GregValiant

I don't get it either, but it isn't hard to do. I think. Maybe. Let's assume a layer height of 0.2mm. Using a cutting mesh for just the top layer you can set the Wall Line Count = 0 and the Extra Skin Wall Count = 0. That will cause the top layer skin to go to the edges of the model with no walls. In the picture below the part is 100 x 100 x 25. The mesh is 100 x 100 x 0.2 and it's bottom is located at Z = 24.8. This means no walls (and raggedy edges) around the top of the part. Changing the Top/Bottom Line Directions to [0,90] helps a bit as seen in the second image. It will still be messy on 2 sides.

If the files weren't recognized then maybe one of the big guns (@tinkergnome or @gr5) can chime in tomorrow. So Z-steps aren't the problem (that was a long shot anyway). It's back to the problem being with Cura as the preview indicates. The dimension shows an out-of-round of .007" or about 0.2mm. Because the layer height is .2mm there is going to be some error as the hole is 6.35 diameter which isn't divisible by 0.2. I've noticed that Cura doesn't like to go over a Z dimension (it would be outside of the part) and so it will short a Z dimension. A vertical feature of 6.35 would typically be 6.2 (.244) because the next step is to 6.4. Some error can also come in dependent on where the horizontal centerline of the hole is. Cura doesn't know where the centerline is of course, but it does effect where the solid portion of the hole is in relation to where a layer line is. More fudging might have to be done there in order to keep the slicing within the solid portion of the model both above and below the centerline. The oddest thing of all this is that when gr5 or I slice your test model it looks fine. When you slice it there are slots instead of holes. Have you tried laying the part on it's side to see if the slots remain horizontal?

In Cura go to Extensions | Post Processing | Modify Gcode and then Select Script. There are two that apply: Display Filename and Display Progress. They both send information to the comment line on the LCD so they really can't be used together as the second one would always over-write the first one.

How about the notorious "MAKE OVERHANG PRINTABLE".

Regarding adding your printer to 4.8 - @gr5 or @nallath will know better. I would think you just need to copy the Monoprice printer definition files and extruder definition files from 4.3 to the corresponding folders in 4.8. Look for Monoprice files in Program Files\Ultimaker Cura 4.3\resources\definitions" and in "...\resources\extruders". There will be at least one Printer Definition file (sometimes there is also a "base" file). There will be an Extruder Definition file for each extruder on your printer. In the case of my Ender there is "creality_base.def.json" and "creality_ender3pro.def.json" and in the extruder folder there is "creality_base_extruder_0.def.json". I would need to copy all three of those files to the correct 4.8 folders and then restart Cura and install the printer. I mentioned checking the overall height because the Z steps/mm of the printer could scale a part down in the Z. But if the problem appears in the Cura Preview then the Z steps aren't likely to be the problem. The print looks too good to be a mechanical problem with the Z. That usually manifests itself as variable layer heights or banding.

I checked you Test Block again. It looks good with the Horizontal Expansion at 0. Changing the HE to -1 does make the holes into slots and the top of the triangle is flat. When you measure the height of the physical print - is it correct?

It can be scaled, moved, etc. with the tools on the left toolbar. Under "scale" de-select the "uniform scaling" option and you can make it whatever size rectangular mesh you like either as a percentage, or using absolute numbers.

I have a Win7 desktop that I use for older software. I installed Cura 2.3 and then came across the SmartAvionics version (of 4.6?) that he ported to 32 bit. You can go HERE on Github and scroll down to the download link. It works alright. The user interface is also from 4.6. The screen fonts are hard to read. All the recent settings are there. If I switch back and forth between printers it will crash once in a while (but so does 4.8). The fella that released it used to hang around here but hasn't dropped in for a while. If you have questions about the version you can probably check with him on Github.

A Nautiphone. Kind of like a Sousaphone only different. Thanks for posting. A Modix 120x. I was wondering what you were going to print that on.

If you would use the "File | Save Project" and post the 3mf file here it will have that model and all your settings. In 4.8 with wall line count = 1 extra infill wall count =3 I get this... Is that a hollow model with ribs you designed in, or a solid model with infill? If you designed the ribs in then there is no infill required, so no infill walls and what you see on the bottom are your Extra Skin Wall Count = 4.

So I'm driving across Texas on a lovely day and I stop for gas. It happens to be a full service station and the fella comes out to pump the gas. I've been staring at the same scenery for 5 or 6 hours and I mentioned "Wow, is it ever flat here." to which he replied: 'Yep. If you stare in any direction long enough you'll see the back of your own head." I like that one. Science in the middle of nowhere.

Cura adds the Max movement to the beginning of a gcode file. ;MINX:74.235 ;MINY:95.097 ;MINZ:0.2 ;MAXX:173.368 ;MAXY:161.003 ;MAXZ:26 You can see by the numbers that there isn't any gross movement, and nothing moves beyond your build plate volume. The Gcode looks good. An on-line analyzer showed the speeds to be normal with a high of 150mm/sec (your travel speed). I read the Gcode into AutoCad and it looked good. The Gcode commands heat the hot end and bed, wait for them to hit the set temps, and then Auto-Homes before printing the purge lines. That is normal Ender 3 and 3Pro behavior. Slamming into the positive end stop is not good and isn't in the gcode. My Ender3Pro with the 1.1.5 board hates SD cards over 32gb and long file names. The problem with long names is they don't display so I can't pick them to print.

PI has been taken to a 31.4 trillion decimal places with no end in sight. For us in 3D printing, that means there will always be steps and circles will always have facets.

It looks like apples and oranges to me. The 4.8 image appears to have Wall Line Count = 2 and Extra Infill Wall Count = 2, and Alternate Extra Wall = False. The Arachne image appears to have Wall Line Count = 1, Extra Infill Wall Count = 0, and Alternate Extra Wall = True (There is a possibility that Alternate Extra Wall = False and that the Infill Overlap Percentage is very high). This ends up with a Single Wall everywhere: Wall Line Count = 1 Extra Infill Wall Count = 0 Extra Skin Wall Count = 0 Alternate Extra Wall = False This is a Single Wall with a Double Wall where there is infill: Wall Line Count = 1 Extra Infill Wall Count = 1 Extra Skin Wall Count = 0 Alternate Extra Wall = False This is Double Wall everywhere: Wall Line Count = 2 Extra Infill Wall Count = 0 Extra Skin Wall Count = 0 Alternate Extra Wall = False This alternates between single and double wall (and in the Arachne image is either the setup used, OR the Infill Overlap is nearly the Line Width). Wall Line Count = 1 Extra Infill Wall Count = 0 Extra Skin Wall Count = 0 Alternate Extra Wall = True Setting the Wall Line Count = 1 and the Extra Infill Wall Count = 3 results in 4 walls. Setting the Wall Line Count = 2 and the Extra Infill Wall Count = 2 also results in 4 walls (and 1 of those appears to be the setup used in the 4.8 image). The setting "Connect Infill Lines" will effectively add partial walls where the line connections are made. "I want to set all layer height is 0.2mm, only 1 outer wall is 0.1mm" There is no setting to have the Outer Wall Layer Height different than the Layer Height. You can have a different "Infill Layer Height". Setting the Infill Layer Height to exactly 2 times the Layer Height (0.4 in this case) means that the infill would go down every other layer and saves time. To my knowledge (someone from the Cura team may know better) 4.8 and Arachne are the same for the settings mentioned above. FDM is just not a fast process.

If it was an injection molded part then your design would work no problem. I've found that functional parts need to be designed with FDM in mind because the strength isn't good when layers are in tension. I've had to revise much of how I think about designing things since I started with the printer. It's been an interesting journey. For something simple like a phone holder for the wife I had to use wrap-around gussets. It's in a hot car and wanted to deform without them.

Ah-ha. Thank you AHoeben. That'll work.

If you would do a "File | Save Project" and post the 3mf file here it will have the model and all your settings in it. "I just put masking tape on my extruder and z all-thread rod on my ender 3 pro printing from SD card. " My printer is an Ender 3 Pro. I don't understand what you did there or why you would need to. Speed can slow down if Cura sees that you will miss the "Minimum Layer Time". It provides more time for a layer to cool before putting more hot plastic on top. Small sections need the additional time or they will have a melted look. Features like spires need special handling. Regarding z-hops - Things like "retraction minimum travel" and "max comb distance with no retract" have an effect. There are a lot of retractions and z-hops in that file. Within layer 385 this happens: G1 X142.86 Y71.569 E3126.44815 G1 F2400 E3119.94815 G0 F10800 X142.834 Y71.32 G0 X142.786 Y67.3 G0 X142.653 Y66.644 G0 X142.327 Y66.112 G0 X142.267 Y66.359 G1 F2400 E3126.44815 That is a retraction, some combing moves, then a prime. There is no z-hop. So something in the settings (or inside Cura) is prohibiting a z-hop there and probably in areas that are similar. I would think it's because the combing moves are within infill or along a wall and so Cura figures no z-hop is required, but without a project file and your settings, it's just guess work.

From HERE? It worked fine for me a minute ago.

If I might poke my nose in. @mark-o-solo In the file you did save - the models are a "Group" and after selecting them you can right-click on the model and choose the "UnGroup Models" command at the bottom of the menu. That will separate the mesh modifiers from the model and make them all selectable again. That is a big model.

I've never heard of one that can do that. According to the JGMaker website, your printer has Marlin 1.1.9 firmware and my Ender runs Marlin 1.1.8 which is pretty close. The LCD screen on the website is identical to the one on my printer. It only has the bottom line for messages. I use a plugin which sends the current layer number and the estimated time to finish to the LCD. Another Cura plugin can send the file name to the LCD. The bottom line of the LCD is only 22 characters long so it can't hold a lot of information. The command used is M117. If you will post one of the Gcode files that has that feature somebody will take a look and see if Cura can do it. Since the settings aren't part of any commands in a Gcode file I don't think this is possible. Some of the information regarding settings is present at the end of a Gcode file but since they are there as "comments" they don't get acted on. By default the LCD does display some current printer settings (feedrate %, hot end temp, bed temp, fan speed %, XYZ location, print time and print %). But they aren't settings that were used in Cura to set the slice up. Rather they are what specific lines in the gcode have told the printer, or what the printer over-rides are if adjustments were made in the "Tune" menu.

When you say "recipe" what do you mean?

Dumb me. Here I was thinking that the "accept" button for a EULA should be at the top because NOBODY (even the attorney who wrote it) ever reads the Extremely Useless License Agreement.

The (-.5) Initial Layer Horizontal Expansion was too much for those thin cross-sections. Setting it to "0" makes everything OK. Related but not the problem - the Initial Layer Height of .35 is real tall for a .4 nozzle and if the first layer gap between the nozzle and bed is short by a bit it makes elephant foot worse because you are pushing a lot of plastic. Backing that down to .20 or .24 may help with that. With nothing to do while waiting for the sun to come up so I can go fishing (and do nothing), here are other thoughts... I don't know if you have the model but in the black highlighted area, the vertical tubes aren't connected to the back wall. Any weight in them will cause stress along the bottom corner where the back wall meets the bottom honeycomb. I don't know if that is necessary to the part but the joining I've shown would be stronger (even if it's just the tube on the very end. FDM parts just aren't as strong as "real" parts so they often need additional features to buttress them. All the weight is going to hang off the top corners so those sharp inside 90° corners are high stress points. With your settings, here is layer 624. And here is layer 625. You can see that the "top" is connected by very little material and counts on layer adhesion for strength. Not good. By adding some plastic at the top corners (either an inside radius/fillet like in the black highlight, or outside like in the red highlight) the durability would be increased. This print is going to take the better part of a day to complete and it would be better if it held up for a while. If it fails, it instantly becomes a "Sink Dis-Organizer".

Since Torgeir did the work with Arachne I went with 4.8. I achieved the same results as Torgeir. The first layer looked good. The model appears to be sound with no errors. I started playing with settings trying to get the first layer to disappear but I wasn't able to hit on a combination. If you still have trouble do a "File | Save Project" and post the 3mf file here. It will contain the model and all your settings. Maybe somebody can see a conflict.

It was easier to find in 4.7. If it isn't checked you get what you got - extruders shut off when they won't be used again. When it is checked you'll get what you want - the extruder heater stays on until the end.