3D Printing Forum

The share link from Dropbox links to a page that shows the image, not the image itself. If you change "dl=0" in the URLs into "raw=1" you will get a link directly to the image file, that hopefully works with the forum software.

Another test.

I been checking the new nozzle robot and the ringing effect it's just like the e3d nozzle. So I connected the old ruby nozzle and send the same gcode with the same filament, machine.

Old Ruby did hide ringing, but the new one doesn't. Why could that be?



Temp I was almost able to print 5C cooler than the new ruby, but it did got a motor skip after 8 layers when the fan did kick in, so I just raised 5C after the base was printed.

So. New nozzle does better overhangs than old ruby, but old ruby did hide ringing. Weird ^o^

@Dim3nsioneer: Images not working?

Are you attaching them here ?
I hovered over and see they are on drop box....i don't know?

Everything fine now with the pictures. Short version: the problem was about 50cm in front of my screen...

The re-print showed the same stringing after very thorough cold pull cleaning. And interestingly nice overhangs except for 190°C where it is rough... don't understand that yet...

I'll do a reprint with a standard 3dSolex Brass nozzle tomorrow...

I just got mine in the post today.
Finishing my printer head (switching from 3mm to 1,75mm) and then I'll start the tests

Did some NinjaFlex printing yesterday with the ruby on my UMO. Not more stringy than normal (retract off), but same temperature (235°), same speed. Turned out great, so, Ruby prints NinjaFlex well, check.

No stringing with the standard nozzle... but a tendency to underextrusion while the Ruby actually showed a tendency to overextrusion at the very same temperature (measured in the Olsson Block, not on the nozzle tip!).

The Ruby has actually a lower thermal conductivity than brass. Is there an effect of cooling out of the nozzle tip? A higher exit temperature might also explain the nice NinjaFlex print by you Martin.

Hm, ok so my first experiences(without having printed yet):
UMO with HBK and UMO+ Fanshroud:

Screwing in the nozzle at 50 degrees by hand went ok, until the screw disappeared into the block. Used tools, went fine at 100 degrees.
I'm not sure how far the nozzle goes up into the block. My guess is less far than the original, causing an empty space in the block, potentially problematic!
Install UMO+ fanshroud: nozzle is tiny therefor doesn't come through :O No comparison between regular and ruby nozzle with the same fanshroud Actually my other shroud doesn't fit either. I hope(and think) Neotko's dual does fit.

Turn up the heat and put filament through! Hm, grinding, did I clog anything? Nop, 200 deg just isn't hot enough to put PLA through apparently.
Time to print! Oh shit, ofcourse it's shorter and my bed level is well, uhm, half a centimeter off xD. Time to level and try again tomorrow.

Note to Anders:
Can't comment on performance yet, but when the nozzle is ready for sale in the current form, I'd advise careful communication if marketed for UMO(+), as it is not a drop in replacement. In retrospect note to self: duh it's smaller

Titus wrote: Screwing in the nozzle at 50 degrees by hand went ok, until the screw disappeared into the block. Used tools, went fine at 100 degrees.
I'm not sure how far the nozzle goes up into the block. My guess is less far than the original, causing an empty space in the block, potentially problematic!

Yes, it is. I though it was tight, but I have a leak from the brass pipe...

On my umo+ Innever used the olsson adjuster. I always had problems with e3d nozzles leaking so on umo I use 'enough' force. Ofc I bet that's too much, and also the main reason I destroyed alublock afger 15-20 swaps. Also that's why I hate umo to change nozzles. um2 hotend for that it's just painless but yesterday I got the first nozzle leak so now I just use the olsson adjuster two clicks. I bet I'm doing it wrong but...

Actually I never had issues with nozzle leaking. My main issue is with the brass pipe that needs to be 'counter-tight' against the nozzle (hence my post on page 13)...

I am really considering screwing the brass pipe one millimeter more and then locking the nozzle against the pipe. The only thing that holds me back is that the nozzle shoulder won't be against the block anymore, so I guess I would loose again a bit of thermal conductivity. On the other hand when I look at UM2 pictures it doesn't seem that the nozzle shoulder comes against the bloc...

Hmmm... just found out I had a sub-optimal setting for retraction which caused stringing. So please mentally cross out everything I wrote about stringing with the Ruby nozzle. I'll redo some prints.

Sorry for not being very active at the forum, I had to spend some time in the hospital with my wife lately among other things.
Anyway, I am reading all reports with great interest, thank you all for your efforts testing these nozzles!

I am not expecting people to print things only for testing the nozzle for me by the way, unless you really like to test it.
Such tests are of course helpful for me, but if you don't want to waste filament just print things you would normally print and report any interesting findings

Meduza wrote:XT-CF20 is the filament that has curled the most for me also, it always makes a mess of the outside of the nozzle (at least it did with the old sapphire nozzles)

I haven't used XT that much myself, but I have the same experience so far. It is quite different from PLA where the nozzle can be completely clean after many hours of printing.

Neotko wrote:So. New nozzle does better overhangs than old ruby, but old ruby did hide ringing. Weird ^o^

I have no explanation for you regarding that right now.
The ruby jewels have identical dimensions but the brass holders have a slightly different internal geometry.
I did not expect it to have any noticeable effect on the printing quality, but I think I should do some more testing if this.

This does make me curious once again if the "ringing" really comes from vibrations in the X-Y-movement though or if it can be some feeder-related thing?

martin-bienz wrote:Turned out great, so, Ruby prints NinjaFlex well, check.

Thank you for confirming this, I also had really nice prints with ninjaflex and the ruby

Titus wrote: I'm not sure how far the nozzle goes up into the block. My guess is less far than the original, causing an empty space in the block, potentially problematic!
...............
Can't comment on performance yet, but when the nozzle is ready for sale in the current form, I'd advise careful communication if marketed for UMO(+), as it is not a drop in replacement. In retrospect note to self: duh it's smaller

For the nozzle to seal properly there should be some gap between the hex-part and the heater block so that the nozzle seals against the pipe (just as Amedee writes). The hex-part should not be tight against the heater block when the nozzle is tightened!
Thanks for the comment about marketing, I don't expect it to be marketed as UMO-compatible although it can be used under certain conditions.

Dim3nsioneer wrote:Hmmm... just found out I had a sub-optimal setting for retraction which caused stringing. So please mentally cross out everything I wrote about stringing with the Ruby nozzle. I'll redo some prints.

Interesting, I also had bad stringing with the ruby and XT-CF20 at some point but never had time to sort that out, so I was curious to read about your findings. It could have been retraction settings in my case too, since I added 0.5 mm at some point which improved printing quality in general.
I probably printed the XT-CF20 too hot too.
Anyway, these are the things that are really time consuming and difficult to sort out, so thanks for the feedback!

Tested one of the nozzles by printing this castle a week ago by the way: The MG94-based ABS is a quite pleasant experience. I very much prefer the lack of the stringing and lack of stickiness of ABS compared to XT when printing these kind of objects. The printer was enclosed and I did not use fans at all during the entire print.

I'm really excited by this design. It looks like the geometry and perhaps the ruby itself allows for greater accuracy in printing. Accuracy is something I'm desperate for, since some of my printed parts really need precision, and have to fit to manufactured parts, some of them carbon fibre tubes for example. I have a 0.15 nozzle that I have used for small weird gears, and although printing takes ages, the results are well worth it.

The tooth keyring took 2.5 hours to print with roughly 370 layers and no infill! My four year old son behaved at the dentist, and managed to break this in ten minutes so I printed a bigger one with a 0.4mm nozzle.

The tool you see in the gear image are the ends of electrical snippers.