Posts made by Ellis

@oliof Sorry, meant to tag @CrazyCreator there!

@oliof The tool will set your PA using M572 at each increment, and then set it back to the start value at the end. If you have your PA set before running the tool, it will override it.

See Saving Your Value once you settle on a value.

@Robthide37 Sorry just saw this.
I would prefer to keep it on my site but you are welcome to link to it

@Exerqtor Generally I try external speed first, and if it's not fast enough to show differences, I will fall back to internal speed.

@CCS86 nozzle strikes yes, stringing no

@CCS86 Interesting idea, but I don't think it's necessary, the part goes straight into the trash afterwards, a bit of stringing doesn't matter as long as its prints and is readable

@mrehorstdmd Currently the numbers are a static size, so the illegible blobs doesn't surprise me. I would need to figure out how to make them scale, I think.
Maybe I will disable numbering for >0.8mm nozzles for now.
Was hoping it would surprise me, but I'm not surprised
The retraction is an interesting idea. You could theoretically do that in a macro - in Klipper, at least, but I believe RRF3 macros aren't too far removed

@mrehorstdmd The blobbing gets worse at higher speeds or lower accels, 50mm/s may just be a bit harder to read - though I imagine flow rate is a limitation here

This was with a 1mm nozzle? I'm also curious if the numbering printed okay, if you had that enabled. The preview freaks out a bit at such line widths since it renders the extrusions as cylinders instead of flattened ones.

My best real world results have been to pick the higher value a little before gapping, inversely to the usual recommendation of erring lower.

Looking at your results, it's certainly subtle. I'd hazard to guess around 0.055-0.06.

@Exerqtor PETG by chance? If so I've found it to need around double that of ABS/PLA. Abnormally high also can point to a sneaky partial clogs, even though it's still printing

Ok, added firmware retracts and slowed the numbering down to first layer speed. They are looking cleaner for me now without having to bump flow

@CCS86 PA seems to change at different speeds, same story with Klipper - unfortunately nothing can ever be simple, hah.

That's why I usually recommend to tune at your perim speeds, as that's where you will see it most

@CCS86 It's still there! Tick "expert mode" up top
I will reduce glyph speed to first layer speed and see how they print for me

@mrehorstdmd I think only 3-4 layers are needed, just to ensure that it's decoupled from first layer squish, but you can also print it tall to look at the sides of the walls too!

@oliof
I am curious if the lack of an unretract distance setting causes issue with the test in your case.

If so, that seems a valid reason to add it - so let me know how it goes

@oliof I'll consider putting them under expert mode

For some background, I went into the 3d printing discord and showed it to some new folks, and they were really confused and overwhelmed, basically. Got a lot of screenshots with "what should I change"?, haha.

That's part of what lead to me trimming the fat like this

I think the print it so small that it doesn't really have much opportunity to curl and cause problematic nozzle strikes
No overhangs either

@mrehorstdmd Hmm, possibly. Might just leave it alone.

Another thing that occured to me, the default print height is 1mm, which could be small for such large nozzles. It has a setting, but it's buried in expert mode then pattern settings. Any thoughts? Maybe do it by layer count instead?

@oliof I don't quite follow the logic behind having a different unretract length. Is that a common thing? Always seemed... bodgy to me. I don't print with large nozzles very often, though, so maybe that's part of it. PA is supposed to help with what you mentioned (needing extra pressure to start), or is that not typically enough?

I think at a certain point it becomes too many settings & too much clutter - it actually had firmware retract and I removed it (and a few other things) to make it leaner. Software retract works for everyone.

Once it starts becoming a wall of settings, it starts to become really overwhelming for new folks.

It's meant to be a quick test with only the features necessary to get it printed, not a full web based slicer with all the same features as your desktop one, y'know?

Hell, I've even thought about getting rid of the Z hop settings and just baking in the 0.1mm z-hop.

@mrehorstdmd Ok just pushed a bunch of fixes, all clear
@CCS86 I fixed the flow and overlap issues. The tab seems to print a lot better now. Give it a whirl.

@mrehorstdmd Found some small errors in the flow math, hold off for now