gr5

I'd have to see the rest of the model but if you flip the plant pot over and print with the "top" "down" then you might not need any support at all. Support can make the model worse in cases like this but if you don't want to flip the part over (easy to do in cura) in this specific case you want to set "support placement" to "everywhere". As stated 3 times now. Always look at the part in PREVIEW mode to see if the printer will be doing what you want and to see what changing a setting has effect on the result.

So the GUI is confusing. When it gives you the "keep" "discard" option I thought "keep" was going to save something to the hard drive. It doesn't. There's the profile, and then there's the changes you make to the profile like the temperature change. When you select a new profile it shows all the changes you made (like temperature) and says "discard or keep changes". If you choose "keep" then it loads the new profile but with your changes on top so your 65C is still visible instead of 60C. If you choose "discard" then you get the profile fresh with your changes gone.

If the ring is larger in diameter than the rim of the pot then it can sit inside the pot loose but never be able to come out of the pot. Then you can grab the ring and have it rotate 90 degrees and turn into a handle for the pot. when you release, the ring falls back inside. This will need a lot of support which will be tricky to remove but first of all you have to place that ring inside the pot where it doesn't touch any walls. then do "support everywhere" as Greg says.

There is an unbricking procedure. Contact your reseller for the S5 unbricking procedure. I know someone who bricked his S5 today with the upgrade and has already unbricked it with the procedure and is already good to go.

1) I'd try printing it. It might not be as rough as you think. Or did you already? 2) Is it printing fast/slow/fast/slow in this area? If so then *reduce* the polygons that Fusion outputs. It's counter intuitive but if you have more than 5 or 10 triangles per mm it really slows down the printer. I can explain if you want. 3) There's a new alpha version of cura out that supposedly handles thin walls better. I haven't tried it yet. But there is definitely the burtoogle version of cura which definitely handles thin walls much better here: https://github.com/smartavionics/Cura/releases

If you need something much more tough than PLA then I recommend Nylon. There's many formulations and it's tough as hell. Most nylon parts can be driven over with a car and will just squish and bounce back once the load is off. Nylon is very hard to break with your fingers alone whether in the shape of a pencil or whatever.

So according to the datasheets "tough pla" is 24% weaker and 21% less stiff than normal pla. It's the 21% more flexible part that makes it tougher. If you use it as a braided rope, PLA is significantly stronger on a pull test. But if you hit parts with a hammer, the tough pla is more likely to survive. Also I've found that the shape of the stress/strain curve is not as linear for plastics as say steel. They start to curve very early so the modulus is actually usually lower over the range of forces that a part is likely to receive. It *is* strange though that the hardness measurement is almost identical. I would have expected the PLA to be harder.

I recommend avoiding ABS if possible. It's more difficult to print and you will usually get weaker prints (due to bad layer adhesion but you can overcome this with a lot of experimenting) and it smells very bad when printing. What characteristics to do you care about the most? Mechanical? Chemical? Everything?

Basically "tough" PLA should be slightly more flexible and have a lower hardness number. But no stronger.

I'm pretty sure the materials were tested professionally. But the people who wrote up the data sheet and other explanations don't know much about the language of stress/strain/toughness/durability. So trust the numbers on those sheets. Many test samples were used to calculate those numbers and they were tested by someone with expertise on those stress/strain machines and the other machines used. They actually 3d print things like the "butterfly" parts because if they had injection molded the parts the numbers would be different. So when you see a hardness number or modulus or tensile strength - those are real numbers from real samples.

I have a home built strain/stress tester but it's a pain to use and takes around 4 hours to test a material. I've tested a few materials - some were crap. Anyway most plastics have a similar shape. So if you just know a few things (tensile strength, % elongation at break, ultimate strength, modulus) you can get pretty close to the actual graph. I think it was Dupont or some other large plastics company that did an amazing job on their filaments where they did stress/strain graphs at multiple temperatures!

Oh wait - I just realized you posted the same 3 pdf files. You want a chart as well? What kind of chart? stress/strain chart? Almost no one publishes those. I wish they would. You can usually get 3 or 4 points off the graph and kind of guess the shape in between from the pdf files you posted if you have experience reading those published values.

I have looked up tensile strength and tensile modulus for many materials in my research for my graph that shows these values for many materials. Usually if you type a product name and "modulus" into google search you get the answer near the top of search results: ultimaker tough pla https://www.dynamism.com/download/2016/TDS Tough PLA.pdf ultimaker pla https://www.matterhackers.com/r/9EBLeA ultimaker abs http://www.novabeans.com/ultimaker/download/material-specification/UM180821-TDS-ABS.pdf My interactive chart is here - you can zoom in and hover over different products and I put a few non filaments in there for comparison (e.g. wood, glass). In the first chart stiffness is higher to the right. More flexible (therefore tougher) materials to the left. Stronger towards the top: http://gr5.org/mat/

1) When you say "the glass plate broke", did it just loose a tiny sliver of glass? 2) PLA doesn't have this issue where the glass easily breaks (95% of most formulations don't). Nylon doesn't have this problem. nGen doesn't seem to have this problem. It's mostly PETG, CPE. 3) Using a very thick layer of glue (to provide an area that is weaker bond between glass and part) is a good option but indeed the bottom is more ugly. There are many options. I have been printing a lot of PETg and have just been lucky recently. There are many ways to reduce the strength of the bond. The best way in my opinion is to reduce the squish on the bottom layer just a little. I would just turn the 3 leveling screws the same amount (clockwise as seen from below to move the glass down - away from the nozzle). Maybe a quarter turn. But it takes a lot of practice looking at the skirt (or brim) being printed on the first layer and deciding if it's squished enough or squished too much. If the first layer is coming out like rope then you are not squishing enough and the part won't stick very well. If it is squished so much it is transparent then it will stick very very well (which is good for some materials but not for petg/cpe). But there is a large range "in between" that is tricky to measure. I don't have a good answer for you. Hopefully someone who prints a *lot* of PETG has a suggestion for something else on the glass. Personally I print hundreds of petg parts and occasionally lose a bit of glass.

Fortunately there is the very simple and easy backup solution of using the USB flash drive. That's what I usually use anyway. Once you do it a few times you realize it's quite convenient.

I also have ubuntu and an S5 but I don't login and I don't use profiles. Here's what I do: Instead of the "profile" way of storing your settings I feel I have a better way called the "project" way. Everytime I slice anything I save the ufp (or gcode) file to the work folder where the STL is and I also do "file" "save". This saves the project file. It's like a profile but better. It saves the machine settings, the STL(s) and how the STL's are positioned. It saves which profile you are using (I only use ones that come with cura) and it saves your overrides of the settings. Let's say I've been printing some small parts with Nylon that don't need support and now I have another one that is unrelated other than being "a small part using Nylon with no support". I load one of the old successful projects, then delete the model and load in the new model. This way I have one "profile" (actually project) for every part I've ever sliced. Many hundreds of them. They always have worked with newer versions of cura (I can use an older project on a newer cura but not the other way around). I got burned early on with profiles on Cura 2.X and switched to projects and haven't looked back. As far as I can tell it's a similar work flow but without the bugs.

Watch the video. 60C should be enough but 60C has a different meaning for every printer because the sensor is "far" from the surface. If you have an IR thermometer you want the surface at exactly 60C ideally. In the video the main issues are: glue, squish, temp, rounded edges. You have the rounded edges down perfect, lol. So it's one of the other 3. Probably squish. Watch the video.

So you can indeed have infill layers be thicker than walls (not sure about support). I believe the feature is called "infill layer thickness". And you could in theory do thicker layers for inner wall but only if the part has vertical walls. Like when printing a coin or a cube or a cylinder or many other parts. But 99% of parts are more complicated and have sloped walls. Like a pyramid. Or a cat. And with sloped walls you are going to get a disaster if the inner wall is thicker than the outer wall. If the slope is shallower than 45 degrees you can even have the inner wall sticking out through the outer wall!

Or 3.3mm diameter holes for 2.85mm filament.

Yeah. Okay. This is weird. I've never actually used tree support so I don't think I can help you much. But isn't the support supposed to loo like trees branches?

I've heard that after you upgrade the firmware you have to do a "factory reset" sometimes. This sounds like that issue. Maybe. I recommend you try that to see if it solves your issues. Unfortunately you may lose your calibration data (not sure). I think you can probably see the calibration data if you put in a particular pair of cores and go to the menu item that lets you set XY calibration values directly - I think it shows the current values and you can write them down.

1) In the left image in your post above - just below the tabs to select extruder 1 or 2 there is a "search settings" box. What happens if you enter "tower" in that box? Personally I don't use the "settings visibility" feature as this is ignored when using the search box anyway. 2) I have an older version of "cura-mb" and it works fine for me. 3) Which setting exactly do you care about - please pick one as maybe the same one you care about is missing for me and I didn't notice. I have at least one tower feature you don't seem to have: "circular prime tower". 4) Please save your project "file" "save..." so we can compare apples to apples - it could be something in your printer (aka machine) settings - I'm pretty sure it's possible to make settings disappear using your machine json file also.

I don't know if slower or faster bridging is better. If more extrusion or less than normal. Or maybe more extrusion initially then less as it goes across. I don't know. But there are better and more bridging options in this version of cura. Also there are features to consider that the first layer over infill is also "bridging" (this feature off by default). This version is by our own @burtoogle. I use it almost exclusively: https://github.com/smartavionics/Cura/releases

Is it even printing your actual part at all? If so, are there gaps in the part itself on the same layers as the gaps in the support? If you answer "yes" to either question then probably a problem with your model. It's probably not manifold. Cura has an amazing plugin to test your model to see if something is wrong with it and can repair a very few of the many potential problems: In the upper right corner of Cura click "marketplace" and make sure you are on the "plugins" tab and install "Mesh Tools". Then restart Cura. Now right click on your model, choose "mesh tools" and first choose "check mesh", then "fix model normals" and "fix simple holes" to see if that helps. Cura doesn't fix most issues so...

@lhodics - did you try what I posted? Did it preserve your machine settings such that now you have both old and new machines each with different settings?