Man, just finished watching a PrintShootRepeat vid, it’d be awesome to see the two of you do a collaboration 🤙🏽 the both of you have been my go to for anything print pew related.
On the topic of carbon fiber nylon I agree for the most part about using another suitable cheaper material if applicable but I believe the benefit behind such a material is that you can ideally get the right amount of resistance nylon provides with the rigidity needed from the carbon fiber for your application. Plus it has killer heat resistance properties. I will add that I found a very awesome side effect to this mixture. I printed some car parts with "CarbonX: filament and wanted to test it's heat resistance. I hit it with a heat gun to see how it would hold up and after a few minutes under the heat gun the print eventually started melting but the cool part is that the print did not warp before melting like many other filaments do. I was able to use this finding in my final prints by heat welded the layers together which gave me a very strong part that with stood a few accidental drops on my concrete garage floor as well as months bolted up to me cars engine without issue. I made velocity stacks for ITBs if anyone's curious. Now that being said absolutely no scientific testing done to my print to give strength and durability results. That would be an awesome experiment you could do for all of us to see? CarbonX nylon heat welded.
Would be something interesting to try! I've done a lot more testing since this video, and I can say that Carbon Fiber Nylons are the best all around good option.
@@HoffmanTactical awesome I can’t wait to see more as im super interesting in how different filaments behave in this application. I recently subbed so I’ve got a back log of your videos just waiting to be watched =D
I know nothing about 3d printing, materials or manufacturing in general, not sure how i got here. Learned a lot here, seems like your testing methods are pretty sound. Nice work!
Plastic Annealing? How would you re harden the materials after you annealed them? Metal annealing is a thing I use all the time. I have read a lot about plastic annealing yet I think whoever started using the term in plastics did not really understand the process of annealing. RE Crystallization through heating is not the same as annealing in metals. At least on its face. When you anneal metal you soften it so it can be shaped and when you are finished shaping you re harden the steal through heating and cooling. While you get plastics hot to shape them there is no process to re harden the material besides letting the plastic set up. How did the term annealing get put into the plastics world and why does it mean a different thing in this industry vs the metal working industry?
Using plaster of Paris covering the model completely or in salt and put in the over is what I have herd from another RUclips haven’t tried it yet but it’s worth a try I think the temperature has to be hotter than what you were extruding
@Ethan I'd doubt it would heat the parts equally inside and out. It would probably create a coating where the outside layers bond better, creating a exoskeleton.
@@jesusoftheapes It is the same process of heating to the glass transition temperature for stress relief and recrystallization, therefore the same name. In your case you are also adding the process of tempering, but tempering is not part of annealing.
When it comes to 3d printer filaments with carbon fibers majority of the time it isn't for strength but to improve printing properties. Some performance filaments well above 350C printing temperature use carbon fibers just so they can be successfully and reliably printed.
@@MobileAura I'm mainly referring to materials like PEEK, ULTEM, PEI, etc. where the materials are so iffy to 3d print and strong the addition of fibers is almost entirely so you can reliably get successful repeatable prints. I'm specifically writing about 3d printing materials that are very strong and adding fibers wouldn't have very noticeable benefits to strength or elasticity. Obviously in a nylon filament for example fibers have benefits to material properties and printing properties.
Outstanding work with this. I would still love to see a comparison like this of regular, glass filled, and carbon fiber nylon, given that glass-filled nylon of some variety is used in almost all commercial polymer-framed frames/lowers. But this test does seem to be pretty informative. Looking forward to when you get your impact tester running. That'll be even more helpful in determining what might work best for printed pews.
Definitely need to get an impact tester running! Remember that glass filled nylon that is injection molded and glass filled nylon that has been 3D printed are two different animals! Once I get a proper test set up I'll definitely test them though.
@@wanderingcalamity360 I'm sure they would perform better after remelting / annealing. The problem with any 3D printed fiber filled plastic is the fibers are very short. With injection molding they are able to use mush longer fibers. That's why continuous fiber printing is so interesting, of course it does not help with the layer adhesion.
I would love to see you do testing and a practical print with remelted parts like shown by Free Spirit 1. this can be done with PETG and if done correctly, fuses the layers together.
And in the case of PLA creates a crystal like structure that increases its thermal resistance significantly. Which is the main detriment of PLA and pew pew uses.
I like the semi-technical graphs. I'm doing a lot of this for my engineering classes and you are getting great data with what you have. I'll admit it is nicer to do this with purpose built testing machines in the $40,000 range but keep it up.
I built the tensile testing machine. I have found that CF can have negative effects on impact resistance in many cases. Another reason that CF is not more common is that it's used mostly in conjunction with plastics that are not necessarily the best. Like PLA, Nylon and PETG. A CF PLA+ or CF PCTG would be awesome. PLA+ and PCTG have the most impact resistance out of all the filaments.
Great video. I'm not into printing firearms but I do a lot of mechanical testing and analysis. I really like your motorized tensile test. You could also take a look at my 3d printable 3-point bending test which can be used to determine the materials bending modulus to compare the stiffness. Usually CF filled filaments are way stiffer, especially when it comes to PETG.
It think you had a good conclusion, but I think you completely missed the factor of high temperature stiffness, which could be very important for many of us. CF definitely helps there, and also the type of base material choice is way more important, for example a good use case for CF nylon, PC CF etc.
I'm with all of the folks surprised at the better layer adhesion. Makes it seem like they must need different print settings due to heat spread in the CF. Or maybe it's just a lot-to-lot variation in the spools. I did order a resin printer. Chasing that layer adhesion,.....
its probably due to less warping from the addition of fibers. Any fiber filled filament will have reduced warp, not so much more strength unless the fibers are long for tensils reinforcement.
It does wear out the brass but no wear nearly as fast as it is reputed to... I printed a whole roll of Carbon fiber pla and at the very end is when I noticed wear... Still the steel is better...
Great video. lots of good information. One point I have to disagree with; Temperature and strength are not completely different topics. They are actually dependent on each other and one material could be stronger at a lower temp. but another material may be stronger at a different temp. They are very interdependent.
Using the same settings isn't really the best way to compare which is stronger. You should have optimized the settings for each. You wouldn't create a steel beam and an aluminum beam the exact same way and expect accurate results. Their materials have very different requirements to perform their best.
With the CF filament i go with a .12 layer height and run the noz i bit hotter than i would with regular pla depending on the day/print 225-230 i also print slllllow @ 40mm/s, and 5% fan after first 5 layers. Takes 3 days to print a uh, well, you know, but it is worth it. Also feed at 105% Im no pro but trial and error has gotten great results now.
PC is good stuff. The blend I use works really well, but it does warp a little, so while it works it's not the best. It's great for smaller parts. Printing big stuff like the LR-308 lower it's more problematic though.
While the testing is great, you need to adjust settings for all different Filaments. You have two different materials that take heat differently. You could adjust for the regular petg to ensure you get smooth prints just like you did for the carbon fiber varient.
Yes. I'm putting together a "standardized" testing method. One of the first things I'll do when testing a new filament is find the best temp for optimal layer adhesion. With PETG it's pretty close to 245 C.
@@HoffmanTactical Awesome! I'm definitely enjoying the tests you are doing. Do you use fiberlogy impact PLA at all? (Also just got my shipping notification for my reinforcement Kit 😁)
Excellent video! Thank you! currently testing polycarbonate with carbon fibers and the look and feel is certainly great, I'm not sure the inter-layer adhesion is as good as PLA - definitely not better. But: The carbon fiber PC is less brittle and my samples did not break to shreds like my PLA sample did.
@@maynarddrivesfast804 I've note done a video yet, but I did test some CF PC, it was strong, but the layer adhesion was low and impact resistance was not that that great.
I've been thinking about that. I'll probably do a test by leaving a bunch of samples outside for a couple months and see how much they degrade compared to refence samples stored under optimal conditions.
You can print with continuous carbon fiber reinforcement strands with dual nozzles. I think Cura ultimatker has that ability as well as Markforged. It would be an insanely tough and lightweight lower. But it would cost way more then a nice aluminum lower from a gun shop. Carbon fiber is not cheap
Dude, thanks for doing this! We've been told over and over that CF is actually weaker than sans CF, all else being equal. This seems to challenge that conclusion for sure. I would also add that CF filaments have much higher definition. I print lots of fine threads, and since starting to experiment with CF I've been able to stop offsetting my thread faces and simply use the looser thread class profiles in Fusion. Which should hypothetically also make the threads stronger just because there's more material there, and more surface area.
@@HoffmanTactical I'm really looking forward to your impact testing on CFPETG. Regular PETG has a tendency to break with impact, so my theory is CF may actually improve that property of PETG. CFPETG is my new favorite material to print with so I have high hopes. If it even gets close to PLA+, and maintains it's higher heat resistance, it could be a winner.
@@Snaaky005 In my testing it did, but still not the best. The CF-PET has performed much better. I'm not yet sure the significant difference between PET and PETG, but the PET certainly appears to have much better impact properties.
Great information. Definitely under rated channel. Have you tried overtures nylon? Supposedly fairly easy to print with but I imagine it's not pure for that reason so it's strength would be the deciding factor IMO.
p2p file share files instead of website. Unless you are specifically looking for website add revenue. in that case host your own on an old pc in your house. Just get an upload speed above 30mbps.
Great video and very informative. But I was partly left with more questions than answers. Let’s say I’m going to 3d print a drone what would be the best choice of material for it overall?
I am actually 3D printing a quad. In fact I already printed the first version ;) CF Nylon or PLA+ are going to be the best options. I'm using PLA+ because it will not clog the fine 0.25 MM nozzles.
Yes. All of the pending orders shipped out Tuesday. You should have received a shipping confirmation. If not, shoot me an email with your order # and I'll get you the tracking info. tim(at)hoffmantactical.com
@@HoffmanTactical ive printed some glock mags lowers and one of your super lowers in the COOBEAN brand carbon fiber PLA and with some basic tests using my hands it seems to yeild quite a bit especially for horizontally printed parts
I imagine petg is stronger than pla, but js you should see my carbon fiber pla prints. They come out so smooth, they do have layer lines but you can barely see them and it creates a really nice looking finish. I just wish it was more heat resistant. Next I'm going to buy the CF PETG and try that out because there are some weapon accessories I would like to print :)
Carbon Fiber does print Beautifully! However, PLA+ is much stronger then PETG. The biggest problem with PETG, and why I no longer use it, is it has very low impact resistance.
have you ever printed a 3d printer to make casting molds for aluminium? You pack the 3d printed lower into casting sand then pour molten aluminum into the sand . The heat of the aluminum burns the polymer out as it is cast and it leaves you with the same thing you printed only now in cast aluminum. It could be a way to improve on your designs . Plus imagine the endless things you could add to the design this way.
I've cast other parts with a similar method. Using the 3D printed part as a pattern, basically green sand casting. Though to get enough detail to do something precise like a lower you really need to use a vacuum investment casting process. Which I'd like to do, just pricey!
@@HoffmanTactical I have seen some pretty cool castings that were 3d printed in videos. I have always wondered if a lower could be made that way. Keep up the good work.
Good comparison video! Good info in this one - so how about possibly printing a different filament for the buffer portion of the lower (to allow for the removal of the hose clamp). Since I know I was the one making the big push for using a CF filament. I'm only saying - I want to be able to print a lower that is strong and can hold up to a heck of a beating without requiring a hose clamp. And youre doing an awesome job of being unbiased and taking a strictly scientific look at this.
Now I mean, not that it's necessarily feasible for everyone but I'm sure if you were to potentially utilize something like MarkForge is producing - they have a continuous Carbon fiber filament (not the powder like most filaments have).
Also, just wanted to leave this here - guess the hose clamp isn't even needed after all - so long as you're not going to be doing any push-ups on it... ruclips.net/video/GBC-y8AFXBo/видео.html
Most of my older designs did not use any hose clamp, but I did not feel they where strong enough to trust in a high risk environment. Check out some of my older videos and you will see what I mean. The hose clamp is there because I want this to be a practical lower, not just a plinker ;) I have a couple ideas for a new non reinforced lower, and will be working on that sometime. But it still won't be as strong as the super lower!
The lower receiver is the only legally regulated (with the exception of violating the 2nd Amendment) part of the Armalite pattern rifle/carbine. All of the remaining parts may be legally purchased on line and mailed to you directly without regulation or registration.
Great video, thank you! I have a question: I need to print an intake for a go kart engine. Where the small carburetor is on the end. Karts have no suspension so the part needs to be strong to 'shaking' with the carburetor on the end. Can you advise the type of filament I should use please?
*Cant go wrong with Ingeo Biopolymer 3D870*(LOL) Brother i finish 2 g17 frames with 3D870 .Bed 70 and 245 nozzle, retraction 1,3 at 40 mm speed ,fan at 60%.I will not buy the E-sun pla+ no more THX for the great info!!!(I am on ender3 v2)
Not very high ;) It's basically ABS, a very weak plastic with only one positive, it can be solvent welded. Which is nice for some things, not lowers though.
O boy, oh boy. Where do I start? I watched one minute of the video and I already see a lot of issues: 1. PETG is just plain BAD base resin for fiber filler. Unless you want only estethic effects. 2. Printing with cooling ALWAYS degrades intra-layer bonding of your parts. Some materials don't tolerate any cooling (PC), some will tolerate it (PLA and some other polyesters), but mechanical parameters will be garbage 3. When you have bad visual quality prints (lines not aligning, or missed extrusions), mechanical properties will always be garbage. Therefore, mechanical strength test results will be heaviky influenced.
All three of your points are correct! This video was not so much about this filament, but more of what effects the fibers had when the base was similar. The impact results where the most interesting I think.
Without watching it yet I would say it wouldn’t be significantly stronger between layers due to fibers not crossing the layers. The fibers all essential laying flat and internal in the single plane
Not quite. PLA is strong, but lacks impact resistants. PLA+ is a better option. Nylon would be better, if you can manage to print with it. Which is not easy to do without a real heated chamber. That's why I now recommend 3D870 PLA. It's a good balance between strength, temperature resistance, and easy printing.
IMO CF is overrated. Sure it looks nice and is stiff but like what you mentioned, it lacks durability which I feel is 3DPs major weakness, especially in layer adhesion.
Depending how it's done, I find that CF and GF can be very helpful. Overdone, and fiber filled filaments have poor layer adhesion, but the right amount of fibers increase strength without loss of other properties.
Do you actually spend time to find the best printing settings for each material or just go with the first one that you manage to print? Temperature can make a big difference, bed, nozzle and ambient temperature. Nylon with chopped fibres is very commonly used, even in injection molding, just because it hasn’t been great the way you printed it doesn’t mean it isn’t good. You generally seem to have pretty different opinions on materials to what most people do, that might say something about how you print the parts not about the materials. When trying a new material you should try different temperatures, different part cooling, etc, to find what is optimal for that material, just because it printed doesn’t mean it was printed well. I really hope you used the same nozzle for the normal PETG and carbon fibre PETG since different nozzles conduct heat differently and different nozzle materials can make a large difference if you don’t change the settings. If you did some testing with each material before doing the tests shown in the video then that is fine too, but if you used the same settings with two different nozzle materials or just stopped experimenting as soon as you got a part to print, that isn’t valid testing. Also for some materials you really do need an enclosure to print it properly, even if it looks like it printed fine without, it can have internal stresses that could have been avoided by printing with an enclosure, you can fix them somewhat by annealing the material.
Yes. Most opinions you will see online (especially related to ABS and PETG) are grossly inaccurate, mostly because they are based off of hearsay and not actual data.
@@HoffmanTactical How do we know your opinions and tests aren't grossly inaccurate due to how you printed them? What makes your tests accurate? Just because you did some tests and got some numbers doesnt mean that the test is accurate or the material is printed well. Maybe you should do a video explaining your experimenting and testing process and how you find the optimal print settings. Without knowing how well you test different print settings you could just take the first sample that printed fine and test that, which might not be optimal for the material, in which case your tests arent any more useful than the people complaining in reviews that they cant print it or it isnt strong. There are also lots of tests that have been done that have accurate results.
@@conorstewart2214 This video and my comments are my opinion based on my testing, experience, and research. It's up to you to research other sources and decide what is best in your application. If you have data you would like to share, I would be glad to learn from it. Until then, I will continue to advise against ABS and PETG, as well as any other filaments that are not suitable for the relevant applications.
@@HoffmanTactical You havent answered any of the questions I asked about how you print the materials or how you come up with your print settings, it is getting to the point it seems you are avoiding them. You seem to want to put out proper information and include numerical data but none of that matters if the material isnt properly printed, just look at plenty of other sources online that use numerical data and test different print settings and you will find that print settings, in particular temperature, make a huge difference to strength and especially layer adhesion. Even just using a different nozzle material can make a large difference in some cases due to the different thermal conductivity. The bare minimum required for any filament testing is to make sure you are printing it at the best temperature (not just going with what the manufacturer recommends), not just the nozzle and bed temperature but also ambient temperature. Temperature towers can be good for that but arent the only way to do it. Ambient temperature or enclosure temperature can greatly affect it too, a lot more than just helping warping. It doesnt matter how you test it or how good your testing equipment and graphs are, if the material isnt printed properly it doesnt mean anything. Just successfully printing your test pieces doesnt mean you printed it well (people can successfully print more advanced materials like polycarbonate on suboptimal setups, they print fine but the physical properties are much lower than if they were printed on a proper setup), so if you dont do some testing beforehand to determine the best print settings then the data isnt reliable. It seems you are trying to put out reliable, numerical data but if you dont properly test the filaments to find the best settings or if your viewers dont know how well you actually do that, then the information can be regarded as grossly inaccurate and cant be relied upon. Why do you think research papers have to describe all methods used in detail? Its so anyone looking at it can tell if the proper procedure was followed so they can tell if the results will be reliable. Of course you dont need to go to that extreme but if we dont know the process you go through to get the best print settings for the material then we cant trust your data at all, as it could be more to do with your print settings or printer than anything else. For all we know you just accept the first successful prints and test those. Without basic information like your print settings and setup, how you find your print settings and if you test different print settings your information isnt much use since the results could be attributed to user error or bad print settings. Im not accusing you of not properly testing the filaments, I have no idea if you do or not, but you should make it pretty clear if you are or arent and if you are then explain how, if you arent then your results are unreliable. You may already do all that, in which case why not just film and explain a little bit of it, rather than us having no idea if you do or not and hence having no idea if your data is actually reliable.
@@conorstewart2214 I have a video covering some of it here: ruclips.net/video/BjIv0g2ezao/видео.html There are other videos I have done as well. Nozzle temp and other factors are taken into consideration where important. I'd like to do more detailed videos on testing, but it's not worth the time. If there is a particular data point you disagree with, I'd be happy to explain why I came to that conclusion. Or that I was wrong.
@@HoffmanTactical Cool, thanks for getting back to me. I've been using the iron around areas like receiver/FCG pin holes, but haven't put enough rounds downrange to know if it's helping or not.
No Clue on any of this, but I did work in industrial epoxies for a bit. We use to cure molds under pressure at 5x-10x atmosphere... Is that a thing in 3D printing??
Autoclaving is more of a thing for composite materials. It improves your fiber density, improves fiber wetting, reduces air bubbles, and improves dimensional accuracy. It wouldn't have the same effect on single-material plastic extrusion techniques.
