Without "use volumetric E", it prints fine with an "extrusion multiplier" of 1, again.

I played with volumetric E in an older version of PrusaSlicer. IIRC, it's meant to be used with the autospeed feature. There are morsels of notes out there to be found, but it's not well documented. It sounded promising, but I didn't get any good results with it.

Without "use volumetric E", it prints fine with an "extrusion multiplier" of 1, again.

Interesting. 

If PrusaSlicer 2.4.0 gets stuck while slicing and eats up excessive amount of RAM, we need to know about it, ideally as a github ticket with steps and 3MF to reproduce. If we were aware of such a critical issue, we would not release the final.

I'm not saying its the cause of your problems but given that setting is listed as experimental and changes the way E units are output then its worth checking with it turned OFF.

Sorry it was not my intention to hijack the thread, I'll try to offer help tomorrow it's 3Am

I tested all the Alpha's and I Tested all the Beta's accept Beta 2 because it couldn't make it past my first level testing (Win7) I know why.

I'm not a fan of the data collection, however I took my time to report it, All be it in a lesser way. (Meaning here and not GitHub)I lost a lot of test time waiting for the next release on that one, and I resumed my testing on the Beta3 all the way through the RC's. I made reports, some dealt with some not, that time is over for me now, I have to move on, I took time out of my personal life to help, so I'm not negligent, I tried with good effort.

I don't mean woe is me, I mean, I think I could have used my time better.

Here's an excerpt from the really long post I mentioned that I back spaced earlier.

We are currently stuck between a rock and a hard place. We have to use the older version, the more stable version 2.3.3, to do our work, however we are trying to switch over since this release of 2.4.0 final, and right off the top we are having issues with getting stuck on certain projects at infill 70%, (I should mention this is in the progress bar) after pressing "slice" not caused by using 70% infill, it represents a complete freeze on our windows systems, if we don't shut slicer down fast after it freezes, and you go to shut the program down to the point of the end task dialogue, the program disappears but continues to run at 100 CPU usages in the background, to the point that we can barley open the task manager to shut it down on i7 3Ghz + quad-core machines running dedicated Nvidia GPU's. (That's just one problem, there's more). I've taken to opening the task manager so it's ready to kill Prusa Slicer when it freezes I've never had to consider doing this before, now it's the first thing I do when I go to use the program, and I save after every single change (because there's no telling when it's going to happen). I didn't have these problems with the alpha's and Beta's. for me it seemed things started going wrong mostly with the RC's I did however go back and test the issues that I did find in the earlier releases to see if I could find out when the originated.

Anyway that's it, I have no more time for this, I gave my time I did it preemptively, and proactively.

I have to start working now and do what I can. I guess others will have to make the reports or not.

I do like the 2.4 features, I just wish I could use them professionally, for now it's a waiting game.

Regards

Swiss_Cheese

Attached is a 3mf file for such a problematic print with a manually created 0.6mm nozzle profile. However, even using the MK3S 0.6mm profile (Cr-10s with Hemera should allow for a similar profile) and simply changing the build volume and G-Code to include a BLtouch routine leads to the same overextrusion. 

xyzCalibration_cube_overextruding

Previously, I had used the 0.4mm nozzle with PS 2.4 and it had a normal extrusion rate. This weird issue only occurred after switching to a 0.6mm nozzle. 

We are aware of no such issues. The only major issue I am aware of after the 2.4.0 release is a hang-up on some Windows machines on start-up, likely due to some ATI Radeon graphics cards. If we were aware of such an issue, we would strive to gather data and try to work it around. However the issue was reported after the final release while it was introduced in beta2. It seems that nobody affected by the issue tested beta2 and later releases after the final.

Also it seems to me that PrusaSlicer 2.3.3 was already good enough for most users, thus people tend to wait for others to test the alphas and betas until the final is out. It is really out of our hands whether there are computers out there that our software does not run on.

I wrote a really long post in response to'

Frankly I don't understand what you are talking about. In my opinion PrusaSlicer 2.4.0 is pretty stable and functional. Surely there are some bugs and there always will be bugs. There are bugs in any software and releasing a bug free software means not releasing at all.

But I Backspaced it.

I'm not here to raise issues with the software for the development staff, I was trying to impart something I've learned to another user of the software after years of working in software development, and years of using Slicer. That is, try to find a way around the problem. You see the thing is, it's needed "now" and if it's not working correctly you might try something different, instead of the intended way.

I'm not unappreciative of the efforts you and your team put towards the software, make no mistake about that. However we have to move on as users, and find ways to get the job done. It's not mine or his job to make the software work properly (as intended) and at least in my case it is my job to make sure I can get the job done. This to me means figuring out why 2.4.0 final sometimes crashes, freezing at 70% Infill on my Windows machines etc,, (yes there's more) I'm not getting into that here. I give my time to the software on GitHub, and I give it to the users not just my time which is very valuable, but my money to help others, and will in the future, however in my experience and opinion (stable) it's not, I'm spending a lot more time crashing in 2.4.0 final then any version before it. I expect you to be proud of the accomplishments made to the software, it has a great potential, I am forced to be realistic about it, I don't have time in my life to create another fork and start building it, this will not prevent me form expressing my opinion about it's current state and my experience to fellow users.

But I'm sure that's on me, because what do I know?

Sorry vojtech-bubnik if this felt offensive to you, I use the software that you helped develop in a very strong manner, and I find ways to make it work in spite of it's short comings (I understand about Bugs), I have no choice at this point but to make it work.

Regards

Swiss_Cheese