End-to-end pipeline.
Drop your STL in. Get a print-ready STL back, with a verified safety factor included. The only FFF tool that closes the loop β no external FEA, no proprietary formats.
FEA Β· von Mises
Ο_max : 245.6 MPa
Ο_min
Ο_max
Precision Adaptive Infill Generator
Form follows Force.
Formetric routes material exactly where the load demands it. Same weight β greater strength. Same strength β less material.
STL in. Print-ready STL out. Safety factor included.
β
The only end-to-end FFF optimizer
β34%
Material saved
+18%
Strength gained
7/7
TPMS patterns
ISO 178 β
Lab-validated
Why Formetric
Built differently.
Four things that separate Formetric from every infill generator out there.
Continuous gradient.
nTop and stecs3D give you discrete zones β 4 buckets of density. Slicers give you manual modifier meshes. Formetric is the only tool varying cell size continuously across the stress field. No banding, no concentration artifacts.
Post-infill FEA, in the loop.
Novineer simulates what your slicer will produce. nTop runs FEA in a separate manual step. Slicers don't validate at all. Formetric is the only one that runs FEA after applying the optimized infill, catches failures before printing, and re-iterates if needed.
Numbers, not promises.
Most tools claim weight savings from simulation alone. We tested ours on flexural and tensile specimens per ISO 178 and ISO 527. Real bars, real loads, real fracture data. The only adaptive infill tool with a lab report behind it.
How it works
From STL to optimal material,
From STL to optimal material,
in five steps.
A linear flow that turns any part into an optimized print, ready to slice.
STEP 01
Load your STL.
Any geometry, with or without holes. Formetric analyzes it and detects flat faces, cylindrical bores, and builds a volumetric representation automatically.
STEP 02
Mark constraints and loads.
Click where the part is fixed. Click where the load goes. Magnitudes in real Newtons β no relative scales. Force vectors are configurable or normal to the surface.
STEP 03
Automatic FEA.
Volumetric finite element analysis computes the von Mises stress field across the entire part. Validated against beam theory. Safety factor reported automatically.
STEP 04
β
Post-infill FEA
Validate the design.
Formetric runs a second FEA pass on the infilled part β not just the solid. The safety factor against material yield, the volumetric stress distribution, and a validation ratio against analytical theory tell you exactly how the part will behave before you print a gram.
STEP 05
Adaptive infill.
The Chirped TPMS routes small cells where stress is high and large cells where it isn't. No double walls, no artifacts. Output: a printable STL ready for Bambu Studio, PrusaSlicer, or Cura.
From the software
Not mockups. The real thing.
Every step you just saw runs inside the actual Formetric application. Below: real screenshots from the software, and from print-ready output loaded into Bambu Studio.
Inside Formetric
FoS = 0.39 β FALLA, ΟVM_max far above PLA yield, and ΟFEA/Οtheory = 16.04 ("ValidaciΓ³n: Sospechoso"). This is the post-infill validation working: the part would have broken in the printer, you find out before pressing print.
Print-ready in your slicer
vs. the competition
The only tool that does all of this.
Compared with the closest competitors at the same problem: structural FFF parts where weight and strength matter. Each tool excels at something β Formetric is the only one that covers the full FFF pipeline.
| Feature | Formetric | stecs3D | nTop | Novineer (NoviPath) |
Slicers (Bambu / Cura) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FFF/FDM-native workflow | β | β | β general-purpose | β Stratasys industrial | β |
| FEA-driven adaptive infill | β | partial | manual setup | analyzes only | β |
| Continuous gradient (vs zones) | β | 4 discrete zones | β (manual) | β | β modifier meshes |
| Closed-loop post-infill validation | β | β solid-only FEA | multi-step manual | predicts, no redesign | β |
| TPMS patterns supported | 7 verified | 2β3 | many (build yourself) | none | 1 (gyroid) |
| Direct STL in/out | β | β proprietary | β proprietary implicit | β G-code only | G-code only |
| Real Newtons (not abstract scales) | β | β relative | β (manual) | β | β |
| Lab-validated (ISO 178 + ISO 527) | β | β | β | β | β |
7 patterns Β· 1 flow
Seven ways to do it right.
Triply periodic minimal surfaces (TPMS) are the mathematical sweet spot for FFF infill: smooth, isotropic, and self-supporting. Formetric supports the seven that matter β all experimentally validated.
Self-supporting curves.
TPMS surfaces are smooth and continuous. They print without internal supports β even at low cell density.
Isotropic by design.
Equal mechanical response in every direction. No weak interlayer planes like rectilinear infill.
Maximum stiffness per gram.
Minimal surfaces by definition route material with the lowest possible mass for a given mechanical response.
Continuous gradient.
Cell size scales smoothly with stress, from tiny (high-load zones) to large (low-load zones). No banding.
Gyroid
Multi-axial Β· 6mm min
Schwartz P
Axial loads Β· 6mm min
Schwartz D
Pure compression Β· 6mm min
Schoen IWP
High stiffness Β· 6mm min
Lidinoid
Impact absorption Β· 7mm min
Fischer-Koch S
Double network Β· 8mm min
Split-P
Double network Β· 8mm min
Validation
Scientifically validated.
Formetric is benchmarked against control configurations using normalized testing protocols. Three configurations are compared at equal mass:
- A Β· Formetric Chirped Gyroid β variable cell, aggressiveness 85%
- B Β· Uniform Gyroid β control without gradient
- C Β· Standard Rectilinear β slicer infill (no Formetric)
5 replicates Γ 3 configurations Γ 2 tests = 30 specimens. 3-point flexural per ISO 178 and tensile per ISO 527-2 type 1BA, scaled to host the TPMS period. Statistical analysis with Welch's t-test.
Beta access
Be among the first
Be among the first
to print smarter.
Formetric is in private beta. Request access and we'll get you onboarded with one of the team.