Jump to content
Ultimaker Community of 3D Printing Experts

Where is the fill orientation defined in the code?


aviphysics

Recommended Posts

Posted · Where is the fill orientation defined in the code?

The code for generating fill has a rotation parameter, but I am having some trouble finding the code that calls the fill routines and therefore sets the rotation parameter. Would someone please point me in the right direction?

What I would like to do is try randomizing the grid rotation at every layer and see what that is like. I think it would not be as strong, but might help provide support with less clearly visible artifacts (e.g. my objects printed with support in translucent filament currently look like they are wearing pinstripe suits.)

Would also like to try randomizing the translation of the grid, but that looks like more work, cause there isn't an existing parameter for that.

 

  • Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted · Where is the fill orientation defined in the code?

    generateLineInfill is called in fffProcessor.cpp on several lines.

    The problem is, however, with the order of the perimeters vs the infill. When the infill is printed first, lines may appear on the surface. In the new cura the order will be configurable.

    Randomizing the grid seems like a bad idea. Most probably the inside of your print will then just contain angel fluff.

     

  • Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted · Where is the fill orientation defined in the code?

    generateLineInfill is called in fffProcessor.cpp on several lines.

    The problem is, however, with the order of the perimeters vs the infill. When the infill is printed first, lines may appear on the surface. In the new cura the order will be configurable.

    Randomizing the grid seems like a bad idea. Most probably the inside of your print will then just contain angel fluff.

     

    Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.

    Regarding the artifacts, I don't actually see an issue when using opaque plastics. I do however normally use at least 2 or three boundary layers, which might explain that.

    Regarding the quality of the fill, this is what I was thinking.

    1) When I have printed with 0% infill, but left combing on, the combing strings do a pretty good job bridging gaps a wide as 25 mm.

    2) Generally, when I do use infill, I use about 10% to 15%, where the longest gap in the grid is substantially less than 25 mm, so the layer above it should be able to bridge that pretty easily.

    3) Normally, the main reason I use infill is to support a flat surface at the top of the print. For this purpose, the infill just has to be strong enough to support the layer above it.

    I do however think that randomizing layer rotation would only be useful for sparse infill. Unfortunately, that decision is made further down in the code. Just makes it a little extra work, if one wants to make that decision a configurable option.

     

  • Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Archived

    This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

    ×
    ×
    • Create New...