Latest MC version 2.20.6 bug



  • Also wanted to add that I was checking out the help section...Thank you Lars for steering us over there. There is so much useful information in addition to the release notes.

    I'm going to have to go over the help area with a fine tooth comb and i would recommend anyone else do the same.



  • I experienced same Issue as OP this morning. Think I did everything correct in submitting a bug report.
    https://github.com/MatterHackers/MatterControl/issues/4772

    Sorry for 3 rapid replies.


  • MatterHackers

    Thanks for posting to GitHub. It looks like you just need to add 'mm' to the settings. We will think about ways to make this clearer in the future.

    Add mm



  • Unfortunately, that does not actually fix the issue. The picture of the parts in grey pro nylon was printed with 1mm layers and was input as "1mm", being the default for those fields. I attempted to do what OP did and place "3" in the fields to get 3 layers each, but the unfilled surfaces presented on some Hatchbox PETG parts that I printed over night.

    As I type this, I'm printing some comparison parts for analysis in Novamaker PLA. Used the most updated version of MC and the most recent previous version that I found in the release notes. Used the MC default of "1mm" in both the top and bottom layer fields, and as of this post, the results are similar but not as dramatic as the nylon parts on GitHub.

    Up until this most recent update, I've never had any prints that looked like that. Unfortunately I can't review my plating history due to an attempt at fixing a probe issue; deleted my local app data and uninstalled/reinstalled MC. I've printed multiple objects since I received the pro nylon, great filament by the way, and experienced no such issues as those presented on GitHub.

    Ill post the pictures to this thread when done.



  • 0_1592368594954_IMG_1393(1).jpg 0_1592368603477_IMG_1398(1).jpg

    While there appears to be some underextrusion in the april release version of MC on my prints, you can see there is a significant difference in the layer thickness. This was done with "1mm" in the top and bottom layers field on all prints. The cal cubes and the letters are one print and the half finished bolt is a seperate print or each respective MC version release.

    Edit: I forgot to note that the Cal Cube/Words are in .2 (Standard) layers and the Bolts are in .1(Fine) Layers.


  • MatterHackers

    This should now be fixed. You can switch to the alpha build if you want to try out the new build. We will promote it as soon as we prove it doesn't break anything else. 🙂

    alt text



  • Awesome, Thanks Lars! Ill try it out after my current print.



  • @larsbrubaker That would be great.



  • Support reached out to me after my bug report as well and suggested trying the Alpha a couple days ago. I didn't get around to it, but this morning there was a new stable release so I switched to that, and have to say the top and bottom layers are looking a lot better although I haven't messed with it enough to know for sure. Thanks for the increased support lately!


  • MatterHackers

    What you are seeing is correct. We pushed the new fix to release.



  • @larsbrubaker any idea of when this is going to happen?



  • @cfitts90 Are you still getting this issue? When I downloaded the Alpha, it was corrected. The fix followed over into the next "stable" update for me as well. Currently running MC 2.20.8.10552.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to MatterHackers Community was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.