Support/Object Base Additional XY Distance #2619
Conversation
…s layers while maintaining base xy distance
|
@lovelytwo |
| @@ -729,6 +729,7 @@ PRINT_CONFIG_CLASS_DEFINE( | |||
| // Overhang angle threshold. | |||
| ((ConfigOptionInt, support_threshold_angle)) | |||
| ((ConfigOptionFloat, support_object_xy_distance)) | |||
| ((ConfigOptionFloat, support_object_base_additional_xy_distance)) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It would be better to define it as parameter: support_object_top_interface_xy_distance
So top contacts us this parameter while other support layers use support_object_xy_distance
| @@ -3274,7 +3275,8 @@ void PrintObjectSupportMaterial::generate_base_layers( | |||
| ++ iRun; | |||
| #endif /* SLIC3R_DEBUG */ | |||
|
|
|||
| this->trim_support_layers_by_object(object, intermediate_layers, m_slicing_params.gap_support_object, m_slicing_params.gap_object_support, m_support_params.gap_xy); | |||
| this->trim_support_layers_by_object(object, intermediate_layers, m_slicing_params.gap_support_object, m_slicing_params.gap_object_support, m_support_params.gap_xy + m_support_params.base_additional_gap_xy); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does it work for normal support only? Or it affects tree/organic support too?
|
Sorry for the long delay, christmas holidays. I will have a look at the comments and suggested changes. |
Thank you very much. |
|
Seems this PR has gone stale. |
This pr, adds a new support option that allows for the base material between interface layers to have a greater xy offset than the xy offset used for interface layers.
This solves a problem I have with printing sloped overhangs that have low gradients. In this case the support/object xy distance pushes the support interface layer away futher than the top z distance.
Ideally in this case i want a small support/object xy distance, however this causes problems with the base support material getting too close the object.
So i've added a simple fix that allows you to specify an additional base support material offset.
Interface layers are printed with "support/object xy distance".
Base support layers are printed with "support/object xy distance" + "support/object base additional xy distance".
I think this implementation is far from ideal, and is more of quick hack.
Additional this will allow zero/small support/object xy distances when using a support filament for interface only, and preventing the base from getting too close (this might be handled differently already as i haven't tested support filaments but i have seen others request the following Cura option, so i assume it's a problem).
Cura has a support distance priority option, that would probably be better but i have zero clue how to implement that.
Any feed back is greately appreciated.