Feels like a “well just use what I made” kinda gloat.ĭon’t take this as bashing Chep, not at all. Chep, on the other hand, is targeting the more advanced users, with advanced tuning of profiles you can achieve faster with 0.4, which is beyond the scope of a lot of beginners and even moderately savvy users. He’s saying that the 0.6, with general/stock settings can now give equal if not better and faster than 0.4 for any user. Tom targets a broader range of users, aiming at the ‘general’ populace and is easy for beginners. Both make good points.Ĭhep missed the main point of Tom’s video, I think. Of course this could be further ameliorated by printing slower and/or with more top layers.įirst example: bracket, about 15 cm long:ĬHEP has a counter argument to Sanlander. It yields a lot better result than the first example.
#BBC N OZZLE SIZE SKIN#
Second example has a better top surface: this is still printed with only two top surfaces but with the topmost skin layer printed at 0,4mm line width and 60 mm/s (so also close to 9 mm³/s). First example does not have a nice top surface, yet this is printed with just two top layers (as I’m optimizing for speed). I’d be very interested in someone actually posting a side-by-side comparison of a part printed with 0,8mm line width and 0,32mm layer height at 35 mm/s, one time with the stock 0,4 mm nozzle, and one time with a 0,6mm nozzle.īelow two examples, both in eSun PLA+. Volumetric flow 9mm³ per s.zip (766 Bytes)Īlso: I’m not saying this is the best option for everyone and every case, but imo it is for sure worthwhile to give this a try before going through the trouble of swapping the nozzle. Well, the nice thing is that no one needs to believe anything, as everyone can just try it on a test part and see if the results suit their purpose or not.
0 kommentar(er)
