Configuring Slicer
-
RRF does support absolute extrusion mode, although I recommend relative because absolute mode has caused additional problems in the past.
Blobs and zits are a symptom of too little retraction distance. However, if you enable pressure advance in RRF instead of coast-to-end in the slicer, then you may not need to increase retraction.
-
Thanks for the answer. RRF does support absolute extrusion I know. But I can't take advantage of the power outage protection feature in this case because ressurect.g file will be created with absolute extrusion mode witch will make extruder go crazy. Enabling pressure advance in RRF did worst in my case. I can achieve better results without it. I have 3.5mm retraction at 80mm/s speed and it works great in Cura 2.6. But the prints results are different in 3.0. Especially I get an ugly seam witch looks like there s too much extrusion there. But I'm courious about what slicer duet users use and what are their configuration.
-
Hi DR8, have you tried enabling the wall print order optimization in Cura 3? That feature along with the new options for positioning the z-seam may help hiding the seam. I would be interested to compare the gcode produced by Cura's 2.6 and 3 for the same part. Do you have example gcode you could share, please?
-
@DR8:
Thanks for the answer. RRF does support absolute extrusion I know. But I can't take advantage of the power outage protection feature in this case because ressurect.g file will be created with absolute extrusion mode witch will make extruder go crazy.
I assure you, resume after power fail DOES work with absolute extrusion. I tested it when I introduced the feature, and I tested it again yesterday before I released firmware 1.20beta7. I retested it because a user (I can't remember whether it was you or somebody else) reported that it didn't work, EVEN THOUGH that user ignored the request I made to provide the Gcode file being printed and the corresponding resurrect.g file.
-
@DR8:
Thanks for the answer. RRF does support absolute extrusion I know. But I can't take advantage of the power outage protection feature in this case because ressurect.g file will be created with absolute extrusion mode witch will make extruder go crazy.
I assure you, resume after power fail DOES work with absolute extrusion. I tested it when I introduced the feature, and I tested it again yesterday before I released firmware 1.20beta7. I retested it because a user (I can't remember whether it was you or somebody else) reported that it didn't work, EVEN THOUGH that user ignored the request I made to provide the Gcode file being printed and the corresponding resurrect.g file.
In this post https://www.duet3d.com/forum/thread.php?id=3310 I had some troubles with the resume after power fail function. I have posted there my ressurect.g files and with your help I managed to solve the problem. But as we got deeper in the conversation there was a big change to forgot to post some gcode files and i'm sorry for that. I really appreciate you sir, all the developers of this electronics and all the people who make this forum to be a great source of learning.
Now, i think my explination was out of target. What i was trying to say is that power fail feature works with absolute extrusion for me also but, i have problems when i run the ressurect.g file after power recovers. As I explained here:
''Another huge problem that I have is that after X Y Z are positioned, the extruder is trying to extrude a huge amount of filament at a huge speed. ''
and resam user helped me and replied:
''What slicer are you using? Cura defaults to absolute extruder moves - but you are using relative in your code.''And my conclusion from this discutions was: Ok, I can slice in absolute extrusion, the printer works fine, the power fail function works great but how can I avoid the problem of the extruder spinning really fast when i run ressurect.g file after power restore? And the answer was that I had to slice in relative extrusion. That is something Cura 2.6 can't support. So I have upgraded to 3.0. Did i understand wrong?
-
Hi DR8, have you tried enabling the wall print order optimization in Cura 3? That feature along with the new options for positioning the z-seam may help hiding the seam. I would be interested to compare the gcode produced by Cura's 2.6 and 3 for the same part. Do you have example gcode you could share, please?
Yes I tried to enable the wall print order optimization but still no difference.
Here are some photos and the gcode files: https://we.tl/CxvNBv2vHU
What is red was sliced with Cura 3.0 What is blue was sliced with Cura 2.6.
Another question is that if I fill a setting box with some values (let't say ''Retraction extra prime amount'') and becomes orange that means the value won't be taken into consideration? I'm trying to add a negative value in that specific box. Thanks! -
Those gcodes aren't comparable because one (2.6) was sliced with spiralization enabled and the other (3.0) was sliced without spiralization.
Orange is OK, it's just trying to warn you that the value you are using is outside of the "normal" range. it will still use that value in the slice.
-
Those gcodes aren't comparable because one (2.6) was sliced with spiralization enabled and the other (3.0) was sliced without spiralization.
Orange is OK, it's just trying to warn you that the value you are using is outside of the "normal" range. it will still use that value in the slice.
Oh, sorry for that. Here is the right one.
https://we.tl/Xcfw0G2cBW -
The biggest difference I can see in the gcodes is that the 3.0 gcode uses a lot more coasting than the 2.6 gcode. I never use coasting and I do not get z-seams as grotty as those shown in your images. Have you tried with coasting disabled? Also, I would move the z-seam to the back of the model so that it is less likely to be seen.
-
In order to move it at the back I think I must choose user specified. I also tried with sharpest corner but did not had effect.
