kmanstudios
-
Posts
4,052 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
119
Content Type
Forums
Events
3D Prints
Posts posted by kmanstudios
-
-
It looks like it does not have enough tension to grip the material when pressure can build up.
how can I change that?
I am only experienced with the UM3 feeders, but, here is a link to this about the UM2 series., Oddly, looking that up, it is very similar to the UM3. But,l I know it is not like your feeder, so I am not sure how much it helps.
And, you mentioned the 3mm in your original post...I missed that...sorry.
-
The calibration data remains on factory reset; at least from fw 3.6.3 upwards.
Thanks! That is good to know because I had done that way back before that version.
-
I have noticed that the new versions (2.6.x family) is very sensitive to pivot points and how the geometry is made. Basically, as the software gets more advanced, it is demanding better/proper models/modeling. Many of the models online are not all that great.
I just spent about 20 hours fixing one of my own files from earlier on because of this. It was a file from when I was using at least 3 different programs to accomplish a goal and did it all ad hoc and not with any real plan. Not the best of procedures.
If you do not know how to fix the files, then you can always go to preferences, uncheck 'automatically drop models onto buildplate' (Or close to that) at the top of general (The default tab when it opens) and then move the model up to make sure it is sitting right on the buildplate. This is very handy for also having to rotate and object to find the optimal printing angle as you sometimes have to model based on the needs of the modeling program (Rendering purposes or animations) and not what will always print best.
-
OK, I finally got the file to work. But it all began as a retrofitted file from when I was experimenting with workflows from one program to another. I was using Incendia Next to generate my 3D fractals. A combo of 3DSMAX and 3D Coat to make parts and put it together using the voxels to create quick and clean boolean ops.
It was done before I had my basic workflow with these programs figured out about last November. As i have refined the fundamentals of what to do, when and what program to do it with, I usually do not have these problems these days. I had to really step back and look at it as if I had received the file like so many I have had to fix in the past. I mean get into it deep and down to the vertex level and such.
But, it did not like the pivot point being messed with. For some reason, I had to put the base of the model on 0,0,0 and leave the pivot point there.
Lessons here are these:
1. Having developed a set of fundamental steps and workflow from program to program, I have eliminated most of these issues. I have not encountered something like this in a few months.
2. Sometimes when a model takes you down the wrong rabbit hole, it is usually easier to start over rather than beat the model into submission.
3. Sometimes, you just have to beat on that thing like trying to make your little brother 'say uncle'. I do not know if that is universal enough or not. Here is the explanation.
4. After nearly 18 hours off and on, I almost said 'uncle' LOL
-
1
-
-
That is why I never use the adapter with threader when using large spools. It fits ok on the main spool holder. I just let the adapter dangle with the filament threaded. The threading helps keep it from pulling at too sharp an angle and binding on itself. The spool should not fall off the main spool rod as it has that 'lip' as well as being pulled towards the printer itself naturally.
I just have not gotten around to making a new spool adapter for large spools. Mainly because, eventually, I will make a dry box to feed the filaments and it will vastly change the dynamics of the spooling actions.
If you want a copy of the current spool adapter as included to make your own adjustments and such, go here.
-
I think 'father time' (is this an international figure?).......
Far as I know it is
-
So the only gain seems to be it is much flatter? That's too bad, it looked promising
May be more resistant to warping and chipping too. Do not know if it is enough to warrant the price. The price is not much of a jump from the borosilicate glasses, but some have said it is not that much better than regular glass in other threads I have read.
-
I believe you do. If I remember correctly, I did a factory reset once and had to do it. I think it even warned me that it was not calibrated.
-
I have found that sometimes I seem to get a UM3E #1, #2, #3, etc.
I have not found a pattern that does this or figured out why, but I just keep deleting them when I notice them. But, I am doing that in the program up top in the black band in the top right of the interface.
-
Here are two Links to guides:
In general though, by the time you are ready to make soap, it has all the animal or plant fats, glycerine and other stuffs that make it 'soap' as we know it added and it is reduced in caustic properties. If not, it would severely burn skin. Also, plastic soap holders would not be able to hold it after solidifying.
I think heat would be the issue as you have to cook it and pour it while still somewhat hot.
-
1
-
-
Is the hole bigger or the width will not fit the adapter with threading holes (That hole at the bottom of the arm with the smooth, white inserts).
If the hole is bigger, just put it on the spool holder and it will just roll. There is a 'lip' that will keep it from falling off.
If the width (From front to back, not in diameter) of the roll is too large for the adapter to fit into, then just put it on the spool holder as above.
In both cases, (I have some filament for which the spool is too wide for the adapter) I just put the spool on the spool holder and thread the filament through the holes in the adapter and just let it hang. Gravity will do its job there for the most part. Worst case, you may have to tape it down to keep it from rising up to the feeder.
I have adapted the spool holder with a piece for the smaller hole spools like Taulman's, but have not played with the printing of an adapted spool holder for the wider spools.
-
Maybe I am missing an obvious point, but why couldn't you continue to print your transparent lamps before?
IIRC he's using filament from Taulman that, mostly, come on tiny spools.
That's it. Just those tiny spools. Oddly, they are not all tiny and some of the prints are fragile. Taulman's T-Glase is stronger than PLA.
-
Way Cool
-
Great Googly Moogly...that is $54.00 USD for one! Ack!! LOL
Plus shipping which they seem to want to charge a lot for. Fortunately they are driving distance away for me. If bed flatness isn't an issue for you then spending the extra money won't net you much but if it causes you the kind of problems I was seeing then $75 on top of the $3500 or so doesn't seem excessive. In my opinion, this glass should be original equipment for this printer.
So far, the plates I have (Original and two borosilicate (SP?) added to that), I have been lucky with the flatness. But I am curious how much it resists chipping and such.
I've gotten better at removing my prints and how to prep the plate, so no issues since the real early days, but at some point, I will drop one or something else stupid.
-
Great Googly Moogly...that is $54.00 USD for one! Ack!! LOL
-
Do you have your print space enclosed at all? Until I receive my advanced kit, I tape up bubble wrap on the door opening. I do not (at this time) put a tent over the top.
I have tried enclosing the printer and if anything, it makes the problem worse.
Huh....that is odd. But thanks for the info.
-
Do you have your print space enclosed at all? Until I receive my advanced kit, I tape up bubble wrap on the door opening. I do not (at this time) put a tent over the top.
-
I happened to have clicked through the photo's and this seems like a real photo to me. If it was not really 3D printed, it would add less and I would lean towards spam or unwanted content more.
I can agree with that one photo, especially with the layer lines, but the rest of it is dubious. And, where are the layer lines on the toggle?
Not arguing a point, just leery of such things that are not fully rendered and shown as a real project. Especially as delicate as that thing is. And, where are the parts images? Not the mesh to download, as it is for sale on another site, but the actual parts?
This is not a knock either on the design. But if it is a real project and not just speculation, I would like to see more of the real printed things that it takes to make it. Design and reality are very different.
-
I guess the 3D print is in a grey area. Lets assume it is true that it is printed (prototyped) on an Ultimaker 3, in that case it is totally allowed and cool that they share it with us. It is not meant and solely available for 'hobby-projects'.
The link may make it a bit suspicious, but I personally think it is fine since they do actually add to the gallery.
But yea, grey area.
I would agree, but that is all renderings and not actual prints as far as I can tell. Having hands in the pics and not Photoshop composites/3d Renderings only would be helpful.
It is a grey area indeed, I just hope it does not lead to an onslaught of things for sale. Especially as I keep seeing the same things/models for free and for sale from various people. So far, not a lot, but it is growing in number.
-
We haven't made any changes to that part of Cura for 2.6 (or 2.6.1 for that matter) as far as I know.
Did you disable the "drop objects on buildplate" option?
Yes, but, having to do that to make things go up or down to accommodate the base base of the object can be frustrating. I can usually fix those things as they are basic.
Next time I have a model that behaves badly, I can PM a link to someone so they can look. Modeling is one of the areas I am confident on, so I am puzzled by this.
It will probably be something silly, but a second set of eyes may be helpful
It could be that disabling that feature actually makes them behave that way. Do they properly get put on the bed if you enable it?
Feel free to share the models with me. If it's something with the models, it's always good to have a few more edge case models.
Oh! Hahahahaha, I understand the question now...duhhhhhh...
OK, until recently, I had automatically drop model on. I always set my objects at 0,0,0 on the base with all pivot points located at the same. Basic operating procedure so that it will always work whether I am doing a two color print or not.
When it started to wonk out on me, I had to turn it off to allow above Zed0 or have fine tuning below Zed0.
But it seems to be model dependent and I have not figured out why. As soon as I have a model again (that is not humongous, up to you) I can PM a link to that file. I have been burning through a ton of experiments and I do not remember which ones or which versions gave me trouble. But it is always the same basic procedure when outputting for print.
Thanks!
-
We haven't made any changes to that part of Cura for 2.6 (or 2.6.1 for that matter) as far as I know.
Did you disable the "drop objects on buildplate" option?
Yes, but, having to do that to make things go up or down to accommodate the base base of the object can be frustrating. I can usually fix those things as they are basic.
Next time I have a model that behaves badly, I can PM a link to someone so they can look. Modeling is one of the areas I am confident on, so I am puzzled by this.
It will probably be something silly, but a second set of eyes may be helpful
-
Woiked for me. Do you have a link to a place saying to not do the Atomic-Pull on the UM3?
yes ... - the link I gave above https://ultimaker.com/...-apply-atomic-method says: ...the Atomic Method applied to the Ultimaker 2+, but this method can be used on all Ultimaker 3D printers, except the Ultimaker 3 (Extended). If you have an Ultimaker 3 or Ultimaker 3 Extended, take a look at the guide on ... - thats why I ask.
If you follow the link in that article it then describes doing a cold pull also referred to as an atomic pull.
I think what they may be referring to are the individual steps being different.
-
In this version, it seems to not like reading pivot points like it used to.
If I have a two part model, for instance, and both parts have the same pivot point, and no floating/stray mesh/geometry or other issues, it seems to want to either float or sink a model. In this instance, one part got placed correctly on the build plate and the other part got sunk.
I have had this happen on several models and no matter what I do to that model (and I am pulling every trick I know) it will behave the same way. Either floated above or below.
It is not consistent model to model though.
Edit: Oh yeah...no matter where I move the pivot points on those models, it gets placed the same way.
-
You had 21 open edges. That means that Cura is working just fine. You have to remember that as things become more sophisticated, the more sensitive it is to subtle errors. They all had to be capped to create a truly Manifold object. I used 3DSMAX to find this, but I am sure it could have been found in many other programs designed to check such things. If you downloaded this, remember, most of the materials out there are a crapnado of errors.
Think of Scotty disabling an entire Starship with just 5 bolts.
Here is the file.
Thanks for the help. But these bugs only Cura 2.6 can't handle.
Finally used other slicer to do the job, without problem.
The bug was in the file, not cura. You cannot say that it is a bug if it is accurately portraying or slicing the model.
Proper modeling is the cure, not the disease.
One thing that is a true bug is the way Cura is beginning to handle the pivot points. It is dependent on the model, but it is increasingly getting to where it will not place a model properly on the build plate: if the Pivot point is at the base area, and not other issues (stray polys, etc...I checked) it will either float the model a slight bit above or below the build plate. It is not consistent, but I have not figured out why yet.
Cura Profile for eSun filaments?
in Materials & profiles
Posted · Edited by Guest
3.00mm is a general measurement. Almost all of the filaments are 2.85 unless specifically stated. Take a look at the filament features online and I am pretty sure you will find it to be 2.85 with a +/- value to indicate the uniformity of the filament.
If stated to be a different diameter, I would enter that into the proper areas so that it is accounted for. Unless I am mistaken, all the fields in Cura are interrelated to some degree or another.