Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 07/19/2018 in Posts

  1. 16 points
    Hey guys, I would like to share a lever action dual extrusion solution I came up with for Ultimaker 2+. The approach is based on the great effort everyone put into Mark2 and Ultimaker 3. The print head holds two hot ends, which are originally to be installed on standard UM2 head for 1.75 filament. The right nozzle move up and down for nozzle swapping. This compact dual print head can achieve single extrusion print area of 220x223x205, and dual extrusion print area of 202x223x200. Video clips: Files and instructions available at: https://github.com/yyh1002/DXU Credits: Lever lifting mechanism is inspired by Ultimaker 3. The firmware is modified based on Mark2 version of Tinkergnome firmware by @tinkergnome. CURA profiles are modified based on the Mark2 profiles by @tinkergnome and @foehnsturm. Used Mark2Tweaks plugin for CURA by Krys Lawrence.
  2. 12 points
    How can the very latest, cutting-edge design software combine with a 5,000 year old manufacturing technique to deliver outstanding weight reduction opportunities? Designing for light-weight parts is becoming more important, and I’m a firm believer in the need to produce lighter weight, less over-engineered parts for the future. This is for sustainability reasons because we need to be using less raw materials and, in things like transportation, it impacts upon the energy usage of the product during it’s service life. Lighter products mean less fuel to move them around, which can make our fossil fuel reserves go further, or make more efficient use of the renewable energies that we’re now beginning to adopt. Generative Design (GD) is the very latest design software released by Autodesk and is now included in Fusion 360, which is at the heart of their "Future of Making Things" strategy for Design and Manufacturing. It changes the way we design things and can deliver very efficient designs that deliver structural performance with optimised use of material. The aerospace industry is expected to be one of the early adopters of this technology because in that industry the cost and environmental savings from improved fuel efficiency carry the greatest rewards. Also, I see interest from the automotive industry for the same fuel efficiency reasons, but in the long term the drive for lighter weight parts could benefit many industries, even those outside of transportation. Another example of the benefits of lighter weight alongside reduced material usage is that shipping costs for parts reduce as their weight reduces, which can therefore also deliver cost efficiencies. GD is targeted initially at metal parts where the biggest opportunity for light-weighting exists. The complex forms it generates though often means that parts conceived in this way cannot be made with conventional manufacturing routes. They therefore need to use Additive Manufacturing (AM) techniques to produce them. The route of using high energy, laser-based AM to do this comes with associated high costs because of the specialised set-up knowledge required together with expensive processing, and post processing, to deliver a quality-assured part. This project explores the possibility of a more cost-effective route to a metal GD part which, even though at this stage may be just used for a small quantity of evaluation prototypes, can act as an enabler for understanding the potential that GD has to offer. This is the baseline design for this project. It is an aluminium bracket design similar to those used in aerospace applications to mount control surfaces, and in this form has not been optimised for weight. This design would weigh 383 grams in the intended material, aluminium A356. After processing this through Generative Design in Fusion 360 it’s time to review and evaluate the many alternative design options presented and decide upon the design that is considered the most appropriate taking into the other factors that have an influence on design selection such as manufacturability, aesthetics etc. This was the design option chosen for this part and Fusion 360 was used to create the final version of the model. The bio-mimicry that’s evident in most of the designs created by GD is interesting to see, in this case the design of the part can be seen as essentially a swept I-beam (which engineers, especially those in construction, are taught is a strong section), but with tendon-like attachments back to the mounting points to carry the tensile loading that’s created by the applied loading conditions What GD does is to turn the standard design workflow that we’re familiar with on it’s head. Traditionally we design a part and then stress test it virtually to determine if it fulfils the required structural performance. Any failures seen during this process require an iterative loop back to the design to correct them. With GD the stress analysis is a core part of the design synthesis, and happens as the part design iterates, which means that the output at the end should meet the requirements of the intended loading requirements. The software is searching for an optimal solution where the stress is ideally evenly distributed across the part as can be seen above. To prove that everything is good with the finalised design this part has then been virtually tested again in Fusion 360 to confirm that the original loading requirements are still met So we've created our lightweight part design, and maybe now we need to produce that in aluminium A356 to do some physical testing, but don’t want the expense of using a metal AM process. What follows is a way of achieving this where FDM 3D printing can play a role as an “enabler” to help create the final parts in conjunction with a very old (if not ancient) manufacturing technique called investment casting. This technique is 5,000 years old according to Wikipedia. The company involved with casting this project is Sylatech who have been using Ultimaker 3D printers as part of their process for investment casting of prototype parts Sylatech took the .stl file of this model and used it to create a 3D print of the part on an Ultimaker 3 in PLA. This PLA part was then used as the pattern in the investment casting process where it is submerged in plaster under vacuum conditions to ensure that all air is excluded from the mould and creates an accurate reproduction of the surfaces of the part. The picture below shows a display box which demonstrates the set up of the 3D printed parts partially encased in plaster. Once the plaster has hardened the casting box is put into a furnace at very high temperature in order to burn out the PLA, leaving behind a cavity into which molten aluminium can be cast. After solidification of the metal, and cooling of the mould, the plaster is broken away from the parts, and then they can be quickly and easily removed from the material feed gate resulting in these aluminium A356 versions of the PLA original. The final part weighs 122 grams which is a weight saving of 68% over the original baseline part, which shows the potential that GD has to make significant reductions in weight and material usage. Using this method we now we have an excellent quality physical part made very quickly in the final intended material in order to commence some physical testing.This is a different route to get to that physical test part in metal at a fraction of the cost of having it metal additively manufactured. It also shows how a brand new, cutting edge piece of software that only became available in May 2018 can combine with FDM 3D printing (which many people still see as a new technology even though it’s been around for over 20 years) and a 5,000 year old manufacturing technique to deliver potentially huge benefits in weight and material usage. Using the investment casting route in this case study is why I chose the title for this article, and shows that we can effectively go “Back To (Deliver) The Future”. Do you see the need for lighter weight parts in what you do, and can you see the potential benefits of using Generative Design and this method of producing metal parts? I'd welcome comments, suggestions, and discussion about any aspects of the above article, the next steps that I'm looking at are how this process could scale up to batch production of the parts using 3D printing techniques that could support low volume production quantities
  3. 11 points
    I'm working on a plugin that changes the new GUI in Cura to be more settings-centric by adding back the concept of a sidebar. If you can't get used to the floating panels in the new GUI, there will soon be a plugin for you. While rearranging things into the sidebar, I am also taking the chance to rearrange some other bits: move X-ray from the Preview tab to the Prepare tab in my opinion it makes more sense to detect/show errors *before* slicing reunite the Open button with the Toolbar Fitts's law suggests keeping distances between small items smaller; I just dislike having UI elements in all corners of the UI. add the same menu and sidebar between Prepare and Preview so things don't jump around The plugin is currently in the state of a proof-of-concept; there is currently no way to switch between the Recommended and Custom sidebar, and there is no way to change the materials/printcores in the sidebar. When all standard functionality is in its new place I'll post a prerelease here before publishing the plugin to the Marketplace. If you can't wait, you can check out the code here: https://github.com/fieldOfView/SidebarGUIPlugin Things I'm considering: integrate the action panel into the sidebar move job name into sidebar move standard view items into view options/legend area The plugin is a spiritual successor to the Compact Prepare Stage plugin, though it was written from scratch with a different end-goal in mind. That plugin will not be developed further. Update: a beta is available below:https://community.ultimaker.com/topic/26014-sidebar-gui-for-cura-40/?do=findComment&comment=229800
  4. 11 points
    Here’s my new printer cabinets to keep noise in my office down and to store them in a neat & tidy way. Made by my favorite furniture maker. PSU, cables, Raspberry Pi with OctoPrint are stowed in the drawers underneath the printers. The printers can slide out for filament change or other maintenance. The doors have gaskets so the noise can’t escape.
  5. 8 points
    Ultimaker has a long history of working closely with our users, and this has worked out really well for both sides. A particularly involved and knowledgeable user group can be found right here, in our community of 3D printing experts. Someone who has been in the spotlight before because of his contributions is @Anders Olsson . If you think that name sounds familiar, you are probably thinking of the ‘Olsson Block’. The Olsson Block is a response to the hot end we developed for the Ultimaker 2 and was later officially integrated in the Ultimaker 2+. Anders didn't stop there and continued to develop a Ruby nozzle which is wear-resistant. Fast forward a few years later, and we have a Print Core CC Red. It was time I sat down with Anders again and talk about these ruby inserts. - Anders Olsson during the Olsson Block campaign. Q: Anders, who are you and how may people have heard about you? A: I work as a Research Engineer at Uppsala University and I am the inventor of the Olsson Block for the Ultimaker 2+ series. Some people might also have heard of me printing boron carbide (link) composites for nuclear shielding. (Boron carbide is an extremely hard boron-carbon ceramic which falls just behind cubic boron nitride and diamond as one of the hardest known materials). Q: With the Olsson Block you could swap nozzles within a few seconds. Why did you continue your research and develop a more expensive wear-resistant nozzle, when replacing a worn down nozzle is so fast and easy? A: For some materials that may have been sufficient, but Boron Carbide is so abrasive, a brass nozzle can easily be destroyed in less than one print. Secondly, we wanted to prevent brass-contamination in the printed material in case we wanted to recycle it. Q: How did a Ruby nozzle end up in a print core? A: There is a type of enriched boron carbide which has much better performance than natural Boron carbide but it’s also much more expensive. By using the expensive material only in areas where it is really needed one can make components which has much better performance without becoming extremely and unnecessarily expensive. 3D printing - dual extrusion gives us these options. We really liked the reliability of the print cores and the quickest way to bring that reliability and the wear-resistance we needed together, was to make a prototype of a print core with a modified block to fit an Olsson Ruby nozzle. - Print core CC Red shown at TCT show. Q: Can you explain why you chose Ruby in the first place from all available options? A: Ruby (Alumina/Corundum) is a great material. It is chemically stable, not toxic or dangerous if you somehow wear it down (which for example, Cemented Tungsten Carbide would be in our case). What you also have to look for is availability and consistency. Ruby was the hardest material that could reliably be sourced with the dimensions I wanted. A scale to quantify hardness is the ‘Knoop’ scale. To put Ruby in perspective of other materials with a Knoop value, Copper is 163, Ruby is 2100 and Diamond is 7000. There are not that many materials between Ruby and Diamond. Diamond was too expensive and not feasible as a solution. Q: While using a Print Core CC Red, have you experienced any downsides with printing non-abrasive materials? A: I personally haven’t seen any disadvantages using the Print Core CC Red for any materials. I’ve also tried other abrasive materials besides Boron Carbide which worked fine. Q: Why is the Print Core CC Red 0.6mm? A: Abrasive materials often have fibers in them for reinforcement. A 0.6mm diameter gives a good balance between printing speed and detail, while being large enough so it won’t clog due to the fibers some materials contain. Q: Can you quantify how long a Print Core CC Red should last while processing abrasive materials? A: So far we have not been able to detect any wear with any commercially available materials. We recently cut open a nozzle that had printed about 25kg of carbon fiber and it showed no measurable wear inside or on the Ruby. To put things in perspective; Brass nozzles will typically last: 0,3kg, Stainless nozzles: 1kg, Hardened steel: 3kg of common carbon filled materials before print quality will suffer badly. - On these photo’s you can see that abrasive material not only wears out the nozzle diameter, but also shaves the brass from the outside shoulders. There is an important side note though, before you might consider Ruby as indestructible: although it’s wear-resistant Ruby can also be fragile. A user should avoid hitting it with hard objects and avoid using a flame cleaning the nozzle, because brass easily deforms when overheated and quick temperature changes stresses the ruby. Q: For some readers, abrasive materials may be a new subject matter. Can you explain what it is that makes a material abrasive when you are not sure which print core to use? A: Materials which are hard in a solid piece (like metals, ceramics and carbon fibers) will generally also wear down the nozzle. In general one should assume that any filament with a filler will cause more wear on the nozzle, except if the filler is obviously much softer than brass (like wood). Example: Glow in the dark filament has a ceramic powder to make it glow. Which makes it abrasive. Q: What are you using the Print core CC Red for yourself at the moment? A: Apart from printing with Boron carbide, we’re now exploring other fillers which stops different types of radiation, which are magnetic, which are electrically conductive or which can be fired into a ceramic object after being printed. Part of the goal is to combine several properties in the same object in three dimensions, which can only really be done with a dual material printer like Ultimaker 3 or Ultimaker S5. None of these materials can reliably be printed without a Print core CC Red. -- And that concludes my interview with Anders Olsson. I hope this has been an interesting read and you have discovered something new about the Print core CC Red. Since Ultimaker products were never compatible with highly abrasive materials, how to work with them may be a new subject for some of you. If you have any further questions, please feel free to post them below! More questions about abrasive materials? We'll host an AMA (Ask Me Anything) soon with 2 experts of Owens Corning (the manufacturer of XSTRAND) on 31st of October. Mark it in your agenda ? And finally, in just a few weeks the print cores will be available at your local reseller. If you want to be kept up to date and receive an email when it becomes available, please follow the link below and be the first to get one! Keep me updated about the Print Core CC Red
  6. 8 points
    OK, so there's quite a discussion going on in the Cura 3.5 thread about quality control and testing of Cura (and related firmware, etc.) and I thought I would start this new thread to make a particular point and give people a place to discuss it and related matters. Here goes... For various reasons, the products UM make evolve. The hardware is fairly static (years) but the software is a much more dynamic thing (months). The software is continually getting enhanced with new features and capabilities, old bugs getting squashed, etc. Almost always, each release brings not only goodies but new bugs and incompatibilities with existing platforms and OSes. Obviously, each new release needs a lot of testing on all 3 supported platforms (with their various versions of OS and drivers, etc.) before it can be considered trustworthy. We know that UM do a lot of testing. They could probably do more but even if they did a lot more, it wouldn't catch every bug and issue. The problem space is too big with too many variables. So this is where the community of Cura users can step up and make a real difference. Hands up those of you who use Cura with a non-UM printer and never bother to try the beta that is made available before each release. [Quite a lot of people looking a bit sheepish out there.] Why not try it? Why not give something back to UM? I'm not talking about money. All it takes is a bit of disk space and some time to install the beta and try out slicing and (ideally) printing a few of your projects. If all looks good, fine, you've done your bit. If there's a problem, create an issue on github (or post on the forum) and that's even more valuable. Yes, the software (Cura) is free for everybody to use but if you're using it on a non-UM printer then you really should be helping with the beta testing because, at the end of the day, that helps everyone, yourself included. If you don't bother to try the beta and the new release doesn't work well for you, who's problem is that? Yours! Of course, it would be nice if those people who have purchased a UM printer could try the betas also if they possibly can but I don't feel that they are in anyway as obliged as the non-UM printer owners to do so. So to sum up, the Cura user community can make a huge difference to the quality of each Cura release. Why be a freeloader when you can be a valuable member of the community?
  7. 8 points
    This is something I've been working on for a while in between other projects. Only a specific sequence of steps will allow access to its secret compartment. Check out the YouTube video linked below to see it in action. Designed in Sketchup and printed on my UM3, it's made up of 36 individual pieces which snap together. I used a variety of filaments: Ultimaker Nylon, Transparent and Black Ultimaker ABS, Orange, Green and Gray Faberdashery PLA, True Lagoon and Glacier Blue YouTube Video, Project X
  8. 8 points
    The S5 knocked this one out of the park. I made a crane (1 meter long when at full extension). Client was happy and now producing two official copies. Making a couple of changes to make the final models be spot on. Edit: Made with UM White TPLA.
  9. 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.
  10. 7 points
    Hello! You may have heard stories about glass plate having one side which brings you slightly better adhesion compared to the other side, or perhaps you have experienced this first hand yourself. Allow me to provide you with some background information and some instructions to figure out which side you should be printing on and which side you should use if you want to add an adhesion sheet. The difference is first introduced during production. When our glass plates are being made, near the end of the production line there is a hardening process. During the hardening process, the plates float on a layer of tin and are heated from above. This creates a difference between the two sides. There are two main factors that ensure good adhesion to the glass plate: wetting and flatness. Wetting is the ability of a liquid to maintain contact with a solid surface. Lower surface tension means better wetting. The non-tin side (i.e. upside during the hardening process) has a lower surface tension than the tin side. Therefore the non-tin side is recommended to print on. If the sticker that is on your glass plate fell off, you can do a simple small test to identify which side is which by placing a drop of water on both sides of the glass. (Not at the same time though). The non-tin side, the side you want to be printing on, is hydrophilic and the water disperses. On the tin side, the water will form a droplet (this side is hydrophobic). If you want to use an adhesion sheet, it is recommended to stick it to this side. Hope this helps! Let me know below if you have any further questions!
  11. 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. 😉
  12. 7 points
    Hi guys, At the end of this year, I would like to share my design of a multi-nozzle tool head. A year ago I've posted some results of dual material 3d printing on my DIY Ultimaker 2 on G+ ( G+ link) I said there I used a different approach which has not been implemented (at least I didn’t find) elsewhere. Well, the nozzle changing idea I came up with was inspired by the multi-lens microscope (where three or four lenses are distributed around an axis, mounted on a plate. To change from one to another, one can simply rotate the whole plate so that the lens engaging is pointing towards the object). Took this idea, I replace the lenses with nozzles. For example, given three E3D kraken style heat breaks, heat blocks and nozzles distributes around a slightly leaned axis, at an even angle. The axis is leaned at a certain angle to ensure the nozzle engaged will be pointing perpendicularly towards the heated bed. Then the heat breaks will be inserted and mounted into a single heatsink. At the top of the heatsink a large 6807zz bearing is inserted to ensure the rotation with the given axis. Actually we use two bearings for the axis to avoid wobbling when performing the rotation. But a free rotation is not what we want, for the engaged nozzle will rotates away by fiction. To implement the intermittent rotation, I used the Geneva mechanism, as you can see the Geneva wheel is fixed in the back side of the heatsink. So that the drive gear rotates, drives the Geneva wheel rotates. And when the engaged nozzle is printing, Geneva wheel is constrained so that the rotation freedom is eliminated. To drive the gear, many approaches can be used. For simplicity, I took the mechanical way (inspired by the Ultimaker 3). I used a rack to drive the gear. So that if the rack is pushed from either sides, the drive gear rotates. To do that, two rods must be mounted on each sides of the printer, so that if the tool head moves towards the end of the rod, the rack will be pushed. Then a printed pivot part will connects these components together. The pivot part is also good for holding all the wires and Bowden tubes, which will be connected to the nozzles. Then comes with the printed enclosure and two fans. The left axial fan is for cooling the heatsink, and the right blower fan is for cooling the printed parts. Finally, at the bottom a sheet metal piece is mounted to the enclosure to prevent oozing from un-used nozzle. Also a printed shroud guides the air flow out from the blower fan to the printed parts. Currently the whole tool head design can be used as a module for UM2. The rack can be pushed by two rods which are fixed on two sides of the wall of the UM2 machine. As you may see here currently only two nozzles have been mounted. The repeat accuracy is impressive, I’ve printed a lot of dual-extrusion models, such as the Gyro, the traffic cone, the hand-drill and also a strandbeest I designed on thingiverse (https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:3263196). I’m working on the hardware and software to make three nozzle printing possible. Also, I’m trying to make this design more compact. The heatsink part needs to be simplified, improved, for easy making. And I have not give a good name for this tool head. So please help me to improve it! Any ideas, comments, names are appreciated! Also I’ve some spared parts, I’ll be very happy to help you to try this out. Best, XJ
  13. 7 points
    Well, that is what I am calling them. Best name I can come up with. Feel a bit like the old Chinese guy in 'Tremors' that can only come up with 'graboids' for a name. First, appropriate thanks to @smartavionics for even putting this infill into Cura because most of the infills will block light getting into the shell and/or letting light pass through. Second, a lot of people think I am a bit of the putz becauses I am just blunt. Ain't a mean bone in my body, but, well, just blunt. Should have seen me 4 years ago before the Asperger's diagnosis and then getting help in modifying some of that. Sometimes I over compensate and then people get weird because they want to read other intentions. So, why bring this up> Instead of focusing on my communications limitations, try to see the information I want to share from nearly 30 years of CG work and 40 years as a commercial artist. I take a lot of my experiences as a traditional artist and reinterpret into CG aspects, including printing. So, this is an expansion of a reply sent in a private message. And, I want to share the information with anybody that wants to play. It does require some modeling capability and planning. To get this effect as seen in this image: I do the following: For the transparents, I am using one shell. But, because I am using a 0.8 nozzle, it is a very thick shell. I am also using big layer heights. 0.3 to 0.53 depending on materials This is solved by creating a copied mesh and cutting away the parts that I do not want. In this case, the dress and not the body. Then manually 'thickening' of that mesh in all directions. I am using 3DS MAX to do this with the 'push' modifier. This will push the vertices/faces. in the direction of the 'vertex/face normals.' this means a thicker 'shell' around the main model. In this case I am pushing the faces and vertices just a small amount of 0.5 or less to encase the model in Cura after merging into placement. When importing, I use 'per model' settings to select mesh type and then 'modify settings for infill of other model." Edit: Again, thanks, in this case, to @ahoeben and @bagel-orb for this getting put into place. I think I got that correct. This lets me change density of infill for specific areas. In this case, the dress. Then I merge and slice. Then for solid models like this image: I do this: For the solids, I am using default shells as I am not worried about transparencies. But, in this case, still using the 0.8 and still getting 'hairy' prints. I just honestly have not taken the time to work that out as I am trying to get as many prints before surgery. Still using layer heights. 0.3 to 0.53 depending on materials. Will get around to using 0.4 nozzles soon on these. But the 0.8 make the print much faster. Also, kinda like the 'beading effect.' Infill overlap is basically a horizontal expansion on the infill and will not expand vertically Again, this is solved by creating a copied mesh and cutting away the parts that I do not want. In this case, the dress and not the body. Then manually 'thickening' of that mesh in all directions. I am using 3DS MAX to do this with the 'push' modifier. This will push the vertices/faces. in the direction of the 'vertex/face normals.' this means a thicker 'shell' around the main model. In this case I am pushing the faces and vertices just a small amount of 0.5 or less to minimize the amount of 'infill poking out' from the main model. When importing, I use 'per model' settings to remove all shell structures of that pushed model. This will only print the very small mount of infill. Then I merge and slice. For this model: I am just using the 0.8 single shell. But the walls are thin because it is a 'hollowed out' model. Nothing special other than choosing the infill colours or density. So, there ya go. That is it in a nutshell.
  14. 7 points
    So's, I goes to da Doc...Says something is veddy wrong... Doc says, "Well, let us see inside." And, oh my....what we found!! This is actually my skull from a recent CT scan the VA had made. Gaze into mine hollow eyes....;... Now we's peeks inside..... Rut roh Raggy......A fetid swamp me innards be!! Bats in me belfry!!!!! the original Batty Concept Edit, I will be putting something together on how I did this....but it really is my skull.....just did not scan the front part of me face ?
  15. 6 points
    So just to be clear, you don’t own a Ultimaker printer, but use Cura, the free open source product for which Ultimaker is paying a large part of the development, and when something goes wrong you feel the need to bash Ultimaker? I understand being frustrated sometimes..... and you excused yourself already..... but please be nice....
  16. 6 points
    Made these 2 custom downspout diverters. Each one is a different angle. Used openScad to design. S5 to print. zero support was needed. Oh - also the brown barrel has a white hose clamp that I modeled in DSM and printed with Nylon filament.
  17. 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.
  18. 6 points
    We Printing Buildings. Usually it is only exterior. Please see the pictures
  19. 6 points
    This was a work project that I decided to print myself. It's a really great model!! The original was going to be investment cast for a Bentley owners club hood ornament in the USA. Printed at 0.1 in innofil white pla pro1 with ultimaker PVA support. Build time was just short of 2 days.
  20. 6 points
    My new rug. Just for fun.
  21. 6 points
  22. 6 points
    Another feedback is to have the list of Print settings (windows/drop down) flexible so you can enlarge it. A expend all settings button as well.
  23. 6 points
    Hello everyone, I have been away for a while being busy with well, work. However, I never had a chance to brag and show some of my work both from work and personal portfolio. Some from the work portfolio is done by myself, some together or exclusively by interns. In case I have not been clear before, I work as an architect for Sweco Architects at the mother ship in Stockholm Sweden. One of my daily tasks for the past two years was to handle the in-house fablab. So here are some photos of the works we have left around in the office - the really cool models always end up with the client (but what is new?) A little preview from work: Personal Portfolio - I use a lot of parametric design and 3D printing to exercise and build up my own skills in my free time - and also to be able to share with the community developments, therefore not implying a client and or her/his secrecy restrictions. Prints from the community such as ultimaker ad thinginverse:
  24. 6 points
    Hi, I have created this thread to keep an overview on which materials are available through Cura as part of our Material Alliance. We can add a short description of each material so you have at least a basic idea of its properties. Do realize this is a summary, if you want to know specific properties please visit each filament specific technical data sheet. I'll also include a link to each individual thread, in case you want to discuss a material specifically. Questions? Feel free to post them below! This thread will be updated over time. BASF - PET CF. Carbon fiber, high dimensional stability, low moisture absorption, heat-resistant of 74ºC - PP GF30 . Glass fiber (30%), extreme stiffness, chemical resistance. Clariant - Clariant PA6/66 FR. Flame retardant. - Clariant PA6/66 GF20 FR . Glass Fiber (20%), flame retardant. - Clariant Pet-G. Chemical resistance, good layer adhesion, heat-resistant ~80ºC. Colorfabb - Color On Demand, PLA in 100+ RAL colors at 2kg MOQ. - woodFill , 70% PLA and 30% wood provides a wood-like texture DSM - Arnitel ID 2045 . ShoreD 34 hardness, flexible TPC. - Arnitel ID 2060 HT . High performance TPC, high temperature, chemical resistance. - Novamid ID1030 CF10 PA6/66. Carbon fibers (10%). Dupont - Zytel 3D1000FL. Ultralow shrinkage. - Hytrel 3D41000FL, shoreD 60 hardness. Eastman - Amphora AM3300. Low-odor, styrene-free material. ElogioAM - Facilan C8 . 3D print almost without layers, good interlayer bonding. Igus GmbH - Iglidur I150 . Self-lubricating, wear resistant. - Iglidur I180. Self-lubricating, wear resistant. Lehvoss - Luvocom 3F PAHT 9825 NT. Unreinforced PAHT, low warping. Matterhackers - NylonG . Glass fiber (~20%). - NylonX. Carbon fiber (~20%). Owens Corning - XSTRAND GF30 PP . Glass fiber (30%). - XSTRAND GF30 PA6 . Glass fiber (30%).
  25. 6 points
    I am working on an exciting plugin that I am calling Mesh Tools. In the GIF, I have loaded three models. The top right mesh (normals.stl) has its normals reversed, because my modeler of choice has a different winding order. That's why it is showing overhang on top of the model (silly Cura...). The top left model (leaky.stl) has a hole in it. It won't print well. The bottom two cubes were loaded as a single STL (dual.stl). No amount of ungrouping will get them apart. The UI of this plugin will change before it gets released, but I wanted to show you some exciting preliminary results.
  26. 6 points
    Term: "Greeble". "A fine detailing added to the surface of a larger object that makes it appear more complex, and therefore more visually interesting. It usually gives the audience an impression of increased scale." Been used in model making since forever. It was requested that I show how I do the greebling and design of my spaceship models. Basically a form of 'hard ops' to added details that look modeled in, but are not directly modeled sometimes. The idea is to pick and choose what works in the moment as well as planning. The following will take you through the steps in broad terms using 3DS MAX as well as 3D Coat. I use the combination because I am very facile with 3DS MAX and can make certain geometries quickly, but modeling things on a mesh level is not always easy or the way to go. I can then then take that into 3D Coat for detailing and making use of voxels for painless and fast booleans as well as being able to stamp in details quickly as well as use their built in set of nice greebles. It is also flexible enough that I can even add additional super structures in very quickly or discard the attempts are I go along. The first thing that happened with this model is that I got an idea from a pic I saw of an unfinished airplane surfing the web one day. On the left is the quick modeling in 3DS MAX from memory. I liked the idea rather than try to make the actual object. This is the actual base model in all its simplicity in 3DS MAX. Yep, that is all the polygons I started with. Then I added a subdivion modifier called meshsmooth to take off the hard edges. Some tutorials say to use the 'Turbosmooth' for this. I differ in that for modeling purposes. Meshsmooth offers more options as well as better visual feedback when doing real details. Turbosmooth is designed to be a lightweight modifier that can be used for animation without draining the system. You can see how it rounded many edges. But, since it is a subdivion modifier, it takes on polygon and makes four for every iteration you apply. It grows exponentially as you apply iterations. One becomes four, fourn becomes 16, 16 becomes 64, etc. The idea is to be very careful in mesh based modeling as it can quickly outrun your memory and crash the program or, even your system. I try to keep it at 2 iterations, but will go to three on occasion. As I developed the idea further, I abandoned symmetry for a slight bit of asymmetry in overall design. This will become more apparent as we go along here. In the back end, I used 8 sided cylinders to start to make the engine exhaust and vent controls. I used a series of bevels of polygons going into the cylinders and individual polygons for the vent controls going out from the edges of the cylinders. Now, to make things easier, I used instances of the cylinders. They are all the same, but the center one has been turned just to remove monotony. I also started to add in details like these purple things that would just be a bit of a pain to model in. This is a good reason for planning what you will do in MAX vs. 3D Coat or any voxel based program. This is the beginning of the asymmetry I spoke of. More will come as the idea develops. I try not to get to wedded to an idea in detail at the beginning as I am designing on the fly here and no real plan. Overall form, yes, but I prefer for the details to flow organically as I go along. I approach it rather like sketching. Underneath, I made a hangar bay. The idea is that this area is for personal shuttles while the giant long part on the side above is for actual loading and unloading of freight. At this point, I was going for a Deep Space Freighter in concept. Here I am still adding pieces that are being made separately. The light blue will be added to the model while the green will become subtractions for windows. Even the windows on the bridge are asymmetrical in layout. Other side as I further developed the idea. Since I was thinking deep space runs for the ship, the big honkin' green box on the lower rear of the ship is for an arboretum while the other windows are not following the exact same path. They have a different set of geometries to work around. But, the arboreatum was a thought of giving crew a place to relax in a bit of contained nature. Then before leaving MAX, I made copies of the engine ports and inserted them further to subtract and provide surfaces for further detailing once I get to using voxels in 3D coat. Now, we are in 3D coat. The pink plane in the middle is for symmetry operations. I did want a certain amount of symmetry, with minor deviations to accommodate the overall design. On the left side is my tool set and on the right side are a group of brushes that I purchased off Gumroad. I found them looking for cool stuff for Blender; whenever I get around to learning it. And, brush packs like this can be used in 3D Coat as well as other programs. they made great 'stamping' details. In this case I am using a pack called Scifi hard ops. At this point, I have added the engine ports and the, at one time, purple boxes to the ship just below the bridge area. Voxels make this very easy and fast. I have reptile scale patterns, ornamental designs and other brush alphas to facilitate a variety of design needs. On the far right of the picture on the face of the engine area, you can see the first of the stampings I am doing to create a greebled effect of machinery and panels on the surface of the ship. In this case, I am using the extrude tool and use it to either raise details or cut in details. I am also going to use them to add more superstructure to the ship. This is just another view of the rear of the engine compartments as I am starting to add details. This is further down the road, still using my toolset on the left and the brush alphas on the right to add more detail. If you look just fore of the engine in this picture and the same area on the image above, you can see that I have actually used the stamping tools to create whole new geometry just forward the engine area. This is one of the advantages of using this method. Voxels are very 'plastic' and, you can up the amount used as you go along as it stretches them out. But it offered me a great deal of freedom in furthering the design on the fly. You do not have the limitations of mesh when operating this way. At this point, I got rid of the silly thin piece down the middle and added a thicker, more robust structure and then used some of the 3D greeble models that came with the program. One of the flexibilities is that I can also make my own 3D greebles, brush alphas and such and import them into the program and use them the same way. But you can see where I put in details that look like giant cooling tubes down the middle if the top portion aft of the bridge area. I have also pulled out and added an extra compartment attached to the bridge. Then after making a certain amount of details by stamping and such, I bring in some of the things I did make in MAX for additions to the model. That would be the dark blue things on the Starboard side of the ship 'wings'. On the port side, I used stamping again to add a different set of details on the Port side of the 'wings.' An advantage of the symmetry plane is that when I add things like the greeble models on one side, they get added perfectly on the other side. But, I can turn it off when I want to devote details to just one side. Just the other side. You can see the amount of symmetrical details, but also the asymmetry in them as well to work around the areas of different surface structures. I am also starting to really focus more on the engine area and the raised section in the middle just fore of the engines. In the 'nose' and hangar area, you can see the parts I made in MAX and brought them into 3D coat to add them soon. 3D Coat can bring them directly in place without having to worry about putting them back into their proper locations. Just bring it in and zap it into the main structure. This is where I bring in the window cutouts.. I colour code things to keep additions and subtractions to the main structure easy to recognize. Now I have added and subtracted out all the parts that were differently coloured above. Then I bring in the ships logo I made in MAX. Since I named the ship Ulysses, I added the 'Bow of Apollo' to it. This is the close up details of the engines. Using the symmetry really helped this to work much easier than it could have been. Now, do not think I just grab any old brush and go with it. If I stamp in details, and do not like it, I undo and then go back and try another until I like the way it looks. This is the direct front. I have not added the logos yet, but I do have them colour coded for port and starboard. Topside. And, here you can really see the asymmetry I employed. It is really mostly 'near symmetry.' Bottom details, but not fully finished. This is where I stop for this part. In the next part I will add more details, and prepare it for mounting (including base design) and lighting. This means hollowing the model out and then cutting the windows out properly. I want the lights to shine through the open areas. Part two coming up soon.
  27. 6 points
    I wanted to try to print from a jpg to see if that could be used as a press die. Printed in abs and pressed in thin aluminium, quick shot with a rattle can and then rubbing with a 400 grit paper. Not meant to be perfect but a fair result for 15 minutes work.
  28. 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.
  29. 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.
  30. 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.
  31. 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.
  32. 5 points
    Humble administrator's garden was approved by UNESCO to be included in the world heritage list in 1997.
  33. 5 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
  34. 5 points
    PVA....Cannot live without it, cannot shoot the nozzle when it clogs.... Requirements: Patience aplenty Airbrush needle or something like that with a nice teeny tiny point. Issues to overcome: When printing and humidity strikes midprint, especially on long ones like I do on a constant basis Humidity will clog the nozzle as PVA pops and crackles, creating a carbonized mess inside as well as outside the nozzle If you pause the print to try this, it will not work because the nozzles cool down and you cannot adjust the temp more than +- 25¯C. By this time, the material is too cool to do anything with. *Are you hearing this firmware devs? OK, now this is an issue that has plagued me ever since I started printing. AND continues to plague the industry as a whole. It is an unavoidable evil that must be dealt with. It does not matter whose PVA you are using.....it will happen. The main warning sign is when the material is not printing like a solid wall, but starts to get very lacy. At this point, it cannot hold the material it is supporting and you may not discover this until the print is done and you just have a lot of time, material and expense down the drain. SO! what to do, what to do..... For some reason it occurred to me tonight that the solution (klugey as it may be) is to fake out a material change. Even if you have a brand new spool of PVA in there, if there is a clog, it will still not give full PVA service to the supports. So, here are the steps ? 1. Go to the 'tune' menu and initiate a material change. This will heat the nozzle to the proper temp and hold it. It will also pause all printing ops and step you through all steps of replacing materials. 2. Once your material unloads, leave it at that stage. This will keep the temp up while not letting anything continue until you go to the next step. 3. Poke the heck out of it with the airbrush needle or something similar. Just be careful not to poke out the delicate nozzle tip..... 4. Take older leftover PVA, like those bits when it was changed out and leaves the parts that were in the bowden tube, and push it though. 5. Rinse and repeat until you get a clean thread of PVA going through. 6. Reload your PVA and start back up. 7. As it reloads, you will see a nice thread of material squishing out. This is not as good as a hot and cold pull, but it can save a long print. It should also be mentioned that this is also available for the S5 as well. The best solution would be something to allow a pause and temp control to the extremes that hot and cold pulls require to really get it out. *Ahem* firemware devs ? Some may say that keeping the nozzle clean is the answer.....it is until you have a really long print, the humidity rises and starts to degrade the printing of PVA during that time. It can happen. It has happened to me as I do these massively long prints. Start with a clean nozzle and 5 days later, humidity strikes, and the lace pattern appears as the PVA starts to underextrude. So, happy PVA supports all around fer everyone!! WOOHOO!!!
  35. 5 points
    my first latest glowfil experiments... super quick but fun. Hard to photograph.
  36. 5 points
    Those three sentences are so absolutely, completely and irremediably wrong, up to a point that it pains me to read them. If there is one thing I learned after nearly 15 years of work in customer-related positions and in retail, it is that, no matter how well documented something is, or how failsafe you think you made your product, some fool will find a way to break it in ways that aren't supposed to be possible. Or will do something that is explicitly marked as 'DO NOT DO THIS!' on the documentation with big red flashing lights, because they didn't read it, skimmed through the documentation or something alike. And, as Murphy's Law would have it, the more detailed your documentation, the more people will break your product. Then they'll say that they aren't at fault, that the documentation wasn't clear enough. Let me share some personal experience: I sold mobile phones for years in a small shop. Back before the advent of smartphones and touchscreens, phones used to have a pretty extensive documentation; thick booklets included in the package, sometimes as thick or thicker than the phone itself. Many of those documentations also showed to the users, using pictures on the very first five pages or so, how to open the phone, place the sim card (and the memory card if there was a slot for it), battery, and then close it back. I've lost count of the number of people who managed to damage their phone right after buying it by trying to put the sim card or battery the wrong way, or place the sim card into the memory card slot, even though most memory cards were maybe a quarter the size of a sim card and not the same shape anyway. It wouldn't fit, then they would use their strength to force it in because they cannot be wrong, obviously, and end breaking something and come back to complain. And even when shown the nice clear pictures in the instruction booklet, they would complain that the pictures and text aren't clear enough, and ask for a refund or an exchange since, obviously, it's not their fault but ours as reseller or the manufacturer's for not being clear enough. So, while I have absolutely no idea what SSH is or means or what it is used for, if giving access to it is opening the door to potentially bricking the printers, then I fully understand why UM is saving themselves the headaches by not supporting it. You can never make anything failsafe, no matter how detailed and clear and concise your documentation is. I printed many engineered objects in Nylon, and other materials, on my UM3E since I got it last year, I never once even had to calibrate the steps, and my customers have always been very happy with the results. I printed a couple of prototypes and a handful of parts for use, including some things for the engine of a car or a motorbike, I don't remember exactly, and the customer told me that they fit nicely in the engine. Maybe you got unlucky and had the one in a million or so printer that wasn't calibrated right? That they choose to only provide support for the appimage and not the PPA is their right. That decision certainly has valid grounds for UM and was probably taken after a lengthy analysis by the people in charge at UM. Besides, the fact that they do not support versions of their open source software that isn't produced by themselves seems very normal to me. I don't see why they would provide support for the PPA made by Lulzbot since Lulzbot isn't part or related to UM in anyway. Or even to a version of the program done by an employee on their free time, since that version never went through the thorough internal process of testing and vetting and such. I disagree that UM does not have the willingness to listen to their customers. We have this forum where we can talk to them, and they usually reply with speed and efficiency, reaching out to people who post complaints or troubles here in a very short time usually. SandervG and a handful of others from the company are very active here, and questions and comments are forwarded to the relevant people inside the company, with some of them logging in to give the answers and other replying through SandervG. Of course, sometimes the answer or reaction from UM isn't what we expect or what we would like. But they are here, they do listen to us, and I would say that I know very little companies with such an active team, or even companies who have gone to the length of putting up a forum such as this one for their users and customers. @RudydG I concur with Smithy: that is a very nice set-up you have! ^^
  37. 5 points
    As I can't remember what the settings are called, I normally do show all settings and just accept that I have to scroll up and down a lot.
  38. 5 points
    Tricky print with no supports. A little clean up to do, but much less than cleaning hard supports. sooooooo.......
  39. 5 points
    Here a sculture I printed the last days on my S5. Height 74cm Printed in Fillamentum Light Ivory No post processing, except glued parts together
  40. 5 points
    Quick projects in the works. Uncle Creepy Bookshelves. Books are printed separately to facilitate painting them and the bookshelves itself. They all fit perfectly. Base is not finished. This was just a quick print to stand things on to check for balance and such even though they will be locked down with glue. So far so good. Walls will be about 14" tall with the floor extended to a 10" x 10" base. Steampunk version of the "Proteus" from 'Fantastic Voyage.' I am designing the interior because I figured how to make clear windows. So, this was just a test print to see how it felt in my hands....And, BTW, the lines in the windows are when my fans stopped working efficiently...so, yeah, little things can have a big impact. But will work out fine once I make the master with the interior parts. This is where the interior is at this time. This is just a 3D rendering of my halting progress as I take care of other things. The single seat chairs are just placeholders until a make more period appropriate set of chairs more in line with the observation couch. This is the ship that I a started to play with making clear windows. So far so good. But, this test model got a bit too hot in the cleaning bath and is a bit warped in a few areas, but the windows and other parts that need lights showing through work just fine. Making the cockpit for this thing. Just slammed this together in about 2.5 hours just for funsies.
  41. 5 points
    Bye bye soft and hello shiny lol! However the soft coating felt really nice like silk or satin or something, very smooth to the touch! I have 2 more skulls to play with, The shinyness really brings out the subtle imperfections! This is because im not dipping and only light brushing trying to maintain maximum detail. A long dip would sort out most layer lines but at the cost of sharp corners and subtle cavitities.gonna try a blue patina one next. They always look sexy but decay real fast if not sealed right!!! I may have to do a terminator skull next...
  42. 5 points
    Stunning, @cloakfiend! Seriously loving all the post-processing you do on your prints. Gorgeous work. This is my latest print (STL, not mine). I may attempt to paint it, but don't have high hopes for a nice paint job (my hand-eye coordination is lacking).
  43. 5 points
    ...in the meantime here is a censored bust, just in case anyone was offended, re-touched sculpted scan data and I had no photos of the back so I just left it plain, and chopped the arms of for statue effect. For the life of me this one just wouldn't polish anymore than this I spend ages and loads of compound and cloths to no avail, the copper grain was just too coarse to smoothly polish (a result of a too high current!). It was also a sign to say goodbye to my solution and a highlight that surface quality massively impacts the ability to plate and the final outcome....which actually turned out ok, I wish I could post a few more models which turned out great but they are extremely graphic close ups so theres no way and too many eyebrows would be raised!!.
  44. 5 points
    A quick 3 hour sculpt based on the statue 'Modesty', just to see if i could, just liked the oldskool features. tried my best, a bit chubbier, but still ok. went very light on the acetone again.
  45. 5 points
    very happy with my doggy...
  46. 5 points
    Just done my unicron v2 yesterday, will defo do shape shifter today, even with my contaminated plating solution...v1 and v2
  47. 5 points
    not sure if these will ever be finished but this is the arty direction they have taken....mamy more to do no many hours to do them in.
  48. 5 points
    Some ornament tests I have done in Polyalchemy Elixr. Printed as fast as possible at 0.2mm layer heights. Just got the capps and wires in today so I thought I would string a few up and see how they photograph.
  49. 5 points
    Hi Folks, I've never been posting any prints (model) I'd made here, but this time I've simply have to share.. Right now I'm working in Japan, far away from home in Norway. So I have no access to my printer, but my two sons have.. Anyway, the older one sent me a picture of a print he made. To my surprise he made a 3D drawing of the old Hansa faucet we have on the kitchen sink, that's have a shower in combination with the faucet. This one is now kind of old, since 83.. so about 35 years I'll say. Anyway, the plastic housing of the shower part does not work very well any more and spreading water all over the place, -kind of awaiting to be replaced.. So yesterday I've got a picture of the old shower device together with a gray printed copy he made as an replacement for the old one. Not just that, he also sent a small video of how the new shower adapter worked. So he told me he is looking for some filament that's food qualified and can be used for producing this kind of parts for drinking water. He used PLA that's the stuff doctors using for support inside "our" body during surgery. The PLA dissolve inside body and leave no trace. -Is there something I'm missing here? Anyway, I'm impressed by those young guys, they just makes those things easily like that. Some says, seeing is believing. Well, another way of creating valuable parts using a 3D printer. Sorry folks, not allowed to upload a 1 Mg byte video, so had to skip. :/ I've almost skipped the whole thing due to this latter.. Thanks Regards Torgeir.
  50. 5 points
    Both properly displaying the MAC addresses of both interfaces and the requests for static IP's are on our backlog. Not displaying the MAC addresses has indeed been an oversight that we are looking to fix quickly, but I'm not sure it can be worked in before our next release, so no promises. With most users so far we have been able to find a workaround for the static IP's, so this has not been a top priority for us before. However, we are getting a lot of requests (not only on these forums) for supporting more network configurations and are actively looking to build support for those configurations. It is on our backlog, but I can not promise you guys a timeframe for now.
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!