When selecting an infill, consider functional requirements. For items that do not require bending strength, using grid patterns, triangles, or lines can fit. For those that demand overall strength, the Gyroid infill is ideal, providing better strength compared to the Cubic subdivision. Lightening infill can significantly reduce printing time and minimize filament usage.

Also better to choose your infill based on the direction where strength is most needed.

While I adjust infill types based on the specific model and used both cubic, gyroid and others – gyroid remains my favourite. In my experience, it stands out for lightweight and strength (even at just 5-10% infill). This makes it my choice for prototype parts, despite its slower print time compared to others.

Hello everyone,

I hope you’re all doing well. I’ve come to appreciate the nuanced decisions we make that significantly impact our final products, especially when it comes to infill patterns in 3D printing with PLA. Let’s dive into the basics and some options to consider:

Infill Patterns and Their Impact:

Strength vs. Weight: The choice of infill pattern can greatly affect the strength and weight of the final piece. A denser infill means more material, which typically leads to stronger but heavier parts.
Printing Time and Material Use: Patterns like gyroid or cubic can provide excellent strength and material distribution but may increase printing time and material consumption.

Options to Consider:

Gyroid Infill:
 – Pros: Exceptional strength and weight balance, even at lower densities like 5-10%.
 – Cons: Can be slower to print and uses more material, making it ideal for parts where strength is paramount.

Cubic or Grid Infill:
 – Pros: Good for large prints, supports impacts well, and can be quicker to print than gyroid.
 – Cons: May not provide the same level of strength in all directions as gyroid.

In conclusion, the choice between gyroid, cubic, or any other infill pattern depends on the specific requirements of your project. Consider what’s most important: is it the aesthetic appeal, the strength, or perhaps the balance between print time and material usage? If you’re unsure or need more detailed insights, don’t hesitate to ask. I also recommend reading our article on “Infill in 3D Printing: Definition, Main Parts, and Different Types” at Xometry.pro for a more comprehensive understanding. Feel free to reach out with questions, whether they’re about the technical details or simply seeking advice.

Cubic is my choice for most projects that demand robustness because it provides the needed strength saving time and filament. For parts where aesthetics are the priority over strength, I prefer lightning. Although gyroid offers unique properties, I find it more time-consuming than cubic due to its complex curves.

My choice varies with the purpose mostly. For parts that must endure specific forces, I select between gyroid, cubic, hexagon, triangle based on the required strength. For those where strength is not a priority, I go with lightning or zig zag infills.

In my practice I’ve found that while Cubic offers good strength from all angles, the true key to part strength lies more in the walls than the infill itself. The integrity of a part relies heavily on the number of top, bottom, and wall layers, not so much on the infill percentage or type. Even with as little as 10% infill, you can achieve remarkable stiffness. Therefore, for optimal strength, I would also advise to increase perimeter layers rather than infill density. But this depends on what you print, of course.

I’ve used hexagonal and gyroid infills for aesthetics, noting that gyroid consumes more material. Therefore, it may be best reserved for parts requiring high strength or when the infill pattern contributes to the aesthetic appeal.