On the Wild Variance in Quality of 3D Drawings
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 05. 2024
- What are Adam Savage's thoughts on improving 3D drawings? What software tool does Adam use for organizing group builds? Adam answers these questions from Tested members Superfreak1000 and Idaho Art Lab, whom we thank for their support!
Join this channel to support Tested and get access to perks, like asking Adam questions:
/ @tested
Subscribe for more videos (and click the bell for notifications): czcams.com/users/subscription_c...
Tested and Adam Savage Ts, stickers, (de) merit badges and more: tested-store.com
About Tested: www.tested.com/about
TikTok: / testedcom
Instagram: / testedcom
Twitter: / testedcom
Facebook: / testedcom
Discord: / discord
Amazon Storefront: www.amazon.com/shop/adamsavage...
Intro bumper by Abe Dieckman
Thanks for watching! - Věda a technologie
There's an art to modeling for FDM printing. One thing is how it's directional. In the Z-direction you want chamfers for the best quality, and in the other direction, you want fillets, both for quality and for print speed. There's also the art of avoiding supports, or modeling built-in supports which are always going to be better than supports provided by the slicer.
I still need to learn to model supports. I once found a model with build in supports and they where so nice. Could just press them right off and they used very little material. Never managed to find a guide on how to do that sort of thing though =(
(cough) makers muse
It’s not an art. Not everything is an art that takes knowledge and understanding. But I agree that it’s a very different mindset and knowing and taking advantage of that for 3D printing makes the two more enjoyable.
I’m not that smart… To clarify, do I want my print head making round motions (fillets on corners oriented vertically) or angular motions (chamfers on corners oriented vertically)? It always seemed like round motions would be better than jerky angular motions…
@@c0mputerIt’s an expression. It means something requires more than one might expect to be done well. If I say “there’s an art to making a good pasta dish”, it doesn’t mean I believe my lunch belongs in an art gallery.
Adam, as a mechanical engineer with 20+ years of CAD experience, this is absolutely on the designer, and not the software. The software is fully capable of anything you can imagine. I design Apache Helicopter upgrades for a living using Solidworks and my parts use fillets, etc. It's the designer that is being lazy and making very planar parts as you say.
Totally, the swoopy lines on F1 cars all of which are modeled and printed in 3D for windtunnel testing and have been for decades is proof. Lots of fine detail in the aero some of the SLS used on track. If one ks using SketchUp, the software can't do it, but that's still the designer's choice.
Yeah his argument really confuses me considering that industry has been using CAD for very complex parts for many many years now. His thoughts are likely heavily skewed by the fact that the majority of models online are from amateurs/hobbyists that oftentimes lack a technical background. I'm not quite sure that they're lazy, instead I think it's due to a lack of knowledge and experience with the software and designing in general.
Adam is totally wrong here. He starts by admitting that he doesn't know much about CAD and then continues to pretend that he knows it's setbacks.
He then shows a piece that he really likes, that is designed using the same software available to anyone and then states that the software is the issue.
The designer's level of skill is the bottleneck, rarely the software.
There are plenty of issues with different softwares but the lack of features within the software is really not the issue.
I think Adams talking from the perspective of an artist, not from the perspective of an engineer. He’s talking about aesthetics not usability. If you’re a very technical person working in a very technical field then normal cad software will be perfect for you, but if you’re an artist who typically works in illustration or sculpture or something that is very intuition based, the jump to 3D modeling the same stuff becomes an insane learning curve that loses the dynamic flow that you’re used to in your usual field
@@tommykarrick9130 Be it an artistic or a technical perspective I still believe Adam is misguided. There's a ton of amateur art online we can point to and say "oh the shading is off, the lighting is inconsistent, the background is too flat" just like how Adam says many .STLs are "too planar". That doesn't mean Photoshop or Procreate are the problem.
The technical background vs artists idea doesn't really apply either since there are artsy modeling software like Blender and Maya. These are much more free form than CAD's hard lines and numbers.
FYI, most slicers including Cura and Prusa Slicer (that Bambu is based on) have that ironing feature option. So any 3D Printer can produce it.
That’s exactly what I was thinking, Bambu did not invent ironing, even my ender 3 could do it with cura. I think these inaccuracies are just coming from Adam being a late comer to 3D printing.
Have to disagree with Adam on this one - it very much is the fault of modelers, not 3D modeling software. Many 3D models are just... lazy. They're designed in Blender without 3D printing affordances in mind, merge things that should be separate parts, avoid the use of hardware when it should be used, or just don't bother with finishing touches like tolerances and bevels. Yes, making things to be printed nicely is more difficult, but it's very possible with basic CAD skills.
Ive seen amazing models come out of sketchup and terrible models come out of Solidworks or Fusion. The user is the unknown quantity in this equation.
I point out those applications due the vast difference in there abilities creating geometry.
Ive seen some people who make great models, but hinder them with the speed they release them. Instead of taking the extra hour to cut the model in fusion the just make it fit an average print bed. Perfect example look at all the gun 3d models where they split 90% of the model in half and print it all flat on the bed...
Yep you can tell when there is a disconnect between the virtual environment and the limitations and physicality of printing especially when it comes to print orientation and consideration of support material
100%
Very much this. There's a ton of beginners releasing files that should never have been posted. Lazy designers that just want to put out files en masse for some reason. Designers who have no personal experience with 3d printing at all and don't understand how to design for them. And then there are the designers that "get it" and that's where you get the good stuff.
I mean, just something simple as not adding chamfers and/or fillets to models is something that drives me nuts. It's seconds of work in CAD to make the prints look/fit oh so much better. I often find myself just looking for inspiration and then I CAD it up myself instead.
Hey Adam, check the preview settings on your Mac, you should be able to preview .STLs in 3D using the Quick Look feature. Sometimes the preview can crash with 3D models, if you force quit, you’ll see a preview option under the Finder line, restart that and it should work for you 😊
Yeah I was thinking the same thing, it should show an icon preview, plus column and gallery view in the finder even lets you have a live preview where you can move, rotate and zoom in/out without opening the file.
Plus one, my Mac can also preview it
@@Aito-Hikariyou can press space when the file is selected to pop up that preview you can rotate too
@@Aito-Hikari Thought the same, he must have Show Icon View unchecked in Finder view options.
Yeah in finder I can see thumbnails and if I press space it'll open them in preview where I am able to rotate and zoom on the models!
It is absolutely the modeler!!! This is why I have a degree in CAD design. Doing it well is a profession. It’s not the interface. The programs are usually 80% under utilized by hobby users. Most people learn the first 20% and stop. I design models for aerospace…..
I repeat: having a different interface will not change how people utilize the software.
I agree. I've seen videos of people modelling 3D with CAD and have seen these features used.
Exactly! 3D Modeling is hard not because of software limitations, but because understanding 3D shapes and the best approach to modeling them is not trivial and like previously said by @stick004 a profession onto itself. Many makers start learning modeling with tools like Blender, created for CGI, where accuracy is not nearly as important as in production. That said, just selecting either a Surfaces or Solids Modeler to create a whole project or part of it is a choice that requires experience. Most of the time bringing a model to completion following the designer's concept as closely as possible requires using more than one application as there is not a single (arguably 😉) application equally capable of creating all sorts of topologies, at least not with the same editability and speed. Maybe a sign of how complex 3D modeling can get is the number of photo editing software available , where most graphic designers, retouchers and photographers use mostly Photoshop VS the 3D world where there's at least a dozen long standing applications for CGI and quite a bit more for CADD specializing in anything from ship hull design to Class A Surfaces for vehicles and consumer products (Alias my favorite for 20+ yrs) to Brilliant Solids Modelers that can do wonders with parametric designs and 2D drawing extraction (IronCAD - the easiest to learn 3D Modeler I've ever used). Thus the problem is thinking in 3 dimensions has far more variables than the actual shape; like if it needs to be used first as a quick sketch to show around a client or to understand it better, or will it need to be edited often to be repurposed later, or anything else that the workflow to arrive at a design needs. As a general purpose and very versatile Modeler ( 3D visualizer and translator - worth it's price just for this) I'd like to recommend you Rhinoceros 3D. It's now over 20 years old and over that time has gained wonderful plugins for all kinds of work, some of them able to create complex parametric Surfaces like those of the main & watersports stadiums in the 2008 Chinese summer Olympic games (voronoi nature inspired patterns ). There's online tools great for collaboration like onshape, but I'd rather have an internet independent tool for my work, there's CAD management experts and books to explain efficient product management to help with that.
100% agreed. Many don't go past sketching and extruding basic shapes and that's reflected in the "very planar" style Adam is talking about. I don't blame them though, it's a lot of time investment to learn and many of these models are from hobbyists with limited free time rather than professionals.
@@NiSE_Rafter It also depends on the purpose of the model. Something simple may be adequate, particularly at small scale.
I spent a long time becoming a CAD jockey, I started with 2D stuff, like CADAM, then progressed onto full-blown 3D systems. Some people have the ability to think spatially, and others don't! It can be learned to a certain extent, but you have to work at it. I designed crankcases & cylinder heads for diesel engines, but I had to have the initial knowledge of how things are made, so my mech. engineering background was an advantage. 3D CAD systems are sophisticated, so much so that very few people know their full potential. We were doing stuff on CAD that our instructors/trainers ( IBM no less ) didn't realise that was possible - they were software engineers, not mechanical engineers
4:09 Adam, your “Philosophical frame” may be “Design Intent”. I use that everyday as a CAD Designer. Knowing how the part will be made, used and how it could change down the road is a driving force for how things are modeled.
Fellow Engineer/CAD guy here. Design Intent is the term and is vitally important. It's designing in a way that predicts how you may want to change a design in the future so that the model can be dynamically updated/adapted easily. It's the core of parametric modeling and is 100% the art/skill part to making a good model. People with more experience just "know" how something should be modeled based on what it is and how it will be produced to make that model the most valuable it can be.
Yes!
//mech engineer
@@EricNistler Completely agree, but it's such a challenging thing to teach because it relies so much on an understanding of the manufacturing processes, product use/features, and parametric elements and less experienced Engineers and Designers haven't built that knowledge base yet.
I've spent years learning/testing ways to transfer the idea of Design Intent clearly to my students, it's core to the start of every class. It's one of the discussions that is lost in many online courses/self-taught CAD users. 3D modelling education should be less about the button clicks and more about the Design Intent.
Sounds like Adam is talking about Parametric modelers (solidworks, fusion360,etc) vs direct/mesh modelers (blender, 3dsmax, etc). As someone that is more mechanically minded...Machinist. I grasped Parametric modelers easily but direct modelers is a much bigger learning curve for me.
But no reason parametric modelers can't make the poly-polygonal things but it's a much different workflow. Surfacing on parametric modelers vs Sculpting in the other. The two literally feel different to work with. One feels like natural engineering work while the other is going back into elementary school art class.
Interesting. I’ve found direct modeling far more intuitive than parametric as I can “see” the requisite steps in a similar way to how I would in real life. I’m gonna sound like a shill, but have you heard of Shapr3D? I feel like it bridges the gap between “art” direct modeling and technical parametric. It’s the first software that has really, really resonated with me as someone who has a bit of a mind for both technical and artistic interests.
i miss solidworks. and i loath blender.
The "lack of 3D object preview" was something that drove me NUTS on mac, until I figured out how to fix it.
You totally can preview 3D files on Mac from thumbnails. You have to automatically set the .stls to open by default using Preview and then the files are associated with Quick Look the same way images and music files are.
Fun fact, if you're on windows, 3D Builder does this automatically.
Weird, I just set STLs to open with Prusa Slicer and yet preview still works as expected, both for thumbnails and I get the preview when pressing space.
I have STL set to open by default with Bambu Studio on my mac and previews work fine in Finder. Not sure how it works, but it does for me. Sadly doesn't work for STEP or 3MF files.
@@rand0mtv660 Okay, so it's basically the same behavior as with PrusaSlicer, which I would expect, since it's based on that. Good to know, though!
You know Bamboo's Slicer, Orca Slicer, does multiple platters in project files?
You can load up all 40 pieces between multiple platters in the software & send them off to the printer at your leisure while keeping everything organized/sliced/ready to go.
Came here to say this same thing. I frequently use multiple plates in Bambu Studio and Orcaslicer for bigger projects. You can see the whole project at a glance, or focus on one piece at a time, just by zooming in with mouse scroll. You can even keep track of what is printed by appending the name of the plate with "-printed" or whatever you want. It's not perfect, but it accomplishes exactly what Adam was asking for in this video.
I've moved over to a newer program recently called 'Plasticity' and just export STLs and I am NOT looking back! You're totally right on this, adding coherent details is pain in CAD, and making things size accurate or adjusting is tedious in blender, plus a substantial learning curve.
Unsure if this will be seen, but I've actually modeled your handheld vise from a few months ago, using nothing but screenshots, it was quite an interesting educational experience on scales and view parallax. I might have even managed to make it 1:1🎉 I'd love to send it over sometime.
Ive been stuck on F360 for a few years and want to try something new. I might have to give Plasticity a try
I love Plasticity, but it does have it's issues. I ran into a STL export scale bug where the size when imported was different after export once. Maybe it's Cura, but it was correctly sized the first time. That said, PrusaSlicer handled autoscaling the second export.
Nevertheless, I bought a license to support the perpetual license because subscriptions for hobby software or contrived limitations like online only infuriates me.
I really want to like it, but the lack of constraints, precise dimensions, or relations make it a non starter for me unfortunately. Obviously it isn’t meant to be a scientific cad program but I can’t wrap my head around the intended workflow for the stuff I do. Maybe I need to give it another shot
I’m hardcore into blender, I absolutely love the fact that it does everything! Plasticity looks super interesting I must say but apart from some cool remeshing algorithms, it doesn’t really do anything that I can’t already do in blender just as precisely. I do think it makes radial arrays super easy but I already know several methods to make radial arrays in blender it’s just not as straightforward as plasticity. The bevels and fillets are probably one of its best feature set compared to blender.
That last part of credit and known print settings is actually really important.
For project planning for 3d we use the following for games (and a few from just picking up stuff):
-Fusion 360 has assemblies where it references smaller pieces that are useful for keeping track (I know wintergatan was doing that at one point)
-Marmoset Toolbag for rendering and does a great job importing lots of models and showing them together
-Trello for project management for dividing tasks (more advanced studios will use jira)
-We do a lot of planning and assembling in the game engine, could probably use the same technique with fusion assemblies
hope that helps someone :D
SolidWorks is an a more complex version of Fusion360 (I find Fusion360 to be more intuitive) SW can actually do more than Fusion in very complex manipulations, but you have to be at the top of your game to utilize it to the fullest. SW can also sub-set and do realtime reference to other drawing files, as well as self update when you've made changes through another reference drawing.
BTW, my background in 3D started with AutoCAD. AC had just started doing 3D back in early 2000s and modeling was so hard. And if you discovered a mistake much further down the line, you had to literally erase the object error. You couldn't edit the history and have it update your shape going forward down the history line. When I discovered SW and then Fusion, it was like introducing a neanderthal to a hammer.
Been using ClickUp at work the past year, its like a stroided up Trello. Backend its a database and that way we can cross link multiple projects that uses the same components, it can do dashboards, diagrams and mindmaps "on the fly". Bit if a learning curve to learn and you need to build the over all structure but once its in place its quite good.
For 3d printing project planning. I find that throwing the model together in blender (because I am most familiar with it) and assigning various basic colors to models helps me keep track of what is going on with things. Green is printed successfully, yellow is currently on the printer, red is something with issues that I want to modify, grey is something that has had nothing done with it etc. Then I also group them in folders in the file directory in blender with what print plate it was done on with info on scale settings so I can easily recreate it later if there is a failure. Creating folders also is super handy for being able to hide things that have printed off successfully so I can really see on the model which things I think are important to print next
This sounds like a smart way to do things in the absence of a good project managing software.
I haven't gotten into 3D modeling or printing yet, but I'm researching things.
Blender is terrible for functional designs
I'm an Engineer designer with wide experience in Autodesk Inventor, and Solidworks (it's my full time job). And find design flaws every time I try to use the Internet files for my personal projects.
My advice is to take some time and learn to design your own parts with proper software for 3D design. (Not Adove).
This way you will have total control of your files in the native software, and be able to adjust them for your own printers and/or final use.
Sometime fixing the downloaded model took longer than making one from scatch. Making new model has the advantage of modify components before merging into one part.
Personally what I prefer to do is to download a model to get the scale, position, and sizes of the essential parts correct quickly and easily. And then I start a new model. @@boeingnz
This! So often have I had to basically just start from scratch. I will often download something that I'm after to then just re-model it because the original model has so many issues or faces that MS' 3D Builder can't just fix.
Gotta agree here. Almost all models i find online outside of mechanical suppliers and distributors are complete garbage.
I've been doing CAD design for mechanical machined parts for the better part of twenty five years and when 3D printing entered my sphere of influence there was a lot more to learn in addition to the basics. Additive is much different from subtractive. Thank you for the incite!
Same here. Addictive is a totally different beast.
Hah! I think you mean insight, but incite is so much better. "Get off your ass and do this!:" :)
Ok, what is with using the term DRAWING and MODEL interchangeably?! Maybe it's just me as a Mechanical Engineer but drawings are 2D and models are 3D, they are not the same thing. The STL files you use for 3D printing are MODELS not drawings.
Ok im not the only one….😂
When translating to dutch what you write its funny. Good 3D software like TopSolid or Solidworks are called 'tekenpakketten' (drawing/drafting packages), and one who works in cad is a 'tekenaar' (draftsman) but in english you'd probably call that 'design' (which we also call 'ontwerp', which is linguistically linked to 'werpen', to throw, as do potters). A model sounds to me like an abstraction of an existing thing. So I'd rather call what you create (rather than copy) in your software a design. Stls on the other hand are an export of the surfaces, and thus a model of your design.
Comes from pre cad design days when things were drawn out in Orthographic views most likely
To be fair, CAD software can also be pretty sketch based (like fusion 360), but yeah the filleting/chamfering etc tend to come later. I think Adam also has a knowledge of and sensitivity to real object forms that newer 3D artists just don't have, but isn't fully aware that his work background makes him an exception there.
I think that a concept that summarize some of Adam"s ideas is " Design for Manufacturing ". I've designed many components made from castings, machined in CNC, plastic components, sheet metal parts, etc... but I barely hear "designed for 3D printing" which should consider the limitations of that process. Having 5 printers myself, I rarely got issues with the model since I try to design accordingly to the process and increase the quality of the .STL file, which normally means more printing time but better results.
It’s the classic newbie trap of modeling an assembly as a part and hoping to somehow manufacture it. One of the big differences between modeling and design.
This is fundamental to the design phase of any project: that you will eventually have to manufacture an actual physical object, and that there is a loop back to designing with the intent for manufacturing. A classic example is designing a part with what seems like superfluous rotational symmetry so that you can do all your cutting operations on a lathe, and not involving other types of operations. With 3D printing, there are lots of similar things: avoiding overhangs, making sure features aren't too thin, designing with layer line orientation in mind, etc.
What Adam is talking about is not at all unique to designs for 3D printing. Every newbie designer will inevitably design features that are hard to fabricate with whatever medium and process they are using. 3D printing just happens to have a particularly vibrant culture of open sharing of source models, and so you get exposed to a lot more models that were designed by inexperienced designers or are just kind of half-cooked. And that's okay, it's great to have those models out there!
Mostly I've seen Slant 3D release a lot of great resources for design for mass manufacture 3d printing without supports, strength concerns, weird alternative shapes, etc
Hey Adam.
The 3MF file format sorta addresses some of the things you mention. Super awesome being able to store slice settings with the print file
Highly recommend learning a mesh editing tool alongside CAD w/ 3D printing. Extremely useful when all you have is an STL and need to make some modifications. Blender is solid, and free to boot
I think it is a bit on the artist because a decent amount of the cad softwares do have tools for making those filets and other higher detail features but it requires you to be more adept at that software and better attention to the real fine detail that they may not have the eye for if they're still newer to modeling
I work for an aerospace company, and as a programmer/machinist, my biggest problem with our CAD model designers is them using segmented lines instead of circles or a radius. This is especially frustrating when it comes to bores on a part.
I've seen that same deficient education practice back in 1983 as an AutoCAD draftsman when I would get "exploded" dimensions from poorly trained draftsman in the office. 😭😭😭
Most CAD doesn't even have the option of using circles, since everything is assigned a Cartesian coordinate or worse, in order to solve something everything is assigned a polar coordinate, and now straight lines don't exist
@@jakobhansen1396LTT recently sent YT on fire over a problem they had which was a cut in a part is trivial for machining, but actually extremely difficult to model correctly in CAD. there's some edge cases that CAD can't do well still like wrapping a path around a cylinder
That's often an issue with file translation, I worked in a shop that designed in solidworks but machined in mastercam and depending on the format of the export, you would get segmented circles.
I'm really looking forward to hearing an update on this or where you go with the philosophical approach to drawing around 3D printing, and what you find there. Very pertinent to the hobbies and projects I've been working on! This was a great video, as always. Thank you!
I design functional stuff, and OpenSCAD is wonderful for that, and I don't care that it doesn't look like Salvador Dali art, I care that it works :-).
That's a bit more like the difference between casting (possibly welding?) and machining.
Most CAD drafters are not machinists, welders, electricians or other trades. So manufacture and assembly is a different kettle of onions for them.
You want good models and hence good prints? You need real world experience, and then go "backwards" to learn the modelling. It breaks down if you go the other way...
At least in my world. (As a project manager I usually work between the two...)
The translation from 2D to 3D is hard, I think with anything like 3d printing or vinyl cutting or etching or whatever is to be super familiar with your machines process and how it works, that helps a lot
Model attribution and print settings logs would be HUGE. I build 3d printers all the time and the biggest pain is keeping track of what I need/needed and what settings and filaments were used. I don’t even produce videos and see the value in this.
Octoprint and the plugin PrintJobHistory work quite well for me. Model attribution is missing to be fair
After slicing export your project as 3mf file. It has all printer settings stored. Look 3mf up in wikipedia
Openscad for anything other than artwork/sculpture models. Theres a tiny bit of scripting to learn, but its oh so powerful. And easily adjusted if you need to tweak anything.
OpenSCAD is fantastic, but the lack of native chamfers/fillets is a huge problem that reduce both form and function IMHO.
@@JernDYou can build them out as libraries. Native would be nice but I think it's one of those things that would be hard to implement in a generic fashion.
@@chaos.corner true you can use libraries, however other CAD packages manage to have generic features for this that are widely applicable
@@JernD I haven't used those packages but my impression is that these are more likely to be amenable to manipulation from a GUI and making them apply through a scripted language like OpenSCAD uses would be difficult to handle. (I could be wrong though.) For example, if you had two disks that intersected at 90 degrees and you wanted a small fillet in one of the quadrants (but not the others) for about 1/4 of the disk's radius, how would you specify that in the scripting language natively? Much easier when you are manipulating the model directly.
Don't get me wrong though, I'd love to have such capability.
@@chaos.corner I stopped using OpenSCAD for this reason and I am now a contributing developer to build123d which can do exactly what you asked! build123d is a type of CodeCAD based in python but runs on top of the OCCT kernel which is a boundary representation kernel that has good support for fillets/chamfers. Here is the source code to accomplish what you asked:
from build123d import *
with BuildPart() as p:
with BuildSketch() as s:
Circle(10)
extrude(amount=5,both=True)
with BuildSketch(Plane.XZ) as s2:
with Locations((0,5)):
Circle(5)
extrude(amount=5,both=True)
edges = p.part.edges().filter_by(GeomType.LINE).group_by(Axis.Z)[-1][0]
fillet(edges,1)
I would read an entire book about your theories about realistic CAD drawing for 3d printing. Please, share more. I wonder if designing in virtual or augmented reality would help accomplish the difficult translation between 2d modeling and 3d printing.
Hello Adam. Amazing to see how you get into 3D-printing. There are various design rules for FDM printing. An awesome example is the design of the functional parts for the Voron printers done by the Voron Design Team. They manage to make nearly all parts printable without supports, the need of extensive cooling or sorts of tweaking. Even the dimensions are tuned to the specific material shrinkage. I often find myself comparing other designers parts to theirs and learned a lot from their philosophy (though I’m far away from their standards). Their ideas are available open source. Maybe you should have a look at those.
Btw: my Mac shows STL thumbnails flawlessly and by pressing space preview opens the stl in 3D for a closer look. Maybe you’re missing a setting there?
Regards and thanks for the inspirational footage you guys produce!
The greatest pieces of advice I can give as a Certified SolidWorks Associate who uses Fusion 360 at home are some things my teacher instilled in me: Think of how a part goes together, design for the assembly and the process used to make it not just the part. Also always try to make a part so that it is easily reconfigurable. So when you need to iterate portions of the model, like you need to change hole spacing or the interior volume everything else that relies on those updated features updates accordingly. I really do recommend taking a class, just to get the basics, I took my classes at the local Community College.
Ironing was first developed in the OS community and then first implemented in Cura years ago, after that Prusaslucer picked it up and that is the only reason Bambulabs slicer has this functionality. Like everything else Bambu does it was developed by someone else.
So many CZcamsrs are promoting Bambulabs because they got a free printer and it makes me sad to see that Adam had joined them. Bambulabs is a leech that is destroying the making community by closed sourcing their products, while profiting from vendors like Prusa and Ultimaker that have always open sourced their efforts. I am waiting for the day all these expensive printers change into bricks because Bambu no longer supports the obligatory cloud connection. But the CZcamsrs won't care, because they'll have received a new free printer from them or another company by that time...
The amount of hate bambu gets for making 3d printing more accessible is ubsurd he didn't say bambu developed it he said it has it as a feature 🙄
@@maxeriousbrooks9807 Bambu doesn't get hate for making it more accessible. They get hate for leeching off the Open Source community and not giving back, as well as closing their ecosystem by forcing you to use their cloud environment, which will eventually bite the users. And I am hoping for that day.
It's amazing that there is such a big community around 3D printing, BUT finding and printing other people's files is not a pleasant at all, and I bet it turned off a lot of people from 3D printing. Start learning 3D modeling as soon as possible! Fusion 360 is easy to learn and very powerful!
In the past I learn some autocad and 3DS and now I started learning Fusion360 by myself and I don't find it easy to learn or intuitive, every time I want to make something it is very frustrating because doesn't let me do it and then I expend more time searching how to do it that working on it.
@Rejetor I only knew 3DS before getting into CAD and did 3D as an artist, but my hobbies pushed me into CAD design. Maybe having previous experience with another CAD makes it harder because you developed habits to do things a certain way? Fusion 360 is so far from 3DS that you basically start from scratch, and there is no real overlapping. Obviously, I had to watch some tutorials also at the beginning, but there are a lot on youtube, so that's fine.
90% of my prints are my own designs and cad models, and if I do use someone else's design i often have to remodel it myself in cad so I can make my own changes to fit my needs.
Many people only print other peoples stl files and never model anything themselves, that's wild to me
@@lovetekman The creative part is the fun one also! There is absolutely no limit once you develop that skill.
@@Rejetorthere’s a video called something like “fusion360 for sketchup users” that help when I was frustrated with it starting out. It might help you?
In modeling for 3d you have check with none manifold for holes in your prints which causes artifacts and problems. Which fixes problems like those.
You are so right. I feel like you should head the development of the software.
I have honestly never heard the phrase "3D Drawing" before today, and clicked into the video just to see what it meant.
Also, "Ironing" is a software feature, any FDM printer can do it. Bambu Studio's ironing is lifted from Prusa Slicer and the defaults are much too low for really good results.
Me either, and I'm still slightly confused.
One of the FreeCAD guys insists it's "assembly" for 3D CAD. I've heard "part" as well.
I'm thinking Adam is very accustomed to 2D CAD, where you would call it a "drawing".
@@JorgTheElder Except he's mostly refering to STLs, which are "models" or "objects" or sometimes "meshes." But fair, Adam-isms I can work with. :)
@@MMuraseofSandvich I dunno about FreeCAD, but in Fusion360, "Assembly" and "part" are both very specific things and not interchangeable.
That 2d/3d drawing thing is something you can train. Mechanical engineers have a 2nd year course in it
Yes and no... I'm an architect and in my experience some people simply can not make the correlation between 2D and 3D no matter how much they try. It's like sports as an example... you can train and train but at some point it comes down to natural aptitude. No matter how hard I try I will never win an Olympic Gold medal. That said, it should not discourage anyone from trying to get better at anything. Just do the best you can with the tools you have and the skills you can develop and celebrate every accomplishment knowing you did better today than you did yesterday.
Love listening to Adam process.
There is a small tool from an indie developer from Austria (the country with the mountains, not the one with the big, jumpy mice).
It's called 3D-MOM.
It is aimed more at 3D printing farms to catalogue their stl collection with description, preview and even turntable renders.
You can tag all models as you like and this way create collections of related parts, shown in a tree view.
I'm geeking out so hard being answered in a featured video!
Best comment
Just out of curiosity, by drawings did you mean the actual parts drawings that you would send off to someone to print to a spec, or the CAD model as Adam spoke to?
At my work we've been defining the ways to put out part drawings for 3D printed parts since to hit certain tolerances you have to have model your part differently than the required dimensions.
@@colinmetzger6755 good question, I'm an Mech Engineer with a focus on 3d modeling and a 3d printing enthusiasts. I've 3d modeled for both applications, but haven't had to 3d print my engineering models. I was more wondering about his approach to the printable 3d model. Spec engineering drawings printed parts is a whole different beast, as you well know.
RE productivity software; When you were making models that used a lot of kit bashing, how did you track where the bits came from? Or have your expectations of repeatability and accreditation increased?
Hell yeah...preach it brother! As you were ticking off your wants and asking why we haven't yet list....I was yelling Amen!
For easily creating your own 3D models for mechanical or structural parts, I'd highly recommend "Designspark Mechanical", free from RS components. It's easy to use, you can quickly create complex parts, you can add chamfers, fillets or radiused edges by just "pulling" the edge line etc.
And, as you draw or drag, you can directly type a dimension rather than having to try to get the exact value with the mouse - so different parts all fit together!
Set the .stl export option to high resolution before you use it the first time, though (otherwise curves have large facets).
What really makes me crazy about STL files is people not designing parts to be 3d printed, they design for looks, and have no consideration for the additive method that will be use to make that part. Unnecessary overhangs, filets instead of chamfers, holes that will print poorly when supported, etc
And often by people who should know better.
Every time Adam calls a 3D model a drawing a tear forms in the corner of my eye ;')
That title hits hard. I'm a 3D Visualiser, I get lumped with so many models to "just render out", and it's like, ok, it's going to take me a day just to get this to a usable state. It would be faster to start from scratch. Clients have this bizzarre expectation that they can make a 3D model of a house or whatever without experience, and expect it to stand up to scrutiny when they send it to me. Worst part is that they usually spend a week on the damn things and I just have to throw it out.
If you're contracting 3D work, leave it to the professionals. 3D Modeling is a fun thing to get into as a hobbyist (that's how I started!) but you have to know that your first hundred models are going to suck, and I probably won't be able to make use of what you've made.
QR code with EXIF data printed on part. That's essentially what is needed for 3D prints.
So that at some point in the future, you could use a barcode scanner to scan each part.
It'd tell you the file name, date, the slicer, settings used, what printer, etc.
Sort of what car manufacturers do these days. I'm seeing QR codes on lots of parts.
CAD has been an expensive thing used by the companies that knew what they were doing but needed the 'AD' part of the product.
Now CAD is available to anyone with internet access, including the ones that have no idea about structural integrity and some that just have basically no idea.
Once their sketch is out there, the fun part is making it work like it did in their heads.
Count me in 😅. I create or modify parts in Tinkercad and, sometimes, only after printing I realise the weakness of some joints and must "reenforce" them. No experience at all except burnt eyelashes from staring too long at the screen 😂
A lot of models posted for free on the Internet aren't fully fleshed out. It's sometimes disappointing, but you get what you pay for.
It would be best to focus on obj or some other true 3d format over STL. They usually also include tags for what you are looking for.
.stp is a generally accepted choice for sharing CAD between users with different software packages. The more recent slicer versions can also import it directly without needing to turn it into an stl.
OBJ and STL are equivalent polygonal formats, there is no avantage whatsoever of one over the other when it comes to a 3D printing workflow. Unless that was a typo and you actually meant Step files, which is a completely different topic ...
@@piorismwe were not speaking about what each uses as the objects for its architecture. You raise an interesting topic though, so you should start a new comment, so you can argue that one all you want.
Some times for fillets and chamfers you almost have to oversize a bit in my experience. Take into account the nozzle size on a filament print when designing.
I was just thinking about this like 2 days ago when i was doing some prints. I was trying to match miniatures to bases but I have so many different base terrsin types that I needed to open up each one to figure out what the difference was between grass1, grass2, and grass3 were
The Prusa Slicer can handle productivity very well. In large projects I have the objects in one file, and use the visibility button to show/hide what I have printed and haven't. As well as serveral tools for making things into parts, or editing the properties of an stl.
I think one problem with thirdparty models is that popular 3d printing site mostly share them as stl files, which makes it hard to really adjust them to your needs. Since prusa slicer supports step files I switched all my files to .stp, which is a true volumetric 3d format, instead of just a shell of polygons like STL
even step is fairly limited compared to the proprietary formats CAD suites use. In CAD, I can parametrically set all of my through holes to a 0.2mm clearance and then update them all simultaneously, or change all of my m5 holes to m6 holes, scale single features very easily, but once the "export" is done (to STL, OBJ, STEP, whatever), you have baked out a lot of that design information.
Similar to how an artist might make something with 50 layers, but you'll only ever see a jpeg. In 3d printing, it's so much more evident because of how much modification tends to happen between the export and print steps.
That's where you model it up yourself with features you want based on measurements of the original.
Adam, something Bambu Studio has done well (but it isn't perfect) is the assembly space and the ability to add multiple beds to your .3MF project. I use this routinely for my medium sized projects
I used (and will use) Blender for creating 3D models. For instance, I used it on a huge restauration project for a castle in Arcen (the Netherlands). First, a 3D scan from two broken 1895 tiles was made using 432 photo's and photogrammetry software I stopped using in 2022. Remodeling both into one complete tile with 6 million polygons, adjusting for reduction while backing tiles, in Blender. Transforming them into a hight-map in Blender, for using an Océ/Canon ultra high end, Eiger printer (usually used for recreating art like Vermeers "Girl with pearl earing", which isn't a pearl by the way) to it's max to create a mold. Then, a ceramist produced 152 tiles, with the same local clay used back then. Those were stacked together to recreate an 1895 fireplace distroyed in the 1930th of which only 2 broken tiles and a photo existed.
Not everyone gets taught Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing, or GD & T, so one must temper expectations.
As far as CAD goes, I've had much better luck simply starting in 3d. I use a package called OpenSCAD. It's a script interface, but it allows you to sculpt 3d primitives with constructive solid geometry. While it doesn't do things like fillets out of the box, you can mimic most CNC operations with it. It also has a nifty set of functions for building hulls and has a shell building tool based on the Minkowski transform. Basically "take this shape, and walk another object completely around the outside. And make that resulting shape a volume form me."
Adam, I understand your enthusiasm for 3D printing and it is all new to you. I started 3D modeling a little more than 30 years ago as an engineer, and then taught 3D modeling, solids, modeling, 3D printing, and creating drawings for 22 years. A 3D model/STL/3MF is a file. A drawing still is and most generally used as a communication tool between the engineer/ drafter and whoever is going to build/make the parts, buildings, etc. So, sorry, every time you said "drawings" in this episode and meant file, it grinds on my terminology meter. When I was teaching, one of the first things I said was "the key to good communication is proper terminology." I believe you're into that.
That said, making models can be difficult. Other posters on here have already said that you've got to know your audience, printing capabilities or your manufacturing capabilities. But when you put something on printables you just have no idea. So really all they can do is the best they can. And that's what I do. Sadly, fillets and chamfers are afterthoughts by most people. True, they should be included when considering 3D printing.
I think one of the more helpful things that creators could do is to supply editable files and honoring creative commons.
Bottom line, saying drawings is one of the very, very very few quibbles I have ever seen on your shows and I love what you do. You are the maker's maker. Take care sir!
CAD modeling in VR is absolutely game-changing, Adam! I've done about half a dozen bits and bobs for around the workshop and being able to see the part in a truly 3D workspace and being able to import to-scale objects/environements to reference the part against is just such a joy, I just can't believe that it hasn't become a major player in the industry
What software do you use?
@@JesusFreke Gravity Sketch is my go-to. Mindesk is also good
The more I watch these Tested videos, the more I think that Adam and I might be cut from the same cloth. It's so weird, because there are so many times that he says something in these vids and I find that I have been thinking the exact same thing. It's a little freaky.
Adam is my spirit guide.
Adam and everyone at Tested are my people. This channel caters to more of my interests than any other. I have more in common with Adam and the Tested crew than even my family.
So, one of the big issues I have is just the fact that people are releasing STL files only. Some people may do this as some sort of DRMish thing to make it hard for people to take their designs and mod them and re-release them. I'm not sure, really, but I hate it. I release step files of all of my stuff and I welcome people repurposing or improving anything I make. And, BTW, you can bring step files directly in to Orca, Prusa Slicer, and I assume Super Slicer, so I kind of wouldn't mind if STL files stopped being a thing, but maybe there's a good reason I haven't thought of that that shouldn't happen. And if not step, some other universal file format standard that isn't just a mesh would be nice.
Similar here, but I do 3mf and Step. Most people don't have cad so the 3mf really help align all the parts of the model the way I originally had them. Bonus is in some programs it retains the material colors too.
I design my stuff in openscad (my old pc couldn't run 'modern' bloat-... I mean software), and usually add the openscad files as well as the stl export.
I know a lot of people design in fusion360 and add those designs in the fusion360 format with their stls.
I don't think lychee handles step files (may be wrong).
I don't think people use stls to specificly DRM, it's just convenient to share full, print-ready models and is usable by most slicers.
Step files are an iso standard, which usually means great for enterprises (small bussiness expense buying a standard specification) but too expensive and cumbersome for hobbyist programmers.
TLDR: Step files are not part of most hobbyist (free software) workflows. STLS can be imported and are easy to share. It's not DRM.
@@sorasensei2100 The problem is you can't share 3mf files because they can contain malicious gcode. They were not designed for sharing models, and a hostile 3mf can burn down your house.
@@TheBayru oh I understand it isn't literally DRM and that many people just assume that's what is wanted by consumers of their work. Personally though, I feel like it's very unlikely that what I'm releasing will fit every potential user's needs, and I want to make it as easy as possible for those who can to do their own thing with it.
@@TheBayru I have never in my years heard about malicious 3mf files. I don't see how a 3mf can burn your house down any more than an stl can. And what I share is the model, not gcode.
One big thing to keep in mind with 3d files from the internet is that there are a lot of uses for them other that printing. A model for rendering or games will have a much smaller polygon count than one for printing, and will look terrible if printed. One of my side jobs is helping make yacht models, and a lot of small parts that come with the model from the manufacturer are low poly count rendering models that are not suitable for printing, but were great for making renderings. I spend a lot of time rebuilding them, sometimes going as far as remodeling them in Rhino with Nurbs surfaces, then remeshing them for 3d printing. Also rendering models tend to have a lot of naked or non-manifold edges and are often not water tight, which mean's more cleanup for printing.
Fusion360 is the easiest tool I have used. 2d sketch, extrude, fillet!
There is a big difference between parts designed to be functional and economical to machine/print and parts designed to be visually pleasing.
As someone who's been designing things for a living for 30 years, I disagree. You CAN'T machine anything economically without fillets or chamfers.
You can set up your Mac to Preview STL files when you select them an hit the spacebar. Not as good as a thumbnail image but better than opening them one at a time.
As someone who's spent years under the hood in cad software and industrial 3d printers I've seen a lot of these challenges show up in the past and have found some solutions. I know for me, I made a lot of progress towards more organic 3d models moving from parametric cad like SolidWorks to direct modeling and surface modeling, ie subd modeling. This workflow is very hard to pick up for a seasoned cad user but is more intuitive for those with more of an art background. As for organizing cad and printers there's a number of softwares out there. In enterprise we use painful tools like pdm and erp but more recently, software is getting more accessible and there's some really exciting startups looking to use AI to make cad more intuitively searchable
excuse me while I "UGH!" at calling them 3d drawings. They are 3d models. Drawings define an object in a 2D plane with dimensions and tolerances for molds and machining. This is coming from a 25 year veteran of making 3d models in CAD.
Raise a big enough fork and hopefully Adam will see it. So here's a thumbs up to you.
Ironing is not unique to Bambu Labs in any way. They are the Apple of the 3D printing world and that is not meant as a compliment. They take developments made by the community and package it up in a locked down box that will be e-waste within a few years.
As a designer, I will say that there are two schools of thought on this subject. 1. The "drawing" aka parametric mindset. 2. Mesh based modeling mindset. I believe the solution you're looking for Adam is a blend of the two.
As having my masters in mechanical engineering and 20 years of experience over mostly industrial maintenance I'd say there's a great influence by two things: 1 the intent of the model, was it meant to be printed, or as a decor for a game perhaps, or to be manufactured by some other means. And 2. The skill of the modeler. One of my favorite quotes, every engineer can design a shaft. What differs a professional from an average person, is the details. The chamfers so you can get the bearings on there easily, the fillets to give the structural strength, the surface quality requirements where they are actually required and where not etc. On the 3D-printing realm there are a lot of people who just have bought a printer and are playing with modeling software just for fun, not with any previous experience and/or intent of being professional in any way. These are mostly the less good simplistic things. Then there are people who do this as their job for years and years. There's going to be a difference for sure between these things. It's a skill like any other, takes a long time to master.
They are models, not drawings Adam :) That being said way way too many people use shitty software like Tinkercad to make models. Fusion 360, Solidworks and Inventor are the gold standards for 3d modeling.
I think a big part of it is what software you are using. I am new to 3D sculpting but I have been designing in 3D CAD for a long time and there are applications that exist to create solid objects that are meant to be physically produced, while Blender, ZBrush etc. target animation and sculpting. If you want accurate parts look at Solidworks, Fusion 360, Revit, or Rhino3D. These apps easily cover things like fillets, radii, and wall thickness for hollow objects etc. Additionally, they handle scale perfectly because they use real units. It is important to use the right tools for the job at hand. Sure, a screwdriver handle can work as a hammer in a pinch but I think I'd rather use an actual hammer to bang in a bunch of nails.
As for organization - the Finder on the Mac supports adding arbitrary tags to any file that you can also search for.
Klipper, a complete printer motion control system, has a lot of the organization and record keeping built into the web UI. You may also want to investigate 3MF file types instead of STL. 3MF allows for a lot of markup alongside the model
I work for a sign shop. And I think there's a similar problem with color printers. One would think that once you have a specific set of colors dialed in that all the rest of the colors would be dead-on. What you see on the screen is not necessarily what you are going to get out of the printer. So when we are printing a job we need to print tests with different adjustments to see which one comes out right. Those settings may not work the next time for a variety of reasons. One would think that this would be a simple problem to solve atleast with a singular printer where you can get the same color twice on two different files. There are all sorts of alignment tests and things of that nature but there are no color tests that you can make the machine adhere to for consistency. We're talking about big latex printers and UV printers and things of that nature. Just saying it's a similar issue with a different product set that seemingly could be solved with software.
wow, thanks for ranting on about being able to view your STLs from the file browser because I never thought about how easy it would be until you mentioned it so I searched for doing that in KDE( Linux desktop ) and sure enough someone did it a few years ago. So I installed stl-thumb-kde and oh man it's so nice to just see the STL design instead of relying on memory and the file names. I do categorize my files by directory/folder names but I can see how someone like you would want an application to wrap your STL files/designs with resources much like how a MP3 system wraps files with band/album/album image/year/etc/etc.
How much of the choices come from manufacturing processes requiring certain things. Like injection molded or cast parts need draft angles and smoother transitions, milled/machined parts will always have a fillets because no tool has a perfect nose radius, chamfers are nicer looking, but also interface with the fillets on assembly, etc.
Notion for project management, all day everyday. You can spin up jira/trello style board along with timelines and other views in 2min, as well as document, create wikis, and tons more. Genuinely one of the most powerful and affordable tools I’ve ever used.
I always appreciate a passionate rant from an intelligent person. Never change Mr. Savage, never change.
P.s. and by “never change” what I really mean is.. always keep changing and adapting and learning with passion. Ty.
Hey Adam and Tested,
In the lithography printing world we would normally work with a physical copy of a CAD drawing, which would list substrate, quantity, machine,etc.
You could import the stl into a CAD software with planning capabilities which will pretty much eliminate your needs to hand write everything.
If you want to see stl previews in a folder it may help to use Windows computer. I installed a quick thumbnail stl program and it works perfectly. I can see a preview of all the stl files in all of my folders by viewing thumbnails.
There'a a category of software in the product development market called - Product Data Management. It allows collaboration, file cataloguing, revision history control, etc. It manages not only CAD data but any other files and documents associated with a project. Autodesk Vault is one such program but any of the CAD software companies also have their own versions.
I know it's not a full solve, but for what it's worth - In my mac I can preview STLs by pressing [SPACEBAR] while the item is highlighted in finder. It even lets me orbit around the object before I open it. (the same trick works when you're in the dialog box to upload a file or select a document or something.)
I've recently been getting into resin printing and painted my first miniature yesterday! I feel like this is gonna be a really fun hobby once I learn how to make these models myself, but learning CAD is kinda intimidating 😅
That provenance tracking feature sounds like a system I built for the Franklin Institute back in '03. We needed a simple system for curators to take to the field to capture information and photographs about physical objects that Ben Franklin owned, and portraits of Franklin. Dang.. now that I think about it, I was doing WebUI before it was cool, because that system launched an embedded webserver that would open a browser window. There were just some things I couldn't get Tcl/Tk to do nicely at the time. Anywho, we ended up having 2 databases. One of the objects. And one chocked full of all of the links between those objects and the people who owned them, the artists who restored them, etc.
Imaging being the designer of that alien belt prop, seeing your design being featured by Adam Savage, only to find him to not bother and look up your name for credit; Then name drops two unrelated people shortly after, and then explains how important credit it.
If you are on the Mac, Adam, if you "get info" in the finder there us a "preview" frame that you can open and see the object and spin it around. It's minimized by default.
From an engineering perspective, the term "drawing" refers to the 2d representation. The file you print on paper, which traditionally was used in fabricating something. It usually has all the dimensions and tolerances to support said fabrication.
What you are talking about is called a 3d model. An STL is a 3d model, not a drawing.
I got preview of models on my Mac think it might be either Xcode or cura that installed a quicklook plugin, btw you can do ironing on any printer not just the bamboo lab
Ive had my flashforge for a long time now , its made of plywood. I just bought a new flashforge finder 3 and its awesome. My favourite stuff to print is tpu. Its very tough and i generally make parts or spare parts for inventions.
I wish someone would come up with a CAD program that didn't have a gigantic learning curve. I would love to be able to 3D printing in my model building but having to learn CAD is what's stopping me. Back in the '90s I did a lot of 3D rendering using Strata Studio Pro, so I thought it would be fairly easy to go from that to CAD. Unfortunately that's not the case.
exposure over time is how you get experience. and some frustration lol
It seems like these features could be wrapped into the slicer - in the case of Bambu's that would be BambuLab (which is based on PrusaSlicer... etc). I know you can manage all your parts on separate plates in the software, and then send them to different printers from in the software. I wonder if we could add that sort of feature into the project management process in Prusa/Bamabu/Orca
It’s a journey. I have a decade of experience in the industry and a degree that is specifically this. I have worked with major CAD packages like Pro-E, CATIA, and UniGraphics. These are in my opinion the big dogs above the solidworks of the world. They have model and drawing tracking software you described but it is for heavy manufacturing. CAD is designed around fully defined geometry so it is a different way of thinking. I could write a book about this. I went back to school to be an art teacher, so I can see where there could be struggle. You opened a can of worms on this one Adam , I can hear a sea of drafters and designers talking about this over coffee at their workstations.
Adobe is right in your neck of the woods! Either in San Jose or their amazing office and show room in the city! Had a family member working there and it was so amazing to go there and see how they filmed Avatar and how built the bay bridge addition 🙌🏼🙌🏼
Just finished modeling a helical chess set for resin printing where the helix spines follow the contour of the chess piece, and having used a cad software for 10+ years I was amazed how long the tree ended up being for what should have been a simple concept. And also a 2 inch helical chess queen was nearly crashing the computer. Perpendicular shapes indeed.
I use Cinema 4D as my CAD of choice, and its last few revisions now has had a voxel modifier. This completely retopologies a model, and can take what you could never print and turn it into a watertight model, that whilst CAN be an ever so slightly "puffed" version of the object, needn't be but I'm printing a lot of starships at small scale, so the slight beefing up is beneficial for me.
I would say that this is precisely the thing that Adam is missing, indeed. Remeshing or turning models to voxels is quite litterally the "interface" he is looking for IMHO.
Adam, I don't know who you have available on the Tested team to aid in this, but one thing I would suggest to connect your artistic tendencies to CAD would be using your hand drawn scans that you can import into CAD. Every parametric modeler will let you import bitmaps that you can then trace with segments of geometry to resemble the more organic nature of drawing itself. One of your team did this in the Starfield build where they tool a drawing, scaled it, and then attached some vinyl piece to an engine. You can do this from your artwork to create organic lines within CAD. I think the main difficulty in the interface is translating organic shapes into the cartesian coordinate system but this method can help you. If you already know this, then I hope you'll use it.
I agree with Fwiffo, there is an art to modeling for printing. I've modeled for video games, art, book covers, and 3D printing. It is tricky.
I am struggling with modeling my animatronic reindeer, and modifying or remaking parts for my R2 and my Utah Raptor Bust.
Meshmixer helps a lot for cutting stuff up and adding pins for print alignment FYI.
Some people keep track of the nitty gritty details with spreadsheets. That is a favorite trick with droid builders. I don't do that but I've been adding the time to print in the name of the file so I know what to expect when I batch slice stuff.
Adam has played with 3D scanning. I'm waiting for Adam to discover 3D scanning with his phone or another device. And the conversion software for art or 3D printing...
3D modelers could learn a lot from pattern makers about filets and chamfers, and joints. Metal casting has some of the same issues as 3D printing and these problems were solved long ago.
Tip for previewing stls on macos, just select it and press space and a 3d environment should pop up, and you can cycle between them using arrow keys, however it can become slow the more complicated the parts are.