kmanstudios

So, I cannot print now. My S5 printer got jammed during a print when filament shattered in the tube. It was old and I thought it would work after heating up. When I tried to get the feeder (#1) off the back to open it up, it popped one of the filament sensor wire connectors rendering the sensor useless. But now, it just runs through the leveling process, runs the printhead to the front and then moves the printhead to the switch and it just dies with this message: When it gives that message, the printhead stays at the switching position where it froze up and the buildplate drops without any resistance or guidance from the z screw. This is when I try to print from USB or even the x,y calibration. I have restored to default printer settings, but it wants to load black Tough PLA which I do not have, so I have to stop at that point. The feeders do work though when I load materials normally. I just finished updating the firmware to the latest and it went smoothly. But it just will not print. And, as luck would have it, I am on my last piece for Christmas gifts. GRRRrrrrrrrr.... I formatted a USB and copied the logs to it. This is all that is on the USB zipped up. DataLogs_Kman.zipDataLogs_Kman.zip I can perform all other functions as far as I can tell...just not printing.

That is so cool!!

Honestly, the first thing that came to mind was 'Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In.' ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Awesome 🙂 Glad that got fixed for you...happy printing. But, know that there are some really bad files on Thingiverse.

Or you could have just gotten crappy models from Thingiverse. There are more than a few of them there. But some of what you mentioned seems to be related more to settings. Agree with the above to submit the project file.

He is on a Draft original setting. So I am thinking tighter line heights. Also to change the structure you would want to avoid curves that are too shallow to get a good resolution unless you go very tight with line height as well as using Adaptive Layers. Depends on what your design requires as to how to construct the geometry needed.

Be mindful of the gaps at the bottom. One wall on low slopes, like on the bottom and top areas, will leave gaps between lines. You can see it in the slice. But a slight change in topography and that could be easily solve the issue.

That tells me that something went wrong at that stage in your original model. When I taught 3D graphics, I used to tell people to just start over. You will waste less time and learn more, establishing solid working practices. You did that by making the new box and manipulating it instead of righting an error filled model. That is half the battle right there. Would like to see a pic of the print. 🙂

You could always try spiralize. Just spitballing here.

Yes, but those are all 3D Objects 😆

Or use a mesh based system that will apply a shell in a way that works. There are give and takes on each program. Learning how and why each program does what it does is key. Choosing the program for what you want to do is going to follow that key. Since this was a mesh based object, I treated it as such. It is teeny weeny though. Should be an interesting print at the scale it came in as. Anyway, here is your sphere with hole fixed. It is now a proper 3D object. Without the depth of the wall, it was a mere 2D object. spherewithhole3D.STL This is a single wall slice. I followed the wall suggestion by @GregValiant as to wall thickness. Using a 0.4 nozzle you will get a single wall print such as this.

I did not think of that! Thanks!! 🤠

I did not get gaps with the pyramid 5 or 6. I think the person just 'cut' pyramid 6 at various heights and left little gaps in the process. You can see in my prints that I had a solid base and no gaps. Spiralize only prints one wall. All prints were done with spiralize. More detailed = more dense. But I reconsidered and figured that pyramids 4 and 5 are just cut versions of pyramid 6 by cutting off the bottom parts. Printed at .2 mm layer height in all prints I made. Yep...bad typo on my part. I am leaving in the typo so that your comment will make sense to anyone who reads the thread. But, yes, should have been 0.06. And I used a 0.4 nozzle....nothing tricky on my prints. Yes, I am familiar with fractals and have designed and made several 3d printed Sierpinski pyramids on my own.

This is the 'slam it through as fast as you can' print of Pyramid 4. Again, could use some tweaking. Spiralized with smoothing turned off.

OK, so this is the print of Pyramid 5. There is very little difference between the two methods of spiralize. One with smoothing on (left side) and one with smoothing off (right Side). Not really much difference. Could have tweaked the settings to get the top to print better, but it was not the issue. Also lousy trimming of the brim. However, after re-reading the OP, I noticed it did mention using Pyramid 4 and I found the issue immediately: Here you can see that a straight slice produces the holes, or gaps. I used Cura 4.8, but have no expectation that there would be any difference. But you can see the gaps that are inherent in the Pyramid 4 model. You can see it in the slice as well as the shading of the original model. It was made that way. I then applied just a 0.05mm horizontal expansion and the gap went away without destroying the aesthetic of the model. Cura's version of 'Zap-a-Gap' I guess 😆 The thing to keep in mind is that the Thingiverse poster showed a pic of the Pyramid 6 which is a much more dense and connected model. It is impossible to compare two separate models without understanding the difference. Had I not missed the model number being printed this would have been solved much earlier. 🙂 But there ya have it.

My print came out fine. If you take a look at the one that was printed (Pyramid 6) on Thingiverse, you can see it has much larger areas to work with. I printed Pyramid 5 and it looked fine other than the layer height. If one wanted to, one could play with line width and layer height for a more refined print.

I just pulled my first print of pyramid 5 and I see no holes as the OP suggests. It is the one that I left on the smooth spiralized contours. I am now printing one with that setting turned off. The first print seemed only present an issue with the layer height.....I just slammed it through with Fast- 0.2mm layer height. I am sure it would look better on visual 0.6 layer height. I will post comparison pics when second print is done. That will be just over two hours from now since the print just started.

I took a deep dive into the files. They all passed the 3DS MAX stl check...so good there The print used in the photo on the link is Pyramid 6 You can tell by the size I am guessing that you printed Pyramid by the density of the iterative triangles and the size I am now printing out pyramid 5 *just over 2 hours just to see what happened. Full disclosure is that I am printing on an S5 (r1) and not a prusa and I used Arachne engine just for kicks and giggles. I also sliced using spiralize and 0% infill as suggested.

Which pyramid are you printing? There are three in the zip folder.

Ahhhh, ok, so you know a 3|D program. Bravo! As for the skeleton being 'chubby', try to use very small increments of horizontal expansion if you need it. I have gotten away with .05mm before. Just enough to beef up the size, but not really enough to notice. You can also go into 'per model settings' and apply almost any setting per model itself. Say select the sword and perform one tiny amount and then select the skeleton and apply a different amount.

😂

Look for 'horizontal expansion.' That has saved me many times with just a very small expansion. Note that it does not expand in the Z axis. Just the Y and X.

😁 Thanks for explaining the white space. I had wondered about that.

Ain't that the truth...they can only do what they are programed to do and many times, something new will break or at the very least, confuse the system.

Did not think you would. I was just explaining the process. If the utilities do upgrade to provide such information, it should be something like what I showed. Not just generic "Not manifold" or such. It checks for everything. If not manifold, it will throw an error. Usually open edges or vertices. That is what creates the 'holes'. Nope. I opened in 4.8. I have seen too many issues for me to upgrade and deal with oddities. I am not as swift on tech problems as I used to be. I just lean towards the issue possibly being printer definition is because both you and Greg use a printer type that is non-UM. That is a whole other can of worms that I am totally ignorant about.