Dim3nsioneer

If the door is directly on the front surface of the Ultimaker 3, the print head can collide with it. To avoid this it needs a special design as provided for the front cover in the Ultimaker 3 advanced printing kit.

No, they don't (too long). You have to use the hardcore nozzles from 3DSolex together with the Hardcore.

Both UMO and UMO+ have a 40W heater cartridge but with different voltages.

In addition to @gr5 I recommend you get a genuine Meanwell PSU again - independent of where you buy it. And I never had a case where the GST made problems.

Please keep in mind that layer view can be pretty slow on older computers. I'm not sure an automatic switch after slicing (assuming non-automatic slicing) is good in all cases.

Some of you might have realized there is an additional field called "anything else you want to tell us?". This is there to give you a chance to mention what might be improved in order to optimize UX (and not for rants about Cura ?). Maybe there is something in Cura that blocks regularly your workflow or costs you otherwise valuable time you would like to spend on designing cool models other stuff. Here is your chance to submit it pretty directly to the developer team.

May I ask what the result of the Wednesday discussion was?

Nicht vor jedem Druck aber einmalig die Cura Connect Einstellungen am Drucker zurücksetzen (Unter System->Wartung wenn ich mich nicht gerade täusche). Cura Connect ist als Druckmanagementsystem für mehrere Drucker aufgebaut. Daher wurden auch die Manipulationsmöglichkeiten für einen einzelnen Drucker weggelassen. Ich und andere haben sich aber schon bei den Entwicklern für ein vereinfachtes, direkteres Interface für Einzeldrucker stark gemacht.

Das heisst der Cura Connect Reset hat nichts gebracht?

I recently had that effect of broken PVA too. It actually broke at insertion (when the feeder loads it). Interestingly everything was fine when I cut off the part that was inside the Bowden tube. The room which this happened in was also rather on the dry side.

In case you are still looking for a material after all that sock philosophy (which I liked btw.) I would try it with some copolyester such as CPE or PET-G. They are pretty resistant to various chemicals. Unfortunately UM does not have a list of chemicals CPE is resistant to.

Mach doch mal einen Cura Connect Reset.

I think @Marco_TvM answered that here: However, I also know of other UM3 users who need to have the pause feature for inserting parts. Atm they do this manually when they think it's about the right height. But this can't be a long term solution. I agree with Marco that it should be implemented in one firmware first and proven to work before it's inserted into the other firmware. However, I assume it will be fixed as broken features are not an option in the pro market. Ultimaker knows that.

That's a problem of the arranging algorithm which is not in a good shape right now (V3.3.1). However, for the time being manual arrangement is not so bad as you can do it e.g. by specifying x and y coordinates.

One should maybe also mention here that spare parts will still be available for the GO.

Looks to me as if the second color is not displayed (holes). Maybe something related to the material profile. If you change the material (e.g. to a standard material), does it appear then?

Those improvements would be in 5.0.13 already?

In my case it was the latest, 4.3.

I would prefer a suffix rather than a prefix. Especially on the UM2+ with limited screen size. If it would be switchable everybody would be pleased... ?

@chuckmcgee, I opened an issue on Cura for this: https://github.com/Ultimaker/Cura/issues/3676 I agree with @ghostkeeper's finding there that the gcode looks good, so it's maybe more of an issue in the UM3 firmware. It would be interesting to hear @Marco_TvM's opinion on the case.

This is a pretty interesting discussion with good arguments in favor or against certain ways and strategies in the Cura (engine) development. Being no software engineer myself I also contributed to Cura with code a long time ago. This was at the time of what we call today legacy Cura. In the meantime the code of both Cura and the engine have become more complex in order to match more people's needs. A code contribution to Cura is from my point of view only possible today if you are a software engineer or at least a very enthusiastic coding hobbyist with the professional knowledge of modern coding (standards). This is good in terms of the quality of the code. However, it limits the access for "normal" people. Their only way to contribute is by making suggestions. So I think your argument, @ianpaschal, that Cura is open source and everybody can contribute is correct in theory but sees serious limitation in the real world. Therefore, I would appreciate if making suggestions would also be regarded by the dev team as a serious and valuable way of contributing to Cura. As @ahoeben pointed out multiple times, Cura has a recommended settings mode where the user just has to set very few things to get a generally good slicing result. There will always be examples where you have to change settings in order to get e.g. an optimal print quality. So the separation into the two modes "recommended" and "details" is exactly how things should be done imo. If a professional customer has troubles finding the right parameters for his e.g. special print geometry, there is a network of Ultimaker sales partners and resellers part of which offers such additional services. It would need some kind of AI in Cura to recognize all those special cases and provide the right parameters for every single print. It was mentioned before one should separate the discussion into Ultimaker printers vs. third party printers. I fully agree. Cura should always focus on Ultimaker printers but stay open to other printers as long as possible (disclaimer: there is no sign on the horizon this might not be the case in foreseeable future). However, that focus also brings some responsibilities with it such as the obligation to fix bugs which affect Ultimaker users strongly and implement features in such a way that they follow the principle of a hassle-free print preparation. The latter could be followed even more consequently (for instance Cura could auto-select PVA as support material if present/loaded; I find it e.g. more likely a user wants to print with PVA (which is usually in extruder 2) than with the main build material). To summarize, I don't think that the Cura (engine) development goes into a wrong direction but the path seems a bit unclear to me. I would appreciate if the Cura team could publish some general strategy where to go with the development. This would allow other people to adjust their contributions - suggestions and code - to those guide lines.

Maybe you also want to to support this feature request? https://github.com/Ultimaker/Cura/issues/1511

I can only confirm the advantage of a PVA brim instead of the PLA brim. This should be a default in Cura. @Tomhe / @KristelB what do you think? I usually don't change the horizontal expansion on the support in order to make it sturdier but the support join distance. I also find the prime towers for two different materials still a bit thin. I increase the thickness to 3-4mm.

PC and ABS adhere pretty well to TPU, maybe too well...

Most plastic materials become more brittle with time due to UV radiation. A pretty easy trick is to apply a layer of UV protecting lack. You also might keep in mind that Tough PLA does not have an increased temperature resistance.