GregValiant

You might need to have someone fab up a 1/8" aluminum plate to the length and width you require. You can't just remove the stock build surface and put a glass plate on? How about just sticking a piece of glass on top of the stock surface? Heat transfer might be a tad slower (longer heat up time) but it won't be by a lot.

That model is awful. The maximum "Overhang Support Angle" for a .2 x .4 extrusion is about 63°. 90 - 63 = 27°. The 30° portion (60° overhang angle) of that ramp looking feature might make it, but the 20(70°) and 15(75°) are going to fail. When you print something simple like a calibration cube, how does it turn out? Speaking of calibration cubes - have you calibrated the E-steps on the printer? If you have then did you stop there, or did you do something silly like use a "single wall calibration cube"?

I've got the stock "magnetic" surface sitting under the printer table. I've got a clip/trip dog I made up that attaches to the bottom left "X" trolley wheel mount and hits the Z endstop switch. With the clip off I can use the stock build surface and with the clip on I can use the glass. I much prefer the glass.

I'll throw this one in as well. It adds the Cura settings to the end of the file. It does not make any adjustments to the gcode so is for information only. If you enable "Max/Min Speeds in the Gcode" the info will be added to the end of the gcode and you will get this popup window when you save the file. Unzip it and put "AddCuraSettings.py" in the "scripts" folder within your configuration folder. It will be available in Cura with the rest of the post processors. AddCuraSettings.zip

Every machine is going to be at least a little different. My printer is on and has been sitting all night in a room that is 23°C. The bed temperature reads 21 and the hot end temperature reads 24. The chances are excellent that all three measurement devices are wrong, but they aren't wrong by much. This is just for comparison purposes... I run PLA from 205 to 215. The color does make a difference. Silkies like it hot or the layer adhesion is really bad. I've found that printing silkies at 215 moves the layer adhesion rating up from "Really Bad for everything" to "Not quite acceptable for real stuff". The bed is the Creality glass bed with some sort of coating on it. I keep it clean and run PLA at 50.

That's a weird one and I haven't seen that before. Maybe @Slashee_the_Cow has seen something like that?

I'd call it "intermittent under-extrusion". The bad ones at the top of your print look like extrusion quit completely. That would make it "non-extrusion". A clogged nozzle would do it (my experience is that clogged nozzles don't happen very often). A clog at the bottom of the bowden tube is a definite possibility. The tube rotates in the fitting and the little knife edges work their way into the plastic allowing it to shuffle in and out by a mm or so. That allows a gap to form between the back end of the nozzle and the bottom of the tube. Plastic pulled into the gap makes a little o-ring and the filament doesn't want to feed. Heat creep will also cause blockage in the heat break tube. Check that the main hot end fan is working and isn't full of strings and crud. Is the extruder skipping steps? If the end of the filament isn't stowed properly (in a hole in the side of the reel) then a loop can form and the filament doesn't want to come off the reel. When you pull the filament out is the section that was in the bowden tube straight or accordioned? It looks like it got worse as the retractions increased. If I was a betting man I'd put my money on a hot end clog.

I wrote a little app for Windows. You can control the printer through the USB and monitor the printer responses and send various commands. It's kind of like Pronterface. Select a file from the USB, print it, see what the printer is doing, tune a print, etc. It doesn't print over the USB but rather controls the printer via the USB. If you want to take a look here it is. It's an unsigned app so if you try to install it you will probably need to explain to your anti-virus what you are doing. Unzip the file and run Setup. Greg's SD Print Tool

The hint means that the "Bed Temperature" cannot be set on a "per extruder" basis. If you have a multi-extruder machine all extruders will use the same bed temperature. The "default" temperature is in the material file as 60°. That default can be affected by custom settings in a profile. This is 5.6.0 with "generic PLA" and my tooltip is different than your screenshot. The Bed Temperature setting I have in my custom PLA profile is 50°. That is what would appear in the box when that profile is active. With the "Standard" profile active the bed temperature is 60°. An over-ride in a custom profile will take precedence. Set Cura up to slice a benchy or calibration cube. Use the profiles that are producing that 70° result. Then use the "File | Save Project" command and post the 3mf file here. It might show something. I see the same thing as @DivingDuck From the "generic_pla_175.xml.fdm_material" file it appears that the default is 60°. "<setting key="heated bed temperature">60</setting>"

There is a bug in the One-at-a-Time mode that a project like that might cause to show up. It depends on two things to come together: The last model printed is shorter than others. Particular moves in your Ending Gcode. It looks like that washer at #11 is printed last so you have that condition covered. In your Ending Gcode there is a 50mm Z move at the end of the print, so the bug shouldn't show up. The bug is that instead of the final Z move being at the transit height (that clears all models), the last transit is at 5mm above the last model. If your ending gcode then tells the print head to go to X0 Y0 without that 50mm Z move, then it would go through your screw #10 and screw #8. If you print a lot of One-at-a-Time projects it's something you need to be aware of.

There isn't a lot you can do if they won't talk to each other. USB Printing is a legacy piece of Cura. It isn't really supported anymore and is rarely updated. If it works, it works and if it doesn't, then it doesn't. You may have run into one of the reasons why. There are thousands of different: computer, USB port, driver, and firmware combinations. Trying to get USB printing to work with all of them isn't possible, so no one wants to put the effort into even attempting it. If Elegoo changed suppliers for the USB port on the mainboard, then it might require different drivers on the computer. Check the properties of the computer USB ports and see if a port driver has any configured as a Serial Port. You will probably need the printer connected to check. Sometimes an operating system will make the driver installation for a specific port rather than allowing just any port on the computer to work with the printer. Try plugging the printer in to different USB ports. You might find one that works. Cura can take a while for Cura to locate a port and connect to it. In the Cura Marketplace are two versions of "USB Printing". By default the original version is enabled. Go to the Marketplace and click on the "Gear" icon. Scroll down and disable "USB Printing". Then go to the regular "Plugins" tab and scroll down to "USB Printing NG" and install that one. Quit and restart Cura. Sometimes it takes a several minutes for Cura to poll all the possible ports while it looks for the printer port. Sometimes it just fails.

If you have a multi-extruder printer then there are 6 Extruder options to pick from. "Support Interface Extruder" can be fine tuned to "Support Roof Extruder" and "Support Floor Extruder".

This is a re-do. I added "Unload", "Reload", and "Purge" options. That makes it more "Filament Change" friendly. There are other changes. The obvious one is that I threw out the "By Height" option as it didn't work with Z-hops enabled, or with Adaptive Layers. I added a "Reason for Pause" option (if you are just inserting magnets or nuts then you don't need the purge settings). PauseAtLayer can co-exist with PauseAtHeight and be installed to the same folder. PauseAtLayer.zip There are a couple more settings.

As Slashee surmises, it's most likely an issue with the Z mechanicals, but there is a slim chance you may need to calibrate the Z steps/mm. It is something that only rarely needs to be done though. If you grab the right end of the X beam with two fingers and move it up and down there will be some movement, but it shouldn't be loose.

M109 S[material_print_temperature_layer_0] Cura uses curly brackets for replacement patterns. The "Initial Layer" is indeed layer 0 in the gcode. That line should read: M109 S{material_print_temperature_layer_0} I would suggest a couple of changes so bed leveling happens with the bed hot and the hot end warmed up. Go to "Manage Printers" and then "Machine Settings". Adjust the startup gcode. M82 ;absolute extrusion mode M220 S100 ;Reset Feedrate M221 S100 ;Reset Flowrate M140 S{material_bed_temperature_layer_0} ;start to heat the bed M104 S150 ; warm up the nozzle M190 S{material_bed_temperature_layer_0} ; wait for the bed G28 ;Home M420 S1; Enable mesh leveling G92 E0 ;Reset Extruder G1 Z10.0 F3000 ; 2mm isn't enough...move up more so there is room for oozing under the nozzle M109 S{material_print_temperature_layer_0} ;move this up a line so heating takes place at X0 Y0. G1 X10.1 Y20 Z0.28 F5000.0 ;Move to start position blah...blah...blah Cura adds a retraction of 0.8mm right before the skirt/brim starts. Your startup has a 1.0 retraction in it as well. So when the skirt starts the filament is 1.8mm behind the nozzle, but the prime is only 0.8mm so you are going to print about 30mm with no plastic coming out.

PrusaSlicer uses different "replacement patterns" and square brackets while Cura uses curly brackets to enclose replacement patterns. You need to make a couple of changes because "{first_layer_temperature[0]}" won't get replaced. For Cura it will be: M109 S{material_print_temperature_layer_0} M190 S{material_bed_temperature_layer_0} AHoeben has put together the full list of replacement patterns for Cura HERE. You can do math in the StartUp Gcode starting with Cura 5.6.0. G0 F{speed_travel*60} will convert the Cura "Travel Speed" setting from mm/sec to mm/minute as is used in the gcode file.

Gcode is Gcode. There is no "better" or "worse". It's just a set of commands that tell the 4 axis robot (in this case your 3D printer) where to go and what to do. If your printer (which you neglected to mention or describe) isn't doing something (which you didn't go into) it probably isn't the gcode.

This can be hard to trouble shoot but there are two things that are usually involved. The ability of the filament to stick to the bed, and the bed leveling (the nozzle is too high so the initial layer is too high). (Another thing would be the E-step calibration but you should have done that.) I also level with a piece of paper. I use parchment paper because it's very thin and nothing sticks to it. A store receipt will work as well. You should feel the paper dragging on the bottom of the nozzle when you level. The bed must be clean so wash it with dish detergent, dry it well and put it back on the printer. Wipe it down with 90% Isopropyl Alcohol taking care not to get any fingerprints on the build surface. In the Cura advanced settings under "material" is "Initial Layer Flow" and it has three or four sub-settings. Set them all to 110%. Do a quick test with a cube or something similar. If the material still wants to drag then you might have to go to an "adhesion promoter". I use Aqua-Net Super Hold hairspray for PETG and there are products like Magi-Goo (and others) that can help. One thing I found was that after I had leveled, the print would start and there was the G28 Auto-Home command in the StartUp gcode. It would home all three axis and my Z would end up not quite where it was when I was leveling. The fix was to change the G28 in the StartUp to "G28 X Y". Now I level the bed and start the print but the Z doesn't home again so when the print actually starts everything is where it was during leveling. I still run my Initial Layer Flow a little heavy at 105% though.

I pulled some speed numbers out of a file made with 5.6. File size: 217,167 lines Print speed: 75 Only looking at the speed of extrusions: Instances of speeds over 75: 2,586 Average of the speeds over 75: 97.55 High speed: 155.44 So of that particular file about 1.19% were overspeed, but some were indeed double speed. There were no over-speed lines in the first layer. That likely has something to do with the model geometry. If I get truly, really, absolutely, mind-numbingly, bored then I'll chart the lengths of the extrusions involved. The end of that particular model is a hemisphere so there will be lots of short line segments. Here you can see that the fast lines are the narrow lines. It's certainly compensating, but in my (never humble) opinion, it's a bit much. These are straight shots here so the print head can and will hit 155 in the straightaways. This is "Speed Changes of Extrusions". It only charts the lines were a speed is mentioned, and not the intervening extrusions made at that speed. The chart should really be a lot longer, but the spikes and dips are variations from "75m/sec" which is the flat horizontal line. This is my "Sportfisherman" Benchy

Part of this is a design thing. If you are building the declination angle into each part then you are going to get more odd effects than if you design the entire part flat and then angle it in the assembly. I don't know TinkerCad, but in AutoCad, building the angle in can be done by "lofting". Loft features and helical features are very complex, but usually as smooth as the conversion from CAD to STL can make it. I have to say though - that is a very odd looking slice. These are the same model. One exported from CAD at high resolution and the other at low resolution. They are both made up of facets.

This has been noted in a few bug reports on Github (including my own). I don't think there has been an official response to any of them, but they are there. In 5.6 - dropping the Flow Equalization to 0% fixes the problem. The setting worked differently in 5.4. As I recall it would slow the speed for heavy flow lines (like printing the infill at 2X layer height) but didn't jack the speed up on narrow line widths. That was the change and so it's likely a "design intent" rather than a "something is broken" bug. I don't care for it myself and turning off the equalization completely isn't a good option for me because I do tend to print infill thicker to speed things up.

Another thing would be to bring in a small model (a cube would work) and make it as tall as the first model then set it to E2. That would be another way to get both extruders working. I suppose a post processor could send the nozzle to the middle of the prime tower and just purge some filament. It wouldn't put any plastic down in layers, but the second extruder would get regular exercise.

In regards to cooling I'd say that if you typically print the material with cooling then the temp tower should be with cooling. The fans (and you have serious fans) are going to effect the hot end temperature. It's hard to tell in those images but it appears there may be some under-extrusion going on.

Regarding the under-extrusion, that was probably the loose drive gear on the extruder motor. The "nozzle size" settings in Cura provide some defaults for things like "line width" and "layer height". Those are the settings that are important. You can run them at any value regardless of the nozzle size setting. Everyone needs to start somewhere so yes, they should match but it isn't a show-stopper if the nozzle size in Cura doesn't match the actual installed nozzle. Trying to put down a 1.0 line width out of a 0.2 nozzle can be done if you print at about 1/2mm/sec and really hot.

I've been coming across some oddities in regard to the V400 definition files. There is a bug report on GitHub and the OP posted a project file. The OP's printer is an FLSun V400 and the project file is from Cura 5.6.0. When I tried to open the project file it immediately crashed Cura. Looking at my installation of Cura 5.6.0 I found that there were no nozzle files for the V400. I opened my V400 definition file and compared it to the V400 definition file contained in the project file. My definition file didn't have "variants" listed, but the 3mf definition file did. Looking further, they aren't even by the same author. This is from the definition file contained in the project file: "name": "Flsun V400", "version": 2, "metadata": { "type": "machine", "author": "FLSUN, Joseph Jackson", "manufacturer": "Flsun", "setting_version": 22, "file_formats": "application/x-ufp;text/x-gcode", "visible": true, "has_materials": true, "has_variants": true, "has_machine_quality": true, "preferred_material": "generic_pla", "preferred_quality_type": "normal", "machine_extruder_trains": { "0": "flsun_v400_extruder_0" }, "supports_usb_connection": true, "supports_network_connection": false, "platform": "flsun_v400.stl", Conspicuously absent is the "inherits" line. This is from the definition file in have in my 5.6.0 installation: "version": 2, "name": "Flsun V400", "inherits": "fdmprinter", "metadata": { "visible": true, "author": "FLSUN, Guislain Cyril", "manufacturer": "Flsun", "file_formats": "text/x-gcode", "platform": "flsun_v400.stl", "has_machine_quality": true, "has_materials": true, "machine_extruder_trains": { "0": "flsun_v400_extruder_0" }, "platform_offset": [ No nozzle "variants" in that one. Something seems odd here. There have also been problems with at least one other printer (Longer??) missing files. If a definition doesn't "inherit" fdmprinter.def.json I would imagine there would be big problems. So what Joseph Jackson did was to copy everything he thought he needed from fdmprinter to his V400 definition file. The prject definition is 9517 lines long and the definition file I have is 45 lines long.