3D Printing Forum

I don't think that's glued. And I did some lots of atomics in and out on the one I had.

Titus wrote: The reverse might be bad as you could pull the ruby out if the glue fails?(it was glue right? and it probably wont, but still)

just thinking, would then not also the filament pressing "down" / or the pressure in general push the ruby out? But I don't think that it is that easy to get it out... Anders will tell us

EDIT: I thought I saw the answer, found it back: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=4&start=45#p1131, no glue used.

Titus wrote:I was already wondering how an atomic pull would behave on these nozzles.
The reverse might be bad as you could pull the ruby out if the glue fails?(it was glue right? and it probably wont, but still)

You will not be able to pull it out from the inside using the atomic method, I can guarantee that

Whether abusing it with for example surgical needles in the hole of the ruby can break it free I don't know yet.
Haven't managed to ruin it that way myself with the current way of fixing them, but I am not saying it is impossible.
The previous version, where we fixed the ruby as a jeweler would fix them, appeared to be more prone to fail that way.

I have some updates that will be introduced after next batch to improve the fixing of the ruby even further, among other things.

Roboduck wrote: Very happy with the nozzle so far and will update here as I get more results.

Question for those of you cleaning your nozzles for inspection after removing them, what are you using to clean your nozzles? I've just been using a brass wire brush to clean the outside of the nozzle but I was wondering if anyone had a good trick to cleaning out the inside? I've tried the atomic method with mixed success.

Thanks for the update!

I normally use Bridge Nylon for the atomic which I pull out at 135 C to clean the inside of the nozzle. I think that works really well.

For the outside, I haven't tried the external atomic method. I just use a piece of paper and try to wipe it clean when it is hot.
This works well with some plastics, but not all of them. XT-CF20 for example is a bit difficult to remove.
The nozzle I got back from Neotko looked really nice and clean, so you should probably listen to him more than to me regarding external nozzle cleaning

Anders Olsson wrote: I normally use Bridge Nylon for the atomic which I pull out at 135 C to clean the inside of the nozzle. I think that works really well.

For the outside, I haven't tried the external atomic method. I just use a piece of paper and try to wipe it clean when it is hot.
This works well with some plastics, but not all of them. XT-CF20 for example is a bit difficult to remove.
The nozzle I got back from Neotko looked really nice and clean, so you should probably listen to him more than to me regarding external nozzle cleaning

I'll have to give the external atomic method a try. I've always used PLA for the atomic method but we have a bunch of Nylon Bridge laying around I'll have to try that. I just ordered some Taulman Nylon 910 and PCTPE that I'm excited to play around with

Just dropping an idea here: wouldn't it be more useful for Anders to switch to 1.75mm instead of using 2,85?
The lower forces related to that size of filament may also contribute to lower the wear on the nozzles?

I already provide ruby nozzles for both 1.75 mm and 3 mm actually, the one Neotko used was for 1.75 mm

I don't think there are any major advantages with 1.75 regarding the wear, but it would be slightly easier to fix the ruby if one only made these nozzles for 1.75 mm. As the market looks though, one has to be able to provide both 1.75 and 3 mm.

It's looking more and more like I'm going to have to get one of Ander's ruby nozzles when they hit the market, they sound like the all round winner. Will just have to butter up the wife first with something that shines first

I keep checking my mailbox for those and the new fans (which, I probably don't need for CF printing)

I will probably give a way a few more when I receive the next batch.
Need help to test the professionally manufactured components too before selling anything.
So, many of you who already posted in this thread might get one for free

LePaul > Did you get your nozzle yet?

Not yet! I'll let you know when it arrives

Anders ,

It arrived today. Can't wait to take some nice pictures of it before trying it out!

Nice, post photos only of the tip of the nozzle, please

Okay!

Been printing about 10 hours with CF so far.
Is that enough usage to produce useful photo's for you?
And do you need a side view or "into view" of the tip?

I am interested if you can see some wear in general, which would normally show up as the tip of the nozzle getting rounded.

When I started this thread though, I was asking for people who prints abrasives because I thought Neotko was the one who had printed most abrasives with about 1 kg.
It quickly turned out that he printed 8 kg (!) of Formfutura Carbonfill though (viewtopic.php?f=9&t=4#p53) , and I recently got that nozzle back for inspection and it looks like new (viewtopic.php?f=9&t=4&start=45#p1132).

So now, I somehow now doubt that carbonfill will wear it
Of course you are welcome to continue printing carbonfill, but don't waste it for testing the nozzle, since the recent results suggests it is unlikely to cause wear on it.

If you print anything that is likely to wear nozzles even more than carbonfill, it is very interesting of course, but few commercial filaments would be harder I believe. The Tungsten loaded GMASS filament is one of the few I think, but that stuff is quite uncommon and expensive.

Therefore I am also interested in your opinions on the general printing characteristics with any kind of filament.
Use it as you would use your normal 0.4 nozzle!

I have noticed that, for what I print, it appears to print better overhangs and bridges, but can be a bit more challenging for top layers.

I can (and will) change the parameters for future ruby orders slightly to get a good balance, but any input is welcome here!