Robo's new Buildtak

I got a couple of new test bed covers from Robo. They're testing a new Robo-branded Buildtak sheet which looks like it will fit nicely on the C2.

Looks like it's got a thin film on the back which seems a bit slick to me. I'll investigate to see if it's a film sheet that has glue underneath. (It almost adheres by static electricity alone to a naked bed but that can't be how this lays down.)

That said, I suppose I should snag some PETG to test with this after the PLA. Robo didn't have any ColorFabb (PLA/PHA) filament yet but I'd like to test that as well. I would really love to lose the rafts so we'll see if this is the answer.

 

I've always had more problems with a raft than without...

 

So... have each of you lost the G29 after doing all this, is that implied?

Honestly, guys, I (think I) believe in my z-offset as set. It lays down line after line (if you slow things down for that first layer). They're all flat across their faces and this is from "sea to shining sea" (full X/Y extent). Part of that success on printing the raft's first layer is the first-layer tweaks I've done in Cura in the adhesion area. The one hiccup is always immediately after the priming line, that initial adhesion of the part itself. I suspect over-retraction after the priming line code as well as a 210 hotend (priming line routine) trying to come back down to 190 without a blocking event. Nobody's tweaked that?

So are you guys tweaking your first-layer settings in your slicer (speed/extrusion) to succeed without a raft?

Mark: I heard that you shimmed your magnets to balance the print bed plane.

Finally, it looks like the C2 bed sags at the front of the printer and further, it allows more vertical wiggle-room than the back does (just part of the design). This appears to be affecting part height with tall parts but I'll confirm.

 

I got 2 out of 3 "drop the G29's" so that's close enough for me.

Alright, got it. Fix the bed level manually. Introduce the extruder to the new setup, drop adhesion gimmicks and you should be good. Hope this works on both beds now (with stock tape & with Buildtak) but maybe not.

I'll likely ditch Cura for S3D soon enough.

Geof, I like your idea of moving startup code from OctoPrint->slicer... I guess I'd consider the transferability of STL to someone with the native setup. I suppose it's their responsibility to slice/print it, though. Too bad there's not a file packaging method of STL plus suggested tweaks.

 

I've removed the G29 some time ago after noticing it actually CAUSES issues (i.e. with a well leveled bed it would "unlevel" it, and especially in varying amounts from a print to the next). For me with it the rear would always end up higher and not sticking, and it would compensate any adjustment I tried to fix it and make it wrong again. Useless.

Leveling is however shady (maybe due to the G29 as said above) since on your video you posted on the other thread one can see the bed being pushed down when the nozzle is in some places. Shouldn't happen.

Fixed it first thing, posted my choice of solution several times since.

Either (preferably) do so with the first layer extrusion wdth, or cheat with a Z offset that pushes a tad more into the bed.

There's less "resistance to pushing down" in the front due to the rear attachment obviously, but that shouldn't matter as nothing should significantly push down anyway.

 

Went to school on your R2-unboxing thread and read it through. Short version: you moved your startup code and the priming line to the slicer (but at something lower than 230) and you possibly added an M400 to the end of that.

 

Fair enough, I created a plugin to ignore autoleveling commands and ran that with one of my existing GCODE files. I've confirmed that it simply ignores the command now.

To make @WheresWaldo happy, I now have a Nikon D3200 for these photos. Unfortunately, the forum doesn't like humungous files so I had to knock them down in quality from their massive bigness (24MP).



Staring at these very closely, it feels like dropping the autolevel is just as good as before, if not better. I'd have to run more jobs to verify but it's not horrible and the initial line started smoothly/immediately where the extruder came down. This is a fair change from what I've seen countless times before. The jury's not out yet but autolevel seems to be one of the problems.

 

Good advice, there. The gf got a D750 in the bargain so it all worked out.

 

I find this thread interesting - my C2 came with BuildTak preattached to the printbed. I didn't recognize it for a while - it had also come supplied with the paper tape squares. It wasn't until the surface got damaged that I looked closer and realized what it was. (I should have figured this out earlier, as I have been a BuildTak user for a long time.) I've even bought my own BuildTak sheets and cut them to size for the C2.

 

I will say, as a guy who maybe has six tape squares left... that if the BuildTak works out better I won't be going back to tape. Adhesion now is... okay I suppose. I have to assume that it's got to be better on the BuildTak.

Allen indicated to me in email that the BuildTak has a glue layer.

Out of curiosity, did the BuildTak sheet come off easily?

 

BuildTak doesn't have a glue layer. It has a textured surface that sticks well to many materials, including some that would normally want a heated bed (PETG, Nylon, etc.) The adhesive that holds it to the bed is very tenacious, but it can be peeled off with reasonable effort.

 

Wait, the default surface is BuildTak?! I've never noticed this and now it looks like I can stop buying the sheets and just use the printing surface (not the tape that the printer came with)...