Jump to content
Ultimaker Community of 3D Printing Experts
  • Sign Up

ghostkeeper

Team Ultimaker
  • Content Count

    191
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

ghostkeeper last won the day on March 7 2018

ghostkeeper had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

89 Excellent

1 Follower

Personal Information

  • Country
    NL

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. At these very low layer heights, aliasing plays a big role. For instance with the 0.0075mm step resolution, it can't step in increments of 0.04mm. It can only step in increments of 0.0375mm or 0.045mm. So for some layers your flow rate will be 11.1% too small and for other layers your flow rate will be 6.7% too much. The Z axis doesn't normally do microstepping (which would reduce the holding force necessary to keep the bed in place).
  2. To be clear, what you're asking doesn't increase or reduce the capabilities of Cura. If you want the layer height to vary in the range of 0.04 to 0.2mm you would currently use a layer height of 0.12mm and a variance of 0.08mm. With your suggested change, you would use a layer height of 0.2mm and a variance of 0.16mm. We've also had suggestions saying that Layer Height should be the minimum layer height: https://github.com/Ultimaker/Cura/issues/7770 With this, you'd set your Layer Height setting to 0.04mm and the variance to 0.16mm to get the same effect. Or that we should have both a Maximum and a Minimum layer height and the normal Layer Height setting shouldn't be used any more: https://github.com/Ultimaker/Cura/issues/2895 With this, you'd set your minimum layer height to 0.04mm and your maximum layer height to 0.2mm to get the same effect. All of these suggestions have the same effect: You can specify a range of possible layer heights. The only difference is in how it's presented to the user. In that regard I think having both a max and a min would be the easiest to understand, at least for an advanced/expert user. Perhaps the current situation is maybe easier to understand for a novice but the novice user probably won't use Adaptive Layers anyway unless there is a profile built-in for it. However we're also constrained by the fact that profiles are optimised for a certain layer height and a lot of settings can't be adjusted to scale with the layer height. Existing profiles are made for a certain layer height (say 0.2mm) so if you want a variance of 0.04mm to 0.2mm you're going to be printing at e.g. way to high temperatures to be extruding 0.04mm layers, and you'll burn your filament. So the best we can do is to use the profile meant for 0.12mm (or whatever is closest) and use that for the range of 0.04mm to 0.2mm. It'll be too hot for the 0.04mm and too cold for the 0.2mm, but it'll be better overall. So letting the layer height be the median of the range is important in order for the profiles to be correct, and you'll get a much better print out of it.
  3. Indeed if you have 0.2mm layer height with 0.16mm maximum variation, it will vary between 0.04mm and 0.36mm. If instead you'd like it to vary between 0.04mm and 0.2mm, you should set the layer height to 0.12mm, and the maximum variation to 0.08mm. We've chosen to hold the current layer height as median on purpose, because all of the other settings will have been optimised for this median layer height when you enable it. It will then stay closer to this optimised/preferred layer height overall. It's easier to transition to Adaptive Layers that way.
  4. Tree support is moved to the support section for the next release. The other experimental settings are there for a reason: We know significant issues with (most of) them. For instance the Adaptive Layers feature messes up all of the Z distances because CuraEngine normally calculates Z distances by counting layers. So the Support Z Distance is too small or too large, skin is too thick or too thin, etc. Those two settings you mention, Spaghetti Infill and Wire Printing, are actually also the two features that I proposed to delete recently, to reduce maintenance burden and confusion of the user. Spaghetti Infill has now been deleted for the 4.7 release upcoming. Wire printing not (yet).
  5. Yeah I'll be a bit more thorough, also including 2.3.1 which was the latest 32-bit release: http://dulek.net/work/Cura-15.04.06.exe http://dulek.net/work/Cura-15.04.06-Darwin.dmg http://dulek.net/work/Cura-15.04.06-Linux_amd64.deb http://dulek.net/work/Cura-15.04.06-Linux_i386.deb http://dulek.net/work/Cura-2.3.1-win32.exe http://dulek.net/work/Cura-2.3.1-win64.exe http://dulek.net/work/Cura-2.3.1-Darwin.dmg http://dulek.net/work/Cura-2.3.1.AppImage
  6. In case GR5's download ever goes down, I've made a mirror here too: http://dulek.net/work/Ultimaker_Cura-15.04.06.exe
  7. The setExtraOverhang function creates a buffer on which to draw. Think like MS Paint. You're actually drawing just with a black pen on a white canvas. While you're drawing (the mouse is holding down) Cura's rendering system will draw everything that's black on that buffer in red if it's on the object. When you let go of the mouse, Cura will look up all of the black pixels from that buffer and spray tiny cubes on your object by drawing rays from the camera through the centres of those pixels. I don't think it should be replaced, really, although it would need to be moved to the correct plug-in somehow. The bear on the road I was facing was to make the overhang erasable again. I think it would need to be implemented through some unique ID for each cube which gets translated to a colour on the render buffer, so that we can look up which cubes to delete from the scene by looking at which colours are within a certain circle in that render buffer. On top of that, you'd want to also erase the original overhang that Cura normally already renders red, although that may be considered optional. Aside from that, I was also just changing the theme to make support meshes render red as if they are overhang on your model. That would also affect normal support meshes that the user places, which is not nice. This is probably not so difficult to fix in Cura but may be difficult from a plug-in. The plug-in was created during a research sprint several years ago, where we got 2 weeks to develop something which we thought was progressive. I had this proof of concept, but due to lack of research time on Ultimaker's planning I was never able to finish it. Well, turns out I was indeed progressive; 2 years ahead of Slic3r PE, which just added a similar feature to their latest release (and did manage to finish it).
  8. Hi Lokster! SandervG gave me a ping about this. It's not unusual that it takes a week or so before we get around to reviewing and testing plug-in submissions. There are a lot of things for the developers to take care of nowadays! Sorry for the delay. I'll get it reviewed this afternoon and ask a colleague to test it.
  9. I am not able to fix disconnections or the networked printer not showing up in the list. This is on the firmware side. We haven't been able to reproduce #6626. #6731 has been fixed though.
  10. I'm not able to reproduce the problem any more though. Here's what I get when I load your latest project into Cura: Your temperature and retraction and such have been edited. Those are also the settings it actually slices with and the settings that are displayed in the main settings list. Are you sure you've selected your own material in the material manager to edit settings for, not something like Ultimaker PLA White? We might also be looking at a bug in the Material Settings plug-in here. We know of a firmware bug that causes network printer disconnections in version 5.4 of the firmware. It happens more often while the printer is printing. There is apparently an infinite loop somewhere in one of the services that keeps rebooting. This takes so much CPU power that other services, like the printer's network API, don't get processing time any more. If the printer takes too long to respond, Cura will assume the connection is broken. You'll also be unable to access the printer via a browser then (by entering the IP address in your address bar).
  11. The time lapse post-processing script adds g-code commands that instruct the printer to take a picture. It doesn't function via any camera view via OctoPrint or anything. If your printer has a camera and supports the command you put in the settings there (by default M240) then the pictures or video would be stored in your printer somewhere. I like how you refer to Cura as "the cure" by the way.
  12. I'm not part of any firmware team so not the best person to ask. I haven't heard of the prime blob being modified recently. I suppose they'd have to tweak things for the S3 but I think they would try to keep the prime blob exactly the same for other printers so that they wouldn't need to re-test that for all materials and nozzle sizes. The UM3 firmware hasn't had an update in almost a year anyway.
  13. Radomir, the articles can also be seen online in the source repository: https://github.com/Ghostkeeper/SettingsGuide/tree/master/resources/articles Browse through these categories to find the article you need. For version 2.3 of the guide, I've implemented a translation system. However there is no Czech translation yet, just French and a partial Russian translation.
  14. For Ultimaker printers this position is set to be at the switching bay, where it needs to move to perform the tool switch. Many other printers have just one nozzle rather than two (with multiple feeders feeding material in it) and to them the tool switch is completely digital or just involves a retraction and unretraction. We've made this the default for third-party printers. This is most likely why it's not making any motion for your printer, while heating the other nozzle. For yet other printers with multiple distinct nozzles, they'd need to have it configured correctly in their printer definitions. The MendelMax falls in this category. There is no way to create a correct default for all printers. We need some information about your printer to do that. In this case, the information provided by MendelMax to Cura is incorrect or incomplete.
  15. You can adjust those settings from within the Cura interface - as well as save them to a profile - if you install the Printer Settings plug-in from the Marketplace. Otherwise, I suggest taking it up with the MendelMax support. Maybe they have experience with this issue with other users.
×
×
  • Create New...