@natewin We'll honor the $15 credit for submission of a profile that fixes a major issue, but we will decide what is a major issue and what isn't. Basically, we're looking to reward significant effort, so as long as your profile is vastly improved over the current iteration we would consider it a new profile and issue the $15 credit.
I have a Robo. Where did the option for Automatic Print Leveling go?You are probably getting confused about the different kinds of print leveling that are available. Your Robo has hardware leveling which allows it to probe the height of the bed before each print. Other printers don't have this feature, so for them MatterControl has the option to use automatic software leveling. This is where you measure the height of 3 points on the bed using the piece of paper. If you try to use both types of leveling at once, they will conflict with each other and cause problems. This is why the option for software leveling is now hidden if you have a Robo or any other type of printer with a probe. For more information on the various types of leveling, and how to configure them, look at our article on Automatic Print Leveling.
I recommend trying to adjust the model to be as close to flat as you can make it, then clicking the button.
I plan to improve the way it picks the face to lay flat, at the moment it finds the lowest vertex, then the biggest face connected to that vertex.
There is lots of opportunity for improvement.
@SteveThatcher, thanks for the feedback (and I saw your issue in GitHub). We absolutely do support multiple printers in one MaterControl instance. I don't think Mike knew we had shipped the build that had that feature yet.
The build we are working on (expected to release in February) fixes the majority of these issues, but we will make sure to take a look at them again - in consideration of this bug.
FYI, I will likely break your issue up into multiple issues, link to the first, then close it.
Thanks again, we are always working to improve MatterControl and feedback is a great way to find not only what is wrong but what is important to our users.
Hey @xeddog
As far as I am aware, we do not yet have a "Patch Notes" kind of followup. Now I may be wrong and @LarsBrubaker may be able to correct me on this one but I was unable to find one on the GitHub.
As we add more features we will be adding in more guides on how to use Mattercontrol. Each patch will also have a number of bug fixes, most of which do not affect too many people but there are a few like the "G28 end code SD export" bug which are taken care of in this last patch.
@larsbrubaker said in Can't export X3G - MatterControl 2.0:
This has been fixed. Please update to the latest build.
Thanks! For some reason I thought you'd secretly install the new version for me.
I'll give that a test tomorrow.
Hey @CDNBACON
Unfortunately we do not have this functionality just yet. Hopefully this is something we can implement the dual print head feature in the future.
(we can all hope for it to come quicker though!)
Currently the only setting that can be edited for second (and more) material is the temperature.
We plan to add complete settings for multiple materials in the future, but they have never been a thing we actually did, and so we removed the illusion that settings could be set.
You can set the temp for the extruder in the settings panel or in the temperature drop down.
@larsbrubaker Hi Lars, glad to get you the file - however, I am getting a message that "You do not have enough priveleges for this action," when I try to upload, here. If there is another way to get you the file, please let me know.
Thanks for the feedback. The slicing performance will be improving throughout the next several releases.
Now that 2.0 is out we have a much better platform to work on this and many other improvements.
Hey @IDES
There are a few reasons for the print shifting on the build plate but only maybe one or two of those options is going to be because of the software. Lets say that the print is loaded up into Mattercontrol, the part will materialize in the center of the plate based off of its designed origin. This is to say that the CAD model is designed based off of a singular center point of the space and depending on the CAD software this will be either in the center of the object or at an edge.
If the print is visually in the center of the build space and the print moves on the printer, that would direct me to look into the hardware as that is the most likely issue.
Let me know which way you are seeing it go and I will see what I can trouble shoot!
@chiques
That does seem to be a bit of a bug, do you mind dropping that into our GitHub here? Our development team will take a look and see if this is something they are able to replicate and then patch out. For sure that has to be annoying to work past and a little bit counter productive when it comes to preheating!
Let us know if you do happen to find any more issues though!
Hey @OsseoLeo
I apologize for not responding to you on this one, normally I catch all the posts but this one slipped by me with all that was going on last week.
For the moment I am unsure how one would go about making a new infill profile. Normally this is taken care of by our development team and pushed out through a patch. Might I ask what you had in mind for this pattern?
I'll give that a test tomorrow.
