While they’re practically a necessity for printing most 3D models where it’s impossible to avoid having overhangs and bridges, supports are never fun to deal with, as they’re usually quite challenging to remove in a clean and convenient manner that doesn’t end up damaging the 3D printed part in the process.
In this guide, we will look at ways of configuring the support settings in Cura to make the support structures as hassle-free as possible to remove, which, hopefully, will make it a breeze to get rid of the supports on your 3D-printed parts from now on.
Configuring Cura Support Settings for Easy Removal
For the purposes of this guide, we will be looking at the support structure, support placement, support pattern, support density, support X/Y distance, support Z distance, support wall line count, and support interface parameters in particular, as each of these parameters contribute to how challenging the support structure will be to remove in some way, making it critical to adjust them correctly.
Support Pattern
When adjusting the strength of the support structures you’re printing, support pattern is the first parameter that comes to mind, as it determines the pattern that Cura will use to fill out the support structures, similar to how infill pattern works, but only for supports, with each pattern coming with a unique set of strengths and weaknesses.
If you’re looking to configure your support settings in a way that makes the support structures as easy to remove as possible without any concern for stability and sturdiness, you will want to choose Lines as your support pattern, which, as the name suggests, consists of straight lines in a single direction without any overlap.
Unlike the more robust support patterns, such as Grid and Triangles, where the lines that make up the support structure are placed in a manner that makes it pretty challenging to bend the supports, which in turn considerably increases the difficulty of removing them, the straight lines of the Lines support pattern are a breeze to bend and break off without requiring too much force.
Additionally, as the lines that make up this support pattern are very close to each other and configured to be positioned in a way that prevents them from being perpendicular to the skin lines that they support by default, we can say that the Lines support pattern also produces the best overhang quality alongside being the easiest to remove, which is an extra benefit to keep in mind.
While it’s the easiest to remove, the Lines support pattern, unfortunately, falls short when it comes to strength and stability, as the lines that make up the support structure not being connected to each other to create a stable foundation can frequently lead to cases where the individual lines end up falling over and cause the print to fail completely.
On the other hand, even though not as easy to remove as supports printed with the Lines support pattern, another option that creates fairly effortlessly removable support structures is the Zig Zag support pattern, which comes with the added benefit of stability and sturdiness that can become necessary in cases where the supports need to carry more weight.
Similar to the Lines support pattern, the ease of removability of the Zig Zag support pattern comes from the fact that it’s pretty straightforward to bend and break by applying force from the directions that are perpendicular to the lines that create the support structure, making it possible to pull the support structures off without needing a whole lot of force.
Another area where the Zig Zag support pattern behaves similarly to the Lines support pattern is the lines that make up the pattern being close to each other and being oriented in a way that prevents them from being perpendicular to the skin lines, which, just as the Lines support pattern, allows the Zig Zag support pattern to provide the best overhang quality possible.
Additionally, unlike the Lines support pattern, which has problems with stability and sturdiness, the Zig Zag support pattern does a fantastic job on these fronts as well, even though it doesn’t have protection against forces from all directions like the Triangles and Grid patterns, as the lines that create the support pattern being connected to each other, unlike the Lines support pattern where they are entirely separated, solves the problem of the individual lines falling over.
With these qualities in mind, we can practically say that the Zig Zag pattern doesn’t have any noticeable drawbacks, making it a pretty balanced support pattern in terms of both ease of removal and sturdiness and a fantastic choice for any scenario where the Lines support pattern isn’t enough to provide the required level of sturdiness to the support structures in a reliable manner, which we can consider to be a common problem.
So, while Lines is undisputedly the support pattern that’s easiest to remove in the technical sense at the end of the day, our recommendation would be to lean more toward Zig Zag if you’re looking for the safer option that won’t cause you any trouble, as printing with the Lines support pattern can definitely require some testing and tweaking to get things right, which may not be suitable for everyone.
Support Density
Support density is another factor that considerably affects how easy or hard it will be the remove the support structures from your printed part, as it directly determines how much material the 3D printer will use to fill out the support structures.
When you use a high support density value, you will notice that it’s a whole lot harder to remove the supports from your prints, as the support structures will get stronger and adhere to a more sizeable portion of the printed part, with the support lines getting closer to each other due to the amount of increased amount of material that goes into printing the supports.
On the other hand, when you go with a low support density value, the support structures will become weaker, and the adhesion surface will decrease with the support lines getting further away from each other as a result of your 3D printer using less material to print the support structures, which in turn will make them a whole lot easier to remove.
Our recommendation for printing supports that are easy to remove would be to start out with a value between 5 to 10 percent and to increase it as necessary based on the results of your tests since using such a low value may not always be possible based on the 3D model you’re printing, with models that have bigger & steeper overhangs and bridges requiring higher support density values for the support structures to be able to fulfill their duty.
While it would be impossible to come up with the optimal support density value from the start, especially considering that it would be different for each 3D model, we highly recommend not hesitating to start with a higher support density value (20 to 30 percent) in cases where the overhangs and the bridges you will be printing are clearly larger and heavier than usual, as there are many other tools we can make use of to make the support structures easier to remove.
Support X/Y Distance
The support X/Y distance parameter determines the X and Y axis distances between the support structures and the print itself, which makes it another factor to consider when explicitly adjusting the support settings for easy removal.
When the support X/Y distance value is low, you will notice that the support structures become closer to the overhangs horizontally, which will ensure that the entirety of the overhangs get sufficient support from the start to the end, even for the smallest overhangs, but at the expense of the support possibly coming into contact with the printed part, which can leave a scar and make it more challenging to remove the support.
On the flip side, if you use a higher support X/Y distance value, the distance between the overhangs and the support structures will increase, which will make it a whole lot easier to remove the supports and drastically reduce the chance that the supports leave scars on the surface of your printed part, but the areas close to where the overhangs start may not get enough support, which can especially be a problem for smaller overhangs as they would lose a considerable amount of support relative to their size.
When setting the support X/Y distance value to make supports as easy as possible to remove, our recommendation would be to use a value that equals three times the line width you’re using as a starting point, such as 1.2 mm for a 0.4 mm line width (which we can consider being standard for a 0.4 mm nozzle), which will increase the horizontal distance between the supports and your printed part enough to make the supports easy to remove, but not so much that large portions of the overhangs remain unsupported.
Support Z Distance
The support Z distance parameter determines the Z-axis distance between the support structures and the print itself, the same way the support X/Y distance parameter does for the X and Y axes, which is why it’s also vital to ensure that this parameter is configured correctly to print supports that are easily removable.
With a low support Z distance value, the vertical distance between the supports and the overhangs, both from the top and the bottom, will become smaller, which will increase the stability of the support, reduce the amount of sagging on the overhangs, and increase the strength of adhesion between the supports and the overhangs, but at the expense of making the supports harder to remove.
On the other hand, when you increase the support Z distance value instead, you will notice that the gaps between the supports and the overhangs become larger vertically, which will make it a whole lot easier to remove the supports, but also reduce the quality of your overhangs due to them having more room to sag with the support structures positioned further below.
Provided that your aim is to get your supports to be as easy as possible to remove, our recommendation would be to start out with a support Z distance value that’s two times the layer height value you’re using, such as 0.4 mm for a 0.2 mm layer height, which will make supports easier to remove compared to the standard support Z distance value that equals the layer height, but without increasing the distance so much that the overhang quality takes a big hit.
Once you have your test print at hand, you can keep performing adjustments in multiples of the layer height value until you find the perfect spot, such as increasing the support Z distance by 0.2 mm if the supports are still too hard to remove or decreasing it by 0.2 mm if your overhangs ended up sagging way too much, assuming you’re using a layer height value of 0.2 mm.
Support Wall Line Count
Support wall line count specifies the number of walls surrounding the infill of the support structures, which effectively means that it has a considerable impact on the amount of material the 3D printer will utilize when printing supports.
When the support wall line count on the higher side, the walls around the support structures will be thicker, which will increase the stability of the supports and allow them to support the edges of the overhangs in a better way, but at the expense of making the supports harder to remove.
On the other hand, with a lower support wall line count, you will find that the supports are much easier to remove, but you will be losing out on the stability that a higher value would provide, which can end up with the supports falling over in some cases.
For the purposes of printing easy-to-remove supports, our recommendation would be to set the wall line count value to 1, which should give your support structures enough stability for them not to fall over under normal circumstances without increasing their strength to the point where they become challenging to remove.
Support Interface
Support interfaces are layers that sit between the top (support roof) and bottom (support floor) parts of the support structures and the printed part itself, practically acting as a connector between the print and the supports that you can configure separately from the rest of the support structure for efficiency.
So, when you enable the support interface feature, you will notice that the portions of the support structure which connect to printed part, both from the top and the bottom, have a different shade (dark blue) in the Preview section of Cura, as you can see in the image below since these structures are effectively independent of the rest of the supports.
On the other hand, when you deactivate the support interface, the areas where the supports connect to the printed part won’t be any different than the rest of the supports, with the entirety of the support structure using the same configuration.f
While there are many advantages support interfaces bring to the table, two critical benefits, in particular, stand out when it comes to printing supports that are easier to remove, making the configuration process a whole lot more convenient for you.
First, the option to configure the “connection” parts separately from the rest of the support structure allows you to print them in a way that would make it a whole lot more convenient to remove the supports without causing the entirety of the support structures to become weaker, giving you more flexibility.
Second, you can now configure our support structures to be as robust as possible without overly strengthening the “connection” parts, and due to this, you can print large and heavy overhangs without worrying too much about finding a middle ground between stability and ease of removal.
So, in a case where you need to use a more robust support pattern and an increased support density to get your overhangs and bridges correctly, but without making the supports impossible to remove, you can combine stronger supports with weaker support interfaces, which will keep the support structures stable while weakening the contact between the supports and the printed part.
When configuring the support interfaces to be easier to remove, the first modification we recommend doing is to go with an easy-to-remove support interface pattern, such as Lines or Zig Zag, as we have discussed earlier, especially if you’re using a robust support pattern such as Grid or Triangles.
While the support interface pattern change alone will make the support much easier to remove as it is, another adjustment you can perform is to reduce the support interface density to be less than the support density you’re using, such as setting the support interface density to 10% if you’re using a support density value of 20%.
Finally, it’s worth mentioning that while these adjustments aren’t without downsides in the department of strength and stability by any means, going down this route will allow you to conveniently prevent some of the more critical issues you can come across when using a support pattern, such as Lines together with a low support density value, such as the support structures falling over, which is what makes it such a fantastic tool for printing easy-to-remove supports that are also sustainable.
Support Placement
The support placement parameter makes it possible to determine whether the support structures should be placed everywhere or only on parts where they would touch the build plate.
When you set the support placement to Touching Buildplate, Cura will remove all the areas of the support structures attached to the printed part from the bottom, which means that only the supports connected to the build plate will be eligible for printing.
On the other hand, when you choose the Everywhere setting as your support placement, your 3D printer will print the support structures regardless of whether they are connected to the build plate or the printed part, which we can consider to be the standard behavior.
When we put these two options into consideration, we can clearly see that the Touching Buildplate setting is a whole lot more likely to create support structures that are easier to remove, as it practically ensures that you will only need to remove the supports from one side of the model, and also has a chance to reduce the adhesion surface by shaving off parts of the support structure in cases where they would otherwise be attached to the part itself.
Unfortunately, deciding how you will need to configure the support placement parameter won’t be as straightforward as choosing Touching Buildplate and moving on, as the setting you will need to choose primarily depends on the shape of the 3D model you’re printing to avoid a scenario where the support placement alone can lead to print failure.
For instance, in the case of the test 3D model below, where the entirety of the overhangs is placed directly on top of the print itself, choosing the Touching Buildplate setting will prevent Cura from generating any support structures at all, which will lead to your 3D printer failing to print the overhangs, meaning that you will always need to go with the Everywhere setting in such cases.
On the other hand, in the case of a different test 3D model, which you can once again see below, using the Touching Buildplate setting can possibly be a good idea, as there’s enough of the support that’s connected to the build plate to support a considerable portion of the overhang already, meaning that it could be possible to remove parts of the support that’s connected to the printed part itself for ease of removal without hampering the support’s ability to fulfill its duty.
So, while it would be suitable to use the Touching Buildplate option in cases where the portion of the support structure connected to the build plate is sufficient to support the overhangs and the bridges, as it will both weaken the support and isolate it to only one side to make it easier to remove without preventing it from doing its job, using the Everywhere option will practically be a necessity for a successful print in situations where a large (or the entire) portion of the support structure is attached to the part itself, and not the build plate.
Support Structure
The support structure parameter allows you to pick between the two distinct types of supports in Cura; normal supports and tree supports.
In this case, normal refers to the standard support structures that we’re all used to seeing, where the support structure is placed right below the overhang or the bridge, connected to whatever is directly below it, whether it’s another portion of the printed part or the build plate, and automatically filled with the chosen support pattern.
On the other hand, the tree support structure, as the name suggests, has the shape of a tree instead, starting from the closest point(s) to the areas where supports are required and branching out from these point(s) to support the overhangs and the bridges accordingly.
While there are many differences between these two support structures that we can discuss, one thing we can say for sure is that using the tree support structure comes with numerous benefits for the purposes of printing easy-to-remove supports.
First of all, the contact area between the support and the printed part becomes much smaller with tree supports compared to regular supports, as the top part of the support structure consists of many small branches as opposed to a flat surface, and the bottom part of the support takes up much less space on the surface of the printed part due to the tree shape that can branch out to multiple overhangs from a single point.
Second, unlike regular supports that connect to the surface directly beneath the overhangs, tree supports try to avoid the surface of the print whenever possible and attach to the build plate as long as the distance allows it, effectively creating a scenario where there’s less connection between the supports and the printed part.
The third and final benefit of using the tree support structure is that it’s hollow by default, and even though it’s possible to fill tree supports just as you can with regular supports by increasing the support density (except for the branches that contact the overhangs directly), tree supports are capable of fulfilling their duty of supporting overhangs and bridges with a support density value of 0%.
Alongside creating supports that are easier to remove, using the tree support structure also comes with some extra benefits for your prints, whether it’s increasing overhang quality, using less material, reducing print times, or producing fewer scars on the surface, making it a fantastic choice in many scenarios.
On the other hand, the primary disadvantage you can come across when using the tree support structure is a lack of consistency, where the number of branches created ends up not being enough to sufficiently support the overhangs on your print, specifically when the overhangs are flat without any curves, but also slanted at the same time.
While it’s not a direct disadvantage, we can also consider tree supports less reliable and forgiving than regular supports regarding misconfiguration and printing errors, primarily due to their complex shape, which is something to keep in mind when going down this route as some testing can be necessary to benefit from the advantages that tree supports offer fully.
As printing tree supports often require the extrusion to start and stop frequently due to the presence of many small branches, it’s not too suitable for materials that are considered harder to extrude, such as TPU, due to its flexible nature.
Conclusion
While removing the support structures from your 3D-printed part will always be a chore, using slicer settings that make them come off easier will, without a doubt, make the process a whole lot more convenient for you while also reducing the chance that you end up damaging the part.
That being said, since configuring the support structures to be easier to remove effectively means that you’re reducing their strength, finding a good balance where the supports you’re printing are strong enough to do their job but not needlessly strong that they become impossible to remove is the key to success.
As a software developer by profession, David has been particularly interested in how 3D printing works even before he picked up his first 3D printer, and completely fell in love with the hobby once he got his hands on a Prusa i3 MK2 for the first time back in 2017. Due to him enjoying both the functional and the non-functional sides of 3D printing equally, you’ll rarely see David’s 3D printer in an idle state.