UltiMaker uses functional, analytical and tracking cookies. Tracking cookies enhance your experience on our website and may also collect your personal data outside of Ultimaker websites. If you agree with the use of tracking cookies, click “I agree, continue browsing”. You can withdraw your consent at any time. If you do not consent with the use of tracking cookies, click “Refuse”. You can find more information about cookies on our Privacy and Cookie Policy page.
Multiple joined components in one STL generate shell walls between components
Posted
· Multiple joined components in one STL generate shell walls between components
It's not the slicer really. If you don't combine the parts, there will be a surface between the two objects. Since STL doesn't actually define what is inside or outside (it only defines surfaces) you get weird results like that.
I've taken a screenshot of the uncombined version of the file to show you what the issue is:
As you can see, there is a small gab between the two objects. This gap is caused by the tessalation (eg; It needs to create flat surfaces, so a round surface is approximated by multiple flat ones). This process will pretty much always introduce inaccuracies, which can lead to gaps like this.
The result that you see is basicly your slicer doing exactly what you ask it to do; There are two components and they are printed as two components.
Posted
· Multiple joined components in one STL generate shell walls between components
Thanks @nallath for your advice, I now understand what it's doing and the rationale behind it.
As much as I've got to like Cura's simplicity and ease of use (even in Expert mode which I am certainly not!), it's a shame it doesn't have similar capability as to what PrusaSlicer appears to do, that is, see both components (it calls them parts) in the single STL and when combined, slices them both as one.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
🚀 Help Shape the Future of Cura and Digital Factory – Join Our Power User Research Program!
We’re looking for active users of Cura and Digital Factory — across professional and educational use cases — to help us improve the next generation of our tools.
Our Power User Research Program kicks off with a quick 15-minute interview to learn about your setup and workflows. If selected, you’ll be invited into a small group of users who get early access to features and help us shape the future of 3D printing software.
🧪 What to Expect:
A short 15-minute kickoff interview to help us get to know you If selected, bi-monthly research sessions (15–30 minutes) where we’ll test features, review workflows, or gather feedback Occasional invites to try out early prototypes or vote on upcoming improvements
🎁 What You’ll Get:
Selected participants receive a free 1-year Studio or Classroom license Early access to new features and tools A direct voice in what we build next
👉 Interested? Please fill out this quick form
Your feedback helps us make Cura Cloud more powerful, more intuitive, and more aligned with how you actually print and manage your workflow.
Thanks for being part of the community,
The full stable release of Cura 5.10 has arrived, and it brings support for the new Ultimaker S8, as well as new materials and profiles for previously supported UltiMaker printers. Additionally, you can now control your models in Cura using a 3D SpaceMouse and more!
Recommended Posts
nallath 1,125
It's not the slicer really. If you don't combine the parts, there will be a surface between the two objects. Since STL doesn't actually define what is inside or outside (it only defines surfaces) you get weird results like that.
I've taken a screenshot of the uncombined version of the file to show you what the issue is:
As you can see, there is a small gab between the two objects. This gap is caused by the tessalation (eg; It needs to create flat surfaces, so a round surface is approximated by multiple flat ones). This process will pretty much always introduce inaccuracies, which can lead to gaps like this.
The result that you see is basicly your slicer doing exactly what you ask it to do; There are two components and they are printed as two components.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Aubs 0
Thanks @nallath for your advice, I now understand what it's doing and the rationale behind it.
As much as I've got to like Cura's simplicity and ease of use (even in Expert mode which I am certainly not!), it's a shame it doesn't have similar capability as to what PrusaSlicer appears to do, that is, see both components (it calls them parts) in the single STL and when combined, slices them both as one.
Link to post
Share on other sites