text:
Alternative to PA12
Looking for alternatives to Nylon PA12. I need a material that is extremely impact resistant, durable and can be left outside. PA12 performs like a dream but it warps intensely on thick parts, so I'm stuck with ASA for now which is rather weak.
I've tried different PA6 blends, Taulman 910, CF and GF filled Nylons, they are brittle and all inferior to ASA. I tried looking for Taulman 230 or 618 but they don't seem to be produced anymore and are out of stock everywhere except eBay.

Let me throw two materials in the bucket I have no experience with: PC/ASA blend, PCTG

Have you tried, to improve PA12 printing, to use a draft shield (you can even add a second one if you model it separately) and/or IR lamps to keep the part hot even without an enclosure? they work quite well

@FarO IR lamps? Never heard of that, I will look into it. Thanks.

Calling Taulman 910 Nylon "brittle" must be the understatement of the decade.
I've yet to see a material that is "less brittle". My larger 910 prints are indestructible by human force, you can throw them on concrete until your arms wear out, you can't break them. Only thin prints can be bent, if you are strong.
They are longterm durable, I used one for a huge glass door hinge (in a moist environment)
No. Taulman 910 is not brittle.

"You can throw them on concrete until your arms wear out, you can't break them" I've thrown large parts printed out of PLA 3D870 on concrete and they held out pretty well.

@John Submerge it in water, then see what happens: It becomes soft and you can tear it apart. Conversely, air dry it in an oven at 50C, then smack it with a hammer. Make sure you wear safety glasses... It shatters with the freezer test as well. We've run countless experiments with Taulman 910, and all-around it's garbage. I've discussed the issues with the staff at 3d-printerstore.ch and they sent concerned e-mails to Taulman, since, before the tests, they were actually recommending that stuff to customers.

"I've yet to see a material that is "less brittle"" You can't top Lauramid N01 in that department. I've smashed some small parts into an unrecogniseable pulp of plastic with a large hammer. But it's really expensive.

@AzulShiva Nylon is not meant for underwater applications...
I have two Taulman 910 hinges in use for a 100+ kg glass-door in a 24/7 75-80% humidity spa room.
It is literally indestructible by human force as soon as you have some mm wall strength.
The hinges are in use for two years by now and there is no degradation. They rely on a rather thin layer of nylon that can be bent (moveable) which is used at least a few times per day.
In addition I printed Taulman 910 for a underwater pump impeller which is used by a 160W pool cleaning robot. That softened up but works.

@AzulShiva regarding "drying at 50°C over night". That would be a wrong application of Nylon as well. Nylon gains it great properties when it draws some water from the air, it makes not much sense to dry your parts as that reduces their great properties temporarily.
Though I do have the completely dry filament rolls and those 3mm strings of nylon are indestructible by human force as well.
Except if you bend it many many times sharply.

@AzulShiva lastly: Your explanation of brittle Taulman 910 is so extremely far from my experience (the most durable material I have used, indestructible and long-term useable) that there might be something else at play.
For example: your filament is not original, you printed it at completely wrong temperatures, no warm chamber (layer adhesion alone doesn't explain it though)

@John They guys at the shop are professionals of the highest tier. Like I said, if it becomes dry, it's brittle. They were brittle during the summer, and strong during the winter, due to moisture differences. If you live in Afghanistan, it will always be brittle. In Great Britain it might work out. It's a very unpredictable and unreliable material. Trust me, we have tested this thoroughly.

@AzulShiva Your statement remains as incorrect as it can get.
T-910 is a PA-12 (Nylon) material which comes out completely dry after printing and it's extremely durable, 3-4mm  strength already indestructible by human force.
When it is in normal environment it adds some percent water into it's chain which make it even better.
Stratasys VeroUltra (PA-6),  Makerforged Onyx (PA-12) both are Nylon intended for most durable use. Makerforged barely uses another material for that reason.
I'll head out of this argument now, no more information can be added.

"Taulman 910" being labelled by you as "brittle" is the most ridiculous claim about filaments and materials I've heard since 3d printing was invented.

You ask about alternative and I will provide two, but for you rinformation both Taulman 618 and 230 can be easily bought in Europe therefore they must be still in production. Also, I'm not sure which kind of problem with PA12 you have, but if it's adhesion and warping, you can get good adhesion with PA12 if you print on garolite (fr4) boards. If they are thick enough they will avoid warping too, check here:

I don't know exactly which performances you expect for your part, but based on the specifications for Fiberlogy PA12 related to impact strength, tensile strength and softening temperature and HDT, I would say that you have two options.
If you are looking for a nylon-like filament for its strength and properties but you want it to print easily, like a PETG, you are looking exactly for Polymaker CoPA. It does not warp during print, it does not require a heated enclosure (in fact, they specify that the ambient temperature must be below 50 °C!).
See various reviews here.
Another option are Polycarbonate blends, where polycarbonate is mixed with other materials to make it easily printable, are a good choice. Polycarbonate is strong and routinely used for parts exposed outdoor.
Obviously you need a hotend reaching 300 °C for both alternatives.
I haven't tried Polymax PC personally, but the reviews and the experiences in various chats groups I follow are particularly good. It can be printed even on printers without enclosure, or at most placed inside a cardboard box to avoid air drafts.
Just remember however that polycarbonate is not resistant to some oils and some greases, that's why it's not used for parts in contact with bearings and so on. It becomes brittle, it cracks and breaks. It is likely not your case.
You can find two useful reviews about Polymaker Polymax PC here and here. Prusament PC is a similar blend with similar properties and printability.
Let me paste the second review if you doubt about its strength.

This is bar none the most printable for the strength polycarbonate.
Absolutely no warping printing at 100mm/s at 110C bed temp and 295C
print temp laying down PVA gluestick on glass.The printing experience
doesn't even feel like an exotic engineering filament because of how
easy it is to work with. Layer adhesion is very good. I print
primarily at 100% infill with parts that are routinely 10" wide by 4"
tall with no curl up issues. There is some shrinking upon cool down in
the x,y axis, but it is to be expected with a thermal plastic
(~0.6-1%). Now on to the strength. This stuff is strong. Printing a
1.5"x1.5" square tube insert, I misjudged the thermal shrinking (assumed too much) and the insert pressure fitted into the tube. Long
story short, after trying to back out the part I eventually resorted
to whacking on the insert with a hammer. For 30 minutes, I religiously
swung with a might that only Thor would understand on this black
Mythril-like object stuck at the end of my tube insert. Sweating
profusely I gave it one mighty cloud-parting swing to the side of this
object of torment. It broke the damn hammer handle in half. My heart
crushed, the sun fading, and my neighbors watching from their windows
I retreated a defeated man to my kitchen drenched in the sweats of my
failure. Too sickened to muster the courage to inspect my handiwork,
but too curious to look away, I set the object on my kitchen counter
and began the awful process of inspecting it. Like a strange autopsy
by cell phone light, I stared blankly at the effects of my entire
human worth condensed into hammer swings. Not a single dent. Not one.
"Impossible!"- I told myself. But the evidence of my lack of human
value lay before me for all to bear. Sitting there, mocking me, a
single scratch. Set there presumably by the object itself to torment
me.

Two Youtube reviews follow.

Nylon 6 gets brittle when dry and soft when wet, the video confirmed it. PC is brittle, not for taking a beating. PC blends is what Im experimenting with right now, but they are not environmentally resistant. G10 sounds interesting, but in order to print Nylon 12 I have turned off the heated bed entirely and covered the bed with superglue. It still warped and my bed is trashed. The guys at the professional printer store told me the only way to print large parts out of Nylon 12 is to get a printer with a heated enclosure that can go above 100C which cost 5000$ upwards.

PCTG is drying in the oven right now, can't wait to test it tomorrow.

You did not specify it in your answer but you do realise PolyMide COPA is a Nylon 6, Nylon 6,6 blend? Those are not tough lol, smack them with a hammer and you will see. ASA is superior.

@AzulShiva CoPA is rated at about 10 kJ/m^2 impact strength and PA12 at 12 kJ/m^2. I would say they are not very different. I gave you the closest alternatives, but your question was quite generic concerning requirements and printer available so it's not possible to do more. Since you don't write what you are actually doing with it, you could even pick a hard TPU (98A or harder) and print 100% infill. Impact-wise it will outperform PA12. Of course it will be softer too.

You can print at 100 °C environment also with an Ender 3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79r5D9nCQfM

100C environment will destroy every part on the printer. Nylon 6 and 12 are very, very different. Impact resistance of Nylon 6 can change by magnitudes of 1000x depending on  it's moisture level, not so with PA12. Naturally it's extremely brittle. But thank you for your answer. I've talked to professionals and it appears there isn't anything between Nylon 12 and ASA quality wise except PC blends and PCTG (and unprintable stuff like PE).

Are you sure that PC blends don't work outdoor? They usually have little amount of additivt therefore it's still mostly polycarbonate, which should work well outdoor.

Have you tried PA12+CF?

PC blends and CF are more brittle, in my opinion ASA is just better (and cheaper). PC/ABS is not suitable for outdoors, PC/ASA should work, but I couldn't find any of it to buy. I was informed by my store of a new filament on the market, Lauramid PA12. It's even softer than ASA but ridiculously durable and practically indestructable if you get layer adhesion right. Also much easier to print than ordinary PA12. I only got a small 100g test sample but will do more tests. It's price is above 100 per kg, but it's great stuff. Also I tested PCTG and it's garbage.

But what do you need to print exactly? it would make the question clearer.

"extremely impact resistant, durable and can be left outside" Let's say: a crossbow or a knife handle.
Im experimenting with metal reinforcement. Works really well with ASA. If reinforced properly the difference to Nylon becomes almost negligible.


text:
Unusual printing after upgrading
So I've just done a full upgrade to my machine in by no means a beginner but this issue is stumping me, and a few other veterans that I've asked.

Steps Completed:

E-Steps extruding a perfect 100 mm in/out
Bed is perfectly Leveled to 0.1 mm
Auto leveler Z offset also set so that it's 0.1 mm from bed /16 point grid
Unassembled and rebuilt both Z stepper motor assemblies and confirmed that the height is equal across all four quarters with the gantry.
Tightened off both nuts and spacer nuts of the gantry so there is no more wiggle or shifting

I get a relatively good first layer, then for the next 7 it as in the picture barely touches the print, then after 8 layers, it starts to print perfectly fine again.
I'm assuming it's something with my Z steppers? After the initial 8-10 layers are completed it starts to look like it's supposed to. I adjusted the z offset thinking that was that issue to have it for the same thing while having the obvious 1st layer being too close.
Same settings and filament from pre-upgrade, other than retraction settings update nothing was touched on Cura.
I've run both calibration cubes, Benchy's, and bed leveling squares.
The problem only seems to happen after the 1st layer which comes out smooth.
Extruder: Sherpa Mini Direct Drive
Hotend: Dragonfly BMS / 0.6 mm tungsten nozzle
Firmware: Marlin 4.xx something
Filament: basic PLA
Temperature: 200 °C
Bed: 50 °C
Speed: 75 mm/s

may not have to touch anything.  it may fill a new setting in an old file with the wrong value upon software update.  slice it from stl again?  it looks almost like a support for something trying to print floating above the bed...

I tired many files, but found the solution to it on the TH3D site about Z fade new feature to me and even the installation of firmware had it set to 2 and it should be around 10. Switching values solved that issue.

Swapping the Z Fade to 10 completely eliminated the issue.
Auto Bed Leveling Z Fade Setup & Info

It looks like your bed height is significantly wrong to the point that ABL correction was just leading to extreme underextrusion. You should probably check that too.

The fade height from firmware was set to I believe 2 and even the guide says that's extremely low setting it to 10 complete corrected this issue

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Ender 5 BlTouch Install
I just installed a BLTouch on my Ender 5 but I'm having trouble installing/editing the firmware. After watching a few YouTube videos, I figured going to the GitHub BTT Marlin repository (because I have a Bigtreetech E3 mini V2 board in it) would be easiest. After leveling the bed without issues, I attempted a print but it started way too high (20-30 mm above the bed). I know there is some type of offset I need to change but I don't know where it would be. My first thought was editing some of the configuration files in VS-Code before installing it on the printer but I downloaded the pre-compiled firmware.bin on GitHub that was already set up for the Ender-5 with a BTT E3 mini V2 board and a BLTouch. Is there anything I can do on the printer or in OctoPrint or should I start from scratch and edit the original Marlin files?

After some research, the BlTouch can be wired to the mainboard two different ways; the 2 pin wires (that were black and white in the kit I bought) are able to plug into the probe spot with the 3 pin wires or they can replace the z-end-stop. I ended up replacing the z-end-stop wires with the 2 pin wires and downloaded pre-compiled firmware from GitHub.

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


text:
Using a shorter heatbreak on the Anet A6
I need to replace my heatbreak on my Anet A6 since I pushed out the PTFE tube when my filament got clogged...
The current heatbreak has a length of 40 mm, but, the shop I'm buying from only sells the 30 mm or 35 mm (the 40 mm is out of stock).
Can I just install a 35 mm heatbreak? Or even a 30 mm? Or is the 40 mm crucial in the design of the Anet A6?

This hotend design is called a Mk8 type/style hotend, based on the Mk8 Makerbot design. You should get the 40 mm length heatbreak, this option gives you some extra space, a shorter heatbreak will result in changing the Z-endstop height or raise the bed (if the endstop is fixed).

The 30 mm will for sure be too short and result in a gap in the heat conducting element, the 35 mm might work. You can source the heatbreaks from typical online market places for about a dollar you get 5 pieces, order these while you try if the 35 mm version works for you (depending on endstop and bed).

Thank you for your considerations. I have a BLtouch to probe the bed. This will mean that I need to adjust the Z-offset when I'm going to try the 35 mm. I do need to check if the BLtouch will be high enough for this Z-offset

@zwep Yes, in case you have a touch sensor you need a different bracket or move the sensor up and redefine the Z-offset.


text:
CR-10 Smart with weak infill
I had a hard time printing some parts as the brim was printed very well contrary to the first layer, wall, and especially infill. I noticed that filament lines were too thin when printing walls, infill, and the first layer. So the first layer was not sticking to each other.
I suspected that the slicer was the first to investigate, so I printed a model which I already printed before from SD Card and the newly printed part has the exact problems.
Suspecting that filament thread gets cooled very soon so we tried:

Printing with more Nozzle Temp (225 °C).
Result: Walls adhered better but still not strong in addition to weak infill.
Then turned on Fan Automatic Control
Result: more nice walls with still weak infill.

Setup:

Creality CR-10 Smart 3D Printer
Cura Slicer
Material eSUN PLA+ White
Nozzle 0.4 mm
10 % Infill
30 % infill overlap percentage
0.32 mm infill layer thickness.

can you tell us the following information via an [edit]: Print material, nozzle diameter and line width? You have 0.32 mm layer height, which is very tall and only advisable with nozzles that are 0.45 mm or larger. It is common to print wider than the nozzle diameter and at max 3/4th the height.

Welcome to 3DPrinting.SE. Is this a stock CR-10? You clearly have under extrusion. Please check your extruder. What filament do you use? Please update the question by [edit].

If you buy a CR-10 the first thing you should do is replace the extruder for a microswiss direct-drive system. The stock extruders are absolute garbage and will cause you a lot of problems like this. It will also remove 1 variable and narrow down the source of future problems.

@AzulShiva no, the term "Layer thickness" is, in industry, used for the height of a layer, not the line width

@Trish Thank you for elaborating, but he certainly isn't using a layer height of 0.32mm, that is not possible. He said "INFILL layer thickness" along with mentioning other infill settings so I assume he meant the infill line distance setting from the Cura slicer and perhaps making a typo in the process.

I meant infill layer height for 0.32 also for the Model layer height, I changed it back to 0.16 mm and I got a better results! for me it's ambiguous why it can't print 0.32 Infill layer height, I didn't have such a problem with CR-10S PRO

@AhmadMagrabi you can't have a layer height of more than 3/4 of the nozzle diameter because you need to squish the plastic down at least that much to get layer adhesion.

To solve this problem, I tweaked the following:

Infill Pattern: Some patterns tend to be more solid than others, going back to Grid instead of Cubic ensuring that there is a solid base for infill to avoid layer shift in infill as Cubic infill is printed in a slanted angle.

Infill layer height: It seems that the CR-10 Smart is unable to print 0.32 mm infill layer height.

Lowering infill speed: going from 75 mm/sec to 50 mm/sec as 75 mm/sec infill speed was too much for the extruder as it was unable to keep up with the speed so you will start to notice under-extrusion on the inside of your part,  This under-extrusion will tend to create weak, stringy infill since the nozzle is not able to extrude as much plastic as the software would like.

Attached below the difference between 0.16 mm infill layer height on the right, the model is sturdy and strong.
0.32 mm infill layer height on the left, the model is weak and stringy.

On my try to print a large scale print the same problem occurred,  very weak infill, which drove me crazy !
Addressing the real problem "Under-Extrusion" .. testing extruder I noticed that there is a crack on the feeder box

In my opinion it's a bad decision to go for plastic for the feeder, their design uses the lever to shift the plastic box which has the idler pulley (fixed on it) to relieve the pressure on filament.

The crack on feeder weakened the grip on filament, causing slippage making the filament to be extruded too thin, which made the filament too weak to stick to each other.
Changing extruder to aluminium kit feeder with tight grip on filament ensured that filament is pushed correctly without slipping and also stopped stringing while nozzle is heating.
Print on left after applying the fix.

Hopes this save someone's the trouble.


text:
Can't connect PowerBelt3D Zero to Print Server
I have tried connecting via Repertier, Pronterface, and OctoPrint.  All of them fail to get a response from the handshake attempts.  The OctoPrint "AUTO" setting will automatically try all common BAUDRATE values. Just to be safe, I just tried setting each of the 7 available baudrates manually and then connecting. They all timed out.
The board runs preloaded Marlin firmware, but I don't know much beyond that.  The board is a BTT SKR v1.4 if that helps.
I can run all axis motors and heating elements from the display, and the PC (or RPI) will detect the USB port is active when connected to the printer, so the board seems to be good, I just can't get connected.  There is virtually no support documentation that I can find for getting connected, and I emailed the PowerBelt3D company three days ago but haven't gotten a response, so any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.


text:
Phrozen ABS-like resin profile (.cfg File) for Chitubox, where to download it?
I am a beginner at 3D printing. I use:

Phrozen Sonic Mini 4K
Chitubox

In Chitubox, there are some resin profiles preloaded and selectable. There also is the possibility to import profiles (.cfg file format).
However, I don't seem to be able to find a .cfg profile file for the Phrozen ABS-like resin so that I could import it in Chitubox.
Am I misunderstanding some concept here? Why can I not find a .cfg-file for the ABS-like resin?

Do you have the latest version of Chitubox install?

You can export settings - someone might need to make a profile available somewherer


text:
Print is rotated perfectly on bed, while straight in the slicer. X-axis moves slowly while printing a straight Y-axis line
I have a weird problem that I can't seems to find an answer for.
I'm using SuperSlicer with my Ender3 + OctroPrint setup.
The prints on the bed in SuperSlicer is perfectly straight

However, it seems that when my printer is moving in a straight Y-axis line, there is some kind of linear multiplier on the X-axis because it moves slooowly to the side causing the print to be pretty perfectly rotated on the physical bed as seen in Octoprint and also on the real physical bed (luckily my physical bed is slightly to large so I don't go outside of it).

I know there is some kind of setting for this which is used for Z-offset with probe, but I can't seem to find it, and it seems weird that it has been set for the X and Y axis. I don't know if that is what really causing this, because I've never touched those settings on this printer before
Anyone got an idea?

Would you consider using a brim rather than a skirt ?  That should print some laps around each part before starting.

The print is not rotated at all on the print bed, the OctoPrint image is exactly the same as the image of SuperSlicer.
What you see is the skirt being printed misleading you into thinking the whole print is rotated! As the rectangles in the corners are aligned in the middle of the rectangles, the skirt is made of 4 skew lines.
If this print prints outside of the bed (in your case the bed is large enough to not cause problems) you are facing the issue that the print bed is incorrectly centered (the hotend to be precise). To have your prints print in exactly the same position as you slice them in the slicer, you could look into How to center my prints on the build platform? (Re-calibrate homing offset), this describes how to determine the offsets from the end stops should be set to get the center of the slicer in the center of your printer.

Haha your are absolutely correct  I never realized.... The skirt is slightly skewed because not all rectangles are rotated the same, exactly as you say. Thanks!


text:
Editing stl files for unwanted multiple parts
I have a Creality CR-10S5 and am printing a large ocean liner model in sections. The problem I am coming up against is that when the person built the model, the 100's of portholes extend into the interior of the model. I've had issues where the long end of the porthole on the interior of the model as it is printing starts to bend upward and has interrupted the path of the extruder and it starts printing about an inch to left on the X-axis.
I was wondering if anyone knew of an easier way than bringing it into Meshmixer or Fusion and individually cutting these long porthole extensions I will call them away from the inside of the model. I've tried using the hollow out feature but they still remain. I've thought about cutting them along a plane in Fusion but that would slice the entire model.

Welcome to 3D Printing SE and thank you for your contribution. If you could [edit] in a screenshot of the model that could help in finding a solution. Also, when you get a chance, please take the [tour] to understand how the site works and how it is different than others.

If you have no other components to the vessel intruding into the volume of the model, consider to create a suitably primitive shape centered in the hull. By creating a boolean union, the new primitive will "absorb" the empty space and terminate the noodles. The result will be a hollow model, more or less as the original, but with a thicker wall.

Thanks, that is a great idea that I’m going to try out. I can probably cut part of the same model and decrease it’s size to use it to cut out the noodles as you say. Thanks so much!


text:
Topology problems
My model is purely quads, (I know about tris/quads for .stl files and other formats, etc.) but when I import it in slicer software (Ultimaker Cura), it changes the topology (and that repeating triangular shape is very visible on the print). Is this just how 3D printers work, or can I change the settings somewhere to make it go away?

Not having read about this before, I went looking for info and stumbled across this on Blender.SE: Triangles to quad for 3D printing. The answer says that .stl files don't support quads.

I don't get it, if you look at the image on the right, your edges aren't cubical, they form triangles.

stl files don't have quads. Every face is a tri

STL does not know quads: STL only knows trigons, defined by three vertices and the normal that belongs to this trigon, though there are extra properties that each trigon can have (such as color). When saving a quad as STL, it has to be converted into two trigons next to one another. The problems appear when some quads have a single point that is not contained in the plane created by the three others: What works as a bend quad, can be solved as two different Trigons: ABC+CDA is jsut as valid as ABD+BCD - but one has a high ridge, the other has a low valley.
To fix such topology issues, you need to convert to trigons first then export as STL. To correct such errors after exporting, a 3D modeling software that can alter Vertex Edge and Surface level details is needed. Blender is such a solution and free, though with a somewhat steep learning curve.
You might be able to fix your surface by carefully merging vertices until your surface does not have the ridges you encounter - because they are already in your model.


text:
Why does the first layer only adhere to bed if I increase the temperature by 10 °C and drop the speed by 75 %
I'm running a stock Ender 5 pro with the filament that came with it, and using Creality Slicer 4.8.2, but I'm only able to get reliable bed adhesion if I increase the bed temperature from 50 to 60 °C for the bottom layer and decrease the print head speed by about 75 % from the default profile for the Ender 5.
The machine is absolutely stock, and is fresh out of the box except for bed levelling.
I used the default bed leveling print and that came out well, so I'm reasonably certain that it's not a bed leveling issue. The problem seems to be with models that I've made myself in blender and exported as STL files.
In all cases the raft that was generated by the Creality software has printed out perfectly, but the print has only partially gone down when it came to the model itself.

I don't know if you're looking for a technical answer but that is normal. First 2 layers should be printed slower for better adhesion. Personally I set the bed temperature to 20-30 degrees higher for the first layer which improves adhesion to the bed and then lower it or turn it off completely to minimize warping.

I'm confused as to why I need to make any changes at all as I'm using all Creality software and hardware with their own profiles and filiment.

There's a setting under PrintSettings/Speed/NumberOfSlowerLayers. Make sure your bed is leveled and you are using proper adhesives.  Every printer requires tweaking and you should make your own profiles. This is how it is, 3d printing is not that easy. I don't know if you're new to printing or you have worked with machines that cost >$5000 that do everything automatically while rubbing your balls and holding your coffee.

First fdm printer, I'm a resin veteran

I have an ender 3 and I have to fiddle with it constantly even when printing PLA. FDM printers clog, underextrude, string, warp, split, fail to adhere, droop, and it's up to you and only you to get it to work. That's pretty much the answer to your question. PLA is easy, good luck once you enter Nylon 12 or even Polyethylene territory where different models will require different settings... you'll be in a world of pain.

And I thought resin was supposed to be the harder option. My saturn printed off the bat using the default settings.

Judging by the picture you're not using any print adhesive. Also your bed level is waaaay too low. The extruded filemant should look flat, but not too thin.  https://ucarecdn.com/c7283aa8-5d84-4c2c-8cd2-a93a3c7c3af7/-/format/auto/-/preview/3000x3000/-/quality/lighter/

https://www.3dmakerengineering.com/blogs/3d-printing/3d-printing-the-perfect-first-layer

Your bed is too low - raise it by turning the knobs underneath.
The first layer should not look like strings sitting on the bed as per your photo.  Instead it should be a wider strip that looks somewhat like an electronic circuit trace, or like someone has pushed wet paint out of a tube that is being wiped across the surface.
My method is to head the bed with "preheat" in the menu, and let it sit at printing temp for at least 5 minutes.  This avoids the heater being at temp but the top of the glass bed being cool.
Then start your job.  As the brim or skirt is printed, actively watch it in person and twiddle the height knobs  a quarter turn at a time.  You want the "end view" or cross sectional view of the printed filament to be like this:
 _____<==>_____

and not like this
 ______0______

and definitely not like this
       0
_______________

If the head starts scratching the bed, you've gone too far so lower the bed back down again (effectively raising the print head a little)

Here's a print in progress trying to show a better brim.  Notice eachgstrand is ovalised and mushed down.  That brim will come off in one piece afterward.

Who said ASCII art is dead? Nicely done! +1 just for the art.

The bed was the first thing that I checked, it's absolutely level and at the correct height, I pre heated it and did it 3 times and did calibration prints that came out perfectly 3 times. The brim and skirt also came out perfectly, in fact everything that was automatically generated has been perfect. It's only the bottom layer of the model which isn't sticking unless I go outside of the manufacturer recommended settings.

@AaarghZombies Based on your photo, the first layer is going down as separate strands, where it should be mushed to a strip.  Try raising the print bed a very little amount and see if it improves, then iterate.

I've adjusted the height 3 times, no change. I don't understand why the brims and skirts go down perfectly but not the first layer of the model

@AaarghZombies: Looking at your photo, the brim and skirt did not go down perfectly. The adjacent extrusion lines are not touching each other and barely touching the bed. Your bed is way too low. It needs to be raised by at least 0.15 mm, perhaps more. The only reason those lines stayed in place at all is that there are no sharp turns in the toolhead path and the molten material had some time to cool before forces started pulling in a different direction.

@AaarghZombies If I measure a priming line scraped off the bed, it is 15 thousandths of an inch thick and 51 thousandths of an inch wide.  That is 0.4mm thick and 1.3mm wide, and shows empirically the amount of squash your first layer should have.  The strands should not be round.    (sorry for SAE, my small micrometer is vintage and therefore imperial)

I used a sheet of A4 printer paper to do the levelling. I'm pretty sure that I've got a feeler gauge set stashed somewhere, what is the correct height?

@AaarghZombies in my experience, the paper method leaves too much gap.  The only reason for using it is to make the bed roughly equal at all corners.  Then when I print next time, I watch the brim go down and adjust on the fly while the print head moves around.   I might be able to do some video of this process if that helps ?

Assuming Creality's stock firmware still doesn't have Linear Advance enabled, there's a fairly hard requirement to go slow on the first layer. This is because, as the toolhead accelerates up to higher speed without advancing the extruder extra to compensate for the backpressure in the filament-path/nozzle, you'll have an interval of underextrusion, giving less contact area for the extruded material to cling to the bed at the same time there's added force pulling it in a direction parallel to the bed surface. This becomes less critical to adhesion starting with the second layer, since the new material is bonding to itself rather than just trying to stick to a bed.
Having the bed hot will help it stick better and maybe even help reduce the pressure at the nozzle by reducing the heat loss, so it might work around the problem. But in general, you don't want to be in a situation where a few degrees of temperature difference are the cutoff between a failed print and a successful one.
Anyway, do all the usual stuff to improve bed adhesion, and especially make sure your bed height is as close to perfect as you can get it, if you want moderately fast printing to work. But don't be surprised if you need to upgrade to a version of Marlin with Linear Advance (or to Klipper) to get successful high-speed first layers.

I'm confused as to why I need to slow the first layer and increase the bed heat, since I'm using Crealitys own profile wouldn't this already be slowed and heated correctly. I'm also confused as to why the brim or skirt goes down perfectly but not the first layer if the model.

I'm talking about slower relative to your full print speed. If you're having to go even slower than Creality's recommended speed you probably have other things in play too (most likely wrong bed height).

I've had to half the speed from Crealitys recommended slow speeds, so other things seem to be at play. Bed height and level redone 3 times, calibration prints all came out perfectly.

Looking at the image, the deposited filament lines do not connect. If we consider that you have the correct filament width in your slicer and the correct amount of steps per millimeter for the extruder or no problem with extruding is present, your initial bed to nozzle gap might be too large, level with a thinner piece of paper or subtract a few tenths, see this answer for redefining the Z-height. Alternatively use a slicer option called “Z offset setting”, see this answer.

Why does the first layer only adhere to bed if I increase the temperature by 10 °C and drop the speed by 75 %

If the nozzle gap is a little too large, the filament doesn't get squished enough for proper adhesion. This is seen as non-connecting filament lines. It looks as if the nozzle is under-extruding, but if that has been checked, a larger initial gap has the same effect. If you increase bed and or hot end temperature and slow down, the filament gets time to adhere properly, even when the gap is larger.


text:
Plastic bottles to filament
Is there a machine (for hobbyists) that will make filament based on the type of plastic I put in. I will sort the plastic before I will put it in the machine.
I have seen the filabot but this uses only plastic from previous prints not plastic types Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET or PETE) or High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE) (these are the #1 or #2 plastic types listed at plasticoceans.org).
To reiterate:

I am asking if there is a machine that can turn a plastic bottle into usable filament.
I want to know if there is a machine (currently on the market) that will make filament, based on the type of plastic I put in.

I will sort the plastic before I will put it in the machine... so,
sorted waste in ---> sorted filament out

I am asking if there is a machine that can turn a plastic bottle into usable filament.

I've seen several projects (one example, and another) where plastic bottles are sliced into long tapes, and the tape is then fed through an extruder. It's a somewhat simpler process than shredding bottles and then melting and extruding the shreds; since the tape is already a long strand, you're really just reforming it into a round filament suitable for use in a printer. Forming the tape from the bottle requires little more than a razor blade and a handful of hardware, and you can pull the tape through the extruder instead of forcing shreds through with a screw.
Some of the drawbacks are that the process can't use the top and bottom of the bottle, and getting consistent results still requires some automation. Also, the process as shown only creates filament from a single bottle, so the length of the filament is limited by the size of the bottle.

I want to know if there is a machine (currently on the market) that will make filament, based on the type of plastic I put in.

The Filabot extruder that you mentioned will accept and extrude a wide variety of plastics, and the same should be true of any commercial or DIY extruder as long as it can get hot enough to melt the material you're supplying. Also, you can only extrude thermoplastic materials; thermoset materials won't work. By definition, thermoplastic materials are those that become soft and malleable when heated, while thermoset materials don't. So you can make filament from PLA, ABS, PET, PEEK, and many others. The material you supply might not always work well for FDM printing, though, or might work better in some printers than in others. For example, filament made from a PET soda bottle will be harder and more brittle than the PETG that's preferred for 3D printing, so you might have better luck using it in a printer with a direct extruder rather than one with a Bowden setup.

There are 2 parameters you need to have good control over when printing any filament:

Melting temperature
Diameter

Of these, the melting temperature is directly correlated to the chemical composition of the polymer blend in the filament while diameter control is part of the manufacturing process.
And for 3D printing, we need to take a look at the usability of the material itself. For example, pure PET is not easy to print at all and as used in bottles might be unprintable. PETG (a glycol modified PET) on the other hand is much easier to print - and most filaments sold under PET actually are PETG or PETT.
Troubles of recycling
The melting point of a blend of polymers is often difficult to gauge before doing experiments and in case of recycled material, there are problems with recreating the exact same blend when using small batches unless you use exactly one material as the base for your manufacturing. This brings us to the big problem: errors in the base material. These come in several types:

Misidentification
Contaminants
Degradation

Let's address these piece by piece:
Misidentified base material
Misidentification is when you chuck material into the wrong bin and then process it as if it was the stuff the bin was for. For example, if you'd chuck a chunk of ABS into the PLA bin, your blend will not come out as PLA but as some kind of higher melting composite of the two. The exact details of the result depend on the mixture and how well you mix the processed raw material, but in effect, you just made some kind of PLA+.
This can be overcome by testing and good training as well as knowing the base material well. For example, there is an Austrian company that takes back ski-shoes. Only the hard shells of a particular manufacturer (which used a red ABS) are shredded, pelletized, mixed with some virgin ABS and color for stability and uniformity, then turned into filament, and then printed into flutes.
Another ski-shoe manufacturer takes back their own shoes and recycles the shells back into the current manufacturing, but is silent on what their shells are made from but that they are a long-chain polymer.
When trying to differentiate between PET and PETG, you can not do that unless you do a chemical analysis of every bottle - which leads to a huge problem in reprocessing: PETG melts well before PET and clumps it up, acting as a contaminant (see here for more details)!
Contaminants
Contaminants are a problem that comes with a bad base material. in general, there are two types of contaminants: Chemical and Physical.
Physical contaminants can be avoided by removing them before and after shredding. In the case of Skishoes (that's why I chose that example) is, you'd remove the soft shells and the metal latches, disposing of them in separate ways. Then the plastic shells are roughly sized up, cleaned, and dried before further processing. Most physical contaminants can result in partial clogging during filament production, resulting in an uneven filament. Uneven filament or such containing non-melting particles can result in print failure, for example from being stuck in the extruder or clogging of the nozzle.
Chemical contamination is arguably worse. PET bottles for example: what if the user before used to store chemicals in them that can't be separated from the polymer easily? In the best case, the contaminating raw material is removed, in the worst, it ends up in the stream. This introduced contaminated plastic ends up melting somewhat evenly into a larger portion of the recycled plastic, altering the properties in hard to predict ways. As a countermeasure in industrial PET recycling, the batches are huge and get well mixed before the new plastic product is made. By diluting the chemical contaminants on a vast batch, the effects of the contaminant are vastly reduced and evened out. This is also why even in the case of the recycled ABS-shoes-into-flutes, they mix in some degree of virgin ABS pellets - to buffer against chemical contamination.
Degradation
Not all polymers are suitable for recycling and some of them alter their properties depending on their surroundings. What actually happens depends on the material in question, but let's look at PLA as one example.
While PLA doesn't exactly break down in nature unless put into a high-temperature environment, prolonged UV exposure can bleach out the contained coloration and some blends do become more brittle, others do not encounter this. Angus/Makers Muse had several prints exposed to the harsh Australian sun for up to several years and concluded the worst enemy of PLA over time is the UV light.
A different type of degradation can happen from the environment. The one side of this is cold embrittlement, which means parts become more brittle in cold. This had some experiments done on by Stefan/CNC Kitchen. The other side of this is softening, for example by sitting in a hot car. Usually, this type of degradation is not lasting but could result in embedding contaminants into the mix by embedding them in the plastic, so see there.
Is it a good idea?
Well, from an ecological standpoint, it certainly is a good idea to recycle plastic. But with all the troubles to get any good filament, will it be viable under all viewpoints? You certainly can't sell filament which is of very varying quality unless you make it dirt cheap. Also, all this machinery takes a lot of power and initial investment before you can produce your first spool - which means it might not be economical or profitable.
economical viability
So, let's go back to the main question:

[Is there] a machine that can turn a plastic bottle into usable filament? [...] [Is it] currently on the market?

Yes, you can certainly extrude plastic from bottles into filament shape, and the tools are out there - for a price. However, not all bottles might be useable due to the chemical composition and you will need to make larger batches to reduce chemical contamination.
On an industrial scale, the process consists of several steps: sorting, cleaning, shredding, pelletizing, mixing, extruding, and finally spooling the filament.
Of these, the steps of shredding, pelletizing, and the combo of extruding & spooling need dedicated machinery. Even if hobby projects exist that manage to do this with well-known polymer blends, e.g. recycling 3D prints, such is usually heavy industrial machinery. In hobby-grade machinery, quality control is often problematic, as filament diameter control is the crux, and the price tag to get even filament without readjusting the machine every few minutes is high.
The Shredder might be the cheapest part, only costing several thousand euros professionally and a couple of hundred in hobby grade. A proper pelletizing machine that turns the shreds into pellets for the filament extruder has a price tag of about 10 000 € and I have not yet found a hobbyist kit. A basic inquiry on the absolute minimum investment into a professional filament manufacturing stream without pelletizer came up with about 14 000 GBP (ca. 16 800 € / 19 000 USD) plus shipping, while hobbyist kits for only one of the two seem to come up with price tags between 500 and 3000 €.
This brings the minimum investment using hobby-grade machinery to roundabout 3000 € but without a pelletizer, while an industrial setup comes out starting at about 25 000 GBP (ca. 30 000 € / 34 000 USD).
Cheaper options?
There are machines out there that turn PET bottles directly into filament by cutting them up directly before entering a filament formation system. This setup is called Pulltrusion, and it turns a plastic strip into an almost-cylindrical, folded-over filament.
While no industrial size machine of this is available, Stefan/CNC Kitchen just released a video investigating the device to manufacture such filament and then tested the print properties of such a filament. Joshua/JRT3D operated the machine in question and manufactured the samples. The base machine is the PetBot engineered by Roman Naskashev, which is commercially available for about 400 € assembled plus shipping and import taxes from Russia. Joshua also managed to re-engineer a similar machine using the same method from a 3D printer, so the price point for a self-made machine might be lower.
Each bottle weighs about 20 grams, but neither the mouth nor the bottom can be used, resulting in not 100% useability. The process also means, you can't get any deposit for the bottle back. Assuming an useable portion of about 50%, this would in Germany result in a price of 25 cents per 10 grams, so about 25 € per kilogram - which for PET filament would be quite competitive. Some bottles have larger useable portions than others, and others might not require a deposit, making these a very good price, to maybe even free filament.
Do note that the manufacturing path creates a filament that is not solid but contains a void, which is accounted for by increasing the flow multiplier, and it does require a higher temperature than PETG: with settings of 265 °C for the nozzle, 80 °C for the bed and a 130 % flow rate, 30 mm/s extrusion rate, Stefan could use an otherwise PETG profile to gain good results.
However, the higher base temperature requires an All-Metal hotend, which is part of why PET is hard to print with many machines. Other problems are the PET's crystallizing properties, which makes the melting properties at times hard to predict and can induce clogging. Also, Layer adhesion can be problematic.
The biggest problem is the tiny production size of each spool: even if one would manage 15 grams per bottle in filament, this means that one needs to change the spool 66 to 100 times more often, making larger prints nearly impossible unless one comes up with a good solution for splicing the short pieces.
Final conclusion
While the tools are available, the price tag for a full recycling chain of raw material into filament, either as a hobby or industrially, can be kind of high. This means it might not be economical unless you can manufacture large batches and beat the price point of fresh filament.
However, with small batches and the proper tooling, it might be somewhat viable depending on bottle size and deposit system.

The source of the plastic doesn't matter a lot.
What matters is the plastic's composition and chemistry and how well shredded it is.
Issues are:

Is it a thermoplast that can be remelted?
Is the working melt temperature range compatible with your printer and/or the filament forming machine?
Is the plastic chemically compatible with the components of the machines and the print platform you are using in the 3d printer? (If it isn't, it either will stick when it shouldn't or won't stick when it should.)
Is the plastic shredded enough for the filament reforming machine to use it?
Is the flexibility of the remelted plastic suitable for 3d printing, or does it need volatile plasticizers added to make it soft enough to handle as filament?

Other factors may also be a problem.  For example, PLA, TPU, and PETG are fairly temperature stable, but other plastics have high thermal expansion rates that can cause warping during 3d printing.  There are a few ways to compensate for that however.
If the plastic is contaminated with other plastics or non-soluble inks or labels, this must be removed first, or the results may be weak or not melt evenly or leave debris in the extrusion nozzle.
Not only must the plastic be chemically compatible, but also there are tuning parameters such as temperature profiles, cooling speed, and extrusion speed that have to be calibrated to the plastic to get good filament.
If all of these things are OK then it might be possible to use a machine to reform plastic from any source into filament.

Whilst this is an interesting post, unfortunately this doesn't appear to actually answer the question

I tried to answer in the first line, and then enumerate why.

The OP is requesting (if I read the question between the lines) if there is a sorting machine that creates different types of filament based on the composition of the plastic. So, unsorted waste in, sorted filament out. If the answer is in the first sentence, it does not answer if there is a machine. Could you add that into the answer, as the answer does have some interesting points. E.g. thermoplastic versus thermoharders. Personally I do think the composition matters, sorting would be a good idea.

I am asking if there is a machine that can like turn a plastic bottle into usable filament. I will sort the plastic before I put them in. I want like Sorted waste in -> Sorted filament out.

And my answer was that the plastic has to be shredded the way the machine wants it and it has to be a compatible composition.  I should probably add info about contamination too.


text:
3D Printer keeps pausing during prints
I have used this 3D printer for over a year now and I just now started running into this problem. It is an Anycubic Chiron with no mods or anything custom added. It is placed in a cabinet my dad and I built to keep the heat in during the winter.
The problem started when the power went out. I came to the printer when the power was restored and it displayed the message, "The printer is sensing a lack a filament." So, I restarted it. It was no longer displaying that message, so I continued printing with it. Now, whenever I print anything longer than 10-20 minutes, it will randomly pause. Displaying the option to continue the print or stop the print. How can I fix this?

Just to clarify - the recent random pauses also say "sensing a lack of filament"  or are they just pauses ?

The first time I happened to see the "sensing a lack of filament" message, but I'm not sure whether it appears only for a short duration of time or if it lasts until the user presses ok. So, if I wanted to catch that again, I would have to wait anywhere from 30 minutes to 6 hours. So, I am now running it overnight with a camera to see if it displays the message, or if it just pauses. I hope this all makes sense and if there is anything you need me to clarify, please let me know.

drawing a line between a filament sensor and random pauses that are not present in the code leads through discrete input read fails... could be some issue with pullups?

What are Pullups?

I have confirmed that it is falsely sensing a lack of filament. it is happening more frequently now.


text:
Ender3 V2: What stops the Y?
As there is no limit switch on the operator end of the Y (Y-), what stops its travel when the print is done?

There only need to be one physical endstop on each axis, if the printer has the dimensions of the printer programmed in.
The Ender3 has its dimensions defined in the firmware, so once homed and then moved to 0 (the end stop and 0 can be different!), the printer won't move willingly out of the orthogonal-space that is positioned between $$\matrix {0\\0\\0} \to\matrix{maxX\\ maxY\\ maxZ}$$.
Where these are can be manipulated with the right software, as the printer in running operation takes the values from the EEPROM - which can be directly altered by for example a terminal akin to Repetier Host.

Concur.  The enders have an optional Z extension kit which comes with longer rails and a replacement leadscrew.  The only config change to extend Z is in software.   Also notice that there isn't an end-switch on X or Z, just the stepper motors keeping track of steps forward and backward.

@Criggie you can alter the software endstop via the EEPROM - till the moment you overwrite with firmware defaults, yes.


text:
Printer crashed into model
So first of all I want to say, that I'm fairly new to 3D printing. I'm currently calibrating different things because I've got a little problem with rough walls. The last thing I did was increase the belt tension for X and Y a little bit. I now wanted to print a calibration cube with these new settings. Therefore I sliced the cube with Cura and started the print. Around 20 minutes into the print, I heard this weird sound and immediately stopped the print. Somehow the printer crashed into the printed cube. The adhesion to the plate was a little too good so the head got completely stuck.
I moved the head up and removed the print. It's pretty obvious looking at it, that for some weird reason the printer dropped the nozzle around 5 mm down. I tested all motors and axis, but everything seems to work alright. So the next thing I checked, was the G-code. I measured the height of my cube and found Z to be around 13.2 mm when it crashed. I don't know much about G-code, but I checked every Z movement between 12.7-13.5 mm and didn't find any value to be out of this range.
I have no idea what to check next. But I guess there has to be a major problem with my printer if this just happens. Maybe some of you have more ideas about what to check.
Printer: Anycubic i3 Mega S
Firmware: Standard
Slicer: Cura 4.13

It seems, after checking the G-code file thoroughly, there was indeed an error in the G-code, that I didn’t find when I checked it the first time.
The Z-Axis suddenly moves from Z13.3 to Z9.175. I have no idea how something like this can happen.

bad G-code can happen if you mistakenly overwrite only arts of a file or if you append G-code to other code messing up Z. usually it is manual interference or some massive error in the slicer


text:
Replacing PTFE tube in Mk8 heatbreak
I am trying to replace a Mk8 heatbreak on my printer. But which orientation do I need to put into the heatblock? The left image or the right image? Note that this specific heatbreak is missing a PTFE tube.

I quickly looked at the other questions on this forum but could not find a clear result with images.

The PTFE liner should be in contact with the nozzle, and is normally cut half a millimetre over-size to ensure that it remains in contact.

Thanks! That makes sense. To make it absolutely clear, that means that the right picture should be screwed into the heatblock, right?

@zwep Yes. That end should be partially stopped, so that the PTFE tube cannot pass through it (but the filament can).


text:
Is there any print quality difference switching from brass to steel nozzle?
Brass has better thermal conductivity compared to steel or hardened steel but it has also far less wearing resistance especially compared to hardened steel that among brass and normal steel has the worse thermal conductivity.
Basically all 3D printer use brass despite is softer and also more expensive metal than steel.
Shouldn't the lower thermal conductivity impact only the time needed to bring it to the established temperature? Is there any noticeable difference in print?

Brass may be more expensive than steel, but it is easier to machine than steel (and far easier to machine than hardened steel), which is why it is commonly used to make nozzles.

@Mick I would expect steel to get hardened AFTER machining. Especially since hardened steel is usually hardened only on the surface, therefore machining takes away the hard part.

The thermal conductivity will certainly affect the time necessary to bring it to temperature, but will also require adjustment to flow rate with respect to speed of travel. The increased time for heat to travel to the nozzle is reflected in the increased time for heat to be "restored" as the filament transfers it from the nozzle to the bed and to the air.
If you make no other adjustments than waiting a bit longer to heat, you may see print quality changes. You might not, if, for example, the current temperature is a bit higher than needed. Unchanged, the effective temperature change required is compensated by the wider range of temperature allowed by the filament.


text:
I painted an uncured UV resin print, now it feels sticky through the paint
I know that you are not supposed to cure resin prints in the window, but mostly it has been working OK for me. I mostly print minis and props for D&D.
Last week I printed some walls and was a bit impatient to see what they would look like, so I painted them 1 hour after they'd finished. I´m coming to regret that decision since as of writing they still have that newly printed sticky wetness feel to them. I had calculated with the paint sealing the partially uncured resin in but this doesn't seem to be the case at all.
Does anyone have any ideas that might work? Will they eventually cure enough in the paint layer that the stickiness will go away? Would another layer of paint help? Or leaving them out in the sunlight for a few days? Or do they go into the trash bin? I also considered if some kind of lacquer would help, though I don't want them to be shiny.

If you've been curing through glass, you may not have been getting sufficient intensity of the correct frequencies of UV light necessary to complete the cure. Step outside with the part, rotate it a few times in the sun, perhaps three to five minutes or so. It's astonishing how quickly the big ball of fire in the sky cures the resin. Fully uncured resin in volume gets painfully hot when cured in the sun.

@fred_dot_u winter might need longer time, but the paint coat will not allow UV light to get to the resin.

roger that, my suggestion was directed to pre-painting curing practice.

thanks for the comments both. there has been a new development with my project. One of the walls cracked open a bit and a lot of fluid resin trapped inside the hollowed out model ran out. Yuck! Into the trash they go!

As a side note: a hollowed model needs both an air-intake hole somewhere (preferably as close to the most upper part of the hollow) as well as a resin drain hole, the latter at the lowest point of the hollow. See also the Cupping question

Scrap the prints
You didn't cure the print, and your paint might interact with the resin in such a way that it might never cure. The paint also will prevent UV rays from accessing the resin.
With this prospect, the only diligent way to go is to treat the item as potentially dangerous and discard it in the proper way.
Layering paints that have not cured fully is also an accident waiting to happen, so better don't.


text:
Creality Ender 3 Pro: Problem with Z-axis inaccuracy (squashed layers?)
Creality Ender 3 Pro – Z-axis inaccuracy problem.
Before opening this new thread, I did read this question
(Perhaps there is another question on this site I did not see!)
Browsing through comments on that question, I don't really see any clear, verified solution for errors in the Z dimension when printing.
I recently bought a Creality Ender 3 Pro (migrating from a Kingroon KP3, to which I had migrated from a Printrbot Simple Metal).
Today I did a print of a small "testing" object which has a series of rectangular walls (1.5, 2, and 3 mm) running along both X and Y axis which are exactly 10 mm tall (in the STL file). I printed this with both the Ender and my older Kingroon. Kingroon had slight inaccuracy with the 2 mm wall (came out 2.2), but all other dimensions were correct.
The Ender had perfect widths for all walls. But the accuracy of the wall height was TERRIBLE- instead of 10 mm, it was only 9.4!
I should mention two other observations:

Very often I print with rafts to avoid the "elephant foot" dimension problem. Each time I specify a raft with the Ender, the raft is more or less impossible to snap off!
During the print there are occasional "clicks" at the extruder feed gear (more or less throughout the print process). The only time I encountered that type of symptom previously was with the Kingroon on the very first layer if the height was not quite zeroed correctly and so it was trying to print too close to the bed (The whole leveling/height adjustment on the Kingroon was a constant challenge and needed to be redone each day).

In any case, these two symptoms could also point to improper Z movement during the print job. I should note that to create the G-code file for the Ender I used Cura with the default settings for the Creality Ender 3 Pro machine. Also, during setup I did follow the instructions on a video to "square" the frame.
That earlier thread I mentioned emphasized problems/inaccuracy was in the first few layers.
But in my case the "wall height of 10 mm" (which came out as 9.4) is not the overall height of the object from the bottom, but rather a measurement from the top of the floor of the object to the top of the walls. So this if well above the first few layers.
I have not yet tried monkeying with the eccentric "tightness" adjusters to the wheels on the two sides (I am a bit cautious about those adjustments because there does not seem to be a way to measure/quantify changes made or even be sure you return to the original state. Hence my use of the term "monkeying").
Also, unlike checking movement on X and Y, I cannot simply raise and lower the Z gantry manually to check for smoothness and freedom of motion).

Welcome to 3D Printing SE and thank you for your contribution. When you get a chance, please take the [tour] to understand how the site works and how it is different than others.

Related to, and a follow up of, What can cause Z height loss in the first few layers?. Maybe, possibly, a duplicate(?) - I am not sure... see this comment by the OP.

Well, lacking any other suggestions, I took a deep breath and "monkeyed" with the blind eccentric adjusters for the wheeled assemblies for z-movement. I say this as plural since there is one on the left side (power side) and one on the right side.As I feared, because you cannot freely slide these, it is really difficult to tell if you are tightening or loosening the "movement".Based on the potential cause as I identified in the original question,my goal was to slightly loosen them up.On a positive note, I was able to measure the symptom by using a caliper to check the height of the horizontal gantry above the bed when "homed"(0) then up 10, 20, 30 etc in a non-printing environment. Indeed the height measurements verified that the progression of height did not correspond with the requested/reported movement as shown on the screen. The variation was much worse on the (slave) right side... Counting on nothing more than dumb luck as I tried adjusting the two sides, I ended up with acceptable performance. So for now I am done screwing around with it. If anyone has a great suggestion as to how to better know whether the wheels are getting tighter or looser when making this adjustment, it could help anyone needing to make the adjustment.

This sounds more like updated info to your existing question. If that is the case, please [edit] your original question with this info. After which, you can delete this "answer".

No. Read carefully. It was the solution that corrected the problem.


text:
CR6-SE issues after a year and ~15 kg of PLA
I've had a CR6-SE for just over a year now and am not new to 3D printing. However, prior to this I had access to a pretty much brand new Ultimaker S5.
When my CR6-SE arrived, it was essentially plug and play. Therefore I don't have enough experience to be able to diagnose likely causes by looking at the output.
I've used the same branded PLA for the best part of a year, the black worked fine, the green worked fine (probably about 7 kg between those two), although printing at 0.28 mm layer height only ever worked with the PLA that came with the machine and a brand I have since forgotten the name of. I then switched to grey and would have print failures but only on LARGE prints (50 plus hours), and they were all layer adhesion issues. I moved the printer into a cupboard and bumped up the temperatures, but still got layer adhesion issues and a lot of weird looking layer lines. I tightened the belts and it helped a bit but still present with he gray filament.
I then got some turquoise filament and couldn't get anything to print at all with that. I initially assumed it was just something with the colouring altering the properties so got another reel of green. Same issues. Nothing would print.
I dismantled the hot end and found a huge clog, so cleaned that out, but still no successful prints (looked like it was really under extruding on the first layer) then I dismantled the extruder itself. There is some wear on the gear that extrudes the filament, but after rebuilding and tightening it up the quality of the prints is still well off what I was getting 2 weeks ago.
I've done the auto bed levelling and put a new nozzle on it.
I've messed with temp settings, from 200-220 °C and flow rate from 100 to 120 %.
Due to the time taken to change a setting and see the results, this is a very length process so I would greatly appreciate someone with more experience being able to point me in the right direction.
Attached are some photos of last nights job and the start of this mornings job before I came into work.

You have a serious under extrusion problem, please look at the extruder and report that in your question. E.g. is the extruder skipping, lever broken?

could be snags on the spool, they look like that anyway. That situation would also make it very hard to diagnose by working on or tweaking the printer itself, which you've seemed to experienced.


text:
What is the minimum density that could be used for support?
Printing support structures often are really a mess to remove especially with higher densities. The default support density in Cura is 15% that is extremely hard to remove without damaging something, in various test using very low density around 5% and interface option I have got better results with PLA.
I'm wondering what is the absolute minimum value that could be used without invalidating the whole support purpose?

you can make manual support next to your model instead of letting cura guess what you want. This allows you to, eg. connect the support to the model with an hourglass shape that easily detaches. Pyramids work well too.

Have you considered sacrificial layers?

In theory zero, if you use support walls (Support Wall Line Count > 0) and top surface (Support Interface). Whether this works will depend on your part's geometry. If the support interface surface covers the whole support area, and has enough layers, it should work fine. However, if it's supporting steep inclines where the interface is only part of the support area in a particular layer, the interface may get printed partly or fully "in thin air" inside the support region. Fixing this requires bringing back some support density.
However you might want to explore why they're so hard to remove and why your part is coming out easily damaged. Unless it's something inherently delicate (like tabletop minis or similar) breaking when removing supports suggests you have a part strength (layer bonding) problem. One thing that will both improve this and make supports easier to remove is turning off Limit Support Retractions, so that supports don't have stringing all over the place and don't cause underextrusion in the next line of the main part printed right after them.


text:
How do I verify the bed temperature on an Ender 5
I have an ender 5, and I'm not certain that the bed is getting up to temperature. Or maybe I'm not understanding what it should be like when it gets up to temperature.
If I use an infrared thermometer, where should I aim it, and what should it be saying in comparison to what the screen on the printer says?
For example, if the screen says 50 degrees should the thermometer read 50 degrees, or should it read something different because that's an internal temperature or something not a surface temperature?
At the moment the bed seems "nicely warm" when the temperature on the display says that I should burn my hand if I touch it.

The least expensive is probably using a multimeter that comes with a thermocouple, and taping the thermocouple junction to the bed with kapton tape.

Sensor mounting
An Infrared Thermometer prefers a non-reflective surface to accurately read the temperature reliably - glass is reflective for Infrared light under many angles and can in the worst case result in measuring anything but what you want to measure. To that degree, a piece of paper tape (Painter's tape or Washi-tape works fine) can act as a mounted measuring point.
A contact temperature sensor can be mounted touching the plate in a location easily by putting it in contact using some tape.
Sensor positioning
However, do note that the temperature sensor of the printer is not mounted on the top of the build platform but at the heater element under it. This means two things:
There is a temperature differential between the heater (which would be quite hot but not scorching in an instant of touching it) under the aluminium bed, the top of the aluminium bed, and even more if correlated against the surface of your build platform.
On the other hand, to verify your sensor setting, you need to measure under the bed at the heating element or at the interface between the heater and the aluminium bed. For example, you could use a spot right next to the heater as your probing point. This is incidentally quite close to where the temperature sensor should be mounted anyway.
Bed temperature control
Depending on your setup, the temperature difference between heater and the build surface could be up to about 15 °C and I would deem that an acceptable number. In accounting for the wanted build surface temperature, one can adjust the set heater temperature accordingly, as shown in this experience I had:
On particularly a cold day in late 2021 the heating in the room was not gaining enough heating water from the central unit set to a lower setting than it ought to. As a result, the room was down from the usual temperature to a rather cold ca. 12 °C. On that day I had to increase the bed temperature by a couple of degrees to gain proper bed adhesion, but it fixed itself once I figured out to fix the setting on the central unit.

I've also noticed needing to vary temperatures when the temperature of the room isn't constant.  Also, printing on glass with a glue stick coating needs significantly different settings than printing on a 1 mm thick build surface on the glass.

Are you sure that "An Infrared Thermometer needs a non-reflective non-glass surface"? the point is that glass reflects IR, in addition to emitting their own. However, if you have a glass surface which is at about 60 °C and the environment at 20 °C, the reflection will be weaker than the self-emission (emissivity coefficient 0.85-0.95, so not bad). I found that keeping the IR thermometer at 10 cm from the glass and perpendicular to it produces a very good reading. Like, 60 °C thermistor below silicone heater, and 59-61 °C for the top surface of the glass. Maybe you can improve the answer.

@FarO reworded, but head-on avoids the problem by choosing the very best angle. going off-kilter can result in measuring the ceiling though, where a non-glass measuring point helps.

"in the worst case result in measuring anything but what you want to measure" I'm not an expert so I can't be sure, but I would expect the worst case to be the plate PLUS the reflection. The emission from the glass itself (given the high em. coefficient) cannot disappear based on the angle. I will ask in physics.SE sometime.

if you try to measure an item that is 60°C and the surface emits 60°C, but also reflects 20°C, the thermometer, depending on how much of the background bleeds into the measurement, will measure something in between 20 and 60, but what it actually measures is dependant on the angle - it is not the surface or the reflected temperature, but a smeared temperature somewhere in between.

I will try, because I'm not convinced it's a value in between, I still think it's some sort of sum. The contribution from the plate itself has no reason to decrease for lower angles.

The actual numerical reading doesn't really matter - as long as the first layer goes down, and stays down through the entire print.
I've noticed that the center of the bed is ~2 degrees C under the set temp, and the edges could be 15 degrees low.
So "verify by effect" - if the bed seems too cold and you're getting lifting, then raise the temp and use that new value.   Write it on the side of the filament spool too.

If you're looking for a hardware solution, some of the IR cameras or camera add-ons for cellphones may be suitable.
FLIR is one such device - be aware they're not cheap!  Some photos at https://toms3d.org/2019/05/02/testing-5-different-heated-beds/

is the photo from the heater sde or from the top side? I suspect the heater because of the differentials.

@Trish I suspect its a normal view down on a build plate from above.  Can see a cold print head  and a motor in the top two corners.  I don't know what brand of printer that is, but the linked video should show that.

ok, I found it in the accompanying video - that is a lullzbot mini, and you actually see the heater element through the glass - which means you are technically seeing the temperature of the heating element directly, as Tom found the right angle to look through it. That also explains the distortion of the thermal image on the right.

Side note: you might be able to rent or borrow a FLIR camera for testing the insulation of your home or searching for heat leaks.

The least expensive FLIRs I've see are cellphone addons.  At least one OEM making rugged phones for construction has a model with a FLIR.  The temperature is probably accuracy with a metal bed plate, but with a glass plate you could be looking through the class to the heating element.  A FLIR works the same as an infrared thermometer. If your measuremt is much hotter than the actuall surface temperature of the bed, your thermometer is probably seeing the heating element.

I looked at the glass heated bed on a German Reprap x400 3D printer.  It measures between 100-110 °C with the bed set at 110 °C.   It appears the pigment giving the glass an opaque white color blocks infrared. My guess is it probably increases the thermal conductivity of the glass.  I don't see an image of the heating element as in the image in the above answer.


text:
Fluid resin gets trapped inside my prints
I have been printing a few props for tabletop gaming: a statue, some walls, wine barrels... and I've noticed that resin gets trapped inside. If it stayed firmly inside I wouldn't care too much, but a few times now a model has cracked a tiny amount and liquid resin has started flowing out.
I know the obvious solution is just to make the model solid, but I assumed that since all the slicer tools have an option for hollowing with infill there is a solution to this.
I haven't tried too many things yet, because I am a little anxious to fiddle too much with the printer setting. I went from having 0.5 mm walls to 0.8 mm but it still happened. I have tried hex-grid infill and pillars. I also increased the exposure time by a second (from 8 to 9), but this was only to see if the object would be stronger and thus prevent the cracking.
I have considered increasing the Z-lift distance just to have the object longer out of the resin bath to drip off better.

Don't hollow most miniatures below the 40 mm-scale
Tabletop miniatures are quite small in scale. Often they have very thin details. As a result, hollowing them out is not advisable in the first place and you will have the best results by printing them solidly. Most wargames use something between the 16 mm to 34 mm scale, but the problem is still present at the 40 mm scale. So bite the bullet and print solid for small items - it also gives the model a little weight to stay where they shall be on the table.
Only if you start to print things like small busts or vehicles that have quite some hollow pace, you could conceivably manage to include the needed geometry, as elaborated below, and then hollow out the models accordingly.
Hollow prints properly
In case you do have a hollowed print, you need to include two vents to allow the exchange of air and prevent cupping:
First, you need a vent for air to enter the model. This is best placed at the very top of where the included volume will wit on the printer and needs to be accessible to air once the model is raised out of the vat. For safety two bores to let in the air should be present.
The second vent is somewhat optional unless the print takes really long. If you include it, it needs to be at the very lowest point of the included volume to prevent trapping resin inside and allow it to drain the resin out of the model hanging from the print bed. Should the volume have separate lowest points, you'd need to include multiple drainage vents.
All vents also need to be sizeable enough to allow the viscous resin to drain from them. About 3 mm² (~2 mm diameter) is the absolute minimum for low viscous resin. High viscous resins require larger holes of about 10 mm² (~3.5 mm).
Also, no point of the model's interior volume should neck down to below those dimensions or you face the risk of having resin clog those neckings - which is again why you don't hollow small miniatures.
Further listening (especially for larger prints) is here from Angus/Maker Muse, who shows a way to hollow out with a hollow base but skipped the drain vent, and Mark Rhodes, who prefers to use 5 mm holes where possible.
Avoiding holes?
There are ways to avoid holes altogether, if you can orient the item in such a way that at all times one side of the print is open. Let's take for example a crate or barrel:
We could hollow the item and remove the face we want to be on the table later. This way we shape the item into a cup. We could add air access or resin vent, but we could also just put the missing wall to be facing in X or Y and then angle the item ever so slightly to give the item good resin drainage and totally avoid the need for an extra hole in a surface we want to retain. This is how you'd print a cup without a hole, as I had explained in Why cupping is bad for SLA
Or, you could time your return to the printer to right after the print is finished, you turn the print around so the resin that was trapped inside starts to drain down to the print platform and over that into the vat.

Thanks for your thorough answer. Yeah I had already realized that miniatures should be solid by now. What I am printing at the moment as I mentioned in my post are voluminous things like barrels and walls. Since I am printing them upside down and the bottom of the barrel is touching the build platform I guess I would need to add a 3mm hole in the side of the barrel near the bottom and then one in the lid. I guess I can fill these holes with some glue and hide them with paint.

Or you print the lid separately and print the barrels as hollow cylinders. Or you print the barrel hollowed out, lacking the lower part and oriented sideways so that there is a wall missing.

@hansnordblad added some way to try to avoid it

I tend to cut my resin prints in half so that the top and bottom can be printed at the same time on the build plate, which halves the printing time for larger models, and then glue them together. This elevates the need for drainage holes.

thanks again for all the help. I found a really nice stack of 5 barrels on a rack. When printing solid it comes to around 50ml resin and hollowed it about halves it. I am experimenting with hollowing it, then slicing it in half. This should allow all resin to drain out. Hopefully I will be able to glue it together nicely after printing.

if you can 3D model with Blender a bt, you might import the halved barrels there and shape a registration feature, such as an angled lip for centering on one half or little teeth that force a specific rotation and centering.


text:
Lower side of print rough on personal protection print
I’m new to 3D printing and printed a few things that came out fine on my Ender 3. But when I print something like a cat protection baton, Kubota self-protection or anything that will have a “floating surface” it comes out rough.

In order to help find a solution, please [edit] in more information such as material, print settings, temperatures, what have you tried, etc. The more information you give, the more likely a solution can be achieved. Also, what do you mean by "Floating service"? Do you mean to say 'floating surface'?

do you use support? how is the support configurated? What are your print settings? can you show us a picture of your slice?

FFF 3D printing doesn't work with "floating surfaces". It comes out rough because the filaments are being extruded in space and sagging away from their intended position as the filament is hot and liquid (as in a low viscosity).
To fix this, you need tell your slicer to add support structures so that it is not "floating", and then break away (and possibly sand) the support structures when the print is completed.
Alternately, you can manually add support structures to the part before slicing.  If the "floating surface" is horizontal, one or more thin wall vertical supports would allow the area to be bridged.  There needs to be at least be one vertical support at each end of the bridge.  You may need to add more in the middle if the span is too long and sags.


text:
What is the thickest sensible layer height that an Ender 5 will print at?
I'm going to 3D print a series of scaffolds and armatures that I'm going to use as the skeleton\structure for clay sculptures as an alternative to using twisted wire, because I can print dozens of identical ones off faster than I can twist them out of wire.
They don't need to look pretty, they just need to be able support a little weight.
What is the thickest sensible layer height that I can uses to get them printed off quickly?

