Jump to content


Team Ultimaker
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by bagel-orb

  1. I'm not sure anymore how I should help. I've said what I can, but mechamecha responded, but that driften off topic and now I don't know how to get back on topic.
  2. Settings always vanish when switching between printers. Settings are often printer-specific. This is how Cura was designed; it's supposed to work like that. So you are saying that the prime blob was already there in 4.1 and the only difference is that in 4.5 it moves down into the prime blob? Or is the whole prime blob new in 4.5?
  3. So what you do is set the line width to 200%, but set the flow to 50%, so that in the end the lines are extruded 100%, but spaces 200%.
  4. Have you checked the setting guide on this? Marketplace > Setting Guide > Install > Restart Cura Union Overlapping Volumes > Right click > Setting Guide
  5. Reduce their initial layer flow. Alternatively, adjust your bed height physically.
  6. That list looks quite complete. Skin is top/bottom. I'm surprised SKIRT is in there. I would have thought it would have been SUPPORT as well. Indeed travels and retracted travels are identified by looking at the E values. Cura doesn't use this when visualizing a gcode it has just generated. It's only the visualization when you load a gcode from file.
  7. The sequence is hard coded in the firmware of the machine. What you can do in Cura is disable The prime blob altogether. The downward movement of the nozzle is not exactly into the blob, but next to it. It's supposed to wipe the blob onto the bed.
  8. What your use-case? Why do you want a part of the model using fuzzy skin?
  9. Then the default settings for your printer include those setting values. Ultimaker doesn't check the validity of 3rd party default profiles; they are provided by the manufacturer or by hobbyists.
  10. The union only works if it's one model, not if it's multiple models. If you can select both volumes separately Cura will not union them. If you try to select one and you always automatically select both then Cura can merge them. It is therefore impossible to have per-object-settings and also use the unioning. If you want you can join several models into one model, by exporting them to one STL in Cura. If you then clear your build plate and load in the one STL with multiple volumes then they get unioned.
  11. This is not possible. I like Makers Muse's videos, though. You can merge bunnies by enabling the setting Union Overlapping Volumes, but it only works if those volumes are part of the same STL model. I wrote most of the CuraEngine code; I know quite well what is possible and what not. Take it from me that it is curerntly not possible to have partly fuzzy walls in a seamless way.
  12. I'm not sure what's going on. Build volume has always been a very eluding mistress. There are a lot of hardware tolerances and even software tolerances to take into account. In order to get the maximum out of Cura, you should set the platform adhesion to none and turn off support.
  13. I'm not sure where I should focus on in these photos. Can you please describe the problem and where in the boat these occur?
  14. You can do this quite effectively using blender.
  15. That's because of your setting of infill wipe distance and/or infill overlap.
  16. Try lowering be the support join distance and the support horizontal expansion.
  17. You can disable an extruder in Cura.
  18. If that all doesn't work then maybe its even easier to jsut change your printer physically! 😉
  19. Theres a "platform_offset" in [Cura]/resrouces/definitions/ultimaker_2.def.json. Perhaps changing that value is all that needs to be done..
  20. I'm rather impressed you are willing to put so much effort into just visualizing the build plate in a different location. Corona got you locked in?
  21. You were going in the right direction, but amde a wrong turn. Reducing the stair stepping to zero prevents some unwanted behavior, but reducing the interface thickness is a bad idea. That makes the interface areas very small, such that they sometimes are too small to be printed. If you don't want a support interface you can simply disable it. Other than that you might want to set the minimum support XY distance to zero as well. Or set the Priority to XY overrides Z. See the project file attached. UM3_test_top_v3.3mf
  22. Sharing your project is a lot easier. Just save the project and send that file, so that all settings are automatically included. For now I'll just reproduce your project from your description though..
  23. Die you try reducing the support infill layer height? Could you please attach a model file for us to look at? Which layer are you seeing this problem?
  24. I already implemented that feature a couple of years ago, but there was no way for the user to actually use it. The UI was never implemented and so the idea finally got abandoned. It's true that aim my more features becomes more difficult if you have to think about all possible interactions with other features, but that doesn't stop anybody from implementing new in ones.
  25. bagel-orb

    COVID 19

    Large companies aren't trying to stop us printing medical equipment - they are trying to stop people from copying their designs. If we want to print some valves we should design our own valves and optimize them for 3D printing. That way we don't infringe on copyright and we should end up with better printed valves anyhow. I'm not sure whether 3D printed valves are very sanitary, though. The tiny ridges of the layers can accumulate dust and bacteria.
  • Create New...