Daid

It's most likely the other topic that's actually aggravating you ;-) we still love you. You do have a point. Ultimakers are my main concern. Everything else is just extra. But that does not mean that a few easy tweaks for other users can be made to satisfy their needs better. Latest RC should have these changes now: http://software.ultimaker.com/Cura_closed_beta/

Yes, ridiculous. Ridiculous that you think that. Naturally Cura adjusts all offsets and line distances if you change the line width for the first layer. So you do not need to adjust anything else, as it will put down wider lines but at a larger distance from each-other. But I guess you assume I'm an idiot. Also your math does not add up, if Cura was not as smart as it is. The first layer is thicker, so 150% of 0.3mm layer, next layer is most likely 0.2 for you, so that would mean 50% * (0.3/0.2) = 75% more material which would have ended up in the 2nd layer. So you would have to put the flow of the 2nd layer to 25%. However, this is not the case, so I'll ignore that piece of flawed logic right there. It's all down to nozzle shape. The way your nozzle is shaped greatly increases the curling up effect. Which you see as a "blob" at the start of the line. That's why you see no Ultimaker users complaining, as they have the "flat end" nozzle which forces the material more downwards into the tape, instead of giving it room to curl upwards. Try the "initial line width" setting that I suggested above. Most likely it will make a difference. Changing the initial layer speed (which is tuned for an Ultimaker by default) could also help. Your problem isn't the end adhesion. It's the adhesion while the material is still hot. That's a whole different set of mechanics happening right there.

Check if your heater and PT100 are properly inserted in the hotend. If you get a heater error in 14.12.1 then you're heating up less then 10C in 20 seconds with the heater on full power. So if you are getting that error with 14.12.1 there is something drawing a lot of heat from your hotend, or there is a problem with the heater or the measurements.

At this point in the project it would be a huge effort to coordinate the unreliable resources of the community. While I love it that people assist in stuff, it's not really possible to depend on participation, as you do it as a hobby, while we do it as a job. So we cannot set deadlines for you, but we have deadlines ourselves, which causes odd problems in this phase of development. Once the code has more settled and less refactoring is happening, and the main structures are ready. That's when we can get the real power of the community development going. As you can contribute with small fixes and additions.

That's great. For the manual slice option, there is that patch you can apply yourself ;-) as I much rather fix these bugs and help everyone out. Now the actual cause and fix that I did in RC2 had to do with how fast the previous process was killed. Which happens almost instantly on my computer, but apparently takes a lot more time on your computer (no idea why). The bug was that the GUI was actually waiting for the process to end, which it should not do. That is a bug, but a huge code design flaw one. The layerview has all kinds of small nasty things like that. Difference between RC2 and RC3 is not related to this problem. RC3 has 1 extra setting for Paul (Bluebot) who is going to tweak the default quickprint profiles for better quality and printing speed. He is like the master of 3D printing quality on the Ultimaker and everyone should bow for him. He did this: https://www.flickr.com/photos/66753090@N08/6191494335/ While the rest of us was doing stuff like this: http://daid.eu/~daid/IMG_20110914_103511.jpeg

That most likely due to the UMO having a better nozzle shape, which reduces the chance of the "curling up" effect. Which brings me to this reply: You're actually using a workaround. The problem you're having is that the material curls a bit up and sticks a bit to your nozzle. Because CW prints the perimeters at in a different order you get more surface area for it to stick on the bed. So you have more grip on the bed because it has double the surface area of the filament on the bed. However, that IS a WORK-AROUND (feel free to add your angry smiley yourself). As the actual problem is that the material is curling up towards your nozzle and sticking to it. The whole of 3D printing is full with workarounds. And it's usually just a choice of selecting the most logical workaround for the problem that has the least amount of side-effects. Most likely your problem is also gone if you set the "Initial layer line width (%)" to 150%. As that would increase the stickiness to the bed. You can also clearly see in your 2nd movie that the speed has a huge effect on how easy you rip it off. The first line is pulled off for a few cm before it finally luckily sticks. You're pretty much looking at the tests to see the results you want to see. So no surprises that you come to the same conclusion every single time. EDIT: As for code changes. This requires quite a few changes in the path order planner. Which isn't as simple as it sounds. As inner wall lines from multiple sections could have been merged into a single section after shrinking. So you get complex logic where a section can only be printed if all touching inner lines have been printed. Quite a bit of complexity for not that much gain. I'm also unsure what it will do for print quality on higher layers as the cooling will be differently.

Only if you got a "Heater error". In the "bed temp error" nothing has changed between 14.07 and 14.12.1, so if you're getting that error it's a hardware issue. Most likely a lose connection somewhere.

Speed A is not Speed B. So your test is flawed right there. Pretty sure Cura won't give the "rip of first layer" problems if you set the speed to the same amount for the first layer, instead of using vastly different parameters.

http://software.ultimaker.com/Cura_closed_beta/ RC2 might fix the problem bot is having. I would love to know if this helps you. As these are exactly the type of bugs I rather fix then adding the manual slice button.

I've been investigating the code that could be causing this. And I've made this minor patch: https://github.com/daid/Cura/commit/a328913ca39f508e8f15719a53b3916bc56e8ff0 The old code could explain the behavior that bot is seeing. Running an RC build right now.

https://github.com/daid/Cura/commit/b0968488b8e2c40d94fda7e031d3f9fc1d502c6e

Just looked at the movie now, that really looks like a bug somewhere. Can you check if the log says anything "odd". The log can be found in: C:\Users\[username]\.cura\[version] (As of 14.12, before that it was in the install directory, but that was causing some unrelated issues) I'll do some tests tomorrow to see if I can reproduce it. (Now it's time for sleeping)

Then this is most likely the result of the path order bug in 14.09, which is fixed in 14.12

I've released 14.12.1 http://software.ultimaker.com/ If you're having problems where this "heater error" shows up. Then please update to 14.12.1. If the problem still persists after that, check if the heater cartridge is properly inserted into the heater block (it should not stick out beyond the metal fanduct below the heater)

No, the fix is good for multi-threading. Actually, the fix is so good. That I left it in place for the 14.12.1 hotfix release. EDIT: Download it from http://software.ultimaker.com/

The 3D PDF isn't really showing any 3D for me. Guess it's not that usual to have 3D PDFs...

I think you have a key difference here. Not the hollow bit, most printers can do that. It's the level of customization. With the Mojo, it will do right what it's told to do. But nothing else. Little room to tweak. While with the UM2, the default output might not be exactly as you want it, but you can tweak the hell out of it. Depending on what you're looking for this might be good or bad. (Also the rips are just on the inside, you can only see this on transparent prints, as the top/bottom/outsides will be printed solid. And you can adjust all this, in every way you want. You could even print only the ribs... yes, you can... not sure why)

pm_dude, we've been seeing the same thing. It's exciting really. We're getting into the quality levels where our previous "omg, it's so accurate!" is no longer accurate enough for everything. As that looks like the 80 steps per mm limit you are running into. However, on the last photo, in the lower left corner, I see some ringing that most likely being caused by vibrations/acceleration/jerk/print speed combination. At what speed did you print these?

Not yet, the UM2 firmware issue is a bit more pressing.

Just did some more measurements. The heater of the slow heating machine is 21W. While the heater of the fast heating machine is 27W. Does not explain all differences, but does explain quite a bit of it. The "start" dip that you see causes about 5 seconds of delay in the heating on both machines. (Compared to straight heating). So that has less actual effect then the difference in power. But it's what causing your machine to go "over the limit" easier then the machine I have here. I'm doing a hotfix right now, to prevent any more people from having this same issue.

If you mean "I just accepted the patch that changes this behavior"? then yes.

A "I have no clue what you're trying to do, but I'll do my best" type of warning. But, yes, Cura still tries.

More info on this. Found 2 machines in the office that show the same problem. Not sure what causes the differences, but there are big differences between machines in how fast they can heat for some reason. (Damn it!)

Just did some measurements. And the printer on my desk is getting 100C in 20 seconds when it's going from 50 to 150. And if I let it cool down from 260C to 200C and turn it back on to 260C at the 200C mark, it's back to 260C in 20 seconds. This was with the fans on, but the bed lowered. So if you're not getting 20C in 20 seconds, that's quite a difference from what I'm seeing...

This. It's pretty much an unintentional side-effect. It's also almost the only dependency that other layers have on each-other in the export gcode step. Making it easier to multi-thread the engine one day.