text:
3DTouch sensor fails after probe deployment and triggering
I'm using a 3DTouch sensor (from Geeetech) on a self-build CoreXY printer (HyperCube Evolution). The sensor worked perfectly until not being used for a month.
The symptoms are that it fails to deploy the pin on the second probe deployment so basically it fails after the first probe is triggered by the raised platform.
On homing Z (not only for G28 or "home all" but also for G28 Z to "home Z axis") and goes into some sort of a fail-safe mode where the LED keeps flashing. Sometimes it does deploy and finishes the homing instructions and continues to the G29 instruction (note that double probing #define MULTIPLE_PROBING 2 is enabled in the Marlin 1.1.8 firmware) and show similar symptoms as described above for the G28 command. Note that failing to deploy the probe sometimes leads to a rising build platform that does not stop, other times some fail safe kicks in and the bed lowers and aborts the print.
To lift the fail-safe condition, a reset of the sensor is required (this can be done through the LCD or by command M280 P0 S160).
What I have done to solve the problem is to isolate the wires from the 3D touch sensor as I was under the impression that this was related to electromagnetic interference (therefore when the sensor is probing, the bed and heater cartridge are not powered momentarily), but that did not help.
Any suggestions and solutions to get it working again are appreciated.

Have you checked wire connectivity while moving the wires around? If the sensor wire for the probe (assuming a three wire setup), if the sensor wire (not power or ground wires to the probe) is failing at certain angles, it might give you something like you're stating. Yes, I'm grasping for straws.

Any time I run into a "ran when parked" situation (old joke from used-car collectors),  I suspect dirt, dust, grime leading to mechanical failures. See if there's any way to do a careful cleaning.

After troubleshooting I have managed to fix the sensor problems.
(Please take note of the update at the end of the answer below as the problem started again shortly after the so-called fix...)
Digging into several posts I found this post that hints to a solution:

After readjusting, the sensor worked and I was able to produce a print, but the next day it failed again... What I found is that the bed and extruder are NOT shut off while probing although that should have been enabled in Marlin 1.1.8. I assumed that this de-powering is only during the actual probe lowering, so very short. So I figured that this might be an EMI problem. In a last resort I updated to Marlin 1.1.9 which has the functionality to shut the power off for heater and bed and everything now seems to work perfectly. I now see that the de-powering is a bit longer and in fact the extruder temperature drops slightly, this has never been seen with the previous firmware version.

Update:
Not long after the "update"/"fix" the problem manifested itself again... Further troubleshooting revealed that it was a bad connection of the connectors of the sensor that got temporarily "fixed" as the cables had been fiddled with during the firmware update.
I have to note that the quality of these non-genuine sensors is not close the the original BLTouch. The BLTouch has never failed me to date, while several 3DTouch sensors did...


text:
Reprap RAMPs over heating issues
So I've got a couple problems, to begin I'm using the RAMPs 1.4, generic Arduino mega with Marlin, generic stepper motor drivers, a generic power supply. Nothing is special or even out of the ordinary. But for some reason when I plug the RAMPs in, with everything connected or everything unplugged my Arduino heats up like hell. I clocked it at around 60°c after a couple seconds of being powered on around where the main chip is. The voltage regulator seems fine because it doesn't heat up much, I've checked it around 40°c.
Second problem is the stepper motor drivers keep blowing up for some reason. With everything plugged in I power on the board for the first time and hear a small pop and then a small amount of smoke comes from the extruder driver. I replaced it thinking it was just a bad chip and the same thing happens. All other chips are fine it's just the extruder that fries.
When the board is plugged into usb it doesn't give me any readings what so ever on what the printer is doing but the Arduino works fine with anything else I throw at it.
Things I've tried:
- Lower the voltage on the power supply from 12.00v to 11.26 with no changes
- try running it with everything plugged in and everything unplugged
- tried buying a new Arduino but the exact same problems occur
I've gotten kinda tired of thinking of ways to trouble shoot so I'll open it up to the community.
 Picture of a friend stepper driver

can you post more images of your ramps board.Does you try to change your ramps board.Check your ramps board for any short circuit.

Welcome to 3D Printing!

Himanshu: here's a pic of the RAMPs https://photos.app.goo.gl/y9WsRNbMXzEE2iTRA

I suggest you to check with another ramps board.

This really sounds like there is a short somewhere on the RAMPS add-on board. It is advised to not use the RAMPS add-on shield to prevent damage to the Arduino or the shield.
Personally, I would ditch this one and buy a new one. By the looks of the picture you are using a clone RAMPS, these are mass produced and the quality is not always the best (many components are skew). If you are very into electronics you could try to find the short, but it can well be that the traces on the board are somehow connected. Alternatively, you could buy a new board where RAMPS and Arduino are already combined, e.g. an MKS board.

I totally agree with the short suggestion, often they are caused by the user (poor soldering or cable residues). Maybe highlight to OP that he totally shouldn't use the printer without observation until this is solved.

@dgrat Thanks for the addition, I have updated the answer.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Why is it conventional to set line width > nozzle diameter?
I recently became curious about the Line Width setting in Cura and why one might change it if they aren't using different size nozzle.
Since I've gotten my Ender 3, I've always kept the line width equal to my nozzle size (0.4 mm). I've looked around a bit, and it seems like most people actually set their line widths to be higher, depending upon who you ask anywhere from 120 - 150 % nozzle diameter.
Why is this? They mention that it helps with print adhesion, but why? Shouldn't a 0.4 mm nozzle create a line of plastic 0.4 mm wide, necessitating a line spacing of 0.4 mm?

There are several things at play that can make a wider line nice to have:
First layer adhesion
Due to some filaments having serious struggle to get the first line or layer stuck to the bed, it can be an easy fix to just increase the line width, generating a bigger Adhesive Force $F_a\propto A(l,w)$, where A is the area covered by the line, and thus simply $A=l*w$ with length l and width w of the line. So, a wider line means better initial adhesion and can lead to less failed prints in layer 1.
Plastic Goo
Plastics under heat behave in certain ways: they turn into a gooey substance that expands. This is also the reason why prints shrink a little as they cool. Now, if we press the plastic onto the bed with more force (as we force more plastic through than before to go from 0.4 mm to 0.5 mm) for the first time, we have a roughly flat area. The extra filament will make a wider line. The slicher can account for that, and does.
Now, next layer up: Where does the extra material go now? Plastic goo has one property that is very interesting: it tries to shrink its surface as much as possible. Heat a short piece with an airgun and it gets a little beady. But on the other hand, it comes hot enough from the nozzle to melt a tiny surface area of the already built layers, which is how layer bonding works in the first place. But our goopy plastic finds the layer below not exactly flat like the first layer found its lower surface, it finds a shape of ridges and valley. Taking into account that it wants to have the least surface to non-plastic (=air) and slightly cross bonds with the print, it will fill these nooks and crevices inside the print a tiny little better, as the increased force we use to push it out also increased the speed at which it expands to them: we reduce the time a tiny bit to reach there. How does it matter?

Well, heat transfer bases, roughly speaking, on a formula like this: $Q = mc\Delta T$ Q is the thermal energy of the object, m the mass of the object, c its specific heat capacity and T the temperature, ΔT the temperature change. But we don't have a homogenous object, we got pretty much a heat distribution with touching zones of different heat. The actual formula for the heat transfer inside the object is a long mess containing stuff like the gradient $\text{grad}T$, thermal conductivities, and integrals, but what matters is the result: The faster-expanding line of filament loses a little less thermal energy to its surroundings than the less forceful extruded line, which can increase the bonding between the two as the temperature on several fronts:

it enters the crevices further before reverting from goo to solid, leading to better adhesion for more surface.
it contains more thermal energy that can and will get transmitted to the layer below and has a bigger surface area, so it can increase the zone thickness that gets remelted a tiny bit, increasing the layer bonding strength a little.

This can result in a problem though: if you don't give the printed lines enough time to cool, it can lead to the material to accumulate heat more and more, leading to the whole thing to melt and turn into goop. An easy fix to this side problem is minimum layer time. But that would be only tangential to the original question, so look for example at the question here or the video the thermal picture above is taken from here.

Thank you for the incredibly detailed answer, @Trish. This is more explanation than I could have ever hoped for.

Very nice answer. I always set extrusion width to 110% of nozzle diameter, even when printing clays and gels.

Shouldn't a 0.4 mm nozzle create a line of plastic 0.4 mm wide

Not necessarily. Due to a phenomenon known as die swell extruding plastic through a 0.4 mm nozzle, the line of plastic that is created is actually slightly wider. Pressure inside the extruder compresses the plastic slightly, and it expands again as it exists the nozzle.

They mention that it helps with print adhesion, but why?

When you extrude a thicker line of plastic than your nozzle diameter, the "excess" plastic is compressed by the nozzle and forced out to the side. This pushes the plastic into the layer below, increasing adhesion. You can compare this to taking a hot glue gun, pressing the tip into the surface and squeezing the trigger, versus lifting the glue gun above the surface and letting the glue drip onto the surface. Doing the former creates much stronger adhesion.
As a side effect, using thicker lines makes it easier to get the first layer to stick, since the thicker line has more surface area to adhere to.

@TomvanderZanden A question that pops up is what would be better, increase the line width or the extrusion multiplier, but that would be a whole new question I guess?

@0scar yeah, that does come to mind too.

@ifconfig For that reason I have asked: "Slicer line width vs. extrusion multiplier for layer adhesion?"

Ultimaker Cura defaults the extrusion with of my UM3E to 0.35 mm for a 0.4 mm nozzle. So, although people tend to increase line width, the software decreases it.

@0scar That is news to me. Simplify3D does the opposite. It would be interesting to learn why Ultimaker does this.

Yes it sure would be interesting!

There are several yet unmentioned considerations:
Given the same movement speed thicker lines fill up a layer quicker, because more volume is extruded per second. In some systems the extrusion flow is the limiting factor for speed, but around corners the print head needs to slow down. Thicker lines = less lines = less corners = less slow down = higher print speed.
Thicker lines have less detail, though. A line of 0.6 mm cannot represent details smaller than that, so smaller line widths capture the input geometry better. Also corners will get rounded by the same distance, so thicker lines = rounder corners.
Thicker lines create worse overhang. Thicker lines require more pressure from the nozzle and if the layer below is (partly) missing the back pressure from the previous layer is less, which results in overextension, which will then also more likely go downward instead of to the sides.
The higher pressure can force lines into small crevices of the layer below, though. This was highlighted by Trish already.
The model Cura uses for a single line is rectangular, while in actuality the printed lines are rounded on the sides. This makes the width of the full extend from side to side larger than computed, at the cost of the corners of the rectangular model. This means that the line width setting should be set slightly smaller than what you would want the lines to end up like.

Is there a reference for Ultimaker Cura using a rectangular line model? This seems highly unusual, e.g. Slic3r uses a rectangle and 2  half circles, for Ultimaker Cura a similar model is expected.

You can quote me on it. I wrote the larger part of CuraEngine.

Nice, I'll take your word for it, but please link to the CuraEngine manual if you can. Thanks for the information, much appreciated!

It's not in the Cura manual (yet). Is it in the slic3r manual?

I'll give a short answer here: It's the volume. The the nozzle redistributes the volume of the plastic into a different shape. i.e. the nozzle is turning a cylinder of 0.4 mm diameter into a rectangle of the same volume, which a function of the layer height / volume = line width.

it isn't really a rectangle but a flattened object consisting of 2 half circles of diameter h and a rectangle of short length h in between them. The line width is this things width. But you do not explain why it is conventional at all

Why is what conventional at all?

OP said: "I've looked around a bit, and it seems like most people actually set their line widths to be higher, depending upon who you ask anywhere from 120 - 150 % nozzle diameter."

Yes, and then the OP asked why that is so. Previous answers didn't address the volumetric concern. Ever poke a hole in a paint can and then run a line with it? how come the width of the painted line isn't equal to the diameter of the hole?

Hmmm, it seems like you could be on to something here as you are approaching the question from a different angle from everyone else... if you could tidy up your answer and include the comment about the paint can [along with an explanation/diagram of what happens - no I have never done that but I'd be interested in seeing what happens  :-) (I guess the line is width than the diameter?)], I'd give you an up vote.

I kinda thought that this answer would have been straightforward to understand. I'll have to go into great detail to explain further.

The height of the cylinder is governed by the extrusion flow, tho, so this isn't an argument. There is no principal reason to compare a line with a height h to a cylinder with the same height.

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


text:
Slicer line width vs. extrusion multiplier for layer adhesion?
My question would like to address what would be better for adhesion and general quality and possibly strength: either increase the slicer line width option or increase the slicer extrusion multiplier for layer to layer adhesion?

This question has a relation to "Why is it conventional to set line width > nozzle diameter?". This answer on that question addresses a phenomenon called die swell to explain that the extrusion width is generally larger than the nozzle diameter even if the line width in the slicer is set to the nozzle diameter. Basically, increasing the line width increases the extrusion multiplier, so why not set that directly?

Related: https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/11074/why-and-how-am-i-supposed-to-change-the-extrusion-multiplier

See also: What's the difference between “Initial Layer Width” and “Initial Layer Flow” in Cura?

Generally speaking, both settings result in the same1: The feed rate of the filament gets adjusted. Either you set a general multiplier, or you demand a wider line which does make it set a higher multiplier hidden in the software.
1 - if you don't look at any other factor that is!
But...
There is always a but, and this one is big:
While we can work with the extrusion multiplier to get wider lines, wider lines do change another setting: it changes the distance between the lines too. Let me show you:

If you print 100% at 0.4 mm line width, lines are about2 0.4 mm wide at 0.4 mm distance.
If you print 100% at 0.5 mm line width, lines are about2 0.5 mm wide at 0.5 mm distance.
If you print 121% at 0.4 mm line width, lines are about2 0.5 mm wide at 0.4 mm distance.

2 - ignoring die swell effects
The result is pretty clear: the theoretical lines do overlap, which will lead to the polymer goop getting squished and pressed around to bulge up. Luckily, that stuff usually ends in the infill on the lower layers, but it can result in very messy sides. You pretty much deliberately chose to massively overextrude!
To say it blatantly: line width changes the overall geometry of the slicing to account for the extra material getting extruded, extrusion multiplier does not.
What is the extrusion multiplier for THEN?
Well, using the extrusion multiplier can be done for many reasons, but mainly 2 are interesting:

Troubleshooting. You can just amp it up or down to test your mechanical properties. Like if your gear ratios on the extruder are correct. Or if your print needs a thicker line to get the first layer sticking.
Dialing in Filaments. In its core, it is meant to allow to change the flow because different polymer blends might have different mechanical and thermal properties.

Different filament blends can have different bite of the extruder gear - if the teeth dig in deeper, then the effective diameter of the gear gets smaller. This can partially be mitigated by the extruder design using gears designed to prevent shifting the depth of bite.
For example, the filler and paint could lead to more thermal expansion and die swell, or they could reduce it. This behavior can be tackled directly by adjusting the extrusion multiplier.
Those properties are why you should calibrate your settings when getting a new type (color&manufacturer) of filament. While some manufacturers try to keep the properties along their lines similar, some won't.

It might not look too obvious at first, but I once had printed a model from one roll of white PLA that came from China. Then I got my fingers on some other PLA that was transparent from the same warehouse. I tried to print the exact same .gcode with it again and got a hyper fragile object that just could get squished, every time I used it with the same settings as the white PLA. I had to increase both the extrusion multiplier and change the temperature to get the same strength as with the other PLA.


text:
How much relief between parts?
I'm working on creating parts which I want to fit snugly together. Obviously, if I make the female side of it 5mm and the male part of it also 5mm, it isn't going to fit together due to interference ... IOW: it's going to be too tight to fit together correctly. My questions are:

How much relief should I leave between pieces?
Is there a "standard practice"?
Do different shapes demand different relief distances?
Are there any factors which might affect leaving more or less relief between parts?


text:
Upgrading to silicone heat bed, will it burn my house down?
I'm looking into upgrading my heated bed and replacing it with a silicone bed. I know nearly nothing about electronics, so I would like someone more knowledgeable to confirm if what I have theorized is correct or I'm going to burn my house down trying it.
Basically, I'm considering setting up a 200W@12V heater, and I am using this premium ramps, which reportedly has Toshiba TK72E12N1, S1X MOSFETs.
I did some basic math following Tom's guide, if that is correct, I would be pulling 16 A current. Assuming I plug the heatbed directly to the ramps, that would mean the MOSFETs are losing approximately (considering 20 % more resistance than the datasheet says as per Tom's advice) about 1.2 W, which means the MOSFET would heat up about 100 °C above room temperature, so the total temp would be around 125 °C, which is below the graded 150 °C in the sheet.
According to this math, I'm thinking I can just plug that heater to my RAMPS board without any issues. Should this cause any issues? Will it set a fire or melt down something? Anything else I should consider?

Welcome to 3D Printing! The song by Burning Heads comes to mind here :o)

haha, yeah it does! hopefully, I won't end up singing that lol

A fire can only occur if specific components are fed far more power (proportional to current in general) than they are designed for.   So, don't try to make a component, or a board, do things outside its ratings.

@CarlWitthoft I had a stepper driver catch fire for a second once (quickly pulled the plug so it didn't cause any damage other than to the driver itself). I think it was a broken driver which was shorted, but since that experience I'm never confident with any changes I do to the electronics lol

The heated bed port on your board has a 11A fuse. It will not work for a heated bed requiring 16A of current, no matter how good the MOSFETs might be. Note that the terminal block might also not be rated for that much current. You'd have to check, because often it is not the MOSFET itself that catches fire but the wiring or terminal blocks.
Also, keep in mind RAMPS only drives the gate with 5V. The value specified in the datasheet (for 10V) plus 20% is probably a bit optimistic. The datasheet doesn't specify the resistance at 5V, so you're guessing at what the resistance might be. Since you're already running the part quite close to its limits, and considering ambient temperature might rise above 25C, I'd be cautious. The designers of that board only intended it for use at 11A, probably with good reason...

Addendum: One might get away with more load if one uses a larger heatsink and a board cooling fan, but even that won't stop an 11 A fuse from blowing under 16 A load. Replacing fuses with higher rated ones or shorting them is a fire that just waits to happen.

Hadn't taken that into account, thank you for saving me from burning my place down! I will use a separate mosfet + heatsink board, and probably stick a fan in there for extra safety, thanks!


text:
Filament storage?
What's the best way (outside of silica beads) to store filament sensitive to moisture? I feel like filament buried under a couple pounds of rice will stay pretty dry.
    I understand that frequently  exposing the rice to humid air will cause the rice to less effective but I would only plan on opening the container to put a new spool in and replace the old one.

What kind of filament? PLA is pretty much unaffected by moisture, ABS endures reasonably outside, Nylons need a drybox and are best printed from the box through a bowden tube into a bowden extruder with little to no exposure to air... Storage is filament dependant.

Rice isn't actually a very good desiccant. See also Gazelle’s Guide to Water Damage: The Truth About Rice, the Galaxy and Everything.

@TomvanderZanden - While rice would not be optimal (compared to silica beads), it's a lot better than nothing (even by the links you've given) and is a lot cheaper/easier to obtain. I'd agree, though, silica beads as a descant isn't all that expensive and most of the factory sealed filament packages come with a packet in them already.

Have you guys ever had a cellphone in a bag of rice? The filament would be completely covered and dusty in a container that's hardly opened. I'll have to try it out.

@ChrisManning Nothing personal, but there are much better desiccants out there. If you are hard-strapped, even Sodium Chloride (aka "salt") is better than rice. The benefit is, that salt dust - unlike rice shavings - don't contain sugar and burn in the hotend but are instead are pretty inert. look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_desiccants for other alternatives.

You might make this a proper question if you'd put the scope on "What kind of cheap, household available desiccant could be used to keep my filament dry"?

@Pᴀᴜʟsᴛᴇʀ2 Actually, it could be worse than nothing if the filament is more hygroscopic than the rice. The filament could end up pulling water out of the rice.

Anyone have any suggestions for vacuum bags? I feel like the most efficient solution is to go ahead and use the desicants with a good vacuum bag. I'm assuming it will last the longest vs a tub.

I like this question, and there isn't a specific question like this, as such, although (as Carl suggests) this answer to Any fix for PLA prints getting more brittle over time? does appear to address the issue. However, that answer addresses PLA. Is this the filament type that you are asking about?

If you don't want to use silica beads, or can't get any (it seems to be a very American thing, you can't buy any here in France except if you go through a specialized reseller), you can put them in a sealable plastic box with one of those big desiccants for rooms.
That's what I use for my Nylon and PVA from Ultimaker and it works like a charm. It keeps humidity at about 25% inside the plastic box, and I even managed to save a roll of PVA by letting rest in a box with one of these for a couple weeks.


text:
How does the auto calibration mechanism for delta printers work
I am currently building my first self designed delta printer (because the Chinese kits lack mechanical stability).
After setting up the firmware and some basic sizes (rods, z-height, ...), I tested the auto calibration method of Marlin. I was surprised, that this method came with slightly different horizontal distance values then I entered initially (~185 mm vs 190 mm).
Can someone explain what this method is actually doing, how it works in detail and how it calculates the horizontal distance, by just knowing the rod length? I have not found much more than it seems to be a "least square" method and tipping some points.

Are you sure that the Marlin bed leveling is actually adopted to the special needs of deltas? Maybe it is just doing a Cartesian bed leveling,..

Yes, it seems so. I thought there is a paper somewhere, but I haven't found it yet :/


text:
Which filaments actually do need to be stored in a drybox?
As I started to learn about 3D printing, the gist I learned was "it's better to store the filaments in a drybox." As I rechecked these notes, they were to a good degree from an era when PLA was rather new to the market and ABS was the goTo.
Then I learned "PLA is not really hygroscopic and can be stored freely."1
Now, I know some materials are pretty hygroscopic, but not all. So, let's try to pin it down:
Which materials are hygroscopic enough to demand a drybox?
I know that it is good practice to store all filament in a somewhat dehumidified or airtight box, but there are some materials out there that become unprintable and need drying before printing if improperly stored. This question is to point out these "special storage mandatory" filaments only. If a material can't be printed without dry storage it belongs here. If it is a nice to have, it doesn't.
This is a Back It Up question: answers need to provide one of two:

explain personal experience, marked as such.
provide an authoritative source (scientific paper/videos, manufacturer papers, quote from an experienced maker).

1 - For some time (month?). I do store my PLA in a closed but unsealed IKEA container with all the desiccant bags I can find as it is clearly benefitial.

Isn't this the same (or similar to) as Filament Storage?

@Greenonline While Filament Storage asks "Do I need a drybox" This is "which filaments absolutely need a drybox". Its scope is in intent not filaments like PLA or ABS that everyone has at home but those that one might want to know about to be hygroscopic before purchase.

PVA
From experience I can tell that PVA filaments need to be stored with silica beads in a plastic bag or in a specific dry-box. PVA is soluble in water and is very hygroscopic. With moisture it gets soft and swells. My Ultimaker came with an open spool of PVA which popped when heated (steam bubbles popping) resulting in very poor quality supports and clogging of the nozzle. A newly bought spool which was properly packed did not have these issues.
Nylon
Some Nylon filament brands require to be stored dry or need to be dried before printing. I have a spool of Nylon that has taken up some moisture although carefully packed, the only time it was out is when it was being printed. This experience applies to Ultimaker Nylon; I've learned now that not all Nylon filaments are behaving the same, it is suggested to look-up the specifics from the manufacturer or from reviews prior to buying.

Is this an all inclusive list?

@Pᴀᴜʟsᴛᴇʀ2 Just sharing my experience, we could make it a wiki so other people can add.

All filaments should be kept in a low-humidity, dry environment.  The OP suggests that PLA doesn't need to be dried.  My experience says otherwise.  I had miserable trouble printing with a PLA spool until I dried it in an oven at about 60 C for a couple of hours.  It then printed well.
A comment was made, and then refuted, about FDM being the same as injection molding.  I agree that, for this purpose, it is.  Both involve heating the plastic so that it softens, and neither process will work well if the filament is outgassing steam.  They both have a confined melt chamber, and steam will be pressurized with the plastic.  When the pressure is released, the expanding steam creates defects in the object.
It is true that some filaments are more hygroscopic than others, but all filaments should be treated as if they are moisture sensitive and should be stored in a dry container.

Necessary:

PVA otherwise it will become unprintable, because it is VERY hydrophilic and becomes soft, but it is dryable

Better to store boxed:

PLA otherwise it can became brittle, I have some of such PLA, it brakes from time to time if it is just loaded, but luckily it doesn't broke while printing so far.
Nylon is also hydrophilic

Generally you should google for the material you want to use and look for hydrophilic properties or other, e.g. gas releasing, properties and so on.

PEEK (polyetheretherketone) will print better if has less moisture, and should be used at under 1%.
PPSU (polyphenylsulfone) prints terribly unless it is extremely low humidity (under 0.1%), and is really only reliable when run from a drier to the print head without any exposure to "normal" humidity from the air in the room.
The point at which you have visible cosmetic issues comes at a different point than that at which you have visible structural issues, but even when no cosmetic issues are visible, there are still potential structural issues at a microscopic level.

You should ask the maker or supplier of the filament which ones really need to be stored in dryboxes and which ones are safe.
Technically, they can all benefit from being stored in dryboxes, but some can handle being left in the open more than others, so it also depends on how fast you go through your rolls of filament. If you use one roll of PLA a month, using a drybox for it is not necessary, if you use it in a year, then a drybox becomes useful.
Though, as a rule of thumb and as was pointed in previous answers, PVA absolutely needs a drybox and Nylon also benefit greatly from being stored in one.

It should be noted that the length of time will vary depending upon the humidity of the country/environment. A month could be too long in a country located in the tropics, for example.

All filaments need a drybox. Before any kind of plastic is injection molded, it has to be dry. I'd advocate a vacuum sealer. If they are not free of moisture then the water will turn to steam and cause little steam explosions inside of the nozzle. This blows the molten filament out of the nozzle causing blobs, gaps and other z scaring artifacts. This is the same thing that happens in injection molding machines. Before the plastic can be placed into the hopper the plastic pellets (of any kind) must be thoroughly dry.
I have personally noticed surface condensation on my PETG filament on a rainy day; here in the tropics. A spool of nylon filament that I have would not stop crackling and poping during the printing process. Its moisture absorption was so high that just having it outside while printing was enough to cause printing problems. The resulting part that I printed was also hydroscopic; so much so that it expands if you place it in water and shrinks after is is allowed to dry out. I had tried to make a cover for a water container with the nylon and foolishly turned the container upside down on the counter just to prove that it was a good seal. I came back a few hours later to find water all over my counter and the floor. The cap expanded, let go of the container, and all the water leaked out. It then dryed and shrunk back to the original size. This caused me much confusion as to why the water leaked out, as the cap was still fitting snugly on the top of the container when I came back to it.
The following link from "CNC Kitchen" highlights these issues in more detail.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAXUjZZER5E
In short the video says that:

Wet filament will have stringing, bubbles and substantial oozing.
Moisture can break up the long chains of the polymer changing the mechanical properties of the plastic, resulting in embrittlement.
Air bubbles end up in the printed part and result in delamination.
The surface finish of wet filament will be rough and inconsistent, requiring post processing (sanding, filling etc).

As the original comment has now been deleted, you may want to include your comment "All filaments. Before any kind of plastic is injection molded, it has to be dry. I'd advocate a vacuum sealer." in your answer (or maybe just the vacuum sealer part) - I'll leave it up to you, but I thought that I'd point out that the comment has been deleted. :-)

Some brands of PLA+ and colors of filament seem to have issues if left in the open air for too long a period.  These then need to be dried back out in a dry box.  The filament seems to be softer and the hobb seems to strip it out more easily causing print failures.  The colors I have had the most troubles with are transparent Blue, Dark Green, and silky Copper.

authors: ام وليد العلي


text:
When is kapton tape useful as a bed adhesive?
I've long since been aware that some people swear by Kapton tape as a bed adhesive, with MatterHackers claiming that Kapton tape is the recommended bed adhesive for ABS.
What makes Kapton tape so useful for printing with ABS? Is it also useful for printing with other materials?

I've had limited success with Kapton tape; I believe this is a holdover from when beds did not typically get hot enough for ABS. If your bed gets to ~80C, Aquanet (or another ultra-hold, non-lubricated hairspray) is better than Kapton tape. For the best results, use the Anycubic Ultrabase heated to 90C.

Personal experience with ABS from Ultimaker in a UM3E: use UHU glue stick, works like a charm. Kapton tape sticks way too much, is a pain to remove from the bed when it's used, and you always risk breaking your print when you try to pry it off the Kapton tape.

So I see... In that case, was Kapton tape the only option, becoming the defacto tool despite its weaknesses? What I'm hearing now is that its disadvantages outweigh its advantages.

I tested Kapton tape for PLA, ABS, PETG and XT. I know it works for other materials as well. What you need to keep in mind is that many materials only stick to Kapton tape well if you use a heated bed.
The advantage of Kapton tape in comparison to other materials is its heat endurance and mechanical stability. It protects the glass underneath, while you remove the print from the surface. Some filaments stick so well to glass that you may break chunks out of it.
The major disadvantage of Kapton tape is the time to apply the tape to the print surface and its very smooth surface pattern which seems odd in comparison to the rest of the print.


text:
What is wrong with my first layers?
I just assembled a Prusa i3 MK3 and went through the calibration process, but when I print the first layer doesn't look good and my prints come unstuck from the bed. I think it might be Z height but this was as high as I could put the probe without the paper moving on the calibration test. The layers after the first few look good but then the print either warps or comes unstuck and moves.

Use a little more temperature.

Judging by the images you posted in your question, the first layer distance is too far away from the bed for the current filament flow.
This could either be related to:

having an offset on the first layer like a height correction in the slicer,
an incorrectly levelled (read height adjusted) bed, (you did the paper test correctly, so this is probably not your problem, it is mentioned for completeness)
under-extrusion

slicer setting not correct, e.g. filament diameter or flow modifier not 100 %
incorrectly calibrated extruder

Your most likely problem is under-extrusion. It would be advised to calibrate the extruder: How do I calibrate the extruder of my printer? and check the slicer settings.

plus one edge is extra far

Is 'live-Z' adjustment relevant here? Isn't there also a built-in calibration gcode?

I used the live-z adjustment feature and set it to +0.150 and now my prints look much better.

You are running +0.150?  I am running more like -0.500.  It all depends on the position of the probe.  That live Z adjustment is important for good printing.  From the pictures, I would be inclined to make it smaller (toward zero or negative).


text:
First move after Start gcode, to start position (but before printing) is way too fast
I have a delta printer. The problem is that after the start gcode is executed and the extruder head is 15 (Pic: x0) mm above the center of the plate, the first move towards the start (x1) of the actual print is performed at (maximum possible?) speed @ infinite acceleration. After that the print is performed with regular acceleration. This can cause missing steps.
The problem seems to arise after the start gcode section. How can I fix it. I use Cura 3.5.

Start gcode
G28 ;Home
G1 F1000
G1 Z15.0
G92 E0
G1 F200 E3
G92 E0

Please post the first part of the sliced file, not only the start g-code script, please show the part up to start printing the product.

By way of comparison, here's what Cura writes as the header of a gcode file.  You may want to adjust some of the default parameters in your Cura settings.  (this header was same for both the default Prusa and the default Deltabot  printer settings)
;FLAVOR:Marlin
;TIME:67934
;Filament used: 22.2173m
;Layer height: 0.06
;Generated with Cura_SteamEngine 3.5.0
M140 S60
M105
M190 S60
M104 S200
M105
M109 S200
M82 ;absolute extrusion mode
G21 ;metric values
G90 ;absolute positioning
M82 ;set extruder to absolute mode
M107 ;start with the fan off
G28 X0 Y0 ;move X/Y to min endstops
G28 Z0 ;move Z to min endstops
G1 Z15.0 F9000 ;move the platform down 15mm
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length
G1 F200 E3 ;extrude 3mm of feed stock
G92 E0 ;zero the extruded length again
G1 F9000
;Put printing message on LCD screen
M117 Printing...
G92 E0
G1 F1500 E-6.5


text:
Hold torque during pause to change filament
How can I achieve keeping the motors active during pause to avoid moving their position during filament changes?  I have changed the filament during some prints to change the color or to change the a newer spool, but sometimes the X axis is moved during the change. I'm now using some cloth clips to prevent moving during this change.
To pause the 3D printer I'm using the LCD menu ->pause, then I go to Move axis X, then I move close to 0. This change is manually and random since I don't know when the old filament reel is going to finish. The printer use Marlin as firmware with Ramps 1.4

Please describe how you activate the pause (e.g. menu button, or from g-code). Motors should keep their power during pauses. Also post the firmware you are using.

In addition, please provide your printer make&model, and firmware if known.

Please see https://3dprinting.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/363/wouldnt-the-filament-tag-alone-suffice-for-this-question

Is ADVANCED_PAUSE_FEATURE enabled in your printers configuration_adv.h file?
There is a PAUSE_PARK_NO_STEPPER_TIMEOUT option included in there, which prevents the steppers from timing out during a pause, and may be more robust than a G-Code command if you plan to manually pause and resume the print instead of setting it up in the slicer.
Alternatively, in the same file,
#define DEFAULT_STEPPER_DEACTIVE_TIME 120
#define DISABLE_INACTIVE_X true
#define DISABLE_INACTIVE_Y true
#define DISABLE_INACTIVE_Z true  // set to false if the nozzle will fall down on your printed part when print has finished.
#define DISABLE_INACTIVE_E true

can be found. You may want to increase the DEFAULT_STEPPER_DEACTIVE_TIME, or set
#define DISABLE_INACTIVE_X true
#define DISABLE_INACTIVE_Y true
#define DISABLE_INACTIVE_Z true  // set to false if the nozzle will fall down on your printed part when print has finished.

to false to keep X, Y and Z engaged while allowing movement of the extruder stepper only.

thanks, I will use this line #define PAUSE_PARK_NO_STEPPER_TIMEOUT // Enable for XYZ steppers to stay powered on during filament change.

I have not tried this, but you could use the M84 S0 command, this prevents the motors to go into an idle state.
From the M84 G-code wiki (firmware specific!):

On Marlin, Repetier and RepRapFirmware, M84 can also be used to
  configure or disable the idle timeout. For example, M84 S10 will
  idle the stepper motors after 10 seconds of inactivity. M84 S0 will
  disable idle timeout; steppers will remain powered up regardless of
  activity.

What rests is to implement this command into your G-code file to be executed during pause. Depending on the pause method you could introduce this command. I have not tried this, but you could put the command in your start G-code and test if the motors keep powered!
Furthermore, a specific filament change command is available for specific firmware applications. This code, M600, can be used to change filament. From the Marlin documentation you can read (since you are using Marlin Firmware, you could use this G-code command):

The M600 command initiates the filament change procedure. The basic
  procedure will move the print head away from the print, eject the
  filament, wait for new filament to be inserted and the user to
  confirm, load and prime the filament, and continue with the print.
  M600 may be initiated automatically if a filament runout sensor is
  installed.

Please do note that in Marlin Firmware the M600 command is only available when the comments before //#define ADVANCED_PAUSE_FEATURE in the advanced configuration options file Configuration_adv.h are removed, hereby activating the command.

authors: Александр Николаев

authors: นราธิป กาญจนณรงค์


text:
Is a 3-D printer made from 3 CD Drives practically somewhat decent, being DIY and less expensive?
I want some indication to all the workings of 3D-Printers and the basics of design.
All links regarding DIY 3D-printer are welcomed.

Motors used in CD drives are nowhere near what you need to build a decent 3D printer.

https://www.google.com/search?q=CD+drive+3D+printer is a good place to start...

Read the Built from waste part or Something from nothing.... it might help.

I would guess that a printer made in the following way would be both poor quality, and annoyingly frustrating, as well as requiring constant tinkering/re-adjustment. Also, if the chassis of the CD/DVD drive is incorporated into the design (as below) then the print volume is rather small, given the inherent limited movement of a CD/DVD mechanism.
If the steppers are used without the CD/DVD chassis then it might be possible to increase the print volume but then you would need to spend extra on the rods and support structure for the X gantry, the Y-axis print bed, and the Z-axis movement. If you do that, then the steppers from the CD/DVD drive probably would not have sufficient torque to move the additional weight - by incorporating the CD/DVD chassis the inertia of the movement has been kept to an acceptable minimum.
By using the CD/DVD drive's stepper motors you are only really saving the cost of buying three or four actual, more powerful and useful, stepper motors (as well as the cost of the additional rods and support).
That said, it could be quite amusing to make, and show off, and also provide some satisfaction if you do manage to print a tiny frog, parts for another printer, or whatever, with it.  However, I wouldn't expect it to print anything to any great accuracy/tolerance/precision/etc., but it would maybe give you something unusual to talk about at dinner parties.

An example
There is this (IMHO unjustifiably1) popular (i.e. well linked-to) Instructables guide: EWaste 60$ 3DPrinter, which describes making a 3D printer from old desktop computer parts2.

$ 3DPrinter">

According to E-waste printer looks nice, prints really, really small, it has an awesome print volume of  37 mm x 37 mm x 18 mm.
Apparently, all you need is to salvage:

2 DVD drives (Matsushita stepper datasheet)
1 floppy disk drive (ensure it has steppers and not simple d.c. motors)
1 PC power supply

Then purchase these standard 3D printing components:

RAMPS & Arduino Mega or RepRap Gen6/7 - Capable of running Marlin/Sprinter frimware
Nema 17 stepper motor for the extruder - Either this, or better still something from RepRap Wiki - Nema 17, i.e. Kysan 1124090/42BYGH4803, Rattm 17HS8401, or Wantai 42BYGHW609.
MK7/MK8-type direct drive gear for extruder
PTFE tubing
Hotend (throat, heaterblock, nozzle)
Heater
Thermistor
Cables, female connectors, heat-shrink tube.

To make the frame, you need a 325 mm x 362 mm, 5 mm thick acrylic sheet, and use this template (missing files):

or this one (cnc-calisma-yalniz.dwg):

You will also need to 3D print these parts (the links to which have died):

Extruder idle
Extruder body
Hot end holder

Once you've gathered all of the parts required, you can then try to work through the incomplete assembly steps of the Instructables guide.

Other links

A very similar printer also made from an old DVD drive, Instructables: Curiosity 80\$ EWaste Educational 3D Printer. See also An E-waste 3D printer for every child?
A very complete, and IMHO, a much more doable E-waste printer, Instructables: Complete Newbie Step by Step, 3D Printer With All Parts Lists
Other Instructables, that I've not really looked into:

Super Cheap 3D Printer From CD-Rom Drives
Cherry- 60€ 3D-Printer
Poor Man's 3D Printer
Chimera: \$60 DLP High-Res 3D Printer
3d Printer for Less Than \$100 USD!!!
A Low Cost 3D Printer With Basic Tools

Thingiverse: \$65 3D printer made from recycled electronic waste

Footnotes
1 Most, if not all, of the links for the printer above are dead (this variant, mentioned above in Other links, is much more complete). However, with a bit of knowledge, and common sense, it should be possible to work through those omissions:

Marlin software - easy enough to find on Github
The frame laser cut - the original file is missing but an alternative is still available
The 3D printed parts for the extruder - as the links have died, you'll either need to find reasonable facsimiles on Thingiverse, which shouldn't be too hard to find, or buy them from cheap Chinese suppliers:

Extruder idle
Extruder body
Hot end holder

2 Funnily enough, whilst searching around looking for information to fill in the gaps in the above answer, I found this question on 3DP.SE: Missing print steps in e-waste 3d printer


text:
"plane Cut" on a curve
I have a cosplay prop that I am trying to cut up into pieces so I can print them out in different color filament eliminating the need for any painting (it's the Handle in Mercy's Caduceus Staff from Overwatch).  I was going along great using Meshmixer creating face groups, then generating complex, then separating complex, until a certain part where I tried to separate a part that has a hole going through the middle and smaller holes for screws (using this tutorial, YouTube - Splitting 1 STL into 4 STLs for multi-color & multi-material 3D printing with Meshmixer).  I think Meshmixer is getting confused though since the topology of the part technically meets up to itself and has what could be considered multiple joining edges.
I was able to fire up Netfabb and get something close by doing a Polygon cut, but it's not accurate enough.  It left a bunch of tiny pieces all over the place where I didn't quite get right at the vertices.
Ideally I would like to have a cutting tool exactly like the polygon cut in Netfabb but that allows you to choose actual Mesh triangle edges as your cutting edge to project through your mesh.  Anyone know if there is a piece of software that can do something like that?  I also considered attempting to "fill in the hole", separate my complexes, then Cut the hole back out, but I don't think that would work very well.
For reference, here is what the part looks like.  I'm trying to separate the green piece from the rest of it.


text:
What triggers Marlin's "Click to resume..."?
I have a long print that keeps aborting. At some random point mid-print the printer says "Click to resume...". There is nothing in the G-code that asks for user confirmation. What could it be that triggers this? I noticed that sometimes (not every time) there is a blob of plastic in the way that should not be there.
On one occasion, after the "Click to resume...", the LCD showed the message FY178.N16466 and again waited for a click.
The printer is an Anet A8 with Marlin 1.1.9. Slicer is Cura. I am printing via USB from Cura directly.
This is the error message:

Do you have an M600 color change operation in your g-code?  An M600 will cause the extruder to eject the current filament by reversing the extruder motor for a distance, like 100mm, then it displays a message like yours waiting for you to load the new filament; after you click it advances the filament and resumes printing.

@JohnDeters No, that is not in the g-code

I observed this too in 1.1.9 when a PC is connected via USB. I think this must be a bug.

I don't know if this helps but Newbie issue mentions the same issue

It appears to be a problem between Ultimaker Cura 3.4+ and Marlin Firmware 1.1.8+, where Cura sends too many M105 commands (without waiting for an OK) causing the buffer of the printer to overflow, see my updated answer.

Yes, I use Cura 3.6 already. I am now happy to say that the print lasts long enough to produce secondary problems (layer shifting, presumably due to overheating stepper drivers). I am working on it.

To answer your question directly, this action (Click to resume...) is triggered by a buffer overflow of the Marlin firmware that is caused by the repetitive sending of M105 command by Ultimaker Cura (without checking the result).
This problem is a reported problem and fixed in the next release of Ultimaker Cura (please do note that as of posting this answer, the 3.6 Beta release is available for download). It appears to be a communication problem between Ultimaker Cura 3.4+ and 1.1.8+ versions of the Marlin firmware and has to to with polling of the temperature (M105). The link above also states it is fixed in the 3.6 release (which is the next release) as the fix has been integrated in the main code base.
This describes the problem:

To update the temperatures in the monitor, Cura sends M105 pings every
  2 seconds. It seems that if this is done during a print without
  waiting for an OK from the printer, the serial buffer on the printer
  may still overflow eventually (causing Marlin to complain/pause).

and this describes the solution:

During some operations, such as preheating, the printer responds to
  new commands with echo:busy. While it is busy, it does send
  temperature messages, but these are not prepended with an ok,
  because the ok is supposed to show that a command was received and
  executed. So the two patches I wrote do the following:

the pattern matching no longer looks for ok messages, but looks for
  temperature updates (this fixes the temperature updating while the
  printer is preheating)
once the printer has said that it is busy, stop
  asking for temperature updates until the next ok is received (this
  prevents the serial buffer overflowing while preheating)

Old answer centered around the firmware (based on the text of the OP, no photo with the actual error message was added yet):
The text click to resume print cannot be found (with case insensitive search) in the latest sources of Marlin 1.1.9 down to Marlin 1.1.6. This means that you are using a different fork, an older version of Marlin or the message is not displayed as such.
The text message Resume print can be found, and is part of the message constant MSG_RESUME_PRINT
#define MSG_RESUME_PRINT                    _UxGT("Resume print")

But, this cannot be found in some sort of a concatenation using MSG_RESUME_PRINT!

This is not an answer/explanation per se, but it might help you track down the cause.

It might be worth enabling logging M928 to the SD card (ensure that the R/W tab on the SD card is set appropriately), so that (after this has happened a few times) then you can look through the log to see what the command preceding the abort was, and if it is consistently the same (sequence of) commands that cause this to happen.
M928 filename

If that doesn't throw up anything obvious, then, in conjunction with logging, you could enable debugging, see M111 Debug level. For example:
M111 S7 ; ECHO, ERRORS, INFO

Then run through the long print again. As before, after a few of the click to resume print messages, then go back and check the log for anything that might indicate why this is happening.
To subsequently disable the debugging:
M111 S0

I'm curious to know whether this error is reported, nice addition!

unfortunately, logging does not work. When executing the M928 command, it shows the filename in the display, nothing else happens. When resuming the print, manually, the printer hangs. The resulting file on the sd card is empty.

@TillB - Hmmm, that doesn't sound right...

I put the M928 into the gcode right at the beginning. Is that correct? Or should I rather put it somewhere later or send it via USB? currently it is executed right after preheating

For your information, this problem has occurred for me with Cura 3.6.0 (yesterday and 2 days ago)
I thought the problem was occurring with Marlin since 1.8.
My Marlin version is 1.3 (... just discover that because of that issue!)
As my printer works perfectly with 1.3, I'd prefer not to upgrade.
I had the 'click to resume' problem twice.
I've printed tons of ABS models without problem, two days ago, I've printed PLA models and had this issue. (70 °C 200 °C).
For sure if the problem occurs again, I'll upgrade to Marlin 1.9 (or even 2.0 even if still in beta) because it seems that you have found the problem and already solved it; I was surprised to read that it was fixed in Cura 3.6 since I had the problem with that version.
My printer is a Tevo Tarentula (modified, I've removed the pseudo bed leveling options because I prefer to level manually (no z move while printing)).
One more information is that in parallel, I've decided to print the first layer at a very low speed (adhesion problems).
I've changed from 30 mm/s (ABS with big adhesion problems) to 10 mm/s with PLA + Cura 3.6 and went into this bug (yes one could argue that I may print faster etc., but that's not the point here). Maybe I have the problem because I'm printing the 1st layer at a this slow speed (thus making the full buffer problem more critical).
The bug does not occur each time I print, even when printing the same model with same parameters...
@HuguesDug reported the same problem 14 days ago and
@Leeb answered him that running with Marlin 1.9 solved the problem.

This seems more like a bug report (or me too answer) and not an actual answer with a solution - would that be a correct analysis?

You're right Greenonline, I wanted not to bug report since I have an old version of marlin and was imho too soon to report anything without searching more by myself. More again, the bug has been 'solved' and the reason was clear to me so reporting the same bug again would have been imho a waste of time for developpers. I've edited my post few minutes ago to answer myself : upgrade to marlin 1.9 should solve the problem. If not, then I'll open a report. Anyway, feel free to remove my post if that's sounds to you as noise :-D

Me-Too reports that don't contain an answer are not what we try to strive for on the stack. Open a new question, if you have a similar problem, make an answer, if you solved your similar problem.

Thanks for providing the update. The answer makes more sense now, thanks. Also, Hi and welcome to SE.3DP, BTW. :-)

Tonight I had faced the same problem.
I've read somewhere (can't find the source now) that this is a Cura bug that has been fixed in Cura 3.6 beta

If you can find the link, that would make your answer very useful. Maybe search your browser history?

According to this page for 3.4beta, For a full rundown of bug fixes, open Ultimaker Cura 3.4 beta and navigate to Extensions > Changelog > Show changelog. The page for 3.6 beta doesn't mention much, and I can't find the full list of fixes.

@Greenonline It is an interfacing bug between Ultimaker Cura 3.4+ and 1.1.8+ Marlin, see my answer

@0scar - Ah ok, nice catch, well done :-)


text:
Ultimaker Cura not always telling extruder to retract when traveling
I'm having a problem with Ultimaker Cura (v3.4.0) where it doesn't always tell the extruder to retract when performing a travel, which causes the hotend to leave a "trail" as it's moving and not start printing again right away when the travel is over.
For example, the extruder does not retract when performing this travel (blue):

And yes, I do have "retract before outer wall" enabled....

Any ideas how to solve this?

You probably have the "Combing Mode" option under the "Travel" options enabled for each layer (All). Combing reduces print time by leaving out the retraction, but leads to ugly first and top layers by leaving "scars" on the surface. It can be disabled by excluding the bottom and top layer by changing the setting to Not in Skin or for all layers by choosing Off. The latter will increase printing time drastically!

Please note that as of version 3.5 of Ultimaker Cura the options of the combing setting have an additional setting. As of Ultimaker Cure 3.5.0 the options are named:

Off
All
Not in Skin (used to be No Skin a few versions ago)
Within Infill (new setting)

Well, the setting was hidden, but after unhiding it, it seems you were indeed correct :)

Also, is there a way to make it comb only if it has to move, say, less than 5mm?

