Should Prusa Slicer be avoided for certain models?
In printing some recent RC cars, I've run into a problem using Prusa Slicer and the lack of "hole expansion". The designer chose to make the STL models accurate for small holes, but as all printers do, they shrink the hole size. To compensate, some designers purposely enlarge their hole diameters, but results may vary from printer to printer. Cura has a feature called "hole x-y expansion" (or something close to those words) that Prusa has philosophically considered & rejected from an old discussion on GitHub.. (and I don't see it in the 2.5 rc). Unless someone can tell he how, I don't think Prusa Slicer can accurately reproduce a model where the STL file does not enlarge small holes significantly. Now one can always drill out holes that are accessible.. but some holes might not be available.. and things like square holes can't be modified; and small bearings that get inserted 1/2 way into a part are very difficult to fix. Anyone have workarounds for this? Or do you just use SS or Cura for these projects ? Is this just a bad decision, or are there other ways to compensate? (the x-y expansion will fix holes but also will throw off the overall dimensions)
RE: Should Prusa Slicer be avoided for certain models?
Cura and PS both have their stronger points and their weaker points. I've had issues with hole sizes too.
On models for which I do not have the source files, I've worked around with a drill bit in a pin vise.
Once I went as far (one troublesome hole) as to convert the .stl mesh to solid in FreeCad, then do a cut with a cylinder of the correct size.
The basic procedure is test-print and calibrate.
Cheerio,
RE: Should Prusa Slicer be avoided for certain models?
My point is that it is not possible for the end user to test print and calibrate if you can't expand the holes independently of the overall dimension. With Cura, it is possible to do so.
The basic procedure is test-print and calibrate.
Cheerio,
if you can't expand the holes independently of the overall dimension.
What's stopping you?
Cheerio,
RE: Should Prusa Slicer be avoided for certain models?
People like these 'automatic' compensations as it means they can put off learning to modify models in CAD longer.
However its ALWAYS best to bite the bullet and learn anyway, as there will eventually be something that the automatic methods cant do. At least until we get much smarter AI anyway.
Of course, stupid of me. I'm so used to configuring my own that I forget - but this *can* be done manually in Prusa Slicer for the commoner shapes of hole. Perhaps the OP has a complex void to enlarge.
Cheerio,