Jump to content

Torsion box implications for infill material and layout?


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited) · Torsion box implications for infill material and layout?

Good morning!  It is a balmy -25C with the windchill outside, so what better time to concentrate on the indoor to do list?


My usual disclaimer:  I'm clearly not an engineer.  I work in the end of the field that tries really hard not to break the nice toys that the engineers design for us.


As I look at the growing variety of materials and prepare to set up a test environment, I was looking at the torsion boxes I've built to hold some of my heavier equipment and began to wonder - I know that infill works on a very similar principle, but if I am aiming for the strongest, truest surface to withstand loads at the lowest cost, can I expect (and predict) strength and performance improvements for given combinations of infill and skin materials?


For example. We know that PLA can be very stiff but isn't particularly strong on its own and subject to longer term 'embrittlement' (pardon my abuse of the term).  But what happens, say, if we embed a PLA grid inside a nylon/CF box skin?  The skin provides stiffness and protection from UV, while the PLA should, in theory (depending on print orientation), serve pretty well to support the central area of the box against compression loads.   I recall that some torson boxes use corrugated cardboard for their internal structures and achieve amazing load bearing capacities.


Where am I going with all of this?  Some of the newer materials provide us with new levels of strength and stiffness - but the cost makes using these for larger prints a serious challenge.  If I was able to use an exotic filament for the skin to protect a less expensive but adequately strong matrix (and my question is really about determining 'adequately'), then all of a sudden these new materials start to look cost effective for a broader range of applications.


Looking forward to your thoughts!


Edited by JohnInOttawa
  • Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Posted · Torsion box implications for infill material and layout?

    Good Afternoon from Europe 😉


    This is a very interesting concept, which has been implemented in a great variety of products (ranging from simple wood shell/cardboard honeycomb filled doors to high-strength sandwich panels used in aerospace applications), but as far as I know, hasn't been put to use in 3D printing very much.


    A challenge I can think of is the bonding between the different materials, and also the question of how cost effective this really is, vs. using a lower infill percentage of the more expensive material. What could work, however, is for example CF-Nylon for the shell, and "normal" Nylon for the infill.


    Regarding the issue of PLA - if I recall this correctly, it is not UV degradation, but slow crystallization of the molecules that makes it more brittle over time.

    • Thanks 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Posted · Torsion box implications for infill material and layout?

    Yes, inter-material compatibility is something I wonder about.  If the PLA change will happen regardless of environment, then I guess my next question would be whether that more brittle state leads to increased risk of internal failure or whether the internal matrix is protected from loads relevant to that change.


    Related, there is a wide price range now of CF reinforced filaments.  Perhaps the answer is to go with a more generic filament internally that lacks the surface toughness or print quality of the exotic stuff, but is still good enough to be used internally.


    Cost effectiveness would certainly be a factor dependent on what was being built.  And of course, if the internal fill material was also abrasive, now (on the UM3), we would be talking about two CC cores or Hardcores, which would drive costs somewhat.



  • Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Posted · Torsion box implications for infill material and layout?

    I once hit hard on a PLA model with thin wall and 20% infill, and both the wall and infill got severely crushed and dented at the place of impact. The damage looked weird and very "un-plastic like", but rather like a crashed car. So I am not sure PLA infill is going to protect, unless the soft shell would be very thick and distribute the loads widely enough, and the infill would be nearly solid and very thick too.


    So I would rather print the whole thing in nylon if it has to be tough, or in thick solid PLA if it has to be hard.


    Another option could be to print the shell, and then fill the inside with polyurethane. PU exists in foam, in rubberlike solids (after curing), and in very hard solid versions. I think a very tough and hard PU like used in skater wheels might be a good choice.


    Or print a mould in PLA, carefully seal it with a non-stick layer, and cast it in PU. Then you have a very tough model in a single material. This might go a lot faster and cost less, once you have the setup right, if you need multuple models. A lot of artists and sculpters use this method in various forms. If it has to be light-weight, they tend to fill it with PU-foam. Or sometimes they work the other way round: first model the thing in PU foam, and cut and remove foam as desired. And then they seal the whole model with a hard and solid PU layer.


    So, a combination of 3D-printing for a detailed model, and casting for strength and speed, might also work well. Then you have the best of both.


  • Link to post
    Share on other sites

    • 4 months later...
    Posted · Torsion box implications for infill material and layout?

    You could use and unfilled Nylon for the infill and carbon or glass reinforced Nylon for the shell.  As long as you use the same type of Nylon (PA6, PA12, etc.) you shouldn't have to worry about material compatibility.  Then you're only limited to one hardened nozzle and feeder.

  • 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

      • UltiMaker Cura 5.3 stable released
        In this stable release, Cura 5.3 achieves yet another huge leap forward in 3D printing thanks to material interlocking! As well as introducing an expanded recommended print settings menu and lots of print quality improvements. Not to mention, a whole bunch of new printer profiles for non-UltiMaker printers!
          • Thanks
          • Like
        • 56 replies
      • Here it is. The new UltiMaker S7
        The UltiMaker S7 is built on the success of the UltiMaker S5 and its design decisions were heavily based on feedback from customers.
        So what’s new?
        The obvious change is the S7’s height. It now includes an integrated Air Manager. This filters the exhaust air of every print and also improves build temperature stability. To further enclose the build chamber the S7 only has one magnetically latched door.
        The build stack has also been completely redesigned. A PEI-coated flexible steel build plate makes a big difference to productivity. Not only do you not need tools to pop a printed part off. But we also don’t recommend using or adhesion structures for UltiMaker materials (except PC, because...it’s PC). Along with that, 4 pins and 25 magnets make it easy to replace the flex plate perfectly – even with one hand.
        The re-engineered print head has an inductive sensor which reduces noise when probing the build plate. This effectively makes it much harder to not achieve a perfect first layer, improving overall print success. We also reversed the front fan direction (fewer plastic hairs, less maintenance), made the print core door magnets stronger, and add a sensor that helps avoid flooding.

        The UltiMaker S7 also includes quality of life improvements:
        Reliable bed tilt compensation (no more thumbscrews) 2.4 and 5 GHz Wi-Fi A 1080p camera (mounted higher for a better view) Compatibility with 280+ Marketplace materials Compatibility with S5 project files (no reslicing needed) And a whole lot more  
        Curious to see the S7 in action?
        We’re hosting a free tech demo on February 7.
        It will be live and you can ask any questions to our CTO, Miguel Calvo.
        Register here for the Webinar
          • Like
        • 18 replies
      • UltiMaker Cura Alpha 🎄 Tree Support Spotlight 🎄
        Are you a fan of tree support, but dislike the removal process and the amount of filament it uses? Then we would like to invite you to try this special release of UltiMaker Cura. Brought to you by our special community contributor @thomasrahm
        We generated a special version of Cura 5.2 called 5.3.0 Alpha + Xmas. The only changes we introduced compared to UltiMaker Cura 5.2.1 are those which are needed for the new supports. So keep in mind, this is not a sneak peek for Cura 5.3 (there are some really cool new features coming up) but a spotlight release highlighting this new version of tree supports.  
          • Like
        • 29 replies
    • Create New...