this post was submitted on 01 Jan 2024
186 points (96.5% liked)

3DPrinting

15583 readers
76 users here now

3DPrinting is a place where makers of all skill levels and walks of life can learn about and discuss 3D printing and development of 3D printed parts and devices.

The r/functionalprint community is now located at: !functionalprint@kbin.social or !functionalprint@fedia.io

There are CAD communities available at: !cad@lemmy.world or !freecad@lemmy.ml

Rules

If you need an easy way to host pictures, https://catbox.moe/ may be an option. Be ethical about what you post and donate if you are able or use this a lot. It is just an individual hosting content, not a company. The image embedding syntax for Lemmy is ![](URL)

Moderation policy: Light, mostly invisible

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I still have no idea what I'm doing really. Just too determined to give up I guess, and it's been such fun. Anyway I made a guitar pedal light switch cover. Still a lot of work to do, and every time I look at FreeCAD the wrong way, the model breaks, but it's been a fun experience nonetheless.

On a side note, anybody have any idea why the face of the model is rough textured, while the foot switch on the lower half is flawless?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] oleorun@real.lemmy.fan 17 points 10 months ago (2 children)

It appears that you need to get the nozzle closer to the print bed. You shouldn't have gaps between the lines like the rough side. Also, check the slicer settings to make sure it's doing several top layers/walls.

[–] ArtVandelay@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Please forgive my rudimentary knowledge here, but if it was a z height issue, wouldn't it affect the bottom part of the print where it's nice and smooth as well? I clean and level between every print, and the corners seem to be very snug at least using the paper method. It's just enough clearance that I can still push and pull the paper without it catching on the nozzle

[–] Jayb151@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

For one thing, the paper method only gets you so close. I find you actually have to watch your first layer go down and adjust that way. If you have a Prusa, there is a menu where you can make adjustments as it's printing and it has a first layer calibration tool built in.

Second, check the slicer and see what it's calling the very top layer vs what it's calling the part that looks messed up. I'm willing to bet that the clean looking part is called top layer, whereas the messed up part isn't. Prusa slicer ads additional material when it knows that it's the very top of a print so that it looks better.

Either that, or is say you had a clog which caused under extension, but that may have worked out by the end of your print.

[–] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

The paper method only ensures that you get the nozzle-to-bed distance reasonably consistent in all the places your printer checks it, to ensure that the bed is trammed, i.e. straight relative to the X and Y axes of the printer, or "level." It doesn't guarantee that your Z offset is actually correct to produce a good first layer, and depending on how your particular printer runs its bed leveling/Z offset program it may in fact guarantee that it is incorrect every time.

If you're going to use some manner of gauge material (paper, one of those plastic cards, a feeler gauge), step 1 is to determine what, exactly, your printer does to set its Z offset and whether or not that's taken into account when you're sliding your piece of paper or whatever under the nozzle. Some printer firmwares further compound things by calling their Z offset adjustment program "bed leveling" when that's not what it is. (My old Qidi was guilty of this. "Fast leveling" was actually just Z offset adjustment in the center of the build plate, and "Full leveling" was actually a four-points bed level check operation.)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] isu712@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

How can you tell that OP hasn’t leveled their bed properly? You can’t see the bottom layer in their picture.

[–] oleorun@real.lemmy.fan 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Not level, Z height. Z height shows as lines spaced too far apart. Could also be under-extruding.

[–] isu712@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Sure, on the first layer. We can’t see the first layer here, only the top layer, so it can’t be the z height.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] sj_zero@lotide.fbxl.net 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If you can get used to an open source tool like free cat, don't let anyone here dissuade you from it. Something to be aware of with the closed source tools is that at any moment they can take them away. CAD tools like that are super expensive if there isn't a free plan, and there's every reason to believe that someday the free plan will go away.

I haven't been able to wrap my head around freak out because just not that smart, but that doesn't mean I don't realize tinkercad can go away at any moment. It metaphorically keeps me up at night.

