DivingDuck

You're welcome.

Guess (w/o looking into the gcode), you run into conflict with the Minimum Layer time setting (Cooling). You can experiment with this setting but you need to be careful as it is easy to set the minimum time too low and that leads to problems of a not cool enough layer to print the next layer onto. For those sections you need to find a well tuned setting between this setting and fan setup.

Guess we need a "Workaround" sign then 😉 To be honest, I tend more to be with @rachael7 and her view of things in this regard. Isn't this kind of discussions why we have those discussions about a missing features since ~5+ years now? And I say this with no harm at all. Peoples who need this feature have stop long time ago to argue that, because they are using other tools these days for this task. The point in the end is, that users are forced to user other applications / tools to solve their needs. Not a good way to design a good process as you need now at least two tools for one job. In addition it becomes more difficult to not make additional errors during those activities. It is maybe not wise too pushing Anyway, this post as well will not change anything except that I'm already using Cura less than I want to use it. This discussion shows only one of a lot drops of quirks over the years that make using Cura less pleasant as it needs to be. This will hopefully change with a new version. Maybe, as I used to say for any new version. I'm quite sure, I need to spend hours/days/weeks in understanding the new changes for having good slices. The show must go on...

Was das betrifft, gibt es bei Cura nicht wirklich gut nutzbare Tools. Es gibt ein Plugin mit Namen Banana Split. Mit diesem kann man einfache Schnitte über die Druckplatte machen. Ich denke, so etwas solltest du besser außerhalb Cura machen. Cura ist da leider das falsche Werkzeug. Es kommt natürlich auch darauf an, was dein Ausgangsmaterial ist, wie z.B. STL-Datei, eigene Konstruktion etc. Für STL Dateien kann man z.B. Blender nutzen. Ich arbeite mit Fusion360, dort kann man auch mit Netzstrukturen arbeiten, macht aber nicht wirklich Freude bei großen und komplexen Modellen. Bei Konstruktionen achte ich automatisch darauf, dass die Teile passend sind. Schau dir mal den Prusaslicer an, die haben ebenfalls eine gute Schneidefunktion integriert. Da kannst du dann auch Verstiftungen für geschnittene Teile automatisch erstellen lassen. Danach kannst du die Teile auch in Cura weiter verarbeiten, falls gewünscht. Für > 100 Schnitte bei einem Model, da wirst du mit keinem Tool wirklich Freude haben. Das schreit nach viel Geduld und Arbeit...

Was hast du übersehen? Vieles wäre wahrscheinlich schnell zu erklären, wenn man ein Beispiel von dir als Cura Projektdatei zur Hand hätte statt der nicht entzifferbaren Einstellungen in den angehängten Bildern. Die hat sich wahrscheinlich keiner richtig ansehen können. Zumindest mir erging es so. Hier mal ein Beispiel mit dem man was anfangen kann: So sieht es als Konstruktion aus (3 mal 2 Gewinde, jeweils eins durchgehend und eins nicht durchgehend, damit man was zum Spielen hat): Und so sieht es dann in Cura 5.6 (sowie in allen früheren Versionen) mit den richtigen Einstellungen aus: Die Cura Projektdatei (*.3mf) kann man öffnen und hat sofort alle benötigten Infos ohne tagelanges Rätselraten. 🙂 Bezüglich Support von Gewinden, diese würde ich bei M4 vermeiden wollen. Warum? Diese sind zu kein für einen Support, den man dann auch nicht heraus bekommt, wenn man ihn entfernen will. Du bekommst nicht genug Kühlung hin um zu verhindern, dass sich der innenliegende Support nicht mit der Gewindestruktur verbindet. Bein Herausfiddeln wirst du die filigranen Gewindeflanken mehr schädigen als das es was bringt. Am Ende musst du nicht nur die Zeit aufwenden um den Kunststoff aus dem Loch zu puhlen, sondern auch noch das nicht mehr brauchbare Gewinde neu schneiden (sofern noch genügend Material vorhanden ist. Mach ein Loch geringfügig größer als das Kernloch für M4 und schneide dann entweder das Gewinde mit einem Gewindeschneider vor oder Erzeuge das Gewinde beim Einschrauben mit der Schraube (was bei M3/M4 auch nicht wirklich Freude macht). Das ist die bessere Alternative - up to you, wie man so schön in denglish sagt. Gedruckte Gewinde mache ich erst ab M5 und wenn die Schraubungen des öfteren benutzt werden, dann immer nur mit Einsatz bei diesen Größen (wie auch schon von anderen vorgeschlagen wurde) UMSupportForDrillHole_v1.3mf

https://github.com/Ultimaker/Cura/wiki/Getting-Started

Not the solution I would expect but hey, we take what ever we get that helps for an never solved problem - even a not intended behavior as workaround. Great finding, thanks for showing it!

Then you should check your printer settings in firmware with the settings in your Cura Printer Settings. This is an issue that all slicers have when max speed and -acceleration settings are not matching. You see this more often with Cura because there are some default values that are not from this universe 😉 like default max speed values in the fdmprinter.def.json definition: 299792458000 mm/s. This isn't a problem if you have a good printer profile, but in case it is not complete and do not have the correct values for your printer then you will face the behavior you see as those default values will then take place in the calculation. Add the plugin Printer Settings from Marketplace and you can check the values and adjust those that are not matching with your printers max values in speed and acceleration. And remember, it is always a good idea to make a backup of your configuration folder first or at least a copy of your printer profile for experimenting with a profile where you don't know how this will end because of missing experience. We all started with low experience once.

I'm not from Ultimaker, just a normal user that uses Cura since quite some years 😉 Anyway I guess as well that there is an issue with the registry that I do not see on my installations (actually 4 different versions on this PC). You can go throe all entries and check where the problem is but I think it is easier to use one of the registry scanner/cleaner for this kind of job. This is all what I can suggest. Edit: (forgot the answer of one of your questions): Regarding how the updates are done, here are not only users that uses the latest versions. That is for a good reason. Having the versions installed in parallel give the ability to use a once made good tuned configuration for models all the time again if needed and have no to mess up with new versions where everything change with each update. So you can see that there is maybe a reason why one like the way how this works actual. Not saying that I'm always happy with this solution, but still with all these update surprises with each new version I'm mostly happy to have this "fallback" if we want to say it that way.

One way is Right-Click a .stl file, choose [Open with] and select [Choose Other App] and find the actual Cura version. There you can usually mark the selected program as standard app.

@Slashee_the_Cow, indeed the poster should at least give some minimum information to understand his post better... The problem can happen with a desktop pc as well in case you have a cpu including graphics support and a additional graphics card. Unfortunately that isn't the main route cause of the problem. The problem is mostly a faulty (or faulty installed) display driver - except from the fact that the graphics hardware don't support opengl >= 2.0 as this is the minimum version for running Cura. And more often was this introduced from the windows update where they fall back to an ancient display driver at some point. The best advice for most users is maybe to check and update all installed graphic card driver's in the pc manually. Switching the graphic device is usually only a temporary workaround that will bite the user again later once more. It isn't a general solution as well as not every user have two graphics solutions build in and it assumes also that the second device uses updated drivers (what is maybe as well not the case). 🙂

Hi @ahoeben, was you able to find out what the reason of that error was? Best regards, DD

This is the case @GregValiant described. My A4/80 g printing paper is around 0.1 mm thick. This is the offset you would like to compensate with a tool like Z-Offset. Most people didn't compensate this that way back in the days and use a higher flow rate for the first layer instead.

@Slashee_the_Cow, this was what I had in mind. Or wrong reassembling of a dual screw after a cleaning session. Many possibilities for generating such problems. Anyway, hope, he will find a solution for his problem.

There is a plugin for manipulating print job names called Printjob Naming. Maybe you had use that some when and then forgot about it?

