purps

Thanks for the reply. I've got... [ 1.705124] usb 3-1: New USB device found, idVendor=2341, idProduct=0010 [ 1.705127] usb 3-1: New USB device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=0 [ 1.705130] usb 3-1: Product: Ultimaker 2.0 [ 1.705132] usb 3-1: Manufacturer: Ultimaker BV (www.ultimaker.com) As for the USB ports, I'm using my wife's old laptop (with Mint) so I'm pretty sure that won't be USB 3.0 - the ports aren't blue. Any other ideas? .

Hi everyone. Any and all help would be much appreciated, as I am slightly worried about my little printer! Cura does not recognise my UM2. I'd like to think I've checked the obvious stuff. I have... - Tried several different cables. - Tried 3 versions of Cura (2.4, 2.5, 15.04.6, 15.04.5 in that order). - Tried above versions on both Windows and Linux computers. - Using Linux I have checked with "lsusb" that the printer is recognised, and it is - Arduino SA Mega 2560 (CDC ACM). So the printer is currently on... "March 17 2016 13:20:06 - Vers:_15.04.5" Any ideas please? My UM2+ Upgrade Kit arrived today and am just about to do the hardware upgrade, and I see the instructions are quite adamant about doing a firmware upgrade! Cheers, Matt.

Hi all, hopefully an easy one. An LED on my UM2 has failed (I believe) which has caused the remaining 5 in that segment to go dim - please see picture. Red arrow is failed LED. Can I safely chop that segment of 6 LEDs out without any detrimental effect to the printer? It'll just draw slightly less power right? Forgive me if that's a stupid question - mechanical background! :-) Cheers, Matt.

Thanks for the reply. I think I have resolved the issue, or at least fixed it in this case. I started by loading the STL back into my CAD program, and I couldn't see any obvious issues. I also checked the X-Ray view in Cura as per your suggestion, but couldn't see anything wrong. It turns out that it was due to having a solid "roof" on my support structure. When I changed it to a rib design, this strange single initial layer went away, and Cura interpreted the area appropriately as per the settings. The images show the 3 layers in question - no strange infill. Cheers, Matt.

Hello all, apologies if this has been covered elsewhere, I'm probably not searching with the right terms. Why at the top of this internal feature, which should be the first solid layer that bridges the gap, does Cura do one solid layer, then a few infill layers, and then go back to what I believe to be the "proper" solid layers, then the main infill after that? Sorry if that doesn't make sense, hopefully the pictures make it clearer. The strange infill is shown by the pink arrow, and the other two images show the model in CAD. It is a simple circular cutout, and the red part is just support structure. The problem is that when I remove the support structure, I find it very hard to not damage the first single solid layer i.e. the uppermost inside face of the cutout. Any and all help much appreciated. Matt.

Thank you for the replies gentlemen. I think am definitely going to be looking into ASA (which is what ApolloX is I believe), it really sounds too good to be true. I will get some PETG as well (which I think is at least similar to the ColorFabb XT I've been experimenting with), but in terms of moisture resistance (indeed weather resistance in general) I think ASA is the one to try. Many thanks again. Matt.

Hi all, Been printing PLA with my UM2 so far - loving it. I have some Colorfab XT samples to try as well. I want to start investigating the manufacture of end-use parts, namely for my telescope project, but also for the future in general. What would be the best material to use in terms of dimensional stability (low CTE) and moisture resistance? And generally for outdoor use? Of course tough/strong is desirable, but to be honest I think PLA is up to the job from that point of view. Not too bothered about UV resistance, but nice to have. Thanks in advance for any and all help! Matt.

Thank you all very much for your comments; they answer my question perfectly. Cheers, Matt.

That's great, thank you for the insight. I would be very interested in seeing that thread for the comparison of the three UM2 models if anybody knows where it is off hand? I'm willing to believe the quality is the same between the UM2 standard and Extended, however I just wanted to be sure because bigger machine usually means more slop! There is no way I would want to compromise quality/reliability for the extra build volume. Cheers, Matt. P.S. Reason they are the same price (or nearly the same price) to me is because I would be buying them for my business, and the price of the Extended is high enough such that I go over a magic number and I get more of a tax break, effectively making it cost the same as a standard UM2. You see I told you it was boring! :-)

Hello all, long time lurker, first time poster here. Apart from the larger print volume, is there any real difference between the Extended and the standard Ultimaker 2 in terms of reliability, print quality, etc? I really don't think I need the extra build volume; however for reasons I won't bore you with, the Extended will end up costing me pretty much the same as the standard Ultimaker 2. If there are any concerns about the Extended whatsoever, I would just go with the standard Ultimaker 2. Cheers, Matt.