Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Personal Information

  • 3D printer
  • Country
  • Industry

meowsqueak's Achievements



  1. @tinkergnome thank you, I think this is very useful. I had to merge the meshes as per the article, and then ungroup the models, which restores the individual models so that I can designate one as an infill mesh, with the side-effect that the meshes are all located in their correct positions. Thank you!
  2. I have a model I've designed in Fusion 360 as a Component. I have an area I need to be solid infill, so I am hoping to use Cura's Infill Mesh feature to define a volume where the infill is different. I have therefore designed a separate Component in Fusion 360 (a simple cuboid) that is located in the correct place, relative to the first component. In Cura I have disabled "Ensure models are kept apart" and "Automatically drop models to the build plate". Fusion 360 only lets me directly send components to Cura one-at-a-time, so I've done this, but unfortunately the second component (the infill mesh component) always ends up at some arbitrary location on the Cura build plate, which is not correct relative to the primary model. I can manually move it but the accuracy of the location is lost. I've seen some forum posts where people manually position their infill meshes, however this is not ideal because I have another project with precisely positioned infill meshes that I want to handle next. Is there a way to import both components, this without losing the accurate location of the infill mesh?
  3. @smartavionics unfortunately I didn't save the .3mf and I'm not in a position to recreate it right now and test that it still shows the problem, but if I see the problem again in my future prints I'll report back. Sorry I can't be more helpful.
  4. Ok, I think in this case it's simply a non-retraction travel on the base layer. Not sure why it does this - I guess because I have 20mm set for the Max Combing distance but the first-layer "no retraction" overrides this, resulting in a continuous extrusion during travel on the first layer, but because it's not combing for this travel, it just goes right across the layer. It's easy enough to remove the strings with a scalpel.
  5. I've designed a grid in Fusion 360 and I loaded it up in Cura 3.4.1 for printing. I'm using mostly default settings, except 15% infill overlap, Concentric infill 50%, and a few custom temp and jerk settings. I have Combing Mode "All" and Max Comb Distance with No Retract set to 20mm. The problem is that the very first layer has an unexpected long diagonal that is *not* a travel string, but a deliberate extrusion at the non-travel speed. It does not appear in the Layer View at all. Shown by the red arrow: I had another print yesterday that seemed to do similar things - it was a set of tessellated hexagonal cylinders and inside each cylinder there were definite non-travel strings at some places - maybe 20 or so in total, none of them "dribbling strings", all properly extruded bridges that are not supposed to be in the design. Is this a known issue?
  6. Hi @smartavionics, you make a good point - most people will think in terms of distance. I suppose I'm coming at this feature from the point of view of someone who was debugging an "oozing" problem that occurred after a certain time, so in order to calculate the distance I would need to take the travel speed into account (plus acceleration but maybe not needed for a first-order guess!). I really like the way Cura can link certain config fields together, such that a change to one can influence or override another. Perhaps one way to do this would be to have the distance field auto-update if the travel speed is changed? Or alternatively, a second field alongside distance that also shows the time? Anyway, this isn't an important thing - I'm probably one of only a minority that have a special interest in this parameter and it's easy enough for us to recalculate the distance if we change the travel speed. Thanks for the feature - it has significantly improved my most recent print!
  7. Having encountered the perfect scenario for this new feature, I am thankful. I have a complex shape that the head takes too long to navigate while travelling in Comb mode, and the molten filament dribbles out before it gets there, leaving a large gap at the same place for each layer. This feature will help a lot if I need to keep Combing enabled. However I have to ask - why is it distance based? Shouldn't it be time based? The most common case, I imagine, is what I've described above, and this "oozing" effect is dependent on travel time not travel distance. Setting it as a distance means that it will need to be adjusted if travel speed is changed. Couldn't Cura calculate the distance automatically from the travel speed and the time parameter, and generate the appropriate GCODE to implement that?
  • Create New...