1 hour ago, smartavionics said:I printed one of those D shapes and it came out very nicely. Just went round and round 25 times. Hard to get my phone to focus but here's a picture...
I got the same thing in my print using default settings...so I am still lost as to the actual physical difference in the end result.
I understand this is how Cura slices thin walls. I have accepted that, but somewhere down the road it got turned into this. I guess because I didnt see a single walled print. I see 2 overlapping walls. and when you break down the gcode, I can SEE that 2 walls are in fact overlapped. The whole purpose of the D was really not to print it, but to create a single walled print without vase mode. Also to demonstrate how it backtracks with the minimal extrusion issue. I cant print it at the moment, Im not even trying because my goal is not to print a 2 walled D.
But that's pretty cool smartavionics! I hope one day thats part of cura in an experimental mode!
Here is the model, its a bit from finished. Since the start of this thread I kinda abandoned it and started designing a double walled version.
Thanks for the model, it appears to be sliced OK. Here's my gcode, you can't print it but at least you could load it into a viewer and see what's happening.
2 hours ago, kmanstudios said:It is not a rush...I am just really fascinated by this as I see a single physical wall, but there seems to be something that you guys are hung up on that I do not understand because I can only go by what I see.
But, it is also fun to make the pieces that can really test your theories...such as this:
Now, this is some crazy X, Y and Z thickness variations.....maybe too much.
Hi Eric, thanks a lot for that model. It's perfect for my experimentation and provides plenty of challenges!
Still lost as to the actual effect and why this would make a difference. In 3 pages, all anybody has said is it is overlapping walls. But nobody has said how it makes a difference when the physical effect remains one line of plastic on top of the previous line regardless of direction.
And, while I appreciate @smartavionics wanting to solve a challenge, I still do not understand the actual difference in the physical world and the way it would make a structural difference in how strong or high it is.
I feel like I am saying four and everybody else is saying, "no, it is 2+2." Same difference as far as I can see.
Hi Eric, it's like this... As we have discussed, Cura always prints a thin wall using two passes of the nozzle. The first pass will output a line with whatever wall line width has been specified. The second pass will output from 0% to 100% of the normal extrusion amount depending on how close the passes are. The thinner the wall, the closer the lines will be and the less the extrusion amount of the second line will be. In the extreme, where the flow has reduced to 0%, the nozzle will pass down the wall extruding nothing. Now I can understand how that may not be detrimental in some circumstances but, in general, slowly moving a nozzle along a wall while the extruder is stationary (and no retract has been done) could lead to some dribble on the wall. At the very least, it's a waste of time as the wall could be fairly long. So, to avoid that situation, it's better to convert the low percentage extrudes into travel moves. And that's what I have been beavering away at today. As always, things are not as simple as one would like and it has thrown up some other issues which I am chewing over. Your second model has proven to be really useful in that it made me realise that I could be doing some of the wall order optimization differently to make a better job when thin walls are present. Hope this makes sense.
1
WOW! hats off smartavionics! It seems to slice it perfect At least for the layers I skimmed through. I cannot wait for this feature to become available.
Sorry kmanstudios. I know its overlapping walls, I knew that from the first reply. I am not trying to create an 'appearance' of a single wall. I want to 'print' a single wall. (but not in a vase mode). Not only would it help my loss of prime issues, it would cut down my print times. Ya know, because its not printing 2 walls. the difference between my slice and smartavionics slice took off 20min in a 1h12m print.
Where's the donate button! 
Again, I was basing my observations only on what I saw in sliced view and in practical prints. @smartavionics's reply made much sense.
This is the only way for most of us to learn, by asking and someone not just saying "it is not." Having been in the design end for many, many years, and then teaching, the how and why is much more important and better than 'da rules.'
That is why I do the "da clumsy noob" stuff. Trying to breakdown things for all the other noobs I am barely ahead of.
It is also why I actually do like to be corrected and have things 'splained' to me. Also, unfortunately, it may take an attempt or two as I can get communications messed up.
But, kudos to @smartavionics for making it clear and helping me understand. Really does make a difference. 
So now I'm a noob? You sure are backtracking pretty quick from "nothing is lost in translation" to "I can get communications messed up"
Oh the things that make me giggle...
Either way, I still have to say thank you. If it wasn't for your misunderstanding and keeping this thread alive, I don't think smartavionics would have seen it nor had ideas to springboard the development into fixing a known issue.
Danke.
smartavionics, if you have a donation link, I would like to shoot you a few pennies for your gracious support in this matter. Solving this issue might help a lot of others in prototyping where weight is super critical. Like mini drones, is what I was kind of working on myself.
33 minutes ago, Modified_Gemini said:So now I'm a noob? You sure are backtracking pretty quick from "nothing is lost in translation" to "I can get communications messed up"
Oh the things that make me giggle...
I am glad my issues cause you humour.
As for backtracking, well, when someone actually puts forth an explanation and not just jabs and insults as you are continuing to do, then I have no issues with backtracking. And, I put forth the communication issues to help others understand that sometimes, what makes sense to them is lost on me. So, do I have an issue with my disability? Nope. When I find I am wrong by one way or another, I have no issue with admitting it. But, I do like to find out why I am wrong.
And, you are the one who is thin skinned. Nobody called you a noob. I called myself a noob. And I called others a noob who are less experienced than myself. It does have to do with being able to explain things. Take the difference between what you said and what @smartavionics said. You just attacked. At no point did he attack. He did explain.
Again, in 3 pages, nobody explained what the difference made. And, oddly, you seem to think your way of saying things is superior.
1
I never said you called me a noob, I was asking if you were calling me a noob. You need to slow down on your reading. Also I am not making fun of any disability.
I never said my way of explaining things was superior. I spent 3 pages trying to get you to understand the "difference" between cura printing single walls and not printing single walls. And my issue was that I could NOT print single walls outside of vase mode. and you continued to say that I could and its possible. Even From the first reply people said this was a known issue within Cura. you continued to say - well I can print single walls - I looked in the legend and I see a single wall I dunno what this yank wants - So I brought out labs to prove to you that you in fact were not printing single walls, you are the one persisted to say that there is no difference (even when the labs proved there was a difference). And I explained over and over the difference of what Cura was actually doing and trying to avoid that.
Can you understand the point of this thread was to print a single wall? Not appear to print a single wall? Or are you too thin skinned to admit when you're wrong?
13 minutes ago, Modified_Gemini said:I never said you called me a noob, I was asking if you were calling me a noob. You need to slow down on your reading. Also I am not making fun of any disability.
As I said before, nobody called you a noob. Maybe you should slow down your reading. And, yeah, you keep pressing this without accepting that I do have an issue. Instead of making yourself clear, you just keep saying the same things over and over and over and yes, you said it made you giggle. As if finally having someone finally actually explain the difference and my being able to understand was 'backtracking'. Most people just call that learning. Is it really that difficult for you to understand the difference?
16 minutes ago, Modified_Gemini said:I never said my way of explaining things was superior. I spent 3 pages trying to get you to understand the "difference" between cura printing single walls and not printing single walls.
Uh, no, you never explained a thing. You just kept saying the same thing over and over and over. That is not explanation, that is just repetition. What makes you think that is going to help someone understand the difference between things? Itf it is not understood one way, then try another. You cannot beat the same drum and expect it to magically set in. And, yeah, you did start to make it personal with the way you did start in on me. I at least posted pics, explained my point of view and why I thought what I thought. You, again, just repeated yourself. And, it is the difference between someone like @smartavionics and yourself.
20 minutes ago, Modified_Gemini said:So I brought out labs to prove to you that you in fact were not printing single walls, you are the one persisted to say that there is no difference (even when the labs proved there was a difference). And I explained over and over the difference of what Cura was actually doing and trying to avoid that.
Again, look at what @smartavionics said and the way you are trying to hamhandedly excuse your attempts at berating vs explaining. And, quite frankly, I am not excusing the programmers for not explaining either. Cryptic responses do not help. That was poor form on them as well.
22 minutes ago, Modified_Gemini said:Or are you too thin skinned to admit when you're wrong?
Ummm, the point of this reply was to your original issue with me "Backtracking" when I understood when someone finally took time to explain what was going on. Apparently, my admitting that I finally understood was not enough for you. Noperz, you had to make fun of it, say I was backtracking and then made you giggle. I have no issues with admitting ignorance, that is part of learning. You apparently have an issue with me and now are trying to attack your way out. Say what you will, but it took someone else to help me make sense of this, and, even after making clear that I have issues, you are still trying to beat this dead horse.
what is your problem? Most would be able to move on, but you seem to not be able to. I will reply. I am not going to let this lie down when you keep coming after me with false equivalencies.
7 hours ago, Modified_Gemini said:You sure are backtracking pretty quick from "nothing is lost in translation" to "I can get communications messed up"
This for instance would be such an example. I am not backtracking from someone that never explained anything to anybody. You just stated things as if it should be taken as gospel. And, this is a source of amusement for you?
I did explain. I wanted a single wall. It was not printing a single wall and it was giving me issues with loss of prime. You kept saying it was printing a single wall. And I said it wasn't. You got it to print and tried to say that it was still a single wall, and I explained again. So I brought out some gcode to prove that it was not an actual single wall, but overlapping walls. You said it was still giving me an appearance of a single wall, while I still kept saying that I don't want an appearance, I want an actual single wall.. You were stuck on the appearance while I was trying to get the actual movements. See stuff like that makes me giggle. I have had this issue since when I started using cura since like in 15.04, but I never needed single walls until now. So I hopped in the forums. And if it wasn't for you, the ball probably wouldn't have been set in motion for another 3 years. Thank you sir.
@Modified_Gemini The problem is that all this only works with a wall whose thickness is equal to the width of the nozzle. (if we consider that the nozzle is 0.40 mm while it is configured at 0.35 in CURA ...)
If the wall is 0.45 mm, it will take two passes of a nozzle of 0.4 so the problem will remain.
What's the next step? A nozzle by wall width?
@smartavionics : Thank you for the proposed solution!
A question: does it work with an object like this?
1 hour ago, darkdvd said:@Modified_Gemini The problem is that all this only works with a wall whose thickness is equal to the width of the nozzle. (if we consider that the nozzle is 0.40 mm while it is configured at 0.35 in CURA ...)
If the wall is 0.45 mm, it will take two passes of a nozzle of 0.4 so the problem will remain.
What's the next step? A nozzle by wall width?
Im not conpletely sure what you mean.
As how is it configured as .35mm?
When i break down the gcode the overlap is super agressive at a thickness of .4007mm or was overlapped at a .001mm difference. Damn near on top (But not on top). If i try to go much under that, or even at a .4mm it does not slice the wall correctly. I also have my line width set to .4mm the same as my nozzle size. If cura was configured to lay down a .35mm line, wouldnt the overlap be less agressive as theres that .05 + the rest of the wall thickness?
Either way smartavionics came up with the idea that if the overlap was to agressive, and the flow rate was under a certain percentage of the main wall flow it would ignore the print and convert it to travel moves.
So with that idea, if one created a wall with a .41mm thickness they could set it to ignore that .01mm wall remainder. Yet at the same time creating a wall of .5mm or .6mm could be set to default to the original code. With less of an agressive overlap i think it will extrude just fine and there would be no problems. (at least i believe thats the plan)
1 hour ago, darkdvd said:@smartavionics : Thank you for the proposed solution!
A question: does it work with an object like this?
Hi @darkdvd, yes, I attach the gcode. I just printed one of these and it came out reasonably well. The ends of the "foot" are thickened because it is doing a retract there but it's not really hideous.
1
1
2 hours ago, Modified_Gemini said:I did explain. I wanted a single wall.
That is not an explanation. That is a statement. I actually provided an illustration that showed you getting a single wall. What I showed was a sngle wall that was two walls stacked. Until @smartavionics explained it, all I had to go on was what I could see. So, no, you did not explain. You just made a statement. Oddly, what you did was more than what one of the UM programmers did. They just asked if it had a phone dial motion without any further info.
Only one person explained. You should accept that. You did not nor anybody else.
2 hours ago, Modified_Gemini said:You kept saying it was printing a single wall. And I said it wasn't. You got it to print and tried to say that it was still a single wall, and I explained again.
No, you kept repeating the same crap line. Just saying something is is not an explanation. I at least showed my reasoning in pictures. You were not trying to be helpful at all.
2 hours ago, Modified_Gemini said:So I brought out some gcode to prove that it was not an actual single wall, but overlapping walls.
And there we have it. I do not read g-code. So, that did not help. And, whether walls overlapped or not, the result was a single wall. Again, only one person explained what was happening. For all I could decipher was you were saying you were getting overlapping bricks. You never said that one wall operated at a different flow or anything else. Again, continuing to say the same thing and expect different results really is poor explanation.
2 hours ago, Modified_Gemini said:You were stuck on the appearance while I was trying to get the actual movements.
This you are correct. Because that is all I have to go on. But in reality, you were the person who never tried to really explain. Just a bunch of repetition of statements. I gots news for yas, I have been a college teacher for more than 17 years. I can teach classes online without ever seeing their screen because my visual memory is that perfect. But most importantly, I know that when I fail to explain something, it is my failure, not the student.
You are obviously more advanced than I am, yet, instead of trying to actually share knowledge, you just chose to argue. I made attempts to show what I meant. Was I wrong? yes. Was it ignorance? Yes. But again, I have no troubles being ignorant. I do have difficulties for being berated about it by someone that makes no attempt to do anything but berate. Ignorance3 is not a fault. Stupidity is the refusal to improve ignorance. @smartavionics helped me be less ignorant. You did not.
Statement - me. "I'm trying to design models as "vase mode". I model in Fusion360 and my latest endeavor is that a few projects require single wall prints."
Explanation - me - "After some troubleshooting, I found in the gcode. It turns out that the "rewind" is actually printing that extra little bit of wall. (I need/want this part to not happen) "
AGAIN - What im trying to accomplish - (I need/want this part to not happen)
you - "print in vase mode"
Me - I'm really not trying to print a vase. Also the model is quite complex, it's about 90% "vase" and the rest are parts that do contain infill. Its just the behavior that's causing issues and messing up prints.
then the whole - you do single walls "all the time" when youre mot in vase mode,
then I tried to explain in cura - if your not in vase mode, is impossible! as others have pointed out..
Then I you tell me in underextruding, when I stated in the first, its a loss of prime
yadda yaddda yadda..you drug it into far left field because you thought it was printing single walls. when in the very first post I explained its printing 2 walls.
even now you say you cant read gcode. so when I bring it to fact, you close youre eyes, and say "well its in the legend". when the legend doesn't mean anything because the legend doesn't control the printer.. the gcode does.. at that point you could have easily said. dropped it because I was bringing up what you did not understand. instead held to your guns ignoring my alternative fact..
this really makes me giggle.. youre still trying to say "I see what I see, and I print single walls all the time" which is proven even more that you don't and never have printed single walls. you print 2 walls that are extremely overlapped.
I mean, do you still think you print single walls?
4 hours ago, Modified_Gemini said:this really makes me giggle.. youre still trying to say "I see what I see, and I print single walls all the time" which is proven even more that you don't and never have printed single walls. you print 2 walls that are extremely overlapped.
I mean, do you still think you print single walls?
See? This is you trying to egg on an argument.
1. I am not sure what part of your 'explanation' did not work for me is not registering with you. But you insist on it anyway.
2. Wayyy back when someone else explained it, I acknowledged the difference, yet, you cannot see that. You still try to prove your superiority even when it has been acknowledged.
3. Again, you state it makes you giggle. I am glad my issues make you giggle.
4. I do find it interesting that you fail to see the difference in what you say and have said and what was finally explained. You are so busy trying to point out something that was wrong, has been acknowledged, and yet you still beat that dead horse. No, I do not read g-code. so, I have only the visual to explain things to me. This is not a fault. This is relying on the information I can understand at that time. You seem to think this is a fault. It would have been a fault if I could not move on as you obviously cannot. Your explanations were faulty, that is all. Accept it. Someone else did it much better than you.
5. At this point, you are just trying to be an agitator and not really trying to get anything solved. So, What is your point? At this point, what are you really trying to prove?
Sigh.... a Vulcan by any other name is still a Vulcan......
9 hours ago, smartavionics said:
Hi @darkdvd, yes, I attach the gcode. I just printed one of these and it came out reasonably well. The ends of the "foot" are thickened because it is doing a retract there but it's not really hideous.
It would be interesting to compare this same object printed with the current version of CURA...
So if you acknowledged the difference WAY back when. Why were you persistant in saying that you can print single walls.
And yes it is a fault. When you blatently ignore facts being given to you.. Just because YOU cannot understand whats being said, does not make it untrue. It does not allow you to revert back to your own reality, ignoring the math of the gcode when the line plot shows 2 walls being printed, when you ignore the physics when way back you admited to visually watching 2 walls being printed. Then continue to say, you print single walls all the time.
Which is completely untrue.
So yes, all that makes me giggle..
So again i ask. ( Iwant to see the depths youre willing to fight this)... Do you think have always been printing single walls?
ArunC posted a topic in UltiMaker Cura,
.thumb.jpeg.0b7a05eafc09add17b8338efde5852e9.jpeg)
Dustin posted a topic in Firmware,
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
30
30
25
8
Popular Days
Mar 10
21
Mar 9
14
Mar 7
11
Mar 11
10
Top Posters In This Topic
Modified_Gemini 30 posts
kmanstudios 30 posts
burtoogle 25 posts
ghostkeeper 8 posts
Popular Days
Mar 10 2018
21 posts
Mar 9 2018
14 posts
Mar 7 2018
11 posts
Mar 11 2018
10 posts
Popular Posts
ghostkeeper
We get a lot of questions about this actually. We use about 7/8ths of the nozzle size in Ultimaker's printers because adjacent lines tend to adhere better together then. Because the nozzle is a b
kmanstudios
I am not sure what you are designing, a pic would be most helpful. But, this is how I cracked the spiralize/vase mode print. It may sound silly, but it showed me the basics of how it could work.
burtoogle
The way Cura works at the moment, when not using spiralize mode, all walls have to have an even number of lines. It modifies the flow of the second line to try and compensate for the overlap but the i
Posted Images
kmanstudios 1,120
It is not a rush...I am just really fascinated by this as I see a single physical wall, but there seems to be something that you guys are hung up on that I do not understand because I can only go by what I see.
But, it is also fun to make the pieces that can really test your theories...such as this:
VaryingThickness2.STL
Now, this is some crazy X, Y and Z thickness variations.....maybe too much.
Link to post
Share on other sites