Minkeproducts

Good day to you, I agree with the beauty of HIPS. It has a nice -matte, -paper, cardboard look. I tried several settings and solutions. Adhesion at the platform works for me on 80 degrees, nozzle temp 235 degrees. I use only the ordinary glue stick, just a little bit more than with PLA. It might help if you make a cut out in the floor. A big floor of the model on the platform might give problems and the model comes of the buildplate before it is finished. Also it might help if you adjust the moment that the fans go at a 100%. In Cura expert settings you can higher up the moment that the fans should go at full speed. Finally, I cover the printer with a towel and at the front I have a piece of plastic. This to prevent cold air coming in and interfere in the wamth. Even it could matter if you have the printer running already for a while or if you start with a cold printer. Basic rule; big temperature differences might interfere your printing job. Also layer adhesion can give problems, due to the same reason as written above.

Guten Tag Martin, Ich drucke HIPS, 2.85 (nicht 1.75mm) am heated bed mit 80 Celcius, nozzle temp 235. Ich habe kein Erfahrung mit auflösen in Limoneen, weil ich HIPS nur als richtiges Material brauche und nicht als Support.

Dag Shiren, Ik print met HIPS met een heated bed op 80 graden en nozzle temp op 235. Met de lijmstick smeer ik iets royaler dan ik normaliter doe bij PLA. Heeft je vorm een groot grond oppervlak? Dan kan je ook nog kijken of je de ventilator iets later op full speed wilt laten komen. Dan kan in Cura bij Expert Settings; Fan full at height iets verhogen. Ook gebruik ik bij HIPS een soort overkapping en een bescherming aan de voorzijde, zodat er geen koude wind in de Ultimaker kan komen.

Goodday to you, Last days I am working out the TweakatZ feature and it does not work the way I expect it should. Also it has been difficult for me what exactly is the reason. I simplified my tests with a testfile. Tweaking in printingspeed with "Tweak value and keep it for the rest" does the job, but only for one layer and next layer it comes back to the former speed at 100%. I found out that the code of doing this is in this Gcode file "G1 F900" (slower speed) or "G1 F1800" (full speed), I changed some more layers with this codes and it printed more layers at this slower speed. I wonder what is wrong. I used the version of Cura 15.02.1 (with TweakatZ version 4.0.1), 15.04.4 and 15.04.5 with TweakatZ version 4.0.2 I copied and pasted a part of the code hereunder; or the full file of this test at here ;LAYER:10 G0 X102.100 Y102.100 Z2.300 ;TYPE:WALL-INNER G1 F1800 X120.900 Y102.100 E156.25600 G1 X120.900 Y120.900 E157.76000 G1 X102.100 Y120.900 E159.26400 G1 X102.100 Y102.100 E160.76800 G0 F9000 X101.700 Y101.700 ;TYPE:WALL-OUTER G1 F1800 X121.300 Y101.700 E162.33600 G1 X121.300 Y121.300 E163.90400 G1 X101.700 Y121.300 E165.47200 G1 X101.700 Y101.700 E167.04000 G0 F9000 X102.700 Y102.700 ;LAYER:11 G0 X102.100 Y102.100 Z2.500 ;TYPE:WALL-INNER G1 F1800 X120.900 Y102.100 E168.54400 G1 X120.900 Y120.900 E170.04800 G1 X102.100 Y120.900 E171.55200 G1 X102.100 Y102.100 E173.05600 G0 F9000 X101.700 Y101.700 ;TYPE:WALL-OUTER G1 F1800 X121.300 Y101.700 E174.62400 G1 X121.300 Y121.300 E176.19200 G1 X101.700 Y121.300 E177.76000 G1 X101.700 Y101.700 E179.32800 G0 F9000 X102.700 Y102.700 ;LAYER:12 G0 X102.100 Y102.100 Z2.700 ;TweakAtZ V4.0.2: executed at Layer 12 M117 Printing... tw@L 12 ;TYPE:WALL-INNER G1 F900 X120.900 Y102.100 E180.83200 G1 X120.900 Y120.900 E182.33600 G1 X102.100 Y120.900 E183.84000 G1 X102.100 Y102.100 E185.34400 G0 F9000 X101.700 Y101.700 G0 F9000 X101.700 Y101.700 ;TYPE:WALL-OUTER G1 F900 X121.300 Y101.700 E186.91200 G1 X121.300 Y121.300 E188.48000 G1 X101.700 Y121.300 E190.04800 G1 X101.700 Y101.700 E191.61600 G0 F9000 X102.700 Y102.700 G0 F9000 X102.700 Y102.700 ;LAYER:13 G0 X102.100 Y102.100 Z2.900 G0 X102.100 Y102.100 Z2.900 ;TYPE:WALL-INNER G1 F1800 X120.900 Y102.100 E193.12000 G1 X120.900 Y120.900 E194.62400 G1 X102.100 Y120.900 E196.12800 G1 X102.100 Y102.100 E197.63200 G0 F9000 X101.700 Y101.700 ;TYPE:WALL-OUTER G1 F1800 X121.300 Y101.700 E199.20000 G1 X121.300 Y121.300 E200.76800 G1 X101.700 Y121.300 E202.33600 G1 X101.700 Y101.700 E203.90400 G0 F9000 X102.700 Y102.700 Screenshot at Can somebody help me out what could be the issue? Kind greetings

