To raft or not to raft?

When extruding HDPE onto foam board a raft needs to be laid down first to increase the anchorage at the corners to reduce curling. It becomes part of the object and has to be trimmed back to its outline with scissors or a knife. Now that I am extruding onto polypropylene cutting board I wondered if it was still necessary.

The temperature at which I lay down HDPE onto the cutting board is important. At 180°C it does not stick. At 200°C it sticks well but can be peeled off with the help of a penknife. Higher temperatures make it harder to remove and do more damage to the board.

Here are a couple of 15mm test cubes made directly onto the PP board without a raft :-



The one on the left had the first layer extruded at 200°C and subsequent layers at 240°C. As you can see it curled badly, particularly at one corner. The one on the right had its first layer extruded at 220°C. It looked promising but when I tried my standard warp test block the result was not good!



So it looks like the raft is here to stay. Here is an example :-



I lay down the raft at 4mm/s with a notional filament diameter of 1.1mm with the extruder head 1.3mm above the board. This is to get the filament as round as possible so that it doesn't form a solid weld. In actual fact, gravity causes it to slump to about 0.9mm high and spread to 1.3mm wide. The oval area calculation would give 1.34mm and a pitch of 1.3mm is sufficient to get adjacent filaments to stick together. My rationale for making the raft as thick as possible in one layer was to make it strong without taking too much time. It probably does not need to be as strong now that it binds to the PP.

I put the raft down at 200°C, then I do the first layer of the object at 240°C with the fan off to ensure it welds to the raft and then subsequent layers at 240°C with the fan on.

I calculate the amount the raft overlaps the object with this completely arbitrary function :-

def overlap(x):
  return x + 10 + 10.0 * (x - 20) / 80

I halved the overlap when I went from foam board to polypropylene.

Will it stick?

ABS sticks very well to hot Kapton, so I wondered what else would stick to it. The first thing to try was PLA. This sticks pretty well to cold masking tape and doesn't warp much, but large objects do have some warping. I figured heating the bed to around 50°C would fix that. Rather than changing from Kapton to masking tape I decided to see if I could stick PLA to Kapton and get a shiny surface as well.



The first bracket was made on cold masking tape so the base has a matt finish.

The second one is on Kapton at 50°C for the first layer, dropping to 40°C after that. My logic was to have the bed just above the glass transition to make it stick and just below afterwards to stop it warping. As you can see one of the hole outlines did not stick properly. The PLA was extruded at 200°C for the first layer and 180°C for the rest.

For the third one the bed was at 55°C falling to 45°C. The outline stuck properly and the base is nice and shiny. The surface imperfections you can see are from gouges in the aluminium bed caused by a slight accident with a decimal point. It caused the nozzle to be rammed into the bed and then the X-Y movement ploughed furrows. These show up through the Kapton tape.

The last one is my first ABS test for comparison.

It was looking good, so I tried something bigger, a Mendel belt splitter jig: -



The left hand corner lifted and the object ended up more warped than it would have been made on cold masking tape.

I tried again with the bed at 55°C all the way through the build. My extruder started jamming so I increased the PLA temperature to 210°C for the first layer and 190°C for the rest, the values I had been previously using on cold tape.

This time it was successful and stayed stuck down: -



The base came out perfectly flat and more transparent: -



The extrusion lines of the three solid base layers are less visible and you can see through to the sparse infill. This is only 25% but the object feels incredibly strong. I get the feeling the hot bed makes things stronger.

There is a bit of a meniscus around the edge. This is mainly because I had a bodge of a -0.1mm offset in the first layer outline to get PLA outlines to stick to tape reliably. I removed the bodge and made this object: -



The base layers are very transparent here, even more so to the naked eye than the camera shows. There is something a little odd with some of the extrusion lanes above the bottom left hole. I think those discontinuities must be the plastic squirming a bit while extruded, which is usually a sign of not being stretched enough.

