gr5

I'm biased and like 3D Universe but all of these places (except probably amazon) definitely have good customer support and dedicated people who know the machine somewhat but at some point if you want even better advice you should come to this forum. Sorry we were away last week - we had great fun. I am familiar with the staff at all of these places (except amazon) and they are nice people who have experience with all kinds of issues with UM printers.

The part of the leveling where you level it 1mm above - that's not really necessary - that's very rough and only needed to avoid smashing the glass later on. Unless I have taken apart the bed I skip that step (continue continue continue).

I think you can do this with the new cura as well (cura 2.X, 3.X). You have to set infill to 0% and play with line widths (all of them - there are a few) and of course set wall thickness to a large value like you already did. Basically it's a lot of experimenting with wall widths and maybe also set flow to more than 100% - maybe 110%.

It could be that you just need to do the manual bed calibration again. It could be that the printer misunderstands the height of the .25mm nozzle. The very last step of manual bed calibration calibrates the second core and you must use the EXACT same technique that you used to calibrate the first core such that when you print they are printing at the exact same height. If the yellow nozzle is printing slightly lower it will overextrude the first printed layer and give you a little tiny ridge. Also - do you want the gray and yellow walls to line up perfectly on the outside? Or inside? Because I don't think you can do both since the nozzles are different.

Using team viewer is fine. There are other products like VNC as well. But most of these have bugs that let people take over your computer despite the passwords and experts recommend running these ONLY over a VPN tunnel with SSL encryption. Personally, if all you want is to control your printer, I would read about how to allow ports through your router. Typically you can pick any port from 2000 to 30,000 and assign that to translate to the needed ports on your printer. So for example I believe port 80 is the main port that the UM3 exposes (maybe there is another? I forget). So you could have port 12380 on your router map to port 80 on your um3. Or even port 80 on your router to port 80 on your um3 but I think cura will let you pick the port. Someone breaking into my UM3 http port is not as serious as someone having control over my main computer.

yes. Well here is what I think is a more precise explanation for leveling on both UM2 and UM3. The calibration card has a thickness. Say it's 0.15mm (not 100% sure). when you level with this the firmware is assuming the nozzle is this distance from the glass (0.15mm or whatever the thickness is). At this point the printer realizes that the nozzle and the glass are 0.15mm apart so it stores this calibration information such that forever in the future if you tell the printer to go to Z=0.15mm it will go to this location. If you tell the printer to go to Z=0 it should hopefully touch the glass. Typically the bottom layer thickness is 0.27mm meaning the printer sets Z=0.27mm while printing the bottom layer and it also extrudes just the right amount of material to fit that gap. I prefer to level the printer without the calibration card (although then I tweak the 3 screws again when it starts printing) such that when you tell the printer to go to z=0.27mm it actually prints about 0.12mm between glass and nozzle. This squishes the bottom layer extra hard. Alternatively changing bottom layer height in cura to 0.1mm seems to work very well also.

After rotating you can go into the scale feature and set the scale to 1,1,1 (unity scale - no scaling). It could be that the brim or some other thing in cura is causing the part to not quite fit the CR-10 bed. To get full use of the bed set "travel avoid distance" to zero. disable brim and skirt both! There's something else to do... details here: https://ultimaker.com/en/resources/44677-maximum-build-volume-ultimaker-2-plus-ultimaker-3

When working in cura it works with any shaped part. It doesn't know that your part is a rectangle - it is meant to work with an infinite possiblity of shapes. When it is telling you the X, Y, Z distances of your part it is telling you how much space the part takes up in the X axis, Y axis, and Z axis. It doesn't tell you how long your part is. So when you rotate a long thin part that was previously very short in the Y axis, the Y axis value will increase as it should. This scaling feature that shows distances is not very useful after you've rotated a part other than 90 degrees.

kman - I think you have to tell opengl to display things differently. It's a very different way to convert 3D surfaces to the 2D display. It's a different set of transformations. And in this mode you should be able to zoom and pan and it should stay in ortho mode. But as soon as you rotate (orbit) - you probably need to somehow leave ortho mode - but how do you leave ortho mode gracefully? you don't want the part to suddenly be redrawn in the other mode (I would think) because now the part would suddenly jump. So you have to somehow smoothly transition between the two modes. There's probably a lot of ways to do this so you have to pick one. Or like you said maybe disable rotation (what you call orbit). Which makes more sense? disable orbit? disconcerting jumps in position of the bed? Stay in ortho mode forever? (my cad package is always in ortho mode but it makes parts look strange/distorted sometimes) Maybe a toggle button to switch in and out of perspective? Lots of decisions. Lots of experimenting. Meetings where UX people disagree with programmers. More meetings. Time.

Look for a parameter - something like "enable/disable combing on first layer". You want to disable combing. This will make it retract on these moves. It still might leak a little but it should get much better. When the machine is able to "comb" then it doesn't retract. Combing is basically moving from one wall to another without leaving the infill area - without going over any clear areas in this photo. With combing on it's very careful not to cross over any of these clear areas. But it doesn't retract either. With combing off - it won't avoid the clear areas - but it *will* retract.

Hmm. I don't think you read my post. I didn't ask you how big your printer is. I asked you about "machine settings". I can tell you how to get to that part of cura but first tell me what version of Cura you are using. You need to get to MACHINE SETTINGS. This is in a very different part of the software depending what version of cura you have. Once you get to machine settings (in cura) then re-read my post.

In machine settings in cura - for your printer - you have to tell it the bed dimensions. It uses those numbers to place the object in the "center". I suspect it has the wrong values there - probably 150mmX150mm instead of 300X300.

@ghostkeeper take note - it seems to be mac only and 3.2 only as you can see in above post. I'm thinking some bad character (a tab, a missing carriage return) shows up from MAC but not PC version of cura.

I'm really surprised by this. 3 walls/shells each at 0.4mm should fix this issue. Even 2 walls. 1 wall -- I've seen this but not 3 walls. Did you mess with the order of printing? I think it's supposed to be infill, then inner shell, then outer shell. Is this cura 15? If this is cura 2.X or 3.X then search for "line width" above the parameters and make sure they are all set to 0.4mm.

@Tafelspitz - are you absolutely certain you didn't install a USB cable between your computer and your printer and update the firmware on your printer? Because there is a code change in the firmware that would explain everything. But only if you updated your firmware when you switched to Cura 3.2.

@tinkergnome - is still convinced that cura 3.2 has different firmware than cura 3.1 (even though both say 2.6.2). All I know is that this is a problem on at least 3 different forum topics right now and it is a hot topic.

So this is looking more and more like a bug in the 2.6.2 firmware (note it may be there are two different 2.6.2 firmwares and the one with cura 3.2 has the bug and not in cura 3.0). I suggest you install cura 2.5 and install the firmware from that onto your printer. And let us know if that fixes it. Also switching to reprap style gcode instead of ultigcode will fix it but that's not as good a solution.

So this is looking more and more like a bug in the 2.6.2 firmware (note it may be there are two different 2.6.2 firmwares and the one with cura 3.2 has the bug and not in cura 3.0). I suggest you install cura 2.5 and install the firmware from that onto your printer. And let us know if that fixes it. Also switching to reprap style gcode instead of ultigcode will fix it but that's not as good a solution.

Maybe your printer cable was loose? It has to kind of snap in. It should not come out without sliding the outer part first.

The feeder may be too tight or too loose for your ABS. You might have particularly soft (or conversely brittle) ABS. I have a 6 year old spool of ABS that prints great. No special storage - just sits in a box. Switching from PLA to ABS is easy but switching back you might want to print hot (around 240C) for 20 minutes to get all the last bits of ABS out. Or do a "cold pull" which is something you do from the menu that cleans out your cores nicely. The picture below shows (left) not tight enought and (right) too tight feeder settings. There is a screw in the top of the feeder. Moving the line down makes it tighter.

Ah - kman done sleeping already? Was the failing printer the master printer or the slave printer? I'm not sure but it's possible if the master printer lost network connection to the slave printer... not sure what would happen. I know your printers were on a UPS but did you put the router on a UPS also? Curious what happens if you start a print in cura connect on the "slave" printer and then cut power to the router or unplug the ethernet cable.

If you wire it wrong you won't hurt the stepper or the driver so it's fine to just experiment.

I have also noticed that the left/right/top/front views are perspective and not orthogonal which makes that feature pretty useless. I'm guessing this is what happened - some customer asked for left/right/top/front orthogonal views and some cura programmer decided to implement this feature but simply put the camera in these locations without understanding what an orthoganal view is. I don't think this is a critical feature and probably very difficult to implement so I think it should be removed from Cura until someone implements it correctly because to implement it correctly is hard - you have to then change the functionality of panning and zooming. And what do you do if someone rotates the view? You have to switch somehow between ortho and perspective views so you need to keep track of the modes. Does it snap out of ortho into perspective on rotations instantly? Or add a perspective button and only allow rotation if the user chooses that? It seems like a big project to me.

@AbeFM I think it's just that your wall is near the limit of printable (in cura's assessment) such that changing the layer height slightly has the slice occur at a slightly higher or lower location. I think the solution is to either make the wall 0.1mm thicker or maker your line width's (all of the wall line widths) a little smaller. For example if you are currently using a 0.4mm nozzle and cura is doing a 0.35mm line width, then try 0.33 line width and I think it will include that bit of wall properly. And print it just fine.

@bradley - maybe you should do a screen shot that shows all the temperatures in cura and then show a few lines of gcode that it creates when it primes. There may be a bug as tinkergonme mentioned.