Daid

Best would be to grab the illustrator files. As those are already put into panels, and specify the thickness per panel.

As far as I heard from our shipping department. All postal services in the US are rubbish like this. We used to have lots of problems with the UM2 shipping to the US. Pretty much the whole packaging needed redesign or else lots of our shipments got some kind of damage. (This isn't the official view by Ultimaker, just hearsay) Maybe our US support and repair center can help you? support@fbrc8.com

The "Printrbot simple makers kit" might also be something then. It's in that price range, a kit, so all the fun of assembly. Perfect to get your feet wet without spending a lot of money. It does not achieve the same quality as Ultimakers. But you get what you pay for I guess. There is however, an quite active printrbot community, and the machine has been around for a while. And I've heard little complains about the latest offerings of Printrbots. Different in print quality between the UM2 and UMO is mostly between find adjustments (which have been done in production for the UM2, and thus less to worry about there). And the dual-fans of the UM2 give better cooling for small prints. However, installing dual fans on the UMO is possible. And the UM2 oozes a bit less, meaning certain prints with lots of retraction come out better for the UM2.

Indeed. There is no defined way what is up. There are just conventions. What Cura currently does matches with most free software. But is by no means "the true one way". Which is why rotation tools are important in Cura :-)

Few years ago people had to wait hours for (what people now see as) a medium sized object. You're welcome ;-) But, yes, it's heavy on the CPU, however, it does so on the lowest system priority, so everything else should get priority over the background slicing. So even on slower PCs the slicing itself should not impact performance too much. So it's stuff around the background slicing that is causing more issues then that background slicing itself.

Yes, I'm well aware. Currently trying to asses the impact and looking into what better parameters are. Most likely will do an hotfix this week (14.12.1)

I'm actually in conversation with Brook about fixing these things. But as my time is limited, as well as his, I'm depended on feedback and links to proper information. (you know, I do not have these printers) If you could link the info from the printrbot site that would save me a shitload of searching, and I will update it for the next release, thank you.

I think it's the same problem as this topic: http://umforum.ultimaker.com/index.php?/topic/8634-curas-1412-firmware-is-screwing-my-um2/ It's why I haven't activated the update notification yet (So most people are still on the previous version). As it seems some new protection mechanism is triggering on some printers.

We've also seen that happen in some occasions with ABS. We're not sure what the cause is (could be high bed temperature related?), but does not happen for everyone.

If you go bigger you run into all kinds of issues. With a bigger X/Y frame you need more thickness, and thus stiffer rods. Which adds more weight. It's better to switch to an core-XY system for bigger printers.

You could try adjusting the XY support distance parameter. This effects the support material in quite a few ways. Note that Cura currently has trouble with supporting thin area's like that.

Most panels are 6mm ply. And there are pieces of 4mm ply (mostly small pieces) so you need 2 different thicknesses of wood. Also, CNC routing can be done, but you'll have to adjust the drawings, as radii is an issue. The UM2 drawings where adjusted quite a bit for CNC routing. (For DIY, I recommend the UMO drawings) If you want something simpler then cutting it yourself, get the kit ;-)

"C:\Models\ProblemModels" Yes, I want models like that ;-)

You're example is incomplete, where are the "supported" areas, and where are the unsupported areas? Kinda bit of important information that is only in your head and not in the picture.

Copy of the model in my email? :mrgreen:

I did some experimental changes: http://software.ultimaker.com/Cura_closed_beta/ And I would really like to know if this helps people who are having problems, and are requesting manual slicing because of that.

The BLEN_C define is defined in the pins.h file. Long story short, you have the LCD enabled, while your board definitions do not properly define all pins for the LCD button.

Not from a "load as many files as possible" perspective. The main advantage of STL is that there is little left for interpretation. With OBJ, there is a lot of possible oddities. Pretty much all problems that you can encounter in STL you can encounter in OBJ. And then a bunch more. (Also parsing binary STL is insanely quick compared to any other format)

"some version back" is a bit unspecific. I did change the bridge detection algorithm a bit to be less broken (as bridge detection is a complex problem). But that was more then 6 months ago... so a few releases back... The idea is to span bridges by printing in the direction of the bridge. This works great, as it's pretty much the only way you can print in the air.

Funny fact, the CuraEngine converts everything to 64bit integers, in microns. To prevent odd rounding problems. After that it merges all vertexes that are within 10 microns, just to close up any imperfections in an otherwise perfect model (but not saved perfect due to rounding errors) And that's before any magic happens :-)

Odd, this error means that the heater was on at full power for 20 seconds, but the hotend did not manage to increase 20 degrees in temperature in that time. Normally it heats about 3x faster then that. This is a new protection to prevent burned out heaters when the pt100 has moved outside of the hotend.

Can someone of the "OMG I WANT MANUAL SLICING!!!!1!!one!1" people give the Cura test version a spin from: http://software.ultimaker.com/Cura_closed_beta/ It contains a change on how the slicing is started, which should prevent slowdowns on large 3D models.

However, Cura does try to do it's best under these conditions. And, a small patch shows that it can do better. And, because building new versions is really easy now. You can give this change a spin with the version at: http://software.ultimaker.com/Cura_closed_beta/

Are you using a stock or modified hotend?

Something could be wrong with the firmware settings (which are not reset on a new firmware install). Specificly the X/Y steps per mm. You could try a "reset to factory defaults" on your UM2. To see if that solves the issue.