Johnmgg

I just wanted to say....I used to use CURA. I now use Simplify3D v5. I love Simplify3d. The main reason is Supports. It is WONDERFUL to be able to easily remove supports in Simplify3D. And I mean DEAD EASY!!! What Simplify3D does in part is to print supports as a Single perimeter/Wall with no infill. Therefore the supports are soooo easy to remove, Yet so strong. Also it looks like Simplify3D has adaptive support of sorts. So some supports print with some infill and some supports print with no infill. Printing in vase mode creates a very strong Print yet flexible. I can not tear the vase apart. I could probable stand on it with out collapsing. I print with 1.00mm Layer Width for Vase mode. I also use 30% infill for supports. In Cura my supports would weld to my parts. In Simplify3D I can remove supports almost with one finger. And I am using AUTO Support Generation not Custom supports and Support are still SOOOO easy to remove. Just for that reason alone the $50-$60 upgrade price is well worth it to me. With some more tweaking on my printer hardware. I am now HAPPLY Printing. And Printing and printing instead of fixing stuff all the time. Also it is DEAD easy to lay a part flat on the bed with a couple of mouse clicks and know that plane will be totally flat all the time. No struggling as I had to do in the past even in simplify3D v4. I know that there are probable options that CIURA has that simplify3D does not. So, if you like to tinker all the time then CURA is great. If you just want to print I love Simplify3D. I realize I only will be able to print at 100mm/s to 150mm/s on my printer. But finally after several years of Frustration I am printing more than I am repairing stuff.

Hi all, Scaling dimensions. I need some help. I made a design in Shapr3D on the iPad. I imported design into CURA 5.2.1. The file is in the .3MF file format. Other than adjusting the Z Scaling dimension from 50-70mm X and Y are correct. Around 134mms. But when I print the design the design is 50ishmm in diameter. It should be about 134mm in X and Y. Is anyone else having issues. I have to up scale my design to 150% to get about the right dimensions. It looks on the simulated build plate to be about the right size, as far as I can tell. Thank You for any help.

Hi, Whenever I add custom/manual supports Cura add the supports through my part. Which is what I don't want. One, Why does CURA do this and 2 how can I tell CURA not to create a support through my part and only to create a support that touches my part. Thank You

I don't know if this is a BUG I have the following Part I created with Shapr3D on my M2 iPad Pro. It measures in CURA as X34.85mm, 16.7mm Z13.46mm and it says it is scaled to 100% After printing My part measures. X 13.8, Y 6.4, Z 5.32.

I am using A interface support Density of 30 instead of the default 75. This helps with removing supports. I have the issue of the first layer on top of supports not printing well. Just not making a strong bond between layer lines. I an going to try to adjust the distance between the support and the m,model layer above it. Does anyone have thoughts. And a suggestion on a good setting that works for you.Thank You

But even with that change Supports Suck. I also used to use Simplify3D and loved their Auto supports.

I got this same issue until I read a post that said to change the interface support density from 75 to 35. I am using a setting of 30. It seems to work better. I am using CURA 5.2

Hi all, Happy Holidays, I am using Cura 5.2.x. I am useing Petg and I dry my filament. I have a Question about Walls. I will upload a pic of my part I am trying to print. So, if you look at the part it is perfect to the design I am trying to make. Looking at the picture itself, it is self explanatory as to what broke. The pieces that broke are used to hold metal long rods as legs. So, my question is how can I make this stronger? I know there is Crush strength and twist strength. I wanted a combination of both. Since this part is mainly a series of Cylinders there is probably not very much in the way of infill. The rest of the part is really strong. I know that Nylon X would be stronger but I don't think this is the solution because I also, printed out fairly thin walled hollow straight rods. Also, these Rods were very very weak. Almost like I have bad filament. I could crush them with one hand no problem. I am printing at 0.3 layer height. Line Width and Wall line width is set to 0.45. Number iof Wall is set to 5. I added a Pic of some of my settings. Any help will and is appreciated. Because this part is finished if I could figure out this issue. Also z offset is set to 0.3. Printing overall at 100 mm/s. I printed a Drum design out of Petg and TPU both printed perfectly!

It would be nice if we could have Processes like in Simply3D where I could divide up a model between certain layers. To better change settings. I want to add extra cooling for my top layers but there is no really easy way to perform this task. Other than to just Ramp up the Fan speed. But I want to have the fan speed set to 10% and then for the top layers set the fan speed to something like 50%. But just for the top layers. Also it would be nice to do things like slow down the print speed at X layer height, etc. Maybe I can add a Marlin Gcode line to do this in the mean time. But not the best option.

As the title says what is the difference between "initial layer flow vs initial layer bottom flow?" These seem in the description to be the same thing. And should I set both to 120% or 200% for PETG?

I just got my M2 iPad Pro. Which mostly uses the same chip as in the Mac Book Air. SO, is there going to be a M1/M2 ipad version. I love using my Pencil and touch screen to move my model around. Much easier than using the Trackpad on my M1-MAX Macbook pro.

YES, I agree! I am using CURA 5 and there still is no feature. I also hate using the trackpad to rotate. Also there needs to be a better way to Automate the process. Well, there is a way but I don't think it works very well. In CURA 5 it is a little easier if you uncheck the snap to check box. Another thing is It would be really nice if I could just enter in my requested Features and BUG on this forum. Unless you are a programmer using Github can be dounting. This is how my other apps Shapr3D and Lumafusion do it. They have an Administrator that does and will respond to your requests. I understand Open source but some companies like Shapr3D and Lumafusion really do it right. it seems like to me that most open source is built around the core components but there is no pretty user interface in most. ie: klipper for example: I tried to install Klipper but for a first timer it was very complicated and I could not get it up and running so I went back to Marlin. I wish someone would write an interface package where I could just tap one or 2 buttons and it would auto install like Repetier Server on my Pi. That is pretty easy to install and to get running. And YES it cost me $75 but well worth it.

Also, is there any way to precisely rotate an object? Just using the trackpad to rotate an object is not very precise. And I understand that I can orientate my part in my design software but that is just a work around, basically and a copout as to not fixing the issues in CURA. I have heard this recommendation. We need to be able to do this in CURA, Easily I guess we as Maker just deal with it or deal around the issues which we should not have to just deal with said issues. And I know with most open source software no one gets paid to fix the issues. But I would pay $50 to $100 for software that has all these little issues fixed. Case in point I Paid $75 for Repetier Server to run on my Pi. and I spend $245 per year to use my design software Shapr3D on my iPad. But NO, I can't speed $10,000+ to have someone fix the issues or design a better interface, etc. for this or any similar Open Source project. BUT, Shapr3D does update their software all the time. And I LOVE IT!

Hi all, OK, I just tried the following to see what I just hate about these features. I just laid flat a part that takes up most of the build surface. I want to use the LAY FLAT option to lay the part flat to the build platform in the exact orientation I have it currently. CURA keeps thinking that the part is to big for the build platform as you can see in the Screen shot which is my best guess. As you can see when I lay flat CURA wants to Reorient my part instead of just laying my part flat in the Z direction only. Also, when I use the .8mm nozzle size CURA 5 thinks the part is the correct size to fit into the build area but when I change to a .4mm nozzle size CURA informs me that my part will not fix. I think this is a bug. I then have to scale my part down to 98.5% to fit. but even then I have the above issues.

I am posting the crash repost as a Screen Shot. I am laying a part flat on the build plate. It takes up most of the Bed. As I try to rotate it to get it into the correct orientation or adding supports it crashes a lot, not all the time like a pattern or anything. The error report Says that it is send the error report to Apple. I have a Macbook M1-Max computer. I am using a .3mf file of the part. When I reopen CURA 5.0 I have to then Reload my part and all my edits are gone. I know this is a beta but frustration since there does not seem to be a lot of updates.

Hi All, Just a Quick question. So, there are two settings in CURA 5.0.Retraction Speed and Retract Retraction Speed. What is the difference? Right now I am just going to set both at 45mm/s.

well, When we talk about layer height and squish, arn't we talking about a layer height higher that the Nozzle height. Which is also the Z Offset + the height of the nozzle at start."the paper calibration height". Now, assuming that this is correct then the Height of the first layer does have to do with the amount of Squish at least by the nozzle. If the layer height is lower that the nozzle then there is going to be no squish resulting by the nozzle pushing the filament into the bed. Maybe there is squish caused by something else? Now, I am rethinking all this in a different way. I have used a BRIM and by using the Anti Warping Plugin. Both do a good job at getting a good first layer and the Layer height of a BRIM is pretty thin. I am thinking that is all you need if your bed is perfectly level. Let's assume it is. One should also make sure it is calibrated as close to level as possible by the paper method. And check the physical bed with a ruler or level (just to have a straight edge only) to see if there is any gaps between the bed and ruler. Also I guess you can use a small ball or something and see if it rolls in any one direction. If so, I would first see if you can replace the bed. That will give you the very best prints bar none. There is no substitute. I have found that I don't even need to use Glue stick if my bed is close to exactly level. Meaning all this other stuff we do to try to compensate, (even ABL TOUCH's etc) are really not needed. There are some companied that will check the level of the build Plate/Bed they send you if you ask. I got an aluminum build plate for my Tevo Tornado printer and they did check it for level. I am thinking of getting another one for my Ender 3 Max printer. I can't tell if my Ender 3 Max bed it level of not level. When I calibration the bed height Left Center, center, Right center; (as well as the 4 corners) Center of the bed is slightly higher (closer to the nozzle) then the Left or right Center leading me to believe that my bed is not level or the frame is still not completely straight. or the wheels aren't alined correctly. I have tried to straighten the frame as much as I could.

YES, The layer height is the Height of the actual extruded plastic. Z offset is where the Z height of the nozzle what the print is started. There is a setting for Layer Height for every layer and the layer height for just the First layer also known as the initial layer.

Oh, I am using an E3D REVO SIX with a .8mm Nozzle and a .4mm layer height. I am used to using a .4mm Nozzle and a 2.5mm layer height. I switched over from using Simplify3D to CURA 4.x and then CURA 5.0 and I have to say I am liking the Options in CURA 5.0. The interface is nice having Plugins are nice, etc. But some of the plugins seem to over lap a bit with the built in Options i.e.: Pressure Advance (Builtin) and Linear Advance which is a plugin.

Hi all, What is the extensive z offset processing option. Opposed to just using the Z Offset Option? I know that it adds Gcode throughout the Gcode file apposed to affecting the Printers coordinate system. But that still does not explain things to me. As if I should use it or not. I want to start with a Z height of 1.0mm from the bed and have 1.0mm spacing between each layer. As an experiment to see if I can dial in my Amazon PETG Filament. Does anyone have a slightly more in depth explanation? Or a web link where I can read up on this option or related topics? Another thing: if I just adjust the Z offset, let say 1.0mm from the fromt panel of my Printer and save setting. It will start at 1.0mm from the bed for the first layer. Now what about the second layer how far from the first layer if the z height going to be and so on. So, is the above option in cure going to add a 1.0mm Z offset or Height to every layer in my Gcode file? But I still don't know the differences between the extensive z offset processing and the Z Offset option. Thank You

Hi all, I have a quick theory question. I am printing a part that in Cura 5.0 I set to a .8 nozzle size and .4mm layer height. Now here is the thing. I forgot to change out nozzles in my E3D REVO. It had a .4mm nozzle installed. By the time I remembered that I needed to change the nozzle I had printed at least 1 or 2 layers. But these layers look perfect. Nice extrusion everything was great. I just wonder why would this not work. And if it will work why couldn't I tell CURA that I am printing with a 1.0 or 1.2 nozzle and a .8mm layer height. I know for the first layer you can over extrude to achieve a better bed Adhesion. Like .6mm layer height even though you only have a .4mm nozzle. So what if any are the advantages or disadvantages?

Hi all, I have a quick question: I am trying to print 8 rods (5.7mm in size each). One of the rods came out great. I am printing in PETG. I can bend the rod and it never brakes. Basically what I want. GREAT! The other RODs just crush with one finger. I printed the 8 RODs flat on the bed with a brim. I printed 2 more with different filament to test. I see that the 2 rods printed as test Vertically did not get filled in with infill. Do you have any ideas. I can tell because it did not print the top or botom of the rod only the wall you can see straight through it. I was thinking that maybe my RODs are to small for infill to print. Do I need to print these as walls only or something like that. But it confuses me that one of the rods did get infill printed? Also could this be a temp issue as well because shouldn't it still bend not brake even with a thin wall?

So, I use Shapr3D on the iPad to design my parts. I tried to export in the .3Mf file format; It is supposed to add more dimensional data when it exports the model, with 8 rods I needed to print out. Each one did come in to CURA 5.0 as separate objects. In Shapr3D there is the option to export one file with multiple objects. I am assuming this is the same if I exported it as an .stl file. I still think CURA should be able to do a better job at placing said objects on the build surface. Now to the real issue I have.... So, to continue with my example: The 8 objects import into CURA Off the build surface. It is not the initial import of objects I have an issue with. I can just manually move them to the build surface and arrange them in any order I want. What I find than the "Lay Flat" feature does not do well at all is that I place an object on the build surface in the orientation I want but I want CURA to sit the object flat on the build surface. I can not tell if the bottom of my object is actually laying on the build surface. Not above the build surface and not below the build surface. Trying to do this manually is frustrating. I used to use Simplfy3D. It has an option to place the object on build surface. Work well it does not try to rotate object only p0lace the object on the build surface. The computer (CURA) should be able to do this for me as well. Also, when I am rotating an object to try to straighten the object. I want CURA to straighten the object for me to the closest 90 degrees. Or at least a manual snap to function. These, what should be simple, take me a ton of time getting right and waisting a ton of time I could be doing something else. Not to mention the frustration I feel with the process. I know CURA has the "Center Object" option which might help somewhat.

Hi I am using Cura 5.0. also CURA 5.0 Keeps crashing. Why does my profile in cura 5.0 Sometimes show the Check box to enable support and then it disappears. I am using the manual support plugin. Some of my profiles were from Cura 4.x. I tried one of my profiles and at first it showed the check box to enable support like it should. Then I saved profile setting and now it does not show the check box. This might be intelligent enough to know I am using Custom Supports. Maybe that is the reason. I know that some of the support feature are still active when you use a custom support, like a BRIM. But very confusing. Can someone explain? I spend so much time searching for the Enable check box that I am pulling my hair out. I wish it would just remain in profile settings instead of Appearing and disappearing.

I will try it but seems complicated and the designers of CURA 5.0 need to come up with a simpler procedure. This just takes to much time for what should be a simple and easy process.