Cuq

Yes it's a bug in the 5.4 Beta 1 . It looks like solved in 5.4 Beta 2 and 5.5 Alpha

This is a known Cura bug that doesn't just affect custom supports or Tab element. The problem comes from the "Enable Support Brim" option for supports, which must not be activated if you don't use any "Build Plate Adhesion Types". This problem has exist since the first Beta versions of 5.3.

Tested with version Beta.2 ... same problem : UltiMaker-Cura-5.4.0-beta.2+3061ac-win64-exe 2023-06-27 18:41:04,559 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: File "cura\Settings\CuraContainerRegistry.py", line 379, in loadAllMetadata 2023-06-27 18:41:04,560 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: super().loadAllMetadata() 2023-06-27 18:41:04,560 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: File "UM\Settings\ContainerRegistry.py", line 517, in loadAllMetadata 2023-06-27 18:41:04,560 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: self._updateMetadataInDatabase(metadata) 2023-06-27 18:41:04,561 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: File "UM\Settings\ContainerRegistry.py", line 437, in _updateMetadataInDatabase 2023-06-27 18:41:04,561 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: Logger.warning(f"Removing corrupt database and recreating database. {e}") 2023-06-27 18:41:04,561 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: File "UM\Logger.py", line 144, in warning 2023-06-27 18:41:04,562 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: cls.log("w", message, *args, **kwargs) 2023-06-27 18:41:04,562 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: File "UM\Logger.py", line 68, in log 2023-06-27 18:41:04,562 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: frame_info = inspect.getframeinfo(caller_frame) 2023-06-27 18:41:04,563 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: File "inspect.py", line 1629, in getframeinfo 2023-06-27 18:41:04,563 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: File "inspect.py", line 940, in findsource 2023-06-27 18:41:04,563 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: File "PyInstaller\hooks\rthooks\pyi_rth_inspect.py", line 26, in _pyi_getsourcefile 2023-06-27 18:41:04,564 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: File "ntpath.py", line 216, in basename 2023-06-27 18:41:04,564 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: File "ntpath.py", line 186, in split 2023-06-27 18:41:04,564 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: File "ntpath.py", line 35, in _get_bothseps 2023-06-27 18:41:04,565 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: RecursionError: maximum recursion depth exceeded while calling a Python object

Strange I don't see any limit .. after ten the parameters are dispaly in the warning information. But you can go upper. But main issue there is no "collision check" with the geometry.

It's because in the Standard Profile of the AnkerMake M5 the Hole Horizontal Expansion is set to 0,2. Each time you have these tiny links then the inner wall are considered as a hole (Closed section) Then you get this 0.2 offset. Change this value to 0.

Wrong analyse the Log File is generate in the Administrator AppData Roaming Folder ( but when you ask to show the Current Configuration Folder it's the curent user folder which is opened by Cura !)

Another thing I've never seen or noticed before: Running Cura in Administrator mode on Windows doesn't generate a log file? Is this normal? So no log file, no tons of messages: 2023-06-20 18:23:35,813 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: File "UM\Settings\ContainerRegistry.py", line 517, in loadAllMetadata 2023-06-20 18:23:35,814 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: self._updateMetadataInDatabase(metadata) 2023-06-20 18:23:35,814 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: File "UM\Settings\ContainerRegistry.py", line 438, in _updateMetadataInDatabase 2023-06-20 18:23:35,814 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: self._recreateCorruptDataBase(self._database_handlers[container_type].cursor) 2023-06-20 18:23:35,815 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: File "UM\Settings\ContainerRegistry.py", line 412, in _recreateCorruptDataBase 2023-06-20 18:23:35,815 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: self.loadAllMetadata() 2023-06-20 18:23:35,815 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: File "cura\Settings\CuraContainerRegistry.py", line 379, in loadAllMetadata 2023-06-20 18:23:35,816 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: super().loadAllMetadata() and at the end no message: 2023-06-20 18:23:35,821 - CRITICAL - [MainThread] cura.CrashHandler.__init__ [69]: RecursionError: maximum recursion depth exceeded while calling a Python object So Cura didn't crash, at least that's the conclusion I came to.

A strange thing happened with version 5.4. Apparently in some printer configurations such as Ender, Elegoo , Weedoo... the printer definition included a list of non-compatible materials exclude_materials. This list included all generic materials. This didn't generate an issue until this last beta, as if this parameter had no influence... With version 5.4, the developers have apparently reactivated this parameter ??? Versions of these printers therefore display the following message: To temporarily correct the problem, edit the creality_base.def.json or similar base.def.json files and delete the exclude_materials entry:

Cura 5.4 Beta Crash at startup Temporary solution : Launch Cura as Administrator

Switch to 5.5 Alpha testing ( without Issue) It looks like I'll be sticking with Alpha ... they work much better (😁)

Could be ... Lot of message with : UM.Settings.ContainerRegistry._updateMetadataInDatabase [437]: Removing corrupt database and recreating database. no such column: icon But stange that I'm the only one with these issues ... And the last Alpha doesn't have any issue ... A little bit frustrating

Good Ideas What's why you have : Import Export CSV Profiles https://marketplace.ultimaker.com/app/cura/plugins/5axes/ImportExportProfiles Export HTML Cura Settings https://marketplace.ultimaker.com/app/cura/plugins/5axes/HTMLCuraSettings Profil Analyser https://marketplace.ultimaker.com/app/cura/plugins/5axes/ProfilAnalyser

You should Share one of your profile for analyse.

Because your model doesn't lay down exactly on the buildplate. Use the function Rotation 'Lay Flat" to fix this issue.

Thanks to share your experience with this plugin . You could also have a look to the plugin wiki : https://github.com/5axes/TabPlus/wiki/Cura-Settings-for-the-Anti-Warping-Tab--Plugin

Not a plugin but a postprocessing script : https://github.com/5axes/Cura-Postprocessing-Scripts#multibrimpy

Happy Birthday my last Submission . Today you have reach your first one Month of your life 🙂 So your validation could take some times.

Parce que Cura ne gère pas le Color Mix et que ces valeurs doivent être définies en dur dans le Gcode d'entête dans la config de l'imprimante ... Donc tu peux bien définir la couleur de l'objet que tu voudras ca changera rien au final ? Après il me semble avoir lu un post sur ce sujet ou un code de démarrage était indiqué où a défaut de définir un color mix on pouvait au moins paramétrer les 3 régimes d'extrusions S0 S1 S2 : https://talent.paperblog.fr/9176220/geeetech-a10t-comment-imprimer-en-1-2-ou-3-couleurs-avec-cura/ Je précise que n'ayant pas cette machine c'est tout ce que je peux dire à propos de cette solution.

Cura Alpha 5.4 Testing 105 The problem with the Support Horizontal Expansion parameter reported by @GregValiant is still present. If the Tree Support option is activated, this parameter changes the result of the supports, but it is not visible in the parameter list. Support with a Support Horizontal Expansion = 2mm Support with a Support Horizontal Expansion = 0mm

I really like this little function that @burtoogle added in his version to have an analysis details of the current line in the layer view . As I don't think he'll be doing any PR since his version is far too out of compatibility with the current versions of Cura. Maybe the team will consider integrating a similar analysis function.

dans ce cas custom support c'est fait pour ça

Support Horizontal Expansion. 0.8 = 2 lines width it's too much in your case, try a value between 0 and 0.6

Support Placement : "Touching Buildplate" On this example some area are not supported because of the Maximun Branch Angle limitation, and it's normal. Now if we switch to the Support Placement : "Everywhere" + Rest placement : Force Only Buildplate we have this result : Some of the support trunk start from the Model : So despite we have requested "Force Only Buildplate" We got some support starting on the model . So that's why I say you should not call this option "Force Only Buildplate" but "On Buildplate as possible" Now if the use the option : "On Model if Necessary" we have this result : In this case it's not "On Model if Necessary" because has the have seen in the previous image, We have the possibility to get a result where some trunk start from the Buildplate so it's not Necessary but Required ? So I would prefer : Support Placement : Touching buildplate. Support will be created only from the buildplate, And if it's not possible due to branch parameter limitations, we will not have any support for the unreacheable area. Support Placement : Everywhere Rest Placement : On buildplate as possible . Support can be created everywhere but as much as possible starting from the buildplate and in some case we can have some support starting from the model. Rest Placement : On model if required , support can be created everywhere and if required you can have support starting on the model. And Sometimes Required means they start on the model because you have more direct or simple support if you start on the model. And concerning Rest Preference , yes it's not really explicit; Positioning Refinement ?

Not sure you can use this script with this machine. The Gcode of a UM S5 have some M104 instruction added by Cura and I don't think you can use a temptower postprocessing script in this case. But As I'm not a USer of this machine I cannot comfirm this first analyse. Edit : UM S5 are using the Auto temperature option so Temperature are modified according to the extruded volume. The Script doesn't work in this case because the value are also changed by cura.