![]() Since the software only knows about the steps and thinks they correspond one-to-one to a distance change, it tells me that the z-offset is larger that it actually is. When the motor has to work against the spring to push the nozzle down, the slight flexibility in the belt means that it has to do more steps to get to the build plate. This is what happened with the calibration. ![]() Increase by 0.1 for example, the way Cetus Studio does. This is not a problem if the load on the belt is constant, but when the load changes, the height will not follow the steps of the motor one-to-one any more. M206 X-180 offset X axis so the coordinates are 0.180 M206 Z-182.3 nozzle offset (TUNE before using) G1 X90 Y90 F5500 G1 Z0.0 F5500 You start with a nozzle offset you know is definitely clear of the plate, then slowly approach the plate. At least the z-axis moves a little bit up and down when pushing or pulling on it. The z-axis belt seems to be slightly flexible. And it is easy to see why that is happening. When calibrating the nozzle height with the spring installed, I got considerably larger values for the z-offset than without it. This is when I noticed that the spring approach might not work after all. Fortunately it stuck on the left side and the print was finished and produced a usable (albeit lightly skewed) spring. This reduced the adhesion and the raft peeled off on the right side of the print. The z-axis could not reach the position it wanted to and the first layer was extruded at a too high position. ![]() I forgot to remove nr 3 before starting the print of nr 4. While printing nr 4, it also became obvious why this parameter had to be tuned: It took me until iteration 4 to get the height just about right. The nozzle could no longer reach the build plate. The first iteration already seemed promising, but it was too high. So I designed a plastic spring in Fusion 360 and got printing: The spring would probably not be able to stop the thing completely before the nozzle touches the build plate if the z-axis fell from the top position, but a decelerated impact would be better than a full speed one. In normal operation, the z-axis would push the spring down to build the first centimetre of the prints. My first idea was to print some sort of spring mechanism that would catch the y-axis when it comes crashing down. Also it is much more fun to design your own solution. I would like to avoid any manual locking or unlocking. When the z-axis is locked, it needs to be released manually when one wants to start a new print. This is done either manually or when the z-axis reaches a certain height. Trial 4: Printed with UpStudio, very precise raft, nice bottom finish, 9.There are already a few designs out there that deal with this problem, but they usually just lock the z-axis completely. Trial 2: Flow 1500: most nearest size 10-10.1mm Trial 1: Flow 1000: very nice almost flexible raft, cylinder is 9:8mm Structure collapses on its own as its mostly air Under custom print setup, enable Flow rate setting under materials (via Settings visibility), tried with 80% infil.įailure 1, no flow adjustment with default 100%: nozzle moves, but the filament barely comes out. G1 X50 E360 F300 extrude a 5cm purge line G1 X2 Y178 F5000 move to back right corner ![]() M206 X-180 offset X axis so the coordinates are 0.180, normally they are -180.0 ![]() M206 Z-183.4 offset Z axis so the bed is at Z0, without this, the bed is at Z-180 UpStudio paper levelling gets me 182.4 with No.7 point at 0 offset Once gcode tuned, I tried printing a a10mm wide 10mm high cylinder, and tried various flow rates to get most accurate dimensions. I followed suggestions from eXXPiI - reddit and cmeyer - cetus3d forum and created my own Cura setup. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |