Jump to content

peetersm

Dormant
  • Posts

    377
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by peetersm

  1. Yes, each one has a raspberry Pi and web cam plugged into it. It's a free for all, students just use the web page to browse thought the printer's cameras to find one that is free, then they send their print job to that printer. https://www.3dprinteros.com/store/easybox-cloud-3d-printer-management/ I goofed around with 3dprinterOS is NOT cheap and NOT opensource, and does not really deliver on the accounting side which was most interesting to me as an educator who needs to keep track of who's printing what and accounting quotas. I have not found anything that does that. Maybe see if the will fit your needs, the opensource and free Octoprint it is pretty awesome https://octoprint.org/ There are some "real print farm" projects out there used by Luzbot and prusa but I have not looked to see if they are sharing.
  2. thanks! I just noticed on the file I thought was good that the nozzle did turn off before the motion was done, but it did not matter since the last several moves only took a ~2 seconds. Cura 2.3.1 is putting that M104 command in the gcode. I did comment that out and things are working better. I like the idea of the M400 suggestion, this would come in handy in a lot of other contexts too. FYI - Changing my CURA version is a HUGE undertaking that I fear going through.
  3. Only some files on my UM2+ are turning off my nozzle (like a M104 S0) before the print is done. It's like the firmware is using some look-ahead and executing the "M104 S0" immediately before all the buffered "G" movements are done. So what happens is the nozzle temp drops resulting in grinding and under extrusion. So far I am only noticing it on very simple files (only about 120 lines total) AND ONLY if a second layer and fan are needed. (FYI-warning these files are for a 2.0mm nozzle , so if you try to print with a smaller nozzle you will have trouble - in cura line_width=2.0mm) EXAMPLE good - MixC-L0-C0_Noz20_6C.gcode = this files prints fine , only has 1 layer and does not use the fan. EXAMPLE trouble - MixC-L1-C0_Noz20_6C.gcode = this file turns off nozzle about half way through. has 2 layers and uses the fan. NOTE based on the gcode the nozzle should not turn off before the fan, but the fan does keep running the the nozzle goes to zero. These are just two files from a set of 14 gcode files that make this print, all 7 files that are single layer-nofan work great all 7 that are 2 layer-fan fail in the same way. UM2+ extend (firmware May 11 2016 13:14:11) CURA 2.3.1 (windows 7) What can I do to stop this? Any suggestions are appreciated. I am considering commenting out the fan off command and manually turning that off at the end of the job.
  4. Fingers crossed. I'm looking forward to a new font! and leaving bugs and frustrations behind. Even if I lose all my old posts, and go back to "level 1" I think this is a good move.
  5. @sandervg this is great news. I am so happy for us. I also agree with @lepaul that "ease of use, quick load time, pleasing to the eyes to view content and so on" should be factored into the reboot. This site forum (and the UM site) is horrible on so many levels. I am so happy about this news. Is it too much to hope that you will be ditching this font too.
  6. We do a lot with openSCAD at the lower grade levels. It's free, cross platform, reinforces mathematics and computer coding, and has a easy learning curve if you're only doing basic stuff yet is very deep if you want to do fancy things. With the really small kids we keep them in 2D art programs as an intro. see this write up Once the kids get older (13yrs+) then we can introduce things like tinkercad (due to legal reasons). The High school kids use a lot of different tools: meshmixer, tinkercad, (looking for a replacement for 123D Catch - but that was great while it lasted), autodesk, blender.
  7. Here's a photo after I scraped at the flakes with my finger nail and spread some down the side.
  8. This is really strange. I am getting what looks like an accumulation of tiny metal flakes only at the tip of my atomic method pulls. I've already done about 7 pulls and each time I am seeing this. I am not seeing any metal flakes or dust anywhere else in the path (extruder teeth, bowen tube, etc). The outside of my nozzle looks fine, before the pull the filament looks like it's coming out really nice and cylindrical, after the pull when I look down inside the nozzle I see shinny clean looking inside of my nozzle. BUT when I look at the pull I get these strange flakes only on the tip (see photos below). I can scratch the shiny flakes off the tip of the pull and they are fine and power like. Has anyone else seen this? What could be going on? Should I keep using the atomic method until this goes away (I've done 7 already). --more details- My printer started to slightly under extrude about 30 minutes into a 5 hour print job and at about 1:30H the under extrusion had become so bad I stopped the job. I was trying out a new spool of "Taulman Clear In-PLA - 2.85mm / Clear". I suspected nozzle issues so I have been doing atomic method pulls with some of my trusty ColorFabb PLA/PHA Traffic Red (a spool that about 80% used up and has been super reliable for me) --------photos-------------------------------------
  9. I think you are correct about adding the raft height. This plugin has always been kinda buggy for me. I use it a lot, you have to put in the exact Z height and it's best to account for slicer rounding. for example...if you have 1st layer=0.3mm and are slicing at 0.2mm you will never have a layer at 20mm, you will have a layer at 19.9mm and a layer at 20.1mm. The plugin has to choose where to do the pause. ALSO - it always breaks horribly if you try to do more that one pause in the print. This has always been an issue. I just jams all the pauses into the same space, ignoreing any height info you're given it. But works good for a single pause.
  10. for "one at a time" I use cura 15.X I think cura 2.3 and 2.4 are broken for "one at a time". for one thing I think they ignore the print head size, and I get items crashing into the print head. https://ultimaker.com/en/community/39281-cura-not-using-user-set-machine-print-head-size
  11. So far looks like the solution was: 1. Do a third "clean install" - not sure why the first 2 did not work. 2. The old printer it was pulling in had a printing profile associated with it that contained a comma in the name, which breaks cura 2.3 and that is why the machine failed to load almost every time. Thanks @ahoeben for seeing the printing profile issue in the logs!
  12. Oh, good eyes. I did not know that was not a character that was allowed. I will keep this in mind when making new machine profiles. Are you aware of any other characters I should avoid? Like slash / or period . Or colon : I could see if this becomes the file name those might cause issues.
  13. UPDATE- I repeated the "clean install" process one more time. --------clean install as I currently understand it--------------------- 1. uninstall all previous versions of cura 2.x using the uninstall.exe file in the C:\Program Files\Cura 2.x folder 2. delete (or rename/remove) this folder *username* \AppData\Local\cura 3. Install the new version. ------------------ AND I'm on my second day of cura remembering the printers, even after reboots. Hopefully the 3rd time is the charm and what ever was wrong with the installation is now fixed
  14. UPDATE- I repeated the "clean install" process one more time. --------clean install as I currently understand it--------------------- 1. uninstall all previous versions of cura 2.x using the uninstall.exe file in the C:\Program Files\Cura 2.x folder 2. delete (or rename/remove) this folder *username* \AppData\Local\cura 3. Install the new version. ------------------ AND I'm on my second day of cura remembering the printers, even after reboots. Hopefully the 3rd time is the charm and what ever was wrong with the installation is now fixed.
  15. No I have not. I have only added printers through the normal front end interface.
  16. I've been having a lot of issues with Cura 2.x on win7. Mostly 99% of the time cura will not remember my machines and I have to re-add them every single time I re-open cura. This morning I open cura 2.3.1 and it actually remembered my printer! I closed cura and re-opened and of course it forgot it again. I have saved the data in cura.log from both of these start ups and am comparing the files with notepad++ and here are some of the differences --when it found the printer-- WARNING - D:\2.3\build\inst\lib\python3.4\site-packages\UM\Settings\ContainerRegistry.py (addContainer [256]): Container of type and id Ultimaker Original+_current_settings already added --when it could not find the printer-- DEBUG - D:\2.3\build\inst\lib\python3.4\site-packages\UM\Settings\ContainerStack.py (deserialize [235]): While deserializing, we got the following container string: Ultimaker Original+_current_settings,ultimaker_original_plus_0.1mm, wall 1.2, infill 0, mark,normal,generic_pla #2,Ultimaker Original+_variant,ultimaker_original_plus,---ERROR - D:\2.3\build\inst\lib\python3.4\site-packages\UM\Logger.py (logException [53]): Exception: Could not deserialize container Ultimaker Original+---ERROR - D:\2.3\build\inst\lib\python3.4\site-packages\UM\Logger.py (logException [53]): Traceback (most recent call last):---ERROR - D:\2.3\build\inst\lib\python3.4\site-"packages\UM\Logger.py (logException [53]): File ""D:\2.3\build\inst\lib\python3.4\site"-"packages\UM\Settings\ContainerRegistry.py"", line 245, in load"--ERROR - D:\2.3\build\inst\lib\python3.4\site-"packages\UM\Logger.py (logException [53]): File ""D:\2.3\build\inst\lib\python3.4\site"-"packages\UM\Settings\ContainerStack.py"", line 262, in deserialize"--ERROR - D:\2.3\build\inst\lib\python3.4\site-packages\UM\Logger.py (logException [53]): Exception: When trying to deserialize Ultimaker Original+, we received an unknown ID (ultimaker_original_plus_0.1mm) for container--- Of course there are some other differences in these files, but I think these are the most significant. . both full log files can be found here (with time stamps removed so you can use compare to see difference)
  17. I think the 1st retract (the one adding 1mm) is coming from the retraction settings in the print profile, and the last two are in the "end gcode" machine settings. SO I can ether change the basic retract amount on all my printing profiles or change the "end gcode" on the machine settings. As far as I can see, there have been no changes in the UMO/UMO+ definitions between version 2.3.1 and 2.4. retyping this due to lost post when posting! When will i learn to copy EVERYTIME before posting..grrrr!!!!! My claim of +1mm retraction comes from looking at the last successful gcode files from 2.3.1 and 2.4. Since I currently do not have a functioning 2.3.1 or 2.4 on my machine I can not look at the printer settings, but initially 2.4 did seem to import the settings just fine so I would guess they were the same. What I think I am seeing is that the retraction that occurs right after the last layer is done is 1mm more. (see attached image) I am not sure where this is controlled since there are 2 more retractions (total of 3) at the end of the file. Anyway, I am not an expert so my observation may have an error, but let me know what you think.
  18. I have been having trouble with "print one at a time" in CURA 2.x and this is what I am seeing: A. The larger grey box does not correspond to the machine head size settings. There seems to be a bug. It randomly chooses either one of the Xmin Xmax Ymin Ymax settings and draws the larger box using that value. B. Cura will not auto-move your objects to avoid crashing the head into previously printed objects. (probably due to A) C. Even if A worked correctly, it would be hard to manually place objects since both shaded boxes disappear while moving the objects around. SO - for now, if you want to use "print on at a time" then download CURA 15.X which has none of the above issues.
  19. Posting this in a separate thread in for 3 reasons. 1st an attempt to get some trouble shooting help, 2nd hopefully help other users who are having the same issues, 3rd hopefully warn users about how easy it is to totally screw up their machine. The beginning of my woe and many other issues are buried here. and specifics are here. Saddly my win7 computer got really goofed up by WELL KNOWN TO ULTIMAKER YET UNDOCUMENTED BUG where cura 2.x corrupts all previous 2.x versions on your computer. In a nutshell - I am not able to get either 2.3 or 2.4 to work anymore on my win7 machine and would like to know if there is process I might use to get working copy of either one working. The only "clean install" process I can piece together from the forums are: 1. uninstall all previous versions of cura 2.x using the uninstall.exe file in the C:\Program Files\Cura 2.x folder 2. delete (or rename/remove) this folder *username* \AppData\Local\cura 3. Install the new version. ---but--- Having done this several times. I still have the following issues: A. After adding printers to the new install they magically pull back old printing profiles.(where were these saved?) B. Cura loses printer settings after being closed, and each time you reopen cura you have at add printers because it has none. The cura log files reports many errors referring to this root path D:\2.3\build\inst\lib\python3.4\site-packages\UM (this path is strange since the only device I have on D:\ is my optical drive) SO does anyone know where else you need to delete files before installing cura? and what the "clean install" process should look like, at this point any Cura 2.x is unusable.
  20. Any chance this info could be on the cura download page, or in the release notes: " Warning CURA 2.x is like the highlander! There can be only one!" please do not try to run multiple copies of CURA 2.x on the same machine because they will behead each other and you will lose your settings"
  21. I have not been printing slow for a while. I think after changing the Teflon Coupler things got better. I should re-test and post results.
  22. I too am seeing behavior that would indicate that data is stored outside of the \AppData\cura folder. I've posted my info here: https://ultimaker.com/en/community/38963-cura-24-issues Basically I am deleting the \AppData\cura and installing new, and when I add printers back I get ghostly instances for Material Profiles.
  23. not sure if this should be a whole new thread or not. But here goes the next chapter. I am worried that I am missing a step to do a "clean install", if there is documentation please link me to it. Or I am doing something very silly, like using a character (like dash) in naming my machine in settings. 1. Manually uninstalled all cura 2.X (using the uninstall.exe in the cura 2.x folder) C:\Program Files\Cura 2.1 C:\Program Files\Cura 2.3 C:\Program Files\Cura 2.4 2. Delete this folder \AppData\Local\cura 3. Install CURA 2.3.1 (this dialog seemed fine, nothing strange) 4. Add machine for my UMO+ 5. Add 3 printing profiles 6. Add 1 material profile. 7. Opened and closed Cura several time, all seems good. printer and profiles still there. 8. Shutdown & turn on Computer. 9. Open CURA - it's asking to add printer, lost all profiles and settings Cura.log shows a bunch of warning and debug stuff, but really seems to die after the reboot with these lines on opening cura: 2017-02-26 10:17:27,894 - ERROR - D:\2.3\build\inst\lib\python3.4\site-packages\UM\Logger.py (logException [53]): Exception: Could not deserialize container Ultimaker Original+ - new MP2017-02-26 10:17:27,900 - ERROR - D:\2.3\build\inst\lib\python3.4\site-packages\UM\Logger.py (logException [53]): Traceback (most recent call last):2017-02-26 10:17:27,900 - ERROR - D:\2.3\build\inst\lib\python3.4\site-packages\UM\Logger.py (logException [53]): File "D:\2.3\build\inst\lib\python3.4\site-packages\UM\Settings\ContainerRegistry.py", line 245, in load2017-02-26 10:17:27,900 - ERROR - D:\2.3\build\inst\lib\python3.4\site-packages\UM\Logger.py (logException [53]): File "D:\2.3\build\inst\lib\python3.4\site-packages\UM\Settings\ContainerStack.py", line 262, in deserialize2017-02-26 10:17:27,901 - ERROR - D:\2.3\build\inst\lib\python3.4\site-packages\UM\Logger.py (logException [53]): Exception: When trying to deserialize Ultimaker Original+ - new MP, we received an unknown ID (ultimaker_original_plus_0.1mm) for container so my D:\ is my optical drive, not sure what D:\ it's referring to here. I can provide entire log file if needed. ---2-27-17----edit to add more info---------------------------- 10. open cura 2.3.1 added back UMO+ did not rename, accept defaults. 11. profiles came back! 12. closed cura 2.3.1 - re-opend - asked for machine again.(umo+ gone) 13. reboot 14. open cura - asked for machine, add UM2+ - no print profiles come back. 15. close and open cura - it remembers and keeps UM2+ 16. add UMO+ - profiles come back AND a material profile (did not know they are stored on the machine). (NOTE-the material profile that came back does not show up under Manage Materials, and where was this stored? I deleted the cura folder to do a clean install) 17. close and open cura - it remembers both printers. 18. reboot - open cura still good 19. delete UM2+ close and open cura. it remembers umo+ 20. reboot 21. open cura still remembers umo+ and the material profile name "PLA - colerfabb mark" that I can not find in manage. 22. try selecting a different material "PLA", dialog asking if I want to overwrite PLA with the current settings. I cancel the dialog, PLA is selected and the remembered material profile is now gone? 23. Same trouble moving objects around the build plate. SO I think: 1. Not everything is saved in \AppData\Local\cura since that material profile name appeared after adding back the UMO+. 2. Printing profiles are saved on the machine? Good thing I never tried to use a profile on more that one machine. 3. I'm not sure if I've arrived at a "stable" place with cura 2.3.1 but at least it's remembering printers.
  24. Those models you link to are very simple I think any FDM printer would have no problem printing them. you get what you pay for. I did some quick looking for a friend a couple of weeks ago and it seems people are needing to mod MP printer this quite a bit and the standard complains are: extruder motor under powered, hot end jams a lot, and general fussyness. A good printer that works is a dream, a marginal printer that needs a lot of fussing to keep it running is a nightmare. hackaday.com has some nice mod articles about trying to make it print better. https://hackaday.com/tag/mp-mini/ read the redit form to see what issues people are having. It's closed source too, so that is a bummer, usually try to avoid that. Check out some of those articles and reviews and ask yourself if you want to go through all that just to get good prints, OR if you want to spend more upfront for a better quality printer. I run printers at a K-12 school and down time is the worst. Poorly built/designed printers require frequent re-calibration, un-jamming, and general fixing. I have sold (or am selling) all our printers that are not reliable. I've standardized on the UMO+ since its super reliable and consistent with a price point I can live with. Of course you could buy about 5 of those MP printers for the cost of one UMO+ kit, so maybe if 3 of the 5 are working at any one time you'll be fine. :-) on the low cost end (2X the cost of the MP printer) is another printer that is open source and has good reviews (that I've been watching) is PrintrBot Play. https://printrbot.com/shop/assembled-printrbot-play/
  25. As far as I can see, there have been no changes in the UMO/UMO+ definitions between version 2.3.1 and 2.4. retyping this due to lost post when posting! When will i learn to copy EVERYTIME before posting..grrrr!!!!! My claim of +1mm retraction comes from looking at the last successful gcode files from 2.3.1 and 2.4. Since I currently do not have a functioning 2.3.1 or 2.4 on my machine I can not look at the printer settings, but initially 2.4 did seem to import the settings just fine so I would guess they were the same. What I think I am seeing is that the retraction that occurs right after the last layer is done is 1mm more. (see attached image) I am not sure where this is controlled since there are 2 more retractions (total of 3) at the end of the file. Anyway, I am not an expert so my observation may have an error, but let me know what you think.
×
×
  • Create New...