Bambu fillament mapping overhaul#261

Many bambu fillaments do not translate properly through from auto assigment on upload, through to mapping to the reported AMS fillaments. Issues so far found with support fillaments, variants of PLA/PETG e.g. matte, tough, basic e.t.c. , clear fillaments.

this is due to the variables SP uses to identify the fillaments from the ams data and gcode data, and the difference in naming bambu themselves use.

This has a knock oin effect of causing the mapping to get completely confused.

e.g.
AMS containing PA-HT (black), Support for PLA Black, PETG Clear, PLA Matte White
File using PETG Clear and Support for PLA Black

mapping decides that the most suitable to print the file is PAHT and PLA white.

For Bambu printers, the experience should improve upon bambu slicer functionality, not detract from it.

Thanks for your post, Htaylor!

Could you provide a clear example of a case of this?

• How the file is sliced
• What the materials are called in the slicer
• What you’d imagine they’d be mapped to / called in SimplyPrint, in the best-case scenario
• What they end up as inside SimplyPrint

Screenshots would be awesome too! At the moment I can’t 100% see what you mean, and a lot of users use SimplyPrint very differently, so there are a lot of cases to keep track of, so we try to get your exact case right when testing things like this.

If you have an example file, please upload it or send it to me at albert (at) simplyprint.io, or via DMs in Discord.

sent a video, and some snippets of code, with a rough explanation via discord DM’s. Happy to jump on a call and explain if you’d find that easier too.