chuckmcgee

Print is done. It looks like the final product shows a better result. Somehow...the print rallied? Who knows. I am suggesting we close the chapter on this story. Again - concluding the model was less than ideal given infill settings and layer height. Also, as I recognize this is not new news...material matters - various sensitivities to the bed heat and cooling Thanks to this amazing community for helping to solve this!

OK...better, but not unnoticeable with the new project file and the eSun filament: At this point, I am concluding it's the material's sensitivity to the bed heat/cooling/etc. This is the first time I have printed it with 0.2mm layer height.

We shall see. I also have MatterHackers Pro and Ultimaker brand. Will try MHP after this if it's not good.

@kmanstudios Just loaded your project file (UMS5_988243375_UMS5_controlbox-V2K-02mm.curaproject.3mf) and started the print using a brand new roll of eSun Pro+ PLA (black). 11 hour print. Will post pics of the result! Thanks again

Once again - @fbrc8-erin seems to have cleared my issues with a suggestion to calibrate the lift switch - this has allowed me to complete the XY calibration (thinking it was working - but maybe the switch didn't fully extend or retract the core? Also, I had success with the print core swap when I chose to UNLOAD and then LOAD, as opposed to CHANGE. If I choose CHANGE and I don't cleanly remove the core during that step of the process (and it slips back into the slot), the sensor reads both the removal and addition in that one move - thinking I just placed the new core. Now when I choose to UNLOAD first - the sensor stops at the point of the unload. I seem to be back to my issue of the cave in on my lower layers (and the camera issue). I have a 2-day print going now - then will print the bed with @kmanstudios' project settings. Thanks all!

Hi @SandervG I get the same issues with both the AA and BB cores in that slot. Should I try to swap the AA from 1 to 2 and see what happens?

All great responses...thanks kman. Only thing I will confirm is that the bed was super clean on leveling. I did see the artifacts on a couple previous attempts, but today it was clean. If you see the YouTube videos...you will see the bed doesn't even get close to the nozzle before failing with the error. It looks like it is about an inch away before giving up. Will try the alcohol though...both to consume (the consumable kind) and to clean the leads on the other ? Oh...and I have interacted with @fbrc8-erin quite a bit. She has been amazingly helpful with my UM3E.

Oh...and I am among the others that lose the video feed of the printer midway through the print. Resetting Cura Connect and/or restarting the printer are my only options. There is another thread in this forum with this topic. Their experience is the same I am having with the S5. I just figured this was a firmware issue and it would eventually get sorted out. With these issues - I may get "uninvited" from this forum ? I also saved the logs and have those to share if someone could get something useful from them. Just let me know.

Wow @kmanstudios. Thank you for going to that level. I think the next logical thing for me to try is to load your project and print it on my print. And I would do that - if I didn't run into another issue this morning. One of the things I noticed about the print that was running until early this morning is that I never configured the X/Y offset after changing from the BB core to the AA core in extruder 2. As a result, I noticed (and no one else will) an ever so slight shift when the color change on my model changed from one color on Extruder 1 (red) to the rest of the height of the box using Extruder 2 (white). As soon as my print finished this morning, I knew I would be printing my final piece, which I planned to use PVA as support material for. In loading up the new materials (and core), I decided to now do an X/Y offset calibration...except it won't work. I have two videos loading that I will share. Every attempt comes with one of two errors (and this is after a couple power cycles of the printer and reloading of material and cores): Nozzle offset probe failed. Please check the nozzles and bed and try again Difference between detected height of both print cores exceeds realistic values These errors come either after the BB core is extended and the bed begins to rise to the nozzle...only to stop way short and then throw this error...or if will successfully complete BB (after retrying from getting error #1) and then stop when the bed is rising to the AA core. It stops way short and throws that second error. Worth noting, since I have had the printer: I get error #1 at the start of every print, regardless of which cores are loaded. I have to acknowledge the error and choose to "retry" - which it does successfully Often times, when I choose to change the core in slot two of the print head, the changed core is not recognized. The wizard tells me to open the door...(which I successfully confirm), then to remove the core (which it recognizes), then to insert the new core - which is where it hangs...it never detects the replacement core. I can hit X on the wizard, but that prompts me to cancel...which I eventually have to do after putting the new core in. With the new core in and back to the main screen, the status shows no core in slot 2. A reboot of the printer shows both cores in place. I bought the printer from Matterhackers and have been sharing these findings with their tech support...I think they are going to turn me over to Ultimaker support at this point. Here are the videos:

yeah...the 0.2 wall may have been an easy fix here - besides a higher infill. We shall see!

Got it - thanks! A few things to try. I can confirm that the current print (which is exhibiting the same issues, less profoundly @ 20% infill) has a bed temp of 60 degrees thanks to @kmanstudios suggestion to change filament to Ultimaker Yellow PLA (regardless that it isn't UM brand). These are the current basics for that material in the current project:

Thanks @kmanstudios. I will try those out on Thursday when my current print is done.

@SandervG I meant to ask...for this point, would you recommend changing the fan/cooling settings in Cura or do I just increase infill for more surface integrity? In the case of this model, I believe I didn't design it well. I don't need 5mm thick walls, which invites the infill between the walls at a lower level. Besides improving future designs, I'm just trying to better understand my path forward on this model - the shrinkage and contraction on the current model happened with and without the chamfer.

Sounds like a plan. If it works for you, maybe you can send me the project file and try here. I just ordered a few rolls of Ultimaker PLA

That could be. I never changed default and assumed it was 60. I agree that 70 may be a little too hot and will definitely pay attention on the next print! I will definitely try that. I wouldn't mind the print-time savings for sure. Only the tough PLA material. I have the black that came with it and bought an extra roll of black and red. I will buy a role of non-tough to have on hand and for testing. You and the rest of this community are the best! Thank you so much for continuing to consider ways to help me.

60 degrees on the bed.

It's the included glass bed. With this being the new S5, I haven't had it but a couple of weeks - so not sure the glass has any pits or imperfections. The prints are no more stuck than they normally would be. When the bed is cooled, they pop right off.

Love it! Thanks a ton @kmanstudios!

Correction - even the flat wall shows the effect slightly. You can kind of see it at this angle. The wall making up most of the camera frame should be perfectly flat.

and, if successful @ 50% infill, it begs the question about other changes I can make. The model is pretty involved in it's final state. Not easy for me to change wall thickness from 5mm (which is not intentionally 5mm...lesson learned). At 50% infill for as large as the model is that is printing, it will take forever. I also plan to try 20% infill, slower speed, and 5 inner and outer shell walls (from 3) to see if that helps to keep the surface integrity.

All of the images in the original print have no chamfer at the bottom. Just straight walls to the bed. The shift and ripple was seen around all sides....except in the current print going on my bed (chamfered bottom edge @ 20% infill), the chamfered sides have the shift. The front flat wall does not. I haven’t tried anything new beyond adding making the setting changes suggested by @kmanstudios, adding the chamfer, changing to a brand new roll and brand of filament, and setting infill to 20%. When the current print is done, I plan to try whatever the best recommended changes are. My inclination is to change speed and set infill to 50%...and to print only the bottom portion of the current model (for the sake of faster turnarounds between tests)

Here is the new STL with chamfered bottom - no other changes control box.stl

Here are some additional pictures of various prints: First attempt on Ultimaker S5 with 20% infill - using MatterHacker Pro PLA (roll 1) Second attempt on Ultimaker S5 with 10% infill - using Matterhackers Pro PLA (roll 2): Third attempt printing on CR-10 @ 50% infill with eSun Pro+ PLA (this one was perfect): Current print @ 20% infill, but with a 45 degree chamfer built into the design and a brand new roll of eSun filament:

Very strange...just fixed the images.

So...just checking in for an update. I am still having the issue, even after the great settings shared by kman. But I also have some theories I want to share and solicit input about. I decided to try my model again (not the same box as before, but designed the same exact way) and let it run (3 day print). This is targeted to finish on Thursday at 2am, but just noticed that the same phenomenon has plagued this print. I am still printing this on the 2nd extruder with the AA core (0.4) Ripples on the walls of those bottom levels Small indentation as if the lower levels are contracted beyond the normal perimeter beyond that point I have made a couple changes to the print: I added a 45-degree chamfer to the bottom of the model I changed the filament to eSun Pro (a filament type I have used extensively on my Ultimaker 3 Extended) Changed layer height to 0.15 (versus 0.2 on the boxes I contacted you about) Added a brim I have a theory that there is something wrong with my model as the walls may be too thick (requiring too much infill) for which I am only doing 10-20% triangle infill. Is it possible that the heated bed is so precise on the Ultimaker S5 that it is melting those lower levels? I wondered what would happen if I changed the outer shell from the default 3 layers to maybe 5. After giving this some more thought - I am starting to wonder if the issue isn’t the model and slicing. The most profound “shift and ripple” came from the box I printed with 10% infill. Remember that the walls of this model at 5mm thick. As a result, that requires infill since there are only 3 layers in the inner and outer shell. A 10% infill isn’t much for holding up the structure if the printer temps are such that it could be warping the print. Things settle down as the model gets further away from the bed an you get to the actual inside floor of the box. The two models which have the far less pronounced “shift and ripple” were done at 20% infill, including the 3-day print that is going right now. I printed the same exact box on my CR-10 (with eSun filament and all the same temp settings) except the box printed perfectly. This had an infill of 50%. For the record, I have yet to try a higher than 20% infill on the Ultimaker S5 since the prints would take longer than I wanted to wait. I may change my mind and attempt another print at a higher infill to test my theory - even if it means just printing the bottom portion of the model at a higher infill Things I still want to do to troubleshoot: Print the box again but increase the inner and outer walls to 5 (from the default 3) Print the same model on extruder 1 Print the box again on extruder 2, but increase the infill to 50%