Modified_Gemini

Really? Can i ask... What version of cura are you using? What settings are you using to achieve this madness! Lol. This is what it lools like when i print this item.

The model itself is not the issue. Its how cura handles the slicing of single walls. The "Super D" is a single-wall model. When you print it you will quickly notice it fail. Even though in the slicer it looks like its sliced and printed fine. (Atleast in Cura, i have not tried any other slicers)

I'm really not trying to print a vase. Also the model is quite complex, it's about 90% "vase" and the rest are parts that do contain infill. Its just the behavior that's causing issues and messing up prints. you can see what I'm talking about if you slice/print this. https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2815078

The print thin walls doesn't work, I have tried designing thinner walls and switching to print thin walls, yet it wont slice them. At least I know the issue, ill have to stick to printing a double wall vs a single wall for now, thanks!

I'm trying to design models as "vase mode". I model in Fusion360 and my latest endeavor is that a few projects require single wall prints. FIRST. I started off with a .41mm offset, (creating thickness of .41mm because a .4mm thickness will not slice) So as a .41 thickness, the print head creates the full perimeter yet backtracks to the starting point. Its like watching an rotary phone! Print - rewind - print next layer. After some troubleshooting, I found in the gcode. It turns out that the "rewind" is actually printing that extra little bit of wall. (I need/want this part to not happen) So I've played back and forth so far as getting my model thickness to .40075mm, And the given distance extrudes .08382mm of filament, while it still backtracks extruding .00021mm of filament. Unfortunately, the minimal loss in filament distance is horribly lost as oozing over the long backtracks and causing prime issues. I have changed multiple settings, over and over, yet nothing.. Possibly I'm in the wrong combination? I have even went to a .4 offset, and even a .39 offset, and selected " print thin walls" and they are quite horrible, not solid or connected. I'm using Cura 3.2.1, Fusion 360

Thanks smartavionics!

Ooooh, you're right, doh! (And im not even drinking yet lol) because this is an electronics case, so much of it is on the same layer that connected, its bouncing around doing walls then infills then gap fills. So yeah, the setting im looking for is simply an optimize movements. So i cant wait for it to come out now! I also did a visualization of single walls and 100% infill.. it did show much less un needed travels, but also added 3hrs to print time ????

I mostly understand the behaviour and the constraints. I was just hoping there was a simple setting i could flip to make it better. But i guess not. But on the optimize code. Wouldnt it be pretty easy to just add a quick code that treats things seperated by a gap as its own item. Like when you add a bunch of models on a plate it will print one at a time, so add a code tweak so where anything printed on a layer that is seperated by a gap is treated as its own item (even if it is physically the same model). It may not be perfect, but i think that alone would get rid of so many back and fourth movements.

I was directed to a setting, Travel -> Combine mode = OFF It looks like it goes straight to the next print spot. Unfortunately movements seem far from optimized and still zig-zag across the print. But it may prove better, as 125 mm movements will probably be more forgiving in loss of prime vs 300 mm movements. It has also added a few more g to my print. (these are just visuals and have yet to print test) Thanks smartavionics for offering to slice my model. I appreciate it, but it doesn't do me much good on my other models, as i only have Cura anyways.

Cool, that helped a little bit. Also shaved off 8 min print time. lol Bit still scrolling through the layers you can still see a lot of movements. I just tried removing the fillets, its pretty much the same luck. I've tried clicking on the "avoid printed parts", but it still wont make a B-line to the next printing point, it would rather make 300 mm movements around the perimeter.

I've hit a little speed bump. My latest of designs, i noticed this happening much more as i started designing more case like objects. CRAZY excessive movements. 300mm of movement to travel around the object to print a dot, then travel back 300mm to print a dot, then back halfway to print a dot again? While i tend to have my settings dialed in pretty decent, that amount of movement is causing a loss of prime, and areas of the prints are really suffering. I just upgrades to 2.7 and still cannot find the proper combination of settings to avoid this. Or is it even possible?

Sorry about the late reply, but my printer took a crap. lol. Still in warranty so I got a brand new printer in the mail!! This one has longer linear bearings, I really want to say smaller stepper motors? thicker build plate (moot cuz I print on glass anyways), larger cooling fan, threaded rod guides seem to have more meat on them. I also noticed some internal settings were changed, their e-steps were re calculated to what I had manually input. Ill work on getting this thing dialed in and see if I can provide some good pictures for your critiquing. Also hope this thread helps others as well.

Woohoo! Well after some number crunching, I realized it wasn't a software issue.. My bad... After some thinking and my inability to tweak layer 0. I modified the gcode in order to compensate. And its working! First I in Cura I changed the initial layer to .27mm then I added this to the beginning gcode. G28 X0 Y0 ;move X/Y to min endstops G28 Z0 ;move Z to min endstops G92 Z0.1 ; reset 0 to .1 G1 Z0.2 ;raise hot end to prime G1 F1500 X100 E15 ; traverse x, prime extruder G92 E0 ; reset extruder to 0 M117 Alakazam I believe with a little more tweaking, I can get a glass finish on the bottom. I hope others will find this useful and I appreciate the help and guidance.

I found an old disc I printed with old settings, I had beautiful bottom lines, but my outside as you can see has the bowl lip going on. Also decided to dig my fingernail in, and come to realize I had improper bonding to the next layer. And again they are about a .60 width, but you can clearly see gaps in whats supposed to be a .4mm line width.

As for a bad part, im still within warranty, ive had my machine for 8months of 1yr. There is 21days/ 20hrs/15m of print time extruding 1,931.3m. When I took my extruding motor off, the cog was not worn down or jammed with filiment in the teeth. There is still great tension on the roller, as to whats expected im unsure. Maybe ill buy a pull gauge and work on a tension/slippage method? Ive done some of what I thought were really nice prints that took 48hrs. http://www.thingiverse.com/make:216997 but on a raft, and im trying to get off a raft.

I have 8 rolls of PLA from 3 different manufactures, stored in a huge ice chest with a 300g silica canister. HA (when I get into a hobby I go hard in the paint). So that rules out a bad roll and me unwilling to use filament for productive purposes. I took off my extuding motor and found out my Esteps were WAY off, but in the wrong direction :( Most likely altered them to mask a previous problem. I was at 108 when I needed to be at 95. As I don't know hot to program small steps, but now im about a half step much in a 300mm sections. Sooooooooo. in reducing my extrusion, ive created and solved some problems. My top layer is much more smoother, however there is a little bowl lip? My O.D. went from a +.2mm to a -.35mm? Ive read there is shrinkage, so I assume this is a good thing? And because Im extruding less, I couldn't even get a print started. I just drag filament around because not enough comes out to force contact adhesion. Which is why im glad for your advice on calibration tips! I was able to hardcode a G92 Z0.1 , but, there is still huge gaps in layer 0, as well as bad (but not as bad) adhesion between layer 0 and layer 1. Also layer 0 lines are about a .64mm!! which boggles my mind because if im supposed to be printing .4mm lines, why am I getting .64mm and gaps in between? Thus I truly believe this is a software issue, Cura engine is over spacing layer 0. Which brings me back to the nozzle diameter, I think its a .4mm. When I use my machine to extrude I do get a .65, but when I had my motor off, I used my hand to push it out slower and got a smooth consistent .41mm. I really appreciate all of your help, I love bouncing ideas around, keeps the mind open. And for new pics. New bottom layer stand alone. New Top Layer/ bowl lip. New Bottom Layer Completed print This is a 20mmx3mm disc, printed at a .2mm resolution. Im working on priming/temp issues. On the bottom layer one of the cross lines is actually some skirt filament that didn't adhere and was dug across previous to printing. Once again Thanks, for everyones help, wish it didn't say this post was answered because its not. lol and I have now been looking in the reprap forums, thanks to your link.

Ive done lots of calibrations, but this guide is a bit more technical than others I found, after I get off work ill use the weekend to see if its really a calibration issue. Ive never taken off the hotend to truly calibrate the esteps, but if that was really the problem I feel this issue would be print wide, not just bottom layer. As for the x/y I do have like a .2 difference in the outside dimensions, but this is a set number meaning is like a .2mm if its 5.2mm or 100.2mm changing esteps would create a percentage problem over different size prints so I feel that's in the belts or something? I would also like to figure this out also but I just try to compensate in the design phase when I need to precise fit. My z height is pretty damn spot on when I print on a raft. Since I been trying to get off of a raft ive noticed a slightly taller print, which brings me to the z-endstop? As I just learned of this and have not hardcoded a z-0.1, could this be my problem? Also what about chances of a different size nozzle? Maybe I have a wrong size than thought? Supposedly its a .4mm, when I raise head and extrude a section of material I want to say it shows like a .56mm or something. If I remember correctly I did try to print with a .5mm setting, and it just spaced the nozzle further creating larger gaps. As for the base printer, I selected the pursa i3. I thought my other layers were good :( haha! live and learn and now something more to strive for!

Here is the top layer. A little ridgy, but its completely bonded with no gaps. cant get anything in there or separate anything. So if my e-steps were an issue, you would think I would have the same issue on the top layer also?

Yeah I understand how computers count, 1 is actually 0, except in some code language , I forgot what one. and after looking a little more, it is not adding another layer, I might have got confused. But here are some pics. This is layer 0, printed directly on the glass, freshly leveled, and no clogs, material flows out smooth and straight. Its pretty clear that there is gaps. My machine shows a 100% flow rate, so im assuming in the cura engine, its giving different calculations for a bottom later? Here is after the completed print, I can usually get my finger nail in there and scrape quite a bit of the bottom layer off. And only the bottom layer, I don't have any other adhesion problems with any other layers I would like to tweak at layer 0, but i run into the previously stated problem. I know i can mod the gcode myself, but would like cura to recognize layer 0. Also forcing a tweak at z only masks the problem im having. I would like to get it figured out.

immediately after executing the tweak, the next lines of code reverted to original settings, plus it grossly modified my flow percentage down to only 25%.

I will work on getting pics. But they will look like every other "bottom layer issue" i have seen. I do not have a problem with leveing my bed, or the distance of leveling. my problem is in the settings. i included the gcode copy showing how the tweak changed, and right away, the gcode went back..

I do understand that, and that took me a while to understand. I printed so great on a raft that i never strayed. But to print smooth on a raft would inherently cause bonding issues. Im not trying to print on a raft. these issues are otherwise.

I feel like im beating a dead horse in the mouth with this topic. Ive tried searching and found most of the same and nothing that displays this problem and I feel these are software issues. I have a Monoprice Maker Select, now using Cura 2.3.0 Ive been printing for quite a few months now. My print bed is level, slight drag of a piece of paper, and holds level pretty good. I print directly on glass with hair spray and with a raft i don't have any problem with adhesion. Im trying to get off of printing on a raft to create a smooth surface. So after a bit of googling it finally made sense to me, raise temp and increase flow rate to fill the gaps. Duh!! So I played around with the tweak at Z. Raise heat to 235, and extrude rate to 125%. But here is where problems came. Not much to understanding the gcode, so when i started looking at it between different settings, I found there is a layer 0. Layer "0" is completely normal in the computer world, but it appears to be a skirt/brim layer that does not say so. So when I try to tweak layer 0 I get this. ;LAYER:0 M106 S255.000000 G1 F1500.000000 E-1.00000 G0 F2160.00000 X93.355 Y93.359 Z0.200 ;TweakAtZ V5.1: executed at Layer 0 M117 Printing... tw@L 0 M104 S235.000000 T0 M221 S125.000000 ;TweakAtZ V5.1: reset below Layer 0 M104 S210.000000 T0 M221 S-1.000000 ;TYPE:WALL-INNER So it does the tweak, but immediately reverts settings, plus my machine shows only a 25% flow rate, because of the "M221 S-1.0". Problem 1 (it took me a couple frustrated months to realize this, believing I kept clogging up, because somewhere down the line I realized a certain combination of other settings also reset the flow to 25%(more bugs?) ) I can tweak at Layer 1, and then it shows and does a successful tweak but only after it completely printed "layer 0"... e.g. a raft/brim is a new layer below the print. A 3mm test, plus a .2 skirt/brim, and a paper thickness bed leveling, plus some error Im at 3.4mm, not to mention with a little effort I can pry away the ugly base lines - closer to the shell they are glued pretty good (ill work on getting pics if needed). Taking the skirt/brim to a 0 count also creates the same results as it still created a new bottom layer, except there is nothing beyond the print foot. Im Hoping im just missing something, I cant believe a simple tweak would be this complicated. Much appreciated.

My print bed was shipped warp, but after putting on a piece of glass it over rid that issue. It also stays level pretty good, i just finished a 43hr print and the level heald.......Ah in the middle of typing this replay i started a print to work on calculating internal shrinkage, and i remembered why i use a raft. I get very little adhesion if i dont. The raft has really thick base lines about .64mm lots of material good squishing. If i dont use a raft it appears to under extrude, really thin and stringy about .25mm barely any squish, and the extruder head will drag it around before it pushes out enough material to sporadically adhere. In that process much hard plastic is raised above the layer, extruder head bumps into it, ripping the print off the bed.. I use aquanet as the glue, and the extruder tip is the thicknes of a paper off the glass with slight drag.

Thank you! i couldnt find the answer is the "shrinkage"! it was pretty frustrating when trying to make pieces slide together. Here are some pics for the second issue ive had with toolpath spacing (i could have sworn i had this issue with top layers, maybe just bottom. My extruder e steps are calibrated. Finished print http://i1104.photobucket.com/albums/h326/modified_gemini/IMG_20160408_005824_zpsjtipsocd.jpg Second layer of raft, spacing of .3mm i believe http://i1104.photobucket.com/albums/h326/modified_gemini/2_zpsj5fjwpkj.png Top raft layer, has no spacing http://i1104.photobucket.com/albums/h326/modified_gemini/3_zpsd4mmznuf.png First layer of object, has clear spacing in the toolpath http://i1104.photobucket.com/albums/h326/modified_gemini/4_zpsfom9ulry.png Second layer of print, less spacing in the toolpath http://i1104.photobucket.com/albums/h326/modified_gemini/5_zpskuhg2btl.png A few layers into the print, and theres finally no spacing http://i1104.photobucket.com/albums/h326/modified_gemini/7_zpsc3cni57a.png Top layer of print, has no spacing http://s1104.photobucket.com/user/modified_gemini/media/89_zpsubdu5pgu.png.html?sort=3&o=2