GregValiant

In the main Cura window click on your printer name and choose Manage Printers then select Machine Settings. On the left are the basic settings and one of them is Gcode Flavor. Plain old Marlin should do. I'm not home and can't access my printer but in the Ender I think Volumetric is under Filament. I have CRS disease and can't really recall. The printer and Cura need to match or one will be thinking mm³ and the other is thinking plain mm. Usually (if this is the problem) it's the printer that got inadvertently set to volumetric and under-extrusion is the result.

Oh, my bad. I did take the 1.75 for granted.

Hello, You have a complicated Z system and I think you need to visit it. You have dual Z motors. Each is attached to the frame at 3 points. Those 3 points (output shaft, brass nut, top bracket) must be exactly in line or you can get binding. Additionally, that's a big frame and the X beam needs to travel freely without binding or wobbling. It's a juggling act to get them all working together. My Ender is a single lead screw without a top support. It needed 0.3mm of shim behind the Z motor mount to make the lead screw straight up and down. Your top brackets complicate things. I guess what I would do is put a book or something on the bed to support the cross beam, and take out the screws that hold the brass nuts to the cross beam bracket. Take measurements of the distance from the left upright to the top of the lead screw, and from the left upright to the bottom of the lead screw right above the motor. They should be the same. If they aren't, you may need some shims to insure that the lead screw is parallel to the adjacent upright. You will need to do the same thing for the right lead screw. (The left measurement doesn't have to be equal to the right measurement.) Then when you put the brass nuts back in place and put their screws back in, they should fit nicely with no binding. Dry lubricants are recommended for the lead screws. You can get them at an auto-parts store or hardware store. It wouldn't hurt to lube the rods, but if they pick up dirt and dust you will get a binding problem again. Dual lead screws need to be clocked correctly. They need to pick up the X beam at exactly the same time. That can be as simple as loosening the coupler set screws and turning each lead screw to take up any backlash and then re-tightening the set screws.

Double check your Cura Machine Settings and make sure that your Gcode Flavor is NOT "Marlin(Volumetric)". Then check your printer firmware and make sure Volumetric Extrusion is turned off there as well. In my Ender that setting is called "E in mm/3". There are a lot of Flow settings in Cura. If you search for "Flow" you can double check that they are all at 100%. If the Extruder Steps/mm are out-of-calibration then under or over extrusion can result. Since you have tried to increase the flow (from the LCD?) that probably isn't the issue.

Diabolical is the correct word. Tree supports. Everywhere. No Support Interface. XY distance as close as you dare. No Support Z distance. And a .2 nozzle at .12 layer height. And cooling. A lot of cooling. I have never used the "Lift Head" setting but for this one I think 20 second minimum layer time and "Lift Head". I am not at home and so cannot print this to check my theory. I am curious about it...and where we can find the demon who came up with it. Greg of Orvieto

I'm going to vote for the glue solution. You would need to alter the model by slicing it in half edgewise. Then put two 2.2mm diameter holes in the backside of the black part, but not through to the show side. With the part loaded in Cura, make a copy and then mirror the copy. Print. The skull will be raised and the hidden 2.2mm holes would be against the bed. Cut two pieces of filament 5mm long and super-glue them into the 2.2mm holes in one part. Trim them short. Super-glue the two halves together. The filament becomes the locating pins to "clock" the pieces. You can use paper spring-clips as little clamps. If this was an automotive assembly, the locating pins would be non-symmetrically placed. We used to call it dummy-proof. The Japanese believe that nothing can be made proof from a dummy so they call it poka-yoke ("Avoiding Inadvertent Errors"). In any event it would be good if the big holes lined up.

You can load an STL directly with Cura. No intermediary is required. What Torgeir (so indelicately) said that I missed is that Cura uses the X and Y dimensions you have in the Machine Settings to determine the build plate size. When you open an STL in Cura, it is supposed to come in with it's own XY center of geometry at the center point of the build plate, and with the lowest surface resting on the build plate. Some software (Fusion 360?) can sometimes alter an STL file and introduce it's own coordinate system. That can cause Cura to put the model somewhere other than the center point.

Right click on the build plate and pick "Select All Models". In the toolbox on the left of the main Cura window - the top tool is the movement tool. Select it and set the X Y and Z all to zero and then use the tab key to adjust the last change. The model should move to the center of the Cura build plate. Not all STL files are created equal. Some have extraneous crap floating around that causes oddities in a slicer. Torgier's suggestion really should have worked but with the X and Y also being off, maybe that benchy file has an issue.

Line 91904 sets the printer to absolute E and then line 91907 tells the extruder to move to -5. All it can do is what it's told. If it has to move 4000 to get there, then that's what it does. You still might want to add the G92 E0 line in the End-Gcode just before the M84. If you checked and found the Octo End Script empty, and later it had a script, it might add it back in again under certain conditions.

I have no idea. It's under construction and I think they started with an earlier version (maybe 4.6?) and built on top of that. If you save your file using "File | Save Project" it should keep all the settings for you. When you open it in Arachne most should transfer over.

The Arachne version of Cura was pre-released a month or so ago for testing because it's a whole new thing. It uses variable line width so it will fit better into features like your chamfer. Instead of jumping from .4mm wide to .2mm wide it might start at .4, adjust the line width to make a layer that is .3mm wide and then drop to .2 for the finish. It's a bit buggy but you can find it here in one of SanderVG's posts on the main forum page. It may give you the added strength you need. Another alternative might be to consider mixing up some epoxy and painting it on. It would enhance the layer adhesion that seems to be a problem with the super narrow point.

The coating might be as simple as spray paint. It is dependant on the material it has to bond to. Whatever material you decide on will determine the coating used. It would be best to consult with the manufacturer as to what coatings would be compatible with the product. So the dive belt has a pre-existing carrier that requires a specific diameter to fit? A domed end avoids the exterior corner and would be stronger. You might need a cradle to hold them upright when you set them on a table.

I have to work in compatibility mode as this old laptop doesn't support OpenGL 4.1. When I open the 3mf file, Support is not enabled. Enabling support, and leaving the part with the legs down, I don't get that center post. There is nothing above in that orientation and it isn't required. I looked at emare's image and rotated the part 180 (a lot less wasted material that way). With the legs in the air, that inside support is required for the roof of the counterbore. Here it is as the 3mf file shows. You can see to the bottom of the front hole and no support was generated. Given that in mariuscapitanu's original 3mf file opens with Supports off, maybe non of his settings were included and I ended up using whatever was set in my install. Greg_Legs UP_part3_model_r_0(1)(1).3mf Greg_Legs down_part3_model_r_0(1)(1).3mf

That support is there to hold up the flat roof of the counterbore. Since it comes up from the build plate "Touching Buildplate" won't turn it off. I did get a support blocker to work. It has to cover the bottom of the bolt hole (which is a roof in the inverted print orientation). The reason it is so skinny is the X/Y distance is 1.0. Setting the X/Y distance to 0.4 you can see that it is supporting the roof. In the image below I have a support blocker on the left rear leg, and X/Y distance is .4, and I changed the support type to Concentric so you could see it better. (Cura 4.8). This is with Normal supports. Tree supports are similar. I am unable to duplicate the unnecessary supports that @emare shows. I assume it is also a setting...but then I lost interest.

The problem may also be in the transition between the single line width for the sharp end, and the point where it becomes 2 line widths. I wonder if slicing with the Arachne version would be a better choice? It is variable line width and might result in the print being closer to the model as it moves up the chamfer. How sharp do you really need the end to be? You may be able to live with it just not printing the problem layers. I printed some cookie cutters for Christmas and used .8 wall and a .4 nozzle all the way up the side walls. They worked fine.

Using the LCD Auto-Home the print head. Move the nozzle 5mm in from the left edge of the build surface and 5mm in from the front of the build surface. With the Z at 0 select "Set Home Offsets" on the LCD. Select "Save Settings".

No. The G28 sends the print head to the end stop switches. M206 sets the home offsets.

Not in the gcode. It's part of setting up the printer. The LCD has an Auto-Home command and a Set Home Offsets command. That's what I was talking about using. You really need to do that. It insures that Cura and your printer are on the same page. It has nothing to do with the start-up gcode. The purge line is fine to use. Regarding the skirt, the default in Cura is 10mm from the print. If you change the skirt distance to 2 you can fit larger models in.

These are just some random thoughts... The typical printing materials are fond of water. I'm guessing that would be a downside so if you can get something with a low affinity for water, that would be a prime consideration. It may be why Delrin was picked over something like Nylon. A prototype for initial pressure testing could be made from something cheaper(?) Among other things, "Layer Adhesion" will play a part in water-tightness. Maybe a coating over the print? I would make the bottom of the vessel a dome. The print will be weaker than any traditional solid part. A domed bottom would enhance it's strength in at least that area. Taking that further, I'd think about an ovoid as well. Egg shapes bear up well to uniform external pressure. The inside could still be cylindrical. Put the battery in and fill it with dielectric oil? I think any infilled volume would still end up near 100% infill.

The printer doesn't really need to be level to the world. It just needs to rest on a solid, flat surface. You don't want the workbench/tabletop moving in time to the printer. If it's dancing, it ain't good. For your viewing pleasure - That star of stage and screen - Moderator @gr5 has made a video on leveling and first layer adhesion. Here he is starring as Mr. Hands in THE_VIDEO. It's a long one but it covers a lot of material. I'm more of a reader so I'll stick you with the Marlin Gcode list. You certainly don't need to memorize it, but some codes (G28, G92, G1, G0, M104, M106, etc.) you will see all the time and having at least a passing knowledge of what they do is a good thing. One of the functions of the printer processor is to calculate how many "steps" to send to each motor to make it move. The steps/mm need to be calibrated so that (for example) if you tell the printer to move the "X" 100mm it does indeed go 100mm. If the X and/or Y aren't calibrated correctly, you get oval holes. If the "Z" isn't calibrated correctly you get parts that end up the wrong height. If the "E" isn't calibrated correctly you get over or under extrusion. Calibrating the steppers (for most printers) is the next step after insuring that the frame is square and level.

You can use Horizontal Hole Expansion to make the bearing ID (and the through hole) larger. It acts on the radius so if the hole is .4mm too small, set HHE to .2. Be careful when using HHE as it works on anything that is a hole (not necessarily a round feature- just a hole). Regarding the large retraction: It isn't in the Gcode. The two files end with identical moves (expected since they are defined in your End-Gcode). The only real difference is the Z height although in the large roller there are combing moves at the end before the final extrusion line. The final move in the main body of both files is a 5mm retraction as defined in your Cura Travel settings. At that point, the End-Gcode comes in. There is a switch to relative mode and an additional 5mm retraction followed by a 2mm retraction. Finally, retraction is set back to absolute mode and the heater shuts off. At the end of both files, the filament ends up 12mm back from the nozzle. The G91 line in your End-Gcode is supposed to set all the steppers to relative mode. What if that is sometimes missed in the printer? You would get a really long retraction in response to the G1 E-5 line. I don't know why that would happen. Adding a couple of lines to the End-Gcode may prevent it. M140 S0 M107 G92 E0 ;Reset the Extruder position G91 ;Relative positioning M83 ;Relative Extrusion Setting the extruder back to 0, and making Relative Extrusion explicit should keep the printer from doing that ridiculous retraction.

This is from your Gcode file. M140 S60 M105 M190 S60 M104 S200 M105 M109 S200 M82 ;absolute extrusion mode G21 ;metric values G90 ;absolute positioning M82 ;set extruder to absolute mode M107 ;start with the fan off G28 X0 Y0 ;move X/Y to min endstops G28 Z0 ;move to min endstop With the bed and hot end pre-heated, the Gcode starts with the bed heating. The machine waits for the bed to heat, then the extruder heats, and then the machine waits for that to finish. This is normal routine. I always pre-heat both the bed and nozzle. If your machine isn't getting to the G28 Auto-Home lines, and the hot end temp is falling, it's probably hanging on the M190 line. Some other machines had that problem but they were printers without heated beds (so they would wait forever). Since your printer has a heated bed then it shouldn't hang there. So open the Gcode file in Notepad and put a semi-colon in front of the M190 S60 line. That will turn it into a comment instead of a command. Print the file and see if it gets past that and heats the hot end and continues to homing. I don't know that this will matter, but while you are in the start-gcode, there are a few lines where the first character is a space. Remove the spaces so that the first character is a real character.

You've probably noticed there isn't a big retraction there. 5, 5, 2 for a total of 12mm. The machine will do what it's told. If there is a file with the E at say 1000 and then there is no "relative" command (G91 or M83) and the Gcode says "G1 E-5" it's going to back up from 1000 to -5 for a total retraction of 1005. If there IS a relative extrusion command, then the same line tells the printer to back up 5 from wherever it happens to be. In the example that would be from 1000 to 995. Big difference. Are you using a post-processing plugin in Cura? Is there a closing statement or code that Octoprint runs?

Select the part. Select the movement tool from the left toolbar and set the "Z" to zero. After scaling, or during some other operations, the part will seem to hover in the air.

If you were making parts using a conventional machining method, screw holes would have clearance. There would be a "body" drill size and a "tap" drill size. You would uses dowels or maybe flat head screws to locate the piece that had the body sized holes. You're trapping a hex shape there. If the nut or screw is positively located by the hex shape, then you are good on that side. Positively locating the other side will require some thought. The previews that Cura shows are pretty good, but I always consider them a cartoon. The Gcode instructions and the printer itself (and it's calibration) will determine if the final shape is round or out-of-round. Horizontal holes are really hard to get round. The bottom and the top are going to have flats. It's the nature of the process.