ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 13 พ.ค. 2024
- Discover the power of functional 3D printed parts! In this episode of Design for Mass Production 3D Printing, we explore how industrial hardware applications benefit from mass production 3D printing, specifically focusing on the transformation of simple L-shaped brackets into fully optimized corner brackets. We'll cover the fundamental differences in design for 3D printing vs traditional methods like injection molding or machining, shedding light on the unique capabilities 3D printing offers. From initial conception to ensuring the design is optimal for mass production, we navigate the journey step-by-step, highlighting potential challenges and their innovative solutions. Learn how to exploit the design freedom in 3D printing to enhance strength, efficiency, and manufacturability.
If you want to learn more about how you can transform your approach to manufacturing products with mass production 3D printing, don't forget to subscribe to Slant 3D!
🔗 IMPORTANT LINKS 🔗
Get a Quote for Your Production Project: www.slant3d.com/
Slant 3D Etsy Plugin: www.slant3d.com/slant3d-etsy-...
Get Our STL's: www.angled.xyz/
Get Affordable High-Quality Filament: www.tangledfilament.com
Try Shapr3D (Use Code: Slant3d): www.shapr3d.com/download?utm_...
Our Favorite Products: www.amazon.com/shop/slant3d
About Slant 3D
🏭 High-Volume 3D Printing: Scalability Meets Flexibility
Slant 3D's Large-Scale 3D Print Farms utilize 1000's of FDM 3D printers working 24/7 to offer limitless scalability and unparalleled flexibility. Whether it's 100 or 100,000 parts, our system can handle it reliably, while still allowing for real-time design updates, ensuring products evolve with the times. This adaptability is key in today's fast-paced world.
🌿 Sustainable Manufacturing: Eco-Friendly Efficiency
Embrace a system that drastically reduces carbon emissions by eliminating carbon-intensive steps in the supply chain, such as global shipping and warehousing. Our approach minimizes this footprint, offering a more sustainable manufacturing option.
⚙️ Digital Warehouses: Parts On-Demand
Think of print farms as a "Digital Warehouse", meaning we can store your parts digitally on a server rather than physically on a shelf. parts are available on-demand, reducing the need for extensive physical inventory.
Produced by Slant Media
As an Amazon Associate, I earn commission from qualifying purchases.
00:00 Using 3D Printing for Industrial Hardware
00:45 Simple 'L' Bracket Design
01:47 Triangle Corner Bracket
02:43 Print Orientation for Triangle Bracket
04:38 Fully Optimized Corner Bracket for 3D Printing
06:06 Print Orientation for Optimized Corner Bracket
07:22 Utilize the Superpowers of 3D Printing
Produced by Slant Media - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
Man I love these videos. It makes me realize that many parts need to be redesigned for 3D printing, whether for the worst or for the best. Keep making those!!
Square peg goes in the square hole
Yes that’s true, with 3D printing the design part is the first step and the most critical
@@slant3deverything goes in square hole
@@mfmr200 exactly - th-cam.com/video/baY3SaIhfl0/w-d-xo.htmlsi=nmZdf4pxUNMLABiz
@@mfmr200 _That's right! It goes on the square hole!_ KEKW
It's not often I feel like I learn something genuinely useful on YT. Today with this video I did. Not the bracket design but the consideration of the physical properties in a different way to how I normally do.
It would be cool to have (and maybe it already exists) a chart of optimal 3d printed design equivalents for typical sheet metal type parts like this little bracket.
I really like this idea. I’d print this out and keep it posted.
Ultra pro move: add a feature that locks into the T slot on one side for both pieces of tubing. Keep the continuity of layer loops intact.
Yes. That's what I was thinking too.
Quickly becoming one of my favorite channels.
Thanks for watching
so good, you not only give the answer but help build a thought process
New dope channel just hit my algorithm
I love how excited you are about FDM printing. It feels like the Reprap days when the possibilities were endless.
I just started 3D modeling, this is PURE GOLD, your content deserves way more attention than the things that go viral about 3D printing, i really really love your videos man, Gracias!
Thank you
As an experiment, I printed a rather long and reasonable heavy L bracket that wasn't even symmetrical on its corner. It printed on a single layer width corner, one line of PLA+, and it printed perfectly. I actually printed it on both flats, sitting on both outward corners, and sitting only on the sharp corner, and the single line corner print got me the best results. If I was going to mass produce it I would definitely add some surface area to keep it stable, but I was super impressed. Great video!
