I like to think of myself as a "Josh" of all trades and master of none. I do metal fabrication, TIG, MIG, and Stick welding, lathe and milling work, blacksmithing, race car stuff, wood working, and many other fun things. I love to learn and make things, and I use RU-vid to learn. I figured I would make a channel where I can share what I learn and mistakes to learn from!
You can change the fuel filter housings with the newer part used on the CIH 495 that uses the spin on fuel filters. Much easier to change fuel filters with the spin on type.
That wire mesh is the bypass filter, if it it clogged then the hydraulic oil bypasses the hydraulic filter going directly to hydraulic pump. It purpose was to allow hydraulic oil flow in cold temperatures until it warms up to flow through the filter.
If have a shop vac, make an adapter for the shop vac hose to fit in the hydraulic filler hole, connect the shop vac to the filler hole and turn it on and then you will not loose much hydraulic oil.
Your 3D model doesn’t look bumpy but rather smooth. Mostly all the videos I’ve seen so far, the scans would come out with bumpy surfaces. Did you have to do any post processing?
Only thing I did was take my time and pay attention to any out of positions frames. From there I deleted out what was not supposed to be part of the scan and just let it procees the point cloud I to a mesh. The only post processing I did once it was a mesh was to thin or decimate the mesh to make it lighter weight. No smoothing or special clean up was done
I bypassed mine. A lot of savvy fellas believe that’s best. For some reason they usually leak after rebuilding, and some guys even believe the equalizer valve is potentially very hazardous. I’m still trying to understand what its purpose is.
what cad software are you using? i want to buy a scanner but im not sure if i have to purchase softwares like solidworks that are super expensive. any information helps and thanks for your time
@@Black240SXDrift have you tried any of the other scanners by 3d maker like the Mole, seal or the magic swift plus? if so which one do you think it is worth getting? sorry for all the questions. I just want to pick your brain. But thank you for responding to my other questions
@bunkerhg1 I've only played with the lynx. Unfortunately the only experience with another scanner was through a friend who bought the mole and he immediately returned it. He had some issues with communication with the scanner and it wouldn't take data. The lynx worked well for me. Just as I said in the video you have to be careful with movements or it looses tracking. But as you can see it does take nice data for the price.
@@Black240SXDrift Thanks but what does that suppose to mean ...you joined all those three scanned images into one single consolidated image by using 9:17 !!?
You would be pushing it. It can be done but that would be outside the capability of this scanner without very complicated fitting and scanning techniques. Big stuff like that needs serious scanners
The sent me the scanner in return for my honest review. I talk about its short comings and it's benefits both in the video. Biggest issues are since it's target less and relies solely on geometry large smooth surfaces aren't possible without adding features and it's very easy to loose tracking so you have to be very methodical. But that is the same with any geometry fit based scanner. The next downside is software is slow and doesn't handle much over a certain amount so you have to split the scan into pieces to stay under the amount. For a $400 scanner it does very well. But like with anything in this price range you have to work within it's limits. It's no handy scan but it's also not bad... if you work with in it's limits. You can see the tracking issues I had in the video and I talk about them and how to work with them. Not trying to sell these scanners just wanted to show what can be done with them and share my 11.5 years of professional 3d scanning experience with people looking to get into it. This is a good step in that direction. I get nothing if you buy one, no money changed hands. I saw their product and asked if I could use it in a video showcasing what you can do with 3d scanning. They said sure and sent it to me. My channel has the full video.
Fantastic video 👍😁. It's so refreshing to see a video where a pro gives his opinion on a scanner rather than a beginners opinion. Many beginners tend to trash a product simply because they cant figure something out due to a lack of understanding. Then of course the product is junk in their eyes. Thanks for this video. You have a new subscriber 😀.
I have a revopoint, so far I've only scanned a headlight housing and some body panels. It gets lost very easily and the point density is very low. This seems to blow it out of the water(at least on video) but it also seems it's automatically converted to a mesh while scanning
Haven't used a revo point, so I can't comment much on it, but all scanners do some sort of processing once the scan is completed. Good possibility is taking each shot and doing a lightweight mesh for display and then processing all shots together into one at the end. Again I don't know for sure, but that's pretty typical for scanners in general. Any geometry alignment scanner will get lost easily if not done right. Smooth/ rounded/ flat surfaces are hard to track. You need good fitting geometry on the part or manually align scans to make them work. Now If the part has a lot of features it's much easier. But that's why target recognition, though a pain to put then all on and take them off, is a good thing.
Thanks for mentioning the GOM Inspect. I’ll have to check it one out. It looks easier to use for scan editing than Solidworks. My Lynx loses tracking pretty frequently, but I’ve been trying to use it for larger scans, where using the turntable isn’t possible. I’m thinking that I may need to try to scan smaller areas (with considerable overlapping regions) and let the system align the scans. Hopefully that works, because it can be a bit frustrating.
Yes gom indirect is great. And if you move slowly and have geometry to fit to it should work out. Also if it's very flat and featureless you can add geometry you remove in post processing
Are there any leaks since you've been using it? I had my equalizer apart and replaced the regular o-rings because I had them on hand but didn't replace the seal. It still looked good so I put everything back together. Now when both brake pedals are pushed and the equalizer rod comes out oil leaks past that seal. When the the rod is in there's no leaking. I'll probably have to take it out again and replace that seal but was curious if it seemed to work for you. Thanks for the video it helped alot.
Yes that's possible. Something leaked before I took it apart but it was so dirty it was hard to tell from where. I only took it apart because I put a new clutch and flywheel in and it was easy access at that point. I redid the master cylinders as well. I'll get that seal and put it in and see how it goes. Thanks
Great video, thanks. Any more tips you have on strategies to avoid scan distortion when scanning large objects would be much appreciated! I've always struggled with that with my HP 3D Scan Pro. I'm tempted to replace it with one of these, and really want one, but don't really scan things often enough to justify the expense. I'll look forward to more episodes.
If the scanner doesn't use targets, geometry is your friend. The more you have, the better your scans will fit together. If you are scanning a "plain" object, you can tape or glue small things to the part that you remove in post processing. The issue with these more affordable scanners is a lack of user calibration, so if you notice distortion and can't calibrate it, you may need to contact the manufacturer.
@@Black240SXDrift Thanks. The lack of any ability to re-calibrate / configure for scanning totally different sized items is another thing which puts me off replacing my HP scanner with something like the Lynx. I really like that about the HP / David system. It's such a pity HP killed the project when they bought it, as it had a good 10 year head start on all the current budget scanners, and would probably completely blow them all away if development had continued. With scan distortion, I've typically had problems when for example scanning around the empty engine compartment of the a car body shell. Each scan aligns nicely with the previous one, but when the 1st and last ones meet, the small misalignments between them all have added up enough for the scans at either end to not meet correctly. Next time I'll have to try attaching something unrelated to the scan in the middle (where the engine would be) to try to help the scans align correctly.
@richardjones38 yeah, especially engine bay scans are tricky. With smaller measuring volumes and only using geometry for alignment, it's like stacking paper, and eventually, your deviation adds up. You want to start your scan in the middle and scan to the outside to minimize that deviation build-up. If you are scanning an engine bay without the engine in there, you can add, say, a piece of plywood with things glued to it to give it geometry to fit to. Once you have the perimeter scanned, you can remove the plywood and add in the crossmember, then just delete the plywood in post processing. This is the biggest issue with geometry based scanning. All it takes is one scan that doesn't line up just right to throw it all off. Targets or camera tracking make huge improvements. However, even with targets, this can happen if it's too much larger than the single scan volume. That's where photogrammetry comes in. When you can use targets and photogrammetry, your volumetric error is greatly decreased. Unfortunately, these systems aren't super affordable. There are a few open source photogrammetric target acquisition tools out there, but that's a completely other rabbit hole.
@@Black240SXDrift Thanks. It's great to hear opinions on this from someone who uses professional scanners for a living, rather than youtubers creating content for affiliate links, etc. but likely lacking any real scanning expertise. Especially when they're also using their scans for the same sort of thing as I am (I'm shoehorning an Audi V8 into a Porsche 914, with the objective being minimal, if any body mods - it's a super tight fit). I look forward to future updates and have subscribed. What spec processor and graphics does the laptop you're using have? My body shell scans are pushing the i7 2nd generation / 20 GB / Nvidea Quattro 1000 Lenovo W520 which I bought for scanning back in 2011 to its limits. I'll be replacing it shortly, possibly with a Lenovo P52 i7 9th gen / 32GB / Nividea Quattro P3200
@@richardjones38 I should be scanning my engine bay here soon. I'll be videoing that. It will be a test to see how the scanner does. If I end up having issues, I'll trouble shoot those and show how I get around them. As far as computer, I'm using an ACER Nitro 5 515-57 with an 11 gen i7 2.3 ghz with 32 gb of ram and nvidia geforce rtx 3050 ti. It does okay. I'm limited at only being able to install 32 gb of ram. Really in 3d scanning ram is king. The more ram the better. For whatever reason, the software rarely takes advantage of multicore crazy processors, and mega graphics cards. We ran work station laptops on my last job and dealt with 100 gb + files fairly frequently. Biggest improvement we got was from 128 gb of ram. Processors and graphics will help but these programs love some ram. A lot of the newer high end scanners recommend a minimum of 128 gbs of ram. Just to use the scanner. So the more ram you can throw at it the better. Even with processing tools like geomagic design-x, wrap, or even polyworks, ram is king. We could lock up custom built multi core dual graphics card desktop machines with scan data. It wasn't until we started going up on ram that we saw improvements.
no worries thanks josh like your videos im from australia is it hard for you to check see if they fit i tried to find part numbers but can only find the kit in the parts list really appreciate it if you could
If you found the kit, it should have a part number for the whole kit. If that part number matches the part number for the whole kit for a 484 then these seals should work for you. If not, a lot of googling to try to find a breakdown of the seals in the kit with their part numbers or sizes is what I did. But I would just check the website you found your kit for and look up the kit for the 484. If it's the same part number, you're good. I would imagine they would be similar.
