Jump to content

BustedChain

Member
  • Posts

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by BustedChain

  1. On 1/5/2019 at 4:23 PM, tinkergnome said:

    Basically it should be possible to use the same start script as before, but the names of the settings / replacement patterns have changed.

     

    You will probably need:

     

    {material_bed_temperature_layer_0}

    {material_print_temperature_layer_0}

    {speed_travel_layer_0}

     

    If you're interested:

    @ahoeben compiled a list of all possible variables a while ago: Settings and replacement patterns

     

     

    Is it possible to do math in the {} ?   I notice there is width and depth of the print area, but that would be much more useful if I could somehow reference the center of the bed {machine_width/2} or {machine_depth/2}....  or if they would just add a reference for the {machine_width_center} {machine_depth_center}

    • Like 1
  2. On 5/6/2020 at 12:38 AM, burtoogle said:

     

    UM are working on their own solution which should see the light of day soon...

     

    Soon in Cura time, could still take a while. 

     

    I've been using the solution posted above and am very impressed with it over the last month.  I've been able to make some really strong / flexible frames that are very well laminated together with minimal surface finish problems in PETG using the version above.

     

     I hope that whatever the final solution is, that they use terminology which overlaps with the terminology of adaptive layer height.     I think Adaptive Line Width is a very easy to visualize thing, even if the inputs are a little bit different because of how they choose to allow the slicer to pick the variations. 

     

    Ultimately, I'd love it if I could tell the slicer a desired line width, a minimum line width, and a maximum line width.  (It would be nice if I could just tell the slicer my nozzle size and then I could tell it that I want line widths that are anywhere from 80% to 150% of my nozzle width with a desired line width.)   The idea is that the slicer ought to be able to pick a line width that decreases the gaps and improves the number of lines / lay of the lines on any given layer.   There would be room for advanced options that try to maintain an overall outer wall (or specified number of walls) line width that is uniform as you move through z layers.  Say for example you want 2 outer walls to have uniform line width on the outer shell, but any other walls can be varied up or down to the best fit within limits.

     

     

  3. On 9/27/2019 at 12:30 AM, burtoogle said:

     

    I'm glad to have helped. My implementation appears to work well a lot of the time but I still regard it as "experimental" and I haven't yet submitted it to UM for consideration. I don't know what Ultimaker's plans are with regard to improving their thin wall and gap filling implementation. Maybe they would look at what I have done or perhaps they would do something else completely new.

     

    I'd really like to see this implemented in the Cura.  I'll give yours a try, but man this is such a powerful feature to let the inner wall widths change and taper off as needed.   I'm planning on giving yours a try, but please submit it to Ultimaker when you are comfortable with it because I'd really like to see this.

     

    I really love the adaptive layer heights, this would really go well with that.

×
×
  • Create New...