A2: Organic Shape

By Kittitat Powpour and Jane Pak

 Executive Summary

Our inspiration for this assignment came from the bonsai tree for
its beauty marked by the unique curvatures. Several iterations of a
bonsai tree were printed to represent an organic shape that can
be found in nature and cannot be replicated with traditional
subtractive manufacturing.

Each successive iteration was created with the intention of adding

more depth to the bonsai tree and/or minimizing the print time
and support material needed.

Surface finish and support removal were consistent issues

through all four iterations given the design of the tree branches
and foliage.
 Settings

*Setup: *Slicing:
● Printer: Ender 3 ● Program: Cura
● Filament: Hatchbox PLA 1.75mm Black ● Standard Quality - 0.2mm
● Layer Thickness: 0.4mm
● Bed: Creality Glass ● Infill Density: 15%
● CAD: Onshape ● Infill Pattern: Cubic
● STL: Onshape ● Build Plate Adhesion Type: Raft
● Nozzle Temperature: 200℃
● Bed Temperature: 50℃

*All settings were the same for both setups and slicing*
Drawings of V4 (Reduced overhang)

Front View Top View Back View

*All units are in mm

 Iterations

V1: 2 Branches V2: 2 Branches-Hollowed V3: 3 Branches V4: 3 Branches-Reduced

overhangs
Optimal Print Time: Optimal Print Time: Optimal Print Time:
2 hours 56 mins 3 hours 22 mins 6 hours 28 mins Optimal Print Time:
5 hours 55 mins

*Optimal Print Time means printing at optimal settings; explained more later in the slides
Upside Down Orientation, Support Placement: Touching Buildplate, Changes in Design
 Results:
● Surface finish was rough where the print eets the raft and supports
○ Small bumps of filament not fully adhered to the tree
● Had difficulty removing the supports
○ All supports were printed together in one huge clump of filament between
the three foliages
○ Some supports extended to overhangs in between the foliage and branches,
increasing the risk of breaking the branches upon support removal
○ Tight spacing prohibited the supports from being removed all at once → had
to remove in small bits
● The foliages had a tendency to break away V2
○ Too much stress on the branches during support removal
V1
 Results (cont): V3

Overhang shown above After supports were Hollowed out trunk

after printing removed
 Results (cont): V4

Support and raft Removal of overhang Side View after supports Bad surface finish on the
attached were removed tops where support material
was added
 Analysis of Supports and Material:
Orientation
● By printing the part upside down, we can reduce the amount of
supports and material.
● With the V3 and V4, we found that it would reduce the most time
by printing it upside down compared to printing on its side or - V4 (Reduced overhangs)
rightside up. - Upright Printing
● With the V1 and V2, it was faster to print upside down because - 10 hours 0 mins
less supports would be needed than right side up
*Times were found with Support Placement as “Everywhere” at - V4 (Reduced overhangs)
Overhang Angle at 45o - Upside Down Printing - V4 (Reduced overhangs)
- V2 (Hollowed) - V2 (Hollowed) - 5 hours 55 mins - Sideways Printing
- V2 (Hollowed)
- Upright Printing - Sideway Printing - 8 hours 40 mins
- Upside Down Printing
- 6 hours 23 mins - 4 hours 30 mins - 4 hours 01 mins
 Analysis of Supports and Material:
Design
Design:
● V2, V3, and V4 had the main trunk hollowed out from
the design to save material compared to V1. All four
designs were sliced in the upside down orientation.
● The difference between V3 and V4 was the design
change to remove the overhang between the branches - V1 - V2 (Hollowed)
and foliage. The overhang in V3 would create more - Upside Down Printing - Upside Down Printing
supports and make it difficult to remove. - 3 hours 19 mins - 4 hours 01 mins
● When comparing V1 and V2, V2 took longer than V1
even though the trunk was hollowed out. The reason
behind the time increase is a foliage shape that was
changed to be larger, thus taking longer.
● The hollowed trunk also plays a role in Support
Placement followed in the next slide.

*Times were found in the Upside Down, Support Placement

as “Everywhere”, and Overhang Angle at 45o - V3 - V4 (Reduced overhangs)
- Upside Down Printing - Upside Down Printing
- 6 hours 47 mins - 5 hours 55 mins
 Analysis of Supports and Material:
Support Placement
Support Placement
● By changing the support placement from “Everywhere”
to “Touching Build Plate,” the time to print is reduced
for all four designs.
● Touching Build Plate only places supports the part
where it can be directly connected to the build plate. - V4 (Reduced overhangs) - V4 (Reduced overhangs)
● This means that the hollowed trunk will no longer filled - Touching Build plate - Everywhere
for V2, V3, and V4. - 5 hours 55 mins - 10 hours 0 mins
● We also have found that we could print the V3 with
this setting and it would not attempt to support the
overhang from foliage to the branch.

**Times were found in the Upside Down, Support Placement

as “Touching Build Plate” unless otherwise stated

- V3 - V3
- Upside Down Printing - Upside Down Printing
- 6 hours 47 mins - 6 hours 47 mins
 Questions/Improvements for Future Designs

● What Cura settings can be optimized to ensure easy removal of supports and raft?

● Are there any settings to improve the surface finish between the print and supports?

● How much print time will be reduced if the infill percentage was changed?

○ Would the final print end up being too fragile?

● How much time will we save if our foliage were all hollowed out inside?

○ Can a lattice be implemented for the foliage?

 Conclusion

● There were difficulties to create an exact representation of an actual bonsai tree due to
CAD limitations on organic shapes
○ Foliage had to be modeled as blocks
● Foliage was gradually added to the design to give the tree more dimensionality
● Removing supports was the biggest challenge we faced
● Choosing “Touching Build Plate” for support placement helps with not getting any
support for overhangs between the foliage and branches that would be difficult to
remove later
● It is best to print upside down to minimize supports
● Overall success: final prints came out looking better than expected!