Best Support Pattern for removing?

[TheOneLasagna 0]

Does anyone know the best support pattern for removal? I am attempting to print a small spring so I need something that can be removed without breaking the spring. 

[geert_2 557]

For my small models, and my single-nozzle printers (UM2), small ribs on top of the support worked best. Also, and very important, I always design enough features into the supports so that I can grab them carefully with pliers, pincettes, other tools, or I can get in there with a knife. And I split them in small chunks which I can wiggle loose easily. So, for these reasons, on delicate models I usually design custom supports into my models, instead of the automatic supports.

 

See the red and orange supports in the first picture. The ribs on top are usually 0.5mm wide, and 1mm separated. The gap between the ribs and the underside of the model is usually 0.2 to 0.3mm, depending on the model.

 

For some models, thin plates floating in the air, also work well as supports: they can be peeled off layer by layer (see the pictures).

 

It depends a lot on the model. So I would suggest you make several test models with different dimensions, and try which works best for you.

 

 

 

[geert_2 557]

I just stumbled on a photo on my harddisk. This is why some supports have extensions beyond the area to support, so I can grab them and wiggle them loose. This makes support removal very easy. Otherwise it would be a nightmare with these small dimensions (see ruler in mm and cm).

 

Also note the ugly defects in the Z-direction in the print: at that time I did not yet print these models with an extra dummy "cooling tower" to increase printing time per layer for better cooling. Sudden changes in total layer printing time, and thus differences in cooling, show up as ugly horizontal defects in tiny models.

 

[TheOneLasagna 0]

Thanks for the help! Would the gaps between the supports just be however long you think your printer can bridge?

[geert_2 557]

The printer can bridge quite a lot, but then the first layer over the gap sags a bit. And I need to slide the other part of the keychain into that hole, so I want it to be more accurate. However, I don't want the supports to fuse with the underside of the model. So that is why I use these dimensions: they give reasonable accuracy and not too much fusion. But it differs from model to model, trial and error...

 

So, I would suggest you try the concept on small test plates, to find out what works best for your materials, your printer (and printer settings), and your typical models. Also, bigger models may need different dimensions than small models.