Notifications
Clear all

Reprint of parts material discussion  

  RSS
Naberla
(@naberla)
New Member
Reprint of parts material discussion

I would like to use this thread to document advice (maybe from the Prusa team as well, please!) regarding the material selection for re-printing original MK4 parts. Selfishly I am seeking input from others to help me out and maybe others can use as a reference. I would like to keep this thread up to date with other's input. I am new to printing and hope that I can ask a question and document learning for others in the future.

Someone printing at home might have different requirements than Prusa printing the original components, so please list out assumptions. For instance, Prusa needs to emphasize time to print, cost, quality in a compromise of all 3. They save time and cost by printing everything in 1 material, selecting a fast-printing infill, and using something that produces fumes is a huge challenge at the scale they print. I might be willing to sacrifice time and cost to improve quality, strength and provide additional temperature capability for regular use in an enclosure printing high temp materials.

Overall material selection for parts:

PLA- Not for printer parts. Not sufficient temperature capability and subject to creep

PETG- Original material used for everything except fan shroud. Obviously sufficient for use in an un-enclosed environment. Print/infill settings described in Printables, but if someone has used additional perimeters or different infill successfully please share. Some people have reported sag on some PETG parts after printing a lot of high temp materials in an enclosure, hence this thread.

PETG CF- Does anyone know how much temperature capability this adds? Is it worth doing? Same print settings as regular PETG? This seems like a quick and easy change to provide a little bit of extra temperature headroom for some additional cost, but minimal headache.

ASA/ABS- Improved temperature capability. Does this impact Input Shaping since the stiffness and density are different? Is ASA recommended for anyone printing in an enclosure? This might be best for someone who has an enclosure + filter to provide the most capable parts.

PC- Improved temperature capability. Does this impact Input Shaping? Is PC overkill, or too stiff and prone to cracking? Is this better than ASA for this use case? Some have reported the stiffness cause rod installation to be more difficult.

Spares to keep on hand (if you are a single printer household):

Fan shroud- ABS or ASA consistent with original part- This seems to be the most common part people recommend to have a spare of, but it requires an enclosure to print these materials.

Everything in the Nextruder- Closest parts to the nozzle and potentially subject to blob of filament in a failed print. PETG is sufficient for a spare, but I am looking to provide additional temperature capability in case I add an enclosure in the future.

Anything at risk of user damage during maintenance? Are the mounts that hold stepper motors subject to a little more temperature than the average air temp in the enclosure?

 

Thanks to anyone who is able to contribute!

...

 

This topic was modified 2 months ago by Naberla
Posted : 20/02/2024 4:38 pm
Diem
 Diem
(@diem)
Illustrious Member

We've done this many times.  Here's a recent one:

https://forum.prusa3d.com/forum/original-prusa-i3-mk3s-mk3-general-discussion-announcements-and-releases/what-filament-material-for-printer-head-plastic-parts/#post-700278

Cheerio,

Posted : 20/02/2024 8:29 pm
Naberla
(@naberla)
New Member
Topic starter answered:
RE: Reprint of parts material discussion
  • Thanks for the response Diem. I acknowledge that it can be frustrating to see similar questions posted, I did see that one when I searched.
  • The linked thread confirms most of the statements made (no PLA, PETG is the common one except fan shroud, pc and abs can be used and have been fine on an MK3s), but I'm not sure it answers any of the questions posted (is input shaping impacted due to a lack of accelerometer feedback, is pc or abs a better solution for the hot end parts in enclosed systems and have people needed to adjust print settings to use the materials, are people seeing other parts sagging besides the fan shroud, how much more capability does the petg cf offer, etc... )  
  • I don't want to re-hash old threads, I just found it inconclusive when reading about most of these questions in previous conversations in particular the impact of stiffness and mass on input shaper profiles, I think it's generally clear that asa and pc are both ok on the MK3s and offer enough temperature resistance for an enclosed printer. I hope this thread could be a repository of information to avoid multiple people making the same "mistakes" .
  •  
Posted : 20/02/2024 10:03 pm
Diem
 Diem
(@diem)
Illustrious Member
RE: Reprint of parts material discussion

(is input shaping impacted due to a lack of accelerometer feedback,

99% won't notice, 90% won't know how to notice.

is pc or abs a better solution for the hot end parts in enclosed systems

Of course not, it will be pei or something more exotic - 99% won't notice, 90% won't know how to notice.

and have people needed to adjust print settings to use the materials,

Guess what percentage won't know how.

are people seeing other parts sagging besides the fan shroud,

Read the flood of threads here about the issue.

how much more capability does the petg cf offer, etc... )

It is twice as effective at emptying your bank account.

a repository of information to avoid multiple people making the same "mistakes"

 

Posted : 21/02/2024 7:15 am
Thejiral
(@thejiral)
Noble Member
RE:

In terms of technical performance my personal experience was that ABS and ASA are similar but generally ABS was slightly better in terms of layer adhesion and creep resistance. I am personally a fan of TitanX, or look for any proper "ABSX". There might be cheaper options out there with similar properties. It behaves very similar to proper ABS but shows almost no warping and works fine when printed in cooler enclosures. 

PC has noticibly higher stiffness. That could impact IS. PC Blends can also be sensitive to lubricants and at risk of cracking. I personally had good experiences with Prusament PC-Blend which did not show any tendency to cracking even when I smeared lubricant directly on a Benchy and let it sit for months at room temperature at least. The big issue with PC-Blend is warping. Still I could print a Voron Extruder on an Mk3 with enclosure which worked fine. With PCCF be aware that cracking etc might be a bigger issue than with PC-Blend, as the CF helps against warping but doesn't improve layer adhesion. 

For the Mk3 and possibly also Mk4 fan shroud I personally recommend PC Blend. Its long term undestructable even if you print PC-Blend all the time. Otherwise, as long as you don't have a pretty hot enclosure (above 45°C or so) I think you'll be fine with PETG. If you do have a hot enclosure, ABS will be a better choice but then you will want to move out all the electronics as well. 

Mk3s MMU2s, Voron 0.1, Voron 2.4

Posted : 21/02/2024 7:58 am
Share: