Tom Richards' added comments are proceeded by %%%%%%%%%%
At 01:38 PM 12/16/99 -0500, you wrote:
>I will not repeat Dr. Anshuman Razdan's demonstration.
%%%%%%%%%%% I apologize to Dr. Razdan and to academia for not realizing that
they do know about the high level of commerce being done with stl files.
More below:
The STL format is
>simple, it has a factor of 3 to 5 data redundancy (useless and leading to
>errors), it does not allow easy extension (color and multiple materials),
>and academics have tried since the early 90s to convince RP manufacturers,
>CAD vendors and users to migrate to a new format.
>
>We have a software to correct STL files, and would definitely profit from
>STL remaining the standard, yet, we see the STL as an impediment to the
>progress of the technology.
>If you the users want the horse and carriage instead of the BMW, then
>resist change and continue using the STL format.
>If you eventually want color, multi materials, efficiency, etc.. then push
>the vendors of RP, of CAD and the academicians to come up with a better
>solution. As mentioned earlier, NIST did try to bring the different
>constituencies together to affect a change, but only companies with a
>significant stake in the technology can force the change.
>
>Note that the format described by Dr. Razdan is a simple VRML format used
>in virtual reality applications (and outputted by most CAD vendors). It
>could be substituted to STL very easily while a better format is in the
>works. One advantage I saw mentioned by Stephen Rock in the exchanges is
>that slicing would be much faster - say 2 to 3 times faster on the average.
> Would that be good enough a reason to migrate?
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% To answer your question: The time required for slicing stl
is small and economically unimportant to me. The time required for data
transmissions is huge and VERY improtant to me. The robustness (say
useability) of the file transmitted, from customers to me, for viewing,
slicing, RP tooling or whatever, and transmitted by me to any of a number of
RP service centers with whom we do business, is MOST important to me. The
stl serves quite well in this last regard. No, I'm not ready to "migrate". I
would if all of the "vendors of RP, of CAD and the academicians" were to
make available a VRML or other format as UNIVERSAL and ROBUST as is stl now.
My use of the subjunctive was intended.
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% I had no idea this subject was such a hot issue (chasm)
between "companies with a significant stake in the technology" and "vendors
of RP, of CAD and the academicians". It's an interesting thread (to me). I'm
very interested in extending our RP tooling capability and plan to build it
upon using the stl, because it is the most universal and robust format
that's available to me.
>
>
>
>
>-------------
>Georges Fadel
>Associate Professor
>Mechanical Engineering Department
>202 Fluor Daniel EIB
>Clemson University
>Clemson, SC 29634-0921 USA
>Tel: (864) 656-5620
>Fax: (864) 656-4435
>http://rafiki.vr.clemson.edu/credo/index.htm
>
>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 - 22:53:48 EEST