Actually there is a way to remove misaligned frames, this feature is not really documented anywhere but if you double click on the scan you've made (on the list), you'll enter a tab which shows all the frames you've captured. Now you'll have to find the bad frames, select them and just hit delete!
@jeeplifted1 I was a manager for a 3d scanning company at my last job. You learn a lot when you do it every day haha. I'm also planning on reviewing other more entry level affordable scanners. Keep an eye out on the channel. I'm trying to cover different price ranges.
Awesome man! Take your time and watch for misaligned data. Should do very well. Set your brightness to 7 or more if you have trouble pulling in black parts. Scan processing takes a long time on bigger scans. Stay below 6,000 frames. It should do well. I'd love to see it when you're done!
@@Black240SXDrift Right now I am having a tough time scanning my cargo bike because it has a lot of long straight tubes and it gets confused. Any suggestions on that?
@charlesbauer1747 add geometry. You can wrap it in masking tape with random patterns. That will help. You can also place "sacrificial geometry" near the bars that gets deleted after. Round bars, even with targets are tricky. Adding in geometry helps a lot. Even when we would scan round bars with targets, we had a frame or something around the bars to hold the targets.
@@Black240SXDrift The tape did not help much. I played around with it for a while yesterday after work, and seem to be getting best results by doing 300-500 frame scans and cleaning them up and aligning them one at a time. This will take some time, but I think the results are good. Now to my that new seal scanner today.
@charlesbauer1747 can always add geometry and delete it later if needed. That seal looks good. Just I don't scan a lot of small stuff so not great for what I do, but scans look pretty good so far.
Great video Josh. You made it seem that it wasn't that far over my head. Looking forwad to seeing you and Ashley, Christina and Kat, And the granddoggers
I'm using an ACER Nitro 5 AN515-57 with the intel core i7 11800H @2.3 ghz and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti graphics card. The thing is, in 3D Scanning RAM is king. A lot of the 3d scanning and processing software out there do a terrible job of effective resource use and rely strongly on Ram. My laptop will only use 32 gb ram. I tried to get 64 but the bios couldn't handle it. You will do much better the more ram you have. We ran crazy multi core processors and high dollar graphics cards at my previous job and found that most software doesn't utilize graphics cards or even the multi cores in the processors, and the "cheap" computer with 128gb of ram ran everything a lot better. I strongly recommend as much ram as you can throw at whatever computer you are using. You will have a much better experience with scanning. A good processor and graphics card will help for sure, but the ram will be a much better return on investment that crazy graphics card and processor.
@Black240SXDrift TY sir, that is exactly what I wanted to know. I had to buy a new computer for mine (needed one for the shop anyways). Later i5 with 16gig seems to do the job when it is plugged in. There must be something in the power settings that causes it to struggle otherwise.
@charlesbauer1747 yeah laptops usually throttle performance on battery. You could play with the settings, but I always plug in because even the killer laptops we had at one of my last jobs would suck a battery dry very fast.
@Black240SXDrift pretty impressed with this thing so far (got mine friday). One freehand scan on my kitchen counter produced a very workable scan (I am far from an expert). I didn't get the turntable because we have weld positioners at my shop and the tripod looks pretty cheapo as well.
@@charlesbauer1747 Yeah, honestly it's not super needed. With the stand off distance of the scanner, the stand provided is too small to get good angles by itself. Also the turn table is really only good for smaller stuff and is just convenient so you don't have to walk around the part to scan. I would almost rather just use a cheap lazy susan type manual turn table because the automated turntable is tethered to the scanner, so it's one more cable to contend with. The biggest thing is slow smooth movements so the scanner doesn't loose tracking. The program does a decent job automatically getting rid of data, but if there is bad data too close to good data, you end up with weird mesh issues. This happens even on higher end scanners, though not as often. That's really one of the downsides of scanning with no target recognition. But the scan I got was very useable and decent quality. There a tricks you can do for "cheating" accuracy for things like hole locations etc to work around some of the issues. But spending a little more time scanning will definitely save you a bunch of time in post processing.
Killer results for the price point. You know my past.. In 2006 I never imagined the then white light ATOS technology would become accessible for more users. The cost at that time was staggering for most businesses and all private users.
