Conversation

Replying to
I actually don't know if this is the "only" correct answer. Afaict, a 3-projection view completely determines a solid model, but maybe complex surfaces have indeterminacy. I think I'll have to sand off some edges to make it the right answer.
1
1
Doh. Of course the solution is not unique. This one is skew symmetric. Any set of contours that fits within the 3 contours will do. I could have added a halfway loft plane with an ellipse cross section and that would have forced symmetry.
Image
1
Anything contour that stays within the bounding box defined by square and triangle projection lines will work. Blue is what OnShape generated. Red is what I’d force if I wanted.
Image
1
Also reprinting the horns from yesterday. Scaled down 50% with raft. Dunno what all that wispy stray fiber is. Too dry? From supports being printed coarse? PLA spool being not as good? Drip during travel?
Image
1
Done. Messed up a bit tried to make the triangle equilateral and the rectangle a square at the same time. Doh. No way to satisfy this template. If you have a square, triangle will be isosceles.
Image
Image
Image
Image
1
3
Replying to
My first one is pretty satisfactory
Quote Tweet
Decent compliance, rather stiff at normal resolution printing with 60% infill. I bet I could get much wider range by messing with infill density. But clearly settings need work. But unlike PETG this feels different enough as a material, it’s worth mastering.
Show this thread
Embedded video
0:12
1.1K views
1
Show replies