When to use 'Support' option?

[printbus]

Thanks a bunch Kevin, great post! Particularly for that advice about facets. I actually tried to get a deliberately low facet value for the little handle but gave up and settled for that universal 100. All because I couldn't find the syntax to confine it to a single object. (Cheat Sheet doesn't show me how/where to use it.)

You're correct that the cheat sheet doesn't show all of the parameter options. The cheat sheet, however, is a great tool to have available online since each of the table entries are hyperlinks for more detail. Clicking on cylinder for example brings you to the detail page for that object, including a list of all the acceptable parameters.

Simplify 3D looks good, but at $149 (about £108) I'll settle with Cura for now. Barely used the features of that yet!

Yeah, Simplify3D is pricey. I bought it years ago when it was $99 USD and I had grown frustrated with everything else, including Cura. Actually, support capability was a key reason to why I went with Simplify3D. I would assume other options like Cura have improved since then, and I'd likely have a harder time spending the $149 today.

Support! Did you see the discussion I had at
https://www.reddit.com/r/openscad/co...upport_option/
That taught me a lot, and with subsequent reading I now appreciate that even apparently trival designs are not so trivial ;-)

No, I hadn't seen that. I didn't even know there was an openscad reddit page. Joined. Just what I need - another reddit time suck.

BTW, did you leave an unwanted curly bracket at the end of your code? Works fine without it. And it also triggered me to learn that I can do a 'collective' translate() by using curly brackets.

My bad. My test file had a combination of your script and my script so I could overlap the results, and that evidently led to an extra bracket being caught up in the copy and paste.
The curly brackets are a powerful tool.

Finally, an associated query (which I've also added to that reddit thread): do you know how to ensure there's not even a tiny gap between a model's surface and the base?

I'm not sure what you're asking. If you're asking about how to make sure the bottom of your lid will end up right at z=0 on your print bed, there's no issue. Openscad won't leave a gap under that first cylinder, and even if it did, most (if not all) slicers will automatically place an imported design so that the very bottom of it sits at z=0.

If you're asking how to ensure there is no gap between the cylinder stackup in your design, well, that's a different question. For simplicity, I ignored that in the sample code I threw back at you. There's generally not much of a problem with openscad leaving infinitesimally small gaps, but there are ways to ensure it. I find this more of a concern once you start applying a difference to carve away from solids in openscad. This can leave you with an infinitesimally thin slice of material that ghosts in and out as you rotate or move around the model view in openscad. Most people ignore that ghosting effect since it doesn't actually lead to a printing issue, but I find it annoying and strive to eliminate it. It's all about providing some overlap between elements in the design - let me know if you want me to expand on that.

[terrypin]

If you're asking about how to make sure the bottom of your lid will end up right at z=0 on your print bed, there's no issue.

Yep, that was it. I had in mind an arithmetic error - typically when using Difference - going unnoticed, placing the model above the base.. But I've now learnt how to select a surface in Cura and elect to have that on the base.