GregValiant

IdeaMaker has a Cooling Profile generator. You can pick and choose what layer to turn the fan on and off or simply adjust speed at. Myself and at least one other person have made feature requests on Github to incorporate that sort of thing into Cura. We'll see. I know they are busy with 5.0. I've written a post-processor in VB that adds a cooling profile by either layer or by feature type (Skin, Outer Wall, Inner Wall, etc.) and it works well but can't be ported to Python 'cuz I don't know Python. But anticipating? That would be a neat trick. Calculating exactly where to put the M106 would be a pain. What are we talking here 15 to 30 mm of movement at 60mm/sec? One thing that Cura does (that I know others haven't been happy about) is the gradual increase in fan speed to start a print. A lot of fans have a minimum speed below which they won't start up and a line like M106 S25 is useless if the fan won't start to spin until 30%. And that's another $.02.

Yes, another house will be necessary to fit the rest of the F-18. With the after-burners sticking outside through a wall it shouldn't be too bad. A little tough on the neighbors maybe.

Thank you for that @ahoeben. This just keeps getting better and better. In my (weak) defense I will say that I have never been a fan of the "just push all the buttons" method of computing that my spouse espouses. When hovering the mouse over that icon is there supposed to be a tooltip? I don't see one. Maybe I should ask Nallath if it's a bug. I suppose there's no reason why he can't join the "Beat on Poor Greg Party" this morning. I gotta get a new belt. Maybe suspenders too.

So my work-around is really a long, long way around. OK @ahoeben, I do have a feature request. This site (https://marketplace.ultimaker.com/app/cura/plugins?page=1) appears to be a (complete?) collection of the contents of the marketplace with links to full descriptions of each plugin. Could a link to the site (or one that is always kept updated) be added to the "Extensions" menu in Cura? Unlike the MarketPlace, the site loads quickly. It would be informative even if the plugins could not be added unless the MarketPlace was accessed. (I ask because it is at least slightly embarrassing to be caught with my pants down like this.)

@ian_clyde Post one of the bad gcode files. As I said above, the Gcode as generated by the plugin looks good. I've stared at it, and imported the gcode into AutoCad, and looked at the plugin code, and I've used it myself up to 7 times in a single print. It all looks good. When @knownchild altered that particular gcode file - THAT's what shouldn't have worked. So post one of your gcode files. The printer is supposed to go where it's told so either it's being told to go to the wrong height (a Cura bug), or for some reason it decided to go somewhere else (a bug, but not a Cura bug).

Here is a snippet of your modified Gcode. Layer 59 has finished printing at Z=15.00 and then... G0 F300 X107.454 Y110.011 Z15.25 Move up to the Layer 60 print height (this line is unmodified by the plugin) ;TYPE:CUSTOM ;added code by post processing ;script: PauseAtHeight.py ;current layer: 60 G1 F300 Z16.25 ; move up a millimeter to get out of the way G1 F9000 X190 Y190 M104 S220 ; standby temperature M117 Paused m300 M0 ; Do the actual pause m300 M109 S225 ; resume temperature G1 F9000 X107.085 Y111.138 G1 F300 Z14.75 ; move back down to resume height This is the line you altered. You are setting the Z to where layer 58 printed. So a synopsis of the Z as you have altered it is: Layer 58 Z=14.75 Layer 59 Z=15.00 Pause Layer 60 Z=14.75 (this is the one you have altered) Layer 61 Z=15.50 Layer 62 Z=15.75 The Z as Pause At Height coded goes: Layer 58 Z=14.75 Layer 59 Z=15.00 Pause Layer 60 Z=15.25 Layer 61 Z=15.50 Layer 62 Z=15.75 The "Unmodified" Gcode looks correct to me where your modified Gcode is printing layer 60 BELOW layer 59 and then when layer 61 starts the gcode kicks the Z up to 15.5 leaving a .75mm gap in the Z. So I think it's apparent that something else is going on. If you open your modified gcode in Cura you will see the gap in the layering.

Maybe. Typing is still involved. Way down in the left lower corner of the workspace is the box to edit the project name. In order to have it "automatic" you would need to use a different definition file (or create one which is a pain). You could alter the Ender 3 definition file as it is almost identical to the E3Pro. The only real difference is in the space on the build plate that is reserved for the glass clips. If you open the C:\Program Files\Ultimaker Cura 4.x.x\resources\definitions\creality_ender3.def.json file in a text editor you can delete the override for "machine_disallowed_areas". Here is the file and the relevant lines in Notepad. I would make a backup copy first. Using this definition for your V2 will result in the project name prefix being "CE3" instead of "CE3PRO". The downside is that when you upgrade to a newer Cura version the new version will have the disallowed areas again. You would need to copy your altered file and paste it in.

I've never had a problem with that and I've used it a lot. Post one of those "bad" gcode files that you have not modified. Posting a project file might be good too. In your example - if you enter 12 into the layer box in Pause At Height then the print will pause at the end of gcode layer 11 which printed at Z=3.00 and should resume at gcode layer 12 at Z=3.25. This is the Cliff Note version and I have removed all but the Z moves. ;MESH:NONMESH G0 F1200 X115.103 Y123.188 Z3.25 ;Here the Z moves the print height from layer 11 to layer 12 print height and is not modified by the plugin. ;TYPE:CUSTOM ;the start of the plugin code ;current layer: 12 G1 F300 Z4.25 ; move up a millimeter to get out of the way M0 ; Do the actual pause G1 F300 Z3.25 ; move back down to resume height ;LAYER:12 ;TYPE:SUPPORT G1 F2100 E465.31688 G1 F3000 X102.878 Y101.681 E465.36044 So with what I see there - gcode layer 11 ends at Z=3.00, the pause occurs, and printing restarts with gcode layer 12 at Z=3.25. That is how it should be. Are you saying that your Pause At Height would resume with layer 12 at 3.50? If that were to occur then layer 13 would smash layer 12.

Nice. Now the magic smoke can't escape quite so easy. Is that from a 1961 Land Rover? There is a reason that Joseph Lucas was known as the "Prince of Darkness" ya know. The "Lucas Electric Vacuum Cleaner" was the only product they made that didn't suck.

Search this site for "Ryzen" and see what you come up with.

Look through the different gcode files and see if you can determine the Acceleration and Jerk settings (M201, M204, and M205) as well as the speed settings (the "F" numbers). The problem looks to be ringing (but might be an extruder issue). If you do not enable Accel and Jerk control in Cura then I believe that the printer will fall back on it's defaults which might be too high for that particular model. For some reason (probably mechanical) you are getting a bounce in that axis. It might be caused by different Accel and Jerk settings in the Cura file and a harmonic vibration is showing up in the print. In the Prusaslicer photo you can see an issue on the left that might be the same sort of thing, just in a slightly different location.

What I believe AHoeben is saying is that the area of the model that wants support must be covered by the blocker. When you look at the model from the bottom in Prepare you can see that things like the fins have red on the side facing the build plate. When a blocker covers those red areas then the support will be blocked. There is no need for the blocker to go to the build plate. In this image looking through the bottom of the build plate - one blocker covers the rear of the model and the blocker is on the build plate. It blocks the overhang around the periphery but only at the back of the model. The second blocker is floating in the air and it covers the interior red surfaces of the roof and so blocks support from being generated for the top of the model. The lower overhang is not blocked and so support is generated. And here you see that no support was generated for the front half of the roof but there is support on the lower overhang and in the rear the opposite occurred as there is no support for the lower overhang but the roof is supported.

A little negative horizontal expansion and it will be good to go.

The "Overhang Angle" is calculated according to line width and layer height. It is the angle of a line running from the lower left corner to the upper right corner of the rectangle that portrays the area under the nozzle. When the layer height is less, that angle is greater and when the layer height is greater then that angle is less. Since using adaptive layers causes the layer height to bounce up and down then the calculated "angle requiring support" changes. When the layer height is uniform throughout a print, then the angle doesn't change. In the image below - the cartoon on the left shows two 0.2 x 0.4 rectangles just touching at their corners. The theoretical maximum Support Angle is 63.4°. If an actual model has an angle above 63.4° then the extrusion on top will absolutely not be in contact with the extrusion below and you are air printing. When the layer height is lowered to 0.1 then the theoretical maximum increases to 76.0°. Now the actual question becomes "Is this the way it actually works in Cura" or is it just a "geometric/trigonometric anomaly" and my reply to that is - I have no idea.

There aren't any problems with the model and I didn't have any trouble slicing it. What "very new" hardware are we talking about? There have been issues with at least one model of motherboard and CPU.

Pause at Height doesn't work when set to "Height" if there are Z-hops in the file. Your print is likely re-starting at the height + a Z-hop height. It is also difficult to use by "Height" when "Adaptive Layers" is enabled as it's difficult to predict what Z value to search for. PauseAtHeight works fine when set to "Layer Number". Remember that layer numbering in the gcode is with Base 0 and layer numbering in Cura is Base 1. The layer number you enter will print and then the pause will occur. So if you see in the Preview that you want to pause at the start of layer 200 then you would enter 199 into the PauseAtHeight layer # box.

It is either a prototype for the proposed Yottabyte drive (some of these words I have to look up!) or it's a question of perspective. I know, I've used this before but I like it...

Let's see if I understand this. Your test model is the simpler one and shows support that is holding up the angled cone shaped area. That cone is at a greater angle than your "Support Overhang Angle" setting while the other two models are below "Support Overhang Angle" and so the 2 fancier models don't require support. The left lower model consists of a single wall 1mm thick. The right lower model has double walls that are 1mm thick. There is a gap between the walls that you need to take care of in the CAD program. You might be able to work with this in Cura. In Mesh Fixes enable the setting "Remove all Holes". Set the "Top Bottom Thickness" to 0. Set the Infill Density to 0 Set the Number of walls to 3 or 4 depending on how thick you think they should be. The image below is with 3 walls and I turned support off because they don't really need any. One of the rules of printing with TPU is GO SLOW. That 3mf file has the print speed at 60 with the inner wall speed at 80. That ain't happenin'. I suggest you start at 15mm/sec for all speeds and see how a test goes. You should be able to tune the print from the printer control panel and up the speed at intervals and see what works best. I print TPU at 10mm/sec and I lubricate the filament with mineral spirits so it moves through the bowden tube easier. I also set all the flow rates in Cura to 112% or I get under-extrusion. I see that your retraction distance is 1.5mm and that is normal for a Direct Drive printer. If your printer is a bowden tube design the I suggest you turn retractions off. The 3mf file are suggestions. My printer isn't good at TPU but I manage to get custom gaskets out of it. Old motorcycles need some love too. GV_infillproblems.3mf

There are a couple of other choices for Support Blocker shapes (Cylinders and Tab Anti-Warping) that can be added from the MarketPlace. I'm thinking that another plugin that could create your "Force Support" shapes might be possible. This would be a new feature and really needs to be written up over on GitHub. If you post it there then several people who develop such things would see it and someone might pick it up and run with it. That goes beyond what I know about Cura and I don't know if it would actually be possible or not. It starts to involve those settings that can be configured "Per Mesh" and a lot of support settings are: "settable_per_mesh": false, "settable_per_extruder": false An example would be that you cannot set one model to normal supports and another to tree supports. I'm sure there was research done before those caveats were added. Right now, I don't see a way to do it other than the ways that have already been noted. For myself I know what my printer (Ender 3 Pro) is capable of and I rarely support horizontal holes below about 20mm diameter because I got tired of picking it out. Much easier to just post-process by running a drill into the hole to size it. Would it be handy for me to have a setting that would exclude holes below a certain diameter from having support? Yes it would. It can't happen though because when Cura slices it can't tell if a hole is a circle because there are no circles, just closed polygons consisting of either more or less facets of variable line length. And would you really trust a piece of software to make all the different configurations of the various parts exactly correct? Would you just go ahead and print without checking that the software got it right? Not if you worked for me. I was a checker in tool design studios for years. NOTHING was made until it was checked and counter-checked. Are you familiar with the saying "There's never time to do it right, but there's always time to do it over."? I think it applies here.

