Daid

I've added some detection for the "off screen" case, still needs a tiny bit of more work, but it should prevent Cura from starting off-screen.

Importing the whole of Cura into another script? That would be madness ;-) also you won't get the speed improvement that pypy offers.

Ah, that effect. My new engine will lay full-infill under those stairs, so the "stair" parts are always 6 layers thick (on default config). This does add a pretty large amount of tiny print moves, but the result works great.

You're almost there ;-) I wouldn't recommend trying to run Cura.slice, which has a different interface and is used internally. And bound to change when I introduce my new engine. The best way would be: cd C:\Software\Cura\ C:\Software\Cura\pypy\pypy.exe -m Cura.cura -p "C:\Queue\Cura.ini" -s "C:\Queue\Pyramid2x10.stl"

If you fold the front flat forwards instead of downwards then this happens.

It could actually be a hidden feature where you can have your printer operational without a heated bed connected (that's why I didn't add it) Like this: http://xkcd.com/1172/

I've seen that before, so I sneaked into production the other day and checked them, but those did fit fine. Could be slight variations in the wood.

I've printed the robot with the high quality profiles in Cura as well, which makes it come out just as good as with KISSlicer, only twice as heavy. Another cause could be a problem with the fan-duct on the printer head, maybe it's not cooling enough near the object, or cooling the tip of the head.

They are on thingiverse: http://www.thingiverse.com/tag:Voronoi

I wish people would stop editing that part. Yes, the endstops USED to be labeled wrong, but as far as I know the current kits have this corrected for more then a month already.

If that's Ultimaker-White-PLA, you might need to increase the temperature a bit. (White PLA is not the easiest PLA to fabricate or to work with)

If you dive into those sources you will encounter a comment that I added. Which is me being very surprised that the heated bed does not have a MINTEMP error.

Finally ran across some proof of 3D systems showing off SLS prints next to their Cubify:

And here you go for filament insertion:

It's reporting "Recv: ok T:386.2 /0.0 B:0.0 /0.0 @:0" Which means it sees 386.2C, which is pretty much in the impossible range and happens when the themocouple board is not read properly. This problem usually is in the 3 wire signal cable, you could try the other 3 wire connector to see if that one works. (you need to switch it around on the top of the head and the bottom of the printer)

Uhm. Not strange at all. It's on the UltiController if you have one. Else, you need the error log, because the temperature is reported in the log. But I think the first-run-wizard does not allow you to access the log, so you need to use the normal printing window (which will throw the exact same error)

Depends, because I'm not sure what you mean with it.

I highly recommend AGAINST filing flats on the steppers for the pulleys. We've build 1 machine which had the wrong motors by mistake, and it kept having backlash issues. This was because even while the pulley screws can get better grip, unless you perfectly align the screw with the flat, you will introduce some play. One we secured the pulleys on the rounded part of the axes the problem was gone. This is one of those "sounds like a good idea but really isn't" things. It's in the same group as "using WD40" and "securing the Z-screw at the top", both things you also should NOT do.

The default of 865.888 is actually the older Ultimaker default, and it ends up as global default due to a bug. Did you increase the temperature already? Always start out at a too-high temperature like 220C, this might feel like a lot of heat, but it ensures that you extruder won't grind because of backpressure from the colder filament trying to be pushed trough the nozzle while only being slightly melted.

If you want an PrintrBot LC Plus, a friend of mine is selling one, assembled, with all the upgrades. He never got it to print repeatedly. It's a fun little printer for if you want to tinker with printers, but if you are expecting to do printing on it, you might feel cheated. My friend wanted to print things for his garden train track, but he never got around getting anything done for it (he's had it for 6 months now). And he is saving up money for an Ultimaker now. It has new extruder gears that I printed (as the one shipped with it where horribly warped), the bed leveling upgrade, belt-tensioner upgrade and a glass plate for the heated bed. It came without a powersupply. So in the end, he payed somewhere around $900 for everything (at least the new gears where free...)

Maybe the thermocouple board is defective? What temperture does it read?

Harder then slicing and a higher density layer thickness. (The layer slicing and polygon stitching is one of the fastest parts of my C++ slicer. Figuring out top/bottom infills is actually one of the slower parts)

Ah, the PC cooler is made of 2 different meshes. If those meshes where booleaned together it will work in Cura (and that's most likely what NetFabb is doing)

There has been quite a bit of information and possible mis-information about Z platform adjustments and re-calibrating the Z level. A while back, at Ultimaker we took a bunch of readings with a very accurate gauge (micron accuracy) First off. The limit switch. Some people think that the metal lever adds in accuracy. But we could not find any evidence of this. As long as we didn't touch the machine, the homing was within a few microns every single time. We tested this in 2 different ways. 1) First by just keeping homing repeatedly. Just pressed home on the UC and measured the difference between the previous home position. 2) Turning the lead-screw by hand and home again. This resulted in the same accuracy as using the repeated home. So I see no reason to remove the metal lever. As the current repeatability of the Z switch is very high. Next the platform stability itself. This is where the problems happen. Just giving a good tug on the platform could deform the platform arms itself causing a 0.5mm difference in position. Now, this does seem to depend on the machine, as my home machine hardly needs any calibration after moving. But that's rare. So if you want to improve repeatability of the platform, you need to stiffen the platform somehow. We have some ideas at Ultimaker, but I would love to hear other ideas on this. Especially on how to fix this for yourself without re-designing the whole platform.

Most likely the "thin wall problem". Printing with 0.4mm wall thickness will most likely work in Cura.