I don't use this type of hardware at all but in the doc it is well written that it is compatible with SolidWorks and you also have all the scan export files.
I think that for SolidWorks you will be able to do tests in the formats: stl obj and ply.
Unless they provide an add-in for the 3d software they cite.
Personally, we have just invested in a measuring arm that also allows 3D scanning with integrated reverse engineering software. It is an "Absolut Arm" from HEXAGON.
I have a 3D scanner, what I can say is that the redefinition is very good, on the other hand be careful when you scan objects with plexiglass or the sensor could go through or glass, because at least mine goes through it and doesn't take it into account
For solidworks, the files become thousands of facets, so be careful because if you don't have the Scan3D module like me which is not, you will be restricted in the use of your 3D file created thanks to the scanner.
Otherwise it takes all the contours of what you scan, after I don't know the other 3D scanners
The reverse engineering software offered with the HEXAGON arm is PolyWorks. It allows, according to a scan (which gives you an object composed of a thousand polygons), to make a NURBS model, i.e. patches that then form a step or IGES that is much less cumbersome to manage.
For translucent objects, the trick is to apply a film of white, especially with a can of weld developer.
Thanks for the 1st opinion, ronathan any idea for a price encompassing software + scan + arm?
Afterwards, the idea of the proposed solution was that some people have to intervene to take measurements and/or scan tools at the customer's site in order to be able to offer an alternative. Hence the purpose of this portable scanner. But any opinion is welcome, as you don't know much about the subject, it is always useful to compare one solution to another.
This arm is transported in a suitcase provided for this purpose. He also probs points and therefore takes measurements. The price of the arm + software is 40000€ with training included over 3 days.
For the objects you describe, I recommend the Artec Space Spider 3D scanner. I use it for reverse engineering of engines, components with complex geometric shapes. The resolution of the scanner is up to 0.1mm and the accuracy of the 3D model is up to 0.05mm. Its price is €19,700 + €400 annual license for Artec Studio or €1,000 for a lifetime license. I personally use the annual license because it's easier to upgrade to a new version. I export the STL directly from Artec Studio to Solidworks. Artec also offers a special plugin for Solidworks. The description states that it offers useful tools to make post-processing from 3D scan to CAD more automatic. I haven't used this option, so I can't recommend it, but they are offering the Spider + plugin + 1 year license for Studio for €25,670
you say """ How can we get an accuracy of 0.05 from precise data of 0.1? ""
This comes from the fact that the scanner makes point clouds whose accuracy is 0.1 but the algorithm that reconstructs the 3D model is powerful, especially in everything that is smoothing. Hence an increased precision in the 3D which has reconstructed the overall image.*
It's like the algo in photos that improve the final quality with noise filters, filter this and that, etc...
Hello @Zozo_mp, I was expecting this answer, and that's precisely what makes me tick: a smoothing is not an increase in precision. All the treatments you mention, which apply to all scanning systems (whether image or 3D) make it possible to eliminate defects, sometimes gives the illusion of improved precision (especially in photography by creating an artificially high contrast). This is a misnomer, we use the term precision to mean uncertainty: if I measure a distance of 100mm with an instrument accurate at 0.1, it means that my measurement is anywhere between 99.9 and 100.1 and I don't see how we could, a posteriori, say that in the end it's between 99.95 and 100.05.
My remark is mainly intended to draw the attention of the readers of this thread to the language used by salespeople and the "promises" of prowess that it suggests.
Back from vacation I see your new answers thank you AviCrest, your proposal seems to be the perfect clone of the initial model (creaform3D), all you have to do is find out more in-depth.
Thank you also for the other proposals that will also be studied.
Hello, after the visit of Créaform, here is my feeling, the Go-scan version has 2 versions, one with + precision and a maximum dimension of 0.5m of scan, another for larger surface but less precise and above all this kind of scan works with an image distortion projected by light. (same for Artec's solutions).
The limitations for this kind of part are the reflections on the parts, except we work mainly with stainless steel and aluminum and also other metals so solution not retained for us.
Otherwise we were presented with the Handiscan 300 and 700 (superior range with scanning by projection of 3 laser crosses, superior precision and greatly increased scan size.
And the handiscan 700 15 laser cross if I remember correctly for even greater precision.
For the scanning part, it's very amazing, speed and precision are there. For the data processing software there is of course still work to be done before exporting. And that's where it gets complicated. The software seems easy to use and exports data directly to solidworks and allows you to push changes from the recognition software to SW (2016 mini) without starting the SW file again at each step. But on the other hand, it remains in my opinion long and quite complex.
On the other hand, it is possible to use the scan to redraw the part itself with "clean" functions, then to export it to the scan software and to do dimensional control in relation to the scan (metrology) and that seems really simple.
So here is my feedback of the Créaform demo following their visit last Tuesday. (after a long wait due to our lack of availability)
The investment will not be made for the time being due to a lack of sufficient budget at this time. While waiting for it to come back to the taste of the day, I finally close the subject.
For the answer I choose AviCrest which seems to have offered the best alternative in the starting budget.
Thank you all for your answers which have made it possible to move the subject forward even ^me if it did not come to fruition.