Maybe a layer of painter's tape on the my existing bed will soften the texture a little?Smooth plate is really really smooth. I'd look for something with more of a matte finish.
For sure! Everything else the same the poop bin I printed with the .4mm said 11 hours, swapped to the .8mm and it was a little over 8!
Holy ****, $50? All the build plates I've looked at are ~$20Sounds worth trying. I've been eyeing a darkmoon satin build plate for a while. A little tape would be way cheaper.
Yeah makes it hard to pull the trigger. Nice looking plate though.Holy ****, $50? All the build plates I've looked at are ~$20
How much time does that save? Getting good enough print quality?
How much time does that save? Getting good enough print quality?
Well I tried some cup magnets and they are much better. I made the pockets to hold them more shallow so they stuck out 0.100” so they don’t loose any strength if slightly recessed and you can use them again else where if desired as the are retained by a countersunk head 3mm screw.


That is awesome. Have you posted the files anywhere? I would like to print a few for my funnels.Well I tried some cup magnets and they are much better. I made the pockets to hold them more shallow so they stuck out 0.100” so they don’t loose any strength if slightly recessed and you can use them again else where if desired as the are retained by a countersunk head 3mm screw.
https://www.amazon.com/LOVIMAG-Neod...g-Cabinet/dp/B0D93KCN54/?tag=atomicindus08-20
![]()
Not yet. I would like to design a variation for typical funnel instead of addition to the vehicle specific funnel above and modify the lid hinge slightly.That is awesome. Have you posted the files anywhere? I would like to print a few for my funnels.
Is it shrinkage?My new H2D is printing test pieces about 0.005" undersized. Can I tighten that up, and how? I'm primarily concerned with X and Y dimensions right now because I have to print some templates for a project.
My Prusa was always less than 0.005", so I'm sure it's possible with this machine. I'm just wondering the best ways to dial in a Bambu since I'm new to them. I can scale the prints for a quick fix, but I'd rather do it the correct way.Is it shrinkage?
Can a 3d printer really do better than 0.005" anyway?
But then you will not need an oil funnel. Better to go with the perennial Garage Journal favorite: Honda Ridgeline.Or maybe I should start a print farm and sell them so I can buy a Tesla.


Looking for some advice here... I'm trying to reproduce a "headlight bezel nut" for a 79 Trans Am.
The model came out well, all dimensions are really close. Problem is, the tabs on the end of the unit break off (which is also a problem with the OEM piece). It's like the bond between the top surface of the cylinder and the tab is not strong enough.
Maybe because it's printed standing upright, and the top of the cylinder is a top surface? I'm going to try printing on it's side, so cylinder and tabs are on continuous layers, if that makes sense. But takes a lot of supports and not very efficient.
I am printing with PETG on a Bambu P1S. I know nylon would be better, but don't have any and the interwebs say nylon is hard to work with. I don't have a filament dryer.
Thanks for any advice, the users on this thread are very knowledgeable.
Looking for some advice here... I'm trying to reproduce a "headlight bezel nut" for a 79 Trans Am.
The model came out well, all dimensions are really close. Problem is, the tabs on the end of the unit break off (which is also a problem with the OEM piece). It's like the bond between the top surface of the cylinder and the tab is not strong enough.
Maybe because it's printed standing upright, and the top of the cylinder is a top surface? I'm going to try printing on it's side, so cylinder and tabs are on continuous layers, if that makes sense. But takes a lot of supports and not very efficient.
I am printing with PETG on a Bambu P1S. I know nylon would be better, but don't have any and the interwebs say nylon is hard to work with. I don't have a filament dryer.
Thanks for any advice, the users on this thread are very knowledgeable.




