Get the benefits of a 0.6mm nozzle with a 0.4?
Vložit
- čas přidán 15. 09. 2022
- Thanks to Private Internet Access for sponsoring this video! piavpn.com/Toms3D
0.6mm nozzles provide some awesome benefits, but can you get there with a 0.4 as well? Is there a downside in strength? And why did I make a skewed comparison in the first place?
Read the article to this video here: toms3d.org/2022/09/22/get-the...
Models shown:
Treefrog by MorenaP www.printables.com/model/3116...
Eastman on Artstation www.artstation.com/eastman
Relevant products
Prusa MK3 (S+) go.toms3d.org/Prusa
Prusament go.toms3d.org/Prusament
Product links are affiliate links - I may earn a commission on qualifying purchases (at no extra cost to you)
🎥 All my video gear toms3d.org/my-gear
I use Epidemic Sound, sign up for a 30-day free trial here share.epidemicsound.com/MadeWi...
🎧 Check out the Meltzone Podcast (with CNC Kitchen)! / @themeltzone
👐 Enjoying the videos? Support my work on Patreon! / toms3dp - Věda a technologie
Thanks to Private Internet Access for sponsoring this video! piavpn.com/Toms3D
When you have time again, maybe try a 0.6 nozzle with 0.8 settings ;)
Where's the LTTea store?
I think I have the answer to your extrusion mystery @7:43 minutes. It has to do with die swell see CNC kitchens video "My High Flow Nozzle is better than a Volcano hotend!"@ 10:30~ minutes. You could maybe turn exploring this property into a video.
Actually, Stefan had experienced the same effect a while ago; he had printed a bechy with a 0.25mm nozzle with gcode sliced for a 0.4mm nozzle. He had noticed that it printed the best... Maybe you guys could discuss this in your next podcast episode? :)
Perhaps it's the pressure build up inside of the nozzle where it has less room to slide out easily so a more restricted flow which results in more precise placement just like how a ketchup bottle is more precise with a smaller tip? I feel like long term that could cause clogging though?
sounds like room for optimization in extrusion volumes and line widths
@@ademonnamedburt1232 that can cause problems actually, the increased pressure can induce stresses into the print. The increase in pressure can also cause issues with oozing and retraction.
@@notsam498 I feel like retraction can just be increased or modified to fix that though because oozing is based apon the retraction setting?
@@ademonnamedburt1232because things often are moving very fast the retraction itself won't be quick enough. On a slow printer that's fine (kind of), on my voron it's a different story. You have to remember everything bellow the extruder can get compressed even unmelted Filament. It turns into a spring.
I love how your channel actually answers questions I have when I'm configuring my slicer settings. Thanks for the video.
You’ve essentially proved why my Extra Fast 0.4 profiles (with 0.6 extrusion widths) produce better results than a standard 0.6 profile.
Your mystery around 7:50 is the filament doesn’t flow past lower layers because the center doesn’t shift as far as your sketch shows. The center of the nozzle is the same for 0.6 and 0.4. So the “over extruding” 0.4 still puts plastic on the lower layers but a bit slower (due to the 0.4 restriction). Slower typically gives smoother results so you get slightly better results in your experiment.
The center of the nozzle should not be in the same position for a 0.4 and 0.6. They should be slightly different positions (approximately 0.1mm difference)
Slightly different positions due to the slicer calculating where the larger nozzle is, not the smaller one. I upgraded my CR10s to a 0.8 nozzle, and in no way will that be in the same x/y position as 0.6 or 0.4 for that matter. I turned a 6 wall parimiter into a 2 wall parimiter and a over 7 hour print jop into 2hours and 30 minutes. These are for functional parts inside an object. So quality isn't an issue. But I found the spirale vse mode prints beautiful in their own way, and bloody strong with the 1.2mm wall thickness.
@@tylers2889 Absolutely.
@@tylers2889 Depends on the line widths, not the nozzle widths. The tool paths depend on the line widths, not the nozzle widths. At least it does in Cura 5, there's no actual nozzle width setting.
@@iskandartaib Yes, correct, but I shouldn't have to make that distinction in order to not be nitpicked. I was refuting his claim which was clearly wrong. And I didn't say nozzle width
I think you missed the correlation that the faster volumetric flow of 0.6mm GCode through the 0.4mm nozzle not only resulted in lower temps, but also that the lower temps are primarily what improved the overhangs.
That's actually a really good observation and something that I think is worth exploring!
It would not have resulted in significantly lower temps, the hotend controls the temp automatically. The temperature is effectively at a steady state and while more is flowing through it has plenty of time to reach the temp, though for some printers the printing setpoint might have to be changed if the hotend isn't keeping up. Most printers can handle significantly more volumetric flow rate than normal speeds/nozzles.
Huh? The volume of filament per time is defined by the gcode, and he used the very same gcode, so how on earth do you figure the volumetric flow is different?? The only part where there's any difference what so ever is that the flow is faster at the very tip of the smaller nozzle, but the volumetric flow is still the same, i.e., the exact same number of mm³/s of filament is being pushed through the nozzle in both cases. But why would that temporary filament speed change while squeezing through the very tip affect any temperature?
@@rileywebb4178 There's exactly the same amount of filament flowing through (not more, not less), so you're absolutely right that the temperature isn't different.
@@rileywebb4178 What makes you think the temperature is steady state? It is steady state at the thermistor, but not within the filament itself. There is already plenty of evidence that increasing flowrate can prevent the material from reaching the desired temperature even though the heat capacity from the heater is well above what is needed to melt it. The problem is that you get a thermal gradient. The more flow you put through the nozzle, the larger the gradient becomes, because the heat required goes up but the thermal conductivity remains the same.
As Thomas said, with a 0.4mm nozzle you have a smaller surface area for the heat to transfer through compared to a 0.6mm nozzle, which means the 0.4mm nozzle has lower thermal conductivity than the 0.6mm nozzle. This is also why the CHT nozzles and the other modified nozzles made on CNC Kitchen can handle higher flow rate even with the same nozzle diameter - they have larger surface areas which increases the thermal conductivity and lowers the thermal gradient.
I've been using 0.6 settings on a 0.4 nozzle for a while now, mainly for speed, and for the functional parts that I print there has been zero difference in quality.
I got myself another printer a few months back and immediately upgraded it to a 0.6 nozzle, and have been using 0.8 settings for everything other than the external perimeter, and the quality is still great, and the speed is even faster!
