AbeFM

Is there anyone else seeing the dual slicing, forgetting file names? It's super annoying and I'd like to at least work towards fixing it. Or is this thread NOT THE PLACE to report issues with the new software referenced in the thread title?

So it looks like if you change the file name, and slice, it will. Then a few seconds later (~2-3) it slices again. That's with mouse entirely outside of the window, no clicking.

I just use concentric for the outermost layer, then lines inside. It fills in the gaps, enough

Ah good. I've seen worse, since - one of the lines was like 8mm wide (on bed), with tons more lines.

Name Reset. I change name and it goes back. ----------------- This is all on Win10 updated, with a dual extrusion custom printer. I've been using multiple build plates, I think it may be part of it.

There's some weirdness with the "Save to removable drive" changing to "Slice" which I can't quite figure out. I'd hit save to drive and it would reslice, I think the button isn't staying.

Not sure it's new to this version, but when switching between build plates, the save-as file name does not follow the plate. So if I go from Figurine to CalibrationPrint, the name will remain "Figurine".

Or maybe "Top Surface Line Spacing" I've been struggling with gaps on a MK3 and a CR-10. Concentric leaves holes, no question. Mostly just watching, because other than "I've seen this" I don't have a lot to add.

You are being helpful! It would be nice to figure out the source of the difference so it can be fixed. Can you save your project and post it?

I've been too casual with my language. This is what I've been envisioning all along: I have only written a few programs in my life, but I cannot see what is technically challenging about this, and it seems straightforward from a user perspective as well.

What are these lines? The bold outer pair turns on and off with Ext 1 (black). The thinner ones turn on and off with Ext2 (and/or "helpers"). See attached project file. MolecularTestMultiPlate.curaproject.3mf

I'd like the see the same print with fixed layers the size of your course steps. It's a little unfair to blame the adaptive layers for just giving you the bigger layers you asked for. If it's specific to adaptive layers, however, it would be good for us all to know!

Really a bigger problem is material. Printing a TPU file with PVA in the nozzle would be a lot worse than printing a 0.2mm file with a 0.4mm nozzle. I often put print temps in the file name (or material). I've done nozzles, but that's somewhat rare and won't result in as serious a problem as printing 50 degrees off. At least make it fixed. I'd rather see 2 everywhere - a single letter can be too easy to confuse?, but frankly letting me pick my own identifier is WAY better. ---------------------------------------- I really like what geert_2 is getting at, but it's a lot more invovled than just letting using the printer name or a dedicated "append name". As a long term goal, it could and should be a lot more flexible (or have the printers be smart enough to read a header file and report the actual settings, ALL of them).... But in the mean time, just add a blank to printer definitions that says "prefix: ___" and let us fill that in.

The important thing is to keep it short and still uniquely identifying. I keep making my own printers and the prefix naming is pretty annoying. Being able to just pick the name I'd like would work - why can't we type in an identifier? Thanks!

I've been chasing down some extrusion issues, and finally hit upon a model with reliable failures - or so I thought. Turns out, my poor quality prints of these extruded ellipses (12x0.5mm, 0.45mm line width) weren't the fault of the printer, but the printer is giving me just what I see on the screen. I would like to get sliced G-Code uniform in Z for objects which are uniform in Z. How does one accomplish this in Cura?

I think I mentioned this some months back - that the top thickness, set by mm, should be respected. In general, the variable layer heights takes a poor approach - we'd be much better served with an AVERAGE layer height. Every print you either decide not to care, or tweak the numbers again and again and again until you kinda get the behavior that: Respecting TOP and BOTTOM thickness Enforcing an AVERAGE layer height Those two changes could make the feature a LOT more user friendly and produce better results. It's been beating a dead horse for me, I hope you have more luck with it.

I've been all over my hard drive (win10/CURA 3.3.1) looking for printer defs. I have a custom printer, but the pre-appended name is way too long, and I would like to edit it. I've been looking for "THE" .json file, and have opened up >30 of them, none of them had the "CFDMP" that I would like to change to something shorter. Where would I find that?

I've started a few threads about this. It is one of the questions that IS NOT HAPPENING. PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN! If there is any serious interest in fixing this, I'll gladly link to a couple relevant threads. Check out: https://community.ultimaker.com/topic/22569-bed-not-detected-right-in-slicingpositioning/ but there are other issues such as "lay on bed" not working right. It is a big problem and manually positioning stuff is just part of Living with Cura. Cool model though.

I don't know about you, but my PLA costs a lot less than my PVA. My PVA hardly needs priming, if at all. A tower that was MOSTLY PLA would be strong and cheaper than 50-50. Every other layer still has PVA, but enclosed/captured by a solid, contiguous PLA cylinder.

I forget where I posted this before, but I'd like to see two concentric towers: PVA as a "core" inside of an outer PLA circle. Each material would be on top of itself, the glue would be well contained. Two towers would work as well. Lastly: A solid PLA core/surround, with the current every-other-layer tower inside/around it. Probably PLA in the center would work better - if there's a bad PVA layer you'll end up with blobs inside the circle, causing issues for next layer. I've used up to 14 mm. I can get failures. I feel my material may be sub-standard, but fixing the towers makes sense anyway. ----------------- Again, as PVA primes just fine, having ONLY a PLA tower would work for me. It's cheaper to use twice as much PLA anyway.

Is there any way to have the prime tower print with just one extruder? The majority of my problems stem from underpriming my PLA, or my prime tower failing as every single bond is dissimilar materials... And I don't have trouble extruding PVA without priming anyway.

I noticed this while trying to tune dual extrusion - I created a test tower with angles of 18,36,54, and 72 degrees. If I set support angle at 72, I get what is pictured above - I get it in multi or single material. It looks like perhaps due to the single wall of the tower, it is not considered "supported"? I was expecting something more like:

I'm wondering if it was a case of not having unhidden the options at the same time as having a definition which supported dual extruders. I'm still having printing issues, but at least they make sense now. Thanks!!!!!!

Thanks for the link! Unfortunately, I'm not seeing how to use that to get my printer to perform the requested operation. It does not appear the OP got it working either. Could you give me a sentence or two which gets me going?

Wow. I guess all those settings are there! Hidden. I may well be in a LOT better shape than I thought.