settings to avoid stepping

[cloakfiend 995]

What was yor reason for upgrading cura if everything was ok before btw?

...I'll stand with the newer version always, and rather will try to adapt them to my needs, finetuning 'em, instead of backwarding. I already did thought to backgrade to some previous version: but the culprit isn't the version. It is something else.

If you have no problems in the earlier versions, then it has to be the version. It wouldn't take much effort to install the older one.

....Besides, I'll stand with the version that works (regardless of how old it is), trying to get something to work that worked before sounds like a waste of time to me. Im doing enough stuff as it is, so I'll get the one that works and not care about any new versions. I know many people who use old version of software because stuff gets bloated or cloud based or whatever. TO upgrade without a need is a mistake in my opinion because you are becoming a test subject. I use what I can rely on. Tried and tested software.

Think about it.....If someone was selling two cars, but one was a year older than the other but the newer one was broken and you really needed to drive, which one would you buy....?

Edited November 5, 2017 by Guest

[stu_le_brew 42]

Have you checked in Cura machine settings that you have the correct setting for the flavour of GCode for you printer ?

[BiaC 0]

Think about it.....If someone was selling two cars, but one was a year older than the other but the newer one was broken and you really needed to drive, which one would you buy....?

Sorry, I don't care of your opinion: it isn't the opinion of most of us. I agree that sometimes coders might release apps in a hurry, but I guess it isn't the culprit of my issue. Btw, before you know if a version might give problems, one must try it, I repeat. And it is always better to stick to newer versions, instead of downgrading. And, btw again, nobody knows if the culprit is the new version or else. You are fighting against windmills...

Edited November 5, 2017 by Guest

[BiaC 0]

Have you checked in Cura machine settings that you have the correct setting for the flavour of GCode for you printer ?

I checked, but I don't know which printer is most similar to mine, either of the 3 Prusas or other ones.

[BiaC 0]

Hi @BiaC, could you please make the failing gcode available for me to have a look at? Zip it up (or not) and put it somewhere that it can be downloaded from. Thanks.

Hi, I don't have any repositories. I might send it to you as I did with Stu.

[BiaC 0]

If someone need codes/models to test, please pm me.

[BiaC 0]

hiya,

I am intrigued by this, clearly it shouldn't happen.

the only thing I can think of is massive over extrusion and it's building up the material by pushing it to form bigger steps.

this is assuming you have the correct printer setup in cura.  if you are printing with PLA i'd lower the temp to 200 instead of 225.

Hi. No problem due to temperature. I always printed with sustained temps so far.

[cloakfiend 995]

Whilst I do understand your pointless obsession in constantly wanting the newest software (we have all been there!) you must understand my confusion in understanding why if you had no problems before upgrading and problems after, that you dont simply try to temporarily revert to the old software to see if it indeed is the problem. Its called trial and error. Starting with the most obvious possibilities.

....And sticking with software that works is not downgrading. Its staying with something reliable. And only when you need to truly rely on something (which you clearly dont) you will one day learn your lesson!

Upgrading halfway through an important job and not being able to carry on will ruin your reputation or companies reputation if you cant complete your job.

[BiaC 0]

SNIP

I tried to print it also with a 2.5 Cura, which remained installed into a notebook, and with almost the same settings, but IT FAILED too. Thus, your "theory" of "not upgrading" is as FLAWED as BOTHERING.

Then, just dismiss answering, I'm not interested in your constant, offensive, ranting and fanatical intrusion. Just take care of your own business and do not mess with others': or at least do not mess with mine.

Edited November 6, 2017 by Guest

[rebekah_harper 60]

Hiya,

is it safe to asume you tried defualt settings in CURA?

could I see the G-Code too please. there has to be something off.

many thanks

Bex

[BiaC 0]

Hiya,

is it safe to asume you tried defualt settings in CURA?

could I see the G-Code too please.  there has to be something off.

many thanks

Bex

 

Hi Bex. What are the default settings?

[rebekah_harper 60]

If you look on the left and select one of the preset layer heights and then select the 0.05 one it will set everything to default you need to discard your ones upon asking.

[BiaC 0]

If you look on the left and select one of the preset layer heights and then select the 0.05 one it will set everything to default you need to discard your ones upon asking.

 

Ah I see.

[cloakfiend 995]

This is a free forum, and if I want to offer good advice then I will , and I stand by everything I have said, just because you are frustrated and annoyed thats no reason to whine at people offering perfectly decent advice

....and to anyone reading this with any logical thinking my 'theory' is not flawed its common sense. When things go wrong, you go back to the last known working state that you had. This is known as the process of deduction. You are investigating the possible issues of the problems that may have occurred.

you mentioned you tried it with almost all the same settings? well try with exactly the same settings and go from there. When you change a lot of variables then your likelihood for tracking down the problem gets a lot harder.

And grow up! To think it is offensive to suggest using a previously working version of software is beyond a joke. Talking to you is like talking to a flat earther!

Good luck, or whatever.

Edited November 6, 2017 by Guest

[BiaC 0]

Snip

 

Yes, sure: you are "free" to reply to me, into a thread opened by me, until I ask you to avoid any further answers to me, specially in the case they are useless, pointless and loathsome to the originator of the thread (that is, still me).

And they ARE: surely much more of those of others who gave some REAL help, and without pretending to roll back to a previous version.

For I already told you that I already went back to the previous version, with same settings, but nothing changed: thus, either you cannot read your own language, or it's me the one unable to correctly write in a foreigner one. I'm also an "advocate" of "the less complex, the better": so, what do you think to pretend to be, the only one who thinks like that? And sticking to older versions is NOT always the rule to solve problems: otherwise, the purpose of progress is missed. We must rather put on place any issues in order to help the coders to solve them and to keep pace with newer versions.

So, hope that that "promise" to dismiss answering over and over (apropos of frustration) from now on will be mantained: for it would be a liberation to me that you finally be silent, for the antipathy you suscitated unto me until the prime post you made.

Be sure that the only thing that's really frustrating for me here, is your continous, unwanted attempt to interact with me, notwithstanding my continous requests to dismiss doing that.

So, unless you decide to embetter your attitude, it will be better for the sake of a factive discussion if you'll be muted.

Farewell, or whatever.

Edited November 9, 2017 by Guest

[BiaC 0]

It is there a black list or similar here?

Edited November 9, 2017 by Guest

[BiaC 0]

For whom it may be of any real interest (excluded some), perhaps I found some progresses in the meanwile. Probably the factor is the stepper, the filament brand or the scale reduction after exportation in stl. Maybe it may be of any help for anybody whom may fall in similar issues.

Edited November 9, 2017 by Guest

[cloakfiend 995]

Have you solved you problem yet?

I was going to leave this, as I may have been a bit jokey before... but now you are just pointlessly being rude without reason and sorry you can't get rid of me that easily, but go ahead and try and get me banned I’m only trying to help, and I’m helping others in the meantime by teaching them how to troubleshoot and get printing again. However there could be a miss-communication in what you have stated due to language/translation.

You stated…

'I printed perfectly so far until Cura 2.5'

So unless you were already using cura 2.5 why not go back to what you were using and carry on printing perfectly as I suggested?.... However, if you were already using cura 2.5 and something has suddenly gone wrong its most likely the printer if nothing else has changed.

and…

‘I’ll stand with the newer version always’ (and everyone will agree with me on this, which you correctly edited out… )

Again, why? if it does not work as good as before? That is not common sense and rational thinking unless you are debugging software. And very few professionals will agree with you in this btw.

On a side note….

I highly recommend the UM2+ if that helps. Its a fantastic printer. I have the older UM2 which is equally as good if you know how to work with the weaker feeder.

…and why not have a bit of a humor in a forum? its all harmless. If you knew me from before, I would already be swearing and ranting at you but after talking to irrational flat earthers I learnt to control my temper and focus on the rational aspects of the argument but flat earthers never answer questions just endlessly ask more and get annoyed because they know they are wrong yet continue to argue till eternity without rational explanations for anything they claim to be true.

So, I ask you only one. Why is newer software ALWAYS better?

Edited November 10, 2017 by Guest

[neotko 1,417]

So, I ask you only one. Why is newer software ALWAYS better?

Indeed

For me that I use S3D I did use 3.01 version for long time because it did what I needed, only until they released 4.0 with really interesting stuff (worth the time to learn how to control it) I did put time to learn the new stuff. Adding stuff on software every 2-3 months isn't always automatically great, and for users that just need to print and be sure it will work, is better to use what one knows that works stable than toying with new versions just for the shake of it

[BiaC 0]

SNIP

Why is newer software ALWAYS better?

"Perhaps" you read badly and in a hurry, so you skipped over some points I highlighted in the previous answers of mine.

When the update alert of a software tells you "there's a new version", the user doesn't think "and what if it will be flawed and will ruin my prints?". And he doesn't think that just because one doesn't know in advance how a newer version will behave, until he got it installed: and one should install newer versions, 'cause logic (true one, not one fuzzyful selective by purpose...) commands to think that newer versions should be more powerful, more precise, more packed with features and more stable. It isn't always the case, and I know this (as I highlighted it in my prime reply to you): but progress goes forward, not backward: otherwise, coders wouldn't have any need to improve their software, and they will remain behind with both their software and their printer, whilst others' printers progress and will become embettered more and more. Keeping uttering the contrary as you sturdly do, btw it is also offensive towards the one who code it and keep it free for all us.

The finality of testing the software when it comes to issues like mine, it is also that to give to the developers some hints in case of such issues. Btw, in case of problems, one could always revert to previous version: so, what's the drama you are rising about?

It seems that you have problems in grasping these simple details, or "perhaps" you cannot cope with accepting the evidence that you are wrong, so you keep beating over and  over upon the software point, although you has been filled with contrary evidences.

And it seems also that you are skipping to read the lines of my hypothesis about what could be the real culprit, due now it is broadly clear that it cannot be in any ways caused by some software nags, being clearly stated that I also tried to print with 2.5 (nay, also with 2.4) versions, which I used in the prime times when I begun to print, but the results was still busted. Ok?

The culprit could be many other things: included material, stepper, nozzle and even the kind of model! So, either it is a selective case of my printer (e.g firmware of Cura or not complete compatibility with it: compatibility which shouldn't be appearing from the blue with this Cura version, but eventually due to some changes I made to the printer), or I don't know what: but surely it isn't a software issue. Otherwise, many people who tried the model with 3.0 hadn't got it printed very well.

Second: one could accept "help" only if it is gladly given and specially gladly received... Otherwise, it is customary in a civil society that one stops "giving help" if the received doesn't like the way it is "offered".

Last, fear not: in case of real problems, I get rid of everybody just ignoring him/her, if blacklists are missing. No need to have somebody banned: he may still be amusing or at least somewhat useful for whom who may find at ease with him as being one of their own kind.

I'm not a "joyful" guy by nature, and I'm happy with this: and I cannot bear people who wouldn't cope with being serious, specially when it is right to behave like that.

Edited November 10, 2017 by Guest

[SandervG 1,521]

ok ok ok, lets all take a breather and carry on as the decent people we are. Formally, I will inform you about the house rules, please keep them in mind while interacting with others on this forum

I think it would be better to drop the subject about which is better, later or newer versions. It is up to everyone to decide. I think it goes without saying that there is a point in the rationale of deduction suggested by @cloakfiend, but how to execute it is for everyone to decide. (and have you really talked to flat-earthers or was this a metaphor? Must have been intriguing!)

As for my 2 cents to this issue, I did not read everything completely, but I thought to pick up that @BiaC was not sure if he selected the right printer profile because the specific machine you have selected was there. I would suggest to first make sure that profile is correct. As an example, even though an Ultimaker Original and Ultimaker 2 have similar mechanics, they have a different Z motor and prints would come out 'stretched' when sliced with the wrong profile. I know that is not exactly your issue, but perhaps something down those lines.

I will not ban anyone because I like to think this ripple in our otherwise peacefully and enjoyable forum came to an end.

Have a good day everyone!

Edited November 10, 2017 by Guest

[BiaC 0]

As an example, even though an Ultimaker Original and Ultimaker 2 have similar mechanics, they have a different Z motor and prints would come out 'stretched'. I know that is not exactly your issue, but perhaps something down those lines.

Hi SandervG, nice to meet you (finally an admin...).

Indeed, since I passed to Cura 3, after starting from 2.4 from version to version, I remember no more whether I used a custom configuration (changing just some details in the customization page) or a prefab one, such as the Prusa I3 (as being eventually the spawner from which my chinese variant was built upon).

Infacts, I currently setted Prusa I3, after having tried a "custom" config, leaving just basic settings (for the sake of leaving it easier): but it fails to replicate the former results.

I actually tried also other slicers, in order to test even the eventuality that the culprit would be given to the app: but also other softwares failed... I do not see any motivation to use another software instead of Cura, also 'cause I found it so far the most user-friendly around: I don't want to put off any easy comparisons, but other slicers gave me results which appeared awkwarder than Cura's... So, I hope rather than my cases may be of any help in order to ascertain from your side what could be issues that may eventually happen to other people, who update to the latest versions and do not want to downgrade.

Indeed, when I used Cura 2.4/2.5, the layers appeared smoother than now, and without going until 0.06 height: perhaps now the culprit is the shape, or even the different brand spool. I don't know whether the new stepper motor could affect the result: for nobody told me that even such an hypothesis could be probable too.

In former times I even wrote to your team, in order to know whether you were able to insert in the list my printer (which is very very common around!), but I received the answer to write down to Geeetech and get from them the firmware of my printer, then transmit it to you and you had inserted it in the list... I guess that's not a common procedure: besides, I did what you asked, but they didn't answered me at all... Perhaps they expect that a private guy couldn't have more voice to ask than a company.

Last, no need to ban anyone, methink: I guess that there are many other ways in order to achieve order.

All the best.

Edited November 10, 2017 by Guest

[SandervG 1,521]

I actually tried also other slicers, in order to test even the eventuality that the culprit would be given to the app: but also other softwares failed...

 

Does this mean other slicers showed you similar defects on your print?

If that is the case, the common denominator in this is your hardware. Perhaps it is worth considering to troubleshoot or calibrate your hardware.

A slicer / gcode can only tell your motors to do 'X steps', if the hardware is failing to execute them for some reason, there is no point to point fingers at the software (just a hypothesis).

Regarding the profile, I think we are doing a pretty good job so far supplying all existing profiles with Cura for all third-party printers. However, do note we are a facilitator in this regard. We don't own most of those printers so there is no way for us to make those profiles, or test them. So it has nothing to do with how popular or common a printer is. We just don't have the tools and information to make those profiles.

In that regard, we rely on those third-party manufacturers or users to supply us with the information. We have already made Cura available to them and their users to use, the least they can do to invest in the user experience of their users is to provide the profile. I hope you understand.

Hopefully this extra bit of information helps and is another piece of the puzzle. Good luck!

[BiaC 0]

 

I actually tried also other slicers, in order to test even the eventuality that the culprit would be given to the app: but also other softwares failed...

 

Does this mean other slicers showed you similar defects on your print?

If that is the case, the common denominator in this is your hardware. Perhaps it is worth considering to troubleshoot or calibrate your hardware.

A slicer / gcode can only tell your motors to do 'X steps', if the hardware is failing to execute them for some reason, there is no point to point fingers at the software (just a hypothesis).

 

Infacts, I'm not pointing the finger to the software...

And, yes: other slicers (two of them, actually: the most famous...) showed up similar problems, besides other ones (such as misalignment on the platform, crazy speeds and so on).

I changed the nozzle 3 months ago, believing that the older one (which came mounted on the printer by default) were broken, 'cause it had begun to ooze and to fail in printing. Another issue I experimented was a "chocking" when trying to extrude the filament, which I addressed to an hardened nozzle problem.

So I changed the nozzle, thinking it was a problem caused by clogged nozzle. But although I changed it, the problem was not removed: so I thought that the stepper had been broken, then I decided to buy a new stepper.

Once arrived, I mounted just one of the steppers (I actually bought a bundle of two steppers for double nozzle printing: it is the "infamous" Biqu dual head extruder, which I'm not exactly sure if it is perfectly compatible with my brand's printer, or even with a Prusa I3: though, I did found it in the search results as a printhead for my Geeetech, and I took it), 'cause their double holder was not so good to be attached to the rails... Interestingly  (I guess it could be interesting, methink), when I connected the single head to the board using its own cable, it gave strange outputs: then I attached it with the cable of the former stepper, and it gave better results, although now I'm experimenting such issues. So, could it be an hardware issue really?

Edited November 10, 2017 by Guest

[cloakfiend 995]

Ok @Sandervg seeing as I like you, I'll let this one go....

But to all the other people out there who immediately install the latest and greatest software, (apart from someone) when you get offered an upgrade or update don't do it straight away unless you need to or are interested in the extra functionality like @neotko also said (after all it could even be spyware or a virus! better safe than sorry!). We use Macs at work and its a nightmare for the tech guys who need to re-code our software for us as updates generally kill our bespoke software. We have test machines for new software, so that incase there are issues we don't get hit. With new software/updates come new problems so a rule of thumb is to always install them alongside the old if you can so that you don't compromise your workflow and can roll back to the old if needed, and then install the new when satisfied its good to go.

I hope no coders were offended by this post!

And apologies for any ill feelings! happy printing everyone! x