Cura release notes and continued very bad prints.

[zews 1]

Interesting to see that even though we are now at Cura version 14.09, on the Ultimaker website they have not managed to get up top date with the release note. The latest release notes on the site are for version 14.03.

It seems that they don't even pretend to care anymore.

And, ... ALL of my prints continue to have artifacts on the surface that do not exist in any of my models. Cura simply makes up stuff that does not exist.

I simply no longer believe that it is I who makes this happen. I strongly believe the fault lies with Cura and/or this printer, which is nowhere near what I was expecting and promised.

Here is yet another extremely bad garbage print of a very simple model. The entire inside surface is covered with these knobby artifacts that do not exist in the model and that Cura introduced. The entire inside surface, not just a spot here and there, the entire inside surface. This is insane.

 

[illuminarti 18]

Would you care to share the gcode and the STL so that others can try to reproduce your results?

 

[zews 1]

I'd be happy to. Where and how do I upload the STL and gcode?

 

[shurik 87]

It was the same for me. Downgrade to 14.07 - it is better.

 

[nallath 1,124]

The release notes are just not up to date because we're very bad at keeping them. We don't have a formal system for it. So if someone fixes something it might, or might not (in most cases the second) reach the release notes.

We really need the model in order to tell you what is going on. You can check the layer view & x-ray view by yourself (eg; these are excellent tools to see what is going on).

Judging by the picture, it looks like you're extruding the material at a too high temperature.

 

[zews 1]

I would not mind doing that, however I would prefer to first do what illuminarti suggested, if I know where and how to upload my stl and gcode files.

BTW, the Ultimaker website is such a mess. When I was searching for a list with previous releases from where to download version 14.07 at https://www.ultimaker.com/pages/support/manuals, which is a page with manual. Go figure.

BTW, this editor is a mess too. Every time I write a URL the text immediately following that URL becomes part of the URL. i.e. it is blue and underlined. WTF?

 

[zews 1]

I was extruding at the default temperature, whatever that may be, using Ultimaker filament. I would assume Ultimaker would know what temperature its filament to extrude at, so I decided to stay with the default as set by Ultimaker.

But then again, today on a different page on the UM website when filling out a support registration form, where one field is marked as "optional", when I left that field blank and tried to upload the information, I got an error message telling me that the information could not be uploaded because one "required field" was left blank!

What is wrong with these people?

 

[zews 1]

The release notes are just not up to date because we're very bad at keeping them. We don't have a formal system for it. So if someone fixes something it might, or might not (in most cases the second) reach the release notes.

 

Wow! "We're very bad at keeping them". Can't be bothered to update a web page, so the user base can read what to expect from a release.

 

[Labern 775]

you seem to complain a lot

the default temp settings can actually be way off depending on what you are printing. I never use the default settings

you can load the stl file on youmagine. Not sure about gcode but you could try loading it there 2.

What material? PLA?

Temp?

Speed?

Layer Height?

 

[visu-al 2]

you can also upload at something like dropbox.com and post the link after make the files public..

i prefer a company that has administration problems but the product works instead of the opposite :wink:

by the way 3D printers are hard to operate in general if you go and pay 30000$ for a printer you can expect better working products but you can then still not expect that it just works without any problems..

 

[DidierKlein 729]

You can upload STL or GCode on youmagine or any other service you can think off (dropbox, google drive etc..)

I find it a bit odd to complain about the release notes not being up to date, and besides that printing stuff without even knowing the temperature you use...

I would advise reading the following links to help you:

http://support.3dverkstan.se/article/30-getting-better-prints

And for troubleshooting problems:

http://support.3dverkstan.se/article/23-a-visual-ultimaker-troubleshooting-guide

Except that in order to help you we need more information on your settings etc...

 

[zews 1]

you seem to complain a lot

 

That's right. After 5 months of printing, I have yet to produce a flawless print. I am not expecting resin printer quality, but I was at least hoping for what I have seen FDM printers can do. This particular print with all the added internal artifacts now holds the record of my very worst print ever.

Most of the time I don't even complain about the quality, I have more or less given up that I will ever be able to make this work. Since I use the printer mostly for prototyping, getting a rough idea of what a part will look like when fabricated is good enough for me. This particular part however was something that I will actually use as it comes off the printer.

 

[zews 1]

I have uploaded the st and gcode files as a small ZIP file to my Dropbox. The link is https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/66542951/Funnel.zip

 

[visu-al 2]

I can just repeat LABERN :

What material? PLA?

Temp?

