<p>Blender has a CNC slicer plugin, it's not exactly what you're asking for but it can perform some of the tasks that you're asking for.</p>
<p><a href="https://sourceforge.net/projects/cnc-slicer-blender-plugin/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">CNC slicer for Blender</a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-09T14:58:54.563Z
Thanks! Unfortunately, as you point out it wouldn't meet the need to do in-CAD analysis and modification.
Kenn Sebesta
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-09T12:35:44.420Z
2022-07-09T12:35:44.420Z
Aaargh Zombies
<p>Microsoft 3d builder will do it. It's far from the best CAD or Printing software though. Works very well for what it is.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-11T14:25:04.127Z
Could be promising. Could you provide some links to this functionality?
Kenn Sebesta
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-11T22:31:43.603Z
It comes inbuilt with Windows 10, lots of instructions online for it
Kilisi
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-11T23:52:08.017Z
That's good to know. I don't mean to give you a hard time, and I appreciate your input. Nonetheless, SE answers should have corroborating documentation, i.e. links. They should not simply an assertion.
Kenn Sebesta
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-11T23:55:35.287Z
Not giving you a hard time, but you've spent more effort typing that than it would to have typed the keywords into a search engine and gotten hundreds of links. ;)
Kilisi
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-12T00:37:50.107Z
Think of SE answers as canonical documentation for everyone who has the same question. If each user searches for his/her own answer, then there's little uniformity, as the answer will depend on the search engine, the user profile, etc... To avoid this, the answer should do more than be an assertion and should instead provide justifications. https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer gives a good overview of how answers ideally would be.
Kenn Sebesta
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-12T00:53:40.697Z
Feel free to downvote if you have a problem with the answer, I was just trying to help
Kilisi
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-12T01:32:40.353Z
I appreciate your help, and don't see a reason to downvote. To the contrary, I would like to upvote as I think your answer is helpful, but without justification it is incomplete.
Kenn Sebesta
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-12T12:03:48.677Z
Ironic that you upvote something with an irrelevant link, here's a link to google https://www.google.com/
Kilisi
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-10T09:23:26.213Z
2022-07-10T09:23:26.213Z
Kilisi
<p>I am on the hunt for CAD packages which can perform some level of slicing as an inherent model feature, instead of either exporting to STL and then importing into the slicer (a la OnShape) or directly opening the slicer from within the software (a la Fusion 360). I would like this because I want to model directly for the print instead of having to go through an iterative process where certain tools cannot be used to their fullest extent.</p>
<p>For instance, it's very easy for me to print a model, measure it to quantify shrink, and then backport required changes into my CAD model. However, this is not ideal as it prevents me from analyzing the model before print. (For instance, using the CAD software to calculate mass, C.G., moment of inertia, or doing mechanical and thermal analysis on the printed shape, not the modeled solid.)</p>
<p>In a perfect world, I'd have the ability to run Cura as an operation on the model. The resulting CAD would then include the infill structures as well as any required modifications to the original part, e.g. a discrepancy between the desired height and the printed height or a wall width vs the nozzle width.</p>
<p>Is there anything out there which fits the bill? I know nothing is perfect, but anything right now would be a big step forward.</p>

<slicing><cad>
Is there an example of tight coupling between CAD and sliced models?
Kenn Sebesta
# Is there an example of tight coupling between CAD and sliced models?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-07-06)

I am on the hunt for CAD packages which can perform some level of slicing as an inherent model feature, instead of either exporting to STL and then importing into the slicer (a la OnShape) or directly opening the slicer from within the software (a la Fusion 360). I would like this because I want to model directly for the print instead of having to go through an iterative process where certain tools cannot be used to their fullest extent.

For instance, it's very easy for me to print a model, measure it to quantify shrink, and then backport required changes into my CAD model. However, this is not ideal as it prevents me from analyzing the model before print. (For instance, using the CAD software to calculate mass, C.G., moment of inertia, or doing mechanical and thermal analysis on the printed shape, not the modeled solid.)

In a perfect world, I'd have the ability to run Cura as an operation on the model. The resulting CAD would then include the infill structures as well as any required modifications to the original part, e.g. a discrepancy between the desired height and the printed height or a wall width vs the nozzle width.

Is there anything out there which fits the bill? I know nothing is perfect, but anything right now would be a big step forward.

**Tags:** slicing, cad


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2022-07-09. Score: 2

Blender has a CNC slicer plugin, it's not exactly what you're asking for but it can perform some of the tasks that you're asking for.

[CNC slicer for Blender](https://sourceforge.net/projects/cnc-slicer-blender-plugin/)

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thanks! Unfortunately, as you point out it wouldn't meet the need to do in-CAD analysis and modification.  

---

### Answer by username_2 on 2022-07-10. Score: 0

Microsoft 3d builder will do it. It's far from the best CAD or Printing software though. Works very well for what it is.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Could be promising. Could you provide some links to this functionality?  
> **username_2**: It comes inbuilt with Windows 10, lots of instructions online for it  
> **username_0**: That's good to know. I don't mean to give you a hard time, and I appreciate your input. Nonetheless, SE answers should have corroborating documentation, i.e. links. They should not simply an assertion.  
> **username_2**: Not giving you a hard time, but you've spent more effort typing that than it would to have typed the keywords into a search engine and gotten hundreds of links. ;)  
> **username_0**: Think of SE answers as canonical documentation for everyone who has the same question. If each user searches for his/her own answer, then there's little uniformity, as the answer will depend on the search engine, the user profile, etc... To avoid this, the answer should do more than be an assertion and should instead provide justifications. https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer gives a good overview of how answers ideally would be.  
> **username_2**: Feel free to downvote if you have a problem with the answer, I was just trying to help  
> **username_0**: I appreciate your help, and don't see a reason to downvote. To the contrary, I would like to upvote as I think your answer is helpful, but without justification it is incomplete.  
> **username_2**: Ironic that you upvote something with an irrelevant link, here's a link to google https://www.google.com/  

---

