GregValiant

You have "Infill as Support" enabled. That leaves a hole in the center of the infill because there is nothing above it that requires support. The button to the right of the "settings search" box is the "settings visibility" tool. Click on it and set the visibility to "All". When settings are not visible they are out-of-site and out-of-mind. If you happen to make a change for a particular model it's easy to forget you did it and then it affects the next model you slice. The model on the left has "Infill as Support" enabled as a Per Model setting.

I sliced the object and it appears as it should with no gaps on the inside. The model appears to be free from errors. Load the model and set Cura up to slice and use the "File | Save Project" command. Post the 3mf project file here. Maybe there is a setting that is causing the problem for you.

Hello all. There have been several reports (complaints really) on GitHub (#12862 for one) and it is alleged to be on the backlog as Cura-7926.

You should have gotten the "Your model is not watertight and may not print correctly" warning when you opened that in Cura. There are a lot of open seams. The model on the left is your OBJ file and the model on the right has been repaired with MS 3D Builder. Notice how you can see right inside your model. That's about the most obvious open seam I've come across. Here is the X-Ray view and Cura has highlighted the open seams of the OBJ model in red. Here they are sliced. You can see that the repair has eliminated that gap. In the Cura Marketplace is a handy plugin called Mesh Tools. Install it and restart Cura. When you right click on a model the top menu item will be Mesh Tools and you can select "Check Mesh". If it tells you the model isn't watertight you will know it needs repair.

Thank you. I sliced the model without making any changes and then saved the Gcode. Here are the outer wall numbers from layer 5. I picked that layer randomly. The numbers are the same for the outer walls on all layers. I've erased the E numbers so it's easier to read: G1 F1500 X159.8 Y159.8 G1 X159.8 Y140.2 G1 X140.2 Y140.2 G1 X140.2 Y159.8 The X size is 159.8 - 140.2 = 19.6 The Y size is 159.8 - 140.2 = 19.6 That is the path of the centerline of the nozzle. We add 1/2 line width all the way around and the cube will print at 20.00 x 20.00 as it should. So the Gcode is telling the printer to go to the correct locations but the printer appears to be missing the marks. It is an extremely rare thing to have to calibrate the X, Y, or Z steps/mm. It is so rare that I haven't actually heard of anyone who has had to do it. A much more likely cause is trolley wheels that are out of adjustment, loose belts, or possibly a loose hot end. You have Acceleration enabled at a fairly reasonable 1000mm/sec and that should be fine. If the E-steps aren't calibrated correctly then prints can suffer dimensionally, but they will either be over or under extruded the same in both the X and Y axes. You wouldn't get a model that was too big one way and too small the other way. Check the belts. They should twang like the strings of a bass guitar. With the printer turned off - run the print head back and forth by hand in the X and the build plate fore and aft in the Y. Try to wiggle them. Look for sloppiness in the movements. They should be crisp but not overly tight. You should be just able to spin any trolley wheel with your fingers. With the machine cold grab the nozzle with your fingers and see if you can wiggle it. Let us know how you make out.

Hello @Distracto You have the Support Z Distance set to "0.2". Typically it is set to "1 layer height" in order to keep the plastic of the real model from bonding so hard to the support interface that the support becomes part of the model. That gap you are pointing at in the last image does appear to be 1 layer. If you have a dual extruder printer then the gap is often not required (Support Z Distance = 0) if the support material is non-compatible with the model material.

@BlasterGales That problem could be in your Cura settings or in your printer. Load a calibration cube and set Cura up to slice it. Then use the "File | Save Project" command to create a 3mf project file. Post that 3mf file here.

@eyeballs The files still go into the "definitions" and "extruders" folders. Those folders are now down a level from where they were. On my Windows computer the folders are: C:\Program Files\Ultimaker Cura 5.1\share\cura\resources\definitions C:\Program Files\Ultimaker Cura 5.1\share\cura\resources\extruders @Baman Cura does not directly support IDEX printers. I was playing with a Raise3D IDEX printer and found that there were Gcode commands that tell the printer what mode to print in. If there is a setting on the Sovol printer itself that would tell it what mode to print in then there shouldn't be a problem. For Raise3D the command is M605. So a user would install 3 instances of the printer in Cura and name them something like "Xxxxx Normal", "Xxxxx Duplicate", "Xxxxx Mirror".) The StartUp Gcode of the Normal Raise3D printer would be just normal startup. The StartUp Gcode of the "Duplicate" printer would contain M605 S1. The StartUp Gcode of the "Mirror" printer would contain M605 S2. There may be something similar that can be done with the Sovol. You would select the printer per the mode you want. You would need to pay close attention to the model placement on the Cura build plate since Cura will not check it for you. If the model was in the middle and you asked for "Duplicate" or "Mirror" it would cause problems once the gcode got to the printer because the two heads would be fighting over the same point in space.

Nice job getting it dialed in. People have come here (and on Github) with "profiles" that have different speeds and accelerations for every single setting. They vary the line widths for everything. Consequently it's hard to see what's going on as the flow through the nozzle is all over the place. There is a lot to be said for keeping things simple because getting a model right and getting a complicated program like Cura to do what you want, and then dialing in a robot on top of all that - it ain't easy. So for being a good listener you get "Greg's SD Print Tool". It's a small Windows application for communicating with your printer over the USB. It controls printing from the SD card, all the tuning functions, homing, leveling positions, calibrating the E-steps, PID tuning, and some other things. The only thing you need to do with the knob on the printer is to "abort" a print. It's an unsigned app so if you decide to install it you have to fool your anti-virus into allowing the install. There is a readme file and there are tooltips on the controls. It isn't rocket science to get it to work. Greg's SD Print Tool

I see that the Cura team has this on their backlog. In the case of that Github model there are settings you could adjust to move the support structure away from the model a bit. That way it wouldn't try to support those small upper radii that are the problem. Changing the minimum XY distance from .2 to .6 will help as would lowering the amount of horizontal expansion and changing to "XY overrides Z". I found another problem on certain models as there is no retraction when moving from the support to the model. If the layer start point is directly adjacent to the support exit point then the model and the support can get welded together. Not an issue for you with the PVA but for single extruder printers it is an issue.

It depends on the exact part and the orientation within Cura. Here is a half pipe with the Z-seam set to Right. The normal situation would be for Cura to put the seam at one of the corners as that is the farthest "right" point on the model. This is with Z seam "relative", and the X and Y coordinates manually changed to be the part midpoint which in relative mode is the "0, 0" point. So the Z seam will locate in the middle of the inner wall. I would think you could do that with your model. Most models take some playing around to get the seam where you want it. Generally it takes me until about layer 10 of a print before I figure it out and have to abort. Senior moments...ya gotta love' 'em.

It's a known bug and I believe it is being worked on. I think you can get it to work if you set the outer walls to "0". Concentric has problems when used for Support, Infill, Ironing, or Skins. The only thing it seems to work perfectly for is Spiralize and it is the only option for bottoms using spiralize.

This is the StartUp Gcode for an Eryone ER20 from the Cura printer definition file: G21 ;Metric values G90 ;Absolute positioning M82 ;Set extruder to absolute mode M107 ;Start with the fan off G28 ;Homing the hotend G29 ;Auto bed leveling detecting G92 E0 ;Reset the extruded length G1 F200 E3 ;Extrude 3mm of filament G92 E0 ;Reset the extruded length again G1 Y-3 F1200 ;Move y axis to prime G1 X150 F6000 ;Move x axis to prime G1 Z0.2 F720 ;Move z axis to prime G1 X80.0 E8.0 F900 ;Prime line G1 X20.0 E10.0 F700 ;Prime line G92 E0 ;Reset the extruded length G5 ;Enable resume from power failure M117 Printing... This is your StartUp Gcode from the Duct file that also says ";Generated with Cura_SteamEngine main": M82 ;absolute extrusion mode G90 ; use absolute coordinates M140 S[first_layer_bed_temperature] ; set bed temp M190 S[first_layer_bed_temperature] ; wait for bed temp G28 ; home all without mesh bed level M420 S1 M104 S[first_layer_temperature] ; set extruder temp G92 E0.0 G1 Y-2.0 X150 F2400G1 Z3 F720 M109 S[first_layer_temperature] ; wait for extruder temp G1 X150 F1000 G1 Z0.2 F720 G1 X80.0 E8.0 F900 G1 X20.0 E10.0 F700 G92 E0.0 M221 S95 ; set flow What is happening is that you have a PrusaSlicer StartUp Gcode in your Cura installation. I don't know how that happened but it won't work. You need to make the changes I described earlier. On the Cura menu bar select "Settings / Printer / Manage Printers" and then "Machine Settings". Look in the StartUp Gcode box. You will see what I am talking about.

M140 S55 > M105 > M190 S55 > M104 S190 > Cura adds these lines because it does not understand [first_layer_bed_temperature] as it is a Prusa M105 > keyword and not a Cura keyword M109 S190 > --------------- M82 ;absolute extrusion mode M92 Z403.54 G90 ; use absolute coordinates M140 S[first_layer_bed_temperature] ; set bed temp > M190 S[first_layer_bed_temperature] ; wait for bed temp > In PrusaSlicer this line would say "M190 S155" but in Cura it passes through as "M190 S[first_layer_bed_temperature]" because it is not a Cura keyword. When you print the file that's what the printer sees. It then goes onto the Firmware how it reacts to that illegal line. My older Marlin firmware would ignore it because it is an invalid command. Your firmware might decide that "first_layer_print_temperature" is = zero and that will cause the printer to not extrude. There is also a typographical error in this line: G1 Y-2.0 X150 F2400G1 Z3 F720 That should be two lines as: G1 Y-2.0 X150 F2400 G1 Z3 F720 So it looks like someone copied an pasted the Startup Gcode from PrusaSlicer to Cura. That doesn't work well. Here is the "Duct" gcode back. I made changes to the temperature lines and fixed the typo. Try to print it. GV_ER-20_Fan_Duct.gcode

I enable the Bridge setting occasionally. Yes, it depends on the model. I've been dropping the Support Flow and Support Interface Flow to 90% (85% for red PLA for some reason) and the weaker supports make them easier to remove and the roof doesn't stick to the interface as well. Setting the Support Bottom Distance to 2X layer height allows them to break away pretty clean as well. I never use Coasting as (with my printer) it tends to cause under-extrusion when it starts up again. That lead me to experiment with Extra Prime after Retraction but I found it left too many blobs when it wasn't needed and that turned out to be most of the time. Your boat is pretty good for checking stringing. I came up with these two calibration models. The "Calibration Shape" is good for walls/Zseam and also works pretty good for checking "Spiralize". The other is for Supports. Getting the supports out of that model is also a test. You better have the right Picks and Pliers for that one. You can scale them to get different effects. For a speed test I take a regular calibration cube, scale it to 200 x 200 x 1mm (or nearly as big as your build plate) and set the "Top/Bottom Line Directions to [0] and the print speed to 100. That will put all the Skin extrusions on the Y motor. Setting the Line Directions to [90] will exercise the X motor. At any rate, tuning the feed rate is easy as 50% would be 50mm/sec, 120% is 120mm/sec. Skins (and a magnifying glass) are also the best place to evaluate your overall Flow and consequently your E-steps/mm. At just over 175mm/sec my Ender starts to have extrusion problems. I think it's because the Accel setting on the E motor means it doesn't get going fast enough. During most of the run it's OK but starting out there isn't any plastic for the first 5mm or so. I never print that fast but it's a slightly interesting data point. This is all part of that "super-fun-totally-not-at-all-tedious" thing you mentioned. I can't see from here of course but I assume you had your tongue firmly planted in your cheek. GV_SupportShape.stl GVCalibration_Shape.stl

The models are fine with no errors. I think the problem is in your StartUp Gcode. When Cura sees M104 S[first_layer_temperature] it doesn't know what to do with it because the words are in "Prusa" instead of "Cura" and Cura doesn't use square brackets. That means neither the hot end nor bed temperatures get set and the printer won't print because there is a safety to keep it from cold extruding. With the model loaded in Cura and ready to slice use the "File | Save Project" command. It will create a 3mf file with your printer and your settings as well as the model. Post that new 3mf here. Post one of your gcode files as well. More information is a good thing. I can slice the models you posted and print them on my Ender but that doesn't help you. I believe the problem is in your printer definition and/or startup gcode.

@FaithV as a glorified Benchy boat then supports would be considered cheating. If you look at the two red ones I printed - other than some stringing (not my gcodes) they aren't bad. I'm still tending to think it's a cooling thing. Hopefully @ndsugi will get it sorted out before he decides to try out for the UM Forum "How far can I throw this @#%#$ printer" record. The reigning champion is an Xvico.

PrusaSlicer uses different keywords and square brackets as replacements in the Start and End gcodes. That is keeping your hot end and bed from heating. Here is the list of Cura Keywords. The ones you will want to change are: M104 S{material_print_temperature_layer_0} M109 S{material_print_temperature_layer_0} M140 S{material_bed_temperature_layer_0} M190 S{material_bed_temperature_layer_0} Note that they are in curly brackets.

I opened that last 3mf file but I don't have the proper printer definition file and so I didn't get the printer or the settings. What I've done is used your sunken ship model and set up Cura the way I want and saved it as a 3mf project file. Opening it as a project will install an Ender 3 Pro in Cura but it's the settings profile you want. After you have it you might have to export it and then activate your printer and import the profile. I'm not sure on that. The print temp is 210, bed 60, speed 50 with outer walls at 35, retraction 6.5 at 35mm/sec. No retract at layer change or before the outer walls, Z-hop is off. Line width is .35 on a 4.0 nozzle and minimum line width is .30. Layer cooling blowers: A decent quality ball bearing 5015 (Delta, Sunon, etc.) will move a lot of air. That fellas comment about aiming the air is on the money. That is one of the shortcomings of the 4010 Ender 3 layer cooling blowers as the exhaust duct is totally wrong. (That and they are noisy and the sleeve bearings wear out in a hurry.) This is the design I came up with for my Ender 3 Pro. I wanted to be able to see what was going on at the nozzle so I wrapped the duct around the back. I'm not a fan of some of the gigantic shrouds I've seen people hang on their poor print heads. Better to have a single fan that just works well than multiple ones that are fighting each other. When I run this at 100% and I'm printing at 100mm/sec the nozzle can throw a roostertail. It isn't really stringing but more like cotton candy. Light fibers of filament that I can barely grab. Not a lot of them, but they are annoying. The cover on the hot end fan keeps the crap out and does a nice job of quieting the fan. GV_Cura_Settings.3mf

They aren't entirely different and for what you want to do they are very similar. This is for Windows. The Definition file will go in this folder: C:\Program Files\Ultimaker Cura 5.1.0\share\cura\resources\definitions And the two extruder files go in this folder: C:\Program Files\Ultimaker Cura 5.1.0\share\cura\resources\extruders Raise3D makes an IDEX printer I don't know if that is one. Cura does not directly support IDEX however you can install multiple instances of a printer each with a slightly different StartUp Gcode. One would be for conventional printing, one for Duplicate (M605 S1), and one for Mirror (M605 S2). You would need too exercise do care when placing the model on the Cura build plate.

Crumbs. I have an opinion, but that's all it is. When the nozzle is doing walls, everything seems to be OK. But when it is extruding Skins, I can see PETG slowly building up on the outside of the nozzle. Eventually, gravity pulls it down and it either gets stuck to the print (but not by much) or ends up on the bed. If it's on the print, the fan can blow it off, or the nozzle hits it and knocks it away, something happens because there they are, laying there. I've resolved the "Crummy" problem by refusing to worry about it.

Hello @FaithV When Arachne first came out I played with it a bit but only really used it for special occasions. I liked 4.13 a lot. When 5.0 came out I said to myself, OK, this is the future so get with it. I've been using 5.x exclusively since then. 5.0 had growing pains (a slicing bug and the new dialogs and controls were glitchy). 5.1 is much better though it certainly isn't perfect. There are some new settings in 5.x that have no carry-over from 4.x. There is a learning curve to get the new version to perform the way users want. I have had no trouble with Cura 5 once I figured out where the differences were and what to watch for. There are a few main differences. Wall Order default is "Outside to Inside". I changed my printer definition file to make "Inside to Outside" my default. The "Line Width" is now more of a suggestion that a rule. Line Width defines the upper limit of the width. In concert with that are 5 new settings in the Walls section starting with "Minimum Wall Line Width". They can make a big difference regarding the toolpaths consequently the outer quality of a print. "Flow equalization ratio" is in the Speed settings. The default is 100% but that isn't right for all models. People see the print speed varying and figure it's some sort of error, but it's Cura changing the speeds to maintain the flow rate through the nozzle. If you want the speeds all the same? No problem. Set Flow Equalization to 0%. I had to smile when I saw a post on Reddit "Cura 5 is ruining my prints". C'mon man, learn the software. It's an industrial strength, complicated program that requires an effort on the users part to learn. There appears to be a lot of people who look for the "Easy" button but they want thousands of custom features. There is no easy button. Users need to put in some effort. That's todays rant. I usually do that on a Sunday but I was fishing.

I printed on my Ender 3 Pro with the 1.1.5 8 bit mainboard and Marlin 1.1.8. I've been thinking on this and I MIGHT (big might!) have an explanation. Gcode is gcode and the printer just goes where it's told. The toolpaths within the gcode are different, but that really shouldn't cause a quality dropoff like you are getting on the 5.1 print. 5.1 has one difference that maybe your printer doesn't like, and it is in the gcode. The default Wall Order in 5.1 is "Outside to Inside" and equates to the 4.x setting "Print outside walls first". I'm not sure why Ultimaker made the new default that way, but my Ender is not fond of it. I've made the default "Inside to Outside" like 4.x was. Outside to Inside might be OK for some things, but overhangs certainly hate it as there may be nothing for "Outside first" to connect to when the outer wall goes down.

I don't know how far along you are with Cura. Turn on the Custom settings. Next to the Settings Search box is an icon with three lines. It's the Settings Visibility button. Set the visibility to "All". Click on it again and collapse the settings as it makes it easier to find things. In the Support section will be "Support Structure" and you can choose Normal or Tree. That's about it for types. On the left side is a toolbar with the move, scale, rotate tools and the 6th button down is Support Blockers. They can be configured to modify where they overlap models, block support, or print as support or print as a model. They can be scaled and moved like any other mesh. I downloaded the chess set and took a look at the X wing rook. The pods on the ends of the wings are barely attached to the wings. That would be really tough to print. Every model has needed repair as well. Here is the other knight. You can see that the axle caps on the back aren't actually connected to the main model. They will fail for sure. Those models have issues. Regarding supports, in the Material section of the settings I've been playing around with lowering the Support Flow and the Support Interface Flow. I've had some good luck running them both at 90% flow rate. It makes for weaker supports that are easier to remove.

I'm guessing it's the way it was modeled. What CAD software did you use? The horseshoe shape appears to have been placed resting on the surface rather than being extruded from the surface. There may be an infinitesimal gap between the base and the horseshoe. There should be no skin between the horseshoe and the lower base. That area where the infill is exposed doesn't look right either. That infill area should not go to the slot. On that layer the only place infill should be exposed is directly beneath the horseshoe. I think you might have an inverted surface there. Here is a similar model. The infill should be a continuation up from the base and into the interior of the horseshoe feature. The top layer of the base should look something like this...