Simple Ways to Make Stronger 3D Prints NUMBER TWO
Vložit
- čas přidán 31. 12. 2023
- What happens when you do real drop tests on 3d prints? Do they bend, do they break, do they shatter? In this video we'll find out by testing different materials and designs at several DROP heights.
Help support this channel! / needitmakeit
I see a lot of testing videos, some of them are useful to compare materials against each other, but they're not as useful when you want to apply them to real designs. If we want to protect something, should we use ABS? How about PETG? Or Maybe you're the PC type. I have an okay sense about each of the materials, but I couldn't tell you which material was best to protect expensive equipment, and which material could take continued abuse and not just break after one drop.
This video is dedicated to doing realistic dop testing to see if we can get some real answers to those questions so we have a better idea of how to design 3d printed parts, and that we also have a sense about which materials perform the best under which conditions.
In the previous video, we tested only PETG, it has a good reputation for being flexible, but it also has this other very strange property of becoming brittle and fracturing at a certain point. In this video we're going to see if we can figure out the right mix of flex and strength for that material so we can use it and have the confidence that it'll do the job.
Which material do you think will perform the best? Check out the video for all of the details, it was a lot of fun, and I learned quite a bit. Let's just say that it isn't all about the size, there is more to it than that.
Another way to support this channel indirectly is through my affiliate links (where I receive a small commission). It helps me to continue to provide high-quality content videos. Thank you for your support!
NEW MIC (I bought this)
amzn.to/3vcMKAr - Rode Wireless ME mic (Saved me about 4+ hours/vid)
amzn.to/3NBFvZe - Mag clip (Super handy, but a little pricy)
BAMBU PRINTERS
shrsl.com/4aghz
CREALITY PRINTERS
shrsl.com/4aghy
CREALITY HYPER PLA
shrsl.com/4aghn
Original Design:
www.thingiverse.com/thing:475...
#bambu
#crealityk1
#3dprinting - Jak na to + styl
So from this I can deduce that you shouldn't drop your radio.😆
I think a combination of TPU with ABS/PETG reinforcements (like the torsion bars you used to get on trainers/sneakers) would probably yield the best results.
Great video. Keep up the good work.
In a perfect world that would absorb the fall and minimize shock on the radio. Bouncing seems like it would introduce more shock from successive impacts.
Yeah, maybe there should be crumple zones like those on a car. Bouncing is great until it sends your radio cartwheeling down a staircase.
It would be great if you could do the next test with some shock watches like Mythbusters used to do or even use an old phone with an accelerometer recording app running inside the crash test dummy box. That would give you another data point on how much force the radio sees since a sharp shock force to electronics can't be good for them.
This is what I was thinking while watching. it doesn't really matter if the bumper breaks. What actually matters is whether it absorbs and disperses enough of the impact to prevent damage. It doesn't matter if the bumper can take infinite hits like a rubber spring, if it then rams all that force straight through the radio's innards.
Great thumbnail, great video, great job. My only (unsolicited) suggestion is you could cut out a lot of the “picking up the part to drop”. That would make the video a lot shorter and keep the (most of us) shorter attention span folks engaged. You would loose nothing especially with the “winner lineup” graph at the end of each height section.
Also posting any measurements etc in metric would be nice, not everyone watching uses imperial :-)
Us imperial folks appreciate the method he currently uses. Maybe he could cite the measurements in both terms. I don't see it as a big deal though. It's just part of life.
@@MidMadn lol not everyone lives in ‘merica
Good point! Optimizing videos can be really hard when you want to show everything.
metric measurements please@@802Garage
Happy new year. Great tests good work.
Interesting!!! Teardrop design was clever, for sure.
I began with a type of compliant style, but it quickly became complex and didn't seem to offer the smooth curved of this design, the teardrop worked extremely well, the amount of flex was impressive. I will have to continue to test PETG to see at which point it turns from a spring to a piece of glass. It does seem that the material quality plays a role as well. Prusament performed better, the generic brand was quite a bit more brittle.
Facinating experiment 👍🙏👍
I really admire your persistence here and it was fun to watch after the first video results came back what I suspect was a little disappointing, to see you come back again and make such impressive gains.
LOL, you found me out! Yes, I really thought my concept for post-forming would do better, but it did the worst it was humbling. I think it's a great challenge, and I know we'll be able to come to something really good in the end. My only regret is that the parts still take several hours to print each, but I prefer to work on something that we can relate to, and I think it's easier to use this information to see how it can apply to other things.
I'm working with TPU next, it seems to be the most recommended material for impacts; it has some great properties, so we'll have to see how we can put them to good use to absorb the impact. Maybe TPU will be the ticket?
EDIT: updated original post to give some constructive feedback.
I appreciate the video and effort you put in. I personally don't feel like you gave ABS or PC nearly as much of a test as you did with PETG, since you used multiple brands for PETG and only 1 for ABS and PC. I print almost exclusively in ABS and I can tell you the properties do change from brand to brand, much like you saw with PETG. This just felt overly biased towards PETG, and didn't really feel "scientific". Just my opinion.
A couple suggestions ( I realize this might sound like internet whining, but I truly mean these as constructive feedback only):
- If you want to stick to a single brand per filament type, then printing the part multiple times for each and testing them all would help to rule out any outliers and ensure you are getting a better conclusion of the true potential for each. Currently, only having a single data point for each test and filament, you are more likely to be subject to variability which could greatly skew your results. I realize this will take more time and effort, but it would help make your conclusions more... valid... accurate? (Struggling to find the right word here.)
- As someone else mentioned, I personally find the repetition of the set-up, drop, slow-mo (with annoying bounce sound) a bit irritating and find myself just fast forwarding through most of it. I think it could help the flow of the video if you cut that back a bit, especially if you decide to add additional tests per filament type. I'd highly recommend emulating Stefan from CNC Kitchen in how he presents testing, as I think he handles this really well.
Anyway, great job and I hope we continue to see content like this from you as I do think it benefits the community greatly.
I appreciate the different perspective, by all means!
Yes, for sure. I only have the one spool of each PC and ABS. PC is a new one for me, and it printed exceptionally well. I think like PETG, it needed a new design to work better with it's properties. That also goes for ABS. I'm happy to do more testing as well. We have two directions to go, we can design with a spring to absorb and re-direct the impact, and we can also design much beefier to be able to handle the impact and not flex and shatter. I think both are good options, it just depends on what the goal is exactly. I think if we're trying to protect something expensive, some spring is a good thing. But maybe a solid structure with ABS or PC and integrate a TPU absorption pad on either end would be the best option.
I'm certainly committed to testing as many materials as I can, I just need to get a bit more traction with my channel. I'd like to test out TPU, PCTG, Nylon. I'd also like to purchase SLS printed parts to compare against our own prints.
As someone who has used the thing these are protecting, don’t forget about the usability aspect. At least the hollow/open design near the front panel is actually functional in the sense that the openings can help getting finger purchase on the front panel knobs and buttons. While the last redesign might have made it more impact resistant to certain drops, it appears that it might make it harder to operate the front panel. (I understand that this was more about design & testing rather than the original part’s intended use.)
Another interesting material for this specific test is a not filled vs filled nylon.
Nylon, I knew someone would suggest it. I've been staying away from Nylon in the past, but I think I can print it reliably now. I was also thinking that I should purchase an SLS version to see if there is a difference, and if so, how much better is it.
Felt like I was watching Project Farm for 3d printing and that's a good thing.
Nice video!
Thank you! Lots more to come, I should be able to get back to 2 videos/wk next week.
Fun testing! Videos like this tend to do well, so I encourage you to keep going. I can't wait for the TPU! My only suggestion would be to take a more Project Farm approach. By that I mean, slightly more scientific. For example, when you are doing a drop test have the item drop down guided by a pipe with a loop of some kind so that it always drops at the exact same angle from the exact same height so you can simulate the same failures for every material. 3D printing always needs more testing!
You really upped your game this time around. Good job.
While I have no experience with PC, I was surprised by the results. Highlights how "if it's on the Internet you know it's true." Needless to say, disappointed with its showing. But maybe a complimentary design is required there too?
Also tip my hat because you specifically address how important it is to design for the material. There is no such thing as a universal design for all materials. You created a design to compliment the material properties of PETG. I frequently find frustration with designs for aluminum or steel yet the material gets the blame when they readily fail. Which is a designer fail not a material fail. That's a huge difference. This has been a hard yet obvious lesson the pew, pew community took ages to learn. The fact you created a design to leverage the flex really underscores how important it is to understand not only the application but the material's properties. Which you did via your iterative approach. That said, I would be curious to see how how PC and ABS work with your superior design. Or if an apt design for these materials exist for like results.
Will add, I believe you've corrected a misconception I had on PETG (which I previous passed to you and you addressed head on). I now believe I misattributed print temp for wall layers attribution as is reflected by shattering. This too is a property I'd like to better understand and do not feel I fully appreciate. I suspect too thick and it becomes too rigid (lessons learned from automotive industry with crumple zones, et al). While I have confirmed wet prints definitely contribute to this factor (at least with the various PETG's I looked at, which I believe stems from the steam voids inside the material), you appear to have effectively removed this variable by drying before printing. Kudos there too.
I also appreciate you noting not all PETGs are the same. I all too frequently see people treat all materials in a class (PETG vs PETG-CF vs PLA vs PLA+, etc.) as identical. This is very clearly not the case from my own experience. Your testing clearly bolsters this position. I wish there was more community effort to identify better materials in a given class.
Lastly, I do wish to point out that energy absorption is important. The protection may provide a high level of spring (deflection), which in turn can repeatedly transfer energy to the "contents" within. Accordingly, an intact part does not necessarily translate to superior protection of the part to which it is attached. Sacrificial absorption can provide superior protection to that of a spring design. Though for an all things equal comparison as you've provided, this critique may be a bit much as now we're talking about shock/impact analysis.
Great content. Keep it up. Look forward to more! MOAR!
Thank you.
Wow, love the detailed comment! I'm working towards trying to give everyone the best answers I can. Testing real parts in these types of situations isn't quite as straight-forward as I would like. With feedback from you guys I can make improvements each time I test and hopefully get a better understanding of the properties of each material.
I think that out of all of the testing recently, this one did the best job of highlighting those points you mention. Leveraging the properties of the material to find a suitable design. I'd like to do the same for PC and ABS. I was a little surprised with PC's performance, I think it has similar attributes to PETG, if it cannot bend, it shatters. When I think of PC being used, it's always thin, I can't think of a time that I've seen PC used in another way.
There are so many variables as you mention, it take a bit of a 'gut' instinct to figure out what exactly is causing the shattering issue with PETG. It seems to be related to the thickness of the material and whether it is being constrained from having that spring action. Too thick and it becomes rigid and accepts the impact more directly, which is doesn't seem to like. A thinner cross-section and it seems to be able to absorb and re-direct it like a type of spring action, maybe this could be boiled down to distribution of impact over time. Still that last test showed that even the Teardrop design shattered, though it was a pretty high drop. The generic PETG clearly was more brittle, but I wish I had tested the exact same wall amount. It was a mistake to make it 7 walls rather than 6.
If we're talking about protection, I think we need to absorb the impact, like a bike helmet would protect our heads, and for that, my hope is that TPU will be able to do the job. I don't have much experience with it, and I'm not certain how to make the design work so that we can leverage TPU's 'rubbery-ness' I was thinking about using infill to create a zone to absorb and then more infill or walls in the areas I need to remain fairly rigid. Alternatively I can also try to mix materials and have TPU placed only where we need it, at the outer most parts, the rest of the rails or frame would be made from ABS/PC/PETG.
I've tried to find some reference material for this, but I've not been able to find anything. The closest thing I was able to find was CNC kitchen's use of variable density infill, but I don't believe he was using TPU.
Do you have any thoughts on this?
@@NeedItMakeIt I'm at a bit of a loss here too. Your thinking is inline with my own on both options. IMOHO, mixed materials is the future but that's strictly an opinion from my tail pipe. You're warned. ;) For example, in the pew, pew community, PETG is not used because pins are slowly pulled through the material because of repeated shock. In my mind this is addressed by simply creating oversized, keyed, holes for the pins complimented with PLA+ or TPU collars/grommets to accommodate the pins. This in turn allows the PLA+/TPU to absorb the impact shock before it can transfer to the lower pew, pew body. While overly specific I believe you smart enough to drag it back to the generic.
