|
|
|
My son 3D printed a go pro adaptor plate for his bike helmet, it seems to have lasted a couple of years.
Mike
FireEngine:Talkiet:
it was that they are quite weak in comparison to other methods of production.
Is it really <just> a materials issue though? Or an inherent weakness in the 3D print process per se?
Yes.
It's a combination of the two, PLA isn't exactly the material of choice for fabricating anything that needs to last, and since the 3D printing process trades off resolution for printing time you can either get something that looks awfully 3D printed or takes forever to print. In addition since you can't do solids, unless you're willing to spend forever on some piece, things tend to be kinda brittle. Every 3D printed thing I've seen I felt like I needed to hold it with tweezers.
You can do better with high-end commercial-grade printers, particularly once you start getting into sintering machines which I wouldn't really class as 3D printers any more, but then you're paying the cost of a car or house for one.
Also, I'm somewhat biased, if I need something for active use I'll make it from 6061 aluminium :-).
neb:FireEngine:Yes. It's a combination of the two, PLA isn't exactly the material of choice for fabricating anything that needs to last
Talkiet:
it was that they are quite weak in comparison to other methods of production.
Is it really <just> a materials issue though? Or an inherent weakness in the 3D print process per se?
Really? Where did you get that from? I have a number of things that have been out in the weather for 2+ years, with no visible deterioration (apart from the colour bleaching).
, and since the 3D printing process trades off resolution for printing time you can either get something that looks awfully 3D printed or takes forever to print.
Quite true. However the "3D-printed look" (and weakness of the product) is as much to do with badly configured printers.
In addition since you can't do solids, unless you're willing to spend forever on some piece, things tend to be kinda brittle.
Right. But why would you want to do solids? An object with a truss-structure inside will be lighter, cheaper, and quicker to make. And it can be engineered to be "strong enough", for whatever definition of that you want to use.
Every 3D printed thing I've seen I felt like I needed to hold it with tweezers.
If you come round to my place, I can show you my 3D-printed gate latch mount. (It's been out in the weather for 2 years too). Or numerous 3D-printed items that you can stand on without damaging them. (I can also show you a bunch of stuff that barely hangs together that was printed with a sloppy or badly calibrated printer).
“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996
I have an ultimaker. Occasionally I give it another go, end up disappointed as it peels off the heated bed which the heat is supposed to stop happening, the filament jams and the stupid thing has no idea (even a $20 inkjet can detect if there is no paper) and the slicer is super picky with STLs that the propper 3d printer at work is totally happy to print - things like edges and holes in the model need you to fix it in other gharish ugly crash prone software that does that thing where they make it for multiple platforms so it works poorly on all of them.
richms:
... and the slicer is super picky with STLs that the propper 3d printer at work is totally happy to print ...
Um... why don't you just use the same slicer as you do at work?
Oh, OK.
I have a bunch of different tools I use in different situations; for slicing, mostly Slic3r, occasionally Cura. They've both had regular updates over the last couple of years.
|
|
|