That’s normal. The full infill setting is just a high density mesh. I think if it would fill the whole thing it would warp too much and also take forever…
The UP/Afinia does the same thing.
I thread holes all the time and never had issues… There is still some meat around the holes. Are you making them too small, maybe?
That's normal. The full infill setting is just a high density mesh. I think if it would fill the whole thing it would warp too much and also take forever...
The UP/Afinia does the same thing.
I thread holes all the time and never had issues… There is still some meat around the holes. Are you making them too small, maybe?
Ok. I will try to change dimensions... but the "meat" arround holes does not seem to be very "large" ...
By the way, is it possible to adjust this thickness of walls ?
Yep, full infill doesn't mean 100% infill, but -
infill is made only in solids,
every part (i.e. a hole) of a whole element is printed with it's border around, so there will be no leakage,
..unless something is broken :)
You are right, but if I need to drill a new hole on a part that took several hours to print, it is not possible : there will be leakage... :(
Drilling through a 3D print to attach screw isn't advised. It will work to attach to a wall or something but adding a threaded hole or regular hole into the design is the best way and then add more layers to the surface would make it thicker and stronger there.
If I have to screw something through a piece I add a hole and then heat sink a metal threaded insert. Works perfectly.
Sorry, there are limitations.
I did print a couple solid blocks and screw down into them to hold to a bottom of a bed. Luckily it wasn't for moving and screwed in nicely but I wouldn't trust it to hold under any other circumstances.
When I print with ABS with the setting set to full I get a "solid part". But when I print in Ultra-T I DON'T get a "solid part" it looks more like the ABS "full" with (small holes about the width of the extruded path).
I do not recall a difference between ABS and ultrat on my prints.
Did you compare that on the exact same part?
The one on your photo seems so flat that it probably just prints the top
and bottom layers and doesn’t do an infill at all.
I have not made the same part in ABS but infill is infill why would it change. The part is flat because I stopped it after seeing that it was not solid. Final height is 1/4". I wonder if I use ABS setting with Ultra-T filament. I wonder what the temp differance is.
I have not made the same part in ABS but infill is infill why would it change. The part is flat because I stopped it after seeing that it was not solid. Final height is 1/4". I wonder if I use ABS setting with Ultra-T filament. I wonder what the temp differance is.
Temp is different.. Infill should be the same. I print with ABS full and still have small spaces..
I have not made the same part in ABS but infill is infill why would it change. The part is flat because I stopped it after seeing that it was not solid. Final height is 1/4". I wonder if I use ABS setting with Ultra-T filament. I wonder what the temp differance is.
Please print the same part with the two filaments. It doesn't have to be big prints and you can abort them as soon as the infill is visible... Then post the pics here.
What Kyle is saying that the ultrat profile and the Abs profile are only different in the temperature (to match the properties of the materials). The infill is the same on both.
I wish the "Full" infill was truly full also. My guess is they don't offer it because it requires knowledge to know when that will cause a print to warp badly or not. Zortrax seems to have made "ease of use" one of their primary targets. IMO, that's may be worth it in terms of how much happier the general user will be for not being able to cause their prints to fail.
However, I suppose Zortrax could just add a disclaimer dialog box like they do when you don't use supports to warn that "full infill" is not a recommended setting. It is useful to have parts that can be machined, drilled and tapped and to not worry about them getting crushed or over stressed, which is easier to achieve with truly full infill.
I wish the "Full" infill was truly full also. My guess is they don't offer it because it requires knowledge to know when that will cause a print to warp badly or not. Zortrax seems to have made "ease of use" one of their primary targets. IMO, that's may be worth it in terms of how much happier the general user will be for not being able to cause their prints to fail.
However, I suppose Zortrax could just add a disclaimer dialog box like they do when you don't use supports to warn that "full infill" is not a recommended setting. It is useful to have parts that can be machined, drilled and tapped and to not worry about them getting crushed or over stressed, which is easier to achieve with truly full infill.
Something I have noticed in almost all FDM 3D printers that I have worked on is that they do not support true 100% infill. The open source printers tend to be able to do true 100% infill however some problems begin to occur. As Rafal put it "...the print will be strongly deformed, further due to lack of cooling prints can be "swollen"." what I have also noticed is that some square parts want to shrink in all directions mid print, leading to highly deformed walls or surfaces.
Another problem is going to be that as accurate as the Zortrax may be, it will always have over or under extrusion when laying down each layer due mainly to consistency in diameter of the filament. I am not saying the material is inconsistent I am just saying that even with a +/-.05mm tolerance there is a factor the printer or software cannot account for. Another thing to consider is the bed level, we are operating with a fairly large build area that is not perfectly flat, when you lay down a layer over a high spot, where is the excess filament going to go? Well it will have to spread out or overlap with another line, this only compounds the effect.
On using taps and screwing parts together I have used PolyMax on a few prints that I was going to screw together or tap the hinges and It worked surprisingly well even with M5 and M6 sizes. I think what Zortrax needs is a setting to increase the amount of inner walls a surface can have, starting at 2 up to maybe 5. This would give people more options when wanting to sand, drill, and tap. There is a "Shell" setting that allows for an input of wall amounts, just add in support with the setting and BANG you got a new setting people will love.
As for WKirk's question about infill settings being different, I did some test print's yesterday and did not find any differences between them. I was writing you a followup email then saw this so I figured id leave it here.
[/URL] [url=http://www.hostingpics.net/viewer.php?id=776632P3021852.jpg]
[/URL]
[/URL]