It’s also pretty much a technical impossibility if you know anything about 3D printers.
3D printers can’t read CAD. They aren’t fed STLs or any other kind of 3D model. They’re fed G-Code, which contains no geometrical details. It’s a list of instructions saying “turn these 4 motors this speed this for this amount of time while heating that part to this temperature and turning this other motor this speed, then heat this part while tunlrning that motor that fast…” with hundreds or thousands of instructions, and then new instructions for the next layer.
In order to print a model, you first have to run it through a program called a slicer that generates that G-code by slicing it into layers with instructions for how to move, heat and cool the nozzle, build plate, and chamber, feed the filament, etc.
The printers just follow those instructions with minimal on-board processing and zero information regarding the final model’s structure.
It’s pretty hard when you have to also account for extra printing to conceal the item. You can render a result, but if it just looks like a box with convenient breakaway pieces that snap to leave behind just the part, you’ll need some more complex work than simple pattern matching. And even then each piece of a gun isn’t a really a unique shape only used for firearms.
Assuming there is extra printing. That wastes resources and your iterative designs are also captured in sequence, which reveals the direction of your efforts.
Speaking as someone that knows basically nothing about 3d printing (though has done similar with CNC), do you think it’d be possible to reverse-engineer the code in some way? I’m thinking something like a simulated 3d printer 🤷♀️
It’s also pretty much a technical impossibility if you know anything about 3D printers.
3D printers can’t read CAD. They aren’t fed STLs or any other kind of 3D model. They’re fed G-Code, which contains no geometrical details. It’s a list of instructions saying “turn these 4 motors this speed this for this amount of time while heating that part to this temperature and turning this other motor this speed, then heat this part while tunlrning that motor that fast…” with hundreds or thousands of instructions, and then new instructions for the next layer.
In order to print a model, you first have to run it through a program called a slicer that generates that G-code by slicing it into layers with instructions for how to move, heat and cool the nozzle, build plate, and chamber, feed the filament, etc.
The printers just follow those instructions with minimal on-board processing and zero information regarding the final model’s structure.
Those instructions can be translated into the final product. It isn’t hard when you know what each instruction produces…
It’s pretty hard when you have to also account for extra printing to conceal the item. You can render a result, but if it just looks like a box with convenient breakaway pieces that snap to leave behind just the part, you’ll need some more complex work than simple pattern matching. And even then each piece of a gun isn’t a really a unique shape only used for firearms.
Assuming there is extra printing. That wastes resources and your iterative designs are also captured in sequence, which reveals the direction of your efforts.
Speaking as someone that knows basically nothing about 3d printing (though has done similar with CNC), do you think it’d be possible to reverse-engineer the code in some way? I’m thinking something like a simulated 3d printer 🤷♀️
there are many open sourced software applications than can produce G-Code for any printer. All of it can be done offline.
But the most popular brand right now forces server interaction.
Only if you want to use cloud printing. I print on my A1 using Orca all the time.