Seems the elegoo subreddit is aware of the "stuck input shaping" issue:I ordered a Elegoo Centauri Carbon at the end of November, received it on Dec. 5. It sat for a couple of weeks with the holidays and having to make space for it. I set it up and ran the initial startup procedure, it made all the right noises and the head and table moved without any problem. I got green check marks on the first 4 items in the display but it sat on "input shaping" for an hour. I have run the startup program about a dozen times with no change, it always freezes at the same point even if I wait for several hours. I searched online, very little info out there concerning setup problems. I confirmed that the table belt had the correct tension, the table or head was not hitting anything and that the plate was properly in the slight recess in the table, all things that others had problems with. I sent an email to the Elegoo Support Center days ago, all that I have gotten back was an acknowledgement that they had received my email.
Any suggestions as to what to try next?
I think that the warranty period is rapidly approaching if not already past. When my box arrived I noted that one corner had received an impact (crumpled cardboard) I took some photos before I took it in the house then opened the box but didn't see any damage, they use some thick foam all around the printer. Both the table and head all move easily and smoothly through their entire designed range of motion, no binding at all.
Interestingly enough, when I worked at an aerospace company I did some 3D printing when it was in it's infancy back in the 1980's . It was resin printing with a 150mm cube capacity. I never imagined that every house could have a printer on the kitchen table in the future. We were in a small windowless and locked building, everything was on a need to know basis.
OK, variation on that design: These wall anchor things need the space between the tabs to be wider than the screw where it goes into the anchor but narrower where it exits so the screw body pushes the arms outward. Rather than dealing with a tapered shape inside the arms, just set the arms at an angle. At their base they have clearance for the screw shaft. Perhaps half way up they make contact. When the arms are expanded you still want interference with the screw so the threads will bite. The dashed lines are where the hole in buried in the part would extend from the base of the arms.The more complex idea would be to CAD something similar to the GM part but with longer flex arms. This would require more detailed CAD work as some features might be harder to model. Note that I didn't add any of the round inside of the snap arms. Also, there is no harm in making the snap arms on the longer side and making the base bigger.
Anyway, the idea here is you have longer snap arms that extend into the part. I've draw this in midplane cross section. The idea is to print the part as if you were looking down on it so the midplane cross section is parallel to the print bed. An issue with that is you want the bulk of the part (the height off the print bed) to be bigger than the opening in the body. I would make the part so the flex arms are full height right up to the point where they go into the body. That will minimize the support material you will need.

Tried 30 and 45 degrees but it didn't make the tabs much stronger. Laid the part over 90 degrees and as expected the layer orientation made the part significantly stronger. Required supports, and printing a round part in that orientation resulted in it being not quite round and some finish issues.You can also print it on an angle...

... In your case I would suggest experimenting with creating either a similar 0.1mm, 4mm deep wall just so the layers that create the snaps have more support or plan B. B would be make the gap large enough that the snaps are truly free (say 0.5mm). That will give them a bit more flex (longer cantilever).
The more complex idea would be to CAD something similar to the GM part but with longer flex arms...





Seems the elegoo subreddit is aware of the "stuck input shaping" issue:
https://www.reddit.com/r/elegoo/comments/1kziuw2
Regardless, their tech support is usually pretty good.
If what you have works - stop now, enjoy beer.Tried 30 and 45 degrees but it didn't make the tabs much stronger. Laid the part over 90 degrees and as expected the layer orientation made the part significantly stronger. Required supports, and printing a round part in that orientation resulted in it being not quite round and some finish issues.
Given it's a hidden part not on a concours-level restoration, this would be sufficient. As would the suggestions to do a different shape, size, etc. However, I'm a retired civil engineer (eek) and this exercise is more about improving my CAD and 3D printing skills, so let's continue.
I tried fooling the slicer with a thin moat, it didn't make a noticeable difference. I think the base of the tabs are just too small, and the sharp corner at the tab/base interface introduce a stress point. A fillet would help, but then the part wouldn't sit flush.
Next try was the suggestion of longer flex arms "buried" in the part. Success! The tabs have some nice flex, and the part looks very similar to the original. I could now also add some fillets to the bottom of the tabs, that may have helped a bit too.
Looks a little rough in close-up, but don't forget this part is only 12mm diameter, and the tabs are 2mm wide. Can't get much better with a 0.4 nozzle (and again, it will only ever matter to me).
Here's a section of the CAD drawing. There are remnants of various iterations in there that I'm sure could be cleaned up/optimized if I was better at Fusion, but it works for me.
I've got some translucent white PETG coming which hopefully will look a bit more like the original. Otherwise, this project is ready for production (x 16).
Thanks all for the advice, it was very useful and I've learned a lot.
