3D Print Orientation and Infill Optimization for Less Support Waste

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Consumer 3D printers face limitations in print quality due to the insufficient capabilities of available slicers, which fail to optimize support generation, infill patterns, and starting points, leading to suboptimal use of materials and surface quality.

Innovation Solution

A system and method that utilize advanced algorithms to compute optimal orientations for 3D models to minimize support material, generate efficient infill patterns, and improve starting points, including techniques for reducing support material volume, easy detachment of support material, and optimizing infill patterns for solid objects.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If conventional slicers are used for 3D printing, then the printing process can be completed, but the print quality and surface finish are insufficient

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprint qualityVSAvoidslicer capability
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies parameter changes by systematically varying multiple printing parameters including orientation angles, support density, infill patterns, and layer heights to optimize print quality. The software evaluates different parameter combinations to identify the optimal configuration for each specific 3D model, thereby improving manufacturing precision without requiring hardware modifications.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Reliability

If more support material is used to support overhanging portions, then the structural integrity during printing is improved, but the material usage and waste increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestructural integrityVSAvoidmaterial usage
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements local quality by applying different support densities and patterns to different regions of the 3D model based on local geometric requirements. Overhanging portions receive appropriate support while flat or self-supporting areas use minimal or no support material. This region-specific approach maintains structural integrity during printing while significantly reducing overall material consumption.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The software performs preliminary analysis of the 3D model geometry before printing to identify overhanging portions and calculate optimal support requirements. By pre-computing the necessary support structures based on angle thresholds and geometric features, the system prepares an optimized support configuration that prevents printing failures while minimizing material waste.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Loss of substance

If the 3D model is oriented to minimize support material, then material usage is reduced, but the orientation must be precisely optimized

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesupport material volumeVSAvoidorientation optimization
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of substanceVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies preliminary action by automatically analyzing the 3D model geometry and computing optimal orientation angles before the printing process begins. The software evaluates multiple potential orientations, calculates the support material requirements for each, and selects the optimal orientation that minimizes support usage. This pre-optimization eliminates the need for manual orientation adjustment and ensures material efficiency from the start.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system creates virtual copies of the 3D model in different orientations to evaluate support material requirements for each configuration. By generating and comparing multiple oriented versions of the model in silico, the software identifies the optimal orientation without physical trial-and-error, thereby reducing support material volume while managing computational complexity efficiently.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

4Loss of substance

If infill patterns are optimized for solid objects, then material efficiency is improved, but the computational complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinfill material efficiencyVSAvoidalgorithm complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of substanceVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies parameter changes by systematically evaluating different infill patterns (such as grid, triangular, concentric, and gyroid patterns) and their parameters (density, orientation, layer connectivity) to optimize material efficiency for solid objects. The software adjusts infill parameters based on the specific geometry and functional requirements of each model, achieving improved material efficiency while managing computational complexity through algorithmic optimization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentEP3186732B1Fabricating three-dimensional objects
Publication Date: 2021.11.10 MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLC
  • EP3186732B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3186732B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3186732B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

The claimed subject matter includes techniques for printing three-dimensional (3D) objects. An example method includes obtaining a 3D model and processing the 3D model to generate layers of tool path information. The processing includes automatically optimizing the orientation of the 3D model to reduce an amount of support material used in the printing. The method also includes printing the 3D object using layers.