Maybe Z axis out of level? I have seen such problems sometimes when someone try to level a z axis to the bed axis not knowing that this is the wrong method doing this. I can't really believe that a manufacturer choose wrong steps settings for a t8 rod. This is a very basic calculation and will never change. The pitch of an lead screw is per definition exact. A difference of 1.1 mm on such a small distance of 20 or 40 mm makes no sense except there is a mechanical problem that cause a z-axis to be out of level. I would suggest to check whether your z axis is out of level. Do it in the old way manually. First delete the saved mesh values for auto bed leveling, if your printer have auto bed leveling. Home your z axis and move it up say 100 mm then try to exactly measure the height on both sides of the z axis against the bottom profiles. They have to be exactly the same. Move the axis again 50 or 100 mm. Now your measurement difference have to hit exactly that value on both sides. If not, find the problem as there is not a lot left over that can cause such a problem and most of them was already told. After this is achieved level the bed manually so that it is in level with the z axis. Two things that just came in mind while writing this post: Do you change the bed temperature during printing or are you leveling your bed cold or while it is heating up? This can cause as well height problems and is easily to check. Maybe your print bed is warping too much in some locations. This can be check by comparing the mesh bed leveling values for a cold and a heated bed.

Take all the time you need. For Cura 5.6 I had build up everything from scratch and after importing my own material definitions files again the problem was solved so fare. There was much to much left over artifact files in my config folders as you may recognize. 🙂

@ahoeben Here it is. Let me know when you finish the download. I then like to delete that big zip file. Edit: File removed

I can make a copy of my 5.5 configuration folder for testing if needed.

@ahoeben, everything ok from my side. My comment was not meant as critic to you. I well know that you only try to help fixing problems that are mostly not yours. Regarding the Material Settings plugin (v3.6.2), I just tested it and feel bad that I didn't thought on that and test this. You are on the right track, after removing the plugin the material manager do not crash. After reinstalling the plugin the material manager crash again.

@ahoeben, this is how it was shown on my installation for Cura 5.5 in case it maybe helps for other users with similar problems: This report was send several times with each >=5.1 version, but I guess it was never reviewed. cura-material manager crash.zip

I had this as well, but not only with Cura 5.6. Version 5.5 had the same Problem. You need to check your material files. For me it was a custom material definition for two filaments. It was working for all 4.x and 5.0 versions but then with newer version Cura crash when ever I try to open the material manager. Two weeks ago I thought I need to find the problem and deleted all custom materials and import them back again. I did it one by one and then identify two material definitions that had force a crash of the material manager. After deleting the GUID in the material files and correcting metadata I was able to import them again. If I remember correct there was something like a linked material definition inside those files. I can't remember that I ever did this, but who knows - I defined those two material definitions maybe 3 years ago....

c:\Program Files\UltiMaker Cura 5.6.0\share\cura\resources\materials\generic_pla_175.xml.fdm_material Looking to the generic PLA Material setting it state 60°C as default temperature.

It seems you have problems with all newer versions. Perhaps you have a problem with obsolete plugins and/or malformed configuration files. Since the spinning wheel is showing you should at least find a log file in those locations that can help to identifier your problems: %appdata%/cura --> stderr.log %appdata%/cura/5.6 --> cura.log It may be a good idea to start Cura without any configuration files that it can find and convert to a configuration file set for 5.6. Therefore you need to backup all directories in %appdata%/cura and then delete them all. You need to close Cura before doing so. After deleting all the directories you can start Cura 5.6 again. It should now start as a vanilla installation without any configurations and plugins.

@zerspaner_gerd, Das liegt an Cura und wie stl und 3mf interpretiert wird. Ich hatte dazu mal vor ein oder 2 Jahren was geschrieben, da es hier immer zu den gleichen Missverständnissen (?) kam. stl Dateien werden z.B. immer in der Mitte des Druckbetts positioniert und 3mf Dateien immer auf der 0,0,0 Koordinate Beispiel: Baugruppe in Fusion Die Baugruppe als stl Datei exportiert, Cura interpretiert das so: und nun die selbe Baugruppe als 3mf exportiert: Nett, oder? Edit: Ich habe den thread gefunden wo ich das verhalten von Cura diesbezüglich mal dargestellt habe: