Has anyone thought about printing narrower lines in order to get sharper corners? Once Linear advance or Pressure advance is activated, you don’t get bulging corners anymore… but can we do better?

Has this been implemented anywhere yet? Does it have a name?

  • Aux@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    That looks cool in 2D, but do it in 3D and you’ll see the issue - your corner will be lower than the rest of the wall.

      • Aux@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Filament is not squeezed as a 2D dot, it’s squeezed as a 3D sphere. If you decrease its radius, it will physically decrease in all three dimensions, not just two.

    • callcc@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Why would that be? There is no physical rule saying that narrow extrusions need to be flatter as well.

      • sj_zero@lotide.fbxl.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Because the same squeezing effect shown in the 2d plane would occur on the 3d plane as well.

        • callcc@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Hmm, not exactly sure I get your argument. I imagine every extrusion to tip slightly to the outside of the curve since material is elongated on the outside and squeezed on the inside. The excess material would be pushed to the inside while the outside of the curve would sink. Is that what you mean?

          • sj_zero@lotide.fbxl.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            in 3d space, your corner extrusion would suddenly be much thinner, so the choices for your filament would be to either droop to be supported by the previous layer or for the filament to sit underextruded in space if your part cooler is really up to the challenge.

              • sj_zero@lotide.fbxl.net
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Because that’s what happens when you reduce the amount of material being extruded in order to create much thinner lines in order to create sharper corners.

                • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  But the corners will have the same amount of material, since it is basically extruding 2 times on the same location during a corner.

                  Which is why the original corners have too much material.

                • callcc@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  It’s all a question of what exactly “much thinner” means, I expect to have some positive effect of the proposed method even when the minimum extrusion width is above the threshold where things become too thin.

                  Overall I expect the described method to make more sense with large nozzles and wide extrusions.

                  Thanks for explaining what you mean!

    • callcc@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      To my understanding, pressure advance only compensates for non-linearities in the extrusion process. These non-linearities, if not taken into account would thin out the path at the beginning (missing pressure) and lead to an excess of material at the end (excess pressure buildup).

      With perfect compensation of these non-linearities but no changes to the target line-width and path, the minimum achievable outer radius is equal to that of the extrusion width. I’m wondering if that minimum radius could not be reduced by progressively reducing the target extrusion width the closer you get to the corner. On top of that you would need to adjust the path towards the outside in order to keep the outer wall straight.

      Edit: to my understanding, a classical corner will also result in a buildup of material inside, this can be explained by the nozzle orifice dwelling longer on the inside of the corner. This excess moves to the inside, creating a round corner on the inside as well.

      My proposal would also combat this inner excess, thus giving overall sharper corners.

      • callcc@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Maybe my sketch doesn’t make it clear. I mean to intentionally make the extrusion narrower and make the print path go outwards to compensate for the narrower extrusion.

          • callcc@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            The actual extrusion or the extruder input? Of course it will also reduce the extrusion if badly tuned, I guess that’s not the idea though. PA is also needed for straight lines with variable speed. It does help with corners but would need additional path corrections.

            As shown in my sketches below:

  • rambos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    Interesting. This is new to me and it looks like it could work. It could be usefull if you print with 0.6 nozzle at 0.6 mm width and then in a corner narrow it down to 0.4 mm

    • callcc@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Exactly. Cura already does variable width lines but mostly to be able to print narrow sections or to fill narrow space between outlines. It could also use this technique to do sharper corners. Unfortunately to my understanding, firmwares don’t yet support G1s with variable target extrusion rates. Ie. start extrusion rate = X and end extrusion rate = Y. Using this feature, my idea could be implemented in just 5 G1s per corner vs 1 for non-sharp corners.

  • u_tamtam@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    So you would need different later heights around the edges just to stack those ever thinner lines? How do you think this will interact with the rest of the print?

    • callcc@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      11 months ago

      This shows what happens with two different extrusion rates at the same layer height.

    • callcc@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      I would keep the layer height constant.

      The lines are not circular. You can have narrow lines and wide lines with the same height. The height is controlled by the space between the nozzle and layer below. The width is controlled by the amount of material you extrude.

      • u_tamtam@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I get that but your original sketch seemed to be showing smaller and smaller radiuses shaping the edge, which necessarily implies thinner and thinner layers. Now I fail to see what’s different from what sliders currently do.

  • echo64@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    11 months ago

    Not sure what you mean by printing ‘narrower’ lines. The width of a line is going to be set by your nozzle

    • IMALlama@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      You can totally extrude both narrower and wider than your nozzle. Heck, if you have a Slic3r based slicer like PrusaSlicer, Orca, SuperSlicer, etc and your extrusion width is expressed as a percentage, that percentage is a percentage of layer height - NOT nozzle diameter.

      If you’re using 0.2mm layers, your extrusion with is expressed as a percentage, and you’re using a 0.4mm nozzle your extrusion with is less than your actual nozel diameter. Unless you’re have 200% or more as the value.

      I print most of my prints with a 0.4mm nozzle and 0.6mm extrusion width.

      • lapis@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        This is definitely not true of OrcaSlicer, at least not anymore. I’m running an 0.6mm nozzle and 120% layer width at 0.2mm layer height results in 0.72mm line width, not 0.24mm.

        • callcc@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          It makes more sense for this parameter to be relative to the nozzle width if you ask me. But that doesn’t change that you can extrude wider or narrower than the nozzle.

    • callcc@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      Nonesense. It’s a combination of the amount of material extruded and the layer thickness.