Developer Terms and Conditions › The Development › Hardware › Additional scanning aids
- This topic has 22 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by Ayelet.
November 21, 2015 at 9:08 am #firstname.lastname@example.orgParticipant
It’s ugly, it’s mostly hand made but it is 100% PTFE. In an attempt to make scanning liquids (and potentially other things) as reliable as possible I’ve created a PTFE scanning box. It will be interesting to see if it makes any difference by removing all but one background spectra.
Now a question- My PTFE box will have a reflective signature, however small. As will the container with water. If I scan those two things in a separate model I won’t be able to “subtract” them from anything I want to scan, other than looking at them visually and deciding which range they have a signature and NOT using it as a differentiator for the thing I want to scan.
It would be very useful to have a “background” element to a model so this could be scanned as an addition to a model and subtracted as part of a differentiator model.
Use the the bank note test is a good example- Build my model in controlled environment with PTFE background get a very good isolated spectrum, a truly representative scan. In the real world I’m not going to carry a PTFE jig around with me, just the scio and phone. When I scan a note in the real world it will be placed on a surface and, because notes are thin, it will reflect from the background as well as the note.
I would like to be able to do a “background” scan which is just the surface alone then add the note and subtract the background from it giving an isolated spectrum of the note.
Is this on the development road map? Or is it something I would need to code?
Many things need to be able to isolate the environment from the target.
- This reply was modified 7 years, 6 months ago by email@example.com.
Attachments:You must be logged in to view attached files.February 2, 2016 at 12:44 pm #2593Paul HiscoeParticipant
I bought some PTFE sheet and made my own cup, but it’s a bit crude. I would be interested to hear where you are sourcing yours from? I’m also in UK and own a 3D printing company. We could make scanning cups and containers, if we could figure out which material to use. Any thoughts?
CP – any recommended material here?
PaulFebruary 7, 2016 at 9:56 am #2610
Hi Paul and Paul,
Subtracting the background is a nice feature, but will require some work. There also a hidden assumption that you can fully compensate for the different backgrounds which is not 100% true.
As for scanning cups, PTFE is indeed a recommended material.
Feel free to ask further questions.
Ayelet and Guy,
The Consumer Physics TeamFebruary 22, 2016 at 3:14 pm #2684cro55anParticipant
Im really interested in the overall hardware and would love to get feedback from the developers seeing as I cant get my hands on a scanner 🙁 .
From your experience, how is its design, capabilities and overall ease of use, where you impressed by its functionality. Are the results you receive effective & efficient. Did you find that the ambient light plays a major role in the effect of your results. I find its hard to specify a main application for the device, do you find yourself looking at it(applications) from the perspective of developing specifically for home users/consumer or targeting industrial applications? Can you see environmental uses, and suppose I would really like to know if it exceeded expectations?
Any feedback would be greatly appreciated
Cro55anFebruary 23, 2016 at 6:51 pm #2747SulzbachnerParticipant
Since the discussion is about hardware scanning aids.
I’m hoping to monitor a changing sample in a heated environment. As I don’t want to damage the sensor, I was thinking that maybe a fibre optic extension could be an option?
I would expect the scatter the be retained through the fibre, as this approach does seem to be applied in lab-scale sensors, but I wonder if the relatively low resolution approach of this one may bring some unforeseen variable to that? Any other thoughts on a radio, or at least extended scanning range?March 24, 2016 at 8:12 am #2993
I’m sorry for the delayed response.
SCiO cannot be connected to a fiberoptic, at least not easily – you will need to connect the illumination source to one fiber, and the sensor to another. Sounds like a complicated work.
Can you elaborate what temperatures are you interested in? If the temperatures are within SCiO’s spec, it can be used in a heated environment.
The Consumer Physics TeamMay 9, 2016 at 4:51 pm #3170rejsharpParticipant
Hey Ayelet, what is the latest news on the liquids accessory?
I keep expecting you to want my money for one!
I tried different white porcelain pots, but they add too much variation unless I use the exact same pot each time.May 15, 2016 at 12:12 pm #3311
We will contact and update you personally via e-mail as soon as possible.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.