Goodday to you! I use a kind of knife, see image at http://umforum.ultimaker.com/index.php?/gallery/image/8365-paletmes/ It is nice thin and is pretty handy. I am very happy with these towels too; http://umforum.ultimaker.com/index.php?/gallery/image/8366-towels/ It cleans up the glassplate, nice and clean, no hassle. Minke

Goodday to you! I vote for separated Top/Bottom settings; There are definitely objects where it matters. For instance printing a scale model of a seat of a chair. This kind of model does not have "overhanged bottom layers" halfway the shape (as Daid mentioned the function of Bottom layers in the beginning of this topic) The top layer, I prefer to have it thicker, to make sure the support inside the pillow covers enough. The bottom layer, I prefer to have it thinner. Printing the object in PLA, it does not differ so much, beside the printing time (it takes much more printing time than necessary, but okay...) Printing the object in Rubber, or ABS, it is difficult to print a thick bottom layer, it is simply more easy to print a thinner bottom layer with these materials. So, I even tried to figure out if I can change the G-code..by comparing a setting with a. thin Bottom/Top (let's say 0.4) and b. thick Bottom/Top (0.8 or 1mm) to see if I can interchange the settings inside the G-code to have a thin Bottom and a thick Top. So far, I found out that the G-code is quite complicated, but I still wonder if it is possible to do that? A separate setting for Top and one for Bottom would save me a lot of time in printing and figuring out G-codes. Minke

Dear Jussi, I was first trying to figure out as well what could be the reason of the rough surface on my prints; Printed two shapes, shown in http://umforum.ultim...raversionstest/ The hourglass shape printed smooth, while the other one (see pict) had this rough surface, although it is just the same shape. Pretty funny isn't it? I use the TEST 2 version now for a while and I am very happy with it, it works fine to me.

Thank you so much! Playing with the slider right now, wonderful to see! :eek:

Dear all, 1.In cura 14.03 Windows 8.01 the slicing process is shown from top to down. In that way it is difficult for me to see a simulation of how the object is going to be printed. Is there a reason to show it this way? 2.Can I find somewhere an explanation of the colours used, in the slicingprocess? Images at; http://umforum.ultimaker.com/index.php?/gallery/album/806-cura-1403-slicing-direction/ Thanks in advance :-P

Dear all, I downloaded Cura 14.03 Test 1.exe and Cura 14.03 Test 2.exe The same model.stl is used, with the same settings. The model, sliced in Cura 14.03 gives in this model a kind of basketry pattern The model, sliced in either Cura 14.01, Cura 14.03 Test 1 or Cura 14.03 Test 2 give a smooth surface. Since the G-codes have different content (and different kB) I tried also to load the model in Cura 13.03 with a loaded Gcode from Cura 13.01, but it made no difference. Conclusion; With this model, Cura 14.01, Cura 14.03 Test 1 and Cura 14.03 Test 2 give a more smooth surface. Question; What version of Cura is best to use? Does anybody have an advice for me? Images at; http://umforum.ultimaker.com/index.php?/gallery/album/795-curaversionstest-2/

Dear Member, Thank you for your reply. As mentioned in the discussions above already, I did, -more or less-, understand that I can do some tests. Thank you for this link. I will do the tests and see if the surface in Cura 14.03 comes out more smooth, make images and I will let you know.

Dear all, I did some tests printing the same mesh with Cura 14.01 and Cura 14.03 in Windows 8.01, 64-bit. It appears to be unpredictable whether the newest version Cura 14.03 gives a smooth skin surface or not. Prints sliced via Cura 14.01 give always a smooth surface. Adjustments in both 14.01 and 14.03 are the same; default settings ( like layer height, normal 0.1 and shell thickness, 0.8) Printing the spheres, comes out that the surface of the sliced models in Cura 14.03 have a rougher surface than the ones sliced in Cura 14.01 Printing the hourglass shape, there is, funny enough, no difference. Till now, I am not sure if I use Cura 14.03, since I cannot predict if the surface will be rough or not. On the images it is maybe not easy to see, but here I pick them out, right away. images at; http://umforum.ultimaker.com/index.php?/gallery/album/791-curaversionstest/ I am new at the forum, so if I missed something, please just give me the right hint?