TazMan2000
Master Member
Which slicer are you using? Can you switch to regular supports.
TazMan2000
TazMan2000
Let's Talk All Things 3d for prop creation, Scan, Design, Sculpt (real and digital), Print and Finish
- Thread starter greenmachines
- Start date
That's the strange thing with that STL I can change the support options in Bambu Studio but after slicing it's showing and then printing the same set of thin supports, the trees are conical shaped with no branches.
I've just finished printing a different STL file
It has both better under chin and underbelly support but overall a nice detailed print..
On first survey it looks better than the up loaders print going by their photos especially the layer lines, mine are much smoother
With much better detail.
Another thing was that in my relatively short 3D adventure, supports usually pop off with ease this file felt like you needed the strength of THOR to budge them.
TazMan2000
Master Member
What nozzle diameter are you using? In your settings, what angle are supports automatically generated? In CURA that's called the Support Overhang Angle an it is usually set at 45 degrees, based on a 0.4mm nozzle. It may be called something different in your slicer.
I find that tree supports should only be used in special cases and not on every type of print. Sometimes I have to use pliers to remove regular supports.
TazMan2000
Nozzle is 0.4
Bambu Studio alerts if supports are needed during slicing.
I'll check the overhang tomorrow.
Meanwhile I just had to print this!
Greedo cactus pot!
In this picture I see trees but still see noodling. Since you mentioned they were difficult to remove, I will also say they are not "too far away from the surface" but will say they are not EVERYWHERE that they should be. The noodling on the belly, that is still happening where there is no tree, is very likely due to the angle meter that Taz was referring to. Your current setting believes it to be not critical, not NOT steep (near horizontal is where supports are needed) and IS considered a marginal (not supported) overhang. Those are 3 separate settings:
1) support only critical areas
Turn it off for this print
2) Support angle, measured from the bed up (most but not all slicers), flat to rising. Anything between this number and 0 (horizontal) will get supports
Raise this number for this print to 30 and possibly up to 45
3) Remove small overhangs, removes support if the overhang is considered small in distance horizontally
Turn this off for this print
4 ) just kidding, there were three.... But, can you remove those trees and show if where they were the noodling did not occur or did anyway? In your specific print, this lack of support just outside the belly should cause the supported section to come away, still attached to the trees.
After this issue is resolved, you can make supports easier to remove by increasing the "top z distance". Mine is 2.5 but I like ease. 2 is standard and creates a more perfect surface but is harder to remove. Below 2 and you are making the supports a permanent part of the print. I cannot use Normal (non tree) support without 2.5 to 2.75 top z and making the support pattern gyroid (makes it very strong so I can grab it with pliers to remove).
smithjohnj
Sr Member
Your concept is correct. You cannot angle the print bed, but you can angle the object you are printing on the print bed. The slicing software will allow you to rotate your object in all 3 axes, individually or in combination, and even raise it above the print bed. Of course any of these changes will require a new calculation of the automatic, support structure the specific slicing software believes will provide the best print. No software is perfect and not all their bugs have been reported or fixed. Changing an object's orientation "forces" the software to recalculate and sometimes improve the situation.Question about the printing of the "bridge": would it be possible to angle the print bed to help with the bridging?
Even if someone does not have a 3D printer I think it would be a good learning exercise to download one of the free slicer programs and examine the user interface. It will provide the terminology and controls which that slicer uses and so point to possible problems or issues the control was added to address. I do find that the printer manufacturers do recommend the slicer they feel best serves their own printer. Over the years I have used Cura, Slic3r, and most recently PrusaSlicer (which is Prusa's own modification of Sli3r.) PrusaSlicer has three modes Beginner, Normal, and Expert, each with more advanced features and since I now only have Prusa printers I have fallen in the habit of only using it. So far I have not been disappointed by the results. Since Prusa also produces their own filament they test and provide default values for the controls for their own and other common products. Again, just examining their default values may provide useful information to be incorporated into other slicer software. Most slicers are associated with a specific printer but I am not aware of any proprietary printer features which one company provides on their printer which is not available on others. So the g-code produced by one software should work with any printer. However, if proprietary features exist those would be useful and helpful information to add to this forum thread.
This must be photoshopped.... I have it on good authority from about 1000 Bambu owners on Facebook that any problems are caused by the operator, not the machine.
I had noticed there were extra fingers growing out here just like the usual AI errors.This must be photoshopped.... I have it on good authority from about 1000 Bambu owners on Facebook that any problems are caused by the operator, not the machine.
Those FB threads are hilarious...This must be photoshopped.... I have it on good authority from about 1000 Bambu owners on Facebook that any problems are caused by the operator, not the machine.
Jackalgirl
New Member
Hi, new here, and I thought I might share some info for anyone who's struggling with Blender (which I use, because I hate myself I guess). I've searched the Forum for a "Blender Tips" thread and don't see one, probably because you all aren't insane.
Anyway,
1) There is an add-on for 3D printing, called "3D Print". It's very useful and I recommend it.
2) When using Boolean modifiers to assemble a mesh, make sure to back it up (a "pre-boolean" version). This way, if you need to go back and make adjustments or fix things, you can.
3) Use the 3D Print add-on's check for non-manifold things with each step. If something's not manifold, use the "make manifold" option to make it manifold. If this ruins your mesh, back up and either fix the non-manifold elements manually or, better yet, figure out why they're not manifold. If you keep applying Booleans without fixing the issue, though, you'll compound the problem to the point where it will be unrecoverable and you will make your slicer cry.
For example, I had an issue importing a number that I had created using Inkscape (which imported as a curve). Inkscape handles vector curves differently from Blender, I'm pretty sure, so Blender doesn't always understand what the nodes of the curves are supposed to be. It tries its best, bless its heart, but you might have to make some fixes, and it's important that you catch this early. What I needed to do was use the Solidify modifier while the number was still a curve, and look for places in the curve where the mesh was jagged/deformed. I was able to convert the associated nodes/points to "Automatic" and it fixed the issue. It was one point,and this one thing fixed the issue completely. I did not do this at first, and it rendered my mesh into a non-manifold mess that I wasted an entire day trying to fix manually before it occurred to me to go see if I could find a problem with the initial curve.
(The funny thing was, I had acutally noticed a problem with the curve, but "solved" it by making the Solidify modifier make the mesh "thinner" so that the problem wasn't visually apparent. But it was still there. So my shortcut turned into a huge longcut. Learn from my fail, please.)
I don't have a lot of spare time to dedicate to learning Blender, so I still spend 99% of my time using search engines to search for "blender how to (the thing I want to do)", but this is hard-won information I got, that I could not find in any tutorial anywhere, that I'm hoping someone finds useful here.
Anyway,
1) There is an add-on for 3D printing, called "3D Print". It's very useful and I recommend it.
2) When using Boolean modifiers to assemble a mesh, make sure to back it up (a "pre-boolean" version). This way, if you need to go back and make adjustments or fix things, you can.
3) Use the 3D Print add-on's check for non-manifold things with each step. If something's not manifold, use the "make manifold" option to make it manifold. If this ruins your mesh, back up and either fix the non-manifold elements manually or, better yet, figure out why they're not manifold. If you keep applying Booleans without fixing the issue, though, you'll compound the problem to the point where it will be unrecoverable and you will make your slicer cry.
For example, I had an issue importing a number that I had created using Inkscape (which imported as a curve). Inkscape handles vector curves differently from Blender, I'm pretty sure, so Blender doesn't always understand what the nodes of the curves are supposed to be. It tries its best, bless its heart, but you might have to make some fixes, and it's important that you catch this early. What I needed to do was use the Solidify modifier while the number was still a curve, and look for places in the curve where the mesh was jagged/deformed. I was able to convert the associated nodes/points to "Automatic" and it fixed the issue. It was one point,and this one thing fixed the issue completely. I did not do this at first, and it rendered my mesh into a non-manifold mess that I wasted an entire day trying to fix manually before it occurred to me to go see if I could find a problem with the initial curve.
(The funny thing was, I had acutally noticed a problem with the curve, but "solved" it by making the Solidify modifier make the mesh "thinner" so that the problem wasn't visually apparent. But it was still there. So my shortcut turned into a huge longcut. Learn from my fail, please.)
I don't have a lot of spare time to dedicate to learning Blender, so I still spend 99% of my time using search engines to search for "blender how to (the thing I want to do)", but this is hard-won information I got, that I could not find in any tutorial anywhere, that I'm hoping someone finds useful here.
Jackalgirl I am a 3d artist by trade, and even now after years, my system is set to autosave every 2 minutes (will allow short-term recovery) and I manually save before any major changes (applying ANY modifier in Blender is a great example). This is also why I have TERABYTES of storage dedicated to previous projects. As an example, I have a complete Arkham Origins batman armor suit that is about 50 individual models. The final Blender save was about 1 gigabyte in size, while the exported files are about 1/2 that in size. The folder that has the progress files for all of the work and individual saves is nearly 20 gigabytes, every major progress save (and I don't save much) after a change is there at the cost of a lot of drive space.
I keep all of those saves because sometimes modifying a particular model file might seem easy, but after some things have been permanently applied it becomes VERY difficult. The analogy I use sometimes is, imagine Michelangelo finishing an giant marble sculpture like the Pieta, life size and so beautifully intricate. Then the cardinal shows up and says 'Wow perfect! but can you turn her head 3 degrees to the right and tip the hand down a little more?' If Michelangelo had all those 'progress saves' I mentioned above, he can go back to before maybe the head was carved or the hand was still part of a clay test, he can adjust them, and start from there. But without that archive to go back to, you can imagine... Cut the head off, turn it, try to sculpt the seams and details to look good again with all that anatomy involved?
3d modeling can be the same way, applying those modifiers is like putting a clay sculpture in a kiln and firing it. Turning a head or raising a hand is not so bad in clay, but once it's fired.... Nobody wants to try try and cut that head off
I keep all of those saves because sometimes modifying a particular model file might seem easy, but after some things have been permanently applied it becomes VERY difficult. The analogy I use sometimes is, imagine Michelangelo finishing an giant marble sculpture like the Pieta, life size and so beautifully intricate. Then the cardinal shows up and says 'Wow perfect! but can you turn her head 3 degrees to the right and tip the hand down a little more?' If Michelangelo had all those 'progress saves' I mentioned above, he can go back to before maybe the head was carved or the hand was still part of a clay test, he can adjust them, and start from there. But without that archive to go back to, you can imagine... Cut the head off, turn it, try to sculpt the seams and details to look good again with all that anatomy involved?
3d modeling can be the same way, applying those modifiers is like putting a clay sculpture in a kiln and firing it. Turning a head or raising a hand is not so bad in clay, but once it's fired.... Nobody wants to try try and cut that head off
Thank you for jumping in. Blender and Inkscape are my two newest self torture devices. I have a long painful history with CAD of several flavors and loathe them all. I can't even fathom how some programs are even used, they are so counter intuitive. But I have loved photoshop and illustrator and especially Corel so am really loving how Inkscape follows in their tool usage and placement, shortcuts and layout. Blender..... well, it is free.... and powerful .... and EXTREMELY COUNTER INTUITIVE, so every hint or tip you have is most certainly welcome.
The fact that you made me aware of the 3d additions is the gift I am accepting from today's threads. This made my day. I really just want the tools that make prop creation available to everyone to become understandable on a basic level. Remembering hundreds of special sequences and combinations of tools makes me want to take up Kung Fu and wander the world righting the wrongs, which would consist of me slapping the crap out of people for not putting join, group, combine, slice, cutout, weld, emboss and merge options in the one friggin location. The fact that join and unjoin do not occupy the same menu in Blender is enough to ..... anyway. Thank you so much for jumping in and keep em coming. Always appreciate a human perspective on what is useful and why.
Jackalgirl
New Member
Thank you both for your reply -- excellent points & observations! Every time I use Blender, I'm reminded of the fact that yes, it's powerful. Yes, it has a lot of options. But boy is it stupid, in that Ron Burgundy way that software has of doing exactly what you tell it to do, and greenmachines you're 100% correct in that the interface is a vertical uphill climb when it comes to learning the right way (in the right order, because in Blender, the Order of Operations really matters) to talk to it.
I am endlessly grateful for all of the people who have posted info on the Internet because I kid you not, using Blender for me is "try to do a thing, Google how to do the thing in Blender. Try to do that thing, Google how to find the thing I'm being told to do in Blender 4.4". It's excruciating sometimes.
The other thing about Blender is that there are many different ways to do the same thing, which is...great? I guess? But it makes it more challenging for people to teach one another.
For example, greenmachines, you're mentioning that "join and unjoin do not occupy the same menu in Blender" and this is new to me. I think it's because I don't use menus for these operations -- I use the Boolean modifier. I haven't even delved into most of the tool options (I just learned about the bevel tool and I think I have tried to use the slice tool twice). There's just so much. Low-key jealous of you, Iaelee, for having a job that makes you use it all the time, though I imagine that at times, it's got to be frustrating. I 100% get you on the "save every couple of minutes" (this is extremely good gouge) but I can't imagine trying to keep track of which save incorporates which step(s) or design phases, in case the client says "yes, this is great, but change this thing" which I am sure they do all the time, and you have to figure out which save to recall.
I am endlessly grateful for all of the people who have posted info on the Internet because I kid you not, using Blender for me is "try to do a thing, Google how to do the thing in Blender. Try to do that thing, Google how to find the thing I'm being told to do in Blender 4.4". It's excruciating sometimes.
The other thing about Blender is that there are many different ways to do the same thing, which is...great? I guess? But it makes it more challenging for people to teach one another.
For example, greenmachines, you're mentioning that "join and unjoin do not occupy the same menu in Blender" and this is new to me. I think it's because I don't use menus for these operations -- I use the Boolean modifier. I haven't even delved into most of the tool options (I just learned about the bevel tool and I think I have tried to use the slice tool twice). There's just so much. Low-key jealous of you, Iaelee, for having a job that makes you use it all the time, though I imagine that at times, it's got to be frustrating. I 100% get you on the "save every couple of minutes" (this is extremely good gouge) but I can't imagine trying to keep track of which save incorporates which step(s) or design phases, in case the client says "yes, this is great, but change this thing" which I am sure they do all the time, and you have to figure out which save to recall.
On realising my laptop was over ten yrs old I went and bought a new one last week, I usually do everything on my phone but wanted something more zippy to play with Blender.
I have been using the 3D model Maker on Makerworld recently which to myself anyway seems like another level of magic.
Throw a photograph at it and it conjures up a 3D image. I have noticed it seems to be improving week by week as giving it the same image improves detail wise.
Auto generated ESB Come link from a screen grab
3D version ruff n ready quick print.
Aurora Monster head
I'm pretty impressed..
It can even generate a
3 Dimensional mini me..
I have been using the 3D model Maker on Makerworld recently which to myself anyway seems like another level of magic.
Throw a photograph at it and it conjures up a 3D image. I have noticed it seems to be improving week by week as giving it the same image improves detail wise.
Auto generated ESB Come link from a screen grab
3D version ruff n ready quick print.
Aurora Monster head
I'm pretty impressed..
It can even generate a
3 Dimensional mini me..
I signed up a while ago but didn't get passed the intense membership info form, due to not actually owning one of their products ........ hehehehe. But you have convinced me to try again. One day, my replicator will offer and I will say ,"No, not earl grey, do you have any red? But berry is fine too. Bone china cup please, blue toile.'
and thank you for this. Your results are critically better than the ones I have tested.
Last edited:
A replicator would be awesome but I'm still holding out for a 1.1 scale 3D house printer as I'd love to design and print my own home.
Rum and OJ.. Make it so!
Similar threads
