FWIW, poking around in the version of Ideamaker on this computer, they seem to have added a feature. I personally have never used this feature, nor am I likely to.
Now how well it works??- I cannot vouch for in any way shape or form. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn't.
I still stand by my advice. You have to start somewhere, that somewhere is getting the printer and your profile to a baseline calibration. The printer hardware has to follow the gcode exactly- and i'm not talking about measuring print results, I'm saying you command 100mm of filament, it better send 100mm of filament. You command the nozzle to move 100mm, it moves 100mm.
From there, you calibrate outside dimensions on the largest object you can print (roughly 300mm). Calibrating dimensional accuracy using only a 20mm cube, to me that's asking to actually increase error, not remove it, but there it is.
Regardless, we already have the known fact at the point of export your STL file is technically undersized- even for other than 3D printing due to limitations of the structure of an STL. Thus in my mind, when starting someone out who is learning both CAD and 3D printing/CNC, then the "right" answer is compensate in CAD so that your exports are more correct for whatever processes (3d printing or CNC) you might send that STL to and expect a perfect result. To solely lie on some slicer (CNC CAM) setting to detect an internal hole, and then somehow auto magically know what the correct compensation is, I think that's a stretch.
Last, let's talk about part strength.
A highly accurate 3D dimensional part is likely to also suffer from less than possible part strength. The fact is, the 3D printing additive process, where we lay a hot layer of new plastic over a previous layer has limitations in the bond to those adjacent and underneath previous threads of plastic. Ultimately, there are voids or air space of no bond at all. If you slightly over extrude and flow more plastic as the nozzle moves and thus squishes that hot noodle of plastic more and attempts to fill those void spaces- strength goes dramatically up. We simply have more contact area and more forces involved all resulting in more plastic and more bond. The flipside is, over extrusion also results in poor dimensional accuracy. In other words, we lose control of the outer edge of this plastic flow, we are intentionally squishing and deforming but the plastic has to go somewhere right? So again, in 3D printing we have tradeoffs. You can fine tune for dimensional accuracy by less deformation, thus less variability, at the cost of layer to layer bond strength. Altyernately, you can over extrude forcing maximum density and layer bonding strength, with a poor surface finish and dimensional quality.
This is why on actual high end and large additive manufacturing systems like the BAAM https://www.e-ci.com/baam
, they intentionally print oversized, and then machine away the excess as a multi step process.
In the casual user advice here, I recommend a similar process. You print as sized (thus purposely undersized holes) and possibly over extrude. You go back with light hand tools and drill and ream, maybe sand down, file, or whatever is required down to your dimensional accuracy. This results in a much stronger part, much more durable.