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

[Feature Request] Zero Travel Mode (cookie cutter mode) #20

Open
Photogad opened this issue Dec 19, 2018 · 7 comments
Open

[Feature Request] Zero Travel Mode (cookie cutter mode) #20

Photogad opened this issue Dec 19, 2018 · 7 comments

Comments

@Photogad
Copy link

Maybe it's already possible some how but here's my issue.

I make cookie cutters. The top most layers all all just outside perimeters. But even with "avoid crossing perimeters" setting checked, it still do cross some perimeters. And I get strings. Check below photo for example.

I wonder if it's possible to do continuous looping perimeters with ZERO travel so I never get the stringing. Maybe useful for other things too

20181215_180651

@supermerill
Copy link
Owner

supermerill commented Dec 19, 2018

You can play with the bottom panel in the layer tab.
Disable "thin walls" (to remove most of gap fill)
looping perimeter -> activate to remove moves between perimeters ( and choose the seam position that create the nicest transitions).
seam-> nearest
travel moves reduced -> activate it

if multiple objects, use "complete individual objects" in sequential printing in output option tab.

@Photogad
Copy link
Author

Photogad commented Dec 19, 2018

Thanks, removing gap fill definitely seemed to reduce my travel paths, I am showing almost no travel path now on the inside of object. However, now there's no fills in my perimeters so I don't think it will print good with no fill in between the perimeters to get nice solid cookie cutter outline.

Below photo show before and after with travel paths on gap fill and no gap fill. The blue lines are travel path,

1

2

@supermerill
Copy link
Owner

I don't have your stl to test, so it's a bit of guessing here.

Maybe you can increase the external perimeter width?

@supermerill
Copy link
Owner

Maybe i will re-do the "don't cross perimeter" by adding a "follow external perimeter if you are on top of it, please". But not right now, sadly, i have other things to do before.

@Photogad
Copy link
Author

Photogad commented Jan 1, 2020

Maybe i will re-do the "don't cross perimeter" by adding a "follow external perimeter if you are on top of it, please". But not right now, sadly, i have other things to do before.

Thank you :) No rush but it will help much

@supermerill
Copy link
Owner

Note that Prusa has done some work on "don't cross perimeter" recently.

@CCS86
Copy link

CCS86 commented Jun 16, 2021

In this case, if you built a more precise model, with an even wall thickness, you could just size your widths to completely fill, with no need for gap fill. Then, there will be less need for extra travel.

supermerill added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 6, 2021
…eter where possible

And also trigger as early as 3 nozzle diameter when retract_before_travel is higher
Can trigger without only_retract_when_crossing_perimeters
#1794
#1793
#1790
#1349
#1061
#810
#173
#20
supermerill added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 6, 2021
…eter where possible

And also trigger as early as 3 nozzle diameter when retract_before_travel is higher
Can trigger without only_retract_when_crossing_perimeters
#1794
#1793
#1790
#1349
#1061
#810
#173
#20
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants