Unwanted solid infill surface in the middle of part #1054
Comments
eowindel
changed the title
Version1.42.0 alpha5 MacOS 10.13.6 Same problem occurring for me. It works fine with 2 or more perimeters but with a single perimeter I am getting a lot of unwanted solid infill added in between the infill. With ensure vertical wall thickness enabled I am actually getting less of this solid infill noise then when enabled. |
|
please provide screenshots and a 3mf file as requested in the issue entry
form.
…On Sat, Feb 9, 2019, 04:55 Anima1000000 ***@***.*** wrote:
Version
1.42.0 alpha5 MacOS 10.13.6
Same problem occurring for me. It works fine with 2 or more perimeters but
with a single perimeter I am getting a lot of unwanted solid infill added
in between the infill.
With ensure vertical wall thickness enabled I am actually getting less of
this solid infill noise then when enabled.
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1054 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFj5I5ZAVp33SBrnMNyxYHa1O5eXvArAks5vLka2gaJpZM4VSNyW>
.
|
|
Thanks for looking into this. Notice that with 2 perimeters this issue doesn't occur. |
Probably because the second perimeter remove the top surface. No top surface -> no solid surface below. |
|
Hi Merill, have you had the chance to look at the file? These solid infills are throughout the entire object not just under the top layer. With two perimeters it doesn't remove the toplayer. Setting the top layers to 0 doesn't remove these solid infill artefacts. However disabling both top and bottom layers does fix it. Any idea what might be causing this or is this infill intented for 1 perimeter? If so any chance to disable it? |
|
see #668 |
|
I tried your build, it's has some really nice options. Would be nice to have a MacOS build aswell. However I have the same problem there, I have tried all the options. I think it sees cavities inside the object as top and bottom surfaces, that must cause the unwanted infill. |
|
Found a workaround by using infill modifiers. |
|
Adding to this issue with another example. This causes a lot of time and material waste. VersionPrusaSlicer-2.0.0+win64-201905201652 Operating system type + versionWindows 10 Pro 10.0.17134 3D printer brand / version + firmware version (if known)Original Prusa i3 mk3 BehaviorPrusaSlicer will put seemingly needless solid infill and top solid infill in the middle of prints. This causes significant increases in printing time and material usage (Cura prints the same model with the same speed settings in nearly half the time). This is not a new feature request. Attached is model, project, and config ini. The problem is most evident starting at layer 74 on up. You will see the seemingly random parts of top solid infill (and some bridge infill). This project takes 6 hours 52 minutes in PrusaSlicer, but in Cura it takes less than 4 hours when using the same speed settings. The biggest difference is that Cura doesn't slice in all of the extra infill.
Project File (.3MF) where problem occurs |
|
Is this getting fixed? I see this rampantly in 2.1 |
|
I found a fix, just turn off "Ensure vertical shell thickness" in the Print settings tab, under Layer and Perimeter |
|
@ftheriachab no, it's not. prusaslicer increase the area of solid infill to ensure it's going well over perimeters, and this setting isn't exposed. "Ensure vertical shell thickness" is an other thing that also add some solid area, but it's not on the same scale nor in the same areas. |
|
Is there any update to this? There has to be someway to disable this "feature" other than limiting either top or bottom layers to 0. This is the only slicer I've seen do this and it's very annoying for certain prints. |
|
Same issue here. Very annoying |
|
I am also encountering this issue a lot! Would be very nice to have it fixed in the next update! |
|
I've been looking to move over from Simplify3D but the second model I sliced this issue popped up. I'm disappointed to see that google searches show that it seems to be a bug that's been around for years, has been reported numerous times and hasn't been addressed. For the print I was testing, with equivalent settings on Simplify3D the print time is around 40 minutes, but using the current PrusaSlicer release (2.2.0), I'm looking at over an hour and almost 25% higher material usage. The model is the well known "Aria the Dragon" at 50% scale, 15% infill, 3 top/bottom. Looks like this on the outside: Other than this, PrusaSlicer looks like the future, but this is currently a deal-breaker. |
|
Not sure if this will help all of your specific use cases, but if you decrease the number of top/bottom solid layers, you will have less of this, or none at all. I came to this thread with a similar issue, and doing that fixed mine, best of luck with yours! |
|
This is how I mainly use modifiers. I set the overall top/bottom layers to 0 or 1 and modify the top and bottom to the number I actually want. Ridiculous. |
|
Hi Guys, So I found the solution :) I'm currently using PrusaSlicer 2.2.0 So here is a before & after Layer & Perimeters setting before Layer & Perimeters Settings After Not sure why this worked. So the trick is: the Top & Bottom Solid layers need to match. Hope this helps you guys. Thank You |
|
Hi guys Was struggling with this too, especially on small objects. Found a solution! The setting that forces this on small objects (and large ones with small surfaces) is Solid infill threshold area, set to 0 to disable. |
|
@Jannes351 Only just got the chance to look at this, but changing this value seems to have resolved my issue. Thanks! 👍 |
|
This option is disabled by default and it still generates those solid infills for even with it disabled. Setting top/bottom layers also seems to have no effect. Have tried everything now and still can't get rid of those solid infills. I noticed it gets much worse after lowering perimeters to 1. |
|
It's crazy this bug has been around for years, and has such a big effect. I print at lower layer heights just to avoid it, or use modifier meshes in the middle of the part to lower top/bottom layers to 1 or 0 where there are no real top or bottom surfaces. The best reason not to use (prusa)slic3r (but (prusa)slic3r is still way better than the competition). I want to learn to code well enough to fix it. |
|
Same problem here, i´ve tried everything to get rid of it. |
|
I just noticed this problem with a print I'm doing.. 0% fill density, yet I get solid infill in the slicing:
|
|
The most likely: That's because there isn't enough perimeters to have at least bottom_solid_layers at these spots, so it has to add more plastic. |
|
How can this still be an issue after so many years? I guess that when you set top / bottom layers, you intend to only adjust the top and bottom layers, not every single layer with angles through the model. The suggestion above with a modifier box to select the whole model expect the top and bottom, and then set top/bottom to 0 layers do actually help. But that just seems wrong that we have to do that in every model with angles.. Please fix it Prusa team |
|
Looks like we missed commenting on this in July. I got the August comment covered... |
|
my current fix for this issue: |
|
Anyone knows to report that is this still a problem on 2.4.x releases? or they solved it once and for all?(option) thanks. |
|
For me this is still unsolved. I switched to SuperSlicer because @supermerill solved it there 👍 |
|
Vertical Shell Thickness on or off makes no difference. I am using SuperSlicer instead which doesn't have this problem. |
|
I still think why PrusaSlicer have not still given option for this or at least give selectable backend engines to slice like CuraEngine which really shines in geometry and structural beauty generation, but UI itself is ultra slow and uses massive bloated UI programming language. |
|
We plan to work on it for PrusaSlicer 2.5, it is high on our list. Unfortunately it did not make it to PrusaSlicer 2.4. |
as of today, PS 2.5 alpha2 is out, but I don't see anything related to this issue in the changelog |
|
It is on our radar, but it did not make it into PrusaSlicer 2.5.0. |
|
Alternative would be add support for seletable CuraEngine backend like i told in 2021. If not possible then it is sad, very sad. |
|
That problem is really annoying for some prints. A fix would be greatly appreciated, since prusaslicer is really good besides that probmem. |
|
This is still an issue in 2.5, none of the workarounds work - at least not if you use one perimeter. It adds a lot of extra plastic and time to prints. @supermerill fixed this in a while ago, can it be ported over? |
|
CuraEngine would be solution if it cannot be fixed. Seems that even in 2023-2024 this thread still might be open. |
|
The problem is not easy to fix. There are two algorithms at play. Both of them kinda do the same thing. If you choose "Ensure vertical shell thickness" it does one algorithm, if you unselected it chooses another. The problem is, you can't just disable both algorithms. One of them is required to run to sufficiently prepare the file for printing. Prusa research did not, AFAIK, code it this way. Their additions tend to be much more discrete. These legacy implementations are very intertwined with the rest of the process. While it might be tempting to just go and rip them out, and then solve the problems as they come -- that can lead to immense unforeseen consequences and end up taking more time than would be taken careful planning an entirely new algorithm. Whack-a-mole-in-production is probably not a game Prusa is looking to spend more time playing. So... while, yeah, it sucks that it's still like this... I've seen the code. I've played with it a lot. It's NOT a simple task to remove. I see that merill has a fix for it. I haven't tried it, but it seems like it could work as a short-term fix. But, it's really just a quick hack to remove things that shouldn't be generated in the first place (if one wishes them to not be generated). |
|
@n8bot I haven't looked at the code but @supermerill already fixed this in the SuperSlicer fork of PrusaSlicer. Perhaps that code can be ported or he can explain how he did it. |
|
Yes I do see that now. It does seem like a decent workaround until the underlying problem is fixed. |
|
Hello. The title of this issue, created by @dehmlowm describes my issue better. But it seems all roads lead here.. PrusaSlicer tends to create these small squiggly paths that cause excessive vibration while printing on my Ender 3. I've tried this at various speeds and I don't typically deviate from the stock settings too much. This often results in layer shift for me.
@tommck's settings above seem to increase the size of the squiggles which I assume will (hopefully) reduces the mechanical vibration. But I have yet to try it. Does anyone have any advice specifically for reducing the vibration? |
|
I had the same issue, I did all of the suggestions and nothing fixed the problem. The problem ended up being on the original CAD model/object (I used Plasticity). I lofted several objects, but noticed that the print messed up exactly on this particular lofted object. The only difference between this lofted object and the other ones, was that I didn't add thickness to it because I didn't have to. So I just added thickness (even though I didn't have to), exported the model/object again to PrusaSlicer again as an object, clicked Slice and walah ! That fixed the problem ! Every time I sliced the model/object, PrusaSlicer would create a whole layer out of nowhere that would cover a huge opening. This layer would also prevent upper layers from sticking to the bottom model/object. So when I added the thickness to the lofted object, it probably converted it maybe from a 2D to 3D layer, eliminating the invisible to our eyes section of the layer that PrusaSlicer could detect. I hope you guys and gals are able to solve your problems, God bless ! |
|
"Ensure vertical shell thickness" option is restored in 2.9.0-alpha1 and hopefully configurable enough to cover all use cases. Closing. |
and others
Version
1.40.1+w64
Operating system type + version
W10 64bits
Behavior
Slic3r add solid unwanted infill in the print. The unsure vertical wall thickness is uncheck.
For exemple S3D on the left (what i want) and slic3r on the right. I tried also is Cura without problems.
Other one with a larger print
STL/Config (.ZIP) where problem occurs
STL-config.zip
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: