PizzaTijd

Pictures or a video wouldn't hurt either. As slashee said, prime/purge towers are meant to look sloppy. Whenever I use it it's usually completely covered in oozed blobs of breakaway - which then don't end up on my proper print. Where it gets weird is that the blobs interfere with your print head enough to the point where it's pulling the plate with it. Prime towers are generally pretty thin in diameter and should just fall over if you apply any real sideways force on them - the amount of adhesion you would need to your build plate would be pretty impressive (ofc this is with my specific printer setup, which is an S5 with a heated glass build plate)

As a quick addition to the mold thing, I downloaded their models real quick and tested the mold feature on them; it seems to work flawlessly Pre-slice: Post-slice: Specific settings: mold is on, mold thickness 3mm, mold angle set to 90° Edit: and in case of that skull model you have in one of your screenshots, it should also create walls to cut out the eyes. I can't find the model for it, so I can't test it myself, but if it doesn't print anything for the eyes to attach to, move your model up a couple mm (make sure to turn off "drop down model"), and it'll create a bottom that they will be attached to.

The "Mold" feature under 'Special Modes' might be of use here (it's hidden by default in the printer settings). It'll only print walls that are directly outside of your model - allowing you to literally use it as a mold for your model. Only difference is that instead of using it to cast a part, you'll be using it to cut dough. The default thickness on my end was 5mm, which may be a tad much for a cookie cutter, but you can just tweak that and the wall angle to whatever you need it to be.

There doesn't appear to be any physical threading in your part. While I have no experience with inventor, other CAD programs tend to just create a hole and slap a texture on it to tell you "here there be threads" - which is exactly what happened on your part. Either you still have to turn physical threading on somewhere, or you have to manually make a helical cutout with the right dimensions and pitch to create your desired thread.

You might have "Ensure models are kept apart" turned on in your preferences. I'm on 5.7, but as long as this is tick box is unticked I can just clip models through eachother without any issues.

One way to do this would be to add a support blocker, adjust the size so it occupies the part you want to be solid, and then use the per-model settings (cutting mesh) to print that area at 100% infill, causing it to be printed solid.

It's the printer you're using. If you're using a creality printer, I would guess that it stands for "Creality Fused Filament Fabrication Printer" or something similar. If you have an Ultimaker S5 it will say "UMS5". Ultimaker S3 it'll say "UMS3" etc etc. Go to preferences -> general -> turn off "Add machine prefix to job name"

You might want to try turning the maximum amount of retractions down, or even try turning retractions off completely just to test. When and how the feeders grind into material can feel a bit random sometimes - but I've found that it helps with materials where the feeders really like to dig into it (mostly TPU on my end). The moment that the feeders dig into filament enough will also be the moment that your printer will start showing you the flow rate error.

If I understand you correctly you mean that you have a model that is basically only the path that the track makes (and all the material required in your Z to get there, and a model that has specifically the path (+ everything in z required to get there) missing/cut, which you then place over eachother and glue together? If so, then that's definitely a creative way to solve it. I do think it's going to be very tricky to make it look good. You'll have printer tolerances on both prints to deal with then, which probably matters a fair bit now since the path will be relatively narrow. I could see it being doable tho. Edit: the way I interpret it is as if you took the completed model, and then cut out the path with a laser from above (just to get an idea of what the two models would look like). You then have the track + landscape which fit together.

@Slashee_the_Cow I wasn't talking about adding an angle to the text - that just is what it is. I see I wasn't particularly clear on this, my bad. What I meant was adding an angle to the area where the charging port is, instead of just having 90° bends. That way you can just ditch the support alltogether, provided that there are no other overhangs in the model that we can't see. As roughly sketched here. Remove the red marked bit. They could do the same on the other side if they want it to look nicely symmetrical. Edit: just to be clear, it's just a design suggestion, nothing more. If it's possible then it's an easy fix to prevent needing support. If not, then not.

Are all the surfaces that you don't want supported properly touched by the support blocker block? I don't see it in your screenshots. Alternatively I can also recommend changing the overhang to an angle (±30-45°), that way you won't need to use support in the first place.

I only have it enabled in the per model setting for the "Eraser" block. Are you sure that it's not ironing the spots you marked? It might not show it as a specific ironing layer, but may show in the same layer as the normal top layer. The two images I have added show what the top layer looks like for a little dummy model I made. To simulate top layers at several heights (like you have) there are different top surfaces at different heights off-screen. Here shows the layer about halfway through as it finished the regular top layer, before ironing and here it shows the head going over the same area again - the actual ironing - in the same layer. Otherwise you might also want to double-check that the "Eraser" block is actually intersecting with the desired surfaces properly (starting a bit under, and ending a bit above). Edit: and just to be clear; I have all other ironing-related settings turned OFF in the regular settings

There is! Place a support blocker, stretch it so that it comes into contact only with the top surfaces you want to iron (so in this case the block should start slightly below surface B, and end just above surface B and below surface A, make sure it also starts above surface C). Go to "Per Model Settings" while having your block selected -> Modify settings for overlaps -> set it to "Cutting mesh" -> select settings -> look for "enable ironing" -> click "Enable Ironing". If you require any specific ironing settings make sure to also tick those boxes as needed. This *should* make it so that only the top surfaces within the "support blocker" area are being ironed. Edit: corrected the letters

While I have never used the setting myself, I know of the following: Extensions -> Post Processing -> Modify G-Code -> "Display Filename And Layer On LCD". There is also a "show progress" variant, but judging by the settings in that one it'll show time remaining and/or the percentage it's at.

Drying your filament might also help. 'wet' materials can also cause unpredictable/worse printing behavior.

Just FYI we use an S5 R1 to print TPU95A, and it works well without any modifications besides a little layer of glue on the glass plate. Tweaking some settings might be necessary depending on your print, but nothing major.

That does make a lot more sense, I just kept the name the same since Cura still lists it as an "Eraser" object if you don't rename it manually

-Add a support blocker block -Go to "Per model settings" -Set it to "Modify settings for Overlaps" -In the drop-down menu below it, set it to "Cutting Mesh" -In the bottom left corner, while having your "support blocker" block still selected, select your second extruder -Scale the "support blocker" to your required size, and set it to your required X/Y/Z That should print everything in the area you marked with your 2nd extruder. I call it a "support blocker" because it loses that functionality if you set it like this in the per-model settings.

Yeah I would consider CPE+ to be a very situation-specific material, personally. For general use and easier prints you might want to take a look at PLA instead (provided it fits within your use case). It is by far the easiest material to print with, IMO.

How much magigoo did you apply to the glass plate? I have found that if I don't apply a thick enough layer with CPE+, that the adhesion to the glass plate will still be so aggressive that it'll pull the glass right off either while cooling down (warping) or when removing the print manually. You have to make sure that when it shrinks or is removed, it pulls on the glue instead of the glass. I personally use a different brand glue stick, but I imagine that they're all just about the same. And in regards to the shrinking; I have found CPE+ to just be a generally tough material to print consistently with. Keep large tolerances, and maybe use walls thick enough to facilitate manual reworking later if necessary.

A poorly placed first layer, because the material wasn't primed yet, causes worse adhesion. Therefore a skirt will provide better build plate adhesion.

The reason it was 'invented' was exactly for the reasons it can be used for. It's not a mandatory setting. If you don't want or have to use it, don't use it. You just know the scenarios now where it is applicable.

In my experience it just makes sure that your print head is primed; that the material is all ready to go, as it has already extruded the skirt before moving over to the print.

Have you tried printing with a brim?

Our printer doesn't even see this new firmware yet. Probably just means you installed it the second it was released. The patch notes always tend to lag behind a bit- they'll most likely be posted very soon.