Jump to content

mastory

Member
  • Content Count

    467
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

mastory last won the day on November 20 2017

mastory had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

39 Excellent

Personal Information

  • Field of Work
    (Product) design
    Engineering
  • Country
    US
  • 3D printer
    Ultimaker Original

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. There are actually quite a few ways to create an stl from a topo map. This site works ok, but the cropping and manipulation of the map pre download is awkward and kind of imprecise in my opinion. No control over the aspect ratio. http://jthatch.com/Terrain2STL/ This site works good. I think it's been tweaked for the good since my last attempt. https://touchterrain.geol.iastate.edu/ I am importing the gray scales into Cura 4.3.0 and using the import utility to generate the STL. I am not sure where I got the map I am currently using. Maybe from Google. The map you tested looks alot like the one I used. My subtract solid adds radii on the 4 rectangular corners and vertically all around in a sweep.
  2. I figured it out. Select the model you want to use as a subtract solid. Set the "modify settings for overlapping models" for this solid. Then pick "select settings". You can then set whatever slice settings you want for this piece. If you set wall thickness, top/bottom and infill to 0, the piece will be regarded as a subtract from the other models.
  3. Thanks for your thoughts Geert. I have created empty voids by subtraction in CAD, but never by placing an STL inside another. What I'm referring to is actually very similar to the support blocker function. Although I don't know if the support blockers are made up of STL files.. Those can be partially interfering a support and/or the printed model. Any portion that interferes the model is ignored, but the interfered support is effectively cut away. I can tell you that I've done the practice in question in the past few months. I just don't remember the exact steps. It is an unintended function in Cura. I'm not sure which versions. To me it worked without qualification like a boolean subtract in CAD. Given that, I think it could fairly easily be added as an intended function. The project at hand is a hand held topographical map of a ski area. My primary model was extracted as grey scale from a topographic map. This PNG file was imported into CURA like a lithophane with the model thickness relative to grey scale. This makes a model that is an accurate topo model, but it has sharp corners. Not a friendly shape for carrying in your pocket. I don't know a way to easily apply chamfers and radii to an existing STL model. What I can do easily, is model a subtract solid in Solidworks and export that to STL. In this case, the subtraction STL is shaped like a picture frame with an contoured inside edge. The shape cuts the exterior of the map with large radii. A cylinder was placed in the subtract model to create a lanyard hole in the map.
  4. I did this once before. There is a way to "modify settings for overlap with other models" and/or "modify settings for infill of other models" (in per model settings) that results in one of the models (overlapping the other) having basically 0 wall, 0 infill and 0 skin, and effectively performing a boolean subtract within the slicer. Can someone remind me of the specifics of this method? Thanks
  5. Is there a change log for the new version?
  6. I see that the part wall there is actually triangular when viewed top down sectioned through that area. If I change my normal .8mm wall size to.6, the surface is filled in. If it doesn't affect function, I'd prefer to keep the thicker wall. I am printing this in ABS on my UMO. The only nozzle available for my UMO currently is a .9mm. Not sure how well that would print at .6mm.
  7. I am seeing an anomaly in the way Cura is slicing the clamping dock. Will this open hole in the planar face of the cone feature have any effect on docking function? Thanks
  8. Nice work Snowball. Tell us which scanner and software you used to achieve these great results.
  9. I finally picked up a second hand UM2+E to add Mark2. I have a few questions as I get started. Does anyone have any good or bad experience with using Makergeeks Raptor PLA for the printed pieces? I happen to have a roll of it. Same question goes for ABS. Thanks
  10. I think small text and icons are programmed by younger programmers with good eyes. They can't realize that the small details are hard to see even with average less than perfect middle age eyes. As for the new layout, I think people are making more out it than its worth. I do prefer the earlier more spacious work area. What I would like to see is for the settings menu to be floating, dockable and resizable. This would allow moving it to the other monitor for even more workspace. I might turn my side monitor to portrait mode, and stretch the menu down the page to see much more without scrolling. Much more beneficial to me would be the capability to turn off perspective in the model view. I think this would be widely appreciated if it were implemented.
  11. @Reywas, I'm not prone to strike an argument with gr5. There's likely more to the issue that I don't see and George is vastly more informed. I defer to him. That said, I checked my start gcode and initial layer gcode to see what is happening. On my machine, the start code zeros the X & Y, then Z, and other unrelated stuff. In the lines that begin the first layer, my build platform positions the bed at 0.2mm (my 'initial layer height') down from the start position, further, not closer to the nozzle. @gr5, During a homing routine, does the firmware jog the bed downward X distance after seeing the Z switch, attempting to offset from the switch position so the nozzle approximately touches the glass - supporting your explanation. From my maybe related and maybe irrelevant experience with production machinery, it is common to 'zero' mechanisms to a switch or prox. That precise position is then referred to as zero. Sorry to confuse Reywas
  12. I can see where this could be confusing at first. The zero position for Z is with the nozzle above the build surface by some distance, often a thickness of paper. The Initial layer height is referring to the actual thickness that the printer is trying to print in the first layer - not the Z position. A good practice for strong adhesion to the build surface is to print a little more material than the actual gap from the nozzle to the bed. In your numbers above, your printer should extrude enough material in the first layer to a achieve a .3mm layer, however there is only .25mm of space. This will result in the material being slightly smashed into the printer bed promoting good adhesion. On materials that resist sticking to the build plate, it can be helpful to over extrude even more than in your example numbers. On lots of printers, you can manually adjust the Z position at early moments of the first layer to get the distance just right. Not sure about your printer, but I don't hesitate to give the Z screw a twist (by hand, over-driving the stepper by a few poles) at the very beginning of a print to get the distance just right.
×
×
  • 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!