This water soluble support material has a higher temperature resistance than PVA and can be easily used with ABS. The ABS was paired with Infinite Material Solution Aquasys 120. For more information about getting strong prints at higher temperatures, check out CNC Kitchen’s video on this matter.Īs for the support materials the PLA was paired with Ultimaker PVA which is a water soluble support material. ![]() It was therefore decided that the hubcaps will be pronted in both materials at the ideal temperature. This would make the clips less prone to snapping when fitting the part. While PLA showed a slightly higher flexure strength when compared to ABS, it was noted that ABS allowed for much larger deflections. For PLA this was 205 ☌, and for ABS this was 265 ☌. The strongest prints revealed the strongest temperature to print at. This was done to compare the Z-direction strengths of the materials and their printing temperatures. The prints were loaded through their centre and the maximum load before the print broke was measured. The testing consisted of three standard flexure prints for each temperature and material. For PLA, the tested temperatures were 205, 215, and 225 ☌. For ABS, the two temperatures that were tested were 255 and 265 ☌. This was considered for the ‘weakest orientation’ (in the Z printing direction). Material Testingīased on this conclusion that ABS and PLA were the best materials that we had for this case study, a series of tests were conducted to find the printing temperature at which each of these materials are the strongest. Another viable option might be Tough PLA which has superior toughness when compared to regular PLA and is still quite easy to print. ![]() Thus we opted to not test it, although it might also be an ideal candidate due to its reported excellent z-strength. At the time of printing only PLA and ABS were available and we did not expect PET-G exhibit a significantly better performance. However, since we had decided to print using two separate materials, we were restricted to using the dual nozzle printers, like the Ultimaker S3 and S5’s. The compatibility with soluble support materials eliminates PP too. The ability to be spray painted eliminates PP and Nylons from the pool. ![]() These constraints are as follows post-processing ability (spray-ability), compatibility with soluble support materials, and ease of printing. Based on a selection of material constraints that have been chosen, the right materials will be narrowed down. The materials pool that we had to work with consisted of PET-G, PLA, ABS, PP, PC and Nylons. Material SelectionĪnother issue that was addressed through these test prints was whether or not ABS was the right material for the final print. This way, the finished hubcap can be cleaned of the support by immersing it in water and dissolving the support. This issue led us to the idea that the support structure should be done using a water-soluble material. The main issue that the support presented was that it was very difficult to remove the support in vert intricate areas (such as behind the clip, and in the small slots). This provided some issues with regards to support structure removal. We printed a number of test hubcaps, using ABS for both the build material, and support material. Following a previous blog post which focused on the measurement and design of an existing hubcap, this blog post will focus on the Material Selection, slicing, and 3D printing of said hubcap.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |