Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Feature Problem] Ugly slopes with one perimeter on. #248

Closed
MarcPot opened this issue May 19, 2020 · 5 comments
Closed

[Feature Problem] Ugly slopes with one perimeter on. #248

MarcPot opened this issue May 19, 2020 · 5 comments
Labels
enhancement fix is live in the last release Please download /build the last release and try to reproduce. question
Milestone

Comments

@MarcPot
Copy link

MarcPot commented May 19, 2020

Version

Slic3r++ 2.2.50
Build: slic3r++_2.2.50+UNKNOWN

Operating system type + version

Windows 10 (build 18363), 64-bit edition

Behavior

When using Print Settings -> Perimeter & Shell -> Quality (slower slicing) -> Only one perimeter on Top surfaces while there is an slope in your model.

When there is an slope like this the sliver will act very strange there, it adds one perimeter, then a bit of top layer and then your actual walls. This only happens when the slope has a low angle
I hope the image will explain the problem enough.

This problem results in a very weak and ugly outer shell on slopes.

These pictures are without Only one perimeter on Top surfaces:
image
image

These pictures are with Only one perimeter on Top surfaces:
image
image

Project File (.3MF) where problem occurs

This is an example, but it occurs with every model like it.
z_drive_main_a_x2.zip

@MarcPot MarcPot changed the title [Feature Problem] Ugly "Reversed" overhangs with one perimeter on. [Feature Problem] Ugly slopes with one perimeter on. May 19, 2020
@supermerill
Copy link
Owner

It detects that there is an area that can be laid out with the top pattern, so it's doing its job. To be able to have enough space to do the pattern, it's grown by "anchor solid infill by X mm".
It is really a problem?

You can remove "only one perimeter on top for these layer where you don't want it (or only where you want it, as you wish) with the height range modifier (or modifier mesh, but they can add seams when working on perimeters).

Alternatively, you can change the top pattern in a modifier mesh, set it to "concentric (filled)" which is almost the same as perimeters, and put the modifier where you don't want the hilbert pattern.

It is enough to resolve your problem?
I don't think it's possible to know where you want top infill and where you don't if you don't put some modifier to explain your tough to the program, but maybe you have an idea on how i can be implemented.

@MarcPot
Copy link
Author

MarcPot commented May 19, 2020

Yea you're right, it's probably just easier doing it by hand.

Only thing I can think of is a setting like "Minimum distance to next layer perimeter" that looks where the single perimeter are closest and if that distance is to low the single perimeter wouldn't be used. But since I'm no programmer, I have no idea how hard it would be to implement.

@supermerill
Copy link
Owner

It may be possible to have a setting like that.
"minimum top thickness for infill" ?
in mm or perimeter width %

@MarcPot
Copy link
Author

MarcPot commented May 19, 2020

Yea like that, would be awesome! Even less reason to turn the function off.

With hilbert curve and one perimeter the perimeter almost gets invisible, would be awesome if it works at even more parts!

@supermerill supermerill added this to the v52 milestone Jun 3, 2020
@supermerill supermerill added the fixed for the next version That means that you should be able to test it in the latest nightly build label Jun 9, 2020
@supermerill supermerill added fix is live in the last release Please download /build the last release and try to reproduce. and removed fixed for the next version That means that you should be able to test it in the latest nightly build labels Jun 24, 2020
@MarcPot
Copy link
Author

MarcPot commented Jun 29, 2020

@supermerill Just checked out the fix, and it's working exactly as I meant. Awesome work!!!

@MarcPot MarcPot closed this as completed Jun 29, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement fix is live in the last release Please download /build the last release and try to reproduce. question
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants