Now that I can create blocks with different infill densities I decided to experiment to see what effect it has on HDPE warping.
I have been using a standard test shape and a jig made of three nails to make comparative measurements.
I measure from the middle nail to the base with a pair of digital calipers and subtract the distance to a rule placed across the nails. The figure I get is an average of the amount each end warps upwards. Not very precise because the base is warped the other way as well.
The block is 40 x 10 x 20mm because you need about 40mm length before the warping becomes big enough to measure and 20mm height is about where things start to straighten out. Bigger shapes warp more but obviously take a lot longer to make. Each one of these takes about an hour including making the raft, extruding the block, separating it from the base and measuring it.
The block is held flat while it is stuck to the bed of the machine by the raft. It warps when I remove it. I have only recently noticed that it warps even more when left overnight, so some of my previous tests are not that accurate. For example I was quite pleased when I first produced this extruder sized block :-
But here it is again photographed some days later :-
Not easy to compare because of the angle but the uplift at each end probably increased from about 0.5mm to 1mm. It implies to me that HDPE creeps when under prolonged strain, not a very good engineering property. That is the main reason PTFE fails in the extruder.
I made the test blocks with different infill densities and left them overnight before measuring them :-
Here are the results: -
Density
Warp
20%
0.44 mm
25%
0.79 mm
33%
0.47 mm
50%
0.47 mm
100%
0.53 mm
The 33% value looks totally anomalous but that is because I tried a thicker base. Its base is 3mm of 100% fill including the raft, whereas all the other tests begin the sparse fill on the first layer above the raft.
I also tried 1mm filament 50% fill which gave 0.42mm warp showing that not stretching the filament does not give any improvement.
Conclusions: well sparser fill reduces the warping slightly. A thicker base, rather than resisting warping, actually contributes to it. I must point out that once you get less than 50% fill the object is considerably weaker than a solid block.
Finally here is a longer example, which illustrates how warping gets worse the larger the object is. This is 100 x 10 x 20mm with 20% fill. The first time I made it it lifted the raft away from the base. I got round that by increasing the raft temperature by 10°C to get a stronger weld. It was then quite hard work removing it and it caused some damage to the PP bed.
The 40mm section in the middle is only warped by 0.19mm but the ends are well over 1mm. That shows that you cannot compensate for the warping with a crowned bed because it is not a constant curvature. One could probably scan the shape of the base and lay down support material with the inverse curve. I expect it would then pull itself flat.
In my next experiment I will try filling the sparse blocks with polyurethane two part thermoset plastic.
I couldn't get to work today because we had seven inches of snow during the night and a couple more today, so I had an extra day of RepRapping.
So my extruder is back working after re-fixing the thermistor with some RTV silicone. I get a degree or two more temperature swing with silicone compared to Cerastil, so not ideal, but it is workable. I think the plastic has such a high specific heat capacity and thermal resistance that it probably averages out the temperature swings anyway.
I switched to ABS to make a change from PLA as I am now able to use my 5kg spool of oval ABS that has always been two wide for my previous extruders. The bore of this one is 3.6mm, which is actually a bit on the big side for 3mm filament. I think about 3.3mm would be the best compromise.
My first experiment was to see if I could extrude directly onto my heated aluminium bed. My initial attempts failed to stick, even at 110°C, but I found that I could lay down a raft. I always cool the raft before applying the first layer of the object (I also drop the temperature of the first layer to 190°C), otherwise it welds too strongly to remove. When I cooled the raft it detached from the bed, presumably because it shrinks.
I reasoned if I could get the raft to stick then I should be able to get the object to stick. The difference is I do the first layer of the raft at 4mm/s and have the head lower than I would normally, so that the filament is squashed more. I tried making the first layer of the object at 4mm/s and a little lower than it should be. It almost worked so I upped the temperature to 120°C and tried again. This time I was able to make one of Zaggo's whistles.
When it came to making the pea it got too hot and started moving around.
Normally I would use a fan on ABS to get small items to hold their shape, but obviously blowing cold air onto a hot base is going to waste a lot of power. The fix I have in mind is to blow a very small jet of air at the same temperature as the base and aim it just below nozzle. Hopefully by keeping the jet small I can avoid the sort of power that hair dryers use. Adding the heated bed has increased the power consumption of my machine by about 50W, which has more than doubled it.
When I cooled the finished object and the bed to 40°C, by running the fan, the object simply lifted off. At 120°C the ABS is like a soft rubber or gel. It clings to the aluminium, but will peel off with very little force. When it cools it becomes completely detached.
The bottom of the object is smooth and shiny and perfectly flat. I can actually see part of one of the swirls that are on my bed if I catch it right in the light. That means the plastic takes the texture of the base, so you could pattern and texture it in the same way as injection moulds.
The next thing I tried was a Mendel vertex bracket as these are big enough to warp. It managed the outline, but when it started doing the outlines of the holes the filament failed to stick so I aborted that build.
The obvious way to get more grip is to use a sheet of acrylic as many people report that works well. I have a couple of problem with that though. Acrylic is a good insulator so the temperature control becomes more difficult. It tends to warp unless it is held down at the edges. I don't have any bolts long enough to mount it on my bed with the frame on top. I ordered some 2BA studding last year, but all the post from just before Christmas has gone missing.
I looked around for a piece of metal with some texture and found some aluminium with a satin finish painted with metal primer, from a very old experiment. It looked promising to start with: -
But it soon snagged and started ripping it up again: -
However, as you can see, I held the plate down with Kapton tape and by accident part of the object was extruded onto the tape. It stuck well to the Kapton but was peel-able. This looked extremely promising. Kapton on top of aluminium could be the perfect bed material for ABS. It looks like it will be reusable many times, as masking tape is for PLA.
The bracket stayed perfectly flat during the build. I cooled it with the fan to 40°C. It was quite difficult to remove. In the end I put a penknife under one edge and tapped it with a hammer. It came off cleanly and with a perfectly flat base with a glassy appearance.
The only blemishes are the gaps in the tape, what looks like an air bubble in the tape, and the dent from my penknife.
The base is a slightly golden colour and that extends up for the first few layers so I think the bed was a bit too hot. I had it at 120°C and the first layer at 4mm/s, so I will have to back track a bit and see if I can get away with a lower temperature and faster first layer, but this is looking very good. No warping, no raft, a cheap reusable bed material and a mirror finish.
My first attempt at extruding ABS onto hot Kapton had "all the stops pulled out" to make it stick, i.e. 120°C bed, nozzle height 0.1mm too low, very slow outline and infill on the first layer (4mm/s). The adhesion was very good so I decided to back off a bit. It is not a good idea to change more than one thing at a time but I did anyway. I got rid of the -0.1mm Z offset and sped up the first layer infill to 32mm/s, leaving the outline at 4mm/s. I also dropped the bed temperature to 80°C. That was too low, the corners lifted about 1mm during the build, but I think the part will still be usable.
The base is still glossy but you can see and feel some valleys between the extrusion "lanes". The next test was a binary chop with the bed at 100°C.
This is perfectly flat, even when off the bed for a day, but the extrusion lanes are still noticeable. The next test was at 110°C.
The extrusion lanes are gone in most places but a few are just visible. The first one that I did at 120°C has no extrusion lanes on it all, just some very slight graining from the Kapton tape that you can also see on the picture above. The tape lines and grain go from bottom right to top left. The extrusion infill slopes bottom left to top right and is only visible on the right hand side of the object. I think perhaps Z has to be a bit lower to get rid of them completely, but it is only important if you want to make something aesthetic, like an instrument panel, for example.
Of course there are the tape join marks. I used unbranded polyimide as it seems to be about half the price of branded Kapton. I got it from here, which is very cheap and free shipping if you don't mind waiting a while. You can get polyimide tape up to 250mm wide, but it is always on a 33m roll, so it gets very expensive. I have ordered a 150mm roll to cover the working area of HydraRaptor's build table. It was £53.71 from here, so very expensive, but a small price to pay for perfection! I don't know when it will arrive as post is a nightmare at the moment. I am still waiting for things from the 17th of December. Parcels are not being delivered because of the snow, so you have to go and collect them, but several letters and packets seem to have disappeared.
Here are all the tests side by side, notice the colour change with temperature, it is a bit exaggerated on the photo : -
I now have a full set of Mendel vertexes including two that I made in PLA that warped slightly (on a cold bed). I moved onto something more ambitious on the warping front: the Mendel x-carriage-lower_1off part. I don't think this is printable in ABS without a heated platform, or air stream, unless you use the apron method developed by Forrest Higgs. For this test I started the bed at 120°C and dropped it to 100°C after the first layer. The logic being that 100°C seems to be enough to prevent warping, but 120°C is needed to get a perfectly smooth finish. It takes a few layers before the temperature has dropped to 100°C as I don't wait for the plate to cool down.
Unfortunately the ancient version of Skeinforge that I use gets one layer wrong on this part. The layer has the central hole missing. The filament didn't span the void very well as it is a very big void, I have no fan running and there is a lot of heat rising from the bed. That caused some filament to stick up and collide with the head. It spun round 90° unscrewing it 1/4 of a turn. Amazingly it did not leak but the nozzle hole must be slightly off centre with respect to the barrel thread, so I got an offset in X and Y above the layer that went wrong. Still, the objective was to test warping and it came out totally flat.
