DaHai8

Combing is traveling the print nozzle across the print without doing any retraction. That leaves a trail of filament ooze goo on the print as it goes. This is not much of an issue if it is Combing across infill. However it can make you print look not so nice if done on an outer layer (skin). So Combing ... Off = Don't Comb. Do a Retract and Travel Everywhere All = Do the Combing All the Time No Skin = Do Not Comb when moving across the outer (visible) layer, do a retract/travel instead (don't ooze goo on my Skin, Baby...) but go ahead a comb on the infill.

TweekAtZ 5.1 is included with Cura 2.3 (Production, not Beta) I used it to tweek the Extruder 0 to 190c at layer 5, and this is what was put in the gcode: ;LAYER:5M106 S137.3G0 X65.806 Y99.748 Z1.2;TweakAtZ V5.1: executed at Layer 5M117 Printing... tw@L 5M104 S190.000000 T0M204 S500 So it looks like its working properly.

The only issue I found with this is that the Plugin streams video (if you have a camera attached to your Pi) even if you don't have that window open in Cura. This really impacts (degrades) network performance with the megabytes of data flowing all the time. Just an FYI.

Here's a discussion on the RepRap forum covering this issue: http://forums.reprap.org/read.php?4,499220 One user found their pins in the cables was pushing back when connecting to the motor or board and so it was not making good contact. Hope this helps.

Ok. If I'm understanding correctly: 1) The Left Z-Axis Motor only rotates counter-clockwise not matter which connector (X or Y) you plug it into, 2) The Right Z-Axis Motor doesn't rotate at all no matter what connect you plug it into 3) You have a Ramps board 4) All you cables are pinned the same: same wires go to same pins on every cable. 5) Plugging your X-Axis Motor or Y-Axis motor into either Z-Axis sockets and they turn? (True or False?) If 5 is TRUE, you probably have bad Z-Axis motors (that's pretty rare, though). If 5 is FALSE, you probably have a bad Ramps board I don't know what kit you are building but this site that may help you double-check everything: https://asensar.com/docs/woodmax/0001-6_woodmax_electronics/

Well, that depends...LesHall: Are you using Cura 2.3 (Beta) or Cura 2.3 (Release) ?

P.P.P.P.P.S: Cura 15.x supports the bat properly:

I created a simple arch where each inside segment was rotate 10 degrees and tested the Suport Placement again. It works as expected with supports being placed according to the degrees specified. I tested 10 - 90 degrees and they all placed properly - with 90 degrees having no support and 10 having everything supported. So apparently Cura is just going Batty (sorry) with that model's supports.

There seems to be a significant Support Placement issue in Cura 2.3.0. It appears to be placing much more support than is needed and in places that don't require any support. Normal View: Red indicate Overhang areas (right?) Layer View: Supports just about everywhere - especially where the overhang is almost 0! This is Thingiverse Night Bat rotated to 150 degrees backward (as instructed) and scaled to 1000% (so its a decent size). Here's an 80% overhang. Notice how virtually None of the near horizontal surfaces have any support: Lasty a 90% overhang, which the help text says will provide NO Support (ooops): Am I doing something wrong/stupid, or is this really horked??

It prints just as it looks in the Slicer: gaps between the walls. The only way I've got it to fill in the walls properly is to set the Wall Line Count to 1. It appears that Cura is deciding that with a higher Wall Line Count, it can't fit a wall in there, so instead of infill, it just gives up.

Tried that with Cura 2.3.0 (Release) and it still doesn't fill in between the walls.

I'm afraid versioning the Release of Cura the same as the Beta is going to be an issue of endless confusion. From my background, our Corporate IT department used the convention of Major.Minor.Beta with a the numbers always incrementing and never using the same number twice. 2.2.1 - 2.2.9 would be betas (your could even slice it finer with 2.2.1.1...) 2.3 would be a release after a 2.2.x beta 3 would be a Major release So in Cura's case, since you already used 2.3 as the beta, I would have gone to 2.4 Release. Then for the next release Betas, used 2.4.1 - 2.4.9 to get to Release 2.5 Just a suggestion, cause I think your versionings are very confusing (not to mention using 15.x for the Old Cura and 2.x for the New! Yipes.) P.S. Right off the bat, Cura is warning me that version 2.3 is already installed ... even though that's a Beta and this new one is the Release....

Check the pins on the Z-Axis cable compared to the X-Axis cable and make sure the all the wires go to the same pins. There may be reversed wires on the Z-Axis cable or that cable may just be bad. Also: Sounds like you have 2 Z-Axis motors (I can't view your video at the moment). Your Pots for the Z-Axis may be tuned too low and not provided enough power to turn both Z-Axis motors at the same time. Try connecting just your single X-Axis motor to the Z-Axis socket on your board and see if that rotates it.

OK, perhaps not a bug, but I'd like it to be an enhancement. I see this issue when the Wall Line Count is set to > 1 and the width of the wall in my object is between 2x and 3x my Nozzle size. As you say, this produces a gap less than the Nozzle size... However, it would be really sweet if Cura could automatically decrease the flow rate (or Line Width) for those gaps to the percentage needed to fill it in. The odd part (that makes me think this is a bug), is that: If I set the Wall Line Count to 1, Cura will fill in those gaps - even if it is less than the Line Width / Nozzle size). So...why does it not do that for Wall Line Counts > 1 ?? And it is usually not desirable to print the entire Object with a Wall Line Count = 1.

You could try disabling Combing, enabling Retraction and increase the minimum distance before retracting .

Cura 2.3 remembers folders now, so that should take care of your first issue. I not sure if it does anything different for your send one.

I would suggest downloading Cura 2.3. While it is Beta, it has numerous bug fixes from 2.1.3. I suggest uninstalling Cura 2.1.3 and then cleaning out your old settings from previous installs by renaming the Cura folder in the Users directory: C:\Users\YourUsername\AppData\Local\cura Just rename the cura folder to something like cura-old just in case you need to go back to it. Then install Cura 2.3 and it will be a fresh/clean install. Hopefully that will either fix your startup issues or at least allow you to see the log files.

I second that. Or perhaps a Prime Nozzle after combing.

Many Days... ... ... ... And Hundreds of Prints... ... ... ... Thousands of Hours... .... ... ... Millions of Meters of Filament.... ... ... ... I have my answers...(Drum Roll, Please....) ... ... ... ... ... ... .. Less than 1 !!!! Thank you, thank you. Yes, I know I'm "Brilliant!!" ... ... ... ... Actually, I found a value equal to the cube of the nozzle size in mm works well. In my case, .064 mm3 ... ... Of course, I could just be fooling myself and .064 ~ .000 Who knows....(only the Shadow)

Ok, let me put his this way: Should I be trying values >1 mm3 or <1 mm3 ?? More than 1 cubic mm seems like a lot, yet less than 1 cubic mm seems really small. So I'm just looking for an idea where to begin with this setting and progress from there. Thanks!

Ah! Allrighty then! I did not know that was there. Thanks!

I stumbled upon this nice Cura 2.1 tutorial. Granted, it's in Traditional Chinese, but Chrome can translate it pretty well: http://3dmart.com.tw/tutorials/ultimaker-cura2.1-printing It covers just about every setting in Cura 2.1 with graphic examples and nice explanations (sadly not up to date with 2.3 version, but pretty thorough nonetheless). This might be really helpful for someone new to Cura/3d printing and overwhelmed by all the options. Heck, I'm finding it handy for the depth it goes into. Thought I'd share... P.S. is there an English tutorial on this level somewhere? Is someone working on one? Would you like to have one? (I'm hedging on volunteering as this could be a rabbit hole... )

I'm getting holes in my prints where the print head is landing after a significant travel ( > ~40mm). I'm pretty sure this is due to oozing after a long travel, along with Combing All enabled. What would a good starting value for "Retraction Extra Prime Amount" be for a .4mm nozzle printing PLA? P.S. Retraction Amount is 6mm and Speed is 60mm/s Thanks!

I'm having that problem as well. Raft also produces supports on the object's first printable layer. But otherwise I believe its a bug in the software.

Is there and ETA on the next release??