New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Partly wrong extrusion rate for support? 1.2.0-experimental #2269

Closed
jonaskuehling opened this Issue Sep 11, 2014 · 7 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@jonaskuehling

jonaskuehling commented Sep 11, 2014

Hey @alexrj,

we are extensively testing support with 1.2.0-experimental (64bit, Ubuntu) and found that on many models at least parts of the support gets pretty much overstuffed, resulting in not so brittle but totally strong struts that fuse with the model's parameters where support touches the model's skin.

This doesn't happen on every part and not in every layer, can't figure out when this behaviour occurs actually. Find attached one example GCODE of the popular Makerbot gnome - the model itself comes out perfectly, but the supports are quite a mess and not really "breakaway"-able.

GCODE https://www.dropbox.com/s/po824tzg4j25jy7/GnomeScan.gcode?dl=0
STL https://www.dropbox.com/s/tbe5643z8mgmbha/GnomeScan.stl?dl=0

Here are a few quick shots of the supports:
foto 11 09 14 09 37 55
foto 11 09 14 09 37 42
foto 11 09 14 09 37 30
foto 11 09 14 09 37 25

Did you or anyone else ever experience the same?

@jonaskuehling

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jonaskuehling

jonaskuehling Sep 11, 2014

Here's another example that I just started on one of our machines, this time the support extrusion rate obviously is too low so that the honeycomb support extrusions get pulled:

(sorry for the wrong orientation...)

foto 11 09 14 10 24 52
foto 11 09 14 10 23 53

GCODE (config inside): https://www.dropbox.com/s/peqm7em529q8ff9/support-test-20140911.gcode?dl=0

There's something fishy about support extrusion rates in 1.2.0-experimental I think ;-) Didn't test with 1.1.7 yet, though...

jonaskuehling commented Sep 11, 2014

Here's another example that I just started on one of our machines, this time the support extrusion rate obviously is too low so that the honeycomb support extrusions get pulled:

(sorry for the wrong orientation...)

foto 11 09 14 10 24 52
foto 11 09 14 10 23 53

GCODE (config inside): https://www.dropbox.com/s/peqm7em529q8ff9/support-test-20140911.gcode?dl=0

There's something fishy about support extrusion rates in 1.2.0-experimental I think ;-) Didn't test with 1.1.7 yet, though...

@jonaskuehling

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jonaskuehling

jonaskuehling Sep 11, 2014

By the way, the very first layer below support (raft..) looks right, but already the first honeycomb on top of the base layer has too thin extrusion..

jonaskuehling commented Sep 11, 2014

By the way, the very first layer below support (raft..) looks right, but already the first honeycomb on top of the base layer has too thin extrusion..

@jonaskuehling

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jonaskuehling

jonaskuehling Sep 11, 2014

So, we did a quick print for comparison with Slic3r 1.1.7-stable and once again with 1.2.0-exp afterwards and it looks like this bug is limited to 1.2.0 only.

Here's our GCODE (once again with included config) for 1.1.7 that printed correctly:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ofjhqhn0elrfbp/support-test-20140911_v117.gcode?dl=0

Hope this helps!

jonaskuehling commented Sep 11, 2014

So, we did a quick print for comparison with Slic3r 1.1.7-stable and once again with 1.2.0-exp afterwards and it looks like this bug is limited to 1.2.0 only.

Here's our GCODE (once again with included config) for 1.1.7 that printed correctly:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ofjhqhn0elrfbp/support-test-20140911_v117.gcode?dl=0

Hope this helps!

@villamany

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@villamany

villamany Oct 12, 2014

Im geting similar issues (i think), as you can see on picture (rectilinear grid support) only the first milimeters of support layers are ok,

when it begins to generate bad support, i see on printer LCD a support layer heigh of 0.4mm instead of 0.25 as normal printing layers ??? (I have set layer height to 0.25).

20141012_114754

villamany commented Oct 12, 2014

Im geting similar issues (i think), as you can see on picture (rectilinear grid support) only the first milimeters of support layers are ok,

when it begins to generate bad support, i see on printer LCD a support layer heigh of 0.4mm instead of 0.25 as normal printing layers ??? (I have set layer height to 0.25).

20141012_114754

@alexrj

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@alexrj

alexrj Oct 14, 2014

Member

@jonaskuehling, thank you! Are you using the default extrusion width for support or are you setting that to some custom value? (I haven't checked your config files yet)

Member

alexrj commented Oct 14, 2014

@jonaskuehling, thank you! Are you using the default extrusion width for support or are you setting that to some custom value? (I haven't checked your config files yet)

@alexrj alexrj added this to the 1.2.1 milestone Oct 14, 2014

@jonaskuehling

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jonaskuehling

jonaskuehling Oct 15, 2014

Thanks @villamany for your confirmation!

@alexrj I used default extrusion width settings (0) for support.
My apologies, the two GCODE links from my latest comments above are broken, looks like I screwed up my Dropbox. But the initial files (GnomeScan) from the very first post above still work.

jonaskuehling commented Oct 15, 2014

Thanks @villamany for your confirmation!

@alexrj I used default extrusion width settings (0) for support.
My apologies, the two GCODE links from my latest comments above are broken, looks like I screwed up my Dropbox. But the initial files (GnomeScan) from the very first post above still work.

@alexrj

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@alexrj

alexrj Nov 7, 2014

Member

I fixed this! Thank you...

Member

alexrj commented Nov 7, 2014

I fixed this! Thank you...

@alexrj alexrj closed this Nov 7, 2014

@alexrj alexrj added the Fixed label Nov 7, 2014

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment