How to measure the surface area of an arbitrary 3D object

  • I
  • Thread starter bob012345
  • Start date
  • #1
bob012345
Gold Member
353
35

Main Question or Discussion Point

I'm looking for an easy way to get the surface area of an arbitrary shaped 3D object. Getting the volume is easy by water displacement. What about area? Any neat tricks? We know different shapes can have the same volume and thus different surface areas so it's not a trivial problem. The purpose is for estimating surface area of 3D printed plastic parts which will undergo copper plating. Thanks!
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
sophiecentaur
Science Advisor
Gold Member
24,282
4,307
Good question. Not so hard to do with lots of images and a clever computer algorithm, I guess. There are algorithms that will construct a surface Net of triangles from a digital 3D image - probably not a difficult bit of geometry.
I can't think of an old fashioned analogue method that would give an accurate answer. Perhaps if you could invent a way of laying down a thin , uniform layer that would fit over the object, then find out the volume of material used. A uniform layer could perhaps be obtained by using interferometry
 
  • #3
bob012345
Gold Member
353
35
Good question. Not so hard to do with lots of images and a clever computer algorithm, I guess. There are algorithms that will construct a surface Net of triangles from a digital 3D image - probably not a difficult bit of geometry.
I can't think of an old fashioned analogue method that would give an accurate answer. Perhaps if you could invent a way of laying down a thin , uniform layer that would fit over the object, then find out the volume of material used. A uniform layer could perhaps be obtained by using interferometry
Thanks. I'm hoping to hear of or figure out a method without computers or sophisticated devices. Your uniform layer could be wax by dipping and then weight it. One difficulty is the inside would follow the hills and valleys but the outside might be smoother thus getting an approximation of the surface area. Of course, I can just estimate the area but that's not as much fun. What would Archimedes do?
 
Last edited:
  • #4
8,244
5,060
I can't think of an old fashioned analogue method that would give an accurate answer. Perhaps if you could invent a way of laying down a thin , uniform layer that would fit over the object, then find out the volume of material used. A uniform layer could perhaps be obtained by using interferometry
The OP didn't say how accurate he needs to be. Just dunk it in paint, measure the amount of paint used. Compare that with dunking an object of known surface area.
 
  • #5
bob012345
Gold Member
353
35
The OP didn't say how accurate he needs to be. Just dunk it in paint, measure the amount of paint used. Compare that with dunking an object of known surface area.
Accuracy should be one percent or so. I think that's close enough. Your paint idea idea Anorlunda is brilliant but I would need to act fast and not allow it to dry first. Or maybe, that won't matter. Thanks!
 
  • #6
8,244
5,060
You could also use oil instead of paint. The accuracy challenge comes if the coating is not uniform, say thicker at the bottom. That is why you want a viscous fluid with high surface tension.
 
  • #7
121
64
You could use strips of masking tape or food service film. Then, measure the tape or film. Alternatively, cut the tape or film into pieces of known area and fill in whatever gaps are left over and measure the oddball pieces. Just be careful to not stretch it.
 
  • #8
sophiecentaur
Science Advisor
Gold Member
24,282
4,307
You could also use oil instead of paint. The accuracy challenge comes if the coating is not uniform, say thicker at the bottom. That is why you want a viscous fluid with high surface tension.
Dipping could result in non-uniform 'runs', which cause me to reject the idea initially. Perhaps dipping in a container full of small spheres (identical) could result in a uniform layer with only the edge effects at edges. Then it would just be 'quantisation error'.
 
  • #9
jrmichler
Science Advisor
1,024
968
You could use strips of masking tape or food service film. Then, measure the tape or film. Alternatively, cut the tape or film into pieces of known area and fill in whatever gaps are left over and measure the oddball pieces. Just be careful to not stretch it.
You don't need to measure the tape. Just weigh the part on a sensitive balance before and after, then weigh a known size piece of the tape.
 
  • #10
bob012345
Gold Member
353
35
You don't need to measure the tape. Just weigh the part on a sensitive balance before and after, then weigh a known size piece of the tape.
Yes, if one can tolerate lower resolution.
 
  • #11
jrmichler
Science Advisor
1,024
968
Use an analytical balance with 0.1 milligram resolution. You will have your 1% error tolerance if you use at least 10 milligrams of tape to cover the object.
 
  • #13
bob012345
Gold Member
353
35
How would you tape objects that look like these?

View attachment 228634
I wanted to reply with a picture of a 3D printed test device called a 'Benchy Boat' so you can all see the resolution and structure of a typical print we want to plate but I can't figure out how to add an image.
 
  • #14
8,244
5,060
I can't figure out how to add an image.
There are two ways, (assuming you're using a web browser on a tablet or desktop, and not the PF mobile app.)
  1. If the image is on your own computer, use the UPLOAD button next to POST REPLY and PREVIEW. After upload, then a new thing appears on the bottom saying THUMNAIL or FULL IMAGE. Click FULL IMAGE.
  2. If you just have a URL for the image, click on the image icon (looks like a mountain range) on the editing toolbar. Then you can paste the URL.
slask.png
 

Attachments

  • #15
bob012345
Gold Member
353
35
image.jpg
There are two ways, (assuming you're using a web browser on a tablet or desktop, and not the PF mobile app.)
  1. If the image is on your own computer, use the UPLOAD button next to POST REPLY and PREVIEW. After upload, then a new thing appears on the bottom saying THUMNAIL or FULL IMAGE. Click FULL IMAGE.
  2. If you just have a URL for the image, click on the image icon (looks like a mountain range) on the editing toolbar. Then you can paste the URL.
View attachment 228636
Thanks! As can be seen, the surface isn't only on the 'outside'.
 

Attachments

  • #16
sophiecentaur
Science Advisor
Gold Member
24,282
4,307
If the object was produced on a 3D printer then the original data is the best source of information about its surface area.
If you want to plate the object then I would imagine the plating thickness would vary quite a bit, according to the position of parts of the surface. Is it a conducting material or will you need to spray the model with a conductor first?
 
  • #17
Grinkle
Gold Member
656
180
plastic parts which will undergo copper plating.
What is the process for plating the parts?

The suggestions seem to be along the lines of "plate the part with something easy to plate with" but if the practical application of this is to predict plating costs, maybe you just need to plate a part and see how much Cu it required. Looking at that boat, I imagine that viscous material won't easily wet the insides of the smaller geometries on the boat, and as already noted, non-viscous material won't be uniform in coverage.

This is a very engaging problem, by the way. I hope we come to a practical answer!
 
  • #18
bob012345
Gold Member
353
35
If the object was produced on a 3D printer then the original data is the best source of information about its surface area.
If you want to plate the object then I would imagine the plating thickness would vary quite a bit, according to the position of parts of the surface. Is it a conducting material or will you need to spray the model with a conductor first?
It's ABS plastic. We will have to apply conductive paint first. The paint could be used to estimate the surface area too. It's also true if the original data the printer printed from is available, the surface area should be retrieved. I'm assuming I won't always have that data available.
 
Last edited:
  • #19
bob012345
Gold Member
353
35
What is the process for plating the parts?

The suggestions seem to be along the lines of "plate the part with something easy to plate with" but if the practical application of this is to predict plating costs, maybe you just need to plate a part and see how much Cu it required. Looking at that boat, I imagine that viscous material won't easily wet the insides of the smaller geometries on the boat, and as already noted, non-viscous material won't be uniform in coverage.

This is a very engaging problem, by the way. I hope we come to a practical answer!
Thanks. I'm using Copper Sulfate solution. I'm coating the ABS plastic with a conductive paint. I tried a homemade graphite layer but have no success yet as the resistance seemed too high, in the 240,000 Ohm range.
 
  • #20
  • #21
bob012345
Gold Member
353
35
you could use a 3D laser scanner to create a mesh of the object on a computer. From that you would easily get a surface area.
https://pages.shanti.virginia.edu/medianet/2012/09/28/scan-big-with-the-faro-focus-3d/

You might even be able to use photos to make a 3d model but the accuracy would suffer.
https://i.materialise.com/blog/en/how-to-make-a-3d-printed-object-from-a-photo-in-5-easy-steps/
That's possible. It's fun though to figure out how to do it low tech. I still like the paint idea. It only has to be calibrated with a known area and could be tested on a series of standard geometrical shapes.
 
Last edited:
  • #22
sophiecentaur
Science Advisor
Gold Member
24,282
4,307
That's possible. It's fun though to figure out how to do it low tech.
But the model starts off as a high tech image with all the data. It would be standing up in a hammock to try to work out the surface area, ignoring all that data, surely.
 
  • #23
bob012345
Gold Member
353
35
But the model starts off as a high tech image with all the data. It would be standing up in a hammock to try to work out the surface area, ignoring all that data, surely.
True, and if the data is available at the time the print is plated, which could be years later, that's great but if it isn't, how do we estimate the area is the question. I also thought the problem is interesting in itself.
 
  • #24
sophiecentaur
Science Advisor
Gold Member
24,282
4,307
True, and if the data is available at the time the print is plated, which could be years later, that's great but if it isn't, how do we estimate the area is the question. I also thought the problem is interesting in itself.
I agree. However, the data could well last longer than the model and so it could all be done again. (But that assumes a good file backup regime. :wink:) Also, in the future, 3D scanning would be available. This all depends on how accurate the estimate needs to be. I reckon the low accuracy of a low tech approach would actually be well within the predictability of the plating method. You would need to make a pretty complex electrode (some of it inside the cab) to get a good uniform plating. The Electric field inside a hollow region would need to be compensated for, I think.
 
  • #25
jrmichler
Science Advisor
1,024
968
You can metal plate plastic. Search electroless plating plastic for some good information. Electroless nickel plating is known for even plating thickness, while electroplating makes a thicker coating on exposed areas.
 

Related Threads on How to measure the surface area of an arbitrary 3D object

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
542
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
27
Views
9K
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
907
Top