@AndroidDev No, but there is an option if needs to retract if it is larger than 5 mm, that would make more sense (only retract on larger than x mm travels). That option is called Max Comb Distance With No Retract.


text:
How to correctly print an object with supports
I'm trying to print the following model in my Prusa printer using its Slic3r PE software.
Ferment Air Lock

In the comments of the model it says that the way to print is the with the filler opener downside to the printing board.
This is how I have it in Slic3r:

When I print it I get this horrible form and I have to stop in order to avoid waste of material.

When I look in the layers tab and then scroll up to see layer workflow I can see this:

So that means is trying to print like in the "air" something without any support.
Any clue how to print this? I'm kind of new to 3d printing.

Welcome to SE 3D Printing! It doesn't look like it's printing supports, which should be coming off of the bed. What are your support settings?

Hi, how can I see my support settings? :) Appreciate is so much

I'm not sure how you do it in Slic3r exactly. You do have to turn on support in order for it to happen. You should be able to see how to do it in this Slic3r help page.

Let me try and let you know

You need to put a check mark to enable supports in Slic3r as you cannot print in mid-air.
This option is found under "Print settings" with header name "Support settings". Please look at the Slic3r manual for more options.


text:
Knotted String as Replacement for Toothed Belt
I'm at a location where I don't have easy access to toothed belts for my printer (a RepRap Wallace). While trying to look for some solution, I saw some talk of using fishing line as a belt, along with a log of admonitions of Don't.
However, as I have easy access to fishing line, but almost no access to a toothed belt, I was thinking of using multiple strands of fishing line with regularly spaced knots to simulate a toothed belt. However, Google didn't help much with either usage or possible Gotchas.
Is there any possible issues that I may face with this solution?

There is some successful documented use of printed belts for low loaded belts. See e.g. this design.

Can't you buy reinforced GT2 belt on AliExpress or eBay and get it delivered via the post? Thailand is very expensive for parts and I just ordered everything from China, often at 20% of the price on the street.

I’m going to recommend not using a fishing line with knots.  Probably the biggest problem you’ll have using the fishing line with knots is if the knots are not perfectly spaced,  movement along the X or Y axis is not going to be consistent. This could result in weird deformations in your print.
Depending on how you tie the knots they may not grip the teeth of the gears quite well enough to prevent slippage.
Both of these issues will mean that you will not get very good quality prints assuming the print doesn’t outright fail.
You would be better off waiting to get the correct belt then attempting to use fishing line.

Fishing line will also have a lot of flex, with stretch and rebound. This, too, would cause a lot of issues in print quality.

If you are using fishing line, it would perhaps work to wrap the line around the pully and fastening it to the pully (both ends), so that the line wraps around the pully.  One side would play out from the pully while the other was wrapping around it.
By attaching the ends of the line to the pully, there will be no slippage between the line and the pully.  The knots aren't needed, and their irregularity won't affect the print quality.  The problem will be if and when the fishing line wraps tightly over itself and jams.  This can be mitigated a bit by having the two ends on opposite sides of the pully, and perhaps adding guide wires to direct the line to the proper side.
Usually, mechanisms like this involve good control of the wrapping and unwrapping, but this might work well enough to print a new pully.
Thin aircraft cable might be a good alternative to fishing line.


text:
Makerbot Smart extruder+ heat block and nozzle question
I am looking for information on the smart extruder+ heat block and nozzle?  I have looked online and from several forums come to the conclusion it is either a MK10 or MK11 assembly.  Can anyone shed some details on the heat block and nozzles.

This is probably their own design, not a MK10 or MK11. The heat block seems to have a coned extension leading up to the nozzle. Like Ultimaker, a crappy decision (I know as I have an UM3E) to sell those all in one (expensive!) cores (from the point of view from a tinkerer).

Thanks Oscar, being new to 3D printing this helped a bunch knowing I wasn't missing something or just didn't have the right search terms to the find the part.  As an engineer and tinkerer myself I just assumed they would make replacement parts or aftermarket parts like in most industries.  I am glad the replicator+ I got was free and it's a pretty decent machine.  I refuse to send the extruder back to MB every time I get a clog so I am going to buy a replacement and then modify the existing one.  When I purchase my next printer I will research how easy they are to modify!!! Thanks again

Maybe this answer is of use to you, it shows history up to MK 11

Caveat emptor: This answer is probably not what you're expecting.
As far as I can make out after looking at this un-jamming video on YouTube, where at time 00:01:24, the video shows a label that needs to be cut to open up the extruder. However, as mentioned at the end of the same video, cutting that label will void Makerbot's warranty cover on the extruder.
From that, I can make out that Makerbot will actively discourage any efforts to disseminate the kind of information you're looking for, at least until the product is discontinued. That would usually include a DMCA takedown notice to Google to remove search engine results, as well as similar takedown notices to other places where such information is hosted. I expect you will not find such information easily.

I'm not sure if this really answers the question... it doesn't seem to do so. However, it is related and interesting, and might serve better as two [sticky] comments (it won't fit in one).


text:
Is lubricating filament a good idea?
With respect to Himanshu's comment about applying a lubricant to PLA filament, and then having read the Reddit thread, Seasoning all-metal hot ends with oil?, pointed to in 0scar's answer, I was wondering if any studies have been done on the topic?
If so, what is the general consensus? From the Reddit thread it seems as if the better quality branded hotends, such as E3D do not require it, whereas the older, or less well finished clones, may well benefit from such treatment.
In addition, which oil is preferable, animal, vegetable or mineral? Is vaseline a good idea?
Also, would the advice differ if ABS filament is used, or would the same conditions apply?

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say this is probably not a good idea in any capacity.
First off, if you take a look at this list of cooking oils, you'll notice that pretty much all of them have smoke points below the printing temperature of ABS, with a handful of exceptions that have smoke points just barely above that temperature. All that means is that the hydrocarbon chains are going to break down inside your extruder, which really accomplishes nothing helpful for you. As the compounds break down further and oxidize with the small amounts of air coming into the extruder, you're going to get carbon fouling on all surfaces, including the filament itself as it extrudes.
Second, and this depends entirely on the amount of oil present, but I'd expect to see oil actually coating the filament somewhat as it comes out of the nozzle, and acting as a separating agent between the lines of filament on the print itself. I'm not sure how much you'd actually experience this, but again, best case scenario is it doesn't happen, and the oil doesn't give you any real advantage here.
Third, the process of seasoning cast iron works because the surface of the cast iron should be smooth for minimal food sticking, and any kind of rusting causes pits and porosity in the metal. Seasoning just ensures that oil stays in the metal to prevent moisture from interacting with it, and to provide a very thin oil layer that somewhat separates food from the metal until the food is hot enough that its own fats have started to lubricate it against the pan. Extruders on the other hand really shouldn't have porous surfaces nor be made of easily oxidized materials. Stainless heatbreaks, aluminum blocks, brass nozzles, all of these really aren't going to rust readily and probably won't benefit much from an oil coating.
Fourth, if you're looking for a nonstick coating for the interior of the extruder, a PTFE liner has been known to give excellent results for a very long time now. If you're printing above the temperatures PTFE can survive at, then unfortunately you're also printing above the temperatures that pretty much any cooking oil (or petroleum jelly) will survive without rapidly breaking down.
So to summarize, you're not going to find many oils that can even survive inside an extruder, and they wouldn't really give you many benefits for the duration of time that they weren't just a charcoal slurry.

W.R.T Nach0z's answer:

Third, the process of seasoning cast iron works because the surface of the cast iron should be smooth for minimal food sticking, and any kind of rusting causes pits and porosity in the metal.

You season a cast iron pan to create a carbon layer on top of the metal. Water should not be left standing in a cast iron skillet. For my 3D printers I replace the Bowden tube once a year. It cures many problems for me. I suspect that over time the filament cause abrasion in the tube that increases friction. I also do a teardown and cleaning of the extruder in the same interval.


text:
What causes ripples on part of first layer?
I'm having issues with ripples on the first layer of big flat prints. The initial corner of a big flat print is fine, but then ripples begin to form as shown in the screenshot.
I'm just a newbie, so I was thinking they might have something to do with heat or contraction or something. Normally, I use the default and print with no turbofan on the first layer. When I tried adding fan 20% or 50%, nothing much changed (slight differences in the ripple pattern and area, but that pattern varies anyway).
I also wonder if one strip gets bent, then maybe the rest just follow the bends. As far as I know, my heating plate is working fine, has no serious hot spots, and I'm using a high-quality PLA+ filament. I also tried adjusting the print temperature from 205-220 (the range on the box is 205-230). Nothing seemed to help. I am running a default first layer thickness of 0.3 mm because that is supposed to help adhesion (and adhesion is fine).
The ripples look worse than they feel. They feel fairly flat, only slightly rippled, even though they look terrible! (And I don't know what that weird row with blobs is in the top left of the picture. That only happened once; almost like junk was in the nozzle or the feed gears slipped or something).
I'm running a Qidi Xpro machine, Sunlu PLA+ (wonderful) filaments, bed 50 C, print temp 205-215, print speed 30-40 mm/s on the first layer, and first layer thickness 0.3 mm (normal layer thickness is 0.2 mm). This machine has a direct drive with gears immediately above the nozzle.
Does anyone know why this rippling effect occurs, and what I might to do to correct it? Thanks
UPDATE: I'm adding this info here to respond to several comments concerning bed leveling, etc. (Thank you to those who made comments!)
1) I'm sure that the bed is as level as I can make it because I always go through the cycle twice).
2) Regarding clearance, if anything I worry that my clearance is too small since there is a fair amount of drag on my leveling card under the nozzle. So, there is definitely drag on all three level points, about midrange between the lightest drag and the heaviest drag that makes me think I'm filing off part of the nozzle.
3) I do have two nozzles, so I suppose the problem could show up on one but not the other if the nozzles were screwed into the block to give different heights. But the ripple shows up on both nozzles, always in the middle of the build plate, always in the middle of a big flat print. Corners don't usually show ripple effects. I don't want to believe that my build plate dips in the middle on my new machine, either ... :-) Adhesion is fine on small prints in the middle of the plate.
Here is a picture of the bottom of the piece. A careful examination shows an oscillation in the squished filament segments on a filament thread. Almost like the extruder was oscillating vertically in the z-axis at that frequency, or perhaps the filament squishyness was oscillating at that frequency. Looks almost like a weave pattern, since the squished parts alternate position on alternating lines.
It's worth saying again that the piece feels pretty smooth on both the top and bottom sides, even though it looks awful. I don't know what to make of that.

