Jump to content
Ultimaker Community of 3D Printing Experts
  • Sign Up

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 02/26/2018 in Posts

  1. 2 points
    WIth the same settings as the sphere, I made a 100mm tall cylinder with a ballnose....then I got this : which make no sense, it starts with the smallest layerheight at the bottom, and it gradually varies it up the cylinder even if the geometry is the same. then by adjusting the base layerheight to 0.1 it looks as one would expect : with 0.3mm layerheight on all of the cylinder part, and gradually decrease the values towards the top, which is superb (but settings make no sense) so atleast it works so you can forget about my ramblings above, i'm happy with results even if it takes some time to get there.
  2. 1 point
    I made some additional documentation outputs of the Ultimainboard 2.1.4. Since this great forum won't let me upload anything, here's the link to where I put it up originally: http://3dprintingforum.us/viewtopic.php?p=11752#p11757 Source files taken from the Ultimaker2 Github repository.
  3. 1 point
    Hi, I wanted to fiddle with the adaptive layers, and after tweaking the settings I see a consistent pattern in the gcode (i.e not adaptive) I modeled a perfect 50mm sphere and cut it in half (25mm tall) and generate the gcode in Cura 3.2.1. I used 0.1mm layer height and 0.02 for maximum variation, 0.001 for variation step size and 200 for theshold , the last layers in the top should have the lowest layerheight, say from 24mm towards 25mm, and it should be that every layer is smaller in height than the previous to maintain the smoothness here are the Z layer heights from 24mm and up G0 X60.555 Y57.02 Z24.076 G0 X60.612 Y57.618 Z24.156 G0 X58.233 Y60 Z24.236 G0 X59.494 Y60.504 Z24.316 G0 X60.06 Y64.822 Z24.396 G0 X59.993 Y64.464 Z24.476 G0 X60.057 Y64.044 Z24.556 so the slicer takes the base layer height - maximum variation and its the same for each layer....each layer is 0.08mm tall Changing maximum variation to 0.05, and variation step size to 0.05, threshold to 2, and the whole print is done with layers of 0.05 I know its probably not an easy task to write this algoritm to check and calculate for every possible geometry out there, but if the math is adjusted to check for step size to next layer in x or y direction, we could maybe get better results.
  4. 1 point
    I'm fairly new to the forum but have been 3D printing for 4 years on Ultimaker printers. Yesterday I visited colorFabb and it was great to hear them say that they still see bronzeFill as one of their flagship materials even though it was launched some time ago. I love this material, and my best 3D print to date was made using it (colorFabb described me as one of the experts in using bronzeFill, which was really nice of them). There are pictures of it shown here. It combined a lot of my 3D printing skills to be able to successfully print this model using no infill, and using only 1 gramme of support material by splitting it into sections that were then joined together. It also took a lot of my post-processing experience with this material to achieve this finish. I did not create the model, I would love to be able to digitally sculpt to this level of detail, but it does show when you combine an exceptional model with and exceptional material you get an exceptional result!!
  5. 1 point
    Für UltiGCode wird die E-Koordinate als Volumen (in mm³) generiert, die Firmware rechnet das je nach konfiguriertem Materialdurchmesser um. Für die "quickstop"-Funktion (M401) wurde kürzlich hinzugefügt, das die aktuelle Position nach dem Quickstop neu berechnet wird Leider wurde dabei der Umrechnungsfaktor für die E-Achse vergessen M401 wird nach Druckende (nur bei UltiGCode) von der Firmware automatisch aufgerufen danach erfolgt die "end-of-print" Retraction je nachdem, was die aktuelle E-Position am Druckende war, hat das den "Blob-Effekt" (wenn E sowieso grad auf Null steht, merkt man es hingegen überhaupt nicht) M25 schließt die Datei vorzeitig, dann ist der Ablauf am Ende etwas anders, das kann evtl. "zufällig" den Fehler verstecken Evtl. kommt noch hinzu, das in früheren Cura-Versionen die E-Koordinate am Ende auf Null steht, und mit Cura 3.2 nicht mehr..., aber das habe ich nicht kontrolliert.
  6. 1 point
    In cura read description of the feature "minimum layer time" however you might want to instead print one or two Towers next to your print to allow the ears to cool more between layers. Towers will give you better quality.
  7. 1 point
    Hi, thanks for posting the gcode, I can see there that you are getting a retraction at layer change, so just disable the retract at layer change option and the z-scar should go away. FYI, there is already a mod (https://github.com/Ultimaker/CuraEngine/pull/694) to ignore the retract on layer change if spiralization is enabled but it hasn't yet made it into Cura.
  8. 1 point
    I made a macro with the math to generate a sphere with adaptive layers, and generating a 50mm sphere (actually a 500mm sphere to get more numbers) I set that the max allowed stepover is 0.1mm (in any horizontal direction) so the 'adaptive' Z value is calculated based on that. Here is the visualized 'layers' from my macro Here not a single layer is equal, since its a continuous slope or arc. Side view in the lower right in the picture, if you think of this as stairs, every step inwards is 0.1mm, the Z layerheigh is different on each layer, gradually decreasing towards the top. The last 10 layers is probably unprintable (numbers is 10x for accuracy) as the difference is 0.038mm then 0.034mm, etc but it may give better results to implement adaptive layers like this. I have a CNC machining background and CAM software have this way of generating toolpaths, its called 'stepover' or 'ridge height'
This leaderboard is set to Amsterdam/GMT+02:00
×
×
  • Create New...