Jump to content


The search index is currently processing. Leaderboard results may not be complete.

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 03/12/2019 in all areas

  1. 7 points
    Hi everyone, Thank you for all the time and energy you invest in sharing your messages here, trying to share your perspective with others. I like to think that this all comes from the same place; because we care, because we believe in Ultimaker and because we feel frustrated with the existing situation. This can be read in between the lines of several of the recent messages. Let's not allow this care or frustration to turn our efforts where we try and help each other into a scenario where we are opposite of each other, head to head. From day one Ultimaker has been aware of the bugs introduced by this firmware and after carefully collecting feedback of the exact size and impacts of these bugs our firmware team has been working on a fix. I would be lying if I said it was not taking long, that is painfully true. But merely the metric of time does not imply nothing is being done. Quite the opposite, we do not permit ourselves anything less than a reliable and useful release of new firmware, which takes time to build and test. As I stated previously in one of my messages in this thread; if you have an Ultimaker S5, our sales partner in your local region should be able to roll back to the previous firmware version. The Ultimaker would need to be shipped, but shipping should be covered by warranty. To be sure, check with your reseller in your region. I would only recommend to do this if the issues you're dealing with leave you in an unworkable situation, otherwise, I would recommend to have a little bit more patience until the new firmware is released. For an Ultimaker 3, instructions are shared in an earlier message how you can roll back firmware yourself. You can read the instructions before executing this operation to determine if this looks like something you are capable of doing. If not, I would also not recommend going down this path. We know, the only real good solution would obviously be new firmware. This is being worked on. Now as a final note, this is a thread where we try to help each other with firmware issues. We help to see if any logged issues can be solved by a temporary workaround and by sharing updates about firmware developments. I urge everyone to stay on topic. Off topic posts will be moderated.
  2. 7 points
    Hello, here is one of my last projects. It`s a mini shredder, made of PLA. We tested the shredder with gummy bears, paper and popcorn. 😉
  3. 6 points
    Just found a few photos I took a while back on my sd card when I had some left over dry ice to play with. Just for lolz.
  4. 5 points
    Hi everyone, I'm also from Ultimaker, also not a firmware engineer but I've been busy trying to collect more information about this uncomfortable situation. If you have read through the past 9 or 10 pages you should know we're very much aware of the issues and are working on a fix. In a previous message I explained that the worst thing we could do now is release a fix for the existing firmware which contained other bugs or does not fix what it should. That is why we're thoroughly testing the new version and it takes longer than any of us wants. The outcome should be a version that we can all trust and reliably use. We're working hard to make that real. A previous version we built and tested did not pass our testing entirely so we choose not to release it. We're almost ready to test a newer build version which, if all goes well, we should be able to release rather sooner than later. But first, it needs to be tested as well. No one would benefit from any unnecessary delays and we also want everyone to get back to reliable and satisfactory 3D printing as soon as possible. So as Nallath says, 'We're working on it as best we can'. Hopefully, with a little bit of patience, we'll have a new version out soon. If there are any relevant updates, I'll share with you via this thread. Thank you for your time and patience so far, it is deeply appreciated. And our sincere apologies for the inconvenience caused.
  5. 5 points
    There are 400+ people working for Ultimaker. There is no way that everyone can know what is happening at any given moment. So yeah, I do work for Ultimaker, but that doesn't mean that I can give answers about everything that's going on at any given moment. I understand that people are frustrated about it, but there is also no need to start lashing out at anyone working for UM that is responding to things in this topic. I'm trying to help in what limited way I can. Not because I have to (because hey, it's not my job), but because I feel that it's important to do so. Let's turn it around a bit; I'm seeing a lot of frustrated people. But due to me not working on the right project, there is little I can do about it. What I can do is respond at some of the other remarks that were being made. Upon doing so I suddenly get attack for doing that. What kind of message do you think that gives off? If that happened to you, would you feel that it matters that you're trying to help? I doubt it. So yeah. I do respond a bit cranky if my genuine attempts to at least do something get annoyed responses. It frustrates me that what little I can do about this issue isn't going to fix it. I also get that your frustration is even worse because there is even less that you guys can do about the problem and for that, I'm really sorry. There just is no more information than "We're working on it as best we can". I know that's not a satisfactory answer because quite often this is used as a "shut up and leave us alone" response to get people to stop complaining. But it's the best answer I can give because it's the truth. We are working on it, it is something that a lot of people (myself included, even though it isn't my problem) feel strongly / responsible about.
  6. 5 points
    First Experimental PP prints. The prints were finished more than a month ago. I have had liquid sitting in them all this time and no leaks. All I have to do is find a silicone seal for the cap and it will be water tight. Literally. Once I have the silicone gasket in place, it will be really spiffy. These are the bottle designs: So, the first on the left is the first attempt. Nothing special. The the 'K-Bottle' was the second attempt (yeah, yeah, I know it is out of order in the image) where I wanted to figure a proper way to make 'logo' and design stylings more complex. The "Tokah-Cola' bottle was spurred by all the news about beverage companies trying to figure how to make and market CBD infused beverages. So, I thought this would be a nice little drink. These are the actual bottles with food coloring in the water.
  7. 5 points
    Since we only ever fill the threads with complaints and blames about bugs and errors, the positive should also be highlighted. Bringing the firmware from UM3 to the same code base was certainly not easy. And it was even more difficult to ensure a smooth update process without bricking the UM3. Therefore I would like to thank all developers and testers for their work! 👍 👏 Please keep up the good work.
  8. 5 points
    Humble administrator's garden was approved by UNESCO to be included in the world heritage list in 1997.
  9. 4 points
    Greetings! We’ve just released a new stable firmware for the Ultimaker S5 and the Ultimaker 3 (Extended). Use your Ultimaker printer with Ultimaker Cura 4.0 and an Ultimaker account, and you can make use of the remote ‘cloud’ printing feature. This lets you print from outside the realms of your local network with an Ultimaker 3 or Ultimaker S5 via your Ultimaker account. There are also some other features detailed in the blog. This release also introduces unified firmware, which makes it easier for our embedded team to support releases for the Ultimaker 3 and Ultimaker S5 together. Because of this, the installation process is a little different this time around. First, install the ‘stepping stone firmware’. When this is installed, update your firmware again to get to the latest version. For our S5 beta testers, you will also need to follow this process. Update instructions and release notes can be found here . When your printer is running firmware 5.2.8, you will be able to use the same .swu package for the UM3 and UMS5 to update firmware in future, reducing the risk of bricking your printer. Feel free to offer any feedback or comments in this thread.
  10. 4 points
    @Smithy I am kinda taking my time updating the post - however work in progress like everything else in my life right now. This is a perma-link but I will finish it under the following days -- I hope!! please feel free to add and comment if you want any other extra info https://www.dineadesign.com/2019/04/29/the-equilibrium-pavilion/ Here are some random photos that are also on my blog post for everyone who does't feel like reading. We turned it into a guest book on Sunday - thought it would be cool. after life of the pavilion in a shared office space in Helsingborg:
  11. 4 points
    hello classmates I want to show my recent work, a design and manufacture of the ultimaker 3 closing printer manufactured in the best acrylic, with the maintenance system of the liver pressure and the ionizer, it also has double top opening and touch screen for Control of the application on black background. I hope you like me
  12. 4 points
    Because I'm not a firmware engineer. So yeah, I reply to things I know something about. Which in this case was scanning & sensors. Or would you rather have me not reply at all or give you false / incorrect information? If you want a nice white lie, I'm more than happy to give it, but I assumed that this is not what you guys want / need.
  13. 4 points
    Here my project from the last weekend. A wall clock, controlled by an ESP8266 microcontroller. The ESP controls a LED stripe to show the current time which is fetched regularly via Wifi from an NTP server. The clock contains 6 segments for the ring and 60 parts for the minute indicators. Red shows hour, green the minute and blue for the seconds. Now I only have to find a nice place to put it on a wall.
  14. 4 points
    Because I can make a plugin that fixes some of your issues, but I have no say about the UI of Ultimaker Cura? Would you rather I don't make an alternative GUI? I don't understand responses like this. Note that what the plugin does would not have been possible with a plugin in previous versions of Cura. Ultimaker have made the Cura UI more plugin-friendly. Now you have a choice, even if you don't like the default option.
  15. 4 points
    I pushed v1.5 update on GitHub. It is mainly to replace the 19mm short bearing with a long one for better reliability. Changes: 1. Both X and Y bearings are now both 35mm long, same as the original UM2 printhead. It is more stable and reliable. The previous 19mm Y bearing had a few downsides: only misumi sells ones with sufficient build quality, they wear faster than long bearing, etc. To make proper space for the long bearing, I had to increase the X offset of nozzles from 18mm to 19mm, and the housing from 35x35 to 38x38. This resulted in 2mm less X print area but it is well worth it. 2. New fan shroud design. Blower fan changed from 3015 to 3510. Homemade aluminium cover by soda can at the bottom. The fan shroud can be printed with lower temp materials such as modified PC (heat resistance of 90C). 3510 12v fan is easier to source with more consistent stock. For those of you who already bought the 3015 fans, there is still a fan shroud variant to use 3015 with v1.5. 3. Hotend fan changed from 2510 to 3010. Not really for performance improvement. 3010 5v is much easier to source and cheaper. 4. Lever dock is simplified with only one tab. This gives the lever freedom to sweep back at full speed, not limited by the travel speed of printhead. Nozzle 2 falls back to it's position with optimal momentum. 5. BOM is hence modified with the new fans and bearing. The hotend, spring and bolts stays the same. 6. Firmware update for v1.5 moved to dedicated repository. I may or may not update the assembly images because people can still figure out how to assemble v1.5 based on the original images. I'll upload the jig and instructions for making the aluminium bottom cover later.
  16. 4 points

    Version 1.0.0


    This is a suggestion to develop a new type of support that gows from the side of the printed part instead of the print bed. This could reduce material used for support and reduce print time. I have done two tests to compare, the design can be improved and i am sure a slincing algorythm can be added maybe in "Cura" to have Ramification support. I added Pictures and the models of two comparative parts. Let me know what you think and if you can develop the algorythm. This is totally open source suggestion i claim no right for. I only would like it to be named "Ramificaitons". (STL need to be rotated 90 degrees)
  17. 4 points
    Could you give it a try with the following settings? We had some good results with these: Line width: 0.4 Wall thickness: 1.2 Top/Bottom thickness: 1.2 Speeds: 40 Jerks: 20 Horizontal expansion: -0.03 walls: 3
  18. 3 points
    So we have been getting along brilliantly with our 'fleet' of Ultimaker printers (1x UMOriginal, 1x UM2 and 2xUM3) and ArchiCAD. The Custom Cutting Planes function is perfect for extracting model information to create facade studies straight out of ArchiCAD and into Cura with minimal alterations!
  19. 3 points
    A circle is never a real circle in 3D printing, it is built from polygons. So in your design software, you have to search for a setting with which quality you want to export the file as STL. When you choose a lower quality then you see each polygon if you choose a higher setting, then much more polygons are created to describe the circle and then it looks round as it should.
  20. 3 points
    As promised from my side, but nothing new for you here anymore, I got confirmed by a trustable source via mail, that you got heard already and people are trying to fix your problems asap. First of all, before I continue on some statements here, I have to say that I'm pretty much disappointed by the exposure done on the Ultimaker team by some people in this thread. I think the correct place to let someone know of your disappointment is not a public place like this. I could continue investing more of my energy into telling what I think (will do this later), but I want to make it short by saying: This way of blaming the whole company in public next to other community members, hobbyists and end users from the industry, is neither fair nor professional at all! Yes, you can be frustrated and you might be correct in many of your points, but are you really sure that it would have been better with a different manufacturer? Nevertheless, even if you thank the community for their help, blaming on Ultimaker makes me personally feel really bad. I'm really limited in time every day, but reading all the messages here made me getting active on this. Wanted to prevent this situation and wanted to calm you all down, but see that I missed my goal on some people here. Generally, have the opinion that many of you misunderstood the purpose of the forums. Resellers are responsible for local services and satisfaction. The forums are for announcements and a place created by Ultimaker for 3D printing enthusiasts to share their designs, problems and solutions. Yes, it is a place for support, but not too much on industrial level. Before something gets considered as a solution by Ultimaker it must be tested before (which should correspond with your industrial thinking, because a bad solution is like having no solution). Additionally, backward compatibility is never guaranteed to work since it is never (and probably will never be) tested (logically - since testing and doing downgrades now, would eat valuable time of an engineer to fix the actual problem). As I said before, what counts at the moment, is that a solution will be found soon. I'm sure Ultimaker as a company learned a lesson from that. (I'm allowed the say the following since I'm neither employed by Ultimaker nor making money with neither Ultimaker nor someone else right now.) Please, take some of your time, find a quiet and enjoyable place and think about how you communicate here. I know from my experiences with industrial (incl. automotive) companies that life can be stressing, but that's no excuse to be like this. Getting no answer from someone in time doesn't necessarily mean that someone is lazy and not doing her/his best to come back with a (real!) solution. Everyone who knows me can tell for sure that I could continue at this point and end up in a book. In any case, I'm convinced of Ultimaker products and trust their work! Thanks - Thomas Karl Pietrowski
  21. 3 points
    taking a break from movies and trying some cuteness. but it seems as either my z screw is dirty or my printer is unable to close a semi sphere smoothly, hence the random line. its 1.2 wall so it should be plenty, its on both models, ill try a few tests in the meantime! miaow, pusheen kitty inspired.
  22. 3 points
    solved ne trouvant pas de solution dans les paramètres du menu, j'ai essayé de soulever le plateau hors tension, bien m'en a pris. j'ai pu nettoyer l'amoncèlement de plastique qui garnissait le fond de l'imprimante, dont la tour de purge qui avait cassée durant le print. cela gênait la position basse du plateau. ensuite RAS, calibrage ok
  23. 3 points
    Google for "simple led circuits" and then select "images". This shows the setup. Always keep in mind: LEDs do need a resistor to limit current, otherwise they burn out! Usually the voltage over a LED is between 1.6V (old red LED) and 2.5...3V (blue and white LEDs). The recommended current for a nice illumination can go from 1mA to 10mA usually, depending on the LED. Don't come near the maximum current through the LED, always stay well below 50% of the maximum. So you need to look up the specs of your LED, or measure them: - normal voltage over the LED= Vled = ? - recommended current through the LED= I = ? What battery or charger are you going to use (I would recommend a 5V or 9V charger): - sourcevoltage = Vs = ? And then calculate the resistor as follows: 1) resistorvoltage = sourcevoltage minus LEDvoltage = Vr = Vs - Vled 2) resistor = resistorvoltage divided by LED current = R = Vr / I 3) power dissipation in the resistor = current multiplied by voltage over resistor = P = Vr x I Example: Imagine this are the specs: - Vled = 2.2V (=voltage over LED, from the specs of the LED) - Vs = 5V (source voltage, as usually found in chargers for charging USB devices or smartphones) - I = 5mA (=recommended current through LED in the specs) Then: 1) Vr = Vs - Vled = 5 V - 2.2 V = 2.8V 2) R = Vr / I = 2.8 V / 5mA = 0.56 kOhm = 560 ohm (take the closest available standard value) 3) P = Vr x I = 2.8 V x 5mA = 14mW (then add some spare: triple this value and take the next higher available resistor series, so it does not get hot: for example take a resistor of 250mW, a very common series) 4) add an on-off switch. That is all. You values may be somewhat different, but this is the principle. Basic scheme But do recalculate the resistor value according to the specs of your LED and your sourcevoltage or battery voltage!!! It may differ. Usually the long pin of the LED is the plus-terminal. And the pin connected to the "dish" inside the bulb is the minus-terminal. Usually, but check it. It only works if you connect the plus-terminal of the LED to the plus-terminal of the battery or source, not vice-versa. Plastic LEDs like these can be grinded or reshaped with a Dremel and cutting disk, as long as you don't hit the wires and chips (also not the very thin wire on top of the chip). But they do get fragile. I used to do that in model trains and cars, to make them fit. But don't cut/drill into modern white LEDs. Typical resistors. The color bands indicate the resistor value. Google for it. That is all there is to it. Use a battery charger with short-circuit protection. And/or add a mini fuse yourself. (All pictures via: "Google --> Images". Credits to the original photographers/designers.)
  24. 3 points
    Question: what nozzle diameter does your printer have? If I were to guess, I would say 0,015748". Is that a nice number to have all widths depend on? What is the wall width if use 3 extrusion thicknesses? 0,0472441". Do you really want to think in those numbers? 0.4mm and 1.2mm respectively sound like much more workable numbers. I have never seen a 3d printer that is based on imperial units. 3d printers are intrinsically based on metric units. This may be different from CNC machines, I don't know. But Cura is designed for 3d printers.
  25. 3 points
    I learned recently that the USA isn't using the Metric System due to pirates, even though it was officially placed in the law. The more you know, and how small events can have big effects! 😉 @MIO This forum is hardly the place to have that good old discussion about Imperial vs Metric and which system is best, and @alan-bc specifically mentioned that he wasn't looking to start a flame war about switching. This thread is about CURA, and if having the option of switching to Imperial units helps @alan-bc and other users in their everyday use of CURA and their UM printers, then I'm all for it. I have literally zero knowledge of the amount of work that coding such a thing would require, plus testing and such, but, from the user point of view, I would agree that it would be useful feature for those who are in countries that use Imperial units. After all, we can already chose the language and the currency units to use, and the software let me put it in French and the currency in $, for example, without a fuss.
  26. 3 points
    Hi everyone, thank you for all your messages and our apologies for any inconvenience the latest firmware may have caused for you. It is important to know that we take your troubles very serious and are working hard on making a new version that would be safe for everyone to use. When it is ready it will be tested, and then tested again, and then we'll make sure you will hear about it as soon as possible. There have also been a few suggestions to take this latest firmware down. While it is undeniable that it has caused some issues for some of our users, the full percent of users plagued by them is not that high as what may seem so in this thread. Higher than usual, sure. But there are (luckily) more users who remain issue-free. This may not mean much to you when you do have issues, but I wanted to elaborate on why it was not pulled offline yet. Unfortunately, releasing a newer, tested and stable version will take a little bit longer than originally shared (referring to an earlier communicated timeline of one week). There are a few things we can do in the meantime. If the issues you are having are creating an unworkable situation, it is probably wise to install an older firmware version. User @gr5 has shared instructions in this thread. While the instructions may not appear difficult for the experienced user, it can be a dangerous area to dive in if you've never done something like it before. You have to be ESD safe and there is risk of bricking your machine if you do it wrong. So if you are unsure, (or if you are sure you just do not want to do it yourself), we recommend getting in touch with your reseller. They definitely can install new firmware for you and return your Ultimaker to you. If you have an Ultimaker S5, unfortunately it is not possible to install new firmware yourself. Our sales partners can. Please get in touch with them if you prefer to have the previous firmware version installed. Since (almost) all Ultimaker S5s should still fall under warranty, there should be no additional costs. Some other tips that may have gone unnoticed: - I read that a Cura connect reset and factory reset may fix one or two bugs - If you are struggling with your XY calibration, make sure to manually push your filament in all the way before your print starts. The firmware retracts it too far which ruins your filament flow. - If I catch any more solutions, I will update this post accordingly. Again; our apologies for the inconvenience. Thank you @CarloK for the help you have been providing here. We're working on a solution and you'll all be the first to know when it is available.
  27. 3 points
    The Sidebar GUI plugin available from the Marketplace fixes most of your points.
  28. 3 points
    Hey all ! New here and to 3d printing in general, thought i'd post up one of my first semi succesful prints. Mostly came out ok, had some warpage on the bed because I thought I could get away with a simple brim and not a raft, which seems to almost never work on my Tevo Nereus. Also had several layer shifts, not sure how to fix that yet. Still learning. All in all its still functional and working great !
  29. 3 points
    It’s unfortunate to see this release has been causing issues for some users. Reported issues, including the ones in this thread have been all been noted and our firmware team is working on solutions as a priority. A hotfix is being prepared that we will release in the upcoming days. So far, the contents of this will include: A fix for updating when the printer has no network connection Extrusion issues with X/Y calibration procedure Correcting incorrect screen orientation after reboot
  30. 3 points
    Hello Community I think I have a quite simple question but unfortunately no answer. Is it possibel in CURA 4.0 to modify the color in the mode "Preview" => "Line type" => "Color Scheme"? Currently the Top/Bottom-Layer is represented in a kind of light yellow. The infill is represented in let me say a kind of less light yellow color. As we are all aware about the fact that millions of colors are available I do not understand why this extremly similar colors have been choosen for representation by CURA. E.g. why not follow the PRUSA Slicer approach? I really looking forward for an answer. Kind regards, Carsten Schröder Horneburg/Germany Cura Approach: PRUSA Slicer Approach:
  31. 3 points
    I don't like the new interface, for the same reasons I highlighted on my post in the beta thread. Thanks a lot to @ahoeben for the sidebar plugin! Now CURA becomes easy and simple to use again.
  32. 3 points
    Ha, I see what you did there with the blog post title...
  33. 3 points
    Je m'en sert pour le maquettisme ferroviaire au 1/160ème. Par exemple pour le reproduction de ma maison ou pour des ouvrages maçonnés. Résultat sympa.
  34. 2 points
    Hello @nubnubbud. In theory it's just a matter of cloning the cura-build-environment repo and following the instructions to build that and then cloning the cura-build repo and following the instructions to build that. However, I have found that I cannot build a working cura using the master branches of those repos. In my forks of those repos I have my own branches that I work from (mb-linux, mb-windows and mb-osx). I am no longer able to build a working OS X binary but the mb-linux and mb-windows branches work with the current master branches of the cura sources. So, you could try cloning my repos and trying to build from them. See https://github.com/smartavionics/cura-build-environment and https://github.com/smartavionics/cura-build. Hope this helps.
  35. 2 points
    A prerelease version of the OctoPrint Plugin for Cura 4.1 can be dowloaded here: http://files.fieldofview.com/cura/OctoPrintPlugin-v6.1.0-2019-05-16T10_29_36Z.curapackage Please drop the downloaded file into a running Cura application window, and restart Cura. Unless issues are reported with this version of the plugin, it should be available as an update on the Marketplace soon.
  36. 2 points
    What do you mean with "it cannot use with Octoprint"? Because the Octoprint plugin is not working anymore? Cura itself cannot communicate with Octoprint, but there is a plugin to send sliced files to Octoprint. Normally the plugins have to be adopted for new Cura versions, so due to the fact that Cura 4.1 is beta, a working version of the plugin will be released latest when Cura 4.1 is released. But @ahoeben is normally faster than light and you will see a working version soon.
  37. 2 points
    I put heatsinks on the original stepper drivers as well. They did get a little hotter than normal with the addition of the tl smoothers. Heatsinks are so cheap it just seems like the sensible thing to do, even without any modification.
  38. 2 points
    Introduction The 3.3 beta introduces new functionality that is intended to improve Cura's ability to print bridges and overhung areas. The current Cura code base has long had the ability to detect when a skin region spans across islands of support and those skins that Cura thinks are bridges will have the direction of the lines aligned with the detected bridge detection. But nothing was done to detect walls that spanned unsupported areas and no changes were made to the wall or skin print speeds, flows or fan speed. The new bridging functionality does now detect when walls cross unsupported regions and it does now modify the print settings for those walls and skin that are determined to be unsupported. This topic introduces the new settings that are grouped together in the experimental section and are enabled using the Enable Bridge Settings checkbox. The settings Explained You will immediately notice that there are quite a few settings. Why so many? Well, I realised pretty early on in my experimentation that modifying the skin settings for the first bridge skin and then using the normal skin settings for the skins above the first does not always lead to a good result. So there are settings to not only modify the print speed, percentage flow, density and fan for the first bridge layer (bottommost layer) but also for the two layers above. If you want to keep things simple you can un-check the Bridge Has Multiple Layers checkbox and then only the first bridge skin layer settings will be modified. The settings used for the bridge walls are Bridge Wall Speed, Bridge Wall Flow (aka line diameter) and Bridge Fan Speed. Also relevant for walls are Minimum Bridge Wall Length which only considers wall line segments that are longer than this length as bridges. Shorter wall line segments are just printed using the normal settings. Bridge Wall Coasting controls a feature that reduces the pressure in the nozzle as it approaches the start of the bridge. This is necessary because the extrusion rate will need to be very much reduced from the normal rate as the speed and flow used on the bridge is likely to be less. If this is not done, the wall line tends to droop very badly at the start of the bridge. Finally, there is Bridge Wall Max Overhang which controls how much a wall line can overhang the layer below before it is considered to be a bridge wall line. By default it is 100% of the wall line width so the line has to be completely over air with no overlap whatsoever with the layer below. Reducing the value of Bridge Wall Max Overhang means that the line doesn't have to overhang the layer below so much for it to be printed using the bridge wall settings. See below for an example of its use. For a given material and print temperature, there will be some combination of the bridge wall settings mentioned above along with Bridge Skin Speed, Bridge Skin Flow (aka line diameter), Bridge Skin Density (line spacing) and Bridge Fan Speed (and the similar settings for the 2 other skin layers) that produces the best results. This is where the fun starts because it's going to require a lot of experimentation to come up with suitable settings. The default values are tested with PLA at 200deg, 0.4mm nozzle and 0.2mm layers and may work OK, or not (YMMV). One other setting is Bridge Skin Support Threshold which is the percentage of a skin area that is supported for it not to be considered a bridge. i.e. skin areas that are supported for less than this percentage (default 50%) are considered to be bridges and will be printed using the bridge settings. Skins that are supported for more than the threshold value will be printed just as normal. Here's some picture that, hopefully, will make things clearer! First, here's the settings showing some typical values: Here is the first bridge layer, I am showing the layerview as feedrate so you can see the speed changes on the bridge. Notice also the coasting just before the bridge walls start (the walls are printed anti-clockwise): Here's the second and third skin layers: Finally, here are a couple of images of a model (thanks to the community member that sent it to me) that has some overhung regions. The first image is using Bridge Wall Max Overhang set to 100% and the second is using 50% and you can see that more of the lines are going to be printed using the bridge settings. For overhangs, I recommend setting Minimum Bridge Wall Length to zero as the wall line segments are likely to be very small. Feedback Required From You Please give it a go and share your experiences, all feedback is welcome (good and bad). You can either reply to this topic or for really bad news, please submit a github issue.
  39. 2 points
    Again; Ultimaker has 400 employees. There is no hidden conspiracy that "holds me back". It's simply that there is not enough time in a day, even if I'd work 16 hours, to keep track of all the things that are going on. So could you pretty, pretty please stop pretending like this is some nefarious thing that is going on (or that is the cause of incompetence). Because it's not. You keep saying that you're doing this to help, but it's doing the exact opposite. To be honest, I don't really believe that you're trying to help. Because it's not the first time I've called you out on this and told you that it's doing the exact opposite. A fair part of what you say is simply not true. There are no distributors of Ultimaker in the US. We have resellers, but that's it. So I'm really wondering who you talked. I know for a fact that delays and releases are always communicated with resellers. But to take some more specific points; 1. You got compensated for this with something of greater value. Also, would you rather have had something that didn't work? Because if that's the case, I'm more than happy to send you the aluminum plate. I'll pay for the shipping myself, but then I don't want to hear you complain about it anymore (Either you not getting it or it not working at all). 2. These issues were fixed within 2 (!!) months. Good luck getting any of that in any other industry. And don't say stupid things like "But it would neve have happened there", because that's a lie and you know it. This can happen everywhere, what matters is how you deal with it. 3. Which firmware updates bit you in the ass? This is the first one right? 4. Promised where exactly? I'm not aware of any such promise. 5. I've not seen any issues with the filament sensor so far. I've got it turned on and working fine. If you look at the forum, you're pretty much the only one with the issue. Now I do get that this sucks (especially with everything combined) but this kinda seems like a fluke. "Has Ultimaker offered prepaid shipping back to them for serving the issues" -> Nonsense. This is something we offer. Because ya know. It's the law. " if I had purchased an Apple product it would have been replaced" -> Same goes for Ultimaker. This is the primary responsibility of the reseller to do this. I understand why they don't want to because it costs them money, but that's what they are paid for. I'm getting the idea that your reseller is putting all the blame with Ultimaker ("Because they entrusted to you that they recommend other printers") whereas the blame is with them. " there are no field service technicians in place such" -> Again not true. All the resellers get mandatory training with regards to repair. So, you want to continue "fighting" this out in public? Because I'm more than able to show you that it's not as you describe it by a long shot.
  40. 2 points
    I have been racking my brain for months trying to deal my prints always being about 0.2 mm outside to outside or so bigger and hole diameters around the same smaller than what the CAD/STL dimensions are. This doesn't always matter but for designs that need to fit real world dimensions it can be an issue. Ideally all parts printed would be the correct dimension for holes and outside dimensions as designed in fusion 360 and allowing the design to be used for 3d printing and other real world uses without needing to compensate for slight printing over-extrusion on the outer walls and skewing your design sizes. Most people seem to calibrate a 100 mm by 100 mm outside to outside dimension object. That is not ideal though as hole dimensions will be smaller when printed as the outside to outside measurement assumes that a line is exactly 0.4 mm when printed on the outside wall which is not correct in my testing and experience. To calibrate the X and Y dimensions, I print a 90 degree L shaped design that is 4 mm wide by 110 mm in X and 110 mm in Y length. I designed some lines on top of the surface that are exactly 100 mm apart in both X and Y dimensions. For a perfectly calibrated FDM printer, If you were to measure from outside to outside of those raised bumps, you would be measuring slightly over 100 mm because the measurement should be 100 mm to 100 mm center to center. I don't expect a 100 mm by 100 mm cube to be 100 mm to 100 mm outside to outside because that assumes that wall lines are exactly 0.4 mm when printed which isn't the case with FDM printing. The outside wall line doesn't have any filament to push up against on the outer side so it expands more than 0.4 mm. You could try and adjust the line width to be exactly 0.4 mm but that would not work well at all. You wouldn't fill the voids between filament lines enough to have good adhesion and the lines would be more visible. From everything I read, It seems that it is normal to have a single 0.4 mm line width to be bigger than that. Because of this I calibrate to be 100 mm center to center of the lines on a 110 mm length print. I have tried to compensate using a few methods for the line width on the outside of the outer wall being slightly bigger but none of them work for all scenarios or they require extra design adjustments to make up for it. 1. Designing all my stuff with a around 0.2 mm larger holes and 0.2 mm outside to outside (0.1 mm per side) smaller size for non hole outside faces. 2. For already designed STL files that don't have FDM tolerances built in, scale the part size bigger if the holes are smaller than actual dimensions. For outside dimensions that need to be the correct precise size, I scale the part smaller or do a lot of sanding which sometimes is not possible if the design is very complex. If you need both holes and outside dimensions to be accurate you are in trouble as you have to pick on or the other and do sanding if you scale it bigger or drilling out the holes. Cura's Horizontal Expansion can do the same thing as scaling the size of it in the slicer but either of those do one of 2 things... either fix holes and expand the outside dimensions or... fix the outside dimensions and make holes smaller. I finally found the setting in Cura that does exactly what I need. It moves the outside wall (realize that the inside of a circle is also an outside wall) toward the inside wall by a certain amount. This allows me to have an exactly calibrated 100 mm to 100 mm line (center to center) and adjust for the line being a little over 0.4 mm causing the outside wall to be over-extruded by somewhere around 0.6 to 0.1 mm per side (Depending on your printer and filament size setting accuracy and flow settings). The setting is called 'Outer wall inset'. You give it a positive value to move the wall inward toward the inner wall by this amount. I set it to around 0.1 mm on my prints to get the outside dimensions and hole dimensions to be exactly how I designed them in Fusion 360. For most prints from thingiverse I leave that feature disabled because most designers have tolerance built into prints to make them fit together. There are some that are not though like some sockets I found on thingiverse. For my own future designs, I am designing them to the actual real world dimensions that I want and then use the 'Outer wall inset' to adjust for line width being slightly bigger on the outside wall's outside facing surface. Hopefully this makes sense to someone as I am not the best at trying to explain things... I was very excited to find this setting though because I have searched on this issue for a long time and never found anything mentioning using this setting for this purpose. The only thing I found on 'Outer wall inset' seemed to indicate it is used to make up for setting a line width smaller than the nozzle size (which Cura automatically adjusts) to get the outer wall to overlap the inner wall more. Then again... I am relatively new to 3d printing (about a year or so)... I have certainly been wrong many times in my life and been in many situations thinking I understand something when I really don't :).
  41. 2 points
    You're welcome, we're happy to help where we can. I'm happy you managed to perform the XY calibration. The flow sensor did not trigger because it is in the feeder, not the print head. Even though it was not printing, that is because it was retracted too far. Not because it was not feeding any filament. So the flow sensor/ feeder was working correctly, it just received the wrong command that made it retract too much prior to the calibration. Hope this helps, and also gives you some more insight in how the flow sensor works 🙂 Not entirely relevant but perhaps interesting to know: The flow sensor is not activated during the first 2 layers of a print because of small height differences and changing pressure in the nozzle could easily result in false positives. It is activated from the third layer, where the flow became more consistent/predictable. At layer 3, when something is preventing a proper flow/feed of the filament, it will trigger then. This should still be fast enough to prevent any big problems and reduce the loss of time to a minimum.
  42. 2 points
    My understanding is that there are many grades of aluminum but only MIC6 grade is flat and stays flat. But after you heat it and cool it for months it starts to warp. Worse than the glass. ALSO the aluminum wasn't for PLA or most other materials - only a few of the new materials work better on aluminum. I could be wrong about these things - I'm really not an expert. Ultimaker doesn't like to release something unless it works very very well and consistently. I think they have learned their lesson about announcing things early.
  43. 2 points
    Thank you for all the effort you guys put into this new release of Cura 4. Beside all new technical features, which are great, the new interface is not. Everything looks designed as of it needs to be "easy of use for every moron in the world". But i hope Ultimaker can imagine most of their customers are not businessman in three-piece suit who like to 3D print with only three mouse clicks away. No we are engineers who want to tune endlessly to get the best out of our 3D printer. An compact and "technical" design fits within such demand. Please think about the following recommendations i would suggest: Get rid of all the useless space. I want to focus on the project NOT on a Marketplace button i will barely use or "step by step" tabs that make no sense at all. The print setting are the most value thing to work with. It's needs to be tuned for almost every project. Make this an fixed pane as in Cura 3.6 and move it to the right full height. Give the slide bars for scrolling thru the layers an accessible place and next to each other. I hope this is something to look forward in an upcoming update Thank you
  44. 2 points
    I haven't heard anything about a new printer, although that doesn't mean anything. But you can't compare a Prusa with UM, the features alone don't matter if you want to print reliably. But yes, the Prusa is 1/3 of the price, but you get what you pay for.
  45. 2 points
    You really have to go through the resellers. UM won't hear your pain unless the resellers do. For example you could call them every day or you could tell them you want to down grade until the firmware is fixed or you could insist you return it to them and have them downgrade it for you. It really takes a lot of complaints I think for the pain of end users to filter through the resellers, through the distributors, and finally back to Ultimaker. I don't think UM realizes the scope of the problem. Or maybe I'm completely wrong and it's only 10 people in the world who have issues with the upgrade and UM realizes this and they will fix this at some point. But right now my impression is that UM doesn't understand how big the problem is and most people are just downgrading on their own. I think if they knew how big the problem was they would have disabled the 5.2 upgrade 2 weeks ago.
  46. 2 points
  47. 2 points
    100% agree with that, in fact there should always be an easy way to revert to previous version for just this sort of issue. I think having to dismantle the printer to get back to working software is a major failing in Ultimakers processes. Having said that many thanks to gr5 and the community in general for helping, but the manufacturer (especially of high end products like this) should not rely on community help to get its users out of problems it created.
  48. 2 points
    Mise à jour: Grâce au scotch, j'ai enfin pu effectuer une impression complète d'un support circulaire. La couche de maintient extérieur a tout de même essayé de se redresser mais j'ai pu la rabattre avant le prochain passage de la tête d'extrusion. (zone monocouche avec "fente") L'état de surface me semble un peu bizarre; Trop de chaleur à l'extrusion peut-être. Merci pour vos conseils en tout cas.
  49. 2 points
    Hi vwguy16, Just some more info; the two black wires is power for the heater, the two gray wires is going to the PT100 temperature sensor. Both, the heater and the temp sensor is not polarity sensitive, as they are floating from ground. When looking into the printer, the two connecting points to the left is for the heat bed and the two to the right is for the PT100 temperature sensor. Good luck Torgeir-
  50. 2 points
    You can look at the situation like it is “sad” that you need a plugin to restore the GUI to what you are used to, or you can look at it as “great” that it is now possible to even make such a plugin. It was not possible to charge the GUI to this extent in 3.6 in a plugin, but it is in 4.0. Now you have a choice, which you did not have before.
This leaderboard is set to Amsterdam/GMT+02:00
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to the Ultimaker Community of 3D printing experts. Visit the following links to read more about our Terms of Use or our Privacy Policy. Thank you!