[ADDED] Honeycomb infill

[jimc]

isnt it alot faster to print it every other layer but have the extrusion volume double. you still get the solid infill you wanted in 1/2 the time.

[littlecat]

I just want to add another vote to this feature request.

Honeycomb infill is sweet, especially when using translucent filaments that allow you to see the profile through the walls.

I am super annoyed with MakerBot for all sorts of reasons (like that they have the nerve to ask for $100 for the privilege of opening a support ticket about a bug in their software - literally, they are calling it "pay per incident," and trying to charge me $100 to file a bug report, which is so insulting I have decided to boycott them completely), but one thing I am sorry to leave behind is their hex infill system, which I still believe is the best out of all the slicers I've played around with (Slic3r, Cura, KISS, and now S3D). Their alternating-layer hex algorithm is both fast & classy... unlike pretty much everything else about MB desktop at this point. If S3D can match it, I'll never look back.

They definitely know about the request, but this one takes a long time to implement. I have talked with people about it when they attend maker faire and there is a LOT of coding involved.

JoeJ, I'm curious as to what's so complicated about the implementation - to my naive brain it doesn't seem like it ought to be so crazy to code - are you familiar with the specifics?

This is my first post, BTW. Happy to be here, and looking forward to some epic builds.

[3Drasle]

isnt it alot faster to print it every other layer but have the extrusion volume double. you still get the solid infill you wanted in 1/2 the time.

Not all extruders can handle the extra needed flow at high speed.
And there could build up unwanted pressure in the the extruder, leaving blobs at start on the next layer.

I think it would be very simple for the team to implement full infill print on every layer, just to let us try it out.

[JoeJ]

@littlecat - that gave me a good chuckle I do a bit of programming myself, and you wouldn't believe how often people ask for a new feature to be added which seems easy from the outside, but in reality would require months of work. Unless you actually know the inner workings of the program, you really can't guess how long it would take. But in this case, you're asking them to completely re-do a lot of the inner workings of the application that previously only had to support one style of infill. It is a BIG challenge, and from my talks with them, it requires a LOT of work to accomplish. This isn't to say they aren't working on it, but you should know it is not an easy thing to add.

@3Drasle - that could definitely be an easier option. Have you tried printing a part using that method before? I guess I would be concerned about the crossing points and how that would affect the extrusion right after it. Seems like you might get gaps (at least more than I see with the 200% infill width). This would likely also be MUCH easier for them to program.

[3Drasle]

@3Drasle - that could definitely be an easier option. Have you tried printing a part using that method before? I guess I would be concerned about the crossing points and how that would affect the extrusion right after it. Seems like you might get gaps (at least more than I see with the 200% infill width). This would likely also be MUCH easier for them to program.

CURA use it, take a look at this thread: http://forum.simplify3d.com/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=1560

[BaronWilliams]

They definitely know about the request, but this one takes a long time to implement. I have talked with people about it when they attend maker faire and there is a LOT of coding involved.

Not easy for sure. With a pattern, the infill logic is much more complex than with the straight lines currently used in Simplify3D. With a straight line you are only concerned about what's in front of the line as you lay down the line. If there's a wall, then you trace the outline of the wall a bit then go back making a new straight line in the opposite direction. With a hex shape, you need to turn left, right, etc., maintain all the turns in the correct position, and all the while looking out for the walls, then when you need to route around a wall, you're not simply tracing the wall and then going back with a straight line, you need to trace the wall and then continue your pattern in the opposite direction, picking the correct part of the pattern to restart from. There's a bit more to it than just that. All in all, it's much more complicated than straight line infill, that's for sure. But once you have the logic working for patterns, it's a relatively small step to go from one pattern to the next, if you code it in a flexible way.

I hope the Simplify3D engineers opt for custom infill patterns rather than just making honeycomb. I really don't like just going for honeycomb. It's just a bit more work I believe to make the infill system work with custom infill patterns rather than make it specific to honeycomb-like patterns. They could maybe have a preset custom pattern for the typical "honeycomb" infill (which is not a real honeycomb) since that's what most people want.

I would rather design my own infill patterns, and have Simplify3D use my patterns. I think that will set Simplify3D apart from the competition. If you like the hidden shark infill of MakerBot, you could make your own shark pattern. If you are like me and know how to make honeycomb style infill stronger than the typical fake "honeycomb" most slicers support, then you could do that too.

Honeycomb infill will please a lot of users. Custom infill with a custom honeycomb preset will please everyone. If a pattern you like isn't there, add it yourself!

[Ola]

Triangular infill for strength would be good - or does that already exist in S3d?

[Bassna]

They definitely know about the request, but this one takes a long time to implement. I have talked with people about it when they attend maker faire and there is a LOT of coding involved.

Not easy for sure. With a pattern, the infill logic is much more complex than with the straight lines currently used in Simplify3D. With a straight line you are only concerned about what's in front of the line as you lay down the line. If there's a wall, then you trace the outline of the wall a bit then go back making a new straight line in the opposite direction. With a hex shape, you need to turn left, right, etc., maintain all the turns in the correct position, and all the while looking out for the walls, then when you need to route around a wall, you're not simply tracing the wall and then going back with a straight line, you need to trace the wall and then continue your pattern in the opposite direction, picking the correct part of the pattern to restart from. There's a bit more to it than just that. All in all, it's much more complicated than straight line infill, that's for sure. But once you have the logic working for patterns, it's a relatively small step to go from one pattern to the next, if you code it in a flexible way.

I hope the Simplify3D engineers opt for custom infill patterns rather than just making honeycomb. I really don't like just going for honeycomb. It's just a bit more work I believe to make the infill system work with custom infill patterns rather than make it specific to honeycomb-like patterns. They could maybe have a preset custom pattern for the typical "honeycomb" infill (which is not a real honeycomb) since that's what most people want.

I would rather design my own infill patterns, and have Simplify3D use my patterns. I think that will set Simplify3D apart from the competition. If you like the hidden shark infill of MakerBot, you could make your own shark pattern. If you are like me and know how to make honeycomb style infill stronger than the typical fake "honeycomb" most slicers support, then you could do that too.

Honeycomb infill will please a lot of users. Custom infill with a custom honeycomb preset will please everyone. If a pattern you like isn't there, add it yourself!

As much as every one of us would really like the Honeycomb infill option, I hope they see your post. That would really set them apart and make every one of us happy about the $$ we spent, I'm sure.

[Vol]

+1. I would very much like to see different infill options that you can choose depending on wether you want to optimise speed (what s3D currently has) or strength (honeycomb).

I cant even use this software for half my parts without this functionality. It makes a huge difference.

[SpragClutch]

I would like to add to this request. If I want to make a model, S3D does a good job at it. If I want to build something that can be used as a strong part, S3D does this poorly. The current infill extrusion width and overlap adjustments works ok for small parts, but as soon as you have a part that has a large infill space, even with 200%-300% extrusion width you get a infill that has no structural use at all. And on top of that, when you are using such an extreme extrusion width, you have to increase temp, or slow down the print speed, because the extruder just cant put out that much plastic and do it fast. There is a huge difference between a layer on layer honeycomb infill part with 10% infill, and a 30 -60% S3D infill part. If you don't believe me, print a 4" by 4" cube with both of the settings. And see which one will crinkle and crack and give.

S3D Infill options is very poor if your trying to make strong parts. For plastic models that look good on the outside, Yaa! S3D works good.