Posted by on Monday, August 15, 2011 in Uncategorized
Gnome and Gnome

Gnome and Gnome

There is no doubt Tony Buser has definitely done more for the 3D printing community than anyone else when it comes to advancing gnome duplication and teleportation technology.  However, I’m convinced that his SpinScan open source software and hadware has a larger potential besides assisting in the controversial practice of gnome cloning. 1  Tony hasn’t finalized the materials list, but the final project would probably involve a decent web camera with good low light performance2 , a cheap laser3 , a stepper driver, a stepper motor, an arduino, a few bearings, threaded rod, and some nuts and bolts.  The whole lot would set you back around $200 and significantly less if you can scavenge a few parts.

So, if you could scan and print anything, what would it be?4

Spinscan by tbuser

Spinscan by tbuser

Error - could not find Thing 10730.
  1. I mean, the anti-gnome-stem-cell lobby is just insane! []
  2. Perhaps around $100 []
  3. He got a $4 laser from eBay []
  4. But, perhaps a better question is…  what are you waiting for?! []
Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 5 comments

5 Comments so far

  • Las
    August 15, 2011 at 6:13 pm

    This is incredible, I would scan everything in my house!

  • Gnomocopier « adafruit industries blog
    August 16, 2011 at 12:01 am

    […] Gnomocopier @ MakerBot Industries. The scanner looks really neat. Filed under: random — by adafruit, posted August 16, 2011 at 12:00 am Comments (0) […]

  • Tony Buser
    August 16, 2011 at 12:11 am

    I love that this is tagged “gnome apocalypse”

    • MakerBlock
      August 16, 2011 at 7:48 am

      @Tony: 🙂 I thought it only fitting since rapidly replicated gnomes could easily create a green-goo problem if allowed to clone themselves unchecked.

  • Jen'n'David
    January 5, 2012 at 9:07 pm

    This concept release CopyLefted(C) 2012 by Jen & David Razler, allowing free distribution for non-profit use only, or low-level profit through parts assemblies created through it or kits allowing duplication. If you’re planning to make a fantastic amount of cash for the builder, either through use in production or production of devices. Make BIG money off it and you’d better contact us firstOK, an idea that *should* work if you happen to have either a very expensive DSLR camera or old-fashioned 1-degree electronic rangefinder.

    As we’ve gotten into the thing-making community, we’ve been more than disappointed at the quality of work considered “acceptable”, either as scanner or machine output – why we’re starting with a rebuilt inherited Cupcake (as soon as the print head arrives) and planning on something with a 3x3x3′ print space (minimum) with the best bearings and “perfect” rods we can find, with big steppers possibly geared to make operating in 1/8th step, operating in 1/32nd step. (I know, dream on, get a laser and either powder or liquid photomonomer, right?)

    The problem on the input side can be solved with borrowed photo hardware designed to give you the exact distance between the object and a specific point on the photosensor. Run the camera on Z axis from base to top of object, taking in as many points as you need (the metadata output of the camera is what we’re after, not the image at all – throw away all data but “distance to nearest object” and store. Roll the object a tiny amount along the z-access with a well-controlled turntable,Do the same thing in reverse, until all 360 degrees by height recorded.

    Pitch the camera 90 degrees, moving it 45 degrees along X and 45 degrees along y (OK, if it was to the “right” of the object, now it is in “back” of it) and run the turntable 360 degrees more, preventing the problem of the “coffee cup with solid handle” problem – (or eliminate the turntable entirely, and take many, many sets of x/y scans – a turntable should cut an overnight run down to 6 hrs.)

    Now you face the problem of the SOLID coffee cup. Yaw (if I’ve been getting my x/y/z rotation names right) the camera so the camera is now pointed “down” at the object. Don’t bother with the turntable for this one. You are going to have to do a full x/y scan of the upper surface, and possibly an x/y scan of the object inverted, using the thinnest possible skeleton of sprues to handle support both in the printer and on the scanner.

    If you have followed Claude Shannon’s law, that information to be transmitted accurately, must be transmitted at 2x the frequency of information, (for instance, a 1,400 point cubed object takes at least 2,800 points cubed to describe to the printer, in addition to the problem of anything but a flat bottom (unless we could suspend the hypothetical object in a ball the camera was free to move around – forget it if gravity’s present) you have enough images to now build at full accuracy – cheap out the point count and you’re doing for the data what MP3 does for music, using a very lossy compression system that might mess things up in the end – a lot of data, but, like I said, we’re looking for perfect resolution available from the camera(i.e. a Nikon D300 with a “Microphoto” lens /comparable quality distance scanner) so we can perfectly replicate the shape, without finding a hollow part filled in, or a major problem with the otherwise “ihidden” side, without inverting the piece.

    A possible, but still costly alternative is to get ahold of a laser powerful enough *not* to damage the surface of your model, but capable of reflecting back encoded data (simple timed square waves should do) not directly to the source of light, but through a very long coil of fiberoptics through which light effectively “crawls”, scanning and recording the time delay with some expensive pulse detectors/timing equipment, the same theory used in “optical compass” systems. Its still going to mean a LOT of scan-crawl-scan work to get a perfect job, but think of the results.

    OK, who has an easier way?


Leave your comment


xhtml: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


What can we help you with today?
I want to chat with Sales.
I have a question about an existing order.
I have a technical question about my device.
Existing Orders
For faster service, enter your order number
(found in your confirmation e-mail)