I'm wondering if you are getting enough "squish" on the first layer ... this would have to do with bed leveling and how close the nozzle is to the bed for the first layer. I cannot see your image at work, but your description got me thinking along these lines.

If you screw in a new nozzle you need to re-level. I recently changed nozzles and found a difference of a few hundreds of a millimeter, just enough to get a really too thin first layer, which I easily changed by changing the Z offset with M851 and a slightly less negative Z value (as I am using an ABL sensor).

Basically the filament flow is too large for the initial layer height you had, reducing that would have had an instant effect. Your solution is equivalent, by leveling with less drag the height increases for that unchanged amount of flow. An additional Z offset would have given the same result.

The main problem is solved (first layer thickness vs leveled nozzle height).
The following image shows the problem. I was running with a default 0.3 mm first layer (the tooltip setting says a slightly thicker layer helps with adhesion). The build plate was correctly leveled with "midrange" friction on the leveling card at the leveling points.
Problem cause: The midrange leveling height put the nozzle too close to the plate and caused rippling. The first layer thickness was set to 0.3 mm and the thickness of the leveling card was 0.25 mm.
The following image illustrates the problem (and one of the solutions). The bottom right of the image shows rippling. Not knowing what else to do with the "too close" or "too far" or "unlevel" tips in the comments, I just manually lowered the build plate knobs 1/4 turn while the print was in progress. The print began in the lower right. You can see the smooth area where I manually lowered the build plate. Then, to be sure, I raised the plate by restoring the 1/4 turn on the knobs. The rippling returned.

To further explore the 0-90 degree suggestion provided by profesor79, I changed the slicer degree settings to 0-90 degrees and set the first layer thickness to 0.2 mm, which was equivalent to lowering the build plate knobs by 1/4 turn. I kept the same "midrange" friction settings when leveling. The result was a first-layer print with no rippling.

Closing Thoughts
From this experience, I think:

0.05 mm difference between a thickness of 0.3 mm on the first layer and a leveling-card nozzle height of 0.25 mm makes a rippling difference.

Using mid-range friction vs light friction on the leveling card also makes a difference. You don't need much of a height difference to reach 0.05 mm. Maybe even less is required to cause a ripple.

When printing with a first layer thickness of 0.2 mm, tolerances were tight and I discovered a spot on my build plate that had no adhesion because of a buildup of old adhesive. It left a 1/2-inch hole in the 0.2 mm-thick first layer. I also noticed just a hint of ripple in another place on the build plate, which (I think) indicates a tiny magnetic build plate thickness or warp issue of some kind. Hardly noticeable.

I think I will go forward with a 0.3 mm layer thickness to "absorb" minor flatness inconsistencies in my plate. (I have a glass plate but I have never used it because the magnetic plate is vastly more convenient.) But, to compensate for rippling effects, I will also use a "very light" friction amount when leveling the plate to ensure that the nozzle doesn't get too close to the plate on the first layer.

I found that manually adjusting the build plate height during a solid first layer print was a wonderful way to detect, see, and explore all the relationships between plate leveling, plate flatness, first layer thickness, and friction adjustments on the nozzle. It's very easy to immediately see, understand, and adjust all the related settings to get the best print possible from the machine.

Thank you again to everyone who contributed ideas to understanding the problem. It's hard to pick any particular answer because the solution involved multiple ideas, so I have added my own answer to share.

Can you explain more about "I think I will go forward with a 0.3 mm layer thickness" What layer thickness we talking here?

I used a fatter first layer (.30 vs .25) to "absorb" minor bumps in the plate.

set the first layer thickness to 0.2 mm, which was equivalent to lowering the build plate knobs by 1/4 turn this can't be right, the flow is also adjusted, so basically nothing changed, the volume per height is still the same.

First layer rippling is usually caused by a too low of a first layer height (for the amount of extruded filament).
Are you sure that:

Your bed is leveled as good as possible, and
the initial height between the nozzle and the bed is correct when Z=0 (A4 paper thickness, when moved should be giving some drag), and
the bed is flat. (This is most probably your actual problem!)

To minimize the effects, you could try to:

increase the first layer height, or
set an additional Z offset in the slicer, or
reduce the filament flow for the first layer, or
install an automatic bed leveling sensor, or
perform a manual bed levelling mesh procedure (if you have Marlin Firmware).

This usually helps fighting these ripples.

please see my updates in the original post. Yes, I have leveled as best I can and there is medium clearance drag. I want to say that "long lines" are associated with ripples, but the long lines on the outer walls never ripple. (But, they aren't laid down side by side like a flat layer is, either.)

Yes, this is a nozzle height issue with a little "over extrusion" due a high temperature and low speed. I was tired of seeing this on an uneven surface until I could set the right offset with the auto level sensor.

@FernandoBaltazar indeed, it looks like the build plate is not completely flat, thanks for the addition! Haven't we all ran into such problems at one time? :)

Yes, the aluminum plate has a little bow like 0.3mm, but I fixed using some glass cover, I was refusing to use them but is the best method for adhesion; on the change I notice that ripples or over wrapping lines but this is due an error on the Z offset between 0.04 and 0.08 mm; now prints smoothly.  I Had an extremely training for debugging 3D printers with my Own printer.

The first that I have in mind was connected with an acceleration, so you could play with it (set to half the current value and see the results)
The other source of that could be drive belt that is fiddling a little bit on the motor and idler shaft (visual check for any play on the motor/shaft)
Next one could be connected with some obstructions in the filament path (as this is direct drive, the Bowden tube could add an extra load if it was bent or spool is blocked)
As this is coreXY type printer could you set in slicer filing angles to 0deg and 90deg? That will force booth motors to run in the same time and eliminate a not holding torque on the other motor (or from other hand please check if the other motor gets some play when the head is going diagonally)

The print speed on the first layer is already slowed down to 30 mm/s (down from 40 or sometimes 50). I will try to slow it more to see what happens. Belts are tight (and it's a new machine too). Prints look good, so slack seems unlikely. Ripples show up on both nozzles and both spools on this machine, so a single-source common element to do with the print bed or settings seems more probable than one of the filament-extruder paths, I'm thinking.

@Kevin, that sounds right. Interesting case. As this is coreXY type printer could you set in slicer filing angles to 0deg and 90deg? That will force booth motors to run in the same time and eliminate a not holding torque on the other motor (or from other hand please check if the other motor gets some play when the head is going diagonally).

thank you for your suggestion - I learned something new about the ability to control first-layer print angles. I will print a test and report back. Please see the bottom image that I posted up above, with the interesting weave pattern that shows up between successive lines.

@Kevin that looks like lack of adhesion - so probably 0scar's answer is closer to the real problem.

What exactly makes you think "adhesion problem?" I guess that means my build plate has a ripple-pattern lack-of-adhesion problem? If so, then I suppose the ripple pattern should show up in the same place all the time. Now I wonder why adhesion would vary in a ripple pattern, and how a ripple pattern would get there... I have the ability to swap my magnetic blue build plate with another plate, which should absolutely have a different adhesion/wear pattern. I will test it out and report back.

@Kevin, that will be interesting to get the results of two different build plates. Waiting for that.


text:
How to set the Z home offset
I have what I thought would be a simple question.
I don't have an auto leveling probe, I do my leveling manually with 4 screws and a piece of paper (I measured the thickness to 0.1 mm).
For the longest time I would have trouble with the first layer, sometimes having to give the bed screws a quarter turn to bring the bed up a bit. I would see that the nozzle seemed quite far away from the bed. This went on for the longest time and I just chalked it up to the quality of my printer.
I realized recently that when I level the bed, I am inserting a piece of paper in between the nozzle and the bed. Obviously, I should be taking the thickness into account as a 0.1mm thick piece of paper accounts for 50 % higher than the nozzle should be for a 0.2 mm first layer height.
My question is, how do I set (either in Cura or directly in Marlin config) the z home offset to account for the 0.1 mm thickness of my calibration paper?

It is preferred to get the distance correct by hardware changes (leveling screws). But it is possible to do it with software. You can not only change the Z offset in the slicer or in the configuration of Marlin, but also with G-code commands.
The "paper drag" method is perfect for determining the correct Z level. Once you leveled with the paper, you do not need to create an offset to account for the paper thickness, however, there are purists that do that. So basically, what we call Z=0 is in fact Z="paper thickness", unless you are a purist. But a slightly larger gap makes printing much easier. Too small heights cause e.g. rippling effects or too much pressure build-up in the nozzle. In order to change your offset after leveling, you could try one of the following methods. This is sometimes a useful method for creating a little extra offset for printing PETG, but personally I do not do that.
In Ultimaker Cura:
Open the plugin manager ("Toolbox"->"Browse packages...") and install "Z Offset Setting", a new parameter will be available in the "Build Plate Adhesion" settings menu called "Z Offset". (See also this older, not up-to-date answer)
In Marlin configuration file, modify the MANUAL_Z_HOME_POS constant:
//#define MANUAL_Z_HOME_POS 0

In G-code:
By adding the following lines to your start G-code (see e.g. this answer) using the G92 G-code command:
G0 Z0.2 ; Move the head to 0.2 mm (so now 0.3 on your machine)
G92 Z0  ; Call this Z = 0

or when you are able to connect to the printer over USB using a printer terminal (e.g. Pronterface, Repetier or OctoPrint) using the M206 G-code command:

Use M206 to apply a persistent offset to the native home position and coordinate space. This effectively shifts the coordinate space in the negative direction.

