Cura Bad Layer

Discussions about ideaMaker and other printing software.
mark_3d
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2018 3:50 pm

Cura Bad Layer

Postby mark_3d » Mon Apr 02, 2018 4:43 pm

When i try to use cura i get bad top layer as shown in the image. Every layer the printer is going to print, the nozzle is grabbing th existing layer. Don't look at the outline, i was experimenting the fuzzy skin.
20180402_171015.jpg
20180402_171021.jpg

zemlin
Posts: 358
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2017 2:02 pm

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby zemlin » Mon Apr 02, 2018 4:48 pm

Looks like severe over-extrusion. Make sure your nozzle size and extrusion factors are correct.

mark_3d
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2018 3:50 pm

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby mark_3d » Mon Apr 02, 2018 4:55 pm

yes they are correct. if you look at the skirt, its look better.

mark_3d
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2018 3:50 pm

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby mark_3d » Mon Apr 02, 2018 5:00 pm

i come from simplify3d, where i had a 0,4 nozzle anche the correct multiplier was 100%. Cura has maybe different setting? estrusion step?

zemlin
Posts: 358
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2017 2:02 pm

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby zemlin » Mon Apr 02, 2018 5:04 pm

mark_3d wrote:yes they are correct. if you look at the skirt, its look better.

I disagree. The skirt looks like a mess too.

mark_3d
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2018 3:50 pm

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby mark_3d » Mon Apr 02, 2018 5:14 pm

the inner loop of the skirt yes. i have to print the cube with only one wall to see if im overextruding...

Jetguy
Posts: 2700
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 1:40 am
Location: In a van, down by the river

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby Jetguy » Mon Apr 02, 2018 5:37 pm

Now, I'm just reaching here, but are you sure you set filament size in the Cura profile?
The reason is, Cura is made for Ultimaker 3D printers and "borrowed" for everyone else. UM printers use 2.85/3.0mm filament by default.
Corrected statement:
As such, Cura does default to 3mm filament and would result in under extrusion even if you chose proper nozzle size and extrusion width.
Last edited by Jetguy on Mon Apr 02, 2018 6:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Jetguy
Posts: 2700
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 1:40 am
Location: In a van, down by the river

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby Jetguy » Mon Apr 02, 2018 6:37 pm

Actually, oops, I got that way backwards. If it thinks it's 3mm at the slicer, the resulting E lengths of extrusion in the gcode would be shorter and that would mean massive under extrusion not over extrusion.

It's really hard for me to diagnose the picture. I mean I generally agree, I look at the print edge and I see this variable mess and blobs and it looks like over extrusion. Then I see the center and that looks like serious nozzle plowing, where the plastic is just so much volume that the nozzle is plowing through a field of plastic.

But, I've seen all kinds of crazy things and errors, and because of the color change, because the fuzz or fine hairs on top, you could underextrude and from that angle the picture is taken, I've seen a top finish that is under extrusion and would have the same appearance. The other details tell me it's not under extrusion, and the permiter really shows the plowing and then the travel move over the infill, that's another tell.

So yes, over extruding and maybe not the 2.85/3.0 filament mistake, but say if your filament was 1.82mm (actually common in some brands) and you had exactly 1.75mm in the slicer setting, that could lead to slight over extrusion, but this looks greater than that?

mark_3d
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2018 3:50 pm

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby mark_3d » Mon Apr 02, 2018 7:04 pm

I have printed the calibration cube and the thickness of the wall was 0.6 instead of 0.4 so I tuned the multiplier and now it's looks better.

Jetguy
Posts: 2700
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 1:40 am
Location: In a van, down by the river

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby Jetguy » Mon Apr 02, 2018 8:06 pm

I just posted this in a FB group, I would never tell a user the single wall calibration method.
Here is a copy:
Print a 100% infill cube in the filament and evaluate the top final surface. Why 100%? Because you need volume- more filament total distance extruded in a defined space to really understand exactly how much cumulative volume of plastic is being extruded. Some folks use the thin wall test and this is where extruder calibration camps get into a war. When you do a thin wall test, you extrude limited total length of filament and what you are measuring (single wall width) is prone to error in measurement and again, as a sample size- totally inadequate in my opinion. If all you ever printed was thin walls, then fine, but I believe in test and calibrate with what you are trying to print. Section 5.4.1 of the Sailfish firmware manual is still universal to most 3D printers. http://www.sailfishfirmware.com/doc/tun ... 8-730005.1

mark_3d
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2018 3:50 pm

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby mark_3d » Tue Apr 03, 2018 11:01 am

Jetguy wrote:I just posted this in a FB group, I would never tell a user the single wall calibration method.
Here is a copy:
Print a 100% infill cube in the filament and evaluate the top final surface. Why 100%? Because you need volume- more filament total distance extruded in a defined space to really understand exactly how much cumulative volume of plastic is being extruded. Some folks use the thin wall test and this is where extruder calibration camps get into a war. When you do a thin wall test, you extrude limited total length of filament and what you are measuring (single wall width) is prone to error in measurement and again, as a sample size- totally inadequate in my opinion. If all you ever printed was thin walls, then fine, but I believe in test and calibrate with what you are trying to print. Section 5.4.1 of the Sailfish firmware manual is still universal to most 3D printers. http://www.sailfishfirmware.com/doc/tun ... 8-730005.1

Im trying the cube method. I know that at 100% flow i'm overextruding. The image below is 0.3 layer height and 80% flow and slitt overextruding. Now i'm trying al 65% flow and i looks better but i have to go lower.
20180403_124428.jpg

mark_3d
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2018 3:50 pm

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby mark_3d » Tue Apr 03, 2018 11:31 am

This is done with 65% flow. The top surface is little bit concave so i have to increase the flow.
20180403_132742.jpg

mark_3d
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2018 3:50 pm

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby mark_3d » Tue Apr 03, 2018 11:49 am

this is done with 70% flow. The top surface is convex so i have to reduce the flow. the next i will print with 67% flow.
20180403_134526.jpg

Jetguy
Posts: 2700
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 1:40 am
Location: In a van, down by the river

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby Jetguy » Tue Apr 03, 2018 1:21 pm

This just concerns me that we are using flowrate as a band aid here. There is a much deeper problem with a setting that just is not making sense here. As a rule, I would never expect to adjust more than 10% up or down from 100% (90-110%).

I see from the first picture, you are using a Raise3D printer. Generally, the factory settings are pretty reasonable on these in firmware (steps per mm), so I have to ask, does it print fine with ideamaker and then go horribly wrong here with Cura?
If it is just Cura, we need to really get to the crux of this because again, a 65% flowrate is not a solution, it's a band aid for some other setting being significantly off.

mark_3d
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2018 3:50 pm

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby mark_3d » Tue Apr 03, 2018 3:45 pm

Also for me going with a flowrate of 65 is extreme. In idea maker and simplify3d my flowrate is 100% and I have no problem. It s a ockward behavior in cura. The filament is set at 1.75. I will try to reset the cura profile.... Maybe something else is affecting the print.

mark_3d
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2018 3:50 pm

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby mark_3d » Tue Apr 03, 2018 8:54 pm

This is what i achieve with simplify3d. Don't look at the corner on the right.
20180403_224738.jpg

mark_3d
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2018 3:50 pm

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby mark_3d » Wed Apr 04, 2018 7:05 pm

I entered in the cura gcode the command to set the step at 94. And i get this with 100% flow:

20180404_205726.jpg

20180404_205743.jpg


So it was a incorrect step command in the profile

zemlin
Posts: 358
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2017 2:02 pm

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby zemlin » Wed Apr 04, 2018 7:41 pm

Earlier I poked around the Cura settings looking for a step count, but didn't turn it up. I've only dabbled in Cura so I apparently just didn't look in the right place.

Jetguy
Posts: 2700
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 1:40 am
Location: In a van, down by the river

Re: Cura Bad Layer

Postby Jetguy » Wed Apr 04, 2018 7:57 pm

This makes zero sense.
Why would you send a gcode command for editing steps per mm and why in a profile would that even exist in Cura?
Gcode is lengths in mm. It's firmware agnostic. I'm saying, it took user interaction or one heck of a mistake, to use a profile in Cura that purposely included the M92 command in the first place.


Return to “Software”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests