AbeFM

Howdy! I've got a direct drive IDEX printer giving me some random missing lines. In general it behaves well, I do not think I'm printing too fast.... But I'm getting skipped lined. It looked random, so I printed a second from the same g-code at got the same exact errors. Reprint, same g-code: I see the same single missing line, the same double missing line in the part. Around the back I see the same thing - something is giving me consistent weak extrusion. Finally, same settings but dropped the part in the bed to shave a couple hours of print time: Similar but not identical. In desperation, I made some towers hoping to have a cheaper/faster test: Here I'm not seeing any skipping at all, they print fine. I have two lingering doubts: 1) Supports look weird, under-extruded perhaps? This happens to 1 or 2 per layer, but not across all supports. I suspect under-priming? But they don't look like holes, it looks like bad layer adhesion or terrible k-factor. Note: K-factor/Linear Advance is disabled in firmware. 2) Perhaps my small squares don't allow peak extrusion rates and I need more material per layer. Does anyone have a suggestion for a good test print?? Similarly, any advice on how to fix my lines would be appreciated. Infill and inner walls are printing at 100 mm/s - that's 0.4 mm line width X 0.2 mm layer height X 100 mm/s print speed = 9.6 mm3/s. There's a possibility my anti-stringing temperatures of 194C are a problem, but I feel these are reasonable numbers. More pics in full resolution at https://photos.app.goo.gl/rpEzfANQTtnrXHR89 Attached, find my project. Retest MirTop- retraction restart-CURA.zip Thanks in advance everyone!!!

In case someone needs a model to play with... See attached file for object/settings. You can probably steal my Flintstones song from my printer's end g-code. Or play with XY and Minimum XY and see if you can figure out why I lose the bottom supports. SupportIssue.3mf Explaining the issue more clearly:

Another strange support issue: It looks like Roof and Floor Horizontal Expansion don't show up. If you search, they appear, but do not display in with the other settings. Also, I can't set the values to a positive number, which seems like that would fix many of my issues with interfaces not contacting the object. Is there some way to use that?

- Stair step height. This version fixes support stair step height, which influences the adhesion between the model and support printed on top (supports everywhere). For now, this bug has had no influence on PVA supported prints. !!! Can you add any more detail on this, and is it related? It sounds like no from "no influence on PVA supported prints", but ~18 months in I'm willing to do a little homework to get prints to work.

Feedback: Supports DO NOT RESPECT the "Minimum Support X/Y Distance" user input with respect to the floors. Is there some way to get the supports to meet the body? I would like to have supports printed on the object attach to the object. Here I have sliced with X/Y Distance and Minimum X/Y Distance both set to 2.0 mm Here I set Minimum to 0.2 mm. The top behaves correctly, making a good bond, but the bottom is unattached to the model, leaving ~30 extrusions of PVA randomly deposited all over my model and ruining the print as well as preventing the support from sticking. I would like to see Support Interfaces X/Y Distance, or the current inputs used on the bottom of prints. If there is a better place to post this, please share! I would DESPERATELY love to use CURA for my multi-material printing. More info to keep this thread from getting too polluted, but I *WOULD* like this issue considered so I'm leaving it here.

It just seems to use the greater of the two numbers. Which makes sense. Basically, I feel the support is using the greater of ("minimum x/y distance", "x/y distance") at all times. Instead, it should use X/Y except in Support Floors and Support Ceilings.

That horizontally expands. It's not really the same thing. You can see massively expanded support, with the same gap. Basically, you can expand support until it forms a complete structure around your object.... But that's not really printing... ON anything, and it won't work if you have complex geometries. There's a SETTING for Z-distance, you would assume someone thought there was utility in being able to choose the distance between support and object, and setting it to 0 for PVA. If you would, could you do it again with settings like mine? If it DOES work on Mac and not on PC... Well, that seems like the sort of thing that could improve the odds of it getting fixed.

Awesome! Thanks! I'd mentioned this on here before and it didn't seem to get any interest from the devs. Perhaps seeing it in action will sell them on it!! I'm convinced, anyway.

Can you point me to the file/GUI-element where I find those settings? To a novice the printer defs are hard to find. That sounds like just what I want!

I'm roughing out a printer concept, and I have one nozzle significantly offset from the other on a dual nozzle set up. Is there some way of making CURA aware that one nozzle covers the entire bed but the other misses the left 50mm? I set the offset on the printer settings, but it clips off from both sides, which is not correct.

+1 I guess no action for a month followed by more talk and then redoubled efforts of no dev participation labels it a "just live with it" topic. In the meantime, you could try taking the top thickness you want, dividing it manually by the layer height, and changing the number. 😛 More seriously - is there something the Devs need to move forward on this? Is it "not an issue", a user error, or is there some benefit to parts missing their tops that we just don't see? If you're just busy, could you engage us just enough to let us know?

I dunno - one day I thought it was working right, but I can't seem to reproduce it. I haven't responded because I can't figure out what triggers it beyond actually needing to print something. Smithy, yours looks right - perhaps try exagurated numbers - min x-y is reasonable, but make general "Support x/y distance" something big like 2 mm so it's obvious. Yours looks right, perhaps you're on a Mac so it works? 🙂 Obewan, it seems you're having the same issues I am - try setting min x-y even lower, but I think it is obvious you're having the same issue. At least I'm not the only one seeing it. I've spent a year screwing with Prusas because they can put support on an existing, sloped wall.... But I would like to think Cura could somehow do this. I've seen far too many people succeed but for the life of me I cannot see how when support prints in mid air. If there's anything I can do to help I am entirely willing.

Hmmm, at an impasse then. Is there something I could do to help you see it happening in a way that would help?

Can someone tell me WHY you would want your support material to print in mid-air and not be able to change this?

There isn't ONE person who can just load this and hit "slice"?

I have a dual extrusion CR-10, just made a profile from scratch when 3.6 came out and haven't had issues. Not sure how I solved it. I just have printer/extruder settings (both) at 1.75, as well as the materials.

Can someone take this model, load it into ANY dual-material printer profile and slice it, with the z- distance set to 0, and z overides x-y? I've had support failures for months (since 3.5.1) and I want to see if others get the same issue. Gluetest.stl Please post a picture of the support floors where they meet the model.

The points are very small (kneecaps). Try making them bigger or setting the distance on the tee tips much smaller and see if it changes.

Does anyone else have a copy of the CURA software? If you do, could you slice something with dual materials and the contact distance set to 0 and let me know if you see that gap or not?

Note that I tried this with Z overirdes x/y and the other way around, even with "minimum support distance" set to a small or 0 value, I get the same behavior. With all distances set to 0 you get support that touches but lose the ability to keep vertical supports off your part.

This is not the first time I've had this issue - I thought I've posted it before but can't find it. Can someone tell me how to get my supports to print on the object instead of floating in free air? =============== Edit: This is not the first time I brought this up. CAN SOMEONE PLEASE COMMENT? I'm over a month into this problem and I would really appreciate some guidance.

Ok. Install CURA fresh. Allow it to delete old profiles. I added ONLY a generic printer, set for 2 extruders. Use, verify functionality, quit CURA (done in the "before time"). Perhaps yours doesn't do this because you've installed an UM profile in your CURA? (I didn't test that) To answer this post, I: Load CURA 3.6.0 Right click, Disable second extruder This notice, similar to but out of order from the lower notice shown in previous post appears.: Not hard to reproduce on my end! No model, no nothing. It seems to happen with Prime Tower enabled or disabled. The option always comes back on regardless of previous state when I enable the extruder.

Oh! It looks like the interface material is just printing one layer too low: This support floor overlaps with the model.

I'm not having any luck getting my tree supports with soluble supports slicing without a gap. I set z-contact distance to 0. Any ideas?

Going back at least to 3.5.1: When you disable the second extruder, many changes are made automatically, one of them is setting the Prime Tower X and Prime Tower Y coordinates to 0. Even with the prime tower turned off, this triggers an error, and won't slice due to "per model settings". Two problems: 1) Prime Tower Position is NOT a per-model setting 2) There's no reason not to slice due to poor positioning of something you're not using. I suggest removing the tower position as a "per model settings check". I suggest tweaking the check to something like " && !(prime_Tower_Is_Enabled?) Or if I'm doing something wrong, let me know. Currently I just set standby temp to 0 (preventing extrusions but not travels), or add another printer with one nozzle and try to keep them concurrent.