M206 Z-0.2 ; Will raise the Z height by 0.2 mm
M500       ; Stores the offset in memory

Alternatively, when you cannot connect through a terminal, putting the last 2 lines in a text file and saving that as a .gcode file on an SD card and "printing" the file will also store the new offset (if M500 is enabled in the configuration file: #define EEPROM_SETTINGS // Enable for M500 and M501 commands)

I had seen the plugin for cura but it felt hacky to me especially since this seems like it would be a universal requirement for everyone without auto bed leveling. Is this what everyone else does??

@MatthewGoulart Preferred solution is to correctly level the bed from a hardware point of view (what most people do). From the software solutions I prefer the M206 / M500 as this stores this for all models you print. If you do it in the slicer or startcode, you need to remmeber that, e.g. when you change slicer.

Sorry if this question has an obvious answer, but how would you level it on a hardware level? Are you saying I give the screws an extra 1/8 of a turn after leveling with the paper?

When you say "Once you leveled with the paper, you do not need to create an offset to account for the paper thickness" are you implying that most people just ignore the offset introduced by the paper? Are you saying I should just not take it into account?

@MatthewGoulart - Yeah, just ignore it. The paper width is your zero starting point.

Based on Oscar's solution using M206, I found it convenient to add in my MicroSD card a hierarchy of such gcode files to set the Z offset to every possible value in some range. For example, "printing" the file z_offset/1mm/1mm2/1mm275.gcode will set (permanently) the Z offset to 1.275 millimeters.
This hack is a workaround to the lack of Z offset setting in the printer's menu, and is an alternative to "hardware" Z tuning by moving the endstop. It can be useful when using different build plates with varying thickness, or attaching a pen or any other tool to the print head.
Here is a simple bash script which creates the files taking the MicroSD card location as argument:
#!/bin/bash -e

mkdir $1/z_offset

for i in {9..0}
do
    mkdir $1/z_offset/"$i"mm
    for j in {9..0}
    do
        mkdir $1/z_offset/"$i"mm/"$i"mm"$j"
        for d in 00 25 50 75
        do
            echo -e \
                 M206 Z-$i.$j$d\\nM500\\nM117 Z-offset="$i"."$j$d"mm \
                 >$1/z_offset/"$i"mm/"$i"mm"$j"/"$i"mm"$j$d".gcode
        done
    done
done

I chose a 0.025mm resolution, as 0.1mm is slightly to coarse to adjust for first layer issues. Tested successfully on a Creality Ender 3 printer (which seems to have a 0.015mm resolution on the Z-axis).

Assuming you already know your Z-offset value, there are several ways to set Z-offset for your printer:

on printer's display
On the printer's LCD, navigate to Control > Motion > Z Offset. Here you can set the Z-Offset value. Next, navigate to Control > Store settings to store this offset permanently to EEPROM.
The location of this setting may vary depending on the printer and firmware, but it is usually located in the Control section.

in slicer
Z-offset value can be set in slicer, from where it will be added at the beginning of each generated G-code file.

PrusaSlicer
Navigate to Printer Settings > Size and coordinates > Z offset. Requires an advanced view mode.

SuperSlicer
Navigate to Printer Settings > Size and coordinates > Z offset. Requires an expert view mode.

Cura
Navigate to Print settings > Build Plate Adhesion > Z Offset. Requires Z Offset Setting plugin installed.

in G-code
It can be set with M851 command, followed by M500 to store it in the EEPROM. For example:

   M851 Z-0.69;
   M500;

in firmware
In Configuration.h, find NOZZLE_TO_PROBE_OFFSET and set third parameter (Z-offset):

    #define NOZZLE_TO_PROBE_OFFSET {
       -53.5,   // X-offset
       8,       // Y-offset
       -0.69 }  // Z-offset <-- set it here

I usually set it via printer's display, since it seems like the fastest and most practical way.

You don't! Level the bed such that you know the nozzle is above the bed. Stop the print. Disable the steppers. Let it all cool down. Tram the bed (or what you call level). Then start the print again. It doesn't matter what first layer height your slicer thinks it is. All that matters is that it sticks and doesn't elephant foot. Note, if you are using glue stick or white glue (like I do) the thickness of the glue layer will be different between the edge of the glass (I assume you're using glass, otherwise you're never going to get a good tram) and the starting position of the prints.


text:
Monoprice maker select v2 doesn't extrude but is not clogged
So I have been printing lately, and got a new spool of filament. It will extrude when I pre-heat the nozzle and manually extrude it, however when I start to print, it doesn't extrude any filament. Sometimes it works with different filament, but not always. How can I fix this?

Welcome to SE 3D Printing! Are you saying when you engage the extruder motor manually it pushes filament out, yet, when you try to do it through the print, you don't get anything? Or when you are saying "manually extrude it" you are physically pushing the filament out through the nozzle?

I am using the motor to extrude it manually

This is probably not enough information to help you. You need to add how you slice a file, add maybe a link to it or the first 20 lines. Does the extruder motor rotte at all?

The temperature is correct, and i slice it using Cura. The motor does rotate, but doesn't extrude.

When you add information, you need to update the question using [edit], not the comments. Comments are for others to request for information or remark. This is not a forum, SE sites work differently. Please take the [tour] and read [ask].

Any T-command in your gcode?

Try advancing the extruder manually using the control interface. Extrude about 10 cm of filament to verify that everything is OK with the machine.
Is the filament curling on the way out of the nozzle? If so then there may really be a clog and you should clean it. Invest in some cleaning filament as well.
The idler bearing may not be pushing down on the filament tightly enough. Check that the spring which holds it in place has not become soft or broken.
The drive gear could be dirty. Plastic particle build up on the gear will cause it to slip. Clean the drive gear to remove all plastic build up.

Outside of this you could have a mechanical problem with extruder. Advance the motor using the control system (without filament installed) to verify that it is working properly.


text:
PTFE pulled into extruder gears
I have a Tevo Tarantula, the problem is that PTFE is getting pulled back to the extruder gears and stopping filament extrusion, do you know how to solve this?
Image:

One hypothesis I have is that there is a cooling problem in the hot end while a retraction is made, causing the extruder motor to pull the PTFE in it.
Suggestions appreciated!

To be clear, which PTFE tube you are talking about? The one on top or the one in the heatbreak near the nozzle? You are talking about pulled back, so that suggests the PTFE liner in the heat break, the upper PTFE (Bowden tube) is pulled forward.

You are probably right, I have a Tarantula as well, and this happened many times to me. The reason is mostly because the hotend fan gets too hot, stops working, then, the filament in the aluminium heat sink melts and sticks the filament inside the PTFE tube. Then, on the retraction, the PTFE is pulled into the gears just like on your picture. Also, the filament stops getting extruded a few moments later.
One solution for that was to buy a new PTFE tube with a pneumatic connector that doesn't allow it to slide into the gears. However, the diameter of the screw thread (of the one that I bought) was too large, so I had to design a new static block for the extruder to fit it.
I chose this type of 1mm PTFE teflon tubing from aliexpress for my replacement.
Maybe you can find a pneumatic connector with the proper diameter.
However the real solution is to check why the heat sink is getting too hot. I bought a few other fans and printed an additional support for them on the hotend and I am making sure the fan stays on all the time.
I hope it helps!

good answer. there is to chance to get hot filiament in default Bowden setup. The provided fitting is just a bad quality - so need to be replaced. I also was cutting down the PTFE to allow a better grip

Just a little make it nice, and nice it is!


text:
Print "hairs" without support in GrabCAD Print
I have a part with hair strands, such as the Hairy Lion on Thingiverse, and I want to print it on a Stratasys F370. The thin strands are intended to print without support, bridging to the exterior wall. Although the bridges are quite long, it doesn't matter if they sag, because they will be heat-treated afterwards.

But when I open the STL file in GrabCAD Print, the slicer gets over-protective of those long bridges, and inserts soluble support for every one. As well as being a huge waste of support material, it would take ages to dissolve out all of that support, and it's completely unnecessary. However, there are other parts of the model that overhang and do need support, so I can't just disable support completely.
How can I avoid supporting these bridges?

There's no way to do this in GrabCAD Print alone, but you can achieve it using Insight, which you can reach from the Apps menu in Print. The steps are as follows:

Open your STL file in Insight.
Go to Modelers → Setup… and set the printer, layer height, and material to the same as in Print. If you get these wrong, you won't find out until you get to the end and Print refuses to print the part.
Use one of the red icons to slice your print, with or without the wall thickness filter.
Use the red and green icon to generate support. You'll notice all of your hairs are now supported.
Go to View → Display options…. Set View only to Group curves, and then Group to view to All support. This filters out the (red) model curves, showing only the (green) support curves.
Go to Edit → Delete…. Then left-click and drag a box around the unnecessary supports. For my part, dragging the 3D view to be top-down made it easy to drag a box around just the hair supports while leaving the other supports untouched, but it'll depend on the shape of your part.
In the right panel, make sure the delete mode is set to Curves, and click OK. Now all your supports should be gone. At this stage you can set the display options back how they were if you want to inspect your model further.
Use the green circle icon to create toolpaths
File → Save As… → Toolpath to save as a .cmb or .cmb.gz file.
Go back to GrabCAD Print. (You can close Insight now if you want.)
File → Import CMB and choose the file you just saved.

CMB files show up very boxy on the tray view (and Print will display a warning about that), but if you go into slice preview mode, you should see it as it was in Insight, with just the right supports.
There's one caveat with this method. The slicer generates the base as a single contour, so deleting the supports under the hairs doesn't remove that section of base, and AFAIK you can't make the slicer recompute just the base (so generating support again would put the original supports back). You could edit the base contour before step 8, or disable the base completely in the support options before step 4, but the amount of support material saved probably isn't worth the effort.

authors: สําราญ วรพุด