Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
This has been requested a couple of times and I've got to ask, what do you need this for. Is it just the appearance or do you want the physical material for weight and strength. If it's for weight I'm not sure it'll be a lot of help as 3d prints, even with 100% infill are normally 20 - 30% under weight because 3d printers don't create a solid like an injection moulded part.
Although i would like this option too (the physical material) Fusion would take it as a solid, formed part.
FDM printers print in layers so its never a truly solid object its actualy quite porous im not sure how accurate the physics would be if you were intending to use this for analysis or simulation.
Hey @Anonymous ,it's true that PLA printed parts tend to de-laminate along the layer as the first mode of failure but we can get fairly good approximation in FE simulations if the printer is calibrated to promote good layer adhesion. If that part is printed at 100% infill I have found some success (+- about 15%) when comparing some simple load cases in FEA vs. real testing. It's great for engineering students to see the discrepancy between a FE model and real life.
The real issue in the simulation is the layer orientation at the printing, it is a crucial fact in terms of mechanical properties and strength in the perpendicular direction. With the correct layer orientation some of my PLA prints has the same mechanical resistance that ABS, same infill but differente orientation.
You can make custom materials. Take a similar plastic in the Physical Material dialog, drag it to the "in this design" section, right click, duplicate, edit to match your material. Right click on it, save the Favorites.
In reply to @HughesTooling I want to turn this the other way around and ask why do you not need this? If you design for PLA isn't the answer to that question obvious? You need PLA becasue you intend to print with PLA.
Yes, you're all mostly right that it won't simulate correctly because PLA is used for printing and printing is never a real solid. But at least being able to choose PLA as a material will give a more correct BOM and when someone opens up your design and see PLA as a material they know what was intended. "Steel - Satin" just doesn't answer those questions with the same accuracy.
So please add PLA to the Physical Material list simply because "Why not?".
I agree with @Anonymous, as an engineering student who works a lot with additive manufacturing I would love to see materials like PLA and PETG in the standard Fusion360 library.
If you are asking why one would need to simulate PLA for 3D printing since the theoretical values will not match the real world results, I have only one question to ask back: Why do we simulate at all? No simulation I have ever heard of can be directly applied to the real world without taking non-ideal conditions into considerations.
It is not the purpose of a simulation to perfectly represent real life situations since the conditions are far too complex to model. They merely provide the user some indication of potential outcomes. It is then up to the user to correctly interpret this information and account for deviations.
I hope this has fully answered the question "Why do you need it?".
Especially with Fusion360 gearing more and more towards the additive manufacturing use cases I would really hope that simple features like PLA and PETG in the standard fusion360 library and maybe some more advanced features like @Anonymous has suggested or directional strength parameters, would get integrated.
Yes it is technically possible to do it manually but why not include it per default if you have a large user base which uses these materials regularly?
The fact that there is stone based materials should be plenty of reason to add PLA. absolutely no one uses granite in a injection mold or machines it in a CNC or Lathe. yet there it is. there is also Paper, Gas, and Glass. any other reason NOT to have it as a default included material?
Not in injection molding, but I guess people that do stairs, kitchens etc. might need it. Same goes for glass. Paper and cardboard is interesting for sheet metal (packaging)....
I don't want to say, that PLA ot PETG isn't nice to have... but why aren't you adding it yourself?
Yep this would be great to have. We are interested in producing a module where students and teachers do a 3 point bend test in Fusion and then in real life and compare the outcomes.
Regarding the comment "I don't want to say, that PLA ot PETG isn't nice to have... but why aren't you adding it yourself?". For people who use PLA all the time this makes sense. It is however a pain for high school teachers and students who are learning the software and is certainly a barrier to using the software and this potential module (as PLA is the easiest material for them to test as they can print the samples easily in their school).
So you're printing with 100% infill (not to mention that Fusion can't simulate layer adhesion). And again - why aren't you adding it yourself. A teacher should be able to define a material.
The number one argument from someone who only care about themselves as long as they have what they need.
"Why do you use Fusion 360? Why don't you just make your own 3D CAD software?"
Why do you even care if they add this if you're never going to use it anyway? Do you see me complaining about having ABS as a material even though I will never use that? And who says PLA can't be use for injection molding?
I myself doesn't care about the physics of the material, but I would like to have the correct one as a reference in my designs. Maybe us that want this could create our own after spending a few hours learning how to, but we really shouldn't need to in a CAD software as high end as Fusion 360.
To sum up my request for PLA: Yes I know the physics are wrong, but I would like to have PLA as a reference.
If you just want to have it for your e.g. BOM and the physics don't matter add it to the list. Doesn't takes hours, just minutes (didn't had the time to make a screencast, but this video might help):
You can even gather some information (e.g. density) from your favorite filament brand and add those to your self created material. Minimum information is always available and the better vendors do have pretty specific descriptions.
First off, thanks for the screencast. I haven't needed to define a new material before but now I know how to. The class indeed would include the comparison of a 100% infill part. While it is possible to add the material, when you multiply the time taken to manually look it up and enter it + teething issues (I would assume the majority of teachers and students haven't done this before) and with 100 teachers, the amount of wasted time grows into many hours. I also assume that adding PLA from a developer end would be as simple as the process in the screencast (?) saving a bunch of time in at least this instance.
Yes. I was finding a way to simulate my 3d printing parts last few days ago. I found that a predefined material of PLA would be nice than custom create it.
