Simplify3D User Forum

I've noticed that a lot of times, the outline and fill in does not always bond enough. This is an idea to fix that.

You can add a feature that will change the outline shell for every other layer. For example, if you set the standard outline layer count to 2 and the every other layer to 3 it will sandwich the fill in of the 2 layer with the 3 layer above and below it.

My suggestion is to be able to specify how many outline layers there should be for every other layer. If you want a stronger bond, you could set the normal outline shell = 2 and the every other outline shell = 4.

Obviously for the layer where the outline is 2 the fill in will go up to that outline layer, and the same for the layer where the outline is 4.
The fill in for the layer where the outline is 2 will be more than the fill in where the outline is 4.

000fffffff Layer 5
0fffffffffff Layer 4
000fffffff Layer 3
0ffffffffff Layer 2
000fffffff Layer 1

From the side it will look like this where O = Outline, f = fill-in.

Thanks for the idea! I've shared this concept with our development team. If you or anyone else has additional feedback for this type of solution for interlayer adhesion please reply here.

This is an interesting idea.
I am wondering if the infill that is being "sandwiched" between the 3 perimeter upper and lower layers would get more pushed into (horizontally) the 2 perimeters and try to show through the wall? Like we see sometimes with heavy infill and minimal perimeters where the infill can show through or create a pattern on the outer wall.

I do think it is a concept worth pursuing though. It would be like a hard core version of the infill overlap.

If the sandwiched layer is pushing through the wall you can always print an extra outer layer.

oooofffffff
oofffffffffff
oooofffffff
ooffffffffff
ooooffffff
oo
oo
oo

The main reason for this would be to get a much stronger bond between outer layers and infill. I've noticed specifically with PLA that the bond between outer layers and fill-in are the week points of the print.

This solution should address the problem.