Jump to content

Has anyone tried this?

Recommended Posts

Posted · Has anyone tried this?

Good afternoon everyone.  Just wondering if this will work or if it is a very bad idea.


I have a model that I need to be strong and relatively ridgid in more than one plane.  it's pretty tall, just about the entire height of my UM3 volume and narrow enough that I am worried that significant leverage could result in a break along a print line.  I really don't think infill geometry is going to do enough for me.


I was recently working with some low viscosity, relatively low temperature curing epoxy on a woodworking project (stablising spalted maple internals for a table) and it occurred to me, what if I printed a grid infill and, before I got to the point where I started to skin the top, I paused the print and filled in the infill columnar gaps with this epoxy.    If this worked, I would further like to experiment with suspending reinforcing fibre or steel wire in the epoxy columns, much like rebar.


I will, of course, make a test run and fill it with the expoxy once removed from the print zone to test for watertightness and to make sure it doesn't just melt everything, but I thought I'd see if anyone here has tried such a thing.


Would it do as I expect, and harden into may vertical bonded expoxy rods, or would it ultimately fail?




  • Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Posted · Has anyone tried this?

    Could you rotate the model 90°, so it is laying flat? And then print with 90% or 100% infill? That should give a quite stong part.


    For casting epoxy into a print, I would rather use no infill at all. Otherwise the infill grid might create weak points where bonding to the epoxy is not very strong, and where air bubbles are entrapped. Another thing to consider might be shrinking of the epoxy, which could deform the model, so try to find a slow-curing, low-shrink and low-exotherm version.


    But if you plan to use epoxy anyway, what about designing and printing a mould, and then casting the epoxy into it? At least, if the shape of the model allows this (=not too complex, no impossible undercuts)? Then you would have a part in one piece, in one single material. And the mould might be reusable. Also, it might be easier to incorporate fibers or steel wire into it. Only make sure you get *very good* release methods, in multiple layers, so the epoxy does not stick to the mould.


    Or else, what about printing a single piece of the model, then post-process it and make it nice and smooth, and then cast a silicone mould around it? And then cast the epoxy in the silicone mould? This gives less release problems, due to the non-stickyness and flexibility of the silicone. But still use plenty of release spray, to ease releasing and to prolong mould life. There are lots of good Youtube videos on mould making and casting. Probably this is the method I would try, if I had to do it. This method combines the advantages of 3D-printing with those of silicone moulds and casting.


    If you have succes, or failure, don't hesitate to show the results here, so that we can learn from it.


    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Posted · Has anyone tried this?

    Good feedback @geert_2, thank you!


    Your reflections on alternatives make sense.   My thinking in this case was to have the part come off the printer in a state where, after curing, it would be good to go with minimal post processing.  Your points on the weaknesses introduced by the infill echo a similar engineering concern on shear lines.


    I did consider alternative placement, there are some constraints on doing that, such as printing a sloping surface without a big alias effect and a full length bore for a rod. 


    That said, I am looking into mold options, there are a few threads here on filament choices, around here it looks like I am down to moldlay or printable wax.  May have to do a bit of trial and error there.


    Thanks again, appreciate your help!



  • Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now
    • Our picks

      • S-Line Firmware 8.3.0 was released Nov. 20th on the "Latest" firmware branch.
        (Sorry, was out of office when this released)

        This update is for...
        All UltiMaker S series  
        New features
        Temperature status. During print preparation, the temperatures of the print cores and build plate will be shown on the display. This gives a better indication of the progress and remaining wait time. Save log files in paused state. It is now possible to save the printer's log files to USB if the currently active print job is paused. Previously, the Dump logs to USB option was only enabled if the printer was in idle state. Confirm print removal via Digital Factory. If the printer is connected to the Digital Factory, it is now possible to confirm the removal of a previous print job via the Digital Factory interface. This is useful in situations where the build plate is clear, but the operator forgot to select Confirm removal on the printer’s display. Visit this page for more information about this feature.
          • Like
        • 0 replies
      • Ultimaker Cura 5.6 stable released
        Cura now supports Method series printers!
        A year after the merger of Ultimaker and MakerBotQQ, we have unlocked the ability for users of our Method series printers to slice files using UltiMaker Cura. As of this release, users can find profiles for our Method and Method XL printers, as well as material profiles for ABS-R, ABS-CF, and RapidRinse. Meaning it’s now possible to use either Cura or the existing cloud-slicing software CloudPrint when printing with these printers or materials
        • 6 replies
    • Create New...