I agree. No one is using mm/min for 3D printing. All 3D printing documents I read have these measures given in mm/s. It's very inconvenient to use mm/min. I have to always convert from mm/s values to mm/min just to satisfy Simplify3D.
Please change this, or at least make mm/s values an option for us users who are using mm/s all the time with everything else.
-
BaronWilliams
- Posts: 184
- Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 8:30 pm
-
Lord Devil
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:37 am
Re: Speed - mm/minute? Why not mm/sec?
+1
First post and I 100% agree with the ability to have radio button or some other UI switching to select from mm/min to mm/sec. Please!!
First post and I 100% agree with the ability to have radio button or some other UI switching to select from mm/min to mm/sec. Please!!
-
BaronWilliams
- Posts: 184
- Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 8:30 pm
Re: Speed - mm/minute? Why not mm/sec?
I noticed that G-code uses feed rate values specified as mm/min. Simplify3D is using the G-code standard for feed rates. Why isn't everyone else?
Since all G-code uses mm/min, I find it strange that everyone is now using mm/sec to describe filament printing speeds. Pretty much all the filament manufacturers specify print speed as mm/sec. What gives? Who started this? Why have mm/min for G-code and mm/sec for filament specs? That's so inconsistent.
Since all G-code uses mm/min, I find it strange that everyone is now using mm/sec to describe filament printing speeds. Pretty much all the filament manufacturers specify print speed as mm/sec. What gives? Who started this? Why have mm/min for G-code and mm/sec for filament specs? That's so inconsistent.
-
Alex Borro
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 8:25 pm
Re: Speed - mm/minute? Why not mm/sec?
mm/min is inherited from CNC milling machines. The gcode interpreter of our 3D Printers uses mm/min just for backward compatibility; do not forget the first 3D printer prototypes came from modified CNC milling machines.
And now we have the following situation: The 3D printer firmwares cannot change to mm/s because the gcode generated by slicers are in mm/min, and in turn, the slicers cannot change to mm/s because 3D Printer firmwares reads mm/min.
The GCode is invisible to the user. Actually 90% of 3D printer users don't even know how to interpret a gcode line. So do not matter what language Slicers and Firmwares talk... The Human interface of Slicers must be as easy as possible. And for 3D printing that means mm/s.
Actually, ALL slicers I know (Cura, Slic3r, Kisslicer and Skeinforge) uses mm/s.. I don't know why Simplify 3D developers decided towards mm/min... it is awkward
.
Cheers.
Alex.
And now we have the following situation: The 3D printer firmwares cannot change to mm/s because the gcode generated by slicers are in mm/min, and in turn, the slicers cannot change to mm/s because 3D Printer firmwares reads mm/min.
The GCode is invisible to the user. Actually 90% of 3D printer users don't even know how to interpret a gcode line. So do not matter what language Slicers and Firmwares talk... The Human interface of Slicers must be as easy as possible. And for 3D printing that means mm/s.
Actually, ALL slicers I know (Cura, Slic3r, Kisslicer and Skeinforge) uses mm/s.. I don't know why Simplify 3D developers decided towards mm/min... it is awkward
.Cheers.
Alex.
-
BaronWilliams
- Posts: 184
- Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 8:30 pm
Re: Speed - mm/minute? Why not mm/sec?
I don't know Alex. I originally thought mm/sec was the "standard" until I started looking at the G-code and saw the history behind it (as you mentioned). Why did people suddenly start using mm/sec when all the machines have been using mm/min in the G-code? The mm/sec scheme is now so widespread that it almost appears to be THE standard, when in fact the standard on the machines is mm/min.
How is one measure more convenient than the other? If the machines are all using mm/min why aren't we all talking mm/min? How is mm/sec more convenient?
I could care less which system we are using. I just hate having to convert between the two.
Before I started using G-code, I thought that using mm/min was a hassle. Now that I started using G-code I can see that it's more convenient. I don't need to translate the mm/min settings of Simplify3D to the G-code values because they are the same. On other slicers I have to do this conversion.
So it's not convenient for G-code programmers to use mm/sec. I didn't know this until I started doing my own G-code programming.
Why did people switch to using mm/sec? For what reason did this happen? Is there some history behind it?
I would say that Simplify3D is correct, and all the other slicers are wrong in having mm/sec. Where's the reason for having mm/sec when the G-code uses mm/min?
Anyway, now we have two different systems to define the same exact thing. Because of G-code mm/min is not going away. What a mess.
How is one measure more convenient than the other? If the machines are all using mm/min why aren't we all talking mm/min? How is mm/sec more convenient?
I could care less which system we are using. I just hate having to convert between the two.
Before I started using G-code, I thought that using mm/min was a hassle. Now that I started using G-code I can see that it's more convenient. I don't need to translate the mm/min settings of Simplify3D to the G-code values because they are the same. On other slicers I have to do this conversion.
So it's not convenient for G-code programmers to use mm/sec. I didn't know this until I started doing my own G-code programming.
Why did people switch to using mm/sec? For what reason did this happen? Is there some history behind it?
I would say that Simplify3D is correct, and all the other slicers are wrong in having mm/sec. Where's the reason for having mm/sec when the G-code uses mm/min?
Anyway, now we have two different systems to define the same exact thing. Because of G-code mm/min is not going away. What a mess.
