• Scam Alert. Members are reminded to NOT send money to buy anything. Don't buy things remote and have it shipped - go get it yourself, pay in person, and take your equipment with you. Scammers have burned people on this forum. Urgency, secrecy, excuses, selling for friend, newish members, FUD, are RED FLAGS. A video conference call is not adequate assurance. Face to face interactions are required. Please report suspicions to the forum admins. Stay Safe - anyone can get scammed.

How do I make a Star Trek replicator?

ok @Matt-Aburg

I've seen different results on one 3D scanner, hobby type, the creality ferret pro 3d. It has anti shake tech to supposedly improve results. I've read an article and seen a video. In the video I am not especially impressed with the results. He gets a part that's good enough for his application but It's hardly a nice copy.


In another article https://the3dprinterbee.com/cr-scan-ferret-pro-review/
the author scans some 3D prints and makes pretty good copies of them.

So one is a nay and one is a yay I think.

But... I want to make copies of parts like in the youtube video which had poor results. I don't need to make copies of 3d printed figurines like in the article. Scanner specs claim some sort of accuracy like 0.05mm or 0.1mm but in the part video that does not seem to wash to me. All the detail in the part is lost and it's just kind of a mashed potato copy of the part. @Matt-Aburg can you please weigh in with your experience and explain what you can about the differences in results? Or anyone else of course who has experience with this tech.
 
Janger said:
ok @Matt-Aburg

I've seen different results on one 3D scanner, hobby type, the creality ferret pro 3d. It has anti shake tech to supposedly improve results. I've read an article and seen a video. In the video I am not especially impressed with the results. He gets a part that's good enough for his application but It's hardly a nice copy.


In another article https://the3dprinterbee.com/cr-scan-ferret-pro-review/
the author scans some 3D prints and makes pretty good copies of them.

So one is a nay and one is a yay I think.

But... I want to make copies of parts like in the youtube video which had poor results. I don't need to make copies of 3d printed figurines like in the article. Scanner specs claim some sort of accuracy like 0.05mm or 0.1mm but in the part video that does not seem to wash to me. All the detail in the part is lost and it's just kind of a mashed potato copy of the part. @Matt-Aburg can you please weigh in with your experience and explain what you can about the differences in results? Or anyone else of course who has experience with this tech.
Click to expand...
It is not just accuracy that is important. Resolution is very important especially on tiny parts like you show. I will give a sketch tomorrow that explains this better. Even if the accuracy is better, resolution is the distance between points. A point distance of 0.16 vs 0.05 is a big difference. accuracy of 0.1 is actually 0.004 inch.. so the error will compound bigtime. This is why I would not got with the Creality product (or any creality for that matter).. The best inexpensive choice is Revopoint. See charts below.. and new review..

Just so you know, I do not endorse either of the two product I mention below... These are simply not good enough to get reliable results and you get what you pay for...

www.creativebloq.com

The best 3D scanners

Create models from real life objects with best 3D scanners for games, AR and VR.
www.creativebloq.com www.creativebloq.com

Creality

1704854793065.png


Revopoint

1704855168209.png
 
Last edited:
Matt-Aburg said:
It is not just accuracy that is important. Resolution is very important especially on tiny parts like you show.
Click to expand...

This is a good point. It's the point I tried to make earlier about the difference between CMM and Scanning but Matt has explained it much better. Quality control can be done by selecting specific points, but replication of intricate parts requires high resolution. Usually scanning also requires a skilled operator to fill in the details when the scanning isn't perfect.
 
So far on the inexpensive side, Einstar wins the race in my opinion... You might think that 1K is not cheap, but it is on these things... Just remember that if you pay 2-500 for Revopoint, or Creality... they will end up never used, sitting somewhere getting dusty. If you want a tool, it just simply will cost more than 3-500.. I will get the sketch later or find a video to explain it..


 
I will have you know that I got my revopoint POP2, out just the other day (and blew the dust off the box). A friend broke a plastic piece on the short little tripod from his hockey radar unit, so I told him he could borrow the one from my scanner while I remade the broken part in Aluminium. So yeah, the scanner "helped" my in replicating this small part :D. Kinda lol
 
Last edited:
Dan Dubeau said:
I will have you know that I got my revopoint POP2, out just the other day (and blew the dust off the box). A friend broke a plastic piece on the short little tripod from his hockey radar unit, so I told him he could borrow the one from my scanner while I remade the broken part in Aluminium. So yeah, the scanner helped my in replicating this small part :D. Kinda lol
Click to expand...
show picture of part and scan-data, then product please
 
I didn't scan the part, I just measured and modeled it the old fashioned way. I only used the scanner for the tripod loaner.....

For stuff like this, a low end consumer scanner (like my pop2) isn't worth trying. Faster and more accurate with a set of calipers, and eyecrometer.
 
I just drew this simple part to show the deviation you could expect with a accuracy or 0.1 mm and resolution of 0.5mm. Actual part in pink, top curves are plus 0.1mm with a 0.5mm rad showing to represent a point cloud spacing of 0.5mm. Bottom curve is the negative tolerance. In reality, the curve could wander all over the place between positive and negative.... Not sure if this helps to show what I mean. Also, on the consumer grade cameras, what kind of lens, electronics, software would you expect from 200 vs 1000? What I can say about Einscan, because I had a different scanner from them (my first was a Pro 2X plus). is that they have been in business for a while. There software, has improved dramatically since when I owned the Pro 2X plus.

Now, comparing Einscan to Creaform or Artec software... there is no comparison.. professional camera and software vs inexpensive consumer grade product....

Next issue after getting a scan in is cleaning, filling holes, decimating.. then you need to redraw clean prismatic geometry from this... No magic button ......

1704894531476.webp
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top