OT: 3D printing

On Tuesday, 21 March 2023 at 15:15:10 UTC, olaf wrote:
> Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote: 
> 
> >I wouldn't expect the same performance as an injected molded 
> >part. But, if it is common enough to be a noteworthy 
> >problem, then I'm probably better off pursuing a different 
> >technology.
> It is possible to print with carbon fiber loaded nylon or PETG if 
> money is not your first problem. 
> 
> Olaf

Yes, but carbon loaded filament is not a win on strength.

On 3/21/2023 2:10 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>>>> Also, does this (?) generality apply to all materials?
>>>> Or, some moreso than others?
>>>
>>> Mostly, yes.  Some have better layer adhesion than others (PETG is
>>> better than PLA, for example, but there are some even better) but it's
>>> rare that it's "as good as injection molded strength".
>>
>> I wouldn't expect the same performance as an injected molded
>> part.  But, if it is common enough to be a noteworthy
>> problem, then I'm probably better off pursuing a different
>> technology.
> 
> You could always make the master part that way and then use the equivalent of 
> lost wax casting to make a conventional mould from it - provided that you obey 
> the rules for a makable part in a convex mould.

Yeah, that's always the problem; the manufacturability of a
particular design requires a commitment to *how* you plan on
manufacturing the item.  So, prototyping on a printer may get
you something to hold and play with -- but, it doesn't get you
any closer to having a manufacturable design.  It's almost
better to make that decision up front and commit the resources
to "doing it right".

I'm having a hard time leveraging printing technology in any
meaningful way, other than as a glorified dog-and-pony.  Like
building an architectural model of a structure out of foam-core
which does nothing to illustrate how the real structure
would/could be built.

On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 9:23:31 AM UTC+11, Tabby wrote:
> On Tuesday, 21 March 2023 at 15:15:10 UTC, olaf wrote: 
> > Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote: 
> > 
> > >I wouldn't expect the same performance as an injected molded 
> > >part. But, if it is common enough to be a noteworthy 
> > >problem, then I'm probably better off pursuing a different 
> > >technology. 
> > It is possible to print with carbon fiber loaded nylon or PETG if 
> > money is not your first problem. 
>
> Yes, but carbon loaded filament is not a win on strength.

Carbon fibre is remarkably strong - better than steel for the same weight. It's not clear that you can get enough carbon fibre into a 3-D printed part to beat something 3-D printed by laser-fusing steel powder.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> writes:
> So, prototyping on a printer may get you something to hold and play
> with . . .

and see if it fits properly and functions as expected.  Most of my "art"
bucket has parts that weren't quite the right shape, size, or were
missing a feature that wasn't obviously needed until you saw it in
place.

3D printed parts are also typically strong enough to test with, although
you have to be careful to stay within its strength envelope.

My electric motorcycle project has lots of 3D printed parts, typically
non-structural brackets and mount points for electronics et al.

> I'm having a hard time leveraging printing technology in any
> meaningful way,

Yeah, it's not for everyone.  There *are* projects where having a
prototype overnight, even if you just try it in place then throw it
away, is definitely worth it.  Even if it's just to "hold in your hand"
- well, if it's a handle, that's the only way to test it :-)

At the other end of the spectrum, with SLM metal printing, 3D printing
*is* how you manufacture the parts.

On 3/22/2023 10:20 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
> Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> writes:
>> So, prototyping on a printer may get you something to hold and play
>> with . . .
> 
> and see if it fits properly and functions as expected.

But, if the shape of the part had to change to be 3D printed -- or,
WILL have to change to be cast, molded, etc. -- then all of that
is suspect.

I recall building prototypes for hand tools -- only to find
something very different when the modelshop got done rendering
it into a manufacturable form.

Similarly, I can recall trying to approximate the behavior of
semi-custom and full custom parts using COTS components...
yeah, you can get the functionality approximately correct
but AC characteristics, impedances, etc. weren't even close.
So, anything that interfaced with it had to be assumed as
correct -- until First Silicon was available.

> Most of my "art"
> bucket has parts that weren't quite the right shape, size, or were
> missing a feature that wasn't obviously needed until you saw it in
> place.
> 
> 3D printed parts are also typically strong enough to test with, although
> you have to be careful to stay within its strength envelope.
> 
> My electric motorcycle project has lots of 3D printed parts, typically
> non-structural brackets and mount points for electronics et al.

Those would all fall into the "I need something of this size/shape"
category -- they don't have to do much "work".  You likely wouldn't
print a *wheel*.  Or, fork.

>> I'm having a hard time leveraging printing technology in any
>> meaningful way,
> 
> Yeah, it's not for everyone.  There *are* projects where having a
> prototype overnight, even if you just try it in place then throw it
> away, is definitely worth it.  Even if it's just to "hold in your hand"
> - well, if it's a handle, that's the only way to test it :-)
> 
> At the other end of the spectrum, with SLM metal printing, 3D printing
> *is* how you manufacture the parts.

On Thursday, 23 March 2023 at 03:11:31 UTC, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 9:23:31 AM UTC+11, Tabby wrote: 
> > On Tuesday, 21 March 2023 at 15:15:10 UTC, olaf wrote: 
> > > Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote: 
> > > 
> > > >I wouldn't expect the same performance as an injected molded 
> > > >part. But, if it is common enough to be a noteworthy 
> > > >problem, then I'm probably better off pursuing a different 
> > > >technology. 
> > > It is possible to print with carbon fiber loaded nylon or PETG if 
> > > money is not your first problem. 
> >
> > Yes, but carbon loaded filament is not a win on strength.

> Carbon fibre is remarkably strong - better than steel for the same weight. It's not clear that you can get enough carbon fibre into a 3-D printed part to beat something 3-D printed by laser-fusing steel powder. 

Commercially available Carbon fibre loaded filament is a much different animal to fibre mat impregnated with resin. Testing shows plain non-fibre plastic filament to be stronger.

On Friday, March 24, 2023 at 11:41:44 AM UTC+11, Tabby wrote:
> On Thursday, 23 March 2023 at 03:11:31 UTC, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 9:23:31 AM UTC+11, Tabby wrote: 
> > > On Tuesday, 21 March 2023 at 15:15:10 UTC, olaf wrote: 
> > > > Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote: 
> > > > 
> > > > >I wouldn't expect the same performance as an injected molded 
> > > > >part. But, if it is common enough to be a noteworthy 
> > > > >problem, then I'm probably better off pursuing a different 
> > > > >technology. 
> > > > It is possible to print with carbon fiber loaded nylon or PETG if 
> > > > money is not your first problem. 
> > > 
> > > Yes, but carbon loaded filament is not a win on strength. 
> 
> > Carbon fibre is remarkably strong - better than steel for the same weight. It's not clear that you can get enough carbon fibre into a 3-D printed part to beat something 3-D printed by laser-fusing steel powder.
>
> Commercially available Carbon fibre loaded filament is a much different animal to fibre mat impregnated with resin. Testing shows plain non-fibre plastic filament to be stronger.

Incompetents can always misuse materials. Trust Tabby to fixate on what some incompetent idiot - probably him - has got wrong.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Friday, March 24, 2023 at 8:01:50 AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Friday, March 24, 2023 at 11:41:44 AM UTC+11, Tabby wrote: 
> > On Thursday, 23 March 2023 at 03:11:31 UTC, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 9:23:31 AM UTC+11, Tabby wrote: 
> > > > On Tuesday, 21 March 2023 at 15:15:10 UTC, olaf wrote: 
> > > > > Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote: 
> > > > > 
> > > > > >I wouldn't expect the same performance as an injected molded 
> > > > > >part. But, if it is common enough to be a noteworthy 
> > > > > >problem, then I'm probably better off pursuing a different 
> > > > > >technology. 
> > > > > It is possible to print with carbon fiber loaded nylon or PETG if 
> > > > > money is not your first problem. 
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, but carbon loaded filament is not a win on strength. 
> > 
> > > Carbon fibre is remarkably strong - better than steel for the same weight. It's not clear that you can get enough carbon fibre into a 3-D printed part to beat something 3-D printed by laser-fusing steel powder. 
> > 
> > Commercially available Carbon fibre loaded filament is a much different animal to fibre mat impregnated with resin. Testing shows plain non-fibre plastic filament to be stronger.
> Incompetents can always misuse materials. Trust Tabby to fixate on what some incompetent idiot - probably him - has got wrong. 
> 
> -- 
> Bozo Bill Slowman, Sydney

Yet another absurd, worthless post by the Bozo.

Here is some useful info on the subject:
https://www.3d-pros.com/optimizing-strength-of-3d-printed-parts
https://3dprinterly.com/are-3d-printed-parts-strong/
https://all3dp.com/2/3d-printing-strength-strongest-infill/

On Monday, March 27, 2023 at 12:28:51 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
> On Friday, March 24, 2023 at 8:01:50 AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > On Friday, March 24, 2023 at 11:41:44 AM UTC+11, Tabby wrote: 
> > > On Thursday, 23 March 2023 at 03:11:31 UTC, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 9:23:31 AM UTC+11, Tabby wrote: 
> > > > > On Tuesday, 21 March 2023 at 15:15:10 UTC, olaf wrote: 
> > > > > > Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote: 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > >I wouldn't expect the same performance as an injected molded 
> > > > > > >part. But, if it is common enough to be a noteworthy 
> > > > > > >problem, then I'm probably better off pursuing a different 
> > > > > > >technology. 
> > > > > > It is possible to print with carbon fiber loaded nylon or PETG if 
> > > > > > money is not your first problem. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Yes, but carbon loaded filament is not a win on strength. 
> > > 
> > > > Carbon fibre is remarkably strong - better than steel for the same weight. It's not clear that you can get enough carbon fibre into a 3-D printed part to beat something 3-D printed by laser-fusing steel powder. 
> > > 
> > > Commercially available Carbon fibre loaded filament is a much different animal to fibre mat impregnated with resin. Testing shows plain non-fibre plastic filament to be stronger. 
> >
> > Incompetents can always misuse materials. Trust Tabby to fixate on what some incompetent idiot - probably him - has got wrong. 
> 
> Yet another absurd, worthless post by Bill. 

By which Sewage Sweeper means that that he can't understand what is being talked about.

> Here is some useful info on the subject: 
> https://www.3d-pros.com/optimizing-strength-of-3d-printed-parts 
> https://3dprinterly.com/are-3d-printed-parts-strong/ 
> https://all3dp.com/2/3d-printing-strength-strongest-infill/

None of them mention printing with carbon-fibre reinforced plastics, which was the subject being discussed. Sewage Sweeper is too dim to have noticed this.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydeny

On Friday, 24 March 2023 at 15:01:50 UTC, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Friday, March 24, 2023 at 11:41:44 AM UTC+11, Tabby wrote: 
> > On Thursday, 23 March 2023 at 03:11:31 UTC, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 9:23:31 AM UTC+11, Tabby wrote: 
> > > > On Tuesday, 21 March 2023 at 15:15:10 UTC, olaf wrote: 
> > > > > Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote: 
> > > > > 
> > > > > >I wouldn't expect the same performance as an injected molded 
> > > > > >part. But, if it is common enough to be a noteworthy 
> > > > > >problem, then I'm probably better off pursuing a different 
> > > > > >technology. 
> > > > > It is possible to print with carbon fiber loaded nylon or PETG if 
> > > > > money is not your first problem. 
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, but carbon loaded filament is not a win on strength. 
> > 
> > > Carbon fibre is remarkably strong - better than steel for the same weight. It's not clear that you can get enough carbon fibre into a 3-D printed part to beat something 3-D printed by laser-fusing steel powder. 
> > 
> > Commercially available Carbon fibre loaded filament is a much different animal to fibre mat impregnated with resin. Testing shows plain non-fibre plastic filament to be stronger.
> Incompetents can always misuse materials. Trust Tabby to fixate on what some incompetent idiot - probably him - has got wrong. 

another bs based ego fuelled comment from slow man