What layer heights is the .4 nozzle capable of with the .6 sliced settings?
@@danielellen-barwell7332 I do 0.28 with variable later height in Prusaslicer
For me this is the real advantage of an 0.6 nozzle. I regularly print 0.8mm line widths and rarely need the detail that an 0.4 provides. The 0.6 is a good middle ground so that I'm not constantly swapping nozzles. I find that 0.6 prints 0.8 line width better than 0.8 in some cases, in the same way Thomas shows here with the 0.4 outperforming the 0.6.
So if 0.6mm line width is your goal, an 0.4 nozzle makes sense. If 0.8mm or a little larger is your goal, 0.6 seems to be the way to go.
@@d3c0deFPV what layer height do you print with 0.6 nozzle?
@@smartinsilicon It depends on the part, but I'm often printing parts for quadcopters out of TPU or Nylon which will be subjected to repeated crashes. I find that sticking with around 0.2mm layer height is best for durability. Haven't noticed much difference with up to 0.24mm or so but I saw a sharp decline after 0.28mm.
If durability is less important, 0.3mm is a good height for faster parts. Don't get me wrong, 0.3mm is still going to produce very durable parts, but when you're flying into solid objects hitting the ground at 60mph+ and trying to protect sensitive electronics, every little bit counts.
Love that you don't hesitate to experiment, keep going Tom!
You're strength concerns were answered in an old cnc kitchen video where it was discovered with a constant wall width, increasing line/extrusion width _increased_ the part strength, with 100% infill this works up to 140% of nozzle size, with normal settings it works up to at least 200% of nozzle size. For this reason I have been using 0.5mm line widths, and have felt no need to switch nozzles. The overhang improvements and quality results are also interesting.
I for my part, I am more curious about layer _height_ than extrusion width. Wider extrusion is "easy" (to a realistic extent ofc), at least with V6 and Phaetus "shaped" nozzles, although there might be sliightly less precision control. Layer heights that 0.6 can do however, that one might be a bit more difficult to increase with a 0.4 nozzle, and still retain same or similar strength... (?)
@@pr0xZen I assume you are saying larger layer heights give more strength, but according to research, the opposite is true: Kuznetsov, V. et al (2018). Strength of PLA Components Fabricated with Fused Deposition Technology using a Desktop 3D Printer as a Function of Geometrical Parameters of the Process. (figure 5). CNC Kitchen also covered this in one of his videos.
Fascinating. Great for those who don't switch to easy-to-swap Revo's. I've got so many .4 nozzles to go through on my older machines, so this is good to know. Any new build(s) will have Revo's, so swapping to .6 will not be an issue... but... that little quality difference in the overhang is interesting enough to cause one to pause and think! Great follow-up Thomas... Good luck with your move!
I followed your recommendation and I switched from 0.4 to 0.6 nozzle and it was a game changer for me. Now I print at 0.35 layer height and times were reduced to a third without a mayor quality change. Thanks for this awesome tip.
The layer heights is the main point why changing to 0.6mm still can make sense. Otherwise you can stick with the 0.4mm and print in 0.6 or 0.7 line width.
You just answered my question. Thanks for putting all this effort to find out!
The .4 with .6 settings might be catching better due to increased die swell out of the nozzle. I remember from a composites course a while back that if you increase shear rate, die swell out of a nozzle will also increase. If the extrusion rate is set for a .6 but a .4mm nozzle is used, I could totally see shear rate increasing through the nozzle
Interesting. In rocket science we work on mass flow rates, constricting the flow would increase the mass flow rate as it tries to keep the amount of material the same. And no, I am a self taught rocket scientist. I find this stuff interesting.
Good luck with the move Tom, hang in there man. I really appreciate the info you share!
No this is Patrick
Haha you did a big funny wow
This is fascinating. Please continue investigating when you have a chance!
Very interesting, good stuff to try and know. Thanks Tom
I actually use a extrusion with up to 0.8mm with a 0.4mm nozzle, when printing vase Mode models. Really helps with the structural integrety of the models. You just need to up the temps a bit and slow down the Print Speere so the extruder can get enough filament to the melting point. Which is probably your issue with the matte print. As you said the filament did not have enough time to get hot enough. So upping the temps by 10 or 15 degree would probably solve this, or slow down a bit.
I've used a 0.4mm nozzle for extrusions up to 1.5 mm wide by 0.5 mm thick in vase mode with no problem. The max layer height you can do seems to depend on the extrusion width for the extrusion width seems to be limited by the diameter of the flat part of the nozzle, not the opening of the nozzle. When I tried the same experiment to see how wide I could extrude with a 0.8 nozzle, it wasn't really any different than the 0.4, because the diameter of the flat tip of the nozzle was about the same. Print speed is limited by the volume flow rate, which is a characteristic of the heater and hotend. That is, thicker extrusions only reduce print time to a point, because you eventually need to slow down print speed to stay under your volume flow limit (and cooling capacity).
Same here. You don´t even need to change speed and temp if you choose the volumetric print speed thingy for y extuder. i use a volcano nozzle in my non vulcano hot end and 15mm³ volume for it everything works great at 0,8mm.
Yep that was interesting, thanks for doing the test and sharing the results. The surprise 4th result was a real treat.
Super interesting! I'll try that. Thanks for your great videos.
Thanks for the follow-up
I’ve been using this technique for a bunch of functional parts over the last week or so, and it’s really been working wonderfully!
Even though it only takes like 5 minutes to swap a nozzle, I’ve been dreading it, so just kept the 0.4 and set it to 0.6 in Cura. Really happy with results.
What settings did you change in Cura? Nozzle diameter, line width …? Thanks in advance
@@tomvs4144 Just the line widths, Cura calculates the rest. Super easy!
@@BRUXXUS great, thanks !!!
I have been using a 0.6mm (or even 0.8mm) extrusion width for at least 5 years now on my 0.4mm nozzle machines. Even back in the day when I first got simplify3d I was doing it and it was always great.
It lets you get better quality than a 0.6mm but with the same print time as a 0.6mm when you need it. And with most slicers ability to dynamically change the extrusion width it has only gotten more effective over the years.
I've done with a 0.3mm nozzle, 1.2mm widths.
Larger nozzles have very few benefits that you get, you should be maxing out your flow rate before you even think of getting a bigger nozzle.
I feel like this is the most underrated 3D printing hack ever which is only little talked about. I first started printing with 0.8mm lines and 0.4mm nozzle when I needed some boxes to only get one perimeter outline instead of two. Parts are much stronger and print way faster.
I'm really glad you decided to look at this. I have essentially been doing this for years, and have even printed essentially 0.8mm widths with my 0.4mm nozzle, and it worked fine. Like you say, you get a few more holes and artifacts in infill, but if that doesn't matter in a print you can drastically decrease the time it takes to print. I still did go to a 0.6mm nozzle after your "0.4mm nozzle are obsolete" video, but that was because I could see the advantages of being able to print even wider perimeters, and I didn't really lose anything by kicking the 0.4mm nozzle off the printer. Thanks as always for the excellent analysis and informative video!
I routinely print 1.2mm widths with a 0.3 nozzle. I strongly advocate that almost everyone goes to a 0.3 nozzle as it gives them more detail *and* they aren't going to print slower because they haven't been printing at their max flow rate anyways.
@@SirSpence99Generally speaking I agree, however you can´t increase your layer heights much with a 0.3mm. You can print line 1mm wide and 0.35mm high with a 0.6mm but you can´t with a 0.3mm. I currently use a 0.25mm and 0.4mm nozzle. The 0.25mm prints 0.4mm line widths.
@@sierraecho884 If you are printing at near your max volumetric flow, increasing layer height doesn't make the print go faster.
@@SirSpence99 If so, then yes. However a 0.3mm or 0.25mm nozzle with it´s max layer higth will probably not reach max flow rate with PLA for instance. So it has it´s perks but I think I stay with my 0.25mm and 0.4mm set up.
@@sierraecho884 It has been a year since I last did the math but iirc, at 1.2mm line widths and 0.1mm heights, you get 15cubic mm/s flow at like 80mm/s speed. That would max out a v6 hotend. With all of the bells and whistles (better hotend, volcano cht) you can probably max out at ~50 cubic mm/s at that nozzle size so roughly 250mm/s travel speed.
All of those are entirely doable.
Since I was printing at 1.2mm widths, I discovered that the knockoff nozzle I had since it had a flatter bottom than the original actually printed better. Since I haven't been able to find another nozzle like it, I find the max I can do is around 0.9 mm widths.
Overall my .6mm nozzle experience has been quite positive! I like the surface finishes I'm getting a little better, seemingly less stringing, faster print times, and it requires _almost_ no changes. I say almost because the one issue I did have was engraved lettering definitely wasn't as good on .6 (even with arachne). This was most apparent on engraving on top layers. Bottom layers were impacted by this too but not as much. I had some positive results changing the font, depending the engrave, increasing the size, and switching to engraving on the bottom rather than top. I was limited in how much I could do this depending on the specific model. Between all that I couldn't really get the quality I had with .4mm but overall I've been able to work around this and get acceptable quality. I can't use raised lettering due to the application though I think that would end up being better.
Everything else was the same or improved so overall it's been a really positive experience. This was all largely with MK3s'. I just setup a Voron V0 with a Revo which I may use to compare at some point. I'm holding off on Revo's for the MK3s' in hope that Prusa announces a MK4 (or MK3s+#^$ or something :P) which moves to a rigid mount Revo (like my V0 has). Given the easy swap options, I do expect I may still use .4mm for some models where I do want nicer engraving where I'm limited on how many of the above workarounds I can end up doing.
Thomas, I am so happy you are moving to Hawaii. Keep on making
There's a CNCKitchen video where Stefan tested the effect of increasing line width on strength when the actual nozzle diameter overall shell thickness remained the same. I've been using 0.5-0.7 lines with 0.4 nozzle for a while and it's been pretty good
I regularly print in vase mode with a .8mm nozzle with 1.6mm line width. You get really strong prints, and I'm about to try 2mm lines from a 1mm nozzle.
I’ve currently got a 0.3mm installed so may go for a 0.4mm profile. Thanks for the tip Tom
It's always going to be a balance between detail and speed. .4 has more detail capacity .6 has more flow capacity. Arachne rules and I have been using 0.6 anyway for years using manually adjusted line widths (it was often annoying having to manually tweak the line width until the preview looked good) pushing the line width wider than the nozzle diameter always helps overhangs
I switched to 0.6 after your video and it is great, 0.4mm layer height is just irresistibly fast since I do not mind the visible layers.
For some reason when I print at 0.4mm layer height it still takes an hour and a half plus for a regular old benchy. Is that normal?
@@zacjohnson452 No not normal, it takes about 35 minutes for me. For PrusaSlicer you need to add a new printer using config wizard with 0.6mm nozzle, then you can select the presets with different layer heights, it will be faster. For cura I think you need to set printers->machine settings->extruder->nozzle. After that you can select coarse profile.
@@zacjohnson452 not really. What is your print speed? With 0.6 nozzle, 0.2 layer height, 3 perimeters, 15% infill, and 35 print speed it takes me close to an hour and a half.
I’ve been using a 0.6mm setting in Cura but still have the 0.4mm nozzle. It has worked great for geometric prints and vases. Cuts time down and the finished product is crisp.
What settings did you change in Cura? Nozzle diameter, line width …? Thanks in advance
I watched this a month ago and then suddenly I needed a new nozzle. I remembered this video and gambled on the .6 to save time and honestly it took less time that you even suggested to retune the printer. Increased flow by half a percent and increased temperature by 5C. 2 setting changes from my profile apart from changing Cura to .6. No going back now. My eyes can't tell the difference at even the smallest scale I print at. Anything smaller and I would have to use SLS anyway.
Thanks for the suggestion.
didnt expect to see you do have to move, saw it on the meltzone, hope it all works out for you
I switched to 0.6mm nozzles on my own printer and the work printer and ive just switched back. From my experience. You do lose quite a bit of detail going from 0.4-0.6mm regardless of slicer. Also with 0.6 you get a bunch of other problems like worse over hangs and cooling, and more stringing, and worse bridging.
Although the speed gain is nice, and the access to thicker layers is nice. I think it really depends on what you are likely to be printing.
Which is why im keen to get a revo or a second printer.
I have found that lying to your printer about nozzle diameter can work sometimes but be super wonky other times. Instead, I just change the extrusion width and layer height values themselves, but keep the nozzle diameter to what the real nozzle is. I've been printing mechanical parts with 0.4mm nozzle using 0.6mm extrusion width and 0.5mm layer height for years now, and it works quite well. I've been designing the with dimensions that are multiples of those values, to make sure I get nice solid parts too. With vase mode prints, I keep the 0.6mm extrusion width (or sometimes bump it up to 0.8mm) and use variable layer height between 0.3mm and 0.5mm. I've found I get strong parts and height speeds! It almost seems like it shouldn't be able to get both, but here we are.
Quick question: I'm on a Mk3s+ on prusa slicer and upgraded to 0.5mm a while ago. The problem is that I ended up with giant extrusion gaps (about half a cm) where my seams were. I tinkered around and figured out that over 5x the stock detraction speed -mostly- fixes it.
Did you have a similar problem when increasing your size in prusa slicer? If so, is there a better fix?
On the overhangs: Well i'd assume that with 0.6mm gcode: The extruder is instructed to pushing 0.6mm quantities of filament through the 0.4mm nozzle, which would mean increased pressure.
And idk if i recall properly, but i do believe hearing that at high pressure the filament doesn't extrude in a clean line out of the nozzle, but instead expands a little into a blob as it leaves the nozzle because of the viscous nature of molten filament. It is the best idea i got as to why it shows different behaviour and still is able to snag onto other existing filament.
Oo this one is gonna be a goodie
Great video Thomas
Considering that i hard-baked my nozzle with several years of PLA buildup and can no longer change it to a 0.6, I am very happy I found this video.😂
Thanks Tom! I changed my 0.4 Nozzle X to a 0.6 Nozzle X on my Prusa Mini+ and the Benchy came out better at 0.2 layer height than with the 0.4.👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼
This series is such a emotional roller coaster
The overhang on the hat starts from within the part, so the extruder only makes a small loop outside the perimiter of the previous layer (print direction perpendicular to overhang edge). On more parametric parts, edges are usually relatively straight so there the nozzle will move next to the perimiter of the previous layer (print direction parallel to overhang edge). This might be the reason why the overhangs might be so good in this case. Although that still does not really explain why smaller nozzle with wider extrusion is better than both large nozzle with wide extrusion and small nozzle with narrow extrusion.
I got a nice carbide 0.4mm so this is a nice trick. Arachne + 0.6mm extrusion looks great
You don't need to use 0.6mm settings for 0.4mm nozzle. Set perimeters to 0.65mm with 0.4mm nozzle and you will achieve the same results. Because when you use 0.4mm nozzle instead of 0.6mm, printer will push trough nozzle the same amount of material. Which for 0.4mm nozzle means just a bit overextrusion with squeezing material into wider lines.
That's also the reason why switching nozzles from smaller to bigger does not give nice results. Because in that case you are constantly underextruding for used nozzle size. 0.6mm nozzle can't print nice 0.45mm lines.
The only reason to change to 0.6mm is the layer heights. You can print 0.35mm layer heights with a 0.6mm but you can´t with a 0.4mm
Hi Thomas, thanks for such a great channel. I just have one question: using a 0.4 nozzle with 0.6 settings (layer height, etc), the nozzle size on the Slicer should be 0.4 or 0.6?
LostInTech did a great video on this a while back. Ever since watching that, I've been running my Ender3 at 6mm line width through a 4mm nozzle. I haven't noticed any real quality change, but my print times are significantly less.
I spent some time considering the geometry here.
I think it depends greatly on the amount of overhang and the exact widths and ratios involved, but I think in your example you are envisioning relatively high overhang and a higher extrusion width to nozzle orifice ratio than what you have.
I think in practice, extruding a larger width from the smaller orifice leads to a higher percentage of the extrusion exiting over the previous layer, and then being pushed outward to fill the width.
e.g. A 0.6mm nozzle/extrusion that shifts 0.1mm to the side each layer will have 0.1mm of the nozzle extruding over air, while a 0.4mm nozzle and 0.6mm extrusion with the same shift will be fully on top of the previous layer.
If the nozzle does find itself mostly over the air, this seems like it would make things worse as you expected, but that seems to have not happened in this case at least.
Interesting results. I'll have to try it out.
Btw, Did you try the .6 nozzle with a .8 profile to see if it would improve the overhangs?
ive been doing this for years as i was lazy to change nozzle size but worked fantasticly. i found that if you use 0.6mm for everything but changed only the external walls to 0.4mm you get the sharper corners.
Same here but down to 0.38 sometimes for the external wall and down to 0.3 for support structures so they snap off easier.
Absolutely agree.
@@Jakalwarrior The support structure hack is so underrated, thank you.
Interesting experiment! Definitely some more diving into this is needed. Wonder how it scales up to something like a 0.8mm. What do you think?
Matt prints mean your filament is underheated (also you're risking to hit the max flow limit of your system and start getting extruder skips), and the overhangs are better with lower temperature as we all know.
The nozzle size setting in prusaslicer (dunno about cura) will limit you in how high you can set your layer height to be (max layer height=nozzle size) and the recommended layer height is generally known to be from 1/4 to 3/4 of the nozzle size. With both 0.6 and 0.4 nozzles and 0.2 layer height you are still within the limits.
Thanks for the video!
As for your overhang conundrum, do you have the setting enabled for printing internal line walls before external?
So I've messed with this type of thing for a while before arakni was around. Ive printed with .8 set in the slicer with a .4mm nozzle. The reason your prints Look matte is related to flow rate, pressure and temperature. In short the more plastic moving through the nozzle, the more heat its taking away from the system. Just like when trying to print faster speeds, the amount of plastic flowing through the nozzle is increased, and a higher temperature may be needed to avoid jams and such. As for the matte of the parts is essentially just due to lower temperature in the extruded plastic. Its important to be aware that were not measuring the temp of the plastic, but that of the heater block.
That was quite helpful Tom, thanks for revisting the topic. I believe a 0.4 Volcano nozzle with 0.6 settngs would be the ideal, since we have more room to melt the filament to overcome the different bore size while extruding. Any thoughts?
It should indeed achieve the same as what would happen with a normal nozzle on 0.4 vs. 0.6mm line width, but with the Volcano's about double volumetric flow.
Volumetric flow itself is one very underestimated parameter from what I see, few youtubers talk about it unless going for extreme speeds.
A normal V6 nozzle does about 10mm³/s, a volcano about 20 so you can print about twice as fast. So if your printer was on the edge of underextrusion on whatever speed you use (say, 100mm/s print moves), at the same layer height with a volcano, going from 0.4mm lines to 0.6mm ones you'll only need to move around 130mm/s, which ain't straining the machine.
By the way if you wanna calculate the flow it's quite easy. The slicer considers the line as a rectangle. So you only multiply line width per layer height and print speed, all in same unit.
@@Kalvinjj This is why I *always* look at volumetric in my slicer, I can tell if my settings are getting me anywhere near my max print speed just by that screen.
It took me way too long to realize the thumbnail was that butterfly meme template. Great video as always Tom. Do you think it'll work on 0.25mm nozzles too?
My theory about why the 0.4 nozzle printing 0.6 settings is : the nozzle doesnt start over the air like your diagrams show.
(I believe Nilz is suggesting the same)
From what I have seen they always start the perimeter elsewhere then move out towards the air. So it will stick to the bottom layer first, gets squished then drag a bit out like a bridge, and i think that given the plastic usually behaves a bit sticky and all it is enough to keep that shape (especially so for your examples where they come from within and only go travel a little before going back over solid previous layers). Part cooling should also help with this new track keeping it's "shape".
Maybe the squishing also makes it more flat since 0.4nozzle printing 0.6settings uses the brass nozzle to "iron" more of the track than the other 2 scenarios.
One way to test this is to do some prints where the overhangs have longer lines parallel to the overhang edge. ie the nozzle will move out over to the air a bit, then continue moving "on air" like your diagram shows for much longer (so much wider overhang pegs on your test piece). If you do a range I think you will see the quality change as you increase the peg width, much like you will see with the bridging tests.
Edit: added part cooling effect
I think what you observed are the benefits of printing a larger line width compared to the nozzle size. For example, a .4 nozzle works best at printing .5 or even .6 wide lines instead of the default width = nozzle size that most people use. From your settings it looks like for the .4 nozzle the width is already at .45 but I am not sure. I usually print using a .4 nozzle with a .5 line width, because for mechanical parts it’s much better to have an even number of lines each mm (this way a 2 or 3 mm wall prints perfectly, they are both multiples of .5 but not of .4). With the newer Arachne slicing this is probably an outdated approach, but I still get good prints and I stick to it.
It would be cool if you compared the print strength across the 3 different methods, I bet the .4 nozzle with .6 settings will give the best results.
Cheers
What I do is keep outers at 0.4mm and inners at 0.6 along with top/bottom and infill. It combines getting details where it needs (since you'll only ever have small details that you need thin lines on the outer wall), and more material at once for more speed. As a bonus you print faster overall for the same movement speed, or same time for slower moves. Keeps the printer quieter and in my case I can actually move fast enough to cap my hotend's flow, so printing as fast as I can.
Yep! I like to run a 0.3 nozzle and print with 0.8 inner perimeters. It works great. I'm currently testing a 0.2 nozzle alongside a new rapido hotend and I am getting about 15 cubic mm/s with it. Given that at a 0.4 I should be getting 50 or more cubic mm/s, I need to do more configuring.
Nozzle diameter should be treated as a limit for only four things, *minimum* line width/extrusion size, minimum layer height (smaller nozzle = smaller minimum), maximum layer height (usually you don't want to go above about 60% of your nozzle diameter) and finally, a multiplier on your hot-ends flow rate. Testing has shown that flow rates vary by about 10% per .1mm. That is additive so if your max flow rate at .4 is 10 cubic mm/s (a v6 can do 12-15) a .5 would be 11 and a .6 would be 12.1, .7 would be 13.31 and a .8 14.64 Meanwhile, a .3 would be about 8 and a .2 would be about 5.
Here is the thing, the *vast* majority of printers are printing at *up to* half of their max flow rate. That is why people see a big speed boost with bigger nozzles, when they increase the nozzle size, they *also* increase the line widths which means that it prints more filament faster. Not because the *hardware* is faster but because they, by happenstance, have gone to a larger nozzle and changed the right setting.
Also, don't be afraid to increase extrusion width to silly numbers. Most of the time as long as you don't go above your printers maximum flow rate, you can get *up to* the diameter of the filament with minimal problems. You *can* go larger if you want.
That's a good idea about keeping line width an equal devision of 1mm. I usually design parts with 0.8, 1.2mm walls for a similar reason.
Do walls need to be in whole mm? I just choose a number of perimeters, usually 3, and don't worry too much about exactly how wide that will be. And isn't there overlap of the lines?
@@dianasharpe9484 they don't if you have some infill, but if you only have wall lines (for example a 3mm wide wall) there are only wall lines. If you set the line width to 0.5 it will be exactly 6 lines, but if it's 0.4 it will be 7 lines and 0.2 will be filled with a "bad" movement, instead of placing perfect lines.
Of course this is a problem only if the part you are trying is thinner than 2x wall width. 10mm part with 4mm wall is not a problem, as there will always be some infill to compensate. But if the part is smaller than 2x wall width, there will only be wall lines printed and it's best to have a perfect numbers of lines (line width is a divisor of the feature width you are trying to print).
I use prusaslicer for a custom printer. I found to get good bottom layers above supports I have to run my support layers at 1.1mm width, on a .4 nozzle. This leaves the undersides looking like they do with Simplify3d.
Hi @Thomas Sanladerer You're using the Beige PLA from PL, did you get that from Prusa? It was one of the FIRST spools I ever bought and I ended up odering another 3 because I really loved them. It prints very matte and unlike any other PLA I've used. Most matte PLAs look matte on the spool where as that fillament is shinny. I regocnised it right away.
That would be why your prints are quite matte with that fillament.
That's the exact filament I used! To me, it looks like regular shiny PLA with the 0.4 and 0.6, but becomes significantly more matte with the 0.4 and 0.6 gcode.
At the end of the video, I think you answered your quandary as to why the overhang on the pirate hat didn't sag as you expected. The layer height of 0.2 with 0.6 extrusion on a 0.4 nozzle is probably not calculating as much of a lateral shift as you're expecting, plus it is producing a mass at the overhang that you are not noticing as sag but it's creating the bonus of support for the next layer and the illusion of smoothness between layers. I'm also thinking the temperature of the extruded 0.4 filament is cooling just that little bit faster at the core because there is less mass for the heat to dissipate through once it leaves the nozzle.
I have used 0.6mm inspired by these last couple videos but i find clearing supports off really hard compared to 0.4mm. Supports are super hard, as they are more rigid as line width is 50% more and also they adhere to printed parts really really well, and they really should not. What settins I should tune? I have tried latest Cura and Prusaslicer 2.5.
I was having terrible prints for a while and I couldn't figure it out. then I figured out that I forgot to switch out the 0.8mm nozzle but was still using 0.6mm settings.
I also did the reverse where I was too lazy to swap out my 0.4mm nozzle and still run a 0.6mm profile fairly well on a coat hanger hook thing.
Hi, just one word on your last test : slicing in 0.4 and printing in 0.6mm. I did it because i made a mistake when i have replaced my old 0.4 nozzle on my QIDI X Max 3. I was surprised but the result was very good, but it was with specials conditions : the material was ABS-GF 25% and the nozzle was hardened. I think it worked because of type of material.
Every time my Prusa Mk3 or Prusa mini starts a print, it squirts out a 1.2mm wide line.
I used this as inspiration to play around with wider extrusion widths.
I found that printing with a wider width on the first layer helped with adhesion.
You can set a wider than nozzle perimeter width and a external perimeter width that is around the nozzle diameter, and get strong high quality parts that take much less time to print.
Yep! I'm flabbergasted that he is just now starting to learn about extrusion widths...
I'm excitedly waiting for the day in the next couple of months when he completely retracts his positive claims about larger nozzles.
I did several experiments while waiting for a larger nozzle to come in the mail a while back. I managed to get a .4 to print up to 3mm wide extrusion at .5 layer height. Granted this was vase mode and simple vertical cylinders. The print movement had to be slowed *way* down and the temperature set to the max that PLA can take, and even with all these factors, there were sometimes print failures after a few inches of height. But the strength of the parts were unreal. I now just use a 1mm nozzle with standard 1mm settings, but it was an interesting exploration of the limits of my old nozzle.
Yep! My understanding is that the max you can get from pretty much any nozzle before you have problems is 90% the width of the filament.. I haven't seen the tests done on 3mm filament. Fun tidbit, you *can* print 1.2mm widths at .1mm just fine and it is super strong as well.
If you have your flow rate maxed, layer height does *not* affect print time except for non-printing moves.
Keep in mind that most of the time, your nozzle size sets your minimum extrusions so you are mostly stuck with pretty low detail. Another thing to be aware of is that compared to a .4 nozzle, your 1mm is probably *only* getting a 160% flow rate boost (10% per .1mm, additively)... I doubt you are printing anywhere close to the max flowrate of your printer.
@@SirSpence99 Maxing out the flow rate was one of the best things about my experiments. The printer was a giant 400x400x500 printer from Alfawise. The print quality was generally bad from the weight of the bed and the height of the gantry, but with max flow rate combined with very slow movement, the surface quality of the parts was very nice and glassy. And you are right about the 1mm settings being nowhere near max flow rate. Flow rate is up a bit, but it is nice to leave plenty of headroom to get more reliable prints.
The 1mm nozzle at .1 layer height in vase mode is also capable of insane overhang angles! If I order another nozzle it will probably be a .6mm to do more detailed parts, but for purely functional parts, everyone should have a 1mm in their toolbox.
@@Panda_Gibs I entirely agree with everything *except* your last takeaway, all of what you said can be done with a 0.4 nozzle with no problems! I don't think an ender 3 for example *could* print at the speeds required to get anywhere close to the flow rate that a 1mm would give you,, they are already pushing it to be able to reach the flow-rate of a v6 with a 0.4 nozzle!
Unless you have something like a ratrig or corexy printer, you won't have a good enough gantry to take advantage of that 1mm flow rate.
Also, keep in mind, you only get a 50% boost by doing to a 0.8 from a 0.4, so the flow rate boost isn't *that* big of a deal, unless you want to print something massive, in which case you should go with a better hotend...
@@SirSpence99 the bigger nozzle is valuable vs over extruding a small nozzle in plenty of situations. Printing overhangs, for instance. The small nozzle forcing lots of material out onto an unevenly supported layer beneath it has a much higher risk of blowing the plastic in a chaotic blob off the side of the overhang, compared to a bigger nozzle that can extrude without relying on building a pool of material beneath it. And I don't say this as a thought experiment, this is simply my observation from my tests. Plus, printing .5 layer lines is amazing both for speed, but also the visual and textural enjoyment of the final part. Some people like chunky layer lines. I love 3d printing, and I love it when it is obvious that my parts came off a printer.
@@Panda_Gibs Fair on both points, I haven't personally experienced that first one as a problem but I can see that it would be an issue. I *have* found that you can do extreme overhangs with a small nozzle if you go with a large extrusion width (1mm+)
The second one is also an excellent point... Which makes me think 0.6 and 0.8 nozzles don't really make sense, get a small nozzle and get a very large nozzle, no value in between the two.
absolutely, i recently replaced mine.. is someone had seen how bad was my nozzle.. it was a shame.. printing on a textured surface with brass nozzle sanded the nozzle end.....
Is there a follow up to this exploration? Feels like we need a part 3 video.
I believe there is a correlation between the matter prints and the better overhangs as it was pointed out the matte surface is a sign of lower than optimal print temps and on the other side bad overhangs can be a sign of higher than optimal print temps
Thank you for this nice informative video, but does 0.6 mm settings on a 0.4 mm nozzle increase the back pressure and therefor the oozing especially with a PETG filament ?
Is there some milage in reducing the extrusion width on overhangs instead of using an entire profile for a larger nozzle?
When I load in the 0.6 Gcode, my Prusa i3 MK3s+ recognizes that the gcode does not match the nozzle size setting on the printer. Did you change the nozzle size setting onboard the printer and "fool it" or did you just keep the onboard nozzle setting at 0.4? I didn't see this issue mentioned in the video. Great video, btw... i'm new to printing and your videos have been very informative.
Well, Who would've thought... Tom, I've been printing mechanical parts on 0.4 nozzle with 0.6 profile ever since I watched this video. 0.6 profile on 0.4 nozzle, 0.24 layer hight (I use 8x2 leadscrews) and a few degrees temperature bump does a great job even on complex shapes. I switched to Prusa Slicer at the same time and I;ve done my Bear upgrade all the way. Thank you for this suggestion. I works, CONFIRMED.
My guess? The overhangs aren't printed with multiple layers directly on top, they're printed with each layer offset. With the 0.6/0.4 combo, the sliced output is doing the same, but the offsets are calculated in such a way that the next layer actually adheres a little better. I can't explain it very well with text, but if you think about offset layer deposition, I think it will make sense.