Have you tried disabling the "Automatically Drop Models to Build Plate" setting (in General Settings) and then moving the model up off the build plate by 5mm or so?

"...I have a lot many different shaped parts in the build plate..." That would have been good to know. If you have "Generate Support" turned off in Cura you can select that particular part and set the Per Model Setting "Generate Support" to true. That will make the normal support structure you would expect if that part was alone on the build plate. For each of the other parts, you would need to customize the support structures individually. If some parts don't require support, then they would fall under the Global setting. If some did require support then you would have to address them individually and possibly add support blockers here and there. That is part of the design process. There is no "Easy Button" that can anticipate a custom situation. What you can do is insure that those groups of models that you select for a single print job have enough in common that they print easily as a group rather than each needing wildly different settings that are hard to achieve all at once on the build plate.

The last E value before that line is E119.0943 and so that move to E112.5943 is your normal "Retract Distance" and doing a little math it is 6.5mm. That is the normal situation when retraction is enabled in Absolute mode. In your second example the E3768.34114 is probably "Retract Distance" less than the previous E value in that Gcode file. Assuming that your retract distance was 6.5 for that file, that would make the previous E value 3774.84114. This is the Ending Gcode used by a lot of Creality printers. It will work on your Anet. When Cura finishes calculating the Gcode it will add that final retraction...call it 6.5mm. The code below will retract an additional 4mm and so at the end of a print the filament will be 10.5mm back from the nozzle. That would need to be taken care of either by adding purge lines to the StartUp G-Code, or making sure a skirt/brim is long enough to "take up the slack". ;Ending Gcode G91 ;Relative positioning G1 E-2 F2700 ;Retract a bit G1 E-2 Z0.2 F2400 ;Retract and raise Z G1 X5 Y5 F3000 ;Wipe out G1 Z10 ;Raise Z more G90 ;Absolute positioning G1 X0 Y{machine_depth} ;Present print M106 S0 ;Turn-off fan M104 S0 ;Turn-off hotend M140 S0 ;Turn-off bed M220 S100 ;reset feedrate M221 S100 ;reset flowrate M84 X Y E ;Disable all steppers but Z ;End of the End Gcode

I went a slightly different way using two Mesh Modifiers precisely scaled and located, and with both configured as "Print as Support". My 3mf doesn't seem to want to upload (Unknown Server Error -200) so I'll describe. Modifier 1 is under the main overhang and is X12, Y10 Z8 in size. Modifier 2 is under the little box looking area and is X5, Y3 Z8 in size. The second small modifier was required to keep support from forming in that slot.

I will apologize if my comment about the magnifying glass sounded flip. When I started out I struggled with under-extrusion on my Ender 3 Pro. I have a magnifying light (handy for removing stubborn supports) and also a microscope. It was under the microscope that I finally understood what people (including gr5) were talking about. I'm a little confused about what printer you have. The first 3mf file loaded as a "Longer LK1" and now you mentioned a "U20". @gr5 knows his Ultimakers. I am more familiar with the "other" printers. The whole point of course is to get you to a point where - when a print finishes you look at it and KNOW that it's good because you've learned what to look for.

And for 2022 buy yourself a magnifying glass.