kmanstudios

An old trick...old as the home computer, is to rename the file it is trying to overwrite. I use the old method of just calling the old file 'name.old.' Where 'name' is the name of the file. Do not mess with that. Just the 'f-extension' or 'file extension.' It causes no harm. Just makes the system not 'see' it for use. I have not had time to dig my spacemouse out to test it with. I am pushing to get a lot of prints done before I get surgery. So, not very helpful there, but your feed back is valuable. Also, check to see what your spacemouse settings are for Cura. I believe you can reverse some things in there.

Someone sent me a message asking how I do the type of prints above. Here is a link to the explanations for everyone to see.

Well, that is what I am calling them. Best name I can come up with. Feel a bit like the old Chinese guy in 'Tremors' that can only come up with 'graboids' for a name. First, appropriate thanks to @smartavionics for even putting this infill into Cura because most of the infills will block light getting into the shell and/or letting light pass through. Second, a lot of people think I am a bit of the putz becauses I am just blunt. Ain't a mean bone in my body, but, well, just blunt. Should have seen me 4 years ago before the Asperger's diagnosis and then getting help in modifying some of that. Sometimes I over compensate and then people get weird because they want to read other intentions. So, why bring this up> Instead of focusing on my communications limitations, try to see the information I want to share from nearly 30 years of CG work and 40 years as a commercial artist. I take a lot of my experiences as a traditional artist and reinterpret into CG aspects, including printing. So, this is an expansion of a reply sent in a private message. And, I want to share the information with anybody that wants to play. It does require some modeling capability and planning. To get this effect as seen in this image: I do the following: For the transparents, I am using one shell. But, because I am using a 0.8 nozzle, it is a very thick shell. I am also using big layer heights. 0.3 to 0.53 depending on materials This is solved by creating a copied mesh and cutting away the parts that I do not want. In this case, the dress and not the body. Then manually 'thickening' of that mesh in all directions. I am using 3DS MAX to do this with the 'push' modifier. This will push the vertices/faces. in the direction of the 'vertex/face normals.' this means a thicker 'shell' around the main model. In this case I am pushing the faces and vertices just a small amount of 0.5 or less to encase the model in Cura after merging into placement. When importing, I use 'per model' settings to select mesh type and then 'modify settings for infill of other model." Edit: Again, thanks, in this case, to @ahoeben and @bagel-orb for this getting put into place. I think I got that correct. This lets me change density of infill for specific areas. In this case, the dress. Then I merge and slice. Then for solid models like this image: I do this: For the solids, I am using default shells as I am not worried about transparencies. But, in this case, still using the 0.8 and still getting 'hairy' prints. I just honestly have not taken the time to work that out as I am trying to get as many prints before surgery. Still using layer heights. 0.3 to 0.53 depending on materials. Will get around to using 0.4 nozzles soon on these. But the 0.8 make the print much faster. Also, kinda like the 'beading effect.' Infill overlap is basically a horizontal expansion on the infill and will not expand vertically Again, this is solved by creating a copied mesh and cutting away the parts that I do not want. In this case, the dress and not the body. Then manually 'thickening' of that mesh in all directions. I am using 3DS MAX to do this with the 'push' modifier. This will push the vertices/faces. in the direction of the 'vertex/face normals.' this means a thicker 'shell' around the main model. In this case I am pushing the faces and vertices just a small amount of 0.5 or less to minimize the amount of 'infill poking out' from the main model. When importing, I use 'per model' settings to remove all shell structures of that pushed model. This will only print the very small mount of infill. Then I merge and slice. For this model: I am just using the 0.8 single shell. But the walls are thin because it is a 'hollowed out' model. Nothing special other than choosing the infill colours or density. So, there ya go. That is it in a nutshell.

The best way to implement something like this is for people who use a spacemouse to try it, give feedback and then see if it can be just implemented in cooperation with the person who authored the fix. It would also be the fastest way concerning people that may use 3RD party printers that may create a conflict of some odd origin. It would be the fastest and easiest way for this than relying solely on Team UM to do this. For them to implement and test would require someone to gain access and use of a spacemouse. I would be hesitant that UM would purchase the thing to do this in a quick pace. Yes, it is. At every level. Modeling, printing, etc. Difficulty is at the level of each person that uses the software. Some people may be mechanical and not technical in quick understanding. But, once you gain a few insights, it does become easier. Unless you have a tech person there to explain it to you, it may be difficult to get instructions more attainable in understanding at your level over the internet. The internet is great for getting information, but it cannot point and lead in real time like a person who could work with you in person. I did the cut and past as I did because, honestly, I do not think I could make it more clear. That may be my limitation. All of my instruction experience is based on being there in person and examples, not over the internet with written instruction.

I was referring to the Thingiverse link. What is it you do not understand? From a user point of view, all you have to do is copy the listed files to the specified locations and it should work. As it says in Thingiverse: " Cura.xml is the config for 3dconnexion software and goes in "C:\Program Files\3Dconnexion\3DxWare\3DxWinCore64\Cfg" CameraTool.py goes in "C:\Program Files\Ultimaker Cura 3.2\plugins\Tools\CameraTool" Restart the 3dconnexion software and open Cura: it should work right away You can check if the Cura.xml cfg is loaded by hovering over the 3dconnexion system tray icon while Cura is in focus. " Edit: It should be noted that the actual Cura location will depend on the version you have installed. So, just substitute "C:\Program Files\Ultimaker Cura 3.2\plugins\Tools\CameraTool" for your version number.

You can slow the movements down. Have you tried the link posted above for the Spacemouse implementation? Basically, if a solution already exists, what is the issue?

I will try to be more clear: When I put the printer into unavailable mode,. the lights go out and I have no control over them. That creates an issue with using 'unavailable; to stop prints going through while doing maintenance. Crazy things like cleaning nozzles, doing hot or cold pulls, etc. Basically, 'unavailable' should stop prints from going through, but not interfere with any other machine functions. Since I cannot see what I am doing, I have not tried any other machine functions, so I have no idea what else may be messed with. I do not quite follow this. What I was trying to say is that if I acknowledge the need to change materials or nozzles (The pulsing lights warning to do so), it should stay off and not constantly nag me. It does not do this on the UM3E machines. So, basically: 1. Warning 2. Acknowledgement 3. No more warnings. The one minute timeout you mentioned would not be really helpful if doing a lot of things like cleaning under buildplates, a series of hot pulls and cleaning nozzles, etc that do not require a lot of menu actions. This is how it behaves with the UM3E machines I have. I hope I clarified this...let me know if I bungled it up a bit more.

Yeah, I am going to have to go with fixing the big things and making robust before anything else. Good to see this happening. 💗

I agree that changing the printer was going to solve the problem. It may be something to do with the printer definition....I would not know. But, I am hoping that the print comes out as expected. Remember though that the modeling suggestion was to avoid destructive modeling techniques. That 'surface of revolution' is a very powerful tool. I just wish that software designers would stop making new names for the same thing.....really a pain to keep up with.

Ye be a fer better tinkerer than meself matey 🙂 Arrrrrrrhhhhhhh <-----part of the pirate alphabet.

On the list of silly things to check: Clean the core contacts Clean the printhead/core interface contacts Clean both with the purest isopropyl alcohol. Now! For anybody that wants to tell me that it probably is not that, remember I DID say silly. But I always try to rule things out because I have had strange issues like this pop up. Also, swap cores to make sure. Maybe something environmental got into the cores at some point and do not let the contacts make, well, contact. Swapping cores just to make sure...AND if you have access to another UM3 or even an S5, put the cores into it to see if the cores heat up. This may point to either the cores being bad or the cores ok and printhead not ok.

ugghhhh...change....I hate moving.

Try that link to see if it works for you. It may be the quickest way to solve the issue without waiting on me.

Way cool as always 🙂

I know that Blender can create a 'Surface of Revolution' (proper term) or 'revolve' in Maya and 'Lathe" In 3DS MAX. This would be the perfect object for such a function in any program. I have seen too many people, no matter what software, try to do this with booleans or other destructive methods. But, a lathe would be best. Now, with THAT being said (to let you know a bit of modeling experience advice) I took a look at your file. Method of process is as follows: Looked at your 3MF file. Got the same results, but see no x-ray errors. Exported the file to an STL to run through 3DS MAX's 'STL Checker'. No errors in that file. Change the printer from yours (Prusa) to my native UM3E and it sliced ok Changing printers without relying on export and reload makes sure I am using your original file, only the printer definition changes Slice in my native printer setup. So, I would gather that something in the Prusa settings is not reading the file properly. I know nothing about the Prusa series so I am useless here, but hope that I have narrowed this down a bit for you to find a solution.

Just to rule out the print cable, have you tried to push it back in as well as make sure it stays seated during printing? I found that some of my print cable issues got take care of when I did the following: 1. Seated the cable firmly in the printhead. 2. The print cable is held by the retainer clips on the bowden tube. So I make sure I push the cable down into the hole and then push the clips down closely to the printhead. As the print is performed, and the clips are far a way, it can produce a wiggle in the cable that will eventually cause the lead in the cable to siggle loose. It is just a suggestion. In this, it is all I got, but I hope worth a try.

Based off of @Smithy's comment, I went and found this: https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2913885 It may shortcut this process. I had no idea this was there, but it may be what is needed. Also, just do a spacemouse search and bammo, a boat load of hand rests and such. https://www.thingiverse.com/search?q=space+mouse&amp;dwh=105c090dc15f085

In reference to me helping with the 3D Mosue, Gimme a day or two to get it up and running again. I switched over systems have not installed it due to a variety of circumstances. And, if you re-read my original statements, I did state that I believe I had it working in Cura. It has been a while. To let you know how driving those circumstances are, I have been sculpting in 3D Coat with a mouse instead of my 3d Mouse/ Wacom combo since I switched over. How is THAT for just doing things instead of solving a few other issues, such as proper space to use the equipment. I used the software to program directions of axis control for window navigation (zoom, rotate, etc) Then I programed button clicks as even the lowest form (just the puck with two buttons) can simulate right and left mouse clicks. I really do not remember a ring of options, but can see why that would be implemented as a solution. It is a favored input method on Maya as well as (sort of) 3DS MAX (the right click quad). As far axis control is concerned, I found this to be the most important thing for me as all programs I use are different in which button, etc controls zooms, rotations, etc. And in 3DS MAX, I even had to program certain navigations to be in negative values as it seemed to want to work in reverse natively. So, my question would be, what specific actions do you need? My expectations/needs may have been different. 💗 Yeah, I am freakin' Joe Friday...'Just the facts man".... To me the most fumy thing as well as the most frustrating thing is when people assume an intent that is just not in my capability wheelhouse. But on to solving the issue....Because is that not what we are here for?

That says more about you than me. I thought I clarified that I do not know your experience. You also seem to think I should keep up with your activities. Whatever makes your day. I actually do have more to do than deal with thin skinned people. And, yes, I am speaking about you. If you cannot accept what I said, then I see no reason to interact with this anymore. If you do not wish to find out why or how I got a system working that you have not, then fine. I am not going to beg people to let me help them. So, read into it as much as you wish. BTW, that was as far as I read because I see paragraphs and paragraphs of typing, but nothing about the subject at hand. When you wish to return to the subject at hand, the 3D mouse input, I will be happy to help. But armchair theories are not what I am here for. I pay my Asperger's therapist for that thank you very much.

Actually it is an invitation to work together when it follows "have you tried 'this''. There is a difference in approach when something works with person a and not with person b. Why not work together to see if it can be solved without inside interference? Basically, since it is working here and not there, are you just willing to give up? I have no idea what you have tried. You have no idea what I have tried. But hey, you are allowed to not explore differences, It may not even help, but would you not rather try and see?

Worked well for me. I had all my programs synced to the same movements and clicks. So, I agree that in a great world, it would be nice to have. I just see so much getting loaded onto the UM plate of requirements, So, I do not subscribe to the perfect house analogy. I subscribe to the 'do not put great furniture into a leaky house' analogy. Things can get ruined. When the things already in the software are working as expected, then yeah, these things would be great. And, as I have stated before, just because I do not agree with some things, people should not assume I am saying it is bad. That seems to be a common issue when people are not told how great things would be if their idea is incorporated.

I just call them 'Gyroids' because all other infills create 'blocks' on the light that prevent the pattern to compliment the skin. :)

Search for photo painting programs and vector based programs. If I may conjecture the suggestion of inkscape, @Brulti can confirm, is that it is vector based and most vectors can be imported into a 3D program and then extruded into a 3D model. Or, maybe it is a more far reaching reason? For instance, gimp is a free photo manipulation/painting program like photoshop. Dunno what platforms it works on though. I have not looked at free vector based programs in a loooooong time though. And, if I remember correctly, you can actually get a really old, legitimate version of some main programs for free. Things need to be looked at before going to a website due to the growing concern of 'bad' websites. These should be put out by the companies themselves.

I gots some things coming up right now, but will look into it once things have settled. Right now it is just mroe efficient for me to design and print as a focus and get around to a few minutes work that I can do whilst watching Dr. Who.

I do not know what your experience has been or version of Cura you are on. So, I would appreciate you: 1. Not put intentions into my words 2. Refrain from bad psychotherapy accusations. See above. I am not enraged. I am befuddled as to why people constantly want things before a robust and solid experience. And, if this is what you would consider enraged, then I guess this would explain your above comment. Ummm, yeah, that is a bit of an broad assumption by you, but by this point in your reply, I would have guessed no less. Or, did this slip by you whilst looking for reasons to be offended: And while you seemed to be too busy being replying quite negatively towards myself, you definitely missed this: Here is the thing: I just have a different opinion. I stated the opinion, based without assumption of your Cura usage. You may not agree with the wording, but my intent ws to balance out a feature request that takes away from what should be a core functionality that has seen a slight bit of regression lately. Profiles are still dodgy, Memory leaks are still an issue. The list goes on. That is all there was to it. Take it however you wish. But, I stated an opinion, no more or less valid than yours and got upbraided for trying to say that that I had mine working a while back, got lectured on how it works and scolded because you did not like my wording. So, yes, it is ok to have a feature request. Same as the people wanting to turn Cura into a hybrid modeler/slicer, etc. Or, are your opinions the only one that count?