It does work. Just not very well. Not enough to be widely usable.
If it was an idea it wouldn't have thousands of lines of code and working binaries.
100% infill doesn't remotely solve the problem I'm referring to. I'd ask you not jump to conclusions if you aren't experienced with 3D printing.
Printing 100% infill also wastes a ton of time and material on the interior of the part for nothing. I added a "dual infill shell" feature where you can use a light, fast infill for the interior of the part.
> It wouldn't give you prints that are stronger than those printed with 100% infill even if worked.
This is very speculative and I doubt accurate. Even 100% infill parts are 10X more brittle than injection molded ones and around half the strength. All because of z layer bonding weakness
If it was an idea it wouldn't have thousands of lines of code and working binaries.
100% infill doesn't remotely solve the problem I'm referring to. I'd ask you not jump to conclusions if you aren't experienced with 3D printing.
Printing 100% infill also wastes a ton of time and material on the interior of the part for nothing. I added a "dual infill shell" feature where you can use a light, fast infill for the interior of the part.
> It wouldn't give you prints that are stronger than those printed with 100% infill even if worked.
This is very speculative and I doubt accurate. Even 100% infill parts are 10X more brittle than injection molded ones and around half the strength. All because of z layer bonding weakness