3D Scanner using static electric fields

AI Thread Summary
Designing a 3D scanner using static electric fields presents challenges, primarily due to the absorption of electric fields by matter and the conductive nature of most objects, which complicates scanning. The proposed method involves using an RF emitter and a sensor positioned opposite the object, similar to a CT scanner, but static fields may not provide the necessary resolution for accurate internal mapping. The discussion highlights the need for numerous data points and precise timing to detect phase changes, which is less critical with static fields but still problematic with conductive materials. Concerns about effective 3D reconstruction arise, as distinguishing different parts of an object using static fields is complex. Overall, while algorithms may mitigate some issues, significant obstacles remain in achieving accurate scans.
taylaron
Gold Member
Messages
391
Reaction score
1
Greetings PFers,
Can someone help explain to me the difficulties of designing a device which utilizes static electric fields to map an objects’ internals and externals?

My understanding is that as a electric field propagates through matter, it encounters absorption.
I envision a device which utilizes a RF emitter and a sensor 180 degrees opposite the object being scanned. Wouldn't this scanner function much like a CT scanner? As the field penetrates more matter, its field strength decreases a measurable amount.

Conductive objects would make scanning difficult because they would conduct the electric field, instead of impeding it.

-Tay
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
All objects are conducting, there are no perfect insulators.
I'm not sure how the object reconstruction would look like, and you will certainly need a lot of data points and sender/receiver combinations, together with a very good timing resolution (<< nanosecond) to detect the RF phase. And it fails if too much metal is in the object, of course.

RF fields are not static, by the way.
 
mfb said:
All objects are conducting, there are no perfect insulators.
I'm not sure how the object reconstruction would look like, and you will certainly need a lot of data points and sender/receiver combinations, together with a very good timing resolution (<< nanosecond) to detect the RF phase. And it fails if too much metal is in the object, of course.

RF fields are not static, by the way.

Sorry, I thought I removed all references to RF fields. I changed my position to static electric fields instead.

Without having to worry about sub nanosecond accuracy with static fields, I still see conductive objects as being an obstacle, but surely an algorithm can be used to solve most of that problem. Any other thoughts?

-Tay
 
I still don't see how you want to do a proper 3D reconstruction. It will be highly non-trivial to distinguish parts of the 3D object with static fields.
 
Thread 'I need a concave mirror with a focal length length of 150 feet'
I need to cut down a 3 year old dead tree from top down so tree causes no damage with small pieces falling. I need a mirror with a focal length of 150 ft. 12" diameter to 36" diameter will work good but I can't think of any easy way to build it. Nothing like this for sale on Ebay. I have a 30" Fresnel lens that I use to burn stumps it works great. Tree service wants $2000.
Hi all, i have some questions about the tesla turbine: is a tesla turbine more efficient than a steam engine or a stirling engine ? about the discs of the tesla turbine warping because of the high speed rotations; does running the engine on a lower speed solve that or will the discs warp anyway after time ? what is the difference in efficiency between the tesla turbine running at high speed and running it at a lower speed ( as fast as possible but low enough to not warp de discs) and: i...
Back
Top