I think this problem is unique to x1 and x1c
The current head clearance is not adequate for the X1 lidar.
Video Added
I think this problem is unique to x1 and x1c
The current head clearance is not adequate for the X1 lidar.
Video Added
Seems like your picture didnât upload properly. Also, if you upload your video on google drive or dropbox you can link it here.
Howdy mates!
Epic level Noob here, stumbled over this right now.
Iâm fiddling with 2 full build plates, with millimeters apart, would my plate be excempt from this problem?
(I mean I have not activated or even know where the Print by object Clash is, itâs not auto on from start I hope?)
Anyhows, great joining a lively forum!
May the force b with you mates!
/Silverbullit a.k.a. Tobbe
Until they correct this bug or make clearance editable, you can adjust extruder clearance in Bambula/Softvever fork :
Or you can try to edit :
C:\Users\[yourName]\AppData\Roaming\BambuStudio\system\BBL\machine\fdm_bbl_3dp_001_common.json
The clearance is stored there.
Why would you want to risk a crash by printing a single object then moving on to the next instead of doing the whole plate at once?
less color swaps with objects in different colors.
Second this, had this problem, too. Unfortunately I couldnât reproduce it with small test cylinders. Are you using the actual slicer version?
There are many reasons to do that, e.g:
And some reasons against it:
So it really depends on the job to be done, but I use this mode regularly.
@Silverbullit : No, doesnât hurt you unless you turn it on. But this shouldnât be your top priority when learning 3d-printing
itâs not a risk if you have any idea what youâre doing. If Iâm printing multiple parts I almost exclusively print by object.
10x faster if you print two objects with differents colors not to mention the quality is always better if you print sequentially
EDIT: and as other already said, if one fail, often you dont loose the others.
NB: It can be see when clicked
</OFFTOPIC
Thanks for this! On my X1C the clearances are set way higher than physically necessary, but not quite as big as the LiDAR.
Or rather, theyâre set to about the physical dimensions, but the slicer wonât let me overlap the clearance zones so that parts end up being nearly twice as far apart as needed. And it wonât let me slice if thereâs any theoretical overlap of clearance zones.
This way I can adjust them so that theyâre not doubled and Iâll just have to pay attention to things a bit more.
I have been trying to change these settings to sequentially print a very thin and narrow part that only need a few mm of clearance for the hotend to not clash with the previous part. However, I am struggling to get the software to actually reduce the default settings.
I have tried the bambustudio fork without results. (changing values doenst change the behaivoir in the slicer.
I have tried changing the textfile for the standard bamabulab as suggested in the thread and while the numbers then change they are still greyed out in the bambu studio. BUT the behavior of the slicer still doesnt change. THose large radiuses still exist that prevent me from printing more tahn 4 parts on a plate.
Any ideas?
I think customised keepout area are a bad idea. I just want them to be right.
Maybe with a cool way to do taller parts individually by positioning them front to back. So the x axis rods donât pass over previously printed parts.
In my case it makes all the sense to print them with small clearances in sequence. Ninjaflex being best rpinted sequentially due to stringing otherwise. I understand the risks and the default vlaues are good to have, but it would be nice to be able to change them for nische cases like mine.
A big problem here is that the extruder clearance is represented by a circle. The Bambulab print head is definitely not a circle: itâs about 3cm to the left, 7 to the right, 4 to the front, and 5 to the back, based on my quick measurements. I think using a circle for clearance is simply a holdover from prusaslicer which itâs based on.
If itâs a 7.5 cm circle, then it wonât matter
why is this showing a collision when printing by objects? the safe boundary doesnât overlap neighboring objects, the only overlaps are the safe zones which shouldnât matter?
I know this is a late reply, but I figured this may benifit someone else who stumbles acros this thread:
The reason this is happening is because the âsafe zoneâ is actually half of the actually ârequired spaceâ when compensating for the full width of the toolhead. Presumably the reason for this is that when printing smaller/flat objects, the safezone required is much smaller, as it only has to have clearance for the nozzle. So this allows each object to indicate its own clearance, allowing for more flexibility. These zones need to be completely seperate.
For the edges of the buildplate it doesnât matter of course.
And even then, your print configuration wouldnât work because on the X axis the safezones of tall objects are overlapping. This is not a problem for smaller parts (everything in the lower part of the volume), but for taller objects like this they will most definitely collide with the gantry after first printing the right and then the left object for example. One way to mitigate this is to make sure these objects are grouped/assembled together. In some cases altering the printing order is essential (first printing the lower parts and then bigger)
Below is a screenshot of a print configuration that I succesfully printed today, and showcases how one could apply this knowledge:
You can see how I donât print the taller black objects inline with the taller dark-blue objects. At the same time, itâs perfectly safe to first print the smaller objects, but not the dark-blue parts (which will give an error), as the gantry/x-rail will hit it.
Also good to know is that you can print taller objects than the volume it shows you (P1x/X1x), but at most one object, and only if itâs the last object in the sequence.
You might be able to do some whacky stuff by removing the top glass plate and modifying the clearances so you can print multiple taller objects front-to-back, but I donât think that would really be worth it in most cases.