GregValiant

@itsMrJimbo at this time the "replacement patterns" in the StartUp and Ending gcodes are only replacements. There is no math or logic performed by Cura. In your case the sequence "(layer < 2 ? 0 : 15 + 45.0 * (layer - 2) / 297)" within the curly brackets isn't recognized as a valid Replacement Pattern and so it is passed on verbatim to the gcode. What you are trying to do I think can be done in PrusaSlicer. Cura does not (yet) have this capability.

@MariMakes are there plans to include math functions and if statements in StartUp gcode?

Perfect. Another problem solved. I've found boat hulls to be not-so-bad. Airplanes are much fussier about weight and some of the wing designs are really tough to get to print correctly.

Hi guys. @DBMandrake It would be a lot easier if you had just included a project file. From the WeedoX40 definition file: ;(**** start.gcode for X40 DUAL****) M104 S150 M203 Z15 G28 ; Home extruder G29 M107 ; Turn off fan G90 ; Absolute positioning M82 ; Extruder in absolute mode G1 X-47 F3000 T1 S M109 S{material_print_temperature_layer_0} T1 G92 E0 G1 E40 F300 G92 E0 T0 S M109 S{material_print_temperature_layer_0} T0 G92 E0 G1 E40 F300 G92 E0 M203 Z2 There are a couple of things. The Weedo base definition file states: "material_bed_temp_wait": "default_value": false "material_print_temp_wait": "default_value": false The "print temp wait" doesn't matter since you have M109 lines in the StartUp. The "bed temp wait" is a problem because Cura will not be adding an M190 line before the startup and so you are leveling with a cold bed. You can over-ride those if you load the Printer Settings plugin from the MarketPlace. You could also add a bed temp line to the StartUp like "M190 S{material_bed_temperature_layer_0}" prior to the G28 line. In the StartUp gcode are these lines G1 X-47 F3000 T1 S T0 S Within the definition file it specifically states that "Origin at Center" is false but that G1 line is telling the printer to move to a negative location X-47. That would seem to be a contradiction. Since it's a dual extruder maybe it can get there. The T1 S line and T0 S line have the S parameter, but there is no number. MarlinFW does not show any parameters for a tool change line. Maybe your firmware makes something of the "S"? There is no mention of Bed Temperature in the stock Startup Gcode. Cura should be adding an M140 line before the StartUp. You need to check a Gcode file to make sure that is happening. If it is, then your StartUp should work (other than the "cold bed" thing). The M203 lines set the max feed rates and that ending M203 Z2 is limiting your Z axis to 2mm/sec. You need to decide if that is appropriate. In the definition file that Max Z Feed Rate is 5. The ending gcode has an error and it needs to be fixed locally or in the X40 definition file. It's missing a semi-colon right at the beginning so the opening line "(*********end X40 End..." is being passed to the printer as a command instead of being ignored as a comment. It needs a semi-colon added. I've added a double below since it's hard to see otherwise. "machine_end_gcode": { "default_value": ";;(*********end X40 End Other than possibly leveling with a cold bed I don't see any real issues there. You will need to check the X-47 move to make sure it's appropriate and whether having the "S" parameters in the tool change lines is proper syntax for your printer.

When you say "Connect" do you mean over the USB port?

At this point the cross-section of the model is only 0.55 thick. You can squeeze a .4 nozzle through there twice but a .8 won't make it. So there can't be a "continuous" loop around the outside at this height (about 15mm). This happens at 6 places around the periphery. One you get up higher then the walls separate and it's all good again. But those necked down areas present a problem. The problem was solved in the 4.x versions by cutting off the loop and simply not printing those areas (the "hole in the bottom" problem is the best example of this). 5.x tries to work it into the toolpath but it can't be done and you get those long extrusions that criss-cross the print and make a mess. Changing the Outer Wall Inset to -.2 adds another .4mm to the .55 and so Cura can then calculate getting the nozzle through there twice without lifting. And then there is the "hole in the bottom" problem when using spiralize.

I forgot to hit the submit button... Thanks for the project file. I moved the model away from 0,0,0 on the build plate and the problem went away. On the Github site is bug report #13353 that describes this behavior. I'll go ahead and link this post to that bug report.

