I just installed 5.3.1 and migrated my profiles from 4.13.1 which were producing excellent results, I sliced and printed (twice) a small "jig" (to be used to drill holes) which is a hollow 1/2 cube c. 24mm x 24mm x 12mm. Overall the print quality was good. The only real print quality issue was a lump on the outside seam which I think is down to needing to tweak the retraction settings - though I am not yet clear whether this is a difference between how retraction is working between 4.13.1 and 5.3.1.
However I have noticed several idiosyncrasies in the base (6 top and 6 bottom layers) all of which should have looked like this:
Actual results
The brim should probably be printed as a continuous line with a small zig where it moves inwards, but it appears to have breaks in it where a travel occurs (with coasting).
The first 8 layers (of 10 - 5 bottom and 5 top) were sliced as expected, however the two top skin layers have a glitch in them as seen here:
As you can see there are small zig-zag elements at the top / bottom rather than the top surface having the same zig-zag pattern as the previous layers. I tried playing with the Skin Overlap Percentage, Skin Removal Width and Skin Expand Distance, and although setting these to zero resulted in fill rather than surface under the outside walls, nothing I could do with these settings would remove the small zigzags.
From a travel optimisation perspective, I personally think that the slicer should do each outer wall immediately after the adjacent inner walls or vice versa rather than doing all inner walls and then all outer walls i.e. as seen in the following screenshot it does the outside outer wall, then the outer walls for each of the two holes, then the inner wall of the holes, and then the inner wall of the outside - but it would be better IMO to do the outside outer wall, then outside inner wall, then the outer wall of the first hole, and its corresponding inner wall, and then the same for the second hole. This would eliminate several travels.
In addition, if you look closely at the one instance where the inner wall does immediately follow the corresponding outer wall, there is a coast and a travel rather than a zig-zag. (I am not clear whether a zig-zag is possible if e.g. the line widths and so filament flows are different, but surely quality may well be better by having a continuous flow and continuous head movement rather than interrupting it with a travel. After all we get great quality zigzags on top and bottom surfaces.
I had some oddities with seams where it was making what appeared to be stupidly long travel moves, but I am struggling to reproduce the ones I saw before. But here are some oddities:
Z-Seam Alignment: Sharpest Corner, Seam Corner Preference: Smart Hiding: second inner wall (for the inside outer wall) has a long travel (from the back-right corner to the front-right corner rather than staying at the back-right corner and continuing.
And of course we then get another long travel back to the back right corner for the start of the first outer-wall of the next layer.
Similarly for the start of the bottom skin, having printed the walls, it did a long travel from the front-left corner to the back-right corner to start the skin when there was no reason for it not to start the skin in the front-left corner instead.
Expected results
My guess (and I wouldn't claim to be an expert - just an experienced and technical user) is that quality (and time) would be improved by avoiding travel moves wherever possible.
Application Version
5.3.1
Operating System
Windows 10
Printer
Dagoma DiscoEasy 200
Reproduction steps
I just installed 5.3.1 and migrated my profiles from 4.13.1 which were producing excellent results, I sliced and printed (twice) a small "jig" (to be used to drill holes) which is a hollow 1/2 cube c. 24mm x 24mm x 12mm. Overall the print quality was good. The only real print quality issue was a lump on the outside seam which I think is down to needing to tweak the retraction settings - though I am not yet clear whether this is a difference between how retraction is working between 4.13.1 and 5.3.1.
However I have noticed several idiosyncrasies in the base (6 top and 6 bottom layers) all of which should have looked like this:
Actual results
Expected results
My guess (and I wouldn't claim to be an expert - just an experienced and technical user) is that quality (and time) would be improved by avoiding travel moves wherever possible.
Checklist of files to include
Additional information & file uploads
jig.3mf