Search found 113 matches

Go to advanced search

by maker2
Tue Sep 17, 2019 1:41 pm
Forum: General Discussion and Tips
Topic: how to prevent support on just one of the parts in a process
Replies: 10
Views: 416

Re: how to prevent support on just one of the parts in a process

That's definitely a good workaround and you did well to come up with it.

It'll now tide both of us over until the fix! (fingers crossed)
by maker2
Tue Sep 17, 2019 1:19 pm
Forum: General Discussion and Tips
Topic: how to prevent support on just one of the parts in a process
Replies: 10
Views: 416

Re: how to prevent support on just one of the parts in a process

I understand your argument. Creating new processes is not something I'm averse to (typically do so for different layer heights and extrusion widths) but it is not innocuous since a new profile is a duplication of all the parameters one might wish to set. And if one decides to make changes in Profile...
by maker2
Sat Sep 14, 2019 3:15 pm
Forum: Troubleshooting and Bug Reports
Topic: [FIXED] add custom supports while in cross section view
Replies: 4
Views: 487

Re: add custom supports while in cross section view

+1 for this, for adding supports

+1 for removing supports using cross-section tool

(This is surely just a bug??)
by maker2
Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:08 am
Forum: General Discussion and Tips
Topic: how to prevent support on just one of the parts in a process
Replies: 10
Views: 416

Re: how to prevent support on just one of the parts in a process

Many thanks for the help. Most useful.

There may be a feature suggestion in here somewhere?
by maker2
Fri Sep 13, 2019 7:29 am
Forum: General Discussion and Tips
Topic: how to prevent support on just one of the parts in a process
Replies: 10
Views: 416

how to prevent support on just one of the parts in a process

If I have multiple parts in a process and generate support automatically on all of them, then remove ALL the support material from just one of the parts, when generate the G-code the part from which supports were totally removed always has a full complement of support attached to it. However if I re...
by maker2
Tue Aug 27, 2019 10:59 am
Forum: Feature Requests
Topic: auto layer height to get perfect top layer height each time
Replies: 8
Views: 476

Re: auto layer height to get perfect top layer height each time

I know nothing but 0.04mm sounds like a bit of a worst case scenario on a modern FFF printer where 0.05mm is a typical minimum layer height. My other printer has: M92 X160 Y360 Z1600 - also a very high level of resolution for Z. Don't know about other people. The solution would surely be to put in a...
by maker2
Tue Aug 27, 2019 10:27 am
Forum: Feature Requests
Topic: auto layer height to get perfect top layer height each time
Replies: 8
Views: 476

Re: auto layer height to get perfect top layer height each time

I guess if it's a problem for some people there could be a parameter "Fine adjustment Quantum" which @rexipus could set to 0.04mm (and I'd leave empty).
by maker2
Mon Aug 26, 2019 3:05 pm
Forum: Feature Requests
Topic: auto layer height to get perfect top layer height each time
Replies: 8
Views: 476

Re: auto layer height to get perfect top layer height each time

On my Duet Wifi my steps / mm are set as follows:

M92 X200 Y200 Z1600 E822

Looks as though there would be no issue making fine adjustments to the Z layer height.
by maker2
Thu Aug 15, 2019 5:32 am
Forum: Troubleshooting and Bug Reports
Topic: additional "features" mysteriously appeared on part?
Replies: 6
Views: 952

Re: additional "features" mysteriously appeared on part?

Interesting. Thanks.

Were there any clues that the model needed "repair"? (Would have sworn that it was fine because have printed more or less the same thing many times. Have never repaired a model before.)
by maker2
Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:47 am
Forum: Troubleshooting and Bug Reports
Topic: additional "features" mysteriously appeared on part?
Replies: 6
Views: 952

Re: additional "features" mysteriously appeared on part?

In case it helps someone debugging, here's a similar example which is different because the activity appears in EMPTY SPACE.

Go to advanced search