suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing Consider 4- and 5-axis mills that support rotation of the workpiece around X and/or Y. If we did something like that for an FDM printer, it means you could have filament paths that are fully supported but not planar, i.e. you can construct an object out of arbitrary paths. This would have a number of advantages: - some dramatic overhangs are no longer overhangs at all; you can build arms out radially from a core - aliasing issues seen on sharp external edges (eg visor on Marvin keychain) go away because perimeter extrusions can happen at any angle - filament paths can be optimised for more tensile strength in Z The drawback to trivially converting a bridge to a column is that it weakens, but the "slicer"/CAM could avoid that problem by weaving layers at different angles, or by building shorter (and weak) support buttresses instead of full-height towers, then laying on filament in the bridge in the bridge's primary axis. I do realise that generating the G-code for this is really really hard. I don't expect to see it happen in the reprap world in the next 5 years but if/when it does, it would be a quantum step up in print quality without the expense of SLS or mess of resin. Printer build cost might go up by 50% to add 2 rotation axes to the bed. https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,415953#msg-415953 Sat, 08 Aug 2026 05:33:57 -0400 Phorum 5.2.23 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,547661#msg-547661 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,547661#msg-547661 5 axis desktop mill]]> simspeed Developers Thu, 20 Aug 2015 00:40:13 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,528053#msg-528053 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,528053#msg-528053
Found another semi interesting video for this topic: 5-axis 3D printing - Surface Conformal 3D Printing (5axismaker)]]> Dejay Developers Wed, 01 Jul 2015 14:15:17 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,528035#msg-528035 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,528035#msg-528035 3dprint.com]

Hopefully the details will be released soon.

Note: With a rotating bed, one thing you definitely need to think about is the level of the bed. If it's not flat (and you can't compensate for whatever reason, be it design, lack of a sensor, etc), you will have issues with objects sticking to your bed.]]> Cefiar Developers Wed, 01 Jul 2015 13:15:52 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,519256#msg-519256 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,519256#msg-519256 -Olaf]]> o_lampe Developers Tue, 09 Jun 2015 04:21:21 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,519019#msg-519019 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,519019#msg-519019
Quote
GRAYWOLF
Quote
nicholas.seward
@GRAYWOLF: Going off the rails here but you could do it with a static heating element. Transmit thermal instead of electrical energy.

Kepping it slightly off topic - Would one of them infered heaters work?
Yeah or even induction heating.]]> nicholas.seward Developers Mon, 08 Jun 2015 13:11:06 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,519017#msg-519017 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,519017#msg-519017
Quote
nicholas.seward
@GRAYWOLF: Going off the rails here but you could do it with a static heating element. Transmit thermal instead of electrical energy.

Kepping it slightly off topic - Would one of them infered heaters work?]]> GRAYWOLF Developers Mon, 08 Jun 2015 13:05:17 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,518848#msg-518848 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,518848#msg-518848 Dejay Developers Mon, 08 Jun 2015 04:17:20 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,518839#msg-518839 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,518839#msg-518839 nicholas.seward Developers Mon, 08 Jun 2015 03:46:40 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,518827#msg-518827 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,518827#msg-518827
you could run the wiring through the bed arm but still a swivel connection will need to be fitted somewhere.

BTW someone is working on a rotating bed printer on this forum somewhere]]> GRAYWOLF Developers Mon, 08 Jun 2015 02:59:16 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,518803#msg-518803 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,518803#msg-518803
Quote
paucus
I need to try it by hand I guess, but I would imagine that a long bridge WOULD be affected by gravity, so if you made it vertically it would be much straighter... maybe my intuition is wrong. Anyone try it? But sagging is due to gravity, so if you remove it, it should not sag. And with FDM bridging is the big problem to getting better prints of ANY geometry...

Paucus

Absolutely. Bridging could be greatly improved by changing the direction of gravity (or eliminating it). If improving bridging is the goal, you only need one additional DOF. Print sideways and have the additional DOF rotate around the printers Z. If you want to print with standard gcode, have the firmware approximately align long moves with gravity.]]> nicholas.seward Developers Mon, 08 Jun 2015 00:25:59 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,518785#msg-518785 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,518785#msg-518785
Paucus]]> paucus Developers Sun, 07 Jun 2015 22:50:55 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,518756#msg-518756 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,518756#msg-518756 I don't know if I understand what you are saying. Rotating the complete printer would only change the direction of gravity. And the printers you observed that print sideways or upside down only show that gravity has not much influence.

If we could rotate the complete printer, but not the build platform, instead of only rotationg the nozzle, that could possible be a way. Also only rotating the build platform, but not the printer,...

The main problem still remains, besides that hardware you need completely new Slicers,...]]> JustAnotherOne Developers Sun, 07 Jun 2015 19:10:37 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,518755#msg-518755 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,518755#msg-518755 nicholas.seward Developers Sun, 07 Jun 2015 19:10:10 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,518749#msg-518749 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,518749#msg-518749 I've seen 3d printers printing sideways and upside down, and in 0-gravity even, so it should work...
You should be able to print bridges vertically, at least a couple of layers, then return to "normal" and continue printing, with a smart slicer... getting that smarts into the slicer is the difficult part, but doable, bridges are already recognized internally in the slicer as such.

Paucus]]> paucus Developers Sun, 07 Jun 2015 19:03:14 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,500070#msg-500070 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,500070#msg-500070 nicholas.seward Developers Tue, 21 Apr 2015 23:59:37 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,500057#msg-500057 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,500057#msg-500057
Adobe Files Patent for ‘Smooth 3D Printing’ Process (I think it's a different process)

5AxisMaker – First Affordable 5-axis 3D Printer (you probably already know about this).]]> Dejay Developers Tue, 21 Apr 2015 22:42:30 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,499175#msg-499175 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,499175#msg-499175
Quote
JustAnotherOne
@nicholas.seward : I don't see the need for slicing on a phone, thats probably me growing too old.

Haha I can relate to that. But a cheap $50 android tablet for example could be the perfect "screen" for a 3D printer. Just one use case.

I think html5 is great for a prototype for another reason. Anybody will be able to test the slicer without having to install or build or compile anything - no package or library not even an app. And a prototype shouldn't also have the burden of also being production ready or optimized anyway. Experimentation and easy deployment are far more important than a few seconds speed. If these ideas and algorithms work out you can be sure someone will port it to c++ and could simply replace the whole slicer module in Cura. Or something.

Also javascript is being compiled by the browser so it's not a interpreted language anymore. And for an academic there aren't even any performance differences except for stuff like o(n^2) and o(logn) ;)

And sometimes it's much easier to test an idea by starting "tabula rasa" instead of working with a big code base.]]> Dejay Developers Sun, 19 Apr 2015 18:11:42 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,499172#msg-499172 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,499172#msg-499172
There is no magic wand of compiled vs scripting languages that will account for the difference between the runtimes of Skeingforge and Cura. It is all about smart design. (For some perspective, my student's code initially took hours to do his nonplanar slicing. It now takes less than a minute. I also know that he has not optimized many things that are hurting his performance. His code is written purely in Java.)

You are right about things a slicer does. However, the middle part where you define the layers is defined by one number in Cura. In a nonplanar slicer it will need to adjust to the model and it will need the engine to have helpful tools to decide on how to warp those layers. Even the gcode generation at the end will have to be redone. You will have to continuously look at how far layers is are from the layer below (because it is always changing) to adjust the extrusion amount. It all goes to shit if you allow layers that aren't functions of x,y. (A vertical line can go through more than one point of a layer.)

To be clear, I will do a design review of all the open source slicers I can find before I start in earnest. If one can be modified with less effort than building a new one then I will. Additionally, even with the c++ backend of Cura it could be ported to HTML5. PNaCL

I understand that you are trying to be helpful and trying to push me toward Cura is a smart thing to do. I just know how I would optimize a slicer for planar layers (Cura) and many of those optimizations would prevent the use of nonplanar layers. Again, I will read through the code base and hope to be wrong.]]> nicholas.seward Developers Sun, 19 Apr 2015 18:08:04 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,499141#msg-499141 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,499141#msg-499141
But more important you misunderstand Cura. You are right that the GUI is Python just as Skeingforge but the fast Slicer is C++ !

Cura == Python == GUI
CuraEngine == C++ == Slicer used by Cura

So with JS being as fast or faster than Python you will be as fast or faster as Skeinforge.

The speed difference between Skeinforge and Cura is simply the difference between compiled code and interpreted scripting languages. The Code of CuraEngine might also bee smarter than Skeinforge. I don't want to step on anybodies toes here. But the huge difference is not smarter code.

From what I know about slicers it starts with reading the Model File. With STL Files the next step is decoding the triangles, checking for manifold, direction of normals (where is outside), fixing inconsistencies,... There are a lot of malformed STL Files (And STL generators) out there and Cura has different mechanisms to deal with many of these problems.

And it ends with translating the calculated path into G-Codes and writing the G-Codes into a File.

I don't see the big difference between nonplanar and planar slicers in those two parts. But I'm just trying to be helpful, so just ignore me if I'm wrong.]]> JustAnotherOne Developers Sun, 19 Apr 2015 16:30:21 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,499011#msg-499011 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,499011#msg-499011
With an HTML5 approach, all I have to do is give someone a web address. They can have a phone, tablet, mac, pc, linuxbox, etc and it will just work. I could even give a link to it preconfigured if I am helping someone. People could share configs for different printers and different prints. It isn't so easy to do all that unless it is web based.

I agree that Cura is amazing. They got it right. I will be spending a lot of time studying their code. If it is possible to sanely make it a plugin. I am pretty sure that Cura hasn't provisioned for allowing nonplanar stuff in any meaningful way. (I have seen the wavy print from cura but those are still very very far from what I am trying to do.)

Bottomline: A nonplanar slicer doesn't exist and its codebase will be substantially different from a planar slicer.

I should also not that there are projects like pypy.js that could allow me to port Cura into HTML5 and make it faster with minimal changes. (I am not saying that is how I am going to go but it is certainly possible.)]]> nicholas.seward Developers Sun, 19 Apr 2015 12:30:00 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,498996#msg-498996 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,498996#msg-498996
Quote
nicholas.seward
@JustAnotherOne:

1) Speed is not really an issue. Cura is a great example of a high level language implementation that is fast. With smart algorithms and data structures many operations can be O(1) or O(log(n)). I never used Skeingforge but I suspect that it does many things with O(n) complexity or worse.

I agree that speed is not the most important issue. But Slicing the same Model on the same PC took 20 minutes with Skeingforge compared to 1 second with Cura. That is a rather substantial difference. And it would be sad if we would loose this benefit.

Quote
nicholas.seward
2) I will look at Cura but remember that it was designed for planar printing. There are so many way planes simplify slicing that I would be suprised if it wasn't baked in.

It is open Source and modular. I only wanted to suggest to not start completely new, but to use the code that is already available. If you manage to make your changes as a CuraEngine plugin/Extension then even better.

Quote
nicholas.seward
3) HTML5 is cross platform, social, accessible, extendible, etc. If you want a desktop app use it as a standalone chrome app. It is all client based so the server only has to send the script. It is easy for others to steal my code for integration into other online workflows.

"social, accessible, " That is bullshit. Then you can say the same about C++. C++ is cross platform, extendable, you can do desktop apps, it is all client based and the server does not even need to send the script. And the code is easily reusable.

Quote
nicholas.seward
4) You can also inject custom user code into app. Writing a user script to print some layers at .2 and others at .4 based on rate of cross section change would be a few lines of code. Particularly useful hacks can be sent to me for consideration as a standard button feature.

I hope I have made my case but we won't really know until I build it.

Cura has already a finished Plugin for such things. So for do something at layer X you need no code at all as the plugin is already done.

If you say that C++ is not your language and all you can code in is JavaScript, then do it. But just for being "social" I think the speed penalty that will probably be in the same order of Skeinforge compared to CuraEngine is too much. But that is only my opinion, you may have your own.]]> JustAnotherOne Developers Sun, 19 Apr 2015 11:25:08 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,498978#msg-498978 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,498978#msg-498978
1) Speed is not really an issue. Cura is a great example of a high level language implementation that is fast. With smart algorithms and data structures many operations can be O(1) or O(log(n)). I never used Skeingforge but I suspect that it does many things with O(n) complexity or worse.

2) I will look at Cura but remember that it was designed for planar printing. There are so many way planes simplify slicing that I would be suprised if it wasn't baked in.

3) HTML5 is cross platform, social, accessible, extendible, etc. If you want a desktop app use it as a standalone chrome app. It is all client based so the server only has to send the script. It is easy for others to steal my code for integration into other online workflows.

4) You can also inject custom user code into app. Writing a user script to print some layers at .2 and others at .4 based on rate of cross section change would be a few lines of code. Particularly useful hacks can be sent to me for consideration as a standard button feature.

I hope I have made my case but we won't really know until I build it.]]> nicholas.seward Developers Sun, 19 Apr 2015 10:41:27 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,498910#msg-498910 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,498910#msg-498910
I disagree with @Dejay on this. I don't think that html5 is a good platform for a slicer. I think that if you compare Skeingforge to Cura in speed you will see why.

Maybe you can save some time in slicer development if you start by extending CuraEngine ? There is no value in reinventing the wheel all the time, right?]]> JustAnotherOne Developers Sun, 19 Apr 2015 07:12:02 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,498758#msg-498758 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,498758#msg-498758
And html5/javascript as a web app for a slicer would be a great platform as well.]]> Dejay Developers Sat, 18 Apr 2015 19:53:44 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,498722#msg-498722 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,498722#msg-498722 [attachment 53118 IMG_20150330_232854.jpg]

Here is another result of my students generalized nonplanar slicer. He is planning on making it open source although it isn't polished enough for a product for those that don't want to dig in the code.

I personally am trying to hobble together a nonplanar slicer for html5.

My baby steps in no particular order are...
1) Allow wavy layers for fun. (Nick Parker test the strength and didn't get much of an increase in shear strength. More testing is required.)
2) Smooth out top layers.
3) Angled bridging
4) Slightly increase in support-less overhang angle. (At least until I upgrade from 3D to 6Dprinting.)
5) Print on arbitrary surfaces.

If I keep 5D printing in mind while I implement all of these for a standard 3D printer then the transition should be smooth. (pun intended.)

I know the argument against this is how to do this well you will have to make the software similar to CAM software for 5D mills. (It is a steep learning curve.) However, I have pretty good algorithms to solve all 5 of the problems above. To switch to 6D I will just have the printer's nozzle remain perpendicular (withing an allow deviation range) to the local normal of the layer. Once, I do that then I can do crazy things like print a part like below with only one exposed layer.

[attachment 53119 thing.jpg]]]> nicholas.seward Developers Sat, 18 Apr 2015 17:37:11 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,498704#msg-498704 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,498704#msg-498704 1) Non-planar slicing with traditional 3-DOF XYZ mechanism printers (eg what Topolabs and Nick's student are doing)
2) 5D slicing with 5-DOF XYZAB mechanism printers (AB here meant in the CNC sense of rotary axes about X and Y, not just extruders)

You can do a lot of stuff with just non-planar slicing. I think it can do anything you'd want to do in the, say, 0-20 degree tilt range. That's where the stair-step effect and overhang droop are the worst. This is entirely a slicer issue. No new hardware or kinematics required.

I'm curious where the true 5D slicing would actually be really useful. Stuff like helically wrapping cylinders is cool, but how often are you really going to want to do that? It's hard for me to imagine an application that really justifies the development energy (at least compared to plain-jane non-planar slicing, which definitely seems worthwhile).]]> RCarlyle Developers Sat, 18 Apr 2015 16:47:14 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,498691#msg-498691 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,498691#msg-498691
Quote
RCarlyle
So, my question is, what "baby step" applications can we come up with for 5D tools that would be reasonable to implement in slicers? Top surface contouring is the best thing I can think of. What else can 5D printers do that wouldn't be hard to program?

What would we actually want from the slicer? I can think of three main requirements:
  1. improve part strength in the z axis by not having all extrusion parallel
  2. reduce staircase effect
  3. print overhangs and print partially "top down".

Can anyone think of any other?

1) The first one is probably the easiest. Cross stitching would be ideal but very hard, for example printing a cylinder from the inside to the outside but one layer parallel to the build platform and the next layer orthogonal. But adding a simple "wave" pattern like shown above in the slicer by nicholas' student might already be sufficient to increase strength in the Z axis significantly. More might not actually be feasible for most parts because of the limited rotation of the hotend and the size of the nozzle. Or maybe you can limit the cross stitching to the inside of the part.

2) The second one alone could probably also be done rather easily. To reduce the staircase effect you might do with simply angling the hotend along the surface normal and adjusting layer heights. You would basically add additional but thinner layers. You could take a space deformer (e.g. a 3D space grid deformer or a thin plate spline) and stretch / deform the model in Z so that the top surfaces are flat, then slice it normally and transform it back, reducing the layer sizes. Not sure if I explain this very well. Imagine a cube with a sloped top surface. You would stretch the cube so that the top surface is parallel to the print bed, slice it and then reverse the transformation. You would still slice the normal deterministic 2D way just on a deformed model to create "additional" layers so that the top comes out even.

3) For the third one you could break up a 3D model where overhang would have to be printed from a different orientation. Similar to algorithms that create convex parts out of a concave mesh. Stuff like that is used in game engines for rigid body physics. So you have to generate a kind of "seam line" where you would want to "attach" an part that is an overhang. For example the arms of a figure you would make a cut on the shoulders and leave the arms out first, then rotate the tool head to attach the arms from a different orientation. This wouldn't work for all cases (e.g. two overhangs facing each other) but probably for some practical cases. But even something simple like printing a window or a straight table with four legs won't really work. Something like an easily dissolvable support material would work much better.

1+2+3) Of course ideally you'd want a kind of global optimization over a lot of tool paths (big bowl of spaghetti!). You could initialize using the result of the standard 2.5D slicers and then try to optimize incrementally. You would calculate a local and global error value and try to nudge the pathes into a better shape. But using the "hamfisted" methods above might actually lead to better results because a local optimization could easily fall into a local optimization. Or it's simply way too expensive to calculate even in parallel on a GPU.

Maybe 5D printing is simply not really practical because of the limitations of FDM printing?

On the other side maybe you could implement portions of 1 and 2 even without additional axis? Even if the toolhead isn't angled to the surface normal you might be able to significantly reduce the staircase effect on the top layer by adding thinner layers. You'd simply have to adjust the extruder speed to the layer height. Maybe a dome shaped hotend nozzle would help with "ironing" the top layer more flat. And only adjusting layer height on the top surface alone (without any fancy deformations) could reduce the stair case effect.
And the wave pattern shown above should already increase strength of the part in the Z direction.

Well, just some crazy late night ideas! Hope any of it makes sense :)]]> Dejay Developers Sat, 18 Apr 2015 16:23:43 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,498637#msg-498637 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,498637#msg-498637
For a super easy hardware implementation, a simple column hexapod can be build on a column delta type architecture, but with three more columns. It's trivial to build. You could design and assemble such a hexapod over a weekend. And then controlling it is a bit more work, but it's really just implementing some additional kinematics and dynamics code based on published algorithms, perfectly doable for a decent programmer.

The big, hairy technical problem is getting the slicer to make decisions. Today's 2D slicing is more or less deterministic. Convert the 3D shape to a series of planes, outline and fill each plane, done. Sure, you've got special rules for things like support and bridges, but those are pretty simple ad hoc heuristics. (If the surface polygon normal is angled so and so, add a tower under it.) That's the stuff computers do well. 5D slicing is a lot harder. It's easy for a human being to say "I would slice that overhang using an angled motion path" or "this arc would print well if the tool paths traced the lower edge" but that's actually an extremely challenging form of recognition and judgment for a computer.

5D slicing with manually-defined tool paths is good for tech demos, but to make it useful in a mainstream sense, you need automated 5D slicing that uses some sort of judgment based on shape recognition to generate non-planar tool paths. That's big. It's arguably an AI application. To date, anyone putting that much effort into the software is selling it as a commercial CAM product, not giving it away for free.

So, my question is, what "baby step" applications can we come up with for 5D tools that would be reasonable to implement in slicers? Top surface contouring is the best thing I can think of. What else can 5D printers do that wouldn't be hard to program?]]> RCarlyle Developers Sat, 18 Apr 2015 14:04:13 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,492928#msg-492928 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,492928#msg-492928
My guess would be as soon as you even vary the orientation of inner and outer layers a little bit you will get far stronger parts. Or even just a wavy print like your picture should be much stronger in Z.]]> Dejay Developers Sat, 04 Apr 2015 23:01:43 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,492711#msg-492711 Re: suggestion: 4- or 5-axis printing https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?2,415953,492711#msg-492711
The 5D slicing that I am working on doesn't concern itself with mechanical properties but it will likely make the part stronger. The secret will be to make it just as easy or easier to use than a 3D slicer.]]> nicholas.seward Developers Sat, 04 Apr 2015 12:11:29 -0400