# Hexagonal infill pattern missing in Cura

I have noted that the hexagonal infill pattern is missing in the latest version of Cura. I would suggest that this is a mistake from the standpoint of strength and economy. Just as a small example see the quotes below. It is well known that from a standpoint of physics the hexagonal pattern is one of if not the strongest in nature as it resists compression and wastes little space.

Wikipedia:

Honeycomb structures are natural or man-made > structures that have the geometry of a honeycomb to allow the minimization of the amount of used material to reach minimal weight and minimal material cost.

Honeycomb materials are widely used where flat or slightly curved surfaces are needed and their high Specific strength is valuable. > They are widely used in the aerospace industry for this reason, and honeycomb materials in aluminum, fibreglass and advanced composite materials have been featured in aircraft and rockets since the 1950s.

https://www.benefits-of-honey.com/honeycomb-pattern.html

Turning to the structural design of their homes, it also suggests that they (bees) excel in economics and mathematics! Studies on the geometry of honeycomb pattern explain that > no other shape can create more space with the given material. > Circles for instance leave space, and square makes smaller area. In addition, your engineer friends can confirm with you that > the hexagon structure provides the maximum strength and that it is used in designing airplane wings and satellites walls.

I would strongly suggest that you drop the hexagon infill pattern subroutine back into the program. It “ain’t that hard to do.”
The honeycomb as mentioned above is also an economical structure and from the standpoint of profitability that’s something we are all looking for.

Recently I watched a user in Waco print a “gun” on TV as part of a news article. He used the honeycomb pattern but the “gun” exploded. I do not think it was the honeycomb pattern that failed the test but simply from observation I think that the density of the infill was too low. The hexagons were somewhat large considering the proposed use of the print. The more hexagons per cubic inch/cm the stronger the structure.