With all due respect, probing evey single position on any design is impossible. At best you get a very high accuracy grid. Secondly, if you scan a shape with a grid shape the computer will not ‘average out the values’ for the grid voids if you use a senisble algorithm. It will create a smooth surface passing through all the scanned coordinates. It will not add any weird data, unless you use a very stupid algorithm. In fact, if you use a good algorithm and the scanned surface are not the same as the digitized surface then either the grid points selected were not representative of the plug or the plug was not smooth in the first place. Since we’re not talking about some Roman or Greek sculptures here, which is it?
If you can’t design a proven shape with CAD, how can you make it accurate with a planer? It’s all about mesurements and vision both ways. Granted, you can’t feel the digital model, but then again, you can’t view the crosssections of the real thing either without taking it apart.
Haavard, I have done both methods of digitizing with the same exact boards many times. From my conclusion after merging the two different CAD files and placing them on different levels, (it’s easier to analyze in overlayed layers) it is quite evident the difference in surface data. If digitizing using the cross grid pattern would be true to the original design I would use this method, it is much less time consuming. This is quite evident on simple boards, even more on noticeable on complex shapes such as step decks, etc. Sure the cross grid method will create a smooth surface, but it is created. Not the actual surface. As you stated it is just a representative of the plug.
As you know if you have been shaping long enough, there are subtle intangeble areas of certain magical shapes that are virtually unexplained let alone measured. You can try and design it on the CAD but it’s not the same. If your a competent shaper you are constantly viewing and analyzing cross sections, but using your “third eye”. The main reason why I have had much better results with scanning a hand shape as opposed to designing with a CAD. Rarely use a design CAD.
This is from my personal experience from actually working both methods for years. Sure, most shapers wouldn’t even notice the difference. But from my experience scanning the entire surface seems to pick up more of the intangeble essence of a hand shaped board, just adds symmetry.
dave, we fill and feather all the deviations and dents prior to digitizing. Then if needed clean up the tool paths as needed. We actually have had a few guy’s that request that their “foot dents” get digitally replicated, it’s the sweet spot. Claims the board isn’t magic with out it. Go figure!? Would be challenging to do on a design CAD.
Haavard, you show some knowledge. love that. but have you ever tried to scan a surfboard?? and machined it afterwards?? and, now thats what really counts, did it pass the test of the eyes of an experienced shaper?? I have done all of this investing a lot of time and a lot of money. and the results did not please. the best was a $ 50 000.-- touchscanner used by GM and Ford for their cars but in hinsight the results were very poor and a digital caliper and some meassuring aids do a better job. so to get the results as well as the step into the 21st century you must go different ways (my oppinion). I could tell you about my experience with CAD programs and where they fail the real life test but it would give too much info to the people I want to keep at further than arms length away. I had enough of those copy cats that try to achieve without sweat (and knowledge). but I know you have the brains to understand the difference between whats out there and what I call the APS, so please send me your email address to and I will send you my program and the instructions. you will design a couple of boards to your liking, send me the files and I will check them and send them back to you. I am sure you will love the experience and certainly enjoy the time you need to invest. and maybe you want to try your designs here at the Gold Coast, in that case I would shape them, you would ride them, you would improve on the design, ride the new one,s and I am sure we would not have to discuss “scanning” or CAD programs any more.
miki, scanning a board and machining can be very tricky using a probe, many varibles. We have been doing this method for awhile now. What’s needed is to have your CNC controller calibrated prior to every digitizing sequence via a calibration tool that is machine tooled with the actual cutter located on the mahine. Your CNC controller needs to have digitizing capabilities to enable a deflection value of your probe. Will pass the test of the best.
The most expensive touch scanner won’t work correctly unless your controller and machine are set up for it. This takes time to do, believe me I know.
Different approach to doing similar work. Many ways to “skin a cat”.
what you say is right. you straight away create a toolpath with the scan data using software to filter and smoothen the curve. have done that with my laser scanner but I soon realized that the perfect replika of that magic board can not be achieved with scanning (at the level the surfboard industry can afford it). so I wanted to go full power to the computer design as I believe there is the future. I wanted a program capable to design a board exactly as the shaper wants it with ease of use so the shapers of today can use it but powerful to allow sophisticated designs as in the detail is the difference. with this board on file and the ability to reproduce or tinker in small details with the original as reference as well as the ability to compare with others. you will certainly agree that a skilled shaper soon has a wealth of information at hand unlike ever before. now he can analyse that “magic” board and learn as he goes. this also enables him to easily create custom boards for every order received, no matter how big his business. something of enormous importance to me and certainly for the customer. please understand me right, I accept scanning as a valuable form to replicate a board (I have done myself well over 50000 boards that way) and I might also be wrong with my theories. time will tell. but please keep in mind that providing professional technical information on a forum like this can easily be abused. I have made bad experience in the past. you have like me worked hard for your knowledge and the copy cats are certainly on line. on a more direct level I am willing to discuss those technical nitty gritty, kind of from machine to machine.
I still believe in the statement that either there is not enough data to build the board upon with the grid scans or the algorithm used to create the surface is not good enough. I know that these algorithms have their flaws, but some can be tweaked and some are just a whole lot better than others. However, if the area between the scanned points are not smooth(we’re talking mathematically smooth here, and not the “ohhhh, that’s smooth” kind), you cannot expect the computer to reproduce it. It would be very interesting to overlay the results of scans with a grid and the tighter scan-it-all method and then have them analysed for tolerance. Then you could possibly tweak the algorithm to make them extremly close tolerance.
Still, wheather it’s in the best interest that surfboards have a ‘human touch’ that might create some magic or if a perfectly smooth computer designed board is better is still up for discussion.
Contrary to your experience I have had excellent results with the scanning teqnique. Much better results than the CAD design teqnique. No wasted time designing boards with no proven performance qualities. Also all the CAD design programs I have used or encountered are very limited to very simple shapes. And /or to design complex shapes takes quite some time on the CAD, easier and faster to hand shape a master for scanning. Scanning gives the abilities to capture the magical qualities of the proven master shape. This teqnique has already proven for the top riders around the world. Sure, you can enter all the data points manually but it’s not the same. Take the exact magic board, then surface scan wth a digitizer it and it will be different than the manually data entered board. Not even close. The scanned board will maintain more exacting tolerances to the original than the CAD designed board.
Also with a digitzed scan it is still possible to “this board on file and the ability to reproduce or tinker in small details with the original as reference as well as the ability to compare with others.”
I understand your desire to offer a decent priced CAD, CNC, system. I just wanted to share my personal experience with both systems. Both techiques have +/-. I guess it’s a preference of choice and what works the best for the individual.
you are right, both systems have + and -. and for sure you have the right to share your personal experience. If you succeeded in scanning a board so the outcome is identical or very close to the original that is an excellent result. you must have worked very hard to solve all those scan problems, it is extremely tough especially if you try to involve CAD software. If your system is really good we one day will sit together for a beer and have a chat and a laugh and maybe marry the ideas while we watch the action on the water. as a matter of fact I went actually both ways. but the scanned board can now go into the design software and be shaped direct as a copy or manipulated to the n’th degree faster than you can mix the patch up filler.
you would be amazed how many surfers in the world cup stand already on boards that came from my machine and of those boards, those masters, I have a file so it can be reproduced or played with to the shapers/surfers content. I do not know what system will take the fancy of the surfboard world in the future, funny things can happen. but I love my part in it and the fun I have while going up or going down. If I know who you are I would not mind to send you a copy of the program.
miki, as you know it’s not an easy task either way. surface scanning requires a competent CAD program and fluent in CAD program language/knowledge also a quality CNC/CAD abilities to control all your parameters needed to get an end result. Such as the scanning or CAD programs there are better or worse software/hardware system. You need to do your homework, it could become a slippery slope very quickly. I have seen machines sit for years, and or quality compromised due to the owners become overwhelmed with all the teqnical small details. Or buyers remorse after taking delivery and to find out the machine inability to do what was expected. People think you just throw up a board and push a button, they don’t see all the small details that entails.
I would love to try out your software! Looking forward to try it out. I’ll send you an email with details.
and isn’t it those small details that rips apart the family, start the screaming, the arguments, the frustration, the “no end in sight” feeling, the F"CK the lot feeling, the give up now acid coming up from deep down, the don’t watch the news - have enough problems already feelings, the dumb excuses to the customers the where am I feeling, the oh no not another problem feeling, the “can’t take more”, the … whatever.
how sweet the rewards on the other side, how gentle and warm the feeling, the how nice the sounds, how gentle the colors but hey, STOP DREAMING, in this field there is only the above, the stuff before whatever. I love it.
have just been reading about the APS3000 while this sounds like a great machine i havwe herd rumors about a machine being developed on gold coast. has anyone else herd about this gold coast machine?
I am not sure what machines are developped at the gold coast but it might be that the rumors actually talk about the APS 3000 as it is developped at the gold coast. if in doubt ask Don Burford, he should know exactly what goes on at the coast 07 55 343 777
i’ve heard similar rumours and saw DH and Joel Parkinson doing some testing down at Dbar, they were having a deep and meaningful over a number of boards on the sand.
The main reason why I have had much better results with scanning a hand shape as opposed to designing with a CAD. Rarely use a design CAD.