nallath

Have you tried enabling the "Mold" setting in Cura (do note that it's experimental!)

Ah, right. I misunderstood the question. If you look at the perobject setting tool, you see that it does the following self.setExposedProperties("SelectedObjectId", "ContainerID", "SelectedActiveExtruder", "MeshType") It also defines the function def getMeshType(self): In the qml it then does the following: UM.ActiveTool.properties.getValue("MeshType") So in your case you could do something like self.setExposedProperties("ObjectTypes") def getObjectTypes(self): return self._object_types model: UM.ActiveTool.properties.getValue("ObjectTypes")

So what would marking one model as a prime tower change versus not marking it at all? The Outer wall Wipe Distance or Infill Wall wipe distance might be what you are looking for.

The Per Model Settings plugin already has a combobox, so you could have a look at that. As for getting a list of files in a directory: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3207219/how-do-i-list-all-files-of-a-directory You might need to create a ListModel to display the values that you want in the combobox.

It's likely caused by rounding errors. We are working on a complete overhaul of the slicing algorithm to resolve this issue. You can find an early version of that here:

That is the autodetect feature of the USB printing plugin. You can disable that plugin via the marketplace-> installed plugins

You can also enable the backup plugin. It's shipped with Cura by default.

I'm pretty sure it's the horizontal expansion. The second image clearly shows that.

A bit of nuance here; We are not all knowing or infallible. By all means ask questions as to why something is the way it is. If we can't explain why we did (or did not) do something it's a sign that something should be done. These kind of challenges are what improves things. There is value in the remarks of those that are experienced and those that are new, but they tend to be on different "levels" (eg; I don't really look at the features intended for novices and i'm unlikely to notice certain quirks of the interface because i'm too experienced!) Also, Cura does have variable layer height although it's only automatically settable (Enable "Adaptive Layer Height" in experimental). The main reason that certain features don't get built is a "simple" matter of triage. We have a certain amount of resources that we can spend on things. There is always a much larger amount of features / bugs to build / fix. As such, we have to make a lot of decisions regarding what gets done. We try to make these choices so that we get the most value from the resources that we have. The type of questions that we ask ourselves when doing this are (and not in that particular order): 1. How much people would benefit from this? 2. Who would benefit from this? (eg; Any user from Cura? People with Ultimaker machines? All people without Ultimaker machines?) 3. How much effort is it to build? 4. How much effort will it take to maintain? 5. Does it align with the strategy of Ultimaker? 6. Does it make things easier to develop / maintain other features? It can quite often happen that we think that a certain feature would actually solve a certain problem, but that we think that not enough people actually encounter the problem. This is by no means saying that the problem isn't there or that we don't want to fix it, just that there are other problems that (in our views) are a more "efficient" way to spend our resources. Again; We could be wrong in this view, which is also why we try to talk to people in the community. I know it's a bit of an overused thing to say, but I mean it. I try to calibrate my assumptions as much as possible to ensure that we can make the right decisions. Anyhow; The post got a bit longer than anticipated, but it's good to share views like this. Please keep sharing your views and opinions. We're all here to make the product better (even if we can't always get everything that we want)

As the message already indicates; your model isn't manifold. More info can be found on: https://all3dp.com/2/non-manifold-edges/

Don't print breakaway with a BB core. That's why it's saying that it's not supported.

You can send me money so it's no longer fee (and thus cheaper for you ;)) Free is more expensive is a bit of a silly statement. S3D can't do these things either and does cost money. I'm pretty sure that Cura is getting more investments in terms of development time than S3D is getting. But just because you're not the one paying, it doesn't mean that no-one is paying.

We use Qt as our graphical framework, but the vesion that we are currently on does not support the M1 architecture. We have been bit slow in updating this, since it would also mean that we won't support older versions of osx. I'm not quite sure when we will make the switch, but I don't expect it to take a super long time.

Have you read this guide: https://github.com/Ultimaker/Cura/wiki/Profiles-&-Settings?

We didn't develop / maintain those builds. Someone else did. The problems with maintaining it also why it stopped. There are parties that provide something like apt builds for Arch linux. The amount of issues we get reported from that is pretty staggering. I personally don't share the concerns that the people that posted the links have with appimages. The same could also be true for software provided via apt. Cura is also open source, so you could just see if it's doing something nefarious.

We used to have .deb packages, but it was a complete nightmare to maintain. On paper it all works, but in practice, not so much. The reason why it's so hard is that we use a ton of libraries that work together. In theory minor version increases should play well together, so it shouldn't matter if you have version 5.11 or 5.14 of a given library, as long as it's higher than 5.11. In practice however it could very well be that 5.14 has some issue with version 3.2 of another library (but not with 3.3 on certain operating systems). With a .deb we simply can't control this, since each operating system decides what versions of a package they support. I'm very much aware of the advantages of using .deb files, but as it stands, I simply can't defend the extra (continued) effort this would take for us to support it.

This is a known issue with big sur. The version of Qt that we use doesn't officially support big sur. We are looking into upgrading it, but it does mean that certain (older) versions of OSX won't be supported anymore.

Whoops. That was a typo on my end! But yeah we could setup a discord server if there is interest for it.

Our material engineers do seem to think so 🙂

If you change the fdmprinter.dev.json file and set the enabled property to true you can. You could also do it via code of course.

I tend to just use the preview and look at the "speeds" color scheme. Since the outer walls are normally at the same speed, you should be in a single color. Areas where this is not the case are due to the min layer time kicked in.

As far as I know a 60deg overhang is perfectly printable on an S3. The formulas for non Ultimaker printers are not created by us. It's up to the contributors in question to set them.

Cura already has a setting for shrinkage. It's still disabled by default, since we didn't get it done in time for release, but it can be changed already. It's called "Scaling Factor Shrinkage Compensation"

I don't really see a reason why it shouldn't be hopping on first glance. Could be a bug.

Might it not be the "Max Comb Distance With No Retract"? *edit* Lol, our posts crossed.