<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<title type="html"><![CDATA[SoliForum - 3D Printing Community — Adjusting steps-per-mm for accurate part dimensions]]></title>
	<link rel="self" href="https://www.soliforum.com/feed/atom/topic/10886/" />
	<updated>2015-04-24T14:24:49Z</updated>
	<generator>PunBB</generator>
	<id>https://www.soliforum.com/topic/10886/adjusting-stepspermm-for-accurate-part-dimensions/</id>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Adjusting steps-per-mm for accurate part dimensions]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/93999/#p93999" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>Claghorn wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I&#039;m afraid I don&#039;t know the answers for the M92 command. I always save the values in the eeprom via the Repetier menu.</p></blockquote></div><p>I&#039;m using Repetier on a mac and the eeprom menu doesn&#039;t work. It just comes up blank. I believe it&#039;s a known issue. It&#039;s easy enough to set the values manually though.</p><div class="quotebox"><cite>IronMan wrote:</cite><blockquote><div class="quotebox"><cite>elmoret wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I doubt the issue is steps/mm. At 700 microns over 20mm, thats likely backlash.</p></blockquote></div><p>True!!</p><p>chancrescolex, have you calibrated your extrusion steps per mm as well?</p></blockquote></div><p>I haven&#039;t, but I suppose I&#039;ll have to look up how to do that.</p><div class="quotebox"><cite>IronMan wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I have had good results by modeling a 50mm cube and then slicing with 1 perimeter / no infill...print about half of it and then kill the print.&nbsp; You can then accurately measure the overall outer dimensions as well as the single perimeter wall thickness.</p></blockquote></div><p>Thanks, I&#039;ll try that next.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[chancrescolex]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/9877/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-04-24T14:24:49Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/93999/#p93999</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Adjusting steps-per-mm for accurate part dimensions]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/93941/#p93941" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>Yup... I remember a discussion similar to this with the z axis in <a href="http://www.soliforum.com/topic/10138/sd2-z-accumulation-error/">this thread</a> if you&#039;re interested.</p><p>Basically, you need to check at two points (say, a 20mm and 60mm cube), not just one, so you can determine both the constant and proportional components of your error. Backlash, wall width and the usual other extrusion derps will appear as a constant error, while an inaccurate steps-per-mm will be a proportional error.</p><p>If you check at one point (say 20mm), find it&#039;s a bit undersized, then increase the steps-per-mm to achieve exactly 20mm, then when you print a 50mm cube I guarantee you it will be oversized now! <img src="https://www.soliforum.com/img/smilies/smile.png" width="15" height="15" alt="smile" /></p><p><span class="postimg"><img src="http://www.soliforum.com/misc.php?action=pun_attachment&amp;item=8160&amp;download=0" alt="http://www.soliforum.com/misc.php?action=pun_attachment&amp;amp;item=8160&amp;amp;download=0" /></span></p><p>I think most people should find that the constant error is much larger than the proportional in pretty much all cases... Those belts are not lying about having a 2.03mm pitch.</p><p>Also, calibrating using internal geometry is probably not the best idea, as things tend to come out a bit undersized due to the<a href="http://hydraraptor.blogspot.com/2011/02/polyholes.html"> plastic pulling around the corner</a>.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[grob]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/4515/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-04-23T22:25:38Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/93941/#p93941</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Adjusting steps-per-mm for accurate part dimensions]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/93936/#p93936" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>elmoret wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I doubt the issue is steps/mm. At 700 microns over 20mm, thats likely backlash.</p></blockquote></div><p>True!!</p><p>chancrescolex, have you calibrated your extrusion steps per mm as well?</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[IronMan]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/131/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-04-23T20:54:12Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/93936/#p93936</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Adjusting steps-per-mm for accurate part dimensions]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/93930/#p93930" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>I doubt the issue is steps/mm. At 700 microns over 20mm, thats likely backlash.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[elmoret]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/221/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-04-23T20:38:51Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/93930/#p93930</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Adjusting steps-per-mm for accurate part dimensions]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/93929/#p93929" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>I have had good results by modeling a 50mm cube and then slicing with 1 perimeter / no infill...print about half of it and then kill the print.&nbsp; You can then accurately measure the overall outer dimensions as well as the single perimeter wall thickness.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[IronMan]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/131/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-04-23T20:28:36Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/93929/#p93929</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Adjusting steps-per-mm for accurate part dimensions]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/93896/#p93896" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>I&#039;m afraid I don&#039;t know the answers for the M92 command. I always save the values in the eeprom via the Repetier menu.</p><p>One thing I do know for sure is that the nickle test is way too small to be a good test for X and Y steps. It is hard to make accurate measurements of dimensions that small. I got my best calibration doing something like punching holes and cutting notches in a 3x5 card, scanning it, turning it into a 3D model with inkscape and scad, then printing a replica and scanning that at the same DPI on the same scanner. Then I could see exactly how much I had to scale the scan of the printed object to match the scan of the original 3x5 card.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[Claghorn]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/270/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-04-23T17:30:25Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/93896/#p93896</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Adjusting steps-per-mm for accurate part dimensions]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/93871/#p93871" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>In an attempt to get my Workbench Apprentice prints to be more dimensionally accurate, I decided to calibrate my steps-per-mm using <a href="http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:11261">this nickel calibration test</a>. When it finished printing, I was unable to fit a nickel through any of the holes. I set up a spreadsheet to do all the necessary calculations for me, and here is what I ended up with:</p><p><strong>Factory steps-per-mm values:</strong>&nbsp; M92 X87.58 Y87.58 Z2267.72 E138.00</p><p><strong>Nickel diameter:</strong> 21.21</p><p><strong>X Slot Measurement:</strong> 20.53<br /><strong>Y Slot Measurement:</strong> 20.25<br /><strong>Current X Steps per mm:</strong> 87.58<br /><strong>Current Y Steps per mm:</strong> 87.58<br /><strong>New X Steps per mm:</strong> <span style="color: red">90.48</span><br /><strong>New Y Steps per mm:</strong> <span style="color: red">91.73</span></p><p>So I entered the new values in Repetier, saved them, and started to print the test again. The carriage nearly crashed into the y-axis idler pulley, and then when it went to home the z-axis, the z-probe was off the bed and the extruders crashed into the bed.</p><p>Where do I go from here?</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[chancrescolex]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/9877/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-04-23T15:51:57Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/93871/#p93871</id>
		</entry>
</feed>
