Skirt/Priming Area Around Dummy Object or Modifier

[TD5023]

Version

2.2.0

Operating system type + version

Windows 10 Professional

3D printer brand / version + firmware version (if known)

Any

Requested Behavior

I'm wondering if it's possible to add a feature where the user can place a modifier or non-printed object whose sole purpose is for pre-print priming. It would be very useful in situations like this:

Here, the objects literally take up the entire print bed and leave next to no room for an outer skirt. Ideally, I would like to place a simple object in the middle of the bed since that's all empty space and use my current skirt settings around it only (while not printing the object itself).

The more I thought about it, the more I realized it would be useful for regular objects, too. When my filament first clears the nozzle, it tends to drag loose strings around the enclosed area of the skirt, which shows on my base layer. If I could move the priming away from the object instead of around it, prints would be cleaner.

I didn't want to tag this as a new feature yet because I didn't know if there was something to handle this that I just couldn't find, but I didn't see anything in the settings or here about it. If I'm just blind, please let me know.

[bubnikv]

The way it is done at our printer profiles is we have a priming line scripted in the start G-code. You may most likely use the same trick with your custom printer. Just install Prusa3D MK3 printer profile and check the start G-code.

ne 29. 3. 2020 v 5:12 odesílatel TD5023 notifications@github.com napsal:

Version

2.2.0 Operating system type + version

Windows 10 Professional 3D printer brand / version + firmware version (if known)

Any Requested Behavior

I'm wondering if it's possible to add a feature where the user can place a modifier or non-printed object whose sole purpose is for pre-print priming. It would be very useful in situations like this:

[image: large object skirt 1] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/55936565/77839073-591a5e00-713f-11ea-9b22-47237d0479c4.PNG [image: large object skirt 2] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/55936565/77839077-5e77a880-713f-11ea-8cab-662f455c864e.PNG

Here, the objects literally take up the entire print bed and leave next to no room for an outer skirt. Ideally, I would like to place a simple object in the middle of the bed since that's all empty space and use my current skirt settings around it only (while not printing the object itself).

The more I thought about it, the more I realized it would be useful for regular objects, too. When my filament first clears the nozzle, it tends to drag loose strings around the enclosed area of the skirt, which shows on my base layer. If I could move the priming away from the object instead of around it, prints would be cleaner.

I didn't want to tag this as a new feature yet because I didn't know if there was something to handle this that I just couldn't find, but I didn't see anything in the settings or here about it. If I'm just blind, please let me know.

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/prusa3d/PrusaSlicer/issues/3946, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABMPSI7OHODMI542IBN5F6LRJ24A3ANCNFSM4LVZ6LOQ .

[TD5023]

That can work, but I was really hoping there was some way to automate the process a little more so that differences would be controlled print-to-print in the plater instead of manually altering g-code. In my above example, a default line that would admittedly work for 90% of prints would need revamped to fit inside of the parts. I've done other prints recently where most of the print bed was covered, so a simple straight-line prime move probably wouldn't fit well anywhere, but a custom shape could be made to fit in an empty spot.

My goal is to still calculate a priming operation as a skirt (so it can hold a shape while making its minimum extrusion length), but with a little more control over its placement. Overall, though, this is a very minor gripe that is generally pretty easy to work around. If it isn't possible (or worth the time to try and implement), please go ahead and close this and I can make do with g-code changes.