Jump to content
Ultimaker Community of 3D Printing Experts


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Ah, yes. Thank you! Actually, I am able to print curved bridge wall with a fair accuracy. I'm heading out of the office for the day, but will post some actual prints showing this tomorrow. Cheers! Edit: I rushed that comment and after taking a closer look at my prints, I do agree that the actual bridge walls along the curves are not actually curved, but segmented lines. The smaller these segments, the more of a true curve it becomes, but they are still segments. The segments in my print were small enough that I could not visually tell the difference initially. Anyways, you solve
  2. I see. That's a good explanation, and I would agree. I can't see a better solution than that at the moment. I'll repost if I ever come across anything that works well in my radial-ish type case.
  3. Let me just start by saying that I have no expectation of you to implement this just for my little part, and if its well beyond feasible, no use continuing the conversation, but I am still curious. This is a programmatic issue or printing issue? The skin lines in your image are parallel to one of the unsupported edges, but not the other for each pie piece. It would seem a concentric skin, would result in shorter bridge skin lines, but then you'd have each line only attached to two floating bridge lines rather than one more stable point. So maybe my concentric fill idea would be too unstable an
  4. @smartavionics, I have one seemingly buggy part of this now that I've paramaterized some elements. I'm now using the latest Windows build from your dropbox link and have a quartered version of the previous part I showed, with a few other minimization things to waste less material/time. See image below, but the paramaterization is done via "per model settings" where I set both the Bridge Wall Speed and Bridge Skin Speed equally in each model and go from 30, 45, 60, 75 mm/s. As you can see in the image, the skin speed is appropriately changed, but the wall speed still seems to follow my general
  5. @smartavionics, interesting, and yes it does look more or less radial, but was this radial pattern intentional or just what happened by default from this design? I'd say in this case, assuming the red walls are fixed, it would actually be better to have a concentric skin as this would result in the shortest bridge skins between these walls. As it stands, the bridge skin lines are of variable length and the shorter ones my work well while longer ones may fail. But it doesn't look like those red walls are supported, but bridge walls , so I'm not sure what would work best there. I could try to in
  6. @phaedrux. Follow the build instructions for OS X but you'll have to replace the terminal line command: git clone git@github.com:Ultimaker/cura-build.git with smartavionics git repo. git clone https://github.com/smartavionics/Cura.git As smartavionics doesn't appear to maintain his builds as releases as Ultimaker does, you'd have to checkout his mb-master branch before building and build based on that branch. If you need more info, read up on how to use cmake, and git. If you still need further help after that, then open an issue asking for smartavionics to update the git read
  7. Got it! I also found your dropbox link to the builds in another thread. I won't build my own for now as the dependencies list for Windows looks monstrous. Though if you can't find a means to make the bridge density >100% I may someday take a peek under the hood and see if I can figure something out. I never had much tangling issues regardless of settings, but based on the few numbers I've seen thrown around on the thread, it looks like everyone is trying to print MUCH faster than I am. I'm using 0.1mm thickness, and speeds around 15 mm/s. I did a lot of testing on a standard bridging
  8. @phaedrux, you can find the build instructions here. Optionally you could run from source as per here.
  9. @smartavionics first off thanks for an amazing contribution! I've been printing bridge test parts for the last two days just toying around and having some great initial results. Where do you maintain your builds you mentioned? I'd like to see what your newest version looks like compared to the Ultimaker build. I checked your git hub, but didn't look like your Cura fork master branch was updated very recently. Are you maintaining these in another branch perhaps? Also one thing I've been hoping to see is some way to allow Bridge Skin Density above 100% (i.e. allowing overlap). I'm
  10. I agree that this as default behavior has the potential to shock/frustrate a fair amount of users (myself included). Yes, it is my fault for not reading carefully through the installation process, but I think deleting profiles should be a very intentional task, maybe only reserved for someone looking to remove the entire Cura software from their system due to lack of use, etc. (e.g. through a dedicated uninstaller separate from the update process). Having this in an update installer where careless users (myself included) are simply pressing enter to cycle through the GUIs can result in a fair
  • Create New...