kmanstudios

I like to save the remnants of the end of the spool filament for hot and cold pulls. You can google for places that recycle other parts of waste. It will depend on your locality and what you would consider appropriate expense for shipping if need be. We have one here in NYC...or had...I am not sure after the pandemic....

I gauged the files I use to print from based on file size. I realize that more triangles mean more bits in the file, but I routinely put far more triangles than 50,000 in my sculpts. It is the only way to hold fine details for the type of work I do. And, yeah, good to have the log file for those that prefer it. But, Greg is right about the project file. The why is so very important.

This is the print that just finished. I slammed it through at the fastest speed and largest layer size. Was not worried about being pretty.

I went back to your original post (the thingiverse link) and got the original file. Unzipped it and got rid of old file. This pic is 3DS MAX's STL check utility in action. The top square is for isolating errors it may find. Here it is showing that it is displaying what it found in the "everything" category. The bottom square is showing no errors on everything. This is the same file sliced as before. I am printing a test out and so far, it is spot on. What printer are you using? This was sliced using an S5 (r1) printer. I agree that the utilities you mentioned should give you feedback of some sort. But I am wondering if the issues may be related to printer definition other than UM printer. Also what material are you printing with? Will post pics of print in about 15 minutes when it finishes. Edit. Just checked and sliced the top separately. Got the same results. When you sliced the top, did you flip it to the flat side with sides printing upwards like so?

See if you can find an old version of 3DS MAX. It has an STL Check that will do just that. The triangles look wonky because it probably came from a program that booleaned the surfaces and that always makes wonky triangles. I beg to differ just because I could get a good slice out of Cura 4.8 and I have never had any issues coming out of my software. This is the bottom of my slice Full Slice I am running a test, but from what I see, all is good. What machine are you printing from?

What you are seeing is the same model that in the first picture has not been 'smoothed'. The second image shows the same geometry, but with smoothing applied. That is why the hard angles look 'rounded'. Smoothing is just an algorithm that causes the geometry to look good without the oddball geometry being noticeable. If the walls had a different smoothing on the bottom as from the walls, you would see sharp corners on the meeting of the walls and bottom 'planes'. They are not true planes. Just a collection of triangles. If one was to take it to the next layer, smoothing values on all the major surfaces, you could make it look hard edged. It is just a visual bit of trickery. The same way a low res cylinder looks smooth in the slicer view port, but will still print with facets. Make sense?

That is good to know for the devs. It is either an error that needs to be addressed or maybe a change in how it evaluates models. I can say that the STL Check in 3DS MAX is always spot on for checking and letting you know what errors there are.

I ran the original file from dropbox through 3DS MAX and did the STL check....it found no errors. Then I loaded it into Cura 4.8 (I have not upgraded since I saw a bit of chatter about issues with it) and got no error when loading or slicing. What version of Cura gave the error?

Are you working in Millimeters? Always work your native file in mm.

I see a trip in the 'Way Back Machine.' 😄

I would definitely make separate pieces to be assembled after printing. You could completely do away with supports.

I have had the glass plate being shoved over due to a strong plastic curl. The printhead collided with it and it would push it over quite quietly, bit by bit. Make sure your clips are really grabbing the plate by pushing them down. Did you use a different filament than normal for this? As for the broken slider block, I would contact your reseller to see if you can get a replacement (free if still within warranty period.) As for changing and realigning, it will take a better support person than myself to tell you how to do it. There may also be video lessons on how to do that as well.

Reply in the language you prefer. There is always google translate 🙂 And helping is what we are here for. 😄 We all start somewhere. Mistakes are how we all learn. I am for one a jump right in and mess things up when I am learning something new. We will still be here to help. Sometimes I cannot help with a specific product, but the base knowledge is all the same. It is just procedure and what tool to click that can be researched when you get the basic idea on what to research. Edit: Modeling will be an invaluable task to learn as you will have to fix many things in scans as well as files you may download. I do not download much, but some models are just so 'spot on' that I would not really be able to improve with a model I made from scratch. And when I do make a print from a downloaded model, I will always post a 'make' on Thingiverse to acknowledge the maker's skill and effort. Sort of to appreciate their work.

I resemble that remark! 😛 OK, I was able to fix it. I can give you some general idea of what I found, but not how to apply it to Blender. There were some flipped faces and multiple edges. There was an abutment of the head itself and the base. This would not join properly in a boolean operation. There were also issues with the 'Screw thread part. I was not sure if you wanted the original thread height on the inside so I went with the firts. Flipped faces are a no-no when doing boolean operations. All the objects and their individual faces have to be facing either inside or outside. Though I would not know why someone would flip them to the inside (This would turn the object inside out), but the point is they must agree. Booleans on mesh objects are always picky and it takes not much to make them non compliant. This is why I choose to use a volumetric approach on objects and not mesh booleans. Volumetric objects boolean much easier. I was able to fix this in 3DS MAX, though I know that Blender can do it as well. You just need to research the right way to do this there. Fixed file: HeadScanFixed.STL

I have used placed supports for various reasons. Sometimes to physically hold a piece in places like a small pyramid underneath a part to hold it in place so it does not get knocked off the support structure. Like this: In this case the character's butt got knocked off the PVA supports after two days of printing. 😬 The manual supports pinned key areas while PVA did the rest. That is when I added the manual supports. Manual supports were added after that fiasco. Got a nice print after that. Edit: They popped right off and then a quick X-Acto blade shave to do final cleaning. But they supports really just popped right off cleanly because it had such a low point of contact with the main body. I just shaved it off to make sure everything was contoured properly.

I do not use tree supports, so I am not really helpful here.

Lawsy, I hope so! A good grin in the AM is a good thing. And all puns are allowed as they are 2/3 P-U 😛

😂😂😂

I do not really mess with z-seam settings since most of my stuff is organic in nature. I also mainly use TPLA these days and it x-acto's very cleanly. So, I may be just slicing off the tell tale signs with the blade.

As soon as the printer cannot detect the UM chip it should ask for you to identify the filament type you are loading.

I think that discussing why a print is aborted is perfectly fine as it can lead to new information for more a better print experience. Especially if you are new to printing.

OK, I took a look and this is what I found: The PLA/PLA combo is not really needed. If nozzle 1 & 2 are using the same material, there is no real gain. However using PLA as support has different tolerances between the support and the model itself. More gap for better removal of the supports. There is no harm in using the PLA, just know it has different requirements than if you used PVA as the support such as this file I saved for you so you can see the difference. Just load and hit slice and you will see it works. UMS5_1756110576_UMS5_conicalcupaeroarmwithchamferPLA_PVA.3mf Now, if you wish to use PLA as the support, just raise the model about 1mm from the buildplate. It will slice with the support all around the object as needed. You may have more questions and here is where to get your follow up. 🙂

Have you checked the feeder tension? If too much it will grind up the filament, too loose and it does not grab enough to feed the filament. Check to see if the core does not require a hot/cold pull. That is all I have right now off the top of my head. If I think of more I will amend this post 🙂

If I am reading this correctly, he knows the part is made a certain way, he just does not know why it will not put supports under the round part. Thanks for putting that in 🙂

Please save the project file and upload so we can see the issue itself.