MiffMaster

@clicky, I put this thread in chatter as I do not intend to share any specifics/instructions/code here. It is more of a heads up, and what to expect in a not too far future

That said, it is most definitely my intention to share this. Though, there are a few bits and pieces I which to finish up first. Most notably the part where basic settings…[Read more]

@clicky, I do not believe the bridge difference is due to material, but rather that @bhudson has not applied the bridge fix I am using. You see, my bridges used to look like BHudsons .

@biscuitlad, I think you are right. It is more like 3p for my bridges. I was reading this (drooping of less that 2mm is acceptable) as a general rule for the…[Read more]

@clicky, No it is 3 year old PLA that my Rostock did not like.

I have also printed the test pieces. At this point I give my Robox 20/29p

Accuracy: 3 p - Would be a 4p if I had compensated for shrinkage. Also, I printed each piece separately. So no time for the thin top part to cool between layers.

Bridges: 4 p - Using normal profile WITH my bridge fix!

Overhang: 3 p

Clarence: 3 p

Retraction: 3 p - I…[Read more]

@i3randon, I am basically running at stock settings. No change to the material profile. Draft setting - unchanged, Fine setting - only line 21: = (0.3,0.8). For normal it is a bit more involved. But you can get the full explanation in the link I posted just above your post.
I have also done nozzle height calibration and nozzle offset. However,…[Read more]

I remember that there was a change in how AM loads/stores project. If the version you had was before this change, and you loaded a model when checking it out. This could be causing the problem. So look in your Home folder. I believe there should be a “CEL Robox” folder there. And in it there will be a “Projects” folder. Delete all files in there…[Read more]

Might also be a problem with the temperature sensor. If it reports a lower value than it really is, the head will become much too hot and burn the filament. This would also explain why it takes longer than usual. As heating to a higher actual temperature will take longer, and naturally slow down the hotter it gets.

Could be dangerous.

@clicky, @pelgrim, No, comments are definitely not suitable for this. The approach of (extrusion/travel) and possibly some detection for fine details (only relying on the actual G-code) is much more robust. This would also allow for any slicer that can produce the correct flavor of G-code to be used.

@clicky, No I was referring to the specific issue of when to use the small vs. the large nozzle. Right now, AM relies on the verbose comments by Slic3r saying either “perimeter” or “fill”. This approach seem to work for all but bridging operations. Though AM already calculates the distance traveled and the amount of material extruded for each move…[Read more]

@clicky, Yes this Slic3r feature of calling a script might become very handy. It seem to be able to execute most anything, and even more than one script. So you could have several different scrips, each taking care of a particular issue. Also, thanks to the robox profile system, you can have different profiles that use specific sets of scripts…[Read more]

@wellander, I have not really notices this behavior. However, some times the Robox will perform a “wipe” move (e.g. in preparation off nozzle switch and possibly also when done with a layer, while closing the nozzle). Maybe this is what is happening?

Ops, the reg file above is for Python v3.3 - current version is v3.4. So use this reg file for Python v3.4 (only Windows).

…I finally managed to enter a link the way it was meant

@biscuitlad, Regarding the code size increase… Apart from the necessary start/finnish, nozzle switching, valve opening/closing and wiping, the AM post processor also ads a LOT of comments. These are probably used during post processing. But does nothing for the printer, and could have been stripped out when post processing was done.

I have created a fix for bridges when printing in normal. See this thread http://www.cel-robox.com/forums/topic/bridges-how-to-make-them-work/

Good luck.

@biscuitlad The top layer is unaffected in both draft and fine. Using the fine setting, it print a fantastic top layer. Almost as smooth as the bottom layer.

Seems it is not possible to edit ones posts forever. Anyway, here is the images for my previous post here.

Nozzle size setting

Solution for the bridge problem. I will upload some images later and update this post with the link.

Began by taking copies of all three default profiles. Then in the “fine” profile, I changed the bridge_flow_ratio from 1 to 0.5. This helped a bit. But then I spotted something else. There seem to be an error in the default profiles (all three…[Read more]

And for the settings.

- Nozzle height. To get to this setting look under [Status]>[Maintenance]>[Calibrate Nozzle Height]. It is a bit misleading, because when you click on it you get to a page which offer you the options of [Adjust Nozzle Offset] <=(the one you want) and [Recalibrate].

Right now mine are set to 0.22 for the small, and 0.31 for…[Read more]