Jump to content
Ultimaker Community of 3D Printing Experts
Sign in to follow this  
chrisr

3D scanners

Recommended Posts

Recently found myself looking at 3D scanners suitable for small (inanimate) objects < 0.25 meters square max. Looking for good resolution of ~ 0.1mm or better?

I've no idea of the pros and cons of the various scanning techniques... but two seem quite interesting so far -

Has anyone any practical experience of either of these ?

The David SL-2 scanner:

https://ssl.david-vision-systems.de/shop/product_info.php/language/en/info/p129_DAVID-Structured-Light-Scanner-SLS-2.html/XTCsid/j6i0cfcfc2guet93uaceh7sia4

or the Next Engine system:

http://www.nextengine.com/

If so, how did you get along with them? Any thoughts, opinions most welcome! :-)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no experience with these two scanners. NextEngine looks pretty cool if it's no fake advertising.

I have a 3D Sense scanner and it's no good for small objects, i like how you can compare scans from different scanners on the website. It's not that expensive

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have access to a David scanner. It is a pity that the comparison did not include the David, because they would be similar to each other I guess. All the other scanner are in a different class, in price and quality.

It looks like the Next uses a laser line, and the David uses a beamer pattern to gain the objects surface.

The size is the scanned object for the David goes up to something like 75 cm per scan, could be a bit more. This is limited by the power of the beamer pattern for a bigger distance.

The rotating platform of the Next looks good.

Quality looks the same, I scanned a key and printed it. After a little adjusting, it worked!

2014 08 26 15.42.51

2014 08 26 20.53.29

2014 08 26 21.02.46

2014 09 19 13.28.19

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't that impressed with the nextengine scanner. It has the main disadvantage of being a laser scanner, which are quite slow. It does have the advantage of a moving platform, which makes merging clouds a lot easier.

Personally, I like the david scanner best, mostly because of speed & quality.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have access to a David scanner. It is a pity that the comparison did not include the David, because they would be similar to each other I guess. All the other scanner are in a different class, in price and quality.

It looks like the Next uses a laser line, and the David uses a beamer pattern to gain the objects surface.

The size is the scanned object for the David goes up to something like 75 cm per scan, could be a bit more. This is limited by the power of the beamer pattern for a bigger distance.

The rotating platform of the Next looks good.

Quality looks the same, I scanned a key and printed it. After a little adjusting, it worked!

 

 

 

 

 

That's pretty impressive, thanks for posting the photos up PeggyB. :smile: From what you say I'm guessing you're pretty happy with the David system? Are you using the 1 version or the 2 ?

I'm getting the impression the support for the David system is quite good.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@UltiArjan,

that's what I intended to do as well, so I will be interested in your pratical experience...

But I postponed the order because their software only supports Windows right now, Mac support is announced for the first quarter 2015.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a structure scanner. It's a Kinect without wire, and some cool i-pad apps like ItSeez3D... I'm quite impressed with the results. Although I hope in a year or two a scanner will be there with higher resolution.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two weeks ago I went to the offices of Fuel 3D (in UK) to look at their “scanner” and take some test “scans” away for further analysis. Having failed miserably with a Kinect type scan system, I found the F3D very easy to use. I got a perfect “scan” on my 2nd try which no doubt would have been the 1st try if I had put the “scanner” on a tripod.

The resolution looks very high, raw resolution is circa 500,000 to 700,000 facets.

The software, which includes automatic stitching of multiple meshes, still has some way to go but seemed useable to me. It lets you change the resolution before creating a mesh file, which I did for my tests, reducing the resolution to 80,000 facets. You can also crop the “scan” photograph before creating the file.

I use the term “scan” because F3D is not a scanner, it is a stereographic camera backed up by sophisticated software. So for many things it is OK but if you, say, want a scan of a head then you will need to take at least 5 “scans” and then stitch the meshes together, which with their automated stitching function should be very easy. I have tried this in Meshlab but singularly failed.

An important test for me was of a foot print made in casting material; in effect instead of taking a scan of the exterior of something, you are scanning the interior. On first look this looks very good, although I do need to do a dimensional check to ascertain the accuracy; but it certainly picked up the surface detail within the cast.

I hope to do my detailed analysis next week and will try to post some pics.

My guestimate, based on comments, was that right now they are shipping to their Kickstarter funders. They should be shipping to their retail outlets in 4th quarter. So if you wanted one now you might be able to get one via retail if they have not all been pre-ordered; otherwise I guess you are looking at 1st quarter next year.

Personally I would be waiting until next year to give the time to get the software debugged. Oh one comment was that though undecided it may be that the automatic mesh stitching would ship with the Pro version.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not 'just' a stereoscopic camera. It combines the data gained by stereoscopic matching with the data from photometric stereo (which uses light sources from different points to estimate the orientation of a surface).

In that regard, it is a scanner as every single 3D scanner needs to take multiple 'images' in order to get a full 3D model.

Meshlab should be able to do the stitching manually, but it is a rather fickle program and crashes a lot. A reasonable alternative is CloudCompare.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh sure you are "right" and it does more than just match against the photometric stereo data (which was all descriptively covered by my term "sophisticated software" :) ) My point was that it operates as a camera not a scanner. YOU have to take separate pictures to get a 360 degree all around view. Each of these pictures has to be setup. For each picture you have to hold a measurement card against the section of the object being pictured and line up your camera so that it focuses on the card and validates the distance between the lens to the object before a shot can be fired. It is my understanding that this part of the process will not be required in the future following a specific upgrade release of the software.

The end result is of course the same.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup you are right on Meshlab too, except for me it did not crash a lot, it crashed every time, to a point where my patience ran out. To be fair to F3D their automated stitching software did not crash once but it had a problem stitching two of the meshes together. The demonstrator did feel that if he took one of the pictures again that would resolve the problem but he also made it clear that the software was still under development, i.e. not really ready for release although the Kickstarter people would be getting it. My personal view was that it failed the stitching test but if I waited until next year it would probably be fine.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If meshlab crashes every time, it might be because it crashes if some data is included in the pointcloud. Try opening it with cloudcompare, save it with it (this removes some of the data) and open it again with meshlab.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Our picks

    • How to 3D print with reinforced engineering materials
      Ultimaker is hosting a webinar where we explain how you can achieve and maintain a high print success rate using these new reinforced engineering materials. Learn from Ultimaker's Product Manager of Materials and top chemical engineer Bart van As how you can take your 3D printing to that next level.
      • 0 replies
    • "Back To The Future" using Generative Design & Investment Casting
      Designing for light-weight parts is becoming more important, and I’m a firm believer in the need to produce lighter weight, less over-engineered parts for the future. This is for sustainability reasons because we need to be using less raw materials and, in things like transportation, it impacts the energy usage of the product during it’s service life.
        • Like
      • 12 replies
×

Important Information

Welcome to the Ultimaker Community of 3D printing experts. Visit the following links to read more about our Terms of Use or our Privacy Policy. Thank you!