It's quite interesting to see how your mesh re-engineering strategy works. We don't tend to go down that route, we tend to pick finite points in space and then construct curves from which the mesh is derived. For example, if I was to go and copy someone else's turbine blade, I would get the root correct, pick a few points up the blade and do the trailing and leading edges and work out the intersections. Then get the intermediate points from there. However I can see the benefit in here for the cooling holes.
Similar here, same strategy. All the detail isn't really needed. Just take a few known linear dimensions and then construct the curves manually. The scan is just for checking really. Not needed in this, such a simple shape but always good to demonstrate on a simple task first.
Edges are always the hardest points to get. I would use a CMM and pick points station-wise and butt-line down each blade then extrude a spline. From there you can use your favourite surfacing software to loft the splines to create a Step file. For cases of dimensional mesh comparison on a mountain bike, I would suggest measuring point to point distance by finding a hole centre from features on the bike and then measuring the distance in CAD to compare your two methods. Now if you want to measure the deviation of that rock chip without having any CAD reference I'm your man!
our design students have been experimenting with 3d scanning models and spaces with various apps....as you say the limits of what gets picked up (transparent or shiny is chaos) and how to handle the output into something useful has a long way to go - we also try to engage with the glitches as a positive since we're not looking at engineering accuracy but creative spatiality
We use 3D scanning spray on shiny objects, it removes the shine and wipes off when you are done. If you want to print those big parts in one part give me a message.
I work in neuroscience and for many reasons, we need a really accurate head shape. I remember using 1k USD Structure scanner attached to the iPad, and for stationary objects with rich and contrasting background it works really nice. As we were working with less than stationary objects, we had to end up splashing on professional 20k scanner with laser, strobe and what have you, built in. The increase in quality and ease of aquisition is night and day. I know that groups who need less precision with coregistation (head to 3d model) are satisfied with what comes out of the iPhone app. The conclusion is, if you need exact precision, it'll cost you. As an addendum: To clean-up the mesh I use Open3D python wrapper. Really powerful if your issues require automated fixing. For manual grind, blender is superior to OpenMesh, as it's clunky as hell. Has it's uses though.
The big problem with 3D scanners is the quality of the gyroscope/accelerometer. When you use the iPad you are probably using the iPad's mems chip. While in the 20K sensor they have a much higher quality sensor. The difference is in this metric called the bias stability. When the sensor measures the acceleration and angular rate it converts these measurements into an orientation so the model can determine the pictures location in space. Any drift in the measurements will end up getting integrated and the computed orientation will drift away from the actual orientation.
@@PeakTorque 3d is another option, but for those who don't have the time and money there are alternatives. Personally I would go the 3d route but not everyone is going to buy one. But I'm fully aware how cyclists love to waste money on new tech, so I get it. Another way would be to make a mold from the old frame guard itself.
🎨 Elevate your style with @AlphaDTFPrint's precision cuts! What's your favorite aspect of the DTF printing process? Let's discuss! #PrecisionCuts #AlphaDTFPrint
Looks great. For shiny surfaces the blue lasers are a major differentiator. I think thats the handy scan 307? I use a Zeiss T-Scan hawk 2 that works well, have custom printed some parts for the cannondale Jekyll.
I would actually love a smaller one of these for my XC bike. My local trails are covered with loose rocks and every time I hear that loud crack from my front wheel kicking up a stone into the BB area I wonder if I'm going to need a new frame. Nice work here.
A couple things we use in the movie biz to kill unwanted reflections could be useful in scanning. Dulling spray, which you find at art supply stores, or spray temporary hair color. We often use Streaks n Tips brand here in the states. Both rinse off easily with water.
I saw that photogrammetry rigs use cross-polarized light sources and camera filters to block out all direct reflections. Curious to see that 3d scanners don't use a similar set up
Just got out of a college project where we used different measuring devices (cmm,etc) and i was blown away by our Romer arm. First by it's price (retails for around 80k) and then by the flexibility and accuracy of the arm (laser scan+touch probe). Here they mainly use it for 3d scanning biathlon stocks. So I guess if you want to make it simple, be friend with a uni teacher that have access to the lab 😂
hell yea Easy composities, i like their yt channel. 3d scanners and just print, almost there. I know of 3d printer channels that cover scanners and try it. cool stuff. not quite for everyday use. good to see that over here.
He basically created a new business. Everybody needs these for gravel bikes. Personally I'd create some carbon aero discs that magnetically join on each side of the wheel for my Hunt wheels
Out of curiosity, why did you choose not to just print the protector? Something with a bit of elasticity, like nylon, might work well for this application and provide a bit of a "cushioning" effect? CF sure looks hotter though :)
@@global_nomad. But it's not like this is a structural part... Even a few layers of bubble wrap, though hardly "strong", would to some extent protect the frame from impact damage (not in a very practical way admittedly). It's possible to print quite impact resistant parts with the right material, though layer adhesion can be hard to get right.
@@bloopasonic because it would look shite. This spaced with a thick layer of adhesive velcro is a great way to make a super light part that can absorb a fair bit of energy
Put an origin or mate connector in two known places, like a known width or point on the downtube, and then mate them in align them in an assembly. Pretty messy, the only way to do it really.
I want to make my own seatpost, because my yoeleo R12 frame doesn’t have one and it isn’t round. Do you think this method is usuable for making a mould of the seatpost?
Coincidentally, I was just thinking about the feasibility of scanning an Easton EC70 Aero handlebar toward printing clamps for a couple handlebar bar configurations. As expected the CAD part of the process is where I’d likely struggle. I guess folks must be working with AI programming to help with this part of the process.
I work with 3D scanners and starting to introduce reverse engineering in my industry. So interesting but so expensive! Love to get involved in this kind of stuff too
I wanna know if I can make a bike frame mold if I don't have a cnc, because making a carbon frame isn't super hard you just need the fiber and some epoxy, anyone try 3d printing using a light foamy material and put the fibers on top of the prints instead of using a negative mold?
If you don't have a cnc, you still have hands and a dremel😁 The greatest problem is that cure temperature of most resins is just a bit below glass transition temperature of printable plastics. So whatever foam or shell with infill you have printed out is going to deform later on. While in negative molds there is enough material to back up the distorted layer, with thin mandrels it would work out poorly. And there is extra weight you have to carry inside the frame afterwards.
I’m surprised to hear the talk of constructing from photos. I’d have thought LiDAR sensors on the phone would be perfect for 3D scanning like this. Or is that what it uses and it was just lost in translation?
@@PeakTorque Maybe just Lifting some marketing claims in different components or just explaining the simple physics and mechanisms behind dirfferent MTB components. I think there is a lot of stuff which nobody really knows what it does and how it actually works. For example whats aktuelly the difference between a good and a bad brake? Because in my head its just leaver mechanics but why cant every manufacture get it right. Why a bitepoints feeling different in different brands. Or is it a friction thing and cheap brakes cant generate enogh of it. Also what could be interesting, explaining different Designs of rear suspension and how it developed over the years and the Pros and cons. Maybe also referring on different Design philosophys of different Brands.
I watched because I was curious about the "professional" scanner you used; you can spray items with hairspray or other products to temporarily get rid of gloss surfaces. There is a much faster easier method for those relatively basic shapes and products as shown, just modify or mock up a new one and make a mold off of the frame / part and work from there, no digital is necessary. The scan that has gone through meshlab is a mess, and there is just additional work in the digital space no matter which way you put it for non production stuff of this simplicity anyway. I work in 3d as a professional and see too many tech obsessed types use it unnecessarily to faf around, using scanners, printers, and cad, wasting a lot of time and money where and when it isn't necessary for any reason other than if you actually like adding on time by staring at a screen and pressing buttons to get the same result, or impress people who don't know about making things or physical digital production.
I would have thought it would have been easier to just make the mould using the downtube of the bike itself
Not sure if you watched the video or title but the video is about exploring 3d scanning so people may learn something new...
@@PeakTorque I watched the whole thing. Long time fan.
Then you wouldn't learn anything.
It's quite interesting to see how your mesh re-engineering strategy works. We don't tend to go down that route, we tend to pick finite points in space and then construct curves from which the mesh is derived. For example, if I was to go and copy someone else's turbine blade, I would get the root correct, pick a few points up the blade and do the trailing and leading edges and work out the intersections. Then get the intermediate points from there. However I can see the benefit in here for the cooling holes.
Turbine blade. Pfft. We all know you work in a fish and chip shop. 😉
Similar here, same strategy. All the detail isn't really needed. Just take a few known linear dimensions and then construct the curves manually. The scan is just for checking really. Not needed in this, such a simple shape but always good to demonstrate on a simple task first.
@Hambini sounds like b-spline modeling / sketching 4 curves then sweeping the area to fill the mesh.
Edges are always the hardest points to get. I would use a CMM and pick points station-wise and butt-line down each blade then extrude a spline. From there you can use your favourite surfacing software to loft the splines to create a Step file. For cases of dimensional mesh comparison on a mountain bike, I would suggest measuring point to point distance by finding a hole centre from features on the bike and then measuring the distance in CAD to compare your two methods. Now if you want to measure the deviation of that rock chip without having any CAD reference I'm your man!
our design students have been experimenting with 3d scanning models and spaces with various apps....as you say the limits of what gets picked up (transparent or shiny is chaos) and how to handle the output into something useful has a long way to go - we also try to engage with the glitches as a positive since we're not looking at engineering accuracy but creative spatiality
We use 3D scanning spray on shiny objects, it removes the shine and wipes off when you are done. If you want to print those big parts in one part give me a message.
I work in neuroscience and for many reasons, we need a really accurate head shape. I remember using 1k USD Structure scanner attached to the iPad, and for stationary objects with rich and contrasting background it works really nice. As we were working with less than stationary objects, we had to end up splashing on professional 20k scanner with laser, strobe and what have you, built in. The increase in quality and ease of aquisition is night and day. I know that groups who need less precision with coregistation (head to 3d model) are satisfied with what comes out of the iPhone app. The conclusion is, if you need exact precision, it'll cost you.
As an addendum:
To clean-up the mesh I use Open3D python wrapper. Really powerful if your issues require automated fixing. For manual grind, blender is superior to OpenMesh, as it's clunky as hell. Has it's uses though.
The big problem with 3D scanners is the quality of the gyroscope/accelerometer. When you use the iPad you are probably using the iPad's mems chip. While in the 20K sensor they have a much higher quality sensor. The difference is in this metric called the bias stability. When the sensor measures the acceleration and angular rate it converts these measurements into an orientation so the model can determine the pictures location in space. Any drift in the measurements will end up getting integrated and the computed orientation will drift away from the actual orientation.
The frame itself is a perfect plug for a one off.
Not sure if you watched the video but it was about exploring 3d scanning and making a video for you guys to learn something
@@PeakTorque 3d is another option, but for those who don't have the time and money there are alternatives. Personally I would go the 3d route but not everyone is going to buy one. But I'm fully aware how cyclists love to waste money on new tech, so I get it. Another way would be to make a mold from the old frame guard itself.
🎨 Elevate your style with @AlphaDTFPrint's precision cuts! What's your favorite aspect of the DTF printing process? Let's discuss! #PrecisionCuts #AlphaDTFPrint
Looks great. For shiny surfaces the blue lasers are a major differentiator. I think thats the handy scan 307? I use a Zeiss T-Scan hawk 2 that works well, have custom printed some parts for the cannondale Jekyll.
I would actually love a smaller one of these for my XC bike. My local trails are covered with loose rocks and every time I hear that loud crack from my front wheel kicking up a stone into the BB area I wonder if I'm going to need a new frame. Nice work here.
A couple things we use in the movie biz to kill unwanted reflections could be useful in scanning. Dulling spray, which you find at art supply stores, or spray temporary hair color. We often use Streaks n Tips brand here in the states. Both rinse off easily with water.
I saw that photogrammetry rigs use cross-polarized light sources and camera filters to block out all direct reflections.
Curious to see that 3d scanners don't use a similar set up
Superfastmatt (car CZcamsr) uses a mix of talcum powder, isopropyl alcohol and a spray bottle. Makes for great measurements
What about resin molding? (polyurethane) (maybe taking the bike to print the shape with clay would be less techie)
Just got out of a college project where we used different measuring devices (cmm,etc) and i was blown away by our Romer arm. First by it's price (retails for around 80k) and then by the flexibility and accuracy of the arm (laser scan+touch probe). Here they mainly use it for 3d scanning biathlon stocks. So I guess if you want to make it simple, be friend with a uni teacher that have access to the lab 😂
hell yea Easy composities, i like their yt channel. 3d scanners and just print, almost there. I know of 3d printer channels that cover scanners and try it. cool stuff. not quite for everyday use. good to see that over here.
Would be interesting to see the results from a phone with a LIdar sensor as well.
I have tried this before but didn't feel like the results were that great and not very easy to work with.
He basically created a new business. Everybody needs these for gravel bikes. Personally I'd create some carbon aero discs that magnetically join on each side of the wheel for my Hunt wheels
When you say everybody you mean carbon frame owners
I would say that Easy composites have the best DIY carbon systems on the current market
7:34
P H A L L U S
he's checking his pen is working.
Elves phallus
@@Hambini that's the Hambini comment I was looking for!
@@PeakTorque Frame still in development.
Out of curiosity, why did you choose not to just print the protector? Something with a bit of elasticity, like nylon, might work well for this application and provide a bit of a "cushioning" effect?
CF sure looks hotter though :)
I'm using Kydex for my downtube protectors :D
3d printed objects are not typically strong in the way you need them to be compared with the moulded carbon.....
@@global_nomad. But it's not like this is a structural part... Even a few layers of bubble wrap, though hardly "strong", would to some extent protect the frame from impact damage (not in a very practical way admittedly). It's possible to print quite impact resistant parts with the right material, though layer adhesion can be hard to get right.
@@bloopasonic because it would look shite. This spaced with a thick layer of adhesive velcro is a great way to make a super light part that can absorb a fair bit of energy
Great video. How did you align the meshes in your CAD program?
Put an origin or mate connector in two known places, like a known width or point on the downtube, and then mate them in align them in an assembly. Pretty messy, the only way to do it really.
I want to make my own seatpost, because my yoeleo R12 frame doesn’t have one and it isn’t round. Do you think this method is usuable for making a mould of the seatpost?
What are Fox factory forks in the background for?
New bike build 🥹
Coincidentally, I was just thinking about the feasibility of scanning an Easton EC70 Aero handlebar toward printing clamps for a couple handlebar bar configurations. As expected the CAD part of the process is where I’d likely struggle. I guess folks must be working with AI programming to help with this part of the process.
I work with 3D scanners and starting to introduce reverse engineering in my industry. So interesting but so expensive!
Love to get involved in this kind of stuff too
I wanna know if I can make a bike frame mold if I don't have a cnc, because making a carbon frame isn't super hard you just need the fiber and some epoxy, anyone try 3d printing using a light foamy material and put the fibers on top of the prints instead of using a negative mold?
If you don't have a cnc, you still have hands and a dremel😁
The greatest problem is that cure temperature of most resins is just a bit below glass transition temperature of printable plastics. So whatever foam or shell with infill you have printed out is going to deform later on. While in negative molds there is enough material to back up the distorted layer, with thin mandrels it would work out poorly.
And there is extra weight you have to carry inside the frame afterwards.
The fancier iPhones have a LiDAR in and a few apps claim to be able to use this to build models. Any idea how this compares to the photogrammetry?
It’s way worse unfortunately
Can confirm the difficult and also most timeconsuming part starts after scanning with postprocessing. 😅
This seems excessive when you could just use the bike frame as the mould
I’m surprised to hear the talk of constructing from photos. I’d have thought LiDAR sensors on the phone would be perfect for 3D scanning like this.
Or is that what it uses and it was just lost in translation?
I dont think he's using an iPhone
Would you make the video about the cube? Why did you get it etc
I'l do a bike check on it soon!
I would love to see some MTB content.
Same, what do you want to see? Most of my viewers are anxious roadies :)
@@PeakTorque
Maybe just Lifting some marketing claims in different components or just explaining the simple physics and mechanisms behind dirfferent MTB components. I think there is a lot of stuff which nobody really knows what it does and how it actually works.
For example whats aktuelly the difference between a good and a bad brake? Because in my head its just leaver mechanics but why cant every manufacture get it right. Why a bitepoints feeling different in different brands. Or is it a friction thing and cheap brakes cant generate enogh of it.
Also what could be interesting, explaining different Designs of rear suspension and how it developed over the years and the Pros and cons. Maybe also referring on different Design philosophys of different Brands.
I watched because I was curious about the "professional" scanner you used; you can spray items with hairspray or other products to temporarily get rid of gloss surfaces.
There is a much faster easier method for those relatively basic shapes and products as shown, just modify or mock up a new one and make a mold off of the frame / part and work from there, no digital is necessary. The scan that has gone through meshlab is a mess, and there is just additional work in the digital space no matter which way you put it for non production stuff of this simplicity anyway. I work in 3d as a professional and see too many tech obsessed types use it unnecessarily to faf around, using scanners, printers, and cad, wasting a lot of time and money where and when it isn't necessary for any reason other than if you actually like adding on time by staring at a screen and pressing buttons to get the same result, or impress people who don't know about making things or physical digital production.
Nice video
How about if you use an iPhone? They have built in Lidar
Didn't realize PT is a Sony Xperia user.
Legit.
Meanwhile pro World Cup downhillers are gluing lead plates to the bottom of their frames.
But why make it out of carbon? It's not the most impact-resistant material for sure
PT maybe thinks it looks cooler than kevlar?
Had a lot of spare fabric lying around
@@PeakTorque probably the only valid reason 😀
whut?