4 ms·

I like this idea. Hiding the seam in a crack or sharp corner (convex or concave) is already a thing, and your idea builds on that. I'm also curious what it wou

I like this idea. Hiding the seam in a crack or sharp corner (convex or concave) is already a thing, and your idea builds on that. I'm also curious what it would do for part strength. If you offset the zig-zags from layer to layer it will not be as pretty obviously, but it should act like offset bricks in a brick wall. Worth exploring (but I don't have the equipment to test part strength). One effect of this would be to make the print dramatically slower though, you would never get up to max speed due to all the cornering. You could do this sort of pattern already while modelling (though that offset version would be very fiddly). Less practical than the slicer but useful for a quick proof of concept. Thinking about it some more, this is not that far from the existing fuzzy skin pattern already in slicers, and I believe that the relatively obscure slicer IdeaMaker does allow to apply arbitrary textures as height maps on the sides of parts. That could be another way to explore this.

cassianoleal 11mo ago
> If you offset the zig-zags from layer to layer it will not be as pretty It would probably just be a slightly less random fuzzy skin effect. This is an interesting idea but I suspect print times would put most people off.
mg 11mo ago
I wouldn't mind long print times. I am not sure, but "fuzzy skin" seems to intentionally sacrifice some adherence to the object's exact shape? "folded outline" would not do that. If the printer prints it exactly, the print would match the object just as precisely as a normal outline. The IdeaMaker repo on GitHub says it is abandoned. Maybe there are other options? An open source slicer written in Python without dependencies that works on the command line would be my favorite starting point. If there is none, writing a new one might also be feasible?
- VorpalWay 11mo ago
  Yes, fuzzy skin does that, in order to create a rough texture. But your idea won't be perfectly conforming to the original shape either, the physics of molten plastic means you will likely get unevenness still. You could consider writing a post processing script, or perhaps experimenting with https://github.com/FullControlXYZ/fullcontrol https://github.com/FullControlXYZ/fullcontrol (not a slicer but a toolkit for generating gcode from python). I suspect that a full on slicer in pure python would be rather slow though. I don't think IdeaMaker is abandoned, but it is closed source freeware.
  - mg 11mo ago
    Fullcontrol looks interesting, thanks! I just started 3D printing a few weeks ago. I already realized that I need to write my own CAD software. None of the existing ones are the way I want to design objects. That will probably take a few months. Then I will probably want to control the prints down to the gcode level and look into the situation then.
    - VorpalWay 11mo ago
      That is rather ambitious. I don't know how you prefer CAD, but if you don't like parametric CAD (Fusion, Onshape, FreeCAD, etc), nor sculpting (Blender, and various other artistic things) there is also code based CAD such as OpenSCAD and iirc some others. For me, parametric CAD is what clicked. I suspect making your own CAD engine is going to be quite a lot of work though, as unlike most 3D modelling for games etc, proper CAD works with mathematically perfect shapes, rather than tesselated approximations. (I believe OpenSCAD doesn't, it tesselates but let's you define the resolution dynamically as the script is executed.) For 3D prints, this is something that you can live with: the imperfections of the technology will hide the triangles mostly if you use a high enough resolution. But for subtractive CNC, this is a problem: If you mill from metal you will see the imperfections.
      - mg 11mo ago
        From what I have seen so far, OpenScad is the closest to how I would like to build my objects. The two main differences to how I want to work are: 1: I want to use a web-based solution. I don't like to install software. I just want to open a website. No matter if I am on Linux, Android or iOS - it should just work. 2: Instead of the SCAD language, I want to use Python.
        VorpalWay 11mo ago
        I saw a programatic Web cad tool before, took a moment to find it (and along the way I found a few others). Caveat: of these I have only used Onshape, and I tend to use it via the graphical interface. - First up Onshape is web based, but is actually programmable behind the scenes (and all documents are scripts under the hood). This is used to let you write plugins it for it. - The one I was thinking of used to be called KittyCAD but has since been renamed: https://zoo.dev/ https://zoo.dev/ (looked at it briefly but it was in very early stages then). - https://www.fornjot.app/ https://www.fornjot.app/ is a work in progress CAD engine that can compile to WASM. Written in Rust (so big plus for me there, I have switched from C++ to Rust for most things). There are a few python cad things already as well: SolidPython, PythonSCAD and CadQuery. FreeCAD is also scriptable in python. Due to the large size, python really isn't suitable for embedding in wasm though.

cassianoleal 11mo ago

> If you offset the zig-zags from layer to layer it will not be as pretty It would probably just be a slightly less random fuzzy skin effect. This is an interesting idea but I suspect print times would put most people off.

mg 11mo ago

I wouldn't mind long print times. I am not sure, but "fuzzy skin" seems to intentionally sacrifice some adherence to the object's exact shape? "folded outline" would not do that. If the printer prints it exactly, the print would match the object just as precisely as a normal outline. The IdeaMaker repo on GitHub says it is abandoned. Maybe there are other options? An open source slicer written in Python without dependencies that works on the command line would be my favorite starting point. If there is none, writing a new one might also be feasible?

VorpalWay 11mo ago
Yes, fuzzy skin does that, in order to create a rough texture. But your idea won't be perfectly conforming to the original shape either, the physics of molten plastic means you will likely get unevenness still. You could consider writing a post processing script, or perhaps experimenting with https://github.com/FullControlXYZ/fullcontrol https://github.com/FullControlXYZ/fullcontrol (not a slicer but a toolkit for generating gcode from python). I suspect that a full on slicer in pure python would be rather slow though. I don't think IdeaMaker is abandoned, but it is closed source freeware.
- mg 11mo ago
  Fullcontrol looks interesting, thanks! I just started 3D printing a few weeks ago. I already realized that I need to write my own CAD software. None of the existing ones are the way I want to design objects. That will probably take a few months. Then I will probably want to control the prints down to the gcode level and look into the situation then.
  - VorpalWay 11mo ago
    That is rather ambitious. I don't know how you prefer CAD, but if you don't like parametric CAD (Fusion, Onshape, FreeCAD, etc), nor sculpting (Blender, and various other artistic things) there is also code based CAD such as OpenSCAD and iirc some others. For me, parametric CAD is what clicked. I suspect making your own CAD engine is going to be quite a lot of work though, as unlike most 3D modelling for games etc, proper CAD works with mathematically perfect shapes, rather than tesselated approximations. (I believe OpenSCAD doesn't, it tesselates but let's you define the resolution dynamically as the script is executed.) For 3D prints, this is something that you can live with: the imperfections of the technology will hide the triangles mostly if you use a high enough resolution. But for subtractive CNC, this is a problem: If you mill from metal you will see the imperfections.
    - mg 11mo ago
      From what I have seen so far, OpenScad is the closest to how I would like to build my objects. The two main differences to how I want to work are: 1: I want to use a web-based solution. I don't like to install software. I just want to open a website. No matter if I am on Linux, Android or iOS - it should just work. 2: Instead of the SCAD language, I want to use Python.
      - VorpalWay 11mo ago
        I saw a programatic Web cad tool before, took a moment to find it (and along the way I found a few others). Caveat: of these I have only used Onshape, and I tend to use it via the graphical interface. - First up Onshape is web based, but is actually programmable behind the scenes (and all documents are scripts under the hood). This is used to let you write plugins it for it. - The one I was thinking of used to be called KittyCAD but has since been renamed: https://zoo.dev/ https://zoo.dev/ (looked at it briefly but it was in very early stages then). - https://www.fornjot.app/ https://www.fornjot.app/ is a work in progress CAD engine that can compile to WASM. Written in Rust (so big plus for me there, I have switched from C++ to Rust for most things). There are a few python cad things already as well: SolidPython, PythonSCAD and CadQuery. FreeCAD is also scriptable in python. Due to the large size, python really isn't suitable for embedding in wasm though.