catohagen
-
Posts
127 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Forums
Events
3D Prints
Posts posted by catohagen
-
-
14 hours ago, ctbeke said:
Mm that's weird. There should be more buttons (also a sign-out and profile edit button). Seems like something is going wrong in rendering the UI.
Which OS and hardware are you running?
I'm on Windows 10 Pro Version 1709 Build 16299.431
Intel i7-8700 and 16GB ram
-
2 hours ago, ahoeben said:
Could be a sideeffect of that textRenderer thing (native vs qt text rendering). @catohagen, could you check the Toolbox to see if there's an update for the backup plugin?
I updated to 1.0.4, but the UI still shows the same as my screenshot
-
On 6/7/2018 at 10:07 PM, ctbeke said:
You can install the Backups plugin from the Toolbox. The plugin UI should speak for itself.
I can make backups with the plugin, but there is no 'restore' or 'load' button
-
How do you select to 'Restore' a backup from the cloud ?
-
here's the print with default bridge settings:
-
11 hours ago, ahoeben said:
niche feature for your printer
its the autostart in Marlin firmware, so basicly every printer that runs marlin firmware supports it, I would hardly call that niche, I use it on my Ultimaker all the time
-
1
-
-
I've just tested a print with this setting on (brigde settings) but the result was....spaghetti
I printed this : https://www.youmagine.com/designs/quick-temperature-fillament-test in greentec, with basicly default PLA settings (210°c)
Why are default feedrate set to 15mm/s ? Its way too slow, the string have plenty of time to sag, it doesnt help when flow is reduced to 75% either...
I edited settings with 60mm/s feedrate and flow back to 100% and got very nice bridging
-
is this the way its intended ?
i dont know why the screenshots are added multiple times, sorry about that
-
is the bed level ? it doesn't look level...
I get good prints with flexible with slow feedrate (15-20mm/s) no fan, and no retracts or minimum retracts....usually I have retract off, strings in flexible are easy to remove.
also use well sized layerheights
-
Hi,
I cant seems to get the last top layer nice and smooth, there are gaps between the inner wall and the top 'infill'
I can adjust infill overlap and see the result on layerview and see with extreme 0.4mm overlap ,that the infill lines go through the wall, but the top skin or top layer still have gaps.
Anyone know maybe other things I can adjust ? It appears that the final last layer on a model have its own settings...?
Infill overlap 0.2mm :
Top layer with infill overlap 0.2mm :
Infill overlap 0.4mm :
Whatever infill overlap, the top layer seems unaffected and have gaps
-
Another adaptive print
Printed with Colorfabb Bronzefill 0.4SS nozzle, layers between 0.10 and 0.26mm (you can actually see the transitions where layerheight creeps towards 0.10)
Not too happy with the top finish, get gaps between walls and top layers...might be too much retraction, but the layering are awesome....
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, ctbeke said:
Great examples!
@catohagen any chance you can share the STL file of that cup holder? I'm writing a report on adaptive layers and I think it would make a great example use case!
Not sure what holder you referring to
but i'll attach the coffee container I used (its for storing 500g of coffee beans for coffee machines)
-
Having great results lately, and its a huge timesaver
My coffee container is very popular amongst family and friends and it's a great gift, I've printed out quite a few of these, and its always been a rather long print.
There are some curves included as details, and I like keeping its original shape and not dull these down just because its prints easier, but any higher layers than 0.2 and it starts to
string and fail on the curves.
The base container takes around 17hrs to print, with 0.15mm layers (0.6mm nozzle)
WIth adaptive layers, varying from 0.15-0.45mm its printed under 8 hours (7hrs,43min ) because most of the layers can be 0.45mm+ the threads came out perfect.
Top of the container to the left, two visible threads with 0.15mm layers and you see the transition to 0.45 after thread stops
-
3
-
-
After a few days of experimenting and printing with adaptive layers, I can say that this really shines its usefulness with big objects printed with bigger nozzles.
I'm printing with a 0.6mm nozzle, I can get the slicer to use 0.4mm layers where walls are near vertical and adjust the layers down to 0.2 on slopes.
So you get the faster print times with using a big nozzle and big layerheights, but keeping more of the details with adaptive layering generating 0.1mm layers on details.
When printing gcode that have layerheight of 0.1 or less, I get a difference in surface texture most likely due to 0.05 layers need a different speed and temperature than 0.15mm layers
Also if your Z leadscrews have just a tiny bit of slack and/or the resolution of the Z axis is reliably max 0.1, you might end up printing a 0.05mm layer ontop of the previous layer as the Z axis might not move at all
But just throwing it out here, I'm thinking maybe adjusting the feedrate and temperature could be added to the adaptive layers section?
or if it automaticly reduces the feed according to cubic mass per second from the base settings (printing 0.3mm layers with 40mm/s and printing 0.1mm layers with 40mm/s is alot of difference in plastic)
-
two spheres with 0.3mm layerheight, adaptive layering smoothed the one in the left rather nicely
-
It will work on multiple models if Cura slices each model seperately, then in the gcode the nozzle needs to lift up abit after each layer before moving to the other model, so for example on model 1 the current Z value is 50.125 and the next layer on model 2 is 50.105, the nozzle must move to the startpoint on model 2 and lower nozzle to 50.105.
Then next layer on model 1 is 50.140, so while nozzle is still over model 2, it lifts nozzle up before moving to model 1.
-
WIth the same settings as the sphere, I made a 100mm tall cylinder with a ballnose....then I got this :
which make no sense, it starts with the smallest layerheight at the bottom, and it gradually varies it up the cylinder even if the geometry is the same.
then by adjusting the base layerheight to 0.1 it looks as one would expect :
with 0.3mm layerheight on all of the cylinder part, and gradually decrease the values towards the top, which is superb (but settings make no sense)
so atleast it works
so you can forget about my ramblings above, i'm happy with results even if it takes some time to get there.
-
2
-
-
Getting better results, at least the layerview looks good
Base layerheight is 0.3, so it looks like it varies from 0.32 to 0.16 with these settings, threshold currently 85, the higher the theshold is, the less gap you get from min-max
Setting it back to 200, gives layerheight from 0.24-0.34
Going smaller and the gap between min-max increases (setting it to 30 gives layers of 0.1-0.31)
-
2 hours ago, JohnInOttawa said:
What I find so good about topics like this is the visualization they evoke. Apart from the discussion on the particular way in which adaptive layers are currently implemented, there is a fresh look at the geometry of layers on difficult surfaces ( I consider a sphere to be such a case with XY geometry printers) and a perspective that may help shape the approach to a future printing corner case.
And, nerd alert, I would love to know what software generated those mockups. I assume a CAD package, but certainly not mine....
.
All the best
John
Yes, discussions like this are interesting, and getting Cura to do awesome gcode generation with this adaptive layers will jump us way ahead towards smarter software.
The cam software I'm using is GibbsCam, I've used it since 2005 for programming CNC lathes and mills (was my dayjob)
The macro is something I wrote back in 1997 when I got my own cnc in the garage, I had no access to cam software then...but I used my macro on an Amiga 1200 to make gcode
to mill out wooden bowls, as with 3d printing, if you use the same layerheight on a sphere, its always ugly at the top/bottom, so I had to figure out how to do smoother surfaces, so
I implemented adaptive cut depths in my macro.
Yesterday I dug out the macro and implemented the same math into a macro for GibbsCam, so I can 'see' the layers.
-
3 hours ago, kmanstudios said:
Milling such as demonstrated is subtractive in nature while 3D printing is additive. Kinda polar opposites.
I wasn't trying to show milling, its the logic behind the toolpath generation of CAM packages, its the same as Cura does with adaptive layers
(creating a smooth surface)
As I replyed here earlyer, put a nozzle at the tip of that mill and invert the direction (start at bottom and go up) and you basicly have a 3D printer that prints a sphere
-
2 hours ago, ctbeke said:
1) Look at the code, it's very much adaptive (as in it looks at the mesh wall angles to determine layer height). in case of a sphere, this would be a continuous decrease indeed. you can prevent this by choosing a larger step size.
2) 3D printing is not milling, so I don't see how that milling technique would result in a 'perfectly smooth surface' in case of 3D printing.
3) It's in the experimental section because it's, well, experimental. We push out features as early as possible to get feedback rather than stay in our own world.
4) It's Free an Open Source Software, so feel free to contribute.
1. From VariSlice, their video and demonstration isnt showing segments of different layer heights, on my sphere, in the first picture i posted, all the last 100 layers from the top is the same layerheight, but VariSlice sphere looks like this
2. 3D printing and 3D milling both follows a toolpath, put a nozzle at the tip of that mill and invert the direction (start at bottom and go up) and you basicly have a 3D printer that prints a sphere
3 . Yes I know its a first implementation and are thankful for all the work that's been put into Cura lately, I don't think its quite working optimal, that's why I started this discussion
I get a tiny sense that you feel I'm criticising your or Cura wrongly, or I'm being negative which I assure you I'm not.
Currently its very difficult to get desirable results, and are merely suggesting some feedback....I can set some numbers and see its starting with the tiniest layerheights at the bottom of the sphere and 0.3mm layers towards the top...like the opposite effect....(but maybe having total configurability is a good thing)
I have gotten some better results today, but you need to sit and try hundreds of numbers and had to use step size of 0.001 for getting the smooth looking preview.
Im printing a sphere now, I'll post picture.....it looks good in preview, so i'm hoping it turn out awesome.
-
I set up a milling operation on a 50mm sphere, using a stepover limit, you see from the simulation the small Z steps at the top, and how its progressively increases cut depth when the slope gets steeper towards the center of the sphere. You see the H,V,D coordinates at the bottom of the screen, D is the Z axis.
Would be great to get similar behaviour with adaptive layers,the surface would be incredibly smooth, instead of the current static layer heights Cura generates at different parts of the print.
-
I made a macro with the math to generate a sphere with adaptive layers, and generating a 50mm sphere (actually a 500mm sphere to get more numbers)
I set that the max allowed stepover is 0.1mm (in any horizontal direction) so the 'adaptive' Z value is calculated based on that.
Here is the visualized 'layers' from my macro
Here not a single layer is equal, since its a continuous slope or arc.
Side view
in the lower right in the picture, if you think of this as stairs, every step inwards is 0.1mm, the Z layerheigh is different on each layer, gradually decreasing towards the top.
The last 10 layers is probably unprintable
(numbers is 10x for accuracy) as the difference is 0.038mm then 0.034mm, etc but it may give better results to implement adaptive layers like this.
I have a CNC machining background and CAM software have this way of generating toolpaths, its called 'stepover' or 'ridge height'
-
1
-
-
Hi,
I wanted to fiddle with the adaptive layers, and after tweaking the settings I see a consistent pattern in the gcode (i.e not adaptive)
I modeled a perfect 50mm sphere and cut it in half (25mm tall) and generate the gcode in Cura 3.2.1.
I used 0.1mm layer height and 0.02 for maximum variation, 0.001 for variation step size and 200 for theshold
, the last layers in the top should have the lowest layerheight, say from 24mm towards 25mm, and it should be that every layer is smaller in height than the previous to maintain the smoothness
here are the Z layer heights from 24mm and up
G0 X60.555 Y57.02 Z24.076
G0 X60.612 Y57.618 Z24.156
G0 X58.233 Y60 Z24.236
G0 X59.494 Y60.504 Z24.316
G0 X60.06 Y64.822 Z24.396
G0 X59.993 Y64.464 Z24.476
G0 X60.057 Y64.044 Z24.556
so the slicer takes the base layer height - maximum variation and its the same for each layer....each layer is 0.08mm tall
Changing maximum variation to 0.05, and variation step size to 0.05, threshold to 2, and the whole print is done with layers of 0.05
I know its probably not an easy task to write this algoritm to check and calculate for every possible geometry out there, but if the math is adjusted to check for step size to next layer in x or y direction, we could maybe get better results.
-
1
-
Print time estimation
in UltiMaker Cura
Posted
Since Cura is opensource, so you could just look around in the code and find it...or just can just use the time estimated and outputted in the top of each gcode file..