Slicing with multiple nozzle sizes, feedback loops, and nested motion systems

Is there any slicing software that can create toolpaths for multiple nozzle sizes? I'm wondering if it'd be possible to print faster without sacrificing quality by printing details with a small nozzle, then fill in cavities with a much larger nozzle. From what I understand, there's a limit of 10mm3/s for 0.4mm nozzles, but this isn't the case for something like E3D's Volcano 1.2mm. Thanks! (my first post)

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/17/2015 04:13AM by johntron.

BTW, here are some other ideas I've been thinking about for increasing speed and/or accuracy - somebody tell me why they're stupid:
1. Auto-calibration or even motion using feedback from integrated measurement equipment like laser collimators.
2. Large scale motion with integrated high-precision motion system - big slides or delta arms with a print head that can position itself within its reference frame by a few millimeters to correct for deflection at larger scales.
3. Fixing my delta to the inside of something like a steel beer keg to increase rigidity - it's floppin all over! Maybe I'll just nail it to the wall.

Quote
johntron
3. Fixing my delta to the inside of something like a steel beer keg to increase rigidity - it's floppin all over! Maybe I'll just nail it to the wall.

A combination of 2020 vertical extrusions, a mix of 2020 and 2060 horizontal extrusions, and metal corners works very well for me. See [miscsolutions.wordpress.com]. I think the metal corners make a lot of difference.

---

Large delta printer [miscsolutions.wordpress.com], E3D tool changer, Robotdigg SCARA printer, Crane Quad and Ormerod

Disclosure: I design Duet electronics and work on RepRapFirmware, [duet3d.com].

Would it really save time?
Heat up a volcano hotend to print the infill...
Then heatup the normal hotend again, ( probably move to a ooze-remove corner to wipe off ooze and) return to print the outer walls a.s.o.

What about layer height for the volcano? It would be enough to print the infill after 2 or 3 outer layers had been printed.
You´d need to have a slicer with multi-layerheight option ( not only nozzle diameter ).
A selfmade postprocessing algorhythm would be nessesary to filter the infill gcode and replace it with a recalculated volcano gcode.

All that for just printing one part? It would be worth doing it for series production, but then a real molding process is better.
-Olaf

Use "infill every x layers" and infill extrusion multiplier with faster travel and youd get the same results.. Faster prints

Quote
o_lampe
You´d need to have a slicer with multi-layerheight option

This is what I'm asking about. I'm aware of the layer mismatch issue.

Quote
o_lampe
A selfmade postprocessing algorithm

Any idea where I could find some post processing algorithms to get some ideas from?

Quote
o_lampe
All that for just printing one part

I never said one part, just armchair engineering here.

Quote
thetazzbot
Use "infill every x layers" and infill extrusion multiplier with faster travel and youd get the same results.. Faster prints

I didn't know this was a possibility! Which slicer(s) support these options? I don't think I've seen these in Cura.

Quote
dc42

Quote
johntron
3. Fixing my delta to the inside of something like a steel beer keg to increase rigidity - it's floppin all over! Maybe I'll just nail it to the wall.

A combination of 2020 vertical extrusions, a mix of 2020 and 2060 horizontal extrusions, and metal corners works very well for me. See [miscsolutions.wordpress.com]. I think the metal corners make a lot of difference.

I'm looking at the same thing right now too - thanks for the awesome blog post!

Quote
johntron
I didn't know this was a possibility! Which slicer(s) support these options? I don't think I've seen these in Cura.

Slic3r has a blog post on the feature, they call it microlayering.

Quote
johntron
1. Auto-calibration or even motion using feedback from integrated measurement equipment like laser collimators.

This exists for extremely precise applications but we are talking nanometers here.

Quote
johntron
2. Large scale motion with integrated high-precision motion system - big slides or delta arms with a print head that can position itself within its reference frame by a few millimeters to correct for deflection at larger scales.

This is a bad idea because your ability to measure with low latency is dependent on having some rigid frame of reference. If your frame is not rigid, you cannot measure your error fast enough to correct it. If the frame is rigid, there is no need for a second positioning stage.



You are trying to solve a problem that does not exist. The repeatability and accuracy requirements of 3d printing are a joke compared to many other (low-cost) applications.

People have trouble because they cut every corner possible. There is no point adding closed feedback to a machine made from zip ties and laser cut plywood.

Building the frame properly is easier, cheaper, and more robust than trying to calibrate a piece of shit with sensors and feedback loops.

Quote
691175002

Quote
johntron
1. Auto-calibration or even motion using feedback from integrated measurement equipment like laser collimators.

This exists for extremely precise applications but we are talking nanometers here.

Quote
johntron
2. Large scale motion with integrated high-precision motion system - big slides or delta arms with a print head that can position itself within its reference frame by a few millimeters to correct for deflection at larger scales.

This is a bad idea because your ability to measure with low latency is dependent on having some rigid frame of reference. If your frame is not rigid, you cannot measure your error fast enough to correct it. If the frame is rigid, there is no need for a second positioning stage.



You are trying to solve a problem that does not exist. The repeatability and accuracy requirements of 3d printing are a joke compared to many other (low-cost) applications.

People have trouble because they cut every corner possible. There is no point adding closed feedback to a machine made from zip ties and laser cut plywood.

Building the frame properly is easier, cheaper, and more robust than trying to calibrate a piece of shit with sensors and feedback loops.

Thanks for the explanation - exactly the kind of info I was looking for. I was just found Folger Tech's aluminum corners for 2020 extrusions, and was thinking that's just the combo I need to stop the shakes on my zip ties and plywood delta. I guess you guys get tired of all us noobs trying to plan too far ahead, but what else are we supposed to do when our dinky printers spend hours printing amorphous blobs nothing like what we intended