15 ms·

Design for 3D-Printing

• MetaWhirledPeas 1y ago
  These are some great tips. The teardrop shaped holes are a neat idea.
  • KeplerBoy 1y ago
    Those were a staple of early reprap designs.
    • q3k 1y ago
      In fact, it was such an iconic piece of early 3d printing design language that it became _the_ RepRap logo! https://reprap.org/wiki/RepRapLogo https://reprap.org/wiki/RepRapLogo Then overhangs got good enough that people just started doing normal holes again. :)
• lawn 1y ago
  What an impressive looking article (I've only skimmed it so far). I've been meaning to try my hand at CAD and designing models to print but I haven't quite made the jump. One thing that has given me pause is a good CAD program for Linux, does anyone has any good tips for a complete Newbie where to begin?
  • q3k 1y ago
    FreeCAD is fine (the author also uses it). Make sure to follow the official documentation (eg. PartDesign tutorial) to not get immediately frustrated.
    • Joel_Mckay 1y ago
      The parametric workflow can be confounding to some people, but most pick up the newer FreeCAD interface fairly quickly: https://www.youtube.com/@4axisprinting/videos https://www.youtube.com/@4axisprinting/videos Best of luck =3
    • titaphraz 1y ago
      I highly recommend MangoJelly Solutions's tutorials. Here's a playlist for FreeCAD 1.0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_yh_S31R9g&list=PLWuyJLVUNtc3UYXXfSglVpfWdX31F-e5S https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_yh_S31R9g&list=PLWuyJLVUNt... But he has a bunch of other videos.
  • pcl 1y ago
    I’ve had a lot of success with https://onshape.com https://onshape.com, which just needs a browser.
  • retrochameleon 1y ago
    I use FreeCAD, but it definitely leaves some UX refinement to be desired. There are a couple of web based options like OnShape that seem to work well, too.
    • rekenaut 1y ago
      OnShape is great (we have been using it exclusively for a project over the past four months, the collaboration tools are phenomenal), but FreeCAD has made some fantastic progress over the past year. Some of the underlying technology problems have solved, and the UX has improved a lot with 1.0. The customization and scripting opportunities are also wonderful with FreeCAD. That said, if you’re coming over from Solidworks/NX/Inventor, as much as there are buggy parts of those, FreeCAD still has extremely frustrating workflows and buggy parts that you have to work around. It feels like it’s moving closer to Blender-like quality, but it still has a long road ahead of it.
    • nullc 1y ago
      All of Solidworks, Onshape, and Freecad have a very similar operating philosophy (I believe they're all based on the same backend engine). I used onshape for a while because I found freecad unusable but recent improvements solved most of those issues and now I prefer freecad.
      • sho_hn 1y ago
        OnShape and SolidWorks use Parasolid, FreeCAD uses Open CASCADE.
  • wkat4242 1y ago
    I use Fusion 360. Free for hobbyists. Yeah it's quirky and they constantly screw the free plan out of features (e.g. less saved editable designs, having to use the cloud to export STL) but it is also a highly capable tool that aligned best with the stuff I already knew. Not entirely sure if it's available for Linux. I probably shouldn't use autodesk but I'm not trying to make the world a better place. Just to unleash my creativity.
    • malfist 1y ago
      It's not. There is a flat pack version but it says it's not supported
      • wkat4242 1y ago
        Ah I see. I've been looking at FOSS options like FreeCAD and Blender but both didn't feel right (especially blender as it's more a tool for animators). And I rather spend my limited free time creating stuff than to learn a new tool. Unless it is actually a more powerful one for the purpose that enables me to do things I can't now. But this doesn't seem to be the case. It's the same reason I use BambuLab printers. My hobby is making stuff, not tinkering with printers. They're just tools, a means to an end. Ps forgive me my defensive attitude but I often get people at the makerspace that take my choice of tools as a political statement. But I don't care. I just want to use what does the job for me.
        • WillAdams 1y ago
          For Blender, try adding: https://www.cadsketcher.com/ https://www.cadsketcher.com/ and https://blendercam.com/ https://blendercam.com/
    • WillPostForFood 1y ago
      Not sure if they changed this, but you used to be able to local export an STL without cloud by going to Utilities -> Make -> 3d print
      • 1y ago
  • seltzered_ 1y ago
    I've been a newbie too and tried to use FreeCAD as others mentioned but I found myself enjoying build123d (basically a python library that uses an long-existing technology called OpenCascade and a viewer called OCPViewer generally used within visual studio code). The learning curve is still there, but I felt more empowered to adjust/share 3d printing designs made in it over dealing with quirks of GUI-based CAD applications. The discord community on there is rather helpful too. https://build123d.readthedocs.io/ https://build123d.readthedocs.io/ https://github.com/bernhard-42/vscode-ocp-cad-viewer https://github.com/bernhard-42/vscode-ocp-cad-viewer I'll still use FreeCAD on occasion as a secondary viewer for stl files, though my hope is to use build123d entirely including for describing joints as well.
    • today54 1y ago
      BTW there is an open source project on GitHub named 'Mayo' which is a pretty incredible viewer for 3d files including most CAD formats. 'F3d' is another great viewer. Both are cross platform.
  • panki27 1y ago
    I just got started recently with OpenSCAD - it's a different beast, but very useful for simple parametric designs. You write code to describe the form of your object - no clicking and dragging things at all.
  • WillAdams 1y ago
    For traditional CAD the notable candidates are: - Solvespace --- small and lightweight, the UI may be a bit off-putting - FreeCAD --- hugely improved in the recent 1.0 release, this is a large and impressive system - Dune 3D --- the new kid on the block, it has the advantage of a modern appearance and UI standards, and the consistency of being a one-man project If one moves away from traditonal/contemporary CAD there are a few other options: - BRL-CAD --- intensely old-school, this is one of the oldest opensource codebases - OpenSCAD --- programmatic CAD, this has inspired more successors than I would care to count (esp. look up libfive and Matt Keeter's Master's Thesis if you are academically mathematically oriented) For that last, one of the more successful hybrids is "OpenPythonSCAD" which is just what it says on the tin --- Python in OpenSCAD: https://pythonscad.org/ https://pythonscad.org/ which I have been using for a project on the other side of the fence --- making DXF and G-code for CNC mills and routers: https://github.com/WillAdams/gcodepreview https://github.com/WillAdams/gcodepreview EDIT: One additional tool to note is Fullcontrolgcode Designer, which to bring things full-circle, is the 3D-printing version of the above: https://fullcontrolgcode.com/ https://fullcontrolgcode.com/
    • yehoshuapw 1y ago
      also have a look at https://github.com/CadQuery/cadquery https://github.com/CadQuery/cadquery (and https://github.com/gumyr/build123d https://github.com/gumyr/build123d) python, but more pythonic then openscad
  • lucasoshiro 1y ago
    > does anyone has any good tips for a complete Newbie where to begin? Start with Tinkercad: https://www.tinkercad.com https://www.tinkercad.com. It runs on the browser, it has some limitations, but it is really simple to use, just open and model whatever you want joining and extracting shapes and importing SVGs for extrusion. After that, if you know any programming language you'll find OpenSCAD easy to learn. I gave a course last year about it, the slides are available here: https://lucasoshiro.github.io/posts-en/2024-03-24-openscad/ https://lucasoshiro.github.io/posts-en/2024-03-24-openscad/. They are in Portuguese, if someone shows interest I can translate them to English, but I think they are easy to follow even by non-speakers.
  • caditinpiscinam 1y ago
    As a fellow linux users and 3D printing newbie: - Tinkercad (browser) fun and great for very simple projects. Like the MS Paint of 3D. - OnShape (browser) seemingly pretty powerful, but not the easiest to learn in my experience, and has some annoying bugs. - Plasticity (desktop) I played around with the free trial and liked it a lot, found it more intuitive than OnShape. - Womp (browser) not CAD software, but easy to use and great for making free-form/organic looking designs. - Blender (desktop) not CAD software and haven't used it myself, but I've seen others use it to design 3D prints.
  • the__alchemist 1y ago
    I can't vouch for this, but maybe you could get SolidWorks working in Wine? (e.g. https://github.com/cryinkfly/SOLIDWORKS-for-Linux https://github.com/cryinkfly/SOLIDWORKS-for-Linux). Of note, SolidWorks is cheap if you're a student or veteran, for a non-commercial license. It is a dramatic improvement over FreeCAD. (I wish CAS were in a state like EDA and artistic model makers where the free/OSS software was on par with commercial, but we are not.)
  • Vox_Leone 1y ago
    OpenSCAD is an underrated but powerful modeling tool, especially for developers and engineers who appreciate precision and code-driven design. It has a low barrier to entry — the syntax is simple, yet expressive — and with just a bit of practice, you can build tight, parametric models that are incredibly robust. One of its standout features is the `hull()` function, which computes the convex hull of multiple shapes. When used skillfully, `hull()` becomes more than a geometric operation — it’s a design primitive that lets you smoothly bridge components, create enclosures, and generate complex organic forms without manual sculpting. It's like having a smart “connective tissue” for your model. If you're comfortable with code and want exact control over your 3D prints or CAD designs, OpenSCAD delivers precision with minimal overhead. It rewards clean thinking and composability — making it ideal for rapid prototyping, parametric part libraries, and even mechanical design.
  • anoldperson 1y ago
    Learn FreeCAD. Getting trapped in commercial software and having to abandon years and years worth of project files isn't a mistake I'm making twice. Fusion seems attractive, but look at how they treat their shit tier users.
    • ansgri 1y ago
      While this is a good idea in theory, one needs quite a lot of patience to deal with its bugs and kernel limitations. It has definitely become much better since 1.0, but the inability to put chamfers and fillets wherever is extremely annoying — whether the features compute is order-dependent and they routinely conflict with each other for unclear reasons. So, maybe it’s not a bad idea to start with a free version of something more ergonomic, just to avoid getting too discouraged.
  • tgsovlerkhgsel 1y ago
    Onshape is amazing. The learning curve is much more forgiving than other software while still being a feature-rich, optionally constraint-based and parametrizable CAD application. It works on any OS, even on a laptop with an iGPU, a Chromebook, and for basic stuff like exporting a part for printing, a phone. Consider signing up via your favorite YouTuber's sponsorship link to support them. Downsides are that the CAM plugin is paid-only (irrelevant for 3D printing) and you're obviously trapping yourself in a commercial, proprietary walled garden that might start charging subscription fees or otherwise rug-pull you once it gets popular enough. I've decided that the ease of use benefit is high enough to warrant the risk - I'd rather risk not being able to edit my models in the future than not creating them in the first place because the alternative software is too painful to use. It's helpful to understand how the software works, because it's different from what you might have experienced from other software: It essentially stores operations, like "start with this sketch, then extrude this part of it to a height of 10 mm, then add a fillet". You can go back and edit previous steps and the following steps will be directly re-applied. In sketch mode, you can just draw, but you can also add arbitrary constraints, e.g. "these points have to be exactly 3 cm away" and it will adjust your sketch to match the (new) constraints. This makes it really easy to change some aspect of the part later. This is common in CAD software, although OnShape's implementation seems more intuitive to me than e.g. Fusion 360. If you want to do actual 3D CAM (for CNC machining), Fusion360 seems to be the only free option (not available for Linux). In general, with all CAD software, the common "just poke at it until you figure out how it works" approach doesn't work well, although once you've understood the basic concepts that I've explained above and know some CAD terms/concepts like creating 3D parts by extruding or rotating 2d drawings, Onshape will mostly let you get away with that approach. You probably should still watch tutorials before you start.
    • q3k 1y ago
      > If you want to do actual 3D CAM (for CNC machining), Fusion360 seems to be the only free option (not available for Linux). The free CAM available in F360 has been artificially limited to only allow extremely slow travel speed. It's almost useless.
      • 1y ago
  • highdeserthackr 1y ago
    I did a lot of poking around when I first started. Tried ~10 different apps. On one end there are the toys, and the other end were sophisticated apps that were too big an investment in time. Settled on SolveSpace as the Goldilocks solution and have been using it for 4 years now. Can run on Linux, never crashes, GUI based, parametric constraints (which as someone that is not a mechanical engineer was the hardest part to get my head around), no cloud and no concerns about it getting crippled by a vendor. In the beginning, it took a day to get a simple design right. Now things can be whipped out in as little as 30 minutes. I'll caveat this as I don't make fancy stuff, just items in support of homelab projects and the workshop (examples at https://www.printables.com/@HighDesertHacker https://www.printables.com/@HighDesertHacker).
• antirez 1y ago
  Also useful to turn spheres into two parts you can screw one with the other, like in this design of mine: https://makerworld.com/it/models/99223-death-star-christmas-ornament-two-halves-no-glue#profileId-707417 https://makerworld.com/it/models/99223-death-star-christmas-...
  • ugh123 1y ago
    Thats great! Reminds me of this dragon egg my son had me print for him with a screw shell but has a hollow inside to put things in it like baby dragons, x-wings, etc https://makerworld.com/en/models/192494-dragon-egg-with-baby-dragon-inside https://makerworld.com/en/models/192494-dragon-egg-with-baby...
• no_wizard 1y ago
  I always thought 3D printing would make multi widget machine[0] manufacturing possible While it’s done a lot of cool stuff and enabled rapid prototyping etc it never scaled the way I really thought it would [0]: there may be a better turn for this however this is what I mean: that is one machine that can output a wide variety of different things using the same common material, IE maybe one day it produces ball bearings and the next it could produce a bunch of car pistons, with only having to make minimal changes to the machine itself if not changing anything at all
  • analog31 1y ago
    "Flexible" or "Quick Turn" manufacturing are terms used for this kind of thing. Quick-turn comes from being able to change from one kind of part to another, quickly, with no added setup cost.
    • codingmoh 1y ago
      In theory, it seemed perfect for flexible manufacturing: same machine, same material, endless outputs. But in practice, it hit limits in speed, material properties, and post-processing. You still can’t print a high-tolerance metal part at scale and cost-effectively replace traditional machining. It’s amazing for prototyping or niche parts
      • earleybird 1y ago
        "You still can't print a high-tolerance metal part at scale and cost-effectively..." Dan Gelbart has a response (with caveats) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLgPW2672s4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLgPW2672s4
        • codingmoh 1y ago
          oh wow - that's cool! - Thanks so much for sharing!
  • al_borland 1y ago
• EA-3167 1y ago
  This article reminds me of another I read first here, 'Reality Has A Surprising Amount of Detail' by John Salvatier. At first blush 3D printing seems easy, but especially with smaller parts that might go through many duty cycles it's anything but. I'm going to have to do more than skim this, I think this one is worth multiple reads over many days to really absorb the densely packed information. Thanks to the author for being willing to put so much of their hard-earned experience into a resource for the rest of us.
• hengheng 1y ago
  Great article. This is all above the skill level of the average part on thingiverse or printables, but the good parts on there are going to follow similar ideas. Love the mouse ears, press-fit holes and step-by-step alignment of layers to build impossible bridges. Notably, in fusion 360 this would all be designed in "plastics" mode, and yet that mode is oblivious to whether the part is printed or moulded. I wonder if any CAD engine can do "production-aware design" that constrains design to the capabilities of standardized machines, e.g. keeping a metal part 3-d millable. I've seen strict design rule enforcement with PCBs, and I have seen sheet metal macros, but nothing for general mechanical CAD.
  • digdugdirk 1y ago
    I've investigated this space, and I'm not entirely sure its even a desired goal from the perspective of a mechanical designer. The benefit tends to be for smaller aspects (ensuring hole sizes are appropriate for the desired thread, or that holes aren't too close to a bend line on a sheet metal part, etc) but the final design of a 3d part is so non-deterministic, and the variety of manufacturing methods are so varied and unique, it might just cause more issues than benefits.
    • sitkack 1y ago
      I use many of these techniques and have modules in openscad to create build orientation aware parts and have for years. You can be less not entirely sure, because many people already do this.
    • hengheng 1y ago
      The people I've talked to found it similarly unnecessary. But mainly because they weren't able to imagine a good implementation. "But what if I want to do x" is what I heard the most. Like, sure, if you want to make your part on a 3-axis router and then drill one sideways hole, then put that in the markup. CAD always seems to have a feature stack, so apply a 3-axis design rule and discard it before the last step. Similar for multiple setups on a mill, or for surface treatment. The gold standard still seems to be a signed and printed drawing that is never complete and full of implications. Mapping a design to a factory, or even pricing it, is an art form that has resisted automation. I expected this to change with all the "industry 4.0" push from ten years ago, but somehow that just meant adding wi-fi.
• nullc 1y ago
  This is fantastic-- while I'm aware of most of the techniques in it, it would have saved me a ton of time and trouble if I had it a few years ago. Each of the points could basically be expanded to an article on their own. E.g. they don't mention for vase mode that you can get much better results using a big nozzle with it.
  • lucasoshiro 1y ago
    3D printing is fun because there's always something new to learn
  • DonHopkins 1y ago
    I'd love to read an article (or watch a video) of such depth and expertise about techniques for printing parts in place, which this article just touches on.
• sgt 1y ago
  Has there been any interest in leveraging LLM's for 3d modelling? Sort of an AI assistant with CAD software, to help beginners get going and also more rapidly design simple objects.
  • iancmceachern 1y ago
    Yeah, tons, there are already products like this in use
    • lucasoshiro 1y ago
      Can you name them?
      • iancmceachern 1y ago
        Several from Bambu labs to start
  • joshvm 1y ago
    Just last week: https://willpatrick.xyz/technology/2025/04/23/teaching-llms-how-to-solid-model.html https://willpatrick.xyz/technology/2025/04/23/teaching-llms-...
  • oofbaroomf 1y ago
    Yes, there has been. Unfortunately, there are a few core issues blocking this from becoming a big thing: 1. The majority of 3D modeling is not done parametrically, meaning there is not a lot of data. The little data there is is generally in OpenSCAD, which isn't very powerful or extensible for useful CAD. 2. Generally, when you want to do CAD, you need to come up with a way to define everything precisely. Like I want this hole 2 millimeters from the bottom, and this exact edge next to the hole to be beveled, etc. Saying all that to an LLM is slower than just making the whole. That said, these still can be useful for beginners, and there are things like Adam AI that are starting to catch on for simple stuff.
    • ai-christianson 1y ago
• lucasoshiro 1y ago
  Amazing. Again: amazing! I've been playing with 3D printers for 7 years, and I even assembled mine at home during the pandemic. Some topics described here I already found out by practice and I think most people with experience in 3D printing also do that. But having everything studied, compiled and explained in that level is just, again, amazing! Not only that, but there are so many other topics covered here that I still have to learn. Great work, thank you!
• pclark 1y ago
  I know they get a lot of hate in the HN community but my Bambu Labs P1S is mind blowing. It’s so easy to use I print 100x more than with my old Ender. It’s motivated me to learn Fusion360 … i’m actually printing droids for my kids to color this very minute.
  • the_af 1y ago
    Hate? I missed this. Why hate?
    • WillAdams 1y ago
      Non-compliance with GPL and other opensource licensing. Predatory licensing agreements and cloud software which presumably allows the company to access/steal designs.
      • Gerardox 1y ago
        What are some alternatives? Ty in advance for any hint!
        • q3k 1y ago
          My favorite continues to be hardware from Prusa. They're rock solid and respect user freedoms (serviceability/upgradability/hackability). Being made in the EU is also a big upside for me. I've had an MK3S+ for years and even though it's a primitive machine in comparison to the current Bambu hardware I see no reason to upgrade to something else. It just keeps printing whatever I throw at it and the results continue to be very good. In fact, I seem to have better luck with it than the Bambus I sometimes use at various hacker/makerspaces. If you just look at the numbers (speed, volume, ...) against Bambu hardware they're not as good, but the reliability and simplicity make up for it IMO. The main missing feature is multi-material support, but that's something I'm not really interested in due to how wasteful the current technology is.
          • Gerardox 1y ago
• WillAdams 1y ago
  One technique which bears mentioning is printing in 100% infill using a filament which will allow re-heating/cooling and then putting it in a tray of powder salt (very finely ground table salt) and then backing and cooling it.
  • the__alchemist 1y ago
    What is the purpose of this?
    • noosphr 1y ago
      You get a solid plastic part without layer lines. This makes it about as strong as injection molded plastic.
      • the__alchemist 1y ago
        Nice! Want to try.
  • DannyBee 1y ago
    Sure, but at that point, you'd almost certainly be better off using resin.
• justaj 1y ago
  Nice article, though what I'd personally love to see is a resource where I can go from zero to actually making (basic) designs using open source tools, which can then be taken to a 3D printer and printed.
  • mikewarot 1y ago
    The learning curve was steep, but FreeCAD has allowed me to start playing with 3d printing gears and other things on my Bambu Lab P1S. I'm largely self taught with electronics and programming, so just starting and making small experiments got me going. For inspiration, there are lots of sites that share 3d print designs.
    • justaj 1y ago
      Would you say Blender is a nice tool for this purpose? I'd much rather learn one graphical tool which does a lot of different stuff than lots of different graphical tools that do different specific things (it's a different story in the terminal though :))
      • AnIrishDuck 1y ago
        Blender is serviceable for simple stuff, but you really want CAD for mechanical parts. Think figurines (Blender) vs gears (CAD). Constraints, among many other important features, just aren't as well represented in Blender. An analogy is C vs JavaScript. Can you do "memory management" in JavaScript? Sure, but you're fighting the tool. Ditto for building a complex frontend in C. The desire to "just learn one thing" is naturally strong. But the "design 3d things" problem space is as large (if not larger) than "programming computers". Hence the proliferation of tools with very different approaches (the underlying representation in CAD is generally brep [1], which is much different than vertices / edges / faces at the core of Blender) The good news is the underlying thinking is somewhat transferrable, especially for core concepts. 1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_representation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_representation
      • Geee 1y ago
• ipdashc 1y ago
  > There is no excuse to not add text to a printed part. Super off-topic, but I've always kind of been let down by the appearance of 3d printed text. As noted, engraved seems to be better than embossed, but it still just looks kind of weird. I envy the clean, crisp labels that seem to be commonplace on commercial injection-molded plastic parts. The toner transfer technique seems kind of promising. I think I've also seen people spray painting 3d-printed parts, and then lasering away the paint to draw text, which is interesting (if somewhat more materials- and equipment-intensive). Really cool article though.
  • prashnts 1y ago
    Another option is water slide decal. It can give a really seamless look, but is time consuming and expensive.
  • Zekio 1y ago
    I've heard people have had pretty good luck laser engraving text onto 3d prints with fiber lasers, though it is pretty steep price bump just to get some text on a 3d print
• finnjohnsen2 1y ago
  6 months into 3D printing and I couldnt have asked for a better article to stumble upon. What a massive field this is and I love some of the take aways. Paricularly circles into hexagons, and making things adjustable. I’m not making my own designs yet. It is too difficult. Modifiying a little here using Blender is where Im at
  • sysrpl 1y ago
    It's super easy to design using OnShape. Hit me up with private message and I will show you everything you need to model 3D printable parts in under 5 minutes.
    • stavros 1y ago
      Agreed, you need to know three things: * Sketch a 2D design on a surface * Make the elements in that design depend on each other (this is parallel to that, this is equal to the other, X is at an angle to Y) as much as possible * Pull the 2D shape up into 3D space Now you know how to design your own things! The rest is just learning the buttons, but there's usually one called "sketch", one called "constrain", and one called "extrude".
    • finnjohnsen2 1y ago
      Thank you kindly. I'll have a look at OnShape.
• alextousss 1y ago
  Incredible article, learned quite a lot. To me, a very good supplementary reading would be Structures by J. E. Gordon [1]. Helped me grasp a lot of the mechanical design notions necessary for that sort of work. [0]: https://archive.org/details/StructuresOrWhyThingsDontFallDown/page/n145/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/StructuresOrWhyThingsDontFallDow...
• lukeinator42 1y ago
  My friend and I have been getting into forge molding carbon fibre using 3d printed molds like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25PmqM24HEk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25PmqM24HEk. It is a great technique for making small batches of really strong parts and I'm surprised it isn't more common.
• timmaxw 1y ago
  > Cut threads into printed parts with a thread tap for quick design of low-reuse joints. I've found wood screws work well for this. The wood screw can cut its own threads without needing to use a tap. It does put some stress on the part, though. I mostly print in PETG, which is strong enough; but PLA might split if the hole was parallel to the layers. > A design limitation of threaded inserts is that they are not reliably usable for screws inserted from the back side. During insertion, heat-set inserts often push some molten plastic into the hole beneath them, preventing easy insertion of a screw from the back side. A trick I sometimes use: 1. Before installing the insert, insert the screw from the back side 2. Screw the insert onto the protruding screw 3. Use a soldering iron to install the insert+screw together into the plastic Because the screw is filling the hole, the molten plastic can't block the hole. Instead, the molten plastic forms itself around the screw, and it acts like a Nyloc nut.
  • taneq 1y ago
    If you don’t gave a tap handy you can quickly “heat-set” threads in a part. Print the hole slightly undersized (I usually go 0.2-0.4mm under for M3-M4 size screws) so it takes some effort to screw in, then quickly screw the screw all the way in with a cordless drill. Friction should heat it up enough to melt the plastic and form it round the screw. Wait until cool before removing the screw. :)
  • hamandcheese 1y ago
    In my experience even small machine screws (M3) can cut their own threads into a properly sized hole, and function well enough for a small number of re-assembly. That said, I'm rarely designing for portability, I just find the right sized hole for my printer by printing some test prints.
  • jvyduna 1y ago
    Plastic-cutting thread screws can also be great for this; the threads have higher pitch and wide spacing, but aren't as deep as a wood screw. The <1000-pack selection on Small Parts / Amazon can be slim, but in the last year Bambu started selling small packs for reasonable prices.
• MuffinFlavored 1y ago
  Does the world have an oversupply of ESP32/RaspberryPi/3D printers/similar but not enough use cases?
  • lucasoshiro 1y ago
    No. 3D printers are not the revolution that they looked at first. But after the initial hype, they found their niche and they are strong in it. Nowadays I even dare to say that it's more useful to have a 3D printer at home than having a ink jet.
    • terribleperson 1y ago
      I have a printer, but I've lived without one before. I simply went to Kinkos or Staples and printed what I needed. Can't do that as readily when you need something 3d printed, and it's a very capable tool.
      • lucasoshiro 1y ago
        > I've lived without one before I think it's easier to live without one today, as many use cases for printing at home were replaced by just using a smartphone and a PDF reader...
• the__alchemist 1y ago
  Question regarding two apparently conflicting bits of information: - A: Fillet edges in the filament direction - B: Have a sharp edge for the seam. How would you crack that nut, as A prevents B. For example, on a rectangular box, maybe fillet 3/4 of the corners, and leave the 4th sharp?
  • aix1 1y ago
    Some possibilities that come to mind: 1. not care about seam placement; or 2. place seams manually in the slicer; or 3. add a tiny V-shaped notch specifically for the slicer to put the seam there.
    • Filligree 1y ago
      4. Use a scarf seam, which Bambu’s does if it can’t find a better option. Still visible, but much less so. 5. Use rear. The seam will be a single line down the back of the part.
      • aix1 1y ago
        Thanks for mentioning scarf seams. They seem like a very neat development that I didn't know about. This was an interesting read: https://www.printables.com/model/783313-better-seams-an-orca-slicer-guide-to-using-scarf-s https://www.printables.com/model/783313-better-seams-an-orca...
• AgentElement 1y ago
  This is a fantastic article. It neatly summarizes several tricks that took me years to pick up. Another useful trick to minimizing material in a print is to not print surfaces at all. Most of the mass in a print is concentrated in the shell. If the top and bottom surfaces are not particularly critical to the function of the part, then you can remove either surface. The slicer can still fill in the volume enclosed by these surfaces with infill. If you use a planar infill, such as a rectilinear, hexagonal, or triangular infill, the parts can look quite nice. This trick works particularly well on mostly flat parts. I use two TPU parts printed in this manner daily: A phone case [0] and a relief strap for a pair of headphones [1]. [0] https://www.printables.com/model/615154-google-pixel-8-case https://www.printables.com/model/615154-google-pixel-8-case [1] https://www.printables.com/model/577575-hifiman-comfort-strap https://www.printables.com/model/577575-hifiman-comfort-stra...
• darkteflon 1y ago
  This looks so good. I’ve gotten into 3D printing in the past six months with an A1 Mini. I initially bought it intending solely to do creative projects with my kid, but I’ve been surprised to find myself getting deeper into printing functional parts. I recently printed a 6” server rack for a GLi.net Beryl and Apple TV for travel, from a combination of pre-designed and self-designed parts. 3D printing as a pursuit can be time-consuming - there’s always a risk with these things that you take them on as a dilettante and they end up gathering dust in a corner. I initially scraped by with some middling Blender skills (leaning into non-destructive operations where possible), but that is far from ideal - you really do need CAD. But to anyone considering jumping in, I would say: if you get an A1 (get the full size, not the Mini) and use Claude to write your parametric OpenSCAD scripts, the time commitment is such that you can _just about_ indulge in this hobby as a dilettante - eg, as a project for your kids. Without LLMs, I think it would be too much of a commitment unless you’re really dedicated, or already have CAD skills. Anyway, gonna go read this in full.
  • abeindoria 1y ago
    the Bambu P1S with AMS is one of the better purchases I've made. I've had an ender3v2 for so long and while it worked ok (and arguably better than many people's experiences with them), I got tired of constantly fiddling with stuff. Now, it just works. It doesn't matter what I throw at it. Made me get into the CAD hobby too. >use Claude to write your parametric OpenSCAD scripts Can you talk a little about it?
    • prawn 1y ago
      I use ChatGPT to help me with OpenSCAD and really enjoy it. It doesn't always nail it, but often works as a shortcut, especially with loops to create radial extrusions. You can muck around with things like asking it to give you code to design a castle, and then see how off-track it is.
    • darkteflon 1y ago
      Yes, as sibling mentions, there’s not much to it: just crack open Claude or ChatGPT and start asking for what you want, as an OpenSCAD script. You’ll quickly get a feel for it. Others might have more structured approaches they can share.
• hinkley 1y ago
  For a second I thought that first picture said Festool.
• owenversteeg 1y ago
  Great article. Unfortunately it seems that there is a lot of information out there about DFM for 3D printing but not much about the actual print process itself: temperatures, bed flatness, bed adhesives, nozzle size, etc. Does anyone have any suggestions or resources on the subject?
  • joshvm 1y ago
    Are you asking about best practices? Or the theory behind the printing process? I think there is a ton of this actually, because when 3D printing became affordable, the community did a huge amount of experimentation to figure out how to make their $250 Ender reliable. Stefan's CNC Kitchen is a good channel if you want to see experiments with things like temperatures and materials. https://www.cnckitchen.com/ https://www.cnckitchen.com/ Or you could look at the original RepRap research and how it's evolved. The MK4S+ is just a very refined version of the original bed slinging printers. There are also papers on slicer development. There has been a trend towards thicker nozzles as slicers have gotten better (eg using 0.6 by default instead of 0.4). Otherwise advances in printer technology, particularly first layer calibration, have improved massively in the last few years. So things like bed flatness and adhesives are much less of an issue with auto-levelling/probing nozzles. Bear in mind Ultimaker has been doing it this way for years, but it became mainstream (cheap) more recently. Any of the major modern enclosed printers (Prusa Core/XL, Bambu) shouldn't have adhesion problems with standard filaments. It's also highly filament specific, though the really high end machines (Markforged) are reliable in my experience because they discourage any deviation from their recommended materials and print settings. For example MarkForged - a $10000+ printer - shipped their desktop FDM machine with Elmer's purple glue. They said it worked best in their testing and it still works for me.
    • owenversteeg 1y ago
      I'm looking for best practices, although any theory as it relates to higher quality finished parts is also welcome. And thank you, I've seen Stefan's work and it seems to be about as good as it gets. I'll take a look at the original RepRap research too, probably some interesting bits in there. I agree that the really high end machines from Markforged and co look dead reliable, but they remind me of that old quote, "you can make anything on a lathe but money." It took me a fair bit of scrolling through slick marketing pages to find out that they are 5-figure machines that print at half the speed of consumer printers and can't print ABS (but can print $200/kg high strength proprietary filaments!) Instead I just got a handful of the major modern enclosed printers.
• bilsbie 1y ago
  This is neat! What’s the angle you can do before you need supports? What amount of bridging is ok?
  • DannyBee 1y ago
    It actually is fairly filament dependent (among other things) For example, stiffer filaments can usually handle more overhang before they sag and screw things up. The easiest rule of thumb is to assume 45degrees, which works for ~all filaments. You can do a lot better if you choose filaments right however.
• bilsbie 1y ago
  Is prusa the way to go for someone who wants something that just works?
  • codingrightnow 1y ago
    I'm not sure anything 'just works'. I have an Ender 3 S1 with autoleveling. I still have to adjust 4 knobs while getting under the print head with a feeler gauge. It's absolutely maddening. I need to do this with every print. If I don't touch the thing for a few months it's really bad. If you don't get it right it will gauge your printing surface or alternatively rip your piece apart as it prints. Then you need to know about bed temperature, nozzle temperature, and a hundred other things. Then what types of filament work best with certain bed types. I wish I never got it.
    • sho_hn 1y ago
      I've never any sort of pre-print processing/calibration on my Prusa MK4(S), other than cleaning the build plate. This sort of hand-holding really isn't required anymore on the modern printers. Slicers also come with presets for different filaments these days, which generally do a reasonable job and knowing about temps & co is largely optional to getting going.
    • lawn 1y ago
      You should upgrade to another printer. You shouldn't have to do this for every print with a better printer.
  • sho_hn 1y ago
    Yeah, they're work horses. I've printed for thousands of hours on my MK4(S) now, and it's still going strong. I've had no issues at all. Similar experiences around me.
  • bschwindHN 1y ago
    Get a Prusa, you'll love it. I have an MK4 which pretty much never fails to print.
  • Geee 1y ago
• Art9681 1y ago
  The moment the teacher realizes it was never about the perceived correct answer, but the questions that led to the paths taken. The sudden realization that teaching is more than the teacher initially perceived. Its not about teaching "this is so", but rather, "why do we know this is so?". Which is what education should have always been about. It's not about responding with the correct answer. It's about asking the right questions. A famous Greek philosopher knew this, as did many before and after. This is another after.
• stackedinserter 1y ago
  Circles are not that harmful if you print a diameter template with 1-10mm holes with 0.1 or 0.2 step. Don't measure your bolt, stick it into the hole where it's tight enough and you're good to go.
• gitroom 1y ago
  yeah i bounced off freecad so many times but once i finally got something printed it was worth the grind
• Geee 1y ago
  One additional trick that some people are doing is printing just the shell and then filling the 3d print with some kind of resin, foam or concrete. Here's a concrete filled CNC machine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8t82OQXefM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8t82OQXefM
• DannyBee 1y ago
  Thankfully, support necessity will go away as 4/5axis 3d printing comes to consumer hardware over say, 10 years. With 5 axis, you can print any model without the need for supports. (I'm well aware of the difficulties/realities here, i've built 5 axis motion control systems before)
• victorhooi 1y ago
  The article states it is specifically geared towards FDM (i.e. filament) 3D printers. I wonder if anybody with more experience knows how much of this would overlap with SLA (i.e. resin-style) 3D printers. For example, there's rough guidelines like, overhangs are less of an issue with SLA - and the Z-height is ultimately what most affects print-time, but would be great to see something more in-depth here, with some engineering behind it. Or if there's similarly in-depth articles for resin 3D printers?
  • WillAdams 1y ago
    It should be much the same except no layer lines or other aspects of squeezing stuff out through an extruder incrementally.
  • alnwlsn 1y ago
    From when I was briefly working with "personal" resin printers (elegoo, anycubic, etc): - In terms of strength, print orientation doesn't really matter. - The z height is pretty much the only thing that affects print time since it exposes a single layer all at once. So it takes the same time to print one item as it does to print with a bed full of them. - The supports in resin aren't to push the print up like FDM, they are to pull the print up. Each layer needs something above it to pull it out of the vat for the next layer. - Unlike FDM, the surface attached to the bed isn't normally used as one of the finished surfaces. The printer usually exposes the first few layers long to make a solid base which is well adhered to the bed. If you want good surfaces all around, raise your part up a bit and use supports. - It's pretty unusual to not use supports in resin printing. - It can help to orient the print so that the least cross section area is in contact with the FEP film at any given time. This makes it less likely for the print to get stuck to the bottom of the vat. - Resin parts don't really have a concept of infill. You either print hollow parts or ones that are 100% solid (you never print FDM parts at 100%). If you print hollow, make sure you have a way to drain out the resin when it's done printing. - Even if your print is open at the top, it can still become filled with resin during the print, like putting your finger over the end of a straw. Make sure this doesn't suck up all the resin in your vat, or put a somewhere so air can get in. - The whole business of washing and curing parts is more than I can get into here. Of note is that you can't really cure the "inside" of a part because light from the outside only makes it so far in. - Resin parts tend to be very brittle. I once pressure tested one with 800 Psi CO2 once, through a small printed tube, and it held, but it would break if you hit it with a hammer. We tried the "tough" resins too, but never got any result comparable to even regular FDM with PLA. I used to say that I thought of resin parts not as a solid piece of plastic, but of finely powdered dust particles glued together. - Large resin parts warp, badly. Dimensions will be accurate on the small scale (millimeters) but not on the large scale (10s or 100s of millimeters). Not sure if it's because there's a good amount of force pulling on each layer during the printing process, or from stresses introduced during the curing process. I mostly make mechanical parts. Between the messy processing, weak materials, warping that throws off dimensions, and health concerns surrounding the resin (not to mention the intolerable smell), I pretty much gave up on resin printing. Any more, if I need something that must be resin printed, I'll order it from a professional service (which have both better performance resins than the home gamer can get and the correct setup to deal with them).
• baq 1y ago
  How is this free. I usually don’t bookmark anything nor print to pdf; done both just to be double sure I don’t lose it.
• danpritch 1y ago
  Extremely interesting. From a readers perspective as well, this was a long read, but the way it was written was very clear and interesting all the way through. So well done on both counts!
• immibis 1y ago
  Note also the more general concept of "Design for Manufacturing" - tailoring your design to use the strengths and avoid the weaknesses and maximize efficiency in your particular manufacturing process, whatever it is. 3D printing was once conceptualized as a magic way to create absolutely anything. It turns out to be just one more tool in the manufacturing toolbox, bringing some very unique strengths and weaknesses, but still just another of many. DFM applies to 3D printing just as much as it applies to CNC milling, sheet metal stamping, plastic injection molding, or any other process - it's always important to think about how the end product is physically created, and optimize for that.
• alnwlsn 1y ago
  In the old days you needed to be a lot more cautious with sharp corners. If you print into a sharp corner, the hotend has to decelerate to a stop and then accelerate in the new direction. During this time, a little extra plastic will leak out of the nozzle. You can soften this transition with a rounded over corner. Current printers usually have pressure advance, so this is a lot less important now.
  • Ccecil 1y ago
    Pressure advance has been around for at least a decade with many people using it. I would say the biggest gain for the newer (cheaper) printers have is the input shaping and resonance tuning. This allowed for running higher accels/speeds with a machine that is less mechanically sound. Followed closely by the lack of slicer options and forcing use of branded filament, eliminating those choices makes it easier to make a slicer profile that is repeatable (in my case I have been using Atomic filament and the same basic slicer profile for close to 10 years). In my shop...I still don't use advance or input shaping...but I build machines with very solid frames. The gains from input shaping seem to be less based on how solid the frame/motion is (based on what I have seen). Current printer is ~10 years old, still solid. Not as fast as the corexy (due to leadscrew drive) but prints very well and has a 320mm cubed area. Without pressure advance or other magic tricks I print at 100mm/s with PLA @150-200mm/s travels, not to mention I have a very heavy extruder.
