agentleFS
arielmikiarielmiki/phyx3d/skills/print-design/SKILL.md

print-design

Skill4 starsChanged 50 days agoMITView on GitHub

Design a 3D-printable part or moving mechanism and prove it will print, hold up and work before the user prints it. Use when the user asks to design, model, make, or fix something for their 3D printer (Bambu Lab P1S/P1P/P2S etc.) — including robots, vehicles, arms, grippers, linkages with servos or motors — or asks whether a model will print, is strong enough, will tip over, needs supports, or whether a robot/mechanism will walk, drive or move. Uses the build123d MCP (CAD) and the phyx3d MCP (printability, stability, physics, strength, mechanism simulation).

4 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

  • Other versions4 projects use a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 4

    1. crealwork/ai-marketing-kit★ 18same name
    2. jtaolv-hash/my-claude-skills★ 1same name
    3. Retired-Projects/ai-marketing-kit-public★ 0same name
    4. skycmoon/skills★ 0same name

    How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

10 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 8 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 4 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 2

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 8

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Never hand over a design that phyx3d says needs-changes without telling them exactly why.

    line 9
  2. Distinctive:

    Before modelling, pin down (ask only if you can't infer a sensible default):

    line 13
  3. Very specific:

    If anything about orientation is off (supports, stability, warp): suggest_orientation {path} and re-run analyze_model with the best rotate.

    line 28
  4. Very specific:

    If the part carries load: stress_test with realistic fixed + loads in the design's own axes.

    line 29
  5. Very specific:

    If it must stand, stack, or survive knocks: simulate_physics with tilt, push, stack or drop.

    line 33
  6. Very specific:

    Use simulate_mechanism whenever parts move relative to each other.

    line 38
  7. Very specific:

    Write a <name>.mech.json next to the STLs:

    line 41
  8. Very specific:

    Run it and read: distance/speed/heading drift/fell (mobile robots), joint ranges (machines), each motor's p95 and peak vs rated torque, …

    line 45
  9. Very specific:

    Run check_interlock whenever two printed parts join (lids, doors, rails, caps, clips).

    line 51
  10. Distinctive:

    Keep it short and concrete:

    line 70

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 4 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Design → test → fix, before printing

The user prints on a Bambu Lab printer (default P1S, 256 mm cube, 0.4 mm nozzle, PLA unless they say otherwise). Never hand over a design that phyx3d says needs-changes without telling them exactly why.

1. Understand the job

Before modelling, pin down (ask only if you can't infer a sensible default):

  • what the part does, how it is held (screwed to a wall, sits on a desk, clamped…) and what load it takes (e.g. "2 kg shelf" ≈ 20 N; add ×2 for safety),
  • key dimensions / what it must fit,
  • material (default PLA; PETG for outdoor/impact/heat > 50 °C; TPU for flexible).

2. Model it (build123d MCP)

  • Design with the build123d tools in small steps and look at their previews.
  • Millimetres, Z up. A single part: put the intended print face at z = 0. Several parts that fit together (an enclosure, a lid, modules): model each one in its assembled position so fit checks compare real geometry, and rotate it into print orientation only when exporting.
  • Printable-by-design rules: walls ≥ 1.2 mm (≥ 2 mm under load); 45° chamfers (not fillets) on downward edges; teardrop holes in vertical walls; fillet r ≥ 2 mm at inside corners that take load; avoid floating parts.
  • Export an STL to an absolute path (e.g. ./out/<name>.stl).

3. Test it (phyx3d MCP) — always in this order

  1. analyze_model {path, material} → read verdict, checks[].findings, and todo. Look at the returned image.
  2. If anything about orientation is off (supports, stability, warp): suggest_orientation {path} and re-run analyze_model with the best rotate.
  3. If the part carries load: stress_test with realistic fixed + loads in the design's own axes. rel regions are the easiest: {rel:{min:[0.85,0,0],max:[1,1,1]}} = the far 15 % along +X. Pass the chosen print rotate too — layer direction changes the strength. Aim for safety factor ≥ 2 (≥ 3 for impact/repeated loads). Snap-fits are different: a snap moves by a fixed distance (barb reach + clearance), not under a known force. Test it with displacements: [{region: <the barb>, move: [0,0,<travel>]}] instead of loads, with a fine mesh (resolution ≥ 60000 for thin arms). You get the safety factor at that travel and pushForces (N, how hard it is to press). Force-guessed snap FEA can be wrong by large factors either way. Lay snap springs flat on the bed where possible, so they bend along the layers.
  4. If it must stand, stack, or survive knocks: simulate_physics with tilt, push, stack or drop.
  5. Optional, if Bambu Studio is installed: slice_bambu for exact time and filament.

3b. Things that move — robots, vehicles, arms, grippers, linkages

Use simulate_mechanism whenever parts move relative to each other.

  1. Model each moving part as its own STL in assembly position (all parts share one coordinate system, Z up, floor at z = 0). Leave ≥ 0.3 mm clearance between separate parts.
  2. Write a <name>.mech.json next to the STLs:
    • parts: {id, file} (or shape box/cylinder/sphere for quick tests), fixed: true for a base screwed down, payloads: [{mass, at}] for batteries/objects carried, friction: 0.9 for TPU tyres/feet.
    • joints: {id, type: revolute|prismatic|fixed|ball, parent (id or "world"), child, anchor [x,y,z], axis, limits} — anchor = the pin/shaft centre.
    • motor: pick a real part via preset (SG90, MG90S, MG996R, DS3218, STS3215 servos in degrees; TT, N20, JGA25, NEMA17 motors in rpm; LINEAR in mm) and a target: number, keyframes, or expression of t (e.g. "20*sin(2*pi*1.2*t + pi)"). Expressions may read yaw, pitch, roll, x, y, z, speed of the tracked part for simple feedback (e.g. steer a walker with (22 + 0.1*yaw)).
  3. Run it and read: distance/speed/heading drift/fell (mobile robots), joint ranges (machines), each motor's p95 and peak vs rated torque, saturated share, tracking error, collisions between parts, overlap at start. Look at the filmstrip.
  4. Fix: a motor saturated or p95 > 0.7 × rated → stronger preset, shorter lever, lighter part, slower motion. Falls over → wider stance, lower body, slower gait. Veers → symmetric design or feedback. Parts collide → clearance or phase change. Then also run stress_test on the most loaded part using the motor's peak torque as the load.
  5. A walking gait that works as a starting point: trot, diagonal legs in phase, hip A*sin(ωt+φ), knee B*max(0,-cos(ωt+φ)) (lifts the foot while the leg swings forward).

3c. Parts that lock together — dovetails, T-slots, bayonets, snaps, detents, threads, press fits

Run check_interlock whenever two printed parts join (lids, doors, rails, caps, clips). Model every part in its assembled position, then give spec: {parts:[{id, file}], interlocks:[{type, moving, against, axis}]} + base_dir (or a .interlock.json path).

  • axis = the direction the moving part travels to go in. Twist types also need depth (push-in before turning), angle (sign = direction) and center (a point on the axis); screws need pitch + turns. Unusual motions: insert: [{move}|{rotate, axis, about}|{screw, pitch, axis, about}].
  • Read: fit (clamped = zero clearance on opposite sides → will bind), insertion (jams where?), escapes (free play per direction; an unexpected free direction → add a stop), engagement.net (catch height − free play; needs ≥ 0.2 mm detent / ≥ 0.6 mm lock, in whole layers), press-fit interference (0.02–0.25 mm per side), wrongWays ("assembles" → add a key so it only fits one way).
  • Then check the catch's strength: stress_test with displacements = the engagement height (needed) at the barb.

4. Fix and repeat

Apply the todo fixes in the CAD, re-export, re-test. Iterate until the verdict is ready, or printable-with-care with every remaining warning explained. Usually 2–4 rounds.

For enclosures and other multi-part assemblies, also:

  • Fit-check against a model of what goes inside (board, battery, device): model it with its real dimensions and check clearances in the assembled position, not by eye.
  • Test locks and snaps with check_interlock: it measures the real free play and whether the catch still holds after it, and finds paths that jam.
  • Watch for slicer settings that break the design: elephant's foot on the first layer, seam placement on mating faces, and hole shrinkage — say which settings (or compensation) the design assumes.

5. Report to the user

Keep it short and concrete:

  • final STL path and how to print it: orientation (rotation values), supports yes/no, material, walls/infill you tested with,
  • the numbers that matter: safety factor under their load, tip angle, filament/time estimate,
  • anything you could not verify (strength is a rough guide; warp is a heuristic),
  • tip: they can open phyx3d serve (http://localhost:5217) to see every check you ran, live, in 3D.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.