Question: Is it possible to 3D print a QR code? or to engrave it using a 3D printer? I tried to convert it to individual boxes but that takes too long and is very inaccurate. Is there a better way?

Answer:
From the excellent Thingiverse link,
Customizable QR Keyring or Tag
by
OutwardB
- which was provided in the (now deleted)
link-only answer
:
Create the QR code
Go to
QRCode Monkey
Only change the Content settings
DO NOT change the color, logo or design settings
Click
Create QR Code
Click
Download PNG
and wait for the file to download
Convert to SVG
Go to
PNG to SVG Converter
and convert the PNG image you just downloaded to a .SVG file
Customise in OpenSCAD
You will need
```
QR_Code_Customizer_V01_2.scad
```
from the
files
repository on Thingverse
Download OpenSCAD from here and install it -
https://openscad.org/downloads.html
Put the downloaded SVG file in the same folder as the .SCAD file from this page
Double-click the .SCAD file to open it
Click
Window
, then untick
Hide Customizer
Optional
: Click
Window
, then tick
Hide Editor
Enter the SVG file name in the basic settings tab (or rename the file to qr-code.svg before opening OpenSCAD)
Customize the settings. After changing a setting, you may need to click outside the text box to apply the change
Click
Design
>
Render
and wait for the design to render
Click
File
>
Export
>
Export to STL
Save the file
Notes
Raised
and
Cut-Out
types are for changing filament at layer height
Multi-color
and
Code
are to be used together for inlay/multi-color printers
You can also set
Base Height
or
Code Height
to 0 and export each part on it's own
If you want to print a
double sided tag
, you can set
Base Height
to 0 and export the second side. Then just flip this over in
the slicer
The text options are a okay for basic text, but if you want to use another program to add some, you can add extra height to the
top/bottom of the card under
Extra Size Setting
Advanced Notes
There is some logic in the script that stop you from making the size too small if you have Line Size set, you can set Line Size to 0
or half your line size value if you really want to override this.
You can change the Customize Design settings before generating the QR Code (on
QRCode Monkey
), but you'll need to set Line Size to 0
and there are no promises that it'll print well
If you want to use a different site to create the QR code, resize the image to 1147x1147 pixels before converting it to an SVG. Or if
the QR code in the image doesn't have a border, resize it to 1000x1000
px.
If you want to use a different source for the SVG file, there are instructions for working out the size in the code
(
```
QR_Code_Customizer_V01_2.scad
```
) at line 215. You'll need to
export it as a STL and measure it outside of OpenSCAD, then enter the
values into the script.
The linked to Thingiverse page also has some extra steps for adding an icon:
Add an icon
You can import another SVG file as a logo or use logo fonts.
The below example uses an
wifi SVG file
from IconMonstr
Download the wifi SVG file
Place it in the same folder as the .SCAD file
In the customizer:
Add some extra space to the top or bottom of the card under
Extra Size Settings
Go to SVG Logo Settings
Tick
enable svg logo
Enter the filename under
svg logo name
Set the
svg y nudge
position and
svg logo scale


Question:
If you are printing an object that has a base (A statue or trophy, for example), and presuming that you have already optimized every other setting: which shape of base would give you the best and most consistent bed adhesion when using PLA on the widest range of printers (For example, if you're putting it up on a site for anybody to download)?

For example:

A square base that is thin at the edges and thick in the middle, and slopes upwards in the center, like a pyramid.

A circular base that is thin at the edges and thick in the middle, like a dome

A flat thick square.

A flat thick circle

Is a shape with corners better, or a shape with no corners like a disc or a fried egg?

Do sloping sides make a difference, or general thickness?

Answer:
From the excellent Thingiverse link,
Customizable QR Keyring or Tag
by
OutwardB
- which was provided in the (now deleted)
link-only answer
:
Create the QR code
Go to
QRCode Monkey
Only change the Content settings
DO NOT change the color, logo or design settings
Click
Create QR Code
Click
Download PNG
and wait for the file to download
Convert to SVG
Go to
PNG to SVG Converter
and convert the PNG image you just downloaded to a .SVG file
Customise in OpenSCAD
You will need
```
QR_Code_Customizer_V01_2.scad
```
from the
files
repository on Thingverse
Download OpenSCAD from here and install it -
https://openscad.org/downloads.html
Put the downloaded SVG file in the same folder as the .SCAD file from this page
Double-click the .SCAD file to open it
Click
Window
, then untick
Hide Customizer
Optional
: Click
Window
, then tick
Hide Editor
Enter the SVG file name in the basic settings tab (or rename the file to qr-code.svg before opening OpenSCAD)
Customize the settings. After changing a setting, you may need to click outside the text box to apply the change
Click
Design
>
Render
and wait for the design to render
Click
File
>
Export
>
Export to STL
Save the file
Notes
Raised
and
Cut-Out
types are for changing filament at layer height
Multi-color
and
Code
are to be used together for inlay/multi-color printers
You can also set
Base Height
or
Code Height
to 0 and export each part on it's own
If you want to print a
double sided tag
, you can set
Base Height
to 0 and export the second side. Then just flip this over in
the slicer
The text options are a okay for basic text, but if you want to use another program to add some, you can add extra height to the
top/bottom of the card under
Extra Size Setting
Advanced Notes
There is some logic in the script that stop you from making the size too small if you have Line Size set, you can set Line Size to 0
or half your line size value if you really want to override this.
You can change the Customize Design settings before generating the QR Code (on
QRCode Monkey
), but you'll need to set Line Size to 0
and there are no promises that it'll print well
If you want to use a different site to create the QR code, resize the image to 1147x1147 pixels before converting it to an SVG. Or if
the QR code in the image doesn't have a border, resize it to 1000x1000
px.
If you want to use a different source for the SVG file, there are instructions for working out the size in the code
(
```
QR_Code_Customizer_V01_2.scad
```
) at line 215. You'll need to
export it as a STL and measure it outside of OpenSCAD, then enter the
values into the script.
The linked to Thingiverse page also has some extra steps for adding an icon:
Add an icon
You can import another SVG file as a logo or use logo fonts.
The below example uses an
wifi SVG file
from IconMonstr
Download the wifi SVG file
Place it in the same folder as the .SCAD file
In the customizer:
Add some extra space to the top or bottom of the card under
Extra Size Settings
Go to SVG Logo Settings
Tick
enable svg logo
Enter the filename under
svg logo name
Set the
svg y nudge
position and
svg logo scale


Question:
I'm struggling to find the name of a connector I just broke, so I can order a new one.

It's a six pin nylon terminal, that plugs into a set of header pins on a stepper motor.

What do I search for to find these?! Also, how would I go about finding something like this in the future? I seem to struggle to find connectors.

Answer:
In an attempt to salvage my (sadly) previously incorrect answer (at the bottom),
and
to add to
anttix's superlative answer
, here is a quote from
Stepper cable for MKS Boards pinout
, which clearly shows the difference - locking and non-locking, and pitch difference (note the thickness of the plastic between each individual pin socket) - in the two plugs:
This pinout information will help you to use our 1 meter stepper
cables correctly. Cable was made to be compatible with 6-pin JST
connectors on NEMA 17 stepper on one side and 4-pin JST connector on
other side. These cables are compatible with MKS BASE and MKS Gen
boards that we sell in our store.
For compatibility with Anet board you will need to swap 2 wires - RED
and BLUE on the 4 pin board side connector.
Whilst they aren't labeled
PH
and
XH
, it is pretty safe to assume that:
For the control board, the
4 pin
female connector
on the
left
is the
XH
, and;
For the stepper motor, the
6 pin
female connector
on the
right
is
PH
.
The
mattmillan.com
link in anttix's answer, whilst informative, unfortunately doesn't show both sides of the 4 or 6 pin connector.
For the sake of completeness, but at the risk of going
off-topic
, the connector to the printer controller board is often a DuPont, and not a JST,
particularly in
, but not limited to, Arduino (Atmel/AVR based) boards.
From the same website, this page
Stepper cable for RAMPS pinout
, shows the DuPont connector to the control board and the JST-PH-6P connector to the stepper motor (I've not fixed the typos in the quoted text):
This pinout information will help you to use our 1 meter stepper
cables correctly. Cable was made to be compatible with 6-pin JST
connectors on NEMA 17 stepper on one side and RAMPS board connector
(also called dupont connector) on other side. Main feature of RAMPS
stepper header and this cable is that you can reverse stepper
direction by turning connector on RAMPS 180 degree.
This cable is aslo compatible with CNC V3 shields for Arduino UNO and
other electronic boards for 3D Printers and CNC control. Please
observe the following piut diagram to make sure that your particular
electronic board is compatible.
Note
: I'm not promoting this particular website, it just so happens that they have the best comparison photos.
Maybe
It is most likely
not
... JST XH 2.54 6 pin female
and the reverse side, showing the locking, with the male PCB connector


Question: Is there such thing as a 3D printer with a very large diameter nozzle, that can make low fidelity, large and fast prints? I'm picturing a soft serve ice-cream machine on a gantry, with a hopper.  You feed it shredded plastic, and it prints bricks, or boards.

Answer:
You can certainly get large nozzles, but the material for extrusion still needs to be consistent.  So any chunked plastic would have to be melted and that will produce an erratic flow at the extruder.
By reforming your shredded plastic into a consistent string of filament, then the printer has a steady supply of material to use.  There are already filament extruders for the small shop, but they're still expensive for the home user.  The main problems are getting consistent thickness of filament, and minimising contaminants.  Also colours tend to be lost and muddied.  These might be economical if you have a print farm and are consuming a spool a day on average.
On a large scale, there are "3d printers" that can place a special quick-drying concrete and produce small buildings as homes in a matter of days.  However they're fed a special mixture of smooth cement and accelerators to set the concrete ready for the next layer.


Question:
Will a 3D scanner capture internal details within an enclosure?

