Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

better base

Expand Messages
  • Graham Stabler
    Attached is an idea for a structure to be used for 3D prints done on resin based printers. The idea is that it is simple, modular and has lots of area to get a
    Message 1 of 7 , Feb 9, 2013
    Attached is an idea for a structure to be used for 3D prints done on resin based printers. The idea is that it is simple, modular and has lots of area to get a grip on the build platform while resisting warping more than a solid base. The warping can cause the edges of the base to peel during printing which can end in disaster or bad printing results.

    I'm thinking you could use this sort of idea in several ways, import into your cad and use manually or it could be generated in the printer software for a fixed bed of nails type support.

    Alternatively I am guessing the network of connected points could be much less rigid so they can be where they are needed or perhaps the supports themselves can be bent or even tree like.

    Just putting some ideas forward, not sure this is a great idea, I will try and print something like this when I get a chance though and see how it fairs.

    Cheers,

    Graham


  • joan raven
    Very nice idea!!This will be nice if it s generated in the printing software, working hand o hand with the generation of supports. Being modular (following a
    Message 2 of 7 , Feb 9, 2013
      Very nice idea!!
      This will be nice if it's generated in the printing software, working hand o hand with the generation of supports. Being modular (following a hexagons pattern), u can use as hexagons as the bounday of the object for example.

      In my case I discovered that:

      In my printer (It's a top-down system), I NEVER use a big rectangle as a attachment layer, this cause always the peeling of one corner. Instead I print directly with the supports, they stick properly, and there are less surface to be peeled. So my attachment layers are a pattern of dots always.


      I think your idea it can be implemented with a lots of success, It can improve a lot the attachment process.

      GOOD JOB!!!!


      To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
      From: grezmos@...
      Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 13:22:56 +0000
      Subject: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] better base [1 Attachment]

       
      [Attachment(s) from Graham Stabler included below] Attached is an idea for a structure to be used for 3D prints done on resin based printers. The idea is that it is simple, modular and has lots of area to get a grip on the build platform while resisting warping more than a solid base. The warping can cause the edges of the base to peel during printing which can end in disaster or bad printing results.

      I'm thinking you could use this sort of idea in several ways, import into your cad and use manually or it could be generated in the printer software for a fixed bed of nails type support.

      Alternatively I am guessing the network of connected points could be much less rigid so they can be where they are needed or perhaps the supports themselves can be bent or even tree like.

      Just putting some ideas forward, not sure this is a great idea, I will try and print something like this when I get a chance though and see how it fairs.

      Cheers,

      Graham



    • Graham Stabler
      Yes the idea was that hexagons could be removed (or generated) as required to cover the area under the model. Thinking about it though, I am not sure that the
      Message 3 of 7 , Feb 9, 2013
        Yes the idea was that hexagons could be removed (or generated) as required to cover the area under the model.

        Thinking about it though, I am not sure that the hexagons should be connected as they are, perhaps if they were tiled but not connected it would reduce the chance of warpage even further, it would need a different design though. This would be a bit like just putting supports straight on to the build platform except each support would have its own base.

        Graham

        On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 5:32 PM, joan raven <jonichk@...> wrote:
         

        Very nice idea!!
        This will be nice if it's generated in the printing software, working hand o hand with the generation of supports. Being modular (following a hexagons pattern), u can use as hexagons as the bounday of the object for example.

        In my case I discovered that:

        In my printer (It's a top-down system), I NEVER use a big rectangle as a attachment layer, this cause always the peeling of one corner. Instead I print directly with the supports, they stick properly, and there are less surface to be peeled. So my attachment layers are a pattern of dots always.


        I think your idea it can be implemented with a lots of success, It can improve a lot the attachment process.

        GOOD JOB!!!!
      • joan raven
        Yes, I think this will be the definitive solution. Much better if the hexagons are not interconnected.I Will try my next print with this solution, I will let
        Message 4 of 7 , Feb 9, 2013
          Yes, I think this will be the definitive solution. Much better if the hexagons are not interconnected.
          I Will try my next print with this solution, I will let you know (I'm printing intensively this days). But I'll just model this pattern and putting the supports by hand in my modeling package....but I'm sure this gonna work really nice (for my experience)


          To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
          From: grezmos@...
          Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 17:41:06 +0000
          Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] better base

           
          Yes the idea was that hexagons could be removed (or generated) as required to cover the area under the model.

          Thinking about it though, I am not sure that the hexagons should be connected as they are, perhaps if they were tiled but not connected it would reduce the chance of warpage even further, it would need a different design though. This would be a bit like just putting supports straight on to the build platform except each support would have its own base.

          Graham

          On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 5:32 PM, joan raven <jonichk@...> wrote:
           

          Very nice idea!!
          This will be nice if it's generated in the printing software, working hand o hand with the generation of supports. Being modular (following a hexagons pattern), u can use as hexagons as the bounday of the object for example.

          In my case I discovered that:

          In my printer (It's a top-down system), I NEVER use a big rectangle as a attachment layer, this cause always the peeling of one corner. Instead I print directly with the supports, they stick properly, and there are less surface to be peeled. So my attachment layers are a pattern of dots always.


          I think your idea it can be implemented with a lots of success, It can improve a lot the attachment process.

          GOOD JOB!!!!

        • Jon Elson
          ... I think this is what some commercial systems do, they put down a grid of dots, hexagons or squares, then build short rods up from that, then place a
          Message 5 of 7 , Feb 9, 2013
            Graham Stabler wrote:
            >
            >
            > Yes the idea was that hexagons could be removed (or generated) as
            > required to cover the area under the model.
            >
            > Thinking about it though, I am not sure that the hexagons should be
            > connected as they are, perhaps if they were tiled but not connected it
            > would reduce the chance of warpage even further, it would need a
            > different design though. This would be a bit like just putting
            > supports straight on to the build platform except each support would
            > have its own base.
            >
            I think this is what some commercial systems do, they put down a grid of
            dots, hexagons or
            squares, then build short rods up from that, then place a grid-like
            floor, and then build
            the model up from that grid. So, the shrinkage-induced stress from the
            platform to
            the floor is allowed to deform those first rods in a gentle manner, so
            as to not
            overstress the attachment to the platform.

            Jon
          • Light77
            I use a checker pattern because I want to minimize the exposure time. A hex pattern has six sides compared to a square with four. In order to cure non
            Message 6 of 7 , Feb 9, 2013
              I use a checker pattern because I want to minimize the exposure time. A hex pattern has six sides compared to a square with four. In order to cure non connecting edgers you would need three exposures with a hex as opposed to a square which has two.
              -Ron

              On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Jon Elson <elson@...> wrote:
               

              Graham Stabler wrote:
              >
              >
              > Yes the idea was that hexagons could be removed (or generated) as
              > required to cover the area under the model.
              >
              > Thinking about it though, I am not sure that the hexagons should be
              > connected as they are, perhaps if they were tiled but not connected it
              > would reduce the chance of warpage even further, it would need a
              > different design though. This would be a bit like just putting
              > supports straight on to the build platform except each support would
              > have its own base.
              >
              I think this is what some commercial systems do, they put down a grid of
              dots, hexagons or
              squares, then build short rods up from that, then place a grid-like
              floor, and then build
              the model up from that grid. So, the shrinkage-induced stress from the
              platform to
              the floor is allowed to deform those first rods in a gentle manner, so
              as to not
              overstress the attachment to the platform.

              Jon


            • Graham Stabler
              Then perhaps triangles would be even better :) Can we have a look at what your base looks like? Graham
              Message 7 of 7 , Feb 10, 2013
                Then perhaps triangles would be even better :)

                Can we have a look at what your base looks like?

                Graham



                On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Light77 <light77@...> wrote:
                 

                I use a checker pattern because I want to minimize the exposure time. A hex pattern has six sides compared to a square with four. In order to cure non connecting edgers you would need three exposures with a hex as opposed to a square which has two.
                -Ron

                On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Jon Elson <elson@...> wrote:
                 

                Graham Stabler wrote:
                >
                >
                > Yes the idea was that hexagons could be removed (or generated) as
                > required to cover the area under the model.
                >
                > Thinking about it though, I am not sure that the hexagons should be
                > connected as they are, perhaps if they were tiled but not connected it
                > would reduce the chance of warpage even further, it would need a
                > different design though. This would be a bit like just putting
                > supports straight on to the build platform except each support would
                > have its own base.
                >
                I think this is what some commercial systems do, they put down a grid of
                dots, hexagons or
                squares, then build short rods up from that, then place a grid-like
                floor, and then build
                the model up from that grid. So, the shrinkage-induced stress from the
                platform to
                the floor is allowed to deform those first rods in a gentle manner, so
                as to not
                overstress the attachment to the platform.

                Jon



              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.