[–] arc@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think FreeCAD would win a lot more converts if it focused on usability. Fusion360 and Onshape are parametric modelers just like FreeCAD yet they're way simpler, taskcentric and more forgiving tools to use.

[–] Aux@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The worst thing about FreeCAD is that it's extremely unreliable. You click a wrong button and your work is gone.

[–] arc@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Forgiving is the word for this - being able to undo mistakes and recover. I reckon FreeCAD would massively benefit from doing a complete feature freeze and focusing on usability for a couple of releases.

[–] Aux@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

It's not about being forgiving or not, FreeCAD is just ridiculously buggy. They are trying to do too many things at once and none of the things actually work in the end.

[–] bluewing@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

That mostly comes from not understanding what best practices are when using ANY 3D CAD. They all fail repeatedly and a lot more often than you think. It's just that some fail more gracefully than others. And some will bite you for being sloppy with your procedures. FreeCAD will bite if you get careless.

But things are looking up. Since the formation of the non-profit Ondsel, there is now a coherent set of adults in the room mapping out a sensible pathway forward for FreeCAD. Their first order of business if fixing the topological naming issue that plagues FreeCAD. The changes have started and are expected to be completed in 3 releases. It's going to take some time to do because of the changes needed to a chunk of the base code of FreeCAD. There are already some nice new features that have been added to the .22Dev releases for improved quality of life. And the UI is expected to be slowly changed over time as well. Though I personally hope they don't turn it into the small child's cartoon clown car UI of Fusion 360.

[–] infinitevalence@discuss.online 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

What slicer are you using?

Also was the clean part attached to the bed or do you have ironing turned in on the slicer?

[–] ArtVandelay@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

I'm using Prusa slicer. I don't think I have ironing turned on, but I'll double check

[–] profdc9@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Hey, I'm working on a guitar pedal. It is a multi-effects pedal based on a Pi Pico:

http://www.github.com/profdc9/GuitarPico

It will connect to a VGA monitor and have cool visual effects to go along the with the playing. So far I have implemented:

Delay, Room Echoes, Low Pass, High Pass, Bandpass, Wah Pedal, Phaser, Flanger, Distortion, Overdrive, and Ring Modulator.

The pedal can be programmed so that several effects are cascaded.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Congrats, and enjoy your new tools.

3D printing to me is still amazing; if you can think it, you can design it on a computer, and then you can make it real. Blows my mind to go from idea to real in just a few hours.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 2 points 10 months ago

Look at OpenSCAD too, if you have clumsy hands or tunnel syndrome or something.

It's for drawing objects for printing with code, using primitives and CSG, and a very simple tool to use at that.

[–] half_built_pyramids@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (4 children)

FreeCad is a nice foss entry, but it tends to get arcane the further you dive. If you find fc stops doing what you need then try fusion 360. F360 is closed source and makes you save files in the cloud so it's a birch that way, but about 10x easier to use.

[–] HerrBeter@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago (4 children)

F360 personal is limited to 10 saved designs, and I don't know how expensive but a lot. I mean I use it but I wish I didn't

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago (5 children)

10 saves that you can actively work on. You can toggle them between “editable” and “read only” at any time, so it’s a stupid nuisance but not really more than that.

At least it doesn’t force you to publish designs online like onshape does

[–] wjrii@kbin.social 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I actually asked OnShape a question and have yet to hear from them. Due to what seems like very poor legal drafting, as best I can tell, they force the creators to agree to non-commercial usage, but then they just give EVERYONE ELSE a license to use the designs commercially. I think that either the public thing was a late addition to their business model, or they were just too lazy to distinguish between what THEY could do with other people's designs and what random Joe Etsy could do. The email address listed on the Terms of Use to accept questions bounces back external emails, though. Nice.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

I suspect that it’s a recent change- probably an attempt to build up a repository like thingiverse… only they figured, why bother with attracting content when you could just force it.

Basically, it’s now their models in the cloud. Their IP. Your work, your, uh “intellect”… their tool, and it’s now theirs.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] AnonStoleMyPants@sopuli.xyz 2 points 10 months ago

What a shitty limitation though.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Avoid cloud based software. All of your work disappears when it gets shut down or if they just feel like deleting your files or closing your account for any reason they choose.

There are other open source CAD programs like SolveSpace, which many people consider to be easier than FreeCAD.
There is BRL-CAD which is quite capable if you don't mind the 1980's style GUI. There is also OpenSCAD if you like scripting instead of a point and click interface.

[–] half_built_pyramids@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Haven't heard off solve space, will try it out

[–] monotrox@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 10 months ago

Solvespace is amazing, the interface is probably the most consistent among any CAD program. Unfortunately volumetric operations (Union, subtraction ..) are kind of buggy sometimes.

[–] BastingChemina 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I used to recommend F360 for beginner but now I think Onshape is a better option.

[–] TwanHE@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Onshape is indeed quite easy to get the hang of. Only downside is that it doesn't work that well with a shitty internet connection. So trying to finish a model between classes was definitely easier when I was still using f360.

[–] rambos@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago

Me again with unpopular approach, just pirate solidworks and enjoy the best CAD experience 😉

[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (3 children)

No idea why you're having issues 3d printing. I've never heard of FreeCAD. But curious if you've ever tried Blender? It's free, and really good for modeling stuff like this.

[–] TheTetrapod@lemmy.world 18 points 10 months ago

Blender is the last thing I would recommend to someone making functional parts like that. Fusion 360 is probably a more intuitive leap from FreeCAD, or OnShape, which I wish I had learned instead of Fusion in the first place.

[–] ArtVandelay@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

I've been familiar with Blender for many years, at least by name, being a Linux nerd for probably half my life. Never really used it though, in truth I had to pick a cad software and that was available in the repositories lol. I do find a free CAD maddeningly frustrating to use though, so maybe I should check out blender too.

[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I would definitely give it a try, maybe a flavor of 3.6 since 4 just came out. But over the last 19 years it's really had some major improvements and works really well for a free software (relatively bug free) for what it is. Best of luck on your 3D printing journey!

[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 1 points 10 months ago

there are alot of tutorials for modelling with blender. Best thing is you now apply those skills toward other blender features if you want to. Also it auto updates with steam.

[–] max@feddit.nl 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Blender is great for decorative/pretty stuff. CAD software is great for functional stuff as pointed out by others. It’s just so much easier to get accurate measurements and dimensions with CAD software compared to blender.

[–] wjrii@kbin.social 3 points 10 months ago

Yeah, Blender has two major limitations for mechanical-type parts:

One, it's not parametric even with its CAD plugins, but whatever. If you're only designing one part or a small assembly, you can manage without parameters, and the basic act of "make something" is often easier and more intuitive with a direct modeler.

Second, it's editing meshes only. For 3D printing, that's not really the end of the world, as Slicers only work with meshes anyway, but as you say it limits resolution and accuracy, and could mean you have a bad time if you wanted to get a better printer or leverage some other form of manufacturing. It's not a perfect analogy, but it's kind of like using Photoshop and only saving in JPG.

[–] ScottE@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

Blender, even with the CAD plug-in, does not have the dimensional precision required for real engineering modeling. The Blender UI is also even clunkier than FreeCAD in many ways.

[–] arc@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

Did you turn layer ironing / smoothing on for the last layer not all top layers? Aside from smoothing modern slicers can also use more attractive patterns for top layers than zig zag such as hilbert.

It also looks like you might have underflow issues so maybe check your e-step setting on your printer to ensure you're extruding proper amount of filament. There are articles that explain the process but you basically mark a reference point on the filament, e.g. 10cm away from where it enters the extruder, tell the printer to extrude 10cm, mark and measure how far away the mark is from where it's meant to be. So if the filament moves 7cm when it should have 10cm then your e-steps need to be multiplied by 10/7.

[–] HewlettHackard@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Did you print the foot switch upside down and then flip it? If so, how does its other side look?

I can’t tell how the surface quality is by the knobs.

Your “main” top surface looks like under-extrusion.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] billwashere@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Well we got another one hooked 😂

load more comments
view more: next ›