Speed?

Layer Height?

the result depends on many many variables like even who produced the filament?

every aspect needs to be harmonized on each printer differently

reading your stuff makes me think you don't know much about all possible problems and solving possibilities or do you ?

if everything should work properly by settings then the printer has a problem and you need to first find out what it is and then how to solve it..

 

[visu-al 2]

i dont know exactly why,

but i print your gcode and it makes a mess its melting all of it. it is to small, no time to cool try print at least 3 of them at the same time

edit: after cooling fan start it looks better but still not enough time i guess

 

[visu-al 2]

i would print 3 of them in a row because it is to small and also i would use a layerheigt of 0.1 if there is no specific reason to go smaller. i hope this helps

 

[visu-al 2]

i can see very unnecessary rectractions going on and weird movements during the print and it generates some "artefacts" similar to yours

i guess this gcode will not be nicely printed by any printer...? so it can be cura in my eyes now

i see slicing the thing in cura that it always makes a lot of retractions, why does combing not work in this way? it even slides over the central gap without trying to combing sometimes , is this maybe because its too small?

My CURA version is14.09.1RC2

you can maybe also try with z-hop when retracting this can help sometimes when cooling is not fast enough

 

[visu-al 2]

i sliced a new one (0.1lh/0.9shell/0infill) and try to disable retraction and see how it goes..

edit: i didn't want to disable retraction on your gcode because it passed over the gap and my new slice with zero infill has no pass like that, i could see in cura

 

[visu-al 2]

i print faster (35mm/s)

and low temp (200°C)

no retraction (0.0mm)

0.1 layerheight

no infill (0%)

and it looks nice till now

->expect at the bottom layers were bottom infill made infill produced the artifacts! so it must be infill related?

edit: further on it reveals no artifacts still but the usual little zscars that would disappear more with low speed but they are as i would expec them so what else should i test?

 

[zews 1]

I have tried to print this part at different settings and a different temperatures. All with the exact same terrible results.

Material: PLA from Ultimaker.

First attempt:

Layer height: .1

Temp: 190

Speed: 20

Second attempt:

Layer height: .05

Temp: 210

Speed: 20

Cura: 14.09

It seems obvious from the blue movement lines in Cura, that this is all wrong. This is a hollow circular part with a wall thickness of .8 mm, i.e. twice the nozzle size. The nozzle should just be moving in circles, and nothing else. It shoudl be laying down two passes of filament side by side per layer, and nothing else.

Why does Cura create all those lateral movements and with it all those internal artifacts?

 

[shiremog 0]

Printed at:

Layer thickness 0.1

Shell thickness 0.4

Print speed 50

Fill density 0

0.8 outer shell, 0.8 inner shell AND a fill between them on a wall thickness of 0.8. Poor little thing is getting confused :???:

I've found that going too thin on layer thickness ( and indeed too slow ) with the aim of a better finish, can be counter productive.

 

[Labern 775]

Small thin items like this can be hard to print.

I haven't printed the item as im printing something else at the moment but in Cura i can see travel that could cause these blobs. under layer view these are visible as the blue lines. There are issues with z height movement that can cause blobs. Cura 14.09 does have movement issues and there is a 14.10 release here you can try.

http://umforum.ultimaker.com/index.php?/topic/7727-1409-creates-insane-amounts-of-travel/?p=72155

Also a post on a similar issue you are having. note the final post.

http://umforum.ultimaker.com/index.php?/topic/7754-skipping-corners-on-spiralize/?p=72378

As you can see shiremog achieved better results and if thats satisfactory you could try that.

 

[IRobertI 521]

I guess I'm a bit old school and realised after printing that I used 14.07... but this is my result. Not a particularly tricky print really.

Here's my gcode: https://www.dropbox.com/s/on3ksx723e2swiy/Funnel%2001.gcode?dl=0

edit: Setting the infill to 0% is what takes away all the travel moves.

 

[zews 1]

Printed at:

Layer thickness 0.1

Shell thickness 0.4

Print speed 50

Fill density 0

0.8 outer shell, 0.8 inner shell AND a fill between them on a wall thickness of 0.8. Poor little thing is getting confused :???:

I've found that going too thin on layer thickness ( and indeed too slow ) with the aim of a better finish, can be counter productive.

 

Frankly that print does not look a great deal better than mine. It still has plenty of artifacts internally that do not belong there.

 

[IRobertI 521]

I like how you chose to comment on the print you didn't like and completely ignored my print which, unless you are extremely picky, should be a pretty good one.