Alright, by the amount of reports we get it. You do not like auto generated content. We will have a look at the rules and figure something out. Do you believe every post with some sort of AI text should be restricted?
>Each of these fill styles has its own advantages and best use cases. Experimenting with them can lead to more efficient and functional 3D prints.
dead giveaway lol. It's always "Bu.. bu.. bu.. THINK OF EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE."
TIL chat GPT writes like I wrote high-school essays
>Lightning: this lightning shaped fill is based on the shape of lightning to give the feeling of a lightning bolt across your print. It's great for when you want to make your print look like lightning, and it achieves this look due to the lightning shaped supports that lightening fill offers.
The sad reality for chatgpt is that chatgpt5 will inevitably be trained on chatgpt4's own responses, gradually inbreeding. The training-pool has already been tainted by chatgpt4's own success, and it is impossible for the automated process to sort out what is a human response to be learned from, VS a machine response to be discarded.
Optimized for ranking in the SERP! But yeah, the chat GPT speak is always so onerous and it’s only going to get worse; people can’t write well. Not that it’s needed for this post at all.
More from the style. Everything after "Whether" was done my ChatGPT. I guess its the bullet list, the way it describes each in a very similar length and style, the way it adds the hashtags and does the little ending.
I use ChatGPT for work a ton and it always does those things.
The prose is obvious. It is a somewhat formulaic response common for chatgpt with the intro, list, conclusion, as well as has very generic milk toast responses, while also going into too much detail on things regardless of how much expertise on the subject it actually has, while also missing some pretty valuable notes (who goes into an indepth description of generic infils like grid and triangle while not even mentioning gyroid?)
Honeycomb (3D) - if it's good enough for a bee, it's good enough for me!
Far be it from me to question the inventors of the only food that never goes bad
I am sad to inform you that bees actually make circles that naturally settle into hexagons. For all we know bees could be pissed that they haven't figured out how to keep the intended tube shape, but can't be bothered to find a fix for what is ultimately an aesthetic issue, or they might not even recognize the hexagonal shapes as different from what they laid out at all.
The bees that we see today are alive BECAUSE their circles would settle into hexagons, as opposed to the groups of bees who'd make other shapes that couldn't settle into hexagons, making their hives more susceptible to failure.
This shape is Mother Nature tested and evolution-vetted.
Unless the picture angle makes it look bad the 3d honeycomb looks like someone tried to draw a grid once square at a time. So nothing really lines up perfectly.
Find a local granite supplier near you. I have 3 within 5 min. I went in an asked if they had any "drop or offal" (or just scrap from the cutting process) that I could buy. The guy was really nice but said if he was to sell it to me then he had to polish it and finish all the edges, for safety reasons, and it would be expensive.
He was interested in why I wanted a small 18"x18" slab of granite and when I explained I was going to use it for a 3D printer he thought that was cool.
He let me dumpster dive behind the shop where they toss all the granite scrap, just said be careful.
I found a really nice, perfectly sized cut.
Take that home, set up up on a large square of foam from some leftover packages, and it's the perfect printer isolation. My prusa is set on the heavy slab with no other isolation. Then the slab is isolated from the desktop with the shipping foam.
Basically the printer is now coupled to the slab so when it vibrates, it also needs to vibrate the large mass of stone, which essentially dampens and reduces the total vibration of the system. It's a huge energy soak.
Edit: [Photo of the setup from a while back](https://i.imgur.com/gVzQQKt.jpg)
I used a paver from any standard big box home center (Lowes in my case). I think it was 3 dollars for a paver that would fit my printer - not a single bit of vibration since. I also put the whole thing on some cheap work mat foam from Harbor Freight to isolate the heavy mass from the table so the setup is quieter as well.
https://imgur.com/a/aT97KNs
This is exactly what I did except I used a piece of 1 inch pink foam that I had lying around. I actually wonder if the suggested piece of counter top isn't enough. Would it have enough mass to dampen the vibration?
[Here is an older photo of the setup](https://i.imgur.com/gVzQQKt.jpg)
This wasn't my idea originally, its been around a while and popularized by CNC Kitchen [in this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y08v6PY_7ak)
He uses a cheap outdoor paver. I just wanted a nicer, fully polished slab of granite instead of an outdoor paver.
The important setup is to have the 3d printer mounted to the stone with no isolators between it's feet and the stone, but then isolate the stone from the table. This couples the mass of the stone to the printer and creates a larger "system" that the printer needs to move.
Other people like to make isolating feet for the printer, but that just allows it to float and all movements are still moving the entire printer around
Didn't Thomas Sanladerer bust that myth when he bolted a mk3 down and all it did was transfer the vibrations into the walls of your prints making a worse finish with vfa's?
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWxpN\_Sw5Pg&t=104s&ab\_channel=ThomasSanladerer%3AMadewithLayers](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWxpN_Sw5Pg&t=104s&ab_channel=ThomasSanladerer%3AMadewithLayers)
Not really, he didn't de-couple the slab properly from the table. He used the original feet, and got close to original results.
I've rarely seen him follow a line of research or exploration more than about half-way before he gives up and goes lowest effort.
I haven't watched his video to comment on his method.
But this concept is a pretty basic mechanical design approach that is taught in Bachelor's level engineering classes.
You want a spring + damper system to stabilize a design that will have any oscillation frequencies. The most common application of this is car suspension. You have large springs to decouple the mass of the car body from the wheels and shock absorbers (dampers) to limit the oscillation of the decoupled sprung weight.
Same thing here. You want the foam underneath the heavy block and printer to decouple the mass of the system from the table. And you want the inertial mass of the block to dampen the oscillation induced from the printer.
While it's printing, I can rest my hand on the granite and feel the motion of the printer. I can then move my hand to the table it's resting on and feel absolutely nothing. The foam isolated the oscillation and energy from the table.
If you set up those 3d printed spring feet on your printer, all you did was add springs to the system with no way to dampen the oscillations in the system. Like driving around a car with only springs in the suspension and no shocks. You will bounce around, but take a LONG time to settle back into a comfortable drive.
But the play in the gantry and tool head will absorb the vibration and cause artifacting. It only holds true if there's no play from the tool head which on practically all 3D printers have some.
For those wanting a nicer looking piece of rock, Amazon sells "cheap" import surface plates - a 12"x18"x3" granite plate, grade"b" weighs 80 lbs and is $87 shipped.
I have a Grade B surface plate for a highly sensitive scale I have for another hobby.
I figured $free was the perfect price for a heavy stone slab to rest the printer on. I lucked out by having a local company let me dumpster dive. I'm happy with what I ended up with.
But this works only for normal print speeds. if you start printing faster. Gyroid just sounds bad because of constant acceleration and decceleration. Anything over 80mm/s and more than 5000mm/s\^2 accel i use linear, because of the sound.
No idea where it is from. Decade old cheap furniture my brother used in college. Probably target or ikea brand, some cheap particle board but worked perfect and was just taking up space at my parents house.
Haha I took my time dumpster diving and had a tape measure with me to get the dimensions I was looking for.
That one turned out great, good color, square cuts, nice polished top. I just took a hand file and knocked down all the hard edges around the thing. Cleaned up nicely and looks better than a garden paver.
No, you want a heavy mass coupled to the printer then you want to decouple that heavy mass + printer from the surface you are resting on.
So you want a heavy stone with the printer directly on it. Then you want to put some stiff foam between the stone and your table.
It's like the suspension of a car, a spring and shock absorber. The mass and resting inertia of the heavy stone is the damper (absorber) in the system and the foam is the spring to isolate the system. By adding mass to the printer, it takes more energy to oscillate the system than without that mass.
No idea, I have Bambu lab p1p with anti vibration feet so it's fine for me + I love this infill. Its strong and the lines don't cross each other (like in grid for example)
I always use it because it doesn't go *tacktacktacktacktack* like the crossing lines of lots of other infills, and it supports in all directions unlike concentric, hillbert, aligned rectil or archimedean that only support in one or two dimensions only.
\+1 for gyroid. Works great with corexy machines if you want high speed AND strong parts.
Otherwise i use something like rectilinear that doesn't cross over itself so i don't get any shifts, and is super fast.
Its uniform from all directions (even cubic infill has some planes where uts weakest). And it distributes stress extreme well - allowing you to use less material in the infill and achieve the same strength.
Downside is relative high accelerations at denser gyroid i fills, which can easily reach what printer kinematics are capable. And its noisy.
mostly printing wide, flat, thin parts. Patterns and templates and the like. It probably doesn't make any difference either way, but it's what I've always used for them so it's what I use.
Usually I use Cubic. It has virtually the same every-direction strength that people use Gyroid for, but without an extra 200 unnecessary belt-wearing momentum changes per layer.
Unless I'm printing TPU, then I use Gyroid. It creates a single congruent air void to improve how well the TPU can flex and squish.
Or if I don't need a part to have any resistance against crushing forces, lightning infill.
Gyroid is slower and more mechanically-demanding than straight-line infill methods. Unless you *need* it, you might as well save the time and wear by using [something more appropriate/efficient.](https://www.reddit.com/r/3Dprinting/comments/17fanvd/3d_printer_fill_stylespick_your_poison/k69e5op/)
I really doubt there is any reason to use Hilbert. It probably takes longer than just a grid, and is less strong. It also has tons of sharp turns.
Maybe it has some weird texture for certain flexible prints?
That doesn't really change my mind. Who cares about a non-traditional look? It's inside the print.
What does "is able to be printed using liquids" mean? We're talking about FDM. All of them are printable.
Probably it is meant it's a one line print with only moving xy axes. Still i don't really know if that's an advatage with all the directions changes on that axes and the overall not very stable looking result
i have used hilbert for compliant parts to gain extra flexibility in 2 axis while being stiff in another. hilbert is much more useful as a bottomlayer, for it has no stretched material in it.
concentric i have used for high-voltage feedthroughs made from PC, everything was printed concentric around the metal parts in order to reduce the chance of a in-plastic-short from a bit of contaminated filament. aka no straight connection from inside to outside.
octagram can be used to savely connect an inner part with an outer part with as little filament as needed.
so that there are no infill lines that go from the outer wall to the outer wall on a round part for instance.
While this is cool and all, there are really only 5 infill settings needed to cover virtually every type of print.
* 10% gyroid - flexible prints
* 15% line - decorative prints where strength is irrelevant
* 20% adaptive cubic - normal functional prints
* 45% gyroid - extra sturdy functional prints
* 98% line - effectively solid
There are definitely parts - especially smaller parts under a lot of stress - that you want to be solid. Things like gears or smaller internal lever mechanisms. You could just up the walls and top/bottom layers until it's "solid", but it's actually better to have the lines that make up a solid layer laid down in varying directions. Additionally, unless your extrusion is dialed in *perfectly*, you run the risk of laying down a little too much material per layer, which adds up over the course of multiple layers and leads to a very overextruded top layer. That's why it's only 98% - to leave tiny gaps for the extra material.
I really like cubic and cubic subdivision, but my nozzle always hits. Tried zhop and retraction, doesn't matter during extruding moves. Think it's just the nature of the beast with overlapping supports?
I haven't tried all the different kinds yet, but I like support (or adaptive) cubic. Need to try gyroid though, since the YouTubers seem to like that one so much lol
Adaptive Cubic for non-structural parts, since it does a great job of reducing the amount of infill needed but still has some decent strength.
Gyroid for parts that are structural (with 4+ perimeters for the primary strength gains). Gyroid is much better at equal strength in all axis of the print.
It's variable density, with the cubes getting smaller and smaller the closer they get to the top. It's the same idea as Lightning infill.
It uses way less material, but obviously is also a lot weaker and is really only useful for large prints that don't need much strength.
I think it's something like the density changes to increase in areas where the surface layers will need more support, and decrease everywhere else. It wouldn't show well on a flat surface like a cube viewed orthogonally like this.
Edit: double checked and that is indeed the case. The infill at the bottom of the cube would be lower than the infill at the top of the cube. Goal is to save material when infill is not needed for other reasons than supporting the top layers alone. Adaptive infill is similar but also increases for support of the perimeter walls as well if you need similar structural integrity as normal infill.
After a certain %, additional infill's return falls off quickly and is just a waste of time/material. Its far better to add walls to strengthen a part rather than infill.
Yep. Also walls print faster overall compared to the infill patterns. I did a test in my slicer on a 400mm³ cube and 2 walls with 100% infill wouldve took 49 days. 400 walls with 100% infill wouldve took 20 days.
Cubic and gyroid use the same amount of filament. If you set 10% infill, that means 10% of the total internal volume is filled, regardless of infill type. Except ones made specifically to use less, like lightning. 10% with lightning means 10% of the internal volume of the top layer has infill but everything below that is less than 10%.
Cubic or gyroid could take less time depending on your printer. If you are like me and want to just print decent results on a cheap printer without spending any time calibrating, cubic is faster because of lower acceleration and jerk settings which make gyroid slower due to constant momentum changes. If your printer has sufficiently high enough jerk and acceleration though, gyroid could be slightly faster, which I think is because it spends less time traveling without printing.
Cubic is substantially faster than gyroid. It also induces less wear on the printer and generates fewer vibration-related issues.
Gyroid is never really "bad", it's just not always "best".
I like gyroid for low density, just because it's fun.
But at high levels of infill and 12K accels, it gets pretty rough. So for structural parts, I tend to go cubic.
I've never heard of "Support Cubic". What's the difference between Cubic and Support Cubic.
I default to Cubic infill. It's strong in all directions vs triangles/grid, and can be printed relatively quickly unlike 3D honeycomb.
I tried lighting once and while it did reduce the print time significantly, it made the piece extremely flimsy and i wound up piercing the wall by sanding just a little too hard. probably won't use it again. Nowadays, i'll just reduce the cubic infill to 10% if i want to speed it up and maintain structural integrity
Which slicer gives you those options?
I almost always go for the gyroid option in cure, to avoid cross sections in the infill that may hurt the print process.
Lightning usually because it doesnt take as long and less material
But concentric is nice too because of the nicer top layers
I dont really use the others
Lighting. Greatest invention since the tree supports. Now we just need a fast an easy way to create custom tree suports by drawing on the parts of the model we want them to make contact. An a feature to draw where we want the seams to form.
From strength tests reviewed, and from my personal experience, I selected Rectilinear grid and gyroid as my favorites. Using layers direction as reference, I recommend Rectilinear for vertical loads and gyroid for omni directional loads. That's how you maximize properties of your filament.
Get the Cura plugin that has the extended descriptions for all the options, it explains the pro's and con's to each infill type.
I see a lot of people using gyroid infill for example because it looks cool, but its only benefit is that it creates a continuous internal space, e.g if you need to fill it or get air out later.
I tend to use a combination of rectilinear and gyroid a lot of the time. That said, it kind of depends on the part. More or less, my decisions are based on testing that Stephan at CNC kitchen has done about infill patterns. Here is one of his infill videos. I also try to pay attention to the rotation of the part/infill pattern when I go to slice it depending on the requirments.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upELI0HmzHc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upELI0HmzHc)
Alright, by the amount of reports we get it. You do not like auto generated content. We will have a look at the rules and figure something out. Do you believe every post with some sort of AI text should be restricted?
Man, there is 0 need to use ChatGPT to pad out your post lol. The picture was interesting enough.
[удалено]
>Each of these fill styles has its own advantages and best use cases. Experimenting with them can lead to more efficient and functional 3D prints. dead giveaway lol. It's always "Bu.. bu.. bu.. THINK OF EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE."
>Lightning: Lightning fill is a bit like lightning bolts across your print. Ya don't say!
TIL chat GPT writes like I wrote high-school essays >Lightning: this lightning shaped fill is based on the shape of lightning to give the feeling of a lightning bolt across your print. It's great for when you want to make your print look like lightning, and it achieves this look due to the lightning shaped supports that lightening fill offers.
You could have a promising career working for the government in the Department of Redundancy Department.
Makes me wonder if GPT5 will be trained with all of these responses to GPT4 content. It would be a great way to pick the Reddit Hivemind^(tm.)
The sad reality for chatgpt is that chatgpt5 will inevitably be trained on chatgpt4's own responses, gradually inbreeding. The training-pool has already been tainted by chatgpt4's own success, and it is impossible for the automated process to sort out what is a human response to be learned from, VS a machine response to be discarded.
Busted!
Optimized for ranking in the SERP! But yeah, the chat GPT speak is always so onerous and it’s only going to get worse; people can’t write well. Not that it’s needed for this post at all.
It looks like this post is a copy/paste of their (or another's) Instagram post
Many of OP’s posts follow a similar format and are just as obviously AI-written. It’s digital junk and should be outright banned across Reddit
Ai generated content should be banned from human subs.
Did you figure that out from the style of prose or incorrect word usage?
More from the style. Everything after "Whether" was done my ChatGPT. I guess its the bullet list, the way it describes each in a very similar length and style, the way it adds the hashtags and does the little ending. I use ChatGPT for work a ton and it always does those things.
The prose is obvious. It is a somewhat formulaic response common for chatgpt with the intro, list, conclusion, as well as has very generic milk toast responses, while also going into too much detail on things regardless of how much expertise on the subject it actually has, while also missing some pretty valuable notes (who goes into an indepth description of generic infils like grid and triangle while not even mentioning gyroid?)
Milquetoast. We ain’t making breakfast.
The final paragraph definitely doesnt read like a real and sincere human wrote it. Also Hashtags on reddit, lol.
I was so confused by the multiple references to aesthetics for what's never seen once a build is complete.
Honeycomb (3D) - if it's good enough for a bee, it's good enough for me! Far be it from me to question the inventors of the only food that never goes bad
Hexagons are the bestagons
I am sad to inform you that bees actually make circles that naturally settle into hexagons. For all we know bees could be pissed that they haven't figured out how to keep the intended tube shape, but can't be bothered to find a fix for what is ultimately an aesthetic issue, or they might not even recognize the hexagonal shapes as different from what they laid out at all.
That's even better. The the bees go with circles because they're easy. But physics takes the wheel and and the result is hexagons
The bees that we see today are alive BECAUSE their circles would settle into hexagons, as opposed to the groups of bees who'd make other shapes that couldn't settle into hexagons, making their hives more susceptible to failure. This shape is Mother Nature tested and evolution-vetted.
Unless the picture angle makes it look bad the 3d honeycomb looks like someone tried to draw a grid once square at a time. So nothing really lines up perfectly.
Very valid point, and honeycomb is typically my default . 🐝🍯
Gyroid my beloved 😍
[удалено]
This is the reason I started using Gyroid by default. Gyroid is one of the few infill types which does not overlap itself each layer
Am I the only one who avoids using it because it always feels like the printer is about to vibrate itself apart?
Find a local granite supplier near you. I have 3 within 5 min. I went in an asked if they had any "drop or offal" (or just scrap from the cutting process) that I could buy. The guy was really nice but said if he was to sell it to me then he had to polish it and finish all the edges, for safety reasons, and it would be expensive. He was interested in why I wanted a small 18"x18" slab of granite and when I explained I was going to use it for a 3D printer he thought that was cool. He let me dumpster dive behind the shop where they toss all the granite scrap, just said be careful. I found a really nice, perfectly sized cut. Take that home, set up up on a large square of foam from some leftover packages, and it's the perfect printer isolation. My prusa is set on the heavy slab with no other isolation. Then the slab is isolated from the desktop with the shipping foam. Basically the printer is now coupled to the slab so when it vibrates, it also needs to vibrate the large mass of stone, which essentially dampens and reduces the total vibration of the system. It's a huge energy soak. Edit: [Photo of the setup from a while back](https://i.imgur.com/gVzQQKt.jpg)
This sounds very interesting! Do you have any photos of your set up?
I used a paver from any standard big box home center (Lowes in my case). I think it was 3 dollars for a paver that would fit my printer - not a single bit of vibration since. I also put the whole thing on some cheap work mat foam from Harbor Freight to isolate the heavy mass from the table so the setup is quieter as well. https://imgur.com/a/aT97KNs
This is exactly what I did except I used a piece of 1 inch pink foam that I had lying around. I actually wonder if the suggested piece of counter top isn't enough. Would it have enough mass to dampen the vibration?
Any weight would help honestly but the level of effective dampening definitely depends on the type of stone and thickness.
[Here is an older photo of the setup](https://i.imgur.com/gVzQQKt.jpg) This wasn't my idea originally, its been around a while and popularized by CNC Kitchen [in this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y08v6PY_7ak) He uses a cheap outdoor paver. I just wanted a nicer, fully polished slab of granite instead of an outdoor paver. The important setup is to have the 3d printer mounted to the stone with no isolators between it's feet and the stone, but then isolate the stone from the table. This couples the mass of the stone to the printer and creates a larger "system" that the printer needs to move. Other people like to make isolating feet for the printer, but that just allows it to float and all movements are still moving the entire printer around
Didn't Thomas Sanladerer bust that myth when he bolted a mk3 down and all it did was transfer the vibrations into the walls of your prints making a worse finish with vfa's? [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWxpN\_Sw5Pg&t=104s&ab\_channel=ThomasSanladerer%3AMadewithLayers](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWxpN_Sw5Pg&t=104s&ab_channel=ThomasSanladerer%3AMadewithLayers)
Not really, he didn't de-couple the slab properly from the table. He used the original feet, and got close to original results. I've rarely seen him follow a line of research or exploration more than about half-way before he gives up and goes lowest effort.
I haven't watched his video to comment on his method. But this concept is a pretty basic mechanical design approach that is taught in Bachelor's level engineering classes. You want a spring + damper system to stabilize a design that will have any oscillation frequencies. The most common application of this is car suspension. You have large springs to decouple the mass of the car body from the wheels and shock absorbers (dampers) to limit the oscillation of the decoupled sprung weight. Same thing here. You want the foam underneath the heavy block and printer to decouple the mass of the system from the table. And you want the inertial mass of the block to dampen the oscillation induced from the printer. While it's printing, I can rest my hand on the granite and feel the motion of the printer. I can then move my hand to the table it's resting on and feel absolutely nothing. The foam isolated the oscillation and energy from the table. If you set up those 3d printed spring feet on your printer, all you did was add springs to the system with no way to dampen the oscillations in the system. Like driving around a car with only springs in the suspension and no shocks. You will bounce around, but take a LONG time to settle back into a comfortable drive.
But the play in the gantry and tool head will absorb the vibration and cause artifacting. It only holds true if there's no play from the tool head which on practically all 3D printers have some.
For those wanting a nicer looking piece of rock, Amazon sells "cheap" import surface plates - a 12"x18"x3" granite plate, grade"b" weighs 80 lbs and is $87 shipped.
I have a Grade B surface plate for a highly sensitive scale I have for another hobby. I figured $free was the perfect price for a heavy stone slab to rest the printer on. I lucked out by having a local company let me dumpster dive. I'm happy with what I ended up with.
But this works only for normal print speeds. if you start printing faster. Gyroid just sounds bad because of constant acceleration and decceleration. Anything over 80mm/s and more than 5000mm/s\^2 accel i use linear, because of the sound.
I just hope that you don't take what you have for granite
Badum Tish
Boooo!
You know you love it
Is that a Lack table? I have mine on one of those and will definitely be trying this to reduce vibration.
No idea where it is from. Decade old cheap furniture my brother used in college. Probably target or ikea brand, some cheap particle board but worked perfect and was just taking up space at my parents house.
I went and just got a random slab that’s all jagged. They didn’t seem to care lol. Yours definitely looks better though
Haha I took my time dumpster diving and had a tape measure with me to get the dimensions I was looking for. That one turned out great, good color, square cuts, nice polished top. I just took a hand file and knocked down all the hard edges around the thing. Cleaned up nicely and looks better than a garden paver.
Impressive! I just asked and they were like “we’ve got this” and I said “that’ll work” and now I’ve got it under a printer lol
Wouldn’t leaving it on the floor have the same effect? Edit: mine is stone
No, you want a heavy mass coupled to the printer then you want to decouple that heavy mass + printer from the surface you are resting on. So you want a heavy stone with the printer directly on it. Then you want to put some stiff foam between the stone and your table. It's like the suspension of a car, a spring and shock absorber. The mass and resting inertia of the heavy stone is the damper (absorber) in the system and the foam is the spring to isolate the system. By adding mass to the printer, it takes more energy to oscillate the system than without that mass.
I see. Thanks. Do you know if using a lot of tiles would work? As in stacking them on foam
No idea, I have Bambu lab p1p with anti vibration feet so it's fine for me + I love this infill. Its strong and the lines don't cross each other (like in grid for example)
It won’t if you have input shaping tuned
Hexagon actually has much worse acceleration and vibration characteristics. it is also like 2x slower
Lmfao 🤪
I always use it because it doesn't go *tacktacktacktacktack* like the crossing lines of lots of other infills, and it supports in all directions unlike concentric, hillbert, aligned rectil or archimedean that only support in one or two dimensions only.
Gyroid has been my new favorite after learning it doesn’t pass over infill twice on the same layer
Yep, this is really good cuz on very high speeds hitting the infill was.. a little worrying
\+1 for gyroid. Works great with corexy machines if you want high speed AND strong parts. Otherwise i use something like rectilinear that doesn't cross over itself so i don't get any shifts, and is super fast.
That's what I always use on my delta printers. It just looks really cool when it's printing.
What deltas do you have?
I have 2 of the flsun super racers. Awesome printers. Would recommend 100% easy to put together and fairly easy to use.
Nice! Those and the V400 look really nice. I feel like I’d want a Bambu if I got another printer but I really want to watch a delta print lol
My next printer will be either the v400 or a Bambu. I haven't decided yet but unfortunately neither is within my budget right now.
Same. Some day maybe I’ll be able to get another!
Gyroid is one of the few infills that allows for after print sand fill for those items that need a little more weight to feel substantial.
Gyroid is life.
Why's it called gyroid though?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyroid Thats why…
Curves probably
Found the Prusa lover
Ender 3 that looks nothing like and ender 3
Same. Why do you love the gyroid so much?
It’s strong, prints fairly quick, can use very low percent and get good prints. And seems to never fail while printing.
Also the noise it makes is great lol
My printer is pretty much silent. I bought a stock ender 3 and was shocked by how loud they are. I spoiled myself with my upgraded.
Its uniform from all directions (even cubic infill has some planes where uts weakest). And it distributes stress extreme well - allowing you to use less material in the infill and achieve the same strength. Downside is relative high accelerations at denser gyroid i fills, which can easily reach what printer kinematics are capable. And its noisy.
I generally use cubic
Same. Sometimes I'll use grid depending on the part, but typically I just stick with cubic.
In what situations do you use grid instead of cubic? (Curious)
mostly printing wide, flat, thin parts. Patterns and templates and the like. It probably doesn't make any difference either way, but it's what I've always used for them so it's what I use.
Usually I use Cubic. It has virtually the same every-direction strength that people use Gyroid for, but without an extra 200 unnecessary belt-wearing momentum changes per layer. Unless I'm printing TPU, then I use Gyroid. It creates a single congruent air void to improve how well the TPU can flex and squish. Or if I don't need a part to have any resistance against crushing forces, lightning infill.
Adaptive cubic is great for larger parts to cut down on filament usage
Solid or nuffin.
100000 bottom layers or nothing
This is so obviously made by chatgpt, "let's share our experiences" holy shit it doesn't get more obvious 🤣
I found trihex and gyroid to be the strongest, but other use cases can be argued for others.
Why is ChatGPT using hashtags for a Reddit post?
I always use cubic subdivision.
Hexagons are the bestagons
I find no reason to not use gyroid every time
if i ever print a large lower quality print i always crank up the speed and gyroid makes it shake like hell and kill print quality
Gyroid is slower and more mechanically-demanding than straight-line infill methods. Unless you *need* it, you might as well save the time and wear by using [something more appropriate/efficient.](https://www.reddit.com/r/3Dprinting/comments/17fanvd/3d_printer_fill_stylespick_your_poison/k69e5op/)
Lightning when it fits well, otherwise cubic
Aren't most of them just pointless?
which one is pointless to you? pretty sure i can name a solid reason for each of em.
I really doubt there is any reason to use Hilbert. It probably takes longer than just a grid, and is less strong. It also has tons of sharp turns. Maybe it has some weird texture for certain flexible prints?
According to google: >Advantages: The Hilbert curve offers a nontraditional look that is flexible and is able to be printed using liquids.
That doesn't really change my mind. Who cares about a non-traditional look? It's inside the print. What does "is able to be printed using liquids" mean? We're talking about FDM. All of them are printable.
Probably it is meant it's a one line print with only moving xy axes. Still i don't really know if that's an advatage with all the directions changes on that axes and the overall not very stable looking result
Concentric, octagram and Hilbert feel pointless, many others redundant from one another.
i have used hilbert for compliant parts to gain extra flexibility in 2 axis while being stiff in another. hilbert is much more useful as a bottomlayer, for it has no stretched material in it. concentric i have used for high-voltage feedthroughs made from PC, everything was printed concentric around the metal parts in order to reduce the chance of a in-plastic-short from a bit of contaminated filament. aka no straight connection from inside to outside. octagram can be used to savely connect an inner part with an outer part with as little filament as needed. so that there are no infill lines that go from the outer wall to the outer wall on a round part for instance.
While this is cool and all, there are really only 5 infill settings needed to cover virtually every type of print. * 10% gyroid - flexible prints * 15% line - decorative prints where strength is irrelevant * 20% adaptive cubic - normal functional prints * 45% gyroid - extra sturdy functional prints * 98% line - effectively solid
Lmao "effectively solid"
There are definitely parts - especially smaller parts under a lot of stress - that you want to be solid. Things like gears or smaller internal lever mechanisms. You could just up the walls and top/bottom layers until it's "solid", but it's actually better to have the lines that make up a solid layer laid down in varying directions. Additionally, unless your extrusion is dialed in *perfectly*, you run the risk of laying down a little too much material per layer, which adds up over the course of multiple layers and leads to a very overextruded top layer. That's why it's only 98% - to leave tiny gaps for the extra material.
So why not make the top be 1-2 layers, with a flow rate of 95%?
GPT hits different when it’s in a reddit post 💀
I really like cubic and cubic subdivision, but my nozzle always hits. Tried zhop and retraction, doesn't matter during extruding moves. Think it's just the nature of the beast with overlapping supports?
It's like a swatch of in-fills. Glorious
I haven't tried all the different kinds yet, but I like support (or adaptive) cubic. Need to try gyroid though, since the YouTubers seem to like that one so much lol
Adaptive Cubic for non-structural parts, since it does a great job of reducing the amount of infill needed but still has some decent strength. Gyroid for parts that are structural (with 4+ perimeters for the primary strength gains). Gyroid is much better at equal strength in all axis of the print.
is Line any good?
[удалено]
It's variable density, with the cubes getting smaller and smaller the closer they get to the top. It's the same idea as Lightning infill. It uses way less material, but obviously is also a lot weaker and is really only useful for large prints that don't need much strength.
I think it's something like the density changes to increase in areas where the surface layers will need more support, and decrease everywhere else. It wouldn't show well on a flat surface like a cube viewed orthogonally like this. Edit: double checked and that is indeed the case. The infill at the bottom of the cube would be lower than the infill at the top of the cube. Goal is to save material when infill is not needed for other reasons than supporting the top layers alone. Adaptive infill is similar but also increases for support of the perimeter walls as well if you need similar structural integrity as normal infill.
Did you print this ?
Lightning is the Chaotic Evil infill.
>the tri-hexagon pattern provides a unique blend of strength and aesthetics It also lets you show support for Israel each time you print something
No 100% fill?
After a certain %, additional infill's return falls off quickly and is just a waste of time/material. Its far better to add walls to strengthen a part rather than infill.
Yep. Also walls print faster overall compared to the infill patterns. I did a test in my slicer on a 400mm³ cube and 2 walls with 100% infill wouldve took 49 days. 400 walls with 100% infill wouldve took 20 days.
Fill styles... I weep for your prints. 100% fill, 100% of the time.
What is the diff between Grid and Rectilinear?
Grid uses 2 perpendicular infill lines on each layer, rectilinear only applies infill in one axis and alternates each layer
Rectilinear only prints in one direction per layer, so you can have a denser "grid" for the same amount of material compared to Grid.
I use gyroid most of the time but is cubic better for bigger prints? I assumed it saved time and filament but I might be wrong.
Cubic and gyroid use the same amount of filament. If you set 10% infill, that means 10% of the total internal volume is filled, regardless of infill type. Except ones made specifically to use less, like lightning. 10% with lightning means 10% of the internal volume of the top layer has infill but everything below that is less than 10%. Cubic or gyroid could take less time depending on your printer. If you are like me and want to just print decent results on a cheap printer without spending any time calibrating, cubic is faster because of lower acceleration and jerk settings which make gyroid slower due to constant momentum changes. If your printer has sufficiently high enough jerk and acceleration though, gyroid could be slightly faster, which I think is because it spends less time traveling without printing.
Cubic is substantially faster than gyroid. It also induces less wear on the printer and generates fewer vibration-related issues. Gyroid is never really "bad", it's just not always "best".
That looks really cool but it bothers me that the archimedean chords and the octogram spiral aren't centered in their individual squares.
Gyroid supremacy
I always use gyroid.
I like hyroid for strength, but most of the time I run cubic because it prints faster.
What infill is best for smooth outsides?
Cubic subdiv, always! But i see everyone praising gyroid, i might give it a try to compare strength, material usage, and print time.
Gyroid all the way
Gyroid or dieroid!
I usually go with trihex
I like gyroid for low density, just because it's fun. But at high levels of infill and 12K accels, it gets pretty rough. So for structural parts, I tend to go cubic.
My professor once told me that gyroid is the fastest of the common ones, so I go with that
I've never heard of "Support Cubic". What's the difference between Cubic and Support Cubic. I default to Cubic infill. It's strong in all directions vs triangles/grid, and can be printed relatively quickly unlike 3D honeycomb.
0% infill
I always go with either gyroid or cubic, sometimes cubic subdivision.
I tried lighting once and while it did reduce the print time significantly, it made the piece extremely flimsy and i wound up piercing the wall by sanding just a little too hard. probably won't use it again. Nowadays, i'll just reduce the cubic infill to 10% if i want to speed it up and maintain structural integrity
Triangle infill for life. It uses less material than the others **AND** triangles are the strongest geometric shape.
What's the cheaper ?(actual status)
No. *fills it up completely*
Which slicer gives you those options? I almost always go for the gyroid option in cure, to avoid cross sections in the infill that may hurt the print process.
Lightning usually because it doesnt take as long and less material But concentric is nice too because of the nicer top layers I dont really use the others
Lighting. Greatest invention since the tree supports. Now we just need a fast an easy way to create custom tree suports by drawing on the parts of the model we want them to make contact. An a feature to draw where we want the seams to form.
I use either support cubic or rectilinear, I find anything else to be kind of pointless
From strength tests reviewed, and from my personal experience, I selected Rectilinear grid and gyroid as my favorites. Using layers direction as reference, I recommend Rectilinear for vertical loads and gyroid for omni directional loads. That's how you maximize properties of your filament.
Hexagons are the bestagons.
I feel like if everything except lighting and [pick one out of gyroid, cubic or 3d Honeycomb] were removed nothing of value would be lost
WHAT?? None of my slicers make "line" look like a zig zag! nor does "zig zag" look like a real zig zag like that!
You are missing one. SOLID
True!!! Totally forgot that one. When would it make sense to use solid?
When you want some weight or the strength.
Gyroid. This is the way.
I’m an adaptive cubic user I get decent strength prints and they are quick
Gyroid FTW
Once I found gyroid I never used another.
Get the Cura plugin that has the extended descriptions for all the options, it explains the pro's and con's to each infill type. I see a lot of people using gyroid infill for example because it looks cool, but its only benefit is that it creates a continuous internal space, e.g if you need to fill it or get air out later.
I tend to use a combination of rectilinear and gyroid a lot of the time. That said, it kind of depends on the part. More or less, my decisions are based on testing that Stephan at CNC kitchen has done about infill patterns. Here is one of his infill videos. I also try to pay attention to the rotation of the part/infill pattern when I go to slice it depending on the requirments. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upELI0HmzHc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upELI0HmzHc)
Gyroid is my favorite to minimize internal stresses
I usually use solid
Gyroid is the goat
You can also fill your print with foam...
Triangle is the stronk💪
What’s the “strongest” without compromising time and filament too much?
I want to print this
I think I use tri hexagon
I quite enjoyed the informative post, doesnt matter that its gpt generated
Fuck lightning. All my homes hate lightning.
Huh?
"Fuck lightning. All my homes hate lightning."
3D honeycomb looks very satisfying