[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Anderson Firearms Hellfire (Page 4 of 5)
So far the tapped bolt holes are holding up great. The screws I used are 1-1/4" long and extend all the way to the front of the printed bolt. There is a lot less flex compared to the printed bolts and the head makes them easy to install with an actual tool. Mortared it a couple times on the buttstock and dropped it a few times from waist height, no issues so far. 
|
|
Quoted: So far the tapped bolt holes are holding up great. The screws I used are 1-1/4" long and extend all the way to the front of the printed bolt. There is a lot less flex compared to the printed bolts and the head makes them easy to install with an actual tool. Mortared it a couple times on the buttstock and dropped it a few times from waist height, no issues so far. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/116461/Screenshot_20210120-203438_Gallery-1789190.jpg Can you provide some more in depth detail about what you did here to reinforce the lower? |
|
Quoted: Can you provide some more in depth detail about what you did here to reinforce the lower? The lower is the same the only thing I modified was the 3d printed bolts. I used a #7 drill bit, 1/4-20 tap and a 1-1/4" long 1/4-20 socket head screw. This won't make the lower any stronger but it will make the printed bolts the last thing to break. Instead of the printed bolts failing it'll probably crack either the buffer tower or at the holes where the bolts go through at the front. I have more pictures if you want but I bought the tap and drill bit set from Amazon and I had the bolts laying around the garage, here is the tap and drill bit I used https://www.amazon.com/dp/B071RFR4VB/ This won't help on the strut bolt so I recommend downloading the remixed strut bolt bionicmonkey linked on page 3. Let me know if you need more info @Keymaster4225   
|
|
Quoted: The lower is the same the only thing I modified was the 3d printed bolts. I used a #7 drill bit, 1/4-20 tap and a 1-1/4" long 1/4-20 socket head screw. This won't make the lower any stronger but it will make the printed bolts the last thing to break. Instead of the printed bolts failing it'll probably crack either the buffer tower or at the holes where the bolts go through at the front. I have more pictures if you want but I bought the tap and drill bit set from Amazon and I had the bolts laying around the garage, here is the tap and drill bit I used https://www.amazon.com/dp/B071RFR4VB/ This won't help on the strut bolt so I recommend downloading the remixed strut bolt bionicmonkey linked on page 3. Let me know if you need more info @Keymaster4225 https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/116461/Screenshot_20210121-165922_Gallery-1790370.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/116461/20210121_170106-1790365.jpghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/116461/Screenshot_20210121-165839_Gallery-1790364.jpg Quoted: Quoted: Can you provide some more in depth detail about what you did here to reinforce the lower? The lower is the same the only thing I modified was the 3d printed bolts. I used a #7 drill bit, 1/4-20 tap and a 1-1/4" long 1/4-20 socket head screw. This won't make the lower any stronger but it will make the printed bolts the last thing to break. Instead of the printed bolts failing it'll probably crack either the buffer tower or at the holes where the bolts go through at the front. I have more pictures if you want but I bought the tap and drill bit set from Amazon and I had the bolts laying around the garage, here is the tap and drill bit I used https://www.amazon.com/dp/B071RFR4VB/ This won't help on the strut bolt so I recommend downloading the remixed strut bolt bionicmonkey linked on page 3. Let me know if you need more info @Keymaster4225 https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/116461/Screenshot_20210121-165922_Gallery-1790370.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/116461/20210121_170106-1790365.jpghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/116461/Screenshot_20210121-165839_Gallery-1790364.jpg I see now. So you put the metal screw inside the 3d printed bolt, cool. The strut bolt is the big one on the side, yes? Sorry trying to get all this figured out before my build parts get here and I get going on this project. |
|
Quoted: Are the updated STLs using screws uploaded somewhere? I think he is just using the standard STL and then reworking it after printing if you want my version of the longer heads as an alternative bolt that doesnt have the weak area, they are here https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4728263/files |
|
It occurs to me the screws with the hex sockets extending past the caps into the screw shaft are a design feature, not a flaw. If the head shears off on one the blind holes, it will still be immediately removable using the supplied tool. If the head shears off a bolt and there is no socket remaining, you can't repair it in the field. You have to drill it and use a screw extractor. The better solution would be to print the screws in a tougher filament, using them as designed, and carrying spares. |
|
Quoted: It occurs to me the screws with the hex sockets extending past the caps into the screw shaft are a design feature, not a flaw. If the head shears off on one the blind holes, it will still be immediately removable using the supplied tool. If the head shears off a bolt and there is no socket remaining, you can't repair it in the field. You have to drill it and use a screw extractor. The better solution would be to print the screws in a tougher filament, using them as designed, and carrying spares. is there a tougher filament option than PLA+ ? the information I have suggests PLA+ as the recommended medium. |
|
Quoted: is there a tougher filament option than PLA+ ? the information I have suggests PLA+ as the recommended medium. Quoted: Quoted: It occurs to me the screws with the hex sockets extending past the caps into the screw shaft are a design feature, not a flaw. If the head shears off on one the blind holes, it will still be immediately removable using the supplied tool. If the head shears off a bolt and there is no socket remaining, you can't repair it in the field. You have to drill it and use a screw extractor. The better solution would be to print the screws in a tougher filament, using them as designed, and carrying spares. is there a tougher filament option than PLA+ ? the information I have suggests PLA+ as the recommended medium. Later this week I am going to do one out of nylon with 25% carbon fiber.  assuming my nylon test prints come out fine. |
|
Quoted: Later this week I am going to do one out of nylon with 25% carbon fiber. assuming my nylon test prints come out fine. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: It occurs to me the screws with the hex sockets extending past the caps into the screw shaft are a design feature, not a flaw. If the head shears off on one the blind holes, it will still be immediately removable using the supplied tool. If the head shears off a bolt and there is no socket remaining, you can't repair it in the field. You have to drill it and use a screw extractor. The better solution would be to print the screws in a tougher filament, using them as designed, and carrying spares. is there a tougher filament option than PLA+ ? the information I have suggests PLA+ as the recommended medium. Later this week I am going to do one out of nylon with 25% carbon fiber. assuming my nylon test prints come out fine. I want to print nylon too. I have an all metal hotend but I don't know if I need to change firmware or anything to make it work. I also got an insulated enclosure for my printer to reduce warping. The big thing that has kept me from doing it yet is the lack of a place to print with good ventilation. Nylon is supposed to put off a lot of fumes and I don't want that in my house. I am contemplating just buying a second printer that is nylon ready from the factory to set up in the garage or something. |
|
Quoted: I want to print nylon too. I have an all metal hotend but I don't know if I need to change firmware or anything to make it work. I also got an insulated enclosure for my printer to reduce warping. The big thing that has kept me from doing it yet is the lack of a place to print with good ventilation. Nylon is supposed to put off a lot of fumes and I don't want that in my house. I am contemplating just buying a second printer that is nylon ready from the factory to set up in the garage or something. I put my printer in a back bedroom on the far side of the house and we leave the door closed 24/7 when the printing is done ill open the large window and turn a fan on. |
|
Quoted: Would someone be able to change the image on the medallion to a New Mexico Zia symbol instead of the Texas star? If so I’d would love that. An easy software to do that with is microsoft 3d builder (free). you can take a 2d image of the design and extrude it down to give it depth and then merge that with the blank from the anderson distro. |
|
Quoted: Is it worth printing with 999 walls instead of infill? well... i am also curious about this.. so I searched the interwebs high and low.. no good info so.. I created a cylinder object 50 mm long, 6mm in diameter, with a 90 10mm end to act as a hook, and printed it 6 ways. regular PLA (novamaker) wall count 2, infill 20% (lines) wall count 2, infill 100% (lines) wall count 999, infill none (all walls) esun PLA+ wall count 2, infill 20% (lines) wall count 2, infill 100% (lines) wall count 999, infill none (all walls) Then I drilled a 6mm hole in a 2x4 about 15mm deep (so the insertion would be consistent) and hung a bucket on that hook. i then added loaded 30 round magazines into the bucket until the bucket fell. I was expecting the hook to snap but instead in may cases it simply bent to failure. but in terms of a consistent measure, when the bucket hit the floor, it was done. 20% infill was done just to verify the process and provide some color around any difference between the 100% infill and the 100% walls results : PLA 20% : 239 loose rounds ( i wasnt sure the capability of the hook and this became tedious so I then switched to mags. this also colors the comparison to esun PLA+ because the shock of each next mag was higher than of each next loose round) 100% infill : 14 mags 100 wall lines : 17 mags Esun PLA+ 20% : 6 mags (snapped) 100% infill : 15 mags 100 lines : 20 mags I want to point out that in my tests only the 20% infill esun pla+ snapped. everything else bent. I was really expecting a snap, but I didnt exert a shock load, just an ever increasing flexural load, so in a way this makes sense. in shooting, I have only ever experienced pla snap (in the form of the strut bolt shearing) - but that is a BIG chunk of PLA under a BIG shock load. overall however thus far in my small sample set Lines id beat infill for flexural strength. |
|
Quoted: well... i am also curious about this.. so I searched the interwebs high and low.. no good info so.. I created a cylinder object 50 mm long, 6mm in diameter, with a 90 10mm end to act as a hook, and printed it 6 ways. regular PLA (novamaker) wall count 2, infill 20% (lines) wall count 2, infill 100% (lines) wall count 999, infill none (all walls) esun PLA+ wall count 2, infill 20% (lines) wall count 2, infill 100% (lines) wall count 999, infill none (all walls) Then I drilled a 6mm hole in a 2x4 about 15mm deep (so the insertion would be consistent) and hung a bucket on that hook. i then added loaded 30 round magazines into the bucket until the bucket fell. I was expecting the hook to snap but instead in may cases it simply bent to failure. but in terms of a consistent measure, when the bucket hit the floor, it was done. 20% infill was done just to verify the process and provide some color around any difference between the 100% infill and the 100% walls results : PLA 20% : 239 loose rounds ( i wasnt sure the capability of the hook and this became tedious so I then switched to mags. this also colors the comparison to esun PLA+ because the shock of each next mag was higher than of each next loose round) 100% infill : 14 mags 100 wall lines : 17 mags Esun PLA+ 20% : 6 mags (snapped) 100% infill : 15 mags 100 lines : 20 mags I want to point out that in my tests only the 20% infill esun pla+ snapped. everything else bent. I was really expecting a snap, but I didnt exert a shock load, just an ever increasing flexural load, so in a way this makes sense. in shooting, I have only ever experienced pla snap (in the form of the strut bolt shearing) - but that is a BIG chunk of PLA under a BIG shock load. overall however thus far in my small sample set Lines id beat infill for flexural strength. Quoted: Quoted: Is it worth printing with 999 walls instead of infill? well... i am also curious about this.. so I searched the interwebs high and low.. no good info so.. I created a cylinder object 50 mm long, 6mm in diameter, with a 90 10mm end to act as a hook, and printed it 6 ways. regular PLA (novamaker) wall count 2, infill 20% (lines) wall count 2, infill 100% (lines) wall count 999, infill none (all walls) esun PLA+ wall count 2, infill 20% (lines) wall count 2, infill 100% (lines) wall count 999, infill none (all walls) Then I drilled a 6mm hole in a 2x4 about 15mm deep (so the insertion would be consistent) and hung a bucket on that hook. i then added loaded 30 round magazines into the bucket until the bucket fell. I was expecting the hook to snap but instead in may cases it simply bent to failure. but in terms of a consistent measure, when the bucket hit the floor, it was done. 20% infill was done just to verify the process and provide some color around any difference between the 100% infill and the 100% walls results : PLA 20% : 239 loose rounds ( i wasnt sure the capability of the hook and this became tedious so I then switched to mags. this also colors the comparison to esun PLA+ because the shock of each next mag was higher than of each next loose round) 100% infill : 14 mags 100 wall lines : 17 mags Esun PLA+ 20% : 6 mags (snapped) 100% infill : 15 mags 100 lines : 20 mags I want to point out that in my tests only the 20% infill esun pla+ snapped. everything else bent. I was really expecting a snap, but I didnt exert a shock load, just an ever increasing flexural load, so in a way this makes sense. in shooting, I have only ever experienced pla snap (in the form of the strut bolt shearing) - but that is a BIG chunk of PLA under a BIG shock load. overall however thus far in my small sample set Lines id beat infill for flexural strength. Truly appreciate the effort you went to to test that. Hopefully it will help others, cuz I'm shit out of luck now. My build kit (complete upper, LPK, buffer, etc) arrived yesterday. Apparently neglecting to inform my wife of this purchase was...ill-advised... So, build kit is going back to PSA, and I'm once again without anything except a mossberg 12ga. FML |
|
Quoted: Truly appreciate the effort you went to to test that. Hopefully it will help others, cuz I'm shit out of luck now. My build kit (complete upper, LPK, buffer, etc) arrived yesterday. Apparently neglecting to inform my wife of this purchase was...ill-advised... So, build kit is going back to PSA, and I'm once again without anything except a mossberg 12ga. FML Damn tech forum rules... |
|
Quoted: Truly appreciate the effort you went to to test that. Hopefully it will help others, cuz I'm shit out of luck now. My build kit (complete upper, LPK, buffer, etc) arrived yesterday. Apparently neglecting to inform my wife of this purchase was...ill-advised... So, build kit is going back to PSA, and I'm once again without anything except a mossberg 12ga. FML I'm sorry man. That fucking sucks. On so many levels. 
|
|
Quoted: I'm sorry man. That fucking sucks. On so many levels. Quoted: Quoted: Truly appreciate the effort you went to to test that. Hopefully it will help others, cuz I'm shit out of luck now. My build kit (complete upper, LPK, buffer, etc) arrived yesterday. Apparently neglecting to inform my wife of this purchase was...ill-advised... So, build kit is going back to PSA, and I'm once again without anything except a mossberg 12ga. FML I'm sorry man. That fucking sucks. On so many levels. Yep, but oh well, so goes. Really wish I hadn't sold all my shit before we left TX. An AR, a 5.45 AK, a FAL, about 4k rds of 5.56, 4 or 5 spam cans of 7n6, a 1911, an xdm9, several hundred rds for each of those. All sold at the end of 2014 for rock bottom prices. So we could afford to ship all our horses up here. Le sigh |
|
Quoted: When you're placing the lower receiver on the bed in the slicer, how do you prefer to position it? The Ender 3 takes about all the X or Y travel to place the lower, do you see better results running the long side parallel with the X/Y axis or diagonally? On the smaller bed that you have I believe most people place them diagonally. I have the luxury of a 350x350 bed |
|
Quoted: On the smaller bed that you have I believe most people place them diagonally. I have the luxury of a 350x350 bed I hear you, the Prusa XL is my next printer, I was more wondering if having the X and Y axis move simultaneously to lay long straight lines induces more error. Also, does it have any effect on the slicer, larger G-code file size or the printers ability to look ahead? Is this a non-issue on a 2 axis 50mm/s machine? Is it best practice to just align the part parallel with the X or Y axis or does it not matter? |
|
Quoted: I hear you, the Prusa XL is my next printer, I was more wondering if having the X and Y axis move simultaneously to lay long straight lines induces more error. Also, does it have any effect on the slicer, larger G-code file size or the printers ability to look ahead? Is this a non-issue on a 2 axis 50mm/s machine? Is it best practice to just align the part parallel with the X or Y axis or does it not matter? I’ve never noticed a quality difference between angled and straight layouts. One thing to keep in mind is the the infill and bottom/top layer angles are relative to the bed so if you angle the part 45 degrees the orientation of the bottom and top layers on the part changes. |
|
Quoted: Here is the Hellfire lower adapted to use M5 bolts. https://i.postimg.cc/f379BnHS/20210205-175907.jpg https://i.postimg.cc/bsMkvRDr/20210205-175925.jpg The long bolt is a M5x80 but a 85 would be better. Other bolts are cut to fit. Work in progress. TYCOM Outstanding! |
|
Finished 35-36 hours total for all parts Attached File Attached File Attached File Attached File Attached File some small defects but I am Happy with it... |
|
Quoted: Finished 35-36 hours total for all parts https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/3064/lowerdone_jpg-1834299.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/3064/lower1_jpg-1834300.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/3064/lower2_jpg-1834301.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/3064/lower3_jpg-1834302.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/3064/lower4_jpg-1834303.JPG some small defects but I am Happy with it... Looks really good. What printer do you have? |
|
Quoted: Looks really good. What printer do you have? Quoted: Quoted: Finished 35-36 hours total for all parts https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/3064/lowerdone_jpg-1834299.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/3064/lower1_jpg-1834300.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/3064/lower2_jpg-1834301.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/3064/lower3_jpg-1834302.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/3064/lower4_jpg-1834303.JPG some small defects but I am Happy with it... Looks really good. What printer do you have? Qidi X-Max |
|
Pistol finished 3d printed an adjustable shockwave brace. Attached File |
|
First time printing anything. I had jumped on a Kickstarter deal for an IDEX dual extruder machine last year and it finally arrived so what better way to christen it than make something useful... It looks like after I get it properly dialed in it can potentially run at least 6 lowers simultaneously on the bed using both extruders, for this test I used just one. I used the "Two bolts and a nut" files instead of the originals as well. All in all the surface quality looks good, my crappy photos don't do it justice but in person I can't complain. It did take a R E A L L Y long time...   The issues: Early into the print it started boogering around the backside of the rear takedown pin holes, it pretty much missed a section in that area, I couldn't identify what was up and it then just dropped material into space. I let it run because I wanted to complete a print and see what other issues, if any, I might have all at once. I also wanted to run all the pieces at the same time for that reason.  Once it was finally done I could see that the problem continued over to the support nub next to the pin hole, I could see pieces of material that were dropped into space being dragged over and affecting the surrounding area.  The other thing is a .47mm shift on the X-axis 40mm up into the run. It stayed like that for the rest of the print, not sure if I bumped the bed because I was poking around in there flicking off boogers at one stage so it's a possibility. I'm running a calibration block right now to see if the issue is still present. You can see the shift pretty clearly in the trigger guard area and it even "italicized" the last row of writing...  Other than around the aforementioned area around the pin holes not much cleanup was needed although the support in the trigger guard was a little messy when it detached, no biggy though. I have to say that the surface finish on the walls is very good, the script is very crisp and hopefully when I address the issues I'll be able to get a production line going. ETA settings: Using Overture PLA+ 
|
|
Quoted: Not knowing anything about that printer, it looks like you've got your settings dialed in for the most part but are now fighting mechanical/axis issues. Look up the info for maintaining and calibrating your x/y/z axis on that printer. It was a bear to level the bed initially, I went round and round and couldn't get it to repeat after homing. Turns out the y-axis track rollers were not adjusted and it had +/- 4mm of freeplay, once I had that sorted it was a no brainer. I still have everything to learn, not just about the machine but printing in general. Once my calibration cube is done I'll go back over the setup and try again, I'll also do another mechanical check to see there are no other obvious issues. I'm wondering now if there wasn't some lifting of the material in the area of the pin holes creating a "flap" that would float up and effectively wipe the end of the nozzle as it passed over. I'm using a layer height of .1mm to get better resolution, maybe that isn't substantial enough to give it the integrity to stay flat? I can go lower on layer thickness but as most of you settled on .12mm I didn't want to deviate too much on my first shot. I'd like to get down to the best resolution possible eventually so maybe (hopefully) I'll discover another cause. |
|
Quoted: It was a bear to level the bed initially, I went round and round and couldn't get it to repeat after homing. Turns out the y-axis track rollers were not adjusted and it had +/- 4mm of freeplay, once I had that sorted it was a no brainer. I still have everything to learn, not just about the machine but printing in general. Once my calibration cube is done I'll go back over the setup and try again, I'll also do another mechanical check to see there are no other obvious issues. I'm wondering now if there wasn't some lifting of the material in the area of the pin holes creating a "flap" that would float up and effectively wipe the end of the nozzle as it passed over. I'm using a layer height of .1mm to get better resolution, maybe that isn't substantial enough to give it the integrity to stay flat? I can go lower on layer thickness but as most of you settled on .12mm I didn't want to deviate too much on my first shot. I'd like to get down to the best resolution possible eventually so maybe (hopefully) I'll discover another cause. Loose v-roller wheels will definitely cause issues like layer shifts, ghosting, etc. Check all of them. There should be no play, but they shouldn't be so tight that you can't spin any of the wheels by hand with minor to medium effort. If you have threaded z-axis rods, those are a pain in the ass too. If they're not greased properly they'll bind up, a very light and even coating is all thats needed. If they're not perfectly aligned they'll bind up. If the little bushings they go through on the x-axis gantry aren't aligned properly or too tight they'll bind up. If they have debris on them, they'll bind up at those heights where the debris is in the threads. I really hate threaded z-axis rods. Layer height probably isn't the problem, but it does need to be a multiplier of your nozzle size. If you're running a 0.4mm nozzle then run 0.12 or 0.08 layer height instead of 0.1. I don't think there are any advantages going lower than 0.12 on layer height on these lowers in my experience. Zits and blobs are a filament or hotend issue. Either a bad batch of filament, your filament needs to be dried, or the bowden tube is not seated down in to the hot-end far enough to butt up against the top of the nozzle causing a small chamber for filament to pool above the