Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Bug] calculate_solid_layer_count returns 1 more than expected #1692

torch-senouen opened this issue Jan 6, 2017 · 2 comments


None yet
2 participants
Copy link

commented Jan 6, 2017

What were you doing?

While debugging a different issue I noticed that in the terminal inputs to Cura the variable downSkinCount=3. I thought this was strange because in the Cura slicing profile I created I set the layer_height: 0.2 and solid_layer_thickness: 0.4. I checked the function "calculate_solid_layer_count" in OctoPrint/src/octoprint/plugins/cura/ by manual calculation.

What did you expect to happen?

I would expect that solid_layer_count=2 with the inputs layer_height: 0.2 and solid_layer_thickness: 0.4

What happened instead?

Since the function subtracts 0.0001 from layer_height before dividing solid_thickness by the total the answer becomes approximately 2.001. Then the function takes the ceiling of 2.001 which returns 3. There are two ways to change this to get the result I would expect: either change the ceiling to a floor or add 0.0001 to layer_height instead of subtracting.

Branch & Commit or Version of OctoPrint

Version: 1.3.0.post0.dev0+g7f5d03d (master branch)

Printer model & used firmware incl. version

MonoPrice Maker Select Plus with stock firmware.

Browser and Version of Browser, Operating System running Browser

Chrome Version 55.0.2883.87 m (64-bit) on Windows 10 Pro Anniversary Update

Link to octoprint.log

Link to contents of terminal tab or serial.log

(putty term output)

Link to contents of Javascript console in the browser


Screenshot(s) showing the problem:

[If applicable. Always include if unsure or reporting UI issues.]

Cura Slicing Profile

I have read the FAQ. Yes, I have actually read the FAQ.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jan 9, 2017

Looks like that one was actually inherited from Cura back when, see Ultimaker/CuraEngine#140. Will look into it.

@foosel foosel added this to the 1.3.1 milestone Jan 11, 2017


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jan 11, 2017

Fixed on maintenance (and soon also devel), will be released with 1.3.1

@foosel foosel closed this in 071c32f Jan 25, 2017

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.