The tool tip should be changed to not make such a directed statement about the Extruder offsets referring only to the first extruder. I only have one and I used the previous z offset all the time. I had to do this search to find out how to set the offset on the new version and find out that it was a negative value also. When I have time, I will take a look and try to understand why there would be separate z offsets for more than one extruder. X and Y is obvious... I would think that the Z on all extruders would have to be the same, so having Z grouped this way makes no sense to me.

@michael-petitclerc
the problem is that a second instance (and third instance) is no longer allowed. At least with separate instances, I was able to keep the printers id'd. You guys are very close...

just to let you know, Lars "added" multiple printer tab support last month and that is why I can not create a second instance (that was an exception bug for a different person). I have added the four points I outlined here to github.

Up until the last release I was happily running "separate" instances on MatterControl 2.0, The latest upgrade appears to not support that. I am adding multiple printers to the 2.19 version and getting tabs for each printer. I have three Anycubic i3 Megas and 1 Anycubic Delta.
bug 1) Printing is not an issue except for the incorrect flashing tab when I add a STL to the last selected printer tab (it always flashes the first tab), but at least puts the part on the right printer.
bug 2) when I go to slice, I am never sure that the right slicing tab is open though because the right tabs do not refresh. I usually end up re-selecting the printer tabs so I can end on the one I need.
bug 3) when I have to reboot and restart everything, I find that the wrong printer tab gets created even though I selected the correct printer from the list. I have named my printers Other Prusa i3 #1 com4, Other Prusa i3 #2 com12, etc. It may not happen on the first printer, but it did happen on the 3rd printer when I was going to connect so I could do some maintenance on it. I selected my Other Prusa i3 #3 com13, and it opened the #2 printer. I was printing with that printer at the time and had two tabs for the same one. It didn't connect at least, but I have seen two tabs disappear when deleting the same named printer at times.
bug 4) I may be missing something, but I would love dearly to clone a printer and keep a master, so I can update my other two printers. The slicing and printing options could be shared and it would make life easier.

That is it for the moment. I did want to say that I am able to do the printing I need to do and am in general impressed with what MatterControl can do. I just need to have it be more stable in the multiple printer scenario.

@scott-cahoon said in Slicer Problem? Weird extruded vertical wall between circles...:

Autodesk Meshmixer

Thanks for the pointer to mesh mixer...

downloaded mesh mixer and the stl image looks fine without the silly wall there. Did the mesh query and nothing was wrong. Must be the slicer...

Just a question to see if anyone else has seen an issue like this. I have a design that I did on tinkercad for a 6.4" diameter ring (internal diameter 5.5") with a height of 0.4". The ring has a channel in it that is 0.3" wide and 0.2" deep from the top. The first one I did was made up using 64 sided cylinders. I have since made my own cylinder in tinkercad that has 256 sides to improve the circular track for such a large diameter. I have printed two rings so far - one with the 64 sides and one with the 256 sides. Now for the weirdness. They both print correctly with their resolution as expected. Their rendered images everywhere look just fine - tinkercad, Windows whatever program, and in Mattercontrol. The weirdness is that both of them have a small wall (maybe 0.05" thick) at the top of the ring vertically bridged between the channel top and bottom walls precisely at 12 o'clock high. It is easy to trim out, but it shouldn't be there... is there a STL analyzer that someone can recommend to dig deeper into the problem or has anyone else seen this? Thanks!