Why 16x micro stepping is not a good idea for mixing hot ends June 08, 2018 07:52AM |
Registered: 8 years ago Posts: 622 |
Re: Why 16x micro stepping is not a good idea for mixing hot ends June 09, 2018 01:52AM |
Registered: 8 years ago Posts: 5,232 |
Re: Why 16x micro stepping is not a good idea for mixing hot ends June 09, 2018 02:43AM |
Registered: 8 years ago Posts: 622 |
Re: Why 16x micro stepping is not a good idea for mixing hot ends June 11, 2018 02:49AM |
Registered: 8 years ago Posts: 5,232 |
Re: Why 16x micro stepping is not a good idea for mixing hot ends June 11, 2018 11:41AM |
Registered: 8 years ago Posts: 622 |
Quote
o_lampe
Wouldn't that require a different object description than .stl? (new slic3rs and all that...)
RRF always claims to be segmentation_free, but the .stl files aren't....
Re: Why 16x micro stepping is not a good idea for mixing hot ends June 12, 2018 02:12AM |
Registered: 8 years ago Posts: 5,232 |
Re: Why 16x micro stepping is not a good idea for mixing hot ends June 13, 2018 01:26PM |
Registered: 8 years ago Posts: 622 |
Quote
o_lampe
I meant, that the .stl files already inherit the segmentation of arcs and circles. On CNC machines arcs are described with G2&G3 moves. If we had a slicer that could produce such Arc moves ( based on other object format than .stl) , it would be seen as one long move from RRF and the pressure advance would work better.
Maybe it's an option to use pressure advance from one retraction-command to the other instead of track_by_track? Jerk setting would have to be pretty high then....