Jump to content
Ultimaker Community of 3D Printing Experts


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

Personal Information

  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It's a rather difficult filament to print and requires an all-metal hotend but I really love it for it's properties and look (specifically the blueish transparent one). And since it's crystalline PET you can anneal it afterwards to increase it's stiffness and temperature resistance which makes it pretty versatile. General print settings that work well for me are very similar to PET-G settings (slightly underextrusion, slow and steady print speed, 70°C bed temp, low fan speed or none at all, etc...). Where it differs are print temperature (260°C on my printer) and it's tendency to c
  2. I use their polycarbonate filament. It's a rather pure PC without many additives which gives superb technical properties but is harder to print than some other highly modified PCs (polymaker for example).
  3. Hello there, I'm trying to gather some information about manufacturing UL(94) recognized parts and it seems that the cheapest option is the UMS5 with novamid. There are a few processing parameters that a manufacturer has to pay attention to and therefore I'd like to know if Ultimaker provides cura profiles tailored for bluecard conformity. Also I'd like to find out how to read the "post process method" section. In the UL file ( https://iq.ulprospector.com/en/profile?e=601705 ) it says "none". Does that mean that I'm not even allowed to remove support? Which would basica
  4. Attached you can see all the vertices that are non-manifold (in orange). It's too much for a quick manual fix for me at the moment but anyone familiar with blender can get it done in 10-30 minutes.
  5. What a bummer... but thanks for the answer. Do you by chance know what I have to edit in the machine definition to make cura accept higher temperatures for this custom printer? This is my definition file which I found in .../AppData/Roaming/cura/4.6/definition_changes (don't know if this is the right file in the right place; I believe not - but there's no file for this printer in Program Files\Ultimaker Cura 4.6\resources\definitions where I'd expect it to find) [general] version = 4 name = P220_settings definition = custom [metadata] setting_version = 13 type = definit
  6. You can try playing around with the mesh-fixing options in cura. But generally you shouldn't expect a proper gcode when you feed the slicer with a faulty model.
  7. Just for cross-reference reasons here the link to another thread about the same topic:
  8. When I set anything above 366°C for printing temperature, cura marks the input red and refuses to slice. This wasn't the case with older cura versions (e.g. 4.3.0). Is this intended or a bug? For me this is really critical since it prevents me from high-temp printing (or forces me to manually edit the gcode/use PP plugins). I also recently had a talk with a high-temp printer manufacturer that told me they were about to switch from simplify3d to cura and this is one of the reasons why they still hesitate to make it their customers default slicer. I don't know about the other reasons
  9. You're looking for the "support overhang angle" option in the support section. Concerning your 2nd problem: your .stl is not manifold which can cause random failures when slicing. Here's a screenshot of your model highlighting the faulty vertices.
  10. Check out the "combing mode" options in the travel settings.
  11. Hi there, there's some useful feature that I don't use as often as I'd like to. In the "travel" section we can find "avoid supports when travelling"; but I can only use this feature when also "avoid printed parts when travelling" is enabled, which I try not to use most of the time. It's also dependent on combing which I also want to disable in that context. There are models and materials where I try to keep travel moves as short as possible due to oozing/stringing (therefore z-hop is no alternative) but this always comes with an increased risk of knocking ov
  12. Ok, then it was probably just a coincidence that it seems to work here on a different model. I tried yours with cura 4.5 and can reproduce the issue. I don't know if that's an option but you could try solidifying your sheet model in CAD to just above nozzle size and see what happens then.
  13. You're missing a lot of really useful new features though. Cure has come a long way since 3.4.
  14. Have you tried selecting a user specified seam position with the coordinates exactly in the center (or with a slight offset towards the preferred corner) of your model?
  15. By watertight I actually mean manifold which it wouldn't be if you just extruded your objects just into another (depending on your modeling software). In case you didn't use boolean operators then this would rather likely be the cause of your problem. The fact that it worked on a different version doesn't proof the models integrity since some of these models are quite unpredictable when it comes to slicing them. As a simple check you can try out enabling/disabling "union overlapping volumes" in the "mesh fixes" section. It doesn't solve these issues reliably but it's worth a try.
  • Create New...