Hi all,
I have problems with flow calibration.
I like to use the calibration method to determine the correct wall thickness. This leads to a flow rate of 1.037 and the walls then have the exact set thickness.
The outer walls are also okay with this value, but when I print parts with flat tops, I notice that the flow rate is much too high and the surfaces are over-extruded.
(I know that I can adjust the top layer separately, but that doesn’t help if a large flat area is not the top layer)
When I use the flow calibration in the Orca Slicer, I get a value of 0.985. This hits the rate for surface extrusion much better. I don’t really like this method because it uses a lot of material and is inaccurate.
Another question concerns fine calibration (part 2). While the range of flow in part 1 is determined up and down (+20% to -20%), in part 2 only one value is tested downwards (from 0 to -9%). If the next higher value is not entered here, the ideal value can easily be missed.
For example:
my chosen plate is no. +5, it is better than +10 and also than 0. but the ideal value would be at +6.5. I cannot determine this with part 2 because the best plate would then always be the 0. what means you would end up with the +5.
Does anyone know of any other test, or has similar experiences?
Did you try the orca YOLO test? Usually a single run of the recommended version does it. Note: unlike the regular method, YOLO does not require you to use a formula. Simply add or subtract the indicated number.
The top layer is always the top layer if there are no layers that print on top of it. Doesn’t matter how high or low it is relative to the physically highest Z surface. Reduce flow on top layer will do what you need.
That being said, if you need to reduce flow, you’re over-extruding. I am unsure what you mean by “walls then have the exact set thickness”. What are you measuring? The width of a single extrusion on the build plate?
calibrating by layer width means to extrude one ore 2 single 0,4mm lines in a cube wall and measuring the extrudet wall size after printing. in my case I receive 0,8mm by two lines with a flowrate of 1,037.( sunlu PETG matte)
so far as recommended in several flow rate tutorials.
but this seems to be an massive overexrtrusion, that obviously can not be corrected ore hidden by a single top layer setting.
I ask myself if anybody has ever noticed this difference in both methods?
You’re printing a cube with 2 walls and then measuring the thickness of the wall? How many layers? Are you measuring the thickness at the bottom layer or the top layer?
Not sure I agree with that methodology. It’s assuming that the variation in wall thickness measured in the test print is due exclusively to over-extrusion. I don’t see how that could be the primary contributor. Assuming it’s not worn out, the nozzle extrudes the same regardless of the direction it’s going. If the sides aren’t the same thickness, I think it’s more likely to be a mechanical issue, an repeatable offset in the positioning system. This may improve things, but it may not be directly addressing the actual issue.
Also, this is a Cura slicer demo. There may be differences in slicers that could invalidate this methodology for BBL Studio/Orca.
The OP’s top layer is over-extruding so this methodology doesn’t seem to be working correctly with BBL. That may be why.
If you’re not happy with the Studio calibrations, use the Orca calibrations for flow. If your wall thickness isn’t what you want once you’ve properly calibrated flow that way, use the slicer’s features to correct the scaling error.
Hello there. I am currently looking for a better way to setup all kind of stuff for my x1c. i sometimes struggle with dimensional acc. I have 10kg of Kingroon petg around which may be just bad quality. I found this flow test which seems to be a bit easyer to use or at least to see which is good.
