Prusa MK4 to MK4S Upgrade and Input Shaper Calibration

In this video I will be upgrading original Prusa MK4 to MK4S and calibrating Input Shaper with Prusa Accelerometer
Printables:
printables.com/@SSD_1637144/models
Instagram:
@StudioSpaceDust
#Prusa #Mk4 #Mk4S #PrusaEnclosure #3dprinting #3dprinter #3dprinterfilament #3dprinters

[@philxcskier]

Nice! I also just got the upgrade, I’m planing on reprinting the PC-CF parts out of ASA: I’m maybe a little paranoid about the breathing carbon fibre particles or having them rub off on my skin. The nanotube fibres just seems very similar to asbestos but maybe it’s harmless. I’m almost finished building my enclosure, and I’m debating upgrading with the parts from the kit to print these parts, and then switch over, or just print the parts with the original MK4 petg parts. Thanks for making the video! I really like how you make Prusa focused, no bullshit videos.

[@philxcskier]

Nice! I also just got the upgrade, I’m planing on reprinting the PC-CF parts out of ASA: I’m maybe a little paranoid about the breathing carbon fibre particles or having them rub off on my skin. The nanotube fibres just seems very similar to asbestos but maybe it’s harmless. I’m almost finished building my enclosure, and I’m debating upgrading with the parts from the kit to print these parts, and then switch over, or just print the parts with the original MK4 petg parts. Thanks for making the video! I really like how you make Prusa focused, no bullshit videos.

[@philxcskier]

Oh and for the difference with the nozzles- Some posters on an MK4 Facebook group said that they have multiple chambers to push the melted plastic from multiple sides - I’m not sure how true that is but I’m guessing they’re a little bit different inside than the original nozzles. For why the obsidian nozzles are much larger - I think that it has to do with the thermal conductivity of the different metals. Brass seems to be about twice as thermally conductive as steel, so to heat at the same rate, you would need twice the cross sectional area. My guess is that they are made so that they have the same thermal transmittance to the filament. This makes sense looking at the photos, the original obsidian end is roughly twice as big as the original brass, and if we assume that there are different chambers in the high flow end that also need a higher rate of heat transfer it would explain why it’s so much larger.

[@StudioSpaceDust]

Intersting you say this - it sort of makes sense, but then I went to check e3d website how their brass HF nozzle looks like - and go have a look for yourself, its as big as obxidian. I also asked them if e3d HF nozzle is suitable for cold pull and they said yes, and sent me photo how successful cold pull looks like - it has 4 small branches, so it explains that filament is split 4 ways for higher flow rate, but in Prusa HF nozzle i don’t think there is physically enough space to split flow at the tip… thats why I’m still confused how they make them HF. But yeah, thanks for your thoughts man!

[@StudioSpaceDust]

After some videos on YT I also now avoid filaments with fillers like CF/GF.. i do also believe that in the end its like asbestos, but i still have some prints that im using.. I guess going ahead i wont be buying that filament but the one I still own Ill finish… so ASA/ABS for parts - better choice. But ASA i find impossible to print without warping even with Prusa enclosure so thats why I use ABS+/ASA+ and i found that ABS+ has higher temperature resistance than ASA+ and also warps less so thats why i use it. But maybe you have some good ASA+ to recommend? For videos - well I only have MK4 (which is S now) thats why. But to be honest going ahead I may make some crap video of how I make stuff, but maybe ill make it as Shorts. Thanks for watching by the way :) 👏👏 but id say - dont go with PETG, it deforms too easy and some parts will start melting if you print hi temp filaments, in my other video there is a shot of how some PETG on my MK4 deformed.