V5 Features requests

[nerys]

Please work on Vase mode a little. multi process vase mode is "iffy" at times. it always "finishes" the one vase section and then starts a new vase section creating an obvious visual artifact at this junction instead of just transitioning to the new vase mode. maybe this is not possible because of how vase mode os calculated and plotted? Not sure. definitely please fix where it sometimes adds an actual "airgap" when you go from vase to non vase to vase etc.. would also like to see an option to "fix" vase mode. sometimes a model will have a wee tiny part that is slightly out of place to permit vase mode and simplify will revert to adding a retraction and travel point here. instead I would like to see it "simplify" (pun not intended) the motion between those points and "patch" the area to permit vase mode to work properly.

I would also like to see options to control model resolution and deviation (Cura has this) this is not an Simplify problem its a PRINTER problem. some printers have limited processors and if you feed them too many commands per second they "stall" and stutter for just a moment at that point resulting in a lovely little sit. being able to simplify the model resolution and control deviation will allow us to compensate in simplify3D to make better slices for these slower/more limited machines.

I would also like to see variable SPEED for vase mode. vase mode ignores the slow down if layer under x seconds command option (makes sense technically there is no layers) I would like to see it somehow honor this specification. the issue I have is when I print something with massively differing length per revolution bad things can happen. for example printing a nose come where it starts off fat at the bottom an comes to a POINT at the top. normally the printer would just slow its speed down as it got to the smaller and smaller cross sections of the slice but in VASE MODE this does not occur. the result is it goes WAY to fast as the cross section get smaller and smaller resulting in over heating of the plastic (not enough time to cool before its laying down more on top) right now the only fix is to slow the printer down manually on the hardware itself.

the only way to do this in simplify is with multi process but then you introduce the issue of it creating discrete "vase sections" with the artifact that comes along with that. a solution to this would be wonderful! right now all I can do is sit their and do it manually OR make the whole print as slow as the slowest speed I need only for the last 3% of the nose cone. so a 30 minute print now takes 1.5 hours :-) grrr :-)

Add an "add solid layer" option in slice preview. IE I want to preview to X layer in the slice preview and "click" add solid layer right at that point and have it do it. that would be so wonderful!!

Enable PREVIEW of my "process breaks" when working the model. when I click variable processes I select my points and I get a red virtual "plane" that shows me where each layer break is. once you leave this you can never see it again. I need to see this "WHILE" working on the model and ALSO in the slice preview would be handy as well. (and let me edit it directly more directly??)

PLEASE fix is so when I command the slicer to print a top or bottom layer it actually prints a top or bottom layer. there are times where I need these and it summarily ignores my instructions and refuses to print them. then I have to use the silly work around of "include solid layer" under infill but this only works ONE SINGLE TIME If I have to add more than 1 I can't unless I make multiple processes so I can have a "new" include solid layer option. very very annoying.

Walls on top of infill and "solid layers" on top of infill are broken. (no. the solution is almost never add more infill)

when it prints the solid layers first it does the layer first before the wall. that is just nuts since the layer now has nothing on X and Y to stick to. it just stops in empty space to end and start a line. combine this with it NOT stopping on top of an "infill line" and you end up with the ends of a layer in "mid air" so of course they warp and dangle. I sometimes have to add extra layers so that it "builds up" the layer over time going further out each time before it covers the area fully. while this fixes the cosmetic issue (at a waste of mass allotment and filament) it does NOT fix the structure integrity issues!! the part is "weaker" at this interface layer.

either print an entire solid layer at these interface points OR extend the "top/bottom" layer on X and Y such that it crosses over an "infill line" outside of the X Y area of the wall its about to lay down such that the wall HAS something to attach to and in the correct designated shape. to see what I mean design I have attached a demo file (factory STL and jpg) to demonstrate this slice flaw (yes I know its done intentionally. still a flaw just not a bug)

I INSTRUCTED the slicer not to do this. but it did it anyway. even if I place TWO objects in this configuration with seperate processes it still ignores my top bottom layer commands at the interface layer.

any solution to this currently requires me to waste mass allotment and or material to "overcome" the issue. (except on this the include solid layer under infill WOULD fix this!!!) but this solution has heavy annoying restrictions (and is sometimes ignored anyway) The only actual working solution is a REAL pain to impliment. I have to greatly 3 or 4 processes "leading up to" the interface layer and slowly increase infill percentage so I have dense infill by the time I get to the interface layer. in a model like I posted this is easy. in a model with 50 of these. forget it. not doing it. would literally take HOURS of editing processes !!!

in the picture is the first interface layer between the cub and the cylinder. this layer needs to be solid not open. as you can see a huge number of those layer lines have simply nothing to attach to at their end. the infill that is "curved" on the edges will also lack anything to attach to since the partial solid layer won't be their. it will have warped/curled away since it was printed in open space.

even 25% infill won't fully fix this and it would be stupid to use 25% infill on such an object. its just not needed except to overcome this slice flaw.

solution is to honor top and bottom layers (I used to retain an older version of S3D because it honored the instructions given to it in this regard using processes but you have since broken that work around and now it ignores instructions across processes as well.) and I use vase mode too much to keep using the older version which has vase mode bugs that you have since fixed (thank you btw works much better)

OR to print the fill "intelligently" ie each of those yellow lines for the top/bottom layers needs to be "extended" until they "touch something" so they will STAY where they are printed. this would not only save material but do so without compromising structure integrity.

I would also like to see a way to "alter" a factory file to change printers WITHOUT changing any of the settings at all except for "build volume" right now when I change printers it messes up all the settings. only work around is to "change" the build volume of whatever machine I am working on now. maybe have a drop down under the gcode screen machine definitions where I can select a different printer and only change that part leaving all my other settings as they are. (I don't change slicer settings machine to machine. slicer settings are for "what" you are printing not what you are printing on. very little usually has to change machine to machine build volume nozzle size heat bed or not if present etc.. but most other settings are model specific not printer specific.

would love a superior way to make "simple edits" to a model. I can edit Z simply by dropping the model into the build plate and limiting the end point with the start and stop at options.

but there is no way to do this on X and Y. sometimes you just need to get rid of a little piece of a model you don't need. slic3r lets me do this (and export the cut stl) its not very good it really grinds on larger complex files but it works. a way to do this in S3D would be nice!!

also a way to change settings in X and Y would be sooo amazing.

sometimes I am printing a model that in layer view has many islands and I want infill on this part but don't need infill on that part. there is no way to do this at all in S3D except with process and only if the model already broken apart so each process is a different "piece" of the model. no way to do this dynamically so a homogeneous model.

a way to adjust the "gap" for brims would be nice. sometimes I need to print over extruded for a nice thick strong wall but the brim is so solid its very hard to remove cleanly. so a way to adjust brim gap like we can supper layer interface gap would be nice.

Please add more infill types. structurally I use either NONE of grid both ways. nothing else. but when making decorative models especially with transparent filaments more infill types would be wonderful!!

update simplify3d print time prediction engine. its for the most part not remotely close to reality. some prints taking "TWICE" as long as predicted (though usually its about 20% off)

I SUSPECT (not sure on this) it has to do with jerk and acceleration. I think S3D is making "assumptions" for jerk and acc and since mine are different the time is not remotely close. (I manually define jerk and acc in start script with M204 and M205 commands) and some printers have "maxes" built into firmware that it won't exceed even if you specify something different)

it would be nice is S3D looked at the start script and took those values into account when it makes its slice prediction so we can have more accurate predictions on print time. also a place to ender "max values" (determined by firmware settings not slicer settings) as part of a printer profile.

A way to visually sequential printing. does it already have this and I am just missing it??

IE I can define the measurement structure of my printer such as volume around print nozzle. distance from nozzle top to bed heat block shroud. cooling fan and duct. x axis. etc.. etc.. so that I can SEE in the slicer. ok these 2 parts are too close as the print head is going to bump into it when it tries to make the second part. but these parts are shorter than the X arm so I can put more of them closer together.

These parts are shorter than the nozzle so I can put them almost next to each other etc.. and "visualize" this in the slicer and have it give me collision warnings.

this would require a lot of input from the user (though you could also build this into profiles for stock unmodified machines)

[nerys]

Another feature I would like to see. if its already their I have not found it yet.

Auto split processes! if I put 20 objects on the bed and create a process I want to then have simplify 3d copy that profile 19 more times and assign each to 1 object each. instead of me having to manually do it 19 times.

then I can set it to print 5mm of each one before moving onto the next. the less often I switch from process to process the better the print will be.

would be a nice feature.

[nerys]

I Would like to see a way to EXPAND processes (one of the single most powerful features of S3D)

what I am doing right now is an example. I am printing 35 of the same object but I am "stacking" them vertically with a 0.4mm gap between each one.

think of it like sequential printing but Vertically (yes its as much a pain in the ass as you might think and yes its as freaking cool as you might think when it works :-)

SO I have to duplicate the object 35 times. then align origins so they are all in the same space at the same time then move then X amount on Z

FIrst a way to automate this would be amazing. IE say stack these with x gap between each and have it do it for me

Second. I now have to create a process. duplicate that process 35 times and uggghhhhhh EDIT each of those individually to assign each one to a single file.

a way to AUTOMATE this would be amazing. maybe 1 process 1 file "DUPLICATE BOTH" together and keep and migrate the associations. ??

There is a few "bugs" in the code here to but I will add that to a bug post.