[Dump Lulzbot Cura?]

6 hours ago, Scotty-G said:

While I don't have all the bugs worked out yet, I will post shortly what I have and am working with.

Couple of the features/capabilities I am working on

• Am able to use 3.00, 2.85 and 1.75 filaments with the stock All Metal Hex Hot End
• Have a few different slice profiles for a few materials
• Have profiles for some different nozzle diameters as well

 

 

That would be awesome - I'd be happy to reshare if I tweak further, but to be honest I just want it to work 😉

 

[Dump Lulzbot Cura?]

On 5/18/2020 at 5:44 AM, Scotty-G said:

I switched over from Lulzbot Cura and am trying to teach myself how to make a compatible profile package. I even am able to print 1.75, 2.85 and 3.00 filaments with the stock Taz 5 all metal hot end.

Hi there Scotty - 

Do you have any resources you could recommend or would you be prepared to share your work as a start for ten for me - I have a TAZ6 I'd love to use with proper CURA?  If I bring in the current CURA LE printer settings, I get a big messy python crash.

[Dump Lulzbot Cura?]

On 1/12/2020 at 4:17 PM, twlum said:

Has anyone dumped Lulzbot Cura and successfully just run Cura for their Lulzbot printers? Wanting to simplify things and trying to keep track of various settings and manage materialas as well as printer settings is a bit of a hassle. Any advice?

 

Hi there twlum.  Did you ever work out if you could ditch CURA LE?  I just tried the latest greatest CURA and I love it but zero profiles for Lulzbot.  I'm looking for specific features that are missing from the LE edition....

 

I tried to move the various settings profiles stl etc over but great fat crash.  I'm trying to diagnose but it's all double dutch.

 

So, short version - how did you get on?

[Feature request: named parts in gcode comments]

6 minutes ago, burtoogle said:

BTW, if you have the mesh tools plugin installed, you can rename selected parts so that the mesh names make more sense. Just right click on the part and use the mesh tools portion of the context menu.

That's a great steer, thanks!

 

I had what I thought was a great idea.  Then discovered that someone had thought of all this years ago and I had just failed in my 'research' (Google).  Thanks Again.

 

[Feature request: named parts in gcode comments]

3 minutes ago, burtoogle said:

Thanks for the file, I sliced it and then searched for MESH...

 

;MESH:ThreePartNameTest.3mf(2)
;MESH:ThreePartNameTest.3mf(1)
;MESH:ThreePartNameTest.3mf
;MESH:NONMESH
;MESH:ThreePartNameTest.3mf(2)
;MESH:ThreePartNameTest.3mf(1)
;MESH:ThreePartNameTest.3mf
;MESH:NONMESH
;MESH:ThreePartNameTest.3mf(2)
;MESH:ThreePartNameTest.3mf(1)
;MESH:ThreePartNameTest.3mf
;MESH:NONMESH
;MESH:ThreePartNameTest.3mf(2)
;MESH:ThreePartNameTest.3mf(1)
;MESH:ThreePartNameTest.3mf
;MESH:NONMESH
;MESH:ThreePartNameTest.3mf(2)
;MESH:ThreePartNameTest.3mf(1)
;MESH:ThreePartNameTest.3mf
;MESH:NONMESH

 

and so on

Awesome, thankyou! I'm grabbing 'Proper' CURA version now as mine is not doing that!

[Feature request: named parts in gcode comments]

4 minutes ago, TurboTas said:

Sure thing, attached to this post.  in the .model fileThreePartNameTest.3mf you can spot the 3 distinct parts each numbered but never referred to in the GCODE comment.  I'm not reporting this as a bug, more a feature request 😉

 

3 minutes ago, TurboTas said:

WOW! Thats's EXACTLY it, thanks - checking it out now.

 

 

Getting interesting - My version of CURA _should_ be naming parts.  Getting Vanilla CURA version and checking it out - Stand by!

 Thanks both!

 

[Feature request: named parts in gcode comments]

2 minutes ago, burtoogle said:

 

I have this installed, not sure I have ever actually used it.

 

https://github.com/paukstelis/OctoPrint-Cancelobject

 

 

WOW! Thats's EXACTLY it, thanks - checking it out now.

 

[Feature request: named parts in gcode comments]

8 minutes ago, burtoogle said:

Could you please save the project file (File -> Save) and attach to this thread? Thanks.

Sure thing, attached to this post.  in the .model fileThreePartNameTest.3mf you can spot the 3 distinct parts each numbered but never referred to in the GCODE comment.  I'm not reporting this as a bug, more a feature request 😉

[Feature request: named parts in gcode comments]

6 hours ago, gr5 said:

I was just told that there are several versions of Firmware that support this exact feature already!  Including the latest Marlin (which Ultimaker has drifted from), and Duet might support it.  Also Octoprint might support that.

 

But then you need some slicer to support this also.  Not sure which slicers support it.

That's awesome, thanks!  Do you know if the feature has a proper name and I can start looking for that in octoprint or my printer firmware?

[Feature request: named parts in gcode comments]

2 hours ago, burtoogle said:

Cura and Octoprint already support this feature...

 

Look for ;MESH comments in the gcode.

 

Hi there,

I don't think that's quite correct - I have 3 separate parts on the bed, but there is only one mesh comment per layer. For my idea to work it would need something like a ';PART XYZ' comment as it moves over the bed within a layer working on the WALL-INNER, WALL-OUTER, SKIN, FILL for each part.

 

Cheers

 

[Feature request: named parts in gcode comments]

That's a great point, it definitely my bad that parts are coming loose.  I'm printing a field of identical tall narrow parts and without support.  Fettling is important, but I'm not sure that print failures due to adhesion (or whatever) are that unusual and the ability to live splice out copies is not that much of an edge case.  But you are right it would be tricky - I checked that XYZ being absolute presents no issue, but never spotted that estep also being absolute would be an issue 😉  you've not to recalculate every layer which is a bugger.  Oh well.  Let's park it in the round ideas receptacle!

 

 

 

[Feature request: named parts in gcode comments]

Hi there, I've been looking at the Cura output GCODE and the comments are really useful, for example  ;TYPE:WALL-OUTER

I've been thinking that if the different parts on the bed could be named or numbered and then commented in the GCODE, then it would be possible for CURA (or whatever software is used to actually print (Octoprint in my case) could be used to live splice sections out of the GCODE on a part by part basis while printing - subject to the print software supporting named parts.

 

The use case that I'm thinking of is that on a long, multi-part, print:  One part breaks free.  At the mo, that's a failed print - the spaghetti will ruin the rest of the parts, cause a domino effect   With a live-splice capability the user could dump that part from subsequent layers.  Obviously the print management software would need to support the live splice capability, but part one of this is the gcode comments identifying the various parts by name or by number etc....

 

Coupled with this, it it possible to force an ooze/wipe tower even on a single nozzle setup?

 

Thoughts?  Crazy?