[FIXED] V4.1 Issues with walls

[dkightley]

If the Development team decide that nothing is going to be done to address this backward step, then there will need to be a workaround.

Lets try upping the number of perimeters to four so as to thicken up the surface:

It does thicken the vunverable areas.....but what the hell of a thing to do - all that extra material!

Let's try using the complicated features to try and resolve the issue. Split the process into three so the number of perimeters can be upped only in the areas where the "shell" is weak.:

Okay...it does strengthen the weak areas, but it looks messy....very messy. And why is there some spurious solid layers being dropped in? Perhaps I need to micro-adjust the split between the processes. OR PERHAPS NOT!

Going back to the question that was asked of me in the reply from Support. Do I have any suggestions as to how I would like the top layers to behave? Yes! Like they do in all versions up to and including v4.0.1

[dkightley]

My reply to Support:

Hi

Thank you for your acknowledgement of having received my email…however I have to admit to being really disappointed in your response.

My reply has been posted on the thread I highlighted in my original email. I’d prefer discussions relating to this to be in the public domain, As a single voice it would be easy for you to “fob me off” or ignore me altogether, but it would not be so easy to do so if matters were in public view on the forum.

The basic issue is that you’ve broken a basic feature of the slicer by making changes for one or more unspecified reasons. I cannot use v4.10. as it has a backward step in its basic operation.

Regards

Doug Kightley

[smeagollum]

Doug, thanks for voicing this, I'm hoping this can get some traction with S3D. However, given the history, I'm not very hopeful, at least not for a few months.

Instead of going back to the 4.0.1 behavior, perhaps S3D could have made a function so that it dynamically added more perimeters in problem areas like you indicated? Somewhat like your workaround suggestion, only automatically and without the side effects?

[dkightley]

What you say may be the sort of thing they're wanting ideas of.....but without knowing the background as to why these changes have been made, its difficult, if not impossible to be able to say anything productive other that "What the hell have you done to change the way things should work??"

[PhillipM]

A checkbox for it would be nice, there are some hollow, thin wall items I make where the new behaviour is much better for the object/print for me.

[dkightley]

Another part of this process improvement is what is described in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=11727&p=46003#p46003

Its looking more like a coding error and less like a process improvement!

[dkightley]

Thread bumped to stop it falling underneath all the "We've solved this issue" updates.

Also adding a cross-reference with this post: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=11734&p=46069#p46069

[S3D-Alex]

Hi Doug,

As PhillipM points out this feature was updated to help with cases similar to what he describes. The threads you mention that we have updated to claim the issue was solved are some of the cases where this now performs better. We have been collecting data from multiple sources to try and better this feature in upcoming releases. As always we appreciate your time and effort in documenting these issues and bringing them to our attention.

[mightyhigh]

I am having this issue as well with the statue models I print. When the arms of the models slope upward they used to print fine but with the new version they have all kinds of defects, presumable because of the missing bottom layers on the slope. I am a new buyer (was using my neighbours install before) and would like to know if I can still download the 4.01 version. The 4.1 version isn't working for the models I print.

[dkightley]

Just booting this report of broken functionality up above all of the "FIXED" thread updates so it doesn't continue to be ignored!