Should Prusa slicer turn three combined STLs into one object?
I recently combined three STL files into one print using the amazing Galaxy Black but have a problem. Instead of slicing the combined files into a single object, it thinks it's still three separate items which complicates the infill of where the three meet.
Is there any way to fix this? It would have taken a lot less time if it wasn't trying to run three infill patterns at once.
Best Answer by Lichtjaeger:
You can import your stl files as parts or objects. If you have 3 different objects, then they will interfere. If you have 1 object with 3 parts, they will combine.
RE: Should Prusa slicer turn three combined STLs into one object?
Thank you. I will play around with adding the files as parts and not objects. One of the objects was added in Prusa slicer directly but the other two were imports. Didn't know the correct terms there.
RE: Should Prusa slicer turn three combined STLs into one object?
Shells are a mixed bag. When you have shells within shells, it is important to ensure the slicer has a way of knowing what surfaces are important: ie, the outside perimeters of the various parts. Often, multiple shells can confuse a slicer and you'll get a garbage-in garbage-out slice.
Consider your parts above: perhaps you wanted the "ears" of the center cube to be hollow areas, not filled. How would you tell the slicer the difference?
RE: Should Prusa slicer turn three combined STLs into one object?
Shells are a mixed bag. When you have shells within shells, it is important to ensure the slicer has a way of knowing what surfaces are important: ie, the outside perimeters of the various parts. Often, multiple shells can confuse a slicer and you'll get a garbage-in garbage-out slice.
Consider your parts above: perhaps you wanted the "ears" of the center cube to be hollow areas, not filled. How would you tell the slicer the difference?
You are talking about face normals. Faces are the "planes" defined by the points of a mesh. Normals define which side of the face is outside and which is inside. When you mess up normals, the problems you describe arise. This belongs to the modeling process and is not part of the question gregory-b10 asked here.
You should assume here that his objects are okay because the objects themselves are not part of the question.
RE: Should Prusa slicer turn three combined STLs into one object?
Shells are a mixed bag. When you have shells within shells, it is important to ensure the slicer has a way of knowing what surfaces are important: ie, the outside perimeters of the various parts. Often, multiple shells can confuse a slicer and you'll get a garbage-in garbage-out slice.
Consider your parts above: perhaps you wanted the "ears" of the center cube to be hollow areas, not filled. How would you tell the slicer the difference?
You are talking about face normals. Faces are the "planes" defined by the points of a mesh. Normals define which side of the face is outside and which is inside. When you mess up normals, the problems you describe arise. This belongs to the modeling process and is not part of the question gregory-b10 asked here.
You should assume here that his objects are okay because the objects themselves are not part of the question.
The final object printed out well but the infill was a mess. I have a dual color project in mind for these same things (not sure what to call them now) and will adjust as you stated.
RE: Should Prusa slicer turn three combined STLs into one object?
Did you try to export the combined and overlapping STLs as a new single STL first from PrusaSlicer and then perform "delete all" and import and use the new combined object STL for slicing and printing instead?
That process worked for us under Slic3r PE 1.41.3 and previously under the original Slic3r. PrusaSlicer is code based on Slic3r PE which is code based on Slic3r.
RE: Should Prusa slicer turn three combined STLs into one object?
Shells are a mixed bag. When you have shells within shells, it is important to ensure the slicer has a way of knowing what surfaces are important: ie, the outside perimeters of the various parts. Often, multiple shells can confuse a slicer and you'll get a garbage-in garbage-out slice.
Consider your parts above: perhaps you wanted the "ears" of the center cube to be hollow areas, not filled. How would you tell the slicer the difference?
You are talking about face normals. Faces are the "planes" defined by the points of a mesh. Normals define which side of the face is outside and which is inside. When you mess up normals, the problems you describe arise. This belongs to the modeling process and is not part of the question gregory-b10 asked here.
You should assume here that his objects are okay because the objects themselves are not part of the question.
If faces and normals are part of an STL, they should be detectable in the file. What would a person look for in the STL to define the start of a "normal" or exterior surface?
RE: Should Prusa slicer turn three combined STLs into one object?
You are talking about face normals. Faces are the "planes" defined by the points of a mesh. Normals define which side of the face is outside and which is inside. When you mess up normals, the problems you describe arise. This belongs to the modeling process and is not part of the question gregory-b10 asked here.
You should assume here that his objects are okay because the objects themselves are not part of the question.
If faces and normals are part of an STL, they should be detectable in the file. What would a person look for in the STL to define the start of a "normal" or exterior surface?
Let's take a look at the first block of a usual STL:
facet normal 0.187597 -0.577354 -0.794651 // start a face and define the normal vector (Aha!)
outer loop // start outline
vertex 0.000000 0.000000 -1.000000 // first point
vertex 0.723600 -0.525720 -0.447215 // second point
vertex -0.276385 -0.850640 -0.447215 // final point
endloop // connect outline points
endfacet // finish face
RE: Should Prusa slicer turn three combined STLs into one object?
I have a dual color project in mind for these same things...
For MMU the bodies should not interfere. They should sit face to face. If we take the example of the cubes again, you would subtract the outer cubes from the inner one using a boolean operation to prepare the model. Suitable software for this would be Meshmixer or Blender.
To make clear how it should look like, see this: