top of page
SlicePie
(in progress)
Design Process
User Research
Takeaways/Questions:
- Customization and troubleshooting is an essential element of 3D printing.
-To effectively locate a setting, could use space->type to find the right setting.
-The naming system needs to be intuitive to ensure understanding.
- Instead of simply listing the setting, how does the program direct the users to the settings?
Main Research Findings:
- Cura/Prusa are two most mentioned slicer platforms.
- Print failure is a common phenomenon mentioned by 75% respondents.
- Failed support, bed adhesion, nozzle jams are the top three mentioned failures.
-Finding the right setting for 3D printing is mostly self driven and arrived through frequent testing and troubleshooting
Examining Existing Platforms
Prusa Slicer
Disadvantage:
- There is a disproportion in the layout of the visual space
- Lack of graphic symbol to illustrate each command,results in over crowded texts.
- Ambiguous naming system
-Unclear hiearchy for the most used setting
Advantage:
- Familiar layout as the CAD program
- Layer management
Prusa Slicer
Advantage:
-Allow tool path and layer views
- 3 different viewing ports as progress bar.
Disadvantage:
- There is only reset, but no undo.
-Print profiles are unclear and difficult to access
-The settings are crowded into a single list, difficult to locate components.
Problems Statement
The current slicer designs tend to exhibit a lack of graphical hierarchy and steep learning curve. As 3D printing technology is becoming a more common prototyping methods in people's households, it is crucial to bridge the gap between users' needs and the often complicated operating procedures, making the printing experience accessible and intuitive to people of different skill sets.
User persona
Initial Wireframe
Initial Sketches
Color Exploration
Built Bed Design In Progress
Setting Progress
bottom of page