Surface looks a lot worse in Cura 14.03

[tlrt2701 0]

I use the TEST2 Version, but the Plugin TweakAtZ has no function. The parameter deletes after saving the gcode.

Thorsten

 

[Dim3nsioneer 557]

I use the TEST2 Version, but the Plugin TweakAtZ has no function. The parameter deletes after saving the gcode.

Thorsten

 

Please try to close and reopen Cura. If that doesn't help, please deactivate the TweakAtZ, close Cura and reopen it and reactivate the plugin...

TweakAtZ 3.1.1 does work with Cura 14.03-test2 in general, which of course does not exclude problems with a single installation...but for different reasons.

 

[tlrt2701 0]

Thanks, I reinstall Cura. Now it works.

Thorsten

 

[Nicolinux 288]

Hey Daid,

since the surface quality problems are a bit worriesome with the latest Cura, could you please release a fix? (like the TEST2 version as Cura 14.03.01). The surface in TEST1/2 looks fantastic.

Pretty please

 

[cor-kiekens 0]

downloaded "test 2" last night. I printed one of my self drawn models. with a very high resolution stl... and there where still artefacts and ugly bits due to super slow and "hopping" print speed... I am currently not at home but will try to post some pictures later....

[cor-kiekens 0]

after a lot of experimenting I have found my problem.... it turns out that my stl output of solid works produced just too detailed stls... I selected a max stl deviation of 0.01mm (not a problem) and a max stl edge length of 0.3mm (big problem)...even straight lines get converted into very tiny segments of g code and this results in varying print speeds during printing an intended straight line.(very very ugly print results) ...for now results are fine we will see what the future brings.

[Nicolinux 288]

But what to do with already exported .stl files? Is there a way to simplify them afterwards? Maybe with Meshlab?

 

[cor-kiekens 0]

no idea....i'm also a bit concerned about this, because the reason I set the resolution so high, was for me to simplify " gluing" stl files together in mesmixer...because of the insane number of triangles it was very easy to "boolean" the stuff together. so for me it would be nice if cura/um2 could easily handle this kind of detail....

[Daid 304]

How does the 14.01 release do on those models? I have a few tweaks and stuff I can try. But in the end it's a careful balance between keeping the model detail and not generating too verbose GCode.

 

[cor-kiekens 0]

sorry daid...i'm currently trying to manage my household...(four kids). will get back on this as soon as i find some time...

[Daid 304]

sorry daid...i'm currently trying to manage my household...(four kids). will get back on this as soon as i find some time...

 

No problem. Just report back on it when you have time, in the meantime I'll do some tests of my own.

 

[cor-kiekens 0]

Hi everyone (Daid somewhat in particular)

I have been playing around with some of the things mentionden above and found somthing interesting.

When i was having trouble printing super high res stl, i saw that the inner contours sufferd much more speed variing issuses than the outer ones. (although the outer contours were stille very ugly).

At first i thougt this made sense because of the higher speed i was printing the inner contour.

Bur now i found out somthing else. When printing a shape like the posted picture, the outer contour (with no infill just testing) can be defined by 4 G-code commands, and one could think that would also apply for the innen contours. But if you look at the sample of my G-code, it is clear that this is not the case.... Funny thing is, when this object is placed alinged with, for example the x-axis, the outer and inner contour for each layer do consist of only four lines.

 

;TYPE:WALL-OUTER

G1 F840 X119.01 Y108.60 E8.52530

G1 X116.52 Y117.88 E8.56142

G1 X106.71 Y115.25 E8.59964

G1 X109.19 Y105.97 E8.63575

G0 F15000 X109.90 Y107.20

;LAYER:16

G0 X109.28 Y107.19 Z1.21

;TYPE:WALL-INNER

G1 F960 X109.47 Y106.47 E8.63856

G1 X109.87 Y106.57 E8.64009

G1 X110.35 Y106.70 E8.64198

G1 X113.27 Y107.48 E8.65335

G1 X113.76 Y107.61 E8.65524

G1 X115.22 Y108.00 E8.66092

G1 X115.70 Y108.13 E8.66281

G1 X117.16 Y108.52 E8.66850

G1 X117.65 Y108.65 E8.67039

G1 X118.54 Y108.90 E8.67388

G1 X116.26 Y117.40 E8.70699

G1 X110.51 Y115.85 E8.72941

G1 X109.53 Y115.59 E8.73320

G1 X109.05 Y115.46 E8.73509

G1 X107.59 Y115.07 E8.74077

G1 X107.20 Y114.96 E8.74230

G1 X107.45 Y114.01 E8.74600

G1 X107.71 Y113.04 E8.74980

G1 X109.02 Y108.16 E8.76880

G1 X109.15 Y107.67 E8.77070

G1 X109.28 Y107.19 E8.77259

G0 F15000 X109.19 Y105.97

;TYPE:WALL-OUTER

G1 F840 X119.03 Y108.61 E8.81092

G1 X116.60 Y117.70 E8.84631

G1 X116.55 Y117.89 E8.84704

G1 X106.71 Y115.25 E8.88537

G1 X109.19 Y105.97 E8.92148

G0 F15000 X109.90 Y107.20

;LAYER:17

G0 X109.29 Y107.15 Z1.27

;TYPE:WALL-INNER

G1 F960 X109.47 Y106.47 E8.92417

G1 X109.87 Y106.57 E8.92570

G1 X110.35 Y106.70 E8.92759

G1 X113.27 Y107.48 E8.93896

G1 X113.76 Y107.61 E8.94085

G1 X115.22 Y108.00 E8.94653

G1 X115.70 Y108.13 E8.94842

G1 X117.16 Y108.52 E8.95410

G1 X117.65 Y108.65 E8.95599

G1 X118.57 Y108.90 E8.95961

G1 X118.33 Y109.79 E8.96306

G1 X118.21 Y110.28 E8.96495

G1 X117.94 Y111.25 E8.96875

G1 X117.81 Y111.74 E8.97065

G1 X117.03 Y114.67 E8.98205

G1 X116.90 Y115.15 E8.98395

G1 X116.51 Y116.62 E8.98965

G1 X116.38 Y117.10 E8.99154

G1 X116.30 Y117.40 E8.99271

G1 X112.97 Y116.51 E9.00568

G1 X112.48 Y116.38 E9.00758

G1 X111.51 Y116.12 E9.01137

G1 X111.02 Y115.99 E9.01326

G1 X109.56 Y115.60 E9.01894

G1 X109.08 Y115.47 E9.02083

G1 X107.20 Y114.96 E9.02815

G1 X107.33 Y114.47 E9.03007

G1 X107.46 Y113.98 E9.03197

G1 X108.25 Y111.06 E9.04337

G1 X108.37 Y110.57 E9.04527

G1 X108.64 Y109.59 E9.04907

G1 X108.77 Y109.11 E9.05097

G1 X109.16 Y107.64 E9.05667

G1 X109.29 Y107.15 E9.05857

G0 F15000 X109.19 Y105.97

;TYPE:WALL-OUTER

 

 

and when placed neatly alingend

;TYPE:WALL-INNER

G1 F2400 E3.24576

G1 F900 X117.01 Y108.10 E3.38543

G1 X117.01 Y116.90 E3.52337

G1 X108.10 Y116.90 E3.66304

G1 X108.10 Y108.10 E3.80099

G0 F15000 X107.70 Y107.70

;TYPE:WALL-OUTER

G1 F900 X117.41 Y107.70 E3.95320

G1 X117.41 Y117.30 E4.10368

G1 X107.70 Y117.30 E4.25589

G1 X107.70 Y107.70 E4.40637

G0 F15000 X108.70 Y108.70

 

[cor-kiekens 0]

Just posting the above i saw that when the object is neatly aligned with the x-axis. somewhere in layer 14 it starts producing massive amounts of g-code..... The shape is stil a sqare shap, but it creates a g-code for every segment of the stl... So that is also a bit weird...

;TYPE:WALL-OUTER

G1 F840 X117.74 Y107.76 E7.95765

G1 X117.74 Y107.85 E7.95801

G1 X117.74 Y107.86 E7.95804

G1 X117.74 Y107.95 E7.95839

G1 X117.74 Y107.96 E7.95842

G1 X117.74 Y108.05 E7.95877

G1 X117.74 Y108.06 E7.95880

G1 X117.74 Y108.15 E7.95915

G1 X117.74 Y108.16 E7.95919

G1 X117.74 Y108.26 E7.95953

G1 X117.74 Y108.27 E7.95957

G1 X117.74 Y108.36 E7.95991

G1 X117.74 Y108.37 E7.95995

G1 X117.74 Y108.46 E7.96029

G1 X117.74 Y108.47 E7.96033

G1 X117.74 Y108.56 E7.96067

G1 X117.74 Y108.57 E7.96071

G1 X117.74 Y108.66 E7.96105

G1 X117.74 Y108.67 E7.96109

G1 X117.74 Y108.76 E7.96143

G1 X117.74 Y108.77 E7.96147

G1 X117.74 Y108.86 E7.96181

G1 X117.74 Y108.87 E7.96185

G1 X117.74 Y108.96 E7.96219

G1 X117.74 Y108.97 E7.96223

G1 X117.74 Y109.06 E7.96257

G1 X117.74 Y109.07 E7.96261

G1 X117.74 Y109.16 E7.96295

G1 X117.74 Y109.17 E7.96299

G1 X117.74 Y109.27 E7.96333

G1 X117.74 Y109.28 E7.96337

G1 X117.74 Y109.37 E7.96371

G1 X117.74 Y109.38 E7.96375

G1 X117.74 Y109.47 E7.96409

G1 X117.74 Y109.48 E7.96413

G1 X117.74 Y109.57 E7.96447

G1 X117.74 Y109.58 E7.96451

G1 X117.74 Y109.67 E7.96485

G1 X117.74 Y109.68 E7.96489

G1 X117.74 Y109.77 E7.96523

G1 X117.74 Y109.78 E7.96527

 

 

And when the object is placed somewhat at an angle (see picture in my previous post) the shape is maily defined by relatively long moves

 

;TYPE:WALL-OUTER

G1 F900 X121.03 Y109.22 E30.24758

G1 X118.55 Y118.49 E30.28370

G1 X106.65 Y115.30 E30.33005

G1 X109.13 Y106.03 E30.36616

G0 F15000 X109.84 Y107.25

;LAYER:88

G0 X109.20 Y107.31 Z5.53

;TYPE:WALL-INNER

G1 F1080 X109.42 Y106.52 E30.36923

G1 X110.30 Y106.76 E30.37265

G1 X110.78 Y106.89 E30.37454

G1 X112.24 Y107.28 E30.38022

G1 X112.72 Y107.41 E30.38211

G1 X115.64 Y108.19 E30.39347

G1 X116.13 Y108.32 E30.39537

G1 X117.59 Y108.71 E30.40105

G1 X118.07 Y108.84 E30.40294

G1 X119.05 Y109.10 E30.40673

G1 X119.53 Y109.23 E30.40862

G1 X120.57 Y109.51 E30.41268

G1 X120.44 Y110.00 E30.41460

G1 X120.28 Y110.59 E30.41688

chew on this daid...... :eek: :-P

 

[falco12 0]

Sorry, but with new version of Cura I've got the problems that I never had before. Surface has some visible vertical ridges. Here is an example of plastic corners printed for my friend. All printed at once in one orientation on buildplate, main speed is 80 mm/s, PLA, temp is 208C, layer is 0.25, nozzle is 0.35.

All ridges are the same on all models so I think it's maybe software problem.

Can anyone have a key to this problem?

also my other print (a little statue, mostly curved surfaces) out very noisy on all surfaces. Really like in first pictures of this topic.

http://s020.radikal.ru/i720/1404/c3/0e8ee455ddf2.jpg

http://s020.radikal.ru/i721/1404/0d/9d683cb2538b.jpg

http://s019.radikal.ru/i620/1404/41/7673c19b4efb.jpg

http://s003.radikal.ru/i204/1404/b1/4648460ac41b.jpg

 

[cor-kiekens 0]

Just confirmed the "when it's alingend it seems more problematic theory" in this picture you see twoo objects printed tonight. Both same settings, same cura 14.03-test2. The only thing changed is that the one on the left is printed 15 degrees tilted clockwise. Wich seems to result in a far better product......

 

[Nicolinux 288]

@Cor Kiekens: But what is with the lower part oft the objects? It looks pretty smooth. I guess that's where tha fan kicked in. If so, you could try to print without cooling and rule out a possibile cause for the wonky surface.

 

[cor-kiekens 0]

the lower part is really the lower part. so the fan was at 100 percent after five layers. but the reason that the surface on the right look really bad is that Cura appears to have no problem with for instance a incredible high res cube... but if one of the sides point outwards (see my sample picture 2posts back) that is where the problems start. it also happens if the top of a nice cube was made round with a fillet.

[Daid 304]

the lower part is really the lower part. so the fan was at 100 percent after five layers. but the reason that the surface on the right look really bad is that Cura appears to have no problem with for instance a incredible high res cube... but if one of the sides point outwards (see my sample picture 2posts back) that is where the problems start. it also happens if the top of a nice cube was made round with a fillet.

 

That makes sense, as a cube might have lots of polygons, but lines that have no angle in between get optimized out by the Cura code. So you need to make a curve for this effect to show up.

 

[cor-kiekens 0]

in my first example there are no curves at all. and the effect only shows when the object is nicely alingend.???

[fingerpuk 0]

I finally got to test, and 14.03 Test1 for Mac gives much improved output over the final release. It's night and day. Also my retraction seems to be working better, and the Z step issues went away.

 

[Minkeproducts 3]

Dear all,

I did some tests printing the same mesh with Cura 14.01 and Cura 14.03 in Windows 8.01, 64-bit.

It appears to be unpredictable whether the newest version Cura 14.03 gives a smooth skin surface or not. Prints sliced via Cura 14.01 give always a smooth surface.

Adjustments in both 14.01 and 14.03 are the same; default settings ( like layer height, normal 0.1 and shell thickness, 0.8)

Printing the spheres, comes out that the surface of the sliced models in Cura 14.03 have a rougher surface than the ones sliced in Cura 14.01

Printing the hourglass shape, there is, funny enough, no difference.

Till now, I am not sure if I use Cura 14.03, since I cannot predict if the surface will be rough or not. On the images it is maybe not easy to see, but here I pick them out, right away.

images at;

http://umforum.ultimaker.com/index.php?/gallery/album/791-curaversionstest/

I am new at the forum, so if I missed something, please just give me the right hint?

 

[sebastian 0]

Did you already try the "TEST" versions?

http://software.ultimaker.com/Cura_closed_beta/

 

[Minkeproducts 3]

Dear Member,

Thank you for your reply. As mentioned in the discussions above already, I did, -more or less-, understand that I can do some tests. Thank you for this link. I will do the tests and see if the surface in Cura 14.03 comes out more smooth, make images and I will let you know.

 

[Minkeproducts 3]

Dear all,

I downloaded Cura 14.03 Test 1.exe and Cura 14.03 Test 2.exe

The same model.stl is used, with the same settings.

The model, sliced in Cura 14.03 gives in this model a kind of basketry pattern

The model, sliced in either Cura 14.01, Cura 14.03 Test 1 or Cura 14.03 Test 2 give a smooth surface.

Since the G-codes have different content (and different kB) I tried also to load the model in Cura 13.03 with a loaded Gcode from Cura 13.01, but it made no difference.

Conclusion; With this model, Cura 14.01, Cura 14.03 Test 1 and Cura 14.03 Test 2 give a more smooth surface.

Question; What version of Cura is best to use? Does anybody have an advice for me?

Images at; http://umforum.ultimaker.com/index.php?/gallery/album/795-curaversionstest-2/

 

[Daid 304]

I recommmend using the TEST2. It's stable, it contains a few fixes but nothing else compared to 14.03. I'm planning to do an official update soon.