Category Archives: 3d

18 April 3D printer dag

Op Zaterdag 18 April is er vanaf 14:00 3D printer dag. Heb je zelf een 3D printer of wil je er in de toekomst eentje bouwen of aanschaffen dan ben je van harte welkom om te komen en te praten met mensen uit de community.

Op deze dag kun je :

  • Met gelijkgestemde praten over je ervaringen en kennis van 3D printers en print technieken.
  • Je 3D printer afbouwen / afstellen (als je mee heb meegedaan met bouwweekend, geef dit bij aanmelding aan.)
  • Je eigen 3D printer laten zien (svp aanmelding ivm ruimte)
  • Mogelijkheden van FabLab Enschede ervaren.
  • Mensen spreken uit 3D hubs Enschede netwerk.
  • Kennis maken met ‘The Element’ van PRINTR, oplossing om 3D printen erg makkelijk te maken (slicen, printen, stl fixen, etc).

Aanmelden kan via email naar bestuur of via deze webform.

Voor meer informatie zie onze wiki

Sense 3D Scanner

Let’s say you want to 3D print a scale model of that box of tissues on your coffee table because you want to commemorate being sick last week. You can do that. We can do that. Yes, Milwaukee Makerspace can now scan 3D objects, thanks to our friends at 3D Systems who sent us this lovely Sense 3D Scanner.

Sense 3D Scanner

When you launch the software, it will ask if you want to scan a person, or an object. (I would have scanned a person for the first test, but everyone was sleeping at 6am.)

Sense 3D Scanner

If you choose object, it will then ask you what size the object is. I chose ‘Small Object’ for the tissue box.

Sense 3D Scanner

When the scanner sees the object it will highlight it. You can then click the start button to start scanning. I ended up holding the scanner and my laptop in my hands and walking around the table looking at the screen, trying to keep the object centered.

Sense 3D Scanner

Here’s our object being scanned. It takes a little bit of practice to walk around with the scanner and laptop. Whenever I’ve seen people get scanned (their heads anyway) they usually sit in a swivel chair and spin while the scanner stays stationary. We may want to try building a turn-table for small objects.

Sense 3D Scanner

If the tracking gets lost, you need to try to realign things… or start over. It doesn’t take very long to do a scan, so starting over isn’t the worst thing in the world.

Sense 3D Scanner

Here’s our scan! We now have a 3D model of a tissue box. Exciting!

Sense 3D Scanner

You may need to do a bit of editing. The most important thing is to ‘solidify’ the model. It needs to be ‘water-tight’ or manifold before you can 3D print it. Solidify fills in the holes.

Sense 3D Scanner

You can also erase things. The erase tools lets you draw around things with a red line, which it will then delete.

Sense 3D Scanner

There are a few enhancements you can perform if needed… otherwise, it’s time to save it!

Sense 3D Scanner

The files are saved as ‘Polygon File Format’, with a ‘.ply’ extension. Typically I use STL files, so we’ll convert to that next.

Sense 3D Scanner

MeshLab can easily import a PLY file and export it as an STL.

Sense 3D Scanner

I like to use Pleasant 3D to view and resize STL models. (It’s Mac OS X only, but there are options for other operating systems.)

Sense 3D Scanner

After making our model a bit more reasonably sized, it’s ready to print! Who wants a hard plastic tissue to blow their nose with!?

Converting 3D models into physical objects through papercraft (3Dモデルをペーパークラフトで作ってみよう)

12/07/2014 16:00
12/07/2014 18:00
12/07/2014 16:00
12/07/2014 18:00
Event Type: 
Workshop

In this workshop you will learn how to convert 3D digital models into physical objects made of craft paper.

Instructors: 
Daniel
Pricing
Member Price: 
0
Non-Member Price: 
1000

Where’s Waldo-the-Datasheet?

Howdy gang,

Once in a while, an interesting, random project shows up at 23b's doorstep.  This week's project-du-jour is a rotary encoder / stepper motor drive.  Without getting too bogged down in the details, what we need to do here is read the position from an encoder, and then drive a stepper motor at 110% the speed of the encoder.  This is meant for pulling extruded vinyl out of a larger machine, while keeping an appropriate tension on the extrusion. 

The focus of this post isn't the extrusion puller itself, this is more about the quest I took to find out where the Mil Spec callouts were for this particular connector, so we can hook up test leads while we develop the rest of the project.

The first step was checking the product data sheet.  A "Sick Stegman DGS25 rotary encoder" yielded ample Google results, with the proper data sheet.  Cool, that was easy. 

Another bit of googling for the connector type lead me to the Digikey and Mouser website where it has the proper connector listed (I think), and it's nearly $20.  Screw that, I'll make something here at the shop (why else do we have all these tools?)  After the 3D printer was down for most of the summer due to my dumb ass putting ancient support material through the extruder, I find myself champing at the bit for every opportunity to make a customized, one off piece for any project in the general vicinity.  The printer is an incredibly useful tool, when it works. 
Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
After examining the case a little better, there is confirmation on the physical connector that it is nearly the same part number, calling out CR3102E18-1P-1.  The numbering convention is essentially the same, but why the CR spec instead of MS? 

After a bit more smashing my face on the keyboard, I learn that the CR and MS specifications are essentially the same scheme.  CR spec came from Cannon Electronics in the 50's, and it looks like the Mil Spec connectors were developed a decade prior.  Perhaps there's some overlap?  Perhaps it's similar to the 7400 / 5400 families of ICs.

Checking Digikey for the part number, I find myself puzzled, as the part number only seems to be for the male receptacle of the plug.  What the hell is the mating part called?   After some more face-smashing and context-grokking, I find "Oh, it's a MS/CR3106-18-1, of course that was easy to figure out".  NOT!

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?


Different Mil Spec, different connector callout.  I guess that makes sense. Now where the hell is the blueprint? 

Just looking for the -3102 or -3106 part number didn't yield anything incredibly fruitful at first.  I did find a few diagrams showing pin location, but nothing with dimensional values.  Should be no big deal, perhaps I can figure this out.  Time to break out the calipers and Solidworks. 

After getting to know my Stratasys 3D printer over the last few months, I know that it's for the most part dimensionally accurate (maybe a hair on the small side)  Sure, I could run calibrations until I'm blue in the face, but that won't help too much.  The printer operates in open loop mode, meaning that it doesn't get any positional feedback to make on-the-fly adjustments to the print head location.  Translation - even if I program something at 1.000" exactly, it may come out a tiny bit bigger (1.003") or smaller (.997"), depending on a few factors, mostly the positional tolerance of the machine itself.  I'm satisfied I can program this part to a tolerance that will be acceptable to fit.  Usually, I give loose-fitting portions a +/- .005" tolerance (depending on direction of interference).  Tight fits usually have a single sided tolerance of .002", and we have even successfully produced accurate interference fit parts. 

There's a neat feature in Solidworks where you can superimpose an image on top of your model, so you can draft features based on an imported image.  "Sketch Picture" is the command you'd use, and here's what I did.  I opened up a sketch on the back face of the nearly-finished connector plug, resized the image, and simply drafted new lines on top of the image until they matched.  Mostly.




Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?One thing I've learned while using Solidworks over the last few years, combined on top of my experience fabricating and machining parts, is that if something doesn't look right, it probably isn't right.  With ample training, your brain can become a finely-tuned difference engine, instantly recognizing small changes in familiar objects, without needing to intellectualize what the change is.  The warning alarm becomes a subconscious manifestation screaming into your Neocortex.

These Mil Specifications are quite good about part fitment and mating.  Something immediately struck me as odd while drafting this using my image file.  According to the superimposed image, the holes aren't precisely centered on the face, nor are they parallel, or even exactly aligned with one another.  I didn't think of this as a huge problem, hoping that the generous amount of space around the pins would more than make up for any dimensional inaccuracies of my part.  Take a close look at the centerlines of the part, versus the centerlines of the circles.  It's all wonky and offset, which is what I should have expected using a JPG as a reference. 



I printed the part, eagerly burning a little bit of time for the print to complete.  After realizing I am surrounded by assholes, I returned to Mr. Printer, lovingly nestled in between Mr. Coffee and Mr. Compressor.  An excited, anticipatory removal from the machine only led to my disappointment.  In this case, close enough wasn't going to cut it.  The pins were offset too far, something was wrong with my design. 

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
Shit, it doesn't fit all the way

Dammit.  

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
you can see a few of the pins barely peeking out

Back to the good ol' drawing board.

So what went wrong?  A quick glance down the holes, and you can see that the pin spacing wasn't quite accurate enough to get us a decent fitment: the plug is jamming on the pin diameter.  Since I gave up on finding the exact dimensions early on, looks like I'll have to dig around on the internet to find the exact specifications for this particular connector.  More Googling. 

As it turns out, there isn't any one specific drawing on the 3106 connector.  Rather, it lives as a subset of the byzantine MIL-STD-1651,where there's a breakdown of all variety of round connectors.  266 pages of connectors, not ordered in any specific way.  Even when searching for the term "18-1", I got close, but not close enough.  Turns out, the X in 18-X gives a variation on the part, usually a rotational value for the pins, and there's umpteen different varieties of rotation, and not even with the same pin population!  

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?

DAMMIT, this last one is close, but rotated 90* off. 

FINALLY, after manually scanning each page of the document (really only about 20 minutes of work), I found the correct specification. 

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?

Strange, even though the pin population is the same as the last spec (18-24), the spacing is just off enough where it wouldn't match, even with a rotation.  Time to update the model with the correct information. 



Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
how about a googly eyed connector?

Close wasn't close enough.  The change in hole location seems to reflect the skew in my first part.  My brain processed the resulting linear offset accurately without needing a measurement.  Now if only my brain could be calibrated for more useful things, like where I leave my keys every day...

A quick revision to the hole locations, and off to the printer.  But wait, things can't be that easy, can they?  Of course not. 

One of the complications I've run across with the 3D printer is incomplete layer slicing. 

Just like reading toolpaths for CNC machines, when slicing a 3D model in Catalyst, it gives a preview of the toolpath before the print, which provides a quick and robust method to diagnose the print quality before finding out the hard way.  Look for erratic motions in the toolpath, or strange insertions of support material.  In this case, we saw both. 

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
STL file imported into Catalyst

The red lines indicate model material, and the white lines indicate soluble support, typically inserted if there are any overhangs to the model, building up a support network from the bottom up.  Since there weren't any programmed overhangs, why is there support here?

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
After slicing.  Notice the support material in the middle of the part.  This is bad, something is wrong.
Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
Top view of the same part.  What's with the hole contours? 

Checking out the top view of the toolpath, you can see how some of the holes are artifacted and incongruous with the contours we programmed in Solidworks.  What happened? 

My first clue is the hole size, and the spacing that requires.  These features are getting pretty small, and the spacing between the holes is getting thinner and thinner.  Even though the finest level of print is .010" layers, that doesn't mean that the plastic extrusion is exactly that size.  The extrusion head prints layers that are substantially thicker than they are tall, nearly .020" wide.  This can cause problems for interpreting smaller dimensions, as well as the fill pattern between thin walls.  In this case, Catalyst changed the programmed contours of the circles to now have a bit of cutaway, probably to accommodate for the XY size of the extruded plastic.  While these changes would be minute, since we're dealing with small parts and tight tolerances in the first place, allowing these changes to be made by Catalyst would at best produce a part that doesn't fit correctly.  At worst, it may have messed up the entire print by inserting support material where none is intended - I've even seen whole layers of support inserted in the middle of a print, effectively ruining the model half-way through.

After a few revisions to the part (making the hole size slightly smaller, so the wall thickness can be larger), I was able to find some dimensional values that would happily process in Catalyst.


Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
Much better, Aziz

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
Notice the holes look right, now?



 So how did the part turn out, after all this trouble?  Perfectly. 


Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?

This is a much more satisfying result.  The printed parts fit precisely, as long as they were designed precisely.  Not everything works on the first shot, but success the second time around isn't a bad consolation prize.   


Where’s Waldo-the-Datasheet?

Howdy gang,

Once in a while, an interesting, random project shows up at 23b's doorstep.  This week's project-du-jour is a rotary encoder / stepper motor drive.  Without getting too bogged down in the details, what we need to do here is read the position from an encoder, and then drive a stepper motor at 110% the speed of the encoder.  This is meant for pulling extruded vinyl out of a larger machine, while keeping an appropriate tension on the extrusion. 

The focus of this post isn't the extrusion puller itself, this is more about the quest I took to find out where the Mil Spec callouts were for this particular connector, so we can hook up test leads while we develop the rest of the project.

The first step was checking the product data sheet.  A "Sick Stegman DGS25 rotary encoder" yielded ample Google results, with the proper data sheet.  Cool, that was easy. 

Another bit of googling for the connector type lead me to the Digikey and Mouser website where it has the proper connector listed (I think), and it's nearly $20.  Screw that, I'll make something here at the shop (why else do we have all these tools?)  After the 3D printer was down for most of the summer due to my dumb ass putting ancient support material through the extruder, I find myself champing at the bit for every opportunity to make a customized, one off piece for any project in the general vicinity.  The printer is an incredibly useful tool, when it works. 
Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
After examining the case a little better, there is confirmation on the physical connector that it is nearly the same part number, calling out CR3102E18-1P-1.  The numbering convention is essentially the same, but why the CR spec instead of MS? 

After a bit more smashing my face on the keyboard, I learn that the CR and MS specifications are essentially the same scheme.  CR spec came from Cannon Electronics in the 50's, and it looks like the Mil Spec connectors were developed a decade prior.  Perhaps there's some overlap?  Perhaps it's similar to the 7400 / 5400 families of ICs.

Checking Digikey for the part number, I find myself puzzled, as the part number only seems to be for the male receptacle of the plug.  What the hell is the mating part called?   After some more face-smashing and context-grokking, I find "Oh, it's a MS/CR3106-18-1, of course that was easy to figure out".  NOT!

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?


Different Mil Spec, different connector callout.  I guess that makes sense. Now where the hell is the blueprint? 

Just looking for the -3102 or -3106 part number didn't yield anything incredibly fruitful at first.  I did find a few diagrams showing pin location, but nothing with dimensional values.  Should be no big deal, perhaps I can figure this out.  Time to break out the calipers and Solidworks. 

After getting to know my Stratasys 3D printer over the last few months, I know that it's for the most part dimensionally accurate (maybe a hair on the small side)  Sure, I could run calibrations until I'm blue in the face, but that won't help too much.  The printer operates in open loop mode, meaning that it doesn't get any positional feedback to make on-the-fly adjustments to the print head location.  Translation - even if I program something at 1.000" exactly, it may come out a tiny bit bigger (1.003") or smaller (.997"), depending on a few factors, mostly the positional tolerance of the machine itself.  I'm satisfied I can program this part to a tolerance that will be acceptable to fit.  Usually, I give loose-fitting portions a +/- .005" tolerance (depending on direction of interference).  Tight fits usually have a single sided tolerance of .002", and we have even successfully produced accurate interference fit parts. 

There's a neat feature in Solidworks where you can superimpose an image on top of your model, so you can draft features based on an imported image.  "Sketch Picture" is the command you'd use, and here's what I did.  I opened up a sketch on the back face of the nearly-finished connector plug, resized the image, and simply drafted new lines on top of the image until they matched.  Mostly.




Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?One thing I've learned while using Solidworks over the last few years, combined on top of my experience fabricating and machining parts, is that if something doesn't look right, it probably isn't right.  With ample training, your brain can become a finely-tuned difference engine, instantly recognizing small changes in familiar objects, without needing to intellectualize what the change is.  The warning alarm becomes a subconscious manifestation screaming into your Neocortex.

These Mil Specifications are quite good about part fitment and mating.  Something immediately struck me as odd while drafting this using my image file.  According to the superimposed image, the holes aren't precisely centered on the face, nor are they parallel, or even exactly aligned with one another.  I didn't think of this as a huge problem, hoping that the generous amount of space around the pins would more than make up for any dimensional inaccuracies of my part.  Take a close look at the centerlines of the part, versus the centerlines of the circles.  It's all wonky and offset, which is what I should have expected using a JPG as a reference. 



I printed the part, eagerly burning a little bit of time for the print to complete.  After realizing I am surrounded by assholes, I returned to Mr. Printer, lovingly nestled in between Mr. Coffee and Mr. Compressor.  An excited, anticipatory removal from the machine only led to my disappointment.  In this case, close enough wasn't going to cut it.  The pins were offset too far, something was wrong with my design. 

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
Shit, it doesn't fit all the way

Dammit.  

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
you can see a few of the pins barely peeking out

Back to the good ol' drawing board.

So what went wrong?  A quick glance down the holes, and you can see that the pin spacing wasn't quite accurate enough to get us a decent fitment: the plug is jamming on the pin diameter.  Since I gave up on finding the exact dimensions early on, looks like I'll have to dig around on the internet to find the exact specifications for this particular connector.  More Googling. 

As it turns out, there isn't any one specific drawing on the 3106 connector.  Rather, it lives as a subset of the byzantine MIL-STD-1651,where there's a breakdown of all variety of round connectors.  266 pages of connectors, not ordered in any specific way.  Even when searching for the term "18-1", I got close, but not close enough.  Turns out, the X in 18-X gives a variation on the part, usually a rotational value for the pins, and there's umpteen different varieties of rotation, and not even with the same pin population!  

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?

DAMMIT, this last one is close, but rotated 90* off. 

FINALLY, after manually scanning each page of the document (really only about 20 minutes of work), I found the correct specification. 

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?

Strange, even though the pin population is the same as the last spec (18-24), the spacing is just off enough where it wouldn't match, even with a rotation.  Time to update the model with the correct information. 



Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
how about a googly eyed connector?

Close wasn't close enough.  The change in hole location seems to reflect the skew in my first part.  My brain processed the resulting linear offset accurately without needing a measurement.  Now if only my brain could be calibrated for more useful things, like where I leave my keys every day...

A quick revision to the hole locations, and off to the printer.  But wait, things can't be that easy, can they?  Of course not. 

One of the complications I've run across with the 3D printer is incomplete layer slicing. 

Just like reading toolpaths for CNC machines, when slicing a 3D model in Catalyst, it gives a preview of the toolpath before the print, which provides a quick and robust method to diagnose the print quality before finding out the hard way.  Look for erratic motions in the toolpath, or strange insertions of support material.  In this case, we saw both. 

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
STL file imported into Catalyst

The red lines indicate model material, and the white lines indicate soluble support, typically inserted if there are any overhangs to the model, building up a support network from the bottom up.  Since there weren't any programmed overhangs, why is there support here?

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
After slicing.  Notice the support material in the middle of the part.  This is bad, something is wrong.
Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
Top view of the same part.  What's with the hole contours? 

Checking out the top view of the toolpath, you can see how some of the holes are artifacted and incongruous with the contours we programmed in Solidworks.  What happened? 

My first clue is the hole size, and the spacing that requires.  These features are getting pretty small, and the spacing between the holes is getting thinner and thinner.  Even though the finest level of print is .010" layers, that doesn't mean that the plastic extrusion is exactly that size.  The extrusion head prints layers that are substantially thicker than they are tall, nearly .020" wide.  This can cause problems for interpreting smaller dimensions, as well as the fill pattern between thin walls.  In this case, Catalyst changed the programmed contours of the circles to now have a bit of cutaway, probably to accommodate for the XY size of the extruded plastic.  While these changes would be minute, since we're dealing with small parts and tight tolerances in the first place, allowing these changes to be made by Catalyst would at best produce a part that doesn't fit correctly.  At worst, it may have messed up the entire print by inserting support material where none is intended - I've even seen whole layers of support inserted in the middle of a print, effectively ruining the model half-way through.

After a few revisions to the part (making the hole size slightly smaller, so the wall thickness can be larger), I was able to find some dimensional values that would happily process in Catalyst.


Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
Much better, Aziz

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?
Notice the holes look right, now?



 So how did the part turn out, after all this trouble?  Perfectly. 


Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?

Where's Waldo-the-Datasheet?

This is a much more satisfying result.  The printed parts fit precisely, as long as they were designed precisely.  Not everything works on the first shot, but success the second time around isn't a bad consolation prize.   


Civic infrastructure hacking: laser-controlled streetlight.

Three more things in my house require a remote control now, and one of them is the streetlight in front of my house. Ever since I heard about a hacked streetlight at the Guerrilla Drive in for Back to the Future in 2009, I have been turning off the streetlight on Darien Street by carefully aiming a laser dot at the light sensor on top of the streetlight. The light sensors on most streetlights face west to catch the last photons from the fading sunset before illuminating for the night—and this one faces right into the third floor of my house. It is very important to me to be able to choose to sit in the cozy dark, save my city some money, and not contribute to light pollution for a minute.
Just recently I revamped the process with a new, permanent laser and remote control system. Here it is in action:
I’ll show you how …

Laser assembly

Laser assembly

First, I pawed through Hive76′s supply of laser diodes. On my third pick, I found a working diode from a laser pointer that was pretty bright at 5V and 20mA. Then I 3D printed a holder for the diode, soldered on a power supply, and attached it to an alignment bracket.

I then added this Wireless Remote Control with 3 outlets to control the power supply.

Power relay

Power relay

Now with the touch of a button, I can make the street dark and enjoy sitting out on the sidewalk. I need it dark because some asshole from Asplundh came over here, climbed my tree, butchered it, and cursed at my dear old neighbor. I am missing half of a tree, so we need dark these days on Darien. It feels like I’m taking back a little bit of control bacuse I can’t get my tree back.

This is a low impact, temporary, non-destructive project. We are merely using the red light of the laser to trick the light sensor into thinking it’s daytime. It takes almost 2 minutes for a built in buffer on the sensor to fill before the light is extinguished. When the laser is removed, the light reignites in 30 seconds and is at full brightness again in under a minute. I used the other two remote relays on the fans in our windows. This is as far as I’ll get into home automation for a while.

Funny epilogue: when I first posted about this hack on Vine, I used the work “hacked” in my description, and then the post was deleted. Huh. Funny that. Here’s the video that was removed:

Presentatie bij Bibliotheek Enschede

Photograph: Elliot Elliot/Getty Images/Johner RF

Photograph: Elliot Elliot/Getty Images/Johner RF

Op Zaterdag 15 Juni presenteert TkkrLab zich aan de bezoekers van de Bibliotheek Enschede.

We zullen deze dag onze workshops Arduino en solderen geven, onze RepRap 3D printer zal aanwezig zijn met de Liberator-tje (3D geprint pistool) Tevens zal Dave Borghuis, de voorzitter van TkkrLab zijn lezing houden ‘Nut en Noodzaak van Hackers‘.

Mocht je vragen hebben of gewoon even met ons kennis maken komt dan gerust langs.

Voor het volledige programma kunt u hier lezen.

Bouw je eigen 3D printer

RepRap Prusa i3

 

Wil je zelf ook een 3D printer gaan gebruiken? We gaan binnenkort een RepRap bouw weekend gaan houden.

Voor de minder ingewijden de RepRap is een open source printer die zich aan de onderkant van de markt bevind, voor ongeveer 375-450 aan onderdelen kun je deze zelf bouwen.

Omdat zelf een 3D printer in elkaar te zetten een op zijn minst een uitdagende taak kan zijn kun je bij ons onder deskundige begeleiding zelf je 3D printer bouwen. Op het einde van het weekend zou je dan een werkende 3D printer moeten hebben waarmee je alles mee kan printen zoals onze Liberator-tje

Wanneer we voldoende inschrijvingen hebben (meer dan 5, maximaal 10) zullen we weer contact met je opnemen om te kijken welke opties je wilt hebben en op welke datum.

Meer info zie onze wiki of schrijf je meteen als geïnteresseerde.

Illustrator to OpenSCAD to 3D printing

For Philly Tech Week, I will be showing visitors how to take a shape from Adobe Illustrator into the popular open source CAD program OpenSCAD and make a 3D model suitable for 3D printing.

Draw in Illustrator, extruded in OpenSCAD

Draw in Illustrator, extruded in OpenSCAD

I’m sure you know Illustrator. It’s the most successful vector drawing program <clarkson>in the world.</clarkson> OpenSCAD is less well known. It is best described as coding for objects. You make a solid with the function cube() and cut a cylinder() out of it with the difference() function, etc. But sometimes you want a more organic or complicated shape to start with. That’s where artist JK Keller stepped in and made a script that automates some of the process for you. What you need for this workshop:

There may not be time to print everyone’s design, but you should go home with something 3D printed.

Monday 4/22 5pm – 10
Gratis and Libre (free)

Hive76, suite 519
915 Spring Garden St
Philadelphia PA 19123

RSVP by commenting below.