Cannot move part in Z direction

[faboaic]

Version

Slic3rPE-1.42.0-alpha1+win64-full-201812231738

Operating system type + version

Win10 x64

Behavior

• Describe the problem

I can move part in X and Y direction with the new function. If I move it in Z direction up or down it instantly goes back to default position.

• Steps needed to reproduce the problem

Use move symbol in x , y and z direction.

• Expected Results

Z works like X and Y. I would need to lower the part below the bed (like with not-so-comfortable cut function) so that lower part is not printed. Or need to lift a part up in the air if you want to continue a failed print... or just do some tests with support function...

• Actual Results

Does not work...

• Screenshots from Slic3r preview are preferred

STL/Config (.ZIP) where problem occurs

Upload a zipped copy of an STL and your config (File -> Export Config)

cannotmoveZ.zip

[zerg960]

wonder what this line's for:

https://github.com/prusa3d/PrusaSlicer/blob/be9dcf0c77d106393b08f961042ea44cd56f8745/src/slic3r/GUI/GUI_ObjectManipulation.cpp#L623

refers to something about a drop to bed button. What'd happen if we nuked that if statement and had the drop to bed button always be available? (possibly in advanced or expert mode).

[davidkeko]

I needed to join two thirdparty .stls to print them as one part, and would have much preferred to position one part over the other in PrusaSlicer without need for additional editing.

Please reconsider enabling this. Thanks.

Until then, you should do it outside PS. For example, Tinkercad or similar, the one you feel more confortable

[NickJonesGlass]

I needed to join two thirdparty .stls to print them as one part, and would have much preferred to position one part over the other in PrusaSlicer without need for additional editing.

Please reconsider enabling this. Thanks.

Until then, you should do it outside PS. For example, Tinkercad or similar, the one you feel more confortable

I indicated in my post that I had to do what you are suggesting.

[carlosjln]

This is BULLSHIT! as a sr software developer I'll tell whoever is denying to work on this feature that YOU DO NOT MAKE CHOICES FOR THE USER! you create features as options where each user opts in on what they want to use...

For the guy with the argument that he's working with students that do not know what they're doing... let me guess, you let those students use a 3D printer which's hot end operates at 200c, right? what could go wrong if they place the object 100mm above the build plate? wasted filament and that's it. Lesson learned.

This reminds me, yet again, that I'm trying to use prusaslicer and I go back to cura because it doesn't force you to go through some shitty process that someone else decided you should do.

This is simple, in expert mode, add a checkbox and label "Allow free object manipulation" or whatever is more intuitive.

P.S. Go back to take classes about improving UX (User Experience), you should know how important that is.

[simoonvance]

I mean just like put in a setting in preferences to enable this as a feature like cura, it's not incredibly difficult and you guys are getting paid to do this sort of stuff anyways, literally everyone wants it

[kulberda]

Well, I'm back to this same problem again. Although this time I have a mesh that isn't completely flat on the bottom and all I want to do is move it down through the base plate a bit. I'm sure there's probably some other "trick" to solve this but (and I really hate it when people use all caps but I think the situation calls for it) ALL I WANT TO DO IS BE ABLE TO CHANGE THE Z POSITION!!!!!

[carlosjln]

@kulberda I feel you, and I'd say I'm sorry I literally screamed on my post above, but that's what this frustration feels like. A stubborn developer that is telling us what to do and how to do things when you can see the shit load of people on this thread yelling out for that function.

I think how social media works these days, we should come up with a hashtag and everyone spam their accounts. Something like @josefprusa #FreeZaxis

[davidkeko]

Well, I'm back to this same problem again. Although this time I have a mesh that isn't completely flat on the bottom and all I want to do is move it down through the base plate a bit. I'm sure there's probably some other "trick" to solve this but (and I really hate it when people use all caps but I think the situation calls for it) ALL I WANT TO DO IS BE ABLE TO CHANGE THE Z POSITION!!!!!

I know, man. Try cutting the bottom in a 3D editor to make it completely flat.

[neophyl]

Well, I'm back to this same problem again. Although this time I have a mesh that isn't completely flat on the bottom and all I want to do is move it down through the base plate a bit. I'm sure there's probably some other "trick" to solve this but (and I really hate it when people use all caps but I think the situation calls for it) ALL I WANT TO DO IS BE ABLE TO CHANGE THE Z POSITION!!!!!

The 'trick' for this one is to use the cut function. Trim off the bottom of the model and it sits flat on the plater where you want it. Theres a whole tool for it with options and everything.

Same solution for davidkeko's issue. Btw cutting the bottom flat is very easy to do in Blender too but its easier to do that using Slicers Cut function.

[kulberda]

The 'trick' for this one is to use the cut function. Trim off the bottom of the model and it sits flat on the plater where you want it. Theres a whole tool for it with options and everything.

Same solution for davidkeko's issue. Btw cutting the bottom flat is very easy to do in Blender too but its easier to do that using Slicers Cut function.

I used to use the cut function all the time but I thought it was removed. That was my first thought but I can't find it anywhere. It's definitely not in the edit menu (right click context menu) or obviously anywhere else I'm looking.

[JohnOCFII]

@kulberda - Cut is now available from the left side of the plater display, as shown here in the blue circle.

[simoonvance]

And performing a cut let's you move the model up and down?

[Naugrimohtar]

No, it just lets you move it down.

In order to move it up, you need to at the model as a part to another model. Once you to that then the move z function works as you expect it to. It also ‘merges’ the models when it goes to print dice the use case for this feature is ‘mashups’ where you can add models to other models with overlap.

I continue to be baffled by this choice! There is even a snap to bottom button and warnings when the print goes SNR in contact with the bed. Let us move it Z with needing to add it as a part of an object PLEASE.

[terribleperson]

Again yesterday I had a part I wanted to print on top of an object, but because of this 'feature' I cannot do it without additional unnecessary pain.

[davidkeko]

"additional unnecessary pain" Pain? That isn't a bit exaggerated?

[carlosjln]

@davidkeko its a pain in the ass to deal with a shitty UX/UI.

[simoonvance]

I would consider it a pain since it is such a limiting factor nobody is able to do many projects or even use some custom supports

[terribleperson]

I have to hand-edit gcode to do something I should be able to do trivially in my slicer. It's not even a feature that needs to be added, this is a feature that already exists that needs an expert mode toggle.

[kulberda]

Yeah, it's really an "unfeature" because it's a feature that was added specifically to not allow you to do something you'd potentially want to be able to do.

[davidkeko]

People, the function "add part" allows to move in Z direction. That is not a solution for you? Why?

[simoonvance]

If devs are seeing this and ignoring it I will be furious. It's literally a problem.

[zabak]

I arrived here because I am new to the slicer an I needed to move my model slightly below the bed. The intuitive way was to use the Z arrow. When that failed I tried to change the object coordinates. After that I tried and failed to find how to do this in the manual and failed miserably. @josefprusa please order your developers to allow moving the object along the Z axis.

[JohnOCFII]

I arrived here because I am new to the slicer an I needed to move my model slightly below the bed.

While I agree Z movement is needed, in your case, you might be able to use the CUT feature to remove a portion from the bottom of the model.

[meutzitzu]

Is this still not added ?

why ?

this is not a feature by any means ... just a restriction imposed by the software to avoid silly mistakes. there definitley should be a pop-up saying "m8, you know you can't print in mid air, right ? you might want to use Raft" or whatever, with an [ OK ] button and a [ I know what I'm doing ] button.

I'm trying to print single layer plastic masks on copper sheets for making custom PCBs via acid etching

I don't want to mess up my perfect Z calibration by adding 1.8mm (thickness of the copper sheet + double-sided tape) to the Live Adjust Z and then having to switch it back when I want to do a normal print

also this is really useful for recovering failed prints

I should be able to just place a model in mid-air and just print it (of course there's understandably goind to be some measure of making sure someone doesn't do this accidentally) but this is a genuine thing that can be very useful and I think just making it imposible is unnacceptable.

[bubnikv]

@josefprusa please order your developers to allow moving the object along the Z axis.

Please, @josefprusa, command / force your developers, whip them to do that! This is simply a hilarious way to communicate.

Frankly, there is so much negative feedback that we are considering to add a checkbox into preferences to enable it. From the UI point of view it is not such a big deal, but I am not sure whether it is worth the trouble.

1) People will print into the thin air. We are going to have notifications about that in the next release, so that is not that bad.

2) There is a big difference between PrusaSlicer (and the upstream Slic3r) vs. Cura or S3D. PrusaSlicer slices each object independently, while Cura or S3D slice all objects at once. Doing the former allows us to do tricks like variable layer height or support stepping independently per object. If we enable lifting objects along the Z axis, people will start wondering, why there is a support generated for the elevated object down to the print bed if there is another object below it. It is because the objects are considered independent. Oh yeah, I bet somebody will give an advice how to solve that situation. Yes, we can always make the system more complex.

[carlosjln]

@bubnikv I think you got the whip end.

" If we enable lifting objects along the Z axis, people will start wondering, why there is a support generated for the elevated object"

Did the user enable support for that object? or is this slicer making assumptions instead of giving the user options?

" Yes, we can always make the system more complex."

If you don't want to work in a complex system there's always another more mundane job you can take.

You're all being a lazy ass with an obvious lack of UX knowledge, blunt argument, yes, but your current software is what demonstrates that. Changing slicer settings is a pain in the ass, having to always click and add which settings I want to tweak on every print.

I'll tell you this, stay on denial, keep thinking that your dev team is making the best and greatest decisions for your users and another slicer will come up to replace your shitty UI/UX.

When developing UI/UX you have to account for cultural and psychological differences and biases, so don't let your own convoluted way of thinking determine what's best for a user that has a completely different mindset.

[bubnikv]

@carlosjln Thank you for your opinion. Take care and stay safe.

When developing UI/UX you have to account for cultural and psychological differences and biases

I see them. Thank you.

[terribleperson]

@bubnikv I hope you do not let peoples' rudeness dissuade you from taking the need for a checkbox for this feature seriously. I think by now it is obvious there is both demand and actual need for this feature. The current state of requiring annoying workarounds or gcode editing for tasks the slicer could support is frustrating.

The main concerns seem to be software complexity and UI complexity. Software complexity is not a valid issue here, where the capability in question already exists. The complexity is present, it is merely hidden from the user.

UI complexity is a valid concern, but keeping unneeded features out of the view of novices is the entire purpose of expert mode. The ability to disable this anti-feature is a perfect fit for expert mode.

My personal concern if I were a developer would be that the ability to turn off bed snapping will result in additional related feature requests, like a snap to bed button and snap to object below button.

As someome who isn't a developer and has needed the ability to disable automatic bed snapping for some time, I think it's worth it. There are more complaints on Reddit and elsewhere about the automatic snapping to bed than there were complaints about objects not snapping to bed in Slic3r or in Prusa Slicer before automatic snapping to bed was added.

[Yosoy-Ed]

@bubnikv There is another use case to get custom supports working, there is a video on the official Prusa youtube channel about using meshmixer supports, it would be useful to add our on "z contact distance" simply by lowering the supports a couple of layers to make easier to remove supports.

As it seems to be a long time to Prusa Slicer to add tree supports in FDM, I am playing with the sla tree settings and export them to use as custom supports ( like the video, replacing meshmixer for Prusa Slicer), however I can't leave a single layer of separation. I tried the "add part" method but it doesn't work, when I move the supports the object moves and viceversa.

I agree a simple fix is allowing a ckeckbox to disable snap under expert mode, I guess it isn't something hard to do and it will please a lot of users.

[meutzitzu]

Ok, So I since this isn't going anywhere, and since I need the modifier functionality of Slic3R, do you guys know of any forks that have this restriction removed ?

[neophyl]

Not for the movement in Z height as that is deeply integrated into the code I think but SuperSlicer has a checkbox to Allow Empty Layers.

[bubnikv]

I would disagree, I have a model that can/should be stacked on top of each other. But they are individual files. If I bring them all into Slic3r, I cannot stack them, and cannot add them together as one part so they all are affected by one change, ex rotation or scale.

PrusaSlicer 2.3.0-alpha1 newly supports merging multiple objects into a single object by selecting them in the plater and executing "Merge" from the pop-up menu. Once the objects are merged into one, they can be manipulated in Z.

Also PrusaSlicer 2.3.0-alpha1 newly allows printing with empty layers, while one gets a notification and a message box when exporting such a G-code.

Let me repeat, that contrary to Cura or S3D, PrusaSlicer slices each object independently and it also builds supports for each object independently, therefore stacking one object below the other may not be a good idea if the supports are enabled. This is a good technical reason why we do not allow lifting the objects up from the print bed.

[davidkeko]

This can be solved putting support blockers in the lifted object. Do you consider PrusaSlicer users so stupid? More stupid is PrusaSlicer, that detects collisions in places where it will not happen. See image, with red circles in the "supposed" sollision (putting clearing distances to the minimum does not solve this):

[lukasmatena]

More stupid is PrusaSlicer, that detects collisions in places where it will not happen.

Do not clutter this thread with that. There is an issue for it.

This can be solved putting support blockers in the lifted object.

Yeah, or by merging the objects.

Do you consider PrusaSlicer users so stupid?

Nobody but you used the word "stupid". But there will be users (most of them) not aware of this discussion. And they will naturally complain that PrusaSlicer generated supports intersecting with objects and that it ruined a 24+ hour print for them. (Yes, they will. See the number of issues on intersecting rafts and supports, which is caused by exactly that.) Will you be the one to explain it to them on Facebook, Github and support?

If a proper collision detection is implemented, the limitation will probably be lifted.

[nicw]

To add to this, here is a pretty common scenario, and how I started googling for how to do this: I have an object with many different parts. Sometimes I don't remember how they fit together, so I want to stack them on top of each other so I can confirm I've put the right pieces in order.

Other times I have scaled objects and want to confirm two parts will fit into each other. I need to put them on top of each other to confirm this.

That is all! I just want to drag an object into the air above another object!

Can't you just remove the code that enforces this auto-drop? I should not have to merge objects, etc - all I want to do is prototype in the 3D space and confirm my objects.

[zabak]

I agree - this might be just an option for advanced users, commented with several big fat reg exclamation marks :-)

[bubnikv]

Can't you just remove the code that enforces this auto-drop?

We can, that is trivial to do, but:

Let me repeat, that contrary to Cura or S3D, PrusaSlicer slices each object independently and it also builds supports for each object independently, therefore stacking one object below the other may not be a good idea if the supports are enabled. This is a good technical reason why we do not allow lifting the objects up from the print bed.

Once the parts are loaded as parts of a single object, PrusaSlicer slices them as a single piece similarly to how S3D or Cura handles the whole plater. You can move the parts of an object in Z as you wish using both the mouse and object manipulation table. That is the recommended way to do that in PrusaSlicer.

So we can enable lifting the objects (Cura has it off by default, but there is a checkbox in their preferences), however we would have likely to implement some complex error checking and / or possibly we would have to warn the user at each G-code export that some objects are lifted and that one may not be getting what he expects.

[carlosjln]

Guys you have to understand that PrusaSlicer developers have to protect us from causing harm to yourselves and our printers... we are 5 year old kids that some how manage to not burn our hands of with extruders at 200c+ but we can't read nor deal with advanced settings like @zabak and myself have mentioned months ago.

I get the feeling there is some strong ego person behind the decision to not make this change as easy as a check box "Allow object Z lift".

[moong8te]

[bubnikv]

PrusaSlicer 2.3.0-alpha1 newly supports merging multiple objects into a single object by selecting them in the plater and executing "Merge" from the pop-up menu. Once the objects are merged into one, they can be manipulated in Z.

Also PrusaSlicer 2.3.0-alpha1 newly allows printing with empty layers, while one gets a notification and a message box when exporting such a G-code.

Let me repeat, that contrary to Cura or S3D, PrusaSlicer slices each object independently and it also builds supports for each object independently, therefore stacking one object below the other may not be a good idea if the supports are enabled. This is a good technical reason why we do not allow lifting the objects up from the print bed.

Hello bubnikv, I fully understand your reasoning about some of the stacking topics brought up so far.

I have seen a few comments that print quality might improve if more support is printed under an object. I just ran into an example. I am currently printing the hair for this model. https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4582503

It comes in three very fine detailed pieces. I print the hair pieces with the fine hair details upwards. Supports on build plate only.

Unfortunately the part of the hair piece that is closest to the building plate is printed in circles and rather flat which later shows in the end result. I formerly printed those hair pieces using cura and lifted them 1cm so supports had been added under them. The result looked better.

But then again I would never switch back to cura ;-)

Best Moong8te

[bubnikv]

Guys you have to understand that PrusaSlicer developers have to protect us from causing harm to yourselves and our printers... we are 5 year old kids that some how manage to not burn our hands of with extruders at 200c+ but we can't read nor deal with advanced settings like @zabak and myself have mentioned months ago.

I am sure we don't need to protect @carlosjln from anything. But not everybody is so smart as @carlosjln, we need to protect those who are either less smart or understand 3D printing less or they just want to do worry free printing for fun or business.

[bubnikv]

@moong8te Why don't you enable raft then?

[moong8te]

bubnikv Why don't you enable raft then?

You are so right - I just checked and it seems to work like a charm. Thank you!

[carlosjln]

@bubnikv I might be smart or dumb af, who knows, who cares... but at least I'm a software engineer that drives to provide the best User Experience to my clients and if I ever had a list of people like this asking for a feature you better be sure as hell that feature would be in place already.

The lack of this feature doesn't bother you or your team because you don't do 3D printing that regularly. That's why its not a pain in the ass for you.

For whatever excuse or reason you got to not do this, there's one simple answer: place a big f*king warning sign next to that check box and let the user figure it out...

Same way I can currently set Nozzle diameter to 5mm and prusa slicer wont say shit, so it's up to us (the users) to figure out out printing problems.

[bubnikv]

@carlosjln

I don't know what user interface you are designing, but

For whatever excuse or reason you got to not do this, there's one simple answer: place a big f*king warning sign next to that check box and let the user figure it out...

A big fucking warning would not be sufficient, because a user will forget very quickly what he did couple of minutes ago. I would forget myself, especially if I am starting my print for fun at 10pm just before falling asleep. We would have to give a big fucking warning at each G-code export, ideally testing everything that may have went wrong due to allowing one to stack one object over the other, which are sliced independently by PrusaSlicer. It is all doable, but it is much more effort than just enabling elevated objects. But with all respect, this is something that you are not willing to admit.

[nicw]

@bubnikv you can ignore my comment about just removing code, I shouldn't have given you a solution, that is the part you are best at :)

I understand your interest in protecting the user (novice, sleepy, etc). Prusa is bringing in many new enthusiasts, and they don't understand the complexities of printing in 3D. The easier we can make this process, the greater the community!

However, we all started there, but now have progressed and understand (more) what we are doing. With the 'Expert' settings area, that's exactly where these more advanced settings should be. As others have mentioned above, you already have a workflow that accommodates both beginner and advanced users. As soon as I switch away from Simple, I understand that my changes could do something damaging.

Please consider this functionality, or from the Product side make a stand that you are prioritizing new users over power users. This way we can understand if we should wait, or try another solution.

[Yosoy-Ed]

You said it is trivial to do it. Are there some simple lines of code we could change that you could point us, who consider advanced users so we can enable this functionality? I have been compiling and trying the source code myselft to test it without worrying to find any issue.

I know there would be people affected by that, you have very good points. But people like freedom. I like Cura because it has a lot of settings, even experimental ( you could add this section and set this option there under advanced to give users a single warning saying "you are using experimental settings, you may find issues in your print" ).

I know you want PrusaSlicer to be user friendly, however you are limiting advanced users, S3D was the best slicer once, but it was left behind for PrusaSlicer and Cura ( and the other slicers less known) because it lacks a lot of advanced features.

[lukasmatena]

@nicw Just out of curiosity, why is it such a problem to merge the objects into one (simple in 2.3.0-alpha1) and then do the thing at the level of parts? I fully understand the reasons why people want to do A, what I don't understand is why it has to be done by B and not by C, when we have reasons not to allow B. The scenarios mentioned by you are both solvable this way and it takes just few extra mouse clicks, so I don't understand the part about limiting power users. Please don't take this as pouring more petrol in the fire, that's not my intention at all. I really just want to understand what is insufficient about this.

Are there some simple lines of code we could change that you could point us

I highly doubt it will be a line of code. Trivial is sometimes relative in contexts like this. You can have a look where get_instance_min_z is called from, but removing just that will certainly break something (first layer determination, variable layer height, wipe tower synchronization, who knows). I don't know how much more is there. Feel absolutely free to find out.

[davidkeko]

However, we all started there, but now have progressed and understand (more) what we are doing. With the 'Expert' settings area, that's exactly where these more advanced settings should be. As others have mentioned above, you already have a workflow that accommodates both beginner and advanced users. As soon as I switch away from Simple, I understand that my changes could do something damaging.

I am with you. Since I started in 3D printing in april I work in expert mode, always checking on internet the meaning of the setting I was going to touch. Forums are wide enough to find answers and warning about the consequences of our actions. Do we have cars that don't start if you don't wear the security belt ? Or that don't move if the lights are not turned on at night hours? It's responsibility of people to do that. Microwave user's manuals advise not to dry a cat inside of them. Hair dryers user's manuals advise not to use them inside the shower.

If people break their printers it's the same.

[CADPAT]

Not even sure how “people might break their printers” is an argument. Other slicers allow it and I dont see forums blowing up with issues relating to that feature.

[lukasmatena]

@CADPAT

Not even sure how “people might break their printers” is an argument

Could you please point me to the place where anyone from Prusa Research used this argument as a reason to not implement this? The reason was explained many times and this is not it.

Other slicers allow it and I dont see forums blowing up with issues relating to that feature.

I'm sorry, but the difference between PrusaSlicer and "other slicers" was explained here many times. Unless you are familiar with our actual reasons, the discussion can hardly lead anywhere. I'm not saying that you must agree with the reasons, but this is going in circles. Please, try to stay on topic and at least read the arguments of the other side.

I'm still waiting for an answer to why the current solution is inadequate and forbids the advanced users from doing anything. I don't see how talking about microwaving cats will help me to see the problem. Thanks.