Being a mechanical engineer by profession I can say that this is what moves 3d printing forward. Thanks! I need to make high strength, light weight parts and this video definetly got me thinking about my design. Especially the possibility to make dual walls at high stress points to add strength while keeping the weight down. More of this please :-)
I know this might struck your ego and sense of self entitlement, but "being a mechanical engineer by profession"(whatever that's supposed to mean) doesn't give you any extra capability to evaluate what moves 3d printing forward. Any 3D printing hobbyist can do exactly the same, but you had to come to the comments writing something to make yourself feel special, I understand, some people are insecure like that 🙃
@AlexandreG And you seem to enjoy interpreting comments ungenerously. Most money spent on 3D printing is by industry, not hobbyists. Mechanical engineers play a significant role in choosing printers and designing parts. Suggesting the perspective of a mechanical engineer is no different than the perspective of a hobbyist is silly. Both perspectives have their value. While you may not like @Meglification 's tone, devaluing their perspective to justify calling them insecure is excessive. And an unreasonable reach.
@@ericmanternach2340 As you might have noticed, I didn't say I'm a mechanical engineer to give value to what I said but apparently the guy is right, some people will just take your word for what it is if you take crtedentials, thanks for showing me. A year ago, me as a mechanical engineer boughta a 3D printer and it was my hobbyist friends who introduced me to it in many ways I didn't even think about, they knew much better than me. And surely they know just as much as me what might move 3D printing forward. Me being a mechanical engineer doesn't make me more entitled to what moves 3D printing forward compared to a person without a degree. Hope you were clarified
You are the man! I love your videos because you face the 3d print as a science, not like others that only print stupid things without any sense or objetive, good job Stefan! keep doing that amazing job!
8:24 15% Full Honeycomb, 2 perimeters is stronger than 75% and 30% infills (same pattern, same perimeters) wow, that's impressive. I'm already using from 5% up to 20% only for really sturdy prints. Great video!
The ones who would dislike the video are working for big-infill. That industry has a lot to lose because of this video. They want to silence the truth! Also, as stated above, cats.
You are wise to choose a good model to test both compression and tension stress at the same time. In fact in one of the slow motion video, the crack happened on the compression side first rather than on the tension side as many people would expect. If you could test torsion stress as well then it would be a more perfect experiment. Thank you for your contribution to the 3d printing community. There had to be a lot of effort you gave.
Your videos are the best! I'd like to point out that in Cura 100% infill will actually make as many perimeters as needed to fill the surface, instead of using paralell lines like S3D, so you would get Pisces a lot stronger with 100% infill in Cura.
Great video. Love your content! I would add a comment/reminder regarding part orientation as the biggest factor (before even looking at infills, perimeter layers etc... whenever possible). It might be obvious, but understanding the load path of your designs and orienting the part on the print bed so that the load paths are in the XY plane (continuous filament) is likely the most efficient way to get strength for a given weight. I know it's not 100% the point of the video but it's still a good reminder. You have shown us how anisotropic printed parts are. Learning a lot from your studies.
agree, and I've found that layer cooling is huge too, particularly when I am printing multiple parts together like these hooks were, and the slicer is making decisions on travel with parts that are being build up side-by-side.
hi if you were printing a furniture leg that is round that has an adjustable skrew to adjust the length, would you print it on its side to make it stronger xx
It took some time, but I got there in the end. Now, I understand exactly what is meant by this video. Not because of its production. It is extremely well made and explained. It is that up until now I did not NEED to understand it. I have been firefighting one problem after another with the belief that if it ain't broke don't fix it. That of course was down to confidence in what I was printing. Now I can experiment knowing if anything goes wrong I can fix it. CNC kitchen has played a big part in building my confidence and I will always be grateful. Thank you, Sir
This video confirms my own research on the perimeter shells. I sliced in S3D and print 3D boat parts for some low load rigging parts and some other areas. They work fine when the part is correctly drawn, load vectors are aligned, rounded edges (sharp edges brake sooner), 20-50% infill (usually triangular), Number of shells (5 is good for this application), material and color (black seems to be the most U/V weather resistant in any one material). Good work.
I think you make great videos, thanks for that! I almost only print stuff that I use on my car, drone or in my home. So strength is number one prio for me. This video helps alot. I did allways print with 2 perimeters and 100% infill before. Now I use more shells instead and lower infill :)
I just found this and it's very good. Thank you for your scientific approach, it really determines what works very quickly without opinion or conjecture.
Finally! you answered my question, I wondered why my parts were weak even when I printed at 100% infill or with higher outer wall and why my prints failed when the infill and outer wall were too high. For a while I've been printing with 15% to 20% infill and with an outer shell/wall thickness =
By intuition I was already doing that not to put too much filler but to put more outer layers. now I confirm that I was doing well. Thank you very much for uploading this video
Structural engineer here. A little late to the party but I'd like to add a little note that the strength of any part heavily depends on 1) how its loaded and 2) the cross sectional area at those loads. There's also the randomness factor of the material so multiple tests of the same thing need to be performed to get an accurate result. But that being said, the failure cross section of your part is parallel to the wiggle fill so only the shell's cross section is contributing to that parts strength and would obviously be the least strong. If you rotate the wiggle fill to be perpendicular to the failure plane you'll probably get higher strength values. The more material you are able to get in the failure cross section, the "stronger" the part will be. That's why increasing the shell makes it stronger, because it's guaranteed to increase the cross sectional area. Increasing shell would marginally increase the moment capacity because it enlarges inward closer to the neutral axis picking up less stress. However increasing shell would more significantly increase tensile strength since it's theoretically uniform stress across the cross section. So that being said, if your typical user's part is failing in bending, increasing the shell won't help it very much. Which is what this test doesn't show properly is whether the part is failing in bending or tension. I'd be happy to help you design a seperate test for pure bending. So to make a part stronger, I agree increasing the shell will help the most and more infill is a bit beneficial but they're not your only options. Assuming there's no critical size constraint you can also change the size and shape of your part to be more structurally sound. Just like how an I-beam can be a stronger shape than say a tube that has the same cross sectional area if oriented correctly to your loads. Infill density and shell thickness will help the most with tension (and possibly compression) loads the most. Bending capacity can be increased a bit with more shell and infill but changing the shape is probably the best option. If you want to do more "scientific" tests to really figure out what's better you need to control a few more variables. 1st variable, have a control part with 0 infill and compare to another infill with the same shell thickness to see how much the infill is even helping. I hypothesize 0 infill will be similar results to the wiggle fill orientation in this video. 2nd variable is to control the failure plane. The cross sectional area of where you want the part to fail should be smaller than the rest of the part. Then you can see how much stress is actually acting on the part. 3rd variable, seperate bending and tension loads as seperate tests.
Thank you for the great test results, this is well worth the watch because as a new user this type of testing would have taken weeks, but now I'm convinced that I have a new approach to printing.
Nice, your approach to the problem does a very nice job of quantitating this and also explaining why it should be the case. I came to similar conclusions that the rigidity of a part is mostly coming from the wall thickness, as long as there is *some* infill to brace the walls. Even parts that have to withstand significant crushing force don't need a lot of infill. I am usually using between 1.2mm walls and 10% infill, to 2mm walls and 25% infill. That's between 3 and 5 outer walls (with a 0.4 mm nozzle), and an infill grid size of between ~7mm and ~3mm. I prefer the grid type infill based on speed. I also use the "connect infill lines" option in Cura. This reduces visibility of the infill lines on outer surfaces, and also helps adhere it to the inner walls, while giving them even more thickness/strength.
Nice job testing this out. I've found that if you want strongest part, you have to determine outside forces nature and enviroment first, then select corresponding material (PLA is fragile, so you wont go with it for impact-proof things, for example), then orient your part so that force goes parallel to the shells in most critical part, and then select infill and shells amount.
Thanks so much for this research, Stefan. I'm designing a 3d printed C-clamp, and the first iteration would break quite easily if tightened even slightly too far - I increased the number of perimeters from 2 to 4 for version 2, and when I attempted to test it to destruction, it actually crushed a small indentation into the underside of a particleboard table before I chickened out.
Another awesome video from you. I really like the content and the quality of your work. I will try to help you keep growing. You deserve many subscribers. Cheers Roy
I was under the impression infill contributed more to the strength than it really does. Thank you for shining some light on this misconception.By the way, your foam bending demo really turned on the light bulb for me. Ciao, Marco.
Best video on the topic. Super easy to understand. I’m going to look to see if you made a video with the updated infills mentioned at the end of the video.
Just found your channel, thanks to a shout-out from Angus. Really like your detailed test and measurement approach. On this particular topic, I'd be interested to see how the cubic etc infill patterns in Cura perform - they claim to achieve more consistent strength as they move layer to layer by building a three-dimensional internal lattice. I can see they should be stronger under compression in all directions overall, but I imagine the layer adhesion for the infill itself is significantly weaker when under tension.
Using Cura, I have had really good results with the 3D Cross infill. A majority of my parts in standard temper PLA are as good as they ever need to be with 30% infill and 3-4 walls with this infill (depending on Application). My personal thoughts, your applying to a market that is highly interested in "tech" if their curious about comparative destructive testing, bring on the "tech"!! Love it!
Wow that was impressive!!! If possible, how about you test the strength of the specimen when using different nozzle diameters? Excellent work Stefan! You have a new subscriber 😀👍
dein Kontent ist echt Top. Ich bin mehr oder weniger gezwungen 3d Druck zu betreiben und Deine Videos befriedigen meine Neugier sehr. Danke für die viele Arbeit.
Dude, I am new to this hobby. Thank you. I needed to find this I’m glad I did. The settings in CURA offer so many options and variables. So much to learn. So little time.
First time watcher and subbed right away. I love how you get right to the point and appreciate all the work you do in your tests. I just got into 3d printing and was messing around with shells a few days ago on a very small part but it had to be strong so i set shells to 1000, just to insure a solid part. To my surprise it worked great but took a long time. So this video taught me new things.
Still pretty new to printing myself but I've been using like 15% infill max and an average of 5% I feel like infill is simply to help stabilize walls to help prevent collapse. Thicker walls I feel is where the actual strength comes in. Ideally you slice it and skim through the layers to see how it will print to determine whether the percentage used is actually going to reinforce what you want.
Just sub'd. I couldn't click fast enough when I saw the title to this video. Iv'e been hoping someone would do this very same test for a long time as I print almost exclusively end use mechanical or mounting parts. Very thorough, answered all my questions.
I quite often use fasteners to strengthen a part. For example, I have made a series of 'L' shaped brackets, about 50mm on each side, that hold various sized waveguides. The right end of the horizontal part of the 'L' has a cap that clamps the wave guide (half of waveguide profile is in cap, other half in 'L'.) Two screws run through the cap and into threaded inserts in the left end of the 'L'. The screws are needed anyhow for the cap, and having them the full length of the bottom of the 'L' keep that part in compression and makes it much stronger. You can also create a separate part/model for the highly stressed region of your part. For example in the part of the sample shown here you can have a separate 'embedded model' to which you apply completely different printing parameter to. I have tried this some in Simplify3D. I combine the two parts of the model in an assembly and export an STL of the whole assembly then tell Simplify 3D to separate the different objects.
Thanks - this was an excellent analysis! I would suggest trying "Stars" in Slic3r. It's my current favourite infill as it's strong in many directions, and also prints quickly as there are no direction changes mid-pattern - the direction changes only occur at the perimeter.
Interesting. Keep in mind that cubes can slide against each other really easily, so it may not be very good. One day I hope there can be rhombic Dodecahedron infill. I think that those could be one of the strongest 3d patterns.
I generally print with a .6mm nozzle for functional parts. I generally use 4 perimeters and 15% hexagonal infill pattern. I also increase nozzles temp by 5-10C. I am able to really durable parts.
Increasing perimeter width is definitely a noticeable strength improvement. However I believe that alternate layers of serpentine and straight paths in the perimeter would improve strength even more and I’ve asked the Cura team to add this to their slicer. Would like to hear your results if you test this option too. My reasoning for it being stronger is that it will give a bit more on the serpentine but will have axial strength on the straight. But maybe the converse argument can be made !!
Before I get to the results, I'd say that the Honeycomb would be the strongest. It's called honeycomb because it's the fastest & most effective way to build supports in nature, and like the name suggests in combs too.
I'm not sure what all options are available on other software but in slic3r to save time on the prints you can set the size of perimeters and external perimeters. Using a .4mm nozzle I set perimeters at .8mm and external perimeter at .4mm So you get a shell of 1.2mm in only 2 perimeters instead of 3.
This is very useful. I'm in the process of making a helmet for a costume so finding out the strength of each pattern was useful. Also, this could be very useful when printing out props as well.
This is why I always pay particular attention to items engineered in Germany when I'm researching purchases in general (non-3d printing items)... Lots of quality coming out of Deutschland
thank you a lot, this is what i am looking for, i hope you can do more video about the filament's use and testing the object not just in traction but also in torsion and fatigue
Really nice video! However, you should also take a closer look at the extrusion-width. When I print strong parts, I usually crank up the extrusion-width to 0.75 - 1.25mm (with 0.4mm nozzle). This way you require less perimeters for the same wall thickness. It's also a lot faster this way.
I suppose the wiggle infill pattern might make sense for some elastic materials, for parts intended to bend, compress or stretch significantly. On one hand it looks like it offers support without adding much rigidity to the part, and on the other hand it has no obvious points of failure, instead looking like it would disperse forces over a larger area.
Very neat. I'd love to see follow up with Cura's cubic etc. 3D infills. My current approach is to print cubic infill at about 33% and 2 perimeters as the default strong part, and using the gradual infill function to bump up the infill to 65% for the last few layers to get a good roof support.
Thanks, Im going into business using several 3D Printers and I need all this tips I can get on how to increase speed to decrease print times. If I can print faster with less quality, then increase the strength back up with by increasing perimeters then Im willing to try!
Awesome vid. I totally agree with your findings. Shell/wall thickness always makes a stronger part. I've used a screws for cement, brand name Tapcon, and a spot of glue for structural PLA parts. Never less than 1.2mm walls with screws. This is strange Just noticed the date you posted this. Feb 25 2018. I just revived the email notification today. June 10 2018
Thanks for sharing Stefan, I love the video. I think a good follow-up video to this would be to see how the same approach to perimeters and infill works when printing in a Z axis.
I noticed that the breaks reveal a small amount of air between the perimeter layers. I'm not sure whether this is layer seperation due to the load or actual gaps in the printing. If it's the first, you could try lowering fan speed to increase adhesion. If it's the second, maybe play with extraction speeds to fill in that fraction more material.
Excellent testing and explanation. It makes sense that having more filaments in the direction of the stress, near the outside of the part where the stress is greatest, would be stronger. I have a question, however. If you are printing a solid, round rod, oriented vertically in the Z-axis, the perimeter layers are printed around the circumference of the part, and if the rod is subjected to a bending load, the stress will be trying to pull apart the layers from each other on the tension side. I would assume this would be much weaker than if the filaments ran in the Z direction, but that is not practical. In my application, I have a flat base with a rod protruding vertically from it, and it is subject to some bending loads applied sideways at the top of the rod. The weakest point is where the rod meets the base. What would be the strongest way to print this part? Thanks in advance for your answer.
Very interesting. What I'm looking for now is software that can determine where the regions of greatest stress will be and then adjust the slicing accordingly in those regions.
A comprehensive analysis, thank you! But have you thought about compressive strain and shear strain as opposed to torsion and tension? I saw a video of someone using PLA printed dies with 100% infill for shaping sheet aluminium. The dies were hammered against the metal, and the compression strength of the part was essential. For shear strain, maybe a through-hole screw fitting that is loaded perpendicular to the screw axis would be an example. It would be very interesting to see how infill vs. perimeter applies in these cases.
As has been said your videos are the best when it comes to actually seeing how strong a part or material actually is. I would definitely like to see a test of the 3d infill pattern as that is what I use when I want a part stronger in multiple directions, but I'm not sure how effective that actually is.
Hi, I am curious as to the effects of these two things (infill and perimiter thickness) on warping. I am printing very simple parts, and mostly, I want them to retain their designed “flatness” - I I don’t want them to warp while printing, and to stay as flat as printed afterwards. I don’t think I’ve seen you address this, but I will check again. Thanks for all you do. I appreciate your scientific, objectively oriented explorations!
Aww finally someone who's actually testing different infill patterns and densities!
At your service ;-)
Check out the geometry on this 3d printing from MIT: ua-cam.com/video/VIcZdc42F0g/v-deo.html
@Dominic Cory Bot
@Cristiano Stefan comments
Cringe 👁️👄👁️
I love the scientific approach to testing! Definitely one of my favorite things about your videos.
Would you mind to share your figures/graphs? I feel a bit lazy.
It's the filament sellers that dislike 😂
I thought the opposite. No consideration to direction of prints etc
Being a mechanical engineer by profession I can say that this is what moves 3d printing forward. Thanks!
I need to make high strength, light weight parts and this video definetly got me thinking about my design. Especially the possibility to make dual walls at high stress points to add strength while keeping the weight down. More of this please :-)
I know this might struck your ego and sense of self entitlement, but "being a mechanical engineer by profession"(whatever that's supposed to mean) doesn't give you any extra capability to evaluate what moves 3d printing forward. Any 3D printing hobbyist can do exactly the same, but you had to come to the comments writing something to make yourself feel special, I understand, some people are insecure like that 🙃
@AlexandreG And you seem to enjoy interpreting comments ungenerously. Most money spent on 3D printing is by industry, not hobbyists. Mechanical engineers play a significant role in choosing printers and designing parts. Suggesting the perspective of a mechanical engineer is no different than the perspective of a hobbyist is silly. Both perspectives have their value. While you may not like @Meglification 's tone, devaluing their perspective to justify calling them insecure is excessive. And an unreasonable reach.
@@ericmanternach2340 As you might have noticed, I didn't say I'm a mechanical engineer to give value to what I said but apparently the guy is right, some people will just take your word for what it is if you take crtedentials, thanks for showing me. A year ago, me as a mechanical engineer boughta a 3D printer and it was my hobbyist friends who introduced me to it in many ways I didn't even think about, they knew much better than me. And surely they know just as much as me what might move 3D printing forward. Me being a mechanical engineer doesn't make me more entitled to what moves 3D printing forward compared to a person without a degree. Hope you were clarified
@@AlexandreG Never seen someone feel so attacked by a random comment on the long story of the whole internet untill you.
@@ziberzero that's really cool 🤓
You are the man! I love your videos because you face the 3d print as a science, not like others that only print stupid things without any sense or objetive, good job Stefan! keep doing that amazing job!
Alfredo Antonio Martinez i
8:24 15% Full Honeycomb, 2 perimeters is stronger than 75% and 30% infills (same pattern, same perimeters) wow, that's impressive. I'm already using from 5% up to 20% only for really sturdy prints. Great video!
I guess its actually not. It is just more efficient, because of the better strength/weight ratio. Absolutely stronger is probably the 75% part.
Wonderful analysis! It is refreshing to see a UA-cam video with solid engineering/scientific methods and result presentations. Well done.
Final Conclusion is INCREASE SHELLS AND DECREASE INFILL. How the hell unlike this video? This is awesome.
This is not universally true. Very dependent on loading case.
What are shells, please?
over time you also have to account for cats jumping up on the keyboard and clicking dislike on a video, 1 out of 100.
The ones who would dislike the video are working for big-infill. That industry has a lot to lose because of this video. They want to silence the truth! Also, as stated above, cats.
@@Amipotsophspond ONE SURE FIrE WAY TO (oops caps lock) avoid the problemiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii990kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk ( ?!@@#! cat) , Get a dog!
You have one of the best hardcore engineering of 3D printing. Keep it up!!!
I love the rigor with which you do the testing. Varying only one parameter at a time. And thoroughly analyzing the results.
Great job !
You are wise to choose a good model to test both compression and tension stress at the same time. In fact in one of the slow motion video, the crack happened on the compression side first rather than on the tension side as many people would expect. If you could test torsion stress as well then it would be a more perfect experiment. Thank you for your contribution to the 3d printing community. There had to be a lot of effort you gave.
Your videos are the best! I'd like to point out that in Cura 100% infill will actually make as many perimeters as needed to fill the surface, instead of using paralell lines like S3D, so you would get Pisces a lot stronger with 100% infill in Cura.
Great video. Love your content!
I would add a comment/reminder regarding part orientation as the biggest factor (before even looking at infills, perimeter layers etc... whenever possible). It might be obvious, but understanding the load path of your designs and orienting the part on the print bed so that the load paths are in the XY plane (continuous filament) is likely the most efficient way to get strength for a given weight. I know it's not 100% the point of the video but it's still a good reminder. You have shown us how anisotropic printed parts are.
Learning a lot from your studies.
agree, and I've found that layer cooling is huge too, particularly when I am printing multiple parts together like these hooks were, and the slicer is making decisions on travel with parts that are being build up side-by-side.
hi if you were printing a furniture leg that is round that has an adjustable skrew to adjust the length, would you print it on its side to make it stronger xx
It took some time, but I got there in the end. Now, I understand exactly what is meant by this video. Not because of its production. It is extremely well made and explained. It is that up until now I did not NEED to understand it. I have been firefighting one problem after another with the belief that if it ain't broke don't fix it. That of course was down to confidence in what I was printing. Now I can experiment knowing if anything goes wrong I can fix it. CNC kitchen has played a big part in building my confidence and I will always be grateful. Thank you, Sir
Using all of your tests, you should combine your findings and print a set of test hooks. I would love to see how strong a hook you could make
all roads lead to a solid hook lol
This video confirms my own research on the perimeter shells. I sliced in S3D and print 3D boat parts for some low load rigging parts and some other areas. They work fine when the part is correctly drawn, load vectors are aligned, rounded edges (sharp edges brake sooner), 20-50% infill (usually triangular), Number of shells (5 is good for this application), material and color (black seems to be the most U/V weather resistant in any one material). Good work.
I think you make great videos, thanks for that! I almost only print stuff that I use on my car, drone or in my home. So strength is number one prio for me. This video helps alot. I did allways print with 2 perimeters and 100% infill before. Now I use more shells instead and lower infill :)
Proper tests with proper usable results. Thanks!
I just found this and it's very good. Thank you for your scientific approach, it really determines what works very quickly without opinion or conjecture.
Finally! you answered my question, I wondered why my parts were weak even when I printed at 100% infill or with higher outer wall and why my prints failed when the infill and outer wall were too high. For a while I've been printing with 15% to 20% infill and with an outer shell/wall thickness =
By intuition I was already doing that not to put too much filler but to put more outer layers. now I confirm that I was doing well.
Thank you very much for uploading this video
I always have to think about bird bones in this context, mostly hollow with "struts" on the inside. Maybe we need bird bone infill.
Google for lattice optimization. e.g. Autodesk is working on these things, but they are not optimally usable in FDM at the moment.
If you do a topology optimization simulation you will get a result similar to the bird bones structure
Concentric seems to do this depending on your density
At this point I’m thinking Stefan has more hooks than Ikea’s curtains and upholstery section.
Structural engineer here. A little late to the party but I'd like to add a little note that the strength of any part heavily depends on 1) how its loaded and 2) the cross sectional area at those loads. There's also the randomness factor of the material so multiple tests of the same thing need to be performed to get an accurate result. But that being said, the failure cross section of your part is parallel to the wiggle fill so only the shell's cross section is contributing to that parts strength and would obviously be the least strong. If you rotate the wiggle fill to be perpendicular to the failure plane you'll probably get higher strength values. The more material you are able to get in the failure cross section, the "stronger" the part will be. That's why increasing the shell makes it stronger, because it's guaranteed to increase the cross sectional area. Increasing shell would marginally increase the moment capacity because it enlarges inward closer to the neutral axis picking up less stress. However increasing shell would more significantly increase tensile strength since it's theoretically uniform stress across the cross section. So that being said, if your typical user's part is failing in bending, increasing the shell won't help it very much. Which is what this test doesn't show properly is whether the part is failing in bending or tension. I'd be happy to help you design a seperate test for pure bending.
So to make a part stronger, I agree increasing the shell will help the most and more infill is a bit beneficial but they're not your only options. Assuming there's no critical size constraint you can also change the size and shape of your part to be more structurally sound. Just like how an I-beam can be a stronger shape than say a tube that has the same cross sectional area if oriented correctly to your loads. Infill density and shell thickness will help the most with tension (and possibly compression) loads the most. Bending capacity can be increased a bit with more shell and infill but changing the shape is probably the best option.
If you want to do more "scientific" tests to really figure out what's better you need to control a few more variables. 1st variable, have a control part with 0 infill and compare to another infill with the same shell thickness to see how much the infill is even helping. I hypothesize 0 infill will be similar results to the wiggle fill orientation in this video. 2nd variable is to control the failure plane. The cross sectional area of where you want the part to fail should be smaller than the rest of the part. Then you can see how much stress is actually acting on the part. 3rd variable, seperate bending and tension loads as seperate tests.
Thank you for the great test results, this is well worth the watch because as a new user this type of testing would have taken weeks, but now I'm convinced that I have a new approach to printing.
Great analysis Stefan! I really appreciate your rational scientific approach in a world where too often speculation is king. Keep up the good work!
Nice, your approach to the problem does a very nice job of quantitating this and also explaining why it should be the case. I came to similar conclusions that the rigidity of a part is mostly coming from the wall thickness, as long as there is *some* infill to brace the walls. Even parts that have to withstand significant crushing force don't need a lot of infill. I am usually using between 1.2mm walls and 10% infill, to 2mm walls and 25% infill. That's between 3 and 5 outer walls (with a 0.4 mm nozzle), and an infill grid size of between ~7mm and ~3mm. I prefer the grid type infill based on speed. I also use the "connect infill lines" option in Cura. This reduces visibility of the infill lines on outer surfaces, and also helps adhere it to the inner walls, while giving them even more thickness/strength.
Nice job testing this out. I've found that if you want strongest part, you have to determine outside forces nature and enviroment first, then select corresponding material (PLA is fragile, so you wont go with it for impact-proof things, for example), then orient your part so that force goes parallel to the shells in most critical part, and then select infill and shells amount.
Thanks so much for this research, Stefan. I'm designing a 3d printed C-clamp, and the first iteration would break quite easily if tightened even slightly too far - I increased the number of perimeters from 2 to 4 for version 2, and when I attempted to test it to destruction, it actually crushed a small indentation into the underside of a particleboard table before I chickened out.
Another awesome video from you. I really like the content and the quality of your work. I will try to help you keep growing. You deserve many subscribers. Cheers Roy
This guy is awesome, I agree!!!
I was under the impression infill contributed more to the strength than it really does. Thank you for shining some light on this misconception.By the way, your foam bending demo really turned on the light bulb for me. Ciao, Marco.
Awesome work Stefan. You hit this one out of the ball park. Best Yt channel out there.
More please! The infill orientation relative to the load vectors will also make a difference but that is a more advanced topic.
Awesome info brother! I see so many people cranking the infill up to make stronger parts when they should just increase the wall thickness a tiny bit
Thank you for sharing this knowledge. Your videos are helping me to learn as I enter the world of 3D printing as an old school sculptor.
Best video on the topic. Super easy to understand.
I’m going to look to see if you made a video with the updated infills mentioned at the end of the video.
Your systematic approach is really refreshing. Nice work!
This confirms something that I only had a gut feeling for before. I've printed some pretty strong parts with only 15% infill but with 6-8 perimeters
Just found your channel, thanks to a shout-out from Angus. Really like your detailed test and measurement approach.
On this particular topic, I'd be interested to see how the cubic etc infill patterns in Cura perform - they claim to achieve more consistent strength as they move layer to layer by building a three-dimensional internal lattice. I can see they should be stronger under compression in all directions overall, but I imagine the layer adhesion for the infill itself is significantly weaker when under tension.
Using Cura, I have had really good results with the 3D Cross infill. A majority of my parts in standard temper PLA are as good as they ever need to be with 30% infill and 3-4 walls with this infill (depending on Application). My personal thoughts, your applying to a market that is highly interested in "tech" if their curious about comparative destructive testing, bring on the "tech"!! Love it!
Wow that was impressive!!! If possible, how about you test the strength of the specimen when using different nozzle diameters?
Excellent work Stefan! You have a new subscriber 😀👍
dein Kontent ist echt Top. Ich bin mehr oder weniger gezwungen 3d Druck zu betreiben und Deine Videos befriedigen meine Neugier sehr. Danke für die viele Arbeit.
Great video. I personally use thicker walls to increase the strength of my prints and use infill as little as possible to save material.
UA-cam at it's best!!!
Thankyou and what a surprising result. I'll be using this information in my next functional prints. I like that you explained the result and why.
Dude, I am new to this hobby. Thank you. I needed to find this I’m glad I did. The settings in CURA offer so many options and variables. So much to learn. So little time.
First time watcher and subbed right away. I love how you get right to the point and appreciate all the work you do in your tests. I just got into 3d printing and was messing around with shells a few days ago on a very small part but it had to be strong so i set shells to 1000, just to insure a solid part. To my surprise it worked great but took a long time. So this video taught me new things.
Still pretty new to printing myself but I've been using like 15% infill max and an average of 5% I feel like infill is simply to help stabilize walls to help prevent collapse. Thicker walls I feel is where the actual strength comes in. Ideally you slice it and skim through the layers to see how it will print to determine whether the percentage used is actually going to reinforce what you want.
Fantastic video! Not just speculation, tons of real data collection and actual science! Very thurough! Subscribed!
Just sub'd. I couldn't click fast enough when I saw the title to this video. Iv'e been hoping someone would do this very same test for a long time as I print almost exclusively end use mechanical or mounting parts. Very thorough, answered all my questions.
I quite often use fasteners to strengthen a part. For example, I have made a series of 'L' shaped brackets, about 50mm on each side, that hold various sized waveguides. The right end of the horizontal part of the 'L' has a cap that clamps the wave guide (half of waveguide profile is in cap, other half in 'L'.) Two screws run through the cap and into threaded inserts in the left end of the 'L'. The screws are needed anyhow for the cap, and having them the full length of the bottom of the 'L' keep that part in compression and makes it much stronger.
You can also create a separate part/model for the highly stressed region of your part. For example in the part of the sample shown here you can have a separate 'embedded model' to which you apply completely different printing parameter to. I have tried this some in Simplify3D. I combine the two parts of the model in an assembly and export an STL of the whole assembly then tell Simplify 3D to separate the different objects.
Awesome. Finally there is a great video on this topic I can share to all those infill fanatics.
Big thanks
Thanks for the analytical approach!
Thanks - this was an excellent analysis! I would suggest trying "Stars" in Slic3r. It's my current favourite infill as it's strong in many directions, and also prints quickly as there are no direction changes mid-pattern - the direction changes only occur at the perimeter.
Fascinating, I’ve just started 3d printing and have only fiddled with the settings a little, this gives me an area to work on, many thanks.
I often use cubic infill, it tends to print well and is more geometrically uniform. I’d love to see you test those other cura infill patterns!
Interesting. Keep in mind that cubes can slide against each other really easily, so it may not be very good. One day I hope there can be rhombic Dodecahedron infill. I think that those could be one of the strongest 3d patterns.
I generally print with a .6mm nozzle for functional parts. I generally use 4 perimeters and 15% hexagonal infill pattern. I also increase nozzles temp by 5-10C. I am able to really durable parts.
Great video! Thank you for taking the time to do and share this experiments! The results are in some cases quite unexpected. Thank you again!
Increasing perimeter width is definitely a noticeable strength improvement. However I believe that alternate layers of serpentine and straight paths in the perimeter would improve strength even more and I’ve asked the Cura team to add this to their slicer. Would like to hear your results if you test this option too. My reasoning for it being stronger is that it will give a bit more on the serpentine but will have axial strength on the straight. But maybe the converse argument can be made !!
Before I get to the results, I'd say that the Honeycomb would be the strongest. It's called honeycomb because it's the fastest & most effective way to build supports in nature, and like the name suggests in combs too.
I'm not sure what all options are available on other software but in slic3r to save time on the prints you can set the size of perimeters and external perimeters. Using a .4mm nozzle I set perimeters at .8mm and external perimeter at .4mm So you get a shell of 1.2mm in only 2 perimeters instead of 3.
This is very useful. I'm in the process of making a helmet for a costume so finding out the strength of each pattern was useful. Also, this could be very useful when printing out props as well.
This is why I always pay particular attention to items engineered in Germany when I'm researching purchases in general (non-3d printing items)... Lots of quality coming out of Deutschland
My first pick was the honeycomb! Nature ALWAYS win!!! Another awesome video!!! 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼 Danke Schoen!!!
Thanks stefan ..old video but really useful to learn something from this channel. Alot better than others! :)
thank you a lot, this is what i am looking for,
i hope you can do more video about the filament's use and testing the object not just in traction but also in torsion and fatigue
This is exactly what we need to see more off from youtube, scientificallyish comparisons between settings and filaments.
Awesome video! This is something beneficial considering I am starting to print parts that need to be strong.
I came. I saw, I subscribed.
Did the opposite 😂😂😂😂😂
I saw, I came, I subscribed
Really nice video! However, you should also take a closer look at the extrusion-width. When I print strong parts, I usually crank up the extrusion-width to 0.75 - 1.25mm (with 0.4mm nozzle). This way you require less perimeters for the same wall thickness. It's also a lot faster this way.
most useful video I have ever found in 3d printing.=)
I suppose the wiggle infill pattern might make sense for some elastic materials, for parts intended to bend, compress or stretch significantly. On one hand it looks like it offers support without adding much rigidity to the part, and on the other hand it has no obvious points of failure, instead looking like it would disperse forces over a larger area.
Making a circular infill instead of rectilinear can help a lot in strength, eliminating crack lines along the rectilinear infill angles.
Very neat. I'd love to see follow up with Cura's cubic etc. 3D infills. My current approach is to print cubic infill at about 33% and 2 perimeters as the default strong part, and using the gradual infill function to bump up the infill to 65% for the last few layers to get a good roof support.
Thanks, Im going into business using several 3D Printers and I need all this tips I can get on how to increase speed to decrease print times. If I can print faster with less quality, then increase the strength back up with by increasing perimeters then Im willing to try!
Awesome vid. I totally agree with your findings. Shell/wall thickness always makes a stronger part. I've used a screws for cement, brand name Tapcon, and a spot of glue for structural PLA parts. Never less than 1.2mm walls with screws.
This is strange
Just noticed the date you posted this. Feb 25 2018.
I just revived the email notification today. June 10 2018
UA-cam is probably doing it's "experiments" again...
Awesome video! Just the right amount of info to deal with real pragmatic situations.
Thanks for sharing Stefan, I love the video. I think a good follow-up video to this would be to see how the same approach to perimeters and infill works when printing in a Z axis.
Yes! This is why I became a Patron.
Is it better to have a pair of 0.4 mm walls, or a single 0.7mm wall? I chose 0.7 because I typically use a 0.6 nozzle.
Man I love your videos you really go in depth at what your explaining, Keep up the good work!!
Good to know that my approach at thicker walls actually helps.
I noticed that the breaks reveal a small amount of air between the perimeter layers. I'm not sure whether this is layer seperation due to the load or actual gaps in the printing.
If it's the first, you could try lowering fan speed to increase adhesion.
If it's the second, maybe play with extraction speeds to fill in that fraction more material.
At 4:03, if orange is really time than that means 'fast honeycomb' takes more time than 'full honeycomb'🍯.
Awesome tests!
Amazing video! So in depth, felt very complete, you’ll blow up on YT I’d bet
Its a great video, but an often overlooked and maybe more important consideration, is design of the part and orientation when printing.
Great engineering approach while still being practical....keep 'em coming!
Excellent testing and explanation. It makes sense that having more filaments in the direction of the stress, near the outside of the part where the stress is greatest, would be stronger. I have a question, however. If you are printing a solid, round rod, oriented vertically in the Z-axis, the perimeter layers are printed around the circumference of the part, and if the rod is subjected to a bending load, the stress will be trying to pull apart the layers from each other on the tension side. I would assume this would be much weaker than if the filaments ran in the Z direction, but that is not practical. In my application, I have a flat base with a rod protruding vertically from it, and it is subject to some bending loads applied sideways at the top of the rod. The weakest point is where the rod meets the base. What would be the strongest way to print this part? Thanks in advance for your answer.
Got into 3d printing not too long ago. Your channel has helped me a lot! Thank you. Subscribed! :)
Very interesting. What I'm looking for now is software that can determine where the regions of greatest stress will be and then adjust the slicing accordingly in those regions.
Your study's almost at academic level. Thank you very much...
Excellent video once again! I appreciate your scientific approach and your willingness to share results.
A comprehensive analysis, thank you! But have you thought about compressive strain and shear strain as opposed to torsion and tension? I saw a video of someone using PLA printed dies with 100% infill for shaping sheet aluminium. The dies were hammered against the metal, and the compression strength of the part was essential. For shear strain, maybe a through-hole screw fitting that is loaded perpendicular to the screw axis would be an example. It would be very interesting to see how infill vs. perimeter applies in these cases.
Very great work. I didn't know your channel. This video was the perfect answer to my question about infill.
Thanks a lot
As has been said your videos are the best when it comes to actually seeing how strong a part or material actually is. I would definitely like to see a test of the 3d infill pattern as that is what I use when I want a part stronger in multiple directions, but I'm not sure how effective that actually is.
Hi, I am curious as to the effects of these two things (infill and perimiter thickness) on warping. I am printing very simple parts, and mostly, I want them to retain their designed “flatness” - I I don’t want them to warp while printing, and to stay as flat as printed afterwards. I don’t think I’ve seen you address this, but I will check again. Thanks for all you do. I appreciate your scientific, objectively oriented explorations!
That was a very nice test, your video are always of a great quality from an engineering point!
Ja, bitte mehr wissenschaftliche Tests. Yes, please do more scientific tests.
You should've tested Prusa's 3D Cubic infill, IMO that's stronger than these and prints quite fast too.
This appears excellent! Cannot simply wait to see the same as this. Great job.
my past failures and successes are about in line with your results. shells matter a lot.