GregValiant

Before every print with isopropyl alcohol. It takes about 5 seconds and is cheap insurance. If I'm printing PETG it then gets a light coat of AquaNet Super Hold hairspray after cleaning with IPA. It's what works for me.

The normal X=0, Y=0 is the left from corner. Delta printers use "Origin at Center", but essentially no other printers use it, so make sure it's turned off in the Machine Settings in Cura. You cannot just replace the negative signs in a gcode file to fix it. Consider that if an extrusion went from X-100 to X+100 and you removed the negative sign, instead of an extrusion 200mm long it would be 0mm long. You didn't mention the printer, but if you absolutely gotta haveta print that particular gcode file you can change the Home Offsets by adding a line to the beginning of the gcode file: M206 X115 Y115 Where the "115"'s are 1/2 the X and 1/2 the Y of the build plate size. You would also need to add a line to the end of the gcode - M206 X(original X home offset) and Y(original Y home offset) to reset the numbers or it might be off for the next print (powering the printer off and then on will reset it also).

"...Ender 3 V2 Pause button? Although could that interruption have any possible side effects?" Using the Pause function on the Ender LCD may shut down the heaters (it does on my 3 Pro) and the default "Disarm Timeout" for the steppers is 120 seconds. If you aren't really quick, it takes longer than two minutes to re-heat and the steppers lose position, and at that point the print is scrap. So using the Pause function needs to be practiced so you have some idea of the side effects and limitations. Adding an M84 S1800 to your start gcode will give you 1/2 hour before the steppers time out, but the heaters shutting off is in the firmware routine that the Pause button calls. (At the end of a print - when the steppers get disabled the disarm timeout resets to 2 minutes.) If you are forced to Auto-Home an Ender during a print, there will likely be a layer shift of maybe .5mm because of position repeatability errors in the end stop switches. I usually run my skirt at 3 loops and if there are issues with adhesion of the skirt (like if some dummy forgot to clean the build surface) then I abort. In my case, the problem is almost always lack of preparation of the build surface which isn't going to get better by itself.

"...so that one Gcode file works for any printer." Good luck with that one. I guess I can understand why you wouldn't want to have to do 15 slices of a model for 15 different printers just because you don't know which printer will be available to use for the job. I'm not a dual extruder guy but I've spent some time fooling with virtual multi-extruder machines in Cura. If the one printer has a two-into-one hot end that shares a heater, then it likely won't work as a conventional dual extruder machine. I guess there would be conditions and settings combinations where it would work, and there would be others where the "shared heater" setting would cause problems ("standby temp" comes to mind). I would also anticipate that those gcode files would be troublesome for a single extruder printer. In addition, extruders can have their own custom start and end gcodes as well. In "Printer Settings" (a plugin that must be installed in the Marketplace) there is a setting for "Always write active tool". Maybe you can play with that and see if it helps. Another thing you could try would be to disable extruder "T1" when you generate a gcode file for a single extruder machine. "Ambidextrous means it won't work either way." - Me "Universal means you'll need a Harley tool and a cutting torch." - Me Too

These stupid machines can drive ya nuts, but when something gets figured out and the thing starts working right again it's a beautiful thing. Congrats.

In the "Data" tab in Excel there is a section for "Get External Data". One of the buttons there is "From Text". Using that button forces the "Text Import Wizard" to come up and the delimiter options are available for any format of text file. Simply opening a CSV file with the normal Excel "File | Open" function assumes (ahem) that it is comma delimited. Once gain Microsoft has made simple things more difficult.

Hi @gr5. I guess I was being round-a-bout. I couldn't duplicate the error in either the first file posted, or in the one I had repaired. I'm starting to think it might be his Cura installation. He might need a re-install. That's been known to happen. I haven't seen many complaints regarding Linux systems though (unlike the MAC's running BigSur).

I usually print the infill at [0,90] so it isn't parallel to the top/bottom. I've switched the top/bottom around sometimes as well with no problems. Load a model and use File | Save Project and post the 3mf file here.

MAC systems have problems with Cura. Some video sub-systems have trouble with Cura. Cura is designed to work with Mac's, Windows, and Linux. There is an old saying that says "Ambidextrous means it won't work either way" and another that says "Universal means you'll need a big hammer and a cutting torch". The extraneous surfaces you show are consistent with errors in a model file. IdeaMaker is another slicing program. It returned that there were 14 disconnected faces. NetFabb is an AutoDesk site designed expressly to fix STL files. It returned a file that was almost 3 times as large as the one submitted. There was no explanation but I view the size change as significant. I used the your 3mf file and it did have your settings in it. I then changed some settings and re-sliced. Then I switched to my printer and my main profile. I sliced, changed, sliced, trying to get the extra surfaces to appear. What broke? Why did it break? What needs to be done to keep it from happening again? I'm a retired forensic engineer. This is what I do. I hang around here because it allows me to keep my hand in. So I asked - What operating system are you using? It goes under my heading of "Why did it break?". The answer may or may not provide insight.

What computer operating system are you using?

When there are errors in a model any slicer will get "twitchy" or "flaky" or "stupid" or something besides "perfect". The resolution that the STL was created with has an effect. Sometimes just rotating a model will make a difference in how errors show up in a slice. Trying to relate a fix in Cura to a model problem just isn't doable. It does a fair job of finding some sorts of errors, but in the case of your model, It wasn't until the 3rd repair utility that the errors were actually found and fixed. There have been some "supposed" model errors that were simply generated in the preview because of issues with compatibility between a graphics card and the computer processor and the model was actually OK. So I think in the end that notifying a user that the model has problems is the best way to go. "Error Descrimination" could be tweaked, but making changes in Cura so poorly constructed 3d models could be sliced would require the software to GUESS at what the model geometry really is. In my experience that is never a good thing. We don't have a HAL9000 and that is just as well.

#1. Cura by default provides no purge lines at all. The purge lines come from the printer definition file that was developed by a third party at the behest of the printer manufacturer (a small percentage may have been written by members of the Cura community). Either way, the definition files were then submitted to Ultimaker for inclusion in Cura. In the case of Creality printers, "Trouch.Com" was the author of the printer definition files for all models of the Creality printers. Ultimaker includes them (thank you) but it would be silly to expect Ultimaker to buy one of every model printer on the planet so they could check the machine definitions. It would be just as silly to try to support a third party printer with a fourth part hot end that was installed by a fifth party. BUT, there are ways. You could just put semi-colons in front of the purge lines. The printer would ignore them and the skirt or brim would be your purge lines. You could add a second printer identical to the one you have but with start Gcode configured for the big nozzle. One of the lines from my Creality start gcode is: G1 X0.1 Y200 Z0.3 E15 That E value of 15 is not a calculation, but rather just a number somebody pulled out of their... ear. If calculated it would be 9. I assume the heavy flow is because it is only a purge line whose only purpose is to get the plastic flowing. Going to a .8 nozzle at .6 layer height and an extrusion 180mm long using 1.75 filament would just require: G1 X0.1 Y200 Z{layer_height_0} E36 In this case I did calculate the E as (extrusion_length / ((area_of_filament_cross_section) / (layer_height * line_width)). The "layer_height_0" in curly brackets gets replaced with the real number when Cura generates the gcode. Having the second printer configured in Cura is the easiest thing to do. Pick the printer, pick your "0.8 Nozzle" settings profile and you're good to go.

It's fine. If you had two Ender 3's you would have to name one of them differently anyway. You can change the name under "Manage Printers". The gcode isn't affected. It's possible that the printer might take offense if you call it by the wrong name. I know mine hates it when I call it "you stupid #@$%@ machine!".

I think they look at it. I don't think they understand what they're looking at. Then they show up here.

It's good to have that explanation @kmanstudios. From the engineering side: This is a horizontal pocket for a hex nut. "Make Overhangs Printable" is turned off. This is the same pocket with "Make Overhangs Printable" turned on: It does indeed make the overhang printable without support. On the other hand, the nut won't fit in the pocket and the screw will no longer fit through the hole. I don't see a bug here since it definitely made the overhang printable. As @nallath notes (and @gr5 has also) it does create a lot of confusion. There was so much confusion that I had suggested the tooltip be changed to "Do Not Touch" but after the explanation I'll go with "Do Not Touch Unless You Know What You're Doing".

That I understand (relative vs absolute). The E is always in sync no matter where in a file you start a print from.

Yes I do. In fact I'll do @tdbinns two better. I'm attaching a zip file containing 3 extruder files and and an altered Creality Base machine definition file. The end result will be that you could define a 4 extruder Creality printer. The three extruder files are: "creality_base_extruder_1.def.json" "creality_base_extruder_2.def.json" "creality_base_extruder_3.def.json" copy them into "C:\Program Files\Ultimaker Cura X.X.X\resources\extruders" The "creality_base_extruder_0.json" file will already be in the folder. Go to "C:\Program Files\Ultimaker Cura X.X.X\resources\definitions" and make a back-up copy of your current "creality_base.def.json" file. Then copy the new base definition file into the folder. You will be able to add additional extruders to any Creality printer. Your Ender 5 definition file doesn't need to be changed as the information comes to it with the Creality_Base Definition file. Like being all dressed up with nowhere to go...I prepared for it and then decided I'd never need a second extruder. Multi-Extruder files.zip

Well @herzla, I cut my teeth on analog computers. Then it was punch cards and an IBM 360 (1000mm diameter memory discs stacked 5 high and each disc held a whopping 720kb!!!). 3D printing is like owning a boat. You don't get it right until you spend enough money on it. I don't trust my Chinese printer. I probably have as many hours troubleshooting as I do printing.

I couldn't get down to .01 Here is .02 with the un-repaired model. At 18 days to print I think I could cut it out of a piece of granite faster.

I opened the original file in IdeaMaker. It tells me that there are 14 non-manifold edges. So it isn't watertight and Cura didn't issue a warning. I don't know what the difference is between Cura and Prusaslicer in this regard. I suppose it's possible that Prusaslicer is seeing the errors and correcting them and then it moves on to slice. I sliced it in IdeaMaker without repairing the model and the slice looked OK. Adaptive layers is good when you are slicing something that has a ball or arch shape. On things that are mostly planer it can cause odd effects. That's a reason it is in the experimental section.

Only God can make a circle. The rest of us have to use 2πr and so there will always be facets even with π calculated to 31 TRILLION decimal places.

Once again I can't duplicate that problem. Going back to your first image it does have the look of a model problem though. Unfortunately the repair utility doesn't tell me what problem was encountered. Since the "fixed" model doesn't have the problem I think you should be good to print. I still wonder what caused the file to nearly triple in size. Service.Netfabb.Com is an AutoDesk site. You need to create a free account but it's a pretty good repair utility.

This sounds familiar. I think it was on this forum and someone was discussing a software fix. I recall it involved anticipating sympathetic frequencies and avoiding movement that generated those frequencies in order to keep a printer from dancing to the beat. A search around here might turn something up. As for myself, all I know about sinusoid problems is to keep a box of tissues handy.

@Labern - is there any chance that you can provide @John2021 with the name or contact information of the author of the script?

The bed looks good. The belt appears to be adjusted correctly. The Kachunk seems to be the nozzle hitting a blob someplace. As I recall the layout of those parts a travel move shouldn't be hitting anything, but it can happen. Enabling Z-hops at 1mm is the easy fix but can come with a downside regarding the final finish of a print. As an aside, I wrote a post-processor for myself that goes through a gcode file and gets rid of Z-hops (because @gr5 here kept insisting they are a bad idea). I just leave the ones that are in the layers where I know they are needed. This also might relate to the catching of the X. The periodic catching on the X may be a flat spot on a wheel. I notice that it occurs when the mark on the left wheel in the video is about straight up every time it catches. What we can't see is the bottom wheel and it's condition. I vote that you wipe the dust and crud off the wheels and clean the tracks in the X-beam. Then loosen the bottom wheel and adjust the cam (using the large hex). When the wheels are adjusted correctly you should just be able to rotate them with your fingers. When I received my Ender 3 Pro the Y wheels were really tight. There was at least one flat spot since it had sat for a long time in warehouses prior to me getting it. I adjusted them and after a while the flats went away (or rebounded back). So now they are gone. The 3 Pro is supposed to have superior wheels compared to the regular Ender 3. That could just be more BS from Creality. The wheels do develop a static charge and pick up dust that needs to be wiped away once in a while.