Close



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13
  1. #1

    Question Print perforation

    Hello,I'm looking for a way to perforate a model evenly over the entire surface so that water can be sucked through, similar to a sieve.Now I had already tried to implement this in the modeling software, but this quickly broke down with larger, more complex surfaces. The next approach was to omit the walls, top, bottom in the slicer (Cura) and only print a 'wall' of infill. The pattern is connected lines. The alternating loops that result create a hole structure that allows water to be sucked through the surface. The only problem is that the surface as a whole becomes very rough and bumpy. In addition, it is only possible to suck the water through the loops at an angle, which is not optimal for the specific purpose. If another slicer seems more capable for the task for you I would happily change. I have only tried Cura so far.It's a bit tricky and I can't think of a better solution right now, but maybe one of you has a brilliant idea.

  2. #2
    Staff Engineer
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    827
    Most slicers have a selection of infill patterns from which to choose. My slicer defaults to a simple rectangular grid, which is vertically coherent and would certainly provide for straight-line water movement. It's as if one is viewing graph paper when the infill is seen from above. This also does not create a bumpy surface. The infill percentage can be adjusted to meet your requirements.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by fred_dot_u View Post
    Most slicers have a selection of infill patterns from which to choose. My slicer defaults to a simple rectangular grid, which is vertically coherent and would certainly provide for straight-line water movement. It's as if one is viewing graph paper when the infill is seen from above. This also does not create a bumpy surface. The infill percentage can be adjusted to meet your requirements.
    Thanks, but I've tried this method before. The problem with this is, that you get uneven holes depending on the geometry of the object. Flat surfaces get the exact hole size you determine via infill line distance, but steep angles get very lengthy holes. It might not seem like such a big of a deal at first, but the fiber casting doesn't work this way. The casted object gets an uneven thickness, and I am trying to avoid that.
    I think I didn't mention it in my original posting, but the reason I am trying to achieve this is to use the print object for fiber casting

  4. #4
    Staff Engineer
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    827
    It's difficult to picture the type of part with which you begin. Is it primarily a flat structure, similar to a grate used to keep debris from passing? Is it a blocky structure, similar to those items created for laminar water flow? Can you provide a sketch or a screen capture or similar?

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by fred_dot_u View Post
    It's difficult to picture the type of part with which you begin. Is it primarily a flat structure, similar to a grate used to keep debris from passing? Is it a blocky structure, similar to those items created for laminar water flow? Can you provide a sketch or a screen capture or similar?
    There is no real existing object at the moment, but the process should be adaptable to all possible models. Picture a flower pot or a vase or something. Flat surfaces are not a big deal as the lines infill with a reasonable infill distance does the job quite well. It gets problematic when you try complex shapes with roundings and angles everywhere.

  6. #6
    Staff Engineer
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    827
    In the example of a flower pot shape, I envision a truncated cone. This would put a number of vertical cylinders either slicing through the perimeter of the cone or it would create a volume in which there were no cylinders. I suspect you would object to the former, but is the latter option suitable?
    Attached Images Attached Images

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by fred_dot_u View Post
    In the example of a flower pot shape, I envision a truncated cone. This would put a number of vertical cylinders either slicing through the perimeter of the cone or it would create a volume in which there were no cylinders. I suspect you would object to the former, but is the latter option suitable?
    It's not quite what it needs to be in order to work. The perforation must be minuscule. About 0.6-0.8mm holes and the holes must be placed all over the model. The water has to be able to get sucked evenly through every point of the object, much like a sieve in the shape of a flower pot.

  8. #8
    Staff Engineer
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    827
    This was more a representative sample than a final model, as until now there were no specifications. Does the model resemble your objective, if one ignores the dimensional aspects? That is, the top of the cylinder is a larger diameter and has no holes, as they would puncture the sides. Should the entire top have holes and allow the sides to be punctured?

    Would you care to provide height, bottom and top diameters? Radial arrays are more difficult (for me) to accomplish, while rectangular arrays will have elements that subtract from the surface, again a limitation of my skill set.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by fred_dot_u View Post
    This was more a representative sample than a final model, as until now there were no specifications. Does the model resemble your objective, if one ignores the dimensional aspects? That is, the top of the cylinder is a larger diameter and has no holes, as they would puncture the sides. Should the entire top have holes and allow the sides to be punctured?Would you care to provide height, bottom and top diameters? Radial arrays are more difficult (for me) to accomplish, while rectangular arrays will have elements that subtract from the surface, again a limitation of my skill set.
    Actually, there is no specific object right now. I'm looking for some kind of process that works on any object. In that regard, the dimensions of your object work just fine. It should be however adaptable to any other kind of shape or form. What I want to achieve is something like having an object of whatever shape or form and put a sieve cloth over it which covers every side of the object and of course I need the printer to be able to print this kind of thing. It is not that easy to explain, and english is not my mother tongue.

  10. #10
    Staff Engineer
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    827
    Your english is doing just fine.

    The process I used is adaptable to any shape and is called boolean subtract. One creates the primary shape, then the secondary shape (cylinders in an array) is created in such a manner as to meet your requirements. The two are "booleaned" which is not really a word and the result is as you have seen in my images.

    Vertical cylinders are easily printed, horizontal versions are much more difficult.

    I think the challenge is to create the subtractive array to meet your requirements.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •