text:
Why Cura cannot slice this object?
I drew this object by myself using Blender:

Importing the STL in Cura v5.3.1 under Ubuntu 23.10 I'm able to slice it for a Sovol SV04 printer, but if I select the Dremel 3D45 printer it fails:

I don't see any "red" spot on the model that would tell me it's damaged.
What could prevent the slicing changing the model of the printer?
How to understand why it cannot slice and how to fix then?

We can't say without knowing a) your cura version and b) having access to the model

@Trish question updated with the Cura version. About the file I've asked here before opening this question. However, how should I share the file?

Good question. I believe this might be a bug or a setting in your dremel profile that is incompatible. This might be better reported as a bug than asked here.

Did you check the Cura log file? It might provide information as to what exactly fails.

Just to clarify: can you repeatedly slice this model for Printer A but never for Printer B?

@Trish, exactly

While without the files it's a guessing game, we can make an educated guess: the most frequent and likely culprit for this sort of faults is the model not being a manifold.
Most likely you've created several objects in Blender, and visually they comprise the shape you want, but internally they intersect, creating a lot of unnecessary internal geometry under the surface, and Cura fails to deduce what parts of the geometry are the actual "skin" of the object.
First, if your shape is composed of multiple objects, use the Boolean Union modifier, to merge them into a single object. Besides that, install "3D Printing Toolbox" add-on in Blender, find it in the sidebar tabs, and use the "Make Manifold" option, and inspect your shape to make sure it worked correctly and removed everything "under the surface", leaving only hollow skin. If it failed, you may have to do that manually.

however, the model did slice for one profile, but not another

@Trish Cura can deal with some of non-manifold shapes, sometimes correctly deriving the manifold shape, sometimes rather poorly, creating extra walls embedded in infill, and sometimes not at all, either failing to solve the shape or creating something seriously wrong, e.g. creating hollows in the volume where two solids overlap, making them connect with a single thread of filament.  Or even just crashing. The only way to get the results reliably is to resolve it at the modelling stage.

Yes, but OP seems to describe to have a reliable outcome for one printer but never for another

Yeah, I was able to fix. Thanks. I wasn't aware of those caveats!

@Trish correct, but using those hints now Cura slices also for the Dremel. My wild guess is the path generation takes care of specific features of each printer

self repair of Cura is a guesswork usually, but if fixing the model helped, good enough!


text:
Can a PLA print be laser engraved?
Is it possible to laser engrave an object that was 3D printed with PLA or will the structure of the whole object simply melt and fail?
How does PLA behave when being engraved? Does it require special treatment of the PLA first or is, for example, more infill required?

ColorFabb used to sell laser marking PLA, not actively sold anymore... This filament was modified to be easily laser engraved.

Yes, it is possible
Jered Adams shared, in a Youtube Video from 2023, that he could, in fact, engrave prints with a laser, and his method. The problems he encountered were mostly related to getting good reference points and affixing the part. He did use a large industrial-size machine with a 40 W CO2 laser module. For the positioning, he used a printed block of known height to adjust the laser module. After making an initial high-power pass with air assist, he added powder-coat paints to the depth to make the engraving easier to see and turned off the air.
During first engraving with 12 %, notice the thin white smoke at the center where the laser impacts, getting pulled away by the air assist. The engraving itself is visible as a slightly different color.

After adding the powder and burning it in with a lower power setting (9 %), the result is very legible:

Power settings
Mr. Adams used 12 % power on the initial pass and 9 % on the "inking" pass. Taking his 40 W Diode as a base, that'd correspond to 4.8 W and 3.6 W respectively, so could be done with a 5 W laser module.
Do note that the initial pass power could also depend on the color of the laser and the exact composition of your polymer. This is because some colors and materials absorb wavelengths from the laser differently, so it is hard to say for sure the same setting will work for all colors the same.
Print settings
The engraving, with the right settings, should at most be one wall thickness deep, which would compromise that one wall's carrying capacity. A 2-wall print might see significant weakness due to the engraving, but with 3 or more walls, the impact would be massively reduced.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
Creality Ender 3 after normal printing, lost the ability to print in X and Z axis
Everything worked normally until the printer finished with a model after a 22-hour print job. As usual, I made everything like for the previous models to print the next one, but I suddenly noticed that this time it was printing only to the left side, the coordinates of Y-axis. I tried to change some parameters, opened and cleaned the nozzle from the PLA, powered it on-and-off to rest, checked everything, and performed some research on the net and youtube but it's still the same.
Additionally, I'm sharing this photo as an example of the current situation, with labeling that works only in Y-axis:

Any suggestions, or solutions if someone has had the problem before?

do you print the same g-code or a different one?

It's the same problem with the existing .gcode and different one.

Could you share a photo of the result and the G-code that was previously working?

Yes, here's updated version of the post.

LEt's get conventional: the printhead moves in the X direction on the gantry. The Gantry is lifted in Z by the leadscrew. The Bed moves in the Y direction underneath. Are you saying it stopped moving the head in X?

Yes, it's only printing like the arrows from the image in Y-axis. The head is not moving in X-axis and Z-axis

There we go! Got you some information, which might help troubleshoot or solve the problem, if you are lucky.

I unscrewed parts that move X and Z axis, took off E and X connectors and then put everything in place. Gently moved the head on X axis, turned the printer on and it was working fine. Maybe, something was stuck or not in place while printing previous large model.

So you followed the tests for connection and a stuck motor?

The problem is, that the printer stopped working in the X-direction. There can be multiple reasons for this:

The motor is not connected to the mainboard.

Check the connectors. It should be plugged into the motor and the mainboard. The Ender3 is known to have its cable in such a position that it can be pulled at by the bed on some occasions, a pulled connector can happen because of that.

The motor might be stuck.

Carefully try to rotate the pulley wheel on the x-axis motor while powered down. If it doesn't move, the motor might need replacement. If you move the printhead manually with a slow to medium speed you might generate current, and light up the display of the printer. Such a lighting up indicates that the motor, the connectors, and some parts of the main board are working. Be careful with this, as you generate current.

The mainboard has a stepper driver that is damaged and won't supply voltage to the motor.

You'd need to get a new mainboard.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Nozzle Z-level is not aligned with Z-probe
With my Ender 3 S1 the bed leveling z-probe level and the nozzle Z-level are not alligned. The nozzle is 0.77 mm higher than the bed leveling probe. I think this causes some problems I have:

When printing the first layer in PLA -- either a G-code for bed level calibartion, or an actual print -- the first layer is not properly attaching plate.
Because the probe and the nozzle are not alligned, and the probe is lower, the probe pulls the first layer along and messing up the print.
If the first layer comes out relatively okay and the print can continue, the print has trouble completing because the probe constantly scrapes over the print. Sometimes the print completes, sometimes the probe pulls the print loose from the bed during the scraping and print fails.

My question is, how do I align the Z-level of the bed leveling probe and the nozzle?
I would think there is some mechanism to align them.
Some notes.

The Z-offset moves both the probe and the nozzle.
I have tried replacing the nozzle thinking the nozzle might be damaged. But the difference remains.
I have measured the 0.77 mm at the center, but at all sides of the build plate I see a clear space between the pin and the nozzle.
Manually bed leveling does not work because after leveling on the nozzle the z-probe again adds the 0.77 mm space.
Printing TPU goes fine. I believe this is because the scraping of the TPU is less risky because the TPU flexes.

I found the issue. The nozzle is supposed to be lower than the z-probe. It seems to be caused by some screws that were not fully tightened, and because of that the nozzle assembly was hanging over a bit. Now the z-probe and nozzle are exactly level. I suppose the z-probe can or should be higher than the nozzle. But exactly level is fine too.


text:
Is there software that allows generating the vertices of a 3D model from a math function and adjusting them dynamically?
I want to print a solid of constant width, and I have defined its shape as trios of math equations in two variables: X(u, v), Y(u, v), and Z(u, v). The equations also have two radius parameters, a and h, that determine the specific shape of the surface generated by the equations.
Is there software that will let me define the vertices of a 3D object with parametric equations, dynamically creating/removing/adjusting-the-positions-of vertices as I change the step size of u and v (determining the total number of vertices) and the values of the parameters a and h (adjusting the positions of the vertices), and export the resulting object as a 3D file to be imported into slicing software?
Blender has XYZ Math Surface, which will create an object from three functions; but once created it is entirely static, and the parameters cannot be adjusted without deleting the object and starting over. GeoGebra will create 3D surfaces and export them as STL files, but doesn't allow choosing the step size and thus vertex count. Are there any good alternatives?

Why is a static object that needs to be deleted and recreated not an acceptable solution?  I ask because that comment about Blender's math surface suggests something about your workflow which may be very applicable to your answers.

@CortAmmon I want to be able to fiddle with parameters to see what looks best before printing, and Blender's implementation of Math Surfaces is not at all geared towards experimentation. Off the topic of 3D printing, I'd also like to create an animation of one specific shape parameter varying over time (not one that affects vertex number/connections), which in Blender would require making a separate copy of the shape for every single frame of the animation.

The first thing that came to mind was:

OpenSCAD: A script-based 3D modeling tool ideal for creating models with mathematical descriptions.

Two other possible candidates are:

MATLAB
Mathematica


text:
How do I prevent PETG from stringing and clumping up?
My PETG prints keep clumping up and stringing. The print is otherwise fine, but there are so many imperfections because of this. It looks like the clumping comes from the infill.
I tried replacing the nozzle with a hardened steel one and fiddling with the settings, but the issue keeps happening.
How do I resolve this issue?

Printer: AnyCubic Kobra 2
Filament: Overture PETG
Extruder temperature: 240 °C
Bed temperature: 90 °C
Layer height: 0.2 mm
Nozzle diameter: 0.4 mm

Welcome Brian. Please formulate an actual question, preferably in the title of your post.

@BobOrtiz not to be complaining, but that's the kind of pedantic moderation that prevents more users from using this platform. It should be obvious enough that the question is "how do I fix this?", as there's really no other point to mentioning my issues otherwise.
But to be cooperative, I've rephrased the question as a literal question.

Thank you, I appreciate it. It's helpful when reading the overview of questions, it can help to catch attention too, without having to reading eaxh and every full post first in order to try to understand what the questioner wants to ask. Although not required, but personal preference, it's also not uncommon on other Stack sites and greatly increases the readability and content quality.

Looking at the print and your speeds, you might also be printing too fast. PETG doesn't like to be printed fast unless you raise the temperature. Bed temp is also pretty high 70 - 75 °C should be enough.

The color of these clumps suggests your PETG is burning. Dark clumps, heavy stringing, that totally feels like overheated material. Try to check if the nozzle really is 240 °C because it looks like quite a bit more. Possibly the thermistor lost some physical contact with the heater block and reads way less than it should.

The problem is not high temperature. PETG needs much higher temperature than 240 to print well anyway. The burnt look is from material that gets stuck to the outside of the nozzle and stays there for a long time, eventually coming off in the print.

PETG really likes to stick to nozzles, especially when the nozzle moves over already-printed material in the same layer, which can pull it back up and drag it around or leave it stuck to the nozzle for a long time until it eventually comes off somewhere it shouldn't be, often blackened from spending a long time in contact with heat and air, or from getting mixed with carbonized gunk that was already on the outside of the nozzle.
Your picture shows grid infill, which is a prime suspect for the root cause. Grid, triangles, and cubic are all self-intersecting infill patterns where the nozzle crosses back over lines that have already been printed. At the intersection points, the slicer does not make any attempt to compensate for double extrusion, and in fact there really isn't any good physical way to compensate without some fancy Z motion or stopping and starting that would be prohibitively slow on most printers.
Non-self-intersecting infill patterns like gyroid (any modern slicer) or full honeycomb (PrusaSlicer & derivatives) should go a long way to mitigate this problem.
Some users also find higher temperatures and/or lower infill speeds solve the problem by giving the needed time/heat to cleanly melt through the original extrusion line when crossing it the second time.

+1 for gyroid, solved similar problem for me. It's slow infill, but imo benefits overwhelmed the time cost.


text:
How to accurately synchronise dual Z-axis when two steppers motors are used?
I upgraded two printers (Creality Ender 3 V2) with a dual Z-axis upgrade using an additional stepper motor. However, I realized that this could potentially still cause the two screws to be moved individually.
I figured that a mechanical dual Z-axis with a timing belt would have probably be a better upgrade instead of adding an additional stepper motor.
Anyhow, when two stepper motors are used, how to accurately synchronise them so that both screws on the Z-axis are and stay synchronised?

There are a few options when adding an extra stepper motor, the usual upgrade is using a single stepper driver, driving 2 steppers either serial or parallel connected, or using 2 stepper drivers, this requires an extra stepper on the controller board (in that case one needs to replace the board; the standard board has the ability to control 4 stepper motors individually: X, Y, Extruder and Z).
The forces in 3D printing of moving the carriage along the various axes are relatively low, far less than e.g. a CNC machine where a spinning tool is pushed through a material. In 3D printing the nozzle hovers over the printing object connected to the print by a molten drop of filament, virtually no resistance. This implies that it is very unlikely to miss steps on one of the driven sides so that is becomes out of sync. Note that you can automatically tune the two sides if you have two steppers on separate stepper drivers and have a BLTouch (I'm using this on my CoreXY).
The two stepper motors push up a reasonably low mass for what the stepper motors can generate, certainly for the Z-axis as these are driven by lead screws. Driving a gantry with one stepper is the design flaw of the cheap-end printers, a timing belt with a single stepper works very well (I'm using this on my take of a Prusa i3 I designed), but must be mechanically tuned to be as straight in relation to the frame (if not, a test cube would look more as a 3D skewed cube).

Anyhow, when two stepper motors are used, how to accurately synchronise them so that both screws on the Z-axis are and stay synchronised?

Print a fixed distance leveling aid, see e.g. these and level the X-gantry to the frame first, remove the levelling aids and then level the bed through the bed screws. The screws will not likely get out of sync, but if so, re-level with respect to the frame. Or, buy a larger controller board with more spare stepper drivers and automatically tune Z1 and Z2; be sure the bed is parallel to the frame then.

I didn't realize that a seperate controller creating Z2 was an option. I now upgraded to double Z on the standard v4.2.2 board with a Y-splitter cable basically having two Z1 axes. That probably makes it harder to synchronise, only mechanically, distance measurement I guess.

Indeed, just make sure they are both at exactly the same height with respect to the frame before powering the stepper motors.


text:
Can a Oldham coupler and a Anti-Recoil Nut be used at the same time?
I'm trying to understand both Oldham couplers and a Anti-Recoil Nuts.

Oldham Coupler: Its function is to connect two shafts and transfer rotation from one to the other while compensating for misalignment.
Anti-Recoil Nut: Its purpose is to eliminate backlash in the lead screw, ensuring precise linear motion.

In case of the Creality Ender 3 V2 both are a replacement for the original nut:

Why is there no part that utilises both functions in order to have the benefits of both? Better alignment to reduce Z-Wobble using the Oldham Coupler, and less backlash and better motion precision using the Anti Recoil Nut.
To my understanding they cannot be used both at the same time and I could not find a part that seems to combine those functions. Am I missing something? Does one make the other obsolete?

I don't see why you couldn't use them together. They are both dealing with eliminating a different effect.
The Oldham deals with the movement in the X-Y plane, the backlash nut with the Z-axis.
The backlash effect is not something to worry about, the Z-axis generally moves just in one direction and the gantry has reasonable mass.

I think I misunderstand something because don't doesn't each of those options require placement, on both sides, in the same place? I would have to make a custom part that combined both? Such as https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fi-just-installed-some-pom-leadscrew-nuts-and-what-a-v0-wc9uyqipn2e81.jpg%3Fwidth%3D765%26format%3Dpjpg%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3D94c2105b2b6c3052ba8838e23aa4c38e07d77ecd&rdt=58594 and https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71kOjARIO9L.AC_UF350,350_QL80.jpg

No, just on one side, you should check if you have enough space on the lower side as the larger part of the nut is screwed into the bottom parts of the Oldham coupler, and the smaller nut of the anti backlash nut below that. Forget the anti backlash nut and get POM nuts, these are tighter, and have virtually no backlash. I use the POM nuts myself.

Thanks for the suggestion. I will look into POM nuts too. I also need to do more reading on Oldham couplers and how and where to install it, because I feel like I still don't understand it completely. I think they inherently also reduce backlash to my understanding. Some Oldham couplers are even sold as 'anti-backlash'. Making a anti-backlash nut obsolete entirely.


text:
Deformed 45 deg angle on outer wall
I have tried a couple different fixes but none worked, when watching the printer it looks like the head accelerates suddenly when printing that wall.  However, when looking at the gcode the acceleration appears to be the same everywhere.
down the middle of the pic you can see what I am talking about.  On the far left there is another 45 deg angle that printed just fine.
This is on a Anycubic Chiron using Cura 5.6.

I have a Anycubic Chiron which I use together with Cura.
I print in PLA at 210-215 °C.
The print bed is set to 60 °C.
I use a print cooling fan at 100 %.
The layer height I set to 0.2 mm
The line width 0.4 from the 0.4 mm nozzle.
The printing speed is set to 50 mm/s for walls (outer walls are 35 mm/s) and 75 mm/s for infill.
My retraction is 0.8 mm/off at 10 mm/s.

Hi Zorro and welcome. Your question is lacking detail and as such is hard to answer without knowing a couple of things about your printer setup. Please [edit] and fill in the [placeholders] in the template I added and then remove the leading <!-- and trailing --> afterwards. This will turn it visible and help us help you find the actual problem.

That's a seam as far as I can tell

These kinds of artifacts can arise in a lot of ways, and are really frustrating to deal with. From what I can tell, they're related to the "stalagmite" stringing you can get on travel with wet filament or insufficient retraction, and the basic mechanism seems to be material failing to come out of the nozzle when expected, then getting "pulled out" by surface tension or similar type forces starting upon hitting a slightly larger bump of material from the previous layer just below it.
It looks like you're having this problem right after travel/unretract to a starting point on the outer perimeter. If so, this could be a result of losing material during travel (especially likely if you're skipping retractions for travel within the infill region).
Another very likely cause is wet filament, making it so that it takes just a moment longer for the extrusion to start, due to getting past bubbly gunk or taking more energy to overcome the water stealing it for boiling or whatever. Drying your filament would be an easy thing you could do to check if this is the cause before spending lots of time on other possibilities.
Another cause for this sort of thing is using a line width narrower than your nozzle orifice. This allows the material to expand outward in the nozzle orifice before it really starts flowing out. I know you said you have an 0.4 mm nozzle, but if it's old or if you've been printing anything abrasive (including matte filaments, glow-in-the-dark, wood fill, carbon fiber fill, glass fill, nylon, etc.) then it very well might actually be 0.5-0.6 mm or even worse, and could cause this sort of artifact.


text:
Rocking extruder stepper gets hot
I have an i3 pro. The extruder motor does not work all. It rocks back and forth and gets really hot. I changed the wires, swapped the pins, changed motor - all it does is hum. I even went through the menu and tried to move it. The motor cuts off so I got a new board. The same thing occurs. It does not work. Is there any way to fix it?

I'm sorry but your question really is rather difficult to understand - could you check the grammar/spelling and remove any slang or abbreviations? In particular, what does I even wet throw the menu mean? Do you mean I even went through the menu..? i3prow - do you mean Creality i3 Pro..? even bout new one same thing need help - do you mean I even bought a new one and the same thing happened. I need help..? Please [edit] and correct your post - I fear that if you do not do so, then the question may be closed as "very low quality" or "needs details and clarity". Thanks.

Please note that I have heavily edited your question. Please re-read and check that which I have written is actually what you want to say. Please [edit] your question, if I have mis-interpreted your original text. Thanks.

We will need more details, such as which board, which firmware version? The more details, the more likely you will get an answer. Maybe a video of the issue? Is the driver supplying enough current? A rocking stepper could be indicative of insufficient current to turn the motor, so it just rocks. Please [edit] and add any info in your question (and not in the comments).

A wild guess, due to the lack of info...

Insufficient current
It is possible that you aren't supplying enough current to the extruder stepper. The humming or rocking of a motor - stepper or otherwise - is symptomatic of insufficient current and can lead to a sharp rise in temperature, i.e. the motor can get hot, very hot.
Basically speaking, the current supplied is less than the stall current of the motor.
I don't know if your board's stepper motor drivers are A4998 or DRV8225 (or something else entirely), however, you may need to adjust the current on the driver for the extruder.
This diagram shows the motor driver for Extruder 1 as being the second from the bottom:

So, assuming that you are using the same connections, you need to adjust  the potentiometer on this driver, to increase the current, until the rocking stops and the extruder starts to turn and extrude:

Even if you bought a new board, and then swapped over the motor drivers, without adjusting the potentiometer, then the same issue will occur. Therefore, it is possible that your first board does not have an issue, either - you just needed to adjust the pots...
Dead stepper motor
If you have checked the current and the potentiometer, then...
It is possible that the stepper has died (especially if the current was too low, and the motor heated and then the windings melted - but that is a lot of supposition).
To check, you could just swap the extruder stepper for one of the other steppers and see if the same low current humming/rocking issue occurs, or if it is indeed the motor that is the problem.
If the motor is faulty, then replacing a stepper motor isn't difficult, so long as you get exactly the same model as a replacement.

References

Geeetech prusa i3 pro C building instruction
Another problem with Stepper Motor and A4998


text:
How to disable a filament sensor?
I have a Lotmaxx Shark v2, which has developed the problem of constantly saying the filament has ran out when it hasn't.  I've narrowed down the issue to the main board, and tried to work around the problem:

Installed new sensor (which is just a switch), no effect.
Checked the cable continuity all the way to the pins that plug into the main board, that was fine.
Added M412 S0 to the top of my G-code file to try to disable the sensor.
Set FILAMENT_INVERTING in the firmware configuration.

If, for whatever reason, the main board is damaged, I'd love to just disable this sensor.  I don't really need it.  Also unused is the second extruder set, so if I can't disable the sensor maybe I could configure the printer to use extruder #2 all the time instead of extruder #1?

you'd have to install new firmware that simply has no sensor.

Or perhaps your firmware provides an option to disable it without reflashing. Mriscoc firmware for Ender 3V2 for example has that. Did you check advanced settings of your firmware?

Via firmware
Looking at your M412 - Filament Runout link, it says that it requires FILAMENT_RUNOUT_SENSOR.
Try disabling FILAMENT_RUNOUT_SENSOR in the firmware by commenting out (//) the following line, in Configuration.h, like so
//#define FILAMENT_RUNOUT_SENSOR

From Filament Runout Sensor
//#define FILAMENT_RUNOUT_SENSOR
#if ENABLED(FILAMENT_RUNOUT_SENSOR)
  #define NUM_RUNOUT_SENSORS   1     // Number of sensors, up to one per extruder. Define a FIL_RUNOUT#_PIN for each.
  #define FIL_RUNOUT_INVERTING false // Set to true to invert the logic of the sensor.

...

Via UI
Watch this video, The BEST Ender-3 V2 Firmware EVER?! MRiscoC Professional Firmware, at 2:43,

It shows the Filament sensor can be disabled via the UI:

Thank you for the help and advice.  I've dug into it... it seems my printer is using some ancient version of Marlin and is tricky to get working on a current version, based on what I've found on GitHub.  So, I'm going to poke at building Marlin for it this weekend, but will probably end up ordering a new mainboard.  In any case, thanks!

That's a real  shame that there isn't a Marlin upgrade path. BTW, If you have some useful links about the ancient Marlin and your board, then it might be useful for someone else, who is experiencing the same issue, if you posted them as an answer (maybe quoting the relevant parts). Also, knowing the version number (if there is one) of your ancient Marlin could be very useful.


text:
What is the expected lifespan of a Bambu Lab A1 mini?
I've seen a few sets of deprecation life numbers for 3D printers, but nothing for the Bambu Lab A1 mini. Is there an accepted deprecation life for the printer?
Ideally this would include a number of hours per month used in the calculations because I want to eventually work my way to a $/hr number which amortizes the cost of the printer over the hours it is expected to run.

With how new the printer is, it may be some time before any "hard" numbers come to light.

Maintain it like your car and it will last. Check for wear, repair parts, etc.

Just to test the machine to destruction, you'd have to run a printer a couple weeks or months in a test stand... if you want to estimate a price per hour, start with electricity and guesstimate a number of hours when you want your printer to be paid off. Typical for machinery is a number in the 3 to 4 digits.


text:
Getting OctoPrint to continue printing when I put my PC to sleep?
What I saw
Last night, I sliced a Califlower in Cura, used the "Send to OctoPrint" option to send it to the printer via the OctoPrint Connection plugin (the standard Cura OctoPrint plugin at v3.7.3), made sure the first layer printed fine, and then put my PC to sleep.
That's when I noticed the print had stopped.
What I expected to see
I expected the print to carry on in the background, as I thought the print had already been sent to the OctoPrint 'server'.
It seems that rather than Cura uploading the G-code to OctoPrint (running on a Raspberry Pi 5†, plugged into the printer via USB) telling it to print and then just monitoring progress, it streams the whole G-code in real time, using OctoPrint as a glorified network attached USB serial port, which rather defeats the purpose of having a print 'server' at all‡.
What I tried
I tried setting the option to "Store G-code on the SD card of the printer", but the Note: wasn't kidding when it said this would take a long time. Since there was no option to cancel, I ended up restarting OctoPrint, forcing a disconnect.
What I want to understand
Is there any way to get Cura to upload the G-code to OctoPrint and then tell it to print rather than stream it to the printer?
I would prefer my power efficient Raspberry Pi pushing G-code commands to the printer for hours, not my power hungry gaming PC.

† Specifically a Raspberry Pi 5, running Raspberry Pi OS the from 2023-13-05 Image, fully `apt` upgraded, and running OctoPrint 1.9.3, installed using the recommended `octoprint_deploy` script.
‡ When I send a 50 page document to my networked HP printer, I don't expect that to stop printing after I put my PC to sleep either!

Searching for an answer to this question, I found, https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/q/15935/63 but while the question was alluding to this question, the answers were answered it directly, missing the obvious frame challenge. This question aims to be a practical, answerable equivalent of that arguably Opinion Based question.

Where is Octoprint running? It needs to be on the device that will remain on and connected to the printer (in your case that sounds like the RPi), not on your gaming PC. The whole point of it having a web UI is that you can access it from your PC while it runs on a more appropriate device that remains online and dedicated to a particular role.

Sorry @R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE, I thought that it was obvious that Octoprint was running on a Pi attached to the printer, but I've updated my question to make that clear.

@MarkBooth then you probably refer to OctoPi instead?

@MarkBooth Good you made that clear it was running on a RPi, I really thought to read in between the lines you ran it from the PC... My bad. I now fully understand the question.

OctoPi is a distribution image @BobOrtiz, an old version of Raspberry Pi OS with OctoPrint pre-installed on it, it's not a generic name for any OctoPrint instance installed on a Raspberry Pi. I'm running a Raspberry Pi 5, which isn't supported by OctoPi, which is why it is no longer listed as an option in the Raspberry Pi Imager, for the Pi 5. As recommended, I installed up to date Raspberry Pi OS, then used octoprint_deploy on that.

Ohh, OP is using some weird Cura plugin that streams gcode from Cura to OctoPrint, rather than uploading the job to OctoPrint and being done with it? I thought the latter was the standard workflow...

I'm using the standard, recommended Cura plugin to integrate with OctoPrint @R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE, the fact that it works in this weird way is what confused me. If there were a Cura plugin which behaved the way we obviously both expected, I would absolutely use it, and I'd be happy to donate some of my reputation to reward that answer.

The behaviour of the OctoPrint plugin is very strange, I can see now why you might have assumed that @Oscar. Thanks for trying to help anyway.

The edits I made were in line with the standards for the site. In addition, formatting was adjusted to make it easier for users who are visually impaired and/or using a screen reader.

I will be more careful about capitalisation in the future @agarza, but I disagree that bold is more accessible than italic. In terms of screen readers it has exactly the same 'breakout' effect, and for many people people, bold is too jarring, so italic provides a way to add emphasis without that effect. I am open to convincing on this, but chat or meta would be a better place for that.

@MarkBooth Please see How do I write an accessible Stack Exchange post?.

I am aware of that post @agarza and your edits were no more consistent with that guide than my original post was. In fact, replacing italics with bold was arguably more jarring, but than you for engaging in a constructive way.

The answer turned out to be to update Cura to the latest version.
Why does the Cura version matter?
Older versions of Cura (some time before v5.6.0) would stream commands to the OctoPrint Connection plugin rather than upload the G-Code to OctoPrint and let it stream the commands to the printer.
This is probably because OctoPrint Connection started out as a fork of UM3NetworkPrinting plugin which provided the Cura interface to UM3 networked printers, so inherited that heritage.
Because it was Cura itself that was streaming the commands, if the machine running Cura was put to sleep, it would stop streaming those commands. With the latest version of Cura, it behaves as you would expect. It uploads the G-Code to OctoPrint (not the printer, which would be very slow) and then lets OctoPrint stream the commands to the printer, so if the PC running Cura goes to sleep, the Raspberry Pi running OctoPrint keeps sending the commands to the printer.
Alternative solution
If you cannot upgrade your Cura version, for some reason, there appear to be several other options which could work.
Export & Upload the G-code file to OctoPrint
Export the G-code in Cura to a file and upload the file to the Web-UI of OctoPrint, it's then fully stored on the storage of OctoPrint. There you can then select the file and start the print.
Watch a folder on my NAS
If you have network attached storage, you could save files into a network share, then mount that folder on the OctoPrint Raspberry Pi as it's watched folder, as detailed in Network Mounting OctoPrint Data from a NAS, then monitor progress on the OctoPrint web interface rather than in Cura.
Switch to another slicer.
Another option is to switch to another slicer. It looks like the OctoPrint integration in other slicers support print once uploaded too. Looking at PrusaSlicer & OctoPrint: How to Use Them Together, I can see one of the steps is to check the "Start printing after upload" checkbox, but I haven't tested this yet.

Thanks for the updates, great answer. Please remember to accept your solution as the answer to the question!

I'm generally uncomfortable with accepting a self-answer @0scar, but since you asked nicely.

You really shouldn't be uncomfortable! Even SE endorses self answered questions! Sharing knowledge and experience is very important, it may help others. Even you got inspired by an answer that did not answer the question!

It's amusing how often the solution to 3D printing problems is just "Don't use Cura, it's 2024".

Thanks @Oscar but I generally feel the community is best placed to indicate a 'correct' answer than the question asker, and acceptance is far more valuable when it isn't a self-answer anyway.

The obvious, a bit expensive but probably best and most common solution is to use Octopi. (it's so common it took me a while to realize you're running Octoprint from a PC!)
You get a Raspberry Pi 3b, or 4, or any of a large number of cheaper and more available alternatives (I personally use Orange Pi zero 2) - then you install Linux with Octoprint on it. You power it up from the printer's power through some sort of regulator, connect the printer with it over a stub of USB cable, and connect it to your home LAN over Ethernet or Wifi. It's powered on and running while the printer is running. You link up Cura to it to upload gcode to its sd card (over LAN, so very fast) and you control it over web interface. That means the PC can be in another room (with Octoptint page displaying camera view of the print bed on second screen, in case anything goes wrong), you can design and slice your projects in silence and shut down your PC when you're done, while the small Pi works overnight feeding the printer gcode over its USB connection.
Configuration:

From Cura Marketplace install Octoprint Connection.

in Octoprint: wrench icon, Features > Application Keys
Generate key, name: cura.

In Cura, Setings, printer, manage printers, select the printer, 'Connect Octoprint'.

Select the Octopi from list, paste the application key in the key field.

From then on the PC is connected to Octopi over the net, so the transmission between the two is vastly faster than over serial, and after slicing you get the drop-down option "Print with Octoprint" besides "Save to disk". Selecting "Print with Octoprint" allows you to type in the directory on Pi, edit the file name, and pick whether to select and start the print immediately - without that it will just be placed in the storage medium of the Octoprint device, to be started from Octoprint at a later time.

No he has a Raspberry Pi that runs OctoPrint, the problem is that OctoPrint is used through Cura, if so then when you shut down the PC, the print stops. So although it appears he is using OctoPrint, the instructions are send by Cura, so, when you shutdown the PC the instructions stop being sent and the print stops.

@MarkBooth In my case "Send to Octoprint" takes maybe 5 seconds to complete, so you'd have to really speedrun putting your PC to sleep while it's still in progress.

@MarkBooth I sent the overnight print to the printer, watched the first layer, closed Cura, shut down the PC completely, went home, and in the morning came back to completed print with the PC dark and silent.

Ok, so it turns out this is a Cura version issue. Without changing the "OctoPrint Connection" plugin, updating Cura made my "Connect OctoPrint" configuration dialogue look like yours, with the option to select "Start print job after uploading" now being present, so the plugin itself must have different behaviour depending on the version of Cura it is running under. Thanks, your answer may not have answered my question, but the differences between your screenshots and what I was seeing, did help me find the answer.


text:
Does anyone know why Meshmixer does this when I bring a brush to a figure?
Does anyone know why Meshmixer does this when I bring a brush to a figure?

I do not know what I am looking at there. You need to be more elaborate in explaining your problem.


text:
Can I use the same flow rate for Core Heating Technology (CHT) nozzles as for non-CHT nozzles?
I'm waiting for some Core Heating Technology (CHT) nozzles to arrive which I will then use to do flow calibration. For now I'm however trying to understand flow rate in relation to CHT.
Does a CHT nozzle always require a much higher flow rate compared to 'regular' nozzles or can I use the same flow rate?

What do you mean by "require"? The point is to allow a higher flow rate, not to "require" it.

I know. But I mean relative to normal nozzles. In other words: Can I use the same flow rate for CHT as for non-CHT nozzles? I'll change it, I think the intention is more clear that way.

Are you talking about flow rate compensation in the slicer?

Yes, that's what I meant.

Flow compensation, the slicer feature you seem to be talking about, is about the material properties of the thermoplastic you're printing - its thermal expansion and corresponding shrinkage when it cools, as well as how much the extrusion path cross-section deviates from the ideal model the slicer uses to determine how much material to extruder. It is a percentage to compensate by.
Flow rate is how much volume of material you can push through the nozzle per unit time, and typically has units of mm³/s. I think what you're getting confused by is that CHT enables a higher flow rate - this means it lets you push more material through the nozzle in the same amount of time. That has nothing to do with flow compensation and does not mean you should change it.
In theory it's possible that you've upped your flow compensation to compensate for slippage in the extruder gear from already trying to go faster than your extruder can really push, and that you no longer have to do this with a CHT. But that was a really sloppy compensation to begin with, if you did it, and would have led to really inconsistent, speed-dependent extrusion.
I suppose it's also possible that the differing melt consistency from a CHT will make the extrusion path cross section more closely match the ideal, which could affect the optimal flow compensation to use. But I have not seen any evidence to that effect.
In short: you don't need to do anything with your flow compensation. Whatever you saw about CHT and flows was not talking about flow compensation.

The flow calibration (also known as extrusion multiplier) must be calibrated each time at least one of the following ones are changed:

type of filament (ABS, PLA, PLA+ which counts differently, ...)
filament brand
extruder+hotend+nozzle
(some people say also) filament colour

If you switch from CHT to non-CHT, clearly the nozzle has changed and you should at least verify the flow rate/extrusion multiplier. Maybe just test a range of +-2% without having to test the whole 90-105% range as you would do for a completely new material.


text:
Does Type A Machines Series 1 Pro heated bed have a thermal fuse?
I'm resurrecting a printer I inherited.
Can anyone tell me if the Type A Machines Series 1 Pro heated bed has a thermal fuse in it?
It's a 120 VAC bed and I'd like to protect from a possible short-circuit failure of the SSR. The company is out of business and I haven't been able to find schematics or info on the web.
Below are three pictures of the heat bed. The first is a top view. The second is a bottom view.The third is a back view showing the place where the heater/thermistor cable enters the four-layer heat bed, which comprises (top-to-bottom in this image) an aluminum plate, a gray foam, a reddish layer that appears to be a silicone heater, and a glass plate. (The foam is absent only in this corner where the cable enters the build plate.)

Sounds interesting. A photo of the heated bed, might be useful. A photo of the board could also be useful in identifying any fuse on the board itself. Please [edit] and update your question. FWIW, Type A Machines went out of business on Jan 2018. Have you looked to see if there is a thermal fuse or two attached to the underside of the heated bed? That seems more likely than having an embedded thermal fuse.

I don't know this printer, but seeing as it is quite old, from 2015, I would guess that any fuses would be on the main board rather than integrated into the heated bed itself (and the heated heat is probably just a PCB). . What makes you think that there is a thermal fuse (embedded) within the board? Just out of interest, do you know of any heated beds that have integrated thermal fuses? I'm not aware of any, although there may be as I haven't kept up to date with heated bed technology (since ~2017), so I am probably wrong, and others may know better.


text:
How to fill a void within a body?
Starting from this sketch:

I've revolved and extruded it to result in the body shown:

This is destined to be printed, so I need to fill in the cavity of the stick-y-out-y bit. I can use Surface->Patch to make it look correct from the outside, but there's still a void within:

I've searched using phrases such as "fusion join surface to body" "fusion fill void within body" and have only found results talking about making a body exclusively from surfaces. One promising sounding option was "boundary fill", but it seems to have no effect in this case.
What is the correct tool / technique to use here?

How is this related to 3D printing? For 3D design and modeling questions this is mandatory.

Just saying you will be printing it will be enough!

Simplify the order of operations
Sometimes, it is way easier to do the order of operations in a different order:
First, create the thickness of the body. Only then then subtract the rotation profile and last sweep the the outer profile subtractively

I'm still working on my "when to think additively and when to think subtractively" strategy, and this is clearly a case of me taking the wrong route. I did manage to resolve it with my model by turning it into surfaces, deleting some of the inner ones and then stitching it back together, but your strategy would have been much simpler.

I don't know if there is a tool that can do that (would be very helpful), but you could use boolean operators to do the same!
A simplified version of your product looks like:

When you create an box , or part of a box of the same height in the part you need to fill the void it will kook like (2 separate bodies in one view):

Now use a boolean operator "Split Boby":

You can subtract your shape from the box:

to get multiple parts (3 parts in this case):

Now use a boolean operator to glue the parts together (option combine):

This will give you your filled void:

That's the unelegant solution and can fail for very complex bodies

Maybe, but it doesn't require the OP to start over again!

you mean modify all bodies before? ;)


text:
Creality Ender 5 S1 Z Axis wanders while printing
While printing you can see the Z Axis screw slightly moving as the printhead travels across the work space. This results in a tapered print - I see about 0.7 mm taper right to left over 100 mm. This has been constant for a while now, it started after only a few good prints from new. I purchased the printer new in January 2023, and have only sporadically used it, mostly since I cannot print level parts.
I have leveled and releveled manually. I do not believe it is a leveling issue, but something more.

What's the warranty period on the printer? If you're still within warranty, sounds like it might be easier to just return it & try a new one.

Are you absolutely sure the linear guides are perpendicular to the top frame?


text:
Prints failing and there is resin hardened on the build plate in areas with no model on Elegoo Mars 3 Pro
I have been printing for years and I have no idea what is going on now. My prints are not coming out and random areas of the build plate have hardened resin where there should be nothing. These are pretty simple objects that are 3mm thick.

In order to accurately answer your question, we will need some more details... please [edit] and update your question with any recent changes that you may have made, along with any settings used. Other details will probably also be required as well.


text:
Prints are clumpy, uneven and "gloopy"
Pictures tell the story. Either the printing layers are uneven sizes or they clumo at the beginning and end of the print.
Bambu P1P with a generic PLA and all default settings with auto generated tree supports. Top and bottom areas should be sharp points, not this mess

Looks like you are printing slow and with too much temperature, could you share your basic speed and temperature settings? Please by [edit]!

Also post a picture of how the object should look, part screen shot or something from STL or sliced object.

Broken cooling fan, maybe?


text:
How is the fan speed calculated?
Let's assume a I set a layer time to start increasing cooling from the base value, and another minimum layer time at which cooling reaches the maximum I set.
How is the interpolation between the two obtained?
Background information:
In general I would expect an inversely proportional relationship, since, for example, half layer time means doubling the cooling. Is this the case, or is it a linear relationship?
If an inversely proportional formula is used, I may only need to define the layer time for the max cooling, and the software would reduce it based on layer time alone, with an additional rule about never going below a predefined amount.

But no cooling fan cools the same, hence the flow needs to be tuned for your printer.  The flow of a radial fan is generally proportional to its speed, but the exact relationship can be influenced by various factors.

@0scar Ok so what is the actual formula used by slicers currently? linear? the rest was guesswork and ideas on my side

You could look it up in Cura slicing engine or slic3r source

@0scar it's beyond my skills

As the ralation is sort of linear you can expect the code to linerly interlpolate in between the min. fan speed and the max. fan speed.


text:
How to find the orientation that uses the least amount of support material in CURA?
I want to print a protein model, given any orientation there are a large number of overhangs, making it difficult to judge by eye which orientation uses the least support material.
Is there a tool in CURA that will try many orientations and pick the one requiring the least amount of support material?


text:
Ender V3 SE middle of print bed sticking but fine elsewhere
Recently got an Ender V3 SE and new to 3D printing. I am having issues where the prints are sticking hard to the middle of the print bed and are difficult to remove, often with damage to the bottom. If offset anywhere else on the bed, the prints are fine. Wondering if the build plate has an issue

Consider to measure the nozzle distance from the bed at the "normal" points, those at which you have no release problems and compare that distance to the points at which the release is difficult. It's not out of the realm of possibility that your bed has a substantial enough distortion to cause the nozzle to too-heavily bond the filament to the bed.
If you're willing to put a bit more effort into the solution, you can install Octoprint on just about anything and run the Bed Level Visualizer which will present a color graph representing the flatness of the bed. Image below from linked site:

It's important when running this program to note the scale for the axes. The linked image shows rather large scale which presents a fairly distorted bed, but I've seen similar images in which the scale was one-tenth or one one-hundredth of this image. As a result the distortion is relatively severe, but absolutely measured, quite insignificant.


text:
How to get detailed information from an STL file for the manufacturer?
I am trying to get a file produced by a manufacturer and they want the detailed dimensions of the model, it is a complex ID card badge holder and I am wondering if there is an easier way to get a dimension sheet. I have used Fusion 360 to get like face and edge measurements but there are a lot and I was seeing if there was a better way to do it?

Can't you make a technical drawing in Fusion? The design tool is meant to produce drawings for fabrication shops.

@0scar I did not create the file in Fusion 360 it was just an STL file that I aquired.

An STL can be transformed into a solid, and from a solid you can make drawings. Can you add an image of the STL, or a reference to the model?


text:
Why does filament feed system not run when changing filament?
When changing filament during a print job I get a message to feed new filament, then press Okay. After pressing Okay, I get the message "Please insert the filament" - but nothing happens.
I repeatedly press the Okay, but nothing. I can load filament, but that requires stopping the print job. Seems like a software problem to me. Any advice? No, it's not the nozzle temperature or any such thing. The filament feed system does not run when Okay is pressed.

Could you please update the question by [edit] to let us know the printer, the firmware and possibly part of the G-code to show the filament change?


text:
Transparent material
I am searching for some material, that can be turned (even with post-processing) into a "glass" like texture.
Additionally, it should withstand some pressure (0.5 MPa in approximately 30 mm diameter canals) so PLA does not fit my case... Mostly, I would appreciate some CFR, since its mechanical properties are amazing, but it doesn't have to be that way.
I own Markforged FX20, Mark two and Ultimaker S5.

Could we please have some more information regarding the finished product that you have at the end of this process. For example, are you going to produce a viewing window to be included as a component of some other practical part?

Print problems
Only very few FDM materials are truly transparent. When printing a line next to line, inclusions of air can and will create outer boundaries that would be visible, so it is paramount to print in such a fashion that prints are as tight as possible. Another problem is, that under normal conditions the extrusion-extrusion boundaries are quite visible and that have different refraction indices inside the part. To remove those boundaries and gaps, it needs special printing parameters that result not only in filling every gap but also partially melt all adjacent lines to create a truly solid part. As such, FDM prints with multiple layers for walls are extremely hard to make fully transparent.
With extreme tuning, the internal voids can be reduced to almost none or truly none, and inter-wall bonding increased to be nigh invisible, but this leaves outer walls.
Extreme settings for clarity
Stefan from CNC-Kitchen had a whole talk about these specialty print parameters with which he achieved very low-opacity prints in some, but not always all directions. As a baseline, he used settings proposed by Rygar1432. He started using a very transparent PCTG, with already very good results, and then experimented with PETG, which had a slightly less transparent look to it after optimizing the settings.

The exact composition of the print material was found to have tremendous effects on the transparency, thus different manufacturers and even rolls from different batches might behave differently and require different settings. Further, some filaments absorb moisture over time, which will degrade the print result by creating voids of entrapped water vapor. As printers also heat slightly differently due to the variance of the heater cartridges' resistance, your settings might not be perfectly applicable to another printer of the same type and might require adjustment. The most important basic settings discussed were:

extrusion width & layer height

Compared to the standard 0.4 mm or 0.45 mm, a wider extrusion of 0.5 mm was used, but the layer height was significantly reduced to 0.12 mm at the same time, resulting in the plastic getting pressed tighter against the previous print and allowing fusion to other walls

perimeters

Using only a single outer perimeter made the print mainly composed of infill and reduced the different geometries that could create pockets

printing speed & part cooling.

Compared to classic prints, the printing speeds had to go way down to 15 mm/s, which is about 1/4 of typical print speeds. The slower print speed assists with keeping the extruded plastic hotter in the area of the nozzle, assisting with inter-extrusion bonding. This was further assisted by disabling part cooling. However, this resulted in very bad results of bridging material.

Infill Geometry

An aligned rectilinear infill pattern was necessary to remove almost all voids, which was coupled with no top and bottom surfaces to again, reduce different print geometries that could create voids in the print.

The most important factor was the extrusion multiplier, which for Stefan's machine was best at about 101 %, as above that he started to experience some deformation of the part's outer shape, mostly in the shape of rough surfaces.

A slight bit of polishing and cleanup was at times required, as Stefan retold. Also, again, the outer perimeter clearly shows in different alignments of the print, best shown with this shot. While you can see almost undisturbed through the part down like, sideways the outer perimeters are very opaque.

All in all, you could get a very well-transparent print in some directions, but the outer surfaces are always somewhat rough.
Specialty Filaments
Some filaments can be treated after printing to create a single, well-fused outer surface that is nigh fully transparent. This precludes prints with many walls unless the interior is already clear, but the results are known to be stunning for prints with a single or few walls. Do note that the order of filaments mentioned here is by the toxicity of their solvents, so the higher up in the list, the less dangerous it is.
PVB
The Hourglass by Mageb uses a chemical quirk of polyvinyl butyral (PVB): it is soluble in isopropyl alcohol to a good degree, resulting in softening and smoothening of the surface if the right exposure time is used. It's hard to predict if and where the IPA can creep into the walls to remove cavities without destroying the print's shape, so this effect is generally best used on Vase-mode prints. This of course limits the wall thickness and strength of the print.
ABS
It's well known that Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) dissolves in Acetone. In a similar fashion to PVB, Acetone liquid or vapors thus can be used to smooth out the outer deformities of a print and create a smooth surface, though not only is Acetone much more dangerous than Isopropanol due to toxicity, ABS itself is a more challenging printing material to PVB and can emit some dangerous fumes in printing. Since ABS has lost ist appeal to most hobbyists, I could not find any report on possible clouding issues from the treatment.
PETG
Yes, Polyethylene terephthalate glycol-modified [copolymer] PETG is chemically smoothable. However, the chemicals that can dissolve PETG are even more toxic than for ABS: Dichloromethane, methyl ethyl ketone (MEK), toluene, and cyclohexanone are extremely toxic and nobody would guarantee you that the print will stay clear and that the prints won't cloud from the chemicals penetrating the print.

To be honest,3D printing has a poor reputation when it comes to transparent parts as resin tends to discolor when exposed to UV light, and need to be coated with another material such as a clearcoat in order to maintain their glass like finish for any time.
Filament is even worse, it yellows quickly and will have visible layer lines no matter how much you tune your printer.
With machines of the quality that you're mentioning, you would be best going with the manufacturer's own brand PETG, turning the extrusion up to the maximum and the cooling off, then the speed down. Ironically, thicker layers are best as they bond together better and so form less pronounced layer lines.
My personal recommendation would be use your printer to create a part in an opaque material, and then use that part to create a mold so that you can create your part out of two part epoxy resin, or create a blank that can be used in a vacuum former.


text:
What do I need to configure to get Marlin to run an Ender 3 Pro with CR Touch?
I have an Ender 3 Pro, board version 4.2.2, and a CR Touch with 5 pin connector. I also removed the z-axis endstop connector at the endstop.
I've been building and flashing Marlin 2.1.2.2, but I haven't found a configuration that makes the CRTouch work as expected. Typically, during auto homing, the machine will ignore the probe triggering and drive Z into the bed either 100% of the time or most of the time. I didn't take detailed enough notes to know for sure.
As a test case, I tried following along with this answer exactly and still had the same problem. Configuration changes from the Marlin Ender 3 Pro default:

Z_MIN_PROBE_USES_Z_MIN_ENDSTOP_PIN commented out
USE_PROBE_FOR_Z_HOMING uncommented
Z_MIN_PROBE_PIN uncommented and set to PB1
BLTOUCH uncommented
NOZZLE_TO_PROBE_OFFSET set to { -44, -9, -0.9 } (here I differ slightly from the { -44, -9, 0 } in the answer)
AUTO_BED_LEVELING_UBL uncommented
ENABLE_LEVELING_AFTER_G28 uncommented
Z_SAFE_HOMING uncommented (not in the answer, but in a comment)

On my first boot after inserting the SD card with firmware:

The probe deployed and retracted a couple of times, ending retracted with the red LED on
The machine seemingly flashed the firmware as it sat on a blue screen for a while
The CRTouch LED turned purple I think when flashing ended, though I can't tell from my video
When I got to the main menu, I started auto homing
X and Y axes worked as expected
For the Z axis, the probe centered on the build plate, deployed, and the LED turned blue
The probe started lowering, contacted the plate and retracted. The LED turned to blinking red, maybe steady red first. The Z motor kept driving down so I killed the power

The extruder fan also made a loud buzzing noise that gradually grew quieter. In the past I've noticed the buzzing seemingly get quieter when the probe is deployed or retracted.
Anyone know what could be causing this, or how to troubleshoot it? Creality's firmware works as expected, so it's not a hardware problem. I was thinking maybe PB1 is wrong for the Ender 3 Pro, but from what I see online I gather it's the same mainboard between both printers.

You modified the hardware in a degree that it does not match the original hardware expected by the firmware. Of course you need a custom firmware now. The Z-Probe isn't a simple toggle though.

@Trish I'm not expecting stock Marlin to work. My question is what I need to play around with in my configuration to get the expected behavior, as miming someone with presumably the same hardware configuration isn't working

Ahhh! So the question is basically "How do I properly enable the BL touch in Marlin 2.1.2.2 using the ender3 chip? We might need to know the exact model of sensor.

@Trish It's a CR Touch, not a BL Touch. I'm not aware of there being more than one model of the CR Touch

I think this is an issue with Marlin v2.1.2.2, which I was trying to use. https://github.com/MarlinFirmware/Marlin/issues/26809 this issue points to another bug with probing. My issue is different, but downgrading to 2.1.1 solved it.

I also have an ender 3 pro that I added a bl touch to. I set mine up with removing the z limit switch and connecting the bl touch using those pins along with the z probe pins. You need to verify which board you have (probably a v4.2.2) and which cpu is on your board,mine was STM32F103 RET6 CPU there are some using a different model. I was never able to get marlin to build and work with the bl touch, however I was able to flash https://github.com/zisismaras/ender_3_4.2.2_firmware which worked fine. A 4.2.2 board with the RET6 cpu is required. You / someone could do a config side by side and figure out which flag(s) you are missing in your configuration or you could just flash whichever probe grid you are comfortable with and use these auto builds.

I've got the RET6, luckily, so this should work for me. I'll give it a shot in the next couple of days; if this pre-built image works then I'll figure out what's missing in my config. Thanks!

Well, the 5x5 auto probe firmware didn't work. I verified that Creality's firmware is working as expected; I'll have to see if I can get them to fork over their source code so I can figure out what they're doing differently


text:
What scale of accuracy in measurement tools is required to verify a FFF item's specs based on the technology properties?
Measurements in machining often are done to an accuracy of "thou" which is thousands of an inch, or about 0.0254 mm. The measurement equipment for such is usually to an accuracy of tens or hundreds of that.
Construction is often done with an accuracy of about 1-5 mm on lengths, and the measurement equipment is accurate to about 1 mm.
FFF Printers often have tolerances somewhere between 0.1 and 0.5 mm in the XY axis, depending on the size of the nozzle and the quality of the printer.
As a result, what kind of accuracy should measurement equipment for consumer FFF prints (before postprocessing) have and what kind of size scale size is required?

This question is not clear. The accuracy depends on the intended purpose of the part, not on the manufacturing process. If I'm printing a plant pot I don't care about tenths of mm, I measure with a tape and that's it. If I print a part which has to match other ones, I'll use a caliper. Please clarify, but I think the question cannot be salvaged.

@FarO it's more about the expectable accuracy to the measureable one. True, a flower pot has like 5 millimeter accuracy demands, but that is not what I want to go for. With the expected accuracy in the 0.1 to 0.5 millimeter area from the machine (and assuming that is what is demanded for the product itself), what's the correct measurement accuracy for tools? Like, how fine a graduation you need on your calipers to get the measurement accuracy to the "negectible" area?

I'm honestly still not sure I understand the question, because your explanation seems to move the question from 3D print to generic measurement theory: if I need x accuracy, how precise should my tool be? the answer can only be "what are the requirements for your part? that's the tool you need". If you need parts to be accurate to 0.5 mm, anything better than that would do. The answer is in the question...

By the way, after flow and shrinkage calibration I printed parts with an UM2 with default settings in Cura which ended up accurate to 50 microns (the best my caliper can do). So if you expect 0.1-0.5 mm accuracy even simple steel calipers will do

I take exception to the common wisdom that FDM printers have XY tolerances in the range 0.1 to 0.5 mm. That might have been the case 5 or 6 years ago, but with a modern printer, you expect tool positioning accuracy and reproducibility (layers lining up) on the order of 10 microns (0.01 mm). The major source of inexactness is extrusion width, due to the cross sections of your extrusions not being perfect rectangles, but bulging at the sides in a shape like two matching parentheses and their convex hull (    ).
One reason I bring this up is that one of the most important uses of calipers with FDM printing is to calibrate your extrusion multiplier to compensate for these effects. If you can only measure in 0.1 mm increments, measuring printed perimeters is just going to come out the nominal 0.4 mm or whatever, unless things are more than 15% or so off. That's a big relative error that will have consequences in terms of solid layers coming out with gaps or coming out over-filled and colliding with the nozzle as it digs them upward. With 0.01 mm measurement increments, you can get your extrusion right within 1%. This makes a big difference to your ability to print parts that fit the first time rather than needing trial-and-error refinement.
As for actually making things, if they're going to fit together with other real-world stuff, they need to be made with significant adjustability or with precise measurements. Often adjustability is the way to go when you can, but for printing replacement parts this often isn't an option. And if you need parts to match for a snap fit, interference fit, holding gears or bearings in a particular place without backlash, etc., measuring to the nearest 0.1 mm is not going to cut it. Especially with digital calipers, seeing a measurement like 10.2 doesn't tell you whether it's actually 10.151 or 10.249, or even further off if the calipers are low quality (which the ones that only show 0.1 mm scale tend to be). I found that upgrading to higher quality 0.01 mm scale digital calipers made a huge difference to my ability to just "get stuff done" with 3D printing, without having to re-print over and over tweaking dimensions. Particular applications that come to mind where it made a difference for me were:

Enclosures for PCBs/SBCs.

Upgrades/add-ons for printers: brackets to mount things to the aluminum extrusions, fan ducts, etc.

Small plastic pieces to reinforce laptops & other electronics where screw points on housing were broken.

Lids to pop in and seal against gaskets in air-tight bins.

Feet to fit snug on metal furniture legs.

Finally, even if in practice FDM printers can only meet mediocre tolerances, being off by something like 0.05 mm or even 0.1 mm from a known good measurement is a lot better than being off by that much from a measurement that itself was already off by nearly 0.1 mm.

Measuring with calipers has way more sources of uncertainty than the intrinsic measurement inaccuracy you mention, see https://ellis3dp.com/Print-Tuning-Guide/articles/misconceptions.html It should really NOT be used to calibrate extrusion multiplier

@FarO: I'm aware and disagree with the conclusions. If your goal is to ensure that you do not have interference or overextruded solid layers, you want to tune extrusion this way. Even if it's imperfect, it's far less bad than other recommended ways.

Calipers don't tell the whole story. You may also have problems with skew or just printer specific inaccuracies not caused by extrusion. The best way to test extrusion is to print a 100% infill test piece at your normal print settings and look for gaps between the extrusions.


text:
Ender 3 Pro Beeping when Hot End Reaches 100 ºC
A little context might be important to troubleshoot this: Last year, I have changed the extruder and the entire hot end piece of my Ender 3 Pro. One day, while cleaning the nozzle with a metallic brush, something on it short circuited and this bricked my mainboard.
Recently, I have changed the broken 4.2.0 mainboard with a brand new 4.2.7 one. Everything seemed to be fine until I attempted to pre heat the nozzle again to 200 °C.
Every time the nozzle reaches around 100 °C the printer starts beeping loudly and resets continuously until the nozzle cools down to room temperature.
I have it connected to OctoPrint and I could see that there were no errors being logged apart from it saying that there was no SD card and no EEPROM.
What can I do to further troubleshoot this error? Is there anything from the OctoPrint side that could provide more information?

A firmware is configured with settings which are stored in the chip called EEPROM. EEPROM  is short for Electrically Erasable Programmable Read-Only Memory which is a kind of non-volatile memory (see wikipedia). It is the chip thar stores the firmware settings you generally see when you command the M503 G-code (see M502 will reset all configurable settings to their "factory defaults", which settings are those?) in a terminal (What is a printer console/terminal?).
The Creality controller board V4.2.7, with a 32-bit microprocessor (most 32-bit microprocessors do not have a EEPROM), stores the data on an SD card, not in the EEPROM. But, the firmware thinks that the EEPROM is used, it is merely a file on the SD card. This could hint to the errors that you are receiving.
To solve this, you need to insert a working SD card (format the SD card as FAT32) in the machine and keep it there.


text:
Poor first layer even after careful calibration
I am using Klipper on a modified Wanhao Duplicator i3 (Monoprice Maker Select V2) featuring a BLTouch probe. I am working through the painstaking process of bed leveling, but even though Klipper seems happy with the level, my first layer calibration print using SuperSlicer is not coming out well:

First, I adjusted the gantry to be level to the table (not the bed). I checked that the PROBE_ACCURACY looks good:
probe accuracy results: maximum 1.995000, minimum 1.987500, range 0.007500, average 1.991250, median 1.991250, standard deviation 0.002016

Then I use the SCREWS_TILT_CALCULATE command to adjust the bed screws until they are very close:
rear left screw : x=50.0, y=200.0, z=1.89750 : adjust CCW 00:02
rear right screw : x=200.0, y=200.0, z=1.89750 : adjust CCW 00:02
front right screw : x=200.0, y=50.0, z=1.89500 : adjust CCW 00:02
front left screw (base) : x=50.0, y=50.0, z=1.87750

The BED_MESH_CALIBRATE command determines that there is maybe a 0.185mm inconsistency across the bed.

I added BED_MESH_PROFILE LOAD=default to my start GCODE, after homing completes.
Then I ran the bed/extrusion test print that SuperSlicer generated for me, shown at the top of the post. The center looks best but the left side is too far and the right side is much too close.
Isn't the mesh supposed to correct for this? What might I still have wrong?

Even if my probe's Z offset were wrong, wouldn't the calibration print be consistently bad?

As pointed out by Jake Palmer on the Klipper forum, I needed to apply axis twist compensation.

Some printers may have a small twist in their X rail which can skew the results of a probe attached to the X carriage. This is common in printers with designs like the Prusa MK3, Sovol SV06 etc...

I have Z braces installed but I believe these were poorly set and exacerbating the twist. After fiddling a little while I got dramatically better prints.


text:
Loose filament hairs on print
I'm printing a vase using Spiralize Outer Contour.
On each print, I run into the issue you see in the photos. There's random 'hairs' of filament spread across the print.
I think it is because there might be some filament building up on the nozzle at some point. And when it becomes too much, the accumulated mess of filament touches and sticks to the print, comes loose from the nozzle, and is partly blown to the side by the part fan.
Is that a common cause for this issue?
If so, what would be a logical fix to the issue? I've tried difference layer heights, I've manually bed levelled many times, and it also happens with automatic bed levelling.
Setup:

Printer: Creality 3D CR-10S Pro V2
Extruder: Bondtech DDX v3 Direct Drive
Hotend: Slice Engineering Mosquito Magnum

Have you tried reducing the flow slightly?

@towe Not yet, good one, I'll try that on the next attempt.


text:
Mysterious line in my Vase-print
Besides the ugly filament hairs (dealing with those separately), I've got this weird horizontal line in my print that's hard to miss. It's perfectly straight, and I can't figure out what's causing it. I'm using the Spiralize Outer Contour setting.
At first, I thought maybe the wall was getting thinner for a couple of layers, but nope. It seems like the nozzle is pulling to the inside direction for a bit for a few layers, because there's also a line on the inside of the vase. On the inside, the line is kind of sticking out. But I have no idea why. I'm not seeing this on my Cura preview, it really happens during the print.
Setup:

Printer: Creality 3D CR-10S Pro V2
Extruder: Bondtech DDX v3 Direct Drive
Hotend: Slice Engineering Mosquito Magnum

Does it happen reproducibly in the same location for multiple attempts? If not, it looks like you just had a momentary problem with extrusion.

I'm trying to understand how you got the filament hairs and blobs on a vase-mode print.  Those artifacts make me wonder if something else is going on with the print in general.  Is it correctly spiralizing?  that is, the nozzle should move in one continuous line around the perimeter without moving away at any point.
Secondarily:  on the far side of the vase, is it pushed out, instead of in, or has the print contracted entirely - that whole band is pulled in uniformly around the perimeter of the print for those layers?


text:
Printer keeps going down when BLTouch activates during auto homing (4.2.2 board)
When I auto home my Ender 3 Pro, it does its usual thing where it goes to the corner and then comes to the middle. Although, when it goes down and the BLT activates, the nozzle keeps going down afterwards and hits the bed while the BLT is flashing blue and red.
I have tried swapping the terminals in which the BLT is placed and re-flashing the firmware yet it still doesn't work. I am using the 4.2.2 motherboard and I followed this video, ENDER 3 / ENDER 3 PRO With Board 4.2.2 - How To UPDATE FIRMWARE, to make sure the controller and board were correct and this video, How to install Marlin Firmware with BLtouch for your simple Creality printer
, for the settings.
Here is the video for my problem: 3D Printer Demo.

If you need any more info, I will try to respond as soon as I can, thanks!

Hi Lionel and welcome. This SE site (but not all) has the ability to embed videos within the posts, see YouTube video embedding has been ENABLED for this site for more info. I have taken the liberty to embed the video for you.

Turns out that the trigger signal (white) and GND (black) wires just had faulty connections.

Thanks for posting your own solution, please do not forget to accept your answer by clicking the checkmark in front of your answer. This may take 48 hours to self-accept your answer. Thanks! Happy printing!

How did you fix the faulty connections? Was it just a matter of pushing the plug in again, or did you have to do some rewiring?


text:
Is an e3D hotend with 3 mm filament diameter still compatible with 1.75 mm filament?
I am looking to buy a low priced 3 mm e3D all-metal v6 hot end. It says 3 mm, however I am wondering if I could make it compatible 1.75 mm if I just get a different Bowden tube and Bowden clip.
Is an e3D hot-end rated for 3 mm actually machined for said filament diameter, or is such constraint only relating to the diameter of the Bowden clip?

You shouldn't buy a hotend for  2.85 mm (which is the actual filament diameter, real 3 mm filament is hard to get nowadays) when you need a hotend for 1.75 mm filament.
Indeed, the Bowden tube is way thicker (about 6 mm) for 2.85 mm filament apposed to about 4 mm for 1.75 mm filament, so you need a different coupling, but, the inside of the hotend is not meant to transport the thinner filament, so you need to fill the inside with a proper tube. This essentially makes your metal hotend a lined version. Furthermore, the nozzle has a bore of about 3.2 mm (like the heatbreak), this is detrimental for your retraction and ooze performance.
I operate printers with both filaments, but always found that it is better to buy dedicated hotends for the correct size you are operating, unless you have many spare parts lying around to rebuild the hotend (nozzle, heatbreak, tubes and coupling).


text:
Help With Bottom of Sphere Coming off With Supports
I printed this on an Ender 3 S1 Pro at 215˚C with a 20% infill (actually 5 were printed at once).  The print bed was leveled prior to print.
When I tried to remove the supports, they took the bottom of the sphere off with them.
How typical is this, and what parameters can I change to have the best chance of a successful print?

Have you seen question 3D Printed Sphere, How to Remove Roughness? Although the question is centered around the roughness, not the supports, the answers hint to a solution for this question.
If you look at the answers, you see that in case you have have unsupported perimeters (see image below), they sag out (as seen in your print where the lower perimeters of the sphere are not perectly round) and may fuse with the support causing the support and the perimiters (walls) to bond quite well.
Furthermore, if you use too few perimeters and a low infill percentage, the print object will become weak and have an increased change that removing the print from the plate or the support from the print cause the print to break.

Picture credits to Trish, this is 180° rotated

Thank you, Oscar, pretty much exactly the information I needed to see to guide me in the right direction.  Unfortunately, I can't upvote your answer since I don't have enough reputation.


text:
M303 Autotune for heatbed fails with "Bad Extruder Number" error. Why?
I'm attempting to get Autotune PID values for the heatbed. I'm using M303 with an E-1 parameter to designate the bed.  I'm also using an S parameter to designate the desired temperature. It's returning a "Bad Extruder Number" error each time. M303 with no E parameter correctly runs the Autotune process and returns valid P, I and D values for the Extruder heater.
I'm using instructions found here, Marlin Firmware M301 / M303 / M304 G-Code Commands Explained.
Printer is a Prusa i3 clone using Marlin (version 1.1.6) with Repetier to send the commands.

Your Marlin version is pretty old.
To enable the tuning of the bed, the configuration.h file requires the following compiler directive to be set:
#define PIDTEMPBED
If the hotend is tuned instead, this means that either the directive has not been set, or that the firmware is flawed by the following issue (#12468).
You should update the firmware to a newer version by flashing a more recent build. Note that the issue was present in a Marlin 2.0.x bugfix branch, so try the latest version or one from early 2019.


text:
Ender 3 v3 SE - ABS slowly accumulates on nozzle
I picked up a cheap Ender 3 v3 SE printer a few months ago. While it works fine for PLA filament, I've been having an issue when printing ABS. My prints come out fine, but plastic will accumulate slowly on the nozzle. It starts at the tip and works its way up - it's not leaking from the threads. Eventually, it builds up enough that it deposits itself on the print. Sometimes, the head crashes into this blob and causes a layer shift.
What I've been doing is cleaning the nozzle between prints. If I don't, it almost definitely will fall off and cause problems. On longer (more than 1-2 hour) prints, I have to pause the print and clean it multiple times.
I've printed anywhere from 220-235 °C but it makes no difference. I don't think it's a clog because it's done this from day 1 on ABS, but has had no issues with PLA, and I've switched between them multiple times. What should I troubleshoot next?

Have you measured the ABS filament with a caliper and copared this to the PLA filament diameter? Have you calibrated the flow for ABS? A filament diameter difference could cause the ABS to overextrude, in that case you should use the flow modifier to adjust. If you don't have calipers, print test cubes at 0.98, 0.96, 0.94, etc. until it doesn't catch on the nozzle.


text:
Print nozzle too far from the plate
My son has a Creality Ender 3 S1. It had been printing fine until this morning. The nozzle is about 3 mm (1/8 inch) from the build plate. Is there a "reset" or "calibration" function I'm missing in the menu?

Just a quick check - I think that the S1 should have an Automatic Bed Levelling (ABL) probe, does yours have one? Also, have you read the manual or user guide? At least some of the answers seem to be easily found there. If you have, and those steps don't work for you, then please [edit] and update your question, to explain why the steps in the manual do not work for you.

TL;DR
There should be both a "Restore factory defaults" setting and an "ABL setup" setting in the touch screen UI.

Bed level
From section 6 - Auto leveling of the user guide:

Go to "settings" and tap "leveling" to enter the CR Touch leveling interface. Tap "start" and wait for the automatic leveling to complete.

Section 7 covers "Assisted Leveling" or manual leveling.
Factory Reset
Inexplicably, this isn't in the User Guide, but from How do you factory reset an ender 3 S1 pro?:

Settings > ADV SET. > Restore All Set.

Still having issues?
I can't give a verified answer, but there seems to be a common-ish issue1, after having done a bit of googling.
I assume that your S1 has a Automatic Bed Levelling (ABL) probe.
From Reddit - Bed Leveling problem on my new ENder 3 S1 pro - ABL doesnt seems to compensate well, there are at least three potential solutions (copied verbatim with no corrected typos):

Make sure there is no clog in the nozzle or throat. that is not the fix but i did have problems with clicking and that fixed it. you only need to run the Auto level once. the Auto level on these machine are garbage. after the auto level adjust the z offset with the paper USING the touch screen adjustment. then go to all four corners with the paper at least twice using the knobs under the bed, not the touch screen adjustment, to get it dialed in. DO NOT run the Auto level again after this. if your g code is set to tell the machine to auto level before or after printer, Disable this. It should print fine until you do an auto level again. also make sure the bed is super clean. We are stuck with non working fancy stuff on these printers until someone can save the day with nice firmware changes, except for people like me who have the crap chip that wont let you flash at all  Sorry for any run on sentences. Also do the manual bed level with the bed warmed up not cold. my machine will crash the software if i try to auto level warm, so i have to heat it up and turn on off the bed

or

Loosen all Axis just to the point of a tiny bit slop.
Clear settings(factory reset)
Manual level with paper all four coners and 80c
Run ABL
Be happy with your printer again.

or

Reset to factory defaults
Iniciate leveling throught settings
Wait for the Home routine
Using the point 1, I adjust the z-offset using the paper metod
Cicle all corners (using the touch menu) and adjust the bed height using the knobs until all have the same resistance. Do not return to the first point in this step
Return to the point 1 and set the z-offset to zero.
Run the ABL and wait.
Return to home screen using the top left arrow.
Run a first layer test and adjust the z-offset.
Done

1 Which may or may not be a bug in the firmware


text:
Issues getting an image texture to print on a Statasys J750
I'm trying to print out a digital elevation model of a landscape with a satellite image of the landscape overlayed on it as a texture. I've been working with the makerspace at my University, who have a Statasys J750 polyjet 3D printer. However, my file prints without the texture, just as a totally black model. The folks at the makerspace have been helpful, but they aren't really sure what the issue is.
Here's my workflow:

Import my STL file for the DEM into Blender
Reduce the poly count of the model by dissolving all coplanar surfaces
Create materials for the base and for the terrain. For the base, assign a solid color (brown). For the terrain, assign a .png texture of a satellite image of the terrain, and project it onto the terrain from above using a UV mapping
Bake on the textures using "combined" bake type, with "direct," "indirect," and "diffuse" lighting and contributions (I'm not sure why this is necessary, but the makerspace staff told me that it is).
Export the project to a .obj file, selecting the "UV Coordinates," "Normals," "Colors," and "Triangulated Mesh" options.
Import the resulting .OBJ/.MTL/.PNG files into GrabCAD and print.

When viewing the model in GrabCAD, my model displays properly, with the .png texture displaying properly on the model, similarly to the screenshot from blender I included below. Even then, my model ends up printing without any color; just as a black piece of plastic. When printing other people's projects using the same settings in GrabCAD, things seem to work fine. The staff at the makerspace aren't really sure what the issue is, and say it is likely an issue with my model.
Is anyone willing to help me troubleshoot this issue? Thanks.