ideaMaker 3.0-RC Release Note Updated Rev. 3.0.5 2017.12.18

[Vicky@Raise3D]

please tell me what is responsible for this setting

This section is named Thin Wall in English. Which means if you have enabled the option above Check Thin Wall (Single Extrusion Width), it will check whether the feature on model is lower than the Thin Wall Width you set below. As you have set it to be 0.3mm, which means if the width of the feature on model is lower than 0.3mm, it will be printed as one thin wall when printing. Normally we will suggestion to set this value to be 1.25 times of extrusion width.

[B3DMax]

Hey Raise3D. Thank you for ideaMaker. Just learned about it and now I'm extolling the benefits in all the Facebook groups. It's really on par feature wise with S3D, but my prints are coming out better for the most part. Couple things I have noticed:

1) Why are supports different on different faces? See attached Supports jpg. Two different faces of one cube. Opposing faces print the same (X prints one way, y prints the other). The top supports come off much easier.

2) Support are almost always "attached" on one edge, as if the printer isn't doing a retract between the edge of the opening and the start of the support. I have retraction set to 1mm, and 0.7mm vertical separation, so there should be no attachment.

3) Holes are atrocious. Here is the top and bottom of a hole and what it looks like in the preview. It's like it just gave up on the hole - too fast maybe? Haven't had this problem with any other slicer.

Outside of these couple of issues - I think I may be regretting my purchase of S3D and will be using ideaMaker from now on.

[B3DMax]

One more question - retraction within a layer. I have a layer with multiple holes in it. I'd expect there to be a retract every time it moves between the holes, but it's not. Causing oozing onto the build plate and marred finish. You can see the difference between IM and S3D. The retracts are the small balls in the S3D Image.

I can't seem to find any setting in IM to make it retract between islands. Minimal retract travel is 0.4mm, so these travels are much further than that.

[duke666]

already figured out thanks, found where to download the manual on the slicer, before that did not see it

[Vicky@Raise3D]

Hey Raise3D. Thank you for ideaMaker. Just learned about it and now I'm extolling the benefits in all the Facebook groups. It's really on par feature wise with S3D, but my prints are coming out better for the most part. Couple things I have noticed:

1) Why are supports different on different faces? See attached Supports jpg. Two different faces of one cube. Opposing faces print the same (X prints one way, y prints the other). The top supports come off much easier.

supports.jpg

2) Support are almost always "attached" on one edge, as if the printer isn't doing a retract between the edge of the opening and the start of the support. I have retraction set to 1mm, and 0.7mm vertical separation, so there should be no attachment.

3) Holes are atrocious. Here is the top and bottom of a hole and what it looks like in the preview. It's like it just gave up on the hole - too fast maybe? Haven't had this problem with any other slicer.

supports.jpg

Outside of these couple of issues - I think I may be regretting my purchase of S3D and will be using ideaMaker from now on.

ideaMaker will choose the nearest way to finish the support structure, so you will see different positions of start points of each support structure.
Or you can set support infill angles to be 2 or more than 2 values, so that each layer of the support will face to different directions.
Or if you'd like to share your STL with us, we can get more understanding of the whole structure of the model.

For the question 2, want to ask for your STL file to check out the reason.

For the question 3, looks like under extrusion at the bottom side.

[duke666]

please tell me what is responsible for this setting

This section is named Thin Wall in English. Which means if you have enabled the option above Check Thin Wall (Single Extrusion Width), it will check whether the feature on model is lower than the Thin Wall Width you set below. As you have set it to be 0.3mm, which means if the width of the feature on model is lower than 0.3mm, it will be printed as one thin wall when printing. Normally we will suggestion to set this value to be 1.25 times of extrusion width.

please explain, if nozzle 0.4 and extrusion width then 0.4, then how much should the width of the thin wall be set? 0.5?

[EldRick]

Try Cura. It has Raise3D support now.

[Vicky@Raise3D]

please tell me what is responsible for this setting

This section is named Thin Wall in English. Which means if you have enabled the option above Check Thin Wall (Single Extrusion Width), it will check whether the feature on model is lower than the Thin Wall Width you set below. As you have set it to be 0.3mm, which means if the width of the feature on model is lower than 0.3mm, it will be printed as one thin wall when printing. Normally we will suggestion to set this value to be 1.25 times of extrusion width.

please explain, if nozzle 0.4 and extrusion width then 0.4, then how much should the width of the thin wall be set? 0.5?

0.5mm is a recommended value for 0.4mm nozzle.

[Vicky@Raise3D]

One more question - retraction within a layer. I have a layer with multiple holes in it. I'd expect there to be a retract every time it moves between the holes, but it's not. Causing oozing onto the build plate and marred finish. You can see the difference between IM and S3D. The retracts are the small balls in the S3D Image.

I can't seem to find any setting in IM to make it retract between islands. Minimal retract travel is 0.4mm, so these travels are much further than that.

Have you enabled this option?

[B3DMax]

One more question - retraction within a layer. I have a layer with multiple holes in it. I'd expect there to be a retract every time it moves between the holes, but it's not. Causing oozing onto the build plate and marred finish. You can see the difference between IM and S3D. The retracts are the small balls in the S3D Image.

I can't seem to find any setting in IM to make it retract between islands. Minimal retract travel is 0.4mm, so these travels are much further than that.

Have you enabled this option?

1.png

Yes, that is enabled. That really wouldn't come into play here since there is no way to travel without going over a hole.

[B3DMax]

It does look like underextrusion, but why? It also doesn't feel like it's slowing down on the holes at all.

The model is here : https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:939528

For supports, look at the cube-no-supports Stl. For the holes, it's in the base Stl. The screw holes in the cube aren't perfect either, but much better.

When printing the model slices with S3D, these issue areas print perfectly with the same settings. Except retraction. I had to increase my retraction from 0.6 to 1.1 in Ideamaker for some reason.

Hey Raise3D. Thank you for ideaMaker. Just learned about it and now I'm extolling the benefits in all the Facebook groups. It's really on par feature wise with S3D, but my prints are coming out better for the most part. Couple things I have noticed:

1) Why are supports different on different faces? See attached Supports jpg. Two different faces of one cube. Opposing faces print the same (X prints one way, y prints the other). The top supports come off much easier.

supports.jpg

2) Support are almost always "attached" on one edge, as if the printer isn't doing a retract between the edge of the opening and the start of the support. I have retraction set to 1mm, and 0.7mm vertical separation, so there should be no attachment.

3) Holes are atrocious. Here is the top and bottom of a hole and what it looks like in the preview. It's like it just gave up on the hole - too fast maybe? Haven't had this problem with any other slicer.

supports.jpg

Outside of these couple of issues - I think I may be regretting my purchase of S3D and will be using ideaMaker from now on.

ideaMaker will choose the nearest way to finish the support structure, so you will see different positions of start points of each support structure.
Or you can set support infill angles to be 2 or more than 2 values, so that each layer of the support will face to different directions.
Or if you'd like to share your STL with us, we can get more understanding of the whole structure of the model.

For the question 2, want to ask for your STL file to check out the reason.

For the question 3, looks like under extrusion at the bottom side.

[Vicky@Raise3D]

One more question - retraction within a layer. I have a layer with multiple holes in it. I'd expect there to be a retract every time it moves between the holes, but it's not. Causing oozing onto the build plate and marred finish. You can see the difference between IM and S3D. The retracts are the small balls in the S3D Image.

I can't seem to find any setting in IM to make it retract between islands. Minimal retract travel is 0.4mm, so these travels are much further than that.

Have you enabled this option?

Yes, that is enabled. That really wouldn't come into play here since there is no way to travel without going over a hole.

With this option enabled, it will decrease the retraction points.

[Vicky@Raise3D]

It does look like underextrusion, but why? It also doesn't feel like it's slowing down on the holes at all.

The model is here : https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:939528

For supports, look at the cube-no-supports Stl. For the holes, it's in the base Stl. The screw holes in the cube aren't perfect either, but much better.

When printing the model slices with S3D, these issue areas print perfectly with the same settings. Except retraction. I had to increase my retraction from 0.6 to 1.1 in Ideamaker for some reason.

Hey Raise3D. Thank you for ideaMaker. Just learned about it and now I'm extolling the benefits in all the Facebook groups. It's really on par feature wise with S3D, but my prints are coming out better for the most part. Couple things I have noticed:

1) Why are supports different on different faces? See attached Supports jpg. Two different faces of one cube. Opposing faces print the same (X prints one way, y prints the other). The top supports come off much easier.

2) Support are almost always "attached" on one edge, as if the printer isn't doing a retract between the edge of the opening and the start of the support. I have retraction set to 1mm, and 0.7mm vertical separation, so there should be no attachment.

3) Holes are atrocious. Here is the top and bottom of a hole and what it looks like in the preview. It's like it just gave up on the hole - too fast maybe? Haven't had this problem with any other slicer.

Outside of these couple of issues - I think I may be regretting my purchase of S3D and will be using ideaMaker from now on.

ideaMaker will choose the nearest way to finish the support structure, so you will see different positions of start points of each support structure.
Or you can set support infill angles to be 2 or more than 2 values, so that each layer of the support will face to different directions.
Or if you'd like to share your STL with us, we can get more understanding of the whole structure of the model.

For the question 2, want to ask for your STL file to check out the reason.

For the question 3, looks like under extrusion at the bottom side.

Have checked the models' structure, the fallen down holes which are not printed out well should be due to improper support structure below. You may need to add smaller size support pillar under the holes to support the overhangs properly. The default 4mm support pillar is too big for those holes.

For the support direction on the wall, I would recommend you try different support angles.

[B3DMax]

For the holes, I shouldn't need to use supports. I've printed dozens of these using Simplify 3D and never have I once used supports on this base. It's such a small hole it should bridge perfectly.

[B3DMax]

Unless I haven't figure out how to do it, please add a "start printing at Z" option. Occasionally you get failed prints and want to re-start where it left off.

[killerb77]

I have 3 feature requests.

1) Allow 3 decimal places for the first layer height or a percentage.
2) Be able to disable the creation of the .data file
3) Be able to disable the insertion of M1001 and M1002 into the GCODE. I have an Ultimaker 2 and this feature is not used.

Thank you.

[Rudolph]

Hello,

first of all, thank you for Ideamaker!
I am printing on a CR-10, just for reference.

And this is the second try to post this, first did not get posted in the thread somehow.

When starting to print 3DBenchy lately to tweak my settings I ran into the problem that the chimney always came out completely broken.

To test things out I first edited 3DBenchy with Tinkercad, I replaced the boat with a hollow collumn to speed things up, only keeping the chimney as it is and at the original Z position.
At this point I was convinced that something with my printer is not right.

This came out fine though.

Then I made a cut of the roof with Ideamaker and exported it:

3DBenchy_1.stl

(1.8 MiB) Downloaded 12 times

To compare things I also loaded this .stl into Tinkercad and exportet it without changing anything:

3DBenchy_2.stl

(228.21 KiB) Downloaded 11 times

This resulted in a smaller .stl file and more importantly in a print with the same settings that was okay.

After several tests I ended up with these:

On the left is what I get with my profile and the 3DBenchy_1.stl from Ideamaker 3.04 Beta.
In the middle is what I get with the exakt same profile but Ideamaker 2.6.0.925.
On the right is the resulting print sliced with Slic3r Prusa edition 1.38.3.

Yes, to be fair, my Ideamaker profile obviously needs some tweaks in regards to that Slic3r profile.
This is not the point though.
I just used this profile for all my tests unchanged to make things compareable.

Something makes Ideamaker 3 trip over that triangles from the original chimney that Ideamaker 2 has no problem with.
And when using the much smaller and slightly broken

3DBenchy_2.stl

(228.21 KiB) Downloaded 11 times

that I got when importing the first one into Tinkercad and just exporting it again, the result with Ideamaker 3 is pretty much the same as the print with

3DBenchy_1.stl

(1.8 MiB) Downloaded 12 times

and Ideamaker 2.

I really do like Ideamaker but this was not nice.

And relaying two requests from the German facebook group I was discussing that in:
- make Ideamaker use more than one process (not sure why though )
- variable layer heights (and adding to that, what about different layer heights for Infill and Shell..)

Plus when looking at Slic3r, some more options for the infill grid would be nice.

[Vicky@Raise3D]

For the holes, I shouldn't need to use supports. I've printed dozens of these using Simplify 3D and never have I once used supports on this base. It's such a small hole it should bridge perfectly.

Have you tried not using support for these holes with ideaMaker?

[Tinkerer]

...regarding the quality of IdeaMakers slicing-capabilities:

This is what I wanted to slice:

This is what I got from IdeaMaker:

This is what Cura made from the same stl:

Guess, which one I would use to print?

[B3DMax]

For the holes, I shouldn't need to use supports. I've printed dozens of these using Simplify 3D and never have I once used supports on this base. It's such a small hole it should bridge perfectly.

Have you tried not using support for these holes with ideaMaker?

Yes - that's what gave me the poor hole quality to begin with. I'm running another unexpected test now due to the bug below.

For the same base that I have the hole issue with, I set the pillar size down to 1mm, then sliced the model. IM won't generate supports for the area underneath the holes. If I open the supports menu before slicing and tell it to generate supports, it will. So there is a discrepancy between generating automatically before slicing, and generating supports while slicing.