SoliForum - 3D Printing Community — Calibration Question

Re: Calibration Question

null@example.com (madmarkus) — Sat, 16 May 2015 17:03:17 +0000

Ive used both methods...currently im running just after using the calibration utility...
I get close to 100 on all three numbers after adjustment and it seems to work and run fine.
I ran for three months after doing a "paper slip" calibration last time; the only reason I re ran using the auto is I just replaced the heat bed (un necessarily as it turns out).

Re: Calibration Question

null@example.com (galaxy99) — Fri, 15 May 2015 23:33:07 +0000

Ahh, that's what I thought (and verified it by snugging down the screws; the dims' changed from doing that.
By the way, I'm actually using a feeler guage not paper but, both work...

Thanks!

Re: Calibration Question

null@example.com (carl_m1968) — Fri, 15 May 2015 23:24:22 +0000

Forget about the calibration system it just does not work. The numbers it comes up with are actuslly the thicknesses of the plates that the probe touches minus some mysterious offset and are supposed to represent the distance from the glass to nozzle tip. For example a value off 255 would be .255mm or 350 would be .350.. or the 30 would be .030mm
Ideally it should be .10 to .15mm or just about a sheet of white paper or post it note.

Just throw away the idea of using the auto method. Use the manual methode and never touch the auto. Those plates could be bent, warped from heat, or not even tightened the same. So they are not an accurate methode to measure from nor does the system take into account the desired layer height for printing.

Calibration Question

null@example.com (galaxy99) — Fri, 15 May 2015 23:12:31 +0000

I read the posts on calibration (here and elsewhere) and have a question that I didn't see an answer for...

I ran the calibration routine in Utilities just to get the numbers. They were off a good bit so, I did the calibration method in the sticky (thanks, Carl).

I printed a test part on the four corners and in center. The parts are fairly equal in dimensions but, the boundary lines were hit-and-miss (thin to non-existant in places). Regardless, the parts were ok. I checked the gap again with sheet of paper and they were basically even and barely dragging the paper.

I ran the calibration utility again to see what the number were: 1 & 3 errored. So, I re-calibrated per the sticky. It was still okay but, I tweaked them just a tad then ran the utility again to see the results. They are 35, 205, 165 that's better than error.

My questions are:
1. Should I disregard the numbers and not bother with checking them after calibrating?
2. How can they be so different and produce a fairly good part while being off so much that the indicate err?
3. To get a baseline distance of 250mm, where/what is the reference point (I'm assuming were talking 0.250mm and referenced from the Nozzle or the Thermistor? [it's the thermistor that touches the test points]