Cuq

I'm rather thinking of an integration into an existing plugin 😁 something regarding mesh manipulation. But need to test the concept before

I must admit that I wondered if it was not the case 🤣

You're a GENIUS @GregValiant. On top Of that it also partialy solved the issue of too long parameter list !! Thanks a lot It will become my new prefered Cura configuration !

It shouldn't be too hard to implement, once the part is flattened we use the ConvexHull geometry as for the nesting function, keeping the longest vector and aligning it with X or Y by a rotation around Z should do the job.

What happens when you exceed the available space in the toolbar ? Buy a bigger screen ? 🙂

10000€ et doubler la mise ??? C est quoi comme station de travail ?

Hello, I don't quite understand the effect of the postpone_emit option on the removeInstance function in Cura's management for the ContainerStack ? If someone could enlighten me on this point it would be nice. @nallath ?

First release in the MarketPlace : https://marketplace.ultimaker.com/app/cura/plugins/5axes/NameIt A V1.5.0 have been submited to intergrate this Enhancement Request : https://github.com/5axes/NameIt/discussions/10

Un onzième en ligne : Name It Plugin Cura pour ajouter un texte d'identification à une pièce d'impression : https://github.com/5axes/NameIt Sur le marché : https://marketplace.ultimaker.com/app/cura/plugins/5axes/NameIt

Hello, You can do a lot of things with a postprocessing script. But it will be not so easy, You will also need to manage the E Value ( test if you are in relative or absolute extrusion mode. You will also need to manage the retract movements Z hop if you decide to use this option etc. It's possible but it's not an quick and easy job. You can start from a sample script like this one to already have a structur and some basic subroutine : https://github.com/5axes/Cura-Postprocessing-Scripts/blob/master/GradientInfill.py

No, just because it hasn't been updated for Cura 5.0

https://github.com/5axes/NameIt/releases/tag/V1.4.0

Note: Cura has a unique function compared to other slicers. If the model is placed (totally or partially) under the build plate . The part is not automatically placed flat on the plate. This is intended either to allow printing a part that the bottom is not completely flat or to cut only a part of the part. Could be the origine of your issue ???

Not sure of that but when I read your messages I don't see where is the issue in Cura, As it was already mentionned with the mesh tool of @fieldOfView plugin plus the Auto orientation one from @nallath I don't see any situation which cannot be solved without spending "tons of times" to place some models on the builtplate. So I certainly missing something. A short video of your procedure should be welcome to understand your issue.

No they prefer use the source code of the other, change the name and the logo to produce their "own" slicer. Chinese Opensource understanding.

Welcome to the club 🙂 I don't know if it's the solution. But I solved my issue with : toolItem: UM.ColorImage { source: Qt.resolvedUrl("type_custom.svg") color: UM.Theme.getColor("icon") } could be a beggining of solution for you

Ou il est aussi possible d'attendre, pour moi je pense une version "apaisée" en 5.2

Just for Information Yes they can do it ( Prusa And SuperSlicer) Ie for Ender-3 end Gcode

no, no ... Just the file Ultimaker Cura 5.0.0\cura\Scene\ConvexHullDecorator.py and its comments 🤗

Must be tested : https://github.com/5axes/TabPlus/blob/V1.0.1/resources/scripts/ReduceZBrim.py I don't have time to do it these days. The last release with some minor modifications and 3 scripts https://github.com/5axes/TabPlus/releases/tag/V1.0.1

Not really because in this case we change just the layer height of the SKIRT Section (Change the Z value AND the flow via M221 : I made an error in my previous post with M220 sorry) . As the Skirt doesn't support any other layer, there is on my point of view no issue to do that ( but of course this idea must be tested to be sure of that ) . Note : parameter "Support Brim Width" in this case must be set to 0 ! And If you fix a value in this case you can have some issue but as we are talking about support, I don't think it will be a problem to have a gap of between the Skirp and the second support layer. My actual script to to the opposite (MultiBrim) : https://github.com/5axes/TabPlus/blob/main/resources/scripts/MultiBrim.py

By using a postprocessing script , yes , you can easily decrease the layer height and reduce the flow according to this reduction by using a M220 instruction, I have a script to increase the layer height, do the opposite should not be difficult. Actual plugin source code : https://github.com/5axes/TabPlus

I hate this kind of situation... finally writing the question gives me the answer... Well I didn't lose everything and maybe one day someone will have the same question The answer are : _compute2DConvexHull

Hello Again the Cura Expert, In my current code I'm using : hull_polygon = node.callDecoration("getConvexHull") hull_polygon = node.callDecoration("getConvexHull") and hull_polygon = node.callDecoration("getAdhesionArea") Works great. But I have an issue with getConvexHull according to the source code in case of one-at-a-time, this includes adhesion and head+fans clearance. Is there any method to keep the "minimal" ConvexHull and not the getConvexHullHeadFull. Best regards, Cuq

One small step for mankind one giant leap for me 😄