gr5

You might also want to tune your printer to make layer change happen as fast as possible. Crank up the acceleration and max speed on the Z. I got it so fast the layer change is now kind of a "click" sound. This has nothing to do with cura but the longer the Z change takes, the more you get out of equilibrium pressure and issues of over and under extrusion. Do you have linear advance turned on for your printer? That could also cause this issue if you have the wrong value for linear advance.

It looks like the underextrusion is happening on layer change and you have very thin walls. So: Make sure retract at layer change is unchecked. Make sure enable coasting is unchecked Do you have "spiralize outer contour" checked? If so uncheck that as well.

Again - this is not normal. Not acceptable. It means you have bad layer adhesion. And it can be fixed. I've heard that thicker layers helps. Higher printing temp, higher air temp, lower fan speed can help. You get the exact same problem with all higher temp materials like ABS and Nylon. This is why for most people ABS seems like a very weak material (along layer lines). But these changes have other consequences so you have to tread lightly. Higher temp can clog the nozzle on many filaments (notably ABS). Please stop saying ASA is weak without qualifying that with "when printed wrong". When Ultimaker creates a profile for a new material, they create this print like a vertical pencil with notches in it. They try lower and lower temperatures as you go up this "pencil". then they break the print and count how many layer lines were crossed when it broke. If the break is 100% in the layer line it gets a score of zero (something like that). If the crack crosses many layer lines it gets a high score (10 or something). They use this to judge what temperature, fan speed, bed temp, layer thickness is sufficient to get good adhesion. In my opinion there is a problem with the fan speed in Ultimaker profiles. Either it's only my printer or someone made a mistake or... I don't know what... but the fan speeds seem all out of whack. I think you said ASA was at 20% but my S5 prints at 100% power when fan speed is at 20%. There is no difference until you get down to around 10% - only then does the fan start to slow down but only slightly. Your printer may be completely different. So I strongly recommend you play with the fan speed in TUNE mode and listen. You can judge fan power by ear. Don't use pitch or RPM as it may come down in only one tonal step (7% change in rpm) and yet be more like 30% less power. Just think - how much power does that seem like when you listen. Trust your ear which hears pitch and also volume. Compared to the other setting. Maybe make a chart - something like this but this may be unique for your printer: fan setting - actual power 12% - full power 11% - 90% 10% - 70% 9% - 60% 8% - 60% 7% - 50% 6% - 40% 5% - 30% 4% - 10% 3% 5% 2% fan won't spin 1% fan won't spin Then if the profile called for 20% I'd set the fan to 4 or 5% according to the above chart. Again - don't use this chart!! The above chart is similar to my S5 but I doubt your S5 is just like mine. And my fan spins fine at 1% on my S5 but my UM2 won't start spinning until around 30%.

@Zavitan - I don't know if it will help but you can create a github account for free and post on the above issue (#9667) as linked by ahoeben and mention that you also have the problem. It might not help get it fixed but it might remind the Cura programmers that it's causing problems for people. A workaround might be to change your "locale" to another language like english while using Cura? I'm not sure. Also explaining on github how someone with english locale can easily switch to hebrew locale might be helpful to programmers who have never changed locale. I suspect at least one of them know how to do this already.

I set my wall width to be a multiple of line width so for a AA 0.4 nozzle I may set the wall width to 1.2mm for example. But never 1mm or 1.3mm. Always make it an even multiple of the primary line width. I like 0.4mm line width for a 0.4 nozzle by the way. The default might be 0.35mm? I forget. Equalize Filament Flow - I never touch that. I make print speeds the same and line widths the same and don't worry about the equalize filament flow feature.

The weakness should never be along layer lines like this. If it is then you have bad layer adhesion. This is because as you print a new layer over an old layer, the new layer is not melting the old layer enough to get a good bond. You fix this by lowering the fan speed. As low as possible. I'd try 1% and start from there. Also consider covering the top of your S5 with a large box. Ideal air temp is around 35C to 40C (the highest safe temperature - you won't damage any components with air at 40C). You can play with the fan speed in the TUNE menu but you want it as low as possible but still turning. You don't have to cover the top of the printer - slowing down the fan (possibly to 0%) will help the strength a LOT.

ahoeben beat me by seconds. He means "right to left". Hebrew (or whatever language you have) is a right-to-left language. This looks like a bug and should be added to github issues.

I haven't printed with ASA so I'm not sure if it gets any better than this. PLA is just such a wonderful material if you are looking for good looking prints. I've heard people call those "zits". I don't care about them much so I haven't paid too much attention but they happen when the pressure in the nozzle is high and some filament squirts out sideways in the cracks. I'd try cutting the speed by 2X to see what happens and play with it from there. I think you can do that live in the TUNE menu. Also in Cura make all your speed settings the same. By default Cura prints faster in the infill and slower on the outer skin so you get overpressure when it slows down (too much pressure in the print head for a few seconds until it equalizes again). Let us know what you learn. Everything is a tradeoff. If you want prettier walls you can do it but it will probably cost you in print time.

Yes. This.

FYI - I just learned that when you fill out the "submit a request" thing it goes to your reseller (magically). But more importantly the data is accumulated (e.g. how many people get ER59) by Ultimaker which is very important in your case so that they are more likely to improve the recovery procedure (like maybe it should pause so you can fix things and allow you to resume or maybe they should add a "resume failed print" to the firmware as many other printers can do this).

Yikes. I don't have the MS so I can't comment. But you need to contact your reseller or probably better go here: support.ultimaker.com and click "submit a request" in the top right corner. I think you'll get faster feedback there and this helps Ultimaker prioritize "failure recovery" procedures to make this kind of thing less painful. For Cura issues it's best to post on github but for S5 firmware issues I think "submit a request" might be the best path to getting the firmware improved. If they only get one request like this probably nothing will happen (although you never know) but if every person who gets this issue posted there - you can bet it would be improved in the next firmware release. Resellers are supposed to take feedback like this and send it to the distributors who are supposed to collect it and report to Ultimaker who is supposed to combine all the feedback like this and choose which issues to concentrate on. But I think much of these issues get lost. So I suspect going the "submit a request" route is more direct and more effective.

This is strange. What happens if you set "minimum volume before coasting" to zero? Does it do it correctly then? I'm wondering if that's related to this bug (at least it looks like a bug). Also this might not be relevant but maybe it is. It looks like you have around 1.2 or 1.5mm line width. Do you have a 1.5mm nozzle? What are your values for: outer wall line width inner wall line width top/bottom line width wall thickness I'm wondering if your inner and outer wall are different thicknesses and that somehow messes up coasting. They appear the same. Is it doing this inconsistent coasting on every layer or just the bottom layer? I'm also wondering if it's keeping track of the volume printed before it does the coast and if you don't hit the minimum then maybe it does a partial coast? Or maybe the volume since the last retract? Or volume since last coast (and ignoring retractions)? I can't think of a scenario that explains your pictures. By the way when adding pictures to a post, drag them all in and then find the spot where you want to insert the picture, place the cursor there and then go down with the mouse and hit the PLUS sign at the bottom of your post where the appropriate picture is. That way you won't get 2 of each picture. It would be good if you could post your project file so people can duplicate this. It will include your model so hopefully that's okay. In cura do "file" "save project..." and post that file here.

I'm not certain but I think the answer is 32GB. I read that the BBB can only read up to 32GB uSD cards so I figure maybe the S5 (which doesn't use BBB but maybe for the same reason) can also only go up to 32GB. Something happens there maybe. Also 4GB can be addressed by 32 bits so that limit would make sense but I doubt that's the limit. I'm going to guess 32GB.

There are over 500 settings in cura. There are hundreds of profiles that come with cura. Each profile has different defaults. This is a difficult question to answer. Maybe narrow down your question? Like do you want to know how to see the settings? Do you want the default settings for a particular profile? Why are you asking? Or are you asking about cura 15.X seeing as you have an UMO possibly you use Cura 15? From 2015? It's an excellent version that works quite well with the UMO.

I think the ear is probably too thin. Typically if your nozzle is 0.4mm then your line width also probably defaults to 0.4mm. Double that to the minimum wall width. 0.8mm. But wait - you can check "print thin walls" and get down to almost 0.4mm walls. Next you can lower the line width to 0.3mm without much loss of quality. Finally you can set "horizontal expansion" to some value to make the ears a little thicker but it will distort all of the model a little so maybe just add 0.2mm? You'll have to experiment.

I'd contact your reseller. Explain how your S5 head wobbles much more than another S5. That bearing is quite short so it's easier to have problems like this. Also on the UM3 and S3. The UM2 never had this problem as the bearings are much longer. I know someone with a UM3 who had this problem and he fixed it with some kind of cylindrical shim. But I think there are better ways to fix your issue - maybe a new bearing or maybe a replacement plastic part for the head.

log file here: %APPDATA%\cura\<Cura version>\cura.log (Windows), or usually C:\Users\\<your username>\AppData\Roaming\cura\<Cura version>\cura.log

This is with an S5? you can do it but it involves editing gcode files. Well even then you can't do it because the active leveling can't be disabled on the S5 and that would ruin the existing print. Unfortunately the S5 printer firmware does not have that capability. I'd still get the UPS and at least that will cover brief power glitches. The UM2 and UM2+ can do this if you have the tinkerMarlin firmware installed but not the newer printers (S3, S5, UM2+C). For me - 15 hours into a 25 hour print would be worth it. I'd immediately heat the bed back up to temperature (otherwise there is a large risk the part might pop off the bed). Then I'd figure out exactly which layer failed and then edit the gcode by hand to start at that layer. I did this once for a failed UM2 print job that was more than 10 hours (resume failed print). But again - you you can't do that on an S5 because of the active leveling.

Not certain if ping works unless the printer is in developer mode. I'd put the printer into developer mode - at least for testing purposes. In developer mode the printer displays it's ip address at the top of the main screen on the S5 and I think ping is enabled. Ping may be disabled. It might be that you had the printer in developer mode before the upgrade and the upgrade turned that off by default? I don't know. The thing is - I'm not sure what "status" and "connection type" mean exactly but I suspect "connection type" should read "ethernet". Is this the exact same file as before the firmware update? Some ideas: I'd contact your reseller. It's possible there is a known issue with this version of firmware (6.2) and having the ethernet stop working If it were me I'd get the olimex-serial-cable-F and connect directly to the linux console so I can go in there with conman and expleriment more directly (like trying to ping outward). There are deadly voltages in the S5 if you remove the cover but personally I don't have a problem with that (e.g. I don't have a cat which could easily rub up against that power supply if I had the cover off and cables going into it and I'm careful not to touch anything when power is on). I seem to remember that the S5 firmware has some kind of firewall now? I am not up to your version of firmware. Maybe there is a problem with this firewall? Try turning off the firewall (as an experiment): https://support.ultimaker.com/hc/en-us/articles/360017379620-Using-the-firewall-on-your-S-line-printer Do you have air handler or material station? If so I'd try to stick with latest firmware. If not I'd go back to an older version. Much older. Your reseller can help you with that - since ethernet is down you can copy it onto a usb flash drive and upgrade that way. Or if you are really desperate you can use the restoration procedure that uses a microSD drive. There shouldn't be any need to hide some of the IP addresses because 10.X.X.X addresses are all private. They don't exist on The Internet. They are only on private local area networks which means I can't connect to those addresses unless I am already in your company network. Did you read any of this stuff? https://support.ultimaker.com/hc/en-us/articles/360018123920-Network-setup-via-USB- https://manpages.debian.org/testing/connman/connman-service.config.5.en.html

I guess many people will say: "so what?". If you want that surface to look better you can try ironing. Ironing only improves top surfaces but I think you implied this was the bottom of your print.

Well you can change your line width a little bit. Assuming you have a 0.4mm nozzle, 0.3mm to 0.6mm line widths are printable. So if you go slightly thicker line widths you should be able to close up that gap mostly. And I think there is an option to ignore the gap if it's below a certain size. Or you can disable infill for this area of the print maybe. Hmm. I guess you'd be disabling skin. So you can disable top or bottom layers for this section of the print potentially. You aren't going to get the gap size 100% perfect but maybe close enough if you play with the line width. Normally you shouldn't have to mess with line width to fix this kind of thing but if you are printing 10 or more identical parts then it starts to be worth the trouble.

Arachne and "mb cura" do better on thin walls so I think they will also do better on this thin infill. But I'm not certain as the situation is a little different. Similar but different.

Yeah that's a common question and I'm not 100% sure of the answer. I think the new beta version of Cura (version 5.X aka archne) is supposed to do a better job with this exact issue? Maybe? I haven't been paying too much attention but you could download and try that beta version of Cura. Also the mb version of cura seems to usually do a better job regarding this exact issue. At least it does for my models - not sure of this particular model. You can get that version of cura here: https://github.com/smartavionics/Cura/releases The smartavionics version is the same person as burtoogle here on this forum. I have met him personally and he has been contributing (as an outsider) to Cura for many years. I trust his code.

Yeah look in those 2 configuration folders. In one of those folders is a file called cura.log. Post that here.

Greg makes a good point - do you have win7 32 or 64 bit? You can check by hitting window key, right clicking on computer and show properties (this is from memory so could be off a bit but google is your friend).