Just got my Vision Plate and I would say… its not worth it. Honestly, seems like mine got worse. I’ll try to recalibrate it again, but yeah… everything I’ve measure is actually worse than un-calibrated. We are talking about very small differences so its not the end of the world if you do a calibration and its not as good, but it is a little bit of a slap in the face.
All numbers an average of 3 measurements near the same position.
Same here but I’ve only printed a 20mm cube and my H2D is of course like all of us new (less than a month old). It will certainly need that we leave the H2D without additional calibration for several months and then redo the vision calibration to compare. I don’t think we will see any difference on a brand new printer which was calibrated from production.
I have before and after calibration on a 20mm square with a mitutoyo caliper, values ranging from 19.96 to 19.98. If I clean my jaws or push a little bit more or less, I can get on and off 0.01/0.02 so I’d say pretty much well calibrated from start.
It was on PLA basic btw, standard filament profile
You’re going to wind up spending more than 115 dollars trying to recreate it yourself, unless you already have specialized equipment that can print details that fine and accurately.
Not asking it to compensate… just expecting the baseline, single filament, single file test to be more accurate and it wasn’t, after 3 identical tests.
When you do the same thing… before and after the calibration, and get worse results with the only change being the calibration, you have to accept the data. You don’t make adjustments to get the results you want.
Haven’t tried any CF/GF filament. But don’t worry about shrinkage. Shrinkage will be a constant. The only requirement is environmental and procedural consistency with no significant variances.
But do you understand that you are suggesting that the Vision plate only works when you are printing CF filaments? That simply isn’t true. I think you are confusing things.
Shrinkage has no bearing on this test, just so long as the material and conditions are the same, shrinkage is a relative constant (meaning it will be the same in both sides of the test, before and after).
Changing to a CF filament filament will shrink less, but the variance will remain the same. I am only measuring the variance. This variance will be largely all X/Y motion, or what the printer thinks it is doing correctly. The fact that the machine has been very repeatable, just confirms, the numbers are the numbers.
Also with the numbers being very repeatable, I can (at any time), create a profile for the material and get the variance even tighter. But that is not what I’m measuring. I am measuring how well the Vision plate works to clean up the base inputs.
One positive that would come from using a CF filament, would be the lack of a Bambu applied shrinkage adjustment. With PLA, I’m pretty sure they have an automatic shrinkage account, but I’m not sure they do the same for other types of filament. So that would be ideal, and remove all automatic adjustments from the test. But honestly… I’ve seen enough to know what the Vision plate is good for. So, if you have a problem with accuracy, or your machine has gone through significant changes, the Vision plate can help you get back to a good place. But if your machine is working well, there just isn’t a lot in it.