Home » Support » 3D Printing » FUD Interlocking parts??
Search Search  
Show: Today's Messages    Show Polls    Message Navigator
FUD Interlocking parts?? [message #31280] Thu, 21 July 2011 09:31 UTC Go to next message
avatar kolo  is currently offline kolo
Messages: 10
Registered: June 2009
Go to all my models
Junior Member
Interlocking parts: accepted, gap between parts must be at least 0.05 mm.

Could anyone explain exactly what the above means for FUD? Does it mean that if I want to design something that should move (i.e. an axle in a bearing), I need to have 0.05 mm between the parts. In that case it sounds like a quite small gap.

Kjell
Re: FUD Interlocking parts?? [message #31282 is a reply to message #31280 ] Thu, 21 July 2011 10:00 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar duann  is currently offline duann
Messages: 369
Registered: August 2008
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I work here
Thats right Kjell,
That is the absolute minimum space but it would also of course depend on how it could be cleaned out, you can make of course make it bigger.

Cheers



Duann Scott, Designer Evangelist, Shapeways
Re: FUD Interlocking parts?? [message #31284 is a reply to message #31280 ] Thu, 21 July 2011 10:14 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar BillBedford  is currently offline BillBedford
Messages: 346
Registered: November 2008
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I think it is more complicated that that, and the area of the sliding surfaces has to be taken into account. I have piece to test the optimum gaps on order at the moment.


Bill Bedford
Re: FUD Interlocking parts?? [message #31285 is a reply to message #31282 ] Thu, 21 July 2011 10:30 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar kolo  is currently offline kolo
Messages: 10
Registered: June 2009
Go to all my models
Junior Member
Thanks for the very quick reply Duann. Interesting!

So this means that the design in the picture below would work? I would be able to move the axle?

http://i833.photobucket.com/albums/zz254/Olovsson/interlockingparts.jpg

If that's the case I'm very impressed.. Smile

Kjell
Re: FUD Interlocking parts?? [message #31287 is a reply to message #31284 ] Thu, 21 July 2011 10:35 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar kolo  is currently offline kolo
Messages: 10
Registered: June 2009
Go to all my models
Junior Member
BillBedford wrote on Thu, 21 July 2011 10:14

I think it is more complicated that that, and the area of the sliding surfaces has to be taken into account. I have piece to test the optimum gaps on order at the moment.


Hi Bill,

Thanks for the input. Any feeling for how big the gap needs to be? I saw a picture of your printed screw couplings in some tread (or might have been on your page), did they work out well, if yes which gap did you use?

Kjell


Re: FUD Interlocking parts?? [message #36999 is a reply to message #31280 ] Thu, 20 October 2011 02:02 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar Berkeley Gang  is currently offline Berkeley Gang
Messages: 2
Registered: October 2011
Go to all my models
Junior Member
kolo wrote on Thu, 21 July 2011 09:31

Interlocking parts: accepted, gap between parts must be at least 0.05 mm.

Could anyone explain exactly what the above means for FUD? Does it mean that if I want to design something that should move (i.e. an axle in a bearing), I need to have 0.05 mm between the parts. In that case it sounds like a quite small gap.

Kjell



This topic comes very close to my first question, but the answers still leave me puzzled. The model I have in mind has flat panels. Think of, perhaps, panel lines on an aircraft fuselage or wing. Or a door panel adjacent to a fender on a car. The two panels are coplaner and adjoining.

I could model these with essentially a scribed line, but then the resolution would be 0.1mm, because that's the minimum detail thickness, right? So how would I design something with separate but interlocking panels, in order to get the gap down to this 0.05 mm gap between the two panels?

aTdHvAaNnKcSe,
Berkeley Gang
Re: FUD Interlocking parts?? [message #37001 is a reply to message #36999 ] Thu, 20 October 2011 03:46 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar stonysmith  is currently offline stonysmith
Messages: 1963
Registered: August 2008
Go to my shop
Shapie Expert
moderator
Consider this design:
index.php?t=getfile&id=11478&private=0

These three peices can print in a single pass, beside each other as depicted, and the panels will separate after printing. It's acceptable for the gap to be 0.05mm, but I've found that it works slightly better when you maintain a gap twice that.

I've got several models in my shop that have wheels that rotate, and they were designed with a 0.1mm gap.

[Updated on: Thu, 20 October 2011 03:47 UTC]


Patience, Persistance, Politeness - the 3Ps will help us get us to Perfect Printed Products
Re: FUD Interlocking parts?? [message #37002 is a reply to message #36999 ] Thu, 20 October 2011 03:49 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar duann  is currently offline duann
Messages: 369
Registered: August 2008
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I work here
Hey BG,

I could model these with essentially a scribed line, but then the resolution would be 0.1mm, because that's the minimum detail thickness, right?

No, that would mean you had 0.1mm wall thickness at that point, not a .1mm detail, if the part was extruding .1mm that would be a detail.

So how would I design something with separate but interlocking panels, in order to get the gap down to this 0.05 mm gap between the two panels?

You would need to model with a space between the parts, and perhaps use tabs, or some other mechanisim to get them to lock together under pressure.



Duann Scott, Designer Evangelist, Shapeways
Re: FUD Interlocking parts?? [message #37036 is a reply to message #37002 ] Thu, 20 October 2011 15:51 UTC Go to previous message
avatar Berkeley Gang  is currently offline Berkeley Gang
Messages: 2
Registered: October 2011
Go to all my models
Junior Member
duann wrote on Thu, 20 October 2011 03:49

Hey BG,

I could model these with essentially a scribed line, but then the resolution would be 0.1mm, because that's the minimum detail thickness, right?

No, that would mean you had 0.1mm wall thickness at that point, not a .1mm detail, if the part was extruding .1mm that would be a detail.


Assume I have sufficient depth to keep the part rigid. A scribe line depth of 25% of the thickness, let's say. How thin could the scribe line be rendered?

See attached file. What would the minimum (non-zero)dimensions for d and t be?

The way I interpret your remarks, from a flat surface, I could have a detail that protruded a minimum of 0.1mm - say, a door handle or simulated exterior hinge (working doors are not a requirement of my model). Is that correct?

Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. I appreciate your help duann and Stonysmith, and especially your willingness to help a newbie. Very Happy

Berkeley Gang

  • Attachment: Question.GIF
    (Size: 2.39KB, Downloaded 58 time(s))

[Updated on: Thu, 20 October 2011 18:19 UTC]


 
   
Previous Topic:Need help urgently: silver printing
Next Topic:Lead time for dyed WSF

Logo

Hello.

We're sorry to inform you that we no longer support this browser and can't confirm that everything will work as expected. For the best Shapeways experience, please use one of the following browsers:

Click anywhere outside this window to continue.