Creating a new implant library

npdynamite

npdynamite

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
262
Reaction score
0
Hello, hope everyone is doing well

I currently am trying to design a full mouth implant supported case on Straumann SRA's. I have Straumanns Variobase interfaces and I have Straumanns library's but I don't have their scan bodies for the SRA's, I only have ELOS scan bodies and another library that utilizes them. Both libraries are fully locked but the coordinates displayed in the preview of both libraries relate to the components the same.

I have built an additional library myself where I utilize all of the Straumann components alongside the ELOS scan bodies. When I configured the library this way it appears that everything is good, but I just wanted to ask if anybody else is doing something like this and if I should have any concerns. It gets old having to buy new scan bodies with every new library and I don't see why this shouldn't be feasible.
 
CoolHandLuke

CoolHandLuke

Idiot
Full Member
Messages
9,468
Solutions
1
Reaction score
1,411
perfectly feasible. just watch your rotational indexing and heights.
 
npdynamite

npdynamite

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
262
Reaction score
0
perfectly feasible. just watch your rotational indexing and heights.

Awesome, thank you!

I'm assuming that I can use the coordinates displayed in the control panels library "preview" to confirm that the rotational indexing and heights are the same on my new library as they were originally?
 
CoolHandLuke

CoolHandLuke

Idiot
Full Member
Messages
9,468
Solutions
1
Reaction score
1,411
yes, although there are others that work better or have better visualization of the mating parts. and yes even though you are using SRA/MUA type interfaces rotations are still important because of the nature of making models with these connections.
 
npdynamite

npdynamite

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
262
Reaction score
0
yes, although there are others that work better or have better visualization of the mating parts. and yes even though you are using SRA/MUA type interfaces rotations are still important because of the nature of making models with these connections.
are there any softwares that you could recommend? I have some experience with Blender, FreeCad, and Mesh Mixer
 
CoolHandLuke

CoolHandLuke

Idiot
Full Member
Messages
9,468
Solutions
1
Reaction score
1,411
you already have all the tools you require.
 
npdynamite

npdynamite

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
262
Reaction score
0
@CoolHandLuke , I finally went to mill what I had designed with my new library and got the message "Cannot generate the CAM output for Abutment # because "" Implant System is not allowed to be produced locally" Any idea what might be done to get around this? the only part of the implant system that it is saying can not be produced locally that I used is the scan body. I moved everything to their own new folder before building the library and also made sure the materials we use and our local manufacturing processes were enabled and selected on the case. I'm assuming there is some background information that is generating this message and after digging through the control panel a bit I wasn't finding a solution.

thanks
 
Affinity

Affinity

Well-Known Member
Full Member
Messages
6,325
Reaction score
1,062
Most implant libraries are locked by the manufacturer, ive never had much luck trying to unlock any of that info, but Id love to hear from someone who has!
 
npdynamite

npdynamite

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
262
Reaction score
0
just as an additional note, I'm using parts from the straumann SRA library and using the Elos 4.6 multi unit scan body from trucrowns library. The elos scan body seems to be the problem. If anyone is aware of a library that has the elos scan body for the the Straumann SRA 4.6 implant and is not locked, that would also likely fix my issue.
 
CoolHandLuke

CoolHandLuke

Idiot
Full Member
Messages
9,468
Solutions
1
Reaction score
1,411
1. nobody can produce any MUA/SRA locally with a USA based dongle for 3shape as this violates both copyright and the FDA's 510k policy. this is baked into the core code of 3shape. not something you can unlock.

2. are you producing a bar? you will need to enable bar production - which uses MUA connectors - and again depends on your region because of the built-in rules of 3shape. talk to your reseller about enabling bar production locally dongle side. simply having the bar module doesn't mean you will produce files for local manufacture. what it does mean is that you will be able to design a bar and send it somewhere.

3. never copy someone else's library, always create a new one from scratch. when you copy an existing library and just swap files or add scan bodies it still looks for original files. this is of paramount importance when trying to unlock a locked dme.
 
npdynamite

npdynamite

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
262
Reaction score
0
1. nobody can produce any MUA/SRA locally with a USA based dongle for 3shape as this violates both copyright and the FDA's 510k policy. this is baked into the core code of 3shape. not something you can unlock.

2. are you producing a bar? you will need to enable bar production - which uses MUA connectors - and again depends on your region because of the built-in rules of 3shape. talk to your reseller about enabling bar production locally dongle side. simply having the bar module doesn't mean you will produce files for local manufacture. what it does mean is that you will be able to design a bar and send it somewhere.

3. never copy someone else's library, always create a new one from scratch. when you copy an existing library and just swap files or add scan bodies it still looks for original files. this is of paramount importance when trying to unlock a locked dme.

1 & 2. I was not aware of this. (yes this is a us dongle) So we can not mill anything locally that uses an MUA/SRA connection? This seems silly seeing as you can mill a screw retained hybrid bridge, what is the difference? I am trying to design an implant supported zirconia bridge. The implants are Straumann SRA connections, so is there no way to produce this in house? I don't want to outsource our zirconia milling. (this is using MUA's directly, not utilizing 3shapes feature to add an mua abutment onto an already scanned in implant)

3. To clarify, I created a "new" library, but I populated it with .dcm's from pre-existing libraries that I compiled into one new folder and then pointed all the paths in the control panel to the new folder with the copied .dcm's of the implant parts. Do I need to build my own stl's and convert them to .dcm's to do this? Or do you mean don't literally copy the library within the control panel and then start making your swaps? Does Elos provide 3D models of their scan bodies for people who want to use them to create a library?

Thanks
 
CoolHandLuke

CoolHandLuke

Idiot
Full Member
Messages
9,468
Solutions
1
Reaction score
1,411
aha

what you'll need to do to get around this is reuse the SRA geometry to be an abutment so you can design an overstructure or superstructure, with the way its currently set up its likely you have it set to integrate the SRA surfaces as part of the bar - or worse if you have copied the dcm and reused it as-is then its not letting you because the file could be locked. easy way around it is to take the abutment interface file instead of the SRA itself. bit looser of fit but works. pay attention to screw heights.

for 3, yes i meant don't simply copy whats in the control panel, rename it and add new scan bodies. that's a bad idea. start a new library and populate it with copies (not originals) of the library in question. converted copies work best. mostly because this lets you see exactly which parts of the library are locked files (and will never work)

most of my work is with Medentika, Dess, Implant direct, Nobel, and a few others. Elos files are pretty straightforward and all copyable.

when you click through to the end of the 3shape implant wizard you will also see boxes pertaining to MUA and Bar options. ensure the correct ones are checked off.
 
npdynamite

npdynamite

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
262
Reaction score
0
aha

what you'll need to do to get around this is reuse the SRA geometry to be an abutment so you can design an overstructure or superstructure, with the way its currently set up its likely you have it set to integrate the SRA surfaces as part of the bar - or worse if you have copied the dcm and reused it as-is then its not letting you because the file could be locked. easy way around it is to take the abutment interface file instead of the SRA itself. bit looser of fit but works. pay attention to screw heights.

for 3, yes i meant don't simply copy whats in the control panel, rename it and add new scan bodies. that's a bad idea. start a new library and populate it with copies (not originals) of the library in question. converted copies work best. mostly because this lets you see exactly which parts of the library are locked files (and will never work)

most of my work is with Medentika, Dess, Implant direct, Nobel, and a few others. Elos files are pretty straightforward and all copyable.

when you click through to the end of the 3shape implant wizard you will also see boxes pertaining to MUA and Bar options. ensure the correct ones are checked off.

Cool, I'm going to dig into this more and see what I can do.

When you say converted copies I'm assuming this is meaning using 3shape to convert the files from .dcm to .stl? and if I'm correct if it won't convert then it's a locked file?

Thanks so much for all the help. I enjoy working on these types of problems and actually have the spare time right now to play around with it
 
CoolHandLuke

CoolHandLuke

Idiot
Full Member
Messages
9,468
Solutions
1
Reaction score
1,411
3shape won't convert dcm to stl unless you are meaning scan files or designed files. library files like implant parts get automatically converted to dcm format (irrespective of original format) once imported into the control panel. same with smile design library files.
 
npdynamite

npdynamite

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
262
Reaction score
0
3shape won't convert dcm to stl unless you are meaning scan files or designed files. library files like implant parts get automatically converted to dcm format (irrespective of original format) once imported into the control panel. same with smile design library files.
I think I'm confused on what you meant when you said "start a new library and populate it with copies (not originals) of the library in question. converted copies work best. " I was not certain what you meant by "converted copy"
 
CoolHandLuke

CoolHandLuke

Idiot
Full Member
Messages
9,468
Solutions
1
Reaction score
1,411
in dcm files, if you are working in conjunction with 3shape you may create a lock for the file; think of it like a second layer to the file.

what you can do to strip this away is to convert the dcm to stl

then, when you import the new stl to 3shape's implant library wizard your file will be in dcm format, as this is the only format that the system will register as "your" library. the importer creates that secondary layer of information as attributes: created by you.

all of this is for information entering3shape via the importer - but for information exiting 3shape through the export or f7 process for manufacturing, the internal dcm format is converted to any other manufacturing format you require (in the manufacturing options) if you select CADoutputRAWstl.dll you will receive STL data (barring proprietary dcm format locks like the ones used by locked manufacturers for things like titanium abutments)

in creating your own library you must overcome these data hurdles by initially converting all of the dcm files in the library to stl, because in so doing you will see which files in the library are copyproof.

alternately (but not what you desire) is to re-use the same library with added scan bodies; this will allow you to send the files to the same people but bypass the requirement to use the scan bodies from a new system that you would not have on hand. this means practically that you can add all the scan bodies from all the compatible systems and accept scans from any dentist and still operate on your desired platforms; i.e. you can accept an iTero scan with a Nobel scan body and manufacture in house.

now, why you cannot make this straumann bar is probably because the library was simply copied, the new scan bodies added, but nothing was changed; this violates the internal export functions of 3shape. you must literally convert all the library files to stl, add them back to a new library one by one, and bypass the adding of the SRA to the model (as that is a locked file) by swapping the abutment file for the abutment spacer file.

the way Straumann set the library up makes it so that you can't manufacture in house - on purpose. they want to be the ones making these all on 4's. you need to use a bit of engineering ingenuity to pull the ol switcharoo on them.
 
npdynamite

npdynamite

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
262
Reaction score
0
thank you for the info. That all makes sense to me but I'm now running into the seemingly basic problem of converting the .dcm's to .stl's. I know how to do this with scans, that's simple, but I can't find anything that will open the elos scan body .dcm I have including the 3shape viewer (no dongle error). (I've also viewed past threads on the subject)

I would like to continue pursuing this for my own knowledge and because I don't like to allow 3shape to beat me but I'm curious if you think this is a worth while pursuit or something where I am wasting my time?
 
npdynamite

npdynamite

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
262
Reaction score
0
yes, although there are others that work better or have better visualization of the mating parts. and yes even though you are using SRA/MUA type interfaces rotations are still important because of the nature of making models with these connections.

Ok, going back to this. I was able to get the file for the Elos scan body directly from their website. I built a new library using this instead and I can now output a cam file. I did notice though while the vertical dimensions are all good, it does look like the rotation is off. What would the negative results be of using a rotationally misaligned scan body in context of a MUA/SRA implant considering there is no actual indexing on the interface?
 
CoolHandLuke

CoolHandLuke

Idiot
Full Member
Messages
9,468
Solutions
1
Reaction score
1,411
misrotation would be bad for trying to work from any IOS, as the printed model's implant index would be wrong.
 
Top Bottom