ZeissIkon: The extruder is the main part I'd replace on an Ender 3 anyway to take it from being a mediocre printer to an excellent one. Don't shell out a lot of money for the light stepper; anything with the right RPM and torque specs is perfectly fine, and 0.9 degree is worse in this application. The most important thing is good hob and reduction gearing.

Other than higher carriage mass as you already noted, the only other reason to not go with Direct Drive over Bowden is the higher level of maintenance required. In most cases Direct Drive will provide advantages such as increasing the maximum flow speed, enabling the use of Linear/Pressure Advance, shortening Retraction moves, and better resistance to obstructions in the filament path, and more reliable printing of flexibles as you have already noted. As well, A direct drive system would allow a less-powerful stepper motor to be used, which cuts down on the carriage mass problem.

How does direct drive require more maintenance? You eliminate the need for replacing worn tube and fittings.

LA/PA can be used with Bowden or direct, but is more essential with Bowden. On direct you can almost get by without.

Sorry, Mustve had it backwards, I had seen somewhere that it's useless with bowden, maybe i'm just confused. Personally, I've had to do more maintenance on my direct-drive setup than bowden.

A bowden has hysteresis effects (tube takes time to return to unstretched state after being stretched) and some change in effective length with curvature (from toolhead moving) that make the LA/PA model insufficient to model the error fully. But unless you're sticking to print speeds so low you hardly need it, it's still better to run a bowden with LA/PA than without.


text:
Does it matter where I place my models on my Resin printer build plate?
I have a resin 3D printer, so I can print multiple models of a similar size without the overall build time increasing very much. So long as I stay within a set height range.
Presuming that my build plate is level and that my FEP is OK, does it matter where I place the models on my build plate?
For example, should I place the largest items in the center, and smaller ones around the edge, or vice-versa?
Does placing particular models in particular places stress the FEP, induce suction or lead to increased failure risk for other reasons?
For example, is the below terrible placement, or just meh?

I don’t own a resin printer, so this is from a layman, but one thing I read is that part orientation is opposite FDM prints, which you want to build flat on the build plate, that resin printers, you want to print tall ways, on edge. The reasoning was that the peeling of each layer off the screen is where failure occurs, and having the smallest cross section peeling at one time was ideal. Also the Z resolution is good, and there are no problems with layer adhesion.

Having only recently begun to print with a resin printer, I've wondered the same. The tension on the FEP is reasonably even across the entire printable surface, and the FEP is slightly larger than the LCD, keeping "edge" prints truly away from the edge.
The deflection of the FEP in the vat may be a millimeter or two greater in the center, but the lift distance is certainly going to be higher than that. My printer's settings is for 8 mm lift between layers, recently changed to 7.5 mm with no complications, other than a warning from Lychee Slicer.
I've found that it's nearly impossible to examine the print for the first few centimeters, so I place the items as close to the front as possible/practical.
This would mean that there's a gradient involved in the deflection of the FEP from the edge to the center, which probably doesn't complicate things and may be a benefit.
Regarding your current layout on the build plate, consider more the removal aspect. The smaller items inside the larger ones are going to be more difficult to remove than the outer smaller items, but not so much more difficult as to complicate matters. The reach of the tool you use to pry under the base would determine how you place the models.
I've added a magnetic removable build plate, but smaller models tend to pop free the supports, making a tool a requirement despite marketing claims. I use the tool size to provide placement reference (close to the front is easy) when building out a plate.


text:
How to move my 3D print file on the Z-axis in Creality slicer software?
I am completely new to 3D printing and am borrowing someone else's Ender printer for a school project. I have never used CAD before either.
I used Onshape to create my design and then exported it as a .stl file.  When I load the .stl file into the Creality slicer software, it loads in the design too large and partially below the platform.
Could anyone explain to me how to center my design so that it sits on top of the platform rather than below it, i.e. move the design up and down on the Z-axis?

If you are wanting to move the model up and down, that would be the Z-axis. From your picture, it looks as if the model is too big for the build volume of the printer. Please [edit] your question with more information as to which printer, the build volume, etc. The more info you give, the better an answer can be found.

I don't think the model will fit the print volume, please add addtional information on the print volume and the model height and max diameter.


text:
When changing my FEP should I pierce it first or just screw the screws through it?
I'm going to do my first FEP change on my Elegoo Saturn. The manufacturer has a video on changing it that shows them putting the FEP into the gasket frame and then simply screwing the screws right through it.
People on Youtube have videos showing them using a sharp object to piece the film before putting the screws in.
Which is least likely to cause a failure?

What they do exactly as different? Did they cut the film in pieces, what do you mean? Simply screwing the film after stretching it carefully will be enough. I did it before many times.

As I said. The manufacturer shows them putting the FEP in the frame and then screwing the screws right through the film. But there are videos of users using a sharp object to make a hole for the screw to go through first. Like using a bradel or a craft knife to make a hole for the screw to go through.

Now ok, you mean making holes before screwing. So its making puncture. And yes making puncture is needed before screwing. Here is an example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLi3chV43LQ

It seems that it doesn't matter. But it's probably a lot easier if you use a bradel (awl) to pre puncture the holes.

It makes sense to use any pointed item to puncture the FEP in order to ensure that the hole is placed where it is desired. Using brute force to push a screw through the film does not ensure that it will be well centered or well placed.

A pointed tip soldering iron may be handy too. When using heat it reduces the chance of tearing the film.


text:
CoreXY mesh probing issue
I am trying to compensate for bed leveling by measuring a mesh with my Z probe, a BLTouch, and I am unable to do so.
I am using RepRap firmware version 3 and have a CoreXY printer.  The first thing I do is home all axes, which works fine, and then choose G29 (run mesh compensation). The mesh compensation then begins to lower the bed and it eventually hits the Z limit switch and keeps going and the steppers begin grinding.
Don't know how the mesh compensation works but this is my config.g file.  Does anyone know what may be the issue?
    ; Configuration file for Duet 3 (firmware version 3)
    ; executed by the firmware on start-up
    ;
    ; generated by RepRapFirmware Configuration Tool v3.2.3 on Wed Jun 23 2021 23:47:21 GMT-0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)

    ; General preferences
    G90                                             ; send absolute coordinates...
    M83                                             ; ...but relative extruder moves
    M550 P"Duet 3"                                  ; set printer name
    M669 K1                                         ; select CoreXY mode

    ; Drives
    M569 P0.0 S1                                    ; physical drive 0.0 goes forwards
    M569 P0.1 S1                                    ; physical drive 0.1 goes forwards
    M569 P0.2 S1                                    ; physical drive 0.2 goes forwards
    M569 P1.1 S1                                    ; physical drive 1.1 goes forwards
    M569 P1.2 S1                                    ; physical drive 1.2 goes forwards
    M584 X0.0 Y0.1 Z0.2:0.3:0.4:0.5 E1.1:1.2                    ; set drive mapping
    M350 X16 Y16 Z16 E16:16 I1                      ; configure microstepping with interpolation
    M92 X40.00 Y40.00 Z400.00 E420.00:420.00        ; set steps per mm
    M566 X900.00 Y900.00 Z60.00 E120.00:120.00      ; set maximum instantaneous speed changes (mm/min)
    M203 X6000.00 Y6000.00 Z120.00 E1200.00:1200.00 ; set maximum speeds (mm/min)
    M201 X500.00 Y500.00 Z10.00 E250.00:250.00      ; set accelerations (mm/s^2)
    M906 X1500 Y1500 Z1500 E800:800 I30             ; set motor currents (mA) and motor idle factor in per cent
    M84 S30                                         ; Set idle timeout

    ; Axis Limits
    M208 X0 Y0 Z0 S1                                ; set axis minima
    M208 X635 Y540 Z500 S0                          ; set axis maxima

    ; Endstops
    M574 X1 S1 P"!io4.in"                           ; configure active-low endstop for low end on X via pin !io1.in
    M574 Y1 S1 P"!io5.in"                           ; configure active-low endstop for low end on Y via pin !io5.in
    M574 Z2 S1 P"!io3.in"                           ; configure active-low endstop for low end on Z via pin !io3.in

    ; Z-Probe
    M950 S0 C"io7.out"                              ; create servo pin 0 for BLTouch
    M558 P9 C"^io7.in" H7 F120 T6000                ; set Z probe type to bltouch and the dive height + speeds
    M558 H30                                        ;*** Remove this line after delta calibration has been done and new delta parameters have been saved
    G31 P500 X0 Y0 Z2.5                             ; set Z probe trigger value, offset and trigger height
    M557 X15:215 Y15:195 S20                        ; define mesh grid

    ; Heaters
    M308 S0 P"temp1" Y"thermistor" T100000 B4138    ; configure sensor 0 as thermistor on pin temp1
    M950 H0 C"out1" T0                              ; create nozzle heater output on out1 and map it to sensor 0
    M307 H0 B0 S1.00                                ; disable bang-bang mode for heater  and set PWM limit
    M143 H0 S280                                    ; set temperature limit for heater 0 to 280C
    M308 S1 P"temp2" Y"thermistor" T100000 B4138    ; configure sensor 1 as thermistor on pin temp2
    M950 H1 C"out2" T1                              ; create nozzle heater output on out2 and map it to sensor 1
    M307 H1 B0 S1.00                                ; disable bang-bang mode for heater  and set PWM limit
    M143 H1 S280                                    ; set temperature limit for heater 1 to 280C

    ; Fans
    M950 F0 C"out7" Q500                            ; create fan 0 on pin out7 and set its frequency
    M106 P0 S1 H-1                                  ; set fan 0 value. Thermostatic control is turned off
    M950 F1 C"out8" Q500                            ; create fan 1 on pin out8 and set its frequency
    M106 P1 S1 H-1                                  ; set fan 1 value. Thermostatic control is turned off

    ; Tools
    M563 P0 D0 H1 F0                                ; define tool 0
    G10 P0 X0 Y0 Z0                                 ; set tool 0 axis offsets
    G10 P0 R0 S0                                    ; set initial tool 0 active and standby temperatures to 0C

    ; Custom settings are not defined

    ; Miscellaneous
    M575 P1 S1 B57600                               ; enable support for PanelDue
```


text:
Why is this central area of the STL being filled in?
We've been doing some work automatically generating STL files using Python.  We've made a ring of cubes like so:

Importing it into Cura still makes it look valid, with a hole in the center:

However, post slicing it comes up with saying it will take 14 hours to print!  A ludicrous time.  Looking at the preview, it seems to be adding supports to the entire inside of the structure:

And also a top / bottom layer:

Why is this?  You can tell it's adding supports to the center and is not filled in due to the differing structure midway through the block:

This is a broken STL file see e.g. this answer, probably due to incorrect normals or hidden faces, this has been asked before. A very good answer to question "Cura messes up my print. How can I make it print what I see in Blender?" is found here. The question is very good though, nice images, maybe this question deserves an answer to be referenced later, this has no link to Blender, but does hint to a broken STL file.

Usually hidden faces have caused that kind of problem for me.  It looks like you already have an unwanted surface in the hole after the import.

+1 Nice question and nice images. However, @0scar - should this be closed as a duplicate? If so, against which of the two previous questions..?

I hoped @Trish would notice this question, as this is Trishes specialty, with many excellent answers on this subject.

I'm new to this forum, but am quite experienced in generating 3d models. Can you share the STL that is causing the problem? I suspect you have concave surfaces that aren't triangulating as expected. Have you tried opening your STL in Blender and running the 3D print tests that software provides?

Any suggestions for a site I can upload the STL file to?  I'm happy to, it's just a square so it's not private. @RonJensen

Found out you can upload it to GitHub, so here's the code that generates it and the STL file. The GitHub rendering of the STL file seems wrong.  Blender, Cura and MatPlotLib all seem to display it accurately. https://gist.github.com/popey456963/470d995032d321b6e49100c51d65f249

Your normals are flipped randomly. When you generate the vertices of the triangles you need to keep the winding order consistent. This is important to Cura so it knows what the "inside" and "outside" of the model is.

It looks to be a straightforward item - would you like it remade ?   (assuming this is still of use a year later)

The surfaces are clearly ill defined - it shows the top surface as a bottom one (those are marked red), and so the normals of that surface are pointing to the wrong direction.


text:
Where the plastic sticker should be installed?
With my Anet ET4, I also received a plastic sticker. I assume this should be stuck onto glass, not to a metal bed. If I understand this right, when sticking this to glass, I will damage the glass and I cannot use the glass as a bed in the future if I change my mind and decide to experiment with glass again.
Isn't better to buy another glass and stick the plastic there? Or is better to buy some completely different sticker? I have many problems with adhesion on Anet ET4, so looking for options. Any ideas?

can you confirm that your "sticker" is a PEI sheet? It's common to have PEI with 3M super-strong adhesive to attach to a print bed. It provides fairly strong adhesion on a heated bed, but releases when cool.

Yes, it is black 3M PEI sheet, which is included

You can always just turn the glass around if you want to print directly onto it

PEI would not damage the glass if your intent is to remove it later. A heat gun will soften the adhesive and allow destructive removal of the PEI sheet and non-destructive removal from the glass. @towe's suggestion to turn the glass over is valid. Your suggestion to use a second sheet of glass is also useful.

Many thanks for all hints, i think i will use second glass to avoid using heat gun later, just to save some time. Glass is cheap, so why not to have 2 ;-)

Also print/build surfaces can be expensive as well as a pain to remove.  You don't want to remove it until it is damaged.  Removing it destroys the print surface.

Besides a heat gun, heating the bed some can also help removing the tape-like print surface/adhesion layer.  Using a puddy knife carefully can help prying up the adhesion layer.  The only danger to the glass is mechanically breaking it.  Avoid mashing a sharp point perpendicular to the surface of the glass or pounding the surface.
Most of the work removing the surface is cleaning off the adhesive left by the adhesion layer on the glass.  A cleaner rated as a degreaser or IPA (at least 90% IPA) helps remove the adhesive.  Many of the hand sanitizers with at least 70% alcohol will work if the remainder is hydrocarbons with little water.  You can remove the hydrocarbons left with soap and water.
Here is an example of a print surface/adhesion layer (black) on a glass bed (white).  The object being printed is blue.


text:
Tiny "fuzzy" wispy strings on the entire surface of the model?
I have my print settings dialed into a real good spot, but there's one obstacle that's preventing them from coming out flawless; somehow, my print has "fuzz" everywhere. Not traditional stringing like you get from filament oozing while travelling from section to section, nor do I mean over-extrusion that causes the outer walls to sag or bubble out.
The final shape/texture of my models are perfect - there's just wispy little hairs sticking out all over the model. They are not even really visible unless you hold it up to the light, or against a dark background.
Here's an image of the wing from a dragon I printed. Notice the top edge of the part and how it looks like it's made of cotton or something? That's how it looks everywhere.

What material?  What temperature?  What nozzle/layer size?  What retraction-related settings (retraction amount/speed, coast, etc.)?

PLA, 200c, 0.4mm nozzle, 0.08mm layer. Retracting 6mm / 40mm/s, coast off.

That is the print stringing still. Even thought that you have your printer dialed in, the plastic that is still in the nozzle is still grabbing onto your print and pulling out the nozzle just a tad. This, as far as I know, is unavoidable. The best solution that I could think of fixing this (as far as having your print come perfect off of the bed) would if a company designed the tips, printer, and filament to perfectly match each other, but until that happens, you are gonna be stuck with a lighter balling up the strings and picking them off.

These stringers are common with PETG.
You can reduce them by:

Increasing retraction reduces the stringers, but too much retraction can cause the filament to jam and stop extruding.

Lowering the extruder temperature will reduce the stringers, but also reduce adhesion between layers.  Stringers usually aren't an issue on the 1st layer, so you can keep the necessary extrusion temperature for the 1st layer to keep adhesion to the bed.

Your stringers are very short thus difficult to reduce.  One method to get rid of stringers is to expose the print very quickly with the flame of a blow torch.  Important is you don't want to melt the strings.  You want them to burn, so that they are ash and easily removed.  Melting the stringers will distort your print.


text:
Inconsistent layer stacking
I'm throwing this out that as a long shot, as I'm not sure if anyone can help me, but maybe there's someone out there who had a similar issue and might have successfully dealt with this before.
I'm dealing with this:

Granted, if I take a picture of the same benchy at a "flattering" angle it looks fine but the prints in real life don't look great.

Setup and attempts to fix the problem:

CR-10S.. -ish, modded to a point where I don't think calling it a
CR-10S is right.
SKR 1.3 board with TMC2208 drivers in UART mode, StealthChop enabled.
Tried changing the current from 600 to 900 for all motors. The only difference was motors running cool/hot and slightly different motor noises, print quality remained exactly the same.
Now running Klipper but flashed back to Marlin for testing at one point. Print quality is improved with Klipper, but the same core issue persists on both firmwares, leading me to believe this is probably hardware (mechanically) related. Tried running Klipper with input shaping and pressure advance both off and on, no difference in terms of the issue I'm having.
Sliced with Simplify3D but also tried with PrusaSlicer using the MK3S quality profile with just a few changes like startup G-code and bed size, fairly similar results with both, mainly this issue is present on both slicers
BLTouch, though the bed is manually leveled to the best of my abilities anyway.
The first layer is beautiful and smooth.
E-steps calibrated and they remain consistent throughout multiple repeated tests both on Klipper and Marlin.
X and Y belt tensioners (metal), played around with barely enough tension to keep the belt from slipping up to a highish note when plucking them - literally no difference in print quality.
Replaced most of the V-slot rollers, yet I didn't see any signs of wear/damage on the old ones
All rollers are engaging with the extrusions but aren't too tight, i.e. they can be manually rotated in place with a bit of force but won't rotate freely in place.
Squared up the frame to the best of my abilities
Leadscrews are aligned dead straight to the motors in the X- and Y-axis.
Tried 3 different couplers - rigid (stock), flexible (the aluminum "spiral" ones), and the ones with the hard rubber in the middle. The ones with the rubber made a slight improvement but didn't fix the issue. Pictures above were taken with those couplers installed.
Anti-backlash T nuts, tried loosening/tightening them - no difference. Leadscrews don't bind when the T-nuts are tightened though.
I had a closed-loop belt syncing the leadscrews together. I took them off and maybe there was a slight improvement, but the issue is still there. Photos were taken with the belt off.

I'm currently using a DD setup with a pancake motor, BMG extruder (Trianglelabs V2), V6 all-metal (Trianglelabs). Tried switching back to Bowden - fairly similar results in terms of the problem I'm having, the quality itself is a bit different compared to DD, DD being more. "tight" I guess would be the word in terms of quality, but the layer stacking is still similar. Tried using a metal "stock" style extruder on Bowden - the overall quality was just trash compared to DD and the issue still remained. Tried using a PTFE lined hotend instead of all metal on the DD setup - surprisingly the print quality overall was worse with it compared to the metal throat, so that leads me to believe the Trianglelabs throat is of decent quality and isn't the source of my problems like with cheap metal throats.
Designed my own DD mount in hopes that not having the stepper motor hanging far away from the extrusion would perhaps result in less hotend "wobble" during faster moves. Didn't help at all, although I do like it and it's more rigid compared to another popular one I was using before.

Tried multiple slicer settings, these are the ones I'm using now for reference

500 mm/s acceleration and ~40 mm/s base print speed (conservative speeds for testing)
1 mm retraction (tried 0.8 mm that results in slight stringing up to 1.5 mm that results in under extrusion)
40 mm/s retraction (tried 20 mm/s to 90 mm/s - no difference)
No Z-hop
Wipe 2 mm (tried on and off - no difference)
Extrusion multiplier at 0.98, tried from 0.9 to 1.1. There was a slight reduction in the layer stacking issue with the multiplier at ~0.93-0.95, but it results in under extrusion in the top layers. Tried to combat that by having 6 top layers but there still were gaps. Everything over 1.05 results in over extrusion to a point where the top surfaces are just scared.
Coasting off with Klipper due to using pressure advance, though with Marlin and coasting enabled the same issue persists.
Printing PLA at 205 °C. Tried 190-215 °C - no difference.
Tried printing with the heated bed off and a layer of hairspray for adhesion and as normal at 60 °C. The quality is somewhat better without the heated bed for the first few layers as expected, but overall same issue persists.

I'm a bit lost on what to try next, I think I've tried every combination I could think of in terms of settings, tightness, etc. My only thought is maybe it's in some way related to the leadscrews as they are the only thing I haven't changed. Although I did flip them over AND swap sides yet that made no appreciable difference which makes me second guess myself if my leadscrew theory is correct.
Maybe I'm missing something obvious.
I'll be delivering a crap ton of benchies to an orphanage or something, hopefully, the kids will have some fun with the stacks and stacks of benchies I've been printing for the past week.
Here's an XYZ cube:

I'm not seeing any diagonal lines in any lighting.

Did changing print speeds make any difference?

It looks like classic Z wobble to me, but could possibly be an issue with the gears in your extruder. If you try reproducing this on a simple cube, are the lines "diagonal" or completely horizontal? This will determine whether the problem is on the extruder side or the toolhead positioning side.

@R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE here's an XYZ cube https://imgur.com/a/4drEW90 Not seeing any diagonal lines in any lighting

OK, that looks like just Z wobble. It happens when flaws in the lead screw or other parts of the Z motion system induce jittery offsets in the XY plane as a functon of Z.

See this for an explanation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqSQhwqSzvg

Awesome video, thanks! Do you think manually bending leadscrews would help, or rather should I just buy new ones?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32dTLRNIYmw If z wobble isn't your issue then this probably is.

I have the same issue with an ender 6 did u find the issue? Was the z leadscrew?

@MihaiDobrin what helped slightly was the anti z wobble magnet mount https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4857627 The reduction in Z layer stacking issues was noticeable, however this and my other issues pushed my to switch to Voron and I haven't looked back :)

Hi Matt, it is good that you seem to have improved the issue that you were experiencing - could you post your last comment (and any other comments or details) as an answer (and maybe mark it as the accepted answer). It might help others with a similar issue. Thanks :-)


text:
Walls separating only on one side of print bed
Whenever I print, the walls separate when genial pressure is applied, this only happens to one side of the print, the side that faces the rear of the printer. I'm using 5 walls, so it’s only truly noticeable on the outer most walls, I’m sure it continues if I peel away more layers (the walls are printed first, then the infill). The print still looks “okay” so I only found out this issue after post-processing a prior print.
I’ve re-leveled the build plate and confirmed it with a bed visualizer.
I have attempted to shim that side of the print bed up.
I installed new belt tensioners to rule out belt tension.
I’m not sure what else to do, I rather not increase my flow or E-steps as the print dimensions are already pretty good and I don’t want to risk over extruding to solve my issue despite how it would fix the problem. I would be sacrificing accuracy for print coherency then.

I print on an Ender 5 plus
Slicer is Cura
Print speed is 60 mm/s
Printing at 220 °C for the hotend
Filament is Makerbot PLA

Does an external temperature measurement of the heater block verify it is within 10 °C of that indicated by the printer?

Yes I did , it’s within specs

Is there something causing that side to be cooler: a fan blowing on that side or the bed heating is uneven?

Well I “ upgraded “ the oem fan shroud with a ring one Instead, ideally hitting the print with air from all sides.  I was having this problem with the oem fan shroud as well.

Try printing with cooling off to see if it's a cooling issue or something else.


text:
Reverse the X-axis of a G-code file
I've got some sliced models that represent the right-side arms and legs of a robot. I'm really happy with how they printed, so now I'd like to print the left-side arms and legs.
I was thinking it would be pretty trivial to parse the G-code file using Python and change the value of all the Xn commands from n to 2*h - n, where h is in the middle of the bed, say 110 or 120 mm for an Ender 3.
Before I fire up my favorite IDE, are there any major gotchas I might encounter from such a naïve approach to mirroring the G-code like this? I originally sliced in Cura 4.9.1.

There are g-code visualizers which will allow you to open your newly modified file to observe obvious problems.  Is your reference to the middle of the bed valid? I've not examined a g-code file sufficiently enough to note if the origin is the bed center or a specific corner.

@fred_dot_u good point, I suppose I could find the bounding box of the print while I'm parsing the file. At least on the Ender 3 the home position seems to be at (0,0,0).

often times you can scale with a -1 value to mirror an axis if your slicer does not have an explicit mirror option.

If your slicer does not have a mirror operation or a scale that allows negative values then mirroring in the G-code should be straightforward.
As long as your printer doesn't have certain specific tool change or homing or purge positions that are done in the G-code you can just transform it, otherwise you would want to skip these sections and just do the model data (it should be obvious looking at the code where model data starts).
In order to mirror it you just need to swap out the X coordinates in your G-code, If (0,0) is the center of your bed, as is often (but not always) the case for delta printers you will just want to negate the X, so G1 X30 Y-3 Z2 becomes G1 X-30 Y-3 Z2.  If your coordinates have (0,0) in a corner  (often the case for orthogonal printers) then you want to subtract X from the maximum X value. for instance if your bed is 250 mm wide then in G1 X30 Y10 Z3  X30 becomes X(250-30) or G1 X220 Y10 Z3.
There is only one caveat, some slicers will switch to relative movement using G91 for certain operations and then back to absolute with G90, so you will want to look out for these. Between a G91 and a G90 you will want to negate the X, no matter where the origin of your printer is.
When writing your script, I'd keep track of the minimum and maximum values encountered and the new minimum and maximum values and print them at the end as a sanity check so you can see if anything is wonky.

Based on @John Mecham's comprehensive answer, I whipped up a quick proof of concept. In the image below, the left arrow (top) is the original and the right arrow (bottom) is the reversed clone. Cura does generate a little relative offset code at the end, I think I handled it correctly.

import re

data_start = re.compile('^;LAYER_COUNT:[0-9]+')

ifilename = 'c:/Users/jentron128/Downloads/ThingVerse/Tools/arrow.gcode'
ofilename = 'c:/Users/jentron128/Downloads/ThingVerse/Tools/rev_arrow.gcode'

new_data =[]
BEDX = float(235)
h = BEDX # Absolute Positioning is default

mode='Skip'

with open(ifilename, 'r') as ifp:
    for d in ifp:
        new_d = ''
        tokens = d.split()
        if len(tokens) == 0:
            pass
        elif mode == 'Skip':
            new_d = d[0:-1]
            if data_start .match(d):
                mode = 'Go'
        else:
            if tokens[0] == 'G91': # Relative Positioning
                h = 0
            elif tokens[0] == 'G90':# Absolute Positioning
                h = BEDX

            for t in tokens:
                if t.startswith('X'):
                    if len(t) > 1:
                        x = h - float(t[1:])
                        t = 'X'+f'{x:.3f}'
                new_d += t+' '

        new_data.append(new_d)

with open(ofilename, 'w') as ofp:
    for d in new_data:
        ofp.write(d+'\n') # how does writelines not support a line separator?

import re
from sys import argv

data_start = re.compile('^;LAYER_COUNT:[0-9]+')

ifilename = argv[1];
ofilename = ifilename.replace('.gcode', '-reversed.gcode');

I tried to comment to make it a reusable script that you can run against any file, but the comment got mangled; basically use sys to import argv and use the argv[1] for the filename :)

It didn't work for me nevertheless, not with a file generated by prusa.

At least on Windows I never run Python from a command line. If you have a (preferably small) prusa gcode file I will take a look to see if I can modify the code to work with it.

I think I found the issue, you are looking for a header that seemed to be specific to Cura, I made a new version based on yours which is correctly working for the prusa slicer files; I took all the math you used overall, it seems to work correctly now; honestly I am not sure, I have never touched gcode until now, but I think the G1 is universal.

Yes, my code has a state-machine built into it, and it seems the switch is based on a Cura specific comment. Anything before the first ";LAYER:0" comment is output as read because it's all printer setup, then the state switches to "Go" mode and processes ALL X directives after that, regardless of G code. It treats G90/G91 separately by setting h = 0 for RELATIVE positioning and h = bed width for ABSOLUTE positioning.

The easiest way around this is just change mode='Skip' to mode='Go' and then the script will process all the lines.

However we (or at least I) wasn't sure wether that was the correct assumption, I simply took all G1 token output and flipped that one, assuming those are the instructions; I wrote the code below as you can see.

Usage: python3 [filename.gcode] [bed-width]
#!/usr/bin/env python3

import re
from sys import argv

#first arg is the file, second arg is the bed x width
ifilename = argv[1];
ofilename = ifilename.replace('.gcode', '-reversed.gcode');

new_data =[]
BEDX = float(argv[2])
h = BEDX # Absolute Positioning is default

with open(ifilename, 'r') as ifp:
    for d in ifp:
        new_d = ''
        tokens = d.split()
        if len(tokens) == 0:
            pass
        else:
            if tokens[0] == 'G91': # Relative Positioning
                h = 0
                new_d += d
            elif tokens[0] == 'G90':# Absolute Positioning
                h = BEDX
                new_d += d
            elif tokens[0] == 'G1':
                for t in tokens:
                    if t.startswith('X'):
                        if len(t) > 1:
                            x = h - float(t[1:])
                            t = 'X'+f'{x:.3f}'
                    new_d += t+' '
            else:
                new_d += d

        new_data.append(new_d)

with open(ofilename, 'w') as ofp:
    for d in new_data:
        ofp.write(d+'\n') # how does writelines not support a line separator?

For those that have a problem with the script above, I think this fixes it.
Also there seems to be a bug with not writting G90 or G91 whenever it finds it.

The way you generate ofilename is not very safe. If the filename doesn't end in .gcode (e.g. if it ends in .GCODE or .gco) the replace will be a no-op and it looks like you'll overwrite the input.

You are right, make a third version or something; I hacked this quickly on the spot, maybe using argv[2] for output name.


text:
Generating height map with Rep Rap
I recently did a G29 (run mesh calibration) and my printer did a 25 point probe and reported back the stats to the console.  After this I went to the height map section and it says "height map not available" and no stats can be used here.
So I tried to load the height map using G29 S1 and am getting:
G29 S1 Error: G29: Failed to load height map from file heightmap.csv: Could not find file '/opt/dsf/sd/sys/heightmap.csv'
Does anyone know what I am doing wrong?  Below is info about my control board and firmware.
RepRapFirmware for Duet 3 MB6HC version 3.1.1 running on Duet 3 MB6HC v1.01 or later (SBC mode)

This looks like an older question but thought that I would post anyway in case someone else stumbles upon this question like I just did.
An ownership change to the /opt/dsf/sd/sys directory can create a situation where heightmap files are unable to be saved. There are a couple of ways to check.
How to check - Method 1: Try creating a new config file from the GUI (under the same menu as your config.g file, same area where the heightmap file is supposed to be saved). If there are any issues creating or saving the file, it is a good indicator that the dir ownership has changed.
How to check - Method 2: Open a terminal and run stat /opt/dsf/sd/sys. There should be an area that lists the ownership and both areas (user and group) should list dsf as the owner. If the owner is pi (standard default user) or anything else then this is likely the issue.
Solution: To reset the folder ownership back to the correct setting, open a terminal and run sudo chown -R dsf:dsf /opt/dsf/sd/sys.
NOTE: If you found that the underlying issue is folder ownership, it is also worth checking the other directories under the /opt/dsf/sd path and the other directories and update with the correct permission fix where necessary.

Even though I have no way of checking this, this looks like a good answer. Hi and welcome, BTW... :-)


text:
Jagged edge on one side and not on the other side
As you can see the left side of the edge came out jagged. The right side came out just fine. What happened to the left side?
I am using Ender 3 + BLTouch using Sunlu PLA+ with 200 °C hotend.

Here are my retraction settings (if that matters):

Do you mean the ringing?

This was happened because I don't use support on the slope. After I use support the jagged edge is gone.

This may be due to uneven cooling. The part cooling fan only comes from one direction on the Ender 3 series of printers. You may be able to solve the issue by printing the walls from the outside in. If not, I recommend printing a fan shroud that has part cooling ducts on both sides; there are plenty of them on thingiverse.


text:
Should I put my models close together on the build plate, or space them out, to minimise suction?
On a resin printer, if I'm printing 5-6 similarly sized items (Warhammer figures, for example) should I group them close together, or space them far apart, in order to get best adhesion on the build plate and least suction on the FEP?

More is better, as less resin need to come under the build platform during the lift. But very close objects specially for delicate details may cause them bend close together by liquid resin surface tension, which will impact surface quality.


text:
Screen protector for Elegoo Saturn?
Can I cut down an iPad screen protector and stick it over the top of my Elegoo Saturn to protect the LCD from scratches or resin leaks\drips?
Or will this harm printing?
Additional information
A resin printer has an LCD screen underneath the resin tank. It shines a light up through the tank (which has a transparent bottom), which cures a thin layer of resin. The built plate then moves up slightly allowing more liquid resin to flow in underneath. The process then repeats.
There are particular wavelengths that must be allowed through. It's 405 nm (at least that's what is written on the side of the resin bottles that I use), which is UV light.

The primary consideration you'd have by adding a screen protector is that you've added distance between the LCD panel and your build plate. Currently, the FEP film is in contact with the LCD panel. By inserting a screen protector, you've increased the distance light has to travel to reach the resin on the other side of the FEP film. It's certainly going to be a very small distance, but not a zero value.
The increased distance will allow a bit of diffraction and diffusion of the UV light passing through the protector film. If your models are not particularly detailed, you may not notice the difference.
Consider to print a test model designed for resin printers prior to installing the protector. Perhaps print more than one, in different resins. Once installed, print the same sequence again and examine carefully for detail changes.
Another aspect of this "project" is that screen protectors are removable.

Image courtesy of linked site. Note that the linked site requires the user to sign up for newsletters in order to receive the free STL file, but one can immediately unsubscribe. Other 3d resin printer test models may be available.
The site has useful information regarding "reading" the printed model with respect to the results.


text:
Making durable 3D printed drill templates?
I’m gearing up for making batch of 30 or so drilled aluminum enclosures (guitar pedals!), and getting the holes drilled accurately is a challenge. I’d like to make a 3D printed drilling template that fits over the box. The plastic alone is too soft to keep from getting deformed by repeated drilling. I’d seen these steel bushing inserts machinists use for their drilling templates. I’d love to use the kind with knurls or ridges so they press into the plastic and won’t get loose and spin.
The only problem is they seem to be unusually expensive- \$8 apiece at McMaster Carr.
The one other question here about these mentions “castable bushings” but are similarly rare and expensive.
Is there a less expensive part that would work well with plastic? Or a clever method for getting an accurate 3D printed drill template that would stand up to repeated use?
This would be used with a drill press and I would be happy with 0.125” (~3.2 mm) drill bits, or similar size, for pilot holes, and drill the holes to various final sizes as a second operation.

Use appropriate sized nuts?

@Ron, yeah, seems like most of the improvised solutions have threads, but there is only a little bit of material on the edges of the threads that the drill would contact. Brass heat set inserts, or the special flanged steel bushing with machine threads that pokes into a piece of wood.

What sort of drill sizes do you intend to use?
One thing that comes to mind would be printed threads which you screw heat breaks into. That's usually limited to ~4mm or ~6mm though.
Or maybe 3-4 normal spacers along the length of your tool which you'd insert from the side?

Are you using a hand-held drill or a drill press? If the latter, you could make a jig that the part fits against instead of having to guide the drill bit.

@towe that’s an interesting idea of screwing something in. Heartbreaks are too long and even the Chinese ones are ~$7. Screwing something in, especially if it had a collar to stop it would work. The drill press spins righty tighty so it wouldn’t unscrew it. Could tap the threads or make a pocket for a nut on the inside face.

@Andrew Morton, yes, drill press. I had previously done what you were talking about, by drilling a “master” with pilot holes, and then using a fixture to hold the box in place, and drill all of that one hole for all of the boxes, then move the fixture for the next hole, repeat. It did work but the opportunity for drift and messing up the same hole location over a batch of boxes made me nervous.

@towe I’d like to just drill pilot holes, 1/8” or 3mm, size not too specific, since it gets drilled out larger.

@ChinchillaWafers Would it be enough to use a plastic template and centrepunch the hole locations? I imagine a centrepunch wouldn't do the damage a drill bit would, but your experience may tell you otherwise.

@Andrew Morton re:center punch jig, that’s interesting. The longer the hole for the center punch the less it should deform. I guess the trick would be how tight you could get the punch in the hole without stressing the plastic, to keep the location tight.

This question is basically a hardware recommendation/shopping question, which is off-topic.

@ChinchillaWafers I realised that a transfer punch (with its cylindrical shape) would be a better fit than the typically conical shape of a normal centre punch.

@Andrew Morton transfer punch could be a good solution. It’d be an extra operation, but the template would be simpler and less labor to put together.

Found one source for small “doweling jigs”, the Telco 06120TK, on Amazon, $1.50 per bushing in packs of 10. Not the neat, press-in kind, they thread into a 1/2”-20 nut, but they are tempered steel.
They are a little thick and tall, which would make the template thick and tall, but the printed template could be cored out so it doesn’t have to be a solid, thick piece of printed plastic on top of the box.  The threaded bit would make them reusable though.
The search was helped by putting in the ID you want (1/8” in this case), and getting into the woodworking category, rather than business/industrial.
Edit: Here's a design for 3D printed drill template with the doweling bushings.  For the holes that were too close and interfered I'm going to try the suggestion of using pressed in 6-32 steel nuts, but drill them out.

EDIT #2:After drilling a test with the 3D printed drill template, results are underwhelming.  The hole pattern is a little undersize, about 0.5%, which has made the holes on opposite sides of the drill template out of tolerance by about .015", not great for matching a PCB.  I believe the issue is plastic shrink, which is expressed as a percentage, an error that ends up as a multiplication of size.  So the 3D printed drill template, as shown, not reccommended for tight dimensional tolerances without experimenting dialing in the scale with the filament to be used.


text:
Movement of the extruder out of its original position during printing
I have a problem with my Creality Ender 3 printer. When I start printing, the first few levels go fine. But then the extruder starts slowly moving in the wrong direction and after a few minutes the extruder is completely out of its original position so the whole printing is ruined.
I tried to start again but it is doing the same thing all the time. Calibration and modification of the bed does not help. Can you advise me on how to fix this situation?

This sounds like you're describing layer shifts. Look through some questions on that topic and see if they match what you're seeing and if the answers might help solve your problem.

This issue is probably caused by layer shifting, please add some images (by [edit] you can embed your images using the insert image button) to see in which direction this takes place. A common problem is that the belts are not tight enough so that the driver pulley skips a few steps when an increased pressure/force is felt by the carriage (e.g. nozzle hitting supports, over extruded filament, etc.).

I found out that the problem is probably connected to layer shifting. More precisely the Z axis, which does not want to move upwards properly (it does move the upwards direction, but not reguarly, sometimes it stops) so that could be the core of the problem. I tried to fix it by making some steps that were discussed at this post: https://www.reddit.com/r/3Dprinting/comments/8ttkf2/ender_3_z_axis_issues/ but so far, nothing seems to help.


text:
Why do segments of my print "pop" off the bed after a few layers?
I just received delivery of some new filament and after a few layers of printing some segments will start to "pop" off the bed.
I've calibrated esteps and levelled bed. It only seems to happen with this new filament

Please [edit] in some pictures to better assess the problem and offer a solution.

What filament (I suspect PLA as it is tagged), please also add printing parameters like temperatures and speeds. What print surface do you use, glass or a coated sheet.

Welcome to 3D Printing Stack Exchange.  This question is a duplicate -- there are multiple questions around about "why are my prints lifting" or similar adhesion related issues.

Hi there jaywayco and welcome to SE.3DP. Unfortunately, I'm going to cast the final vote that this is a duplicate, which will cause it to be closed. However, if you can edit the question to make it differ from the proposed duplicate, then it may get reopened... Top marks for the Terry Tibbs avatar though... :-)

I should have added that if you don't feel that your question has been answered by the proposed duplicate then please add the extra requested info,  and leave a comment saying so and/or click on the flag link beneath the question. That way  your question can be re-opened.


text:
How to define bed dimensions in Marlin for custom carriage / hot end?
How would I begin measuring my hotend / carriage dimensions in Marlin to prevent my hotend from slamming into the frame?
I see in Marlin the 'define bed size' parameters
#define Y_BED_SIZE 360
#define Z_MAX_POS 400
#if ENABLED(E3DHemera)
#define X_BED_SIZE 352
#define X_MAX_POS 352
#else
#define X_BED_SIZE 360
#define X_MAX_POS 360
#endif
#define Y_MAX_POS 360
#define ClipClearance 25

But how would I go about measuring my hotend / carriage assembly to edit the values accordingly?
I'm not sure how I would measure it or at what point of reference I'm measuring from, is it from the nozzle to the edge of the hotend carriage in both the X and Y or total space on X and Y.
I'm using an Ender 5 plus.
I have a custom-made aluminum hot end carriage for my E3D Hemera.
I defined the BLTouch probe offset.
I'm using "Tiny Machines" firmware and my next step in the installation is defining the aforementioned parameters.
In the video tutorial, I'm watching for installation they are using a different mount for their E3D Hemera, so I'm unsure how I would go about defining my own values for my setup.
The guide I'm following is here

I also moved one of my end stops closer to the carriage because my original endstop would trigger on the wheels, but now that I installed the new carriage, it hits the frame before triggering the endstop, is there an endstop offset value I can adjust for what I think is my Y-axis?
(The axis going from left to right)

TL&DR
Using a larger carriage will, if too large, diminish the printing area.
To determine the correct values (for the X-axis) you:

First need to assure that the nozzle can reach the origin, if not, try to see if you can move the endstop without the carriage hitting the frame, if not possible, your left margin will be decreased. If there was enough space for the carriage, and a value for X_MIN_POS defined, this value needs to be decreased. See How to center my prints on the build platform? (Re-calibrate homing offset) to set these margins correctly as you effectively need to reposition the print area on the build area.
Second, define the bed dimensions temporarily to be the design size (do note to not bluntly jog the carriage to the end positions!).
Now flash the firmware and home the X-axis, jog the carriage in increments to the right and observe the position on the LCD or through a connected application over USB. When the carriage is about to hit the frame, note the value, this is your bed X size (for a CoreXY make sure the carriage is clear over the whole Y-axis).
Something similar can be done for the Y-axis.
When you have noted the maximum sizes in X and Y direction, change the firmware and re-flash the printer board.

More details
The text below goes a little more in depth, first some definitions, then some theory.
Definitions
Axes
In reaction to:

The axis going from left to right

When facing your printer the left to right movement is your X-axis, back and forth the Y-axis and up and down the Z-axis.
   -> Please note this is generally the most used printer convention, exceptions are applicable.
Dimensions
Hotend dimensions are needed for your slicer (when you need to sequentially print multiple objects), firmware uses bed dimensions and positions.
Bed dimensions
The following image reflects the changes to the build area when a larger sized carriage is used on the same printer (grey is the original size, red is the decreased area as a result of a larger carriage; note this is for fixed endstop positions!). Note, this is an example, CoreXY machines have limited space, so a decreased print area is more likely to be seen in both X and Y dimension. Prusa i3 style printers have the Y endstop generally on the bed carriage, so the bed size in Y will most likely not decrease. It totally depends on the construction of the printer, the extra space between the frame parts and the carriage (usually you can see that instantly by the endstop offsets, if there aren't homing endstop offsets, there is not extra space and the print dimension of that axis will decrease) or the ability to move the offset. Note that the bottom half of the image draws the out the result for losing X movement, the red area does account for losing Y movement as well, this is not uncommon for CoreXY, especially the printers with limited extra space for the carriage beyond the minimum and maximum bed positions.

How does this translate to your situation?
From Tiny Machines (TM) firmware (InsanityAutomation) you'll find that:
    #define X_MIN_POS 0
    #define Y_MIN_POS 0

This tells you that there is no offset from the homing endstop.
    #if ENABLED(E3DHemera)
      #define X_BED_SIZE 352
      #define X_MAX_POS 352
    #else

This tells you that there is less printing space in the X direction available.
From Marlin configurations (2.0.9.1), you can find something similar. It looks like somebody did a similar attempt, but added the offset to the X_MIN_POS and mixed up the signs (it does hint to a 8 mm offset, so the creator probably also has a e3D Hemera extruder).
From the TM constants we read that the endstops in fact define the origin of the printer to be at the endstops (the MIN values are zero) so the printer is at the origin when homed. Because of the larger extruder, already 8 mm of the X dimension is used, hence the smaller bed size of 306 - 8 = 352 mm. This is also the X_MAX_POS, the carriage is not allowed further. You should now look into your custom mount and the endstop location and deduce your own "x mm" offset.

But what about the opposite side? I only have 2 endstops , one for x and one for y. And sure , thank you.

From the display you read what the maximum is so the opposite site is taken care off, no need to worry.