search

prusa3d / PrusaSlicer

G-code generator for 3D printers (RepRap, Makerbot, Ultimaker etc.)
https://www.prusa3d.com/prusaslicer/
GNU Affero General Public License v3.0
7.63k stars 1.92k forks source link

Solid infill should use selected fill pattern #5803

Open jbro-oregon opened 3 years ago

jbro-oregon commented 3 years ago

Version

2.3.0+win64

Operating system type + version

Windows 7 Professional 64-bit

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

Prusa mk2s FW: 3.2.3

Behavior

New feature request: Solid infill above bridged non-solid infill is rectilinear instead of selected fill pattern. It seems to me that solid infill should match the fill pattern selected, or at least have its own fill pattern selection pull-down instead of being stuck as only rectilinear with settable angle.

Project File (.3MF) where problem occurs

This is universal, not specific to a file. Slice anything and look at results to witness what I am describing.

rtyr commented 3 years ago

Why do you need it?

Most of the fill patterns are not suitable for 100% density.

andreyoleynik commented 3 years ago

Sometimes I need circular pattern or something like this

jbro-oregon commented 3 years ago

In some cases, I need concentric infill for best results. Having the solid layers stuck at rectilinear takes longer to print and reduces print quality. An example is a long and thin rectangle; the rectilinear back-and-forth path is very short, which can cause extrusion defects and takes longer to print than infill aligned with the long axis of the rectangle (like concentric).

SeeJayDee commented 3 years ago

I second this as a feature request. Being able to set the solid infill to one of the existing top- or bottom-infill patterns would allow better control over print defects and could also increase print speed. Use cases like @jbro-oregon's example are not uncommon.

carlosjln commented 3 years ago

Why do you need it?

@rtyr Because I don't want the printer to zig zag when it could perfectly do concentric lines and be quicker with less issues.

image

kuon commented 2 years ago

This seems similar to #2147 an #6014, maybe we can consolidate in one issue?

This is quite an important feature for me, is there any workaround?

michael-from-there commented 2 years ago

This seems similar to #2147 an #6014, maybe we can consolidate in one issue?

This is quite an important feature for me, is there any workaround?

  Try this

Infill: 0%

Vertical shells: Perimeters: ABIGNUMBER