WEEK 05 3D Scanning & Printing

GROUP ASSIGNMENT:

3D Printer Parameters & Slicers

For my 3D printing tasks, I used two different printers and their corresponding slicers.

Prusa i3 MK3 & PrusaSlicer

The Prusa i3 MK3 is a reliable and widely used FDM printer known for its precision and open-source design. I prepared the print files using PrusaSlicer, which allows control over settings such as layer height, infill density, print speed, and support structures. The slicer converts 3D models (typically in .STL format) into G-code instructions that the printer can follow.

Bambu Lab A1 Mini & Bambu Studio

I also worked with the Bambu Lab A1 Mini, a compact, high-speed printer with automatic calibration and multi-color capabilities. Its slicer, Bambu Studio, offers an intuitive interface for adjusting print settings such as temperature, speed, and build plate adhesion. Both slicers include preview tools to simulate the print and optimize the final result.

TESTS

I found this open-source model, developed by Kickstarter and Autodesk, that provides a standard test to assess 3D printer performance.
Download the model from GitHub

I used standard settings to compare the outcomes.

• PRUSA

  

• BAMBU

  

RESULTS

SUMMARY:

The printing time on the Bambu was impressive — it was about half that of the Prusa. Honestly, the quality also seemed better, especially in the upper spikes and bridge sections. However, the Prusa filament was slightly older, and I should have used a solid color for better comparison.

Extreme Bridging Test

Download the extreme bridging test model

• PRUSA

  
  
  
  
  

• BAMBU

  
  
  
  
  

COMPARISON:

Since the Bambu printer was so fast, I reduced its speed for a better comparison.

SUMMARY:

This test is very extreme. The bridge is 15 cm long, so both printers struggled, but I have to admit the Bambu performed better again.

As the final two tests, I used the Bambu printer because of its speed.

I printed this cute spider to explore fine bridging and final sphere finishing.
Download the spider stress test model

The bridging worked quite well, and the model seems stable and strong.

To further analyze finish and sloped surface quality, I tested this model:
Download the slope test model

This test demonstrates how slope angles influence the staircasing effect in 3D prints. Staircasing occurs when layer-based printing creates step-like patterns rather than smooth curves — a common additive manufacturing challenge.

The design includes nine angle pairings (each summing to 90°), ranging from 5° and 85°. This helps identify which angles best reduce staircasing on sloped surfaces.

Once you find the optimal angle, you can orient models accordingly to achieve more natural results. Alternatively, testing multiple layer heights can help minimize staircasing as well.

---

INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT:

3D Model of the Cat’s Button

I explored new features in Fusion 360, starting from modeling.
I learned these techniques from the following tutorials:
- Fusion 360 Tutorial 1
- Fusion 360 Tutorial 2

Here’s my first look at the remote button:

Prints

I printed the bottom part on the Bambu and the middle one on the Prusa.
I wanted to compare different types of infill.

While setting up the button print, I watched this video on infill strength:
Watch the video
I chose gyroid infill.
I paused the print to take a picture and then resumed it without any issues.

---

Resin Printer

For the paw-shaped part of the button, I used a resin printer.

I tested the Uniformation GK Two, an LCD resin 3D printer designed for high-detail prints — great for miniatures or dental models. I used Chitubox for slicing, which allows control over layer thickness, exposure time, lift speed, and support generation. It slices the model into layers and prepares a print-ready file optimized for adhesion and detail.

I used X23 flexible resin.

Standard settings were used for this resin.

Printing Preparation:

I removed the container, poured the old resin back into the bottle, and cleaned it with a rubber spatula and alcohol.

Then I added the new X23 resin, closed the lid, and started the print from the touchscreen.

Unfortunately… nothing came out.

Before reprinting, I mixed the resin and removed any hardened bits. I also cleaned the build plate.

I adjusted settings several times, but each attempt failed. The errors seemed random — sometimes nothing adhered, other times supports failed. I even changed the model's position, thinking the light source might be inconsistent, but that didn’t help.

I extended the light exposure time, hoping for better adhesion, but the prints still failed — so I stopped testing.

Here are images and settings from the one attempt that came closest to success:

---

3D Scan

(Section not documented yet — maybe add scanner used, method, and result?)

---

CHECKLIST:

Group assignment:

• Test the design rules for your 3D printer(s)
• Document your work on the group work page and reflect on your individual page what you learned about characteristics of your printer(s)

Individual assignment:

• Design and 3D print an object (small, few cm3, limited by printer time) that could not be easily made subtractively
• 3D scan an object (and optionally print it)

Learning outcomes:

• Identify the advantages and limitations of 3D printing
• Apply design methods and production processes to show your understanding of 3D printing
• Demonstrate how scanning technology can be used to digitize object(s)

Have you answered these questions?

• Linked to the group assignment page
• Explained what you learned from testing the 3D printers
• Documented how you designed and 3D printed your object and explained why it could not be easily made subtractively
• Documented how you scanned an object
• Included your original design files for 3D printing
• Included your hero shots