Since I upgraded my router from a model that only supports WPA2 to a model that also supports WPA3 my ESP8266 modules do not work consistently anymore.

I read online that the ESP8266 modules do not support WPA3 at all.

My router has a hybrid WPA2 and WPA3 security setting so it should support legacy devices. Apparently this compatibility is iffy.

What is strange though is that tasmota devices, which have an ESP8266 chip on them, work fine. This is especially frustrating because apparently the chip does work it's just some obscure setting or command that needs to be set.

Does anyone have any experience with this? I have a lot of old ESP8266 modules and would like to put them to use.

I have been a long time Prusaslicer user but lately I'm running into a limitation. Hole XY size compensation is a big missing feature which I have seen in Cura. Also Cura handles lithophanes really well.

I do not like the UI of Cura but do like the Prusaslicer one.

What slicer do you prefer?

I have a somewhat interesting issue.

Recently I've installed the BTT SFS v2 filament sensor, which detects both if filament is present and if there is a jam or not. The jam detection works with an encoder that spins whenever filament is running through it.

Pressure advance however works by slowing down and speeding up extrusion based on motion of the nozzle to prevent bulging and oozing.

This however triggers false positives in the jam detection. Without pressure advance it works fine.

Does anyone have experience with this? Below is example code of my Klipper config related to the jam sensor. Raising the detection length from 2.88 to 10 did not solve it and I don't want to put excessive numbers there.

[filament_motion_sensor encoder_sensor]
switch_pin: i forgot lol
detection_length: 10
extruder: extruder
pause_on_runout: False
runout_gcode:
  PAUSE # [pause_resume] is required in printer.cfg
  M117 Filament encoder runout
#insert_gcode:
  #M117 Filament encoder inserted

I've designed a new toolhead a while ago and the hotend, a Phaetus Rapido UHF v2, is mounted using a small aluminum bracket meant for an E3D hotend.

The bracket is mounted to the toolhead using brass insert nuts that were pressed into the plastic using a soldering iron.

The picture is the side view of the toolhead. It's currently missing the bottom half.

The hotend ends up not entirety vertical.

How bad is this? Ideally it's perfectly vertical but is it worth the effort of straightening this out?

So the Creality Ender 5 is/was my first and only 3D printer. Over the years, as is tradition with Creality products, you replace parts and install upgrades here and there.

In the latest iteration only the frame is original. Everything else has been replaced.

Some of the highlights (screw AI for ruining that word)

-Cartesian -> CoreXY, inspired by the MercuryOne project.

-X strut replaced with two 10mm steel rods. The print head is in between the rods so that the reachable area can be increased.

-Redesigned toolhead allowing for a Phaetus Rapido UHF and Orbiter 1.5 or 2.0 extruder, as well as a BLTouch bed sensor.

-New bed, 314x314mm instead of 235x235mm.

-The bed motion system is placed outside the frame instead of inside. The bed will be raised to just below the top of the frame. The toolhead can freely move over the frame, the fan ducts will not hit the frame but the nozzle will.

-Oversized rails on the Y axis, 24mm rails of 530mm length. I got these from discarded lab equipment at my old job. They allow the toolhead to go over the frame bounds and allow the nozzle to reach the whole inside of the frame.

I now have a 260x310 usable print area, up from 220x220 with the stock unit. There is still room to improve and I believe 314x314 is also possible.

The FreeCAD design file is available here: https://www.printables.com/model/1867046-ender-5-radical-redesign

Do you have any experience doing so?

I have a project coming up where I would like to print a large object and fill it with sand and resin.

Sand, as we all know is coarse, rough and irritating and it gets everywhere. So it's good filler material.

Afterwards I want to solidify it by adding resin, hoping that it gets everywhere as well.

What other materials are usable? Perhaps concrete but it can't really dry inside a printed object right?

The infill should be Gyroid with 10% with at least 3 perimeters IMO. Would something like tree infill work as well? Or removable infill? I'm not sure how to get a slicer to do that though.

I intend to build parts for a CNC machine so I value weight and rigidity in this project.

I'm designing a partially 3D printable CNC machine and have some options regarding the motion system.

I can choose between belts and ballscrews. Currently I have 2 ballscrews. One for X which is easy but what is the best way to control the Y axis?

Either I use one ballscrew and move the workpiece back and forth or I get two of them and push/pull the X gantry back and forth. A second ballscrew significantly adds to the cost of the machine but is there any benefit to doing so?

Bed slinging seems fine for slow speed operations such as CNC milling.

It is not possible to filter ai content from search results, even duckduckgo links to articles shat out by some mindless toaster. I've had enough of it.

It's only a matter of time until the ever flowing diarrhea deluge of "AI" generated information will engulf the internet. Soon all information online will be useless or might as well be because it will be impossible to tell the difference.

I think it's wise to download a full dump of Wikipedia and other sources. Preferably from before AI.

Are there any other websites or information packages worth getting? Are there hosts that aren't contaminated with this digital disease?

I'll start off with a recent one. I forgot to connect the hotend cooling fan when remounting the hotend. After a while the printer jammed and the whole toolhead got so hot that it started to melt. The brass inserts were coming out of their sockets and the hotend stood at an angle instead of straight down.

I also noticed that the "teflon" tube connecting the extruder to the hotend was not in fact teflon. The slowly melting ABS was blowing a bubble in that tube and it was clearly starting to melt.

It was quite a pain in the ass to fix as I did not have a second toolhead nor a second 3D printer to print a new one so I had to fix the extruder/hotend in place using 2-part glue hoping that the printer lasts long enough to print a new toolhead.

I should probably have either a thermal fuse or a smart filament sensor that notices jams as well. When your hotend cooling fan fails, or the operator forgets to connect it, the filament will jam in the heatbreak and if it goes long enough the whole hotend will be plastic-meltingly hot. A jam sensor should see it before the toolhead starts to melt.

So my 3D printer uses two 10mm rods for the X axis with LM10UU bearings inside the toolhead carriage.

The regular metal bearings are quite noisy and have nasty resonance effects at 40mm/s speeds. They also have a lot of wiggle room.

In an attempt to solve this I bought the plastic variant which has no moving parts and just slides over the rod. They are too tight however and my printer struggles with moving in the X direction.

Does anyone have experience with these? I assume the plastic ones wear out over time so the friction should go down.

This spincoater is made for making custom circuit boards. The idea is that all boards made with this process have a 3mm mounting hole in the center.

UV curable resin is applied to both sides of a copper clad board, spun off at 3000rpm after which the speed is lowered to 300rpm and the UV light on both sides will then cure the thin layer on the board.

This is only a prototype.

The spinning mechanism is a 775 motor with a rotary encoder that is controlled by one of the PWM pins of an Arduino Nano.

This is just an idea at the moment and would like to hear your thoughts on this.

Instead of a toolchanger that goes to a designated spot, releases a hotend and picks up another one, would it be feasible to have two independently moving X rails? I mean two sliders on the Y axis that each have their own independent toolhead mounted on it.

To 3D print using two materials you could have rail 1 move out of the way so that rail 2 can move to the object and resume printing. I suppose this could be done with a pause command followed by executing gcode with different stepper motors.

This obviously only makes sense on a 3D printer that is large enough. I would say rails of at least 500mm in X and Y direction and a bed that supports that.

Does this make any sense over a dedicated toolchanger? I suppose the complexity is much lower and it's less likely to fail.

I also believe there is a benefit for printing multiple objects simultaneously but at some point it might as well be two separate printers.