Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Articles
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lab talk, the good, the bad, and the ugly
Equipment
Accuracy, and how we define it.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="CoolHandLuke" data-source="post: 304170" data-attributes="member: 4850"><p>I could spend a day talking about this. </p><p></p><p>Itero was innovative, back in the day. It was an exceptional leap forward in technology because it was a cerec alternative that cost 1/10th the price, and let you control who made your restos without the hassle of doing it yourself. Very much like what rkm's lab setup is. You just scan and send and wait and pay. Since then it has ceased to be innovative. This philosophy is apparent in almost every ios player now.</p><p></p><p>Scientifically speaking it relies on photogrammetry to stitch pics together to create topography. This has not been innovative since the early 80's. But the hardware became cheaper and software became smarter as the years went on. Now that same technology is 1/100th its price and 1000x more accurate. Drone cams now are able to take a series of photos and create a digital map accurate to 1mm from 1km away. </p><p></p><p>So why.does it need us to stop accuracy down to 2 decimal places of the camera and stitching is so good? Well while the tech can conceivably infer precision to 4 decimal points, the data files are 300x larger by necessity. Nobody cam work on the fly cad with files that big except nvidia themselves on supercomputers woth ridiculous cards.</p><p></p><p>Until our cad products are developed woth 4th decimal place accuracy, it is by and large useless.</p><p></p><p>Then we face the dilemma of actually turning that design into cam. While individual motors, guides and rails, lr ball screws can acheive single micron precision it is in controlled environments. Dustless, loadless. You will look at lasers to be the machining solution of the future. Laser ablation technology will get us the 3rd and 4th decimal place, but not for a while because it only works up to a certain depth, and only on certain materials.</p><p></p><p>As to whose data is most dense/accurate at the moment is a topic you should probably talk to mr delorean about. I think he had a thing about testing scanners output some time ago.</p><p></p><p>But yeah could talk about this for hours.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="CoolHandLuke, post: 304170, member: 4850"] I could spend a day talking about this. Itero was innovative, back in the day. It was an exceptional leap forward in technology because it was a cerec alternative that cost 1/10th the price, and let you control who made your restos without the hassle of doing it yourself. Very much like what rkm's lab setup is. You just scan and send and wait and pay. Since then it has ceased to be innovative. This philosophy is apparent in almost every ios player now. Scientifically speaking it relies on photogrammetry to stitch pics together to create topography. This has not been innovative since the early 80's. But the hardware became cheaper and software became smarter as the years went on. Now that same technology is 1/100th its price and 1000x more accurate. Drone cams now are able to take a series of photos and create a digital map accurate to 1mm from 1km away. So why.does it need us to stop accuracy down to 2 decimal places of the camera and stitching is so good? Well while the tech can conceivably infer precision to 4 decimal points, the data files are 300x larger by necessity. Nobody cam work on the fly cad with files that big except nvidia themselves on supercomputers woth ridiculous cards. Until our cad products are developed woth 4th decimal place accuracy, it is by and large useless. Then we face the dilemma of actually turning that design into cam. While individual motors, guides and rails, lr ball screws can acheive single micron precision it is in controlled environments. Dustless, loadless. You will look at lasers to be the machining solution of the future. Laser ablation technology will get us the 3rd and 4th decimal place, but not for a while because it only works up to a certain depth, and only on certain materials. As to whose data is most dense/accurate at the moment is a topic you should probably talk to mr delorean about. I think he had a thing about testing scanners output some time ago. But yeah could talk about this for hours. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Who do we work for?
Post reply
Forums
Lab talk, the good, the bad, and the ugly
Equipment
Accuracy, and how we define it.
Top
Bottom