Week 5: 3D Scanning and Printing

This week we moved from 2D cutting into the world of additive manufacturing. Our group worked with the Ultimaker S5 FDM printer to systematically explore the range of 3D printers at our lab. We were introduced to design-rule testing, and how to start, operate, and maintain 3D printers primarily focused on the Ultimaker S5 in our lab. The design rule testing checks crucial baseline limitations: overhangs, bridging, and dimensional accuracy.

Group Assignment Requirements
  • 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 the characteristics of your printer(s).

Machine Overview & Hardware Setup

The Ultimaker S5 is a professional-grade dual-extrusion FDM printer with a generously sized build volume. Its enclosed frame and heated bed make it well-suited for a broad range of filament materials beyond basic PLA — including nylon, PETG, and flexible TPU. The dual print-core system lets you load a support material (such as PVA) alongside the primary filament. During our hardware preparation, we verified our active print cores directly inside the print head assembly.

Ultimaker S5 Print Cores CC 0.6 and BB 0.4 installed
Verifying the print-core configuration: CC 0.6 and BB 0.4 loaded
Ultimaker S5 touch screen interface displaying active print job statistics
Job settings verified on screen: 3h 3m total runtime estimation using 1.84m of PLA
3D print in progress on the heated glass bed with the print head active
Initial perimeter layers processing on the heated build plate
Parameter Value Notes
MachineUltimaker S5Professional dual-extrusion FDM desktop printer
Build Volume (L × W × H)330 × 240 × 300 mmOne of the largest desktop FDM envelopes available
Min. Layer Height0.06 mmAchievable with 0.4 mm nozzle at reduced speed
Max Volumetric Flow40 mm³/sVaries by nozzle diameter and material
Filament Diameter2.85 mmBowden-fed; not compatible with 1.75 mm spools
Max Nozzle Temp.280 °CSupports engineering-grade filaments
Heated Bed Max Temp.140 °CGlass bed with adhesive BuildTak surface
Print TechnologyFDM (Fused Deposition Modeling)Thermoplastic filament melted through heated nozzle
Test MaterialPLA — 2.85 mmStandard material; good detail; no enclosure required
Slicer UsedUltimaker Cura (latest stable)Native integration with S5 printer profiles

Safety Practices

Before operating the Ultimaker S5, every group member reviewed the lab's safety guidelines for FDM printing. While 3D printers are generally lower-risk than machine tools, there are several real hazards that deserve attention:


Slicing Profiling & Filament Comparison Tests

All test geometry was sliced in Ultimaker Cura. To understand our operating parameters fully, we contrasted two distinct setups: an uncalibrated profile running a rough profile settings test versus a properly adjusted generic PLA settings configuration. The side-by-side differences clearly showcase how profile accuracy dictates part success.

Cura settings used for the clean design-rule test print:
Material: PLA  |  Nozzle: 0.4 mm  |  Layer height: 0.2 mm  |  Infill: 20% grid  |  Print speed: 50 mm/s  |  Supports: None  |  Adhesion: Brim (8 mm)  |  Cooling: 100% fan from layer 3
Side by side comparison of rough profile PLA versus clean generic PLA on print bed
Top bed view: Rough parameters/unoptimized print (left) vs. clean generic settings profile (right)
Front elevation view of rough versus clean generic filament prints side-by-side
Front profile view: Drastic differences in stringing, drooping, and wall artifacts (rough vs. optimized)

Design Rule Test Model

We used the Thingiverse "Test Your 3D Printer" model by ctrlV (thing:1363023). This well-established test geometry packs several independent capability checks into a single compact print, evaluating multiple parameters simultaneously.

Completed generic PLA test model resting on build template
Completed test matrix matrix on the glass plate showcasing fine detail stability

Test Results Analysis

Result 1 — Overhang & Curved Surface Performance

Overhangs remain one of the most limiting factors in FDM printing. Without support material, the printer must deposit filament partially into open air. We looked underneath the stepping geometries and internal curved arches to trace the exact threshold of performance breakdown.

30° – 45°
Excellent
  • Clean layer lines visible
  • No drooping or curling
  • Smooth under-surface
Prints without supports
50°
~
Acceptable
  • Slight surface roughness underneath
  • Minor filament sag visible on close inspection
  • Top surface remains clean
Borderline — add supports for finish-critical parts
60° – 70°
Degraded
  • Visible filament drooping
  • Stringy under-surface texture
  • Layer adhesion to prior layer weak
Supports required above 50°
Close up view of dome structure layers and interior overhang under-surfaces
Close-up tracking under-surface contour steps and layer sagging inside the dome

Takeaway: Design features with overhangs up to 45° can be printed confidently without supports. The 50° zone is usable for non-cosmetic geometry. Anything steeper should either be reoriented on the build plate or have support material enabled in Cura.

Result 2 — Bridge Span Performance

Bridging measures how far the printer can span a horizontal gap between two walls before filament begins to sag significantly. The test model includes progressively wider gaps. Each was inspected visually and tactilely handled to verify actual material deflection limits.

Bridge Span Under-surface Quality Sag Visible? Verdict
5 mmPerfectly flatNone Excellent
10 mmFlat with faint rippleBarely perceptible Excellent
15 mmSlight mid-span roughnessMinimal Good
18 mmNoticeable texture undersideYes — ~0.5 mm Marginal
22 mmVisible stringing and sagYes — ~1.5 mm Needs supports
Manual removal and flexibility testing of printed sample structure
Manual check of bridge flexibility, element durability, and mechanical tolerances

Takeaway: The Ultimaker S5 handles unsupported bridges up to about 15 mm reliably. At 18 mm the result is still acceptable for internal geometry, but anything beyond that should be supported or re-designed with an arch profile to distribute the load.

Result 3 — Fine Detail Reproduction & Dimensional Accuracy

The test model includes raised lettering, thin walls, and a calibration column with a nominal outer diameter of 20 mm. After printing, we measured the column with a digital caliper in two perpendicular orientations and compared the readings to the CAD dimension.

Nominal (CAD)
20.00 mm
Measured — X axis
19.90 mm
Error: −0.10 mm
Measured — Y axis
19.90 mm
Error: −0.10 mm
✓ Consistent offset of −0.10 mm — well within typical FDM tolerance bounds.
A uniform negative error in both axes suggests a slight calibration offset in the flow rate or line-width setting rather than axis skew. Applying a slight flow multiplier correction in Cura would likely bring this closer to absolute nominal specs.

Fine detail: Raised lettering 1 mm tall was clearly legible. The thinnest test wall (0.4 mm, equal to one nozzle width) printed as a single-extrusion pass with no gaps, though it required careful handling off the bed. Walls at 0.8 mm and above were robust and fully fused.


Design Rules Summary Table

Capability Tested Range Safe Design Limit Notes
Overhang (no supports)30° – 70°≤ 45°50° borderline; 60°+ requires supports
Bridge span (no supports)5 – 22 mm≤ 15 mm18 mm marginal; beyond that use supports
Minimum wall thickness0.4 – 2.0 mm≥ 0.8 mm0.4 mm possible but fragile
Dimensional accuracy (XY)20 mm reference±0.15 mm typicalUniform −0.1 mm offset; tunable via flow rate
Layer height used0.2 mm0.15 – 0.25 mm0.2 mm balances speed and detail well
Embossed text readability≥ 1 mm feature height≥ 1 mmSub-1 mm text loses legibility at 0.2 mm layers

Reflection & Key Takeaways