We Need A Better Slicer !
GeraldTrost last edited by unlimitedbacon
I have not yet tried matterControl but I will try it.
First of all - why is there a new slicer ?
My personal answer:
I hope that MatterControl will evolve in a direction that satisfies our needs.
I try to explain what today's slicers are missing - what they cannot do so far:
Suppose I print a house with an overhang balcony.
At the time the slicer reaches the lowest balcony layer then he
will generate shell only because the lowest balcony layers
consists of shell only without infill.
Now all of today's slicers will generate a pathway for the
shell layer from OUTSIDE-IN
HOW STUPID IS THIS ???
THE FILAMENT WILL SIMPLY FALL DOWN !!!
There must be better solutions to this - lets say - start
in the middle of the balcony as close as possible in the
proximity of the aready printed shell .... and then circle
around this starting point to fill up the overhang layer
(maybe also supply a "overhang shell level tweak" in
percentage for the slicer should asume the oberhang
to slightly sack down a bit ...)
This is building from INSIDE-OUT.
Does MatterControl have such "intelligent" overhang
building strategy ?
Now, please, let me propose an additional optional
improvement to the overhang shell issue:
In addition I propose to implement an "auto-chamfer angle for overhangs".
Let me explain:
Suppose the architect has designed a linear 30 degree support (slope)
stucture below the balcony's bottom and suppose I set the
"auto-chamfer angle for overhangs" to 35 degrees in the
In this case the slicer is advised to add tiny chamfer layers underneath
the balcony's support slope layers bacause the slope has less
angle then my settings suggest (30 degrees vs.35 degrees)
Okay - this suggestion always creates a lot of discussions
like "I want the object to be exactly the same as my model".
But we overcome such discussions simply by stating
"Dont Use It If You Dont Want It" - as Simple!
Or we can also state:
"Others would be glad to have this option because they print
machine parts where the additional chamfer does not matter"
IN OTHER SHORT WORDS:
My first suggestion is desirable in any case - whether the customer
uses support material or whether he uses support structure or not.
My second suggestion is desirable for those who dislike cura's support
structure and who dont have a free extruder for support material.
Please, sleep over these suggestions for some days and please,
let me know if you consider to implement the 2
improvemment requirements in future versions of MatterControl