First and last layers problem

Hello
I'm heaving a problem where I want to make ful layer. In a case of first and last layer outside is good, but inside i ger many lines, that are not close enough. I want ful layer. Problem apears alsi on low angel surfaces - see picture of generated code.

I tried with Carve-With/thickness ratio - to change from 1,8 to 2 - practicly no changes. I also tried to change Speed - Flow rate - but then a problem with too much material acures.

Any ideas?

Thak you and regards from Slovenia.

Bogdan

I am not sure I understand but the width of the outside line is Carve\Perimeter Width Over Thickness and the width of the inside lines is Fill\Infill Width Over Thickness.

If you're just changing the one in Carve, that will not help you on the inside of the object. Try setting the one in Fill to the same value you have in Carve.

Use SFACT.. Just measure your fialment diameter, enter it int DIMENSION filament diameter and print..

---

Manufacturer of low tolerance Filaments PLA, ABS, ASA, PETG, TPU, PA, PVA,
[www.miafilament.com]
[github.com]

Note that the thickness of the tool path trace shown in skeinlayer and skeiniso is not scaled to the width of the extruded filament. It's just a line showing the path of the tip of the nozzle. On the surface, the spacing between the traces is equal to the extruded filament width = layer thickness x width over thickness ratio. Thus, if you increase the width over thickness ratio, it would have the opposite effect and the gaps between the traces will increase. You really need to see it printed in order to determine if you have gaps in the infill pattern.

ahmetcemturan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Use SFACT.. Just measure your fialment diameter,
> enter it int DIMENSION filament diameter and
> print..


Don't you still need to calibrate the extruded length?

brnrd: He says that he gets his Perimeter OK so I am assuming he did that to a degree. Fact is that the calibration feature in SFACT can compensate for an error in E steps calibration...

---

Manufacturer of low tolerance Filaments PLA, ABS, ASA, PETG, TPU, PA, PVA,
[www.miafilament.com]
[github.com]

ahmetcemturan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> brnrd: He says that he gets his Perimeter OK so I
> am assuming he did that to a degree. Fact is
> that the calibration feature in SFACT can
> compensate for an error in E steps calibration...


It didn't sound like he actually printed a part. After rereading the original post, it seems that the statement about changing the flow rate would imply that he did print the part. Perhaps SF is not putting enough solid layers before the exposed layers. I've noticed that SF doesn't always put enough solid surface under exposed layers until it gets to the last layer. If the infill solidity is low like 25%, this results in gaps in the infill showing. I'm not sure if there's another parameter that can be changed or if increasing the Solid Surface Thickness (layers) would do it.

Also, the SF parameter filament packing density ratio is there to correct the E steps per unit.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/29/2011 07:06PM by brnrd.

brnrd: thats correct what SFACT does it takes out the guesswork.. In the end you enter a value into packing density... of course..
SFACT did not change the basic functions of Skeinforge.. It just connected them internally with formulas...

---

Manufacturer of low tolerance Filaments PLA, ABS, ASA, PETG, TPU, PA, PVA,
[www.miafilament.com]
[github.com]

I'm printing parts - just used rendered picture because I use black ABS, and on photographi it is hard to see, what the problem is.
I tried SFAC - head some problems (it seems, like G codes generates to small amounth of material printed out - E parameter is to small). Since I'm printig preati decent parts with classical SF dont wanna change. Just another question - what the point of heawing ''user frendly'' SFAC and still heawing 1000 parameters at user interface?

I'm using kliment-Printrun-eaaa56a software - realy nice - simple - just what I needed.

E steps per mm is OK - since if i print let say - cube - wals are nice, actualy complete part is nice, just first and last layer are not completely ful - closed - there are some gaps.

I dont want to randomly change some parameteres and make prints lower quality at the end.

Regards
Bogdan

I have one roll of green that does that yet all my other colours come out perfectly, real pain

---

__________________________________________________________________________
Experimenting in 3D in New Zealand

Yes, material that I'm using is not a standard material.
But i can get a lot of that for fair money.

Quote
BogyX
E steps per mm is OK - since if i print let say - cube - wals are nice, actualy complete part is nice, just first and last layer are not completely ful - closed - there are some gaps.

This is a different problem from your original post where you said that the first and last layers are good.

Anyway, I was getting similar looking parts where the infill gaps were wider in the middle of the surface when I was printing at high feed rate (around 80 mm/s and above) with Sprinter firmware. How fast were you printing? Have you tried slowing down your feed rate to 30 mm/s or below?

Sorry for my bad english - but problematic are onlie first and last layers - there are not good.

25mm/s is my speed.

Still heawing small problems - but I can live with that.

Just another question for all your Skeinforge experts - after printing raft printer head does another free round around raft - I know, that is ment for cooling down raft - but where the heck can I turn this OFF :-) ?

SF does this if the support temperature and the main part temperature is not the same. You can turn this off by setting them to the same temperature.

The delay between printing the raft and printing the object can mean a much-more detachable raft.

A decent trick is to mess with the temperatures and heating/cooling rates to give it 3-4 seconds between the raft and the object. If you also turn the Speed\Orbit Speed way down, the head will move very slowly away from the raft instead of wandering around the whole thing - this can do a lot to prevent strings during the delay.

A - so it is a temperature isue - thank you.

Regards

Bogdan

Just to revisit this problem,

I am still getting my Infill too sparse as was the original poster. I have spent the morning double checking my E steps and they are correct. I'm still using SF41 as going to SFact didn't make any difference in fact it was slightly worse so please don't tell me to use it.

If I print a single wall cube with my 0.6 nozzle I get walls of somewhere between 0.6- 0.62 so I know that is correct I use a layer of 0.4 with 1.8 PWOT.

When I get to print something with a solid base the infill lines are too far apart using PLA with a width of 2.8 measured in several places with digital callipers.

Things I have tried knowing my E steps to be correct.

I did the following one at a time and then ran my test again

As a test raised and lowered my E steps 80 points above and below the correct setting
changed the WOT in Fill from 1.5 to 1.8
reduced the filament packing density setting from 1 to 0.9

I'm using a fill ratio of 50% and a feed/flow rate of 40mm/s

As I said it's not the perimeters there fine its only on the infill.

I have had to stop printing before I pull all of my hair out.

---

__________________________________________________________________________
Experimenting in 3D in New Zealand

NelsonRap Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> If I print a single wall cube with my 0.6 nozzle I
> get walls of somewhere between 0.6- 0.62 so I know
> that is correct I use a layer of 0.4 with 1.8
> PWOT.
>
>

Your walls should be 0.4x1.8 = 0.72 mm, not 0.6-0.62. This is why your infill is not correct. If you have already measured your feed diameter and entered it to SF, then you need to multiply your filament packing density ratio by a factor 0.6/0.72. The best way is to measure the actual feed that is pulled by your extruder and calculate the fpdr by dividing the actual by the amount you asked to extrude.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/06/2011 08:35PM by brnrd.

I have the FPD down to 0.8 as calculated and infill width over thickness down to 1.2 and it looks pretty good. Thanks, was really strarting to annoy me

---

__________________________________________________________________________
Experimenting in 3D in New Zealand

brnrd Wrote:

> Your walls should be 0.4x1.8 = 0.72 mm, not
> 0.6-0.62. This is why your infill is not correct.
> If you have already measured your feed diameter
> and entered it to SF, then you need to multiply
> your filament packing density ratio by a factor
> 0.6/0.72. The best way is to measure the actual
> feed that is pulled by your extruder and calculate
> the fpdr by dividing the actual by the amount you
> asked to extrude.

This filament packing density is something i have not calibrated yet either.
Do you mean measuring the feed as it extrudes into free air or when actually printing ?

Thanks.

Both measurements should give the same number if your stepper is not missing steps or if your filament drive is not slipping. Note that you want to measure the feed going in to the extruder, not the filament coming out of the nozzle. It's easier to do this if it's just extruding in air. To avoid skipping steps or slipping, I extrude at a slow rate (around 1 mm/s). BTW, a good test to see if your extruder is working at higher speeds is to measure the feed in the same way. It should still be the same at higher speeds.