I'm contemplating buying a 3D scanner, but they're pretty expensive so I'm looking for advice on whether they will actually be useful for the projects I have in mind. So with the picture below as an example, could I expect to generate a usable STL file by scanning this?

Answer:
You can certainly get large nozzles, but the material for extrusion still needs to be consistent.  So any chunked plastic would have to be melted and that will produce an erratic flow at the extruder.
By reforming your shredded plastic into a consistent string of filament, then the printer has a steady supply of material to use.  There are already filament extruders for the small shop, but they're still expensive for the home user.  The main problems are getting consistent thickness of filament, and minimising contaminants.  Also colours tend to be lost and muddied.  These might be economical if you have a print farm and are consuming a spool a day on average.
On a large scale, there are "3d printers" that can place a special quick-drying concrete and produce small buildings as homes in a matter of days.  However they're fed a special mixture of smooth cement and accelerators to set the concrete ready for the next layer.


Question: I thought I am not bad at Google, but simply I am unable to find a G-code for doing circular motion for nozzle cleaning. It is possible to write a simple circular motion in G-code?

Answer:
To draw a circle, you need to approximate the circle as a sufficient number of line segments. This requires computing or using a table of sine and cosine values for each angle step. Then you just emit a sequence of
```
G1
```
commands.
Some printer firmware also supports arc drawing commands you could use instead in principle, but support is not widespread, and the quality of the results varies enough that I would not recommend trying to do it this way.


Question:
I'm trying to print large objects (around 1 meter squared) with polycarbonate pellets. The problem is sometimes the print cracks. It is not due to delamination as it is a shear crack across multiple layers. I know the ideal scenario is to have a heated enclosure but I cannot do that due to the size. Any suggestions?

I am using a robotic arm (KUKA KR360) with a custom extruder. That is why I can't build the enclosure. As for the temperature, they are 230 to 260 °C. Nozzle is 10 mm.

I like the idea of directed heat. I might try that.

Answer:
Printing polycarbonate requires a high end 3D printer that is suitable for the task.
From
Simplify3d support
we learn that:
... requires very high temperatures for printing and will
exhibit layer separation if printed at too low of a temperature or with excessive cooling enabled
. Polycarbonate is frequently
best printed on a machine that has an enclosed build volume
and is capable of handling high bed and extruder temperatures.
High temperatures and enclosed build volume are key to print polycarbonate without cracking or delamination.
Any suggestions?
Note that NASA has successfully printed ULTEM (even higher temperatures needed)
using open source hardware
. They have used infrared lamps directed at the build plate, this may be an option if a full enclosure is not possible. Also people seem to get good results with draft shields for printing ABS on non enclosed printers. Key is that a constant elevated temperature is created near the print, whether that works for such a large size remains to be seen. Best solution would be enclosing the printer.


Question:
I want to put in a date and serial number that would be difficult to erase or change. Is it better to print in the number or engrave it in with a laser engraver.

Material will be anti-bacterial PLA.

It will be on free masks donated to schools, I want to make sure we can identify them when they show up at the market or in shops.

Answer:
It's plastic. Nothing is difficult to remove, but it could be difficult to remove without damaging the functionality of visual quality of the part. If you want to be really devious, you could embed the serial number in an inaccessible cavity
inside the print
that's not visible without breaking it open.
However, I wonder if it would make more sense to drop this. If you're worried about students (?) or educators (?) stealing and reselling these items, does having a way to trace and punish them really benefit anyone? Even before you consider the harms from doing so, isn't the effort spent tracing (and even the effort automating generation of STLs with each serial number and slicing each one to print individually, rather than using a single gcode job) greater than the value of the item you're worried about losing?


Question:
A 3D printer needs to be homed (homing) before the print starts.

What is homing?

What is the purpose of homing?

Is it necessary?

Answer:
What is homing?
From the
tag wiki
homing
we can read:
The process of determining the location of a 3D printer nozzle in
three dimension using a reference point (home location) is referred to
as "homing". Homing should occur before every print and involves
bringing the X, Y and Z-Axis motors to pre-defined limit locations
(usually these are endstops). Pre-recorded homing data offset values
determine the position of the build plate origin with respect to the
endstop locations.
What is the purpose of homing?
So, homing is defining the printer coordinate system location with respect to a reference location we call "home". Why? The controller board or steppers have no memory for storing their position and could have been manually moved. Once the axes have "seen" there reference location, the printer will remember to refer all movements in respect to this point (this may include offset values to get to the origin of the printer (see
How to center my prints on the build platform? (Re-calibrate homing offset)
). Note, if a problem occurs where e.g. the nozzle hits the bed or print object, the nozzle may be out of sync with the reference point. Such an anomaly is e.g. layer shifting which occurs on open-loop stepper movement (servo steppers have feedback to prevent this from happening, but these are more expensive). The purpose of homing is to set a reference so that your sliced objects can be printed at the correct location within the printer print volume. If correctly configured, and no problems like layer shifting occur, the benefit is that proper homing prevent the machine to print within the limits of the printer.
Is it necessary?
Strictly speaking, no, it is not necessary. But if you do not automatically set a reference for each axis, you would need to manually provide a position to start from. This can work just as well, but the use of end stops automate the procedure so that it is very easy for the printer operator. Some (of the cheaper) CNC machines do not have end stops, the operator needs to be aware to position the tool head of the CNC machine at the proper starting position.


Question:
When choosing which filament to use for a particular print does the color of the filament have any impact on it's performance, or is it purely a cosmetic choice?

For example, are there any side-by-side comparisons available that demonstrate that differences do\don't exist between different color filaments from the same company\range, such as a particular filament needing a hotter bed because the pigment changes it's properties?

Answer:
Yes in some cases it does.
It is widely known in communities which are pickier about properties that white filament requires a percentage of pigments much higher than other colours, therefore white filaments are typically weaker (or significantly weaker) than most other colours.
Another exception is black: ABS is not UV resistant, but if you use black ABS, the UV will not penetrate and, unless the surface is continuously scraped away, the UV resistance of black ABS is better than other colours.
I remember some mentions in the Voron discord chats that red (at least from some manufacturers) is better than some other colours from the same manufacturer, but I don't remember the details. You can
join
the chat yourself and search (before asking!) in the #filament chat.
I remember reading that pure ("natural") filaments are however not always better than filaments with colours added, but I cannot remember the source. It could be that some little amount of extra additives (the colour pigments) offer the polymer something to "grab", so better than nothing. My guess, but I have no support for it.


Question:
My new Ender 5 Plus' Bowden tube keeps popping out of its socket on the extruder mid-print, I've tried several times and it keeps doing it even though it's locked into place securely at the start every time. Is this a known issue? And how do I resolve it?

I just got it so I doubt it's the coupler, I replaced it with a spare as my first solution, I did notice that it got almost stringy plastic around it whenever it gets popped out.... could that be indicative of what the problem is?

Answer:
The coupler for the Bowden tube is probably worn out or the tube end has been scraped so that the coupler can't grab it or you have left out the clamp on the coupler.
The coupler has a sleeve that when pressed down releases the Bowden tube.  There is a C-shaped clip that should go between the top lip of the sleeve and the body of the coupler that prevents the sleeve from moving and should help hold the tube more firmly.  Make sure this is installed.
If the tube outside is visibly worn with scrape marks (this is rare), it might help to cut a few cm off the end so that a fresh section is gripped by the coupler.  Be sure to cut the end flush so that there is no gap between the heat break and the Bowden tube or you will have other problems.
Alternately (and this is more likely), the coupler itself is worn out, possibly with bent or broken-off teeth.  If this is the case, you will need to replace the coupler.


Question:
Most people, articles, videos, etc. refer to printing speed by linear speed (mm/s), but a lot of YouTubers prefer to talk about volumetric flow (mm3/s) (mm cubed per second).  I suspect that at some point in the past year or three, some of the more engineer-y types switched to this new measurement standard, but I'm not entirely sure what happened.  What is the practical difference between using linear speed vs flow rate to determine print speed?

For a follow-up, how can you go about changing your print speed as a flow rate in a slicer?  It's easy to find the linear speed, but I have not found the flow rate speed.  I use Cura and will start using Prusa Slic3r soon.

Answer:
Flow rate adds a dimension to the regularly used printing speed. Note that maximum volumetric flow is determined by the hotend (unless your extruder is under dimensioned or highly geared) as it cannot supply more molten filament than it can melt in a certain time.
So, instead of specifying the print speed, you should include the amount of material it can process. Volumetric flow includes nozzle diameter, layer thickness and hotend type.
E.g. a 60 mm/s of a 0.4 mm nozzle at a 0.2 mm  layer height has a very different volumetric flow (4.8 mm³/s) from a 60 mm/s 0.8 mm nozzle at a 0.4 mm  layer height (19.2 mm³/s). The latter may require a different hotend to get that flow, but usually it is advised to print slower with a larger nozzle.
Most practical is to use the linear printing speed. This is the value you find in the slicers. But, for a given hotend design it is good to keep the maximum volumetric flow into account to determine whether you are within the specifications of the hotend when you change certain printing/slicing parameters.


Question:
It seems there are some missing lines on the outer wall on the Z-axis with my prints. I'm not able to pinpoint the problem. Does anyone have ideas about what might be wrong with my setup/settings?

Example:

Here are some settings that I think are relevant:

Printer: Ender 3 v1

Filament: Das Filament

Slicer: Cura

Hotend temp: 215 °C

Layer height: 0.2 mm

Wall speed: 30 mm/s

Travel speed: 200 mm/s

Retraction distance: 6.5 mm

Combing mode: not in skin (Max comb: 30)

Cheers

Answer:
According to
'The-EG' comment
in this GitHub issue,
Add Creality Ender 2 Pro config #633
, you can often determine the stepper drivers by one of a few ways:
Listen to the sound. The 'TMC22**' will sound much quieter
Look for a marking in Sharpie on the SD Card reader
```
```
C = HR4998
E = A4988
A = TMC2208
B = TMC2209
H = TMC2225
```
```
Remove the heat sync
https://github.com/MarlinFirmware/Configurations/pull/633#issuecomment-995480295
After removing the heat sync, it appears that the Chip is actually a
```
MS35775
```


Question:
Recently, my Ender 3D Pro has been unable to print any large models successfully with PLA as the filament starts to expand inside the Teflon tube, causing a clog after about an hour of printing. I am starting to suspect that the problem is heat creep.

This occurs with the two brands of PLA filament that I use (3D Fila and Voolt 3D).

The hotend that I am using is the one that comes with the printer, I don't know what it is made out of.

I have tried many things to patch this problem:

Try to unclog it with the needle

Replace nozzle (three times)

Check if the Teflon tube is touching the nozzle

Increase temperature from 200 to 220 °C

Increase temperature from 200 to 215 °C

If the problem is indeed heat creep, I have plans to control the heat sink temperature with a Peltier and an extra thermometer. Any other ideas are appreciated.

Answer:
This sounds like heat creep may be the problem. For preventing heat creep to occur you should do the opposite, print at lower temperature, tweak retraction length and increase cooling of the cold end.
A Peltier element is not very effective cooler, use a bigger fan, or a fan with a higher flow rate. Note that the Peltier element required a large cooling body and a fan as well, so this adds a lot of weight to and limits space of the hotend. You should not go there, it has been tried before.


Question:
I have a Prusa MK2.5 which runs at 12 V, the Prusa MK3 runs at 24 V.

I noticed that on Prusa's webpage, they list the stepper motors as being compatible with both the MK2 and the MK3 even though they run at different voltages.

My question is: are stepper motors typically tuned for specific voltages (like most fans are), or are these stepper motors compatible with both 12 and 24 V systems?

Answer:
Without having the exact model number of the motor to check the data sheet, this can't be answered.  Glancing at the link you supplied, I didn't see either a data sheet or a model number I could use to get a data sheet.
Typically stepper motors overheat when they are run at too high of a voltage.  However, the advertised voltage for the motor could be the lowest voltage at which it works.
For a real answer, you'd have to look at the manufacturer's datasheet for the motor, which should include minimum and maximum voltages and graphs showing current vs. voltage vs. force graphs, and possibly duty cycle graphs.
Also, in some cases, if you run a motor at a higher voltage than it is rated for, it may produce back EMF that is larger than the motor controller is prepared for, and it could burn out the controller.  However, if the controller is designed for 24v, this is less likely of a problem.
Note also that there are conversion kits, where you place a small board between the controller and the motor that fixes the voltage for the motor.


Question:
I'd like to print a cylinder, 50 mm diameter, 200 mm long, with 1.5 mm diameter holes tightly fit like this:

The holes go all the way through from top to bottom.

I am using a Prusa i3 MK3S. With 0.1 mm detail and 20 % infill, printing one cylinder is going to take 5 days and 5 hours. I need at least five cylinders.

Is the above setting appropriate for this job?

Is there any way I can reduce the printing time?

Answer:
That's a hell of a print!
You are printing a model that has a highly complex structure there, with about 650ish holes, assuming there is space for about 2 perimeters between each hole.
Taking my standard 0.3 mm layer height and 0.4 mm nozzle using a 0.45 mm wide line, I sliced a 10mm high slice of the model for a first estimate of the expected print time - and came out with 2:21 hours. That means the expected print time with 0.3 mm layer height is in the area of 47 hours - or just about 2 days.
As a result, 5 days and 5 hours are in the order I'd expect from a 0.1 mm layer height print for the same nozzle, in fact, your settings seem to have a faster print speed than I do work with.
In general,  don't think this model is good for FDM Printing at all, due to many non-fully formed lines inside the model (yellow) and the red perimeters being a very dense pattern.
Solutions?
print faster
You might get a faster speed with a high flow solution, for example, using a long melt zone (volcano-style) or an even higher flow core-heating 3DSolex nozzle. The latter originally only comes in 0.6 mm and up, also mandating fewer holes, but in late 2021 CHT Nozles in 0.4 mm came to the market. This could drop print time some, but it'd still be a several days print job.
reduced pattern
Besides increasing layer height to drop printing time by the same factor, reducing the number of holes and as a result, spacing them further apart not only can increase the print speed but also make the print form more reliable.
Another alternative would be to alter the pattern from a circle to a hexagonal pattern: by using hexagons, the resulting pattern does not contain thin walls and might print much faster - depending on hole size, you might experience a drop by a factor of 2!
Printed differently
Going from FDM printing to a system such as SLS might be faster and more reliable while SLA/DLP would make this print not only fast and reliable but also trivial - if one can get a 200 mm high SLA/DLP printer, all three models should be able to be printed in one go at the same time!


Question:
the 3D Benchy is everywhere. It is one of the top test prints if you look away from a simple cube.

But what makes the Benchy a good test print at all? It does have almost no critical dimensions that would be measurable to see if the printer is calibrated correctly!

Answer:
the 3D Benchy isn't a specific calibration test
With the Benchy you don't see if your printer is calibrated in any axis, but it is a general use-case test for a model that can show you many of the issues you might face in a normal print. For all intents and purposes, it is more a general Benchmark item than a specific calibration test like a cube, stringing test, or temperature tower, where you go through iterations of a profile to dial in settings and printer properties.
the 3D Benchy is a Benchmark for printer and settings
Most of the printing issues that can be seen on a Benchy are related to the print settings, though some are also related to the physical properties.
Overhangs
The bow of the Benchy has a shape that is very conducive to seeing how much the printer can handle overhangs due to proper cooling and settings.
The arches in the sides of the cabin, as well as the back window, have a rather challenging overhang pattern (the extension needs to be larger and larger), and the front of the Benchy has a short bridge, which shows if cooling is happening properly.
The upper edge of the hull also is a little overhang, which shows how well small oversteps can be printed.
Small Diameter
The funnel of the Benchy is of sufficient small crossection, that with bad settings it can result in printing layers upon one another too fast, which can result in bulging, misinformation, or totally blobing that area.
Sharp corners
The front and back corners are rather sharp and can show the effects of ringing on the area next to them due to bad acceleration settings


Question:
It seems that a Bowden extruder is the most used in all cheap 3D printers by far compared to Direct Drive that is very rare under 500 USD machines. But I haven't understood the reason, since in terms of hardware a direct drive doesn't seem to have any impact on price more than Bowden (correct me if I'm wrong).

Why?

Answer:
As I understand it, there's really no good reason for this except "momentum". At some point in the not too distant past, a Bowden extruder was seen as an "upgrade" over direct drive, which required a bulky toolhead that was seen as limiting speeds.
(This perception was at best accurate only for delta and CoreXY machines at the time even, I think. As it turned out, Bowden doesn't let you print faster, at least not at any quality, because the nonlinear/hysteresis effects of the Bowden tube on the actual amount of material extruded can't fully be compensated with linear advance/pressure advance once you reach moderately high speeds. You can overcome this with the
Nitram Bowden
but good luck finding a cheap 3D printer manufacturer willing to put in that kind of custom part!)
Anyway, all the cheap printer manufacturers jumped on Bowden as a feature, and they're slow to develop any new designs rather than just making incremental improvements and production cost optimizations to existing ones.
Since then, direct drive designs have improved greatly, and the mass of the good ones has gotten so low that it's hardly a consideration anymore except on the most extreme agility-seeking printers (designs attempting 50k-300k acceleration). Everything should be direct drive, especially since it makes things so much easier for beginners (no difficult-to-load tube, broken filament in tube, loose fittings messing up retraction, etc.)
Teaching Tech has a video, oddly named
Why direct drive is not automatically better than bowden tube
, where he basically concludes that it is actually better, and goes over some of the history I've touched on.


Question:
In Cura Slicer, is it possible to change the direction that the filament is laid down when making the top layer?

For example, in the above picture the filiment is laid down at about 45 degrees to the X\Y axis. Can I make it 90 degrees?

Answer:
Yes with a few tricks:
You could turn the item by 45°, then all layers are turned to follow the local X and Y-axis of the body itself, but not the global X and Y of the printer - there'll be a 45° conversion between the items local coordinates and the printers global ones.
Or you could choose a different upper layer pattern, for example concentric, for the upper and lowermost layer.
If you want to define a specific zig-zag direction, you need to go advanced mode, click the gear and enable "Top/Bottom Line Direction". This now allows altering the direction by setting an angle different from 45°/135°. The setting however is ignored if you don't use Lines or ZigZag


Question:
Faulty endstop caused the printer (a traditional cartesian FDM) to try to move over the maximum axis limit at top, the noise has been atrocious, I don't see damages (apparently) but I'm wondering if this could have damaged something or the motors aren't strong enough to do any serious physical damage to mechanics of movement.

Could you clarify this?

Answer:
It's highly unlikely this crash caused any physical or electrical damage to your printer. Printers are designed to be able to withstand an occasional crash as typically, no Axis Maximum endstops are installed. The 'atrocious' noise you describe hearing is the sound of the stepper motor having lost (or, in this case, repeatedly losing) steps. If you are worried, I would check that the X/Y Gantries are still in-tram and that the printer can still home itself without any problems.
If this was a Z-Max runout (ie, printer tried to move too high), I would also check that the Z carriage is still on the Z axis Leadscrews before attempting to home, because if the Z carriage is not on one or both of the leadscrews, It is possible for the machine to engage them at different heights, throwing the X gantry out of tram or worse if only one leadscrew manages to re-engage.


Question:
I am currently printing PLA infused with 80% copper powder. So far I mainly used it because it looks and feels really nice and post-processing is almost limitless, however recently I have thought that metal-like filaments might actually be a good idea for gears (in case I don't want to use polycarbonate or carbon fiber PLA).

I have been researching about the material properties of copper-infused PLA and found a few studies about the "strength", however, those seem to have exclusively focussed on how much weight can be suspended on a hook where it showed pretty good results. The only other info I found was an unsourced "it is more brittle", however the objects I printed so far do not feel more brittle.

Does anyone have any experience with spur gears printed from copper-infused PLA? Are there any advantages over regular PLA? Any downsides (I could imagine higher abrasiveness is not really helpful)?

Answer:
At a guess, copper really isn't that strong so you're likely to see minimal improvements, if any.
The PLA carrier plastic is still PLA, with a low melting point.
The copper won't "fuse" with the PLA, it will still be flakes of metal embedded in a tiny pocket inside of a plastic structure.
However this is all speculation, and your best option for an answer is to print some gears and methodically test them against plain PLA, and perhaps a metal gear if you can.  Try and use identical setups/bearings/pressures and times.
Perhaps a high torque and a high-speed test, in both lubricated and unlubed, for PLA, copper-PLA, and a straight metal gear? That would be 12 tests in all and clear out all questions.


Question:
I have a bit of an odd request. I am studying the vulnerability of 3D printers and would like to know if there is a way to disable the limit switches on, for example, an Ender 3 in the G-code.

Ideally, the exploit would be used by plugging in the malicious code via SD card into the 3D printer. I have found ways to change the nozzle temp and things like that, however, nothing on the limit switches.

If I were the manufacturer, I wouldn't implement the function, so if it's not possible it will not be a surprise. If that's the case, what would be some other options for tearing this thing up?

Answer:
Ethics and justification:
If you have physical access to the device you could just... physically damage the device. Running arbitrary G-code is just more complicated
Most printer farms have a strict no outside G-code policy for good reason. Because direct physical access to the printer does not provide any security.
This is also a problem for CNC Mills and other equipment. The firmware is not there to protect you. If you ask the system to put the spindle into XYZ_POS, the device's job is to deliver your 300 dollar end mill into the part as expediently and directly as you have told it. It does not hold your hand.
As a result, it's probably best that
no one
run pre-compiled G-code. You should use an STL and generate your own G-code. Not only does it allow you to properly tune the print for your specific printer, but it prevents nasties from breaking your printer.
Do not test this on a system you do not own. You will face civil and criminal liability for any damages as a result of performing this on printers that are not your own. Additionally, I would question the value of your research provided that physical access to a device automatically makes it vulnerable; let alone running arbitrary code from an untrusted source.
To help your research: Most "secure" facilities prevent even touching a machine with external code. All code has to be generated on trusted and isolated machines by trusted persons. There is no guarantee that the "trusted" person can't manufacture a job that will crash their 300,000 dollar CNC mill and cause damage - but there are serious repercussions for doing so.
It's extremely difficult to "tear up" a printer by turning off the endstops.
You can disable physical endstops with a simple command
```
M121
```
.
However, this only does so much.
With
```
M121
```
, the printer is only really vulnerable before it has been
home
d. Most printers will
auto home
when starting a print, or refuse to print until they are
homed
. If issuing
```
M121
```
then arbitrarily trying to ram it past an endstop, it will continue until it counts steps to the
software endstop value
```
[XYZ]_MIN_POS
```
to
```
[XYZ]_MAX_POS
```
.
Older printers didn't have software endstops and would keep going until they were stopped or turned off. But this wouldn't
explicitly
cause damage as physical limitations would prevent it. Outside of old designs that do not physically limit the Z position - and crashing the nozzle into the printer.
Nowadays - the printer would crash into the axis limit and then stop because it would hit the software endstop (and funnily enough, be homed as a result - I have done this as an experiment on my own printers)
This would not damage the printer - just be annoying for a short time until it hits the software endstop.
You can however make it work like an older printer provided it does not have stall or crash sensing (like Prusas have by default) by issuing
```
M211 S0
```
.
This turns off the software endstops. And should allow it to continually try to reach the value programmed in the G-code. It should continue to count until it gets to XYZ_POS then finally stop.
Will this cause damage? Maybe. If the Z-axis is high and it can physically push its way into the printbed hard enough it can cause damage to the hotend. However, generally, most printers are designed (these days) that the Z-axis cannot go too far into the print bed and cause (too much) damage. Modified printers can be vulnerable if they modify the bed but do not physically limit the Z-axis from going down too far. Additionally, when the printer
autohomes
on print it usually will set zero to the endstop before the payload can be run, giving a home and only allowing excursion to the axis positives. When this happens, no damage can really occur outside of overheating the steppers/drivers and possibly damaging belts.
There are also some firmware protections to help protect the end-user (e.g. Prusa Crash Detection) - depending on the printer these may need to be circumvented as well.
How you can really tear up a printer? If you have physical access to it - you have total control over it. Simply being physically near it is enough for you to just throw it out a window. It's arbitrary to try to run any code. But if you're trying to research how a threat actor can mess up someone's printer?
Thomas Sandladerer made an excellent video on these vulnerabilities (specific to 3D printers) here:
In his video, he's speaking directly on the threat of running pre-formed G-code from public sources. (Something that you should not do - something that
no one
should do)
Conclusion:
In security, physical access to a system by an untrusted person or running untrusted code on a machine is not allowed.
For this vulnerability to be exploited, it requires a person to do things that they should not be doing - running generated G-code from an untrusted source. This includes from "friends" or even family.
I won't tell you how to "really tear up" a 3D printer as there are a plethora of horror stories out on the internet of printers catching fire let alone the threat of running some random code on your printer. How to do it is publicly available. You just have to figure it out yourself.
The lesson here is simple:
Just don't run pre-compiled G-code.


Question:
I'm running a stock Ender 5 pro with the filament that came with it, and using Creality Slicer 4.8.2, but I'm only able to get reliable bed adhesion if I increase the bed temperature from 50 to 60 °C for the bottom layer and decrease the print head speed by about 75 % from the default profile for the Ender 5.

The machine is absolutely stock, and is fresh out of the box except for bed levelling.

I used the default bed leveling print and that came out well, so I'm reasonably certain that it's not a bed leveling issue. The problem seems to be with models that I've made myself in blender and exported as STL files.

In all cases the raft that was generated by the Creality software has printed out perfectly, but the print has only partially gone down when it came to the model itself.

Answer:
Assuming Creality's stock firmware still doesn't have Linear Advance enabled, there's a fairly hard requirement to go slow on the first layer. This is because, as the toolhead accelerates up to higher speed without advancing the extruder extra to compensate for the backpressure in the filament-path/nozzle, you'll have an interval of underextrusion, giving less contact area for the extruded material to cling to the bed at the same time there's added force pulling it in a direction parallel to the bed surface. This becomes less critical to adhesion starting with the second layer, since the new material is bonding to itself rather than just trying to stick to a bed.
Having the bed hot will help it stick better and maybe even help reduce the pressure at the nozzle by reducing the heat loss, so it might work around the problem. But in general, you don't want to be in a situation where a few degrees of temperature difference are the cutoff between a failed print and a successful one.
Anyway, do all the usual stuff to improve bed adhesion, and especially make sure your bed height is as close to perfect as you can get it, if you want moderately fast printing to work. But don't be surprised if you need to upgrade to a version of Marlin with Linear Advance (or to Klipper) to get successful high-speed first layers.


Question:
Is there a machine (for hobbyists) that will make filament based on the type of plastic I put in. I will sort the plastic before I will put it in the machine.

I have seen the filabot but this uses only plastic from previous prints not plastic types Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET or PETE) or High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE) (these are the #1 or #2 plastic types listed at plasticoceans.org).

To reiterate:

I am asking if there is a machine that can turn a plastic bottle into usable filament.

I want to know if there is a machine (currently on the market) that will make filament, based on the type of plastic I put in.

I will sort the plastic before I will put it in the machine... so,

sorted waste in ---> sorted filament out

Answer:
The source of the plastic doesn't matter a lot.
What matters is the plastic's composition and chemistry and how well shredded it is.
Issues are:
Is it a thermoplast that can be remelted?
Is the working melt temperature range compatible with your printer and/or the filament forming machine?
Is the plastic chemically compatible with the components of the machines and the print platform you are using in the 3d printer? (If it isn't, it either will stick when it shouldn't or won't stick when it should.)
Is the plastic shredded enough for the filament reforming machine to use it?
Is the flexibility of the remelted plastic suitable for 3d printing, or does it need volatile plasticizers added to make it soft enough to handle as filament?
Other factors may also be a problem.  For example, PLA, TPU, and PETG are fairly temperature stable, but other plastics have high thermal expansion rates that can cause warping during 3d printing.  There are a few ways to compensate for that however.
If the plastic is contaminated with other plastics or non-soluble inks or labels, this must be removed first, or the results may be weak or not melt evenly or leave debris in the extrusion nozzle.
Not only must the plastic be chemically compatible, but also there are tuning parameters such as temperature profiles, cooling speed, and extrusion speed that have to be calibrated to the plastic to get good filament.
If all of these things are OK then it might be possible to use a machine to reform plastic from any source into filament.


Question:
I have an ender 5, and I'm not certain that the bed is getting up to temperature. Or maybe I'm not understanding what it should be like when it gets up to temperature.

If I use an infrared thermometer, where should I aim it, and what should it be saying in comparison to what the screen on the printer says?

For example, if the screen says 50 degrees should the thermometer read 50 degrees, or should it read something different because that's an internal temperature or something not a surface temperature?

At the moment the bed seems "nicely warm" when the temperature on the display says that I should burn my hand if I touch it.

