mechamecha

I'm currently trying Slic3r's variable layers to see if it does a better job for me. It's not automated, but so far I like the way it allows you to "paint" on where you want the thinnest and thickest layers to be instead of forcing you to have variable layers for every single detail in your print.

Exactly right, that's why it would be really nice if they're able to fix this bug very soon.

I get the impression that you're not quite understanding what I'm asking for here, but OK.

I'll have to check out Slic3r's variable layers feature, because it looks like it works pretty much the way I suggested. It's great to have options.

Haha! OK.

There is definitely a visible difference between 0.05 mm layers vs. 0.25 mm, and banding is quite evident when very thin layers are unnecessarily added to fairly straight vertical surfaces. Also, I'd prefer not to waste valuable printing time adding very thin layers to details that are less important to me on a model. I'd be very surprised if I were the only person wishing that the adaptive layers feature had slightly more versatility. For example, if I were much more concerned about eliminating the visible banding on the exterior of this very simple object than having the arched opening printed as nicely as possible, it certainly would be nice to tell Cura to ignore the arched opening when calculating adaptive layers. It would reduce the print time as well. Obviously the problem is exacerbated on more complex models.

Thank you for replying, @ctbeke!

Thanks, @cjs!

So Cura is apparently calculating the number of top (and probably bottom) layers relative to the base layer height, and not on the calculated adaptive layer heights.

This isn't even a difficult bug to reproduce. All you need to do is take a cube, fillet the top surface, then slice it in Cura with adaptive layers turned on. If I slice the attached STL using .15 mm as the base layer height, 0.1 as the maximum variation, and top thickness set to 1 mm, there will be 7 top layers generated, and each layer will be approximately .05 mm thick. That results in a top surface that is approximately .35 mm thick, not anywhere close to the specified 1 mm. adaptive_layers_bug.stl

I apologize if my replies came across as snippy. I'm not taking any of this personally; I just thought it was kind of funny. I probably should have clarified in my original post that I was merely reporting a bug and not necessarily asking for assistance. But, seriously, if Cura was doing exactly what it was supposed to do (printing 5 top layers when 5 top layers were specified), I wouldn't have posted this. I know this forum receives posts from people with a wide range of 3D printing expertise, but we shouldn't just assume that everyone is new and confused. I do appreciate both of you for taking the time to respond.

If you take into consideration that I'm talking about setting the top thickness in mm, then, yes, that is pretty much what I said. For example, if I have my top thickness set to 1 mm and adaptive layers are calculated to use something like .07 mm for those layers, I need to double (at least) my top thickness setting (therefore, something like 2 mm) to get an acceptable top surface. I'm not sure why anyone would set their top/bottom thickness in layers instead of mm...

C'mon, guys, give me some credit here... I set it by mm. If I set it by layers, I wouldn't be posting this.

Yes, that's pretty much what I said. But that's not the way it should be. Adaptive layers shouldn't be completely ignoring the top thickness setting.

In such cases, I've had to multiply my top thickness setting by 2 or 3 to get acceptable top surfaces.