Jump to content
Ultimaker Community of 3D Printing Experts


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


yellowshark last won the day on February 7

yellowshark had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

133 Excellent


About yellowshark

  • Birthday 01/01/2015

Personal Information

  • Field of Work
    (Product) design
  • Country
  • 3D printer
    heated bed and enclosed housing which were not offered by Ultimaker.
  • On The Web

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. yellowshark

    Washing Machine resistant filament?

    and do not forget; a sock is for life
  2. yellowshark

    Washing Machine resistant filament?

    Great idea 😍 Mind you my socks go straight into the hot air drier so I need to trace the user manual and try to determine the temperature in the drier.
  3. yellowshark

    PLA object shinking during use

    I used nGen to build a GPS holder for my car and so far, since last summer, that has survived warm sunny days in the Summer - of course Texas may be different! Colorfabb also do another material, sort of next step up from nGen, Colorfab HT which again is done in collaboration with Eastman like nGen (no personal experience with HT); this has a Tg of over 100c. I found nGen as easy as PLA to print and capable of better surface finishes. My personal view is to print nGen at at least 245; go lower and you may start to hit layer adhesion weaknesses.
  4. yellowshark

    Ultimaker's screwed AI?

    Appalling UM customer service today. It decided to help me, as per the message, by unsubscribing me today alleging that I had not opened any UM emails "in a while". What a jerk; I read every email from UM, just why does it think it knows what I read and what I do not. So instead of hitting a "confirm" button or similar I had to go through the rigmarole of re-registering. Really peed me off. Having spent some considerable time working in Amsterdam I do not recall the Dutch people I worked with being so - put your own word in - and we go a lot further back with my father being part of the allied forces that drove the Germans from Holland and making a number of Dutch friends on the way and lots of Xmas cards; and I had a very nice Dutch girlfriend some time ago admittedly. Looks like the Dutch are not as caring as they used to be 😒
  5. Sorry no idea but an alternative method is as follows. Note your estimated print time. You know which layer you want to check first so calculate the height of that layer from your layer height. Go to the move icon and sink your model into the bed by entering -calculated height of layer. Re-slice and you will have a new, shorter print time. Subtract that from the original print time and that is the time it will take to print the first part of you model up to the layer you want to check (give or take a bit of time either way) Repeat for the 2nd layer you want to check
  6. yellowshark

    Pillowing and Warping on Extra Fine Settings

    Personally I am not convinced that 17 layers is enough, especially if your infill is sparse. If you increase your infill to 90% as per @gr5 then you may find it is OK - only one way to find out! Thinking about it, which I never have really, I would say from experience that the thinner your layer height then the thicker you need the total of the solid top layers to be to get the job done - this is though significantly affected by infill % - with 90% the first few layers of 0.06 will probably lay down quite well. I have never used a slicer that provides variable infill density so have always increased the upper layers
  7. My immediate thought is that you have a levelling difference between the front and rear of the bed. If by "thicker" you mean "wider" then the front of your bed is closer to the nozzle than the rear. Either raise the rear or lower the front so that they match
  8. For the past 4 + years I have been using my magic number with no problem at all. I know it may seem a bit radical but I use 1/1
  9. yellowshark

    Paper copy of CURA profile

    Not sure what the definition of "enough " is but there was a thread on this very same subject a month or two ago.
  10. yellowshark

    z-seam alignment and bloobs

    The easiest way to get your best quality is firstly to print slow - if anyone disbelieves that, well have you ever done any serious physical comparative testing on the subject? Also as @gr5 says, set all your print speeds to the same value to reduce pressure variations to a minimum; and yes I do recognise that there will be certain model geometries where you will not want to do this and will be happier to accept any resulting deficiencies.
  11. yellowshark

    How to prevent those surface dimples

    Well I guess layers will start on the outer layer if one were to specify walls before infill and outer wall before inner wall(s). Also I cannot but help think, never having done it, that specifying 0.4mm line width with a 0.8mm nozzle is not going to help. Certainly the result is up the gumtree. Given that you seem to have some dubious settings it will help us if you post all your main and relevant settings, rather than us making assumptions and guessing.
  12. Interesting post! I do not have the benefit of your background or experiences but I am a long gone software developer, ranging from assembler to Cobol. Yes old stuff but the fundamentals of software development broadly remain the same, just the tools and audiences change. The more complex one makes a subject, whether necessarily or unnecessarily, the more difficult it becomes to deliver clean code. Probably more importantly the more difficult it becomes to modify and deliver clean changed code. A generalisation would be that new functions work but bugs are introduced to existing code that was clean – it is just too complex to understand all ramifications of change and beyond one’s financial/operational capabilities to test everything that has not changed ( or so your thought!). At the moment I am stuck on Cura 2.7 (which for me works fine) whilst I await a clean version of 3.n. Does 2.7 produce better models than 15.04? For the most part, for me, probably not. But, as you say, there are more options which give you more control and if nothing else should help one overcome problems more easily. So is Cura now more complex than it needs to be? (Anyone from Ultimaker is welcome to shoot me down in flames for any wrong assumptions here). There are some fundamentals. The decision to create the new software (was it Pink Flamingo back then?) would have been driven by a variety of influences. There was a new printer in the labs to support, importantly with dual extruders. There was a new extruder system and coded reels of filament to support. Probably the architecture of the old Cura software did not lend itself to what Ultimaker wanted to do and the decision to throw away the old software was taken. Maybe, above all of this, Ultimaker saw that the market needed to change. It was populated mainly by techies and difficult, without help and that level of technical capability, to produce decent quality results quickly without some considerable experience – the learning curve was quite steep. Ultimaker wanted to move the market to a more plug β€˜n play level; just compare laptops now to pre Windows or even early Windows PCs. I cannot remember the last time I reloaded the Windows O/S whereas with W95 it was every 6 months at least. Just consider how much functionality they have added to try and make this goal achievable if you have an Ultimaker 3. So yes the subject is more complex and no doubt so is the code, although hopefully better architected. I for one would not criticise them for this; indeed I applaud them for embarking on such a change. Just think of the increase in productivity if your engineers each had their own printer and with a few key depressions could produce their own prototype there and then, not having to rely on people like ourselves. And whilst there are now all these additional settings to keep the techies happy, their challenge going forward will be to gradually automate everything, remove all those techie settings, so we are all just making a few key depressions!
  13. yellowshark

    Top thickness not respected when using adaptive layers

    Lol I do neither/ both. I decide how many layers I want and then convert that to mm. No I cannot defend that or promote it; it is a bit like eating Weetabix for breakfast, although I can defend that 😎
  14. yellowshark

    Layer resolution range

    With a 0.8 nozzle (3 years ago) I ran .300 layer at 40mm/s with a temp of 210. I suspect that these days I might run that cooler as in general I print cooler now than I did back in my early days. Then again I seem to printing 10 degrees or so cooler than you, although I have no idea what speed you were using; there are a number of variables so nothing is gospel although I think about 10 degrees is the limit, beyond that I would be suspicious of something being wrong.
  15. yellowshark

    Layer resolution range

    ... sorry,that was for PLA; I use ColorFabb and Faberdashery; Ultimaker could be different.

Important Information

Welcome to the Ultimaker Community of 3D printing experts. Visit the following links to read more about our Terms of Use or our Privacy Policy. Thank you!