From acc8ec3ee005e43684917475c55f4469e30d55bf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: neophrema <48735216+neophrema@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2020 22:21:51 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Update over-bridge_tuning.html Minor changes --- .../calibration/over-bridge_tuning/over-bridge_tuning.html | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/resources/calibration/over-bridge_tuning/over-bridge_tuning.html b/resources/calibration/over-bridge_tuning/over-bridge_tuning.html index 34dac9cf7..ab4267802 100644 --- a/resources/calibration/over-bridge_tuning/over-bridge_tuning.html +++ b/resources/calibration/over-bridge_tuning/over-bridge_tuning.html @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@

Ironing Pattern Calibration

You need to do the filament flow calibration and the bridge flow ratio before this one. It's better if you have done the filament temperature.

-

This test will print test samples with various level of over-bridge flow ratio, between 100 and 125. Choose the lowest value where the top surface is smooth without rough "holes".

+

This calibration method will print test samples with various levels of over-bridge flow ratio, between 100 and 125. Choose the lowest value on which the top surface is smooth without rough "holes".

Results

@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
Flat
-Here, we can see that artifacts exist until the over-brodge flow was set to 115. It was flat from the flow calibration, if it's not now, it's because the bridges below the top surfaces are dropping a bit, and so there are more volume to fill afterwards. Here, 115 should be enough, but 120 is a more safe bet. +Here, we can see that artifacts exist until the over-brodge flow was set to 115. It was flat from the flow calibration, if it's not now, it's because the bridges below the top surfaces are dropping a bit, and so it leaves more volume to fill afterwards. Here, 115 should be enough, but 120 is a more safe bet.

Advice

TODO