Data Measurements
This is where we will put empirical measurements of data and trends.
Possible routes of exploration:
Minimize Incorrectness
The orthogonal arrays has the following special properties that reduces the number of experiments to be conducted.
The vertical column under each independent variables of the above table has a special combination of level settings. All the level settings appears an equal number of times. For L9 array under variable 4 , level 1 , level 2 and level 3 appears thrice. This is called the balancing property of orthogonal arrays.
All the level values of independent variables are used for conducting the experiments.
The sequence of level values for conducting the experiments shall not be changed. This means one can not conduct experiment 1 with variable 1, level 2 setup and experiment 4 with variable 1 , level 1 setup. The reason for this is that the array of each factor columns are mutually orthogonal to any other column of level values. The inner product of vectors corresponding to weights is zero.
Incorrectness: To measure Incorrectness I will measure each circle (3 circles). I will measure each side (3 sides) Take percent error from each measurement (3 circle diamaters) (12 side lengths for 3 sides) compute their geometric mean.
I will trace the edge or circle I am trying to measure onto a piece of paper via pen, then use a ruler to measure the length. I will measure from the farthest edge of the pen marking because the pen I am using has about a 0.5 mm wide marking.
| Parameter Name | Default Value | Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Level 4 | Level 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Retraction Distance (mm) | 1.5 mm | 0.5 mm | 1.0 mm | 1.5 mm | 2.0 mm | 2.5 mm |
| Retraction Speed (mm/min) | 2400 mm/min | 2040 mm/min | 2280 mm/min | 2400 mm/min | 2520 mm/min | 2640 mm/min |
| Primary Layer Height (mm) | 0.15 mm | 0.11 mm | 0.13 mm | 0.15 mm | 0.17 mm | 0.19 mm |
| Interior Fill Percentage (%) | 20% | 10% | 30% | 50% | 70% | 90% |
| Internal Fill Pattern (type) | Rectilinear | Grid | Triangular | Rectilinear | Wiggle | Full Honeycomb |
| Primary Extruder Temperature (C) | 230 C | 190 C | 203.75 C | 217.5 | 231.25 C | 245 C |
| Heated Build Platform Temperature (C) | 200 C | 50 C | 100 C | 150 C | 200 C | 250 C |
| Default Printing Speed (mm/min) | 2500 mm/min | 1800 mm/min | 2160 mm/min | 2520 mm/min | 2880 mm/min | 3240 mm/min |
| Top Solid Layers (layers) | 4 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 8 |
| Bottom Solid Layers (layers) | 3 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 8 |
| Outline/Perimeter Shells (layers) | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Additions (type) | Use Skirt/Brim | Use Prime Pillar | Use Ooze Sheild | Use Skirt/Brim | Use Raft | None |
From OA generated by http://www.freequality.org/documents/tools/Tagarray_files/tamatrix.html
| Experiment No. | Retraction Distance (mm) | Retraction Speed (mm/min) | Primary Layer Height (mm) | Interior Fill Percentage (%) | Primary Extruder Temperature (C) | Heated Build Platform Temperature (C) | Default Printing Speed (mm/min) | Top Solid Layers (layers) | Bottom Solid Layers (layers) | Outline/Perimeter Shells (layers) | Additions (type) | Internal Fill Pattern (type) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 3 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 4 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| 5 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| 6 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| 7 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1 |
| 8 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 2 |
| 9 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| 10 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| 11 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 2 |
| 12 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 3 |
| 13 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 4 |
| 14 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 5 |
| 15 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 1 |
| 16 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 2 |
| 17 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 3 |
| 18 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 4 |
| 19 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 5 |
| 20 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 1 |
| 21 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 5 |
| 22 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| 23 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 |
| 24 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 3 |
| 25 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 4 |
| 26 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 3 |
| 27 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| 28 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 5 |
| 29 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 1 |
| 30 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 2 |
| 31 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 4 |
| 32 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| 33 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
| 34 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
| 35 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 |
| 36 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 4 |
| 37 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 4 |
| 38 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 1 |
| 39 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 2 |
| 40 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 3 |
| 41 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 3 |
| 42 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 4 |
| 43 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 5 |
| 44 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 1 |
| 45 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| 46 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 1 |
| 47 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 2 |
| 48 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 3 |
| 49 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
| 50 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 5 |
| Parameter Name | Source of heuristic | |
|---|---|---|
| Retraction Distance (mm) | http://reprap.org/wiki/Retraction_Tuning_With_Slic3r#Basic_Retraction_Tuning_-_Distance | |
| Retraction Speed (mm/s) | Illuminarti: https://ultimaker.com/en/community/4292-retraction-optimization (Went for difference of 10 mm/s) | |
| Primary Layer Height (mm) | https://jinschoi.github.io/simplify3d-docs/ (Under layer settings) | |
| Interior Fill Percentage (%) | http://my3dmatter.com/influence-infill-layer-height-pattern/ (Quality found from 10% to 90%) | |
| Interior Fill Pattern (type) | Did not use "fast honeycomb" because I am trying to optimize quality not speed, https://www.reddit.com/r/3Dprinting/comments/3ar0rn/simplify3d_v30_possible_release_tomorrow/ | |
| Primary Extruder Temperature (C) | Pawel Drogowski: https://www.facebook.com/groups/470637449795481/ | |
| Heated Build Platform Temperature (C) | Pawel Drogowski: https://www.facebook.com/groups/470637449795481/ | |
| Default Printing Speed (mm/min) | Pawel Drogowski: https://www.facebook.com/groups/470637449795481/ (Compromise between getting close to default parameter as level 3 and a difference of about 25 mm/s as by Pawel's recommendation) | |
| Top Solid Layers (layers) | http://www.mattercontrol.com/articles/slice-settings-explained---part-3 (recommended 9-10 for 0.1 mm layer height) | |
| Bottom Solid Layers (layers) | http://www.mattercontrol.com/articles/slice-settings-explained---part-3 (recommended 9-10 for 0.1 mm layer height) | |
| Outline/Perimeter Shells (layers) | http://3dprinting-blog.com/34-what-are-the-main-3d-printing-parameters/ | |
| Additions (type) | Did not want to use multiple additions at the same time. This gives me only 5 options |
Cause: First layer cools down rapidly and contracts, forcing the bottom layer upwards or first layer cools down too slowly and weight of model pushes causing the first layer to widen (a.k.a Elephant Foot)
I hypothesis that extruder temperature and model weight has a relationship to warping. My first goal will be to confirm the hypothesis that extruder temperature has a relationship to warping. Once I find the optimal extruder temperature for a certain standard model weight, I will try and find an optimal extruder temperature for multiple model weights and see if I can derive a function for the optimal extruder temperature given the weight of the model.
In order to measure warping as both the lifting off the print bed and elephant foot effect I will use a standard "model" cube of the given cube size. I will use the maximum distance the bottom layer deviates from the horizontal plane and the the maximum distance each side deviates from the side of the model cube as measured from above. Thus my warping equation will look like this:
Warping = (Distance of bottom layer off even surface) * (Sum of maximum distance off model edge for each side, 6 sides total)
To measure each model side I will draw a 10mm x 10mm square on a sheet of paper, line up one edge of the side of the 10mm cube and measure the offset on the other 3 edges. I will then use the max of these 3 offsets to get the distance off model each for each side.
Note: For the marking the cubes I will use a sharpie oil paint marker
These can be adjusted for latter experiments to test more variables:
Quality:
Layer height: 0.2 (mm)
Shell thickness: 1 (mm)
Retraction enabled.
Fill:
Bottom/Top thickness: 0.4 (mm)
Infill: 25%
Speed and Temperature:
Print speed: 30 mm/s
Extruder Temperature: 160 (C)
Bed Temperature: 30 (C)
Filament:
Diameter: 1.75 (mm)
Flow: 100%
Machine:
Nozzle size (mm): 0.5
Adhesion:
None
Experiment 1: Find relationship between extruder temperature and warping for initial 10mm cube model
- Print out 10, 10mm models at 210(C) extruder temperature
- Repeat for 9 more times with 5 (C) bumps in extruder temperature (Up to 255 (C))
- Average warpedness of each sample of 10 cubes
- Choose extruder temperature that demonstrated the least bumps as optimal extruder temperature
Cause: In higher layers the material cools faster, because the heat from the heated print bed doesn’t reach that high. Because of this, adhesion in the upper layers is lower.
There are many different problems that arise when 3d printing, however this problem is hypothesized to have a relationship to model height, and its solution is hypothesized to have a relationship to extruder and bed temperature. Thus if we can get the cracking behavior to express itself in a consistent fashion we may be able to find a relationship between extruder and bed temperature and cracking.
Our first goal however, is to confirm the hypothesis that as model height increases, more cracking is observed. We want to develop a mathematical relationship between the crackedness of a model and its height.
First we need to clarify what we mean by cracking: A crack will be noticeable break in the horizontal axis of the model. Since the layers are supposed to be 0 height apart, a good metric for how “cracked” a model is should incorporate both the size of a crack and the number of cracks.
Thus I propose that to measure the crackedness of an object we use the following formula: Crackedness of Object X= (Number of cracks in object X) (Sum of height^s of cracks) Where the height of a crack will be measured from its base layer to the top of the crack. Note: While it would be interesting to see what the effect of direct temperatures on each of the variables above would be, I think it is within our best interest to try and reduce how cracked an object is in general, and save more specific measurements for later exploration.
These can be adjusted for latter experiments to test more variables:
Quality:
Layer height: 0.2 (mm)
Shell thickness: 1 (mm)
Retraction enabled.
Fill:
Bottom/Top thickness: 0.4 (mm)
Infill: 25%
Speed and Temperature:
Print speed: 30 mm/s
Extruder Temperature: 195 (C)
Bed Temperature: 60 (C)
Filament:
Diameter: 1.75 (mm)
Flow: 100%
Machine:
Nozzle size (mm): 0.5
Our first goal is to confirm the hypothesis that as model height increases crackedness increases and establish a base line crackedness measurement for each model height. Thus I propose a very simple test to develop this relationship: Steps
1. Create 10 different models
- Each model will be a rectangle with width and depth equal to 40mm
2. height of model number x is x/10 * 170mm
3. Print out 5 versions of each of these models for a total of 50 prints
4. Throw out and re-do prints that have “fallen over” or are exhibiting some other aberration that is not cracking.
5. Measure each model for crackedness, there will be 5 measures of crackedness for each model 1-10.
6. Average the crackedness for each model call this C_ave for each model.
Note: This experiment has many other variables that could be considered. The width and depth of the base of the rectangle, the max print height, printer used, ect. However these issues will have to be ignored to try and establish a general relationship for printing height and crackedness on our specific printer. Once we establish a rule and a solution to a problem on our printer, then it becomes easier to generalize.
Experiment 2: Determining relationship between change in only print bed heat, only extruder heat, and a combination of print bed and extruder heat to crackedness in each model.
Let change in extruder head temp be ∆E Let change in print bed temp be ∆B
1. Print out 9 models based off the model with the highest C_ave, call it M, each with different settings
- First 3 will have increased ∆E by 5,10,15 C respectively
- Second 3 will have increased ∆B by 5,10,15 C respectively
- Last 3 will be have increased ∆E and ∆B by 5,10,15 C respectively
2. Subtract each crackedness measurement from all 9 models from C_ave, call this value C_test
- This value represents the improvement in crackedness over the average crackedness for a given height,
3. Find the greatest C_test. Use this to determine which route seems more promising, changing ∆E,∆B or ∆E and ∆B. Let the choice we make be ∆T
4. For each model 1-10 do the next two steps (5-6):
5. For each model, print out 20 models with 2 models per ∆T increasing from 1.5 up to 15C per model
- ex. for model 1, there will be 20 models, 2 with ∆T = 1.5, 2 with ∆T = 2.5 up to ∆T = 15 C.
6. Average the crackedness of each pair of models for the specific ∆T call this C_aveT
7. Subtract each C_aveT by the C_ave for the model height, call this value C_imp
- Since there are 10 models and 10 C_imp per model we have a total of 100 C_imp measurements
1. Create a bar graph with the 10 different model heights on the axis, ∆T on y axis and the 10 C_imp measurements per model height.
2. Find range of ∆T gives largest C_imp for each height.
3. Plot line graph, ∆T vs. height
4. While this line graph will be skimpy because it only has 10 height values, hopefully this will allow us to determine a relationship between ∆T and Height.
Our graphs will look something like this (note that these graphs were made with max height = 170 mm:
Height vs. crackedness with change in temps:
Height vs. change in temps:
We may want to increase the amount of model heights we experiment with to get a better relationship between ∆T and Height Once we find a relationship, we can determine the height of the model from the gCode and implement the correct ∆T for that height.
Sources: https://all3dp.com/common-3d-printing-problems-and-their-solutions/