By using STL we are approximating the real object twice, and crtainly we
have to try to improve opon this. STL has served us well and we have
accepted, but as hardware becomes more flexible in handling curved
surfaces, we have to move to improve upon this.
> Right On Terry!
> At 06:28 PM 2/13/98 -0500, you wrote:
> >Mike Pratt wrote:
> >> At the next meeting of the STEP development community ISO TC184/SC4,
> >> 7 - 12 June '98 in Bad Aibling (near Munich), Germany, there will be
> >> an initial meeting of an RP Interest Group that will probably decide
> >> to include RP as a new product life-cycle phase within STEP, make
> >> recommendations for the use of existing STEP APs for RP and develop
> >> appropriate new resources for the future. The impetus for this is
> >> coming from Canada, Japan and the USA.
> >This makes **really** good sense. There have been discussions over the
> >years, even in recent months, to develop a replacement or alternative to
> >STL. Getting CAD developers to support yet another output format would
> >take more blood and sweat than most of us care to shed. Why not 1) carry
> >"STL data" within the STEP file (as Mike said, STEP AP203 already contains
> >a faceted boundary representation), 2) ask the RP system manufacturers to
> >support STEP, and 3) let the user decide whether to use STL data or precise
> >math surface data (which STEP also carries) when building an RP model?
> >What could be easier and more flexible?
> >Wohlers Associates, Inc.
> >OakRidge Business Park
> >1511 River Oak Drive
> >Fort Collins, CO 80525 USA
> >(970) 225-0086
> >Fax (970) 225-2027
> >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/
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 - 22:44:56 EEST