• ajuc 1y ago
  > Divide and Conquer This is the most important, it's so much better for obvious and less obvious reasons. I tried to print a front basket in one piece for my wife's bike 2 times before I got it to print. It broke the next week. I changed it from 1 part to 5 and joined them with zip-ties, thread and 3d-printed pins. Despite the assembly time I was finished in less than half the time, every part was stronger because it was in best orientation, the linkages had some give to them which provides surprising amount of amortization that wasn't there when everything was in one piece. It shakes the contents much less on uneven road because the linkage to the bike is only rigid one-way. It also prevents parts breaking easily, and if something breaks I just have to reprint the weakest sacrificial part that joins the bike with the basket. And if I think of an improvement - I just need to reprint small part instead of everything. BTW another very useful trick is preventing layer splitting by designing a vertical through-hole into which you put a zip-tie in tension. Some people use bolts and nuts for that, but that's more expansive and much heavier solution.
• sitkack 1y ago
  Best thing to cross hn on 3d printing in years. Many of the design considerations they outline are classified under "Compliant Mechanisms" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compliant_mechanism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compliant_mechanism https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=compliant+mechanism https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=compliant+mecha...
• Jubijub 1y ago
  This article is incredible, in the age of AI slip it’s refreshing to read content of this quality. I’m very new to 3D printing (designed my first part this weekend), and so I learned a lot
• Xmd5a 1y ago
  A couple techniques I used the article doesn't mention: - Molds: in my case for silicone joints for high pressure environments. - Flexible filaments/TPU: custom shaped joints to make boxes rainproof. Custom elastic straps with a seam in the box makes for a very nice alternative to screws. - Triboplastics: self-lubricating polymers that can be used as bearings. https://www.igus.com/3d-print-material/3d-print-filament https://www.igus.com/3d-print-material/3d-print-filament
• semireg 1y ago
  I started 3D printing about 10 years ago with the first Taz machines and they left me a broken, broken man. Fast forward to a month ago, I bought a Prusa Core One, loved it, and then bought a XL 5-toolhead. It's been so much fun using printers that "just work." I finished this 6-day print last week! https://www.reddit.com/r/prusa3d/comments/1kb3p0w/xl_full_bed_6day_fractal_finish/ https://www.reddit.com/r/prusa3d/comments/1kb3p0w/xl_full_be...
• tgtweak 1y ago
  These are excellent tips. Also helpful is the fact that since Bambu came into the scene, the tooling (slicers) and printers (core-xy and others) are all stepping up their usability game, getting the entire space into a "just print" mentality which is really driving a lot of adoption, model creation and just good for the overall ecosystem. I design a lot of parts in fusion360 and have been printing for nearly a decade, and even I found some good tips in here. I would add one very important section here which is filament selection. Modern filaments like PC-CF (carbon-fiber impregnated polycarbonate) are unbelievably versatile for real-world prints and parts, and the higher-end consumer printers can print this (requires a ~300'C capable print head and hardened steel nozzle) with relative ease. There are so many different filaments out there outside the standard PLA that really shine in many ways and aren't 10x more expensive to print with. Slicers are getting pretty good now too with a lot of work going into slicers to improve print quality, speed and part strength. Love seeing cnckitchen called out here so many times - such a great resource to follow and learn from if you're getting serious about new developments in 3d printing and unbiased reviews. The quality of models on printables and thingiverse is really getting better and the amount of things you can simply download and print and have a fully functioning device with 0 external parts (print-in-place and single-print components) is really encouraging to see. Once generative AI gets a grasp on object modelling and cad principles I think we'll see an explosion in functional part models in the same way parameterized models are becoming more mainstream.
  • fennecfoxy 1y ago
    Yeah I went from Creality Ender 5 Plus to a Bambu and even with Bambu's recent getting too big for their boots I still like their hardware. Upon getting it I'd realised just how much I was always tinkering with the Ender and never actually really printing anything. With the Bambu I didn't have to do any manual configuration at all apart from changing the level of quality as desired and then one where the bridging wasn't quite right (reaaally long bridges) that I had to fine tune over a few test runs (default bridges were fine, but I wanted more squish on them).
    • tgtweak 1y ago
      The print speeds have also 5x'd with these new high speed printers and it's great for experimentation and prototyping. What used to be a 16-20 hour print on a kit based bed slinger is now 3-4 hours with similar quality.
• Ccecil 1y ago
  I'll start out by saying that the article seemed to cover most/all of the areas I would advise people tune around...great work to the OP. About a decade ago I was pushing for more "designing for 3d printing" classes, not only in my own curriculum but also telling anyone who would listen how important it is. Having a design that is designed from the start knowing that it will be manufactured on a printer makes the end result much more usable. Having a solid machine is the first step (this was a major limiting factor to a large number of people in Reprap). This though...is not the most important step. The slicer is the most difficult thing for people to actually "learn". This is why printers like Bambu have such a large "new user" following...they have presets that "just work". To most who have printed for a long time this is less of an issue (which is part of why printers like Voron are still popular). By designing properly you can ease the pain of slicer "tuning", as well as, making your parts stronger in the use case they are planned for. Orientation for strength is a major thing that the inexperienced seem to forget about. I don't know how many designs have been given to me to print that not only are bad for printing, but also, they are not designed in a way which ANY conventional machining/molding can make in a cost effective way. I have wasted a lot of time explaining the things that are in this article to designers...often for them to have me print it as is.