Jump to content
Ultimaker Community of 3D Printing Experts

Xeddog

Member
  • Content Count

    46
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

Personal Information

  • Country
    US

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. No, nothing in particular. To be honest, most of it would probably be soooo far above my head anyway. I was mostly just curious since FormerLurker's github page doesn't have any updated release since February.
  2. Thanks for the reply. Now I just need to find out what some of it means. 😁
  3. I have been using CURA 4.10 for a while, but in the last couple of days there was an update for the ArcWelder plugin. I checked github and there are no program updates, so I am curious what the update was. Thanks.
  4. I tried Arachne on one small print, but after printing I noticed that the support interface was not created so the overhang was bad. I double checked the settings and it should have been there, but wasn't. I think I'll wait for Arachne 2.
  5. Note that when printing in one-at-a-time mode, the "Printhead Settings" in the machine settings section must be correct. Those settings are used to keep the objects separated, and that there is clearance between printed parts and machine hardware. If you have custom hotend mount, or cooling ducts, etc. you will have to measure all of that out and enter the correct values.
  6. I seem to remember an issue with custom material profiles. Switch to one of the canned material profiles and see if you profiles are visible again.
  7. Yup, It do look like that little beastie. As soon as I selected a generic PLA instead of my eSun PLA+, they all came back. Thanks, Wayne
  8. I have been using Cura for many releases now, but upgraded to 4.7 when it came out (2 days), and it was working fine til today. I have three printers now, and use separate profiles for each although 99% of the settings are common. The three printers are a Monoprice Mini, A CR-10S, and an Ender 5 Plus. For a long time I have been launching 3 instances of Cura in my Windows 10 Pro, and when they are finally up and running, I change two of them to other printers so I have one instance running for each printer. Today, all of the profiles for the CR-0S vanished. All of them, with one excepti
  9. Hey guys, regarding the mathematics of 3d printers let me just say my printers are consumer grade machines made out of Chinesium parts with Chinesium tolerances, etc. Just because the math sez it will work doesn't mean it will. 😞 Back on topic, I also realize that with a Layer Height of 0.2 and a maximum variation of 0.16 that there are many other variables that need to be tweaked to get good results going down to a 0.04 (a difference of 0.16) layer height too. Print speeds, temps, flow, retractions . . . And on the opposite side of that, those same parameters would have to
  10. The bright red part is what is in contact with the bed. The darker red is overhangs, and are not necessarily parallel to the bed. If I put a brim on it, there are still bed adhesion problems and every time I tried to print it this way, the thing separated from the bed and the brim (This was before I realized that it wasn't flat). This screenshot was taken after I lowered the model 0.24mm into the bed, and it still isn't quite all on the bed and is still too high for a brim to attach.
  11. I've been using Cura for over two years and most of the time I can figure out what I did wrong. But the last few days . . . Dang. As the title suggests, I am having an issue with Cura 4.6.2's Lay Flat option and the attached stl. It is one of a set of files I downloaded from Thingaverse. When I import the model into Cura, the model is laying in a very bad position for printing as shown here: I use the Rotate>Lay Flat command, zoom in on the bottom surface, place the cursor on the very bottom flange of the engine, and click. The model is stood up, and laid flat on t
  12. ghostkeeper and DivingDuck - As I mentioned, the example I gave was an example only to illustrate what I think is a problem, and was most likely beyond the capabilities of me printers as I don't think it can successfully print at .04 layer height anyway. But if I was wanting to print that piece, I would have to cut that part into two pieces and print them separately. The cylindrical body at one setting and the dome at another, and then re-assemble them post-processing. But lets say my printers COULD print at .04 layer height. With THAT much change to layer heights (.28mm), there are seve
  13. Wow. MAJOR brain fart on my part and I should have known better. I made the setting visible and it was indeed checked. After UN-checking and re-slicing, I get exactly what I was after. To make matters worse, I sliced this same piece for printing on a different printer, and the towers were not present. At that point I was fairly certain it was a slicer setting, but a the time I did not have time to investigate and it slipped my mind. So thank you very much for resolving my issue.
  14. I know about the different settings, and I think I actually understand what they do. The bottom line is that I think the Layer Height setting in the shell section should be a hard maximum layer height limit to keep from exceeding what your nozzle is capable of. The screenshot is just an example, and frankly is probably beyond my printers capability, but it does illustrate what I am talking about. I would be attempting to smooth out the top dome part of the model without affecting the 0.2mm layer height of the body. With a maximum variation of 0.16mm, that gives me 0.04mm layers at the to
×
×
  • Create New...