gr5

So I looked at the gcode in repetier-host (awesome free software) and there is nothing wrong with the gcode. Would have been nice to know 4 days ago. So that layer underextruded. it's just a coincidence that it's on the layer with the hole in it. It could be a filament tangle. That happens a lot to some people. Or it could be the Z stage is somewhat defective and fell more than it should. This happens to a lot of people who have both a bad Z nut and extra friction on their Z stage. If it's the Z stage it will probably happen at similar heights each time whereas a filament issue would be more random. So that might help you diagnose. Many people end up spending the bucks (4€ ?) to get a new Z nut with less backlash/play. Other's just put a weight on their Z stage to eliminate backlash. Consider cutting power and pushing the stage up and down many times and feel for irregularities. Don't oil the rods - but you can use oil and a rag - or wd40 and a rag to clean them if they are dusty. The z screw should have a lot of green grease on it hopefully already. Some people loosen the 4 screws that hold the vertical bearings on either side of the screw and move it up and down a few times and re-tighten. Sometimes simply moving the bed up and down 10 times is all you need to do to remove friction there.

That red is normally a problem but it doesn't seem to affect your part so I guess you got lucky this time.

Great! >but all ends with happy printing. Well I doubt that. I'm sure you will have more problems soon enough. Post photos and description when they happen and good luck! For most of us it takes around 100 prints to get perfect prints every time. There's a lot to learn.

Right but the new 2.1 beta might use this formula to create the default line widths? Not sure.

>Now Part 2 began printing. After 1 mm PauseatZ kicked in to let me add Part 1 Genius!!!

I'd be surprised if they took that feature away so: "almost certainly yes".

If you do "reset to factory configuration" it will zero all those values and should stop crashing. But of course you will lose those values :(

Sketchup also specifies "inside" versus "outside" by color. Have you noticed in sketchup that walls are either white or gray? Well that matters to cura. It could be related to that or what owen is talking about in xray view. That sketchup has 2 major issues frustrated me for years which is why I don't use sketchup anymore.

For any programmer to think they can do better than google is hubris. There is no better search. I've never even tried any search on the ultimaker site. Never. Why bother? If google only does one thing amazingly well, amazingly fast, amazingly relevant it's this: search. Plus it's built right into all web browsers now. Just click slightly higher on your browser. Google does amazingly well at other things like maps but search? Ha! You have to be an idiot to think you can beat google. A typical search uses 1000 computers. They are improving the algorithms even today. They hire the most billiant people. All right. Sorry.

Oh and I went 2 years without an upgrade because the bugs that existed were not a big deal. The better upgrade is to go to the tinkergnome version of marlin - very nice marlin! I strongly recommend it - for example it has a feature "continue failed print...". Lifesaver feature. And available now for PLUS ultimakers. https://github.com/TinkerGnome/Ultimaker2Marlin/releases

Cura is a very fast, light weight install. It's not a big deal. The first time allow it to install the arduino driver which does actually take a bit longer but from then on always cancel the arduino driver install.

Regarding bridging: If the roof of that first photo is bridged on a single layer the UM2 can do it no problem with PLA. The UM2 can bridge completely from one side of the print bed to the other if it happens suddenly on the next layer up. If it is a gradual bridge forget it. Almost impossible. So you may be right that you need the support everywhere but if it's indeed level you don't need support for that section.

Try to save all you gcode files of every print you ever made with notes so you know which gcode goes with which photo. That way from cura you can do "file - load profile from gcode..." and check exactly what your settings were for a print. Some of the things you say don't agree with each other - something isn't quite right: The pattern on the very first photo above could either be 50% infill showing at the top (not top layers to cover the infill) or it could be heavily underextruded solid layers. I assumed the later because people don't usually choose 50% infill and in fact you seem to think the infill was set to much less in your later posts. So I still stand by the fact that the first print was extremely underextruded - by about 50% (50% of the material is advancing through the nozzle as desired). Lowering speed by 5mm/sec shouldn't make any difference instead while it's printing go to the tune menu and cut the speed in half and wait for 10 lines to be drawn and listen to the speed change and then re-evaluate and adjust the speed from there. Changing speeds on walls versus infill can indeed cause exactly what we saw. 100mm/sec with .15mm layers and even at 240C this is challenging but I assume you were much cooler than 240C (sorry if you said I read some of your posting yesterday). The cooler you print the more viscous the filament is (think toothpaste at 190C and honey at 240C) so you have to print slower at cooler temperatures but it's worth it if you want extra nice quality. There is a very very recent bug in cura that changes nozzle size to .46 even if your actual nozzle is .4. Ultimaker is just now recommending going 7/8 if anything so after years of recommending .4mm nozzle size setting for .4mm nozzle they are now thinking putting .35mm in Cura (lying) which is the opposite direction of your .46. Anyway having it at .46 means it has to push that much more plastic through that tiny nozzle which also increases underextrusion potential so I'd change that (and change shell to .8 as shell should always be an integral multiple of nozzle size (unless you are an expert and understand the actual code of how it chooses line width).

So for example if nozzle size is .4 and wall (shell) is 1 then lineWidth is .5 (two passes at .5) If nozzle size is .4 and wall (shell) is .7 then lineWidth is .35 (two passes at .35). If shell is zero then it is ignored and is always one pass at nozzle width. And so on...

If you change nozzle size from .4 to .45 but leave shell at .4 or .8 it will do NOTHING DIFFERENT. There's a complicated formula that interelates line size, shell size and nozzle size. As long as shell size is a multiple of nozzle size then the line size will match the nozzle size. Here's the actual formula: def calculateEdgeWidth(): wallThickness = getProfileSettingFloat('wall_thickness') nozzleSize = getProfileSettingFloat('nozzle_size') if getProfileSetting('spiralize') == 'True' or getProfileSetting('simple_mode') == 'True': return wallThickness if wallThickness < 0.01: return nozzleSize if wallThickness < nozzleSize: return wallThickness lineCount = int(wallThickness / (nozzleSize - 0.0001)) if lineCount == 0: return nozzleSize lineWidth = wallThickness / lineCount lineWidthAlt = wallThickness / (lineCount + 1) if lineWidth > nozzleSize * 1.5: return lineWidthAlt return lineWidth

Wow those are difficult prints. For example having that yellow thing come out of the red base... SIDEWAYS! pretty much impossible wihtout some kind of support or soemthing. I guess one answer is to just turn on support. Not "everywhere" just do option "touching buildplate". Personally I would try to use meshmixer support - but it takes many prints to get good at using meshmixer supports - some details here: http://www.extrudable.me/2013/12/28/meshmixer-2-0-best-newcomer-in-a-supporting-role/ pay particular attention to how to rotate your part in the "annoyances & limitations" section and also note that there is a small error where he set layer height to "0.5" mm and it should be the layer height you print at e.g. .2 or .1mm.

I haven't checked my steps/mm yet but I believe it should be 564. The UM2, UM2go, UM2ext all have 282 steps and doubling that gets you to 564 for the "plus" kit. I'm thinking though that the "plus" moves the feeder stepper the opposite direction! Not sure if you can change that in tinker Marlin or not. tinker marlin is here: github.com/TinkerGnome/Ultimaker2Marlin/releases edit: Holy $h!7! Tinker Marlin already has a "plus" version! Use that one!

This is extremely common. It's your Y axis only. X axis seems fine. It's usually the pulleys as nallath says - most often the motor pulley or the other pulley on the short belt - tighten the hell out of these. HOWEVER it could instead be friction. Push the head around in X and Y. Feel the difference. Oil the 4 rods in upper corners. Wipe all dust off all rods. Don't oil the 2 rods through the head but still you can use oil or wd40 to clean those (put something on the bed to keep it from getting oil dripped on it).

It will be tough to get it that hot! It's only 100 Watts I think. But I'm guessing it will be okay. Certainly the temp sensor can handle that. The circuit board should be okay because it can handle molten lead which is more like 250C or 300C. Glass can handle that. Metal can handle that. I suspect it will be fine except without the air temperature being 90C I don't think you can get it that hot with only 100 watts. But if something breaks you won't be covered by warranty! I would go for it and if anything breaks fix it. Keep in mind the servos can't handle that kind of heat either so move the servos outside the printer (very easy and requires no hardware - not even an extra screw - but requires software change to reverse direction). I forget the max operating temp of the servos but they are okay with 40C air temp. 90C air temp is too much. I forget if 80C is the max allowed air temp or the max allowed servo temp. You will need good insulation to get it that hot! Plus maybe a second heater. Don't let the second heater get the electronics hot though! Insulate the bottom of the printer as well!

I don't know the answer but I know it's the NSIS installer and by default if you run it from command line with /S it will run it in silent mode. However the NSIS scripting language lets you ignore the /S for certain things so unless the person who wrote the installer (probably Daid?) paid attention... it might not work fully. But give it a shot!

By the way - that's a ridiculous amount of support. You may have trouble printing this with no support but ideally you only need it in the rounded corner area. Not printing support can save you tons of time but the print might not come out proper. Personally I would build my own support in cad at those rounded corners where wall meets roof and then leave the central flat ceiling unsupported as that will print pretty well. Removing support and cutting the print speed in half should make it print in the same amount of time with less underextrusion.

First of all NEVER PRINT BEFORE CHECKING LAYER VIEW. You would have seen these problems ahead of time. You have 3 problems. 1) The "mesh" you refer to is support material. In slice view you would have seen this as a grayish teal color. You should probably turn off all support. 2) Your walls probably were too thin - they need to be at least .8mm thick to print with a .4mm nozzle and even then they might not print due to floating point errors so I recommend 1mm thick walls. However rather than do massive edits to your CAD model you can "lie" to cura and tell it you have a slightly smaller nozzle but you must change shell width to be multiple of nozzle size or nothing will change. So experiment with .3mm .2mm .1mm or whatever it takes to get the walls to appear. The farther you stray from the actual nozzle width the worse the qualtiy gets but .35mm is excellent quality output for a .4 nozzle and .3mm should be acceptable also. .2mm - will if that's what it takes then don't print it. So play with this and look at it in slice view and see what gets your walls to re-appear. Again - CHANGING NOZZLE SIZE DOES NOTHING IF YOU DON'T ALSO CHANGE SHELL. So .35mm nozzle and .4mm shell gives you .4mm lines. .35mm nozzle and .7mm shell gives you .35mm lines. It's actually easy to leave the nozzle size at say 1mm and just adjust shell at first to get your walls to appear and only then make the values make more sense e.g. nozzle .31mm shell .62mm. 3) You have quite a bit of underextrusion - there are lots of gaps on the top layer. This is probably the hardest problem to fix as there are dozens of possible causes but the simplest is temperature and speed. Try printing it either 20C hotter or at half the speed you had used. What was your: layer height, speed, temperature?

Um. Well I summarized it here on this screen that's kind of private still for another day or two - but read the details in the description setting that goes through all the features of the upgrade kit: http://gr5.org/store/index.php/ultimaker2-plus-upgrade-kit.html

I suspect it's a double bug. The first bug (now fixed in git) was to accidentally apply it to non-plus machines. The second bug (not yet fixed) I think is to make the nozzle size 8/7 as big instead of 7/8 (8/7 is basically 1.14). But this is just a guess. Quite a long time ago there was a video with Erik (a founder) saying something like "there were many problems with print quality that we fixed using software instead of hardware" which was not expected (fixing quality issues with software). And he implied that this happened over and over and that each time they think they have a hardware problem they manage to overcome it with software. Well not *every* problem but an impressive amount. I think it's interesting that this still seems to be true - that you can still make improvements simply in Cura and Marlin. And that all printer companies that use Cura and Marlin benefit - not just Ultimaker.