kmanstudios 1,120
Oh, and I think it is just purty :)
I also think its pretty, and what is that alien looking sex toy thing! that looks funky with al the gyroid stuff looking like veins!! I have plans for something similar but different.
56 minutes ago, cloakfiend said:what is that alien looking sex toy thing!
That was not in my original thoughts. I was worried when I first conceived of it that it would be too close to the 'Phantom Cruiser.'
No the wings are the other way round. Looks alieny to me eitherway good job. Inspiring as usual.
Well, yes, the wings are the other way around, but still not far off.
When you have an almost eidetic visual memory, it gets difficult to separate the ideas from the recall. So, it is a bit of a struggle.
I hear you! even though I had to look up eidetic! Thats gonna be my knew fav word! I like it! Like your work!
Do I understand it correctly that for the first model (the red dancer) you split the original model into multiple models? Thus into a sort of "shell model" and an "infill model" (or multiple infill models). And then adjust each one separately to your desires? And then have them printed all in one shot with different colors and settings?
Does your method also work with fine layer heights (like 0.06mm...0.1mm), 0.4mm nozzle, and double wall shells? Or would that diffract and reflect the light flow too much? For example if you wanted to smooth the edges with acetone like cloakfiend's method?
40 minutes ago, geert_2 said:Do I understand it correctly that for the first model (the red dancer) you split the original model into multiple models? Thus into a sort of "shell model" and an "infill model" (or multiple infill models). And then adjust each one separately to your desires? And then have them printed all in one shot with different colors and settings?
Here is an image of how I set up the dancer file:
The Master model is all intact.
The model for modifying has the body removed and then 'pushed' out along the vertex/face normals so that it encapsulates the parts I want.
With the modifier model, I tell it to use a different density. This way I do not have to worry about the proper meetup of two separate models and can control whether it as more or fewer walls.
The main system has an infill of say 8% gyroid. Then I use the modifying model to use, say, a 30% gyroid. Both of these are just numbers for example and will depend on the model employed.
The only control I have found for colours is that you can specify shell colour and and infill colour.
44 minutes ago, geert_2 said:Does your method also work with fine layer heights (like 0.06mm...0.1mm), 0.4mm nozzle, and double wall shells? Or would that diffract and reflect the light flow too much? For example if you wanted to smooth the edges with acetone like cloakfiend's method?
Would not know about transparents, but would work with solid models in the example above.
In transparent materials, I use a large bore nozzle and one wall at larger than normal layer heights. This increases the transparency by eliminating air gaps between walls.
But the only way to really to tell would be to experiment. Basically I followed this example:
http://taulman3d.com/t-glase-features.html
Once I found this, it became the template I worked from.
As for smoothing the surface, I would think that applying any chemical to the materials would cloud it. Personally, I like the way the layers work with the light. And, most people who have held the physical models seem to like the look as well.
I have not gotten around to using my XTC-3D yet to see how that would help.
So I printed a cooling hood for a fan today...*sigh*
You guys are on a level I can't even see. I feel like a termite watching an aircraft take off. Still, it is inspiring and like our own private art gallery. Thanks for sharing!
J
Ive seen xtc work well with transparent filament, some dude was making lenses and although small looked pretty good. There is also light cured resin and nail varnish to try. Also a thick layer of superglue might work (it sands clear and can be polished!). Might cloud up though? Maybe superglue remove. I remember that melting plastic. So many things to try....when i have time, lol.
15 hours ago, kmanstudios said:Here is an image of how I set up the dancer file:
The Master model is all intact.
The model for modifying has the body removed and then 'pushed' out along the vertex/face normals so that it encapsulates the parts I want.
With the modifier model, I tell it to use a different density. This way I do not have to worry about the proper meetup of two separate models and can control whether it as more or fewer walls.
The main system has an infill of say 8% gyroid. Then I use the modifying model to use, say, a 30% gyroid. Both of these are just numbers for example and will depend on the model employed.
...
Thanks for the clarification.
I think the gyroids add an extra dimension to the typical fluidness (I don't know a better English word) of your designs. It fits well together.
I wonder how long it will take before industrial designers are going to try gyroids in overmoulding, in their injection moulded tooth brushes, decorative vases and statues, and sex toys indeed? Sort of gyroids, because you can't injection mould cavities with deep undercuts of course. With misty, translucent materials the effect might work. I haven't seen anything like this yet, apart from marbles.
35 minutes ago, geert_2 said:I haven't seen anything like this yet, apart from marbles.
I am sure someone will figure it out. Until then it is a unique opportunity for 3D printing.
36 minutes ago, geert_2 said:Thanks for the clarification.
You are welcome :)
@geert_2 asked about transparency and printing them.
I saw this post elsewhere and though I do not think it would be good for what I am doing above, I think it is a good thing to consider for other projects.
On 12/12/2018 at 9:42 AM, kmanstudios said:@geert_2 asked about transparency and printing them.
I saw this post elsewhere and though I do not think it would be good for what I am doing above, I think it is a good thing to consider for other projects.
Thanks for that link. Remarkable that they achieve best transparency by doing exactly the opposite of what is usually recommended: very thin instead of very thick layers. I am going to try that next time I print in transparent PET.
Recommended Posts
kmanstudios 1,120
yep. nothing more than that. Or, let the patterns be manipulated by region. For instance, in the dancer, I used an overall pattern in the model as a whole, but used the model settings to dictate a denser pattern to alter the light passing through areas.
But, it is basically the same thing. Just one is internal and, if chosen, one external. Infill expansion will not protrude except horizontally, thus needing the extra model to create a specified area in all directions for infill poking through uniformly.
Edited by kmanstudiosLink to post
Share on other sites