CuraEngine VS Cura

Here (at the bottom of the page) you can find an overview of the calculation and the git repository also holds the entire source code of the Cura Engine (which is the part of Cura that actually does the slicing and G-code creation) where the calculations happen. The repository is in C++, but the calculations are actually universal.

There have been some improvements but I would not say it's fixed yet. 😕 It is my favorite 5.x seam for sure! You can read about the work done here: https://github.com/Ultimaker/CuraEngine/pull/1762

If you can figure git and out how to compile Cura and CuraEngine from source, you can test it by using the "vms" branch on both my CuraEngine and Cura github forks.

If you want to contribute by testing it you can find the necessary commits for Cura here and here for CuraEngine.

There's also a pull request on the main Cura repository, seems like it's nearly ready to be merged in: https://github.com/Ultimaker/CuraEngine/pull/1282

I am currently developing a pipeline for creating STL files, slice them and create a print job based on it. My setup at the moment is an Ultimaker S5, which offers a simple REST-API, for example starting a job with a G-Code or UFP file. I am using the cadQuery library for creating parametrized 3d shapes and export them as a STL file. I want to use the CuraEngine CLI interface (Backend for Cura) for slicing or their library libArcus (python bindings) but there is literally no documentation or any kind of examples, except the source code. There is also the prucaSlicer, which also offers a CLI interface for creating G-Code, but no support for the Ultimaker S5.

Bridges are hard to detect because of the workflow of the slicing engine. To put it simply: a bridge cannot be detected until the perimeter is layed down. But since both in the Cura Engine (which btw is now also at the core of the perimeters in PS) and in the Slic3r the Area generator operates simultaneously on periters and skin, it's impossible to inject in the pipeline and change the skin orientation. For two reasons: -First, they cannot detect a bridge because the start and end point are arbitrary and not static. It does make sense for us, but not for the algorithm. -Second, they cannot define an orientation. It cannot see that is a rectangle, and that therefore it should be best to lay the skin following a path parallel to the longest side.

You might be able to use Curaengine to provide weight estimates.

Are you using Cura?

EDIT2: Turns out one of my problems was dodgy End code in Cura [5.4.0] Questionable end gcode in some default profiles for Anycubic printers · Issue #16621 · Ultimaker/Cura (github.com)

Full release notes and new Cura downloads can be found here https://github.com/Ultimaker/Cura/releases/tag/5.5.0

So I'm using beta version of Cura (5.5.0) with V3 SE profile from https://github.com/Ultimaker/Cura/pull/16796 and I just figured out that Creality print is way faster than Cura. As far as I can see, settings are almost identical; print speed is set to 180mm/s in both programs. I'm using stock PLA profile in Creality print and eSun pla+ profile in Cura - same temperature, infill, walls and fan settings.

github.com/Ultimaker/Cura/issues for a bug report including Windows version.

In this case, Cura is an open source project, so the most straightforward way of submitting a feature request would be by creating an Issue in the code repository, where you can explain your idea along with why it’s important to you, who else you think it could be valuable to, and what you want both minimally and ideally.

If you're using the Startup Optimizer plugin, try disabling it temporarily - it can occasionally interfere with the list of available printers. Should that not help you could manually re-insert the profile by copying this JSON into the appropriate directory (eg C:\Program Files\UltiMaker Cura 5.4.0\share\cura\resource\definitions).

This reminds me of this known issue we mentioned in the changelog: Support Brim is missing if the Buildplate Adhesion is set to None. We are tracking reports here.

Yes..there's some sort of bug in 5.3..5.2 is ok, the developers are working on a patch for the new version: https://github.com/Ultimaker/Cura/issues/14811