The Smell of Molten Projects in the Morning

Ed Nisley's Blog: Shop notes, electronics, firmware, machinery, 3D printing, laser cuttery, and curiosities. Contents: 100% human thinking, 0% AI slop.

Tag: M2

Using and tweaking a Makergear M2 3D printer

  • 3D Printed Handcuffs

    A friend who read about my chain mail armor asked about handcuffs, so I ran off one of gianteye’s Printable Handcuffs V1.0:

    3D Printed Handcuff
    3D Printed Handcuff

    Alas, that shows the difficulty of using an STL file designed for a different printer, as the interlocking parts didn’t even come close to fitting and required major abrasive adjustment with a Dremel. One of the few successful prints reported on Thingiverse seems involve a commercial printer, so it’s not just the M2’s problem.

    I’m not sufficiently motivated to conjure an OpenSCAD model right now…

  • 3D Printed Chain Mail Armor – Zombie Hunter Edition

    Reducing the link bars to 4×4 threads produced a diminutive patch:

    Square Armor - small links - platform
    Square Armor – small links – platform

    Most of the dark smudges come from optical effects in the natural PLA filament, but the second-from-upper-left armor button contains a dollop of black PLA left in the nozzle from the end of that spool; running meters and meters of filament through the extruder isn’t enough to clean the interior. I now have some filament intended to clean the extruder, but it arrived after the black ran out.

    Comparing the patch with the original buttons shows the size difference:

    Square Armor - large vs small links
    Square Armor – large vs small links

    A trial fit suggested a 5×5 patch would fit better, so …

    Square Armor - small links - mounted
    Square Armor – small links – mounted

    The whip stitching accentuates the jacket’s style.  We I think a glittery piping cord square around the armor links would spiff it up enormously and hide the open links, but that’s in the nature of fine tuning.

    I’ll eventually see what happens with 3×3 thread = 1.2×0.6 mm links, which may be too small for reliable bridging and too delicate for anything other the finest evening wear.

  • Rounded Cable Clips

    This isn’t quite the smoothly rounded clip I had in mind:

    LED Cable Clip - rounded channel
    LED Cable Clip – rounded channel

    It seems somewhat better looking than the square design, though:

    LED Cable Clips
    LED Cable Clips

    I ran off a few of both styles to have some on hand:

    Cable clips - on platform
    Cable clips – on platform

    They’re in a bag until I install the new LED strips and needle light.

    The OpenSCAD source code:

    // LED Cable Clips
    // Ed Nisley - KE4ZNU - October 2014
    
    Layout = "Oval";			// Oval Square Build
    
    //- Extrusion parameters must match reality!
    
    ThreadThick = 0.20;
    ThreadWidth = 0.40;
    
    HoleWindage = 0.2;			// extra clearance
    
    Protrusion = 0.1;			// make holes end cleanly
    
    AlignPinOD = 1.70;			// assembly alignment pins: filament dia
    
    function IntegerMultiple(Size,Unit) = Unit * ceil(Size / Unit);
    
    //----------------------
    // Dimensions
    
    Base = [12.0,12.0,IntegerMultiple(2.0,ThreadThick)];	// base over sticky square
    
    CableOD = 2.0;
    
    BendRadius = 3.0;
    
    Bollard = [BendRadius,(sqrt(2)*Base[0]/2 - CableOD - BendRadius),2*CableOD];
    B_BOT = 0;
    B_TOP = 1;
    B_LEN = 2;
    
    NumSides = (Shape == "Square") ? 5*4 : 6*3;
    
    //----------------------
    // Useful routines
    
    module PolyCyl(Dia,Height,ForceSides=0) {			// based on nophead's polyholes
    
      Sides = (ForceSides != 0) ? ForceSides : (ceil(Dia) + 2);
    
      FixDia = Dia / cos(180/Sides);
    
      cylinder(r=(FixDia + HoleWindage)/2,
               h=Height,
               $fn=Sides);
    }
    
    module ShowPegGrid(Space = 10.0,Size = 1.0) {
    
      RangeX = floor(100 / Space);
      RangeY = floor(125 / Space);
    
    	for (x=[-RangeX:RangeX])
    	  for (y=[-RangeY:RangeY])
    		translate([x*Space,y*Space,Size/2])
    		  %cube(Size,center=true);
    
    }
    
    //-- Square clip with central bollard
    
    module SquareBollard() {
    
    	intersection() {
    		translate([0,0,(Base[2] + Bollard[B_LEN])/2])			// overall XYZ outline
    			cube(Base + [0,0,Bollard[2]],center=true);
    
    		union() {
    			translate([0,0,Base[2]/2])						// oversize mount base
    				scale([2,2,1])
    					cube(Base,center=true);
    
    			for (i=[-1,1] , j=[-1,1]) {						// corner bollards
    				translate([i*Base[0]/2,j*Base[1]/2,(Base[2] - Protrusion)])
    					rotate(180/NumSides)
    					cylinder(r=Bollard[B_BOT],h=(Bollard[B_LEN] + Protrusion),center=false,$fn=NumSides);
    
    			translate([0,0,(Base[2] - Protrusion)])			// center tapered bollard
    				cylinder(r1=Bollard[B_BOT],r2=Bollard[B_TOP],
    						 h=(Bollard[B_LEN] + Protrusion),
    						 center=false,$fn=NumSides);
    			}
    		}
    	}
    
    }
    
    //-- Oval clip with central passage
    
    module OvalPass() {
    
    	intersection() {
    		translate([0,0,(Base[2] + Bollard[B_LEN])/2])		// overall XYZ outline
    			cube(Base + [0,0,2*CableOD],center=true);
    
    		union() {
    			translate([0,0,Base[2]/2])						// oversize mount base
    				scale([2,2,1])
    					cube(Base,center=true);
    
    			for (j=[-1,1])									// bending ovals
    				translate([0,j*Base[1]/2,(Base[2] - Protrusion)])
    					resize([Base[0]/0.75,0,0])
    						cylinder(d1=0.75*(Base[1]-CableOD),d2=(Base[1]-CableOD)/cos(180/NumSides),
    								h=(Bollard[B_LEN] + Protrusion),
    								center=false,$fn=NumSides);
    		}
    	}
    /*
    #	translate([0,0,6])
    		rotate([0,90,0])
    			cylinder(d=CableOD,h=10,center=true,$fn=48);
    */
    }
    
    //----------------------
    // Build it
    
    ShowPegGrid();
    
    if (Layout == "Square")
    	SquareBollard();
    
    if (Layout == "Oval")
    	OvalPass();
    
  • OpenSCAD: Quantized Vertices

    Back when I started fiddling with 3D printed chain mail, the whole process from model to plastic worked wonderfully well. That continued with the larger sheets, but now, occasionally, the OpenSCAD model would produce weirdly sliced links. Depending on nothing repeatable, some links wouldn’t bridge correctly: the thread paths in the bottom layer across the gap would mysteriously stop just short of one pillar, return to the start, and leave an unsupported shelf that would, of course, fall into the gap.

    Shortly before Christmas, I managed to get a consistent failure that manifested differently: upon loading the STL file, Slic3r would quietly perform dozens of automatic corrections that (sometimes!) produced bizarrely distorted results. Feeding a failing model into Meshlab showed an irregular assortment of “self intersecting faces”, highlighted in red:

    Chain Mail Square Armor - open - 2x2 - Meshlab self-intersecting faces
    Chain Mail Square Armor – open – 2×2 – Meshlab self-intersecting faces

    Although all four outer links in that image come from the same OpenSCAD module with identical sizes, they don’t all exhibit the same problem in the (nominally identical) faces on each of their four corners. In fact, those faces come from the intersection of two square slabs, carefully sized and positioned to avoid creating coincident planes:

    Chain Mail Link - Outer shape
    Chain Mail Link – Outer shape

    The central opening comes from a similar, slightly smaller, intersected-squares shape, but all four interior corner faces in each link show that they’re self-intersecting.

    The STL looked fine in Meshlab, except for the highlit self-intersecting faces, so the geometry seemed OK.

    When Slic3r autocorrected the “problems”, it apparently removed one vertex on the bottom surface of each bar, deleted the triangles connected to that vertex, then repaired the mesh to produce a delightfully symmetric pattern:

    Chain Mail Square Armor - open - 2x2 - Slic3r corrections
    Chain Mail Square Armor – open – 2×2 – Slic3r corrections

    Although the links are resolutely symmetric, Slic3r seemed happy with the identical vertices at the other end of the bar.

    Unfortunately, the resulting G-Code won’t produce good links:

    Chain Mail Square Armor - open - 2x2 - first layer G-code visualization
    Chain Mail Square Armor – open – 2×2 – first layer G-code visualization

    So, shortly before Christmas, I filed an issue on OpenSCAD’s Github repository.

    The ensuing discussion showed that Meshlab flags faces as “self intersecting” when they have different vertices, even if their values are numerically equal, as well as vertices that differ by teeny amounts. Slic3r applies slightly different criteria to vertices & faces when it automagically corrects “problems” in the STL file, so that Meshlab may:

    • Highlight faces that don’t bother Slic3r
    • Apply the same highlight to faces that cause horrible problems

    I don’t profess to understand much of that and may have the details wrong, but, apparently, OpenSCAD formerly used quantized coordinates that ensured all vertices within a tiny volume would have the same numeric value. In particular, all three faces that meet at a common point would, in fact, have numerically equal coordinate values for that point. The STL file format consists of a list of separate triangles, each with three coordinates for each of the three axes, and (without quantization) it was entirely possible for each of the three triangles with a common point to have three very slightly different positions for that point.

    In theoretic terms, quantized coordinates cause horrible problems during geometric manipulation, because numeric values that aren’t exact can make repeated transformations come out wrong; running an object through a transformation and it’s inverse might not yield an object identical to the original one.

    In practical terms, it seems that slicers and STL repair algorithms can reach incorrect conclusions based on minute differences produced by floating-point operations and numeric-to-text conversions. Those differences depend on slight changes in position, rotation, and size, so doing anything to the model produces completely different results.

    That notwithstanding, the day after Christmas brought a new OpenSCAD version that uses quantized coordinates. A bit of rummaging in the source shows that the 3D grid (defined in src/grid.h) isn’t all that coarse:

    const double GRID_FINE   = 0.00000095367431640625;
    

    STL files don’t carry units, so that could be in either millimeters (the Slic3r / RepRap convention) or inches (Sketchup, but we won’t go there). It’s exactly 1/10242, in case you were wondering, which produces a 5% speedup in the geometry engine compared to the more human-readable 1/10002.

    With that commit in hand, all the chain mail links slice perfectly again.

    A very nice Christmas present, indeed!

    Thanks, Marius…

  • MakerGear M2: Better Lighting, Redux

    A surplus haul of 24 V / 150 mA white LED panels arrived:

    LED Panel - 24 V 150 mA
    LED Panel – 24 V 150 mA

    I wired a pair to a 24 V wall wart and stuck them under the M2’s bridge supporting the X stage:

    LED Panel - on M2 Gantry
    LED Panel – on M2 Gantry

    I thought about epoxying them in place to get better heatsinking to the metal bridge. The ever-trustworthy description said the big copper baseplate meant the panels didn’t need any heatsinking, so I used tapeless sticky and will hope for the best. Should the sticky give out, then I’ll use epoxy.

    They’re much better than the previous white LED strip, although it’s tough to tell in the pictures. The chain mail armor appears under the new lights; some older pictures will creep in from time to time.

  • MAKE Magazine 2015 Test Objects

    Just for completeness, here’s how the MAKE Magazine 2015 Test Objects came out on my somewhat modified MakerGear M2. I ignored the instructions, lumped all the models together, sliced ’em with my ordinary Slic3r settings, and printed the entire lot in one go:

    MAKE Magazone 2015 Test Objects - on platform
    MAKE Magazone 2015 Test Objects – on platform

    Some details…

    There’s no point in showing the Dimension Accuracy Tower-of-Hanoi (hiding behind the smokestack), as it looks exactly like it should. The 20 mm diameter platter came out at 19.7 ± 0.05 mm in both X and Y, so that’s a score of 2 or 3. It’s exactly the same along both axes, both diagonals, and, in fact, all the way around, within ±0.07 mm tolerance. In fact, all the layers worked out about that way; it’s consistently a bit too small. That’s what I’d expect for an uncalibrated model.

    The Bridging Performance lattice gets a 5, with all the bars having dead-flat perimeters and no dropped infill. That would be a 1 if “dropped” should be “drooped”; I have no idea which is correct or exactly what they mean, but I have seen bridge threads drop off the sides, so I’ll assume it means what it says.

    The front view shows the first bridging layer getting droopy under the longer bars, as you’d expect:

    Bridging - front
    Bridging – front

    All those drooping threads remain above the 2 mm tolerance, assuming that’s what they intended.

    The bottom view shows the loose strands below the bars:

    Bridging - bottom
    Bridging – bottom

    The Overhang Performance arch gets a 5, because the top surface finish remains pretty much the same from 30° through 70° overhang:

    Overhang - upper
    Overhang – upper

    Underneath, things look weirder:

    Overhang - lower
    Overhang – lower

    I think the oddness on the left (the underside of the 30° section) is due to interference from the Fine Positive Space Features spire array; the nozzle came directly from there. The 70° overhang looks ugly, but I wouldn’t have imagined that would work at all, let alone as well as it did.

    The Negative Space Tolerance block weighs in at 2, as the pins with 0.6 and 0.5 mm clearance pushed out with finger pressure. The 0.3 and 0.4 mm clearance pins have air nearly all the way around, but would require a sharp rap from a mallet. The 0.2 mm pin remains firmly stuck:

    Negative Space Tolerance
    Negative Space Tolerance

    I don’t know how to judge the Fine Positive Space Features bed-o’-nails:

    Fine Positive
    Fine Positive

    I think it’s either a 2 or a 3, but opinions will certainly differ. Hot off the platform, five of the nine spires completed successfully. Three other got almost done, but broke off in handling. The collection of drool on the left-middle spire seems to be from the uncompleted spires in the foreground; I think there just wasn’t enough adhesion to hold them together. The perimeters ran at 50 mm/s and the infill at 150 mm/s, because it’s printed with everything else, so it wasn’t done with the delicacy it would get in isolation.

    Both Mechanical Resonance in XY boxes look fine to me:

    XY Resonance - notch
    XY Resonance – notch

    The ripples are visible, but barely perceptible to the thumbnail. The Rules call for 0 or 2, I’d give it a 1: if those ripples pose a problem, then sheesh you’re using the wrong process.

    Also, the perimeters ran at 50 mm/s perimeter and the thick walls got 150 mm/s infill.

    A corner of the single-wall box looks about the same as the corresponding point on the 1 mm box (which isn’t shown):

    XY Resonance - corner
    XY Resonance – corner

    I think the Mechanical Resonance in Z smokestack gets a 1 (the Rules allow either 0 or 2); I stopped it after 100 mm, because bedtime. The bottom section shows the influence of all the other stuff going on around it:

    Z Resonance - lower
    Z Resonance – lower

    That’s not a missed step over there on the far left: it lines up with the bottom bar of the adjacent Bridging Performance lattice. The next glitch lines up with the top of the Negative Space block. And so forth and so on.

    The top, done all by itself at 11 mm/s, shows some misalignment:

    Z Resonance - upper
    Z Resonance – upper

    Each layer took 15 seconds, so I suspect it’d look better with more cooling.

    So, using ordinary default settings for everything and with all the handwaving in mind, I’ll call the total score 19-ish of a possible 29. The M2 would definitely do better on individual objects sliced with carefully hand-tuned parameters after considerable iteration; this is its ordinary, day-in-and-day-out performance on crazy models that I’d never attempt without tweaking.

    The score would be much much much higher if I judged it with criteria similar to what I see applied to some of the Thingiverse groupings.

    The M2 works well for me, anyhow.

    For reference, here’s the current Slic3r configuration:

    # generated by Slic3r 1.2.1 on Sun Dec 7 12:19:19 2014
    avoid_crossing_perimeters = 0
    bed_shape = -100x-125,100x-125,100x125,-100x125
    bed_temperature = 70
    bottom_solid_layers = 3
    bridge_acceleration = 0
    bridge_fan_speed = 100
    bridge_flow_ratio = 1
    bridge_speed = 150
    brim_width = 0
    complete_objects = 0
    cooling = 1
    default_acceleration = 0
    disable_fan_first_layers = 1
    dont_support_bridges = 1
    duplicate_distance = 6
    end_gcode = ;-- Slic3r End G-Code for M2 starts --\n; Ed Nisley KE4NZU - 15 November 2013\nM104 S0 ; drop extruder temperature\nM140 S0 ; drop bed temperature\nM106 S0 ; bed fan off\nG1 Z160 F2000 ; lower bed\nG1 X130 Y125 F30000 ; nozzle to right, bed front\nM84 ; disable motors\n;-- Slic3r End G-Code ends --
    external_perimeter_extrusion_width = 0
    external_perimeter_speed = 50
    external_perimeters_first = 0
    extra_perimeters = 1
    extruder_clearance_height = 25
    extruder_clearance_radius = 15
    extruder_offset = 0x0
    extrusion_axis = E
    extrusion_multiplier = 1.07
    extrusion_width = 0.4
    fan_always_on = 0
    fan_below_layer_time = 30
    filament_diameter = 1.72
    fill_angle = 45
    fill_density = 20%
    fill_pattern = 3dhoneycomb
    first_layer_acceleration = 0
    first_layer_bed_temperature = 70
    first_layer_extrusion_width = 0.4
    first_layer_height = 100%
    first_layer_speed = 25
    first_layer_temperature = 175
    gap_fill_speed = 50
    gcode_arcs = 0
    gcode_comments = 0
    gcode_flavor = reprap
    infill_acceleration = 0
    infill_every_layers = 2
    infill_extruder = 1
    infill_extrusion_width = 0
    infill_first = 1
    infill_only_where_needed = 0
    infill_speed = 150
    interface_shells = 0
    layer_gcode =
    layer_height = 0.2
    max_fan_speed = 100
    min_fan_speed = 75
    min_print_speed = 4
    min_skirt_length = 15
    notes =
    nozzle_diameter = 0.35
    only_retract_when_crossing_perimeters = 1
    ooze_prevention = 0
    output_filename_format = [input_filename_base].gcode
    overhangs = 1
    perimeter_acceleration = 0
    perimeter_extruder = 1
    perimeter_extrusion_width = 0.4
    perimeter_speed = 150
    perimeters = 2
    post_process =
    raft_layers = 0
    resolution = 0.01
    retract_before_travel = 1
    retract_layer_change = 0
    retract_length = 1
    retract_length_toolchange = 5
    retract_lift = 0
    retract_restart_extra = 0
    retract_restart_extra_toolchange = 0
    retract_speed = 60
    seam_position = nearest
    skirt_distance = 3
    skirt_height = 1
    skirts = 3
    slowdown_below_layer_time = 10
    small_perimeter_speed = 50
    solid_fill_pattern = rectilinear
    solid_infill_below_area = 5
    solid_infill_every_layers = 0
    solid_infill_extrusion_width = 0
    solid_infill_speed = 150
    spiral_vase = 0
    standby_temperature_delta = -5
    start_gcode = ;-- Slic3r Start G-Code for M2 starts --\n; Ed Nisley KE4NZU - 15 Nov 2013\n; 28 Feb 2014 - 6 Mar 2014 - tweak Z offset June July 2014\n; Z-min switch at platform, must move nozzle to X=130 to clear\nM140 S[first_layer_bed_temperature] ; start bed heating\nG90 ; absolute coordinates\nG21 ; millimeters\nM83 ; relative extrusion distance\nG92 Z0 ; set Z to zero, wherever it might be now\nG1 Z10 F1000 ; move platform downward to clear nozzle; may crash at bottom\nG28 Y0 ; home Y to be sure of clearing probe point\nG92 Y-127 ; set origin so 0 = center of plate\nG28 X0 ; home X\nG92 X-95 ; set origin so 0 = center of plate\nG1 X130 Y0 F30000 ; move off platform to right side, center Y\nG28 Z0 ; home Z with switch near center of platform\nG92 Z-4.65 ; set origin to measured z offset\nG0 Z2.0 ; get air under switch\nG0 Y-127 F10000 ; set up for priming, zig around corner\nG0 X0 ; center X\nM109 S[first_layer_temperature] ; set extruder temperature and wait\nM190 S[first_layer_bed_temperature] ; wait for bed to finish heating\nG1 Z0.0 F500 ; put extruder at plate \nG1 E30 F300 ; prime to get pressure, generate blob\nG1 Z5 F2000 ; rise above blob\nG1 X15 Y-125 F20000 ; jerk away from blob, move over surface\nG1 Z0.0 F1000 ; dab nozzle to attach outer snot to platform\nG4 P0.5 ; pause to attach\nG1 X35 F500 ; slowly smear snot to clear nozzle\nG1 Z1.0 F2000 ; clear bed for travel\n;-- Slic3r Start G-Code ends --
    support_material = 0
    support_material_angle = 0
    support_material_enforce_layers = 0
    support_material_extruder = 1
    support_material_extrusion_width = 0
    support_material_interface_extruder = 1
    support_material_interface_layers = 3
    support_material_interface_spacing = 0
    support_material_interface_speed = 100%
    support_material_pattern = pillars
    support_material_spacing = 2.5
    support_material_speed = 150
    support_material_threshold = 0
    temperature = 175
    thin_walls = 1
    threads = 2
    toolchange_gcode =
    top_infill_extrusion_width = 0
    top_solid_infill_speed = 50
    top_solid_layers = 3
    travel_speed = 250
    use_firmware_retraction = 0
    use_relative_e_distances = 0
    vibration_limit = 0
    wipe = 0
    xy_size_compensation = 0
    z_offset = 0
    
  • 3D Printed Chain Mail Armor: Bridging

    With about two meters of black PLA left on the spool, a pair of spare joiner links and a few tchotckes seemed in order:

    Chain Mail Armor - spares and samples
    Chain Mail Armor – spares and samples

    The underside of the samples shows the bridges between the pillars and the cap layer between the sides:

    Chain Mail Armor - link bottom
    Chain Mail Armor – link bottom

    The bridge strands start out droopy, then pull into a more-or-less straight thread as the plastic cools and shrinks. The next layer up looks much, much better.

    I can spend a long time watching the nozzle stretch threads across the chasms, putting me in a definite Channel Zero state of mind…