I don't think this is a correct way to test different materials on the same settings that is, how about setting the printer to print good/nice quality petg, and print cf petg with it or the other way around, I bet that would be the same result just mirrored IMHO
EJ armory uses Carbon fiber polymers and they have tested better than standard plastics have for that company. they use a 1 to 1 mix of carbon infused polymers to high performance polymers. Casting is a better method of making polymer lowers. This topic proves it. While printing out your own lower is a neat thing to be able to do but the truth is they have not invented a good enough base material to make weapons grade stuff yet. I am sure they will come up with something. They probably already have invented such filaments but because they would replace so many tools,guns and parts they are being kept from the public's hands. Until then freedom 15 type systems are far more effective ways of making polymer lowers for yourselves than 3d prints. They take far less time to produce. They cast stronger materials and they are cheaper.
If CF nylon isn't ideal why are you using it in your Orca? Genuinely curious, I am sure you have a reason. Am currently deciding on which material to make 9ne of your Orcas out of!
It not ideal, but better then most other options. This video was before I was using CF Nylon. Nylon benefits a lot from carbon fiber, compared to PLA or PC.
Remelting is the right term. Annealing is but lower temp and does not melt the plastic. The problem with remelting is features like the take down retention pin holes will not form properly.
@@HoffmanTactical even encased in plaster? just so we're talking about the same thing it's the method where you print your file as per usual, and encase in plaster so it retains the shape while the plastic goes completely liquid
@@ravener96 Even with plaster, it's pretty tricky getting all the nooks and cranny's filled. A vacuum chamber will really help with this of course. My thought on the matter is that while going through all the trouble to remelt the part, it's not much more trouble to do an aluminum investment casting. But if it's something you'd like to pursue, check out the videos CNC Kitchen did on remelting. It think he covered the salt packing method as well.
@@HoffmanTactical all i know about it is from the cnc kitchen video. it seems to be much much simpler than aluminium casting, the plaster remelt method doesent require a furnace and cna essentially be done with a bucket, a bag of plaster and an oven. im sure there needs to be more research though, it seems unnessecary to immerse the part in a block of plaster vs dipping to coat it in sequential layers, so there isnt so much plaster to insulate. also it seems PLA works poorly with the method, so it might be the polycarbonates time to shine or some other fancy filament.
Dude... I'm researching a material to use to 3d print an amphibious airplane... Ya, and Thank God I'm a Crazy test pilot But what material would you recommend to use for an airplane? And No Worries, its on my head..
Like a full size plane? You would need a big printer. But I think something like carbon fiber nylon would be a good option, because it is light and strong.
Have you tried glass fiber nylon? The carbon fiber nylon is surprisingly brittle and I’m not a huge fan of it either, but I’ve had great success with glass fiber nylon so far
I just bought a roll of NylonX and NylonG from Matter Hackers. We will see how they hold up to the new impact tester I am putting together ;) I don't think Matter Hackers is the best though, what GF Nylon are you using?
![KSI - Thick Of It (feat. Trippie Redd) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/At8v_Yc044Y/mqdefault.jpg)
Did your website get shutdown ??
Yes. I knew it was coming and It finely happened. I'm working on moving over to another provider now.
@@HoffmanTactical Damn I just stumbled upon you 308 lower vid and just went to check it out! Hope your dogs are ok!!
@@kennebearsarms So far the dogs are fine! It's our hosting service that shut the site down.
@@HoffmanTactical I was just about to purchase a reinforcement kit. Hope you find a new provider soon.
@@HoffmanTactical I was looking for your site. Hope its resolved soon.
I'm enjoying this series of materials testing.
Keep up the good work!
DUDE, you're one wicked kid, seriously. Wish my parents were as supportive as yours are
Video is easy to follow easy to understand for someone just getting into 3d printing great job man keep up the work love from the north!
Fantastic run down! Thanks a ton for this excellent review and testing!
Love this guy and love his energy and love his work and love his attitude and keep it up.
As a printer NewB, this was extremely clear and concise, and demonstrated in a way I could see for myself. Appreciate it!
I'm in the concrete industry. Fibers put in concrete make it a huge pain if you go to remove it. So much tougher than concrete without it.
Man, just finished watching a PrintShootRepeat vid, it’d be awesome to see the two of you do a collaboration 🤙🏽 the both of you have been my go to for anything print pew related.
On the topic of carbon fiber nylon I agree for the most part about using another suitable cheaper material if applicable but I believe the benefit behind such a material is that you can ideally get the right amount of resistance nylon provides with the rigidity needed from the carbon fiber for your application. Plus it has killer heat resistance properties.
I will add that I found a very awesome side effect to this mixture. I printed some car parts with "CarbonX: filament and wanted to test it's heat resistance. I hit it with a heat gun to see how it would hold up and after a few minutes under the heat gun the print eventually started melting but the cool part is that the print did not warp before melting like many other filaments do. I was able to use this finding in my final prints by heat welded the layers together which gave me a very strong part that with stood a few accidental drops on my concrete garage floor as well as months bolted up to me cars engine without issue. I made velocity stacks for ITBs if anyone's curious.
Now that being said absolutely no scientific testing done to my print to give strength and durability results. That would be an awesome experiment you could do for all of us to see? CarbonX nylon heat welded.
Would be something interesting to try! I've done a lot more testing since this video, and I can say that Carbon Fiber Nylons are the best all around good option.
@@HoffmanTactical awesome I can’t wait to see more as im super interesting in how different filaments behave in this application. I recently subbed so I’ve got a back log of your videos just waiting to be watched =D
I know nothing about 3d printing, materials or manufacturing in general, not sure how i got here. Learned a lot here, seems like your testing methods are pretty sound. Nice work!
Just thought I would drop you a comment, you are making some damn good content, very analytical and fact tested, much kudos to you :)
You’re doing great work Hoffman Tactical! Thank you!
Should try Annealing the Parts and test those results.
Plastic Annealing? How would you re harden the materials after you annealed them? Metal annealing is a thing I use all the time. I have read a lot about plastic annealing yet I think whoever started using the term in plastics did not really understand the process of annealing. RE Crystallization through heating is not the same as annealing in metals. At least on its face. When you anneal metal you soften it so it can be shaped and when you are finished shaping you re harden the steal through heating and cooling. While you get plastics hot to shape them there is no process to re harden the material besides letting the plastic set up. How did the term annealing get put into the plastics world and why does it mean a different thing in this industry vs the metal working industry?
Using plaster of Paris covering the model completely or in salt and put in the over is what I have herd from another RUclips haven’t tried it yet but it’s worth a try I think the temperature has to be hotter than what you were extruding
It’s more about layer adhesion making layers come together better I guess….worth looking into
@Ethan I'd doubt it would heat the parts equally inside and out. It would probably create a coating where the outside layers bond better, creating a exoskeleton.
@@jesusoftheapes It is the same process of heating to the glass transition temperature for stress relief and recrystallization, therefore the same name.
In your case you are also adding the process of tempering, but tempering is not part of annealing.
When it comes to 3d printer filaments with carbon fibers majority of the time it isn't for strength but to improve printing properties. Some performance filaments well above 350C printing temperature use carbon fibers just so they can be successfully and reliably printed.
I think that has a lot to do with it.
This is false, it has absolutely everything to do with the terminal elasticity peak of the fiber.
@@MobileAura I'm mainly referring to materials like PEEK, ULTEM, PEI, etc. where the materials are so iffy to 3d print and strong the addition of fibers is almost entirely so you can reliably get successful repeatable prints. I'm specifically writing about 3d printing materials that are very strong and adding fibers wouldn't have very noticeable benefits to strength or elasticity. Obviously in a nylon filament for example fibers have benefits to material properties and printing properties.
@@GENcELL2014 This is correct. I agree.
Good info my dude, nicely done. I would definitely say an impact/energy tester would be a good investment for your work
I've since built an impact tester, definitely very helpful!
Outstanding work with this.
I would still love to see a comparison like this of regular, glass filled, and carbon fiber nylon, given that glass-filled nylon of some variety is used in almost all commercial polymer-framed frames/lowers.
But this test does seem to be pretty informative.
Looking forward to when you get your impact tester running.
That'll be even more helpful in determining what might work best for printed pews.
Definitely need to get an impact tester running! Remember that glass filled nylon that is injection molded and glass filled nylon that has been 3D printed are two different animals! Once I get a proper test set up I'll definitely test them though.
@@HoffmanTactical
Yeah, unfortunately.
Though I also wonder how doing a cast annealing might change how printed GFN performs.
@@wanderingcalamity360 I'm sure they would perform better after remelting / annealing. The problem with any 3D printed fiber filled plastic is the fibers are very short. With injection molding they are able to use mush longer fibers. That's why continuous fiber printing is so interesting, of course it does not help with the layer adhesion.
@@HoffmanTactical
Agreed.
This channel is def gonna have a million subs someday.
Very useful data for my electronics prototyping especially for my Ebike battery holder ! A massive thank you.
Great video and information, thank you!
I would love to see you do testing and a practical print with remelted parts like shown by Free Spirit 1. this can be done with PETG and if done correctly, fuses the layers together.
And in the case of PLA creates a crystal like structure that increases its thermal resistance significantly. Which is the main detriment of PLA and pew pew uses.
I like the semi-technical graphs. I'm doing a lot of this for my engineering classes and you are getting great data with what you have. I'll admit it is nicer to do this with purpose built testing machines in the $40,000 range but keep it up.
I bet 40K gets you some nice equipment!
People with the 40k machines don't make RUclips videos. 🤷
@@_nom_ they do :)
Really do appreciate everything you're doing for this community. Keep doing what you do man
Seems like pla+ works good for me for frames. But I’m interested in trying carbon fiber for magazines.
First where the hell did you get a tensile testing thingy and second of all why aren’t we all using carbon fiber??? AWESOME VIDEO!!!
I built the tensile testing machine. I have found that CF can have negative effects on impact resistance in many cases. Another reason that CF is not more common is that it's used mostly in conjunction with plastics that are not necessarily the best. Like PLA, Nylon and PETG. A CF PLA+ or CF PCTG would be awesome. PLA+ and PCTG have the most impact resistance out of all the filaments.
The man among men is back gentlemen with even more critical info. 👌 doin God’s work. 🇺🇸
Truly a legend 🙌
He sure is.
CF Nylon core wrapped in Nylon is an option, yes? For rigidity, but to also retain some of that shock resistance? Works well on Glock lowers, anyway..
Great video. I'm not into printing firearms but I do a lot of mechanical testing and analysis. I really like your motorized tensile test. You could also take a look at my 3d printable 3-point bending test which can be used to determine the materials bending modulus to compare the stiffness. Usually CF filled filaments are way stiffer, especially when it comes to PETG.
Yes, stiffness is the main reason for adding fibers.
Love the work you’re doing man. Love from NYC
It think you had a good conclusion, but I think you completely missed the factor of high temperature stiffness, which could be very important for many of us. CF definitely helps there, and also the type of base material choice is way more important, for example a good use case for CF nylon, PC CF etc.
I'm with all of the folks surprised at the better layer adhesion. Makes it seem like they must need different print settings due to heat spread in the CF. Or maybe it's just a lot-to-lot variation in the spools.
I did order a resin printer. Chasing that layer adhesion,.....
its probably due to less warping from the addition of fibers. Any fiber filled filament will have reduced warp, not so much more strength unless the fibers are long for tensils reinforcement.
Great review, jumping in one some new carbon filament on my CR10. Going to upgrade to the steel nozzle and give it a go.
It's amazing how much input you have with what little testing you've done. Go back and try again kid.
Not only like and subscribe but comment as well. It helps defeat the algorithm
Great video as usual!! Thank you sir!
You are the hero we need
It does wear out the brass but no wear nearly as fast as it is reputed to... I printed a whole roll of Carbon fiber pla and at the very end is when I noticed wear... Still the steel is better...
Have you looked at glass filled filaments? It would be interesting to see how a filament comparable to zytel performs...
I am also wonder about GF filaments. I wonder how they compare to CF filled ones.
From my understanding GF prints like CF but it's more flexible and less brittle. I've been thinking about testing with GF30-PA6
@@HoffmanTactical I was about to ask, if your going to test Glass Fiber Reinforced plastics.
@@cafenightster4548 I just got a roll of Nylon X and Nylon G from Matter Hackers. I don't think theirs is the best, but will see how it it performs.
@@rybred007 Yeah I was looking at 3DXTECH's PA6-GF30 which oddly comes in FDE!
Great video. lots of good information. One point I have to disagree with; Temperature and strength are not completely different topics. They are actually dependent on each other and one material could be stronger at a lower temp. but another material may be stronger at a different temp. They are very interdependent.
Your videos are great man. Keep it up!
Using the same settings isn't really the best way to compare which is stronger. You should have optimized the settings for each. You wouldn't create a steel beam and an aluminum beam the exact same way and expect accurate results. Their materials have very different requirements to perform their best.
Well said. You select a material for its properties, I’m not going to make a bullet proof vest out of wet cardboard.
Great video man
With the CF filament i go with a .12 layer height and run the noz i bit hotter than i would with regular pla depending on the day/print 225-230 i also print slllllow @ 40mm/s, and 5% fan after first 5 layers. Takes 3 days to print a uh, well, you know, but it is worth it. Also feed at 105%
Im no pro but trial and error has gotten great results now.
I run the same temp and speed with all my PLA prints as well ;)
Polymax PC is my filament of choice best strength, impact resistance and toughness overall with awesome heat resistance
PC is good stuff. The blend I use works really well, but it does warp a little, so while it works it's not the best. It's great for smaller parts. Printing big stuff like the LR-308 lower it's more problematic though.
wonderful and thanks very well explained!
