Optimize layers for uniform distribution using the gravity packer

00:03

After using a slice analysis to verify the placement and distribution of packed parts in Netfabb,

00:09

you may find that the packing method does not achieve the expected distribution of layers.

00:15

In this case, you can apply a post processing method to further optimize an already-existing packing result.

00:24

In this example, the Monte Carlo packer was used on the parts shown and a slice analysis was performed.

00:33

When Recalculate is used to view the area printed at a specific layer height,

00:38

you can see that this results in 1,907 slices, with a maximum of up to 154 square cm being printed at once,

00:48

and a minimum of 19 square cm.

00:52

Ideally, you want to achieve a more uniform distribution of layers for optimal printing,

00:59

so after clicking Export as CSV to save these results for comparison, the next step is to try a different packing method.

01:08

First, delete the current slice analysis.

01:12

In the Browser, select all of the slices, press Delete, and then click OK to confirm.

01:22

Next, duplicate the build so that you can look back and compare packing methods.

01:28

In the Browser, right-click the workspace and select Clone this Workspace.

01:34

In this example, a custom menu was created for easy access to packing tools.

01:41

With this menu selected, click 3D Packing Gravity.

01:46

This packing method minimizes gaps in packing.

01:51

In the 3D packing – Gravity dialog, ensure that Pack all parts is selected, and then adjust your Performance.

02:01

Here, leave this set in the middle between Accurate and Fast.

02:06

Set the Distance between parts to Medium, and the Part rotation to Arbitrary.

02:13

In this case, keep the Distance to side walls (XY) set to 5.00 mm.

02:21

You have the option to select Preprocess starting positions.

02:27

However, in this case, leaving this option de-selected will allow you to start from the current positions.

02:34

Click Pack Platform.

02:38

The progress bar displays the progress as the parts are packed using the gravity packer.

02:44

Once complete, you can see the difference in how the parts are packed, with a priority on minimizing visible gaps between parts.

02:54

The Part-Height is now 8.31% compared to 9.36% in the starting example.

03:02

Even though the packed height has increased and the part-height has decreased, this may result in a more efficient packing process.

03:11

Now, you can use collision detection and the Interlocking Test, and then perform a slice analysis to assess the layers.

03:20

Select all the parts, and then, in the custom menu, click Collision detection.

03:28

The red X in the context view indicates that a collision is detected.

03:35

Click Update.

03:39

Then, pan and zoom around the build volume to find any collisions.

03:45

Here, you can see a collision identified by the area of red.

03:51

To remove the collision, in this case, one of the parts is selected and moved in the Y- direction by 3 mm.

04:01

The green checkmark indicates that the collision is resolved.

04:06

Next, click Interlocking Test.

04:10

In this example, there are no interlocks that need to be fixed.

04:16

Now, perform a slice analysis.

04:21

Select all parts, and then click Slice Parts.

04:27

In the Slice Parts dialog, enter a Layer size of 0.1, set the Start to 0, and Leave the packed height as is.

04:39

Click Start.

04:42

In the Browser, with Slice Analysis selected, you can see a much smoother graph than in the first example.

04:51

Here, there is a smaller variance between the maximum and minimum areas.

04:57

Again, click Export as CSV to use for comparison of the two outcomes.

05:04

Now you can apply multiple packing methods, including the gravity packer,

05:10

and compare the outcomes of multiple packing methods using a slice analysis.