Great to hear
Thank you for this explanation. This topic is hard to explain and is unintuitive to most people. And 100% agree on supports. They have no place in production setting.
Damn. I've been designing 3D printed parts for a few years now but this still gave me some new concepts to think about. Thanks!
Thanks for watching
Great video! Something I learned after buying my first Ultimaker in 2013. Great explanation and example. CR-30 belt got me printing in 45 degrees
This highlights what I have been trying to explain to people in a beautiful and concise way, thank you
Optimum might be viewed as being able to piece bits of it together as needed. If you only need internal bracing (say front panel or accessories), just use the internal brace. If you need to keep the internal space clear (i.e. if you're putting a panel in the extrusion), then use the external bracing. If you only need max strength (and don't mind covering up slots/surfaces), then use both internal and external bracing.
Another great video to challenge us to think differently because we have a tool that is very different from all the other tools we are used to using. That’s a big part of the fun!
Thanks for watching
What an incredible teacher.
Thanks for sharing you knowledge!
Thanks for sharing 👍🏼
Would have been nice to see some real tests and see how the strong the different designs are
I appreciate you take the time to show the printed parts
Thank you so much
A well thought out explanation to achieve the full potential of 3d printed parts.
What a trip seeing simplify3d.
The only thing I don't see is hardware or design features that prevent the aluminum extrusions from falling out of the final L-bracket. What secures it all together?
Hi, can you show the also a video if you want to connect three aluminum extensions, i.e. you want to make a corner bracket. This is quite a common problem (also for building 3d printers) and als the solutions I have seen are not as I like them. Second would you not still keep a rib even with this design as it would stabilise even more. thx Rainer
Design is the same except you base it on a trihedron instead of a squared L, also known as a triangular pyramid, commonly recognized as the shape of a D4 gaming die.
Ribs you need to weigh the pros and the cons. The more space you spend on your bracket, the less you have for your motion system later, for example. As things stand, the wide, angular brace spanning the inside of the corner in that last bracket serves the same purpose as a rib and potentially has more strength even if it was designed to be hollow. In this case, the rib would replace the brace and would provide the benefit of less material used and the con of a potentially weaker bracket.
The video is very well made.
As a design engineer this is the best way to optimize and really help you find a better way.
Thanks for watching!
This is great. Two L-brackets can be combine by rotating them 90 degrees from each other to form a corner of a frame. I can immediately use this to for a lightweight frame that combines my functional parts as well as the clearances needed to allow parts to move and wires to be routed. Since the screw is not load bearing along the axis, I can just use appropriate tolerances in the plastic so I won't need a nut. In fact, since some elements of the frame have almost no load, I can just use pins or 3d printed detents so that those parts just snap together.
Really enjoy these videos. I’m new to 3D printing and I’m glad I’m learning this now. 3D parts should not be replications of metal components.
Very nice video.
How old you make a 3 way or even a 4 way piece? Just curious. I mean would you be able to print it in the same orientation?
Improving my idea process day by day. Thanks for teaching me about how to Make 3D prints better wish I would have seen one of your videos a few days ago though could have saved me $10 in filament
Glad to could help. Thanks for watching.
Nice iterative design. But I would feel better if 2 brackets were contacting. This would bring extra strength than brackets just contacting with PLA.
Have you ever thought perhaps... not use PLA but use PLA Plus or ABS/ABS Plus/ ASA /PETG anything more strong and heat resistant than PLA alone. I suppose it comes down to what your printer is able your standard non-all metal extruder is not going to safely do any of those other choices except maybe PETG.
This is where a upgraded extruder is often cost effective from a new printer.
@@MoistDreams or how about the aluminium you are already using?
Is there some context I am missing here?
aluminium filiment is not actually really metal its a PLA polymer metal like filiment in texture and style.
If you wan real metal
280c
120c bed
$300 and some change spool of stainless steel filiment which is real steel.
Cons, you can't print overhangs without having to send it away to be sintered.
But for these since the optimal way is not to have overhangs anyway sure you could print these in steel if you like.
@@MoistDreams In the last design of the video, the 2 brackets were far apart and they were only being held by the 3D printed corner. We are saying that if this corner holder allowed the brackets to contact, it would give more strength (at least when 2 brackets are being spread out). We are not talking about filament types or strengths here. just the design choice to benefit from what we already have
Ohh, that was like woosh without that context, I see now. Yeah, I mean in that case why not just screw the damn alluminium down to the other one like always and just print the cover.
Always enjoyable and beneficial. Thank you.
Our pleasure!
I know the focus is 3d printing.What we have been doing is printing the part and casting in a material that is more appropriate for the application like rubber for example.
Your videos always give me ideas on how to approach new problems, so thank you
Thanks for watching. Printing is rubber is quite doable and the scale of 3D Printing has really made cast defunct as long as a part is well designed.
Good advice, you can also make a 3 way corner the exact same way, I'm currently using a similar design for my next custom 3D printer build.
i laughed, thanks dude best comedian type of video for hobbies
great, thanks for sharing 👍
Hola...
Este video me encanta y los resultados que has obtenido son geniales... Felicidades...
Gracias por compartir tus proyectos...
Saludos.
Someone is figuring it out, good work.
Love this one
Thanks for watching
Great video!
Thanks!
A corner bracket that combines a square hole with a V-slot groove would be even stronger, and fully leverage 3D printing
If it's strength is especially important, use a CF or GF nylon (pre-dried 24h, and preferably oil submerged heat-annealed)
Thank you thank you~ 🤜
Awesome!
Thanks for watching
Thank you great video they don’t teach people in tech schools so well as you explain everything in your videos from your experience
Thanks for watching
Questions for part optimization could you implement sort of a girdering triangle system to lighten the plastic even further or remaining strong factoring in print direction for the girdering
*even further while remaining*
Hey, thanks for the vid... what software are you using? I'm looking for other programmes to use to build my 3D prints
How does one screw hold this piece together?
Why don't we want a large contact area with the build plate? You've said this in several videos but I haven't noticed you explain why.
Something I did for 1515 extrusion which had threaded holes in each end, I made a few brackets that attach onto the ends of the extrusion with pieces going in the slots and it had a screw hole to screw into the end of each extrusion. So the bits that fit into the slots keep it from twisting and the b screws hold it together. It makes a very low profile connection, essentially the whole connector would fit in a 15x15x15 mm cube. This approach does start to become more difficult with more complex joints though, especially when access to the screw at the end of the extrusion would be difficult, like T joints. I’ll probably implement something like this instead.
Something similar could be done with your bracket, just create bolt holes into the ends of the extrusion.
don't forget, if your screw holes are on top or bottom, you can have crosshatch patterns making splitting almost a non issue if the area has enough layers.
As usual, a very instructive video about designing for 3D printing.
Thank you! Cheers!
Do you have a model for this?
I don't think it would be the same as a metal one. When have metal frames for a reason, and it it to be strong and to resist vibrations. Putting back plastic just seems to defeat the purpose of the metal frame
Optimal part? Pretty bold claim
I mean sure, from the manufacturing point of view this is pretty good, but there's a good reason why L-bracket look how they do; you can do multiple types of joints with it.
So last one, even if optimal from manufacturing point of view, is not that great desgn-wise as you'd need many types of this bracket system to create a frame from profiles.
I'd say that one before it was a good compromise between end product that is desirable and manufacturing technology used, making it truly optimal as a product
good design.
Thanks
Now we just need to use those brackets to make a core xy 3D printer!
You want a bit chonkier, and with more fastners, if you want it to be rigid under intense forces. But it's very doable! Check out The 100 or the Rook, both mostly-printed corexy designs you can build with impressive performance. Plenty of videos here on YT for both.
Slant's printers they make themselves use these.
@@getlostinit3D Yes, I've seen the ringing on their prints. 😂
Nice video, and I see where you are coming from. But coming from a design engineering background I find 3d printing and mass production is hard to accept in a single sentence. As a designer, be careful not to get caught by the all I have is a hammer, so everything looks like a nail. As soon as you can justify the up front costs, things like injection molding make an incredible difference. As handy as 80-20 extrusions are, they are really expensive and time consuming to use. A good example of what I am talking about is the difference between the Prusa printers and the Bambu Labs P1P.
We are the largest mass production 3D Printing farm on the planet. We do have some experience.
@@slant3d I certainly would not doubt your experience. I'm a retired EE, in my career mass production was >10K units per month. Anything less than that was just considered production or pre-production.
This is a great video summarizing why we really do need to flip the paradigm when fabbing 3D printed parts and proactively consider the end goal with a conscious eye on the additive method versus other methods. I would, however, disagree that this particular part redesign is uniquely enabled by 3D printing... It is in fact a fairly simple aluminum part to machine with a small desktop CNC or even a manual mill with a bit more work. Not to say that this negates the first point at all.
Good talk
Reminds me of an infomercial... But wait... there's more, if you order now you get...
Is it possible to do 4 corners with this? I believe it is almost impossible to fit the last corner
This is a good point, if you do 4 corners and want to remove just one it is a problem. Obviously you can remove 2 and slide the whole side away but you may have to disassemble more than you want if more parts are connected to the side you have to remove.
Yes, you just do the last two together at the same time. What's hard is the triangle version of this.
Your desing block some areas of the profile so it has upsides but also down sides :)
Our organization, in the aerospace sector, has been an early adapter of addittive manufacturing and recognizes the paridyme shift taking place. And while we've used it to do a number of things related to our processes, I learned something I hadn't seriously considered from your talk.
The use of it to build elements of the actual assembly.lines and related mfg equipment I hadn't considered -- been to fixated on producing product hardware -- shame on me -- the supply chain opportunities are huge.
But I was wondering why you didn't mention the increasing number of materials which can be used -- especially the various metals. Also, an other point you difn'tt mention, at least in thr one video I watched, was the fact that you can print things which couldn't be produced prior. Ex, parts consisting of indivual elements combined and interlocked in ways which couldn't be done unless printed as a whole. To illustrate a simple example, you could figuratively build a model of a ship insude a bottle. i'm sure we'll be rinting glass elements sime day!
I feel like some of the brackets shown off could avoid supports if you used arc overhangs
I don't understand why it's better to print it tip-of-the-triangle on the plate. The piece is going to take the same "space" on the plate, so it won't allow for more pieces on the plate. Can you explain ?
'Better' is related to the process of how the part is manufactured, not to the design process of where the material is placed within a part. When filament flows from the extruder its uniformly molten, and cools along the filament length uniformly. So within a layer the strength of the material is the strongest, just as strong as it would be if the material was injection molded.
However, between layers the molten filament is making contact with solid (cooled) material. The bond between solid (cold) and molten (hot) material will be much weaker.
The issue with bonding strength between layers is not unique to plastics, metal bonding faces similar issues. Metal parts after being welded are reheated and then quickly cooled. This 'annealing' is a heat treatment process which alters the microstructure of a material to change its mechanical properties. (very common with steel) An annealing process can't be used with common plastics, as heating will cause the part to deform before it reaches a temperature where layer bonds would be strengthened.
There have been some 'experiments' where 3d-prints are packed in sand, with some variation of results with small parts. This sand packing process effectively turns a 3d-printed part into a molded part, will lots of extra prep, cleanup and labor.
For mass production, the parts need to reliably separate from the bed
They work with automatic ejection of parts, the amount of parts they make per print doesnt matter. To make autoejection relaible they want little surface area sticking on the plate.
The optimal design is cost-effective and quick to assemble and those are certainly advantages but it eliminates the aluminium-on-aluminium joints that the standard brackets support. If you make a frame with these as joints, it's going to be mechanically weaker than the standard brackets, because those allow one piece of aluminium extrusion to sit on another. You can get around that by getting rid of the chamfer feature and leaving a right angle though, that way the aluminium can still rest on more aluminium. I'd go a bit further and add a dimple to act as a drill guide, so that you can drill through with a hand drill and put a screw through one bar into the end of the other. The plastic will give stability and a degree of precision but you still get the strength of metal joints.
Well yes, but you actually overlooked a big piece: infill.
The type and orientation of infill also makes a huge difference and is part of only additive manufacturing. For the L-Bracket i would try cubic infill.
@3:41 why is having a large contact area on the build plate a negative?
In this part in particular, if the part is facing downwards there is no support material needed and you’d possibly have a smoother surface facing outwards (if the aesthetics was a consideration)
Pardon my armature/no0b ignorance. Lol
Small contact is more reliably ejectable in an automated manner, and less likely to warp.
I think in practice, there is sweet spot with how large the contact area is. For my parts where I'm pushing to build very small, the problem I often face is that the contact area is so small the part tips over or lift up. But if you have a really large part, with lots of contact area warping is a problem, and depending on your print surface you might have hard times removing the part.
@@daliasprints9798 Ah, that makes sense.
Excellent design process lesson. Even thought I know the importance of layer orientation in 3d-printing, the design process walk through in this video really stressed how important this concept is as part of ones "design process thinking". (not the slicing/print process)
A realization I had while watching is layer orientation is not always clear in a design. Not seen in CAD view like at 1:55, while (slider?) image at 1:20 layers are more clearly visible. Often with a multi-part CAD file, individual part print orientation may not be provided. The ability to even set a part print orientation property varies with CAD software, and may require designers to create a print perspective view of a products parts. Often print design orientation is accomplished in slicer software, separate from the CAD definition. It would be helpful if CAD software had a layer orientation property that displayed layers as a gradient, or a rainbow of shades. (even if just an optional view) Particularly with multi-component designs.
It would be helpful indeed - although a good rule of thumb is that the positive Z axis is pointing up. That's how most slicers and 3D printers work; the X and Y axis are parallel to the bed and the Z axis is perpendicular.
3:36 - I'm curious as to why having a lot of surface area for something that small on the build plate is problematic? I generally don't have problems until I start making prints that fill most of the plate; for something as small as that I generally don't have any problems.
I suspect the idea there is that it's easier to automatically eject a part when it has a smaller contact area.
Don't worry about that for hobby printing. The reason you would want minimal contact is for MASS PRODUCTION. This video is describing how to optimize the bracket for mass production, though most of his points apply to home printing. They need the parts to easily come apart from the build plate consistently
@@JohnLattanzio98 most slicers will still take it as an exclusion zone so this doesn't really make sense. In fact it may be worse since overhangs can be a problem, requiring the printer to slow down.
@@brisance generally for home printing you want MORE contact, but with mass production at the end of each print the nozzle moves forward and pushes the print off. They need to be sure that the part will come off, so the nozzle isnt digging into the part
@@JohnLattanzio98 guess it doesn't sit well with me that a toolhead is intentionally crashing into the print to get it off the plate. Loads of bad things could happen e.g. heatbreak bending, parts going not where they're supposd to. But hey, who am I to judge? 😅
Where can I d/l the files?
try and assemble a square, or modify the bracket for a cube and assemble that, this will show where the problem will come in with this bracket, there is an easy fix of coarse 😊
STL?
Please stop saying various parts are impossible to make with injection molding, blowmolding, extrusion, etc. It's perfectly fine, and far more accurate to say they are generally more difficult/expensive/complicated, and therefore only used in applications where they are warranted. Saying they are impossible makes you look bad to people who have experience designing and manufacturing such "impossible" parts. Engineers are clever people. They can do remarkable things with a little careful thought and creative execution.
This part is impossible to mold. Physics.
@@slant3d Which part, exactly? And which kind of molding? There are lots of ways to manufacture parts, plastic and otherwise. Engineering.
You also have to take into consideration the plastic you're using to print structural pieces like this PLA will conform to stress yes even with carbon fiber it just takes longer PETG is too flexible so you need to print this out of ABS for a long-term solution. Don't believe me install this and torque the bolts with a torque wrench then wait a month then come back and torque them again and you will find it is loose.
very cool but you forgot to talk about the price...
I apologize, I missed the part where you supported the argument that you could mass produce parts with 3d printing and do it cost effectively. I agree that you can do things with 3d printing that are unique vs injection moulding but I don't follow how you could mass produce them cost effectively when considering speed and energy.
The biggest difference is design revision and part changeover. Instead of waiting on new molds to be manufactured for a revised product, the gcode is simply updated. Changeovers are effectively a single button, rather than requiring someone to remove molds, cleaning out the machine, doing other maintenance tasks to ensure proper function, test pieces, and so on.
After the initial few test prints, it would generally be considered reliable enough to come back to the gcode in the future without modification
It can also be adapted for a three-pointed corner... whatever that's called..
I'd raise that the last bracket is probably less stiff than the other solutions (has more wiggle room).
3.45 no no its good more surface on the building plate
Incorrect
I loved the video, but you cannot just say that any of these designs are stronger than any other without proper scientific testing... you're kind of speculating.... but honestly I liked how you're describing designing for additive manufacturing in an incremental fun way.... my suggestion is to try testing all of them with other manufacturing techniques and then draw your conclusions... Other than that I enjoyed your video
I would say it's based on experience. 3D printed parts is weakest when the force is directed in line with layer lines.
So he is doing the statements based on massive amounts of general expertise on the area.
"And machining", shows a picture of a laser cutter lol
Which is machining btw. We could've also shown a 3D Printer or literally any piece of manufacturing equitpment that creates a part with a toolhead
@@slant3d No, laser cutting is not machining. Machining is specifically a subtractive manufacturing method involving a blade of some sort.
Cutting items out with a laser cutter, water jet, scissors, whatever is not considered subtractive.
Not so good if your making cube though
what about corner brackets?
Interesting idea but it absolutely is not as strong as the corner brackets, plus aluminium brackets will always be stronger and are easier to come by. I think 3D printed parts should not be used for structural parts unless unavoidable. Remember that PLA, ABS and PETG all have creep rates.
I think this is a bad example of a part to mass produce using 3d printing, its not unique and its not better than the alternative.
The problem isn’t that 3d printing is bad, it’s that both sheet metal and injection molding are so cheap and useful it’s just hard to beat them.
I would imagine the brackets are intended to be used in low-load applications (see their custom made printers for example). The result would be precise and accurate enough to make a reasonably strong printer frame or some other low force CNC (like hotwire foam cutters or foam routers if you were making lost material molds for cast aluminum). I have found PETG to be very reasonable in strength (remembering that it is plastic) and I have made some pretty reliable brackets for miscellaneous things.
You're right, there is 0% chance this is stronger. You now have no overlap on the extruded aluminum and you're relying solely on 3d printed material for the precision and strength of this frame. If it has extruded aluminum frame to begin with, then there is some sort of stresses being put into the frame. Over time,the standard filament materials will deform due to either heat, or pressure. It's literally cutting corners like this that makes some 3d printers so unwieldily to use. Robust, rigid, solid base/frames are essential to any CNC type machines. This is intentionally making a mediocre product and adding higher costs for your customers in the long run so you can save pennies now. There are some places plastic just doesn't belong.
You totally glossed over why you don't want the part to have too much contact with the build plate, and so you don't want to print it diagonal face down. What is the actual reason?
harder auto ejection
Regardless of how-ever you beef up that bracket any 3D part will eventually fail (for several reaons, like matertial desnity (not fill lol) or crap filament)... And if its for "mass production" why not make a die? Lastly, make something ridgid does not always make it stronger!
Absolutely none of that makes any sense at all
or you could just print it sideways without support material lol 1:40
You should really watch the entire video
Optimal ? I don't think so. Why don't you add tongues in the l-square to match the lateral grooves ? Even better you can add snap fit to completely remove the screw. Even even better the snap could apply a pressure on the tongues to strengthen the joint evermore.
This has confusing and misleading info. If you are printing for mass production, the bed will be full and a print will take many hours - don't think you're helping by suggesting objects should have anything less than great contact with the bed. A single failed part could trigger a failed batch and that's a major time loss. Redundancy is helpful, one vs two screws per rail mount is not an upgrade or savings and can decrease stability over time. These extrusions are useful because they can be modded - the final design here hides all 4 sides of the extrusion while only taking advantage of one mounting rail. This is a waste - a waste of plastic, a waste of time printing and a waste of the extrusion since it becomes inaccessible
You should really watch the video witht he sound on.
But why would you want to mass produce anything with 3d printing, that is perfectly manufacturable with standard techniques? I mean, the variation is cool, but using two standard parts that are mass-produced is still cheaper than running a printer for about 20-40 minutes to manufacture that one part solution. Additive manufacturing is wasted on solutions that do not require it. It is incredibly time and energy intensive and just slow when used for big part counts. And all these brackets would be the same, so not even customization would justify it in this case. Also, you just change the task, the different styles of brackets are not better solutions for the same problem, they are solution for different problems. I love additive manufacturing, but it is not some kind of wonder tech. We do not need to reinvent everything just to find a reason to use it. It is fine as it is, and will be used in many different and appropriate applications where it provides wonderfull solutions. But there are still a lot of problems where a simple injection molded part does the trick.
Take a look at a few of our other videos. We explain every one othe points
If you’re going to have mass production, you need many machines. It is well worth considering trading a few of those printers for a laser cutter, it is way faster and uses very strong flat sheets that outperform 3d printed materials. You would design your part accordingly, in this case you would design 2 flat parts that screw to the top and bottom of the joint (these could also be printed) and cut them out in under a minute. Your printer bed may just have reached printing temperature when you laser is already done making 2 parts from a stronger material.
2:30 what??? You absolutely could injection mold that part. Your argument makes no sense. Plants of March larger parts than that get injection molded every day
The walls are too thick. It causes shrinkage in molding that deforms the parts. A variation of it could be molded. But the mold is really quite expensive for a trivial part produced with printing.
Great video, but how can I say this without coming across as ungrateful.... the chewing gum rolling around in your mouth was very distracting.
I literally didn't even notice lol
Laser cut, bend and weld = 1 minute per part on a production line.
3D printed = dozens of minutes per part.
So you're making weaker parts, more slowly and more costly. Still not grasping the concept of mass production economics huh? :D
I've just assembled a table using square tubes and printed corners using these ideas... Then this video came out 🤣
Google knows