Konky
-
Posts
10 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
3D Prints
Posts posted by Konky
-
-
I don't want to remove the glass with every print and wouldn't want to spray inside my printer.
That's the main reason;)
-
I can not find the origin, axes are oiled fine.
It's repeating per rotation of the axis.
Printer seems to print quite accurate, so right now it's just a noise problem.
The printer is an UM2+ and has been used only for a week or so.
-
Yea I also used slurry but I was not very happy with it.
It's kinda messy
Well better than hair spray!
-
I've been using Scotch blue tape for a while. It works well is acceptable to apply and remove.
However it's not a perfect clean surface, it's a bit rough and sometimes blue color leaks into the print bottom.
I've been trying only glass but it's kinda a mess with the glue stick and it does not bond that well.
I've tried Kapton tape but using it was horrible. It's barely possible at all to put it on the glass without loads of bubbles and it gets damaged easily.
I wonder, what's the best to use ? Considering I mostly print on ABS.
-
I'm having my issues with it, mainly because it's just very feature rich and it's way less taking your hand in the beginning because it's made for many printers while Cura clearly has the UM in mind.
From what I have seen and read S3D is with quite a step the best and with a large step the fastest slicer on the market.
There are some downsides, like no absolute values in some cases where relative printspeed or heights make no sense. Also the multi-process stuff could need an overhaul as you said.
In general it's worth the extra time to set up.
-
Also the performance is much too slow in comparison to the stable version, that's not a killer but large objects need like 5-10 minutes on my (fast) computer each time to modify some setting.
This is fixed in the upcoming release.
I like that you added profiles per object (important thing) but the layer height feature would be something that makes cura special.
I don't understand why that's not already implemented, it seems so obivous to me ?
It's actually very complicated. We would need to change a lot of logic to get this to work properly
I've bought simplify3d yesterday to test and found it works very well and I think Cura could learn a lot from some parts of that slicer.
The slicing of large models takes only a few seconds (I'll stay updated on the Cura speed, however maybe python was not the best choice performance wise?)
They support different layer heights and it does not seem to be such a difficult logic change.
They offer a "cut view" in their UI to locate the right position.
You create 2 processes:
You tell process #1 to stop at height Xmm and process #2 will continue at height Xmm
So they basically used the feature of multiple profiles (processes) to support different layers.
Why would that be so much logic change ?
It's the simplest approach and requires a bit more "fiddling around" than I'd like but it works well.
I printed a bust using 0.2 layer resolution for the bottom area and then 0.06mm resolution for the facial structures saving me 40% print time time.
S3D is not optimized for that (you have to turn off bottom/top solid layers for example) but it's really a simple solution and it works.
The positive side for Cura so far: Cura prints better quality models.
While S3D sometimes makes prints that are nearly as good as an acetone finish (just not glossy) I also had errors in many prints due to wrong settings (it's a pain to learn every raw detail).
I wish there was a crossover to get the best of both worlds
-
something with licenses and patents, Guess that''s why you have to buy a program like Simplify3D.
I wonder how many people who are strong on open source buy programs like Simplify3D. Having to buy something to get these features because of Licences and patents seems a bit against the open source system.
I'm sure someone in the community who is capable to make a workaround to get this to work could provide some sort of solution.
Well I didn't know it supports different layer heights.
It's a bit cheap to say that's protected by licenses because that's bullshit.
If any amateur can come to that solution it's not patentworthy, so such a patent would be invalid in a court case.
It's also not that challenging.
For manual setting it should be damn simple and automated would not be that difficult either:
1) set range of minimal and maximal layer width
2) detect fine structures within N layers of current layer
3) if true, reduce layer width by X, if false increase layer width by Y
Such a simple mechanism would reduce the layer width more and more the closer and increase it as it moves away.
Don't tell me that is patented, it's a few days of work and testing for a programmer of a slicer. Or where is the difficulty in it?
Does Simplyfy 3D support that ?
I will always prefer open source if quality is on level of closed source, just like Labern said.
However I am not modifying the slicer so the difference is minimal.
I want a working product mainly which fulfills my requirements.
So if simpliyfy 3d supports that I'll buy it.
From the screenshots it looked more like a hobby programmers tool, the interface looked aged to me..
-
I can see improvements on Cura beta but I can not get it to work properly on my UM2+.
Identical settings as on Cura 15.04 on ABS causes my raft to be completely ruined (second layer does not bond and wraps like spaghetti between the first layer strokes.
On PLA it worked ok but I also had more issues, on ABS I can't even start to print.
Also the performance is much too slow in comparison to the stable version, that's not a killer but large objects need like 5-10 minutes on my (fast) computer each time to modify some setting.
The most important feature I would like to see is different layer height support.
That would be such a huge improvement on print speed and quality.
I like that you added profiles per object (important thing) but the layer height feature would be something that makes cura special.
I don't understand why that's not already implemented, it seems so obivous to me ?
Update:
I had an older beta of cura installed, with 15.10 the problems became less (except for the missing settings of temperatures)
-
Hi guys
Using: UM2+
Using Rec.ru ABS material
Having: mostly enclosed UM chamber for better prints.
The new beta Cura fails hard on me, aside of being a good 2-3 times slower in calculation the print results are horrible.
I am not even able to print the ABS raft, I've heavy wrapping of the second layer without bonding.
At exactly same settings (also tried standard settings) as on the standard cura.
No idea how to make that program work at all ;(
About the 15.04 cura:
1) There is a print speed setting in the standard expert tab, does it have ANY influence ?
I found a lot of print speed settings in the Advanced tab that seem to have influence.
2) Is it possible to set temperature in Cura ?
In the new cura I could set it without effect, in the old one I can set ABS/PLA in simple version but not in expert mode and it seems to have no influence.
Is it only defined by printer settings ? If so, how to print the first layer hotter than the others!?
I tried it in new cura and the temperature was completely ignored.
I found a general problem with ABS printing (and PLA but less obvious)
The ultimaker starts to print a string of filament in front left corner, then it moves to the print dragging that string of "crap" behind it and often moving it into the model/raft/brim causing a failure.
The best solution I found so far is to just let it flow on the side and then hold it when the print starts, that causes it to break off or get very thin and not causing issues in the print.
Without manually doing something it ruins a good 80% of all prints.
Bugreport M23 M24 commands faulty on Ultimaker 2
in UltiMaker Cura
Posted
SENT: M23 torso3~1.gco
SENT: M24
It starts printing the file but when finished it keeps the fans on and does not move the platform down.
Also it does not show print progress and the menu shows "Print" as if I could start a print.
There are several bugs with those two commands that need to be fixed.