More Durable Printed Parts for Long Term Operation?
Hello everyone!
I am considering reprinting all of my printed parts for my MK4's because it seems like my MK3's degraded in quality through the years and at this point the only thing I can tie it to is the printed parts as I have replaced all the rods, bearings, and nozzle and the quality is still degraded. I was thinking about going with CF-PETG as I have experience printing it and it is significantly stiffer than regular PETG with better heat resistance so my expectation is that long term it dimensions will hold up better than the regular PETG parts. However, I am not certain of this and I am worried that the printed parts may weigh less or more than the original parts and that might cause issues with input shaper.
Anyone have any experience with running machines over to over 500 days of runtime and upwards of 11 miles of filament throughput? That was what I put on my MK3's and I fully expect to do just as much or more on my MK4's and XL's. So any advice on maintaining their accuracy and quality long term would be great!
RE: More Durable Printed Parts for Long Term Operation?
Hello everyone!
I am considering reprinting all of my printed parts for my MK4's because it seems like my MK3's degraded in quality through the years and at this point the only thing I can tie it to is the printed parts as I have replaced all the rods, bearings, and nozzle and the quality is still degraded.
I guess in general there are a few options when things do not do what they should do anymore 🙂 :
- Rebuild it (seems that is the option you consider). In my opion the same buying a new "the same" thing.
- Live with the changes. People grow older, Entropie effects all in the universe. In the end "dust returns to dust" 😉
- Analyze and drill down, untill you find the root cause(s) of your problem and fix them.
I would suggest the last: Analyze and drill down.
The first option (rebuild what it was) is not so good. Takes a lot of time, costs. The best you will get is a clone of what it was.
Why not use your experiences to make a better version of what it was. That is how MK4 came from MK3 and MK3 from MK2 .... a process of quality improvement.
So far the "wise words".
Now to business: You write: "it seems like my MK3's degraded in quality through the years". A good analyze starts with the questions:
- what is degraded? Be precise. What was it back in time, and how is it now?
Find old printed objects and compare, Describe the differences. There can be multi differences, so describe them ALL.
- One by one, think what causes could there be for the differences (and differences can also be improvements).
- think about the causes behind the causes.
Tell us on the forum what you conclusions are, and what you grounded them on.
Seems like a difficult and long process, but will surely be faster then reprinting the machine and not knowing if it better then what you have now.
And do not be surprised you will (also) conclude that:
- there might be difference in filament
- or difference in the way you look and judge the printed results.
- it is a simple issue
- it is a part/effect/appareance of 3D-printing, like rust is a part of iron and grain a part of wood.
We will do what we have always done. We will find hope in the impossible.