UltiMaker Cura 5.3 beta Released

[tinkergnome 927]

4 hours ago, ClausJ said:

I want my initial layer to be printed at 230°, next layers at 210°.

 

Should be more or less self-explanatory 😀:

1. "Printing temperature" = 210
2. "Printing temperature initial layer" = 230
3. done

"Initial printing temperature" and "Final printing temperature" are only relevant for prints with more than one extruder during nozzle switches. These two are not related to the layer number at all.

 

The various temperature settings in Cura are well explained on this support page (IMHO):

 

https://support.makerbot.com/s/article/1667411286833

 

 

[ClausJ 5]

Thank you tinkergnome,

 

The link you provide clarifys that initial printing temp is not relevant to me. However it’s still preventing me from slicing if set wrong, due to conflict with the small layer temp setting. Apparently I’m not alone being confused

 

10 years of printing with Simplify3d did not prepare me for Cura 😉

 

[qwerty8224 16]

When forming the substrate, the print area is cut off.

CFFFP_CuraCrocClipRigid.3mf

[MariMakes 198]

Thanks for all the feedback over the weekend 🥰

 

@qwerty8224, Support Horizontal Expansion, seems broken on my side as well. That definitely looks like a bug. 🪲, I'll have the team take a look 👍


@qwerty8224 Are you seeing missing layers between the raft, support, and the model? Because that's a known issue that should be resolved in stable, you can read more about it here: https://github.com/Ultimaker/CuraEngine/pull/1834

 

 

[drayson 75]

Having some issues experienced with print quality settings when giving 5.3 beta a try.

My "fine" setting shows 0,15 instead of 0,1 compared to cura 5.1.0

My printer is a UMO, "fine" is my default profile.

is this a bug or intentionally?

profile "extra fine" shows 0,06, "normal" shows 0,15 as expected...

 

Any hint appreciated...

[qwerty8224 16]

4 minutes ago, MariMakes said:

Спасибо за все отзывы за выходные 🥰

 

@qwerty8224, Поддержка горизонтального расширения, кажется, сломана и на моей стороне. Это определенно похоже на ошибку. 🪲 , пусть команда посмотрит 👍


@qwerty8224 Вы видите недостающие слои между плотом, опорой и моделью? Поскольку это известная проблема, которая должна быть решена в стабильной версии, вы можете подробнее прочитать об этом здесь:  https://github.com/Ultimaker/CuraEngine/pull/1834 .

 

))) More precisely, I meant from the print area 200x200x200 remains 170x170x200 

[gokartmagic 0]

I'm running into an issue with the 5.3.0 beta. On the left is the current 5.2.1 and on the right is the identical profile and file with the new 5.3.0 beta. The print time is increased significantly and the seams are just terrible. Both are set to sharpest corner and smart hiding. This is happening with every file I've attempted so far. Not sure if this is a known issue?

[Cuq 198]

First of all try with the "Release" and not the Beta : https://github.com/Ultimaker/Cura/releases/tag/5.3.0

 

Then Share your project for analyse. Identical Profile doesn't mean Identical parameters

Edited March 7, 2023 by Cuq

[tomnagel 126]

On 2/23/2023 at 11:24 PM, kwakefield said:

Any chance this release includes a fix for the material profile sync to the printer that never completes?

This support article should solve all your material profile sync problems: https://support.makerbot.com/s/article/1667337559396

[zvonkorp 0]

I'm also having issues with this version of cura & no others. It appears that at the end of every single layer, or where there is a seam, that an extraction gets placed into the corner which increases in length with each successive retraction. The same file does not do this in 5.2.1, only in 5.3 & it can be seen in the preview window as what is essentially a white spot all over the previewed model that I cannot get to go away no matter what settings I try changing around. 

 

I've attached the gcode file that's generated, as well as the model & a picture of the gaps I just described in the gcode preview window.

 

 

cura 5.3 white spots.3mf cura 5.3 white spots.gcode

[cdr-automatisierung 1]

The following settings have errors: Small Layer Printing Temperature

 

Unable to slice!

 

I have checked and changed all temperatures but none of the settings work. I don't understand, everything worked in Cura 5.2.2!

[MariMakes 198]

Hey @cdr-automatisierung,

This, Small Layer Printing Temperature, is a newly introduced setting in Cura 5.3.
It was assumed that nobody would raise their initial printing temperature above the final printing temperature.
But we see more reports of people doing this, so I'm discussing with the team if we can resolve this for more people. 

You can do two things:

Easy option 1: lower your initial printing temperature.
Option 2: Change your max/min into a warning.

1. Go to the following folder C:\Program Files\UltiMaker Cura 5.3.0\share\cura\resources\definitions
2. To find the following file fdmprinter.def.json
3. Find the Small Layer Printing Temperature definition
4. Change "minimum_value" to "minimum_value_warning" and "maximum_value" to "maximum_value_warning"
5. Save the file and restart Cura to slice

 

Hope this helps 💪

[cdr-automatisierung 1]

OK, thanks! Now, it works.

 

I use MAC and this is the Path to the file:

/Applications/UltiMaker Cura.app/Contents/Resources/share/cura/resources/definitions/fdmprinter.def.json

[zvonkorp 0]

Just discovered another bug, this one for dual extrusion printing. I'm not sure if this started with 5.3 but i remember it did NOT happen in 5.21 for sure. The issue is that during dual extrusion printing, despite all the options being enabled for retraction settings with the second extruder, they do not appear in the materials tab on extruder #2 in cura 5.3

 

Switching back to the print settings for extruder #1 tab makes them reappear again, but not for #2. As a result,  on my latest print it's clear that since those settings are no longer available  (only for extruder #2 though), that they do not get applied & while printing, extruder #1 will retract & unretract as appropriate during the extruder switching sequence, extruder #2 just stops extruding at the end of it's loop before switching back to one. As a result, the filament is never unretracted and since it's under pressure just continues to extrude all over the print, despite there being configured a 22mm retract & 21mm unretract sequence, the extruder never attempts to do either of those things (only extruder #2)  and #1 works fine as it did before.

 

I also was not able to get these settings to appear in the settings page on the materials tab for tis specific material under print settings. The section DOES appear for dual extrusion, but expanding it reveals absolutely 0 options for editing - while the other material does.

 

 

[GregValiant 1,250]

It would be very helpful to have some screenshots and a project file of the problem.  I can't duplicate it but I may be off on a tangent and I'm not setting Cura up correctly.

[Geckoas 1]

I think ther's a bug in the "Pause At Height" script when choosing the  "Redo Layer" option.

 

I used a layer height of 0.2mm.

When this option is checked, Z-height after the pause script is set for the same layer where the "Pause At Height" script started and not for the layer printed before. 

In my case, I used a testcylinder with 15mm height and wanted to have "Pause At Height" at Layer 25 and Layer 60 of 75 layers in total.

For the first instance, after layer 24, Z-axis was moved to 5.2mm before the script and also to 5.2mm after the script to redo layer 24. But 5.2mm would be the height for layer 25. Shouldn't Z be set to 5mm height to redo layer24 ?

 

****** Gcode Sample with "Redo Layer" checked

;MESH:NOMESH
G0 F600 X111.336 Y114.781 Z5.2
G0 F9000 X108.417 Y108.417
;TIME_ELAPSED:169.794624
;TYPE:CUSTOM
;added code by post processing
;script: PauseAtHeight.py
;current layer: 25
M83 ; switch to relative E values for any needed retraction
G1 F2400 E-6
G1 F300 Z6.2 ; move up a millimeter to get out of the way
G1 F9000 X30 Y30
G1 F300 Z15 ; too close to bed--move to at least 15mm
M104 S230 ; standby temperature
M117 Click to continue
M84 S3600 ; Keep steppers engaged for 1h
M300 S440 P1000 ; Beep
M0 ; Do the actual pause
M109 S230 ; WAIT for resume temperature
G1 F199.998 E5
G1 F300 Z5.2
G1 F9000 X113.591 Y113.591
G1 F300 Z5.2 ; move back down to resume height
G1 F1444.1 ; restore extrusion feedrate
M82 ; switch back to absolute E values
G92 E115.74526
;LAYER:24
M204 S1000
M205 X8 Y8
;TYPE:FILL
;MESH:Testzylinder-10-15 v1.stl
G1 F1444.1 X113.591 Y113.591 E115.74526

 

For reference, I sliced another file without checking "Redo Layer".

I this case the same z height 5.2mm was used before  and after the script at layer 25.

 

****** GCode Sample with "Redo Layer" unchecked

 

;MESH:NOMESH
G0 F600 X111.336 Y114.781 Z5.2
G0 F9000 X108.417 Y108.417
;TIME_ELAPSED:169.794624
;TYPE:CUSTOM
;added code by post processing
;script: PauseAtHeight.py
;current layer: 25
M83 ; switch to relative E values for any needed retraction
G1 F2400 E-6
G1 F300 Z6.2 ; move up a millimeter to get out of the way
G1 F9000 X30 Y30
G1 F300 Z15 ; too close to bed--move to at least 15mm
M104 S230 ; standby temperature
M117 Click to continue
M84 S3600 ; Keep steppers engaged for 1h
M300 S440 P1000 ; Beep
M0 ; Do the actual pause
M109 S230 ; WAIT for resume temperature
G1 F199.998 E5
G1 F300 Z5.2
G1 F9000 X108.417 Y108.417
G1 F300 Z5.2 ; move back down to resume height
G1 F1444.1 ; restore extrusion feedrate
M82 ; switch back to absolute E values
G92 E119.21561
;LAYER:25
M204 S1000
M205 X8 Y8
;TYPE:FILL
;MESH:Testzylinder-10-15 v1.stl
G1 F1444.1 X113.591 Y113.591 E119.45898

 

Please find enclosed a screenshot, the project file  and both gcode files for investigation.

 

If I'm wrong, please ignore and delete this post

 

 

Regards Gerhard

 

 

 

AK_Testzylinder-10-15 v1.3mf AK_Testzylinder-10-15 v1.gcode AK_Testzylinder-10-15 v1-noredo.gcode

Edited March 12, 2023 by Geckoas

[ECOULTIMAKER 0]

[translated]

Hello, unfortunately I don't speak English, but I hope this is the right place for me: I miss entering presets permanently in the "Change settings for overlapping" menu: So: if I put a support structure blocker on an object, where I then want to change settings at that position, mostly fill and fill pattern, I have to search for them in the menu and pass them in every time. A preset where I can choose what appears to be permanent like this: top thickness... if I do this it would make the job easier.

 

 

[original]

Hallo, ich spreche leider kein Englisch, aber hoffe hier richtig zu sein: Ich vermisse es in dem Menü "Einstellungen für Überlappungen ändern" Voreinstellungen dauerhaft einzutragen:

Also: wenn ich ein Objekt mit einem Stützstruktur-Blocker versehe, wo ich dann Einstellungen an dieser Position verändern möchte, meistens Füllung und Füllmuster, muss ich jedes Mal im Menü diese suchen und übergeben. Eine Voreinstellung wo ich auswähle kann, was also dauerhaft erscheint wie dies: obere Dicke ... , wenn ich dies mache, würde die Arbeit erleichtern.

Edited March 11, 2023 by gr5
translation

[Geckoas 1]

PauseAtHeight script - Layer numbering mismatch between Cura workspace and gcode

 

While using PauseAtHeight script I was faced with an issue that the layer numbering in Cura 5.3. workspace doesn't match to the produced gcode.

I used a model with 10 flat layers and 2 layers with numbers on top.

 

In the PauseAtHeight script I used layer 11 to start the pause for the filament change.

During printing, the pause started after the first layer of the numbering, which was wrong.

After this,  I checked the gcode file and found the difference.

 

Layer numbering in Cura starts at layer 1, whereas in gcode it starts with "Layer:0" 

As I selected layer 11, as displayed in Cura workspace, the PauseAtHeight script was inserted 1 layer too late.

 

Please verify.

Edited March 11, 2023 by Geckoas

[ahoeben 1,948]

35 minutes ago, Geckoas said:

I was faced with an issue that the layer numbering in Cura 5.3.

While I agree this is a problem, it has "always" been this way in Cura, since Cura 2.x.

[MariMakes 198]

Hey @ECOULTIMAKER,

 

Your request reminds me of this conversation:

We've added a ticket to the backlog with the intent to improve this in the future, but we don't know when yet.