Mechanical properties of aluminum and steel are known...I would find intersting too to compare machined and printed samples...and it would be much better if you use standard sample usually adopted in these cases (it is usually a small bar with the terminal part thicker in order to induce the sample to fail in the middle part), with a known cross sectional area. Another thing that I have noticed in your video, in fact, is that no one of the 2 hooks made by pointer metals began to yield before fail. This is an important diffrrence with respect to machined metals, where the piece, before failure has a permanent deformation. This behaviour is and advantage of metals over, for example, composites because it advice you before failing. Composites instead are fragile and fail suddenly. If printed metals should lose this their feature with respect to machined ones, it would be, for me, a big concern.
The slight difference between the stainless steel and aluminium might be because of the melting points. During 3D printing, aluminium might melt more efficiently and bond together more strongly because of its lower melting point.
Also the stainless steel looked like it might have had some voids. But to be fair stainless steel is not particularly known for great tensile strength either.
@@nocturnal0072 316L Ultimate Tensile Strength is 515 MPa while that of AlSi10Mg is at max 450 MPa. That is about 14.5%. The AlSi10Mg though has a higher Yield Strength than 316L. If this were a straight up test of a fixed object it shouldn't matter but we are looking at a complex assembly and the 316L assembly going plastic first could very well have seen loading on individual areas of the assembly increase on the 316L as others went plastic. Also, as said, the 316L "looks" like it may not be perfectly sintered but we are looking at something already torn apart. Bottom line, without testing a simple test part lacking moving features and assembly it is very hard to make a direct comparison.
@@kennethfharkin 4340 steel quenched in oil at 315 C has a tensile strength of 1,760 MPA. The alloy contains nickel, chromium and molybdenum Just like 316 SS does but not as much concentration of those elements.
The cost difference for aluminum and SS makes the slightly lower strength of the aluminum compelling for the 3D printed versions. I think the SS would be lots stronger except that the melting point is much higher and that was probably making for poorer bonding of the metal powder. If these clips were made from actual solid aluminum or SS I think the strength would be much better. You can see the porosity of the metals...that's going to make 3D printing weaker.
That is a valid point you made there, I would like to see the test results of the same apparatus made from the traditional methods of casting vs 3D printing.
I got a Frog for my birthday back in 1999 and drove my dad nuts fidgeting with it. I printed one out last year and it has been one of my favorite prints since. Thanks a ton.
it would be even nicer if the test was made with same parts and materials with 3D printed vs CNC made, so like that we know how strong 3d print vs parts made from forged metal.
You noticed the sponsored metal parts were solid while the non sponsored plastic where lightly infilled. Not to say PLA ever had a chance but lets see apples vs apples. Solid CF filled nylon would have been a lot fairer comparison.
To me the aluminium was superior as the jaws didn’t fail in any way. The stainless jaws began to fail at 884kg. The aluminium clip failed only a little lower than this, but not the jaws, which looked good. The way the aluminium clip did break, at the bottom, I believe a couple more stainless screws low down would add significant strength and potentially outperform the stainless steel clip. Of course just a little more force could make all the difference, but unless tested we won’t know.
Report Sxx ~ ((load at fracture)/(area of fracture)). Expect perhaps max of annealed 6061-0 (Sy~8ksi, Sult~18ksi) or whatever the basic Al alloy suggests. If lower, this gives an idea of loss by 3D print on axial, at least in this case. A cantilever test, or a perpendicular pull would be interesting to also involve the plane-to-plane bond. All in all, we've a strange dichotomy at work, with CMTR's & V&P inspection on traditional, but folks pushing for allowed metal print use in similar higher-QA applications, while a-s-s-u-m-i-n-g handbook values, isotropy, and puzzled looks when reminded of an often near-100% welded part without weld inspection. IMO, as yet, 3D print is most often analogous to in-to-near complete sinter, rather uncontrolled (at present), and of most use to low-stress (& smaller) parts. Perhaps with better control, might come to use low-end bulk properties in FEA or hand calcs but, even there, you've usually a in-plane & orthog-plane layering issue plus shape-& order-of-bond issues. I've reservations, at least 'as yet'.
It would be interesting to see weight matched comparisons. Even if it's just for the PLA, a 50g and 100g version would be cool to see in comparison to metal parts.
looks like the laser bonding required encouragement to work on the stainless steel, like a magnesium powder or some such catalyst, it should be a lot closer to solid internally, its so strange to see such thorough internal blackening, but then I've never seen a broken stainless 3d print either!
Larger stainless bolts, and fileting the edges will greatly increase the strength of the unit. With 3D prints there are a lot of stress risers on those sharp corners. Nice video!
you got that right, didnt notice that, they are basically covered in stress raisers, too bad he didnt get matched parts with water-jet cutting etc. and test them against the printed stuff. 3d printing is a bit of a religion and some people are afraid of knowing the truth about the material limits.
@@electrosync it would be close. Aluminum yes, but steel I doubt it would break. You would be pushing it, I think 5 to 10 ton rig will be needed for that
@@CL-yp1bs surely it would depend on what the part is and its design? there are aluminium screwgate carabiners that are used in climbing/work at height that are rated for 25 kN on the major axis.
@@spudpud-T67 they're typically 99.9X% dense as-printed with the right laser parameters. But after hot isostatic pressing, which is typically performed, you have virtually no porosity.
could try to super size a bunch of bency's in differnt material like PLA, TPU and ABS and stretch it from bow to stern til it snaps. Would look epic in slow motion
this is basically the george, gina & lucy handbag clip. there is a video of different metals, including titanium, with the same tests comparing 3d print and cnc.
from my experience, this looks like bad quality steel with no heat control, normalization or heat treat, the grain structure of the steel is closer to grey cast iron, its not good quality at all
@@azpatriot7937 That’s the quality for 3D printed metals for a part I had printed. It all depends on application. My print was for a part in my door latch that broke. Similar latch $240 and would have to sand and repaint door. Company no longer made that model and so designed and printed by Shapeway in SS. About $8 seven years ago and still going strong. Worth checking out all the items and materials available on Shapeways.
“Selective Laser melting” isn’t going to give you similar results to a cast or forged piece for the simple reason the nature of the process doesn’t enable the material to form a crystalline structure. It’s essentially little different to any sintered piece…just a lot of small particles stuck together.
No crystalline structure?!? What does it consist of then? An amorphous structure? High quality AM materials are typically superior to cast material, and in some cases on par or even better than forged. The PCBway material does not look like high quality....
Did the metal look porous to you? A big part of the additive metal process are the parameters used, laser power, layer height, powder used, where the parts stress relieved.
I think what you were trying to say was that you 3D model a carabiner designed by Kong which is a climbing company in Italy and the name of that Carabiner is called frog.
Forged would be significantly stronger, but the nice thing about 3d printing is that you can make complex parts without specialized equipment or much skill (relatively).
Hey, blacksmith here! You know this new way of making metal parts reminds me of the old ways, in the sense that before mass melting furnaces were a thing, people would process iron trough forge welding sometimes very small pieces together (a bit like the Japanese and the tamagahane). So welding something together will get you to good results, but modern homogenous steels are still superior tho. I think a good forge welding heat forging would help his 3d printed parts actually stick together more into a solid piece. Also the grains look disgusting... His metal parts definitely need tempering cycles
@@jeanladoire4141 Forge welding isn't easy for high carbon steels, and it's really impractical for most uses. Metal 3D printed parts are sintered for a couple hours, though the finish of these specific parts seems a bit off.
@@ignacioaguirrenoguez6218 i'm familiar with forge welding high carbon steel, it's not that it's "not easy", it just wants to crack and burn at high temperatures, but there are ways of solving these problems. Now i dont see why you'd make structural pieces out of high carbon steel, most commonly used stuff for high strength structural parts is like S325, something with like 0.35% carbon
Since steel has a higher melting point, it is possible that the powder sintered worse than aluminum during manufacture. Maybe Leather didn't have enough power to melt enough. But perhaps there are some limitations or physical phenomena that do not allow creating a stronger part without losing geometry, for example, or gases or oxides are formed that make the structure porous, I don’t know. I'm not an expert - I can only speculate.
It all boils down to metallurgy and tribology which still has to be correct for the application. There are many techniques and processes to ensure that you end up with a good part that will function.
A few issues I noticed. The stainless steel wasn't tempered properly. The clip you designed is ok but consider the bottom hole it is made of two parts that are pulled on unevenly by the test rig. That isn't a problem with the test rig but the clip design. The hole edges need to be rounded over also it would help if there was a bolt or two ensuring the pressure between the two sides there remains the same.
I kept wondering why the pivot bolts didn't shear off. I would have thought on the metal parts those would have gone before the printed parts. I'm also wondering if heat treating would work on metal parts. That might be another interesting experiment for the future.
it seems like it was the hardware that gave way first on the aluminium unit not the eye, maybe a bigger centre bolt and a couple of smaller clamping bolts just above the eye could help increase the load these can take.
From what I've gathered after a mediocre amount of research, the 3D printed parts have micro-faults that don't necessarily cause problems unless put under extreme pressures. It's due to how the fusing of the metallic structure is applied. So CNC'd parts are most likely going to out perform by a noticeable margin most likely. It would be cool to see the comparison indeed.
Surprised Aluminium was so comparable in strength considering all its other advantages, Its just so easy to cut and drill compared to steel and its lightness can easily be the difference between a project being practical and not. Would have liked to see non printed versions for strength comparisons....
I beleive if these were mass produced alluminium would be the best. At less than 100kg difference but huge difference in weight and also material costs and labour manufacturing cost
3d printed metal isnt the same as forged metal because it has a very loose grain structure compared to the tight compressed grain youd get from forging steel. Also with forged metal you can temper and harden the metal to the desired strength so it's just vastly superior.
TL;DR Aluminium (50g) Breaking point is 830kg/1829lbs Stainless Steel (120g) Breaking Point is 900kg/1984lbs PLA Breaking Point is 92kg/202lbs Not surprising how Aluminium is x9 stronger and Stainless being barely x10. The differences between Aluminium and Stainless Steel is small. For regular folks Aluminium is the way to go. Being able to work on something softer and more tinker-able. Great for projects being realized and it's lighter. Cheaper too in the soon future. Steel is for something more towards something industrial. Where you CAN'T have stuff failing. Course stuff fail and break all the time but Steel is just less prone to it. Note: Metal is far- FAR more easily recyclable than any 3d Plastics. Metal can be contanimated and it'll just be melted off and slabed away. Plastic- once it's contaminated it's going to stay contaminated. Plus you can't just mixed plastic together, they won't bond well. We've already seen 3d prints for quick replacement for certain parts, now we can have an mini-market of folks 3d metal printing parts that had been discontinued.
I would love a comparison with machined aluminum and stainless steel parts, to see what is the difference in the 3d printed material that looks to have a porous Christine structure. Compared to a "normal" metal crystalline structure.
impressive results considering the predictable grain structure. personally what I'd like to see is the test simply REPEATED with X number of samples to determine consistency and reliability of the failure. (as seen in the comments) because our psychology leans toward "bigger, better, stronger" this invariable creates a "blind spot" at just being able to see the value and use case of the Net parts as they come off/out the printer. this is why parts - even the strongest ones - have ratings and something that never occurs to us is that not every part has to be rated for "1-Ton", particularly if the application doesn't call for it. for those situations that DO need higher ratings, we obviously have all the traditional manufacturing methods (castings, forgings, CNC etc.) to lean on.
I'd love to do some repeatable tests, but these parts are pricey. I've got a follow up video in the works featuring the same materials, plus more. Watch this space!
@@electrosync re: "these parts are pricey". yeah sadly I figured as much. it would indeed by cost prohibitive but who knows, maybe (just maybe) PCBW could be talked into a wee bit more charity...? 🙂 not talking a crazy sample size of 10 to 100 but simply 3 to 5. basically any value of X > 1 would allow for some degree of extrapolation. seeing the aluminum bend the tubing of the test rig was impressive, geez the gauge and dimensions of the square stock used for my engine hoist out in the garage is not much different, heck I'd be afraid to place some 6061 suspension bits to that amount of strain (I have and they failed albeit by bending/deformation). re: "Watch this space!" you bet. 👍
Engineer here; Using the same aluminium piece after it has been subjected to stress testing isn't a true reflection of its material property, though it stands up well in the test, aluminium is famous for its low resilience to fatigue cycles which get worse over time.
Interesting project. The steel held up to 1984.16 pounds and the aluminum held up to 1823.22 pounds. That is impressive to me. It could be use to hang bicycles up in garage and things like that.
Not traditional supports like FDM printing does. The metal powder acts as the support, but is not melted by the laser, so it doesn't need to be removed later on.
Spot on. I'm making a follow up to this video where I use test specimens with a known cross sectional area. This allows me to do some improved calculations.
It looks more like the welding method used for the powder is what failed not the metal.. since both failed about the same... if you can get some machines parts of the same grade metal and do the test again and you'll see stainless steel tinsel strength is 2-3 times that of aluminum
Great vid, were these raw metal or were they heat treated? because the stainless steel may of been soft due to looking at the grain of the breaks it is rather coarse 07:39, im not a metal worker or smithie but after watching Forged in fire they always talk about the grain
Could you please use Kilonewtons instead of Kilograms? This is a force measurement, not a mass measurement. It also makes it more comparable to climbing equipment with the strength ratings (though you shouldn't really use this in that sort of environment). 900 kg is 8.826 kN.
Would be interesting to test the new Carbon Fiber and maybe Titanium 5. It looks like the metal is not fully solid so maybe the new filament type stainless that gets heated will be more dense and thus stronger.
I have some really nice parts printed in onyx with carbon, kevlar and fibreglass reinforcement to try out. Oh, and some titanium parts produced a few different ways. We'll find out soon...
Re-Run the tests after annealing and/or quenching the parts. Can you get the steel parts re-made with high-carbon steel? I think the differences between steel and aluminum were too narrow. The steel should have much higher tensile strength per unit volume.
Aluminium appears to be the best price/performance material. Maybe alter designs to see if that could improve durability in use, or if you’re crazy get some made from titanium
When I heard one ton test rig, my first thought was, what calculations did he do to determine the material requirements to take that much stress? Apparently none :)
It would've been great to see how a 3D-printed metal compares to the same metal, but machined.
Stay tuned...
@@electrosync I'm interested. 🤔
I think stamped aluminium and steel would be great too!
Mechanical properties of aluminum and steel are known...I would find intersting too to compare machined and printed samples...and it would be much better if you use standard sample usually adopted in these cases (it is usually a small bar with the terminal part thicker in order to induce the sample to fail in the middle part), with a known cross sectional area. Another thing that I have noticed in your video, in fact, is that no one of the 2 hooks made by pointer metals began to yield before fail. This is an important diffrrence with respect to machined metals, where the piece, before failure has a permanent deformation. This behaviour is and advantage of metals over, for example, composites because it advice you before failing. Composites instead are fragile and fail suddenly. If printed metals should lose this their feature with respect to machined ones, it would be, for me, a big concern.
He's going to need an upgrade for test rig already 🤣
The slight difference between the stainless steel and aluminium might be because of the melting points. During 3D printing, aluminium might melt more efficiently and bond together more strongly because of its lower melting point.
Also the stainless steel looked like it might have had some voids.
But to be fair stainless steel is not particularly known for great tensile strength either.
@@nocturnal0072 316L Ultimate Tensile Strength is 515 MPa while that of AlSi10Mg is at max 450 MPa. That is about 14.5%. The AlSi10Mg though has a higher Yield Strength than 316L. If this were a straight up test of a fixed object it shouldn't matter but we are looking at a complex assembly and the 316L assembly going plastic first could very well have seen loading on individual areas of the assembly increase on the 316L as others went plastic.
Also, as said, the 316L "looks" like it may not be perfectly sintered but we are looking at something already torn apart.
Bottom line, without testing a simple test part lacking moving features and assembly it is very hard to make a direct comparison.
@@kennethfharkin 4340 steel quenched in oil at 315 C has a tensile strength of 1,760 MPA.
The alloy contains nickel, chromium and molybdenum Just like 316 SS does but not as much concentration of those elements.
@@darkshadowsx5949 yes but what does that have to do with the 316L which was DLS printed?
it makes sense.
The cost difference for aluminum and SS makes the slightly lower strength of the aluminum compelling for the 3D printed versions. I think the SS would be lots stronger except that the melting point is much higher and that was probably making for poorer bonding of the metal powder. If these clips were made from actual solid aluminum or SS I think the strength would be much better. You can see the porosity of the metals...that's going to make 3D printing weaker.
If the SS was caste as opposed to printed it would have doubled aluminums performance.
He could make compatrison betwean printed and caster parts. More useful.
That is a valid point you made there, I would like to see the test results of the same apparatus made from the traditional methods of casting vs 3D printing.
Genuinely surprised with how much PLA could hold!
probably hold more if he printed it solid and beefed up the weak area.
could hold me twice !
@@thecaptainnoodles schmol
It can hold like 10 of me
The fact no one in the comments noticed a but plug at 0:38 is truly amazing
I did.
🤣
I rewind 3 times just thinking it could contain mercury 💀 and no one will test in the ass duringa flight 💀💀😬
I got a Frog for my birthday back in 1999 and drove my dad nuts fidgeting with it. I printed one out last year and it has been one of my favorite prints since. Thanks a ton.
Glad to hear!
I’d be interested to see how the same components made from sheet Aluminium and stainless steel performed and if their failure points were the same.
Great idea! I'm working on a follow up to this video and I'm looking to include some laser cut parts, plus some more exotic materials...
@@electrosync
I'm looking forward to seeing how the gold, platinum and adamantium ones perform.
@@electrosyncwell the metal is stronger then my will to survive so pretty solid😎👍💯
What is that glass object @00:39 😳
hæææææææææ
I was searching 5 min for this comment bc i knew i wasn't the only one who noticed that
It's a butt plug.
I've seen these also used to display resin pellets and such.
it would be even nicer if the test was made with same parts and materials with 3D printed vs CNC made, so like that we know how strong 3d print vs parts made from forged metal.
Planning this...
You should off printed PLA+ with solid infill, it could haa make some difference, 100Kg is still quite impressive for a printed plastic
You noticed the sponsored metal parts were solid while the non sponsored plastic where lightly infilled. Not to say PLA ever had a chance but lets see apples vs apples. Solid CF filled nylon would have been a lot fairer comparison.
The aluminum and stainless were VERY impressive, atleast to me. 🤯🤘👍
To me the aluminium was superior as the jaws didn’t fail in any way. The stainless jaws began to fail at 884kg. The aluminium clip failed only a little lower than this, but not the jaws, which looked good. The way the aluminium clip did break, at the bottom, I believe a couple more stainless screws low down would add significant strength and potentially outperform the stainless steel clip. Of course just a little more force could make all the difference, but unless tested we won’t know.
Report Sxx ~ ((load at fracture)/(area of fracture)). Expect perhaps max of annealed 6061-0 (Sy~8ksi, Sult~18ksi) or whatever the basic Al alloy suggests. If lower, this gives an idea of loss by 3D print on axial, at least in this case. A cantilever test, or a perpendicular pull would be interesting to also involve the plane-to-plane bond.
All in all, we've a strange dichotomy at work, with CMTR's & V&P inspection on traditional, but folks pushing for allowed metal print use in similar higher-QA applications, while a-s-s-u-m-i-n-g handbook values, isotropy, and puzzled looks when reminded of an often near-100% welded part without weld inspection. IMO, as yet, 3D print is most often analogous to in-to-near complete sinter, rather uncontrolled (at present), and of most use to low-stress (& smaller) parts. Perhaps with better control, might come to use low-end bulk properties in FEA or hand calcs but, even there, you've usually a in-plane & orthog-plane layering issue plus shape-& order-of-bond issues. I've reservations, at least 'as yet'.
It would be interesting to see weight matched comparisons. Even if it's just for the PLA, a 50g and 100g version would be cool to see in comparison to metal parts.
I'm impressed that the aluminum part was able to bend a steel tube like a bendy straw.
Love the OSHA approved footwear @ 1:50
looks like the laser bonding required encouragement to work on the stainless steel, like a magnesium powder or some such catalyst, it should be a lot closer to solid internally, its so strange to see such thorough internal blackening, but then I've never seen a broken stainless 3d print either!
I love how this guy puts so much time making these video’s
Thought it was going to by boring old SLS, but proper SLM ! NOW WE’RE TALKING!
Larger stainless bolts, and fileting the edges will greatly increase the strength of the unit. With 3D prints there are a lot of stress risers on those sharp corners. Nice video!
you got that right, didnt notice that, they are basically covered in stress raisers, too bad he didnt get matched parts with water-jet cutting etc. and test them against the printed stuff. 3d printing is a bit of a religion and some people are afraid of knowing the truth about the material limits.
I would love to see a machined part out of billett or such to truly test how strong 3d printed metal is versus machined metal
I'd love to do it, but do you think it would break under 1 tonne? I might have to build a stronger rig!
@@electrosync it would be close. Aluminum yes, but steel I doubt it would break. You would be pushing it, I think 5 to 10 ton rig will be needed for that
@@CL-yp1bs surely it would depend on what the part is and its design? there are aluminium screwgate carabiners that are used in climbing/work at height that are rated for 25 kN on the major axis.
The printed metals seemed badly porus.
@@spudpud-T67 they're typically 99.9X% dense as-printed with the right laser parameters. But after hot isostatic pressing, which is typically performed, you have virtually no porosity.
could try to super size a bunch of bency's in differnt material like PLA, TPU and ABS and stretch it from bow to stern til it snaps. Would look epic in slow motion
I like the sound of that. I'd love to see a giant TPU benchy stretched out on there!
this is basically the george, gina & lucy handbag clip. there is a video of different metals, including titanium, with the same tests comparing 3d print and cnc.
tapping with the part loose in your hand you madman! of course the tap broke
Love this design! Considering scaling it up and adapting it for a completely unrelated application! Thank you!
Sounds fun! I made one at 200% scale and it worked well with heavier gauge wire for the torsion spring.
You need to look into Hot isostatic pressing if your interested in possibly making them even stronger
Was the steel heat treated in any way after printing? I've gotta wonder if tempering might have helped.