Spiralize was changed at some point. the 4.x versions of Cura are definitely different. The new implementation has been called a regression but I don't think so. In the previous versions Cura would make decisions on what would print and what would not. If there were islands they were mostly ignored. This is a slice of that vase with 4.13.1 at your 0.8 line width. You can see that 4.13.1 ignored the folds in this area because they could not be part of a spiral path. This is that same area in 5.2.1. Cura is trying to incorporate the islands into the spiral path and failing. This is the same area in 5.2.1 at a line width of 0.4. The folds in the model are dictating the maximum line width that can print it properly. The narrower line width allows Cura to keep the islands from forming. So part of the problem is the model. If those folds came together but allowed a .8 path to move around then there wouldn't be a problem. You are getting the model sliced with your settings. That's why I don't view the changed behavior as a regression. The problem is that either the model isn't appropriate for the settings, or the settings aren't appropriate for the model. If you insist on using the .8 nozzle then you would need to do something like set the Outer Wall Inset to -0.2 or round-a-bouts. The entire model gets bigger in the XY though.

Tree Supports have some reach. They can't get everywhere and sometimes it's still necessary to allow the supports to grow on the model. There are a lot of support settings (73 I think) and tweaking them to get a good support structure is often necessary (and tedious). The XY distance comes into play as well as the "XY Overrides Z" or "Z overrides XY" setting. Your "Minimum Support Area", "Minimum Support Interface Area" and maybe "Support Horizontal Expansion" can be used to move the support so it catches the overhang. The Support Interface Density will come into play...there are a lot of settings. I've settled on running Support and Support Interface at 90% flow and with the air gap to the support floor at 2X layer height. The supports are weaker and easier to remove. Printing the Support Interface slow can help as well because a cooler interface doesn't stick as well when the roof gets put on. For large roofs I'll sometimes put in a Pause at Height and then replace the pause command with a G4 S180 to give a 3 minute break and allow the interface to cool further. The G4 allows the print to restart without any input from me.

It should print like the preview shows it. I have to say though that my confidence isn't high that something will not be amiss. Go over the preview closely and make sure any internal structures are getting printed.

That gcode was sliced with "Origin At Center" enabled. Maybe that's what you need to do in Cura. From what I've read some of the Wanhao 4S printers are configured that way.

Yep. That's one of the tell-tales of a model problem. Another is disappearing sections. A third is when Cura shows a model with purple polka-dots. You can see in the image with the gap that Cura figured it needed top layers in there when it should have been all infill with walls around it.

What you are looking at here are the two gcode files read into AutoCad. One prints at the Left Front Corner which is my 0,0 origin point (that is your Origin At Center checked file). The other file prints near the middle of my bed which is likely a different size than yours to it doesn't look quite correct. What I get from this is that one of those files should have printed correctly. You can see that the Origin At Center gcode straddles the negative quadrants of the coordinate system but the other gcode is right in the +X +Y quadrant and should have been fine. When my Ender loses position because the steppers have disabled there are a blinking X Y and Z on the LCD. Those are the axis positions and normally tell me where the print head is located. It seems very odd that your LCD doesn't tell you where the print head is.

@PeterDenis57 - Good find. Forgetting that you enabled certain things ("Remove all Holes" comes immediately to mind) is a PITA.

As you know that should not have happened. Post the problem gcode file here and someone will take a look. Are you printing from the SD card, using Octoprint, or printing via USB??

You have a problem with the model itself. If you are using Windows you could try to use MS 3D Builder to repair the model. Airplane parts and boat parts are tricky though. Some are modeled just as surfaces rather than solids and attempting to fix them results in a loss of detail and/or areas getting filled in. Give it a shot though and look closely at the Cura Preview to insure nothing truly Stoopid happened. There are also different slicing modes. Under the Cura Special Modes section you can select a different "Surface Mode" and see if it makes a difference.

@odonnse welcome to the forum. Post one of your gcode files sliced with Cura and we'll see where exactly it's printing. The printer will put the origin of a gcode file at the Home Offset location stored in the printer. As I said above - some 4S printers do have their "Origin at Center" and so may need that box checked in Cura. After you Auto-Home, raise the Z a bit and use the LCD to move the print head to X0 Y0. Where is the print head? Still near the back right corner or is it over the middle of the build plate? If you have a stock gcode that came with the printer (cat or dog or something) post that as well. As a side note - The Creality Ender 5 and Ender 6 printers have their origins at the right rear while all the other Creality printers are at the left front. The E5 and E6 models just have the entire origin system rotated. It looks odd and prints seem to be facing the wrong way when compared to the Cura build plate, but everything prints fine.

It sounds like you are making progress. Every printer will be at least a little different. Ultimaker can't test these sorts of settings on every machine out there - just on their own. General "default" settings that are aimed at Ultimaker machines might not be optimized for "all those other" printers. In your case - the "3 in 1 out" nozzle is a relative new comer and so some experimenting will need to be done to dial it in. In the case of the E+10 and where exactly it's occurring in the toolpath, if you can't fix it then you should probably put up a bug report over on GitHub. Ideally it should occur away from the model. There was a similar problem with Pause at Height doing the same sort of thing. It was a question of moving a couple of lines so the prime occurred at the park position rather than over the print. A little change to a post-processor I can do. I'm not skilled enough at Python to attempt anything more ambitious. Continue to post your updates here so the next Geeetech owner can find them.

"Perhaps it too will be time consuming but educational." That is 3D printing in a nutshell. Every day I strive to learn something new (good for the mind) and do a good deed (good for the soul).

That's the stock Ending Gcode for an Ender 3 and the ends of both Gcode files are identical. I don't see any issues there (in fact it looks much like my own ending gcode for my E3Pro). At the end of the print the G91 command makes the follow-up Z0.2 and Z10 relative so those are upward moves. The M84 line is missing the Z parameter so the print head should not drift down by itself. It looks like somehow, someway the problem is coming from Octoprint. If there is an ending sequence that Octoprint is adding, make sure it has a G91 line prior to any Z moves and that the Z moves are small.

Within the gcode file - does Cura add a call for T1 prior to your startup gcode? It should be there, but then your StartUp Gcode is explicitly calling for T0. You could try changing that "T0" line in your StartUp Gcode to "T{initial_extruder_nr}" and see if it makes a difference.

In Cura go to "Manage Printers" and then "Machine Settings". In the "Ending Gcode" window will be the end of print commands. I don't know how you have configured Octoprint but generally it's the Ending Gcode that finishes up a print. I have seen some printer definitions that include a G28 line in the Ending Gcode. That's a bad idea as it will drop the head. Post a Gcode file that shows the problem. The "drop the head" move will either be in the Ending Gcode or there may be some sort of configuration in Octoprint (which I have no experience with).

@Dana1960 I'm an amateur hack and write a bit of code. One of the things I thought Cura lacked is the ability to create a "profile" for fan speeds. Included with this little Windows app is a Cooling Profile generator. You can change fan speeds at any layer, shut it off, turn it back on...whatever. There is also an option to adjust the fan speed according to Line Type (Wall-Outer, Infill, Support Interface, etc.). Greg's SD Print Tool This is the "By Layer Number" page: This is the "By Feature Type" page: The app opens an existing Gcode file created with Cura. You set up your fan profile. The app then creates a new gcode file and writes the original into it with the fan profile inserted. You end up with the un-altered original file and a new "Cooled" file. (The M106 lines are PWM so all the percentages are translated to 0-255 scale.) If you decide to install it a shortcut will be added to your desktop and there is an un-install app. If you decide to try it and come across any issues let me know.

@pozzello I've responded in the other thread.

Within the project file you have the Extruder #1 "Nozzle Switch Extra Prime Amount" set to 40mm³. That's 16.63mm of filament on top of the 16mm regular prime amount. That will leave a mark. Your "Dual Extrusion" settings for Extruders 2 and 3 look reasonable and neither have any extra prime (much less 500mm worth of extrusion in a blob). You need to set Extruder #1 up the same as 2 and 3. There is no G1 F2400 E-16 because you set Cura up for Absolute Extrusion rather than Relative extrusion. This is what is happening every time Extruder #1 gets over the print and starts its first extrusion: G1 F1800 X120.359 Y116.04 E203.41115 --- Last extrusion of the previous tool and the filament is right at the nozzle ..... G1 F1200 E187.41115 --- Nozzle switch retraction of 16mm for the previous tool ..... G92 E0 --- Reset previous extruder to 0 T0 --- Switch to Extruder 1 G92 E0 --- Reset Extruder 1 to 0 G1 F2400 E10 --- 10 mm prime (16 minus your regular retraction distance of 6.0) The filament is 6mm behind the nozzle. .... G1 F2400 E32.63007 --- Here is the problem. For the other extruders this is E16.0 but for Extruder 1 it's adding that extra prime of 16.63mm (40mm³) that you have asked for in your settings. PS: I just had another look at the project file I posted in the alternate thread and it's fine. That "40mm³" of extra prime came from somewhere else.