Description

This is a disc golf driver model generated using the numerically optimized design from the paper: [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00158-021-03107-7.](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00158-021-03107-7.) Shout out to BigBlambino for identifying this paper and posting the original model. This driver profile was designed based on mathematical simulations to have the lowest drag (as needed for a driver), but was just a theoretical exercise. The work by BigBlambino and myself reduces this theoretical work to practice.

Filament Type and Disc Weight

Disc weight can easily be adjusted by changing infill %. To achieve higher disc weights in the 175-180g range I prefer, higher density plastics in the 1.2-1.25 g/ml range (PLA, PETG, TPU) are needed. ABS and ASA, with densities closer to 1 g/ml, were too low to achieve the higher weight range even at 100% infill. I have printed and thrown several discs in PLA during the testing phase and I advise against it. The PLA discs take terrible bounces and will shatter the first time you hit a tree squarely. I have not tested PETG, but I would expect it to be only slightly better than PLA. I highly recommend TPU for AMS as the filament choice. It's much tougher and feels much more like a store purchased disc.

An oddity I noted in printing these discs was that the model weight predicted by the Bambu slicer was approximately 5-10g higher than the actual disc weight for both PLA and TPU for AMS. As example, the TPU for AMS profile I posted lists a model weight of 181g but the final disc was 175g. It's unclear why I have been seeing such a large difference, but it may require several prints if you're trying to hit specific weights.

Supports & Brims

You will absolutely need supports. Since there is an extensive amount of support material, the type selected is important and I have found tree type to be easiest for removal. In the TPU for AMS profile I posted, I utilized PLA as an interface material. You can see from the picture below that it separated well and needed minimal sanding to clean up the disc. To start the PLA interface layer peeling did require the use of a utility knife to cut a tab in the PLA that I could grab with pliers, but once I did that, ~95% of the PLA interface layer peeled in one shot. I did need to spend time removing a number of small remaining pieces but the final inner surface was quite smooth. Given the TPU for AMS material toughness, I think support removal would be difficult to remove without the PLA support interface.

When I did the print profile development in PLA, I found inner and outer brims to be necessary since there is very little model-to-bed contact area. I am not sure if TPU for AMS absolutely needs a brim, but I carried them through in this profile for added safety.

For final clean up of the disc, I used a utility knife to remove the little nubs that occur from the use of random seam position and gave the entire rim a light sanding with 400 grit sandpaper. The random seam position was done to eliminate a defined seam that could be a weak point during impacts. 

Final Assessment

As mentioned above, I don't recommend PLA. While my test PLA discs did fly well, they broke too easily and bounced oddly on landing. For the TPU for AMS disc, it also flies well but lands more like a typical disc. I had no hard hits on my first outing with it, so full durability has not been established. In comparison to my regular driver, currently an Innova Gorgon (10/6/-2/1), I am not getting quite as much distance from the TPU for AMS disc - throws more like and 7 to 8 speed disc. I might not use it as a regular drive, but I can see using it for mid-range shots.