This page serves as a companion for this video: 3D printer calibration revolutionised - Step by step to better print quality
It has received a major update to bring it up to V2 which is explained in this video: 3D printer calibration revolutionised - Step by step to better print quality
+
+
It aims to make calibrating your 3D printer as easy as possible. If you find it helps you and you would like to say thank you, here is a donation link: PayPal.me
Special thanks to my Patrons for suggesting this video, helping define the contents and testing/proofing.
Watch the videos and then work through each tab. I have created a custom gcode generator to assist in making testing towers. This used to be a laborious process and beyond the skills of many users. Other times pre-sliced gcode was used from the internet, but it is impossible to have gcode available for every printer configuration. Until now!
@@ -50,10 +53,10 @@The information above is a summary, but if you wish to see the exact settings, the Simplify3D fff profile is available for download here.
Please note that non Simplify users can simply open this file in a text editor and everything will be listed.
-You may notice settings related to temperatures, retraction, Z hop, part cooling fan percentage, etc have set values, but these are altered by post processing scripts and this site to ultimately be determined by the user's inputs. Several parameters work like this, please don't be fooled by what is in the slicing profile. Opening the final gcode file in a text editor and searching for 'custom' will show if the user's inputs have been successfully adopted.
+You may notice settings related to temperatures, retraction, Z hop, part cooling, etc have set values, but these are altered by post processing scripts and this site to ultimately be set using the user's inputs. Several parameters work like this, please don't be fooled by what is in the slicing profile. Opening the final gcode file in a text editor and searching for 'custom' will show if the user's inputs have been successfully adopted.
Unfortunately, there is no official reference for this provided by S3D. Instead, I have relied on this forum post.
The scripts in my profile perform the following tasks:
@@ -97,8 +100,8 @@
{REPLACE "G1 E-7.5000 F2700\n" ";retract6\n"}
{REPLACE "G1 E0.0000 F2700\n" ";unretract6\n"}
The information below is mainly for my reference. However, if you wish to duplicate the tests yourself out of interest or perhaps to develop a new test for the site, then the steps must be followed exactly.
-First layer test: No changes, although it should be noted that a single square is included which is then duplicated and positioned by this site. Non uniform scaling of the source STL needs to occur to suit certain nozzle/layer combinations.
+The information below is mainly for my reference. However, if you wish to duplicate the tests yourself out of interest or perhaps to develop a new test for the site, then the steps must be followed exactly, including replicating the process names.
+First layer test: No changes, although it should be noted that a single square is included which is then duplicated and positioned by this site. Non uniform scaling of the source STL needs to occur to suit certain nozzle/layer combinations. THe square should be 25 x 25 mm with it's height scaled to match the target layer height.
Baseline test: No changes
Retraction test:
Please use the following video as a guide to this test:
-The cube should look similar to those at the top of this page. If there are no major issues, please continue to the next step. If there is a significant defect, the culprit will likely be found by working through the frame page.
+The cube should look similar to those at the top of this page. If there are no major issues, please continue to the next step. If there is a significant defect, the culprit will likely be found by working through the frame tab. Minor issues will hopefully be resolved with the subsequent tests.
M92 E
Followed by M500 to save to EEPROM.
M500-
Special note: Prusa has disabled M500 saving to EEPROM on some printers (eg. Mini). In these cases the above M92 gcode must be added to the start gcode in your slicer to be read before every print.
You may wish to repeat this test with the new E-steps value to verify.
+Special note: Prusa has disabled M500 saving to EEPROM on some printers (eg. Mini). In these cases the above M92 gcode must be added to the start gcode in your slicer to be read before every print.
Although starting a new print or power cycling will achieve this, it may be safer to put the printer back into absolute position mode after completing this calibration by sending:
@@ -503,7 +506,7 @@This print shows clear signs of under extrusion. There are gaps in the top infill as well as gaps between the perimeters and infill. Despite what any calibration procedure determined, the flow rate for this slicer/printer combination needs to be increased.
This article on all3DP has examples of what over extrusion looks like.
-The short answer is: not really.
The gcode generators on this site work by using javascript to modify source gcode originally created by Simplify3D. However, when you completed the calibration test above, you sliced your own gcode, making your own baseline and then making a flow adjustment relative to that. Therefore, this test is unique from the others on this site which is why the flow rate doesn't necessarily translate.
Let's say your old flow rate was 100% and you have tested and corrected this to 96%. The gcode on this site originally had a flow rate of 90% when sliced, so applying your 96% to that gives a final result of 86.4%, not 96%. Your slicer profile settings will also be different in other ways, which further complicates matters. Therefore, there is not a straightforward correlation between your slicer and my gcode generators.
@@ -683,7 +686,7 @@The following form will create a retraction tower to conveniently test back to back parameters in the same print. Of the three available parameters, it is best to change only one per test print. For example, keep the retraction speed and extra restart distance the same, but vary the retraction distance over each segment. Changing more than one parameter makes is hard to tell what made the difference. The print is quick, so repeat the test varying other parameters until you are happy with them all.
-Here is the STL if you would like to slice a similar test yourself: retractiontestv2.stl. This file has been updated to V2, which changes the external shape from circular to pentagonal. It is also slightly shorter to print faster. The original file is still available here: retractiontest.stl
+Here is the STL if you would like to slice a similar test yourself: retractiontestv2.stl. This file has been updated to V2, which changes the external shape from circular to pentagonal. It is also prints slightly faster. The original file is still available here: retractiontest.stl