GregValiant

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...

I looked at the extrusion rates using MSExcel. They look fine but it's hard to tell with 5.x because the line widths change and I can't account for that with my macro. So I printed them. One of these is your 4.13 file and the other is your 5.1 file. I made no changes and didn't tune anything during the prints. I'm sitting here staring at them under a magnifier and if I hadn't marked which is which I could never tell them apart. So what does that tell us? I have to let Cura off the hook on this. The 5.1 on the left (or is it the right!!) has no ringing while the 4.13 print (which is actually on the right) has very minor ringing, That is the only difference I can see between the two prints. The startup gcode of each file is the same as well. There just doesn't seem to be anything about the two gcode files that should cause your printer to hiccup on one and not the other.

On the Cura menu bar go to "Settings / Printer / Manage Printers" and then "Machine Settings". Check the box for "Gcode Flavor" and if you have Marlin make sure it is set to Marlin and NOT "Marlin(volumetric)". Click on the Extruder tab and check the "Compatible Material Diameter" and make sure it is set to whatever your printer uses (1.75mm or 2.85mm).

Those "X Wing" rooks look tough. Stringing aside - proper support is a must. In regards to the stringing, make sure you have your "Retraction Minimum Travel" and "Max Comb Distance with No Retract" lower than the shortest distance you need a retract on. If there is a move of 15mm and you tell Cura you only want a retraction if the nozzle travels 20mm then yes, there will be a string. Here is my effort.

How is your layer cooling fan working? I ask because the tops of the windows of the second deckhouse are really sagging and things like the radar dish on the roof don't look too good either. I thought I had posted these but it was late and I must have forgotten to hit the submit button. Neither of these have the "saggy" windows that you are getting. I have a single 5015 bolted to the side of my Ender 3 Pro. These are with some old PLA and it could have stood some drying out. PrusaSlicer Cura

You know I hate having to explain... Oreo cookies are the best in this arm of the galaxy. Here is the proper way to eat an Oreo. Oatmeal cookies are second best (IF they have nuts and raisins). Animal Crackers may be called crackers but they are actually cookies. And welcome back.

Animal? Oreos? Oatmeal?

Hello. As far as I know nothing changed in Pause at Height. I use it a lot but I don't use the retract or prime functions. Post that gcode and someone will take a look. If you read the tooltip for "Extrude Amount" you will see it is for UM2's. In most cases the retractions and primes are taken care of in the regular gcode and there is no need for further retractions and primes. There can be a prime move by the "regular" gcode after the pause. Whether there is or not is dependent on whether there was a retraction in the regular gcode before the pause.

That's it. That part won't print anywhere near as faceted as the first model.

#12808 and #12956 are the Github bug reports I was referring to. They aren't the only ones.

I would say just go with "Fine" and export that model you printed and then change it to "Coarse" and export the same model again. That's what I did for that comparison view. I used MS 3D Builder but you can open the STL files in Cura and put them side-by-side. In the "Prepare" screen you should see that the Fine model isn't nearly as faceted as the Coarse model. Curves and cylinders really show the difference.

Hello @gr5 and @princefemo01 There are bug reports on GitHub regarding this behavior. Something is broken with "Concentric" as both regular Infill and as Support Infill. It looks like the developers are addressing the problem for the next release but for now, it's a problem with certain combinations. One combination is that if "Infill Layer Thickness" is different than "Layer Height" things go wonky. It might be operating system specific as well. On my Windows system if I set the Infill Layer Thickness to 2X layer height the result is 0% infill in the preview and it isn't generated in the gcode even though I have my infill density set to 50%.

In the AutoCAD STL export utility the setting is called "Facet Resolution". The model on the left was exported with the FACETRES at 0.25 and the model on the right had the FACETRES set to 10.00. The model on the right would print as a "smoother" model as the sides of the triangles that comprise the chords of the diameter are much shorter. A high resolution STL gives a high resolution print. The gcode files can be much larger and in the case of these two - the low res gcode was 4.5mb and the high res gcode was 9.7mb. The print time was about the same.

@Cuq - He's running Klipper and an SKR mainboard. @kc6331 - I get the same results when I slice the model. The gcode contains (1) M104 line at the beginning immediately followed by M109 and those set the hot end temperature. At the end of the file there is a single M104 line to turn the hot end off. Octoprint can be configured to send some commands on it's own. I wonder if your Klipper install is doing something similar. What's happening to your temperature is not the result of any command contained within the gcode.