Can 3D Printed bearing run at 233km/h?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ก.ย. 2024
- Testing 3d printed bearing designed in Rhino 7 (grasshopper). Choosing which one is better PLA or TPU for future projects.
To download 3d file check : ussadesign.com...
Instagram: / ussa_design
Patreon page: / ussa
3d printers used :
Artillery Sidewinder X1: amzn.to/318pRvN
Creality Ender 3 V2: amzn.to/317DXNY
Creality official website: www.creality3d...
Creality Ender 3 V2: www.creality3d...
Equipment:
Screw driver: amzn.to/3tFDGxY
Camera gear:
Camera: amzn.to/3tOKV6K
Camera lens: amzn.to/3cbLSAa
Second monitor: amzn.to/3tO3pUZ
Microphone: amzn.to/3fbALZM
Lights: amzn.to/3sfYWdm
#3dprint
#bearing
#grasshopper
#ender3v2
#ussadesign
You can't really calculate speed like that
not to mention, the drill has to be fixed at one position, not hand held
He should make video with same bearing size and materials by different industrial Lubricant including Food grade oil and TENGA Lubricant.
Km/h are used to define the speed of a point but with a bearing you want to mesure the rotation speed. For that, pls use RPM or rad/s, that's more apropriate.
Not only that, but the calculation of the circumference given in the video is also wrong. Instead of π 3.41 was used. This would result in a circumference speed of 216.4km/h
Edit: also the same speed is assumed for every bearing independent of it's radius.
Yep, the km/h made zero sense
1500RPM and 2800RPM
and pls use motor oil.
@@odeontlt Motor oil is not designed for plastics. It has chemicals that make it bind to the surface of the metal chemically and it's made as thin as it can be. Bearings like this need to be either submerged in oil or need greasing. Graphite filled grease would be a game changer here
Even steel bearings need lubrication. where did this 233km/h come from ?
I also think that steel bearings would not withstand such speeds and times either. Lubrication required
Calculations with the wrong units mm vs cm so the speeds are 10 times too big (also see top comment - the og captain)
Worst than that... Rotational speeds needs to be expressed in RPM.
Even tho, the peripheral speed increase a lot with small radius increase due to 2piR expression. Smaller one withstand the rotational speed because its peripheral speed is way lower than her sisters with a bigger radius, si it even heats up a lot less due to less "motion" that causes friction and subsequent failure of the "beans".
If u calculate the distance the biggest bearing runned in 15 secs and compare it with the distance the smaller one did, I'm quite confident that the biggest one had won even standing the mere 15 seconds...
Some plastics are self lubing i don't think that's the case here but just a heads up
I think, he wants the bearing to be used in a ferris wheel... also people using rhino for industrial designs... 😁
Should have tested with grease.
Somebody else did a test similar to this and grease made a huge difference.
Pack as much as possible lithium grease in them and then close bearing shut.
Then it wil be different story (I have never found/bought bearing that wasnt pre-greased or manual told you to do so)
@@rkseifert Yes: it was for 3D printed worm gears. =)
Also, testing bearings without any load is pretty meaningless too. I mean, even if the 3d printed parts withstand pure RPMs, they might fail if you put them under even slight load.
@@BOTmaster15 as much as posible and close it is going to get heat to, just a little is enough
Usless test. Every bearing needs lubrication. Alsow you can't use km/h as a measure of speed because every bearing ball have different speed inside of bearing body. You should use rpm as a measure unit.
And the unbalanced load on those bearings makes it even worse...
And the smallest one is the best one sense ish ball covers a lager space % wise and gets more cooling. Smal balls in smal ring is better the many small bald in a big ring do to heat. You have to scal all in proposition to it self.
Ps. Sorry my bad English.
Hey! Was fun to watch at least :)
thanks for the test, but I believe that to be reliable this test should be done on a lathe or column drill, with a free hand just tilt the spindle a few millimeters to make it work off axis, exerting more friction in the bearing and consequently a different wear at each test
Came down to comments section to say this...
I was thinking this exact same thing as I watched him. I bet they all failed because of this off axis pressure.
@@cptairwolf well, i think ball bearings are used for this purpose, they are supposed to have off axis pressure otherwise we wouldn't need them
@@gabrielenitti3243 the reason most bearings fail is caused by incorrect usage by inexperienced users (in this case it was caused by off axis loads on a radial bearing by unintentionally tilting of the drill)
There's a darn good reason as to why they are designed the way they are
Heres 2 good videos explaining the different kinds of bearings:
th-cam.com/video/pDC99hfsxgU/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/Xb59xt_bkok/w-d-xo.html
I think the test is inconclusive because of the variable of the drill angle which was not fixed, the drill was held by hand, the more angle you put in the drill more stress in the part, more heat.
Test need to be redone with the drill fixed to remove this variable.
I wouldn't stick my finger so close to something like that, especially if I'm testing it's durability.
This was the first thing that crossed my mind when the vdo began.
He’s just better.
His hands are 3d printed don't worry
Still not understand why you choose TPU for the bearings balls... sound like a bad idea. And rotation speed in rpm next time (the bearings is not going anywhere ;)
tpu is pretty abrasion resistant, so maybe thats why. idk tho im no expert
@@jasonstewart8612 tpu has a higher coefficient of friction unlike nylon for example.
@@williamarms2trong857 yeah but because the bearing balls are rolling and not sliding, the difference of friction is minimal. A more abrasion resistant material such as tpu is going to last a lot longer than most other plastics. But hey, for this application I don't think it matters.
4:59 - I feel this 50mm one failed prematurely and it wasn't the bearings that failed, it was your design flaw of having the hex diver opposite to the locking tabs which locked the center hub in place. As you applied pressure with the drill you pushed the locking ring out. If the tabs were on the same side as the hex driver, it would have lasted longer, but I think the bearings would have piled up quickly anyway. But in a way, the 50mm didn't fail the test, (even though it likely would have), you failed it. Another of the rings came apart this way as well.
So without lubricant, the basic idea of this test is "does TPU and PLA melt when it gets heated by friction?"...didn't really need a test to answer that.
I think that the design should address the difference in size. There wasn't a size mass ratio. Regardless very enjoyable video.
I am going to say the same thing many others have, use grease next time. Never run any bearings, steel, PLA or otherwise. and yeah, speed in RPM is far more appropriate for this type of experiment, I believe the drill should at least give you a ballpark if you don't have a tool to measure its actual speed
1500 and 2800
There's been enough comments about how it should've been done, and that it needs lubrication, etc. But you actually inspired me that I could design a 3D printer large-format bearing for a machine that I'm designing that has a moving part that's very lightweight. I think the biggest bearing in your design could totally help me make that part without having to buy a super expensive big bearing.
I also think that TPU is a good choice for noise reduction.
I really love the idea of the C-clips on the inside, that's really clever. It allows disassembly while securing them well together once they're put onto something.
I'm trying to figure out what TPU means@@zombieno1
I saw the tiny white bits he was using and didn't know what they were.
Could you enlighten me?
I think I figured it out. TPU must be a type of filament.
I just got my first 3D printer. I've not even set it up yet, as I'm watching LOTS of videos to learn before I get started.
@@BrianMeeks I did years of watching technical videos before buying my printer. Make tiny adjustments and small test prints before going big. Good luck and enjoy
You should have fixed the drill so u allwas get the right angle.
So, conclusuion I get from this is 3D printed bearings can work, but it's best kept to low speed
Sure if you run bearings without lubrication. He stupidly ran them dry. The plastic simply overheated and melted. Im sure all of them would have worked.
first, lubrication (oil, grease. mineral, synthetic) and compatibility with those materials... second needs to run a load test, he use rollers 90° arranged the load test should be axial and radial
You need to make a jig to sit it all in
Please redo with grease
The method used to clamp the bearings by the outer race is inducting distortion in the bearings which produces heating in the bearings. This will cause further distortion & heat which leads to fatigue and failure.
Not just that, any axial misalignment causes non tangential forces which further increase friction at certain points. Ball bearings are already notoriously bad for axial loads, and I would expect a 3D printed bearing to deal with them even worse.
Also not being able to keep the drill perfectly coaxial can add friction as well
Exactly, which is why his way of testing these bearings just made me not bother watching the rest of the video. Doesn't matter how well the bearing is made, they'll fail by holding the drill by hand like that.
I concur with the above. A solid testing jig is needed for more accurate results. Annealing could (or could not) improve results as well. But this may be above the scope of this project.
I did enjoy it though. 😃🍻
Why would you use km/h and not just rpm? The way you do it is just plain confusing, especially with that much of a diameter difference between min and max size.
And pi=3,14 not 3,41
Overall a nice video with some unnecessary confusion.
Surface Feet(meters for you metrisexuals) per second is the number you really want. That(sfpm) and load is how you go apples to apples.
i do believe i caught you pushing hard and pressing down on some of them tests. i cant believe your results because of his
The petg?
Your test methodology is totally useless. In addition to what others said, holding the drill by hand only introduces leverage load on the bearing and increasing wear against the rotational plane of the bearing. You should have used a fixed position for the drill and a mount for the bearing that holds it perfectly square to the drill. Only then you can get good results with no introduction of forces from outside. That is also, why your biggest bearing disassembled itself.
Also, TPU for the bearing was a bad choice from the beginning. As this is quite soft, deforms easily and produces much more rubbing force against each other (consequently heat). As you found out, the bearings basically welded themselves by that and were not functional anymore.
Yo wtf, you can't define an axial velocity in km/h. You dont have any distance so you can't use km/h. You'd have to use rpm(rotations per minute) for example. Km/h isn't just unaccurate, you can't use it it's not possible. This would be as if you would describe a distance in liters
3:35, being far from physics and testing this bearing only for future equipment for woodwroking this equation made sense to me to get general idea of how fast it is, although I made mistakes in numbers
Imagine if you had lubed the bearings.
You need a test jig so you can test reliably and not have so many variables coming from the way you hold the drill.
also the way they are clamped in
A bearing needs to be tested under load, because that's what a bearing is made for. The maximum RPM is irrelevant if it can't even handle 20N of weight.
first you need grease, second... you need to hold the drill perpendicular, and without pushing/pulling on the bearing itself as I see clearly that's the point of failure...
Main problem with this test is that it was run without load. Bearings without load serve no purpose.
Made a mistake at 3:36 by calculating pi as 3,41 instead of 3,14, sorry for misleading
There is also a other mistake in the right calculation. In the last line, you wrote 289200 instead of 389200... but the result is calculatet with 389200 ....
You also used cm instead of mm for your calculation. But your average diameter cannot be 41mm cause it is too low. From the video it may be your average radius. In this case average circumference is (2*41*3,14)mm = 257.4mm
Surface speed is 257.4mm*2800rpm = 720720mm/min = 43.2km/h.
PETG: am I a joke to you??!?
No lubrication, bad math, cheap depressing youtube music, seems like one of those channels that makes weird 3d printing videos to cash in on the 3d printing/maker community and nothing else
man you made me laugh for sure 😅😅😅
Feel like some of these would roll smoother if they had a bearing cage to prevent the bbs from hitting each other
Can see real potential in making very light disposable drones
I see lot of people already comment it. But you should make a version 2 of this video, where you lubricate the bearings, and where you don't fix them in with the tension of a vice, but rather in a circular hole. And yes count rpm. Other than that great experiment!!
math is wrong. 230 km|h on the biggest bearing reacheble only at 13000 rpm.
btw. Pi is 3.14159265... so for 41sm wheel 116 and 216 km\h
This was a mediocre test process. You building the drill like that is introducing all sorts of inconsistent loads. Speed calculation isn't the best. But that being said, literally everyone would have guessed PLA was a better alternative
besides Pi beeing wrong the "average diameter" for sure isnt 41 cm
asuming he's working on a 1cmx1cm grid work mat the max. diameter appears to be approx. 13 cm for the outer edge of the rotating part.
based on that its more like:
Ø0,13m*Pi*2800(RPM)*60(for rounds per hour)*0,8(assumed efficiency between no load & actual RPM)
=54,89 km/h
other than that i rly liked the over all quality of this video
Your testing method is like from 5 year old thinking kid. ... Absolutely irelevant result. So much energy for nothing.
Do you have a grasshopper course? Alternatively, do you have one you recommend?
PLA+ would probably do a lot better. All that is happening here is the balls are melting and disforming.
I don't see the loads, for what you did this testing of bearing ? To look how they good spinning ? If yes - cool, but if it's will work under loads, so, you must testing it under loads, the bearings create and using to limits relative movement to only the desired movement and reduces friction between moving parts and сarry the loads through themselves.
You didn't showed us the loads testing except spinning, it's good test for spinning, but not for working under loads, but bearings will work under loads, sometimes huge loads, so ? Where all this ? I liked you and subscribed ! ) Please, do it right, but not like this time ;)
At least this en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bearing_(mechanical)
It's not very accurate when you use your hand to hold down the drill. That has introduced way too many uncertainties. Typically the outer and inner parts of the ball bearings are fixed along the same axis. However, having your hand holding the drill would shift the inner rotation axis away from the outer bearing axis
You should do the same tests with a load on the shaft ! (Also using rpm and grease)
Without stabilizing the tool with a jig this test is functionally flawed.
A human hand cannot provide the stability needed to accurately reproduce a test involving these physics, unless the test involves measuring some aspect of the hand itself explicitly as the subject.
Nnnnope. You put in an awful amount of effort to construct those great devices. However, you totally devalued this as a scientific test. You should've built a stable rig with a motor for testing.
Cool idea, but your experiment seems kind of wasted since there was no grease or load.
Having different materials for different dimensions means you can't make a direct comparison between them. You can only do an estimation comparison.
Who is going to talk about tolerances with 3d printed balls? Miniscule tolerances will cause friction and easily melt the plastic whichever type you use.. Friction Welding would be the accurate word to describe what is happening here.
why didn't you lubricate them? They would have performed much better with proper lubrication
Can you call it a ball bearing when you aren't using spherical balls in it? If they were all aligned right (they weren't) and had a cage to avoid rubbing, these barrel bearings may have worked much better...
why would you use printed bearing balls when steel balls cost practically nothing?
If I could make a suggestion, could you repeat this test with nylon and PETG
Made all rollers same size? May should be sized for bearing needs. And flexible rotor? Try graphite powder as “lube”?
Cool cool cool. Guessing the friction heat warps the plastic.👍
Gusy im not a Einstein engineer, but even the steel bearins wouldn't last long without grease. Next time use nice heat resistan grease (no oil,wd40) . The other thing what you can try more is all plastic except the balls. The steel balls not expensie at all and also excellent thermal* conductivity which is your biggest enemy* in this case .
You're brave for having your fleshy bits near that.
Also wondering if you applying lateral force with drill socket setup.
How long and with what load? Both pretty much zero.
Real bearings are cheap off the shelf standard parts.
I am shocked. Shocked I tells ya. I for cannot believe that a bearing, which is a precision part even on the cheap end, can't be made with a 3D printer at home out of material that can be broken between the thumb and forefinger.
Put some grease and all of them will last forever... no problem !
Are those bearings lubricated with grease bfore testing???
Terrible video... Spends all that time printing bearings, and doesn't have clue about their use or how to test them
next to pubrication, you are using not a ball bearing where orientation of the ball doesnt mather. You are using another design where orientation of the rollers are important. Then you should use that orientation instead of wacking them in.
Lubrications such as silicone based lubrication (typically doesn’t swell plastic) would likely help that sticking problem you had
Lubricate, use compressed air to rotate, and use laser tachometer to measure the rpm.
it's pointless nevertheless, bearings always need to be tested under load, what good is free-wheeling bearing, that is not its job
He also had too many variables going on if you do this again please only change the bearing material and for the size test both PLA and TPU on the same diameter bearing
No lube, no roller cages, no break in period. All the dumb
your jig to test is awful, should have set the drill on the table and held the bearings with your hand against it at minimum.. at least you'd not be driving a big drill into it constantly changing angles and pushing the middle parts out
Small winner because 233 km/h it's in center, on borer speed more big for biggest bearing
This is the least scientific "test" i've seen, at least 3d print a jig for it all. Other than that good concept; bad execution.
Sorry but all of you test are wrong and there 3 reason ! ( im car tech ) 1 the ball inside are not in same position 2 bearing are always a amount of lubricant inside before run 3 dont take the bearing from the side but with the exterior side
Your method of testing is bad, you need to make sure the tester is the same for every "product"....
Speed is normaly measured in RPM,Not in Kmh.
does anyone know how to pull the hex code for those two filament colors?
i cant believe u clamped them like that.....
not good but not bad, for a more accurate test you need a balanced way to spin the bearing so that it doesn't create friction in one spot or more and also lubrication is needed so it doesn't create over heating and frictionless spin. but it was a goods test to see how a bearing would act if no lubrication and un balanced spin would act noting it is plastic and metal bearings would heat up and shatter but still I see what you were going for gg
233千米每小时怎么换算出来的？TPU的滚珠怎么看上去比PLA的滚珠还要紧的？没把材料成型收缩率算进去是吧。TPU材料比PLA耐磨是事实，但是在这种条件下却变成了由于TPU滚珠比PLA滚珠紧，而导致TPU滚珠摩擦发热融化卡死轴承，进而得出了PLA比TPU Better的悖论。这个结论很有误导性了吧。
pla got some good ball bearings, could use this for a robot build
How do you get linear speed from rotational speed??
ABS filament is very resistent. I use in my RC. Mu test pass at 30.000 rpm
Disliked due to lack of verbal explanation.
mabey u should lube them
Чёёёё пластиковый подшибник вы серьёзно????
U have to make the balls bigger.. Heat dissipation
Ein sehr eigenwilliger Test... kuriose Angaben in mm und km/h... schwer nachvollziehbar, was hier eigentlich getestet werden soll... für mich völlig nutzlos. Aber Du hast dir viel Arbeit damit geschaffen und warst weg von der Straße.
Try the same thing but with metal balls instead, see how that works out
It is interesting how long will they last if you use metal balls instead.
Whish software are you using to create the 3d model ?
And i think clamping it s squeezing them too.
should try this with Air Soft BBs
6:10 well if you dont push your thing out it might work lmao
Nice prints, but the testing method is.. less than ideal
Curious to see how using airsoft BB as balls helps.
I take it there is no lubricant being used on these bearings ?
So many things wrong with this video .. she😂
Yes it can. Just make good design, use better suited materials (maybe nylon, or clear pla, i don't know), use higher tolerances, lubricate it, mount it properly - i mean not in 1 point with strange forces applied by hand. But you already know all of this.
Also if you throw it very fast, it will be moving faster than 300km/h
maybe you should print a drill holder because it seems that you putting a side load on the bearings and they die faster
а с керамическими шариками на8ерное бегал и бегал би
But can it hold 50km/h under load?