GregValiant

Hello @rickdrawl, When Creality created the definition files for their printers they (as the manufacturer) decided that the Ender 3 needed those areas reserved. Those reserved areas are hard coded in the Ender 3 definition file and they are not settings or adjustable in Cura. Now, if you were a printer manufacturer and had put time and money into creating your definitions...would you be happy if a different manufacturer went in and changed things? I don't think so. You however can go in using any text editor and delete those areas so they don't show up. You are an end user and not a competitor. The Ender 3 Pro definition is nearly identical to the Ender 3 definition. The Start and End gcode are the same, same printable area, etc. The only difference I know of between the definitions is that the E3Pro (that's what I have) does not have the reserved areas for the bed clips. So you can install an Ender 3 Pro in Cura, change the name to whatever you want, and there ya go. About the best you can do for "printable area" on the E3Pro is 230 x 230. The bevel on the edge of the glass is not printable and you need about 1.5mm all around as a safety cuz your getting close to the edge. So 230 x 230 provided you get the Home Offset location right. That location should be about 2.5mm in from the left edge and 2.5mm in from the front edge of the build surface. Creality has made a hash of a few things (extruder arms with a life expectancy of 7 minutes, TFT screens that don't support their own firmware, etc.) and this is just one more example.

Use the File | Save Project command and post the 3mf file. That first picture looks like "Spiralize" is turned on with no bottom layers(?). Spiralize prints a "solid" model with a single wall with no Infill. The second picture appears to be single wall and the bottom layers (48) go to the top(?) and "Extra Skin Wall Count" is set to 1. Finally, the third picture looks like 6 walls, the bottom layers again go all the way to the top, and a single Extra Skin Wall. A project file will answer most of my questions. This is 3 walls, 4 top/bottom layers, 5% Zig Zag infill. The model is a 50mm cube.

There is an "M141" line just before the print starts and it is after the StartUp Gcode. Does that printer have a Heated Build Volume (a separate controllable heater). If it does not then you need to go into the Cura Machine Settings and de-select the "Heated Build Volume" option. If it doesn't have a separate heater for the air in the chamber then that "M141 S28"command may cause a hiccup in the firmware. Other than that question - the gcode is correct. The printer should home, move up 15, heat up, purge 6mm of filament, move to "G0 F3600 X87.231 Y58.337 Z0.3" and start the print. I assume that "0.3" is your "initial layer height" you set in Cura.

With the model loaded in Cura use the File | Save Project command and post the 3mf project file here. I haven't seen that before and with just that one view as evidence I'm tending to think it's something in the model file. The model will be contained in the project file. One thing you can do right away is to rotate that model 45° and see if it will fit diagonally. There are also tricks you can do by making the build plate larger in the Cura Machine Settings and then manually adjusting the home offsets in the gcode file with an M206 line to compensate. Just making the build plate larger you should get it to slice and maybe something will stick out and provide a clue in the preview. All the CR10 models are very similar so whether it's a v3, or a wifi model, or other sub-model, it's hard to go wrong using the base CR10 definition.

A picture, or a sketch, or even scribbles on a napkin would be really helpful. It's not impossible to hand code simple shapes but the norm is to create a model and let Cura do the coding. As far as not showing the infill - is it turned on for the preview? You can toggle the different line types on and off.

In 4.13.1 in the Marketplace the Solidworks plugin has a link to the author / maintainer of the plugin. You would need to contact them and find out if they have a timeline for re-submitting the plugin to the Cura Team. EDIT: I found a contact form for the author and sent a query regarding the plugin and if/when it will be available for 5.0.

I just saw this. What printer is that (looks like a Creality layer cooling fan)? If it is a Creality printer and you still have the stock plastic extruder - have you checked the extruder arm for cracks? They usually appear on the underside of the arm around the pivot hole. It looks like the problem happens suddenly like it's fine and then it's a mess. If that's true then it appears to be a mechanical issue rather than the filament.

Here is a creality_base definition file. Unzip it and copy it into the definitions folder of Cura. This is the one I use so it's a bit different (up to 4 extruders) but it calls for the nozzles as "variants". Maybe it will make a difference. Actually, before you do that click on the down button on the nozzles. Maybe there just isn't a default. Make sure you keep the definition, platform, and nozzle files someplace. They aren't (yet) part of Cura and if you upgrade you will be back to the default definitions. creality_base.def.zip

There are about 73 support settings. You must be in one of the basic views. To the right of the Search Settings box is an icon with three lines. It is the Settings Visibility control. Click on it and set it to "All". Some of the settings may still not be available. They might be for certain printers or materials whose definitions call for them to be visible, but most are there. With a model loaded and selected - on the left side of the screen are a column of controls. The 6th one down is "Support Blockers". Select it and then click somewhere on your model and a 10mmm cube will be added. It can be scaled and moved. The button right above the support blocker button is "Per Model" settings. You can change the effect of the support blocker to change infill or other things at whatever location you want. Ya just gotta play around. Here you can see seven of the eight support blockers I put in (they are the gray blocks). This particular model gets sliced twice. Once at .2 layer height and once at .1 layer height. The gcodes get combined so the base portion prints at .2 and the external threads on top print at .1.

I was wondering how many clues I'd have to give you.

I think the first thing I'd try would be to dry the PLA out. 45°C (115°F) for 4 or 5 hours. If you don't have a low temp oven (one with a dehydrator is best cuz it'll have a fan) then you can just turn up the build plate to 45 and leave the roll on it overnight. It will develop some brittleness but it may also print a lot better.

This model just came up with a brim problem. With the model loaded and Cura set up to slice use the "File | Save Project" command and post the 3mf project file here. I sliced this with 5.0 and it was fine so it must be a setting.

Ok. Let's start at the beginning. What printer are we talking about? By "the gear" can I assume you mean the drive cog on the shaft of the extruder motor? Is it pressed on or does it have set screws? "Some slipping sounds" Does that mean it's skipping steps like snapping backwards instead of moving the filament forward? Do you have an Auto-Leveling system or are you leveling by hand using a piece of paper? "20 minutes later it's turning but not moving the filament" So it is grinding away at the filament in one spot? No more extrusion coming out of the nozzle?

@Stephan77 did you find it? It was moved down a couple of levels to: C:\Program Files\Ultimaker Cura 5.0.0\share\cura\resources\definitions

Did you restart Cura after copying the files into the variants folder? You did install the Ender 3 Max definition? Does the platform picture show up? The person a couple of posts back had to restart their computer (I have no idea why that would work but it did). Looking back, there are a lot of downloads of those files and not many complaints. My guess would be that any issues may be specific to certain systems. I can't troubleshoot any further because it works on my system.

A lot goes on in that little rectangle below the nozzle. Line Width means different things in different situations. Most people think of Line Width as the width of an extrusion under the nozzle...a rectangle that is "Line Width Wide" X "Layer Height Tall". Line Width is actually the index distance between two adjacent extrusions. That results in a rectangle that is indeed Line Width wide by Layer Height tall. When there is no adjacent extrusion (like with your infill), then the single extrusion is un-confined on either side. The width of the extrusion is then a function of print speed, the calculated flow, plasticity of the material, print temperature, and (dependent on the flow rate) maybe some other things like turbulence in the nozzle and the cooling effect of the flowing plastic on the hot end. This is in fact the problem I have with "Single Wall Calibration Cubes" but in your case they may actually be of some use. In the Material section you can try adjusting the "Infill Flow" upwards. This is where a single wall calibration cube may help. You could also try adjusting the "Infill Speed" downwards. Going slower may allow the plastic to spread further. There is a new setting in 5.0 in the Speed section called "Flow Equalization Ratio". The default is 100%. Try setting it to 0% and see how it goes. Getting a single wall to be a specific width is usually a matter of flow (as in volume of filament/mm of extrusion/second). The final shape of the unconfined "Rectangle" (and consequently the width of the extrusion) is not the same as an extrusion that is confined on one side. My Ender 3 Pro prints large models pretty good up to about 12mm³/sec. With a .4 nozzle at .4 line width and .2 layer height that occurs at 150mm/sec print speed. If I was to double the line width then each extrusion would require double the plastic. I would need to cut the print speed in half in order for the extruder to keep up. I would never advise to run any Line Width beyond about 1.25 X the nozzle diameter. The velocity of the plastic coming out of the nozzle goes a lot higher and it's tougher to control how that plastic is going to spread. In essence - if you want to print at .8 line width then put in a bigger nozzle.

60 is fine. If it continues to be a problem there are a couple of custom things you can try. Put a chamfer on the model. That would hide the elephant's foot. Go into the gcode and adjust the flow manually with M221 commands. Maybe the first layer at 90%, the second layer at 95% and then the third layer back to M221 S100. Something like that would give it a bit of a taper near the bottom. You are printing with a skirt for build plate adhesion? For small parts I often use a brim and set the "Brim Distance" to .1 or .15. It makes it easier to break off and leaves less of an edge for post-processing.

The "F" parameter in movement lines (usually G0 through G3) are the speed in mm/minute. So if the print speed for a particular extrusion is set at 100mm/sec in Cura then the Gcode line would contain F6000. The gcode command "M220" is the feedrate multiplier in %. M220 S90 would set the feed rate at 90% of whatever any line in the gcode says. It's the same as adjusting the speed with the knob on the LCD and should be reflected in the "fr" field on the Info screen of the LCD.

You have Cura set for support "Everywhere"? I looks like that feature comes to a point on the bottom and it's possible that your "Minimum Support Area" is set to high. You can also add Support Blockers (or custom supports) then use the Per Model settings to configure them to "Print as Support". This is with support turned off but the blocker is configured to Print as Support. They can be moved and scaled like any other mesh.

0.2 works for me. I print PLA with the build plate at 50. That might make a difference as well. If a printer has problems with "Z binding" when it's near the bed then that can look like elephant's foot but it's a mechanical thing and adjusting the Initial Layer Horizontal Expansion doesn't help. That is actually a popular problem on kit printers.

No. Your definition load order is: fdmprinter.def.json creality_base.def.json creality_cr10.def.json creality_cr10s.def.json Your StartUp Gcode is from the creality_base file and it does not contain either a G29 or M420. I don't have an ABL and I don't want to give wrong or confusing information. The ABL commands are handled by the firmware and how the firmware is set up. They are typically G29 and M420 (and M421 may be required as well). If you search the CR10 users group on Reddit you may come across your answer. Now, if you want to roll the dice...you could go to Manage Printers and then Machine Settings and in the StartUp Gcode box put "G29" right after the "G28" line. That is often all that is required for the ABL to be activated. You could try that and print a calibration cube. You could abort when it was obvious it didn't work, or once the skirt starts if it did work. In addition to the ABL command you may want to think about adjusting the temperature in the StartUp so the nozzle doesn't drool while the ABL is doing it's thing.

The printer is supposed to go where it's told but if the printer-processor is told to go 25mm then it sends "steps" to the motors to move them. How many "steps/mm" comes into play. The first thing to check is the gcode. Open that Calibration Cube gcode file in a text editor like Notepad. In the first few lines is the Max and Mins for the three axis. The max and min XY will include the skirt/brim, but the MaxZ should be 20.00. Typically, the X Y and Z steps don't need any adjustment, but maybe yours do. (You said the printed cube was 1.79 on each side. I hope that was cm and not mm.)

@earth_inheritor I can only speak for myself here as a casual user. When the Beta was released I installed it and sliced and printed a few models. Cura 5.0 runs well on my Win10 laptop and prints well on my Ender 3 Pro. I found a couple of bugs and duly wrote them up on GitHub. Since it is an open source project, it's what I figured I should do. I am one person with one computer and one printer so that's all I can check it on. If you (and those others) didn't care to participate in helping to de-bug the beta then that's fine. More people means more computers with different operating systems, different hardware, different video systems, and different printers. If you are having problems with Cura installation or with the program not starting, or not loading files, then a bug report on GitHub is your avenue to explain what is going on. Project files, "cura.log", model files, and a concise explanation of the problem, are all helpful to chase down issues and fix them. A terse "utterly broken" doesn't provide much of a clue as to what's going on. Bug reports DO get chased down and fixed...but only if problems are reported. If they aren't reported then they aren't a problem. The people at Ultimaker likely put a boat load of money into developing Cura over the years. They are kind enough to give it away for free and provide definitions for my cheap Chinese printer and over 300 other printers from other manufacturers. Helping to debug it seems like a small enough price that I gladly pay.

On a lark I opened the model in MS 3D Builder and it reported an error. This report is from https://formware.co/OnlineStlRepair. There were some triangles added but that's it. --> 0 Naked edges (?) --> 0 Planar holes (?) --> 0 Non-planar holes (?) --> 0 Non-manifold edges (?) --> 0 Inverted faces (?) --> 0 Degenerate faces (?) --> 0 Duplicate faces (?) --> 0 Disjoint shells (?) -> Repairing: 100.00% ----- Repair completed in 279ms ------ -> Vertex count changed from 112 to 300 (+188) -> Triangle count changed from 220 to 596 (+376) 3D builder before repair And after repair. You can see where the triangles were added to the flats between the ribs.

It looks like the line width you are using with the .8 nozzle is too much to print the areas between the holes. There are new "Wall" settings that you can adjust. Things like "Split Middle Line Threshold" and "Add Middle Line Threshold". Try setting them to around 50% and see if it makes a difference. The calculated defaults may not be right for that model at your line width.