I really appreciate the data.
Is it stronger? That's a non engineering term used often! Should always be followed with a designation like ductile, tensile and more.
Yes. Trying to rate the overall "toughness" or "durability" of a plastic involves a lot more then just strength!
I stepped on my bathroom floor and heard a quack-- it dawned on me that I had a very ducktile floor.
Yo, nice video man. Just a little advice: Calm down. You speak into the camera as if you are going to beat me up lol
While the testing is great, you need to adjust settings for all different Filaments. You have two different materials that take heat differently. You could adjust for the regular petg to ensure you get smooth prints just like you did for the carbon fiber varient.
Yes. I'm putting together a "standardized" testing method. One of the first things I'll do when testing a new filament is find the best temp for optimal layer adhesion. With PETG it's pretty close to 245 C.
@@HoffmanTactical Awesome! I'm definitely enjoying the tests you are doing. Do you use fiberlogy impact PLA at all? (Also just got my shipping notification for my reinforcement Kit 😁)
Thanks, I just bought paramount petg cf, good test charts.
Excellent video! Thank you! currently testing polycarbonate with carbon fibers and the look and feel is certainly great, I'm not sure the inter-layer adhesion is as good as PLA - definitely not better. But: The carbon fiber PC is less brittle and my samples did not break to shreds like my PLA sample did.
I think it could have potential. Still got to test the stuff I get!
@@HoffmanTactical Any update on the testing of carbon fiber PC?
@@maynarddrivesfast804 I've note done a video yet, but I did test some CF PC, it was strong, but the layer adhesion was low and impact resistance was not that that great.
You rock
What about PLA vs UV and other weather elements?
I've been thinking about that. I'll probably do a test by leaving a bunch of samples outside for a couple months and see how much they degrade compared to refence samples stored under optimal conditions.
Great video!
You can print with continuous carbon fiber reinforcement strands with dual nozzles. I think Cura ultimatker has that ability as well as Markforged. It would be an insanely tough and lightweight lower. But it would cost way more then a nice aluminum lower from a gun shop. Carbon fiber is not cheap
Dude, thanks for doing this! We've been told over and over that CF is actually weaker than sans CF, all else being equal. This seems to challenge that conclusion for sure. I would also add that CF filaments have much higher definition. I print lots of fine threads, and since starting to experiment with CF I've been able to stop offsetting my thread faces and simply use the looser thread class profiles in Fusion. Which should hypothetically also make the threads stronger just because there's more material there, and more surface area.
I'm one of the guys who says bad things about CF ;) Impact testing will really give us the answer though.
@@HoffmanTactical I'm really looking forward to your impact testing on CFPETG. Regular PETG has a tendency to break with impact, so my theory is CF may actually improve that property of PETG. CFPETG is my new favorite material to print with so I have high hopes. If it even gets close to PLA+, and maintains it's higher heat resistance, it could be a winner.
@@Snaaky005 In my testing it did, but still not the best. The CF-PET has performed much better. I'm not yet sure the significant difference between PET and PETG, but the PET certainly appears to have much better impact properties.
Thanks for sharing this video & info. Great review
Great information. Definitely under rated channel. Have you tried overtures nylon? Supposedly fairly easy to print with but I imagine it's not pure for that reason so it's strength would be the deciding factor IMO.
I have not tried Overture yet, but it's definitely on the list.
Excellent data impressive apparatus thank you.
p2p file share files instead of website. Unless you are specifically looking for website add revenue. in that case host your own on an old pc in your house. Just get an upload speed above 30mbps.
Always great work 👍🏽👍🏽
Great video and very informative. But I was partly left with more questions than answers. Let’s say I’m going to 3d print a drone what would be the best choice of material for it overall?
I am actually 3D printing a quad. In fact I already printed the first version ;) CF Nylon or PLA+ are going to be the best options. I'm using PLA+ because it will not clog the fine 0.25 MM nozzles.
@@HoffmanTactical Awesome thank you so much man! Hopefully your quad turns out good👍
Hoffman, i ordered a package. I just read the comment about the site shutting down. Can you still make those orders despite the shut down?
Yes. All of the pending orders shipped out Tuesday. You should have received a shipping confirmation. If not, shoot me an email with your order # and I'll get you the tracking info. tim(at)hoffmantactical.com
@@HoffmanTactical Ive received the package! Thanks man!
I’m looking to print guitar picks, I’m thinking CF is the way to go. From a material perspective in don’t think any other material compares.
CF does add a lot of strength and rigidity, if done right. Though it may irritate your fingers while playing.
Please do a test of carbon fiber PLA
I'll have to try some. But from what I have seen it is pretty brittle.
@@HoffmanTactical ive printed some glock mags lowers and one of your super lowers in the COOBEAN brand carbon fiber PLA and with some basic tests using my hands it seems to yeild quite a bit especially for horizontally printed parts
I can print up some test samples for you so you don’t have to go out and buy a roll of filament
Seems like when printed that way you are mostly just testing layer adhesion though.
I do a sample for each. The vertical samples are to test layer adhesion, and the horizontals test absolute material strength.
I imagine petg is stronger than pla, but js you should see my carbon fiber pla prints. They come out so smooth, they do have layer lines but you can barely see them and it creates a really nice looking finish. I just wish it was more heat resistant. Next I'm going to buy the CF PETG and try that out because there are some weapon accessories I would like to print :)
Carbon Fiber does print Beautifully! However, PLA+ is much stronger then PETG. The biggest problem with PETG, and why I no longer use it, is it has very low impact resistance.
I think you need to get the petg print better then that to make a comparison.
have you ever printed a 3d printer to make casting molds for aluminium? You pack the 3d printed lower into casting sand then pour molten aluminum into the sand . The heat of the aluminum burns the polymer out as it is cast and it leaves you with the same thing you printed only now in cast aluminum. It could be a way to improve on your designs . Plus imagine the endless things you could add to the design this way.
I've cast other parts with a similar method. Using the 3D printed part as a pattern, basically green sand casting. Though to get enough detail to do something precise like a lower you really need to use a vacuum investment casting process. Which I'd like to do, just pricey!
@@HoffmanTactical I have seen some pretty cool castings that were 3d printed in videos. I have always wondered if a lower could be made that way.
Keep up the good work.
I was thinking to use cf petg for a lower to help with dealing with higher temperatures in general. Petg is the best option i have at the moment.
I can see it now kid... The HOFFMAN AR9! Now make our 3d printers happy, get to it. 🤝
Good comparison video! Good info in this one - so how about possibly printing a different filament for the buffer portion of the lower (to allow for the removal of the hose clamp). Since I know I was the one making the big push for using a CF filament. I'm only saying - I want to be able to print a lower that is strong and can hold up to a heck of a beating without requiring a hose clamp. And youre doing an awesome job of being unbiased and taking a strictly scientific look at this.
Now I mean, not that it's necessarily feasible for everyone but I'm sure if you were to potentially utilize something like MarkForge is producing - they have a continuous Carbon fiber filament (not the powder like most filaments have).
I mean - has anyone on here been able to print any lower design without requiring a hose clamp for the buffer?
@hoffman tactical
Also, just wanted to leave this here - guess the hose clamp isn't even needed after all - so long as you're not going to be doing any push-ups on it... ruclips.net/video/GBC-y8AFXBo/видео.html
Most of my older designs did not use any hose clamp, but I did not feel they where strong enough to trust in a high risk environment. Check out some of my older videos and you will see what I mean. The hose clamp is there because I want this to be a practical lower, not just a plinker ;) I have a couple ideas for a new non reinforced lower, and will be working on that sometime. But it still won't be as strong as the super lower!
I keep thinking there's a lot more parts to a gun than just the receiver.
And lot's more weapons then just guns...
The lower receiver is the only legally regulated (with the exception of violating the 2nd Amendment) part of the Armalite pattern rifle/carbine. All of the remaining parts may be legally purchased on line and mailed to you directly without regulation or registration.
@@HoffmanTactical 👀
LOL@ 8:24! who's that, your big brother?! lol
Great video, thank you!
I have a question: I need to print an intake for a go kart engine. Where the small carburetor is on the end. Karts have no suspension so the part needs to be strong to 'shaking' with the carburetor on the end. Can you advise the type of filament I should use please?
*Cant go wrong with Ingeo Biopolymer 3D870*(LOL) Brother i finish 2 g17 frames with 3D870 .Bed 70 and 245 nozzle, retraction 1,3 at 40 mm speed ,fan at 60%.I will not buy the E-sun pla+ no more THX for the great info!!!(I am on ender3 v2)
It's great stuff!
Good info, thanks. How well are the frames holding up? Also, where are the frames breaking when they do let go?
Good video Hoffman! What's your opinion on ASA for printing lowers and such?
Not very high ;) It's basically ABS, a very weak plastic with only one positive, it can be solvent welded. Which is nice for some things, not lowers though.
I'm interested to see performance with temperature extremes. Cold extreme to be specific.
O boy, oh boy. Where do I start?
I watched one minute of the video and I already see a lot of issues:
1. PETG is just plain BAD base resin for fiber filler. Unless you want only estethic effects.
2. Printing with cooling ALWAYS degrades intra-layer bonding of your parts. Some materials don't tolerate any cooling (PC), some will tolerate it (PLA and some other polyesters), but mechanical parameters will be garbage
3. When you have bad visual quality prints (lines not aligning, or missed extrusions), mechanical properties will always be garbage.
Therefore, mechanical strength test results will be heaviky influenced.
All three of your points are correct! This video was not so much about this filament, but more of what effects the fibers had when the base was similar. The impact results where the most interesting I think.
Without watching it yet I would say it wouldn’t be significantly stronger between layers due to fibers not crossing the layers. The fibers all essential laying flat and internal in the single plane
That's right. I even thought that the layers would be weaker with the fibers, but that is not so.
Excellent info! So, PLA is king? Not Nylon or other "exotics" for lowers?
Not quite. PLA is strong, but lacks impact resistants. PLA+ is a better option. Nylon would be better, if you can manage to print with it. Which is not easy to do without a real heated chamber. That's why I now recommend 3D870 PLA. It's a good balance between strength, temperature resistance, and easy printing.
IMO CF is overrated. Sure it looks nice and is stiff but like what you mentioned, it lacks durability which I feel is 3DPs major weakness, especially in layer adhesion.
Depending how it's done, I find that CF and GF can be very helpful. Overdone, and fiber filled filaments have poor layer adhesion, but the right amount of fibers increase strength without loss of other properties.
Cant go wrong with e-sun pla+ my brother
It's good stuff. And the 3D870 is even better!
@@HoffmanTactical I will check that one out my brother
I am surprised the CF PETG had more tensile strength. I have assumed the added CF took away from the stickiness of PETG.
I was surprised as well, particularly in the vertical axis.
Layer adhesion: +5C and 0.2mm layer height.
Do you actually spend time to find the best printing settings for each material or just go with the first one that you manage to print? Temperature can make a big difference, bed, nozzle and ambient temperature. Nylon with chopped fibres is very commonly used, even in injection molding, just because it hasn’t been great the way you printed it doesn’t mean it isn’t good. You generally seem to have pretty different opinions on materials to what most people do, that might say something about how you print the parts not about the materials.
When trying a new material you should try different temperatures, different part cooling, etc, to find what is optimal for that material, just because it printed doesn’t mean it was printed well. I really hope you used the same nozzle for the normal PETG and carbon fibre PETG since different nozzles conduct heat differently and different nozzle materials can make a large difference if you don’t change the settings. If you did some testing with each material before doing the tests shown in the video then that is fine too, but if you used the same settings with two different nozzle materials or just stopped experimenting as soon as you got a part to print, that isn’t valid testing.
Also for some materials you really do need an enclosure to print it properly, even if it looks like it printed fine without, it can have internal stresses that could have been avoided by printing with an enclosure, you can fix them somewhat by annealing the material.
Yes. Most opinions you will see online (especially related to ABS and PETG) are grossly inaccurate, mostly because they are based off of hearsay and not actual data.
@@HoffmanTactical How do we know your opinions and tests aren't grossly inaccurate due to how you printed them? What makes your tests accurate? Just because you did some tests and got some numbers doesnt mean that the test is accurate or the material is printed well. Maybe you should do a video explaining your experimenting and testing process and how you find the optimal print settings.
Without knowing how well you test different print settings you could just take the first sample that printed fine and test that, which might not be optimal for the material, in which case your tests arent any more useful than the people complaining in reviews that they cant print it or it isnt strong.
There are also lots of tests that have been done that have accurate results.
@@conorstewart2214 This video and my comments are my opinion based on my testing, experience, and research. It's up to you to research other sources and decide what is best in your application. If you have data you would like to share, I would be glad to learn from it. Until then, I will continue to advise against ABS and PETG, as well as any other filaments that are not suitable for the relevant applications.
@@HoffmanTactical You havent answered any of the questions I asked about how you print the materials or how you come up with your print settings, it is getting to the point it seems you are avoiding them. You seem to want to put out proper information and include numerical data but none of that matters if the material isnt properly printed, just look at plenty of other sources online that use numerical data and test different print settings and you will find that print settings, in particular temperature, make a huge difference to strength and especially layer adhesion. Even just using a different nozzle material can make a large difference in some cases due to the different thermal conductivity.
The bare minimum required for any filament testing is to make sure you are printing it at the best temperature (not just going with what the manufacturer recommends), not just the nozzle and bed temperature but also ambient temperature. Temperature towers can be good for that but arent the only way to do it. Ambient temperature or enclosure temperature can greatly affect it too, a lot more than just helping warping.
It doesnt matter how you test it or how good your testing equipment and graphs are, if the material isnt printed properly it doesnt mean anything. Just successfully printing your test pieces doesnt mean you printed it well (people can successfully print more advanced materials like polycarbonate on suboptimal setups, they print fine but the physical properties are much lower than if they were printed on a proper setup), so if you dont do some testing beforehand to determine the best print settings then the data isnt reliable.
It seems you are trying to put out reliable, numerical data but if you dont properly test the filaments to find the best settings or if your viewers dont know how well you actually do that, then the information can be regarded as grossly inaccurate and cant be relied upon. Why do you think research papers have to describe all methods used in detail? Its so anyone looking at it can tell if the proper procedure was followed so they can tell if the results will be reliable. Of course you dont need to go to that extreme but if we dont know the process you go through to get the best print settings for the material then we cant trust your data at all, as it could be more to do with your print settings or printer than anything else. For all we know you just accept the first successful prints and test those. Without basic information like your print settings and setup, how you find your print settings and if you test different print settings your information isnt much use since the results could be attributed to user error or bad print settings.
Im not accusing you of not properly testing the filaments, I have no idea if you do or not, but you should make it pretty clear if you are or arent and if you are then explain how, if you arent then your results are unreliable. You may already do all that, in which case why not just film and explain a little bit of it, rather than us having no idea if you do or not and hence having no idea if your data is actually reliable.
@@conorstewart2214 I have a video covering some of it here: ruclips.net/video/BjIv0g2ezao/видео.html There are other videos I have done as well.
Nozzle temp and other factors are taken into consideration where important. I'd like to do more detailed videos on testing, but it's not worth the time. If there is a particular data point you disagree with, I'd be happy to explain why I came to that conclusion. Or that I was wrong.
Would running the ol' soldering iron across the layers make a diff?
Probably, If you melt in fiberglass it would certainly help.
@@HoffmanTactical Cool, thanks for getting back to me. I've been using the iron around areas like receiver/FCG pin holes, but haven't put enough rounds downrange to know if it's helping or not.
Will you let us know who your web provider was after you get up and running again?
No Clue on any of this, but I did work in industrial epoxies for a bit. We use to cure molds under pressure at 5x-10x atmosphere... Is that a thing in 3D printing??
Autoclaving is more of a thing for composite materials. It improves your fiber density, improves fiber wetting, reduces air bubbles, and improves dimensional accuracy. It wouldn't have the same effect on single-material plastic extrusion techniques.
@@MO-zu9xq Ahhh... Appreciate the insight
Just askin', hope there is news soon on your new provider.
I don't think this is a correct way to test different materials on the same settings that is, how about setting the printer to print good/nice quality petg, and print cf petg with it or the other way around, I bet that would be the same result just mirrored IMHO
EJ armory uses Carbon fiber polymers and they have tested better than standard plastics have for that company. they use a 1 to 1 mix of carbon infused polymers to high performance polymers. Casting is a better method of making polymer lowers. This topic proves it. While printing out your own lower is a neat thing to be able to do but the truth is they have not invented a good enough base material to make weapons grade stuff yet. I am sure they will come up with something. They probably already have invented such filaments but because they would replace so many tools,guns and parts they are being kept from the public's hands. Until then freedom 15 type systems are far more effective ways of making polymer lowers for yourselves than 3d prints. They take far less time to produce. They cast stronger materials and they are cheaper.
If CF nylon isn't ideal why are you using it in your Orca? Genuinely curious, I am sure you have a reason. Am currently deciding on which material to make 9ne of your Orcas out of!
It not ideal, but better then most other options. This video was before I was using CF Nylon. Nylon benefits a lot from carbon fiber, compared to PLA or PC.
I hope you test out plaster annealing, or remelting as it should really be called
Remelting is the right term. Annealing is but lower temp and does not melt the plastic. The problem with remelting is features like the take down retention pin holes will not form properly.
@@HoffmanTactical even encased in plaster? just so we're talking about the same thing it's the method where you print your file as per usual, and encase in plaster so it retains the shape while the plastic goes completely liquid
@@ravener96 Even with plaster, it's pretty tricky getting all the nooks and cranny's filled. A vacuum chamber will really help with this of course. My thought on the matter is that while going through all the trouble to remelt the part, it's not much more trouble to do an aluminum investment casting. But if it's something you'd like to pursue, check out the videos CNC Kitchen did on remelting. It think he covered the salt packing method as well.
@@HoffmanTactical all i know about it is from the cnc kitchen video. it seems to be much much simpler than aluminium casting, the plaster remelt method doesent require a furnace and cna essentially be done with a bucket, a bag of plaster and an oven. im sure there needs to be more research though, it seems unnessecary to immerse the part in a block of plaster vs dipping to coat it in sequential layers, so there isnt so much plaster to insulate. also it seems PLA works poorly with the method, so it might be the polycarbonates time to shine or some other fancy filament.
Dude... I'm researching a material to use to 3d print an amphibious airplane... Ya, and Thank God I'm a Crazy test pilot But what material would you recommend to use for an airplane?
And No Worries, its on my head..
Like a full size plane? You would need a big printer. But I think something like carbon fiber nylon would be a good option, because it is light and strong.
Wait so carbon fiber PLA is stronger than carbon fiber PETG? So the PETG is just more heat resistant? What benefits are there for PETG?
I've not tested any CF PLA yet. But I would say that anything in PLA+ would be better then PETG.
What’s the best filament for 3D printing 12 gauge tripwire alarms
Have you tried clear PCTG filament?
Have you tried glass fiber nylon? The carbon fiber nylon is surprisingly brittle and I’m not a huge fan of it either, but I’ve had great success with glass fiber nylon so far
I just bought a roll of NylonX and NylonG from Matter Hackers. We will see how they hold up to the new impact tester I am putting together ;) I don't think Matter Hackers is the best though, what GF Nylon are you using?
@@HoffmanTactical agreed MH is poor quality for a high price, I use polymaker!
Lmao you discovered house music. Nice.
I don't know what it is. I thought it was good though. Most of the free stuff just is not right.
@@HoffmanTactical it's a nice change of pace, good ambiance.
Thank you