Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
My Secret To Perfectly Fitting 3D Prints
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 08. 2024
- Unlock the secret to perfectly fitting 3D prints with my little trick! Dive into precision modeling in Blender, learn how to leverage scale reference, and transform any photo with just a ruler into accurate design. So if your a maker or hobbyist, this tutorial is your gateway to flawless 3D printing results.
This video is proudly sponsored by PCBway! : www.pcbway.com/
- BLENDER MAKER CRASH COURSE: bit.ly/Blender...
MAKER TALES ACADEMY
- - Learn Blender Fast Through 3D Print Design Paid Course - - -
academy.makert...
Useful Links:
Crystal Clearance Tower : than.gs/m/362850
MAKER TALES ACADEMY
- - Learn Blender Fast Through 3D Print Design Paid Course - - -
academy.makert...
Free Course | Learn Blender 2.9+/3.0 through precision modelling playlist:
• Learn Blender 3.1/2.9+...
If you have any questions please leave them in the comments below and I'll do my best to get back to them as soon as I can or even better join the discord and I'll be sure to see it.
💬 Maker Tales Discord Server
/ discord
🛠 Subscribe To Keep Making:
bit.ly/sub2MT
📨 Share with a friend:
• My Secret To Perfectly...
📺 Watch My Most Recent Upload:
bit.ly/recentMT
Other Places Where you can find me:
Patreon: / makertales
Instagram: / makertales
Twitter: / themakertales
Facebook: / makertales
This makes sense for layouts, curves, complex shapes. But for the diameters of those cylinders, hole distances, etc. I think it's still better to use a caliper.
Yeah this is good for hard to measure features but something like the example would be easy to do with callipers.
Took me a long time to figure out the "as far away as possible" photo trick... this makes a huge difference
If you have a scanner, you don't only get a perfectly orthographic photo, you also get a fixed scale. So if you can, use a flatbed scanner.
I have done this many times. I assumed everyone does this, I don't know why.
Unfortunately this does not work with all flatbed scanner. Some scanner can scan the ceiling (can get dark) others already struggle with less than an cm.
@@GMLSX You can put a piece of white paper or card stock above the object, in place of the scanner top.
@@noeqplease and that is supposed to accomplish what exactly?
@@GMLSXthat blocks the view of the ceiling and helps exposure.
A major cheat to copying in a pre-existing item is to remember that any patterns are probably symmetical and dimensions are often the usual sorts of numbers that designers are wont to pull out of the air. So in something like this, the bolt holes will be on a fixed grid (ie the lines between them will be parallel and perpendicular to each other) and probably at multiples of 5mm apart. In the same vein, corner fillets are often 5mm or 10mm radius. While I've used the photo method, I've also drawn up all sorts of things to match something with nothing more than a ruler.
In Fusion 360 you can calibrate that imported image - you choose two points and enter what distance this is. Not aware of other CAD software, but in Fusion it's very simple. For me making a simple model (as shown in the video) is faster with calipers, but your method is great while working with odd shapes, curves etc.
You can do that with FreeCAD as well. It is really handy with things like scans of traced curves
Useful stuff! Some thoughts:
1. When initially measuring, make sure to do so in both Imperial *AND* Metric. (If measuring in Imperial and the last two decimal digits is close to a multiple of 25, that is a good sign that the part was designed with Imperial measurements.)
2. Don't waste time and materials when testing fits. A thin plate on a raft with holes in it--as he used here--is all you need to check initial fitting.
3. Unless you are doing a one-off, don't bother fiddling with your phone to scan the part in. Instead, pick up a cheap-as-chips scanner or all-in-one from your local classifieds. You won't have to worry about zooming/etc, and everything will be perfectly aligned.
4. Print a precisely-sized rectangle larger than what you need to scan, cut a rough hole in the center big enough for the object--without touching the rectangle, of course, then lay both on the scanner, facing downwards. You can then accurately scale the image using the high-contrast rectangle instead of the object, itself.
Cheers!
Mostly good tips, though regarding #3, note that the part used in the example would not have laid flat on a scanner surface. A scanner can be a great option under the right circumstances, but evaluate the part first before choosing a particular imaging method.
@@klasodeth True; a scanner doesn't cover all cases. (Where an object is *mostly* flat, a simple jig/wedge/etc. can prop it up.)
Very interesting. Maybe you can shoot your ruler at the same time as the object, that should simplify the scaling.
This is how I do it and it makes it so much easier to calibrate the image.
I've done that a few times with really good results.
After that, you can (in most programs) also cut out the ruler image and spin/realign it if you need to get other measurements.
other really easy workflow; check for manufacturer documentation. Especially for technical elements, like stepper motors, sliprings, etc. They usually have a technical drawing somewhere with the exact dimensions on it for everything.
A flatbed scanner also works well if the face is pretty flat and doesn't have an axis pointing out the bottom.
Unfortunately, the example in this video isn't really suitable for flatbed scanners because of that shaft sticking out of the motor. Other objects might be more suitable. As with any technique, YMMV. (Your Mileage May Vary)
0.2 mm is the difference between press fit and loose fit. I use this technique for low-accuracy work. However, when precision is needed I break out the calipers
Great idea on using background compression. For the photo, I’d suggest using a cutting mat that has either a 1cm or 1/4 inch grid on it. Place the object on it and you have the X and Y scale right there.
Be careful with this though, if the objects surface is off the grid's surface, you'll still have a potential parallax error that equates to the height vs the distance your perspective was at, so that initial largest-feature precision-measurement is still a good thing to do for sanity.
For fitting round parts I usually print a small wall 5mm high and try it from there. The repeat accuracy of these printers is actually quite good.
I've done something very similar using a flatbed scanner for parts that can be scanned. If you only care about a flat part on the end, the scanner will scan the portion of interest with 2400 dpi resolution and the portion above the scanner bed will be fuzzy and out of focus. The scanned image can be opened in GIMP, which has tools that can measure any dimensions you like with sub-pixel accuracy. A scanner and GIMP is a very inexpensive optical measuring system, similar to having a microscope with built-in micrometer.
I use a scanner and GIMP for determining the hardness of a material using the Brinell method. A hard ball is pressed into the surface using a fixed force. The diameter of the spherical impression indicates the hardness of the material. I scan these small impressions at 2400 dpi and GIMP can make six measurements of the diameter at different angles, with sub-pixel accuracy. I average the measurements. It's far more accurate than using an optical scale on a pocket magnifier.
Tip: you can default transforms like position and rotation by pressing alt + transform key (like "S" for example, resetting the scale to 1). This helps save a little time while dragging the image in as a plane; you can set it to be in the world center and lay flat using alt + "G" and alt + "R".
Hey just a wee thank you for the orthographic photo trick, never would've considered doing it - take a gold star sticker for your jotter ⭐
Nice trick for programs like blender. In oneshape or other cad software this works aswell. But i do prefer just measuring and inserting those numbers in my cad software.
Been using CAD sketcher for about two weeks and my tiny ruler and ive been able to make some boxes for my ESP cam. The switches and Lids anll fit perfectly. I usually go about .25mm-.5mm bigger or smaller when im fitting components into things and when im doing lids and stuff I just do everything tight with no wiggle room and so far everything has come out nice.
I feel dumb asking but Im a blender n00b. At 2:30 you took the cylinder, bisected it, and extruded half into an oblong shape. For the life of me, I've tried figuring this out. How is that done?
You enter edit mode add the shape, and press B for box select after you add the circle or cylinder, or any shape, he eyeballed the halfway point but you can zoom in and see which verts are selected. It's easier to do this if you are aligned with the gird and go into an orthographic mode '5' on the numpad, '7' for top plane view iirc.
Thank you !!
This works. Needed to make a riser for a pet food water bowl and the orthographic photo method did the trick. Thank you!
this is genius and the delivery is perfect. Thanks a ton
wow really nice video, thank you!
I usually prefer working with OpenSCAD instead of blender. But a similar workflow is possible! Import the photo into inkscape, create a simple SVG with outlines of your part (to scale) and then import that into OpenSCAD as a 2D primitive. Boom!
I use OpenSCAD too! Thanks for the import photo tip; I hadn’t thought of that, but should allow you to use the same, very creative, technique.
Brilliant video
I got your precision gears and bolts add on. Totally stoked!
it's amazing - very simple and easy way. thank you
Good video, again. I already do this, well, except for the tolerance tower test, but you explained it easily for others which I am sure will help more people.
That clearance tower is a really good idea - I'm gonna use it. Although the video is a great example of being able to make items without calipers - if you're really into designing things, digital calipers aren't really that expensive, and they're worth it. Even the two decimal digit accurate ones aren't a bad price.
Also - if you're not getting round measurements with metric when you're measuring an item (especially if it's made in the USA), try the US customary units. Most CAD software and slicing software can accept either unit of measurement and do the conversion for you.
Thank you thank you thank you!
Good techniques overall, I've found in my prints 0.25mm is a good off-set for tight fitting resin parts, and .35mm is a good offset for fdm.
Yes, I've found that depending on the surface angles within the parts, .25 to .3 millimeters is best with my Bowden type extruder.
I think that the best workflow cames from combining the calipers along with this procedure, so you can quickly have a pretty decent starting point and later you can fine tune the measurements with the calipers. I personally have issues when measuring the distance from the mounting hole to either edge, for example.
If you do not have calipers around I would also suggest to take a photo of the ruler itself or a known size object (Maybe a screw) along with the "scanned" object, so you can scale things propperly. Better than nothing I guess.
If the part is small enough you can put it over a piece of paper and use the photo to scan apps that will correct the perspective 👍🏻
Why didn't I ever think about that?!? 😮 I use Office Lens all the time for my documents 🤦♀️😅
Fusion 360 makes this easy, take a photo of the object with a ruler in the picture, when you inport the picture into fusion there is an option to calibrate, you just click two points on the ruler and tell fusion how far apart they are, usually 10mm works for me
my biggest issue with 3D resin printers is WARPING, especially when printing thin parts. does not seem to matter what orientation or settings i use. at some point during the print, cleaning or curing the part warps. i finally gave up on 3D printing some things and resorted to CNC milling machinable wax, making rubber molds of the wax models, then pressure casting plastic parts. this typically results in perfect parts every time
Realy hands on example and a good one!
My recommendation that’s worked for me is set the ruler next to the part in that pic, draw a 10-20 mm line in your design app and align it with ruler and adjust until it matches
This happened across my feed by accident. I'm looking to get into 3d modelling, and already I see so many mistakes to avoid.
Nice vid, would love to see this with resin and a before and after curing tolerance with different resins.
I was very impressed with the 3d render in the thumbnail until I scrolled back up and read the title XD
Super useful video really! thanks
Great tip, thanks.
Good video. I would trust calipers and arithmetics and would use SketchUp myself, but this has chance to live. Like, every second tutorial about making car in blender starts from importing a picture.
I’ve had a lot of success just phtoscanning the object and modeling something around it in blender you have to use mesh room though because it’s the highest detail
Using Blender = one new subscriber 😁
Something that's not very clear on that tolerance test print, is the ring you slide up is as wide, if not wider than a size segmant, so once it stops, where do you take the reading from? The top of the ring? The middle of the ring? The bottom? Thanks
I love that this comment section is full of just as many great ideas as the video. What a great community!
The most important thing for such parts is the correct wall order setting in the slicer. Default settings are made for decoration stuff.
To clarify: Print outer walls first when doing mechanical parts where tolerance is important. Also calibrating your printer/filament is very important!
That looks far easier than taking all the measurements like I stupidly did.
To ease scaling just toss your calipers or even a ruler next to your part when you take the picture. The larger the scale the more accurate it will be
this sounds easy and then you remember blender takes literal hundreds of hours to even understand how to turn a cube into a shape
I used the same technique for a long time.
How did you take a photo of the camera thats taking a photo of you?
As someone who used to do similar kind of thing (ie, creating mating parts to another parts), what's wrong with using just a caliper? It is just as quick. Not convoluted at all. Well, you won't get sub 0.1mm tolerance accuracy. Good enough for most purposes.
so how
do you do this process that has curves surface? like a
pipe and a sphere. ?
Oh wow you're printing white marble without warping. Teach me senpai.
Do u have blender lessons? I struggle to use it
The way to look at it: it isn't the camera being not accurate enough. It depends on your eyes and how close you zoom in. I bet that if you took the time to really make sure those lines where correct to your picture, you would be a lot closer. I once seen someone throw that ruler in the picture. Use the ruler to set the scale the same way you did with measuring the part and making the box. Then make the part, pretty much, the same way you did it.
Because I am incapable of watching the whole video before making comments... As for the "building in the printers tolerance." Why not just make the printer shrink or enlarge things by that amount? The slicers have that option. Best practice, always assume metric or inch are whole numbers. If it don't make sense, something is wrong. Maybe that round part isn't straight? Maybe you are getting a skewed reading because the pin is tapered. All in all. I really like the push for people to model this way. I think 3d printers make more everyday engineering easy and more obtainable. Creates self value and is a very handy thing to be able to do.
I personally prefer to work with Fusion 360, but the workflow is pretty much the same. Still, good tips though. Got a new subscriber.
Thumbs up for the effort in the camera works dang
Ooo interesting
Not printing yet, so maybe thats a stupid question, but what about shrinkage (of different materials)?
That's something you can tune-in with "flow rate" or "scale" or "offset" depending on the part and plastic and how accurate it needs to be,, everyone has there own method-.
@@Mindless_One Using flow rate to offset that is a bad practice, because you are going to affect the actual volume of material that exits the nozzle, which can affect things like layer adhesion, surface finish, bridging, and other factors. You should always compensate for material shrinkage by scaling or dimensioning your part to accommodate it.
@@ydoucare55 That's one of the reasons i'm use Cura 5.4.0 at the moment,,, you have full control over all flowrate for each extrusion action ( innerwall/outerwall/ infill/ surface/ toplayers etc,,, it can be a very powerful tool to get high quality surface/wall finish without effecting the parts strength (think of it like a coat of paint)-... with adjustable jerk and acceleration on each extrusion action the combination of actions is pretty bloody awesome,,, not like the old days when we had very very very limit options-.. don't drink the youtubers kool-aid these option are there for a reason,,,
This was covered by @Clough42 with his example being an ABS part. The shrinkage of the plastic threw off the location of mounting holes so he showed how to measure what you got to calculate against what you want for a scaling factor in the slicer. It's an older video (currently 4 years old), so to help anyone find it the video title is "How to 3D Print Dimensionally Accurate Parts". I only thought of this because I discovered the video only a couple days ago.
STL?
with a set of calipers I could knock that out in 5 minutes in fusion or solidworks
But that doesn't get clicks
I am using my flat bed scanner if not possible my phone
For a body like this, I think the caliper is faster e more precise
hi stefano, what do you think about all gubments drawing a line around you(Antarctic Treaty) and saying you are not allowed to leave? If you don't know what I mean, read my about tab.
@@flat-earther Sorry if I sounded rude in my comment, I didn't mean to be. I just wanted to say that in my opinion it is much quicker to use a measuring instrument than to do all the operations you describe in the video.
I honestly didn't understand what you meant about your comment, sorry again
Please share the stl file🎉🎉
I use this method very often.
I will be over the moon with happiness if my customers start using the same method.
And they will finally stop sending photos from the knee taken with a Fish eye.
First time I see blender being used for "cadding"
1:19 Just make a photo of the object with a ruler to the side of it.
Use a phone holder (resembles a tabletop lamp frame, sells online for cheap, used for videomaking) an set it flat via a level/clinometer app, find the borders of the camera viewing angle (mark it with a sticky tape) find the center of rectangular field of view by drawing two diagonals (they intersect in the center). This is where you put your object, orthogonal view is provided.
Printing that clearance tower is vital. Once cooled, filaments made of a variety of materials shrink differently. Even the same filaments differ in shrinkage in summer or winter. Any advice to use a generic 'loose' or 'tight' fit alone - is simply wrong. And a caliper is still best.
You forgot to use mirror modifier. There's no point in creating unnecessary cylinders when the object is symmetrical.
"Calipers, m***ker!!! Do you know it?"
haha laughs in Fusion 360 - scale
That's not a secret dude - it's built into every cad program.
Modelling based on an image should be the last resort, especially for simple shapes like rectangles and circles.
As a general rule of thumb you should (in that order):
1. Try to get a CAD model of the part directly from the manufacturer or from someone who modelled it already (and always check the dimensions);
2. Model based on dimensions drawings;
3. Model based on the dimensions you measure with a caliper or a ruler (you need to have the part).
Taking an image (or a scan) is best used on organic or complex shapes
Blender 😆
0,2mm thats a bad printer. I always aim for precision to 0,01mm. I never use tolerance in my designs and it always fits as intended.
Good grief, so much easier just to measure everything with calipers than faffing around with not-quite-orthogonal photos.
Now do it using Plasticity.
You did it wrong. That was not a private room, it had a see-through door. No wonder it didn't work.
this video was hard to watch! please tell me you were not using the default cube just for my sanity.
cad designer cringe lol
What awful advice - much easier to find dimensions online for the motor and copying into proper CAD software, not Blender. As others have said, use calipers. Measure twice, cut/print once.
deja vu with way more blah blah... boooooring
I use the hell out of these motors… and always wish I had access to gear attachments etc…
If you calibrate all axes correctly including the extruder. And get a orthographic picture than you can get 0.01 accurate.If you just get 0.1 accuracy then You should reconsider your calibration on your 3D printer🤣
Why not use a 3d scanner? I would think a 3d scanner would produce a 3d model in stl format so you can print it, no?