It has stated different values for parameters such as young modulus and tensile strengh.
For every parameter exists different values depending on the table you look at, i mean, in the first table the value of, for example, Young modulus is higher than the value in the second table (table 1: tensile test),
but anywhere in the report especify where these values are taken from.
Other unasked question are:
1_ % of infill used in the construction of the Dumbbell shaped specimens
2_ Direction of farication of the Dumbbell shaped specimens
Does anyone know something more about the material data sheet or the conditions of the performed tests in zortrax?
I think thesse values im searching for are very useful for very enginering applications
It has stated different values for parameters such as young modulus and tensile strengh.
For every parameter exists different values depending on the table you look at, i mean, in the first table the value of, for example, Young modulus is higher than the value in the second table (table 1: tensile test),
but anywhere in the report especify where these values are taken from.
Other unasked question are:
1_ % of infill used in the construction of the Dumbbell shaped specimens
2_ Direction of farication of the Dumbbell shaped specimens
Does anyone know something more about the material data sheet or the conditions of the performed tests in zortrax?
I think thesse values im searching for are very useful for very enginering applications
Thank you
I think it`s because the filament is solid, hence the modulus will be higher. The printed test piece is "meshed" internally, thus the modulus will be lower.
I think it`s because the filament is solid, hence the modulus will be higher. The printed test piece is "meshed" internally, thus the modulus will be lower.
Thanks @motordude
this was my first thought, but without any indication of the used infill or the position of the specimens the provided values are useless.
this was my first thought, but without any indication of the used infill or the position of the specimens the provided values are useless.
The printed part varies on the settings and the orientation of the part on the print bed. I have done some tests on printed parts. I use a basic 75mm x 25mm x 5mm test print. When printed with the same infill (all settings) but with just the print orientation changed I get massively different results. I use a test rig the forces load through the 5mm plane. If I print the part vertically (25mm x 5mm face on the bed) I get the weakest results. When printed flat 75mm x 25mm face on the bed) I get a better result. When I print the same part on its side I get the best results (75mm x 5mm face on the bed)
The results for ABS printed at 0.39, Quality Medium infill MAX surface layers 3 and 3
The printed part varies on the settings and the orientation of the part on the print bed. I have done some tests on printed parts. I use a basic 75mm x 25mm x 5mm test print. When printed with the same infill (all settings) but with just the print orientation changed I get massively different results. I use a test rig the forces load through the 5mm plane. If I print the part vertically (25mm x 5mm face on the bed) I get the weakest results. When printed flat 75mm x 25mm face on the bed) I get a better result. When I print the same part on its side I get the best results (75mm x 5mm face on the bed)
The results for ABS printed at 0.39, Quality Medium infill MAX surface layers 3 and 3
your results are totally understandable as soon as they reveal the fracture between layers (25mm x 5mm face on bed) occur at the lowest load. Then between the other two build direction the 75mm x 25mm face on bed resists less load because the bending moment affects the adhesion of the layers too.
The strongest build direction should be the one that the load doesnt affect to the mentioned adhesion between the layers.
I am doing a little research with tensile test specimens built in different directions and diferent infills to have reliable information about material properties.
