this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2023
36 points (90.9% liked)

3DPrinting

15595 readers
17 users here now

3DPrinting is a place where makers of all skill levels and walks of life can learn about and discuss 3D printing and development of 3D printed parts and devices.

The r/functionalprint community is now located at: [email protected] or [email protected]

There are CAD communities available at: [email protected] or [email protected]

Rules

If you need an easy way to host pictures, https://catbox.moe may be an option. Be ethical about what you post and donate if you are able or use this a lot. It is just an individual hosting content, not a company. The image embedding syntax for Lemmy is ![](URL)

Moderation policy: Light, mostly invisible

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Not a scientific test and not from every angle but interesting still.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The optimal structure is highly dependent on the type of loading: tension, compression, bending, shear, torsion, or combinations thereof. Thus, the results of these experiments are only valid for compression. For other load cases one either needs to do the specific experiments or run a topology optimisation, by e.g. a SIMP algorithm.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Or even in compression… if he had tested them with the weight moving along the printed z-axis.

Rectilinear, grid, lines, honeycomb and stars and any other patterns like that aren’t going to be the same.

Also, things change again with part geometry- some paterns won’t be able to set up that neat crushing pattern on something like the wing he had in an example.

Edit: if he had included solid top and bottom layers as well- which is probably more typical of printing- the attached infil would behave differently.