I assume you are interested in it to print faster. Consider using a larger nozzle instead, so that you need to print only one perimeter instead of 2 (or 2 instead of 3) before increasing the layer height. You may get faster prints and better quality. Also, keep in mind that no matter the layer thickness or nozzle diameter, the maximum melting rate will likely not exceed 10 mm^3/s with the original stock extruder. If you place a dual gear direct drive then you can reach much more.

Your maximum layer height is related to the nozzle diameter. Typically, a printer is sold with a 0.4 mm nozzle diameter, unless otherwise specified. One expects to be able to print safely to eighty percent of nozzle diameter, which would be 0.32 mm layer height. Quote from linked Prusa site.

Layer height vs nozzle diameter
Layer height should not exceed 80 % of the nozzle diameter. If you are
using the standard 0.4mm nozzle, the maximal layer height is about
0.32 mm. However, with a 0.6mm nozzle, it’s possible to achieve up to a 0.48 mm layer height.

Exactly this - I've seen a concrete-based printer that can do a 2" or 50mm layer height, but it had a nozzle that looked like a fire hose.

There might be a different formula involved with concrete printer nozzles. Due to the faster flow of semi-liquid concrete, it might be a max layer at 50 percent nozzle diameter.

Or this one which lays down what looks like half-inch-thick and inch-wide lines

Flow rate is certainly a factor, but most plastics have a maximum flow rate too, although it can be more than proportionally higher with a larger nozzle.  But then there's also a max caloric rate needed to melt the plastic too.  You can also slow down linear head movement, but this introduces stresses that can cause other problems in the final part.  This would all be different for concrete vs. plastic.

Workable flow rate depends on both the filament material and the hot end design.  If the flow rate is too fast, the material will not have adequate time to melt.  If the flow rate is too slow, one gets heat creep.  Of course print speed affects flow rate.


text:
Ender 3 print temperature
I've tried different retraction speeds and distances using calibration models, Z-hop, coasting but nothing prevented stringing. Now I tried printing at 230 °C and that seems to do the trick. Even 220 °C gives me strings. The filament is quite new.
Has somebody had a similar experience and could you tell me if something else is wrong maybe?

Can you add a picture showing the stringing you see? There are several different "types" and seeing which it is can help a lot in diagnosis.

If increasing temperature helps, I think the most likely cause is wet filament. Even new filament can be wet, even if the manufacturer did everything right, if the distributor/warehouse/shipping handled it poorly. Especially thost numbers - going from 210 to 230 is exactly what I have to do to compensate for wet PLA if I'm too lazy to dry it. I don't get stringing, just other problems, but that's probably because my retraction and travel speeds (45 ms, 400 mm/s) are so high as to not allow time for oozing.

I think you are right, I will try it with different type of filament.

You could also just try drying it.

It just needed drying, even though it was brand new. Thnx @R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE.


text:
Cura Slicing software failing to slice properly
Sometimes Cura will slice a model and have failed lines of code. After discovering this problem I have tried re-slicing and then the code will come out fine. The first picture below is the failure point in the code from the first time I ran Cura's slicing. The second picture is the exact same model that I ran a second time through Cura and it came out fine. Is there any settings/reasons as to why this is happening?
Note, that I am also using an Ender 3 v2. For the time being I suppose I will have to look at the full code ahead of time to spot failure points.

Which version of Cura are you using? Is it the most recent? Have you tried slicing the same stl file with another slicer? What else have you tried?

Do you write directly to SD card? That looks like a writing error!

The random appearance of the commands makes this appear as a writing error. I have had these happen in three cases:

When I sliced an object and then saved to the SD card but removed the card before saving finished, the resulting file was corrupt and at times wouldn't even print.

Solution: Wait for Cura to tell that saving finished, then use eject before removing the card.

When I sliced and saved, waited for completion, and yanked the card too quickly after that without using eject.

Solution: use the eject card button.

When I used an adapter with a bad fit or connection to the SD card.

Solution: reseat the SD card or use a different adapter.


text:
How to tune pattern for a given infill density
Obviously the density and pattern are strictly related but seems values aren't tuned automatically according the combination of various patterns and if I change the infill density Cura chooses automatically only 2 the patterns:

always grid for lower densities <=25 % infill
always lines for higher densities >25 % infill

If I change the pattern to something different, I get a warning message

"This setting is normally calculated, but it currently has an absolute
value set."

Each pattern has specific vantages that are useful according the situation, how should I properly configure the combination infill density and infill pattern to get optimal vantage without just wasting time for more intricated patterns?
E.g.
Considering densities 20 %, 40 %, 60 % and triangle (best perpendicular resistance), cubic (best transverse resistance) and gyroid (best all around) pattern, I would get the specific vantage of each of these patterns at all densities or after a certain level, they haven't any sense?

The infill density depends on the object you are slicing. E.g. if it has a large flat top you make sure to get enough support to prevent the "roof"/top surface from collapsing (in combination with enough top layers). If the object is a pyramid for instance, you don't need much infill. I don't really understand what you are trying to achieve with this question?

@0scar "depends on the object" is implicit in the last part of question where I mention the resistance  peculiarity of mentioned patterns, and  the type of mechanical stress to which it is subjected during use


text:
G29 UBL G-code - every request levels bed?

Every time I issue a G29 command the printer runs through all its multi-point/probing bed leveling routine.

Is this normal? or can I issue one G29 command with suffice to rule them all! :-)

When I issue G29 S1 to save the topology to the printer makes a buzzing noise with output :

READ: echo:busy: processing
busy: processing
READ: echo:busy: processing
busy: processing
READ: echo:busy: processing
busy: processing

Below is my Start G-code for reference to this issue.
; reset BL Touch twice
M280 P0 S160
M280 P0 S160

; set Acceleration settings
; M204

; set JERK X/Y to 8s
; M205 X10

; set E-Steps for 3DPW Grey PLA E-Steps test results
M92 E106.6
; save those settings
M500

; home all axes
G28

; set temporary nozzle temp to prevent oozing during homing and auto bed leveling
M104 S120

; perform auto leveling
G29 P1
; extrapolate leveling
G29 P3
; set fade height to 10mm ***NOT sure this is needed with an almost flat bed out by 0.2mm ?!
; G29 F10
; Saves the bed topology results into slot one.
; G29 S1 ; ***NOT*** a god idea - makes a bad bussing noise and never completes
; save for future use
M500
; Loads mesh #1 for the current print job IF previously saved !
; G29 L1

; set target extruder nozzle temperature and wait (if heating)
M109 S[extruder0_temperature] T0 ; wait for extruder temp

; use absolute positioning for the XYZ axes
G90

; move to the Y=20mm position on the bed = FRONT
G1 Y20 F3600
; move to the X=200 mm position on the bed  = MIDDLE
G1 X200 F3600

; purge nozzle
G1 E25 F300
```

Welcome to 3D Printing SE and thank you for your contribution. When you get a chance, please take the [tour] to understand how the site works and how it is different than others.

The TH3D article "Storing Bed Leveling Mesh & Updating Your Slicer" I think can help.
A summary of that write-up:

Send a G28
Preheat the machine to your normal print temperature. Let the printer sit at temperature for 5 minutes to let everything expand as it heats
Send a G28
Send a G29
Send M500

After doing these steps the mesh is now stored in the printer EEPROM.
Then:
Update your slicer to use the stored mesh

Load your slicer and open up the settings where the starting G-code is stored
Replace the G29 with M420 S1
(2.5 If you want to use ABL fading use M420 S1 Z10 – This will fade ABL compensation until it is off over the first 10 mm of the print.)
Slice up some files!

My Cura start G-code.
M75 ; Start Print Timer and Engage Fil Sensor if USB Printing
M84 E ; Disable E Motor for probe accuracy on direct drive systems
M117 Antiblob retract...
G92 E0 ; Reset Extruder distance to 0
G1 E-2 ; Retracts filament to prevent blobs during probing
G92 E0 ; Reset Extruder distance to 0
M117 Homing All...
G28 ; home all axes
M117 Heaters Recovering...
G4 S10; wait for heaters to recover
M420 S1 Z2; Retrieve saved mesh, Z fade 2mm
M900 K0; LA

M117 Purging extruder...
G92 E0     ; reset extruder
G1 Z2.0 F3000    ; move z up little to prevent scratching of surface
G1 X0.1 Y20 Z0.3 F5000.0  ; move to start-line position
G1 X0.1 Y100.0 Z0.3 F500.0 E15  ; draw 1st line
G1 X0.4 Y100.0 Z0.3 F5000.0  ; move to side a little
G1 X0.4 Y20 Z0.3 F500.0 E30  ; draw 2nd line
G92 E0     ; reset extruder
G1 Z1.0 F3000    ; move z up little to prevent scratching of surface

M117 Printing.....

Hope it's of help.


text:
Meshmixer or Blender thickness feature
I ran the thickness gave these errors. Now what should I do to fix the errors with Blender or Meshmixer?
Blender thickness analysis:
!
With meahmixer:
enter image description here

The blue error flags are usually trivial. You should be able to click on the blue ones while in Analysis, Inspector and have the model correct those locations. Consider to do one at a time, as you can then Control-Z (undo) to back out if the repair is damaging.
The other flags usually point to a much more severe problem and are likely to remove portions of the mesh. For those, use the select feature to surround the openings, then F to fill. Unfortunately, such a repair may convert what might be a contour into a flat surface, but the options in the Fill feature may provide some relief.
After performing the fill, run the inspector again.
If this is not satisfactory and you are using Windows 10, 3DBuilder will often create repairs that fit the original model quite well.

Can I do what you say with Blender software?

I'm not qualified to answer your Blender aspect. I see that you've replaced the Meshmixer image with a Blender one, negating my answer references. Consider to provide both images to return relevance to my answer.

I downloaded 3d builder. Now what should I DO? No warning in the secreen of 3d builder