My thoughts exactly, especially for the stainless.
from my experience, this looks like bad quality steel with no heat control, normalization or heat treat, the grain structure of the steel is closer to grey cast iron, its not good quality at all
@@azpatriot7937 That’s the quality for 3D printed metals for a part I had printed. It all depends on application. My print was for a part in my door latch that broke. Similar latch $240 and would have to sand and repaint door. Company no longer made that model and so designed and printed by Shapeway in SS. About $8 seven years ago and still going strong. Worth checking out all the items and materials available on Shapeways.
Excellent video!
It would be interesting to see the difference between 3d printed, machined and stamped aluminium and steel too.
“Selective Laser melting” isn’t going to give you similar results to a cast or forged piece for the simple reason the nature of the process doesn’t enable the material to form a crystalline structure. It’s essentially little different to any sintered piece…just a lot of small particles stuck together.
No crystalline structure?!? What does it consist of then? An amorphous structure?
High quality AM materials are typically superior to cast material, and in some cases on par or even better than forged. The PCBway material does not look like high quality....
Did the metal look porous to you? A big part of the additive metal process are the parameters used, laser power, layer height, powder used, where the parts stress relieved.
yes these are ugly pitted rough parts, dont look at that just buy into the latest craze
I think what you were trying to say was that you 3D model a carabiner designed by Kong which is a climbing company in Italy and the name of that Carabiner is called frog.
Yes. I have another video on that.
I would love to see the same test with forged metal vs. printed to see the difference. Good stuff
Forged would be significantly stronger, but the nice thing about 3d printing is that you can make complex parts without specialized equipment or much skill (relatively).
Hey, blacksmith here! You know this new way of making metal parts reminds me of the old ways, in the sense that before mass melting furnaces were a thing, people would process iron trough forge welding sometimes very small pieces together (a bit like the Japanese and the tamagahane). So welding something together will get you to good results, but modern homogenous steels are still superior tho.
I think a good forge welding heat forging would help his 3d printed parts actually stick together more into a solid piece.
Also the grains look disgusting... His metal parts definitely need tempering cycles
@@jeanladoire4141 Forge welding isn't easy for high carbon steels, and it's really impractical for most uses. Metal 3D printed parts are sintered for a couple hours, though the finish of these specific parts seems a bit off.
@@ignacioaguirrenoguez6218 i'm familiar with forge welding high carbon steel, it's not that it's "not easy", it just wants to crack and burn at high temperatures, but there are ways of solving these problems. Now i dont see why you'd make structural pieces out of high carbon steel, most commonly used stuff for high strength structural parts is like S325, something with like 0.35% carbon
Since steel has a higher melting point, it is possible that the powder sintered worse than aluminum during manufacture. Maybe Leather didn't have enough power to melt enough. But perhaps there are some limitations or physical phenomena that do not allow creating a stronger part without losing geometry, for example, or gases or oxides are formed that make the structure porous, I don’t know. I'm not an expert - I can only speculate.
It all boils down to metallurgy and tribology which still has to be correct for the application. There are many techniques and processes to ensure that you end up with a good part that will function.
Wow you don't have to retire your Print buster 3000, it can be a star in future test episodes!
I just uploaded a vid where it’s the star!
I had a good laugh at the part buster bending. I was just noticing the weight slowed way down when you revealed why.
You would think I would have caught it earlier, but when I'm filming I'm looking all over the place!
If you want to make a thread in a metal you have to make a half/quarter turn forward and then full turn back in order to remove span.
How do you not have more subscribers? Your videos are awesome!
A few issues I noticed. The stainless steel wasn't tempered properly. The clip you designed is ok but consider the bottom hole it is made of two parts that are pulled on unevenly by the test rig.
That isn't a problem with the test rig but the clip design. The hole edges need to be rounded over also it would help if there was a bolt or two ensuring the pressure between the two sides there remains the same.
That's amazing! It is something new for me about metal 3D printing.
4:56 Yes, you've got some leverage onto the part, no wounder it bent
I kept wondering why the pivot bolts didn't shear off. I would have thought on the metal parts those would have gone before the printed parts.
I'm also wondering if heat treating would work on metal parts. That might be another interesting experiment for the future.
You could get laser or water jet cut parts from steel or aluminium plate quite cheaply.
Coming soon...
Great look forward to it
it seems like it was the hardware that gave way first on the aluminium unit not the eye, maybe a bigger centre bolt and a couple of smaller clamping bolts just above the eye could help increase the load these can take.
Really want to see how CNC parts perform against 3D printed ones.
From what I've gathered after a mediocre amount of research, the 3D printed parts have micro-faults that don't necessarily cause problems unless put under extreme pressures. It's due to how the fusing of the metallic structure is applied. So CNC'd parts are most likely going to out perform by a noticeable margin most likely.
It would be cool to see the comparison indeed.
Follow up video is in the making with CNC and laser cut parts.
I'd be really interested to see what PLA would do at 100% infill.
This bothered me too. Altho the metal wasn't technicly 100% infil either, because of the air bubbles. It wasn't 20% like with the PLA.
ja, not sure why if testing a tensile test, to not have 100% infill
Surprised Aluminium was so comparable in strength considering all its other advantages, Its just so easy to cut and drill compared to steel and its lightness can easily be the difference between a project being practical and not. Would have liked to see non printed versions for strength comparisons....
Thanks for the effort done for the strength test.
Thanks for watching!
I beleive if these were mass produced alluminium would be the best. At less than 100kg difference but huge difference in weight and also material costs and labour manufacturing cost
3d printed metal isnt the same as forged metal because it has a very loose grain structure compared to the tight compressed grain youd get from forging steel. Also with forged metal you can temper and harden the metal to the desired strength so it's just vastly superior.
TL;DR
Aluminium (50g) Breaking point is 830kg/1829lbs
Stainless Steel (120g) Breaking Point is 900kg/1984lbs
PLA Breaking Point is 92kg/202lbs
Not surprising how Aluminium is x9 stronger and Stainless being barely x10. The differences between Aluminium and Stainless Steel is small.
For regular folks Aluminium is the way to go. Being able to work on something softer and more tinker-able. Great for projects being realized and it's lighter. Cheaper too in the soon future.
Steel is for something more towards something industrial. Where you CAN'T have stuff failing. Course stuff fail and break all the time but Steel is just less prone to it.
Note: Metal is far- FAR more easily recyclable than any 3d Plastics. Metal can be contanimated and it'll just be melted off and slabed away. Plastic- once it's contaminated it's going to stay contaminated. Plus you can't just mixed plastic together, they won't bond well.
We've already seen 3d prints for quick replacement for certain parts, now we can have an mini-market of folks 3d metal printing parts that had been discontinued.
you should put a strain gauge on it, just use a dial gauge, so you can do a proper stress - strain plot.
I would love a comparison with machined aluminum and stainless steel parts, to see what is the difference in the 3d printed material that looks to have a porous Christine structure. Compared to a "normal" metal crystalline structure.
Need to do another PLA+ test with 100% infill for a more fair comparison, still won't compare with the metals, but its a bit unfair to the PLA+
ruclips.net/video/Js3bJ1B8ySM/видео.html
impressive results considering the predictable grain structure. personally what I'd like to see is the test simply REPEATED with X number of samples to determine consistency and reliability of the failure. (as seen in the comments) because our psychology leans toward "bigger, better, stronger" this invariable creates a "blind spot" at just being able to see the value and use case of the Net parts as they come off/out the printer. this is why parts - even the strongest ones - have ratings and something that never occurs to us is that not every part has to be rated for "1-Ton", particularly if the application doesn't call for it. for those situations that DO need higher ratings, we obviously have all the traditional manufacturing methods (castings, forgings, CNC etc.) to lean on.
I'd love to do some repeatable tests, but these parts are pricey. I've got a follow up video in the works featuring the same materials, plus more. Watch this space!
@@electrosync re: "these parts are pricey". yeah sadly I figured as much. it would indeed by cost prohibitive but who knows, maybe (just maybe) PCBW could be talked into a wee bit more charity...? 🙂 not talking a crazy sample size of 10 to 100 but simply 3 to 5. basically any value of X > 1 would allow for some degree of extrapolation. seeing the aluminum bend the tubing of the test rig was impressive, geez the gauge and dimensions of the square stock used for my engine hoist out in the garage is not much different, heck I'd be afraid to place some 6061 suspension bits to that amount of strain (I have and they failed albeit by bending/deformation). re: "Watch this space!" you bet. 👍
Boy that PLA clamp can hold alot
Was that PLA on 20% in-fill. Kinda like PLA-light
Great video. Those screws are pretty strong too.
Engineer here;
Using the same aluminium piece after it has been subjected to stress testing isn't a true reflection of its material property, though it stands up well in the test, aluminium is famous for its low resilience to fatigue cycles which get worse over time.
Its amazing how each metal had vastly different sheer characteristics, in the sense where that fractured.
Now with the knowledge of that design.
You could try it with thicker plastic at the failure spots.
You have a base line to start with.
if the upper part is made a little thicker, should be able to go up to 1000 kg: which is very safe for climbers.
Wondering if mixing the aluminum and steel parts that didn't fail would be stronger
You could measure the stretching with a mounted ruler and your camera
Great idea!
Realy intresting video !
But for PLA it look like (3:58 ) it was not 100% infill .. this is not fair in my point of view ...
Interesting project. The steel held up to 1984.16 pounds and the aluminum held up to 1823.22 pounds. That is impressive to me. It could be use to hang bicycles up in garage and things like that.
the official kong ones hold like 4000 lbs so truely a crazy impressive tiny thing
Yeah , it could but it gone by expensive
Do metal prints need supports like plastic prints
Not traditional supports like FDM printing does. The metal powder acts as the support, but is not melted by the laser, so it doesn't need to be removed later on.
Get the parts casted and CNC cut, I'd love to see how more 'standard' manufacturing methods compare to the newer technology
Working on it!
well, that PLA+ part looks kinda...hollow... is not the infill, but the wall lines count what makes the pla stronger
So you compared PLA with low infill and 100% infill metal pieces ?
A PA12 with full infill would have made the results less impressive ?
8:02 please add labels to the three curves in the graph :)
If you test with simpler shapes, I think you can compare 3D printed materials with commercially available materials.
Spot on. I'm making a follow up to this video where I use test specimens with a known cross sectional area. This allows me to do some improved calculations.
What was the song you used?
It looks more like the welding method used for the powder is what failed not the metal.. since both failed about the same... if you can get some machines parts of the same grade metal and do the test again and you'll see stainless steel tinsel strength is 2-3 times that of aluminum
I have some machined parts for a follow up to this video.
You've got the wrestling theme already - let's see a rematch with each part in the same weight class.
that was pretty cool sir
those clips you made are pretty slick too ...
You didn’t mention the costs of printing each test item. I would like to see who does this printing so I could contact them for unobtainable parts.
The metal parts were about $500 AUD.
0:39 is that a .. you know .. thing you put somewhere ..
You should have sent them a couple made with traditional cnc cut... And some of the stronger materials for fdm like CF Nylon and GfNylon
I would like to see them in a fast stress test. Could this eventually be used in tree or rock climbing gear? How many Kn
nickel titanium alloy would be dope, I'm looking to get into weaving nitinol soon, it looks promising for all 3d printed metal fields.
Tq for your video.it make me more confident to print stainless steel and aluminium with pcbway.
I’m glad it was helpful. Thanks for stopping by!
Tysm, did everything as described
Great vid, were these raw metal or were they heat treated? because the stainless steel may of been soft due to looking at the grain of the breaks it is rather coarse 07:39, im not a metal worker or smithie but after watching Forged in fire they always talk about the grain
Could you please use Kilonewtons instead of Kilograms? This is a force measurement, not a mass measurement. It also makes it more comparable to climbing equipment with the strength ratings (though you shouldn't really use this in that sort of environment). 900 kg is 8.826 kN.
Would be good to see tests against machined parts
Working on it!
Would be interesting to test the new Carbon Fiber and maybe Titanium 5. It looks like the metal is not fully solid so maybe the new filament type stainless that gets heated will be more dense and thus stronger.
I have some really nice parts printed in onyx with carbon, kevlar and fibreglass reinforcement to try out. Oh, and some titanium parts produced a few different ways. We'll find out soon...
Re-Run the tests after annealing and/or quenching the parts. Can you get the steel parts re-made with high-carbon steel? I think the differences between steel and aluminum were too narrow. The steel should have much higher tensile strength per unit volume.
I'm working on a follow up video on this including tool steel. I'll need to devise some way of quenching them.
I’m curious how the original frogged clips would have held up.
The Kong Frog I have is rated at 26 kN, so I believe it would likely destroy my test rig, unfortunately.
I would have expected Stainless to be much stronger than Aluminum.
Literally lmfao at that canal bridge test 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Aluminium appears to be the best price/performance material. Maybe alter designs to see if that could improve durability in use, or if you’re crazy get some made from titanium
Titanium coming soon!
I would like to see before / after sintering the parts.
I'd like to see these tested alongside the same materials except CNCed. I'm interested to know whether which is stronger overall.
I'm working on it. I've got a pile of different materials and methods, including CNC.
That looks like a Kong Frog connector.
you could make this neat clip from pressed sheet metal as well, giving a stronger part.
Spot on. Follow up video coming soon...
maby try a non 3D printed stainless steal / aluminum one to see the difference
33kg to tare the mug handle off? You can tare it with your own hands?? That's amazing
That poor PLA never really stood a chance : (
It put up a good fight though!
When I heard one ton test rig, my first thought was, what calculations did he do to determine the material requirements to take that much stress? Apparently none :)
I wish I had that to repaire the loose thread on my iPhone case (for a tripod).
God bless.