nallath

I have no idea why that isn't working. It's working on my machine. If you have a good reproduction step, please create an issue on github.

I've got some good news for you then; That isn't the case! If you merge models the origin is set to be the same. You could also just use 3mf / obj files, since those actually support multiple objects

Even though Qidi uses Cura, they haven't released the source code (and are thus violating the licence Cura was released on). I have asked them to adhere to the licence, but i've not been able to get any response from them. As such, I can't say what changes they actually made.

I'm very sorry to say that curasurf is completely right. Once Arachne is merged this is going to be more impossible to convert settings from one slicer to another.

By the looks of it this was manually added to the start gcode. I've only found references to A & B in g-code in context of replicatorG: http://replicat.org/gcodes

Again; please make an issue (one for each issue) on github. It's impossible for us to keep track of things otherwise.

I've never seen modifier meshes being moved, so that's also why it never got any attention. If you have a good set of reproduction steps, i would be more than happy to have a look at it if you create a bug report on github.

Thats what it does by default. But without actual log information, there is little we can do to debug the issue.

You could also try the new version of the slicing algorithm:

Without giving more information, all i can say is "probably". Do you have a repository of some kind for these files? I could have a look at them.

That's generally an indication of a bed that isn't really flat. If the nozzle is too close it will be over extruding and if it's too far away it will result in lines that don't stick well together. You could also try to print with rafts; that way the raft functions as a buffer for the uneven bed. Once you start with the real object it should already be more flat (although it's still a bit of a bandaid solution; a flat bad or compensation based on grid bed leveling is much better!)

Why do you think that priting a solid bottom layer is a bad idea? it's the first time that i've heard anyone talk about it. Not having a solid bottom does kinda mean that you're not getting the object that you're asking for, right?

You could try to invert it; Print a positive in PLA, create a mold over that by casting it and then use that mold to cast your final positive. You could also try to cut the model up into parts; A thin model that sits inside of a casing for support. You print the inner "sleeve" at a very low resolution and the sleeve very rough.

Have a look at https://github.com/Ultimaker/Cura/wiki/Profiles-&-Settings to see how the cura setting system works under the hood. Depending on what printer you have, it could be that the author of those profiles set the retraction settings in the quality profiles.

The fight to actually get your models removed if you did set the "correct" licence is something that takes a lot of energy. I've heard quite a few horror stories from artists that actually got death threats and a ton of verbal abuse for doing it. A common "defence" is: 'You shouldn't have put it online if you didn't want people selling it'. It's a completely ridiculous argument ofc, but for some reason people do think that way.

Not entirely true; The Arachne build does.

Please report issues with Cura on github. You can do that on https://github.com/ultimaker/cura/issues/

It is available. There are multiple ways to do this even. You can export profiles, you can export materials, you can save project files, you can import settings from g-codes, you can create backups and you can manually copy the files that Cura creates. I don't understand what you mean by this. Could you clarify what you mean? Yes they are.

But people are free to build one themselves! It's a great excuse for us to beg for a VR set at Ultimaker 😉

Internal server error is generally used for when the server crashed during the handling of the request. It could be that the g-code does something to trigger it, but I'd say that the issue primarily is with the server.

The limits that we set there are obviously based on our own experiences. It's entirely possible that there are things that you can do to get it to work.

Orange is indeed the warning value. We set these ranges based on what we know about 3D printing, but we also want to allow as much freedom to the users as possible (and well we might also be wrong sometimes!). As such we only put settings in error mode if we know that they will lead to machines breaking or just impossible situations (eg; speeds of 0). That being said; if you aren't using a weird machine / material, the settings should not turn orange.

Download the app image, make the app image executable, run the app image.

Well, you could just store a backup and restore that every so often.

It is on our backlog though. But LibArachne has more priority.