nozzle(assuming it's like an ender 3 hotend) which causes inconsistences with flow. I fought this issue for weeks until I bought a filament drier and re-seated that bowden tube properly on my ender 3 pro. Looking at the close-up of your lower where the print got messed up at the rear takedown pin...I'm not entirely sure what happened there. Something happened there that triggered a layer adhesion problem in that spot and for the next X number of passes in that same spot it just kept messing up because there was nothing for new filament to adhere to, but then it sorted itself out later in to the print. Hopefully that was just an one-time anomaly. Bear in mind my advice is based on my ender 3 pro, so some things I've mentioned may not apply to your printer. |
|
Quoted: Loose v-roller wheels will definitely cause issues like layer shifts, ghosting, etc. Check all of them. There should be no play, but they shouldn't be so tight that you can't spin any of the wheels by hand with minor to medium effort. If you have threaded z-axis rods, those are a pain in the ass too. If they're not greased properly they'll bind up, a very light and even coating is all thats needed. If they're not perfectly aligned they'll bind up. If the little bushings they go through on the x-axis gantry aren't aligned properly or too tight they'll bind up. If they have debris on them, they'll bind up at those heights where the debris is in the threads. I really hate threaded z-axis rods. Layer height probably isn't the problem, but it does need to be a multiplier of your nozzle size. If you're running a 0.4mm nozzle then run 0.12 or 0.08 layer height instead of 0.1. I don't think there are any advantages going lower than 0.12 on layer height on these lowers in my experience. Zits and blobs are a filament or hotend issue. Either a bad batch of filament, your filament needs to be dried, or the bowden tube is not seated down in to the hot-end far enough to butt up against the top of the nozzle causing a small chamber for filament to pool above the nozzle(assuming it's like an ender 3 hotend) which causes inconsistences with flow. I fought this issue for weeks until I bought a filament drier and re-seated that bowden tube properly on my ender 3 pro. Looking at the close-up of your lower where the print got messed up at the rear takedown pin...I'm not entirely sure what happened there. Something happened there that triggered a layer adhesion problem in that spot and for the next X number of passes in that same spot it just kept messing up because there was nothing for new filament to adhere to, but then it sorted itself out later in to the print. Hopefully that was just an one-time anomaly. Bear in mind my advice is based on my ender 3 pro, so some things I've mentioned may not apply to your printer. Went through everything, no mechanical issues, this is a direct drive machine so no bowden cable, couldn't see anything glaringly obvious and the calibration cube printed perfectly so decided to run another lower. The only changes being 1.2 layer height, bumped the speed very slightly up to 45mm/sec and added a brim. I agree with you and think it was that first layer that didn't adhere that caused the problem, (full disclosure, I did give it a shot of Aquanet this time as well), the brim gave it a larger surrounding surface area and better grip as the thing came out perfect. Next up, running two lowers at once using both extruders. |
|
Quoted: Went through everything, no mechanical issues, this is a direct drive machine so no bowden cable, couldn't see anything glaringly obvious and the calibration cube printed perfectly so decided to run another lower. The only changes being 1.2 layer height, bumped the speed very slightly up to 45mm/sec and added a brim. I agree with you and think it was that first layer that didn't adhere that caused the problem, (full disclosure, I did give it a shot of Aquanet this time as well), the brim gave it a larger surrounding surface area and better grip as the thing came out perfect. Next up, running two lowers at once using both extruders. These lowers are designed to not require supports or brims/rafts, but if the brim helps and you're cool with trimming it off the lower then it shouldn't hurt anything. Usually a good quality bed surface that is clean and a bed temp of 50-60c are enough for most folks, and if not then a fine misting of aquanet should do the trick. |
|
Quoted: I'm not familiar at all with that printer, but on an ender 3 with direct drive(like mine) there is still a short piece of bowden tube inserted down in to the hotend that the filament from the direct drive feeds through, presumably to protect and insulate the filament as it goes through the hotend to the nozzle. I was having issues after the direct drive conversion because when I cut the tube down and inserted a short piece in to the hotend I didn't insert it all the way in, fought blob/zit/quality issue for a few weeks until I figured it out. Without the direct drive, again on an ender 3, it's one long bowden tube from the hotend to the extruder. These lowers are designed to not require supports or brims/rafts, but if the brim helps and you're cool with trimming it off the lower then it shouldn't hurt anything. Usually a good quality bed surface that is clean and a bed temp of 50-60c are enough for most folks, and if not then a fine misting of aquanet should do the trick. When I ran the original it had a very small brim in a few places, my next run included the full brim because I saw that the issues occurred at the points where it was non existent. I can only think that it is the difference between machines and that not all settings are going to be exact and that we will all need to make changes according to our own devices. It seemed to be the easiest way to test rather than go wild (and pure guesswork) with multiple settings and I can remove the excess in less than two minutes so no biggy. I'm now comfortable with the knowledge that it is working as well as I can reasonably expect and I'm currently printing another set of "bolts" as a sanity check before diving in to the multiple uppers on the same run. The new PLA+ should be here tomorrow so I'll set them up using both extruders and see how that goes. If everything works out I'm going to venture into making some of the vast array of other offerings that are out there. |
New to the group so thanks for all y'all have done. Here's mine. Lower is ABS. Layer height .20 with 80% infill. Once finished, brushed on MEK substitute (dissolves ABS) on critical areas to bond layers together making it as close to a solid block of ABS as you can get without molding. Hand Guard is ABS. Pistol grip, foregrip, and stock are PLA. Stock pad is TPU. Print time was days - 50 something hours for lower. 20ish for guard. Probably 40 hours for stock, foregrip, pistol grip. Tried the buffer tube in 3D print but buffer wouldn't fit so I had to grind out the inside. Then on first shot it just fell apart at the threads. So real-off-the-shelf buffer tube. Going out today to give it a try. Hope I don't shoot my eye out. 
|
|
Quoted: New to the group so thanks for all y'all have done. Here's mine. Lower is ABS. Layer height .20 with 80% infill. Once finished, brushed on MEK substitute (dissolves ABS) on critical areas to bond layers together making it as close to a solid block of ABS as you can get without molding. Hand Guard is ABS. Pistol grip, foregrip, and stock are PLA. Stock pad is TPU. Print time was days - 50 something hours for lower. 20ish for guard. Probably 40 hours for stock, foregrip, pistol grip. Tried the buffer tube in 3D print but buffer wouldn't fit so I had to grind out the inside. Then on first shot it just fell apart at the threads. So real-off-the-shelf buffer tube. Going out today to give it a try. Hope I don't shoot my eye out. https://www.dropbox.com/s/mkxmlay2ce7s94y/BumbleFire.jpg?dl=0 Attached File |
|
My first printed lower from PLA + made it through about 200 rounds and developed a crack on the rear takedown pin hole. I made two rainbow silk PLA + lowers and the first one delaminated in several areas after 2-5 rounds. The second has not been assembled. I am planning on lowering fan speed to help with layer adhesion. it seems I have a problem there. I also think thicker layers might help as well. just fyi, the rainbow silk PLA + is crap, just like momma told me. |
|
Quoted: My first printed lower from PLA + made it through about 200 rounds and developed a crack on the rear takedown pin hole. I made two rainbow silk PLA + lowers and the first one delaminated in several areas after 2-5 rounds. The second has not been assembled. I am planning on lowering fan speed to help with layer adhesion. it seems I have a problem there. I also think thicker layers might help as well. just fyi, the rainbow silk PLA + is crap, just like momma told me. For layer adhesion issues I'd increase flow rate or hotend temp a bit. If you drop fan speed you're probably going to hurt bridging and overhangs. |
|
Quoted: For layer adhesion issues I'd increase flow rate or hotend temp a bit. If you drop fan speed you're probably going to hurt bridging and overhangs. I have not tried flowrate adjustment. What is a good increment to try? |
|
Quoted: I had stringing issues with elevated hotend temp... I have not tried flowrate adjustment. What is a good increment to try? There are some methods out there for calibrating your flow rate by printing a hollow 20x20x20mm cube and measuring the walls with a caliper to determine your current flow rate and what your flow rate should be. That would be the best place to start, so you have a good base to work from. If you do this then it probably wouldn't hurt to also calibrate your e-steps. |