ansonl

I added a compatible Ultimaker S3/S5/S7 profile for PrusaSlicer On the PrusaSlicer profile settingsrepo: https://github.com/prusa3d/PrusaSlicer-settings/tree/master/live/Ultimaker Implementation details: https://ansonliu.com/2024/04/ultimaker-s3-s5-s7-prusaslicer-profile/

Standby temp of 170-180 works for me. I found a good nozzle heat up and cooldown rate that I put in the DXUv2 cura profile on GitHub that will minimize the time waiting to heat using curas predictive heating in advance.

You use retract the filament extra when switching away from a tool. A nozzle switch retraction distance of 16mm and 20mm/s eliminates ooze for me. And also using the ooze shield in the slicer.

Looks good, did you try the dual color benchy that has only gunwhale and edges in a different color for a challenge?

@LouDFPV Good to hear! How is the dual extrusion working for your prints so far?

The issue was due to a implicit type conversion in the Ultimaker firmware. My write up can be found at https://ansonliu.com/2024/03/ultimaker-gcode-footprint-halt/

When adding the Ultimaker header to a gcode file so the Ultimaker S printer will let you print gcode files sliced in another slicer, the GENERATOR.VERSION needs to be of the format X.X.X When the GENERATOR.VERSION is missing the third version number like 1.0 vs 1.0.1, the printer will home and error with ER999 which only lets you reboot the printer to continue using it. GENERATOR.VERSION:2.2.2 <- good GENERATOR.VERSION:2.1 <- bad I needed to slice a manifold model with PrusaSlicer that the latest versions of Cura had an error on and created a working profile for the Ultimaker S line printer. I was able to use the linked post to get some information on the newer Ultimaker's expected format but it would be great if the Ultimaker Griffin gcode format and header had more up to date documentation. I did not see a way to report a bug with the Ultimaker printer firmware/software itself so I hope that Ultimaker team sees it here. I tested this GENERATOR.VERSION bug on an Ultimaker S3 (3?) and S7 and both printers had the same issue and solution.

@LouDFPV I just updated the github with my toolchange gcode at https://github.com/ansonl/DXU/blob/master/Firmware/README.md https://github.com/ansonl/DXU/blob/master/AL-DXUv2/Cura configuration/README.md

Thanks to https://github.com/Ultimaker/Cura/issues/18319, it seems like I forgot to set the horizontal expansion for the second extruder to 0 as well. The drawback of this method is that you can no longer compensate for elephant's foot that only affects the exterior edges of a print due to the horizontal expansion affecting each part and not taking into account inner interlocking objects' edges that are within a close threshold (e.g. 0.001mm) of each other.

See my photos of the switching lever mount on both my UMO+ and UM2 frames. The files for both mount styles are in the GitHub. The closed um2 frame needs holes to be drilled in the side and the location of the holes can be determined with the exterior mount piece.

Do you have an open side hole on right like the UNO+ or closed right side panel on UM2?

You need to mount your y endstop either to the back of the printer like the UM2+ has it. Or if it's in the same location as the UMO+, move the y endstop at the front towards the rear by a few mm. I relocated the y endstop on my UMO+ to the back like the UM2+ has it. The default UM2+ y endstop position should work.

UM2DD_Dual_Extruder_Calibration__Target_B_v2.3mf I looked back at some of my other prints and the first layer gap appears on all of them to some. I attached a much smaller example that slices faster to show the issue. As seen below, between the outside calibration parts, there is a gap inserted when you set one of the objects to a second extruder.

Yes, my printer is a modified UM2. If you set the printer and profile to Ultimaker 2 or a newer Ultimaker, the same issue presents itself. I tried have tried to set the expansion to positive and negative but it seems to make no difference. If it is set to positive, it also makes the model edges wider on the first layer which is undesirable since the edges of different models fit together like a puzzle piece.

The clone um2.5 print cartridge fits 1.75mm as shipped? And the real um3 cartridge is for 2.85mm?