Jump to content
Ultimaker Community of 3D Printing Experts
Kruno3D

Vase Mode Issue

Recommended Posts

I have surface model that I wish to print in Vase Mode (Spiralize Outer contour).

I have created model with Fusion, and checked with Meshmixer, so model is all good.

 

Now when I select Vase model, slicer shows strange behavior, and I'm afraid that this will cause problem with printing.

When I set Surface Mode to normal, the part of model is missing from slicer.

But when I set Surface Mode to Both, again on same spot is problem where layer is missing and shooted in the air...

Selecting Surface, will solve problem, but leave bottom empty...

 

Cura version 3,1 (tried also on 3.03 the same results)

Ultimaker 2

 

How to solve this?

 

 

Screenshot_012318_094542_AM.jpg

Screenshot_012318_094818_AM.jpg

Screenshot_012318_094913_AM.jpg

Screenshot_012318_095027_AM.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not done vase mode in a while, but I do know it will 'crop' things to a horizontal level at its last position of being able to do so.

 

Does your model have a bottom modeled in?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the base sit below the build plate? I have my Cura preferences set to not automatically drop the model to the build plate for fine adjustment. Sometimes the base will sit just enough below the surface to not be registered. By not setting it to automatically drop the model, you can move it upward in the Z by direct input or arrow to get it where it truly needs to be.

 

To get around the issue of vase mode cropping the top parts to horizontal, I have found the going to a single wall, with as thick of a line width as I can get away with. For these, I usually prefer a 0.8mm nozzle/core. But, I believe you could also try to beef a line width of a standard 0.4 core/nozzle to about 0.4 - 0.6. It will over extrude a bit, but will get a thicker base out. Personally, I have pushed my 0.4 cores to 0.42 whereas the default is 0.35. But not beyond that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thnx for all the input.

 

I have checked, and yes model is sitting on top of build plate, nothing is wrong here. Even if I lift model up, slicer is always showing sliced version on the build plate, without bottom...

 

Here is mine Shell profile, , I have set up things you said, but still no luck.

Check if there are some other options I should change.

Screenshot_012318_124343_PM.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow...that was a fun model LOL ;p

 

Ok, to start with, it was not manifold, in that it was a single wall. I took it into 3DS MAX and did an stl check on it and it pointed to open edges (the two open holes in the tiop)

 

Then I put on a shell to give it thickness and make it manifold. It took a bit of playing with, but I did set the file to 0.8 on the line width with a 0.4 nozzle. I have not pushed it like this before, but it seemed to slice fine now. But, I do not know how it will print with a 0.4 nozzle and a 0.8 line width. Cura did not throw out any color changes in the input fields as it will do when you make  an error or push values too much.

 

Here is the Curaproject file so that you can look at the settings. Basic 0.2mm layer height with the model as I modified it. I could not get it to work without modifying it. But it is a single wall now and captures the angles of the open areas at top.

 

UM3E_watercan.curaproject.3mf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, that was fun to model indeed :)

 

BTW thanks for trying to find solution for this problem.

 

I have take a look at your file, and I see that my understanding how things works isn't quite as I thought.

Let's start with model thickness.

You set thickness to 1,4 mm in 3D model

Line Width to 0,8 mm on 0,4 mm nozzle

Wall Thickness to 1 mm

Wall Line Count to 1

No Vase Mode

 

Based on this parameters I should have 3d printed part, that have 0,8 - 1 mm wall thickness made from 2x 0,4 mm walls (because of 0,4 mm nozzle) right? I can't make 1,4 mm thickens with above settings, because Line Width is set to 0,8 mm?

So basically 3d model thickness don't have any role at this point?

 

But if I set thickness to 1,6 mm in 3d model, and with same settings in Cura, I should get 1,6 mm 3d printed part that is made from 0,8 mm outer wall (2x0,4 mm walls) and 0,8 mm inner wall (2x0,4 mm walls)?

 

Can you share more light on how to set up and print thin walled models?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

forget my file if you want basic wall theory. I ws just trying to make it work the way you set it up.

 

Here is my philosophy:

  • If I want strong walls, I will design the wall thickness to the object I am making and then use multiple walls so they make things nice and strong. Sort of laminating them together.
  • I try to make the walls at least 0,8mm thick so that I can get 2 walls at least. the number of walls should be a direct multiple of the line width. So, if I want 4 walls I multiply that by the line width.
  • The default line width in Cura for a 0.4 nozzle is 0.35. That is your multiplier.
  • N= number of walls. X = line width. So, 4 * 0.35 (default line width) = 1.4mm
  • This prevents under or over extrusion.

Hopefully that made sense.

 

As for why the model originally did not have a bottom was that the curvature of the bottom was so slight that it could not 'sample' enough lines based on the layer thickness to create a bottom. Vase mode needs sharp angles to connect properly or it leaves wide areas of gaps that it cannot fill. This is not such a problem with a walled model as described above or a solid model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Off at  tangent maybe @kmanstudios but why is the Cura line width default 0.35. I always thought that a nozzle with a 0.40 opening always printed a line with a width of 0.40? Anyway as an Englishman I have always used line width of 0.40 and got excellent dimensional accuracy and strong models. Double lol,maybe that is why our Dutch friends keep having to put their fingers in the dykes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, yellowshark said:

Off at  tangent maybe @kmanstudios but why is the Cura line width default 0.35. I always thought that a nozzle with a 0.40 opening always printed a line with a width of 0.40? Anyway as an Englishman I have always used line width of 0.40 and got excellent dimensional accuracy and strong models. Double lol,maybe that is why our Dutch friends keep having to put their fingers in the dykes.

I have no idea. Most of my information either comes from here or extrapolation of what I see. In this instance, 0.35 is the default for a 0.4 as far as I have seen in Cura.

 

I put my finger in a dyke once. Unfortunately, I am a pneumatic/hydrolic by nature and all it did was clean my ears out.

 

Think about it ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seams that I always choose to complicate models for simple testing lol ;)

 

Thanks for clarifying the wall theory.

My thinking was the same, so after all I wasn't wrong about it.

 

To sum it up:

  • did 2 mm thickness on model, now vase mode works and I have bottom filled, but again Cura have problem with upper part of the geometry
  • ditched Vase mode
  • I decide to print it in normal model with 2 mm thickness on 3d model, with 2 Wall Line Count, and 0,4 Line Width and 10% infil
  • This results in total 4 walls; 2 outer and 2 inner which gives me 0,8 mm outer line, 0,4 mm space for infil and 0,8 mm inner line
  • total 13h print time :D

 

And now back to the problem.

Cura is having issue with this part of my model geometry from the very begging.

 

With current setting it seams that I'll have top surface printed all the way up, on this model side.

Why and how to remove printing top surface here?

It will add unecesery time, but also cause cooling and sink makrs problems...

 

 

 

 

Screenshot_012418_103003_AM.jpg

Screenshot_012418_103118_AM.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is a nice model for the new Cura beta 3.2 using adaptive layers...

In Meshmixer you can offset your walls to your liking, keeping in mind the nozzle thickness, a multiple of 0.35. I did 0.7.

At the bottom you need some support, so I put in a scaled cylinder and used the 'per model settings' 'print as support'.

And used the new 'adaptive layers'

 

UM2_WaterCanv25surface-07.3mf

Ultimaker_Cura 3.2 beta vase.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow so much great info! Ty Guys :)

 

@kmanstudios so there is no way to adjust or alter that settings in cura for top layers?

 

@peggyb sweet, this per model settings' 'print as support' is only for Cura 3.2? because it seams I can't find it in 3.1 I mean there is Per model setting but it doesn't have Mesh type print as support as in 3.2

 

Also how do you set up 2 bodies in one single stl file? It seams that when I create 2 bodies, on export i got one merged body.

If I load 2 separate stl files, how do I get them aligned in cura, as you did in your example?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kruno3D, not sure about the settings for that as I have not worried about it. Are you wanting this to be transparent? Seems if it is a watering can, you would want that thing as internally supported as possible.

 

Re: Setting up multiple parts for unification in Cura.

 

This is what I do: I make the objects in place. I also go through the trouble of making sure that the pivot points align. Although, depending on software used to create with, this may not be an issue.

 

Then I export as separate object and then bring them in. Once all parts are in, I give them their individual settings and then select all. Then I either right click to bring up contextual menu or go to edit menu in drop down and select "Merge models". Group models just takes their positions as they are and creates a group for easy manipulation. But 'Merge Models' will put them together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

something is different in 3.2 compared to 3.1 with the 'per model settings' for support. In 3.2 the options to choose from changed, and selecting 'print as support' should be the way to go,  In 3.1 you can choose 'generate support' and 'cutting mesh' and it generates only support underneath the bottom curve.

I load two separate models, don't merge them, the only thing is to uncheck 'keep models apart' in the preferences. Selecting both, rightmouseclick, 'center selected models' and using the move and scale tool to your liking.

Notice the huge time difference... 

 

Ultimaker_Cura 3.1 per model support vase.jpg

Ultimaker_Cura 3.2 beta per model support vase.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@kmanstudios well yes and no. I printed similar geometry before, and those top layers caused sink marks on 3d print. At least that is my theory.

But since I can't adjust top layer settings, I'll just add more walls to it will hopefully disappear. 

 

Quote

 

This is what I do: I make the objects in place. I also go through the trouble of making sure that the pivot points align. Although, depending on software used to create with, this may not be an issue.

 

Then I export as separate object and then bring them in. Once all parts are in, I give them their individual settings and then select all. Then I either right click to bring up contextual menu or go to edit menu in drop down and select "Merge models". Group models just takes their positions as they are and creates a group for easy manipulation. But 'Merge Models' will put them together.

 

 

I tried that and it's logical thing to do, but again it seams Cura wont co-operate with me lol 

When I load models Cura allocate them all over the build plate...

 

When I load models in Meshmixer, they are perfectly aligned.

Pot-Vase-Root-Sink-Marks.jpg

Screenshot_012518_125231_PM.jpg

Screenshot_012518_125323_PM.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will load the objects all helter skelter when you first put them into Cura. But select them all and then merge them (Merge Models) and it puts them together for you in a group and in proper location relative to each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@kmanstudios Thank you, now I got them all aligned and sorted! :)

 

Move to my next question.

@peggyb

I found that options, but regarding my support on second body doesn't show. So where do I control support option for that second body?

And what I set in Per Model Settings for original body that I want to print?

 

 

Screenshot_012518_011101_PM.jpg

Screenshot_012518_011228_PM.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@peggyb's method is using 3.2 Beta. If you download that you can find it under per model settings.

 

If you stay with 3.1 stable, then you can CTRL+left click on the cylinder model and choose to print it with the PVA extruder if it is loaded as such.

 

However, I just noticed that your machine is an Ultimaker 2. I am assuming you only have the one nozzle. So, that would be useless. You may have to go with the 3.2 beta to give it true support qualities in the same material. This would allow you to control density, type of support, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Our picks

    • Ultimaker Cura | a new interface
      We're not only trying to always make Ultimaker Cura better with the usual new features and improvements we build, but we're also trying to make it more pleasant to operate. The interface was the focus for the upcoming release, from which we would already like to present you the first glance. 
        • Like
      • 22 replies
    • "Back To The Future" using Generative Design & Investment Casting
      Designing for light-weight parts is becoming more important, and I’m a firm believer in the need to produce lighter weight, less over-engineered parts for the future. This is for sustainability reasons because we need to be using less raw materials and, in things like transportation, it impacts the energy usage of the product during it’s service life.
        • Like
      • 12 replies
×

Important Information

Welcome to the Ultimaker Community of 3D printing experts. Visit the following links to read more about our Terms of Use or our Privacy Policy. Thank you!