While my example is specific to pew, pews, I believe this type of mixed materials is very complimentary so long as the design accounts for it. TPU on ends mated to a small spring; creating a shorter fulcrum. In turn reducing the over all transfer to the spring arm.
A 95A TPU (by far the most common) does become rather rigid the more solid you print it. I expect but don't know overall deflection is an indicator here for TPU. While I have TPU and printed it, my experience is rather limited. My go to materials are PETG, PLA+, and PLA, in that order. Driven by what I'm printing. Mostly my prints are mechanical and not aesthetic. I tend to use PLA or PLA+ or aesthetics and PETG for other. While I can print ABS, it's not my preference because I don't have an enclosure (warpage and hazard).
We can discuss more but I expect its the blind leading the blind. That said, sounding boards are frequently helpful at feeling the way forward. But at this point, I'm like minded in both of your approaches. They are of my own thinking on the topic but I never explored. Accordingly I'm most interested in your results, regardless of your choice (or both).
As for TPU, I expect but don't know, the infill pattern may have a role to play as much as the overall infill percentage. For what its worth gyroid is interesting in TPU. But again, only played/toyed with a couple different infills and TPU, having printed gyroid without skins for the aesthetics.
Color can also play a role in strength which may have effected the pc if it wasn't natural color I couldn't tell, I believe CNCkitchen did a video on it. White is by far the worst color in my experience to the point I won't even use white filament, it's always very brittle. The color in it comes from titanium dioxide which I think is what makes it brittle it also wears out nozzles much quicker than any other color. Another great filament for this would be nylon but, it's kind of a hassle to keep dry I also really like ninjaflex armadillo it's a super hard tpu but, it is a bit pricey.
Good point. The pigments are just additives which don´t help. For proper testing natural translucent filament should be used, but this does not reflect real life use of those materials. Most people use all sorts of colors in their prints.
Even if it breaks it offers protection, just for the first fall
Would be good to have a table conclusion at the end too. Good work!
Sure, sounds good, I'll see if I can include more of these as I get a little better at video editing. Sometimes I can go a little too far in some areas and not far enough in others.
I have about zero chemistry knowledge, but here's what I've googled and learned by experience. The PETG becomes brittle when overheated. By overheating I don't mean burning it, but rather printing it glossy. Especially evident and easily observable with tranclucent colors: if it's not milky then it's gonna break as you bend it. PCTG doesn't seem to have this problem: it's printed highly translucent but still holds.The difference between PETG and PCTG (again, I'm not a chemist) seem to be the proportion of cyclohexylenedimethylene in it - otherwise they are composed of the same elements. The more cyclohexylenedimethylene, the more impact resistant it is and the hotter it needs to be printed. So I feel like the division between PCTG and PETG is a little vague. I guess the prusament PETG is closer to the PCTG i.e. has more cyclohexylenedimethylene, because if you look at the Prusa Slicer profiles for "Generic PETG" vs "Prusament PETG" they have a higher temperature for the Prusament there. Also when I've printed it it also felt less brittle. One good simple test I've found for checking the brittleness it to print a 0.6 to 1.0 vaze and to try breaking/collapsing it by hand. Also not overheating PETG is hard when there's a complex part where the hotend is working on a different speed all the time, varying the degree by which it melts the plastic. I think doing it slower, same speed for walls/infill and with a CHT nozzle works better if I need a strong part.
I would like a feature in a slicer so that speed varies depending on the layer time and also on the type of features, in a purpose to keep a melting and adhesion level.
There is the speed under layer time setting , but it is primitive.
Cool video good to see you continue the testing.
I still believe a very hard tpu will be the best material for this task.
Your conducting the tests in a enclosed and probably warmish environment so the materials are not being tested in real world situations. Extreme heat/cold weather. Being chucked in and out the back of a truck, other kit smashing against it etc that can weaken the frame.
Tpu would lasts for many drops on any surface
Agreed! TPU would not only provide better protection by absorbing and distributing the impact force, it will be unaffected so won’t be sacrificial like the Petg
try CF-PA, or PEI-9085
You arent getting the same impact on each drop, some are hitting at different angles and if you really want to see bending/impact you should consider doing ASTM impact notch testing with a swing hammer and solid printed test samples.
Thanks
Hey, thank you so much!
There are soooo many variables when it comes to a drop and energy absorption. For example I’ve dropped things that broke on subsequent bounces so a frame that just broke on the initial fall would have been best.
I think what would be best is using an accelerometer and looking at all the data from impact until at rest.
That’s just a suggestion I’d have though. I have no idea how to implement that or interpret the data specifically for this application. A smart guy like you could figure that out though. 😂
Regardless I enjoyed this video. I didn’t comment in your other video but I was REALLY impressed how well your mold worked to reform material. There are a lot of uses for that outside this application.
The redesign is the clear winner
It performed far better than I expected. It was an educated guess based on what I learned about PETG, it seems to like to be printed thinner and to act more like a spring, All I did was give it a nice smooth shape that allowed it to do that. I'd still need to try a larger nozzle, maybe a 0.8, and I may try the same design with TPU as well.
Quick tip, to increase layer adhesion even more besides the increase temp, you can increase layer width, for example 0,7mm-0,8mm layer width for the 0.4mm nozzle.
This adds pressure to the layer while it´s being printed and binds the material stronger. It also decreases print time (which is the main reason I do it).
And it does not cost anything!
where is that setting in the bambu labs slicer?
and with petg i mean partcooling change the durability too (lesser is stronger)
@@kjgfalsk Yes, this is true. However I would still cool somewhat to keep the quality consistent.
@@RaicoRosenberg I don´t know, I am not a Bambu user. If it´s like Orca Slicer it should be in Quality --> Line width. You can also choose different line widths for different features. For instance I always print my infill with at least 0.6mm line width for 0.4mm nozzle, same for inner wall. Makes the part stronger.
TPU if this is your requirement. Do you have access to drop test simulation? All the bouncing might not be helpful. If the TPU structure could be designed to absorb the impact. You could also have a ride along sensor in the form of a small iPad with its accelerometer. Just an additional feedback metric for the design. I enjoyed the first video showing your forming method.
Consider using PP (polypropylene) for your application. While Nylon remains an alternative worth exploring, it's important to note that despite the challenges associated with printing PP, its lightweight nature, toughness, high impact strength, and flexibility make it an excellent choice. PP shares similarities with PETG, allowing it to absorb impacts without succumbing to breakage.
very interesting tests. To bad you dont have Prusa XL (dont know if you can do it with the bambu), for composite printing to give the prints some more interesting properties :)
For impact, isn't nylon one of the best? I totally would go for a relatively hard TPU else but it's so soft that it needs to be thicker in this case.
Did you try conditioning the PETG ? I would like to see if conditioning helps just as much as with PA parts.
22:27 pretty much all materials act like that. Steel In tension. will have plastic deformation, elastic deformation then will snap.
Petg is a great product. I print most of my stuff with it as you clean plate, brush nozzle and come back to a finished part usually no issues. The flex is good. But if you push it hard it will snap.
Be interesting to see what the g loads were as some electronics couldn’t handle high g. Be interesting to see if the shopping part dissipate enough energy vs flexible one. End of day it is a designed to avoid Damage in a foot well, in a bag getting bump around (probably to stop knobs breaking) it may fall from a bonnet is worst case so if survives that then your probably be good.
You should try nylon and cf nylon. It’s kind of made for this type of thing, very shock absorbent.
From my own experience, I found that 0% infill 100% walls makes an object a LOT stiffer, perfect for applications where you want compressive resistance and not a lot of tensive resistance I would imagine. It takes a lot longer to print, sure, but for what I've used them for (I make LARP prop weapons and blunt training swords), they worked quite well. Print bed orientation matters quite a lot too because ultimately, the layer line seams are the weakest link in any 3D print. To circumvent that, I make sure to always print in an orientation that would meet my requirements, as well as just printing with slightly more than 100% flow to over compensate for high layer heights. I found that more than 100% flow rate truly increases the heft of a part, which means there's a lot more filament being put into it, which in turn would also mean stronger parts (or theoretically at least).
Something else cool to try would be printing a mold and using casting urethane or something similar from SmoothOn to make a homogenous part from a material like tpu without waiting for the slow print times. Just have to wait for it to cure lol.
technically I don't think it's a problem if this kind of sacrificial part shatters. if it absorbed the impact the thing it's meant to protect didn't take any damage.
Like bike helmets, they're only meant to take a single hit. and for something like this where you can print a new one for pennies when you have filament and the file... it's probably better to expect single impact use.
you'd need a way to measure the amount of energy absorbed by the material on impact. like the hammer swing test (I don't remember which channel does that on their test samples, might be CNC kitchen)
Really interesting to watch!
I wonder what is that 'light blinking' in the slow motion segments. I suspect it's some fps issue as the light is fine at normal speed.
You're sort-of right. It's an interaction between the lower framerate and the frequency that the shop lights naturally flicker at.
@@claws61821 You've got it, yeah, I'd love to get some different LED lights in the shop that run at a higher rate. That and my slow motion is limited to 240fps, and I think I'd like something closer to 1000 to really see what's going on.
Thanks! I had no idea that teardrop design would do so well, shame that it looks 'bubbly'.
I'll have to experiment a little with lighting to see if I can either use different lights, or add more and brighter lights from the side to see if that helps.
Hilarious spring jumps 😂
I was having a little bit of fun playing the video back and fourth, we got some great spinning action on some of them. I was impressed with the Tear drop spring approach, it was a bit of an afterthought, but as far as absorbing and re-directing the force of the impact, it seemed the best. TPU will come next, I'd like to see if we can get some good absorption going, but I'm concerned about it being too flexible.
@@NeedItMakeIt these 70+D
interesting!
Thanks, I have one more follow up video to come, I need to wrap my head around using TPU first, it's quite a bit different than anything else, but maybe for impact, it is the way to go.
I love PETG, only thing i print with
I'm curious why you did not look into nylon filament if you were looking for i.pacs resistance and flex. It is mad specifically for those properties. If you have a setup that can print abs, you should be able to print nylon without much difficulty. But with nylon, make sure to wait 10 days after a print since that is the standard for nylon parts to absorb moisture and perform at the specs of their data sheets. Also, most industry standard mounts/brackets use glass reinforced plastic. So going with a carbon fiber or fi er glass filament would add more resistance ar well. They do make cf and fg nylons, but they are not the smoothes prints, and might actually decrease flexibility, adding more brittlenes, but with a less flexible material it could be a benefit.
gotta agree with others asking for TPU. you can get some VERY stiff TPU that is basically completely impact resistant!
TPU is next up. Mine is only 95A, do you think it's going to be stiff enough? I think I can make it work with a slight re-design. It is pretty slow to print though, I'll need to work on some of the settings to improve that print speed, it is very tedious to have such a slow print in comparison to the other materials.
I forget if you said why you ruled out Nylon. Maybe because it's difficult to print. I personally have steered clear of it for that reason. Without having first hand knowledge however - I find myself thinking that would be the perfect material for these parts. I bet PCBway would print those in nylon for you if just for the advertising.
Going back to when we were printing it for my work, we had so many problems with it absorbing moisture and then also the warpage. I've been trying to stay away from it. I'm happy to give it a try in my home shop to see how it compares. I want to try to keep the channel as free from adverts as possible but if it would be good info that everyone can use, I think we can give it a try.
What causes PETG to explode like that is water.
It was either too moist or it was improperly manufactured in the first place, resulting in damaged polymer chains.
Proper PETG doesn't explode, it's supposed to be semi-flexible unless you apply some truly ridiculous force to it.
i think it would be helpful if you use stress analysis and topology optimization software to design the strongest prints possible.
He kind of did, just the old school way. Through testing and analysing. He increased the fillets which is always a good idea and made the parts a little more flexible in the affected areas.
A FEM would simply tell you exactly that and the topo. optimization would come up with a branched design which is not necessarily well printable.
Those tools can help, but this part and use case is pretty straight forward where you don´t need that. He also drew his own conclusions from the testing which is good.
well i think the new ways are better. :]@@sierraecho884
Try ASA. It's like ABS but more friendly and overall, just nicer.
You should go with Ninjatek Armadillo 75D TPU. You will not find anything tougher than that. Please include that in your TPU video. You won’t be sorry.
If it were me I'd design a TPU insert for the tear drop sections to provide external protection and internal compressive force distribution. That should increase the amount of force required to bend the frame material to the point of shattering. And provide some extra face plate scruff protection with increased distance from floor to face.
TPU on its own may be ok, but it might flex more than you'd like and provide limited protection to the dials and face plate. But the potential to combine them is very cool. If you have the machine for it you can print them together too and have the two materials integrated entirely.
They can glue to each other?
@@vim55k I don't think so, or I don't know how much I'd trust it. But with a idex or multi material machine you print the materials together and use geometry to lock them together
I'm going to attempt using the AMS for my TPU to see if I can print it with multi-material. I was thinking about shortening the tubes on the printer just for this test. Have the AMS right behind the printer. It may be hard enough at 95A to print reliably, but I'm not sure yet. It would be ideal to switch between materials easily.
@@NeedItMakeItsupposedly (according to some reddit posts) overture high flow TPU 95A (and one more brand I don't remember as it was hard to get in my region) works with AMS.
Didn't test it myself though - still hesitating if I need AMS :D
Design > Material
PETG is brittle. The reason you see it flex is because you are only stressing it in it's elastic region. Like glass, it can bed up to a point, but if you go over that point it shatters. The same way glass fibers can easily bend in tight radius, but thicker windows do not. (this is an over simplification)
Seems that PC is similar to petg, right?
@@vim55k Yes, but it is much tougher than PETG and has a higer modulus, so it takes much more energy to break. But if you are looking for ultimately touch parts (like in a bumper) I would use a PA (nylon) with some high carbon fiber content like a Jabil 4535. That stuff just doesn't break.
Try PA12 nylon Or PACF nylon.
If you haven't already, the simplest thing you can do to make prints stronger is to use a infill type like gyroid or cubic since they offer strength in more directions than the default grid infill
Also as you already noticed after a certain amount of walls parts become more brittle, likewise after 80-90% infill you hardly get any more strength and a solid part in some situation may be weaker
From my test, it seemed to me that honeycomb offered flexibility
@@vim55k honeycomb is a good option the only drawback it has is it tends to take more time and use more filament, I've heard 3D Honeycomb is an improvement over it but I've yet to try it myself.
I really don't like PETG. ABS usually gives me zero grief. Maybe it's because I've been printing with ABS for a long time. But for this specific application I'd definitely go with TPU. Or Nylon. But Nylon is a nightmare to print
PETG seems pretty sensitive, it's not exactly predictable at which point it will act like a spring and when it will fracture into 100 pieces. I thought ABS would perform better, but in its defense, it did protect the 'radio' really well in both design cases, but it didn't last. It did the job. I think it's just a matter of having a better sense of how to design to have ABS perform better for this particular situation. It it stiffer and doesn't have that fracturing issue, it does tear, but remains a little flexible. I think I could do more with ABS as well. TPU is next up and I have a few ideas on how to make it work to absorb the impact.
Was PETG a requirement? I think PLA has a higher impact resistance than PETG.
Not a requirement, I have mainly PETG and ABS, a little PC and some TPU, I don't tend to print much with PLA, it does have a tendency to be impacted quite a bit by moisture over time and becomes unstable... I suppose that's mainly because it was designed to breakdown.
Fill them with concrete, then fiberglass or carbon fiber the outside
dude polycarbonate is bulletproof to a 9mm with only like a 1/2” thick piece
Other tip when using materials like ABS, PP, PA which warp a lot. Use them with GF or CF filling. The main purpose of the filling is to make the material easier to print/injection mold, because it combats the natural tendency of the material to shrink and warp. It does not add significantly anything to strength but it helps printing a lot. You don´t need CF GF does the job just as well.
Fiber composites while not necessarily increasing impact strength are useful for a lot more than just helping with warping/shrinking they also help with things like abrasion resistance and stiffness.
@@thirtythreeeyes8624 Stiffness yes, what do you mean by abrasion and resistance exactly ?
what about trying fiber carbon prints?
They don´s add additional strength. The filling, GF or CF helps printing challenging materials which warps and ridgidizes soft materials like PP.
It is a common, maybe the most common misconception that GF Filaments add strength.
@@sierraecho884 They don't generally add impact resistance mainly for stiffness, though I've heard some claim the fibers actually help layer adhesion not sure on that claim though and I know there are big differences between brands.
@@thirtythreeeyes8624 The fibers do the opposite to layer adhesion, the thermoplast stick to itself not so much to the filling.
Generally speaking CF filament is a waste of money if you do it for strength. Rather get GF filament if you try to print PA, PE or PP. With PLA & PETG it´s a waste of money entirely.
The main reason for the filling is for making it printable in the first place. You will rarely find PA parts in the wild without a filling or PP parts.
oh?@@sierraecho884
hmmm@@thirtythreeeyes8624
From my experiments with PC, it doesn't like bends, it breaks.
It seems to me that your test is not so of impact, but bending with impact
True too. We have different directions we can go, we can probably do well with the PC material to thicken it up to have it take the abuse, but when it comes to protecting something like this radio, I think we need to absorb. Can we combine PC and TPU? I'd like to see if we can get the stiffness of the PC along with the flex and shock absorption properties of TPU. The spring method is certainly interesting, it's not exactly where I thought we'd go, but learning more about PETG and having the problems with it fracturing, it seems as though it prefers to act like a spring if we can keep it thin enough.
@@NeedItMakeIt yes, multimaterial is an interesting path. Though that extra hard TPUs 60+D, maybe the whole frame can be built of it.
Umm... What are you trying to test??? If it's which part better protects the radio then you'd need to measure acceleration in the radio. Filament that breaks might be much better for the keeping the radio from breaking.
Or if you're just measuring filament impact strength then you obviously need synthetic tests, since they're reliably repeatable.
but it can be brittle
'ProjectFarm' would've condensed this video into 2 minutes, tops 🙃
He's a master!
You could embed carbon fiber rods into your print...
I was thinking about wood, you just want to make me poor!
Dropping on to Styrofoam and carpet is by no means real world. Drop it on hardwood floor, bare dirt and rocks, or concrete is real world. Dropping from waist height or a little more is more realistic. Keep at it though you will find a successful design.
You should definitely do a test where TPU is embedded into the models. For example, print 1-3mm of PETG/PC/ABS, then fill the interior with TPU, or just use TPU as the infill material. That sounds like a great shock absorption system. Alternatively, do the reverse, like a phone case. Add a soft TPU outside, with a PETG/PC/ABS core for structure.
But they probably will not glue to each other... Also the ams probably doesn't handle tpu
Maybe if he had a dual extruder printer. I've put TPU outside PETG and ABS with no issues. I've even designed in retention bowties that help keep things adhered, but that hasn't seemed to have been needed for my tests.
Why not print a sandwich with TPU/PLA/TPU
I've been trying to figure out how to do something like this, would this be a manual material change? Do they bond do you think?
With manual filament change you could print easily PLA on TPU. But maybe it's just better to print the TPU shell separately because it's such a simple geometry. Just press the PLA or PETG core into the TPU shell.
Don't call it PET-G. It's P.E.T.G.. Edit: Well. Call it whatever you like.. I just do not like that you call it PET-G.
Every test you changed something else. Different materials have different wall counts. Each time the "radio" hits the solid ground you added more foam. Then you go and change the drop height. One set of tests one set of conditions. Your tests are pointless with all the changes.
Yes, it's quite hard to control drops like this, I'd need to create a fixture to drop through a tube, maybe this is possible.
Let me put it this way, testing real parts in realistic situations regardless of the variables introduced is far better than testing parts which have no purpose. It's quite challenging to do what I'm attempting to do. Likely the reason that nobody is doing it.
It's your prerogative to say that something is pointless, I don't think that's the case, in fact through these tests I've learned more about each of these materials than in any previous test. More testing and more samples of each material of each brand at each different temperature, w/fans and wo/fans are also required. Adding all of these up, becomes a monumental task. I'll be chipping away at it incrementally.
As my channel grows, I'm happy to spend more of material and buy more printers to be able to make more parts to help with coming to a more definitive answer.
Thanks for the comment, I always takes something away from getting a different perspective
Horrible noise in slomo - I am out