Livermore-Dad

I started a discussion in another location regarding some weirdness that I was having when attempting to create a 6.4mm hole and the hole was coming out to be 5.3/5.4 instead of the requested 6.4mm.. I enlarged the hole to be 7.4mm and it gave me roughly 6.4mm It seems that others have found this also to be the case "as one member cited "it seems that a hole is always nozzle width smaller than requested". This sounds like some slicing math or other, or that it starts in the middle vs the tangent.. Just be interested in hearing what the Cura programmers think about this and is there something that can be adjusted to get the holes to be requested size, when one is running larger nozzles. Now note, the rest of the object was to spec, it was only the hole and obviously the top bottom (the sides of the hole, grew as the hole was made smaller than the stl required. Would be very interested in if there is some computational changes or other to remedy this?

All my plugins are up to day. Nothing needed an update. Interesting. I have not printed anything in 2 days, Cura has been up and it's memory allocation is fine. Sooooo, umm I'm not sure what is going on. I'll see if I can print something and see if memory is consumed and grows after a print. But ya memory is fine at 350MB without activity. I do have a browser window for octoprint but it's not the one that being used. I'll play around some more and see if I can see something 🙂

Just a note on this. Not sure if it's still active. But Mac High Sierra, Cura 3.6.0, Octoprint and recently added Octolapse and a cam. I had no Memory warnings or errors or ran out of Application memory before adding Octolapse or the cam My Mac has seen Cura using as much as 65GB while sitting idle. In fact last night I left things on and Cura running (no print jobs, no octoprint windows open. Just Cura and it ballooned from 356KB to over 45GB of Memory use. This is a leak, and significant. Now as I said before I just installed Octolapse and prior to that I had not seen these errors. But also note, before this I didn't have my cams hooked up either, so Octolapse itself could be a red herring. And as the dev stated, it could be tied into the camera piece. However if I don't have a browser up, how is octoprint then eating my memory Via Cura? There is no active cam data being viewed..