I agree entirely.
In medical applications we have always favoured a direct contour SLC
approach rather than STL. There is however considerable nostalgia for STL in
the CAD world.
Paul D'Urso
MB, BS, PhD
---------------------------------------------------------
Anatomics Tel. 61 7 3364 0776
QMI Fax. 61 7 3364 0786
P.O. Box 4012 Em. anatomics@qmi.asn.au
Eight Mile Plains Web http://www.qmi.asn.au/anatomics
Q 4113 Australia
Anatomics : The BioModelling Specialists
---------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: ATiburon <ATiburon@aol.com>
To: schillen@fzi.de <schillen@fzi.de>; rp-ml@bart.lpt.fi <rp-ml@bart.lpt.fi>
Date: Saturday, May 09, 1998 10:04 AM
Subject: Re: IMPORTANT for all rp'lers with practical experience
>In a message dated 98-05-07 10:18:13 EDT, schillen@fzi.de writes:
>
><< I try to improve the applicability of the
> software, >>
>Ok Volker since you asked,
>I don't understand why we should be using STL files at all. Any decent CAM
>program uses surface IGES. Can do cirular interpolations, reproduce curved
>surfaces without faceting etc. The STL format is limiting the capablilities
of
>the machines, causing geometric inaccuracies and poor surface finish.
>Why not use IGES instead of STL?
>
>For more information about the rp-ml, see http://ltk.hut.fi/rp-ml/
>
>
>
For more information about the rp-ml, see http://ltk.hut.fi/rp-ml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 22:45:34 EEST