logo
NOTICE:  This is the new PunchCAD forum. You should have received an email with your new password around August 27, 2014. If you did not, or would like it reset, simply use the Lost Password feature, and enter Answer as the security answer.
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Glicinus  
#1 Posted : Wednesday, February 21, 2018 8:46:17 AM(UTC)
Glicinus

Rank: Guest

Joined: 2/21/2018(UTC)
Posts: 6

Thanks: 1 times
I've shifted from game development models to engineering (mostly quality control and reverse-engineering). I have such types of tasks:
-To compare real machine part to it's CAD model (to find out if our old models are accurate enough, or to make sure the detail has proper characteristics as it is showed in it's cad file)
-To make 3d drawings (cad) of old machines. Some has proper "old-fashioned" drawings, some not.

What me colleagues did before and what we do now is we measure object we work with and than compare this numbers with numbers in cad file. Or model according the measurements.
It's not the fastest and accurate process.
On my previous job I used 3d scanner to scan people for character creation. I think, that same technique can help at my new job, but i know that engineering needs more accuracy than game-development.

Speaking shortly. I was offered Space Spider scanner (I left the link to be clear), and i'm not sure if it will be suitable for me. Manufacturer says "yes", but i used their other product "Eva" and I saw, that equability was not enough. As this guys costs huge amount of money i need to be sure if i have to buy Spider, or people who have huge experience in CADs can suggest me a better option.
horst.w  
#2 Posted : Wednesday, February 21, 2018 2:22:47 PM(UTC)
horst.w

Rank: Senior Member

Joined: 12/21/2014(UTC)
Posts: 209
Germany

Thanks: 4 times
Was thanked: 26 time(s) in 22 post(s)
Try out a solution like shown in the video. I think, a scan doesn't deliver more than a photography.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKoaxCqo_6E

Regards
horst.w
GER
ViaCAD 9 Pro german + ViaCAD 10 Pro & PowerPack + ViaCAD 11, Win7Prof 64 Bit upgraded to Win 10 64 Bit
cad'n'stuff  
#3 Posted : Wednesday, February 21, 2018 2:32:18 PM(UTC)
cad'n'stuff

Rank: Guest

Joined: 8/10/2017(UTC)
Posts: 47
Man

Was thanked: 47 time(s) in 23 post(s)
I guess it really depends on what kind of parts you have to remodel. If your parts have complex surfaces, you probably need some kind of 3d scanner (like the one you mentioned). For simple mechanical parts, you're better off with stuff like calliper, height gauge and micrometer.
thanks 1 user thanked cad'n'stuff for this useful post.
Glicinus on 2/22/2018(UTC)
Glicinus  
#4 Posted : Thursday, February 22, 2018 4:18:22 AM(UTC)
Glicinus

Rank: Guest

Joined: 2/21/2018(UTC)
Posts: 6

Thanks: 1 times
Originally Posted by: cad' Go to Quoted Post
I guess it really depends on what kind of parts you have to remodel. If your parts have complex surfaces, you probably need some kind of 3d scanner (like the one you mentioned). For simple mechanical parts, you're better off with stuff like calliper, height gauge and micrometer.


Most of them a rather complex. If they were simple shaped simple measurements would be enough.
murray  
#5 Posted : Friday, February 23, 2018 8:05:35 PM(UTC)
murray

Rank: Senior Member

Joined: 9/24/2014(UTC)
Posts: 373
Australia

Thanks: 8 times
Was thanked: 104 time(s) in 85 post(s)
I think photogrammetry would be suitable, because you know the "design intent" (as SW fanciers are fond of pontificating) of a machine, you know what it's intended to do. Fasteners and stock part sizes will often give you dimensions (how many pitches along a lead screw, how many teeth in a gear when you can find its diametral pitch, gear-train axle centres from the same detail), manufacturers specifications for centre height and distance-between-centres for lathes, etc. As well as that, "aesthetic" features like ball handles or fillets are more "add-on" on older machines, which give strong dimensional clues. You can take some manual measurements to give driving dimensions, and use photogrammetry to give you proportional relationships of the features for the machine overall. In older machines that I've seen, even when they're complex, their parts have been developed and added in fairly obviously linear sequence, and they have almost no freeform aesthetic adornment, everything is functional, or composed of analytical shapes, like a real-world implementation of constructional solid geometry, because that made things easier to produce.
ALBANO  
#6 Posted : Tuesday, February 27, 2018 9:25:44 AM(UTC)
ALBANO

Rank: Senior Member

Joined: 2/20/2007(UTC)
Posts: 302
Man
Germany

Thanks: 6 times
Was thanked: 28 time(s) in 15 post(s)
Hi Glicinus,

I use a 3D-arm with a saphir probe.
That gives very precise coordinates!

For reverse engineering I find it more suitable to take ONLY the coordinates I like to have (not 400.000 more :-).
And you can upgrade the arm with a 3D-Sanning probe.

That places all the scanned geometry in the exact place in space without having to scan the entire object (or big parts of it) and matching the points with mathematical algorithms.

Besides, I´m thinking of selling it because I shifted from reverse engineering to industrial design.
I get data of the underlying mechanics from my customers.
I have to try with the new version 10 of shark.
In older versions the arm was directly integrated in Shark (PC-Version)
I´m on MAC all the time :o)
UGMENTALCASE  
#7 Posted : Tuesday, February 27, 2018 12:49:18 PM(UTC)
UGMENTALCASE

Rank: Senior Member

Joined: 3/21/2017(UTC)
Posts: 955
Man
United Kingdom

Thanks: 46 times
Was thanked: 321 time(s) in 213 post(s)
What arm is it? Could you pm me details?

Cheers
Glicinus  
#8 Posted : Tuesday, July 2, 2019 2:55:48 AM(UTC)
Glicinus

Rank: Guest

Joined: 2/21/2018(UTC)
Posts: 6

Thanks: 1 times
Well. for this year and a half I had some (quite a lot actually) experience with this Spider 3d scanner. We decided not to buy it as we got the ability to rent the scanner. I must say it was the right decision. I can't complain Space Spider captures complex shapes really well (resolution and accuracy are way better than Eva, it helped me a lot. The advantage was that it works with Geomagic Control X which we have used and use now a lot. It's not a perfect software for design, but it helps to prepare 3d scan data for future engineering a lot. However for parts smaller than 5-6 cm Space Spider is not the right solution.
It can scan such parts, but the process is not easier and faster than traditional measurement methods. However Artec offered me a demonstration of new 3d scanner Artec Micro. I did a research on their site, seems this may be a solution for tiny machine parts. Unfortunately I didn't receive exact day when I'll be able to try this scanner, but I hope this will happen within a month. If I won't be in a heist I will share the results here. Or disappear for a year as I did last time :)

PS: about photogrammetry, it worked good with not so complex shapes. So We did give it a try and still use sometimes.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.