I've just tried to make some small labels with embossed lettering. Base is 1.5 mm, with letters and a perimeter protruding by another 1 mm. After printing, I realised that Cura is not giving me a top layer, all I get is an inner and outer wall for the perimeter and the lettering:
The base is OK, with 4 layers, but there is no infill at the top. Presumably there is a setting that I've missed (I can appreciate that maybe this is a detail to the slicing which is model dependant). Layers are 0.2 mm, top and bottom set to 4 layers.
I had walls set to 1.6 mm, (4 layers) and the wall features here are 1 mm (i.e. 2.5x the nozzle). The features are solid so far as I know, not drawn as a hollow.
I found a relevant bug for Cura: https://github.com/Ultimaker/Cura/issues/1303 (and I also understand a workaround now, just need to write up an answer).
What is your source model? Typically this "missing layer" effect happens if the source has a wall thickness less than the size of the extruder nozzle selected. Cura will view that part of the model as non-printable.
Meshmixer and TinkerCad (among many others) will allow you to set and change thicknesses in the model.
problems. But last night they had serious problems: I haven't seen a problem like that before. Extrusion rate seems basically perfect - why does it look like it just stopped extruding around the perimeters? I'm using PLA filament and Simplify3D 3.1.0 slicing. Settings: 0.35 mm nozzle, 0.40 mm extrusion width, 1.05 extrusion multiplier 0.15 mm layer height, 3 top, 3 bottom layers, 2 perimeter...) - there's just one small hole at the base of each structure. (I stopped the print a few layers after the problem layers do ignore the tops.) Going to 99% (Simplify3D's max) would probably get rid
to explain the calibration method I have used. I have made in Solidwork 15x15x15 mm cube. The cube was imported into Slic3r, where I have set the infill to 0% and number of sides shells equal to 1 and number of top and bottom shells equal to 0 (It gave me one layer thin wall in shape of cube). I printed it out and measured the width using caliper and compared with the perimeter's width from g... test" (printed a hallow cube with 1 layer thin perimeter line). I then compared the desired value of the perimeter's width with the value from the g-code and adjusted the flow rate. I repeated
I have been studying the differences between version 2.x and version 4 of the P3Steel frames - in particular the AC08 bracket at the top of the frame which secures the top of the smooth bars... for the threaded rod and one for the top of the smooth bar (from the lasercut image): However, in version 4, the corresponding top Z axis bracket only has one hole for the smooth bar and just... anyone know why the top of the threaded rod is not secured by a hole, as it was in version 1.x/2.x? It just does not look particularly well secured. Under the list of version 4 changes it is mentioned
the "stress" of laying 7 layers of infill could screw up the next layer... I just can't figure out how layers 2 and 3 could be basically perfect, but layer 11 is consistently a disaster, when they should be almost the exact same gcode (only a mm apart). I looked at the gcode and it's basically identical for layers 3 and 11, including same feedrate (G1 F2250). This is on a DeltaMaker printer.../perimeter shells, and 15% orthagonal infill every other layer. The first 3 layers print fine. Here's the first (bottom) layer after removing the print and turning it over: The infill (layers 4-10
of the layers so I think it must have something to do with slicing settings, but I'm at a loss for what I need to change to fix it. See below for images of the issue. On the orange piece near the right hand side you can see light shining through the gap. The black cube has it at the top, though it's not deep enough to let light through like with the orange one. There is also an image of the layer preview which shows the same gap. I have a Rostock Max v2 (stock hot end). I am using Matter control using mostly stock settings, I've tweaked around layer height, speed, and temp but I don't think those
I frequently have to print a range of different parts each with different geometrical features. So far, I generate each part's optimum printing parameters manually. To be able to print such parts more efficiently, I am planning to create a "library" of individual geometries, each with its unique set of optimum printing parameters. The issue I am facing here is in combining all the different... parameters such as layer height or infill pattern/density, merging would not be possible, however if we keep such incompatible parameters constant for all solids, and only vary, say, printing speed
, so this works also. But when I slice with Repetier host 1.6.2 with latest slicer / curaengine, it does not go down 0.4 mm before starting to print. I've set first layer to 0.2mm, but when it starts... ; Wait for all used extruders to reach temperature M109 T0 S230 ;Layer count: 226 UPDATE: It's definitely Repetier or it's slicers. I'm using Cura 15.04.6 and it also calculates the offset set in marlin when printing! I'm trying to use Cura 2.1 because it's newer, but I do not get the print usb option in Cura 2.1 :/ UPDATE 2: I just don't get it, it was printing very nice the first 4 layers
head (0.35 mm). These are the settings that I used while printing these objects: Layer thickness: 0.1 mm infill: 20% Printing temperature: 230°C Printbed: 85°C Bottom and top layer thickness: 0.1 mm..., I have printed it a few times and every time I'm getting the same problem at the same side. Click Here Click Here Bridging performance test: Has severe infill drop, the test recommended printing...I have printed the XY resonance, Z resonance, bridging performance and the negative space tolerance test, from Makezine (can be found here), and I have encountered the following errors in the prints
a problem because, worst case scenario, my print would simply not be dead-center on the bed. But I've decided to try and fix it. Here are pictures of a test model in Cura, and the resulting physical print: What's the proper way to align the two? It seems I just got lucky with the x-axis here (though note that the BuildTak surface is a bit off center). But obviously the y-axis needs fixing... would be set by the Marlin firmware (EEPROM?). But I also need to be able to do a little offset tweaking on the software side for when I need to replace the BuildTak mat. Edit: I tried M206 (home