|
I tried it with a moderate 200 degrees, but watever has happened, now the old brand of filament with my old temperature setting also does not work anymore. Maybe it's just a coincidence and the new filament had nothing to do with the actual problem.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
To me, both the not bonding and not feeding point to extruder too cold. Did you check if the extruder is running the temperature it says it is? Is filament moisture content consistent?
|
|
|
|
|
Have you checked the bed leveling / height? Since you removed the extruder - to change the nozzle if nothing else - it's quite possible that the bed / extruder distance is slightly different.Which would give you less "squashing" of new hot filament onto older colder filament, and less layer adhesion, I think.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Certainly. We are talking about a distance between the nozzle and the bed that is as little as the thickness of a folded sheet of paper. No more and no less.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: 3D printers Early adopters, you got to love them
FTFY
Or is it too late by now to still refer to them as "early" adopters?
In any case...I'm still holding out for all the kinks to be worked out. I probably won't be getting a 3D printer until the process has been shown to be foolproof, and we've gone through a few more generations of fools.
(no offense) 
|
|
|
|
|
3D printing is absolutely foolproof, but only when you are willing to pay the price.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
So...
If you want it foolproof, you've gotta spend the money.
But the more money you spend, the more foolish the whole thing starts to look. 
|
|
|
|
|
The only foolish thing would be to buy just any printer without actually knowing what you want to do with it or what you are getting yourself into. After that it's your decision how much that purpose, whatever it may be, is worth for you.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
Couple points to add:
1) - Don't assume that a certain brand and type of material will not change properties over time and or different lots.
2) Make sure, when troubleshooting, that you are using models that will help with specific problems, ie: temp towers for temp issues, single layer discs for first layer issues, 10mm cubes for layer adhesion, dimensional issues and extruding issues, etc. Usually these test prints are quick, and allow you to focus (and eliminate) fewer issues at a time.
|
|
|
|
|
If this is PLA, you may have gotten some filament that wasn't stored properly. PLA is really bad about absorbing moisture, which makes it swell and not feed properly. It also makes it generate steam bubbles when extruded, which absorbs a bunch of the heat and messes up layer adhesion. You also might see a rougher texture from all the little bubbles.
I've heard people bake their PLA to try to dry it out, might be worth a try, 40C for 6 hours or so. Here's a link: How to Dry Filament: PLA, ABS and Nylon | All3DP[^]
HTH! -- prr
|
|
|
|
|
@Fueled-By-Caffeine
You won yesterday, so your prize is to set it today!
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Honestly... it gets worse and worse and worse with Microsoft.
What was wrong with the code analysis in VS2017?
* perfectly integrated, just runs with the build
* no additional installs (or nuget-mayhem) needed
* compiler-warnings and all perfectly there for any logs
NOW
* "install this extension" _or_ "you can do it as nuget"
* give a warning of deprecated analysis in each and every project
* go there, click install for this, and configure that
* starting time of VS tripled since this crap has been installed
OMG really???
In a multi-product environment with 100+ solutions which are opened at least once a week (throughout the team) the nuget-mayhem is no option - we don't want to have 100's of copies of the same crap running around on the dev machines.
The CI server plays the song of death
The performance is down to the late 90's
WHY... microsoft... WHY?
Do you really want to push us all to the java world with intelliJ? It was already lightyears ahead of Visual Studio and now you implemented the Hogwarts Express from VS to intelliJ.
Good job.
I'm totally pissed.
Have a nice day 
|
|
|
|
|
MS saw that Node had NPM, and thought it was a good thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Barthold wrote: we don't want to have 100's of copies of the same crap running around on the dev machines.
If you use the PackageReferences format of csproj file, you don't end up with multiple copies; you use the same one (as long as the version is the same).
|
|
|
|
|
I have no opinion on FxCop because I don't use it and the only time I looked at using it, I couldn't run fast enough away from it.
|
|
|
|
|
Lucky you.
Unfortunately this decision is not up to me. I only have to live with it 
|
|
|
|
|
To be fair, I tried FxCop many times, and once, like in 2005 perhaps? it gave me good tip on how to properly implement IDisposable!
Although, since then, it has done nothing else good! 
|
|
|
|
|
I look at FXCop maybe once a year, I don't really care for it, but it does once in a while give me a good tidbit that I'll start using, but most of it is just nit picky
|
|
|
|
|
Installed FxCop.
100s of additional warnings.
(first bunch with how using statements should be inside the namespace, and yes I know you can configure the warnings, but there is a joke here)
Uninstalled FxCop.
Me: Warnings fixed. 
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's great!!! I use it in every .NET project I have by default. It's in my default Solution-wide Directory.Build.props file, so I don't even have to think about it in any new project, it's just there already.
|
|
|
|
|
Me too, I think it's great. An advanced developer might find some of the warnings unnecessary (myself included) but you just suppress them if you know what you're doing. The real benefit is for junior devs that don't understand the implications of their code (not properly implementing IDisposable for example). I probably won't use it in older, existing projects because I'd be overrun with warnings but I always use it in new code.
|
|
|
|
|
We use it and have over 75 projects in our solution, and so far it's been, well, a non issue. (I won't say "great" since that implies too much).
I can't speak to the startup times (they have always been a bit slow for my liking) but the most important thing for us is we use a custom ruleset so it doesn't complain about dumb things like the way we prefer to format code.
For us it's been an important tool to help keep things consistent.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Same here I'm pissed too - i totally aggree with you Mike - And I like FXCop. Everyone that says "oh i had 100 warnings then" has written code "not good". Normally from 100 FxCop Warning only 3-4 are to ignore…
But this update mess with VS 2019 is complete crap.
|
|
|
|
|
It slowed things down to a dead crawl, and gave me over 8000 warnings. Of those, roughly 7800 were complete rubbish, yet considered so Very Very Very important (in someone's imagination) that they couldn't be turned off. Pitched it after a few hours.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
