THANK YOU FOR THIS! I have struggled with all of the other calibration tests, and this one is so simple. You don't even have to clean the part to read it. I ran the test a few times with different resins and it matches closely with the times I found using other methods that were much more time consuming and tedious. I really appreciate that it's self cleaning. Unless the print failure is completely catastrophic, a failed test doesn't mean I have to clean the vat.
Great! What you also should do is dial in clever. Read the Resin spec which i.e. says "2-3s exposure time". Start at the center (2.5s) and look at the cones. Underexposed? try 3s. Then overexposed? hit the center between extremes: 2.75s. Or 2.8. Then just a few steps and you are there.
So this is what it feels to see the light! I struggled so much calibrating a batch of Siraya Tech with Tenacious until I ran this test and, once calibrated, now I have perfect prints. Thank you!
What a great calibration tool. It's the first time I was able to look at a calibration thing and tell if it had succeeded or failed without needing to ask someone's opinion.
I absolutely love how you presented this calibration tool and that you made it a whole story/game. I love that you involved other creators that we can now support and get new wonderful files from. I found this at just the right time as I just got my Elegoo Saturn 2. Excited to try my new "adventure".
Thanks so much for saying that! If you need any help at all, please feel free to join our discord and we got you covered. Im so excited for your new journey!
Absolutely wonderful I always hated those ambiguous calibration prints, where you invariably get to “yeah ok, good enough” - this is pretty much yes/no Also I love the lore-style instructions - personally I like the style, but also the presentation is really professional and adds to the experience 👍 (I did see you comment on Vogmans video, and I’m excited for the v2 to come out)
Nice! Thanks getting my very first 3d printer on Thursday. Got the Elegoo Saturn 2 8k. The support for this hobby is great and with folks like you I am confident I've learned enough my first prints will be a success! Thank you so much for sharing.
I needed this SO badly. New to printing, got the obligatory 'test print' cube to print once, and then maybe had 1 model out of 8 actually survive to be primed and painted. The rest are in a box that I have no idea what to do with. Maybe make terrain pieces with 'salvage' mechs and use them as part of a scenario. Thank you so much, and keep up the good work
This will help immensely with clear resins where reading the thin wafer-like tests are almost impossible. Just tested this out on a clear resin I tuned last week using old methods. overcuring!
I tried the flat Matrix one and tried so hard to see the differences. With the new Anycubic Photon Ultra, it's such a good detailed printer that anything from 1.6 - 2.4 looks really good (way better than the best samples on RUclips videos from mono printers - note: haven't seen any samples from 6-8k machines though). I was trying to tell the difference between them with magnifying glasses of different shapes and size, some with and without led lights, I had hobby magnifying glasses that you wear with a led light, I tried taking photos and zooming in... I asked 4 different people what they thought... Every single person gave me a different answer on which one they thought was the best. So when I tried this, the first time I went with 2.0 and I immediately saw that the success cone side had a failure and thus I need to up my exposure time. Brilliant!!! Seriously mate, if there was some type of resin artist awards, you'd get my nomination! (insert slapping joke :P )
That is so good to hear. This is exactly the struggle I saught out to solve for people. It's definitely not perfect but for a lot of people it's been really helpful. I already have ideas for improvements for a V2!
This is the best calibration test that I've tried for my resin printers. It's so much easier to read. I'm recommending this to everyone who needs to calibrate their printers. Nice work and thanks!
Thanks a lot for this useful Print and the good explanation. This example shows what a good community with open-minded people and a open-source Lifestyle can reach. ❤
Man, i was using 4.5 sec with xp2 validation test(had a lot problems) and now with cone calibration im using 9.5 sec....brutal difference Thanks my friend!
That seems a bit extreme of a change. I'd love to take some time to help you out and make sure you're dialed in well. Are you printing on an RGB screen? These types screens tend to take longer. What type of printer are you on?
Interesting. I think I'd use the card type ones to get it ballpark and then try this to confirm the setting. Just because of print times. I have a new resin to calibrate today so I'll try it.
Thanks so much TJ! Let me know if you have any questions. You can also join our discord and show off the cones or anything else you might print. discord.gg/7fjwXyJjgH
Thanks so much for saying so! I really put in a lot of though and effort with our test team and CrazMadSci to make this as effective as I know it can be.
Thank you for taking the time to record this video and for sharing it! Thank you more for supplying the required files! I love the fact that you walked through every step and stated the most important features. I also love the adventure-style theme of the walkthrough! Excellent job!
Liked and sub’d. It was mentioned in r/resinprinting. I’m still waiting for my first resin printer to arrive (M3 max) and am trying to absorb every bit of knowledge I can before i get it. Even though I’m more of an FDM engineered part maker (I have zero artistic ability) I’m looking forward to some crazy intricate artistic prints from the community to adorn my man cave. Thank you for taking the time to do this, I look forward to watching more of your videos and being a part of this side of the 3d printer community.
Hi Ty, I've been FDM 3d printing for some time now and recently got a resin printer the Anycubic Photo Mono 4k. The supplied test files came out well but i found creating my own prints a really annoying FAF! I used to paint miniatures many years ago and Ive played many a description based adventure game on early home computers (from the 80's) keep that bit to yourself though! As just about every resin printer video is about table top miniatures, i was struggling with supports for my small scale projects. I caught the RUclips of the live stream you did for supports, which helped a lot for an FDM guy who is looking to use as few supports as possible normally for better quality! I used your suggested setting support tip values and I've had almost perfect success on the few prints Ive tried, the support interface i find a bit janky in the free and its a bit annoying the cost of unlocking the thing that seems key to resin prints! Next up for me is the cones, The instructions made me chuckle as its just like you used to get all those year ago on text based adventure games. a question i have, my 1st prints even my failed efforts were a good representation of the slicer but i find now my prints complete but there is often a thin layer over at least half the build plate maybe 1 or 2 layers thick like a skin. Also there is a faint skin in places on the model as well as a few sort of snotty danglers from the model where its drained back? They wash off but i'd like to hear your thoughts. I've even subscribed! Sean
Hey man! No shame in the game from the 80s. I love that you call it a description based game. Sounds like your off to a good start printing wise. That skin can be tricky. There could be a few causes. Is your printer near a window or direct sunlight? Or near any uv light source? If so, then move the print away from the source. If you're not, there is potentially a corrupted sliced file. Format your USB disk and reslice. If that doesn't work, you may be looking at a screen that's on it's last legs. It shouldn't be dying this soon, so it's likely something else.
This is amazing! I cant wait to try this. it works out crazy awesome, I just got my Creality Halot ONE today and was doing a little research before I started printing. Its FATE I found this video and more importantly a new miniatures maker.. Thanks Guys
Congratulations!! Make sure to join our discord. We can help you get the ball rolling and help you through the inevitable speed bumps. Https://discord.gg/tableflipfoundry
Just printed this calibration test 3 times. Easy to use! I finally have the exposure for my resin dialed in! Could you tell us the dimensions so that we can see if our printers are dimensional accurate?
You can super easily find that info in your slicer. Just select the scale option and it will tell you the current dimensions! The cones are 11x17.5x15.5 mm But you dont have to measure the cones specifically In your slicer you can drop a cube or a cylinder directly from their tools, scale it to the dimensions you want, print and measure.
Lol, love the Tome of Understanding and the lore behind it all. Very well done. Seems like a pretty nice test, which I will try once I change my resin. Even so, I still dream of a day, where the printer self calibrates, according to outside temperature, resin used (just let the printer scan a qr code or choose from a menu) and a vast database of usermade resin profiles and success rates.
Cones of calibration has to be center of the build plate which does not test all 4 corners of the build plate for leveling testing which should be added. thank
The Cones of Calibration are designed to be an exposure test. And not a full printer test, or a bed leveling test. This is not possible with this method. Very sorry for the inconvenience here.
@@TableFlipFoundry barely trying it now. I tried the others but wound up finding out there were issues. Yours is simple. I do plumbing work and we used to use a simple go no go gauge to test crimps. It worked so easy and was reliable. Since then manufacturers have changed things a bit. Over complicating things. Sorry I’m Blabbing haha, but yeah that’s why I appreciate the simplicity a lot
Incredible work. Not sure on the physics behind the failure side but I'm not the smartest person. But I would rather overexpose than under expose I think. My cones came out with 3 cones on the failure side which I might just stay with for this resin.
Cool, I will gone download this now niven found it! I watched VoGmans channel on the cones last night he was saying it's not great for calibration but when you have got your settings dialed in then to use it last for further refinement. I'm new to the 3D printing world I bought 2 Anycubic printers this month, I got the mono 4k with wash and cure first then just the other day I caught the end of the mono 2 promotion sale so picked that up for much cheapness with a wash and cure station so have a spare. It prints perfectly but the mono 4k can do with calibration and no harm running it through the mono 2 aswell! I just need help with how to use the settings in layman's terms lol.
Great video, quite late for the party here. But if I am getting it right you say the only cones that really matter are the ones with the "+" and "-" symbols, if by any reason I get other cones within the failure upper side to print should I just ignore them as long as it is not the "-" cone? or are they an indication of a tiny reduction in exposure time?
Sometimes there can be some abnormal results with the cones. When that happens is easiest to just look at the most important ones and not dig too deep into it. That said, v2 of the cones is available on our discord and it has better considerations for reliability and also prints 35% faster. I recommend grabbing them
This looks interesting, so I'll give it a try. Having huge problems dialing in the Mono X with the RERF test giving results that are, apparently, just wrong, and the XP2-Validation giving slightly better results, but ones that completely conflict with the RERF test. However, even though this can help with exposure, there are other factors, like lift and retract speed.
You got it. This only focuses on one aspect of the 3d printing process. You should jump in our discord. I can help you sort out what's going on with your printer. I have a mono x too.
Just downloaded and read all info. Very well put together. I measured the test and you said it was 11 x 17.5 x 15.5.....I got 10.99 x 17.59 x 14.75. I'd say pretty much spot on. I did by first test and on the FAILURE side all 4 cones only printed the bottom cones. And the SUCCESS side all 4 cones printed and connected....with the far left with a .17 separation.....had to look close to see it. do not know if I broke it cleaning....LOL Looks like I am pretty dialed in with my SIRAYA Fast Navy Grey. This was 2.50, just for grins I am going to do a 2.45 and a 2.55.....lol....worth it. I do have a question: Would it have any advantage to do anti-alisiang? So far I am stoked and gonna follow and post findings. Thanks for all you do.
The test was not tested using any anti-alising and have not found if it makes an impact. Make sure to join the discord though and share those findings!
I went through this process completely with my Mono X. I got almost a perfect result after a lot of tuning. After this I used these new settings to try an actual part I needed to print. It failed, big time! The exposure times that this test told me I need to be using were WAY off. Not even close! I went back to the recommended manufacture settings and the print came out fine. So, a word to those new to resin printing, I don't think this is an end-all, be-all that this is claimed to be. Try it, adjust your settings as per the test and then try a real world print and see if it works for you. It didn't for me. BTW, same machine, same resin, same room temp, everything we the same between the "calibrated" print and the setting this test told me to use. Oh, and one more thing, the parts I'm printing are rather large. Much larger than the little figurines for board games. That may have something to do with my results.
Thanks so much for posting! I imagine your factory settings ended up being higher exposure than the cones provided you. (They usually are) In which case your advice given here is not quite right. The problem you're having here is mostly just a lack of experience and understanding. Which is totally understandable. There are a number of reasons your print failed...and none of them have to do with the cones. I encourage you to have a watch of my calibration class. By the time it's over, you will want to come back and edit this comment ;) For real though. Don't get trapped into thinking these factory settings are correct. They are not. The size of the print doesn't matter what so ever. My company does professional presupports for many types of models. I've printed plenty of things that take entire build volumes using this calibration. (And many other people have too) This comes down to a fundamental understanding of what's taking place. If you truly want to understand more about this hobby, that calibration class is going to open things wide up for you, I promise.
@@TableFlipFoundry I'll go through your class. I'm interested to find out what I can learn. I'm always trying to lean how to do things better and I'm open to what you have to teach. Over the weekend, I printed some very detailed parts some have bolts that are as small 0.15 mm and the factory settings printed these beautifully. I can't imagine how it could get any better but I'll give it a try. Thanks for the advice.
I managed to finally get all 10 cones touching on success, but no matter what I do, the failure side always has 10 cones as well. They are small but still there.
Getting into resin printing after 5 years of FDM printing and this test looked interesting at face value but I have high doubts it's relevance outside of the meta resins. Please correct me if I'm wrong. The idea seems to be that the 280um "rod" isn't structurally sound enough to peel off the following layer when properly exposed but 350um is. Therefor if your exposure settings are right then you get the expected results. But what if an individual uses less than the meta 50um layer heights? Or Stronger Resins? or using nano coatings on the FEP sheet to aid the release of cured resin such as silicone oxide coatings. (Think RainX, WD40 Silicone, or automotive "Ceramic" coatings) I'm not a fan of all the calibration techniques omitting the use of calipers or at minimum a feeler gauge. Im gonna have to experiment and see if a piece of paper could be used as a go-no-go gauge, such as if edge of paper fits in Slot A = good but if paper also fits in Slot B then Bad.
This is excellent consideration. You are generally correct. That said, the things you're discussing here are not average use case. The point here is to help new users enter the hobby in a way that is easy to understand and digest. That said, the cones provide use in all case but require higher understanding of the process to fully get the most out of the results. That said, v3 is coming soon and approaches the topic of calibration still in a very binary way but accounts for dimensional accuracy as well as tensile strength on the same part. But these have been out long time..downloaded and used a lot. The key here is that we aren't shooting for absolute perfection and to be honest most people don't need absolute perfection, especially when they start. They just need to get some reasonable reliable success to get them into the hobby and this is the goal for the cones.
Not everyone has precision instruments or wants to buy them. If you want that kind of test then it's definitely your progative but many others want it simpler and don't have the same mindset. They just want minis for their DND game.
Nice test and especially since you have made it free for all. I think however that this is a test you have to do in conjunction with other exposure tests to fully dial in your exposure. I used the cones at first with the stock exposure setting of 3 seconds in my printer (with some undocumented resin that didn't have any online exposure times available) and it looked fine. Only the succes cone did shift a bit (hindsight is 20/20: that should've been interpreted as a fail) and the failure cone did print a tiny bit so i chose an exposure time just 0.1 second shorter and then it failed massively. Tried the old setting and it also failed. After struggling with getting a succesful print of anything i went back to the drawing board and started printing the faster printing validation matrix at a ludicrous double stock exposure of 6 seconds and the validation matrix came out near-perfect. Tried 5 seconds and it was underexposed. Tried Seven and it was just a bit overexposed. Tried 6.5 and it came out the best imo. Mind you, i did use a macro lens on my digital camera to check the infinity symbol on the matrix because you cant really tell a difference with your own eyes without extremely good eyesight. Currently running the Cones as a secondary exposure test because it definately is more easy to differentiate between succes and failure (when not messing up the interpretation of obviously failed prints).
I am new to 3d printing world and this will definitely change my way to calibrate it. Thank you, a really helpful and comprehensive calibration tool. Just one simple question: where's the menu to exchange XP points acquired for skills, I cannot manage to find it. 😅
After recasting the spell of magic light.. You reach into the yellow tomb of making.. You retrieve the amulet of calibration but the spell wasn't strong enough. You mix a new potion of light 2.0 and re cast the spell at the tomb of making..
Seems my Mana has settled at 2.2 seconds which gives full cones on success approx 1/4 and one half cone on the fail. 2.1 seconds sees all the fails missing and 2 of the success missing. Great work much easier to see the result.... There is a door to the North, Inside is a computer and some stl files Enter the room Y/N blinky blinky
So I tried this out using Sunlu nylon like resin. For me this part just didn't work with this resin. I'm pretty experienced using this resin, but I just got a new Saturn s and wanted to try out the cones because I quite like the idea of having a way to read the results unambiguously. Note that this resin on mono printers is generally exposed at between 2 and 2.2 seconds exposure. Those are the numbers I settled on with my Mars 2 pro. Printing the cones, I had to crank the exposure to over 5 seconds to get the success cone to print. I then attempted an actual mini and it turned out waaay over exposed which was not at all shocking to me. For this resin, specifically, the cones were a total fail. I was much better off using the normal validation matrix which, while subjective, didn't overshoot the mark by 3 seconds. That, and the fact that the cones take over an hour to print, just makes the whole thing more trouble than its worth. Overall, I have mixed feelings. I wanted it to work... and maybe it would have with a different resin but that's the whole issue.. we're printing calibration parts because we are using a new resin. The validation matrix has worked for me with every resin. Yes, the results are open to interpretation. That comes with practice. I just can't trust the cones even if I really really want to.
Thanks for leaving such a detailed comment. The response to this is a little complex and long winded, but I do have something to share with you. I did an interview with Once in a Six Side and I talked about some stuff that may be directly relevant to you. Give this a watch and it might open up some insights for ya. ruclips.net/video/xffUpV0zhKo/видео.html
Thanks for this. This was actually very informative. The main reason I'm disappointed has not changed. I printed the same pre supported mini after running each calibration parts (Janet Demonbane from artisan guild) The fact remains that the standard calibration matrix produced a part that printed perfectly and maintained all the details. The ones calibrated with the cones printed fine of course but way overshot the mark on exposure. By cones logic the validation matrix print should have failed. (Every single cone failed at this exposure) It was less than half the exposure time the cone eventually lead me to. In this interview you sort of make the case that if the cones don't work, then you shouldn't be printing minis with that resin. At best, I can say that's not always the case.
I get no cones on the failure side, but I keep increasing exposure and not only I don't get all succesful cones but the ones that print don't fully connect.
Not having cones on failure side touch = failed prints for every printer I've done. It seems like CoC is intended for deep supports on small prints, If I have 1 cone on fail side I've had great results.
They aren't intended as you describe. What it means is that you're supports on those models are insufficient for the calibration. Have a watch of my Calibration class video. It will definitely unlock some light bulbs about what calibration means and what you need to watch out for. I promise its worth the watch.
I'm a little confused about the amount of succes cones you need. So I understand if the most left under the + sign is printed, then you're good. But what about the other 3 succes cones? Are they for finetuning dialing in more perfect? I noticed that in order to let all 4 cones print I had to increase exposure a whole lot compared to just 1 cone.
at 2:15 he explains which cones we are looking for. Basically Success you want the top left cone to print, The failure side you want the top right cone to fail. All other cones are not relevant for this test 4:03
In my experience any failed print would indicate that there will/may be resin artifacts that would still be adhered to the FEP film. Since a missing layer(s) will still be on the FEP, a complete inspection of the FEP film at the models location would be in order. If a cone was incomplete, that cured resin has to be "somewhere". Your comments please.. Thanks.
You're absolutely right! Typically thats how it works. The cones have been designed to self clean though. The failed cones get picked up by the roof of the part. No pancakes on the fep!
@@TableFlipFoundry that's the comment I was looking for before giving it a try. Because I really wasn't looking forward to have to clean the FEP everytime I try this calibration. Now I think I should give it a try!
Hey guys. So I printed this model. Started with 2.5 exposure time. One fail cone succeeded to connect. Changed it to 2.0. Success cones failed. Changed to 2.2. One success cone failed. Now before I print again. Do I only need to change the exposure time or I need to print something else? Printer: Elegoo Mars 3 Resin: Anycubic Eco Settings from other people uploaded in lychee slicer server. Please help! Thank you
if the cone of calibration is lets say 1 inch high for 50 Microns can we adjust the scale size to adjust to microns, so if 1 inch high = 50 micron then 1/2 high =25 Microns. another idea is if you use the cone of calibration lets say 1 inch high for 50 Microns the time to print would be 1 hours, the cones of Time LOL you could use this as print time as long as they did not change any other settings
An answer, a thought, and some news for you. Answer: No you cant scale it A Thought: These machines are highly complex and have a lot of variables. Getting them calibrated is difficult and shouldnt be rushed. Also, this version is almost identical to the Ameralabs city in height. News: V2 is coming out soon. It prints 35% faster ;)
@@TableFlipFoundry thank you the part i liked that you said is when you said when you calibration you should know without a doughy you should know instead of asking others what they think, yeah get a lot of objects on 1 calibration test print that half maybe good and the other totally messed up leaving you clueless, so basically you end up picking the best over all looking one then having to judge on each item. i think yours is the best, could this be made for multiple exposure or used in UVTools to create multiple exposure, i have anycube photon M3 Which has its own R-E-L-F multiple exposure and i have phrozon mini 8K, be nice to have cones for multiple exposure for both of my printers
Ok but whats the science behind it? Are the failure cones supposed to break from the peel forces? They obviously have a continuous material, its not like they come to a specific point
You almost got it worked out. Yes the failure points are specifically designed to fail at a certain point. The connections between the cones are not all the same size. They are carefully.sized to fail in a predictable way.
Hmm, this test looks simple and clean but i wonder... If I pass this test, but other tests (for example 3DRS Chip or Validation Matrix) shows little overexposure, what to do in this case? Stick to setting from this test? Some tests also recommend adding 10-20% to your ideal exposure time. Is this overexposure affects minis quality?
My recommendation is to use the exposure from the Cones of Calibration, then rather than compare other exposure tests, just print some minis and evaluate your experience with the minis. Good pre-supports will come off easily. Every detail of the model should be crisp and clean.
Basically that's correct yeap. Those are the index cones so to speak. Sometimes outside factors can give some abnormal results. So we focus on those first
Thank you for this. Just to be clear we want to focus on the First cone correct on each side? I just did some test prints and there coming out better as I dial them in but have noticed that on the failure side does have some cones that print but not the first 2 and the success side is perfect. Sorry for the question. I recently purchased my first resin 3D printer (Photon M3 - and have only used this calibration print. It’s my first ever resin print lol. I want to make sure I dial in the correct setting required to get the best prints. Thank you so much for helping you are amazing.
late to the party on this and I do not see this question asked and answered. Why do we only care about the left most cones? I ask because I can not get those two cones to print as expected. When I get my exposure time high enough(going in .1 increments) I get a successful 'success' left most cone. But when I turn it over, there is always some bit of the top cone on the failure side. If I lower my exposure enough to get that cone to completely fail, I do not get a successful success cone on the left most cone. BUT, typically, on the success side, 3-4 of the other success cones are printing entirely.
I am pretty new to printing and just bought a Phrozen mighty 4k. I am trying to dial in the Aqua grey resin and finding different settings from one place to another. I would have thought that a printer using a certain resin would be very cut and dry as far as the recommended settings for a good print but I guess that is not the case.
You're absolutely correct. A lot of new hobbyists enter the 3D printing space expecting it to be plug and play, and sadly, its just not there yet. There is a lot to understand about the properties of resin and 3d printing, and pre-supports. It's hard to explain because it can be such a tedious thing to go over. I'll try to make a video soon explaining more details about resins and how they affect your printing experience. In the mean time, you can come visit our discord community. If you have any questions getting things going, I'll personally be around but we have a ton of super helpful members. discord.gg/tableflipfoundry
@@TableFlipFoundry Thank you so much! I appreciate people like yourself who go out of their way to help other people learn and I will definitely be subscribing to learn more! Thanks!
Thanks for making this! Can you confirm or deny that the cones only work with 50 micron layer heights? I was using it with 10 microns, and think I got false over-exposure results. When I printed it with a 50 micron height, it worked perfectly
Deny. As far as I know. I don't know anyone who prints at 10um though. They should work on any layer height. But you should check out my calibration class to find out a bit more about why that might have happened!
Why are the shapes the way that they are? Is there a reason there are flats on the base of the cones? Is there other information we can gleam running this test beyond just exposure? (thinking about lift speed and such)
The smaller part at the base of the cone is designed to be an apparent success or fail. If the cone fails to print that area it's definitely failure. If it prints then it's a definite success. This part's only purpose is to test exposure at the moment. But if you can use it to verify other things I'd love to know and we can expand testing with it
I don't get it. I've printed 8 of these from 3.5-5seconds of exposure (obsidian black color) and it's inconsistent. At 5 seconds I have the closest success but it also has the most failure too, not the least. Then if i go down to 4, it has very little on the failure side but the success is about a quarter of what the 5second success cone is in length. Wtf.
Very interesting but the print time @0.05mm is well over an hour per test. You should make it a lot shorter to lessen the time it takes to print. It does not need to be that tall. They could be a LOT shorter since the test is only the thin gap points between the cones. *compared to the XP2 test that takes only 10mins to print.
Unfortunately, the very nature of this being a mechanical calibration means it cannot be printed as a 2D calibration like the XP2 test. In our opinion it's superior to the XP2 test in many ways, and also runs about the same acceptable time frame as the Amerilabs City. So it is what it is, this takes about an hour to print. Don't rush, calibration is the most important part of your printing experience, it's worth taking your time to do right. If the XP2 works for you and you have that level of experience to read it, then by all means thats the right test for you. It's a perfectly fine part. This is meant for people who want something they can read without question.
@@TableFlipFoundry The test points are the thin joints between the cones, no reason the cones need to be that long. This type of exposure test could be made with cones being a lot stumpier, the tall cones look cooler but it is not efficient or necessary.
@@gotloveforall01 Sorry I missed this message. Unfortunately, there are a lot of factors at play when it comes to measuring the strength of the cones. There is a very specific increase in surface area for the cones. It is possible, I supposed to shorten the bottom cones though without too much trouble. Maybe on the next revision I can look into that!
Adhesion issues wont be related to any of the actual calibration methods. This is all about your level and bottom exposure times. If you're having problems with parts sticking, you want to make sure your bed level is good and you can turn your bottom exposure time up a bit to solve it.
IS THIS TEST SUITABLE FOR TRANSLUCENT RESINS? Well... I've printed it few times and ... Success cone has a microscopic gap same as fail cone... or both has connection. Currently I am between 2.4s (both has gaps) and 2.5s (both has connections) (Exposure time for this resin is recommended as 3s - 15s, so I'm quite far below anyway) I am guessing the issue here is that I'm using Anycubic TRANSLUCENT green resin which can pass uv light further then other non translucent resins or ... is it so precise? Should I start messing with hundreds after a comma? 2.45s, 2.47s, 2.43s etc?
I think I understand the concept of this, but perhaps it's my peasant mind. I can't see/find any information of what my initial settings should be before printing this. Where should I start? What layer height? Is 0.05 a good starting point? At what exposure time? Perhaps I'm too blind to see, but.. I don't know where I'm supposed to start..
Everyone's printer and resin and temp and all the rest of the variables are different and so its hard to offer that kind of info. If you have a modern printer and modern resin (something made in the last year or so) then you can start at 2.5 seconds for .05mm layer height. That's a fairly average starting point for most printers. It should get you some results to get started. Also, have a watch of my calibration class, it will be extremely helpful for you. And join our discord, because we can answer all your questions super easily over there. We have 5700 members now and tons and tons of helpful people. The hardest part of starting the hobby is feeling like you dont know what you're doing and feeling like you're left alone to figure it out. We will fix both of those for ya :D Https://discord.gg/tableflipfoundry
I don’t do minis but this has changed the way I calibrate my printer. I’ll definitely recommend this to people.
Thanks so much! Im glad it was helpful for you!
THANK YOU FOR THIS! I have struggled with all of the other calibration tests, and this one is so simple. You don't even have to clean the part to read it. I ran the test a few times with different resins and it matches closely with the times I found using other methods that were much more time consuming and tedious. I really appreciate that it's self cleaning. Unless the print failure is completely catastrophic, a failed test doesn't mean I have to clean the vat.
I am so glad you found this tool useful!
i agree
Great!
What you also should do is dial in clever.
Read the Resin spec which i.e. says "2-3s exposure time".
Start at the center (2.5s) and look at the cones.
Underexposed? try 3s.
Then overexposed? hit the center between extremes: 2.75s. Or 2.8.
Then just a few steps and you are there.
So this is what it feels to see the light! I struggled so much calibrating a batch of Siraya Tech with Tenacious until I ran this test and, once calibrated, now I have perfect prints. Thank you!
You're very welcome! V3 is in beta on our discord if you want to see the new hotness!
I like the way you gamified the calibration process, hope this lead to more people investing time in good printing settings
Thanks so much! I just wanted this to be easier than it has been. Nothing is perfect, but I hope this gets people a lot closer.
What a great calibration tool. It's the first time I was able to look at a calibration thing and tell if it had succeeded or failed without needing to ask someone's opinion.
It makes me so happy! That's really the whole reason we went through designing this!
I absolutely love how you presented this calibration tool and that you made it a whole story/game. I love that you involved other creators that we can now support and get new wonderful files from. I found this at just the right time as I just got my Elegoo Saturn 2. Excited to try my new "adventure".
Thanks so much for saying that! If you need any help at all, please feel free to join our discord and we got you covered. Im so excited for your new journey!
Absolutely wonderful
I always hated those ambiguous calibration prints, where you invariably get to “yeah ok, good enough” - this is pretty much yes/no
Also I love the lore-style instructions - personally I like the style, but also the presentation is really professional and adds to the experience 👍
(I did see you comment on Vogmans video, and I’m excited for the v2 to come out)
I used it and it works great. Thanks.
Nice! Thanks getting my very first 3d printer on Thursday. Got the Elegoo Saturn 2 8k. The support for this hobby is great and with folks like you I am confident I've learned enough my first prints will be a success! Thank you so much for sharing.
I needed this SO badly. New to printing, got the obligatory 'test print' cube to print once, and then maybe had 1 model out of 8 actually survive to be primed and painted. The rest are in a box that I have no idea what to do with. Maybe make terrain pieces with 'salvage' mechs and use them as part of a scenario. Thank you so much, and keep up the good work
You're quite welcome. Stick with it. You'll get it all figured out in no time.
😊😊😊😊😊😊😊£😊😊😊😊😊k😊😊😊😊
This will help immensely with clear resins where reading the thin wafer-like tests are almost impossible. Just tested this out on a clear resin I tuned last week using old methods. overcuring!
Did you get yourself nice and dialed in?
I am very much looking forward to trying this test! It seems much easier to read than the others.
I hope you like it! Please feel free to join our discord in the description with your results!
I tried the flat Matrix one and tried so hard to see the differences. With the new Anycubic Photon Ultra, it's such a good detailed printer that anything from 1.6 - 2.4 looks really good (way better than the best samples on RUclips videos from mono printers - note: haven't seen any samples from 6-8k machines though). I was trying to tell the difference between them with magnifying glasses of different shapes and size, some with and without led lights, I had hobby magnifying glasses that you wear with a led light, I tried taking photos and zooming in... I asked 4 different people what they thought... Every single person gave me a different answer on which one they thought was the best.
So when I tried this, the first time I went with 2.0 and I immediately saw that the success cone side had a failure and thus I need to up my exposure time. Brilliant!!!
Seriously mate, if there was some type of resin artist awards, you'd get my nomination!
(insert slapping joke :P )
That is so good to hear. This is exactly the struggle I saught out to solve for people. It's definitely not perfect but for a lot of people it's been really helpful.
I already have ideas for improvements for a V2!
@@TableFlipFoundry I'll post my results here when I'm done!
@@dmaikibujin make sure to jump on the discord to share!
This is the best calibration test that I've tried for my resin printers. It's so much easier to read. I'm recommending this to everyone who needs to calibrate their printers. Nice work and thanks!
Thanks so much!!!
Thanks a lot for this useful Print and the good explanation. This example shows what a good community with open-minded people and a open-source Lifestyle can reach. ❤
Testing this out over the next few days, first print shows I need to up my exposure time 😁
Thanks for this tool!
The irony of the intro is that I searched for this video in order to decipher the results of printing the cones of calibration.
The Tome of Understanding explains all. :)
Did you find what you needed?
@@TableFlipFoundry I did the same, Tome of Understanding wasn't with the downloads at thingiverse
Man, i was using 4.5 sec with xp2 validation test(had a lot problems) and now with cone calibration im using 9.5 sec....brutal difference
Thanks my friend!
That seems a bit extreme of a change. I'd love to take some time to help you out and make sure you're dialed in well. Are you printing on an RGB screen? These types screens tend to take longer. What type of printer are you on?
Hi! Rumor has it that version 2 is coming out :) ❤ when can we have a sneak peek
Actually, your calibration model has really simplified my calibration process. Cheers.
Love it. Helped me lot more than all other calibration files that i tried.
Interesting. I think I'd use the card type ones to get it ballpark and then try this to confirm the setting. Just because of print times.
I have a new resin to calibrate today so I'll try it.
Thats definitely a fair way to approach it!
You rock! RPG in a calibration test! Down loading tonight, subscribing now!
Hahaha! thanks! I don't put out tons of content but I hope the stuff I do put out is really helpful!
Props on keeping the D&D theme in the documentation.
Hehehe thank you. I figured it could be more fun than just black and white text.
Really awesome video. I can’t wait to test out the files. You were so creative with the way that you did this video. Just wonderful.
Thanks so much TJ! Let me know if you have any questions. You can also join our discord and show off the cones or anything else you might print.
discord.gg/7fjwXyJjgH
Trying this test out for the first time today, thanks for taking the time to add to the community at large and wish me luck!
Please let me know how it goes for you!
Thank you.. This is by far the best tool for dialing in printer I have come across
Thanks so much for saying so! I really put in a lot of though and effort with our test team and CrazMadSci to make this as effective as I know it can be.
Thank you for taking the time to record this video and for sharing it! Thank you more for supplying the required files! I love the fact that you walked through every step and stated the most important features. I also love the adventure-style theme of the walkthrough! Excellent job!
Thank you so much! I hope you find it useful!
Liked and sub’d. It was mentioned in r/resinprinting. I’m still waiting for my first resin printer to arrive (M3 max) and am trying to absorb every bit of knowledge I can before i get it. Even though I’m more of an FDM engineered part maker (I have zero artistic ability) I’m looking forward to some crazy intricate artistic prints from the community to adorn my man cave. Thank you for taking the time to do this, I look forward to watching more of your videos and being a part of this side of the 3d printer community.
I'm super excited for you! That's a big boy. You're going to have a lot of fun with resin once you get it all dialed in
Hi Ty, I've been FDM 3d printing for some time now and recently got a resin printer the Anycubic Photo Mono 4k. The supplied test files came out well but i found creating my own prints a really annoying FAF! I used to paint miniatures many years ago and Ive played many a description based adventure game on early home computers (from the 80's) keep that bit to yourself though! As just about every resin printer video is about table top miniatures, i was struggling with supports for my small scale projects.
I caught the RUclips of the live stream you did for supports, which helped a lot for an FDM guy who is looking to use as few supports as possible normally for better quality!
I used your suggested setting support tip values and I've had almost perfect success on the few prints Ive tried, the support interface i find a bit janky in the free and its a bit annoying the cost of unlocking the thing that seems key to resin prints!
Next up for me is the cones, The instructions made me chuckle as its just like you used to get all those year ago on text based adventure games.
a question i have, my 1st prints even my failed efforts were a good representation of the slicer but i find now my prints complete but there is often a thin layer over at least half the build plate maybe 1 or 2 layers thick like a skin. Also there is a faint skin in places on the model as well as a few sort of snotty danglers from the model where its drained back? They wash off but i'd like to hear your thoughts.
I've even subscribed!
Sean
Hey man! No shame in the game from the 80s. I love that you call it a description based game. Sounds like your off to a good start printing wise.
That skin can be tricky. There could be a few causes. Is your printer near a window or direct sunlight? Or near any uv light source?
If so, then move the print away from the source.
If you're not, there is potentially a corrupted sliced file. Format your USB disk and reslice.
If that doesn't work, you may be looking at a screen that's on it's last legs. It shouldn't be dying this soon, so it's likely something else.
Going to have to try this
I hope it works great for you! Please feel free to jump in our discord and share your results!
Just printed my 1st one 😎👌👍
Welcome to the family!
@@TableFlipFoundry good to be here 😎
This is amazing! I cant wait to try this. it works out crazy awesome, I just got my Creality Halot ONE today and was doing a little research before I started printing. Its FATE I found this video and more importantly a new miniatures maker.. Thanks Guys
Congratulations!! Make sure to join our discord. We can help you get the ball rolling and help you through the inevitable speed bumps.
Https://discord.gg/tableflipfoundry
Just printed this calibration test 3 times. Easy to use! I finally have the exposure for my resin dialed in! Could you tell us the dimensions so that we can see if our printers are dimensional accurate?
You can super easily find that info in your slicer. Just select the scale option and it will tell you the current dimensions!
The cones are 11x17.5x15.5 mm
But you dont have to measure the cones specifically
In your slicer you can drop a cube or a cylinder directly from their tools, scale it to the dimensions you want, print and measure.
Lol, love the Tome of Understanding and the lore behind it all. Very well done. Seems like a pretty nice test, which I will try once I change my resin. Even so, I still dream of a day, where the printer self calibrates, according to outside temperature, resin used (just let the printer scan a qr code or choose from a menu) and a vast database of usermade resin profiles and success rates.
Oh come now, half they fun of printing is the screaming, cursing, and money wasted on lost resin from failed prints from the calibration process! /s
Thank you all!!
My pleasure. :)
Cones of calibration has to be center of the build plate which does not test all 4 corners of the build plate for leveling testing which should be added. thank
The Cones of Calibration are designed to be an exposure test. And not a full printer test, or a bed leveling test. This is not possible with this method. Very sorry for the inconvenience here.
This guy is so wholesome.
Hell yeah. A go, no go test
Yessir! I'm trying to make this as easy as possible for ya.
@@TableFlipFoundry barely trying it now. I tried the others but wound up finding out there were issues. Yours is simple. I do plumbing work and we used to use a simple go no go gauge to test crimps. It worked so easy and was reliable. Since then manufacturers have changed things a bit. Over complicating things. Sorry I’m
Blabbing haha, but yeah that’s why I appreciate the simplicity a lot
hi. thanks for the nice tip to readjust my resin parameter bro.
Oh and another important thing: don't you think that I haven't noticed the Iron Maiden font. Up the Irons! 🤘🏻🤘🏻
Thank you so much!!!! My settings wern't off to much but your cones helped to dial my printer in perfectly!!!
My pleasure. I have a new calibration system releasing very soon. Keep an eye on the channel. Even better ;)
Incredible work. Not sure on the physics behind the failure side but I'm not the smartest person. But I would rather overexpose than under expose I think. My cones came out with 3 cones on the failure side which I might just stay with for this resin.
Thank you so much for putting this much effort in. I will check out your other products. Greetings from Germany.
Hey! thank you so much!
Cool, I will gone download this now niven found it! I watched VoGmans channel on the cones last night he was saying it's not great for calibration but when you have got your settings dialed in then to use it last for further refinement. I'm new to the 3D printing world I bought 2 Anycubic printers this month, I got the mono 4k with wash and cure first then just the other day I caught the end of the mono 2 promotion sale so picked that up for much cheapness with a wash and cure station so have a spare. It prints perfectly but the mono 4k can do with calibration and no harm running it through the mono 2 aswell! I just need help with how to use the settings in layman's terms lol.
That is a useful tool!
I really hope you give it a try!
Great video, quite late for the party here. But if I am getting it right you say the only cones that really matter are the ones with the "+" and "-" symbols, if by any reason I get other cones within the failure upper side to print should I just ignore them as long as it is not the "-" cone? or are they an indication of a tiny reduction in exposure time?
Sometimes there can be some abnormal results with the cones. When that happens is easiest to just look at the most important ones and not dig too deep into it.
That said, v2 of the cones is available on our discord and it has better considerations for reliability and also prints 35% faster.
I recommend grabbing them
This looks interesting, so I'll give it a try. Having huge problems dialing in the Mono X with the RERF test giving results that are, apparently, just wrong, and the XP2-Validation giving slightly better results, but ones that completely conflict with the RERF test. However, even though this can help with exposure, there are other factors, like lift and retract speed.
You got it. This only focuses on one aspect of the 3d printing process. You should jump in our discord. I can help you sort out what's going on with your printer. I have a mono x too.
@@TableFlipFoundry I did, actually, and got a bit more useful info, so thanks for that!
Just downloaded and read all info. Very well put together. I measured the test and you said it was 11 x 17.5 x 15.5.....I got 10.99 x 17.59 x 14.75. I'd say pretty much spot on. I did by first test and on the FAILURE side all 4 cones only printed the bottom cones. And the SUCCESS side all 4 cones printed and connected....with the far left with a .17 separation.....had to look close to see it. do not know if I broke it cleaning....LOL Looks like I am pretty dialed in with my SIRAYA Fast Navy Grey. This was 2.50, just for grins I am going to do a 2.45 and a 2.55.....lol....worth it. I do have a question: Would it have any advantage to do anti-alisiang? So far I am stoked and gonna follow and post findings. Thanks for all you do.
The test was not tested using any anti-alising and have not found if it makes an impact. Make sure to join the discord though and share those findings!
I've been having serious issues with my new resin pri ter and many have turned my on to this.
Let's try it out:)
If you have any issues or questions jump in our discord and we will be happy to help!
I went through this process completely with my Mono X. I got almost a perfect result after a lot of tuning. After this I used these new settings to try an actual part I needed to print. It failed, big time! The exposure times that this test told me I need to be using were WAY off. Not even close! I went back to the recommended manufacture settings and the print came out fine.
So, a word to those new to resin printing, I don't think this is an end-all, be-all that this is claimed to be. Try it, adjust your settings as per the test and then try a real world print and see if it works for you. It didn't for me.
BTW, same machine, same resin, same room temp, everything we the same between the "calibrated" print and the setting this test told me to use. Oh, and one more thing, the parts I'm printing are rather large. Much larger than the little figurines for board games. That may have something to do with my results.
Thanks so much for posting!
I imagine your factory settings ended up being higher exposure than the cones provided you. (They usually are)
In which case your advice given here is not quite right.
The problem you're having here is mostly just a lack of experience and understanding. Which is totally understandable. There are a number of reasons your print failed...and none of them have to do with the cones.
I encourage you to have a watch of my calibration class. By the time it's over, you will want to come back and edit this comment ;)
For real though. Don't get trapped into thinking these factory settings are correct. They are not. The size of the print doesn't matter what so ever. My company does professional presupports for many types of models. I've printed plenty of things that take entire build volumes using this calibration. (And many other people have too)
This comes down to a fundamental understanding of what's taking place.
If you truly want to understand more about this hobby, that calibration class is going to open things wide up for you, I promise.
Matter of fact, I've used these in my mono x also. I used my mono x for huge production runs of models with no issue.
@@TableFlipFoundry I'll go through your class. I'm interested to find out what I can learn. I'm always trying to lean how to do things better and I'm open to what you have to teach. Over the weekend, I printed some very detailed parts some have bolts that are as small 0.15 mm and the factory settings printed these beautifully. I can't imagine how it could get any better but I'll give it a try. Thanks for the advice.
puk is adorable
I managed to finally get all 10 cones touching on success, but no matter what I do, the failure side always has 10 cones as well. They are small but still there.
Small is fine. Print puck now and make sure he fully prints.
Thank you !! the cones of calibration are sooo helpful.
Im so glad you like them!
Very cool test! Thank you very much! I just printed my perfect cones on the 3rd try.
WOOO!!!
Thank y'all for putting this together.
You're quite welcome. Glad to be of service :)
@@TableFlipFoundry seriously, using this and being patient kept me from throwing my printer through my window.
Getting into resin printing after 5 years of FDM printing and this test looked interesting at face value but I have high doubts it's relevance outside of the meta resins. Please correct me if I'm wrong. The idea seems to be that the 280um "rod" isn't structurally sound enough to peel off the following layer when properly exposed but 350um is. Therefor if your exposure settings are right then you get the expected results. But what if an individual uses less than the meta 50um layer heights? Or Stronger Resins? or using nano coatings on the FEP sheet to aid the release of cured resin such as silicone oxide coatings. (Think RainX, WD40 Silicone, or automotive "Ceramic" coatings) I'm not a fan of all the calibration techniques omitting the use of calipers or at minimum a feeler gauge. Im gonna have to experiment and see if a piece of paper could be used as a go-no-go gauge, such as if edge of paper fits in Slot A = good but if paper also fits in Slot B then Bad.
This is excellent consideration. You are generally correct. That said, the things you're discussing here are not average use case. The point here is to help new users enter the hobby in a way that is easy to understand and digest. That said, the cones provide use in all case but require higher understanding of the process to fully get the most out of the results.
That said, v3 is coming soon and approaches the topic of calibration still in a very binary way but accounts for dimensional accuracy as well as tensile strength on the same part.
But these have been out long time..downloaded and used a lot. The key here is that we aren't shooting for absolute perfection and to be honest most people don't need absolute perfection, especially when they start. They just need to get some reasonable reliable success to get them into the hobby and this is the goal for the cones.
Not everyone has precision instruments or wants to buy them. If you want that kind of test then it's definitely your progative but many others want it simpler and don't have the same mindset. They just want minis for their DND game.
How long does it usually take to print the cones of calibration? My Saturn 2 takes about 1 hour, ist this too long? What are your experiences
This is all based around later height and the movement settings. But that's typical yes
Nice test and especially since you have made it free for all. I think however that this is a test you have to do in conjunction with other exposure tests to fully dial in your exposure.
I used the cones at first with the stock exposure setting of 3 seconds in my printer (with some undocumented resin that didn't have any online exposure times available) and it looked fine. Only the succes cone did shift a bit (hindsight is 20/20: that should've been interpreted as a fail) and the failure cone did print a tiny bit so i chose an exposure time just 0.1 second shorter and then it failed massively. Tried the old setting and it also failed. After struggling with getting a succesful print of anything i went back to the drawing board and started printing the faster printing validation matrix at a ludicrous double stock exposure of 6 seconds and the validation matrix came out near-perfect. Tried 5 seconds and it was underexposed. Tried Seven and it was just a bit overexposed.
Tried 6.5 and it came out the best imo. Mind you, i did use a macro lens on my digital camera to check the infinity symbol on the matrix because you cant really tell a difference with your own eyes without extremely good eyesight. Currently running the Cones as a secondary exposure test because it definately is more easy to differentiate between succes and failure (when not messing up the interpretation of obviously failed prints).
Interesting! Will have to give this a shot! The failed bits, do they adhere to the part itself, or do they end up floating in the vat?
You can see the majority of it grabbed on the top of the failed part and haven't had issues with floating resin. It will appear as a pancaked cone.
Yep! Self cleaning! No worries.
@@TableFlipFoundry Ah sweet!
@@crazmadsci3806 wonderful!
I was about to ask this question! Thanks!
I am new to 3d printing world and this will definitely change my way to calibrate it. Thank you, a really helpful and comprehensive calibration tool. Just one simple question: where's the menu to exchange XP points acquired for skills, I cannot manage to find it. 😅
Great stuff!
Would the intended failures cause floaties in the resin, needing to strain it after every test? I'm about to try this out!
The design picks them back up with the roof.
honestly regardless I strain every print, a couple minutes of straining is a lot quicker than having to replace the screen/fep 😅😅
After recasting the spell of magic light..
You reach into the yellow tomb of making..
You retrieve the amulet of calibration but the spell wasn't strong enough.
You mix a new potion of light 2.0 and re cast the spell at the tomb of making..
Seems my Mana has settled at 2.2 seconds which gives full cones on success approx 1/4 and one half cone on the fail. 2.1 seconds sees all the fails missing and 2 of the success missing. Great work much easier to see the result....
There is a door to the North, Inside is a computer and some stl files
Enter the room Y/N blinky blinky
I tired this several times... best result so far was that BOTH sides printed. I have no idea htf that happened outside me keeping to roll nat1.
This means that you're very over exposed. Drop your exposure time until the fail side stops printing
Thanks very much from a newbie like me. Will try it soon.
I'd love to hear back! Also we are doing a community beta test of V2 of the cones on our discord if you want the new hotness
@@TableFlipFoundry I already joined your discord. Currently waiting for feo fil because my first attempt was a real disaster.
Thank you guys
So I tried this out using Sunlu nylon like resin. For me this part just didn't work with this resin. I'm pretty experienced using this resin, but I just got a new Saturn s and wanted to try out the cones because I quite like the idea of having a way to read the results unambiguously.
Note that this resin on mono printers is generally exposed at between 2 and 2.2 seconds exposure. Those are the numbers I settled on with my Mars 2 pro. Printing the cones, I had to crank the exposure to over 5 seconds to get the success cone to print. I then attempted an actual mini and it turned out waaay over exposed which was not at all shocking to me. For this resin, specifically, the cones were a total fail. I was much better off using the normal validation matrix which, while subjective, didn't overshoot the mark by 3 seconds. That, and the fact that the cones take over an hour to print, just makes the whole thing more trouble than its worth.
Overall, I have mixed feelings. I wanted it to work... and maybe it would have with a different resin but that's the whole issue.. we're printing calibration parts because we are using a new resin. The validation matrix has worked for me with every resin. Yes, the results are open to interpretation. That comes with practice. I just can't trust the cones even if I really really want to.
Thanks for leaving such a detailed comment. The response to this is a little complex and long winded, but I do have something to share with you. I did an interview with Once in a Six Side and I talked about some stuff that may be directly relevant to you. Give this a watch and it might open up some insights for ya.
ruclips.net/video/xffUpV0zhKo/видео.html
Thanks for this. This was actually very informative.
The main reason I'm disappointed has not changed. I printed the same pre supported mini after running each calibration parts (Janet Demonbane from artisan guild)
The fact remains that the standard calibration matrix produced a part that printed perfectly and maintained all the details. The ones calibrated with the cones printed fine of course but way overshot the mark on exposure. By cones logic the validation matrix print should have failed. (Every single cone failed at this exposure) It was less than half the exposure time the cone eventually lead me to. In this interview you sort of make the case that if the cones don't work, then you shouldn't be printing minis with that resin. At best, I can say that's not always the case.
I get no cones on the failure side, but I keep increasing exposure and not only I don't get all succesful cones but the ones that print don't fully connect.
Wow big difference thank you!
Super easy to use, thanks!
Did you give it a shot!?
I'd love to hear your results. Feel free to come hang out on the discord server and give us an update!
@@TableFlipFoundry Yes, I was able to get the perfect result in 3 prints, I hope the calibration exposure will be correct :)
Not having cones on failure side touch = failed prints for every printer I've done. It seems like CoC is intended for deep supports on small prints, If I have 1 cone on fail side I've had great results.
They aren't intended as you describe. What it means is that you're supports on those models are insufficient for the calibration.
Have a watch of my Calibration class video. It will definitely unlock some light bulbs about what calibration means and what you need to watch out for.
I promise its worth the watch.
Can someone explain why the failure side should fail? It looks the same as the success side. I don't understand why the failure should fail.
Never forget about the essence of the game... it's about the Cones.
Ahahahah, It's all about the cones babay!
I'm a little confused about the amount of succes cones you need. So I understand if the most left under the + sign is printed, then you're good. But what about the other 3 succes cones? Are they for finetuning dialing in more perfect? I noticed that in order to let all 4 cones print I had to increase exposure a whole lot compared to just 1 cone.
at 2:15 he explains which cones we are looking for. Basically Success you want the top left cone to print, The failure side you want the top right cone to fail. All other cones are not relevant for this test 4:03
I was pondering the same
oh. I thought all 4 cones should be gone on the failure side. my exposure level is way too low then good thing I watched this video
They ARE supposed to be gone. I did indicate that in the video and in the documentation.
In my experience any failed print would indicate that there will/may be resin artifacts that would still be adhered to the FEP film. Since a missing layer(s) will still be on the FEP, a complete inspection of the FEP film at the models location would be in order. If a cone was incomplete, that cured resin has to be "somewhere". Your comments please.. Thanks.
You're absolutely right! Typically thats how it works. The cones have been designed to self clean though. The failed cones get picked up by the roof of the part. No pancakes on the fep!
@@TableFlipFoundry that's the comment I was looking for before giving it a try. Because I really wasn't looking forward to have to clean the FEP everytime I try this calibration. Now I think I should give it a try!
Hey guys. So I printed this model. Started with 2.5 exposure time. One fail cone succeeded to connect. Changed it to 2.0. Success cones failed. Changed to 2.2. One success cone failed. Now before I print again. Do I only need to change the exposure time or I need to print something else?
Printer: Elegoo Mars 3
Resin: Anycubic Eco
Settings from other people uploaded in lychee slicer server. Please help! Thank you
if the cone of calibration is lets say 1 inch high for 50 Microns can we adjust the scale size to adjust to microns, so if 1 inch high = 50 micron
then 1/2 high =25 Microns.
another idea is if you use the cone of calibration lets say 1 inch high for 50 Microns the time to print would be 1 hours, the cones of Time LOL
you could use this as print time as long as they did not change any other settings
An answer, a thought, and some news for you.
Answer: No you cant scale it
A Thought: These machines are highly complex and have a lot of variables. Getting them calibrated is difficult and shouldnt be rushed. Also, this version is almost identical to the Ameralabs city in height.
News: V2 is coming out soon. It prints 35% faster ;)
@@TableFlipFoundry thank you the part i liked that you said is when you said when you calibration you should know without a doughy you should know instead of asking others what they think, yeah get a lot of objects on 1 calibration test print that half maybe good and the other totally messed up leaving you clueless, so basically you end up picking the best over all looking one then having to judge on each item. i think yours is the best, could this be made for multiple exposure or used in UVTools to create multiple exposure,
i have anycube photon M3 Which has its own R-E-L-F multiple exposure and i have phrozon mini 8K, be nice to have cones for multiple exposure for both of my printers
New at this thank you so much!
Thanks so much! I wanted to make this fun and approachable.
Ok but whats the science behind it? Are the failure cones supposed to break from the peel forces? They obviously have a continuous material, its not like they come to a specific point
You almost got it worked out. Yes the failure points are specifically designed to fail at a certain point.
The connections between the cones are not all the same size. They are carefully.sized to fail in a predictable way.
Hmm, this test looks simple and clean but i wonder... If I pass this test, but other tests (for example 3DRS Chip or Validation Matrix) shows little overexposure, what to do in this case? Stick to setting from this test? Some tests also recommend adding 10-20% to your ideal exposure time. Is this overexposure affects minis quality?
My recommendation is to use the exposure from the Cones of Calibration, then rather than compare other exposure tests, just print some minis and evaluate your experience with the minis.
Good pre-supports will come off easily. Every detail of the model should be crisp and clean.
Puk The Adventurer is no longer in the ZIP file... bummer! But I found it on the website... LOL!
Yeah, hes still free. V2 is coming out soon, he will be released in that one as well.
I'm stupid and overthinking this. Do we only care about the leftmost cone on the good side and the rightmost cone (or lack thereof) on the bad side?
Basically that's correct yeap. Those are the index cones so to speak. Sometimes outside factors can give some abnormal results. So we focus on those first
Thank you for this. Just to be clear we want to focus on the First cone correct on each side? I just did some test prints and there coming out better as I dial them in but have noticed that on the failure side does have some cones that print but not the first 2 and the success side is perfect.
Sorry for the question. I recently purchased my first resin 3D printer (Photon M3 - and have only used this calibration print. It’s my first ever resin print lol. I want to make sure I dial in the correct setting required to get the best prints. Thank you so much for helping you are amazing.
late to the party on this and I do not see this question asked and answered.
Why do we only care about the left most cones?
I ask because I can not get those two cones to print as expected. When I get my exposure time high enough(going in .1 increments) I get a successful 'success' left most cone. But when I turn it over, there is always some bit of the top cone on the failure side. If I lower my exposure enough to get that cone to completely fail, I do not get a successful success cone on the left most cone. BUT, typically, on the success side, 3-4 of the other success cones are printing entirely.
You don't have to get the failure side perfect. Put yourself in the spot where you can't go any lower but have a good success cone. Then print puck
@@TableFlipFoundry awesome, will do! Thank you for replying.
If all cones printed perfect on the SUCCESS and FAILURE side what way do you adjust next print?
If you had all cones on both sides print you reduce your time. There should be no top cones on the failure side.
I love this 🤩 useful and you made it entertaining 👏
This is such awesomeness.
I am pretty new to printing and just bought a Phrozen mighty 4k. I am trying to dial in the Aqua grey resin and finding different settings from one place to another. I would have thought that a printer using a certain resin would be very cut and dry as far as the recommended settings for a good print but I guess that is not the case.
You're absolutely correct. A lot of new hobbyists enter the 3D printing space expecting it to be plug and play, and sadly, its just not there yet.
There is a lot to understand about the properties of resin and 3d printing, and pre-supports. It's hard to explain because it can be such a tedious thing to go over. I'll try to make a video soon explaining more details about resins and how they affect your printing experience.
In the mean time, you can come visit our discord community. If you have any questions getting things going, I'll personally be around but we have a ton of super helpful members.
discord.gg/tableflipfoundry
@@TableFlipFoundry Thank you so much! I appreciate people like yourself who go out of their way to help other people learn and I will definitely be subscribing to learn more! Thanks!
My result was, all top failure-cones failed, and all top success-cones printed BUT the first one on the left. isn't that a bit contradictory? Cheers
Hmm, download from website is failing for me every time I try..
Thanks for making this! Can you confirm or deny that the cones only work with 50 micron layer heights? I was using it with 10 microns, and think I got false over-exposure results. When I printed it with a 50 micron height, it worked perfectly
Deny. As far as I know. I don't know anyone who prints at 10um though. They should work on any layer height. But you should check out my calibration class to find out a bit more about why that might have happened!
Thank you so much for this
You're quite welcome! Please let me know how it works, and if you're having more troubles, shoot us a message in the cones channel on the discord!
@@TableFlipFoundry Will do Thank you :)
Why are the shapes the way that they are? Is there a reason there are flats on the base of the cones? Is there other information we can gleam running this test beyond just exposure? (thinking about lift speed and such)
The smaller part at the base of the cone is designed to be an apparent success or fail. If the cone fails to print that area it's definitely failure. If it prints then it's a definite success.
This part's only purpose is to test exposure at the moment. But if you can use it to verify other things I'd love to know and we can expand testing with it
I don't get it. I've printed 8 of these from 3.5-5seconds of exposure (obsidian black color) and it's inconsistent. At 5 seconds I have the closest success but it also has the most failure too, not the least. Then if i go down to 4, it has very little on the failure side but the success is about a quarter of what the 5second success cone is in length. Wtf.
Hit up our discord. I'll sort ya out
Very interesting but the print time @0.05mm is well over an hour per test. You should make it a lot shorter to lessen the time it takes to print. It does not need to be that tall. They could be a LOT shorter since the test is only the thin gap points between the cones.
*compared to the XP2 test that takes only 10mins to print.
Unfortunately, the very nature of this being a mechanical calibration means it cannot be printed as a 2D calibration like the XP2 test. In our opinion it's superior to the XP2 test in many ways, and also runs about the same acceptable time frame as the Amerilabs City.
So it is what it is, this takes about an hour to print. Don't rush, calibration is the most important part of your printing experience, it's worth taking your time to do right. If the XP2 works for you and you have that level of experience to read it, then by all means thats the right test for you. It's a perfectly fine part.
This is meant for people who want something they can read without question.
@@TableFlipFoundry The test points are the thin joints between the cones, no reason the cones need to be that long. This type of exposure test could be made with cones being a lot stumpier, the tall cones look cooler but it is not efficient or necessary.
@@gotloveforall01 Sorry I missed this message. Unfortunately, there are a lot of factors at play when it comes to measuring the strength of the cones. There is a very specific increase in surface area for the cones. It is possible, I supposed to shorten the bottom cones though without too much trouble. Maybe on the next revision I can look into that!
Where is PUCK for V3 is it only on your patron?
This methot it's the only one that stick to the FEP.
The rook from Elegoo, XP2 test and others worsk quite well...
Adhesion issues wont be related to any of the actual calibration methods. This is all about your level and bottom exposure times. If you're having problems with parts sticking, you want to make sure your bed level is good and you can turn your bottom exposure time up a bit to solve it.
IS THIS TEST SUITABLE FOR TRANSLUCENT RESINS?
Well... I've printed it few times and ... Success cone has a microscopic gap same as fail cone... or both has connection.
Currently I am between 2.4s (both has gaps) and 2.5s (both has connections) (Exposure time for this resin is recommended as 3s - 15s, so I'm quite far below anyway)
I am guessing the issue here is that I'm using Anycubic TRANSLUCENT green resin which can pass uv light further then other non translucent resins or ... is it so precise?
Should I start messing with hundreds after a comma? 2.45s, 2.47s, 2.43s etc?
I think I understand the concept of this, but perhaps it's my peasant mind. I can't see/find any information of what my initial settings should be before printing this. Where should I start? What layer height? Is 0.05 a good starting point? At what exposure time? Perhaps I'm too blind to see, but.. I don't know where I'm supposed to start..
Everyone's printer and resin and temp and all the rest of the variables are different and so its hard to offer that kind of info.
If you have a modern printer and modern resin (something made in the last year or so) then you can start at 2.5 seconds for .05mm layer height. That's a fairly average starting point for most printers. It should get you some results to get started.
Also, have a watch of my calibration class, it will be extremely helpful for you.
And join our discord, because we can answer all your questions super easily over there. We have 5700 members now and tons and tons of helpful people.
The hardest part of starting the hobby is feeling like you dont know what you're doing and feeling like you're left alone to figure it out. We will fix both of those for ya :D
Https://discord.gg/tableflipfoundry