TESTING 3D printed INFILL PATTERNS for their STRENGTH
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ก.ค. 2018
- Let's crush some 3D printed infill pattern and test which is the strongest!
💚 Support me 💚
Patreon: / cnckitchen
Join as a TH-cam member!
Original CNC Kitchen Threaded Inserts: geni.us/CNCKInsertsChoice
Merch: teespring.com/stores/cnckitchen
Buy an Original Prusa i3 printer: geni.us/CNCKPrusa
PayPal: www.paypal.me/CNCKitchen
Shop at Matterhackers(US): www.matterhackers.com/?aff=7479
Shop at 3DJake(EU): geni.us/zHvnB
🎙Check out my PODCAST with Tom Sanladerer
/ @themeltzone
⚙ My gear (Affiliate Links):
🎥 CAMERAS & LENSES
Panasonic GH5 - Professional 4k60 camera: geni.us/LMN0CmS
Panasonic GX80/GX85 - Great value system camera: geni.us/M2Sm
10-25mm f1.4 - Awesome Lense: geni.us/ZTBH
30mm f2.8 macro - Great Macro Lense: geni.us/vEwqD
12-35mm f2.6 - Great allround lense: geni.us/S9GOsr
14-140mm f3.5-5.6 - My go-to travel lense: geni.us/fSAyKo
25mm f1.4 - Nice prime for photoraphy: geni.us/mqWM
🎙AUDIO
Rode Video Mic Pro - Shotgun mic: geni.us/6JFRdJ
Rode Film Maker Kit - Wireless mic: geni.us/XMD2N
Rode NT-USB - Studio Mic: geni.us/YVONvy
🔴 LIVE STREAMING
Elgatoo Stream Deck: geni.us/ppIiAL
Elgatoo HDMI USB Capture Card: geni.us/imhD
Logitech C920 - Overhead camera: geni.us/ViVgB
Building my compression test rig: • Machining a Compressio...
Performance on infill and perimerters: • INFILL pattern and SHE...
🏆 Do you want to help me cover my running costs? Send me a dollar or two over PayPal, it helps me a lot!
www.paypal.me/CNCKitchen
🌼 Even watching the ads before my videos helps me a lot!
Follow me on Twitter: / cnc_kitchen - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![[Vowel]물고기는 물에서 살아야 해🐟🤣Fish have to live in the water #funny](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3G9MH063Cx4/mqdefault.jpg)
![[TH] 2024 PMSL SEA W1D4 | Summer | ละเอียดทุกเม็ด เพื่อเข้าไปเก็บคะแนน](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/W6i3u5r1Vbw/mqdefault.jpg)
video: "Rectilinear is a good pattern, has good strength and low print times, and has a small distance between lines to improve top layers"
me: "yea but gyroid looks sick"
you are so superficial hahaha
Get well soon
@@joshuak4553 LOL
Also video: "gyroid is nearly as good, tho while it takes longer, check out how sick it looks!"
Really? I found that gyro I’d and honey comb is the fastest, and slight strnghther
I can't belive someone would do that much reserch, way to go, you're saving everyone else tons of time and efort!
The only usefull part of video was time and weight measurements on a pretty colored chart. Due to his hardware limitation, no trustworthy and relevant data. Amateurs level
@@venom999971 Produce something better my higher than average friend.
@@Aethelbeorn this is the time, you have to chose, either you go for ego or for truth.
@@venom999971 perhaps provide your input on improvements. If you are such an advanced printer everyone would surely learn more from you.
@@ruzzcraze1862 you have enough context, decide for yourself to agree or not.
I am Russian and my knowlege of english so worst, but understanding german accent so easier than native english speech. I am glad I found this channel, because in russian wery little information about 3D printing. Thanks for your work. Спасибо!
Братаны, смотреть тяжко, а в инглише сосу прям что трындец. Какой вариант самый эффективный то? Тот что в виде волнистой синусоиды?
@@Kard1n1 Самая эффективная в плане материала прямоугольная сетка, а самый крепкий во всех направлениях гироид.
I englixh
I wurt
@@Kard1n1 треугольники
In mother russia does 3d printers print you.
A test of bending strength might be interesting - print a beam and load it in the middle. This tests both tensile and compressive strength.
I'd be very much interested in seeing that as well, seeing as I've been playing with the idea of printing my own rear fender struts(non loadbearing) for my motorcycle.
JonzuihGaming I agree with this.
Well, I have been watching this since he put it out but I now have a reason to switch so I just asked him "Stefan, which of these would be the best for a bending type force? I am
thinking of the Z axis on a CNC router where the spindle/router will be pushing, and pulling, on the plate that holds the tool and I can't figure out which would be best to use." I look at all of these and I really don't know. What I do know is Gyroid almost tore my machine up with 50% being used.
Bending strength, shearing strength and torsional strength are all properties I am particularly interested in.
Yes, please do a bending test and please throw a solid wall (only shells) in there as well. I have been searching all over and cannot get a good answer on what to use. For example, think of a drawer that has long unsupported walls that could be 12" long and maybe 5" tall and only has 3-5 mm walls. What method what best prevent flexing/bending of the walls?
I'm glad you decided to do the test with some outside walls and not just pure infill. Thank you, as always, for your time and effort in making these videos.
This video has me thinking I should be using grid rather than rectilinear.
Whenever I think, I wonder X about 3d printing across variables. I know CNC Kitchen will have a video about it.
*Gyroids: Perfectly balanced, as all things should be.*
Gyroid
Beside that it kills cheap printers..
I'm getting an ender 3 v2 and I was pre slicing a bunch of stuff I'm gonna print with gyroid 5% infill do you think I'll be fine I don't wanna rescale and slice everything
@@alexunderhay6185 might be to late but yeah you should be just fine
@@pivorsc why would it be any different than printing anything else?
I'm a huge fan of your videos. Really appreciate the scientific approach. Reminds me of my youth lol. Much of the work I did for my master's degree in mechanical engineering involved compressive strength tests of different formulations of Portland cement.
One trick I would suggest if you're reaching the force limit of your machine is to scale the sample down. If a 2cm cube failed at 350kg, a 1cm cube would fail at around 90kg. You could make all samples out of that so you can still compare. I would also suggest upping infill to 15-20 percent to emphasize more the infill differences and minimise the effect of the perimeters.
Since you asked at the end what we would like to see, I have some ideas. I would like to see a test of stiffness/rigidity (Young's modulus) of the different patterns. When I squeeze a part with rectilinear infill between my fingers I feel more flex/give than the same part with hexagonal/honeycomb infill. One way to test this would be to print a 2cm calibration cube and then press a 1cm cylinder into the center of the cube's faces (top and side faces) so that you're stressing the infill rather than the perimeters. Measure the stress, strain, and ultimate strength and the results should show which is more rigid.
Another test I'd like to see between rectilinear, grid and honeycomb is a simple 3-point bending test (x3 variations, them being with layers oriented in X, Y and Z directions), and lastly a cantilever test with one end of the beam clamped rigidly and the other end loaded with your tester to produce a force-displacement graph. Then just plot the results of all the patterns on the same graph and it will be easy to see which is the most and least flexible.
Hope some of this inspires your next video! Thank you for your work!
Another small tip I learnt from experience. Before you commit to making a collection of samples, make just one and test it to see how the equipment handles it so you can fine-tune at the beginning. So if for example you decide to do my 3-point bending idea, you'd print just one bar and load it up. If you notice you're close to hitting the displacement limit on your tester, you would revise the bar to make it taller. If you're close to hitting the force limit of your tester you could increase the distance between the bottom supports or decrease the Y-dimension (width) of the bar. After 2 or 3 iterations you'll have a specimen design and test protocol that's comfortably in the middle of your machine's range of limits for displacement, force etc. Then you can proceed to make the 20+ identical samples for the real test and be confident that you're getting the best possible data from them.
A 3-point bending test would be nice to see with 2 cm x 2 cm x 20 cm or 2,5 cm x 2,5 cm x 20 cm bars.
Crushing small cubes with huge force is not very sensible. It does not reflect real world conditions.
LMF5000 you spent too mutch time 4 8 likes
Yes the bending tests I would be particularly interested in. I've just printed a spool holder for the 3D printing nerd competition and my design is practically a long beam and I really wanted to optimise strength/weight. Most of the bending resistance comes from the walls but I did use triangular infill as that acts like an internal truss structure for the beam and I'm fairly sure that is the best infill under that loading condition.
Up to this point I have been using just triangular infill for its inherent rigidity and strength, although I may start using line or rectilinear as that is quicker and produces a higher part quality for everyday objects and actually has a similar if not higher strength/print-time ratio (also I've been limited to lower layer heights because the flow rate on my printer is limited atm so pillowing on the top layers is more apparent).
Another test which would be interesting although not hugely applicable to everyday objects, would be a shear loading test. Take a 1.5cmx1.5cmx4cm oblong and create a shear load along its long axis. Fix one side down a produce a shear load on the opposite side with different infill patterns and orientations. I would guess that triangular infill would be strongest there as well.
'scale the sample down'. On the other hand scaling the sample down would make the side wall strength dominate the test over the infill even more. Even a 2cm sample is already a little small for this sort of testing, but it is representative of a lot of 3D prints. Much better would be to keep the sample at 2cm and simply change the mechanical arrangement a bit to give it 2x the advantage so it has enough leverage to break the sample within the range of measurement, and simply double the number of kg shown on the scale.
Dear Stephan Really thank you for this technical videos, so far that I know off no one is doing or at least publishing results with different infills, walls, materials etc. In my humble opinion they are invaluable source of knowledge, work and information you are sharing with your followers. Keep the good work!!!
Wow. So much work too do the tests. Great job and thank you.
My first printer is on order and I'm gathering as much useful information before I start. I had no idea that there would be such a large difference in print speed depending on the style of infill using the same about of material. Thanks for taking the time to do this, it's very helpful.
Gyroid Infill + Gradient Infill + Non-Planar Slicing would be a perfect combination in my opinion. I would also suggest doing some bending tests to simultaneously test tensile and compressive strength, as well as some shear strength tests.
It would be awesome if you could also use a hybrid infill that changes the infill pattern and ratio based on the location in the part and what kinds of stresses those locations would experience.
I appreciate your video; as always, very informative. One item to further discuss is paths crossing on infill patterns. They can potentially create buildup on the nozzle (I notice a lot with Triangular in S3D) whereas honeycomb the pathing never cross over each other on the same layer but alternate every other layer (similar to rectilinear).
I'd love to see a comparison of these infill patterns with *flexible* Filament, especially in wheels where uniform dampening/strength of the pattern is important for smooth operation. The Gyroid pattern looks promising for that application
You should also test infill strength on 45° angle
Your dedication to a rigorous scientific testing method, even ensuring they are all roughly the same mass, is fantastic. Keep up the great work!
These are my favorite videos. I appreciate them!
I'm Dutch and it's really easy to follow your explanation in this video! so compliments for that!
and this video was very interesting to watch and this subject is very important for 3D printing.
thanks a lot for this video👍
Super job, as always! Thx for all your hard work. Your efforts are a big benefit to the 3D-printing community. Keep up the awesomeness:)...
P.S. You seem like a very genuine person, Stefan. I would like to meet you, someday. Tschüß...
Nice video Stefan! I added this to the list but it's clear that it can be removed because you've covered it nicely. What we talked about fits nicely as a followup to this.
Thanks! Was looking for a good speed vs strength vs density discussion and that was all covered very nicely here. Finally getting a new printer which has all the fancy infill patterns in the default slicer. Before I was using a pretty basic slicer because I hate to update them and mess with bugs etc...
Super cool I really liked how you tested for so many different results and did the material usage calculations.
Thank you Stefan. Most interesting and educated me as to changing my infill setting. 🖖
Great and very informative video! Thank you for taking the time!
Thanks for this video Stefan! I have been using honeycomb since I got my Prusa, since it looked strong, but seeing the print time compared to other infill methods I’ll be switching now!!! As you said, rectilinear for aesthetic parts and gyroid for strength seems like a great compromise between speed/strength! Thanks again for your work testing!
Excellent work a always. Personally, very few of my prints are only loaded in compression. The vast majority are in tension or torsion, So I would love to see these tests done as well for infill patterns.
tension -> increase the perimeter count (& top/bottom layers) and 0% infill (or very low) is the best from my tests
Thanks for the tips, I'll give them a try. Very interesting that you're limiting your infill so much. I normally bump up both shells and infill to help stiffness (though I know infill only helps so much in these cases)
Well done again Stefan for these meticulously performed tests that help the rest of the world! Thanks a lot.
I was surprised about the gyroid structure performing the same in either direction because it's to be expected that the perpendicular directions have more strength from the walls in that orientation.
Very comprehensive analysis - well done!
Your patience and thoroughness while conducting these tests is excellent, keep it up :)
gratulations on 30.000 subs
I'm mostly using cubic infill in the Cura slicer. Decent strength in all directions for non-structural parts. (mini figures for games.)
Your are the best! I subbed. Thank you so much. I have ben looking for this type of video for forever!
That gyroid pattern is definitely the coolest looking pattern for sure.
I saw this video at the beginning of 2023 and I recently made some “art pieces” that display just the infill of my designs, inspired by what you did here. The most difficult of these pieces that I am *trying* to execute is an 8” sphere with 0 perimeters and .25% gyroid infill. It looks like a giant potato chip, on a raft lol. I have been unsuccessful with this one so far, but i will figure out the tuning eventually. Maybe you can pull it off 😅😉
Thank you for the great videos 🙌🏻
Brilliant video. This totally confirmed what I believed just through printing stuff and having it fail/succeed.
I'm liking PrusaSlicer's "adaptive cubic" infill more and more, to the point where it's now my profile default. Strong yet fast. You can set the density fairly high, the cubic infill density is high near the exterior surfaces, but more open and hollow in the middle. The algorithm seems to be testing whether a larger hollow cube would fit without interference, and if so, it makes the largest hollow cube that fits.
it helps me somuch! thank you for introducing so much! herzlichen vielen Dank.
Great work! Very useful information.
I would've liked to see what the percentage values were for each infill to get a consistent weight for each sample. Also is the print time comparison with or without that percentage adjustment.
Nice! Your videos are always edutaining
Your videos are a great help for everyone. Very concise and informative
Cubic is my default infill choice, speedwise is usually very similar to rectilinear. I only use rectilinear when the shape is not a good fit for cubic, like spherical parts. I am curious about what drive your choice of gyroid over cubic. Was it only aesthetics? What are the speed diffences? Which supports the top surfaces better? Which uses more filament (if you disregard the tuning to have same wight)?
Wow, nice project 👍
Thanks for sharing 😀👍
Thank you for doing the test work. Your work helps me a ton when I am doing my projects. I am printing gaming pedals. Something i've noticed is that the cubic performs better when you have stress concentrations. My shaft for pedal was failing at cantilever joint with gyroid for ~50 % infill. But with cubic, held up good. Gyroid is still my go to option though.
Thanks dude, this was super informative! I'm still just waiting for my first to arrive, an Artillery Sidewinder X1, but I'm trying to learn as much as possible ahead of time haha
DIY enthusiasts NEED these. Awsome work!
bester Mann ohne Witz, durch deine Videos lern ich so viel mehr als von den anderen videos auf youtube
I like the way you think everything through, great job and great video!!
You are very cool! A great experiment. And excellent work. Thank you for your efforts.
Thank you for the great video. Would love to see a test like this done for cantilever. Thinking of 3-D pattern might be best but not sure.
Video as great as always. I think that it will be really interesting also to check how different infills influence stability of deformations (depending on direction of compression and elongation) of some elastic and semi elastic materials. And how they modify elasticity of printer models.
Danke schön for sharing your expertise, Stefan.
WHat a professional review and experiment. THank you so much!
Thanks to your research we know that more perimeter will equate to better strength, but would there be any difference in strength if we keep the overall perimeter width the same, but change the nozzle diameters? 6 perimeters with 0.4mm nozzle will gives us 2.4mm overall thickness of the wall. With 0.6mm nozzle we only need 4 perimeters. With 0.8mm nozzle 3 perimeters.
I tested changeing nozzle diameters for walls and infill and unfortunatelly you get equal-more strenght( with equal thickness) but it print times are only 1-2% faster.
Bravo, I'm subscribing - I've been wondering for a while.
Excellent information and presentation!
Brilliant, Thanks Mate.
Thanks for your impressive work man! Very usefull.
@CNC Kitchen I would love to see a compressive test like this but for different filament types. I have a use case where I want to print bicycle pedal cleat shims which will be under repetitive cyclical load and I have no idea where to start to choose a filament. When ever I am looking for 3d printing test based answers I always start with you! Thank you for the great work.
gyroid is my go-to infill for most of my usable things. It seems to have less "tears" in between layers as the extruder as the extruder moves over. And it looks pretty slick when printing ;)
Yeah with my huge moving bed I'm definitely moving away from fast honeycomb and going for this.
I think it would be very interesting for you to perform the same experiment with a relevant flexible filament, say Ninja flex @ 85A shore hardness. Analyzing both the stretching and compression properties of the printed parts based on the various infills. Thanks for all the amazing videos and keep up the great work Stefan!
very interesting! I tested some of these patterns last year and got similar results (of course no gyroids were involved). It was confusing to me that there are a lot of choices but only rectilinear/lines triangle and honeycomb had a significant effect. I´ll be trying out gyroid for sure..for the looks
Another niche benefit of the gyroid that has been relevant to me sometimes; it forms a single connected interior space, which can be important for several reasons, like (temperature induced) pressure changes.
Good point :)
wow this is a lot more in depth and helpful than I was expecting. Thank you for making this. My only comment is that if one doesn't care about strength and wants to optimize for the look of top layers, what you suggested is good, but Cura's "lightning" infill is just better in my opinion. It generates infill basically just as supports put on the inside to make sure the top looks as good as possible while optimizing to use relatively tiny amounts of material. Not sure if a highly similar infill type is available on other slicers, but either way I hope it catches on and becomes a common(and more well explained in the slicer lol) option
Überragend! Danke für das Video. B-)
Excellent as always your tests Stefan. Would be great what infill pattern would work best and what orientation would best absorb impacts with flex filaments. Do you have some video made with this?
Great video Stefan, one other aspect of infill is that it also adds lateral strength, not just crushing or compression strength. I wonder what the results of testing a 10x100x4mm (or pick your dims) part using 3 top, 3 bottom, and 2 wall perimeters might be? Crush strength for me comes into play with screw holes so I normally just increase the wall count to overcome that. Anyway, it'd be very interesting to see the strengths of parts on a longitudinal test. Thanks for your vids! Enjoy them all.
I've been printing my new engineering project and gyroid infill is my absolute favourite... and it just look SO DAMN cool when it prints.
You should do a video on infills effect on part warping. Theoretically, gyroid would reduce the chance of warping with materials like ABS as it doesn't use long straight lines. The idea is that infill patterns with long straight lines would increase internal tension on the part. Would love to see if there is a measurable difference, but I do not have the time to test it as thoroughly as you do in your videos.
The ONLY thing I love about Cura is "infill multiplier". I haven't found a way with Prusa slicer to reproduce this (no, things like extrusion width don't cut it and lead to very different results). Bascially "infill multiplier" makes 2, 3 or more infill lines where there is normally only one. For stability the number of outer shells is king. Infill doesn't matter much. BUT if you use "infill multiplier" (e.g. value of 3, with infill percentage of 15%) you get something like "internal walls". Then increase infill overlap from 30% to 50% or more and those thick inner walls really connect to the outer walls. This is really amazing stuff that nobody uses!
Far out I love your videos. Thank you!
Excelente gracias por tomarte el tiempo con las pruebas y compartir esta informacion.
Excellent and informative video. I shall definitely be using gyroid in future. I would like to see something on printing ABS , namely how to avoid stress cracking / layer separation . I'm doing quite a lot of ABS because of the ease of post-processing to a nice finish, but still struggle with layer separation despite having a good enclosure around the printer. I have managed to minimise this by slicing components into shallower sections and ABS allows for good glue assembly.
Thanks for posting useful and methodical content.
Fantastic vid...thank you so much!
Excellent investigation. Compression from the top versus compression from side to side is a good comparison. In practice, shear can also occur or compression from diagonally opposite edges. I've been using cubic (I use Slic3r) which seems like a good compromise with strength and print time. Sometimes using fillets between external faces works if U- or V-shaped limbs are pulled apart like the wishbone on a chicken. Again, thank you for your research and keep up the good work! Best Regards, Tubewaller
Looking at this video to find out which infill pattern is best for my press-fit pulley extractor.
I initially did Grid at 0.12mm and it snapped in half. Currently doing Lines at 0.16mm
Boy I love this channel.
Thank you for doing this as i have often wondered which was stronger and faster. Cubic seems to be my best choice but i noticed it changes my part dimensions somehow, have you had that happen?
Hi Stefan, I love your Videos. In the near past I saw that in Cura there is now another infill method called "Cubic Subdivision". I would love to see how this infill will compare against the other methods.
well deserved like & subscribe ! Very useful information !!!
Hi Stefan, thank you very much for your great studies. Have you ever checked the effect of infill raster orientation/angle on the flexural strenght of 3D prints? (e.g. if you turn the rectilinear infill by 45°)
Great graph thank you.
Have you ever tried filling the infill volume with epoxy to increase strength of parts? After seeing the infill pattern from the top on a failed part it seems you could use the printed part as the cosmetic and form for a strong epoxy filled core.
Any plans to test torsion, tension, etc on the different infill patterns beside compression?
That would help inform their effectiveness in reinforcing compressed air vessels with minimal loss of actual internal volume.
Nevermind, just had to rewind lol might have been good to put refresher pictures with your recommendations at the end.
This is if you're searching for maximum strength. But sometimes, printing with TPU, you need extra flexibility in Z direction and cannot rotate your part on the bed for some reasons (e.g. tunnels for screws and compartments for nuts). Which infill would you recommend for this particular case? X/Y can be quite soft too, but the purpose is maximum flexibility along the Z axis.
Very useful. Thanks !
Thank you for this.
Damn this is incredible, thanks so much for this video.
I like cubic subdivision the most -- you get the benefits of cubic, with less material in the middle of the part -- similar to your gradient infill, in concept.
Danke mein Herr! Sehr gut video!
this guy is the gold standard of all 3D printing related testing :)
Great video. Useful tests along the primary axes. Any thought towards a test along the diagonals?
On the subject of the MK2 rattling itself apart, I've found that blue thread-locking adhesive works well. The blue stuff's also decently easy to torque free if you want to take the Y carriage apart or remove the gantry for something, and I haven't had to re-tighten the frame in months.
To prevent rattling, maybe reduce acceleration for infill, 2000mm/s²
may be a bit much, I typically reduce it to 1000
amazing work thanks a lot
Cubic, from the first, has been the only infill i have ever used. super awesome.
great video! love the accurate graphs. Your printer prints so beautifully, i have the Prusa Mk3 (original) and my prints are not as good as yours. Please make a video explaining how you get such great prints! (i'm currently rebuilding my HotEnd as i think that was my problem - but it's still it bits so i'd better get back to it!)
Stock settings, Slic3r Prusa Edition and good filament. There isn't actually much more.
very useful and informative video, I would like to see one aimed specifically at gyroid filling to have an effective resistance curve at various filling percentages, for example from 1 to 50%. It could also be useful to understand the optimal formula and achieve significant savings in material and also printing time ...
Hi Stefan,
great work you have done again! I think, one of the main Problems is not the infill itself but the first shell layer on top of it, especially, if it is in the middle of the part (does not stretch from one side to the other). For me, printing time is not the highest priority and neither it is strength. The smotheness of the cover layer is of more importance.
Another interesting variable (for strength and cover layer) is the overlap percentage of perimeter and infill (should be also available in Prusa Slicer Edition).
I don't know, how to fit these two topics into your investigations to get objective results, but I would be very interested in the result.
Thanks again for your great channel.
You can try gradual infill in CURA, that can help with the first top layer. Otherwise it really depends on the slicer and infill. For esthetic parts I usually use rectilinear infill because you get more infill lines per layer as with others.
Stefan, which of these would be the best for a bending type force? I am thinking of the Z axis on a CNC router where the spindle/router will be pushing, and pulling, on the plate that holds the tool and I can't figure out which would be best to use.
Unter den vielen 3D Druck-Videos strahlen diese hervor wie ein Edelstein in einer Kiesgrube. Deutsche Qualität halt. Top.
Among all the 3D Printer Videos, these shine through like a gemstone in a gravel pit. Classic German Quality.
Vielen Dank.