The top of the object has a small defect: -



There is a small hole above and right a bit of the centre. I think this is because the plastic doesn't span gaps as well without a fan, so it fails to bridge the sparse infill properly. I wasn't watching so I didn't see exactly what went wrong.

The next plastic I tried was HDPE. Not surprisingly it doesn't stick very well to hot Kapton. With the bed at 130°C it stays molten but is quite rubber like. With the bed at 110°C it sets and turns white (because it crystallises I believe). I tried various combinations of these two temperatures but could not get it to stick reliably. I could lay down the first layer of a raft but then subsequent layers would rip it up as the adhesion is very low.



I think the way to do HDPE without a raft is to extrude it onto a thin sheet of HDPE, or maybe polythene, held down by a vacuum and heated to prevent warping. That will have to wait until I build a little vacuum table, hopefully this weekend.

Last on the list was PCL. That sticks very well to Kapton heated to 40°C but it never sets and makes a soggy object.



Before the heated bed I used to build with a fan, and at only 40°C the bed has no trouble holding temperature, so I tried with the fan next.



That worked OK and built a complete object: -



The infill did not stick very well to the outlines of the holes, especially on the downwind side. It probably needs a denser infill, and perhaps some overlap. 25% fill is not really appropriate for PCL as it very soft and flexible.



The bottom is smooth and shiny as expected and it took some effort to peel it off, so I expect large objects could be made. I couldn't experiment further though because the filament started buckling in my extruder.



I can't explain why it worked for a while and then stopped but I tried higher temperature and slower extrusion but could not get it reliable again. The pipe could probably be a few mm closer to the pulley but not much more because it would hit the pinch wheel.

I don't have a lot of use for PCL, other than using it up. Dropping it from the requirements for the extruder would allow me to use a smaller pulley. If you look at the table at the end of this article, you can see that it is only PCL that struggles for grip with a worm pulley. I think I could drop to half the diameter, which would just about bring the gear ratio into the range of a single pair of spur gears. I have a 4" Meccano gear that gives 7:1, so I might try that in my next extruder.

So hot Kapton works well for everything I have tried so far apart from HDPE.

ABSolution

I have been testing Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) in the RepRap extruder and I have to say it works rather well. It is surprising how different each plastic I try is. For example, if I fold a short piece of filament double and let it go this is what happens :-



PCL is rubbery and springs back almost straight, HDPE is a lot less springy. ABS bruises when bent sharply and is a more opaque cream colour rather than white. PLA is transparent like glass and breaks when bent through a small radius. The progression from top to bottom is from rubbery to brittle. I think the reason for this is that ABS and PLA are below their glass transition (Tg) at room temperature, whereas with PCL and HDPE their Tg is well below 0°C.

I have a bit of a routine now for getting my machine working with new plastics. First I look at the extruder performance at different flow rates and temperatures. Then I have to experiment to find a bed material it will stick to. After that I make test blocks to fine tune the temperatures and find the best speed and filament diameter to build with. Finally I look at the warping with different infill densities.

So here is the flow rate versus motor duty cycle extruding at 190°C measured at the nozzle (the other plastics are at different temperatures):-


As you can see ABS works the motor harder. Part of this is due to the fact that it has to run faster (for the same flow rate) as the ABS filament I have is only 2.75mm rather than 3mm. However, I think that it is due mainly to the increased force and friction required to cut the thread in the pump. At first I had a lot of problems with the GM3 motor's clutch slipping. I got it working reliably by loosening the top springs and just tightening the bottoms ones. I also have the filament running through a felt washer soaked in oil, which I had to add when doing PCL.

Here is how the filament diameter varies with flow rate :-



ABS has much lower die swell than HDPE and is quite a bit better than PCL. That makes it good for extruding fine filaments at high speed.



I think the graph above shows that the viscosity increases a lot as the temperature drops but the motor duty cycle remains pretty constant showing that most of the torque is used overcoming friction in the pump.


