bagel-orb

Hi Chri, Cure does do some quality reduction on segments smaller than 10 micron when the removed vertex would only result in a shortcut path of 5 micron. Perhaps those parameters should be set a bit more aggressive... You could try the ABS profile from the UM2+ - it might work better than the default profile of the UM2. I suggest you turn off the setting Fill Small Gaps for organic models like this.

This doesn't really look like a fair comparison. The Cura print has skin at places where S3D doesn't have that. Could you please create a github issue so that this issue is on our radar? We can further discuss there what the differences between Cura and S3D are in this respect.

What's your operating system? Is it 64bit?

What material are you using? Did you select the right material in Cura?

What gcode viewer are you using there?

What if you try to turn off Compensate Wall Overlaps? Did you use the high detail version of Baby Groot?

Thanks for this elaborate report! I will definitively dive into this problem.

Which version of Cura are you running? When did you last update the firmware on the printer?

But what type of filament? PLA? Perhaps the firmware upgrade ffed up your retraction settings. Please check your retraction settings on th printer. Please consider filing a bug report at github.com/Ultimaker/CuraEngine Please attach your gcode and your project file (change extension to txt)

The mold feature you suggest is incredibly difficult. I'm afraid we won't add it. With Cura 2.6 there is the option to add / remove support, but it's as unuserfriendly as it can get (as of yet). You need to import a mesh, e.g. a cube, place it over the area where you want to modify suypport and then in the per object settings specify that it's a Support Mesh or an Anti-Overhang Mesh.

Please attach gcode of the z scraping issue. It would be best if you would make a new issue at https://github.com/Ultimaker/CuraEngine/issues

Thanks for your elaborate feedback! 1. Known issue. This is fixed in the next 2.6 beta or the 2.6 final. 2. Do you mean the nozzle isn't avoiding printed parts when traveling to a different part in a layer? Sometimes PVA needs to be extruded right next to PLA, so it's unavoidable in some cases. Moreover, if it were doing Z hops over PLA all the time you would get Z ringing because the bed would start to vibrate. Nonetheless the print head should avoid printed parts. Please look at the layer view and enable viewing travel paths. 3. You can clean your nozzle by heating it up manually from the printer menu and then wipe it off with a cloth or something. There's probably better ways to do it, but that's how I do it. Watch out for the heat, though. 4. Yeah I noticed as well. It's in the top 30 issues, so hopefully it will be solved soon. 5. I don't recall why we made the setting for the prime blob location hidden for users, but you can simply undo that change. Navigate to Cura/resources/definitions/fdmprinter.def.json and edit the "enabled" property to true, for the settings extruder_prime_pos_x and extruder_prime_pos_y

The top of those support towers is probably cut off due to the xy distance. You can prevent this by disabling Support Towers.

It is really model dependent whether gradual infill will decrease print time and material use. The infill density close to the top surfaces is increased compared to the 20% infill setting, and in a 26 min print, all infill is close to the top surface. Try loading in a big model with lots of infill. The infill percentage is the density of the most sense infill. You probably inadvertently changed the infill density when you enable gradual infill from the recommended settings. Simply enabling gradual infill doesn't make the to of the infill more dense, it just makes the bottom less dense.

2.5.0 on windows 10

@nallath I had the same problem when double clicking a n STL file.

Does the same thing happen in cura 2.5?

There's two settings which might influence this behaviour: merged models overlap and horizontal expansion. Can you see if you can get this problem fixed by tweaking those? If so, please post your before and after settings, for future reference.

In that case a layer height of 0.105 would give more consistent results. If a layer is 0.001875 mm off then the line widths change by 0.001875*0.35/0.1=0.0065625. This still less than the XY positioning accuracy, but it might have a cumulative effect with neighboring lines. I wonder whether this will make a difference on my 3D hatching results.

What does the layer view show? Does it show your print or not? If you use an SD card, don't forget to eject!

Yes we could, but it would only be needed when you print a part without infill and want to have a different Layer Start position than the Seam location, which can only be the case if you want a different seam location for different parts. The use-case for such a feature is just too small. Perhaps it would be nice to have a feature to control the seam location of the inner walls, though I don't think we're going to invest time in this any time soon...

My suggestion wasn't to rotate the part, but to change the Layer XY Start Position to be the same as the Seam XY position. Those are two settings which control layer starting positions. The first setting determines where to start printing the inner walls and infill, etc. while the second one determines where to start the outer wall. I think your problem is fixed by setting the settings to the same value. I do not recommend turning combing off. The rattling sound isn't that bad, right? I cannot imagine that the rattling sound is new since 2.5....

Underextrusion is most often a hardware issue. It could very well be that this problem coincidentally started when you started testing Cura 2.5. Please try the standard methods to try and resolve the issue on your printer.

1) Is should always have printed a skirt for each extruder, as it is used to prime and normalize the extruder pressure. You can disable it by setting the skirt/brim distance to zero for the second extruder. 2) Thanks for the heads up. I just fixed it on the 2.5 branch.

There was some internal miscommunication; it should read "2.5 beta 2", rather than "2.5.1" Just use that download link..