I am very upset. The new Bambu Studio 2.0 generates tree support differently than in the previous version. The structure changed and more importantly, it’s missing the support interface layer in most places!! This makes the support very hard to remove and already cost me many hours of my life. Also, I have some 3D Models that I created in the old Bambu Studio which need custom tree support. I spent many hours and many test tries to perfect these custom supports and hand paint them in bambu studio until they are perfect but now with the update everything is ruined. They generate in a different way and miss the support interface in many critical places - even with the exact same settings like before. One example would be Sailing Yacht A by ChallapenjoMakerWorld: Download Free 3D Models this yacht which I created. It’s masts are thin and long - that’s why custom support is critical for a clean print. My previous custom support (hand painted) was perfect - a clean print and easy to remove. Now I saw that the generation changed and the structure looks differently and the interface layer isn’t everywhere. I haven’t tried with this one in particular but from experience with outer simular models I guess it will be way harder to remove the support and maybe also effect the print quality. PLEASE for the love of god fix this nonsense ASAP, thank you very much.
Not the first time Bambu makes a mess out of existing files for no reason.
As said before they need to spend more man hours on the development and far more hours on actually testing things.
Sadly we pay a fortune for our printers to end up as life long beta testers who report and work around the created issues.
The top one probably would struggle with tree support as the distance to the plate is quite low.
Same for the second one.
3 and 4 are just tiny overhangs.
Is there a reason why you want tree supports for this?
Normal supports seem to make more sense from what I see in the image.
I get your point though and I noticed that when painting supports Studio loves to make a mess more often than setting proper supports.
I guess there is a reason I prefer to be stuck on outdated Studio and firmware packs…
Saves time and material. Regular support does make more sense in this case but I use tree supports on everything and never have an issue. One Tree trunk would have done the job of 3 columns for two taller ones with smaller overhangs. And then it has the same supports on the other side of this model that you can’t see. No option I tried would give me a tree support. This model I don’t really care but it got me tinkering trying to figure out why its not generating tree supports at all.
It is works as planned in older Studio version you know where the culprit is.
I guess it is a Bambu thing to constantly change things with the claim to make it better why in reality it makes things worse.
Gave up on old 3MF models and now only save in 3MF to get print profiles with a known reference without having to add them to the actual profile selection.
Load the model reference 3MF, delete the model and sync the AMS - easy.
Supports have been an ongoing nightmare for many users with many Studio releases.
The thing that annoys me most here is people spent a lot of time to get their print settings and profile to produce good prints.
Then comes Bambu and their ‘fix’ ruins the lot.
Probably not even intentionally but what those users HAD to change to make it work of course fails if Studio calculates things completely different.
It is not just sefault values that change, Bambu also changes the underlaying fundamentals the user has no control over - and THAT is a bad combination.
Like how the Arc fitting setting affect or not affect actual arcs - the 3MF format does not support arcs and for STL files it is a hit and miss.
Does not mean those Studio acknowledges that - it still applies these setting in rather inconclusive ways.
I noticed that there is sort of a bad feedback loop when it comes to fixing issues in Studio and or the firmware.
Bambu keeps adding new things, ‘fixes’ reported bugs and while at it usually creates new bugs.
A beta version is meant for beta testers so they hopefully encounter all possible issues - and then those issues are fixed before the release version is published.
So far I still have to see a release version that did not require urgent fixes right after being released - and that is something I take as a really bad sign.
You need to select organic as the type for it to generate like it used to.
That picture was with organic. That’s what led me to believe there was an issue with tree supports. This is BambuStudio 2.0.3.54
I was replying to OP, but now that I look at yours, that’s crazy. Not even close to tree supports lol. Anytime Bambu releases something new or does some new features everything gets all jumbled up. I’ll give it a few weeks and everything will be back to normal.
I’m in the same bucket. I have been trying to print a rather tall object (200mm) and 20 hours into it the tall tree supports fail to work as they once did. They move all over the place. Three days gone and lots of filament, no print success.
Absolutely inexcusable for a hotfix to not have already been pushed out on this issue.
just found out about this one of my best models is getting complaints now because i upgraded and the support doesnt work right anymore it fails almost every time in certain parts… i have tried several ways to fix it and no luck. I have currently put that print profile to private to prevent further bad reviews.
I just encountered this bug in studio 2.x and this was the only thread I found even discussing the problem. @BambuLab any updates on this? It’s nuts that support generation is failing this badly, I tried changing the tree supports from slim to organic hybrid and strong, all of them fail to generate interface layers.
I tried the same model in Orca with the same tree support settings and it created the proper interface layers:
In Bambu studio, no interface layers, and when it printed, the model was just floating above the supports with only a connection to the build plate at the bottom of the model:
Yep, I’m on 2.1.1.52 and it’s actually dookie dogshit.
I’ve got older 3mf files I’m trying to print, that previously worked FINE
I just wanted to go in and re-generate them as I got an A1 instead of the p1s’s that the 3mf was made for
and now, I simply can’t print it using the same 3mf because it has a significant number of floating supports/missing support interfaces that were not in the file previously
absolutely terrible and incredibly frustrating, especially as I was planning to sell this model/3mf. Absolutely amazed there aren’t more people complaining about this.
this is frustrating just had a complaint about one of my old models not working i test printed and sure enough it had issues. I personally havent printed it since the BS 2 upgrade so never would have known if someone didnt point it out… i think i found the settings that were changed, i just worry i will have to go through hundred of prints to double check them
I’ve found that enabling “Z overrides X/Y” with hybrid tree supports is generating better tree supports with proper interface layers
This has no effect whatsoever for me. Bambu Studio is still not generating support interface layers, of course in the spots where they’d be most critical…
I design and sell parts that are relatively tricky to print, with a constant need for custom seam placements, variable layer heights and very specific part orientations, and this is making it really hard for me to get even with all the waste that goes into failed prints. I’m on an H2D for the record - never would’ve thought it’d be the software that makes me regret my 2000€ purchase. But here we are.
I’m not willing to make the jump to Orca either due to the loss of convenience, which is what I was specifically looking for when getting a Bambu printer. I demand this problem with support interfaces not being generated correctly be resolved ASAP.
Just after posting my previous complaint, I turned off “Remove small overhangs” and some of the interfaces are now being generated correctly. Still not in every spot, though.
any fix on this?in orca you increase the tip diameter a bit and y have fully generated interface layers