What's new

Additional Threads for Modeling- The Unsupported Package

Joseph_L

Administrator
Staff member
Hi All;

During development for the V28.1 release, I had a hand in providing necessary data for the modeling of threads. Throughout this endeavor, I created a number of threads that aren't officially supported by Alibre. This allowed us to verify that custom thread modeling indeed works in Alibre as expected. Now that the release has happened, I'd like to share these threads with all of you. These of course, are not officially supported, and are for use on an 'as is' basis. We would love to support even more, but verifying that everything about these are correct has proven to be challenging.

To add these to Alibre, simply navigate to your thread spreadsheet and replace the spreadsheet at that location with the one attached here.


##################Threads with profile shapes that are officially supported by Alibre##################

DIN 405
1750173486398.png

DIN 405 threads, also known as knuckle threads or round threads, are standardized in Germany and feature a highly rounded profile with semi-circular crests and roots, typically with a 30° flank angle. The thread designation begins with "Rd" followed by the nominal diameter and pitch, and sizes range from 8 mm to 200 mm under DIN 405.

DIN 7756
1750173503110.png
DIN 7756 threads are a German standard specifying the dimensions and profile for valve threads used primarily in vehicle tire valves. These threads feature a conventional 60° V-shaped profile, similar to standard metric threads. Any root rounding is omitted in these models.

DIN 79012 Bicycle
1750173522100.png
Interchangeable or nearly so with BS811 Cycle threads that are supported in Alibre. DIN 79012 is a German standard developed to address threads used in bicycle manufacturing.

DIN 40430 Conduit
1750173536054.png
DIN 40430 defines the "PG" (Panzergewinde) steel conduit thread, a legacy German standard widely used for electrical conduit and cable gland fittings. The PG thread was specifically designed for thin-walled steel conduits, featuring a shallow thread depth and a distinctive 80° flank angle—much steeper than the 60° angle found in standard metric or unified threads.


##############################Threads with profile shapes that are not officially supported by Alibre##############################


Stanag 4155 ("40mm NATO")
1750173553850.png
One of my favorites. Due to the lower overhangs, this is a great thread for 3D printing. This is a rounded thread profile that is composed of two arcs. Alibre does not officially support a thread like this, but by carefully giving values to a 'Whitworth' setting, these can be generated with the "Average" profile being accurate. Only the average profile is dimensionally accurate for these threads. This thread is commonly used for NATO compliant respirators.



GOST 8762-75
1750173568905.png
Gost threads are very similar to STANAG 4155 and are used for respirators. Like the Stanag 4155, the gost profile uses specific values in the Whitworth configuration to generate a 'knuckle-like' profile, and only the 'average' setting is dimensionally accurate.

E27 Light Bulb
1750173583271.png

E27 refers to a widely used Edison screw base for light bulbs, standardized at a 27 mm diameter across the peaks of the thread. Like the other profiles, it is generated by feeding specific values to the 'Whitworth' profile and as such, only the average values are accurate.


I'll also add these to the 'Resources' section. I hope you all enjoy having some extra threads at your disposal.
 

Attachments

I am not sure everyone realizes how much of an achievement it is to be able to model the 40mm NATO and the E27 light bulb threads. This is beyond amazing! Alibre went from being a step back in this area to being the Absolute leader!!! I like what I'm seeing in Alibre's future!
 
I am not sure everyone realizes how much of an achievement it is to be able to model the 40mm NATO and the E27 light bulb threads. This is beyond amazing! Alibre went from being a step back in this area to being the Absolute leader!!! I like what I'm seeing in Alibre's future!
Yep, more transparent acknowledgement of their position and a willingness to improve at any time, not waiting for a release, does go a long way.
 
I thought I'd take a shot at test printing some 3D ACME threads and came up a bit disappointed with the results. For the test parts I modeled a .75-6 bolt and nut at Minimum Material. I was expecting to just screw the parts together but found that they would not fit. In fact when looking closely at the parts I could see that they were binding on the thread flanks.

Acme Thread Jamming on Flanks.jpg

So I did some testing in the models to see how the thread tolerance settings affected the model.
I added a config in the parts for each of three settings, Nominal, Average, and Minimum Material. Then I added a corresponding config in an assembly and looked to see what was changing for each tolerance setting. What I saw is a bit confusing because the ID of the nut and OD of the bolt did change quite a bit but, from what I could see, it appears that the flanks of the threads did not change very much. I would have thought there would be more change in the flanks than what it did but the configs confirmed what I saw in the printed parts.

These images show a Precise Section View of the assembled bolt and nut with the respective config settings.

NomTol Config.jpg


Avg Tol Config.jpg
MinMat Tol Config.jpg

So, is there something I need to do with my printer (Bambu X1C) to get good parts that actually screw together or is there something wrong with the thread data in the model?

And here is the package file of the fastener assembly if anyone wants to try printing it.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
I don't have access to new thread modelling in Alibre, however I have printed threaded parts before using Inventor.

To get reliable results, I had to split the internal threads, then scale them up by 4-5% in two directions other than the height direction.

I think, for anything smaller than M5 thread, you should decrease the layer height in your slicer to increase the resolution. Obviously, your part will take longer to print.
 
Last edited:
I thought I'd take a shot at test printing some 3D ACME threads and came up a bit disappointed with the results.
To test, I printed a bolt and a nut with minimum material configuration. Additionally, I scaled up the nut by 4% in X and Y directions using the 3d printing slicer.

I couldn't insert the original nut with minimum material by hand, however it was okay to run it all the way through using adjustable wrenches.
4% scaled nut was easy to run in until the half of the bolt, but then I had to use adjustable wrenches to run it all the way down.

After both were ran in, now I can do and undo both nuts easily by hand. original nut still feels tighter than 4% scaled version though.

IMG20250707142731.jpg
Left side nut is 4% scaled version, added a little number 4 on it using the slicer.
 
I was about to say something. I decided to not say anything. This is good news. I am glad an ongoing conversation on Threading still exists.

I am building a 1A and 1B nut and bolt for testing at 0.75 for each. I will update shortly.

Seth

P.S. Where did you find the ACME ideas? Are those types listed in Alibre? Off to check...A-Okay. Just checked and yeppers. They are listed. Odd I never saw 'em before your mentioning of them.
 
HaroldL - those flanks do appear quite rough. You may need to use a finer print resolution.

I'm sure a forum member posted after 3D printing some real threads that the parts screwed together easily - but I haven't been able to find the post.

I only dabble with 3D printing, others may have useful tips.
 
I just printed a set of nut and bolt for a present. Anyway, I used Nominal instead of Average. Nominal makes the, of course while 3D Printing the items, nut and bolt very hard to put together, e.g. not having the ability to use my hands for tightening.

I have printed Bolts and Nuts before today. I used Average on the Form option in the Hole Tool. I will try again on the Average Form instead and get back to this post.

Seth
 
I thought I'd take a shot at test printing some 3D ACME threads and came up a bit disappointed with the results. For the test parts I modeled a .75-6 bolt and nut at Minimum Material. I was expecting to just screw the parts together but found that they would not fit. In fact when looking closely at the parts I could see that they were binding on the thread flanks.

View attachment 44908

So I did some testing in the models to see how the thread tolerance settings affected the model.
I added a config in the parts for each of three settings, Nominal, Average, and Minimum Material. Then I added a corresponding config in an assembly and looked to see what was changing for each tolerance setting. What I saw is a bit confusing because the ID of the nut and OD of the bolt did change quite a bit but, from what I could see, it appears that the flanks of the threads did not change very much. I would have thought there would be more change in the flanks than what it did but the configs confirmed what I saw in the printed parts.

These images show a Precise Section View of the assembled bolt and nut with the respective config settings.

View attachment 44910


View attachment 44909
View attachment 44911

So, is there something I need to do with my printer (Bambu X1C) to get good parts that actually screw together or is there something wrong with the thread data in the model?

And here is the package file of the fastener assembly if anyone wants to try printing it.


@HaroldL , are those finished parts glass filled Nylon?

Seth
 
ACME threads are typically used in linear motion applications, so flank clearance will be much less than in standard nuts and bolts, as the intention is to minimise backlash.

I'm not surprised if these are challenging to 3D print.
 
I concur. Outside of that idea, my finished print is about 30 minutes out and I can already see the detail of such overlapping of the threads. It is very challenging so far.

I thought a 200mm/sec would be an okay print speed but the excess "goo" of the filament drooling off the tips of the major diameter of the ACME screw is a bit overwhelming.

I can show off what has happened versus what I thought may take place. Of course, my enclosure is a bit hot to begin with now. 100C for the bed and 260C for the hot end creates amplitudes of heat. Anyway, I will try to post a photo. Earlier while posting a couple (three actually) photos of the current states of the ACME screw and "lead" nut, I came across issues with the posting. I was not allowed to post any further photos. That is okay. I can try again.

Seth

P.S. I think the time it takes for the filament to dry on the print is "warp" (guessing here) and the finalized print in actual states are not 100% accurate due to "warp." With that in mind, layers on layers of filament drooling and drooping may be a key factor in providing exact replicas of ACME screws with lead nuts. From experience, larger diameter nozzles are easier to make threaded components like ACME screws with large diameter lead nuts.

Side Note:

My ABS is printing hot with all the enclosed area.

The faster the ABS prints, the better on the CoreXY.

The faster the print, the quicker it can solidify.

Almost time for a cool down and then the photo(s).
 
Last edited:
I tried Harold's model with both 0.2mm and 0.1mm layer heights on an AnyCubic Kobra 3 Max. the lesser layer height was close to usable, but certainly bad compared with a previously done M12 thread.
I suspect that a resin printer would produce better results with a low angle threadform like ACME. It's close enough that, if one needed usable threads, one could print them with minimum tolerance and clean up with single point threading assuming ownership of a lathe and appropriate thread cutting tools.
 
I got the Lead Screw (ACME) and lead nut done. They fit together well. I must have done something correct:

ABS_200mm-sec_ACME_1-125.jpgACME_THREADED_COMP_1-125.pngACME_THREADED_COMP_NUT_1-125.pngNo_DEVIATION_for_SURFACE.png

I made a video but I think the video takes up too much room...

Seth
 
My first quick test with the Bambu Lab x1 Carbon and PLA. (Min. Min.)
The nut can be moved easily.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0357.jpeg
    IMG_0357.jpeg
    1.4 MB · Views: 28
Last edited:
I thought I'd take a shot at test printing some 3D ACME threads and came up a bit disappointed with the results. For the test parts I modeled a .75-6 bolt and nut at Minimum Material. I was expecting to just screw the parts together but found that they would not fit. In fact when looking closely at the parts I could see that they were binding on the thread flanks.

View attachment 44908

So I did some testing in the models to see how the thread tolerance settings affected the model.
I added a config in the parts for each of three settings, Nominal, Average, and Minimum Material. Then I added a corresponding config in an assembly and looked to see what was changing for each tolerance setting. What I saw is a bit confusing because the ID of the nut and OD of the bolt did change quite a bit but, from what I could see, it appears that the flanks of the threads did not change very much. I would have thought there would be more change in the flanks than what it did but the configs confirmed what I saw in the printed parts.

These images show a Precise Section View of the assembled bolt and nut with the respective config settings.

View attachment 44910


View attachment 44909
View attachment 44911

So, is there something I need to do with my printer (Bambu X1C) to get good parts that actually screw together or is there something wrong with the thread data in the model?

And here is the package file of the fastener assembly if anyone wants to try printing it.
I'm seeing a few Issues. ACME are not good for printing due to the overhang, using support material can leave some extra material behind on the flank when it breaks off, and not using support material on an overhang like that can affect the flank staying in dimension. ACME threads do not print well, unfortunately.

The MIN/MAX/Average settings are derived from the thread standards. Thread standards do not account for 3D printing. Alibre uses the MIN/MAX settings take the extremes of the standard to generate edge samples and give some extra space for 3D printing, but ultimately that is the best we can do considering that's what the standards give us. Since printer tolerances are larger than standard thread tolerances, overbuild does happen. Go with the loosest settings on the loosest fit class.

The differences in diameter and flank dimensions you are seeing come from ASME standards, which are not designed around 3D printing, which is why you don't see the flanks move as much.

As others suggested, layer height plays a big role here and you may see better results going to a smaller value if your layer height is a large value.

Working the threads back and forth and slowly progressing further has, in my experience, loosened the fit and created a tight-fitting thread.
 
Back
Top