On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 3:32 PM, joem joem@martindale-electric.co.uk wrote:
On Tue, 2014-06-24 at 14:56 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 2:06 PM, joem joem@martindale-electric.co.uk wrote:
On Tue, 2014-06-24 at 12:20 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 10:12 PM, joem joem@martindale-electric.co.uk wrote:
> The final jigsaw is a fully GPL'd openscad based case designs for > tablet, netbooks, panel computer, and match box sized gadget. > Got me four 3D printers to address that soon enough.
oo. i have a partially-completed layout for a tablet in blender, all the components have "parts"representing them - touchscreen etc - it needs the "outside" making. any takers?
I got 4 printers - one of them formlabs. I'm very proficient at openscad parametric design now as well. If you are open sourcing it, drop the files somewhere and I get it printed.
it needs completing. there's no actual case, just the parts that go *in* the case (including touchscreen) so that the case can be made around them properly without screwing up.
? I'm not sure what that means.
there are parts inside. it is very easy to make a case where the parts don't bloody well fit.
for example the battery compartment is the wrong size. the hole for the camera is in the wrong place. the connector for the touchscreen can't fit because there's bloody well bits of plastic in the way.
is that clear now?
Nope. Verbosity makes things unclear.
If things don't fit, I change parameter and print again. Its parametric. Two three iterations, and job is done!
yes... but you have access to a 3D printer on a fast cycle. the internal 3D layout of all components *had* to be done as CAD/CAM because we did *not* have access to a 3D printer on a low-cost fast iterative cycle.
The easiest option for me then is to take one of a numerous number of tablets I got, strip it down and do an openscad parametric design and release it fully GPL'd after making sure it can be 3D printed.
great idea. can you use pyopenscad rather than direct openscad?
Probably.
it's pretty obvious, object-orientated and if you can handle openscad directly i think you can handle pyopenscad. it actually outputs openscad files so that way you can see what is going on iteratively.
end result is that you can do very sparse spec'ing of a complex 3D shape and it will generate a smooth 3D sheet that fits exactly through those points.
Snap! Funny thing I needed exactly something like that for various projects.
the only (current) limitation is that the "offset" for creating the 3D shape is a *fixed* vector. by that i mean that rather than specify the "thickness"and do some normalised vector calculations at every single damn point created, what i did was *copy* the surface that was created, shift every single point by the fixed vector then create edges around the sides to join the two surfaces up.
the down-side of that approach is that if there is extreme curvature in the surface being created the thickness will end up varying or possibly even be zero (or overlap) creating an invalid shape.
at some point i will revisit the code and work out how to create the best "rangle" between each of the 3 to 4 vectors coming in to a single point. it's harder than it sounds because sometimes they could overlap.
l.