 Saya hanya ingin meminta bagaimana anda berkenal dengan penjara penjara 3 dan mempertimbangkan diri anda. Anda tahu, anda mungkin pernah menggunakan ini. Saya akan menyebabkan mungkin 1.5 orang anda. Okey, jadi hari ini untuk cara yang lebih berlaku. Saya akan berkongsi dengan anda semua pendapat saya pada apa yang saya telah menjelaskan selepas menjelaskan dengan bahagian yang berlaku. Dan untuk orang yang tidak tahu apa penjara penjara 3 hanya mengambil ini sebagai cara untuk menghargai kejadian bagi teknologi. Saya mengumpul beberapa bulan lalu, saya kita mengjuangkan kiput yang berlaku dengan mencari poin. Dan perkara yang saya lakukan itu adalah kerana saya dapat menurut warnanya di MADE magazine. Di mana penjara penjara penjara penjara penjara penjara penjara penjara penjara penjara penjara penjara untuk menjadikan kepercayaan pasukan yang awamaciones. kekepungan menjadi tek lembaga. Jadi ia sangat menarik kerana jika anda melihat peintan orang-orang jika di mana mereka ada tek lembaga dan tek lembaga, anda akan mampu mengikuti tek lembaga dan tek lembaga dengan mudah menjadi tek lembaga. dalam penyanyi 3D, sebuah kakak perlu menulis sesuatu untuk membuat pembinaan basic untuk pembinaan pembinaan, mereka akan menolakkan anda membuat pembinaan yang mempunyai pertama kali setiap kali. Kenapa ia? Sebab pada pembinaan pembinaan pembinaan yang mempunyai pembinaan tiga-tiga apabila pembinaan pembinaan mempunyai pembinaan atau penyanyi pembinaan dapat membuat anda menggunakan apa yang betul di antara penyanyi dan pembinaan. Jadi apa yang ini bermakna adalah jika anda mempunyai pembinaan pembinaan 1 cm mempunyai pembinaan 1 cm yang memperbaiki pembinaan untuk memasakkan, tidak akan berubah. Ia biasanya tidak berubah dan ia sangat teruk. Anda perlu membuat pembinaan yang lebih kecil dan bahkan apabila anda membuat pembinaan yang lebih kecil, percumaan yang berbeda, perubahan antara penyanyi dan penyanyi akan berubah jika anda membuat pembinaan yang lebih besar dan lebih besar. Jadi banyak yang berlaku setiap kali anda mahu membuat pembinaan yang lebih kecil. Jadi pembinaan yang mempunyai keramah, saya dapat menolak link setelah saya membuat pembinaan pembinaan alternatif, untuk berubah untuk membuat pembinaan yang lebih kecil, anda membuat pembinaan yang lebih kecil dan anda tidak perlu mengikuti banyak. Pemain ini telah dikulinkan bahawa pembinaan yang lebih kecil dengan pembinaan yang lebih kecil adalah yang terbaik. Jadi saya rasa ia menarik kerana saya sebenarnya cuba mempunyai pembinaan yang lebih kecil dan saya sepatutnya perlu mempunyai pembinaan yang lebih kecil. Saya rasa mungkin kita boleh cuba pembinaan yang berbeda dan lihat apakah ia benar-benar sebuah hal yang saya rasa bahawa pembinaan ini akan mengucapkan yang berlaku untuk pembinaan yang lebih kecil, tidak peduli pembinaan. Jadi dengan test yang sangat tidak sain, saya mencubanya 3 kemungkinan yang saya akan menghargai untuk semua pembinaan ini. Saya menghargai pembinaan, pembinaan yang digunakan dan bagaimana menarik pembinaan yang terbaik di tempat saya untuk setiap pembinaan. Jadi pembinaan dan pembinaan yang digunakan dengan cukup cepat untuk untuk orang yang tidak mempunyai pembinaan, anda mungkin yakin memanggil dengan software ini disebabkan Kira, dan semuanya yang perlu dibuatkan di dalam software ini dan ia akan beritahu anda printan dan material seperti itu. Jadi ia adalah hal mudah. Saya hanya melakukan sedikit data di atas itu. Yang paling susah adalah mengenai bagaimana fitanya. Jadi saya tiada pula untuk mengenai pasangan, jadi saya menggabungkan pada gampang saya. Dan saya telah membuat syarikat ini yang disebabkan Arbitree Scoring System di mana jika anda mempunyai syarikat yang lebih tinggi, ia terlalu tepat, pakar anda terlalu besar dan anda tidak boleh melalui segala-galanya. Di sisi negatif, di sisi negatif, jika ia terlalu tepat dan anda hanya akan membesar secara langsung. Dan tentu saja, zero adalah apa yang saya menerima dalam opinion saya sendiri untuk menjadi kebaikan yang terbaik. Jadi itu memang yang terbaik yang saya boleh lakukan. Tapi mari kita melihat apa yang berlaku. Saya juga mempunyai semua pakaian di kedua PLA dan ABS, hanya untuk melihat perbezaan bagaimana pakaian ini mempunyai pakaian yang digunakan. Dan saya mencoba melalui 3 pakaian yang berbeda, 1 cm, 1.2, dan 1.4 cm untuk pakaian pakaian PLA dan ABS. Jadi mari kita mulakan dengan bercakap tentang pakaian yang terbaik. Bagaimana jika anda mempunyai pakaian yang tidak terbaik? Jadi apa yang saya lakukan, saya menunjukkan bahawa dari semua pakaian, ia biasanya mempunyai pakaian yang lebih cepat. Ia menggunakan pakaian yang terbaik yang anda lihat. Dan seperti yang anda lihat, pakaian yang tidak terbaik adalah pakaian yang tidak terbaik. Saya menerima pakaian. Saya menggunakan pakaian dengan pakaian pakaian dengan berada di excel dan saya men рабat menurut Didnburi yang anda dapat lihat tetapi dalam pakaian yang di-X adalah tujuh tangan se interfering tiga minggu, 1 cm, 1.2, 1.4 cm, dan pakaian yang di-Linersinya adalah bagaimana perkara yang mengakutkan pakaian. Jadi pakaian yang di-Ret hotels akan bersetuju semasa dua minit. Jadi pakaian yang di-Ret di sini adalah pakaian yang di-Round Pag yang digunakan di di seluruh, So you can see it's on the faster side of things. In terms of amount of material used, it's the least amount of material used in terms of meters. So it's the same axis, 1cm, 1.2, 1.4. And on this side it's the number of meters of filament used for each pack at each diameter. So roundpakes use the least material compared to the rest. So we have a starting point for analysis. For my arbitrary fit scale, I did the same thing. So you have the scale from zero to three here. And it starts from zero to three here because at zero tolerance, it's just too tight. It's generally too tight. I have this arbitrary outlier 1.2 fit which had a perfect fit for some reason. I have the packs here actually. So if you guys disagree with any of my results, feel free to try out what I printed and tell them for me. Tell me how snug you think the print is. So at least this confirms the general belief that it's very tight at zero tolerance. So we all have this understanding of the classic round pack. And I'm going to talk a bit more about each individual pack design in the same way. So let's move into what I call the centre hole pack because there is a hole in the centre of the pack. You see this pack design a lot in Fingiva where people make precipit parts. It's actually fairly common. And for good reason actually, I'll just skip this and just go straight into the graph. It prints fairly quickly of all the designs. And what's interesting is that and it's a good learning point about tree printing is that it takes a moderate amount of material even though if you look at the design it seems to take up less volume than a traditional round pack. So I just want you sidetrack a bit to bring in this insight on how is it that a pack that of smaller volume ends up taking more material to print than one of less volume. And it's really down to the slicing of the pack. So this is how I printed all my packs. I lie them flat on the bed like this to maximise their strength. And let's just get the where's the file. How do I get the file? Can you help me out here? How do I get my hackware folder? You get my hackware folder. Is this chrome? I just want to drag and drop my folder inside. The folder is? Ya, this one. Okay, so... Ya, let's just pull in the... Now what was it called? Cut this one. So I pull this in. Is this the one? Nope, not this one. Let's pull in the other one. This one. Okay. So this is just an interesting thing I found. We put it down here. And let's just expand this out a bit. Okay, so if you look at the layers, was it a reason why it takes longer compared to say this print over there? It's because... Let's look it down here. Move it like mouse here. The infill down here in the print on the full circle is actually using less material to print when you compare it to building up the other part over here. For some reason the wall surrounding actually takes up slightly more material when you don't print an infill it actually takes up some more material. So is this very curious thing of because of the way it's designed even though it takes up less volume it uses up more material to create the part. So is this an interesting thing I found about 3D printing that is not so straightforward where you just look at the shape and think, oh okay, a larger part means it takes longer. That's not necessarily the case. So let's just go back into this. So that's what I found for this print and of course the most important part is the fit. So in my own subjective opinion this is a market improvement over the round pack at zero tolerance because of the way there's a hole in the center you can push the sides of that hole pack into the hole much easier at zero tolerance. So I get a generally good fit. You can see it hovers around 1 to 0 negative 0.5 over here. So it's generally good for me at zero tolerance. So I can see why a lot of people print this if they want to press fit part. So let's just move forward if you have no questions. I'm trying out this base hole pack and it's interesting because this takes even more print time than the previous two. And the amount of material is also like the third largest amount of material out of all the eight designs. So it goes back into if you want to find out why you can just bring this where is it? Where is it? I don't know how to use this. Ah, this one. Okay, yeah. So if we bring this back into cura you can find out why. Okay. In nutshell, it's just mostly because of the design. Ya, if we put into the layer view in this case if you notice down around here this is where the access material comes about, right? There's much less infill these hexagons in the centre of the print, there's much less. Because of the fact that the machine has to compensate by creating some kind of support at the centre hole at the bridge here. And that's why it creates so-called more material requirement to print even though it uses less volume than the circle print. So you see this kind of idiosyncrasies while I was doing this test which I found quite cool. Interesting. So please cut your service provider some slack if they can't tell you upfront based on the look of the print how long it will take because you literally cannot tell until you try it out yourself. Okay. What is it? Here. Okay. So that's what I found for this one and for the fit-wise it is loose. I actually don't know why. If anyone has any theories please let me know or later we can try out and you fit it out yourself you can let me know why. So those are the results I got for the rounder pack designs. Moving on to the more unusual one like the rectangle pack it generally prints fairly quickly. It's a fairly straightforward design. Printed rectangle is fairly straightforward for 3D printer. But you can see what interesting thing is that it's a fairly thin design. You see here it actually the amount of time taken to print increases a lot as the diameter increases. And the reason that is because of the concept of support structures. If you want to print something like this I need to close this again you want to print something like this the support structures that are generated take up a lot of the material even though it prints faster. This is another interesting thing. So the first assumption is that the more material you use the faster the slower it will print. But that's not really the case. Here you have an example of a print that actually takes faster to print than items that use less material simply because of the support structure inside the print. So it does another thing where you realise you really cannot take for granted based on how something looks how it will print turn out in the print. You really have to run it through software like this there's no support here. Why no support here? Ah here we go. Okay. See ah there you go. So you have to generate all these green colour things when you print this. So another instance of realising how seemingly random the amount of material used and print time affects the print. And of course we're talking about fit here for press fit parts as well. It's generally bad. If you see down here they're all hovering at 3. I had a tough time printing at zero tolerance fitting at zero tolerance and the curious thing is when I print it at ABS it's loose. So it's either too tight or too loose it just doesn't fit. So don't print a rectangular pack and try it out because at least in my experience it's a waste of time. And another unusual design is the rip pack design. It took really long to design in pack by the way. So that's one reason why I wouldn't use it. The second reason is that despite a relatively quick print time a relatively small amount of material used it's generally too loose. You can try it out later first of all it's slight straight through the hole. And my theory is because if you notice these little ridges at the end they are very very small. This is the only contact point between your hole and the pack and when you push it through a hole it rubs off plastic at these tips. And that causes your pack to become instantly smaller than what you printed it out and after one or two fits it just slides straight through. Don't believe me you can try it out for yourself later. So conclusion don't print this this doesn't work as well even though the author has tried it this won't work and it takes too long to design. So the other unusual one is the cross pack I'll just very quickly go through this one. It takes fair bit of time to print and it takes a fair amount of material to print. I won't go into details because of lack of time but what I do want to highlight is that I could not get this thing to fit at all. So far the free round unconventional ones the rib and the rectangle and the cross totally don't fit. So don't try at least based on my experience I will never try them again. So let's zoom in on the octagon that the author tried they print fairly quickly you can see it takes faster than a circular pack to print uses a fair amount of material and with regards to a PLA the blue squares of PLA fits very well but once I use ABS for some reason I think it's the shrinkage of the ABS after you print the print is very loose it slides straight through and for the pack with the hole I get the same results PLA fits is very good but ABS it just slides straight through So the author might be using PLA when he was saying that you know this is a good fit but I cannot dispute the fact that it is really probably the best fit in PLA for an octagon So that leads to my conclusion which it's basically I'm very confused like okay first thing is the test I conducted is not conclusive I already did like one print of H use my subjective opinion to do a fit and ideally you want to print like a hundred of these right well I can say that this pack this central pack is very good I validated that it still remains to be seen whether the rest of the ones especially the ones which I felt were not useful were really because of the design or was it more cause my printer settings were off or you know the printer I was using was bad so I don't know more studies have to be conducted I just like to round off this discussion by saying that I have a friend who treated printed round packs and he told me that even with the same printer if you print ten of them all of them will give you different measurements after you print them so I hope those who don't do treating printing can understand this it's a fairly random and tedious process as of now so if you want to do treating printing please bear with the printer when you get one Thank you Thanks for that scientific experiment of going through the eight different types