<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<title type="html"><![CDATA[SoliForum - 3D Printing Community — Cura estimated print time inaccuracy]]></title>
	<link rel="self" href="https://www.soliforum.com/feed/atom/topic/10590/" />
	<updated>2015-04-02T02:29:44Z</updated>
	<generator>PunBB</generator>
	<id>https://www.soliforum.com/topic/10590/cura-estimated-print-time-inaccuracy/</id>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Cura estimated print time inaccuracy]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/91726/#p91726" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>That makes me wonder if RH does its own computation instead, which certainly wouldn&#039;t be hard for them to do.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[jagowilson]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/7321/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-04-02T02:29:44Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/91726/#p91726</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Cura estimated print time inaccuracy]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/91723/#p91723" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>In my experience, Cura can be notoriously bad in predicting times. As in 2x-4x the estimate to actual time. With that being said, two things. 1. Supposedly going from 13-14 or 14-15 they rewrote their algorithm and it was supposed to improved. 2. The two times I have used it with Repetier Host it was almost spot on to the minute.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[Morganism]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/9095/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-04-02T02:20:44Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/91723/#p91723</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Cura estimated print time inaccuracy]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/91695/#p91695" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>I&#039;m a graduate student so I can work from home when I want to - but if I had a print ever give me that long of an estimation, I&#039;d probably throw on my Volcano. I&#039;ve put a lot of work into upgrading things so I can print accurately at higher speeds, too (thanks to wardjr for all of his help on that <img src="https://www.soliforum.com/img/smilies/wink.png" width="15" height="15" alt="wink" />) Without bearings on the back rod I print at 125mm/s reliably with exceptionally good repeatability. When I (some day) get bearings back there, 300mm/s travel and 150mm/s print speeds should be achievable if I can melt the plastic fast enough, but I have some issues with this already at 125mm/s solid fill. I also tend to print more functional parts so things like ringing aren&#039;t really a concern for me as aesthetics don&#039;t matter.</p><p>You&#039;d be amazed at the speed improvements you can achieve with just a larger toolpath. My 0.6 nozzle substantially reduces print time without increasing speeds.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[jagowilson]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/7321/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-04-01T21:48:13Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/91695/#p91695</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Cura estimated print time inaccuracy]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/91692/#p91692" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>jagowilson wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>It&#039;s an extremely important feature if you take full-time attended printing seriously. I think the last time I used Simplify3D is when it estimated a 5 hour+ job at 3 hours. I wasn&#039;t too happy having to cancel that print when I had to leave...</p></blockquote></div><p>You actually babysit all your prints?&nbsp; Have you ever tried a long print, I mean something in excess of 10 hours?</p><p>I routinely do 12-15 hour prints.&nbsp; The longest print I did once, ended up at 33 hours. </p><p>Re: Slic3r, it&#039;s accurate within a few seconds to a few minutes (depending on print time).&nbsp; The longer the print is, the more it deviates.&nbsp; But even it needs a fudge factor of +10%, which seems to be the RH default anyway.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[pirvan]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/1357/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-04-01T21:26:32Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/91692/#p91692</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Cura estimated print time inaccuracy]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/91689/#p91689" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>That&#039;s strange. I have mine all set at 0 in Slic3r (1000 XY acceleration in the firmware) and it is accurate to within +/- 3 seconds regardless of fill type, fill density, layer height, first layer speed, nozzle diameter, ...</p><div class="quotebox"><cite>pirvan wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>So, do you use Cura to slice?&nbsp; If so, how close are your estimates to the actual completion time?</p><p>Also what value do you have in RH Printer Settings/Printer Tab/Add to comp. Printing Time?&nbsp; </p><p>I now have 42%, but it still varies, just not as bad as before, but it still can be off by 10-20 minutes depending on total print time.</p></blockquote></div><p>I don&#039;t use Cura, but my suspicion is still that Cura&#039;s estimation does not properly account for acceleration. I had this issue with Simplify3D - the print time estimates were way off, in both directions, and there was no way to adjust its estimation. This might have changed, but I stopped using the software in favor of Slic3r 1.1.7. Slic3r is just plain good at estimating, and I&#039;m surprised others haven&#039;t just copied their algorithm for time estimation. It&#039;s an extremely important feature if you take full-time attended printing seriously. I think the last time I used Simplify3D is when it estimated a 5 hour+ job at 3 hours. I wasn&#039;t too happy having to cancel that print when I had to leave...</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[jagowilson]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/7321/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-04-01T20:28:00Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/91689/#p91689</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Cura estimated print time inaccuracy]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/91644/#p91644" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>jagowilson wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I&#039;ve never attempted to alter slic3rs acceleration values before. I checked mine out and they&#039;re all 0 - I&#039;ll have to play with that and see how the emitted GCode changes and whether or not the firmware obeys them. </p><p>Your acceleration values are the same as mine - all default.</p></blockquote></div><p>I was seeing actual print time 2X predicted when I had mine all 0 using honeycomb infill so I am thinking the fw does obey them.&nbsp; Now I have them all at 1000 except perimeter which I reduced recently to eliminate bounce artifacts.&nbsp; I can tell, watching &amp; listening to the print that it is working as advertised (perimeters have a distinct Weeeee-ewwwww, Weeeee-ewwwww sound I don&#039;t hear on the other components).</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[TickTock]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/6045/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-04-01T14:14:27Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/91644/#p91644</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Cura estimated print time inaccuracy]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/91624/#p91624" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>So, do you use Cura to slice?&nbsp; If so, how close are your estimates to the actual completion time?</p><p>Also what value do you have in RH Printer Settings/Printer Tab/Add to comp. Printing Time?&nbsp; </p><p>I now have 42%, but it still varies, just not as bad as before, but it still can be off by 10-20 minutes depending on total print time.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[pirvan]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/1357/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-04-01T04:11:55Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/91624/#p91624</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Cura estimated print time inaccuracy]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/91620/#p91620" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>I&#039;ve never attempted to alter slic3rs acceleration values before. I checked mine out and they&#039;re all 0 - I&#039;ll have to play with that and see how the emitted GCode changes and whether or not the firmware obeys them. </p><p>Your acceleration values are the same as mine - all default.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[jagowilson]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/7321/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-04-01T02:47:06Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/91620/#p91620</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Cura estimated print time inaccuracy]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/91619/#p91619" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>jagowilson wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>The slicer can&#039;t take into account the firmware&#039;s values unless the host reads the eeprom and sends them via command line input - I&#039;m fairly certain this doesn&#039;t happen. What are you using for acceleration in EEPROM? The default XY acceleration in Marlin is 1000 mm/s^2. I&#039;d check to make sure yours isn&#039;t any lower than this, as this is quite slow.</p></blockquote></div><p>Here are the EEPROM settings:</p><br /><p>19:27:23.805 : echo:Maximum Acceleration (mm/s2):<br />19:27:23.807 : echo:&nbsp; M201 X3000 Y3000 Z100 E3000<br />19:27:23.807 : echo:Acceleration: S=acceleration, T=retract acceleration<br />19:27:23.808 : echo:&nbsp; M204 S1000.00 T2000.00</p><p>Slic3r uses it&#039;s own acceleration settings:</p><p>Perimeters:&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 1000<br />Infill:&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;2000<br />Bridge:&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;2000<br />First Layer:&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 1000<br />Default:&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;2000</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[pirvan]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/1357/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-04-01T02:42:34Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/91619/#p91619</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Cura estimated print time inaccuracy]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/91567/#p91567" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>The slicer can&#039;t take into account the firmware&#039;s values unless the host reads the eeprom and sends them via command line input - I&#039;m fairly certain this doesn&#039;t happen. What are you using for acceleration in EEPROM? The default XY acceleration in Marlin is 1000 mm/s^2. I&#039;d check to make sure yours isn&#039;t any lower than this, as this is quite slow.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[jagowilson]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/7321/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-03-31T18:54:09Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/91567/#p91567</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Cura estimated print time inaccuracy]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/91562/#p91562" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>TickTock wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>That was my problem with RH/Slic3r.&nbsp; I&nbsp; had left the acceleration at 0 (the default).&nbsp; Once I changed it to 1000, I was much closer to the prediction.</p><p><a href="http://www.soliforum.com/topic/7799/solved-printing-is-slow/">http://www.soliforum.com/topic/7799/sol … g-is-slow/</a></p></blockquote></div><p>I can&#039;t seem to find an option to input acceleration values in Cura, which leads me to believe, they use the values built into the firmware, or they don&#039;t use acceleration at all.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[pirvan]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/1357/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-03-31T18:24:20Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/91562/#p91562</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Cura estimated print time inaccuracy]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/91309/#p91309" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>That was my problem with RH/Slic3r.&nbsp; I&nbsp; had left the acceleration at 0 (the default).&nbsp; Once I changed it to 1000, I was much closer to the prediction.</p><p><a href="http://www.soliforum.com/topic/7799/solved-printing-is-slow/">http://www.soliforum.com/topic/7799/sol … g-is-slow/</a></p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[TickTock]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/6045/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-03-30T03:35:37Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/91309/#p91309</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Cura estimated print time inaccuracy]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/91211/#p91211" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>Could it be that their estimation algorithm assumes different (faster) acceleration? Or worse, doesn&#039;t consider acceleration at all?</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[jagowilson]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/7321/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-03-29T16:00:46Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/91211/#p91211</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Cura estimated print time inaccuracy]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://www.soliforum.com/post/91202/#p91202" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>Does anyone else have problems with Cura&#039;s estimate print time?</p><p>to say it&#039;s inaccurate is actually a misnomer.&nbsp; It&#039;s so far off sometimes it&#039;s not even funny.&nbsp; </p><p>For example I just finished printing a model that was estimated at 13:34:48.&nbsp; Actual print time was 17:26:48.&nbsp; That&#039;s almost 4 hours difference.</p><p>Slic3r was always under estimating, so I added about 10% to the time of completion in the printer settings, and it became a lot more reliable, print time completions were only within a few minutes of estimated time.</p><p>The 13:34:48 estimated time that Cura gave in the example above, included the 10% add-on it inherited from Slic3r.&nbsp; I had to change that to 42% to get the ETA close to the actual time.</p><p>Does anyone know why the estimations are so far off?&nbsp; Other than the fudge factor in the RH printer settings, is there something that we can tweak inside Cura?</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[pirvan]]></name>
				<uri>https://www.soliforum.com/user/1357/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2015-03-29T15:05:10Z</updated>
			<id>https://www.soliforum.com/post/91202/#p91202</id>
		</entry>
</feed>