I tried using PP and MDF as bed materials but ABS does not want to stick to them. Unlike PCL which stays molten for a very long time, ABS filament sets soon after leaving the nozzle. PCL and HDPE turn transparent when they are molten but ABS does not. I think its specific heat capacity is quite low compared to HDPE so the workpiece cools quite quickly and I can get away without a fan.

The best material I have found for a bed is plastic laminated board. My wife bought me a big sheet of it for 10p when I was experimenting with HDPE. It was cheap because it was scrap advertising material. She was disappointed when HDPE did not stick to it, but is made up now that I have found a use for it. I think possibly it works because the thin plastic lamination is actually polystyrene.



I can extrude ABS on to it and it sticks well enough without needing a raft. To remove it I cut the lamination around it with a penknife and pull the surface off. I can then peel the lamination off the base of the object leaving a clean finish. It works well but I don't know where to get any more and it is single use although you can use both sides.



It is good not to need a raft because while I can remove an HDPE raft with scissors or a sharp knife, ABS 1mm thick is too hard to cut off easily.

My theory about welding temperatures is that you need to extrude at least twice the melting point (105°C) minus ambient. That works out at 190°C. In practice I needed to go a bit hotter to get a satisfactory bond between the layers at high speed. I settled on 220°C for the first layer and 200°C for the rest of the object.

Layer bonding can be quite variable with ABS. It is easy to make objects which can be peeled apart again. I think this is because even at 220°C ABS is quite paste like and less fluid than the other plastics are at their critical weld temperature. That makes the filament contact points very tangential and so smaller. Plastics that are more fluid slump and get a bigger contact area, hence a stronger weld. Also, the time the plastic is in contact and above the melting point determines the amount of fusion. I think if I spend some time on this (and with the other plastics) I will be able to use plastics as their own support material for making overhangs. The layer height will be crucial to making this work so it will have to wait until I have replaced the PTFE insulator with stainless steel.

Here is my standard warp test shape: 40 x 10 x 20mm block made with 0.5mm filament at 16mm/s, layer hight 0.4mm, filament pitch 0.6mm: -



The warping figure I got after leaving it a few days was 0.38mm compared to 0.53mm for 100% HDPE and 0.21mm for 100% PCL. 50% filled ABS gives a figure of 0.15mm which is the lowest I have measured yet and ABS is still very strong at densities less than that, whereas PCL is not. Also, this was without a raft which gives worse figures for PCL and ridiculous warping for HDPE.

The filament is very soft and compliant when it is molten, with no spring in it, so it goes where the head leads it and produces good definition. Here is a top view showing how accurate the corners and infill are: -



Here is a 50% infill pattern: -



This is very accurate compared to the same pattern in HDPE shown here. 25% fill is also very good and the object remains strong: -



For some reason my 9M pixel camera doesn't like taking close ups of white things.

When I was extruding thick rafts I noticed some bubbling of the surface. I think this is due to absorbed moisture turning to steam because ABS has ten times more water absorption than HDPE. Oddly, it does not happen when extruding the object so is not a problem, at least with the current weather conditions.

ABS smells a little when it is hot but not enough to be objectionable.

My acorn nut nozzle, with the very shallow exit hole, is very incontinent with ABS as it was with HDPE but not with PCL. This means that even though I wipe it clean with the toothbrush it has extruded another few millimeters by the time it gets to where it has to start the object. The problem with that is that it sets so fast it is solid when it meets the table so will not stick and stops the following filament sticking. I am hoping the latest nozzle design will fix that.

On to the same test with PLA before I alter the extruder.

Warped

Having got an idea of the HDPE warping for thin walled open boxes, I decided to start investigating solid shapes. I made a solid block 40 x 10 x 20mm to compare with the open boxes of the same dimensions.