Answer:
Sensor mounting
An Infrared Thermometer prefers a non-reflective surface to accurately read the temperature reliably - glass is reflective for Infrared light under many angles and can in the worst case result in measuring anything
but
what you want to measure. To that degree, a piece of paper tape (Painter's tape or Washi-tape works fine) can act as a mounted measuring point.
A contact temperature sensor can be mounted touching the plate in a location easily by putting it in contact using some tape.
Sensor positioning
However, do note that the temperature sensor of the printer is not mounted on the top of the build platform but at the heater element under it. This means two things:
There is a temperature differential between the heater (which would be quite hot but not scorching in an instant of touching it) under the aluminium bed, the top of the aluminium bed, and even more if correlated against the surface of your build platform.
On the other hand, to verify your sensor setting, you need to measure under the bed at the heating element or at the interface between the heater and the aluminium bed. For example, you could use a spot right next to the heater as your probing point. This is incidentally quite close to where the temperature sensor should be mounted anyway.
Bed temperature control
Depending on your setup, the temperature difference between heater and the build surface could be up to about 15 °C and I would deem that an acceptable number. In accounting for the wanted build surface temperature, one can adjust the set heater temperature accordingly, as shown in this experience I had:
On particularly a cold day in late 2021 the heating in the room was not gaining enough heating water from the central unit set to a lower setting than it ought to. As a result, the room was down from the usual temperature to a rather cold ca. 12 °C. On that day I had to increase the bed temperature by a couple of degrees to gain proper bed adhesion, but it fixed itself once I figured out to fix the setting on the central unit.


Question:
I'm new to 3D printing, but my printer supports Linear Advance. I heard that it offers improvements in print quality. I used Marlin Linear Advance Pattern Generator to generate a print with horizontal lines at a variety of k-values.

Which K-Value would be best from my below image?

Answer:
As a general answer to evaluate the effectiveness of the K-factor, when the K-factor Calibration Pattern generator output print is inconclusive (probably not in this case), printing a tower at various K-factor values might give you more insight, e.g. like:
To vary the K-factor with height, a similar procedure as in
How does one use a heat tower?
can be followed to insert a new K-factor with
G-code
```
M900
```
.


Question:
I have an Ender 3 pro. In my country electricity outage is an issue, though it comes back pretty instantaneously, when I hit the resume button on the Ender 3 pro after heating the hot end and the bed when the hot end lifts the Y-axis or X-axis shifts a little bit, I do not understand why as when there is no power outage the prints are just flawless.

I have also tried tightening everything but feels like the motors are having their own fun tilting an extra step for no reason. I have thrown away many prints because of this problem as I work in robotics and prototyping is a necessary thing for me and so is the accuracy.

Answer:
Not sure on your exact firmware, but it could be that it is using a
M413 power loss recovery
rather than a power loss interrupt pin. Possible you might be able to change this with your current firmware, but worst case you could install a new controller that does support this power loss interrupt pin.
Depending on the frequency and duration of your power outages it may be worth getting an uninterruptible power supply (UPS). With the heat bed off
this UPS
would run a full print easily. It would even handle a heat bed for shorter outages.
Where you work in robotics, you are probably electrically savvy enough to set your printer up on
direct DC battery power
, which would be cheaper than a UPS of equivalent energy storage. If you need help going that route just post over on electrical engineering stack exchange with the power supply info.


Question:
I'm working on a project using 3D printed parts, everything is working very nicely except for one part that needs a 3 mm x 1.2 mm diameter rod. I can print with PLA/PLA+ but such a thin object doesn't seem viable for 3D printing. Is it still possible or am I better off using a 1.2 mm metal dowel?

The bigger part (5 mm x 7 mm diameter) near the back isn't an issue, it's the small rod that I can't seem to print correctly

Answer:
It would be impossible to print this standing with the rod straight up, and even if you got it to print the part would be very weak due to the thin cross-section of the rod aligning with the layers.
The only way to print this part and get a usable result is to print it in the orientation shown in the picture, with the rod part being horizontal. Because the layers will now have a much larger cross-sectional area, this not only makes the print much stronger but also prevents issues with the plastic not cooling off sufficiently between layers. Though this will still be a tricky print, because now you'll need lots of support material.
Using a metal rod is probably the better option. Another option is printing the rod lying flat on the bed, and gluing it in place later. This would avoid the issue with support material.


Question:
I want to use magnets to hold the lid of a box down tight enough to keep it relatively airtight (along with a rubber seal etc.), but I am not sure what strength of magnet to use, that will still allow it to be opened without causing damage either by having to be pried open or by crushing the print layers. I cannot seem to find any guide to how magnets are used for 3d printing at various strengths and I cannot afford to buy too many types that I am not then going to use.

Any help that you can provide will be greatly appreciated.

Answer: I had a similar experience using magnets to hold two plates together. Currently also building a device (3d-printed) that clamps together with magnets. For both of these scenarios, I typically start by looking at what size and force you need. I would look into maybe 3 options of different magnets to start with. It could be in the range of 0.6 lbs, 4lbs and 6lbs. Do you know how much the "opening force" would be? As in what would keep it opening? If its substantial, I could see more the 6lbs but this is a very very very rough estimate that honestly would be best supported with trying a few ranges of magnets first. Try McMasterCarr if you're in the US. They have affordable sized magnets that I've worked with, ranging from different sizes, thicknesses and magnetic forces.


Question: I picked up a roll of Overture matte black PLA, and the surface of both the filament and the printed object feel like paper. This made me wonder if it contains wood-based fibers like "wood PLA" does, and if so, whether it's abrasive and harmful to the nozzle. In the past I wouldn't have cared, but I'm using a CHT now and would like to avoid ruining it since it's expensive and I don't have spares sitting around.

Answer:
You may be experiencing the feel of paper, which is typically a matte surface, when feel testing the printed item, as both would be matte. A search for your focus found one purchaser of this product (via Amazon) has
left an answer addressing this question
. The answer is on the last page of Q/A and is accompanied by another answer suggesting the white filament is abrasive. One has to click "see 2 more answers" in order to locate the quoted answer.
His reply was that he has printed 8 spools and found no deterioration of his nozzle.
Not any more than any other PLA. I've gone through 8 rolls of this PLA so
far with no noticeable degradation of my nozzle. D. DAmico · September
30, 2021
My own suspicion is that the filament has a chemical additive to create the matte finish, rather than any particulate that might cause abrasion.


Question:
On a PLA print where stringing has occurred, what is the best way to remove it during post processing?

Should I simply cut it with a hobby knife and sand the surface or are the better techniques to use?

Answer:
Use a hobby knife with a chisel blade (straight edge perpendicular to handle, beveled on one side only).
Apply with beveled edge against workpiece. Raise the handle in small increments while stroking over the flaw until it is entirely removed.  This provides pretty good control to prevent gouging.
Avoid sanding.
This method also works well for removing "ribs" caused by gaps in painter tape applied to print bed.


Question:
I'd like to force Klipper to perform power on (using M80) before homing. For this purpose I'm trying to override G28:

[gcode_macro G28]
rename_existing: G28_BASE
gcode:
  M80
  G28_BASE { rawparams }

But for some reason this does not work, I'm getting the following error:

G-Code macro rename of different types ('G28' vs 'G28_BASE')

Isn't G28 overridable? Is there any other way to achieve the desired behavior?

Answer:
Because of the way parameters work differently (
```
Sx
```
vs
```
NAME=x
```
) for gcode style commands vs Klipper extended ones, the rename has to be to the "same type" of command.
```
G28_BASE
```
does not fit the pattern to be considered a "gcode style" one. Use
```
G9028
```
or
```
G28.1
```
or something instead and it should work.


Question:
In every 3D print that I have seen, the bed should be leveled (manually or with some sensor-based system) on multiple points, pretty annoying because often when you reach the perfect distance on a point another point should be adjusted again repeating the procedure multiple time to have perfect leveling on all points.

I'm wondering why height isn't just fixed with the optimal leveling.

Answer:
The point of "leveling" (tramming) the bed is to make it:
square with the coordinate system of the printer so that it lies in a plane perpendicular to the direction of Z travel, and
a known distance from the nozzle tip at one point (and thus, due to (1), all points) in the plane at any given Z value.
In theory, if the machine were all preassembled and sufficiently/perfectly rigid, this could be done once at the factory and never need leveling again. However, even if that were possible, there's at least one factor that will throw you off: you're going to want to swap/replace nozzles, and they will not all be exactly the same length - especially if you use different nozzle diameters, styles, materials, from different manufacturers, etc. This is why, even with an ABL system, unless it performs probing using the nozzle tip itself, you always have to calibrate out the offset between the probe and the nozzle tip.
In practice, many machines (especially affordable ones) require final assembly by the consumer, which necessitates calibration. They also have parts which can warp or wear and require adjustment - especially POM V-roller wheels - which will then throw off the squareness of the bed with the rest of the frame.
If you find you're having to re-level often, something is wrong with your printer. You may have play in the Z-axis/gantry - on Ender 3 style printers with only one side driven, the undriven side tends to wander up/down unless you get everything tensioned perfectly, and this manifests as apparent loss of leveling. You may have
adjustment wheels working themselves loose
(watch the end to see final findings) that mess up your leveling (I've had good luck mitigating that with
this add-on
). You may have an unreliable endstop switch (mine was acting up recently after years of use, and replacing it fixed the problem entirely).


Question:
There are numerous topics found on first layers that do not adhere properly causing prints to fail or cause print quality defects.

The advice is often to properly level or tram the build surface. How does one tram the build surface?

