Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

Personal Information

  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I don't understand how the startup g code commands could be "accidentally" changed, especially by a supposed professional. I am 3d printing professionally and this is in the way of being professional. When a print fails 2/3 of the way through, which is several days long this is a professional waste of time. As for restarting a print with new code it is actually much easier than you think. The worst that can happen (if you are a professionally skilled) is the restart layer deviates in layer height by like 50 microns, which is either negligible of able to be easily sanded off. I've even done it with the awkward UM3 hardware by cutting off the under-extrusion layers very carefully with an exacto knife, marking where the base of the model touches the bed plate and then removing the model and putting it back precisely where it was after the startup routine during a quickly-timed print pause. But this is so hard and takes so long. The quality wasn't even that bad with the temporary removal of the whole object. I suspect I could make a near-perfect startup layer if the Ultimaker3 coding wasn't flawed like this. I think its a huge shame these things are hardwired considering that the annoying parts of the startup are merely X/Y/Z and extrusion movements. Pretty short-sighted considering there is no filament sensor
  2. It seems that the UM3 hardware includes gcode at the very beginning of every print that is outside of the code generated by slicing in Cura. This includes the wipe, the auto leveling and printcore and bed plate heat checks. I would propose that this part of the hardware gcode be put back into the slicer-generated software gcode to improve the machine's versatility. These are the reasons I am having a problem with hardware gcode: 1. Continuing a print after the filament extrusion fails: When extrusion fails but the gcode keeps executing, the machine operator will often discover the failure after many millimeters of Z stepping has been bypassed in the gcode. To restart the print at the correct spot after the filament has been fixed you can compare which spot the object failed at to the layer number in Cura's preview and just delete all the gcode up until that point. But when you try the modified gcode, the wipe and the leveling ruin it because the nozzle comes down to the bed plate and crashes into your half-printed object. This is especially frustrating with long prints that take days to print because it is so important to be able to attempt a restart halfway through the print when it is such a large amount of time. If the default beginning gcode was completely included in the generated Cura code then it could be deleted in these circumstances, allowing continuation of the print. 2. The second reason to keep default startup code in the software gcode instead of hardware is to allow the printer to be more versatile for other purposes than making an object. I want to use my printer to extrude filament in mid-air for testing the quality of new filament materials with only gcode written for extrusion-speed and temperature . For this I want to be able to write my own gcode and skip the preparation steps - because it wastes time and is unnecessary. I don't see why some gcode needs to be hardwired. The exact same gcode could be generated at the beginning of every slice, which is better for modification. And more importantly it is absolutely needed for restarting long prints with filament failure.
  3. First problem: Cura 3.2 will only run while its still open for the first time immediately after downloading. It won't open if you try to run it another time. Second problem: is that I "prepared" a model in Cura and it only calculated a thin shell along Z planes of the outer walls of the model. My model is solid and not the problem. I have prepared hundreds of CAD models for/in Cura before. Third problem: is "Extra Fine" setting was missing from the layer height choices. Only the other 3 defaults were there. Fourth thing is just a dislike: Back in Cura 2 the arrow keys let you pan around and above/below the object in layers mode. In Cura 3 this is not possible since the up/down arrow keys have been commandeered for scrolling through the layers. I liked being able to look around the object while examining the layers. To do this in Cura 3 requires going back to solid layer mode to change the viewing orientation and then going back to layer mode, which is a hassle. Scrolling through layers by using the on-screen scroll bar with mouse was good (cura 2). Fifth thing is a dislike: Cura 3 wastes much more space than Cura 2 in the right-side settings area. I'm using a laptop and it isn't a small one and yet still the space is so crammed in Cura 3 that it makes settings information much more difficult to scroll through. The "materials," "profiles," and "print setup" takes up too much space. I would rather see much more space used for the list of settings. It actually causes me to miss things noticeably much more compared to Cura2 style when I am inputting my settings. Six: While I'm at it, I have a dislike about one thing in all Cura versions as well. When you have the preview camera positioned at most angles (that are not 90 degrees), and you zoom in, the zoom bypasses the model altogether; The model goes off screen. I would like to be able to zoom in on my model at any angle, not just directly above and directly in front... Other slicers do not have this problem.
  4. Ultimaker headquarters has emailed me saying that Ultimaker 3 can safely go up to 350°C. I have been testing out PVDF for the last couple weeks using 345°C. It seems to be okay. Between 345°C and 350°C the software starts to give temperature errors
  5. Ok, that is interesting... And to add to ideas, maybe the hot tip of the nozzle could also be used to physically micromix 2 colours right on the model as its printing. Could playing with the nozzle height and an overheated nozzle be used to truly mix colours by re-melting the layer below and injecting new colour into it?? Might be tricky but probably possible.
  6. Hi, I am designing custom internal structures in my CAD models, but Cura seems to ignore internal voids in my CAD models and just prints solids instead. For example, one of my models is a brick with 5000 pores throughout it resembling a foam. Cura/UM3 just prints the bubbles that break through the outside wall but neglects the fully enclosed bubbles. I need to make custom internal structures for engineering lightweight objects with optimized strength and the supports and infills are too random and arbitrarily designed for what I need. Is there a setting that I have to change to recognize internal structure in CAD models? The only thing I can think of is trying to programme my own infill structure, but this is not ideal and won't work for other conceivable objects that have complex internal structures. ~Nyk
  7. This is just a detailed 2-colour print. I've been planning to make something like this but it would be time-consuming. I am looking forward to software that can easily fast-track making models like this with a new process, but you can make gray-scale or colour-gradients using no new software. All you have to do is design it in CAD with the same-coloured layers unioned and make sure that your layer height in Cura matches your layer or layer-multiple heights in the model and then merge them in Cura for a regular 2-colour print.
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to the Ultimaker Community of 3D printing experts. Visit the following links to read more about our Terms of Use or our Privacy Policy. Thank you!