Skip to content
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

Skirt extrusion width does not account for second extruder nozzle diameter #966

Open
simonkuehling opened this issue Jan 30, 2013 · 6 comments
Labels
Perimeters Support material Verified bug This issue has been reproduced by a developer
Milestone

Comments

@simonkuehling
Copy link

When doing a skirt with dual extrusion all skirt loops are printed with the same flow rate for both extruders (standard extrusion width of first extruder is used).
Using two nozzles of quite different diameter for the extruders (here: 0.35mm on extruder #1, 0.75mm on extruder #2) this results in the second extruder trying to print skirt loops as thin as the first extruder - but doing a 0.39mm extrusion width by a 0.75mm nozzle just won't work :-)

@alranel
Copy link
Member

alranel commented Jan 30, 2013

I confirm that, Simon.

@simonkuehling
Copy link
Author

I also noticed today, that with two extruders and 5 skirt loops the generated gcode will first print two loops with extruder No.1, then two loops with extruder No.2 and then another loop with extruder No.1.

Is this sequence intended by a specific reason?

@alranel
Copy link
Member

alranel commented Jul 31, 2013

No @simonkuehling, the order does not make sense and I need to change it :)

@lordofhyphens
Copy link
Member

This is partially addressed by #3349 @simonkuehling is that enough or did @alexrj fix it before then?

@simonkuehling
Copy link
Author

As of 49f327f in the stable branch, this issue still exists - i just checked that quickly. Due to the fact that a dedicated skirt width always applies to all extruders, an extrusion width of 0.5mm will not work with a 0.35+0.75mm nozzle dual extruder setup. The most obvious workaround to just use 0.75mm skirt width instead may get problematic for the smaller nozzle pretty fast as well.

There are other strategies to prime two extruders than using a skirt, of course. We do the priming in front of the printbed (extruding freely and then sticking it onto the print bed edge) from the start-gcode ever since.

So, while potentially a cause of failure, this issue has no priority i think.
We should include a warning, though - just telling the user if the skirt extrusion width is too low for one of the nozzles configured.

@lordofhyphens
Copy link
Member

When you have some time, could you take a look at the PR for skirt width
and see if that makes anything worse?
On Jun 3, 2016 5:27 AM, "simonkuehling" notifications@github.com wrote:

As of 49f327f
49f327f
in the stable branch, this issue still exists - i just checked that
quickly. Due to the fact that a dedicated skirt width always applies to all
extruders, an extrusion width of 0.5mm will not work with a 0.35+0.75mm
nozzle dual extruder setup. The most obvious workaround to just use 0.75mm
skirt width instead may get problematic for the smaller nozzle pretty fast
as well.

There are other strategies to prime two extruders than using a skirt, of
course. We do the priming in front of the printbed (extruding freely and
then sticking it onto the print bed edge) from the start-gcode ever since.

So, while potentially a cause of failure, this issue has no priority i
think.
We should include a warning, though - just telling the user if the skirt
extrusion width is too low for one of the nozzles configured.


You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#966 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AAB8Ck7Ti_0S02KugPCBBsou619pdSM2ks5qIAGigaJpZM4AZT0i
.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Perimeters Support material Verified bug This issue has been reproduced by a developer
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants