-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 890
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
CURA-12352 different minimum layer time for layers that contain overhangs #2187
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
CURA-12352 different minimum layer time for layers that contain overhangs #2187
Conversation
…ang' into CURA-12352_different-minimum-layer-time-for-layers-that-contain-overhangs
…er-time-for-layers-that-contain-overhangs' into CURA-12352_different-minimum-layer-time-for-layers-that-contain-overhangs
…fferent-minimum-layer-time-for-layers-that-contain-overhangs
Even if the overhang wall speed is set to 100%, and thus wouldn't normally change, the minimum layer time for overhanging walls (split off from the minimum layer time, which is the whole point of this ticket) still should take effect -- which we can't detect if the merged regions are just one big everything blob. part of CURA-12352
done as part of CURA-12352
Since the speed regions can 'too' small as well, we need to make sure we don't create microsegments -- While there was already a mitigation earlier, Ihad to partially undo that to fix a bug, and now it's done in a more guaranteed, explicit way. part of CURA-12352
…layers-that-contain-overhangs
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Micro-segment filtering is a good addition, although I have doubts on the second part. We should take some time to discuss it.
| ranges::views::chunk_by( | ||
[](const auto& region_a, const auto& region_b) | ||
{ | ||
return region_a.chunk && region_b.chunk && region_a.speed_factor == region_b.speed_factor; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm sure there is a good reason for not merging the internal area, but I would be curious to know it 😃
} | ||
|
||
// (Also) Avoid microsegments: Filter out pairs of intersections that are too close to each other. | ||
// This should be possible because the intersections happen in the same region. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't really understand why this should work. According to me, it shouldn't because in the next step, you always assume that you are moving from a region to an adjacent one. But not you filter our intersections, which means you can move from a region to any other.
CURA-12352
Requires Ultimaker/Cura#20039