Commit 58c11c32 authored by Árni Björnsson's avatar Árni Björnsson
Browse files

Updated week06

parent 3e0232ef
Pipeline #306237 passed with stage
in 46 seconds
......@@ -4,10 +4,19 @@
The 3D printers in the lab are probably the tools I've spent the most time on since I started working here. When I started, we had two Ultimaker 2+. They are pretty old and worn and we spent a long time trying to get them to work properly.
One of the things I did, was to install [OctoPrint](https://octoprint.org/) on a spare computer, hoping to get more milage out of them. OctoPrint turned out to be quite the nice tool for us, but we wound up buying a new Prusa i3 MK3S+, what a machine!
One of the things I did, was to install [OctoPrint](https://octoprint.org/) on a spare computer, hoping to get more milage out of them. OctoPrint turned out to be quite the nice tool for us, but we wound up buying a new [Prusa i3 MK3S+](https://www.prusa3d.com/category/original-prusa-i3-mk3s/), what a machine!
Nice features of this printer include:
- Filament sensor to detect filament run out or is inserted
- Power loss recovery
- Automatic bed leveling
- Very detailed and fun instructions, if you select the DIY assembly kit from the maker, which saves you a few bucks.
We own the multi-material addon but we have yet to install it. We made a dry box for filaments and attached above the printer. When we have the multi-material addon installed, we can easily route all materials to the printer.
These two models are the only ones I have personal experience with. The comparison between old and worn printers vs a brand new one is not really fair, but given the price of a new Prusa`($$)` vs a new updated Ultimaker`($$$$)`, I don't need think much about that decision.
## Design rules
I already know our new printer is way more capable than the older ones, with the self-adjusting print bed being a major factor. We have on display a few test prints of design rules from when my colleague was in Fab Academy. It's time for a new set of prints!
......@@ -149,7 +158,23 @@ I wanted to keep the design simple since time is limited and I may also try to w
I started poking around Fusion360 and Youtube but kind of found the ways I found a bit convoluted. So, I found a way to make use of the tools we used in Week 3.
I found [this code](https://github.com/KitWallace/openscad/blob/master/dodecahedron.scad) to create a dodecahedron using OpenSCAD.
I found [this code](https://github.com/KitWallace/openscad/blob/master/dodecahedron.scad) to create a dodecahedron using OpenSCAD, included below:
module box(size) {
cube([2*size, 2*size, size], center = true);
}
module dodecahedron(size) {
dihedral = 116.565;
intersection(){
box(size);
intersection_for(i=[1:5]) {
rotate([dihedral, 0, 360 / 5 * i]) box(size);
}
}
}
dodecahedron(20);
Running it resulted in this nice dodecahedron!
......@@ -373,11 +398,13 @@ To clean the mesh up, I use Edit and the `Plane cut` feature. I select the flat
<figcaption>Cleaned up</figcaption>
</figure>
### 2.5D vs 3D
### 2.5D vs 3D
Now, I must mention that this is not really 3D scanning, it's 2.5D scanning. Since the needle scanner only scans from the top, it misses all features that are below another surface. The fixture on the WiFi access point has these little tabs that secure it to the mount when you turn it. These show up as solid blocks in the mesh.
Without spending too much time on it now, it's trivial work to create the wall/ceiling mount with this model in hand.
As we can see on the picture above, the model is pretty jaggered. So, based on the amount of time and effort spent on this type of scanning, I personally would pursue other ways of modeling what is needed, at least in this case.
But we do see the necessary features of the mount needed and could, create the wall/ceiling mount with this model in hand.
| Scan files |
| ---------- |
......
Supports Markdown
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment