Unfortunately I can't do it. Uninstalled 4.5.0 and reinstalled 4.4.1 No artifacts anymore.
That's because of your setting of infill wipe distance and/or infill overlap.
All default settings were used with installation.
Then the default settings for your printer include those setting values. Ultimaker doesn't check the validity of 3rd party default profiles; they are provided by the manufacturer or by hobbyists.
One more time. Slow. Cura 4.4.1 DOES NOT have any atrifacts. Cura 4.5.0 DOES. If you saying that defaults are wrong they should be changed. If you are saying that new Cura grabs my old profile and wrongly interprets it it should be fixed.
Conclusion: New Cura doesn't work the way it suppose to be.
One more time. Slow. Ultimaker depends on community members to make profiles for 3rd party printers.
Since you are not even saying what printer you use, and you seem to be unwilling to even help test changes to be made to Cura so they are included in the next version, I am afraid you are going to be using Cura 4.4.1 for a while.Edited by ahoeben
Printer Anet A8. Artifacts is on Cura level, not printer. And YES I will use older version of Cura since it doesn't have bug I tried to point to.
Look, unless you provide the asked for info, there's no real evidence that this problem is really being caused by a bug in Cura 4.5. It could just as easily have been the result of bad settings or (less likely) a bad model.
No problem. I don't have time to experiment with new Cura right now. If nobody else reported similar problem I will try to play with it after finish project I am working on now. Older version don't have any artifacts and works perfectly for me. Thanks.
- 2 weeks later...
It's not related to a bug in Cura but as stated before it's simply a misconfigured profile, not specifically the Anet A8's profile but even "worse" the underlying Anet base profile.
The fix however is simple, click advanced settings and go down to Infill setting make sure that "infill wipe" is set to 0, now verify your preview again and see that it's no longer showing the artifacts.
The funny thing is that Cura 4.4.1 doesn't even come with an Anet A8 profile so I've curious to see what other settings might be different to your 4.4.1 setup and the nowadays included Anet A8 profile.
I've created a pull request resolving this issue.
https://github.com/Ultimaker/Cura/issues/7379 maybe it'll be present in 4.5.1
Great! I will give it a try.
- 4 weeks later...
I had similar strange artifacts like that on my 4.5.0 Cura. Using a Modix Big60 V2 printer, not using any imported profiles, just the standard profiles that came with the clean installation (I'm using Cura for only 2 weeks now).
While slicing a tube, I also got 1 single infill layer passing through the entire tube, even through the Outer Wall layers of the inner diameter of the tube. Really weird.
I updated to 4.6.0 today, but now I have a very strange other issue. I guess I should post that in a new post, but I thought to mention it here also..
See the image..
I made a simple cylinder. Tried 3 walls and a line bottom layer: All ok.
But I'm trying to find a good setting to print a flange which will need to receive a rubber gasket and I really don't want straight lines (and possible gaps) causing any leaks.
So, I wanted very much to use the concentric type for the top and bottom layers.
And to my stupid surprise, I see these totally weird jumps in the extrusion path???
How is that logical? To convert a perfect cylinder into "concentric" paths that have these weird jumps in them?
Does anyone have an idea why that's happening?
Just now I bumped into [Mesh Fixes] Maximum resolution, which is default set to 0.5mm.
Earlier I didn't expect that this could mean anything, as the shape is a perfect cylinder, but.. Now i just imagined that maybe it's all about matching the polygons, which are just triangles.. And when I changed that max resolution to 1.0mm, I suddenly get perfect circles!
I have no idea yet what effect this will give on actual details that it SHOULD print.. I'll have to investigate that tomorrow morning (as it's 3am here in Belgium already)..
Then I only endlessly wonder why the software can't close that last gap (in the 100% concentric infill) with one more circular path, with a calculated reduced flow to compensate for the reduced available width from the standard 0.4mm Infill Width setting.
If there would now only be 75% of 1 line width space left in the center (my current settings are 0.4mm line/infill width, and the wall is 11.50mm wide, so 11.50/0.4=28.75 paths, leaving you with the visible 0.75mm gap).
Why can that gap not be filled?
At least, why not with a concentric (75% flow of the default set flow) pattern?
I can only select "Everywhere" or "Nowhere" for [Fill Gaps Between Walls]...
While I just want a nice, smooth concentric line...
Does anyone know how to solve this problem in Cura?
Or should I use something else with more options?
Thanks in advance for any help..! 🙂
Hi @kayazuki, I think there is a problem with the Cura concentric fill that I have fixed in my releases. [edit - this is actually in 4.6.0 but there is also a regression in that release that could be causing those jaggies]
You can find my releases at https://www.dropbox.com/sh/s43vqzmi4d2bqe2/AAADdYdSu9iwcKa0Knqgurm4a?dl=0
They can be installed alongside the UM releases, please read the README.md file there before using.
That last gap can be filled if you enable the gap filling but, again, the UM releases are buggy and my releases have a more reliable gap filling implementation.
Edited by burtoogle
Thanks a million for the lightning fast response and your kindness of helping a stranger 🙂
So would you agree that such nuts shapes in the path of that cylinder really should never happen and should not have to be corrected by that setting [Mesh Fixes] Maximum resolution..?
I would think so at least.. Especially since I exported that STL with my very high resolution setting in SolidWorks.
I just downloaded your release, can't wait to see how you deal with those paths and gaps! 🙂
So do you work for Ultimaker? Or you're a programmer and work with 3D printers in some other way?
Again, thanks a LOT, I'll go try this now.
In your version, there is absolutely no way that I can define or create any material with a filament diameter of 1.75mm.
Would you happen to know why?
Even creating duplicates and manually entering 1.75mm does not work.
Upon exiting the screen, I see the new material briefly appear, before it vanishes all automagically.
Thank in advance..
Make sure the currently active printer is configured to support 1.75 mm material first. See the extruder tabs in the Machine Settings.
Hello @kayazuki, sorry I don't know why you can't create a material with a dia of 1.75mm. Could you please provide a project file (do File->Save and attach the .3mf to this thread. Thanks.
Hmm, I wanted to try your version so enthusiastically burtoogle, that I forgot I was stupid enough to run the app straight from the .dmg image..
There were no [Update Firmware] and [Machine Settings] buttons for the printer (so I guess it was very stuck on the default 2.85mm).
I properly copied it to the Applications folder and now I can indeed just change the [Compatible material diameter]..
Silly me.. Sorry for wasting your time!Edited by kayazuki
No problem, make sure you try the very latest release 20200424 (from yesterday) as it contains the fixes for a couple of regressions that are in 4.6. Note that my releases are built from the upstream development branches with my own changes so they don't correspond exactly to the UM releases.
And if you are still having problems with the print quality, please post the project file so I can slice it, thanks.
Yea I got that 20200424 release, thanks.
Btw, do you know if this is wise to utilise and what exactly is the definition of "just before the end"...?
Is that like the last 25mm of printing?
Or the last 12 minutes?
Without knowing that, the only thing I can think of is that printing with a colder temperature might lead to poorer adhesion..?
And another thing;
Is G90 not mentioned (I can also not find that the the complete generated G-code) because Absolute Positioning is default..?Edited by kayazuki
Sorry, I know nothing about that final temp setting.
Yes, absolute x/y/z positioning is the default.
Please save a project file (File -> Save) and then attach the .3mf file to this thread. Thanks.
Link to post
Share on other sites