3D modeling in Autocad

For this week’s 3D scanning and printing assignment, I started with AutoCAD 3D modeling. For me, AutoCAD will always be the easiest option when the 3D volume is simple and geometrically controlled. Since I have been working for years in technical drawing and architectural documentation, the transition from 2D plans to 3D solids feels natural.

    One of the main advantages is how intuitive some tools are:

    PressPull, Extrude, Revolve, Union/Subtract, FilletEdge/ChamferEdge

    These commands allow me to quickly transform 2D profiles into solid volumes. The workflow is efficient, precise, and especially useful when working with orthogonal or modular geometries. Switching from 2D drafting to 3D solids is fast, and dimensions remain controlled and accurate — which is important in architecture.

    However, when it comes to exploring more complex or organic forms, AutoCAD becomes less comfortable.

    One of the aspects I don’t like is the interface when rotating and exploring the volume in 3D space. The navigation feels less intuitive compared to more sculptural modeling software. To properly orient the model, I constantly need:

    The visible grid, The UCS (X, Y, Z axes), Orbit controls

    Without clear axes and references, it becomes easy to lose orientation. Because of this, AutoCAD does not feel like the best tool for free volumetric exploration or experimental geometry. For precise, simple volumes → AutoCAD works very well. For spatial exploration and complex morphologies → it may not be the ideal option.

Sketching

After the first 3D modeling tests, I started sketching to rethink the idea. I was developing a vertical “3 in a row” game inspired by Connect Four, but I wanted to connect it with my final project — an interactive wall.

At the beginning, the system had many holes like a traditional game board. Later, I realized I want less perforation and more solid surface. The wall should feel continuous, not empty. So I changed the idea:

  • Instead of inserting pieces, the modules rotate.
  • Each module can turn 180° and has two different sides (for example, two colors).
  • Two unknown players stand on opposite sides of the wall.
  • When one person rotates a piece, the other person sees the change.

This creates indirect interaction — no direct contact, but still communication through the wall. Sketching helped me simplify the system and focus on the module logic before moving to prototyping and 3D printing.

    I found that modifying existing elements in the template was manageable, but writing new lines of code from scratch required more effort. This experience reinforced why choosing an organized template was so crucial—it provided a solid framework to build upon while I familiarized myself with HTML/CSS syntax.

3D Printing Assignment

The volume of the cut sphere was modeled in Rhino using the Sphere tool to generate the base geometry and the Boolean Difference command to subtract volumes and obtain the desired form. The wall surface, where the repetition of the spheres will be applied, was start modeling in Grasshopper. Using parametric design will allow us to control the position, spacing, and distribution of the spherical modules efficiently and flexibly for THE FINAL PROJECT.

Once the digital model was completed, we exported the file and prepared it for fabrication. We opened the file in Bambu Studio to configure the printing parameters. The design was positioned on the print bed in a way that minimized the need for supports, optimizing both material use and print quality.

We selected a variable layer height to achieve a good surface finish while keeping the printing time reasonable. Then, we chose the available printer, build plate, and material. Since the element is not intended to withstand significant structural loads, we selected a low infill percentage to reduce material consumption and printing time.

After slicing the model, we reviewed the estimated printing time and material usage. Finally, the file was sent to the 3D printer, and we monitored the process until the print was completed. This workflow allowed us to integrate parametric design and digital fabrication, moving from computational modeling to a physical prototype.

Modeling the sphere

using Rhino and Boolean Difference command

  • Details

Prototipe

prototipe of the module for final project - sphere 8 cm

  • Details

Prototipe of parametric wall

Using Grasshopper for designing the wall

  • Details

Opening the file in Bambu Studio

exporting the file for 3D PRINTING

  • Details

Minimizing the need for support structures.

positining the model on the print bed in an specific orientation

  • Details

3D Printing

Selecting variable layer height

for optimize surface quality while maintaining an efficient printing time

  • Details

Selecting the available 3D printer

corresponding build plate configuration, and loaded material

  • Details

Reducing material consumption and printing time

low infill density was selected

  • Details
/>

Slicing the model

to preview the estimated printing time and material consumption

  • Details

Printing prototipe

Sending the prototipe to the printer

  • Details

3D printing

waintng for te result

  • Details

Printing another game - 3D three-in-a-row

Additionally, driven by further interest in experimentation and validation of the printing process, we proceeded to fabricate an additional model based on a three-in-a-row game logic adapted to a three-dimensional configuration. This secondary model was obtained from an online open-source repository and was not developed as part of our original parametric design workflow.

The purpose of this print was primarily technical and exploratory. It allowed us to continue refining the additive manufacturing workflow, including file preparation, slicing configuration, and printer calibration verification. By working with a pre-designed model, we were able to focus specifically on optimizing print settings rather than geometry development.

Moreover, this iteration served as an opportunity to test different filament colors available in the laboratory. We evaluated color contrast, layer adhesion, and surface finish variations between materials, as well as the visual impact of multi-color combinations in modular components. This process helped us better understand material behavior, extrusion consistency, and the aesthetic potential of filament selection within small-scale functional prototypes.

3D SCANNING

For this week’s 3D scanning and printing assignment, I started with AutoCAD 3D modeling.

    One of the main advantages is how intuitive some tools are:

    These commands allow me to quickly transform 2D profiles into solid volumes. The workflow is efficient, precise, and especially useful when working with orthogonal or modular geometries. Switching from 2D drafting to 3D solids is fast, and dimensions remain controlled and accurate — which is important in architecture.