Fusion 360 · FDM Additive Manufacturing · Design Iteration

Compact 3D-Printed TV Stand

A practical design project created because commercially available TV stands did not fit a small tabletop. The first CAD iteration used hexagonal cutouts to reduce material, but slicer analysis showed that the geometry increased perimeter generation, filament use, and print time. A second iteration redesigned the part around the realities of FDM manufacturing.

48.8%
lower estimated print time
34.8%
less filament by mass
$3.54
lower estimated material cost per print

The problem

I needed a TV stand with a smaller footprint for a limited tabletop area and could not find an off-the-shelf option that met the space requirement. I used the project as an opportunity to build my Fusion 360 skills and create a purpose-built solution that could be manufactured on an FDM 3D printer.

Overall envelope: 182.92 × 190.30 × 134.40 mm Manufacturing: FDM 3D printing CAD: Autodesk Fusion 360
01 — DefineFit a TV support into a constrained tabletop footprint.
02 — DesignCreate an initial structure with hexagonal weight-reduction features.
03 — AnalyzeSlice the model and compare print time, filament use, and cost.
04 — IterateRemove inefficient geometry and let slicer infill create the internal structure.

Design iterations

The visual cutouts seemed efficient from a CAD perspective, but they created many additional printed walls. The redesign preserved the external form while simplifying the wall geometry.

First TV stand iteration with hexagonal cutouts
Iteration 1

Hexagonal cutouts

Designed to reduce apparent material volume and weight while retaining structural support.

Second TV stand iteration with solid walls
Iteration 2

Solid walls + slicer infill

Simplified geometry so the slicer could generate a more efficient internal infill structure.

Rear view of first TV stand iteration
Rear view of second TV stand iteration

Slicer results

Both designs were evaluated in the slicer. The second iteration reduced filament use by 177.14 g and reduced estimated print time by 32 hours and 5 minutes.

MetricIteration 1Iteration 2Improvement
Filament mass508.71 g331.57 g−177.14 g (34.8%)
Filament length170.56 m111.17 m−59.39 m (34.8%)
Extruded volume410,252.26 mm³267,395.32 mm³−142,856.94 mm³ (34.8%)
Estimated cost$10.17$6.63−$3.54 (34.8%)
Estimated print time2d 17h 47m1d 9h 42m−1d 8h 05m (48.8%)
Slicer statistics for hexagonal iteration
Iteration 1 slicer output
Slicer statistics for solid-wall iteration
Iteration 2 slicer output
Key result: the redesign cut estimated print time from 65 h 47 min to 33 h 42 min, a 48.8% reduction, while also reducing estimated filament use and cost by about 34.8%.

Engineering takeaway

This project reinforced an important design-for-additive-manufacturing lesson: a shape that appears lightweight in CAD is not automatically efficient to print. In FDM, added holes and small features can increase perimeter count and toolpath complexity. Using slicer feedback as a design input led to a simpler, faster, and less expensive part.

The project also demonstrates an iterative workflow: define a need, create a prototype, analyze manufacturing output, identify an unexpected tradeoff, and redesign using measured results.