WEEK 6 - CAD-design and 3D-printing, and skanning

TODOs for this week

☑ Design and 3D-print something that can not be manufacture by milling or CNC-machining.
☑ Explained why it could not be made subtractively.
☑ Scan something and if time permits 3D-print it.
☑ Scan something and if time permits 3D-print it.
☑ Include design files and a ‘hero shot’
☑ Group assignment: Test 3D-printers capacities

I tested the 3D-printers first but I will present the results last. My 3D-desgning and printing recuired a 3D-scan, so I did scanning first and 3D-design and printing last. I will present these in this order.

3D Scanning

Using a Depth Sensor for 3D Scanning


3D-Scanners have their pros and cons. The limitation is specially clear with the entry level scanners we have in the lab, they are not good at everything, but 3D-scanners are pretty useful for capturing complex organic shapes that can’t be modelled easily.

I used Skanect Pro software with an ASUS XtionPRO depth sensor for 3D-scanning. I also experimented with Makerbot Digitizer which is a desktop laser 3d scanner.

The setup requires a computer with a decent graphics card to capture the 3D and image data at a reasonable framerate. Running with a basic PClaptop achieved <10 frames per second (fps), meaning the sensor must be moved around the object veeeery slowly to avoid interruptions in the scan. Once set up on a more powerful machine with a good graphics card, we managed >30 fps making the scanning much more stable.

I wanted to scan an object that warrants using a 3D scanner - something with geometric complexity that is difficult or impossible to model in CADsoftware. From previous experience, 3D scanners are not very good at capturing simple objects precisely (like a simple cube for example). These objects are much more easily, quickly and accurately modelled in CAD.

I decided I would scan myself, which I could later 3D-print as a coathook or statue.

Skanect Pro + ASUS XtionPRO setup


First I cleared some space and placed a rotating stool in the middle of the scanning area to use it sit still for a few minutes whilst scanning.

Setting up the scan with Skanect

I first made a test to check everything was working well. Before starting the scan, it’s important to make sure the object is positioned close to the centre of the scanning area on screen. Pan around to check the position front-to-back and left-to-right before initiating the capture. Any geometry outside the scanning are will be clipped.

Test scan of myself - the scan captured only the front side as I was not in the bounding box.

Scanning my own body was going to be logistically challenging. I needed an assistant. Luckily Niklas, A colegue at Aalto Fablab, was happy to help.

The scanning in progress

As Niklas kept the scanner in a stationary position I sat down on a rotary stool and try to keep my self rolling on a slow pace as much as possible trying to circle around a vertical axis: That is quit a chalenge as one tends to loss the center of mass.

Post processing the scan

The scan was post-processed in Skanect, first using the Watertight function to seal any holes in the mesh (important for 3D-printing), and then using the Move & Crop tool to straighten up the object and clip it flat to the ground plane.

Using scanect software. There is not that many options in the process, first you make the scan, make some minor improvements like closing surfaces etc. and finally save the scan file or export the file to .stl or .obj-format for futher mesh editing in softwares such as Meshmixer.

Pros and Cons of using a Depth Sensor for 3D Scanning

+ It’s easy
In my opinion, using a depth sensor is the easiest way to start 3D scanning. It requires very little technical knowledge because the process is very interactive.

+ No need to worry about the background
What’s great about a depth sensor is that it actually senses depth. That means that the software can tell it to only capture the object or person — and ignore the background. Because of this, the background doesn’t matter at all. There can even be people moving in the background!

+ Interactive Progress Preview
The sensor software overlays a preview of what is being captured on top of the camera feed. This way you know exactly which parts have been scanned to ensure you cover everything to generate a model without holes (extra important for 3D printing).

+ Fast results
Scanning an object or person can usually be done within two minutes. Processing time depends on the software and computer that’s being used but is usually done within minutes.

+ To Scale by default
Depth Sensors are factory-calibrated and know exactly how far objects are. Sensor scans are usually great for doing interactive measurements that don’t require industrial (sub-millimeter) accuracy.

– Don’t work well outdoors
this depth sensor uses a small infrared laser projector. This light is invisible to the human eye, which is convenient and safe. But the small projector isn’t as powerful as other infrared light sources like, let’s say… the sun. You might be able to capture on a very overcast day but any direct sunlight messes up the depth sensing capabilities.

– Limited Scan Range & Object Size
There are different kinds of depth sensors but this ones here is called short-range sensors. This means they can sense objects from a distance of 20-40 cm up to 100-300 meters. This limits them to medium to large objects and people. I’d say anything from 40 – 250 cm tall is the ideal scan size for this depth sensor subjects.

– Limited Scan Quality
I determine scan quality by both looking the geometric details and texture quality. These depend largely on the resolution of the cameras that are used. Without becoming too technical: these sensors use an infrared black-and-white camera to capture the patterns projected by the infrared projector and and a RGB color camera to capture texture information.

The quality of a depth sensor scan can be considered a low-poly 3D model. It might not be the best scan result but the fact that it’s “light” means it’s perfect for realtime 3D purposes such as online sharing, VR/AR applications, body measurements and small-scale decorative 3D printing (e.g. miniatures in full color sandstone).

The quality of this set up could have been greatly improved with the use of a large, Automatic Turntable.  That way one can controll the speed of the scan and get a larger freedom of rotation compared to sitting in a turnning chair and trying to rotate in a vertical axis. A future project for lab development.

colour mapping really brings 3d-scanned objects alive


I made a minor adgestments on the file using Meshmixer.

I made a minor adgestments on the file using Meshmixer

3D Model

It seems you are using an outdated browser that does not support canvas :-(

Download

I 3d printed a mini me. I used a bronze fill filament and patially polished it

Makerbot Digitizer setup


For this setup I wanted to 3d scan a 3d printed piece of a little statue of my fabacademy tutor Ali. I set up a matte white back ground behind the object i wanted to scan. I also cleaned the camera and the laser pointer with a lense cleaner.

my digitizer setup

In order to get as accurate scan as possible, I started by calibrating the machine.Three stage process following the guide on the software using a special tool that came with the machine. Fist the camera, the turntable and the laser.


my digitizer setup

my digitizer setup

The result was quit disapointing! I made 5 different scan trails each taking about 9min to compile. And there seem to be no control as for how the computing is done. There seems to be quit a lot of noise around the scanned file. I bleave the 3d object isn't as symetric as the software assumes. Which might be that the placement of the object is not exactly in the center of the turn table. This method is full of trial and error with not enough documentation on how to improve the scan quality. It was a waste of my time.


my digitizer setup
my digitizer setup


CAD-designing a part not possible with subtracting processes

To do a design that can not be made by subtracting process, I made A hinge. The design is composed of 2 parts and a conneccted with a shaft going through on of the parts. This would not be possible to be possible to accomplish with out complicated welding or sheet metal folding and an industrial stamping. This is the areas where 3d printing really shines where layer by layer additive manufacturing makes it possible to make this design in one peace.

I designed the hinge using a wide set of design tools and functions in Fusion 360. Main ones were:
1. sketch

2. extrude
3. press pull
4. Combine and Cut( Keep Tool)
5. Extrude the connecting Rod plane.

and I made the shaft diameter 0.3175 mm smaller to avoide the diffusion of parts inside the hinge when 3d printing. This number was obtained from the test experiment I made. We will cover that bit later down below.

5. Made the Holes.



Printing the model

Now I was ready for printing. So I imported the file into the Luzbot version of cura, in this case 3 bodies where exported from Fusion 360 into one STL file.


I did two prints with two different printers . It took about 40 min to print this.

Download Hinge

Group assignment - test the 3D-printer.

For the group assignment, I tested three 3D-printers at our FabLab. The formlab2, Ultimaker 2+ extended and the LUzbot mini.
In order to compare in the most resonable fasion I will be using similar speed setting material (PLA) for the FDM #d printers. I selected two tester files from Thingiverse called All In One 3D Printer test and 3D Printer Tolerance Test! .


All In One 3D Printer test


Aal in one 3d printer test

Aal in one 3d printer test

1. Dimensional Accuracy

Using digital calipers, I measured the Hole test area, and the cylinder diameters. Differences between X and Y measurements indicate the magnitude of backlash present in the system.

  • Ultimaker 2 -the average deviations in X or Y is between 0.4 and 0.3
  • Luzbot mini-the average deviations in X or Y is between 0.2 and 0.1

    2. Bridging Performance

    Inspecting the six bridges for dropped perimeters and infill.

    3. Overhang Performance

    Inspecting the 30, 45, 60, and 70 degree overhangs, and looking for drooping perimeters, wobbling extrusions, and infill hemorrhaging.

    Aal in one 3d printer test

  • All In One 3D Printer test


    Aal in one 3d printer test

    Aal in one 3d printer test

    4. Negative Space Tolerances

    This was very exciting test. Rotating the roller wheels in the assembly I could only move the parts with 0.0125in (0.317mm) offsets. This is true for both machines.

    5. Fine Positive Space Features Performance

    Evaluate based on the quality of deposition composing the towers:

    6. Mechanical Resonance in XY

    This test evaluates both resonance in the XY gantry, deposition control during linear extrusions, and deposition control at layer changes. As resonance is difficult to measure quantitatively, this is a binary test.

    Both printers had a slight rippling at the corners or at the midpoint of the print wall with the inset.

    7. Mechanical Resonance in Z

    This test exposes resonance in the Z axis if present and is subject to a binary evaluation.

    Aal in one 3d printer test

    When illuminated from above,there is noticeable loss of layer registration in the top half of the print of the Ultimaker conical shape, manifesting a horizontal ridging.

    For the luzbot, no loss of layer registration with increasing Z height.

    I had to lower the printing speed to 50mm/s to get the ultimaker print almost identical print as the Luzbot.


    UM 2+ tolerance test
    -->