Maybe think of it as "how much of the nozzles hole is printing into air"? A 0.4 nozzle has more of its area blocked by the already printed part if it follows 0.6-gcode. So there is less room for the filament to get pushed down and the molten filament has to travel more horizontal at overhangs.
I have noticed that Arachne is skipping details on the Tabletop terrain ( a house ) , even though classic renders and prints them just fine.
This with the first Alpha version and its still in the final Prusa slicer version.
So its not yet the fire and forget setting I've gotten used to with the Prusa slicer.
I've been printing with anywhere between 0.5 and 0.6mm extrusion width on my 0.4 nozzle for mechanical parts. It works perfectly fine even on 0.3mm layers, however the printer is immediately flow rate limited on 0.3*0.6. A larger bore nozzle has larger surface area to transfer hear through so I think that's the difference. Honestly I think of you're changing nozzles, a CHT 0.4 might be the way to go with Arachne.
I'm of the view that you should almost always be printing at about 80% of either your gantries max speed or your flow rate.
Larger bore only gives you a 10% improvement per .1mm above .4, that means if you double the bore to .8, you get about a 50% max flow rate improvement. Most people aren't even getting close to their max flow rate normally anyways.
You bring up an excellent point with the CHT nozzle, another alternative is a volcano nozzle or some other "high flow" nozzle. IIRC, going to a CHT 0.4 from a regular 0.4 gives you over a 100% increase in flow rate, volcano up to 300%.
The bigger thing that I've noticed is that the nozzle diameter sets the minimum extrusion width which, *especially* with arachne is a big deal.
Overhang explanation is simple. At overhang angles that work, the center of the nozzle orifice is above the existing material below it, but part of the orifice hangs off. With a relatively large orifice, there will be a large area hanging off with no backpressure, and material will want to shoot out there. With a smaller orifice, most of the area will be extruding against something, then squishing outwards fairly uniformly in all directions as intended by the slicer.
Heard about the workshop situation on the podcast. Really sorry to hear about it :( hope the next place is more stable 😥
i normally print at a relatively thick layer height and relatively high speed so the volumetric flow rate is quite high
what i experience is that 0.6 will definitely look more even in the corner etc
i would presume because 0.6 is a bigger hole, there's less pressure buildup on the nozzle
This is one of the most important drawbacks. We need more of information like that. I use a 0.4mm with 0.7mm lines and 0.25mm with 0.3mm lines. I would like to use my 0.25mm nozzle for all the prints up to 0.6mm lines but I don´t know if the pressure build up the filament swell and the volumetric flow will be influenced negativly.
Lol, i did the 'experiment' of slicing for .4 with a nozzle worn to .6 nozzle, i had all those bad bridges and missing extrusions that i could absolutely not tune out. When i figured iout the nozzle was worn by measuring it with numbered bits i stepped my slicer up to .6 and it printed fine until a new nozzle arrived.
I like .6 printing for speed and strength but it fails on some projects needing top surface detail. I got some .2 nozzles for doing precise small lettering for clay pottery stamps where even the .4 is too wide to get clean stamps.
Just tried it on my ender 3 v2 with the stock 0.4 mm nozzle and had some problems. First one being that I had a lot of filament extruders skipping, so I had to slow down the print speed to 60% and heat up the nozzle up to 249 C° (249 because it will shut down by 250, idk why), normally I heat it to 240 for PETG.
The other issue that I had was that my nozzle got stuck during the print, somehow the filament got up in the PTFE tube and cold down.
I already thought that the amount of filament could be an issue, so I already changed the filament flow to 80 % but as I mentioned, I had still few difficulties.
So from my perspective, I can't really recommend you to do it, at least not on an Ender 3 v2 with PETG.
I agree with many of the comments here… this seems more about extrusion widths and whether the nozzle can keep up with the ext width x layer height volume. The acid test would be to take a 0.4mm profile, just increase the ext width and then check overhang quality. Of course if that wasn’t it, then we have a few settings to change one at a time to see what makes the difference (or the dreaded complex combination)
so to ask a basic question, I use Cura as a slicer, and a 0.4mm nozzle, would I still get the same benefits of the middle nozzle/slicer combination if i changed settings to say it is a 0.6 nozzle?
I am using cura 4.13.1 is there an upgrade to use the arachne software with it, i havent kept up to date with printing for a while. thanks
I ended up here because Cura was ignoring cirdcular holes 3 mm when set up with my 0.6 nozzle and at line width 0.6mm. So I changeded settings to line width 0.4 still using the 0.6 nozzle and the print was just fine and the holes perfect. I am going to experiment further!
After your video, I tried a steel 0.6 nozzle with PET-G and it was a complete failure. It eventually clogged completely and I put a brass 0.4 back on the printer. One of my other printers has a 0.4 nozzle that has been worn out by Carbon Fiber filament and it still prints great, even with the enlarged nozzle diameter...
Have you tried PETG as well? I made the experience that cranking up the extrusion width causes failed prints with PETG because the filament starts to stick to the nozzle
I switched to a 0.6mm nozzle based on your last video and it was absolutely the right choice for me. I only ever print functional parts and they now print so much faster.
Did you even try printing them at 0.6 mm with the 0.4 mm nozzle?
@@marcus3d No, I had a 0.6mm nozzle that I bought in case fibre filled filaments clogged my 0.4mm but they never did, so I'd never used it. I swapped it and tried a few prints with great results.
Have you tried 0.8mm settings with the 0.6mm nozzle
@@paranoidpanzerpenguin5262 I've done 1.2mm with a 0.3 nozzle, it works great!
@@SirSpence99 wait what exactly does that do?
Could it be the case of the printer is putting the nozzle in the normal postion for the .4 and the extra material pushed out allows it 1 more material to grab the previous layer an extra .1mm and then 2 leaves an extra .1m material in place for the next one to do the same meaning better over hangs?
Theory on the overlap, when I'm pushing the limits of extrusion speed the filament curls out of the nozzle, maybe the big gcode on the small nozzle is doing something similar with the higher pressures and giving itself something to stack on
Thomas, which material brand did you use for these prints? Thanks
Been meaning to ask Thomas, are there any variable nozzle solutions? Like a nozzle that will go from .6 to .3? (like nested nozzles)
I have Arachne now and a set of AliExpress CHT nozzles, should I use 0.4 or 0.6 for best quality/speed compromise?
Is a Food Dehydrator is the best to dry filaments
Good luck on the new new studio!
The act of squeezing is indeed interesting. How about 0.8 settings on 0.6 nozzle?
I'm assuming the extrusion is squeezed more, and as a result you get better over hangs... But then, you could just add those settings to the 0.4 profile and live happily. The question is maybe what is getting worse with this?
I’ve always experienced under extrusions when trying to over extrude a smaller nozzle. Did you weigh both 0.6mm sliced parts to see if or how much the smaller nozzle under extruded?
Didn't went through all comments - as several others posted: claiming to have a bigger nozzle than you actually have may result in better quality should be the same effect as telling the printer to print in higher line width. The result of claiming a 0.6 nozzle is that the printer by default picks 0.6 line width and extrudes the required amount of filament for this. Which means when doing this with a 0.4 nozzle the filament gets squeezed far more and the line is flattened resulting in better layer adhesion and stability as well as potential of achieving better overhang structures. The in-creased pressure is counterproductive but the increased overlap is helping - so there must be a sweet spot. My expe-rience is 10%-20% increased line width works best for me. So I would assume claiming you have a 0.5 nozzle while having a 0.4 should give kinda best results (estimated).
Of course, you have countless parameters and all interact somehow with each other. E.g. claiming having a bigger nozzle is also increasing the flow and to the same time the same effect as reducing the hotend temperature slightly which helps with overhangs but may have negative impact on layer adhesion. So its quiet complicated but I would still argue claiming to have a higher nozzle diameter is quiet similar to increasing the line width.
What about setting the line width to .6 instead of changing the nozzle setting, wouldn't this get better quality since the slicer knows it has a .4 nozzle but extruding a .6 line? I'm curious what any change between the 2 methods of slicing would be.
this is the method that i first learned about. not sure about quality difference but i know that it turns out to be the same print time and grams when sliced.
Not really. The nozzle size is afaik only used to calculate proper defaults for extrusion width, layer height and some few other parameters as well as sanity checks. When you set these attributes to fixed values anyways, the nozzle size gets irrelevant. I change extrusion widths als the time as part of my print settings, but I never change nozzle size. I only did this once because I wanted to use a layer height that was larger than 0.4mm and Slic3r simply prevents you from using a layer height that is higher than the nozzle width - so I adjusted the nozzle width.
But, just test it. Simply compare gcodes if you want ;) Once you've set all attributes manually that the slicer would otherwise deduce from the nozzle size, the actual gcode output wouldn't change even if you change the nozzle size.
Simply changing the nozzle size is mostly for users that don't want to play with "expert" settings in the slicer.
I've been printing a lot with a 0.8 nozzle lately and today went back to a 0.4 for some Voron parts, man it seems slow now!
Just tried 0.4mm nozzle with 0.6mm extrusion width and as you noted - overhangs are far more better than with 0.6mm nozzle. I previously switched to 0.6mm nozzle for faster prints with arachne, but after this test I'm rolling back to 0.4mm nozzle with another profile in slicer (0.4mm nozzle 0.6mm extrusion width).
Imagine the possibilities if slicer would be capable changing extrusion width within the print - for smaller details/holes -> 0.4mm, stright lines/infill/no details needed -> 0.6+mm together with variable layer height (not for whole layer, but again thinner where needed only). And I know you can set different extrusion width for different feature (perimeter/infill/and so), but this is for the whole model.
Something like you paint supports - paint where you need more detailed features. It'd be awesome!
Now imagine instead of multi color prints you would print multi nozzle prints. Switch between 0.25mm nozzle and 0.4mm nozzle, you would get amazing details way faster.
@@sierraecho884 Yep already thought about multi-layer thickness within the model. There is variable-layer height already but I mean change layer heights within the layer itself. Like - not detailed regions of the model 0.3mm layer height, detailed regions 0.15mm. One thick layer for coarse regions and then step down and (at the same height) make 2x0.15mm for the detail region :) and combine this with multi nozzle diameter. Mind boggling.
@@JanVokas Not even getting that complex, you can simply print the inner walls and infills with 1mm and the outer wall with 0.4mm for example. You prints would be crazy fast and crazy strong, of course if you can reach the volumetric flow.
Is 'Arachne' on on the Prusa slicer ? Due to illness I've not printed for nearly 2 years now so well out of the loop :) I'm still using Simplify3D LOL
0.4mm nozzles printing extra wide extrusions are great you just need to increase nozzle temperature and/or extrusion multiplier so you don't get under extrusion. The overhangs are better because the nozzle is further from the edge and relies on squeezing out a wider extrusion so more of the perimeter is overlapping the one below. All this while you retain ability to print thinner infill lines and save plastic where the infill is mainly just a top layer support. And you can still print fine detail.
1. Do not need to increase extrusion multiplier, the slicer calculates that automatically you need to increase temp for higher volume flow.
2. The opening of the nozzle is not closer to the edge it is at the same position for 0.6mm nozzle with 0.6mm lines and 0.4mm nozzle with 0.6mm lines.
This is not true, actually try it mate, print a 1mm extrusion width with a 0.4mm nozzle at default extrusion multiplier and temperature and see the gaps between extrusions. If you actually have done this you wouldn't be giving incorrect advice.
@@EK1H Oh I do, you seem not to understand how extrusion multiplier works.
Extrusion multiplier calculates the volume needed for give layer height and line width. So if your multiplier is at 100% for say 0.2mm layer height and 0.4mm layer width for the 0.4mm nozzle it will also be 100% for any other layer heigth and width.
The temp might need bumping up a little but only if you struggle with volumetric flow.
The nozzle just differs in it´s opening size but the amount of plastic being extruded does not differ. You basically extrude the same amount of plastic through a smaller or bigger opening that´s it. Only the pressure increases or decreases.
@@EK1H Your problem is probably underextrusion from the beginning which shows more if you increase layer with. Let me guess, you have done the "single wall" calibration of whatever it was recommended on youtube and you dialed down your EM to 95% or so instead of using XY compensation.
@@sierraecho884 you have to slightly under extruder because no filament has perfect diameter and slight under extrusion is better than over extrusion and nozzle blobs. If you go from printing 0.45mm extrusions with a 0.4mm nozzle and then bump it up to 1mm extrusion, that is almost doubling the output volume, you either have to slow down, increase temperature or increase extrusion multiplier. My method of testing is to inspect 5 perimeter commercial product I print using a 20 loupe to check xy binding between extrusions.