Obviously there are many ways to fill the interior so I started with the simplest, just alternate layers of horizontal and vertical zigzags. HydraRaptor seems quite happy extruding 0.5mm diameter filament at 16 mm / second. If extruded into free air it would actually be 1mm at 4mm/s, but that is too course, so I move the head at 16mm/s which stretches it.

From trial and error I have found that a good layer height to use is 0.8 times the notional filament diameter. If it is more, then as the lower layers shrink, the nozzle rises faster than the object and a gap develops. Once that happens the filament squirms about and does not follow the path of the nozzle accurately.

So the extruded filament is constrained to 0.4mm high. Measurements show the width to be about 0.6mm. Incidentally, if it squashed to a perfect ellipse with a height of 0.4mm then it would be 0.625mm wide to have the same area as a 0.5mm circle. I extrude the zigzag with a pitch of 0.6mm so that adjacent filaments touch, but it means the object is not actually completely solid. The space occupied by each filament is a rectangular channel 0.4 x 0.6 = 0.24mm² but the cross sectional area of the plastic is π x 0.25² = 0.20mm², so about 18% is air. I confirmed this by weighing the block. It weighs 6.5g but if it was solid HDPE then 8ml would weight about 8g. It takes about 45 minutes to make the object including laying a raft.

Before I tried it, I always imagined the amount of plastic deposited would have to exactly match the volume of the extruded object otherwise it would sag or bulge. I could never understand how FDM worked reliably. Now I know that the volume can be a bit less and the difference is made up by air. That means the amount of plastic deposited is actually not that critical, which is why RepRap can get away with an open loop extruder.

I measured the warping with the three nail jig that I showed in the last post. The thin walled box is warped 0.44mm and the solid box has warped 0.87mm so that answers the question whether solid objects warp more or less. Note that the thin walled box is made with 1mm filament because 0.5mm filament is too thin to be self supporting.

I expect I can make a less warped block by extruding a thick base and then a less dense infill above that. Something else to try.

It is amazing how strong 10mm thick HDPE is. You don't often get to see plastics in that form. Most end products have optimised strength against cost by having thin walls and ribs etc.

HDPE + PU

Because my test objects are less warped while they are still attached to the polypropylene bed, I had the idea of filling them with something that sets hard to freeze them in that shape. That would also allow me to use a sparse fill pattern, which speeds up the FDM build time, but still get a strong object.

I needed something that was not too viscous so that it would flow in between the mesh of the fill pattern and would set hard.



Polyurethane was recommended to me because it has the consistency of milk before it sets and is strong enough to cast parts for Darwin. I bought some Smooth-Cast 300 which has a pot life of 3 minutes after it has been mixed, and cures in 15 minutes. I choose a fairly fast setting one because it gets hot while curing and I hoped it would soften the HDPE to relieve the stress. It only seems to get to about 50°C though so I don't think that it has much effect in that way.

This is the equipment I used :-



I know the internal volume of my objects pretty accurately so I measure out the required amount of plastic using separate labeled syringes for the two components. I mix it in a small pot before filling a third syringe to inject it. The syringes and pot are made out of polypropylene, which polyurethane does not stick to, so they can all be reused. I haven't found a way of unblocking the needles though.

I made a 50% filled object and drilled a hole the diameter of the needle in the middle that allowed the needle to go to the bottom. I also drilled a small riser hole at each end to let air out. Obviously, with cleverer software these holes could be made during the FDM phase.

The first attempt was a complete failure because the needle blocked when the object was only about 50% filled. Here is a cross section :-



For my second attempt I used a thicker needle, 1mm OD rather than 0.8mm :-



The object filled OK, but just as it became full the plastic in the needle set suddenly but I carried on pushing. The needle popped off the end of the syringe and PU sprayed all over the place. It was a good job I was wearing goggles and gloves but I should also have been wearing long sleeves, a mask and a hat! Fortunately PU does not stick to much, only untreated wood, skin and hair! Where it gets on your skin it burns slightly. Because it is transparent before it sets it is very hard to see where it has gone but when it sets it turns opaque white so it becomes obvious.



It actually sprayed around one quarter of the room. I even got some on my lips which I didn't notice until I tried eating.

What seems to happen is that if you subject the liquid plastic to pressure it accelerates the curing, which increases the temperature and pressure creating a positive feedback effect which makes it set suddenly in the needle. I only had two needles and they were now blocked so I did the remainder of my experiments using just the nozzle of the syringe into a bigger hole in the object.



The ideal solution is probably a very big needle that locks onto the syringe. It doesn't need to be sharp but the 45° slant at the end is handy because it stops the end being blocked if you press it against the bottom of the object.

Results
I left the objects on the bed overnight to make sure the PU was fully cured even though it sets in 15 minutes. The first object I made had a 50% fill and warped 0.36mm compared with 0.47mm without the PU injection.



Thinking that 50% fill leaves the PU fairly weak, I did another test at 25% fill. That gave 0.24mm warp, the lowest figure I have achieved yet for this shape.



I also tried a 100 x 10 x 20 mm test with 20% fill ratio. That gave about 50% less warping compared to the version without PU.



Conclusions
A useful technique for reducing warping and reducing the build time of FDM objects. The main disadvantage is that FDM is one of the cleanest and safest fabrication techniques whereas injecting PU is messy and somewhat dangerous unless you wear protective gear.

I was disappointed not to get rid of the warping completely. Instead of alternating the horizontal and vertical fill patterns, several layers of one followed by several layers of the other might make the PU lattice stronger. Raising the PU to 50°C for a few hours is supposed to harden it further, so I could try removing the bed and putting it in a very low oven for a while. I have a Peltier effect 12V beer fridge which can be reversed and used as an oven, so that would be ideal.

Using a harder plastic like epoxy might work better but it may be too viscous to inject. I believe heating it reduces viscosity.

Reducing HDPE warping feels much like banging ones head against the wall so I will try PCL and ABS next for some light relief.

Time for a new extruder controller

Having decided to switch to stepper drive for my extruder I needed to make a new extruder controller for HydraRaptor, the previous one has served me well for two years.

The spec for the new one is: -

• I²C or RS485 comms link to the main controller.
• Micro stepping bipolar stepper drive.
• Heater control from a thermistor.
• Fan control output.
• Second fan control and second thermistor for controlling extruder heatsink temperature.
• A spare output for a solenoid, etc.
• A filament empty input.

I designed it in Kicad and got the PCB made professionally. Here is the schematic: -



U4 generates a local 3.3V rail from the 12V supply. C8 and C9 are the bulk low frequency decoupling for the 12V and 3.3V rails respectively. C1, C2, C3, C5, C7, C12 and C13 are the high frequency decouplers placed close to the chips that they are decoupling. D2 is a green LED to indicate the board is powered.

U2 is an RS485 transceiver which I intend to use on my Darwin. It is slew rate limited and ESD protected but somewhat expensive compared to the older 5V versions. R1 ensures the transmitter is off until the micro takes control of it. HydraRaptor uses I²C to talk to its heads at the moment, via K1.

Q3, Q4 Q5 and Q6 are NIF9N05CL protected MOSFETs to control fans, heaters and solenoids, etc. They are protected against over current, over voltage (hence no back EMF diodes), over temperature and ESD. They also have controlled edge rates to minimize RFI. Q1 and Q2, together with R3 and R4, are level translators to increase the gate drive voltage on the two higher current drives. That minimises the on resistance to ensure they stay cool without heatsinks, even at 2A or more. R13 and R14 ensure the drives are off before the micro starts. D6, D7, D8 & D9 are red LEDs to indicate when the outputs are on. Essential for the heater output, but a luxury for the others.

R15, R16, R17 & R18 form the correct potential dividers to give a good approximation to linear temperature response for 10K thermistors, see here for details. For a 100K thermistor they would simply be 10 times bigger. C10 and C11 remove high frequency noise. Probably unnecessary as a little noise actually seems beneficial because it converts bang-bang control to proportional.

The thermistor inputs have their own analogue ground rail, which is only linked to the main ground at one point close to the VSS pin of the MCU. This is done via a zero ohm link, R25, on the schematic. On the PCB this is the smallest footprint available and is shorted by a bit of copper, so no part is actually fitted. The reason for this bodge is to keep the track separate from the ground fill, so that no current from the heater or motors is passing along it. That might cause a small voltage offset that would affect the temperature reading.

U1 is the stepper motor driver. I used the Allegro A3983 as it gives micro stepping with a smaller external part count than the A3977, but as mentioned previously it does have some disadvantages.

C6 and C7 form a charge pump which generates a supply rail for the gate drive that is higher than the main supply voltage (12V). That allows the top transistors of the H-bridges to be N-channel devices, rather than P-channel, which have inferior performance.

R22 sets the off time of the chopper and needs to be different values for different motors as described here.

R23 and R24 are 1W current sense resistors. I found them to be expensive in the 2512 SMT package. It is actually cheaper to use two 1210 0.5W resistors in parallel, or through hole parts mounted vertically, which take up less board area.

The reference voltage for the chopper is generated by a high frequency PWM output on the micro and smoothed to DC by R2 and C4. That allows software control of the motor current. As I had plenty of spare I/O on the micro I also have software control of the step mode (full, half, quarter or eighth), the enable and the reset pin. R5 ensures the stepper is disabled before the micro is running. As with R1 it ensures the circuit is well behaved before the micro is programmed, or when it is being run under a debugger.

D3, D4, D10 and D11 indicate the state of the stepper outputs, a bit of a luxury really. With SMT parts there is not much point in using bi-colour LEDs. It is cheaper to use back to back red and green next to each other.

I used an MSP430F2012 micro on my first extruder controller because you get a full development kit including an excellent C compiler, in circuit programming and source level debugging for $20. I think there is also open source support via gcc, but I have not investigated that yet.

For this one I had to move up to an MSP430F2112 to get a UART for the RS485. As it is the same core with different peripherals I assumed my $20 eZ430 SpyBiWire debugger would still work. Big mistake! It programs OK but it locks up when trying to debug. It also miss-identifies the chip. I have two, and the second one I tried said the firmware needed updating and offered to do it. JUST SAY NO, if you say yes it reprograms the eZ430 and it never talks again. I contacted TI and they have no plans to fix this firmware updating bug so I got an MSP-FET430UIF debugger for $99. It does JTAG as well as SpyBiWire so I should be able to mend my second eZ430, as it has JTAG test points and I read the security fuse is not blown. I also suspect a new eZ430 may well work as the web page has been updated to show it supports the F21x2 now.

D1 and D5 are red and green status lights. I light the green one to show the processor is running and blink it whenever it receives a command. The red one indicates errors.

P3 is a connector for a filament out switch. I haven't implemented one of those yet as a spool of filament usually lasts many months. It uses an internal pullup resistor to pull it high when the switch is open.

P1 is the SpiBiWire connector for programming and debugging.

Even with extravagant motor control I had three spare I/O lines, so I brought them out to a connector with the supply rails for future expansion.

This is what Kicad predicted the populated board would look like: -



I found 3D models for all the parts on the web but the connectors were a bit of a nightmare. I used Tyco MTA100 and MTA156 connectors as they seem to be about the cheapest form of wire to board connector. As usual there is an expensive tool to insert the wires, but you can get away with using a pair of needle nosed pliers, or even make a tool as it is only a metal plate with slots in it mounted in a plastic handle. We should be able to RepRap one.

Tyco have STEP and IGES 3D models on their website. Kicad needs VRML, which should have been no problem as CoCreate can import STEP or IGES and export VRML. But Kicad did not like the VRML from CoCreate, it seems it has to come from Wings3D. Wings can import STL but it does not like the STL from CoCreate or AOI either. In the end I had to do IGES -> CoCreate -> STL -> AOI -> OBJ -> Wings-> VRML -> Kicad! I coloured the body and pins in Wings.

I got five boards made by PCB-Pool in 8 working days for €125 including shipping, certainly not the cheapest, especially as it included Irish VAT at 21.5% (VAT is only 15% at the moment in the UK), but I like the web interface, the quality is good and they include a free solder paste stencil.



They also email pictures of the board being made at five different stages, although two of mine went missing. Here it is before the tin plating was added: -



And here it is finished apart from routing the outline: -



Using the stencil is very easy. You trap the board between two L-shaped pieces of PCB material stuck to a flat surface with some masking tape. You then align the stencil over the pads and stick one edge with masking tape. Spread some solder past along the edge that is stuck and then wipe it across the board with a metal squeegee to force it through the holes and leave it exactly level with the surface of the stencil.

You then lift the stencil carefully from the edge that is not taped down.



Notice how the paste for the heat slug on the A3983 is split into four and reduced in area. This is recommended to stop the chip floating on the paste and sliding across the footprint. It was not easy to do in Kicad. It doesn't seem possible to do it in the component footprint, so I had to draw on the stencil layer of the PCB. That means if I use the chip again I will have to do it again. I had the same limitation when expanding the resist layer around the fiducials. These are the two copper circles bottom left and mid right. They are used for optical alignment of pick and place machines.

The next stage is to place all the parts with tweezers. I used 0805 footprints for all the passives, so they were not too fiddly to do by hand. I hope to be able to automate the pasting and placement with HydraRaptor soon.

Then I cooked the board in a cheap electric oven, a Severin TO 2020 for €45.



I believe you can get these for as little as £15. I expect they give more even heating than using a hotplate, as they heat from above as well as below, but a hotplate has the advantage of taking up a lot less space and probably uses less power. I will be making a heated bed for HydraRaptor, so I might be able to use that.

The temperature profile was controlled by a thermocouple attached to a PID controller that I borrowed from work.



When I have time I will connect one of Zach's thermocouple boards to a spare analogue input on HydraRaptor and plug the oven into the software controlled mains outlet that HydraRaptor has, and then program it as a PID controller. Not another head, but certainly another manufacturing capability. I will also try putting extruded objects through a heat cycle in the oven while they are still attached to the base. It should release the stress so they don't warp further when removed.

This was the finished result after hand soldering the connectors: -



U2 is not fitted because I got the footprint wrong, doh! I can bodge one on when I need RS485. There are two construction faults on this picture, can you spot them?

The reflow was not perfect. The big capacitor did not flow at all. The temperature needs to be a bit higher, or perhaps the warm-up a bit slower. There were solder bridges on the TSSOP chips. That was because you are supposed to shrink the stencil apertures by an amount related to the stencil thickness to get the correct amount of paste. Normally the stencil manufacturer will do that for you but PCB-Pool do not offer it on their free stencils, presumably because they are shared with other designs. Unfortunately Kicad only seems to be able to make them 1:1 with the pads. It is open source, and written in C++, which I know well, so I could have a go at adding that facility if I had the time.

I have tested the board and used it to control one of my experimental extruders, more details tomorrow. The only thing wrong with it apart from the foorprint error is that the A3983 gets too hot to deliver its full rated current of 2A. 1A is no problem, which should be plenty for the extruder designs I have in mind.

The back of the board is nearly all copper to give a good heatsink but at 2A per coil the chip will dissipate 2 × 2A² × (0.3Ω + 0.3Ω) = 4.8W. The datasheet recommends a 4 layer board with 2oz copper on the outer layers. I am not sure what the extra cost of 2oz is. I will investigate the heat distribution in more detail at some point.