Jump to content

burtoogle

Member
  • Content Count

    209
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

burtoogle last won the day on August 17

burtoogle had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

48 Excellent

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Does this problem only occur on Windows systems?
  2. Hi @ahoeben, I've seen this fix mentioned a couple of times recently, would it make sense for Cura on closing to either detect when those lines should be deleted because there's more than one monitor or just delete them anyway?
  3. Hello @uloxer. I'm afraid I can't answer your question as the printers I use don't have Linear Advance. They do have what I think is a similar feature (it's called pressure advance) but I don't use that either! I think that the only way to find out is by experiment. Good luck!
  4. Sorry, I'm not really the right person to answer that, here's some general info https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_(geometry)
  5. I managed to upgrade my ancient MacBook Pro to MacOS 10.13 (High Sierra) and can now build experimental Cura releases for that platform again. Please note that the builds will not run on earlier versions of OS X / MacOS. Support for multi-threading has been enabled in the slicer so that should reduce slicing times for large/complex models. As always, the builds are supplied with no warranty, YMMV. All feedback is welcome, please add to this thread if you have anything (good or bad) to report. You can find the releases at https://www.dropbox.com/sh/s43vqzmi4d2bqe2/AAADdYdSu9iwcKa0Knqgurm4a?dl=0, the README.md file in there tells you about what's in the releases.
  6. The problem is with the model's normals. You can fix this in Cura by installing the mesh tools plugin from the marketplace, selecting the model and then using the extensions -> mesh tools -> fix model normals menu item. Hope this helps.
  7. Hello @cHubbz, please save the project file (File -> Save) and attach the resulting .3mf file to this thread so it can be investigated. Thanks.
  8. I have submitted the PR(s) for these changes. All we can do now is wait...
  9. If I remember right, someone (maybe @SteveCox3D) has tried that filament with gyroid infill? Unfortunately, I can't remember the outcome.
  10. I doubt very much they will be integrated into Ultimaker's releases any time soon. What happens is that I can submit a pull request (PR) asking for the changes to be incorporated. At some point in the future the Cura developers will look at the PR and either reject it outright for some reason, or they may request changes. When they are happy they will merge the PR into their source code and assuming that it works OK, the new features will appear in the next release. So far so good, the problem is that PRs can hang around for many months before they get around to looking at them. I currently have 18 PRs in the queue. Some are trivial and some fix (IMHO) important bugs. One is now almost a year old. I have other changes that I really would like to submit as PRs but, quite frankly, I can't see them ever being accepted because they are simply not getting through the backlog. I've gone past the point of being pissed off, I just accept it now and no longer care whether they use my PRs or not. Anyway, just to show willing, I will submit a PR for these changes and then I can say I've done my bit.
  11. You should understand that changing the infill vertical scaling doesn't alter the amount of filament used compared to the un-scaled version. What differs is the paths the filament takes. It will only save you weight if by using scaling you can reduce the infill density required.
  12. I'm not sure which changes you are referring to. I've made so many changes to many parts of Cura. To see how they are different. Clone my CuraEngine repo and then compare the mb-master branch to the master branch and you will see all the stuff I have changed. I just did that and the diff contained 4845 lines!
  13. Thanks. Sorry, I won't be implementing the non-planar slicing feature because I think it would be a lot of effort for rather dubious benefit. In my mind it has novelty value but little else. If you want to print non-planar, you need a printer with more degrees of freedom so the nozzle can always been normal to the surface being printed.
  14. Thanks for the image (very creative), I understand now what you want. I have implemented a new setting called Infill Vertical Scaling. Default is 100%. Larger values stretch the infill pattern vertically, smaller values shrink the pattern vertically. Not sure how much use it is except if one is being "artistic". Will be in build 0914 available on dropbox soon.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to the Ultimaker Community of 3D printing experts. Visit the following links to read more about our Terms of Use or our Privacy Policy. Thank you!