<p>My Tevo Flash works well. Right now, I'm trying to print a thin, disc-like part on supports. The 3 perimeters at the edge of the disc are OK. The dense fill zigzag pattern makes many U-turns near the perimeter. It all looks OK in Simplify3D. But in the printed part, in several spots, the zigzag pattern doesn't reach the perimeters, leaving a ~1 mm gap.</p>
<p>My guess: in those spots, the filament has nothing to grab onto underneath, so the U-turn region is dragged back by the nozzle a bit (away from the perimeters) and/or it droops. I'm using the smallest support res in Simplify 3D: 1 mm. Any options I can try?</p>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/nxpz1.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/nxpz1.jpg" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>

[{'answer_id': 16584, 'author': 'Willian Soares', 'author_id': 12795, 'author_profile': 'https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/users/12795', 'pm_score': 1, 'selected': False, 'text': '<p>The zig-zag pattern are known for this kind of fluke...</p>\n<p>I will use Cura to demonstrate, but it\'s gonna happen on the majority of slicers.</p>\n<p>See this example:\n<a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/uK0sk.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/uK0sk.png" alt="Image showing air gaps when using zig-zag fill for top/bottom layers" /></a></p>\n<p>Because nothing is really a circle on a cartesian plane and there\'s resolution limitations on the real world, the slicer has to account for these and, assuming you are using zig-zag to save time, they are doing what is expected. The Zig-zag pattern is a continuous, fast way to fill the top/bottom layers.</p>\n<p>Now, see this lines pattern top layer:\n<a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/3CzgP.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/3CzgP.png" alt="Image showing smaller air gaps when using lines fill for top/bottom layers" /></a></p>\n<p>It has much smaller air gaps. Every time the nozzle finishes a line, it has the chance to reposition itself to make a much smaller gap, just because isn\'t continuous.</p>\n<p>So yeah, the air-gaps are a &quot;feature&quot; for zig-zag patterns, but you can mitigate this effect reducing the line width on top/botton layers.</p>\n<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/V4zXp.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/V4zXp.png" alt="Image showing kinda-smaller air gaps with zig-zag patterns when reducing the line withd" /></a></p>\n<p>It seems that increasing &quot;Skin Overlap Percentage&quot; on cura mitigates this effect too, but i really haven\'t seen the effects of this setting on a real life object</p>\n'}, {'answer_id': 16779, 'author': '0scar', 'author_id': 5740, 'author_profile': 'https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/users/5740', 'pm_score': 3, 'selected': True, 'text': '<p><em>Posted as a wiki answer from a comment from the OP to a different <a href="https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/a/16584">answer</a>.</em></p>\n<hr />\n<p>The <a href="https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/a/16584"><code>Zig Zag</code> vs <code>Lines</code> patterns</a> was only a part of the problem. The 2<sup>nd</sup> part was that this layer rested on supports only, so the fill, whatever its pattern, didn\'t have enough surface to &quot;grab on&quot; near the perimeters. If I had switched from <code>Zig Zag</code> to <code>Lines</code>, the air gap would\'ve diminished a bit, but I would\'ve gotten drooping. I solved it with wider, underlying perimeters.</p>\n'}]
['https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/16523', 'https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com', 'https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/users/14316/']