The corners have a dimple that looks like an air bubble, but must be something to do with them trying to lift I think. Apart from these the base is as flat as glass and had it not been for the Skeinforge bug it would have been usable straight off the bed. I cut the membrane out with a knife and drilled through the blinded holes before taking these pictures.
I tried the x-carriage-upper_1off starting the bed at 120°C for the first layer and dropping to 90°C. Again Skeinforge got it wrong, not surprising as the topology is very similar. This time I also dropped the filament temperature to 220°C, so it spanned better and the head did not get spun. A longer snout on the nozzle might be a good idea to avoid collisions with build defects.
Again here it is with the membrane removed.
The corners lifted very slightly but the rest of the base is completely flat. It doesn't rock on a flat surface like an object made on a cold bed would. In fact, the raised corners made it easier to remove from the bed.
So it looks like 100°C bed temperature is the minimum to prevent warping when using Kapton. 120°C for the first layer gives a better aesthetic finish, perhaps with a small negative z-offset. Having the object kept warm seems to allow a lower filament temperature without losing strength. I used to build at 240°C and use 0.5mm for stronger objects. I can now use 220°C and 0.4mm with no sign of de-lamination so far. The lower temperature is good because the ABS out-gasses less and so smells less.
I can't recommend Kapton on heated aluminium highly enough. It has transformed my experience building with ABS completely. I no longer need a raft, which saves a lot of plastic, time and labour to remove it. My objects can be completely flat, smooth and glossy. Together with using a geared stepper extruder drive to completely eliminate ooze it means I just print an object, remove it from the bed and it is ready to use. There is a slight meniscus of plastic around the base, which you might want to remove with a file or a knife.
It has several advantages over acrylic: -
Acrylic is a good insulator, so even 3mm reduces the surface temperature by about 15°C, making it take longer to warm up and harder to control.
It tends to warp as it has a similar glass transition temperature to ABS.
It can be hard to remove the object as it can be permanently welded if you deposit the ABS hot enough.
The way ABS sticks to hot Kapton is different. The Kapton does not melt at all so you don't get a weld no matter how hot the ABS is. I don't know what sort of bond it makes, but it is always peel-able.
While I have been writing this article a friend came up with a brilliant suggestion. Why not use non-adhesive Kapton film, clamp it on the table, possibly with a vacuum? When the build is finished just release it so it can be peeled off the object with ease. I realised that would enable a conveyor belt table to be made. People have suggested this would allow a machine to churn out parts unattended. E.g., stretch a band of Kapton over a heated plate and rotate it when the object is finished and has cooled. The object will then drop off the end.
I still have a couple of problems to solve with the heated bed. The heat spreads downwards and warms my X-Y table. It is not much, I haven't measured it but I would guess to mid 40's C. That is enough to expand the aluminium that the table is made from and open up a gap in the ways so that it has some play and starts rattling. I removed the foam-board to leave an air gap (the logic being that the movement of the table would generate some cooling airflow) and covered the top of the bed with aluminium foil to reflect the heat back. That helped, but not enough. I think I will need to blow cold air over the top of the table with a sheet of something like PTFE to cover the bottom of the heated bed.
The other issue is that having heat around the object rather than cold air blowing on it means that void spanning and overhangs don't work as well as they did. I think I need a jet of warmed air directed at the end of the nozzle to cool filament to freeze it quickly.
... well only time will tell but I have now fixed all the teething problems on my "no compromise" extruder.
The first problem was it was leaking plastic. I simply tightened the thread about another quarter turn while hot. The problem started when I had to dismantle it to replace the first resistor that I damaged. When I put it back together I didn't get it tight enough as it is difficult to judge when full of plastic and hot. The seal relies on the fact that the relatively sharp edge of the stainless steel tube can bite into the softer aluminium. It seems to work when tightened enough.
The other problem was that the motor would skip steps in the middle of a build for no apparent reason. It seems the amount of force required to extrude varies wildly for which I have no explanation, but I did find some mechanical issues that were reducing the torque available.
I noticed the gear would always be in the same position when the motor skipped. I found that the grub screw was catching on the bearing housing. You would expect it just to grind the PLA away, but PLA is very hard, so it would take a very long time to do so. I increased the clearance around the wheel hub and also around the moving part of the ball bearings.
Another issue was that both the worm and the gear were slightly off centre on their shafts, so when the two high points coincided they would bind. The hole in the Meccano gear is slightly bigger than the 4mm shaft it is on, not sure why. The hole I drilled in the worm is 5mm but the MakerBot motors have imperial shafts about 4.75mm, so that was even more eccentric. Added to that was the fact that the motor bracket has a slight warp to it angling the shaft down a little. All these things conspired to make it stiff to turn once per revolution. I fixed it by tightening the bottom motor screw tight and slackening the top two a little. That was enough to reliably extrude PLA. Making the motor holes into slots would make things less critical.
Although the extruder was working reliably for PLA I wanted more torque in reserve, so I switched to a higher torque motor more suited to my driver chip. The Lin motor I was using was rated at 0.3Nm holding torque for 2.5A, but my controller can only manage about 1.5A without some better heatsinking. I switched to the Motion Control FL42STH47-1684A-01 which gives 0.43Nm at 1.7A. So at 1.5A I have gone from 0.18Nm to 0.4Nm, i.e. doubled the torque and also got the right shaft diameter to fit the hole I drilled in the worm.
The only downside is that it is bigger and heavier, not really an issue on HydraRaptor.
To give it a thorough test I printed off a couple of Mendel frame vertices.
These take about 2 hours each with 0.4mm filament, 25% fill, double outline at 16mm/s, infill at 32mm/s. Six are needed in total.
I still have to test it with HDPE and PCL., I know it works with ABS.
I had been making Mendel parts with my Mendel, using PLA on blue masking tape, as it didn't have a heated bed . When I made a frame vertex on its own it came out completely flat. Larger parts like the z-base brackets warped a little at the corners, but were still acceptable. However, when I made a bed full of parts the warping was much worse. Frame vertexes warped a little and z-base brackets curled up several millimetres and jammed the y-axis, ruining a bed full of parts. I think the reason they warp more is that it takes so long for each layer that the parts are completely cold when the next layer is deposited. The odd thing is that Adrian Bowyer manages to print trays full of parts on blue masking tape without a heated bed. I have added it to the growing list of things that work better in Bath than they do here: AOI and PTFE being another two.
I had some aluminium plate on order but I wanted to knock something up quickly. I figured PLA on blue tape would only need 40-50°C to stop it warping. My bed is made from Dibond, which is 3mm thick and has the following characteristics:
The great thing about it is that it appears to come pretty flat and is strong, light and easy to machine. I wondered if the aluminium layer was thick enough to spread the heat. I didn't think heat would flow though the LDPE very well so I mounted 10 47Ω 50W resistors around the top edge. I have found that for some reason 47Ω are cheaper than the 12Ω ones I used on HydraRaptor's bed. I wired them in pairs in series and then all the pairs in parallel giving 18.8Ω. I connected them to my 48V AC transformer with a small solid state relay. The total power is about 120W. Not as much as I use on my aluminium beds, but plenty of power to get to 50°C quickly. In fact, it warms up faster that my extruder does.
An initial test showed that the middle was about 10°C cooler than the edge. Not a big surprise considering how thin the aluminium is and how far the heat has to travel. When I measured the other side the difference was only about 5°C, so I decided to mount it upside down with the resistors on the bottom and the thermocouple on the top.
It works very well, and the objects stay flat. The first multi-part build I did though failed after the first few layers.
The extruder jammed because the top of the thermal insulator got hot enough to allow the PLA filament to go soft before the entrance. The extruder was finding PLA very hard to push anyway and the maximum speed I could get was about 24mm/s of 0.5mm filament. This is because the thermal transition zone is too long. The extra heat rising from the bed must have pushed it over the edge, literally!
The insulator is a combination of PTFE for slipperiness and PEEK for strength, but I think PEEK conducts too much heat. It doesn't help that my heater is not insulated yet and the Mendel carriage traps any rising heat.
I am quite happy with with Wade's drive mechanism but decided it was time to try another hot end design, coming soon ...
I think that for PLA, Dibond and blue tape / Kapton is a good solution. It won't handle the temperatures for ABS on Kapton though, but it might be good for ABS on PMMA or PC.
It was immediately apparent that I had not made it strong enough.
As the worm gear is about twice the diameter of the threaded pulley the axial force on the motor is about half the force required to push the filament, i.e. a few kilograms. After making a few objects it cracked along the layer where the bearing housing rises out of the flat motor mount.
I designed a new bracket but I was back in a chicken and egg situation with no working extruder to print it. As Erik pointed out you need a Robin Hood / Friar Tuck strategy of having two machines so that one can make replacement parts for the other. I must get my Darwin up and running!
In the meantime I cobbled it back together with some random bits of metal, some tiny G-clamps and tie wraps: -
I made some of the new bracket thicker where I could: 8mm instead of 5mm, which should be ~2.5 times stronger. I also added some ribs and extruded it at 10°C higher temperature.
This one seems solid as a rock, but it did warp a little more. The stronger you make something the more it warps.
I was curious to see how polycaprolactone (PCL, trade name CAPA) compares to HDPE. I bought some from BitsFromBytes a while ago but have not had chance to try it yet. It is the plastic RepRap was designed for and there is plenty of evidence on the web that it does not warp like HDPE does.
The first test I did was to run the extruder at various flow rates and look at the filament diameter and the amount of motor power required. Although I think I only need to extrude at twice the melting point minus ambient (~100°C) to get it to stick to the next layer, the extruder seemed to struggle a bit so I did the tests at 140°C (measured at the nozzle).
This is how the motor duty cycle varied with demanded flow rate: - The first surprise: although the torque required for PCL through a 0.5mm hole starts off lower than HDPE through 0.5mm, it actually rises faster with flow rate and ends up needing more torque than HDPE through a 0.3mm hole. This became a problem when I started to try to make objects because the clutch in the GM3 gearmotor kept slipping. It never slipped when I was extruding HDPE. I tried loosening the pump springs to the point where the filament started to slip and I tried backing off the flow rate but to no avail. I even replaced the GM3 in case the clutch was worn. I solved it by lubricating the filament with oil, a tip I got from Vik Olliver who found it necessary for PLA, the other RepRap plastic. I did that by passing it through a felt pad with a hole in the middle, with a few drops of 3 in 1 oil applied.
I found the felt disc in the road, I have no idea what it is, but it I thought it might come in handy someday. If anybody recognises what it is please let me know.
The oil is very effective, a few drops lasts for many hours. Previously I was using PTFE spray to lubricate the pump for HDPE but that required opening the extruder occasionally.
The amount of spring pressure required for PCL is much less that HDPE, presumably because it is much softer so less force is required to make the screw bite.
Next I measured the die swell: -
PCL has far less die swell than HDPE, such that PCL filament from a 0.5mm hole is actually smaller than HDPE from a 0.3mm hole. Reducing the hole size to get smaller filament gives diminishing returns because the die swell as a percentage goes up with a small hole.
I also looked at how motor torque and die swell are affected by temperature. Once I had fixed the clutch slipping problem by lubricating the filament I had no problem extruding at low temperatures.
Quite a big variation in die swell indicating the viscosity changes a lot over this temperature range. This is also obvious looking at the filament. In fact some of the reason why it gets thinner at high temperature is that it is so runny that gravity probably stretches it. That may account for the inflection in the graph, or it may just be measurement error.
The next graph was another surprise: motor duty cycle plotted against temperature: -
This is essentially flat, the slight rise is probably due to the motor windings getting warm, increasing their resistance and thus lowering it's torque. The 160°C reading was taken after the motor had had time to cool down again. This is a good illustration of why a shaft encoder is necessary to control the feed rate.
So if the viscosity is changing, but it has no effect on the motor duty cycle, I have to conclude that most of the torque is required to overcome the friction in the filament guide. That also explains why more torque is required to extrude PCL than is required for HDPE, despite it being less viscous and requiring less spring force. If I rub my fingers over PCL it is obviously a lot less slippery than HDPE.
Having got the filament to extrude properly the next task was to get it to stick to the bed. I found that PCL does not stick to the PP board that I used for HDPE. I expect that is because it is too low a temperature to form a weld with PP.
The RepRap Darwin machine use MDF so I decided to try that.
I assumed that I could dispense with the raft that I lay down for HDPE, but that was not the case. I found that PCL objects still curled away from the base, so I went back to using the raft. That holds the object flat but is a pain to trim off. For some reason it is easier to cut HDPE with scissors even though it is stronger. One downside of using MDF is that some of it comes off with the object so it is not completely reusable and it leaves wood fibers embedded in the base of the the raft. This is nowhere near as good as a polypropylene bed is with HDPE. That peels away undamaged and leaves no trace on the object. I think I need to do some more experiments to find a similar solution for PCL.
The first test shape I made came out very grey. It must have picked up some contamination in the extruder but the only thing that should have been in it was left over HDPE. Perhaps for some reason white HDPE plus white PCL makes a grey plastic.
It was very flat to start with but over a few days it has warped slightly. The corners are lifted about 0.21mm compared to 0.53mm for a 100% filled HDPE block. That is also better than my polyurethane filled 25% HDPE block which had 0.25mm warping.
I think the reason PCL shrinkage is so much less is that although it melts at 60°C, it doesn't harden again until it is around 40°C. That means after setting it only cools a further 20°C back to room temperature. In contrast HDPE probably goes hard around 120°C so it cools a further 100° after that. Even if they had the same thermal expansion coefficient, PCL would shrink five time less.
I did the first test at 8 mm/s because that is as fast as I could go with HDPE with my current nozzle. However, I found that I can go at 16mm/s again with PCL. I have a fan running continuously to cool the object because otherwise PCL takes for ever to set.
I made a second block and that came out white: -
It was extruded at 100°C, 0.5mm filament at 16mm/s, 0.4mm layer height, 0.6mm pitch. The reason for having the height so much less than the pitch with HDPE was that the object shrinks in height while it is being built, otherwise the nozzle ends up extruding into fresh air. Perhaps with PCL I can get away with a smaller filament aspect ratio.
Here is a longer test piece with a 25% fill HDPE equivalent underneath for comparison: -
The PCL shrinks far less but at 100% fill is not as strong as the HDPE at 25% fill. I can also make 25% filled PCL objects but they are very flexible. Presumably PU injection would work with PCL as well and get the strength back.
The brush that I use to wipe the nozzle does not work as well with PCL. With HDPE any bits left stuck to the brush get knocked off on the next wipe cycle. With PCL they get picked up again by the nozzle on the next pass. I need to go back to using a knife I think, as shown here.
My acorn nut nozzle didn't work very well with HDPE compared to the one piece nozzle I used before, but it works much better with PCL. I get less extruder overrun and I can extrude quickly without the filament snapping.
PCL filament is much more compliant so the minimum corner radius is less and definition is generally much better. Some of this may be due to being able to run my fan again. I found that it improved HDPE definition but it pushes the heater temperature up above the point where the PTFE insulator goes soft.
So to summarise:
HDPE:
Rigid.
Cheap.
Readily available.
Handles high temperatures.
Shrinks a lot leading to warping.
High die swell.
Doesn't stick to anything.
PCL:
Springy.
Expensive.
Hard to get hold of in filament form.
Doesn't handle high temperatures.
Shrinks less leading to less warping.
More compliant leading to better corner definition.
Low die swell.
Sticks to far more things.
Has green credentials.
PCL seems better in all aspects that affect making accurate objects. HDPE is better in all other respects.
HDPE seems to push the extruder temperature wise and PCL seems to push it torque wise. I think a stainless steel barreled extruder with a PTFE lined filament guide will solve these problems.
The PCL results look easily accurate enough to make the Darwin parts so I need to hook up my machine with the host software and start churning them out. The HDPE results are probably good enough for some parts and probably beneficial for motor couplings and mountings which get hotter than 60°C.
Before that I will have a go with ABS and then do some more work on my high temperature extruder design.
Since I started cleaning my PET tape with acetone it can be hard to remove the parts from it sometimes. Somebody suggested trying freezer spray a while back, so I gave it a go.
I got this Arctic Spray, which is intended for freezing water pipes so that you can work on them without draining the water. I must admit I wouldn't fancy having a strict time limit if I was plumbing, you would have to be sure you had all the right tools and materials to start with. My occasional forays into plumbing rarely go to plan and usually involve a trip to B & Q in the middle.
I tried it first on an ABS part before the bed had cooled for any length of time, so it would be at about 100°C and the parts still soft. The part curled up at the edges and so came off easily. I thought I had ruined it by making it warp, but to my surprise it became flat again when it cooled. Still that seems a bit risky, and the spray isn't cheap, so now I cool the bed to 50°C with a fan and then spray any stubborn parts that I can't pull off. It works a treat but I don't know how long a can will last. It would have to be a lot of uses to make it worth the cost: £4.49 plus £2.20 on eBay. Hitting them with a block of wood and a hammer is a lot cheaper!
Up until now I have been extruding HDPE onto foam board because it was the only thing that it sticks to well enough. However, it has a couple of failings: It is not strong enough to completely resist the warping caused by the HDPE and it is not reusable because the surface gets ripped off.
I have tried many other surfaces including various woods and metals (with and without primer), melamine and several other types of foam board but nothing worked. Obviously HDPE sticks to HDPE so I decided to investigate that further.
My first idea was to use a thin sheet of HDPE cut from a milk bottle. This makes a nice surface to extrude onto but the problem is holding it down. I first stuck it down with double sided tape but the heat melts the glue. Sticking it to a sheet of aluminium to take the heat away improved matters and I was able to get slightly less warping than with foam board.
To compare the warping on different base materials I made a test shape that is a 40mm x 10mm x 20mm open box with 1mm walls and measured how much the corners lift using a simple jig.
With foam board I was getting 0.83mm lift between corners and the middle. With HDPE stuck to aluminium I got 0.76mm. Not much better because the glue of the sticky tape stretches under the curling force.
I needed a thick HDPE base and I had heard that plastic kitchen chopping boards are made from HDPE. I bought a new one from ASDA which looks like this :-
It is 5mm thick, opaque and quite rigid. I realised it was very different from the other chopping boards we have which I think came from IKEA.
These are 10mm thick and made from a softer, more translucent plastic. To find out which was HDPE I used the flow chart on this website www.texloc.com/ztextonly/clplasticid.htm. I concluded the thin hard one from ASDA is HDPE and the thicker softer one from IKEA is PP. HDPE seems to stick equally well to both of them but the HDPE one warped a bit when it was only held down with masking tape, so I decided to go with the PP one. I cut it up and bolted it down to my XY-table. It was a bit curved due to years of dishwasher use but bolting it down pulled it flat.
Surprisingly, if I lay down a raft at 200°C it sticks well but can be easily prized off again with a penknife. The board is marked slightly but it can be reused over and over again.
I extrude the object at 240°C so that it welds to the raft and itself, and I turn the fan on after the first layer so that the object cools to room temp as fast as possible.
The board is strong enough to hold the object completely flat while it is attached but when it is removed it does still curl a bit. I measured 0.44mm on my jig so that is about half the curling I was getting with foam board. Other than extruding onto a convex surface, I think that is the best that can be achieved for that shape with HDPE at room temperature. Here are the three tests side by side :-
Next I will look at different solid shapes to see if they warp more or less.
The magnetic steel and polyimide tape bed works very well for manual operation but I am pursuing the vacuum bed idea for fully automated production. I went through a few designs in my head before actually making anything.
The first idea was to drill an array of holes through an aluminium plate and connect them on the back by milling a network of channels. I would close the top of the channels with some Kapton tape. The problem with that idea was there was then nowhere to mount the heating resistors unless it was on top of the Kapton sealing tape, which didn't seem ideal. My solution to that was to mill a channel into the edge of the plate and wind a coil of nichrome all the way round it. That was my plan until I realised there would then be nowhere to attach the vacuum hose.
A solution might be to use a Kapton or silicone stick-on heater and use it to seal the channels in the underside.
What I actually did was to mill a grid of very fine channels into the top surface allowing me to attach the vacuum hose to the side edge and drill a small hole down to meet it, leaving the bottom free for the resistors and thermocouple.
The channels are about 0.5mm wide and 0.5mm deep on a 5mm grid. I milled them with a 0.3mm conical bit that I bought for milling PCBs.
I used a feed rate of 2mm/s and 0.1mm cut depth per pass. My MiniCraft drill runs at about 20,000 rpm. The results were not very good. I have only ever milled plastic before with HydraRaptor. It struggled cutting aluminium such that the shaft of the drill was being displaced in the direction of the bed travel. It raised a burr about as high as the channel is deep. My friendly local milling consultant told me afterwards that aluminium does not like lots of flutes. He recommended a D-shaped cutter with a single cutting edge and a higher spindle speed.
I sanded the surface flat with 240, 600, 800, 1200 and 1800 grade wet-and-dry sandpaper and then polished it with metal polish. I did this to get as good a seal as possible with whatever was placed on top.
I attached some polythene pipe using an M5 copper welding nozzle screwed into a tapped hole in the side of the plate. I use a tapered tap so that the thread would bind to form a seal. I used Fernox LS-X jointing compound to make sure it was airtight. I think it is silicone, so should handle the temperature.
I was hoping to get a perfectly air tight seal and be able to use a static vacuum generated by a syringe. It doesn't seal fully though. I believe normal vacuum tables use rubber o-rings set into a groove to form a seal. I reasoned that would not work in this case because, whereas sheets of stock for milling are stiff enough to remain flat and squash the rubber, thin films would just bend upwards. My idea was that the thin film would be sucked into the channels and be compliant enough to seal it. I think it fails because the edges of the channels are too rough due to my poor milling.
I first attached a small vacuum pump that I made for my jukebox. It is just an aquarium pump with a pipe attached to the air inlet and the case is sealed with rubber glue.
It is not a very strong vacuum, but it is enough to pick up a CD with a suction cup made from the end of a child's rubber dart. I plan to use it for SMT pick and place soon. I measured it at 960 millibars, which is also the extreme low reading on our barometer. I knew that the vacuum it created was less than the atmospheric variation because I started off with an absolute pressure transducer on my jukebox to detect if a disk had been picked up. I had to change the trip point about twice a year because one setting would not work for both extreme high and low weather conditions. In the end I added a second sensor to make it differential.
I placed a piece of 0.075mm polyimide film on top. This is about twice as thick as the tape I use.
The video below shows the effect of the vacuum. It pulls flat and has some resistance to sliding but is not a very strong grip.
I built a Mendel part at 100°C for my first test. The film stayed flat during the build but a few corners lifted. When the part cooled it broke the vacuum and wrinkled the sheet. It was past the point where it had hardened so the base was perfectly flat apart from where the top corners had lifted slightly during the build.
I measured the temperature of the surface and found that it was 10°C lower than that measured underneath by the thermocouple. I raised the set point to 110°C and made another part. This time only one corner lifted (left side of the boss in the middle) .
Here is a speeded up video of the film releasing as the bed is cooled down to 40°C by a fan.
And here is me simulating removing the object by sliding the film. Ignore the ×16 annotation, I am not that slow!
The next thing I tried was a really big part of Mendel. I didn't trust my weedy aquarium pump to hold it down so I used a 1/4 HP 180W 3 cubic feet per minute pump rated to go down to 0.1 millibars. I bought it for £150 over two years ago to make a vacuum bed for milling but never got round to it, so it has been sitting on a shelf, like a lot of other parts and materials I have bought for experiments but not had time to use.
When connected directly to the vacuum gauge with a length of plastic hose it goes down to about 30 mb. I think I would need better quality fittings and pipe to get down to 0.1 mb. When connected to the vac table it gives 40 mb, so although it does leak, it still gets most of the available downforce from atmospheric pressure, i.e. ~15 lbs / square inch.
The part I made ended in disaster because the vacuum broke during the build. I think it was mainly because the object was not quite centred on the table so its outside perimeter was on top of the last vacuum channels. Before it failed some corners had lifted a little, early in the build, so it looked like the ABS does not stick to film as well as it does to tape.
I centred the table and made a slightly smaller piece. Actually this was the same depth as the last piece, so the perimeter falls about half way between the last two channels. Ideally I think you don't want to be that close to the edge.
I raised the temperature to 120°C, so the top of the film was probably ~110°C.
The film stayed vacuumed down during the build but still broke the vacuum and wrinkled during the cool down period. That means that even with close to the maximum vacuum it cannot hold the contraction force. Not a big surprise as I realised a long time ago the warping can generate a lot more than 15lbs / square inch of pull. The only reason I thought this might work is because the plastic does not warp while it is kept hot and indeed the vacuum holds during the build. The problem is that the object does not stick to the film well enough. One corner peeled early on and lifted further as the build progressed. The rest of the base is flat though, so the part is easily good enough to use. The higher temperature and vacuum meant that the grid lines are just visible on the object base if you get the light right.
So just to make sure I can make an object this size on tape without warping I made the larger part again on my magnetic bed. That failed because the bed slipped part way through. I knew that was a likelihood and that I need to add a couple of dowel pins in the corners, but I didn't want to do that while I was experimenting with vacuums. I gambled on it not slipping and lost.
It did build enough to show that it sticks much better though. The corners stayed down and the build lasted long enough to go way past the point where the corners lifted on the vacuum bed. The base was perfect.
I could only think of three possible reasons why the corners would lift on the vacuum bed and not on the magnetic bed.
The surface of film might be different to tape. After all, tapes have the magic property that the glue only sticks to one side and peels from the other without leaving any residue.
The film is thicker, so has more thermal resistance, which might have some influence.
Perhaps the film can lift a little in between the vacuum channels allowing the plastic to peel away and then be sucked flat again.
My best guess was that the third explanation was the most likely. Perhaps closer spaced channels or thicker film would solve it. I had a sample of 0.15mm film so that was the easiest thing to try next. It stuck much better but towards the end of the build I heard a snapping sound and saw that one corner had lifted.
More importantly though I could see that the other corners were deforming the film upwards as I had suspected. It is hard to see here, but the slightly raised blister of film was over a channel, so subject to the full vacuum force.
This shows that even with a heated bed, there is sufficient warping force at the corners to beat atmospheric pressure. The part ended up with one chamfered corner and dimples in the others.
So in general the experiment is a failure as it does not work as well as the magnetic bed. It does allow easy automated removal though. All you need to do is tape down one edge of the film. When the object cools it wrinkles the film and breaks the vacuum. A fence could then push the object off the bed with not too much force, as the film peels easily. When the object is gone the film springs back to being flat and the vacuum can pull it down again ready for the next object.
Although corners lift, the objects are usable for making a Mendel, it is only an aesthetic issue in this case. I think rounding the corners of the parts would fix it. I guess PLA might stay stuck as it warps less, and ABS only fails in extreme cases.
Thanks to Paul for providing the polyimide film samples and lending me the vacuum gauge.