Answer:
Definition of leveling
Tramming, often referred to as "leveling" in the 3D printer world ("tramming" and "leveling" is used interchangeably, but "tramming" is the correct nomenclature), is the process of creating a 2D
plane
of the build surface that is parallel to the nozzle at the whole print area (usually the X-Y plane).
Why tramming?
In order to adhere the hot filament from the nozzle it is essential that the distance between the nozzle and the build surface is as constant as possible. Increase of the gap may cause the filament to not be squished enough and it may be dragged instead of deposited or create an insufficient bond to cause problems later in the print job when e.g. shrinkage of the object comes in play.
How to tram the surface?
To tram the build surface (a build surface comes in many shapes and forms, sheet of glass, bare aluminum plate, some sort of coated heated surface, etc.) most printers are equipped with at least three so-called "leveling screws". Why at least three? It takes a minimum of three screws to fixate a plane in space, more screws cause the bed to be over-defined or indeterminate, but with a flexible build surface it is quite common to have 4 screws although it is causing a
statically indeterminate system
. So, these screws need to be adjusted as such that the build surface if parallel to the nozzle.
First step is to home (
What is homing? What is the purpose of homing?
) the printer,
homing
from the
tag wiki
reads:
The process of determining the location of a 3D printer nozzle in
three dimensions using a reference point (home location) is referred to
as "homing". Homing should occur before every print and involves
bringing the X, Y and Z-Axis motors to pre-defined limit locations
(usually these are endstops). Pre-recorded homing data offset values
determine the position of the build plate origin with respect to the
endstop locations.
Once homed (with G-code
```
G28
```
or through the graphical user interface of the printer display) , the origin (0, 0, 0) of the printer is known, from this origin you can determine the level. Note that the X and Y is usually correct (if not, see
How to center my prints on the build platform? (Re-calibrate homing offset)
) the Z offset depends on the height of the Z endstop and the leveling screws. For a surface that uses a sensor as endstop (see e.g.
Automatic Bed Leveling (ABL) with a sensor (BLTouch, inductive, capacitive), how does it work?
) the offset is defined by G-code (
```
M851
```
) or through the user interface of the printer display. Note that automatic bed leveling (ABL) is not magic, you still need to provide a trammed bed that is as level as possible, the sensor merely scans the surface and adjusts for larger imperfections of the build surface. After homing, move the nozzle at a certain Z value to the corner of the origin, which is usually the front left) (0, 0, Z) or close to this corner (10, 10, Z), put a piece of paper (A4/Letter) on the build surface and lower the Z to 0 (or if you hit the build surface before you reach zero height, then lower the build surface) raise the build surface until you can feel the the paper drag slightly when pulled between the nozzle and build surface (alternatively you can use a feeler gauge, A4 paper is 0.08 to 0.11 mm thick, so a 0.1 mm gauge will do fine). To be sure that the carriage hasn't been moved by the tramming, issue a homing command and move to the corner to the right and repeat the process to crete a slight drag of the paper when pulled between the nozzle and build surface. Note that tramming this point may have influenced the first point. Now repeat the homing and moving (for corners back right and back left) to start over again at the front left corner and repeating the whole process at least one to two times. This iterative process will deliver a trammed bed, the bed should now be parallel to the nozzle.
Trammed, but filament not adhering...
Once trammed the build surface should be parallel to the nozzle, if the distance (usually paper thickness) is too far or too close, adhesion or first layer deposition may fail or cause surface defects like
ripples
. If not adhering the initial gap between the nozzle and the build surface (paper thickness) might be too big, making this smaller may help squish the filament more so that it adheres better to the build surface. Alternatively use an adhesive in between the build surface and the first layer, nowadays there are multiple dedicated sprays and liquids available, but some house hold product like wood glue, glue sticks and
hair sprays
could be used.
Build surface cannot or is difficult to tram
When the build surface isn't perfectly flat, tramming is a challenge, or doesn't provide a 2D plane at a fixed distance of the nozzle. In such cases, scanning the build surface and adjusting during printing might help to get the filament to adhere properly; this process is called automatic bed leveling or ABL (see
Automatic Bed Leveling (ABL) with a sensor (BLTouch, inductive, capacitive), how does it work?
). An alternative is UBL (see
What is ABL or UBL? Is this the same?
).
Tramming frequently?
The frequency of tramming depends on the quality and (mis)use of the printer to maintain the 2D plane parallel to the nozzle. For good quality printers the tramming is performed very seldom.


Question:
I have an Ender 5 Pro with a flexible build plate (The factory default one).

There are multiple extremely thin tracks of melted PLA all over it. Too thin to easily peal off when cooled. Thin enough that you can run your finger over them and barely know that they are there.

What is the best way to clean them off other than simply brut forcing them with a scraper and risking damaging the surface.

Rubbing with IPA and a cloth isn't enough.

I have a plastic razor that's normally used for removing vinyl decal from vehicles without scratching the paint, would that be useful, or maybe just scrubbing for an hour with a nail brush?

Answer:
TL;DR:
Print more PLA on top of them, and pull it off together.
Preparation
First, of course, clean it well with IPA. This will both ensure there's no oil or other material on top of the PLA that will prevent it from bonding well with new PLA, and start to work underneath it to get it loose.
Printing
Then, print! Do a 2- or 3-layer square covering the whole buildplate if you need to, or just smaller ones in the affected areas. They should bond to whatever is there and pull it up when you peel them off.
Prevention
To avoid this happening in the future,
fix your bed leveling
. The type of tracks that are nearly impossible to remove by themselves normally come from printing with the nozzle so low that the material is forced entirely between the texture irregularities of the build surface, with no significant layer on top, and this means your bed is at least a whole layer-height too high relative to the nozzle.


Question:
Is it possible to 3D print multiple 0.1 mm high layers with a 0.4 mm diameter nozzle in FDM while ensuring fidelity to the set layer height? The raster width is set at 0.4 mm and I am not touching that. The part thickness is 3 mm, so 30 layers of 0.1 mm have to be deposited for the completion of the print job. My polymer is PLA.

If not, should I be using a 0.2 mm diameter nozzle for this purpose?

Can a 0.4 mm print nozzle print rasters with higher width (0.5 mm, 0.6 mm, etc.)?

Answer:
The
general consensus for nozzle diameter versus layer height
is to limit the layer thickness to eighty percent of the nozzle diameter. For a 0.4 mm nozzle, one usually limits the layer to 0.3 mm. The printer on which the nozzle is installed will determine the minimum layer thickness, often a typical value of 0.10 mm. I have printed successfully to 0.10 mm layer thickness with a 0.40 mm nozzle.
The linked site says just about the same as above, but also provides useful information regarding appearance, speed, strength, etc.
With a "next size up" nozzle of 0.6 mm, you'd want to limit the layer height to 0.48 mm but you might get away with 0.50 mm layers as there is some wiggle woom.
For 0.8 mm nozzle, you can get your 0.60 mm layers as the max for that nozzle is 0.64 mm.
The article also references that one can print wider than nozzle dimensions by increasing the extrusion factor, which may go by other terms, depending on the slicer used.


Question:
I'm working on a gadget a bit like a jewelry box. I want the lid on a hinge. Are 3d printed hinges robust enough for daily use long term? Perhaps with a metal pin?

I want to incorporate the hinge into the design but my thinking is that it would be a waste of time if the hinge will break as I'd need to reprint the whole gadget.

Answer:
More detailed information would be valuable. A hinge the size of a soft drink can is going to be stronger than that of a pencil, generally speaking.
A substantial portion of determining the strength of a specific printed object relies on the layer orientation and of the material from which the object is printed.
Consider to examine others' creations on sites such as Thingiverse and PrusaPrinters to see how the result fare against your objectives. I've noted that the better designs will have substantial wall thickness to the barrel portion of the hinge. Additionally, if one can print the hinge with the cylinder axis oriented vertically, the layer lines will "encompass" the pivot. This provides the better strength characteristic of the layer.
The pin aspect is not as important when considering strength, although a 3D printed pin can be weak if printed vertically.


Question:
I love the idea of the XYZ test cube to help diagnose my bad prints.   I’m able to find online very common print issues however am looking for a resource that is more extensive. Often I run into a situation where my issue is not covered.

Would be great if there was a resource that had pictures of numerous bad or less than ideal XYZ prints with cause and fix for each. I’m thinking of more than 50 examples.

Does anyone know of such a resource?

Answer:
Make sure to set the scale properly for your use case!
In CAD, you define your measurement space in either Inch or in Millimeter units, and that is your grid. In blender, the native unit is the meter.
This can be easily converted in exporting (remember to set it to scale!), but it is best to just set the measurement scale to actually match what you design: if you want to design a 5 mm hole, set your scale to Millimeters and make sure you export in millimeters. If you want to design in meters (maybe you design a building), then work in meters, and set your export scale in the end so that 1 meter actually is represented as 1 meter - or rather as 1000 millimeters.
The STL in the end will not know the difference
: it all is defined in scales of
unitary units
, and it doesn't even know if it was originally designed in meters, inch or angström. The typical slicer expects the unit to be either millimeters or inch, so any scaling of the exported model that does not result in units equivalent to 1 mm or 24.5 mm is bad procedure - converting between these two types is just scaling the model by 2450%.
Make sure to design closed manifolds made up of triangles!
When working with blender, it is very easy to leave the item in a shape that contains multiple intersecting, non-manifold surfaces and areas of inverted surfaces. While
interecting shells
is not a problem (the slicers can handle those by unionizing the item), the intersection usually covers up the non-manifold areas, making them hard to spot.
As a result, before finalizing your project, I suggest follow this procedure:
In Blender, turn on the visual for the normals of surfaces. If an area does not look like a hedgehog after that, the normals in that area are reversed and you need to flip the surfaces there or re-mesh it.
Triangulate the surface using the triangulate modifier. This is to spot artifacts from conversion to STL early and be able to fix them: STL only knows triangles, while blender knows
bent
n-gons.
Add a new object. A cube with side length 1.
Do a test export to STL with scale 1, which also contains the 1-unit cube as an extra shell.
Import the model into a software such as meshmixer, that has a command to separate shells.
Separate the item to all shells. In Meshmixer this is in analyze, separate shells.
After separating the shells, measure your 1-unit cube. If it is not 1 mm, calculate your scaling factor. It should be a multiple of 10.
Next, you should check each shell for gaps or other errors. In meshmixer, the automatic analyze feature points to these areas with red, blue and magenta lines.
Fix the marked errors in blender, then return to the test export. This time use the proper scaling factor. Repeat until no errors remain.


Question:
Using cyanoacrylate to glue PLA parts sometimes leaves a white residue or haze near the glue locations.  Is there an easy way to remove it?

I've tried water and alcohol swabs but after drying the haze remains.

Answer:
Make sure to set the scale properly for your use case!
In CAD, you define your measurement space in either Inch or in Millimeter units, and that is your grid. In blender, the native unit is the meter.
This can be easily converted in exporting (remember to set it to scale!), but it is best to just set the measurement scale to actually match what you design: if you want to design a 5 mm hole, set your scale to Millimeters and make sure you export in millimeters. If you want to design in meters (maybe you design a building), then work in meters, and set your export scale in the end so that 1 meter actually is represented as 1 meter - or rather as 1000 millimeters.
The STL in the end will not know the difference
: it all is defined in scales of
unitary units
, and it doesn't even know if it was originally designed in meters, inch or angström. The typical slicer expects the unit to be either millimeters or inch, so any scaling of the exported model that does not result in units equivalent to 1 mm or 24.5 mm is bad procedure - converting between these two types is just scaling the model by 2450%.
Make sure to design closed manifolds made up of triangles!
When working with blender, it is very easy to leave the item in a shape that contains multiple intersecting, non-manifold surfaces and areas of inverted surfaces. While
interecting shells
is not a problem (the slicers can handle those by unionizing the item), the intersection usually covers up the non-manifold areas, making them hard to spot.
As a result, before finalizing your project, I suggest follow this procedure:
In Blender, turn on the visual for the normals of surfaces. If an area does not look like a hedgehog after that, the normals in that area are reversed and you need to flip the surfaces there or re-mesh it.
Triangulate the surface using the triangulate modifier. This is to spot artifacts from conversion to STL early and be able to fix them: STL only knows triangles, while blender knows
bent
n-gons.
Add a new object. A cube with side length 1.
Do a test export to STL with scale 1, which also contains the 1-unit cube as an extra shell.
Import the model into a software such as meshmixer, that has a command to separate shells.
Separate the item to all shells. In Meshmixer this is in analyze, separate shells.
After separating the shells, measure your 1-unit cube. If it is not 1 mm, calculate your scaling factor. It should be a multiple of 10.
Next, you should check each shell for gaps or other errors. In meshmixer, the automatic analyze feature points to these areas with red, blue and magenta lines.
Fix the marked errors in blender, then return to the test export. This time use the proper scaling factor. Repeat until no errors remain.


Question:
I own a spool of PETG and I have been having major print quality issues: layer offsets, chunks of 3d print strewn across the buildplate and other things. I traced these effects to a single culprit: rough layers. I don't know how to fix this. I haven't had this issue at all with all of my other PETG filament colors. And the buildplate height is just where it needs to be, so why is this happening?

Print settings

Layer height: 0.23 mm

Extruder: 235 °C

Bed: 80 °C

Retraction length: 6 mm

Retraction extra restart length: 0.3 mm

Z-Hop height: 0.25 mm

Base print speed: 45 mm/s

Extrusion ratio: 106%

Answer:
Make sure to set the scale properly for your use case!
In CAD, you define your measurement space in either Inch or in Millimeter units, and that is your grid. In blender, the native unit is the meter.
This can be easily converted in exporting (remember to set it to scale!), but it is best to just set the measurement scale to actually match what you design: if you want to design a 5 mm hole, set your scale to Millimeters and make sure you export in millimeters. If you want to design in meters (maybe you design a building), then work in meters, and set your export scale in the end so that 1 meter actually is represented as 1 meter - or rather as 1000 millimeters.
The STL in the end will not know the difference
: it all is defined in scales of
unitary units
, and it doesn't even know if it was originally designed in meters, inch or angström. The typical slicer expects the unit to be either millimeters or inch, so any scaling of the exported model that does not result in units equivalent to 1 mm or 24.5 mm is bad procedure - converting between these two types is just scaling the model by 2450%.
Make sure to design closed manifolds made up of triangles!
When working with blender, it is very easy to leave the item in a shape that contains multiple intersecting, non-manifold surfaces and areas of inverted surfaces. While
interecting shells
is not a problem (the slicers can handle those by unionizing the item), the intersection usually covers up the non-manifold areas, making them hard to spot.
As a result, before finalizing your project, I suggest follow this procedure:
In Blender, turn on the visual for the normals of surfaces. If an area does not look like a hedgehog after that, the normals in that area are reversed and you need to flip the surfaces there or re-mesh it.
Triangulate the surface using the triangulate modifier. This is to spot artifacts from conversion to STL early and be able to fix them: STL only knows triangles, while blender knows
bent
n-gons.
Add a new object. A cube with side length 1.
Do a test export to STL with scale 1, which also contains the 1-unit cube as an extra shell.
Import the model into a software such as meshmixer, that has a command to separate shells.
Separate the item to all shells. In Meshmixer this is in analyze, separate shells.
After separating the shells, measure your 1-unit cube. If it is not 1 mm, calculate your scaling factor. It should be a multiple of 10.
Next, you should check each shell for gaps or other errors. In meshmixer, the automatic analyze feature points to these areas with red, blue and magenta lines.
Fix the marked errors in blender, then return to the test export. This time use the proper scaling factor. Repeat until no errors remain.


Question:
I am new at this and maybe my model is not the best, I adapted it for another one actually. Can you tell me why I can't get the holes printed? I already checked the faces and they are all in the correct orientation (I think)

What happens is that I start printing with the holes facing down and they are not printed at all. I never let it keep going for long but it seems to be completely filled inside.

You can check the file here.

Answer:
The overall appearance is that the normals are "normal," that you have no reversed facets, but there are discontinuities within the model that Meshmixer and Netfabb show as failure points. Windows 10 3DBuilder also attempts a repair which fills in the holes.
The Meshmixer capture image shows red lines and points at the flaws in the model. Both above programs fill the faces, which works fine on the cylinder, but fills in the plane where the holes reside, as well as removes the internal holes/cylinders, preventing a simple plane cut repair.
Additional examination of the original model shows an internal cylinder formed axially on the end face red warning markers in the image above.
I used Rhino3D v6 to slip inside, select the cylinder and remove it. Because the cylinder is "inside" the overall model, there's no inside face and outside face, causing the software to glitch.
On the red line along the circumference of the cylinder, there's an internal disk/disc with an internal diameter to match the previously removed internal cylinder. As it also resides within the overall model, the same trouble applies: no true inside/outside surface for the software to comprehend.
Once these were removed, a problematic set of errors appeared. I'm working on that. Work completed. Windows 10 3DBuilder has a pretty amazing repair facility, once the deep stuff is cleaned away. The end result passes the Meshmixer Inspector test and I suspect will work for you. The cylinder appears to be 37 mm in diameter (about an inch and a half) which is rather tiny, but with the flaws repaired, will scale up just fine.
It loaded into Simplify3D slicer with no errors and appears will print nicely, although with support required along the beveled portion of the cylinder.


Question:
What are the real overhang limits? I see a lot online about 45 %, then up to 60 %, but I'm routinely doing them at up to 90 % for "shortish" distances and 80%+ for several centimeters at a time. I haven't tried to see how far I can do it, since I don't have filament to waste on that sort of thing.

It's making me wonder how believable all the YouTube and website experts are. Same thing with stringing, they all talk about it on Ender 3's but this print has been going for 25 hours and has maybe two tiny strings.

This is the second time I've printed this same STL with no supports.

0.2 mm layer height

Ender 3 Pro

Generic PLA

Answer:
It is very difficult to determine a definitive number/value for the overhang angle, this is very dependent on the temperature, speed, material, nr. of walls amount of cooling fan percentage and the effectivity of the fan duct and your object geometry. Probably more settings are applicable.
You could find out what the specific values for you printer and your settings are by printing an overhang test, e.g. like
this one
:
Such a test will give you definitive answers on the overhang angle for your specific slicer settings and machine capabilities.


Question:
I want to print out a flat object without any support structure straight onto the build plate of my ender 5. It's going to be PLA and I need it to be thin enough to still be flexible.

I don't have a picture available, but imagine that I wanted to print out the Coke Cola and then wrap it around a bland soda can, so that the logo is raised up slightly?

Alternatively, what is the best layer height to use, and how many layers should I use?

Answer:
With PLA you can just heat it to curve around the object. I've done this with up to 2mm. Real easy with 1mm.
I haven't tried thicker but assume it would work ok.
You'd have to glue it though to make it stick. My attempts were just to shape the prints, I didn't want them sticking so I shaped them around a glass bottle.
If you want it flexible in it's own right, then I suggest 2 * 0.2mm layers. I have a large 2 layer print in front of me that bends easily.
This can be rolled up into a tube, but as soon as you let go it will return to flat.
1 layer is even more flexible but tears along the lines with a bit of effort. So if you want it really flexible I suggest you print 1 layer at slightly lower than normal nozzle height to really get the lines melded together. Or a bit hotter than normal.


Question:
Questions like this are usually not allowed but since the price of a brass nozzle in Switzerland is 15.90 and the average price of a nozzle from Alibaba or AliExpress is less than 0.10, and nozzles are something you exchange frequently the issue becomes of such magnitude that we need to have a simple answer to the very straightforward question:

Do nozzles from China offer the same quality and results?

Answer:
Up until this year, I used the cheap nozzles - the original that came with my Ender 3, and both the ones that were supposedly by Creality and appeared identical to it, and similarly cheap ones off Amazon. I never had any problem with them that I attributed to nozzle quality, but I went through them fairly quickly since they were so cheap, just swapping one out if it got a lot of buildup that was hard to clean off rather than bothering to clean it well. I would say they are perfectly usable.
However, if you're already used to paying more for a nozzle, I would
strongly
recommend ditching plain nozzles and going with the Bondtech CHT. The performance and quality improvement from it is
drastic
. It gives more improvement to flow than going from a standard size block to a volcano size block (see
Stefan's tests on CNC Kitchen
), and a lot less backpressure, so you can get by with lower values for Pressure Advance/Linear Advance, which put less stress on the extruder and get more consistent extrusion. In terms of ratio of printing performance boost to price (not to mention ease of installation), it's probably the single best upgrade you can make to a printer. And while it's not a special durable material, it is coated, which makes it a little bit better than plain brass.


Question:
In my previous research for mods for my Ender 3v2, I came across the topic of part cooling mods. The two most common are the Petsfang and Hero Me sets.

What are the pros and cons of third-party/DIY part cooling mods?

What benefit does having a third-party/DIY part cooling mod provide?

Answer:
Part cooling is essential to print at any decent
vertical speed
(layers per second), which is critical if you do rapid prototyping of small parts or vase mode prints. This is because you can't (repeatedly) print on top of material that hasn't yet cooled enough to be rigid; if you do, after a few layers, you'll find nothing is in the right place and it's all a bunch of goo getting dragged around by the nozzle. In fact, if the part is small enough you might not be able to print it at all. That's because, while slicers have features to slow down to guarantee a minimum layer time for cooling purposes, if the hot nozzle sticks around in the vicinity of a tiny part the whole time, just the heat from the nozzle will keep it from properly solidifying.
The Ender 3 (and as far as I know, the v2 as well, along with just about every other Creality printer) has
pitiful
stock cooling. It's off-center from the nozzle, and aimed more at the nozzle itself rather than the part below it, so that it saps heat out of the hotend (making the heater work harder and reducing your max achievable flow) at the same time it's (barely) cooling the print. So upgrading it is desirable. But, as you've guessed, there are cons too.
Some, especially those utilizing the stock 4010 fan,
reduce airflow
by constricting the airway too much. The 4010 does not really have the power to compress the air much, so if the airway cross-sectional area decreases along the way, that will reduce flow. Does the increase in focus/delivery to the right place make up for the lost flow? Maybe.
Some
focus the air too narrowly
while increasing its pressure, delivering high-pressure air to a still molten point on the print. This can actually cause the extruded material to bend in the direction the air is pressing it before it cools enough to solidify, giving an inaccurate print.
Large fans and ducts add mass to the toolhead, which can increase ringing, especially if they're not sufficiently rigid.
Many of the cooling mods mount awkwardly to the toolhead in ways that interfere with the motion of the carriage, reducing total build volume.
If the cooling mod blows on/over the heater block, it can reduce melting performance and pour heat onto the part you're trying to cool. Most try to avoid doing this, but you may find you want additional insulation around the block if you use more powerful part cooling.
Some people will also tell you that "too much cooling" will harm your print quality, hurting layer adhesion, making the print warp, etc. I use a rather extreme cooling system and have not encountered such problems that can't be remedied with a slight increase to the nozzle temperature, yielding better overall quality and equal strength to what I would have gotten with lower fan. But I print just PLA, PETG, and TPU, so it's likely that this could be an issue with other materials like ABS or nylon. If so you can always reduce the fan speed.


Question: I have a semi-diy hotend setup on my MOOZ-2 (an obscure chinese printer). It requires that the total nozzle length (including threading) is longer than 15 mm. So far, I've been using Volcano nozzles because they're the only ones I can find that meet this requirement. However I believe this negatively impacts performance because they stick out way beyond the heater block (see picture below). Unfortunately, the next size I can find are MK8 or V6 nozzles which are 13 mm - too short! Are there any nozzle sizes in between that I could use?

Answer:
I think this is just an overcomplicated lost-PLA (investment) casting.
What you're asking for is to create an object, create a mold around it, and then burn out the object and replace it with metal.  Traditionally this is done with wax,
and called lost-wax casting
, but the same can be done with anything that melts/burns away, including PLA.
Rather than worrying about burning hairs and pressure and compaction of metal powder, print a model, and use the correct kind of plaster (a search for "investment casting plaster" will get you going down the right path) to make your mold.  Heat the metal powder in a crucible, instead of the mold itself, and pour it through the expansion/extra material tube you were talking about.


Question:
I have a spool of PLA filament where the diameter is visibly inconsistent. So it will only print a meter or two and then start slipping instead of being fed into the nozzle. Is this still useful for anything or can it be salvaged somehow?

I can't return it, the shipping costs more than the spool.

Answer:
In principle you can re-extrude it with a somewhat simpler machine/setup than making filament from scratch, but controlling the diameter is the hard part of making filament - as you can see from how the manufacturer of yours botched it.
I would first try insisting on a refund without returning the item unless they pay return shipping, and that they cover the original shipping cost. The product they delivered is not usable for the purpose it was advertised for.
As for salvaging it - if that's what you really want to do, or if you end up stuck with it - as long as it's not too wide to fit through the filament path to the nozzle, an extruder that's spring loaded can
probably
manage to push it reliably. You will of course have pulsating under- and over-extrusion which will make it largely unusable for serious parts that need to be dimensionally accurate, strong, or visually appealing, but there are lots of things without these requirements it might be useful for. If your printer isn't capable of handling it, you could perhaps sell or trade it to someone whose printer can handle it.
Getting more on the wild end of things, there are filament diameter sensors that can be integrated with your printer and firmware (I'm pretty sure Klipper supports this; not sure about Marlin and others) to measure the diameter and compensate extruder motor steps to keep the extruded volume per requested E-axis length constant. This would in theory make it possible to use the bad filament for serious prints.


Question:
I have an old notebook computer that works just fine, but the outside of the lid is badly damaged and needs to be replaced. The screen and wiring are fine, so I only need to replace the housing that is exposed to the outside world.

What is the best filament for an impact-resistant printed housing? Should I consider other options that may prevent damage to the internal components? Are there any alternatives with cosmetic benefits?

Edit:
Since I was asked, presume I may be willing to buy a new part to upgrade or accommodate a new filament type.

Answer:
If you just cared about impact resistance of the housing itself, the clear choice would be TPU, which would be basically indestructible. However, the housing is there to protect what's inside - not only from impact, but from stresses (e.g. bending) that could break it. This means you need a material that both provides rigidity and avoids breaking easily itself.
If you were doing an old (90s or earlier) style laptop case that's a tank, I'd actually say yeah, go with TPU 95A or higher (98A or so if you could get it) and add some reinforcement ribs/stiffeners. This stuff can be quite rigid at 100% infill, and it will hold up fine to heat, abrasion, even most chemicals. But if this is a modern slim style case, a small amount of material needs to provide a lot of rigidity and that's not going to work.
PLA actually fares really well here in some ways - it's one of the most rigid printable materials, and very easy to get good bonding. If you check for example CNC Kitchen's strength tests, you'll find plain PLA usually coming out on top of most comparisons. However, PLA doesn't handle heat well, which might rule it out.
ASA, ABS, or PC is probably your best bet, but I don't have any experience with them so I'll leave the part about them as something for another answerer to write.


Question:
Can the GT2 belts lengthen themselves if they are tentioned too much?

I had them tensioned quite a bit until I saw the video from "Lost in Tech". I then decided to reduce the tension, but the dimensional precision was all over the place. So my guess is, that the belts are too long now?

Answer:
First of all there are two methods to achieve the belt be tensioned.
First method is when both ends of the belt hard attached. In this case if there is a fluctuation in the mechanical system then it will be absorbed by the belt itself. And in this case with big tension it will result in stretching over time with tension disappearing.
The second method is to use spring at one end. The spring will absorb all the fluctuations with little or no effect on the belt.
But I had really bad problems with GT2 PU belts (including steel reinforced), under big tension they degrade suddenly with big change in the geometry at some position. When removed they look twisted. Looks like some reinforcing wires slipped inside the PU body of the belt.
Once switched to rubber GT2 belts (fibreglass reinforced) I never had problems connected to the belts. I can tell that rubber GT2 belts have no noticeable change in the geometry over many years of constant use under high tension with the spring.


Question: Most of the guides I can find are just canned responses to specific questions. Instead I'm looking for something meant to teach good fundamental understanding and core needed skills. Beginner's guides are common in other hobbies but I am having trouble finding one for 3d printing.

Answer:
Thera are plenty of such guides. But from necessity they deal with specifics, there are too many things to cover otherwise.
Multiple types of printers, multiple brands, multiple slicers, multiple ways of modelling etc,. With more all the time. Reading up on something that tells me how to model and slice in Freecad & Creality, when I'm using Blender & Cura is a waste of time.
Generic instructions that apply to everything are so vague as to be essentially useless. (Plenty of those online though)


Question: Looking to print a new part for a home appliance. There's going to need to be a new model created with the customizations made, but the model (after printing) will have to fit where the old part was. Is there any 3D modeling software that is better for this purpose? Will I just have to guess at proper proportions and hand-adjust the scaling of each dimension and angle through trial and error until a version fits?

Answer:
Thera are plenty of such guides. But from necessity they deal with specifics, there are too many things to cover otherwise.
Multiple types of printers, multiple brands, multiple slicers, multiple ways of modelling etc,. With more all the time. Reading up on something that tells me how to model and slice in Freecad & Creality, when I'm using Blender & Cura is a waste of time.
Generic instructions that apply to everything are so vague as to be essentially useless. (Plenty of those online though)


Question: When using a filament based printer, what operator behaviors increase the frequency at which a bed must be relevelled between prints?

Answer:
The only ones I have found are.
Manually putting pressure on the bed when removing prints.
Removing the bed covering, eg a glass plate
Damaging the bed in some way. For example my bed has high spots on it (always has). This means that if I remove the glass plate I use and put it back, it sits slightly different. If I orient the glass a different way from prior it always needs levelling.
Changing filament types.
Changing cover types eg magnetic and glass are different thicknesses.
Changing first layer needs. Sometimes I need the first layer squished a bit depending what I'm doing.
Lastly on my Ender 3 Pro if the z-axis switch isn't screwed in tight enough it can slip down a fraction.


Question:
I'm looking for a way to slice up a 3D model and then get the profiles of each individual layer. I need to 2D print the different layers (with the layer height that I define) for a Styrofoam craft.

Thank you very much!

Answer:
With OpenSCAD, you can
```
import
```
the STL file and apply
```
projection
```
with
```
cut=true
```
at successive Z-axis
```
translate
```
operations, and write out the result as SVG. This can all be automated from the command line to product a series of SVG files for your layers to "2D print".