UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Support for UP Software. To report a bug, post with a title [BUG REPORT]. To request a feature, post with a title [FEATURE REQUEST]
User avatar
Tiertime-Jason
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 4:31 am

UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by Tiertime-Jason » Tue Jul 26, 2016 7:59 am

Hi Guys,

I dont think simplify 3D is better in all the aspects, but it does have more parameters to play with.
Since many have suggesedt UP to be compatible with simplifiy3D, I am just wondering which features of simpliy3D do you really want.

How can we add these features without becoming "Complicate3D" :lol:

tel
Posts: 242
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 1:35 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by tel » Tue Jul 26, 2016 8:38 am

Jason
For me the main things I would be looking for without overcomplicating it too much:

- Ability to step through the print by layer seeing support as well
- Ability to change the standard support (add or remove support)
- Ability to vary temp by layer (at a minimum, being able to set a different temp for first 3 layers)
- Ability to choose fill pattern and %
- Ability to add brim
- Ability to choose point of contact on the bed

Nice to have would be to set different parameters per part on a printbed. Havent used it a huge amount but is handy at times.

User avatar
3DWP
Posts: 194
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 4:00 pm
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by 3DWP » Tue Jul 26, 2016 8:47 am

Hi Jason,

I don't use S3D a lot (I mainly use Ups) but sometimes I test some machines like a Cubicon. S3D is very versatile.

The fact you can change a lot is very helpful, I have used:

- The distance between support and model, easier break away

- :!: Preview of 3D print/slice file: layers and support material are completely visible

- Wall thickness/perimeter shell number can be set for more strength. Also infill (solid model printing)

- Retraction settings can be changed for use with various materials

- :!: Vertical lift: the platform is lowered by specified number when needed so the print head doesn't tip over printed structures. I had this a couple of times with my Up Box, it broke some structures in a long print so I could throw away the model every time (it's now unprintable on my Up Box..)

- :!: Support structure can be automatically and manually added - and edited. I can let the software add support beams automatically and then delete and add beams I want

arhi
Posts: 256
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2015 10:51 pm

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by arhi » Tue Jul 26, 2016 9:47 am

I'm using too many different slicers so I'm comparing UP to all of them and missing is

1. ability to make a material profile
* you keep your few profiles locked so a noob can just select one of the existing profiles and have the simple app
* you allow creation of a new profile based on any of the existing ones
* in a new profile(s) you can select "everything" (print bed temp during raft printing, print bed temp during firs 3 layers of object, print bed temp during rest of the print, nozzle temp during raft, nozzle temp during contact raft layer, nozzle temp during support layer, nozzle temp during support contact layer, nozzle temp during contact object layer, nozzle temp during rest of the layer, min layer time, retraction, relation between infill and perimeter - for e.g. you can print 3 0.1mm layers of perimeter and then one 0.3mm layer of infil, corner speeds, perimeter over infill overlap, extrusion modifier (+-% from what's default).... basically everything you have in your 3 provided profiles, make available to change for new custom profiles)

2. ability to preview the print (g-code preview, layer by layer, different colors for different movement speed..)

3. ability to edit support

User avatar
3DWP
Posts: 194
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 4:00 pm
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by 3DWP » Thu Jul 28, 2016 6:20 am

I have another feature I would like to add:

In S3D you can choose settings for starting points for every layer, random, fastest or closest to specific point.

The random start point will prevent a seam. I just printed a model on an Up Plus with Shell mode, that's a nice feature of Up software that can print organic models hollow with support scaffolding on the inside. The only problem is it had a seam on the front of the model. Now I have to sand down that and use post processing to be able to use the model. So I hope the Up software can have parameters to automatically end the seam or that it will be a setting like in S3D.

vmstech
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2016 11:23 am
Location: Bucks, United Kingdom

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by vmstech » Mon Aug 08, 2016 2:48 pm

Hi,
Firstly, I'm very pleased to hear that Tiertime want to improve their software and that you're listening to what we'd like! :D

Okay, here's some simple-ish options that I'd love to see in UP studio:
- Infill percentage rather than 4 pictures that you have to guess the percentage from
- Infill pattern options (eg. choose between rectangular/honeycomb, to aid strength of part)
- Support/raft infill percentage options (to help with ease of removal)
- Cooling options (eg. adjust fan speed so greater on bottom layers)
- Ability to create a skirt around the part
- Print doesn't start until the nozzle and bed are both up to the correct temp (I know its been voiced before but this really is getting annoying)
- Automatically recognise if 'thin wall' options are required

I look forward to seeing the Studio software develop.

Kind regards,
Heather

aesdaileblp
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2016 4:26 am

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by aesdaileblp » Wed Aug 31, 2016 3:35 am

Tiertime-Jason wrote:Hi Guys,

I dont think simplify 3D is better in all the aspects, but it does have more parameters to play with.
Since many have suggesedt UP to be compatible with simplifiy3D, I am just wondering which features of simpliy3D do you really want.

How can we add these features without becoming "Complicate3D" :lol:
I disagree - Simplify3D is better because it can produce consistently good prints on cheaper printers than the UP!Box. There is no point to 'simple' software if it can't produce consistent good prints.

All of the above replies detail the functions that would be useful to have in UP!Studio - but if you added all those you would have Simplify3D! :lol:

:arrow: A much better solution would be to focus Tiertime's development on the current UP!Studio software - the latest v1.2.16 is a vast improvement over the earlier beta versions (but it still has the 'wheel' :roll: ) - This gives a good, simple plug-and-play experience for most users.

:idea: :idea: For advanced users, just make the UP!Box compatible with Simplify3D. This way Tiertime doesn't have to spend time & money developing and maintaining a 'complex' software interface, and us 'advanced' users will be able to get the best results from our investment in the UP!Box.

This would be win-win with everybody happy! Those who want to pay for the complexity of Simplify3D can; those who just want to print with a single click (ok, maybe 3 or 4 clicks) can! :D

:idea: Maybe Simplify3D compatibility could be achieved via a firmware patch; or it might be simpler to work with Simplify3D to provide a software module that lets Simplify3D drive the Up!Box (and your other printers) directly.

:idea: I notice that Autodesk now produces an excellent FREE slicer as well, called 'Print Studio' that is at least as good as, possibly better than Simplify3D. The Autodesk Print Studio software (like Simplify3D) supports a wide range of printers, not just Autodesk ones, and provides a simple interface with deep customisation for those that require it. Again, it would be GREAT for Tiertime if this FREE software supported your printers! Links to Autodesk Print Studio are: https://support.ember.autodesk.com/hc/e ... int-Studio or https://ember.autodesk.com/overview#software
Adrian Esdaile
Senior Project Architect
Billard Leece Partnership Pty Ltd
Architects & Urban Planners
http://www.blp.com.au

arhi
Posts: 256
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2015 10:51 pm

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by arhi » Wed Aug 31, 2016 4:00 am

aesdaileblp wrote: For advanced users, just make the UP!Box compatible with Simplify3D. This way Tiertime doesn't have to spend time & money developing and maintaining a 'complex' software interface, and us 'advanced' users will be able to get the best results from our investment in the UP!Box.
A(f..)MEN
Allowing UP! to accept normal g-code would solve so many issues ... I got the board to switch to g-code (smoothieware) but now I can't use studio .. not really a solution, I Want to use "Studio most of the time" and "whatever else" (simplify or my own slicer or skeinforge or ..) when needed .. and I don't want to want to change boards when I want to change SW, makes no sense really ...

aesdaileblp
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2016 4:26 am

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by aesdaileblp » Thu Sep 01, 2016 4:49 am

arhi wrote: I got the board to switch to g-code (smoothieware) but now I can't use studio .. not really a solution, I Want to use "Studio most of the time" and "whatever else" (simplify or my own slicer or skeinforge or ..) when needed .. and I don't want to want to change boards when I want to change SW, makes no sense really ...
Did you swap out the entire mainboard, or did you reflash the UP!Box mainboard? (goodbye warranty! :lol: )

I'd be interested if you were able to reflash the mainboard - that would give us a reliable, useful printer! :D
Adrian Esdaile
Senior Project Architect
Billard Leece Partnership Pty Ltd
Architects & Urban Planners
http://www.blp.com.au

arhi
Posts: 256
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2015 10:51 pm

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by arhi » Thu Sep 01, 2016 5:50 pm

aesdaileblp wrote:
arhi wrote: I got the board to switch to g-code (smoothieware) but now I can't use studio .. not really a solution, I Want to use "Studio most of the time" and "whatever else" (simplify or my own slicer or skeinforge or ..) when needed .. and I don't want to want to change boards when I want to change SW, makes no sense really ...
Did you swap out the entire mainboard, or did you reflash the UP!Box mainboard? (goodbye warranty! :lol: )

I'd be interested if you were able to reflash the mainboard - that would give us a reliable, useful printer! :D
I got up trough weird channels so warranty is not something I can easily enforce so I don't care much about it....

I didn't even lift the sticker from the mcu I have no clue what mcu UP! is using at all ... I just replaced the CPU board with lpc one .. and that works ..
viewtopic.php?f=28&t=22192&p=46849&hili ... are#p46849

I will check in next few days what mcu is on original up and see if it's usable for some adaptation but I really want to have original firmware in order to be able to use printer "as is" when I need to ... the main reason I got UP! is to have that (as I have number of other printers running my own firmware, and some other firmwares... my own slicer and some other slicers...) so if they protected the mcu from reading I would not be keen to reflash it ... on the other hand, depending on what mcu is there it might be simple to decompile the firmware and help out the g-code2up project :D .. as you don't need to change the firmware, you just need a way to convert g-code to whatever this firmware reads .. I don't get why teartime ain't helping with this, giving full cooperation to guy's running this g-code2up thingy would make this printer super usable without them changing anything ....
check out https://github.com/MaikStohn/UP3D if you are not sure what I talk about :D
and of course the local thread here: viewtopic.php?f=28&t=55250#p45580

aesdaileblp
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2016 4:26 am

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by aesdaileblp » Fri Sep 02, 2016 6:43 am

I'm doing a trial with the M.Stohn UP3D Tools right now.

I'm not about to tear down a printer that belongs to my employer! :o I would if it were mine... :twisted:

I've had to guess some parameters to set it up, but so far the quality is much better than from Up Studio, because I'm able to properly control stuff like raft size and density, infill size & shape, speed, retraction, coasting, filament dia, extrusion rates, bridging, fan speed - all the the settings you must have control of to get good, consistent, professional prints.
Adrian Esdaile
Senior Project Architect
Billard Leece Partnership Pty Ltd
Architects & Urban Planners
http://www.blp.com.au

User avatar
3DWP
Posts: 194
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 4:00 pm
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by 3DWP » Sat Sep 24, 2016 4:05 pm

I still have problems printing models with lots of support. I have tried to print a model with a lot of support pillars three times, the first two times I came to a printer with ''Motion system error'' and lots of wasted material. The third time I was present and after a while you can hear the nozzle bumping over all the printed structures while doing fast XY movements.. This is how the printed structure is tipped over OR the print head gets misaligned or even damaged.

Please add Z lift/hop to avoid this. When Up studio prints a raft this function does work so why not set this also for printing the rest of the model?

arhi
Posts: 256
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2015 10:51 pm

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by arhi » Wed Oct 12, 2016 5:20 am

this is not just simplify3d as I replaced the cpu too and am now running smoothieware but for e.g. I was never able to calibrate UP! before to print matching parts... every time I'd have to design parts with huge slack in order for parts to be able to fit into each other snuggly .. and that was always a pretty big slack .. and it always took more then one try to make the darn thing mesh ..

I spent under 60 minutes with simplify3d and smoothieware to get the perfect calibration ..

for e.g. look at parts:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:342198
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:52946

try printing them with off the shelf up! :(

look at this puppy:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1818156

I printed this on UP!, meshed from the first try (the exposed honeycomb infill is because I intentionally stopped printer before it closed the top layer to have this structure exposed, looks nice with this old equipment :D ) ... check out the source for that part:
https://cad.onshape.com/documents/56f1c ... a817df08b1

I drawn the part in onshape as a single piece and then cut it with 0.1mm line ... and it meshes perfectly .. try doing that with UP! without modifying parts :( .. you can't influence anything with up! :( .. too limited .. I ain't returning old cpu back inside :(

check the images of the S parts for matching (closed and opened, you see when they are closed they fully close - this is without any processing, directly from the printer, they fully match) ...
IMG_0313.JPG
IMG_0313.JPG (1.34 MiB) Viewed 23025 times
IMG_0316.JPG
IMG_0316.JPG (1.44 MiB) Viewed 23025 times

User avatar
Tiertime-Jason
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 4:31 am

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by Tiertime-Jason » Wed Oct 12, 2016 9:13 am

未标题-1.jpg
未标题-1.jpg (29.28 KiB) Viewed 23021 times
See the picture above? printed with a random UP machine with samples provide by Polymaker (PLA MAX).
No calibration at all, just fit. I dont why you need to calibration UP for dimensional accuracy.
aesdaileblp wrote:
I disagree - Simplify3D is better because it can produce consistently good prints on cheaper printers than the UP!Box. There is no point to 'simple' software if it can't produce consistent good prints.
Can you provide examples why no consistent good print regarding to original software? (UP BOX indeed has some hardware issues)


Anyway we welcome any challenge from simplify3d or the software hack users. Show us what can do with them and lets compare! :twisted:

iPeel
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 8:32 am

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by iPeel » Wed Oct 12, 2016 10:35 am

With my box, if I want an interference fit then I need to factor in a 0.2mm size difference between parts for them to fit together snugly otherwise they won't go together at all.

I believe the problem at the moment is that Tiertime are chasing the concept that "everything just works" and there's little tweaking required to obtain perfect prints, which is a great concept but at the moment the software doesn't achieve anywhere near that. More to the point, clicking print is like rolling a dice in UP! Studio and there's absolutely no way of knowing whether the print is going to work out, with either support material or in the structure itself. Even worse, the software is so buggy on OSX that I have endured two weeks without being able to print anything at all, because UP! Studio wouldn't even start after an update to OS Sierra. Right now my experiences of the Box plus Studio are such that I'm unable to recommend Tiertime products to anyone.

As a minimum, I would say UP! Studio needs the following:

1) A stable and useable UI that is resizable and intuitive.
2) Preview of what the printer is actually going to do WRT support material, rafts and tool path before printing.
3) Ability to create additional support structures and move other auto generated structures to avoid scarring.
4) Ability to orientate parts on the bed by clicking a surface.

arhi
Posts: 256
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2015 10:51 pm

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by arhi » Wed Oct 12, 2016 11:40 am

Hi Jason :D

wrt that picture - I NEVER managed to get that from my UP!PLus2, never! not with original white ABS that came with printer, not with other white ABS spool from TT nor with colido ABS nor ensun ABS nor any other one I tried... to print this and have them match without sanding it was just not something my UP!Plus2 ever could do... so I always had to design with more slack :( ... it was not a big deal for me really but it was bothering me.. now what I can see on your picture is over-extrusion, something I was fighting a lot with ENSUN/COLIDO filaments (I never had that overextrusion with original TT filament!) and if you look at your picture, how ugly the top layer is, you see that you should reduce it by ~10% right? .. anyhow if I had have the same results on mine I'd never even think about upgrading CPU and moving forward to smoothieware ..

now you say this is PLA, I have to say I haven't tried PLA on UP! for years, printed totally one small 250g test spool .. ABS is the material of choice for me (and PP and HDPE on my other machines) ... PLA is not very useful :( .. but I doubt this makes a difference, but who knows, maybe it does ...

as for examples of bad prints, unfortunately I don't keep those but why do you think I ventured in this whole "fsck up the working printer and patch it with $$ heavy 3rd party cpu, patch smoothieware to work with PT100 and weird pt100 amp, waste plastic and time making it all work, pay extra $$$ for software..." if the prints out of it were satisfactory?!

now to be fair, I was 90% happy with my UP! prints but:
- studio messes with way I use computer (and obviously this is the future)
- old app has issues with temperature
- can't tweak extrusion %
- can't preview the job
- support system of up! software is the best there is (one of the reasons I went with UP! in the first place) but some things it just can't solve :( .. I need the ability, very often, to prevent the printer from printing support in certain areas (for e.g. I'll survive some ugly overhangs but I will not be able to remove support from some places but I don't want to not print support at all) - this is why I'm using simplify3d and not slic3r/cura/skeinforge .. because it gives me great tool to control support (unfortunately not giving me as good as support as UP! software did but I'll get there)
- heated bed stopped working properly after studio did something to the firmware
- overhangs on UP!Plus2 are terrible (I'm not able to solve this yet with custom setup!!!)
- bridges on UP!Plus2 are terrible (I'm getting bit better results now with custom setup but still not nearly as nice as my other printers)

IMO, any of this issues should be tackled by TT .. apart from the way studio looks & feels, that's personal preference.. everything else I believe is super important, irrelevant that other printers and other software does it better or worse, these are some serious issues that separate good printer from a crappy one - the last mile .. something I'm often talking about TT -> some years back when I purchased my UP!Plus2 (it just came out, I was expecting UP!Plus, and 2 came into stores) compared to other printers the printer itself was "average" (or bit below) in features, functionality.. but UP! software was decade in front of everything we had available (there was ks, slic3r and skeinforge then only iirc, erik didn't start the cura yet, bfb was modifying skeinforge a bit and presenting it as their own app... but all in all competition was crap) ... what happened since then is, well, they all moved forward and UP! staid still :( ... now you need some catching up to do .. I believe you have more then enough ppl on forum giving you the list of priorities :D so ..

kcarbuncle
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2015 3:12 pm

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by kcarbuncle » Fri Oct 14, 2016 7:11 pm

Not to be rude, but simply put the amount of control you get with Simplify3d makes Up Studio look like MS Paint to Adobe Photoshop. The amount of settings that are possible to tweak are huge from the extruder (nozzle, extrusion width, retraction, etc), movement (print speed per layers, rafts, wipe length, brim, etc.) and even inputting custom G-Code strings on start, end, retraction, etc... It even has CNC-like machine controlling when tethered to a supported printer.

What confuses me is that i tried out an older version of the software that is used by Tiertime's industrial printers (Model WIzard) and some of the important things that we want like a real G-Code print preview (seeing the layers/supports/etc, and i see a way to edit it) and changing some (at times critical) settings (though not as much as Simplify3d) are things that you already have made, that you can insert into UP Studio and increase it's value tremendously.

I mean it's nice to have the simplicity of getting a simple print right 90% of the time (especially for a beginner), but as we go on using your machine designs we want more control with the printer itself, and by control, we mean controlling every parameter that we can to ensure that we get the perfect print. These printers are not cheap, and we'd rather stick by the brand because of the ease of use, but at least give us the possibility to grow out of the simple options that the UP! softwares have (the old and new Up studio).

It's just sad that sometimes it just feels like you treat the UP! line of printers like toys and the users like kids with the amount of options that we get.

Xevel
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 7:16 pm

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by Xevel » Fri Oct 21, 2016 7:33 pm

I use my UP Mini to make functional parts, and small one (most are in the 0.5 - 5g range) for robots I design.
So the things that I would really need is nore control over aspects that affect directly the solidity of parts.

For example right now I have parts with 3mm high vertical pins with 4mm diameter, and with the available options in number of surface layer (max 6...) and infill (no way to set it relatively close to full), these features end up sometimes very strong, sometimes very weak, depending things as random as where they are located on the bed and their Z rotation.
If I could have just a few more surface layers (12 would be my need), then I could get good parts.
If I could choose to have the model solid (all layers like surface layers) it would solve my problems even better.
If I could choose higher level of infill if would be another way to have my part behave rationally (i.e. being robust every time I print them, and less dependent on random details like position on the build plate).
If I could ask for more perimeters, it would be perfect too.

I will not ask for deterministic slicing of a part, because it seems like a bad idea and difficult to do, but any of these seemingly simple changes to the software would make my life so so much more easier.

In general, the first step that would seems to be simple to implement would simply to give us more values in the hard-coded lists like number of surfaces.
Restrictions like "we just did not populate the dropdown menu" are really annoying for no reason.

User avatar
3DWP
Posts: 194
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 4:00 pm
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by 3DWP » Tue Jan 03, 2017 2:48 pm

Well, as I have read on this forum many many threads with complaints and problems about Up Studio would Tiertime PLEASE reconsider to add (perhaps a hidden button/screen) gcode/Simplify3D compatability?

For instance the raft removal problems right now can be avoided if I can use Simplify3D.

I understand the software had to be built from scratch because of some stupid lawyers but in the meantime it would be very helpful if we can use other slicers especially if the older Up software can't be used with newer machines.

Please consider this Tiertime, lots of manufacturers have own software but still allow gcode..

User avatar
MakerTree3D
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 7:50 pm
Location: Richardson, TX
Contact:

Re: UP Studio vs Simplify3D

Post by MakerTree3D » Fri Feb 03, 2017 9:46 pm

I'd like to share that in a production environment, we do utilize several UP printers, as well as many other brands along with a variation of printer software from Cura, Simplify3D, UP Studio, Flashprint, Makerbot Print, IdeaMaker, multiple other rebranded Cura iterations, and different SLA software. While each has it's pros and cons, I do have to say that I do like the UP Studio software. As hard as it was to adjust to Studio from the previous UP slicer software with the many early bumps, I've come to enjoy using the new Studio software. Although I have posted my concerns with the new 1.5.1.1 and results we've been having with our UP Fila ABS raft removal since we've updated, but with that aside....

To be more 3rd party filament friendly as advertising, adding some adjustable parameters to the custom materials section would be great: These should include but not limited to:
- Retraction distance/speed
- Print speed
- Adjustable flowrate (extrusion rate)


CUSTOMIZABLE SUPPORTS!! This is a must have for modern slicers. Sure, leave an option that auto generates supports, but allow users to:
- See the preview of the supports clearly
- Add/ Remove supports
- PLEASE allow us to choose whether we want to use the dense supports at the top of the standard linear supports. We can only select a number of dense support layers, so let us select 0 as a number as well.
- There's been times that I've selected "No Supports" in UP Studio, but for some reason UP Studio couldn't help itself, and decided to apply supports in some areas of the model anyway.


Also allowing for more customer material profiles to be added, and with longer material names. We may use more than one brand of say PETG, nylon or other filaments.


To allow users who many have more than (1) UP printer on WiFi, having the printer selection drop down accessible directly from the interface instead of having to go into settings every time. We juggle several UP printers all day, every day and this could be simplified for commercial, industrial or education applications where many UP printers are switched between repeatedly all day.

Post Reply