This really shows how research doesn't have to be commercial, all you need is a community of enthusiastic people and good communication and they can produce innovation at absurd rates.
@@HE-162 I really hope this is sarcasm. Ah yes billion dollar companies must innovate on more anti repair and predatory monetization schemes because they really need that money to survive and not for the 16th yacht the bossman wants this year.
@@lawlcake8788 it is 100000% sarcasm. Just a prod at the chuds who think leftist economics won’t foster innovation. I quite literally think that we will see the greatest speed, quantity, and variety of innovation in human history if people’s basic needs were met and they had the time and resources to pursue their passions. Capitalism stifles innovation, people just can’t wrap their head about the notion that financial gain is not a prerequisite to development.
So sick! Using hilbert curves is brilliant. I freaking love open source innovation! What other products do you own that keep getting better over time?!
Don't forget Stefan himself for making the first video that inspired further development! Signal boosting small projects really goes a long way in accelerating their development.
Read on this a year ago, saw that it'll be available in Prusaslicer a week ago, and now it's finally here. Frankly, this has been one my most-awaited features to be implemented as easily accessible through any slicer for a long time now, and needless to say I'm ecstatic!
When I saw the first video on these arc based overhangs I tried to make a version of my own in Java. Instead of using arcs I expanded the already printed parts outer walls until it completely filled the overhanging part. It worked pretty well besides some strange edge cases!
Love seeing commercial/academic research being an inspiration to the open source community :) Excellent work from Nicolai and the rest of the team behind this! Software driven improvements are the key to moving AM on at the moment.
Great update Stefan! It's great to see what the open source community can do just a few months after my initial release :) Hopefully Prusaslicer and Cura will take another look now that arc overhangs are easily accessible!
The hilbert curve thing is absolutely brilliant. I'm so glad they found a solution to this problem. An idea I had for solving the warping was to just print the arc overhangs in a non-planar manner, with it curling downward. The next layers would print on top of it, causing it to warp upward into the shape it was originally meant to be. Obviously this has a ton of problems, but the hilbert curve avenue makes a lot more sense.
Arc Overhangs look like they'd be a perfect solution for internal overhangs where there's not enough space to remove support material or the surfaces need to be cleaner than supports would allow. I've come across situations like that now and then where I had to spend a lot more time reworking a part just to make it printable that could be solved by this, even if it cost a little extra printing time
Looking forward to this migrating to the main superslicer branch. I also wanna say I'm currently using your transparent printing video as a base to engineer an amount of diffusion to a translucent illuminated sign. Thanks for your very technical videos that have really informed my techniques and strategies with both design and printing.
Incredible how quickly this came about! This is the type of thing that make me really love open source software - passionate individuals helping to advance the state of the art for everyone, quickly. Thanks for showing these efforts!
Three months. Three f'ing months since I saw your previous video on the subject and shared it with a friend since I considered it cool a/f for the future of 3D printing. Really wasn't expecting a meaningful update on it for at least a year, or even two. Despite its issues with certain things, this is an illustration on why the Internet is awesome. :)
I'd say this would be a huge improvement for me, as I print functional parts mostly designed for 3D printability, but encounter some geometry that would make using supports inevitable. This would include counterbored holes, slight overhangs for detents, shoulders, etc. and just overall slight overhangs. This is a very big innovation in my book!
9:38 I agree. I think they should be added to the overhang-toolbox; another option to pick from, not completely replace something that's tried and true
Interesting use of the Hilbert curve. I do use it for my first layer on production parts that need a perfect face. Printing with ASA or ABS on a textured bed, layer lines are completely invisible once dialed in. The paper you cited about the stress relief baked into the path is making me wonder if the effect has something to do with the way my first layers perform. I always assumed it was simply the shape itself that was disguising the tool path. Perhaps there is more to it than that. Awesome work, as usual. Thanks.
Excellent overview Stefan! What an exciting time to be in additive manufacturing. More evidence that so much of our current limitations are software based and not hardware. I hope more people realize this and help invest in developing more clever solutions.
Cool! It's great to see this progressing! I'm curious how similar techniques could be used to reduce infill and enable steep but not fully horizontal exterior overhangs too. Lightning infill and tree supports are excellent for my current projects, but it seems like this could cut back even more on the amount of infill and supports needed.
I literally just stood over an active print, looking at all the wasted support material, and went, "Didn't I watch a video about printing in mid-air, a while back?" I then opened youtube, and you just uploaded this video. lol
I want the non-rectalinear solid infill options also for regular use. Large rectangular prints with 90 degree corners that fill up the whole print bed are prone to warping, and usually it occurs when a large part of the top surface gets solid infills. If those layers could be generated with a different pattern (now it's fixed in prusaslicer, I can't change the pattern) then less warping could be the result.
Honestly tree supports work pretty well right now but for certain files or geometry where support just doesn't work, would be impossible to remove, or ruins the print, it would be really cool to see arc overhangs develop to the point where support becomes obsolete in 3d printing and overhangs just print perfectly. One mistake I see many beginners make is not understanding what support is or where it is needed, and they try to print a file with impossible overhangs and it keeps failing and they don't understand why. If arc overhangs were included in all slicers and just worked without any issues then it would get rid of all the headaches that support gives people. This is a really cool development that can revolutionize 3d printing so thanks for covering it Stefan!
That's a charitable way of putting it. To me it seems more like a handful of really bright guys being really generous. Either way, I agree, some amazing stuff comes out of it.
@@amarissimus29 in this case yes, but (mostly) everyone has done something to help the community. Might not be as ground breaking, but uploading a stl to thingiverse you are building a stronger community.
In cases of really low infill percentage, using arcs on the infill bridge layer might be more feature than bug for keeping the pattern from showing on the top of the print.
Floating overhangs, they use helium bubbles to just, kind of, float there in space. Requires either solid air or speeds so fast things to have time to fall to work properly.
Wish this was in Cura so badly. I print so many complex parts for robotics in engineering and this would make many parts possible without breaking them into multiple pieces.
I discover multimaterials support with my Bambu lab and love it. PETG as interface support for PLA work perfectly, but PLA for PETG and ABS for PA-CG work too. It don't need lot of filament change for flat overhang and result is perfect!
Oh man I can't wait to try this. It's not going to work on my machine at first, I'm sure, but getting that first sort of successful print is going to be great!
One really exciting thing about this technique is that right now I tend to print a lot of things where I use ovals or arches in my designs so I can print what would otherwise be difficult overhangs. Once this makes it to cura, I bet I won't need to design that way and can use straight overhangs and save material and print time.
Very nice work, I love the reduction of warping just with a different infill pattern which is a critical issue for these parts but also many other materials that have high shrinkage. Has there been any direct comparison of printing time needed for traditional supports vs these arc overhangs? I guess it depends how high up the overhang would be but maybe an updated script to chose one or the other depending on calculated print time or material use would be valuable in the future.
It depends on the size of the overhang and how far up the supports would have to be. I think the ideal use case for arc overhangs are for small overhangs on tall models that would otherwise require a huge organic support "tree trunk"
fantastic! now we need non planar printing without 4th axis rotation. I hope Prusa releases a modified nozzle to get around the interference issues and clearance for the fan shroud. This would be amazing.
Using temperature modulation to manipulate internal stresses to correct droop would require per-material, per-printer and even per-design characterization to accurately model shrinking and expansion. The effort may make sense for mass production, probably not so much for hobbyists doing mostly one-offs.
Woah, using Hilbert curves to combat warping is such a great idea. I wonder if it would be beneficial as the second layer for the base as well, or if it should be used as the first layer.
It's very likely they will add that too. But if not, prusa sclicer is easier to use imho. A lot of the stuff is self explaining and I think u could even import cura settings, but not sure.
@@SwervingLemon same. I don't have any problems with it, but I feel I enjoy using cura more because all the settings are in one list as opposed to Prusa slicer where I need to navigate between pages.
I'm shocked anyone complain s about PrusaSlicer after using Cura. I have both and want to rip my hair when I need to use Cura. PS is grouped in a way I can find the settings so much faster. But then again I "grew up on" Slic3r, so I guess I'm biased. I only used Cura when forced to and not without grumbling.
I expect future printers will have the ability to extrude numerous filaments at once, 'weave them' and make products which are strong, flexible and durable as well.
(writes down to use hilbert curves since a print of mine really likes to do that warp) Awesome to see progress on this and looking forward to where it and others goes.
An interesting note about the Hilbert curves is that in the script, they are printed in random chunks rather than a continuous line. In theory this should help distribute thermal stresses better
@@stevenmcculloch5727 I saw that in the video. I wonder how much of an effect it actually has, but if that's what the research paper suggested then maybe it's an idea to actually implement outside of the fork
This is a revolutionary feature for my prints, where I have small overhangs that would require too big of a support to hold, but I need to keep quality without support injuries.
Support Painting for Tree Supports is the feature I'm desperately waiting for in Cura. Asd it is, the TS implementation is still pretty unrealiable, and painting mandatory support points would help a lot.
This is an interesting concept, but we are missing some data. It would be interesting to print a part two different ways - one with traditional supports and one with arc overhangs and see if there is a meaningful difference in strength, durability, etc. If only there was someone we all knew and respected who had the experience and equipment do such a test... Hmmm...
I see a lot of improvements in 3d printing just by changing the path of nozzle movements. I wonder if it's realistic to use AI to predict a better way to print each part. It could be trained on soft body and thermal simulations as well as on real 3d scanned prints.
I had posted this in the last video but I still would be curious to hear from someone who could explain why or why not this would be worthwhile. At the time I could find no info about different types. I'll repost below. Would the catenary arc be even better as a shape for building horizontal? Something a bit shallower. Or I wonder what doing a link like shape in the curve of an arch might do for thicker overhangs.
👍👍...I think arc overhangs are probably the future though I'd guess they will ultimately still use some minimal support....Personally I don't care that much about plastic or time wasted in supports. I care about the surface finish and mechanical properties of prints. Arc overhangs look like they may be able to produce stronger parts with a better quality and a more accurate surface finish. To me anything else is a bonus.
Organic supports are great but needs more work. We need to be able to adjust how much brim the supports have. We also have to add z lift to clear them because they very easily detach and knock over depending on the material. For example: PETG is a miserable experience because of how easily they release but ASA or PC is also miserable because of how difficult all that brimming is to remove from the build plate. I'll only use organic supports on PLA for now.
Arc Overhangs, regular supports or a combination of it: What will be the future? Also: check out our CNC Kitchen products at cnckitchen.store/ or at resellers www.cnckitchen.com/reseller and on AMAZON (EU) geni.us/s8rYtQ
For a single layer overhang, I can see this being useful. However, any layer that is placed above this overhang layer is going to suffer from poor layer adhesion, as you can't "smoosh" the layer into the overhang layer. The only way you can get a "smoosh" is if the previous layer is supported. After 3-8 subsequent layers this is no longer an issue, but those first few layers will have significantly less layer adhesion. This is probably fine for art pieces, and knick-knacks, but it's a non-starter for functional prints. At least for now, the best option is to make use of the Interface layer for a single soluble layer, and printing supports in an inexpensive material.
I wonder if instead of using arcs for something like the straight edge, if instead you could use something more resembling a sine wave. It would in theory allow you to grow an arbitrary shaped edge. You're essentially using the surface tension in the molten plastic to control the warping
Impressive, super interesting. Looking forward to next versions of slicers including those features. -> I have troubles using deal extruder printer wanhao duplicator 12 and will definitely try super slicer fork.
Was testing Nicolai’s script yesterday. It’s a little inconsistent. One of my overhangs came out well, but another symmetrical one ended up saggy. Also my overhang was designed to have a precise shape to functionally fit into another part. The output was not usable because of the loss of precision in the shape. It was also SUPER slow. Fantastic concept, but not really practical.
Amazing video as always!! I was wondering if you could do a video comparing ABS or ASA to Taulman’s N-Vent or if you could share any experience that you’ve had with that material, from what I heard it’s supposed to be comparable to ABS and ASA but easier to print but I can’t find many videos on the material!
It's super cool that this is possible. But it makes me wonder if it's worth it. Printing at speeds this slow you could just as well print supports and go full bore. Yes it takes a little more material but it could potentially save like an hour in printing time which also adds considerable cost.will be interesting to watch this tech develop though.
If you have to add supports at the corners anyway, why not bridge between them and then between those bridges and the model? Seems like bridging would be faster like that. EDIT: Well, if Hilbert curves work then [insert shrug]
I think it won't be fancy supports OR arc overhangs, but rather a combination of all the techniques. corner supports, hilbert curves, whatever else people figure out
Would shape following overhangs be even better? That would give longer passes, so smaller time difference between successive passes, more even heating/cooling, and better edge quality?
The hilbert curve infill is a great idea, but couldn't the initial arcs be printed past the edge, like a mid-air brim, to provide additional rigidity? It wouldn't be softened from the above layer.
This is great news. I just wish it was being addressed in Cura. It's taken me years to get used to that. I don't want to switch now. Am I missing out? Will it be done in Cura at some point or have I backed the wrong horse?
