coachmann Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Apologies if this has been posted before.... http://www.youtube.c...be_gdata_player Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigwelsh Posted July 11, 2011 Share Posted July 11, 2011 Apologies if this has been posted before.... http://www.youtube.c...be_gdata_player Not sure why they decided to use different design data for the printed wrench instead of using the scanned data. Slightly obvious that the two were a bit different in the end. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted July 11, 2011 Share Posted July 11, 2011 How did the scanner know there was a spindle inside the moving parts of the wrench? Can one scan a pre-selector gearbox and expect it to be fully working...? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbedford Posted July 11, 2011 Share Posted July 11, 2011 How did the scanner know there was a spindle inside the moving parts of the wrench? It didn't. A scan will give a set of points [a point cloud] which have to be manipulated to form the sufaces of the object scanned. It's probable that all the moving parts worked on separately, if only to give them the correct clearances to enable them to be built without fusing to each other. Can one scan a pre-selector gearbox and expect it to be fully working...? You could scan the components of your gear box, assemble them in CAD and then build it, but you would have to run it for a week filled with toothpaste to polish the mating surfaces on the gear teeth........ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Thanks Bill. So it looks like the Youtube video was a gross simplification, or a downright goddam lie. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tebee Posted July 12, 2011 Author Share Posted July 12, 2011 My guess would be, rather than tidying up the scanned image, they drew it again from scratch in a cad package - it would be a much easier that way ! I looked at some 2-d scan converted to cad files and there was a lot of dross in these, though it's probable the conversion software has got better since then ( six years ago). I think they were using a bit of journalistic licence to show what is possible rather than what they actually did. Tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigwelsh Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 My guess would be, rather than tidying up the scanned image, they drew it again from scratch in a cad package - it would be a much easier that way ! Tom They clearly did redraw it as the copy doesn't look much like the original apart from it being another wrench! The adjuster has a different amount of turns and shape, the depression in the handle casting is a different shape and there is a metal loop on the end rather than a hole in the handle. Definitely artistic license used which makes it look a bit fake when it would be possible to have fixed a scan of the original. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tebee Posted July 25, 2011 Author Share Posted July 25, 2011 The presenter has now put a response on youtube to the criticisms of that video - and they did fake it ! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yt8ZZGFkFc&feature=player_embedded Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.