It's time for DIY, so I have a little personal project: it's a spool to store a few cables and take advantage of the core to put adapters in. The gizmo would be 3D printed. My problem: I don't know anything about plastic and 3D printing.
So I would have 3 parts: a base, several spacers (to separate the cables) and a cover screwed on the base.
My questions: - What material? This link (Printer filaments) gives me some clues but difficult to judge between ABS, PET and TPU (by making a first selection). - Depending on the material, the thickness of 2mm seems sufficient to me but is it suitable for printing? - Should we put shelves or will it be done "naturally" when printed? - I traced the thread a bit on the fly (I'm on SW15) do I need more play?
Attached is my model (assembly with virtualized parts).
I am interested in advice/experience on printing platforms.
First of all, you should expect to have to practice for a while before getting the expected result, because depending on your machine, its accuracy, the nozzle, the diameter of the filament and your printing settings, the results will range from catastrophic to nickel.
I advise you to practice with existing models of modest size, which will allow you to familiarize yourself with the settings and behavior of your machine and the filament, to make adjustments accordingly, ... in short, to understand how it works and the results obtained.
To start with, I recommend the PLA, much easier to print, even without a heated bed and a moderate nozzle temperature between 190 and 200°. ABS requires higher temperatures (230°) than all machines can handle, better vapor evacuation, ...
2mm thick is a good compromise.
It will necessarily take play for the thread. A minimum for modeling, and a probable compensation for printing, to be adjusted in the slicer and after testing.
Regarding the "spokes" I'm not sure what you mean. If you want to talk about "rim spokes", they are not necessary in themselves since you will have to print this model flat (the base on the bed), so the "rings" will be stacked.
I don't have a printer at my disposal so I'll go through one platform or another (although the first quotes obtained online are frightening: around 150-200€ just for the base).
Indeed, it's not cheap. It seems surprising to me, but you have to see the details of the quote and the dimensions of your object. Well, at least it saves you a lot of technical problems.
Since the thread is the only really crucial point, it is necessary to know the manufacturer's tolerance and plan the clearance accordingly. For example, for an external tolerance of 0.2, it will be necessary to provide at least 0.4 (rather 0.5) of space between the thread of the base and that of the lid (from external tip to internal point > > ).
I think I know what inflates the price; the position of your object. In this position, it requires unnecessary supports for each hole! The plates of your cylinders must be horizontal, flat on the bed, like a glass placed on a table, this is one of the basics of 3D printing. Drawn from above, not from the front. Reorient and requote.
I don't think that the orientation plays on the quote, they know how to turn a part so that it is printable and easy for them^^
If you stay on a filtering made in a bigger one (don't think in metal thread if we can say ca^^, or a system with 3-4 notches by playing on the flexibility of the plastic.
On the other hand I think something is missing, a notch to block the wires otherwise it may be complicated to wrap even with a knot^^
Maybe add a square profile in the center to prevent the rotation of the wedges (which can also be used to fix the wire feeders. (don't forget the notch in this case on the wedges)
Too bad for the price, at this price you might as well buy a printer one^^
@FUZ3D: Unless it's an automatic quote that considers the orientation of the object as you send it.
Regarding the improvements, I was thinking of a way to have a better grip on the lid to tighten/loosen it, but it's not essential if you don't force it to tighten it. And then there will be the vents as sockets if necessary.
The price has nothing to do with the cost of the machine and materials, but rather in relation to the hourly cost of all the players needed until the point of collection of the delivery.
Example
Receipt of the order in registration 15 minutes Reception at the fab + planning and sending to the right machine 20 mn Work by the operator less expensive if thread deposit because no cleaning if you had opted for a powder model. On the other hand, the machine time of the powder model is less. 15 to 30 minutes I don't know the hourly cost of the machine (because it depends on the model and its technology). Packaging, invoice output, 10 mins Mail transport ??? let's say €9 to €15
So at the hourly cost of 90 to 105 € per hour, I let the math do the math. So for an isolated part it's expensive but if you make 100 parts nested in a powder model then the price it decreases on the machine cost sector. The others are the fixed costs but which are spread over a larger number of rooms, so a much lower unit PR.
I think you'll get a better result with a powder model in addition to the thread mode on objects that are a bit large and cadaverously slow so high machine cost. If you take an ABS and your subcontractor does nesting with other customers, the cost and time are normally less. What costs is not the material but the fixed costs. Ask for a quote in Romania where a P3HQ is paid 500 to 600 € month and you will see that what costs are the fixed costs.
Kind regards
PS: The powder deposition is very accurate and with less defect. Remember the model I made for the Visiativ competition. The thickest wall is 1 mm and the size of the Visiativ logo is 8 mm in its largest dimension and with details of 0.5 mm. Remember that the object should not be more than 5 cm X 5cm
A little friendly tip, because you do 3D printing, your spacer grids can be lighter and stronger. Give me your part file, I'll make you a simulation on two types of objects. In 3D printing you have more attitude for your shapes so you have to take advantage of it.
Small suggestion uses the thread tool but especially the pitch which is used for bottles which are easier to screw but especially to make in 3D Print. The thread tool and allows you to adjust the start of the thread correctly
There are other tricks to make the thread also serve as a spacer for intermediate grids.
The thread on this side of the cylinder implies a greater inner diameter of the interlayer than the thread and therefore less adjusted for those that will be positioned deeper in the base, at the risk of jamming the cables, depending on their cross-section, between the interlayer and the wall of the central cylinder. Keeping it indoors is better in my opinion. This is only my humble opinion.
The goal was simply to suggest using the bottle thread (much simpler than the classic thread and less turn to close) and also to shapes that can only be made in 3D printing (here lightening in the inner cylinder to concretize the possibilities). For the rest I had a little fun (that all folks) ;-)
Our eminent colleague @stefbeno is not a beginner, he is well versed in design for a long time and I would never dare to say anything to him. But we can always make suggestions ;-)
At the same time, if @stefbeno has asked for advice, it is because he is inclined to hear it. I think that any remark, as long as it is constructive, is good to say and to consider. "You always need someone smaller than yourself," says an expression.
"The goal was simply to suggest using the bottle thread (much simpler than the classic thread and less turn to close)"
Wow, we can see that there are big cats in cages at the moment.
The spacer is ~15€ (model with the same orientation). I'm going to try to rotate the pieces to change the orientation.
@Fuz3d: the cables will already be coiled and tied. The idea is to have a nice company.
@Sylk: for the socket on the lid, I was thinking about it.
@Zozo_mp: the problem is that in the 2015 version, there is no thread tool. It's an idea to open the central barrel, it could limit the material and therefore reduce the price. Do you have an extract of "standard" on bottle threads.
I chose to put the thread inside the barrel to avoid hanging up with the cables if they are coiled a little tight. I also made a double net to avoid doing x turns.
And yes, I'm a bit used to design, but between stacking aluminum cubes and printed plastic, there's quite a gap.
Not having the thread tool is not a big deal in your case since the thread does not need to comply with any standard, as long as the cover and the base are compatible. Your method is viable, simply reduce the number of turns and use a larger thread profile, for example the so-called "bottle" suggested by @Zozo_mp which will be sufficient and therefore easier to print. The spacing of the steps does not matter; Whatever it is, the two threads will be in contact at the end of the tightening.
