WEEK 14 - SMP 3D PRINTING
2 JUNE 2018
Failed 3d print using SMP filament
I have now received my SMP filament and have created .stl files ready to use on 3d printers. This week I booked in to use the University workshop but I didn't realise that the program required for printing my .stl files required adjustments to the printer settings. This is to ensure the printer will feed through the filament and optimise the settings accordingly. After three days of adjusting the print properties I still haven't had any success in creating a 3d printed artefact. This has been a very disheartening and stressful time. During the week I have been in regular contact with the filament manufacturer who have been very helpful with suggesting options to try. I am now waiting to hear from their technical staff as the settings they provided (PLA - Poly Lactic Acid) were not successful (as demonstrated in the video above). The closest I have come to printing is with ABS (Acylonitrile Butadiene Styrene) settings, which did produce a result for a short time but eventually clogged the nozzle and printer head.
​
My main concern is that the filament won't work on any of the printers available to me and that by constantly having to stop the printing process and take the printers apart, damage may be caused to the equipment. I feel that not being able to use this SMP filament is not an option - I have spent too much money and time for it not to work. Not to mention my entire year's work is based around an artefact made from this material. This experience this week has made me realise just how new this material is and that there isn't much information I can use to help my situation. It has also made me realise how determined I am to see this project through and to produce a positive result.
WEEKS 15 - 21 - 3D PRINTING PROPERTIES + TEST PRINTS
10 JUNE - 1 AUGUST 2018
Various 3D printed outcomes
Initially, I ran a number of test prints with the SMP at varying thicknesses, mainly 1-5mm. I tried printing these pieces with various infills, some being solid and others with different degrees of honeycomb density. The thinking / hope behind printing the pieces with a honeycomb middle was that it would encourage the applied heat to move around the piece and potentially hold pockets of heated air to aid in the SMP's manipulation. The result was: any print over 1mm thick struggled to be manipulated after the application of heat, unless the item was heated to such a degree that it could not be comfortably handled by human skin. The addition of a honeycomb infill meant more material requiring longer exposure to a heat source and, while it did retain heat for slightly longer, the flexibility of the piece was minimal as the internal walls increased rigidity. I was able to successfully print sheet of the SMP at a thickness of 3mm which was subsequently used for the final artefact as it responded well to testing (see below for details).
WEEKS 21 - 25 - GEODESIC DOME PLANS / DRAWINGS
2 AUGUST - 8 SEPTEMBER 2018
'A' Type triangle used in final geo-dome with dimensions
The final dimensions for the various triangles used in the geodesic dome were initially difficult to work out. After much research in geodesic dome construction and planning of the footprint of my final artefact, I decided to create only one section of the full dome, consisting of 11 large triangles (of varying sizes) with 6 smaller triangles inset. It was partly time and cost restrictions that influenced this decision - an entire dome would have been a great space to experience, however a section still allowed the user to understand the intention of the piece and the materials involved.
​
In order for the printed SMP to attach to the various triangles, each piece was cut via CNC (see below for details). By utilising this method I was able to cut a small indentation around the inner lengths of each triangles where the SMP could be inset. Thinner pieces of laminate were then cut to mimic the existing frame of each triangle and were adhered over the top of the SMP, thus securing the SMP to each individual section of the dome. Final drawings were created using Autodesk CAD.
WEEK 25 - 32 - SMP TESTING
9 SEPTEMBER - 27 OCTOBER 2018
Tensile testing
A number of tests were carried out on the 3D printed SMP. By 3D printing this material I was able to create specimens that perfectly adhered to testing standards. The three tests carried out were:
​
- The exposure of the SMP (3 specimens, each measuring 100 x 100mm and at thickness of 0.3mm, 0.6mm and 0.9mm respectively) to various temperatures at a distance of 100mm from heat source. This test recorded how long each specimen took to reach a temperature of 55ºC and how long it took for the specimen to return to 25ºC (room temperature at the time of testing).
​
- Puncture tests, carried out on SMP specimens measuring 100 x 100mm, with a thickness of 0.3mm, 0.6mm and 0.9mm respectively. The weight used was ø30mm, 250g drop cone, released from a height of 100mm above each specimen. The first set of puncture tests were carried out on specimens at room temperature (23.3ºC), the second set of tests were carried out on specimens heated to 55ºC.
​
- Two tensile strength tests, each utilising a 3D printed 'dog bone' as per Australian Standrards. The initial test monitored the specimen under room temperature conditions and the second with the application of heat until the specimen reached 55ºC. The determined load rate for both tests was set at 80mm / minute.
​
* Results were published in my final exegesis.