School of Science, Engineering and Technology

Department of Engineering

A Methodology to Apply 3D Scanning and Software Tools to Reverse Engineer

Various Geometric Shapes

by

Olga Zavala Handal

A Graduate Project Presented to the Department of Engineering

in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the Degree of Masters in Science in Industrial Engineering

San Antonio, Texas

December 12, 2016

Supervising Advisers:

Dr. Angel E. Esparza

Dr. Rafael Moras

Dr. Winston Erevelles

2

Acknowledgments

It is a pleasure to thank those who made this project possible. Firstly, I thank God for

the strength and courage to keep me moving forward. I wish to express my sincere gratitude to

Rafael Moras, Ph.D., and Angel E. Esparza, Ph.D., for their encouragement, guidance and

support on this endeavor from start to end as well as their assistance to help me achieved this

honor, and to Dean Winston Erevelles, Ph.D., for giving us the opportunity to develop and

understand this project. Lastly, I offer my regards and blessings to all my family and friends

who supported me in any respect during the completion of the project.

3

Abstract

We present a framework to efficiently and accurately reverse engineer mechanical

components by converting given artifacts to Computer-Aided Design (CAD) models. This

framework was developed by applying CAD tools, rapid prototyping (RP) machines, simple

hand tools, fixed and movable laser scanners, as well as reverse engineering (RE) software to

several primitive objects and test parts with compound features. Software tools and analytical

methods were used to determine the difference between key dimensions as designed and as

reverse engineered.

4

Table of Contents

Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 3

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 5

Background Information ................................................................................................................. 6

Project Plan and Methodology ........................................................................................................ 8

CAD Design................................................................................................................................. 9

STL File & Part Prototyping ..................................................................................................... 10

Part Scanning & Sketch Extraction .......................................................................................... 10

Experimental Setup ....................................................................................................................... 11

Hardware Tools......................................................................................................................... 11

Software Tools ........................................................................................................................... 15

Implementation ............................................................................................................................. 16

Establishing a Reference Plane................................................................................................. 19

Results ........................................................................................................................................... 20

Conclusions ................................................................................................................................... 23

Recommendations for Future Work.............................................................................................. 25

References ..................................................................................................................................... 25

Appendix A: Images FaroArm...................................................................................................... 29

Appendix B: Images from the E-Scanner ..................................................................................... 33

5

Introduction

Manufacturing, the production of goods or wares by manual labor or by machinery, is a

key economic driver for entities that depend on this activity. Therefore, optimization of design

and manufacturing techniques is essential, and currently used in instances such as to rebuild a

damaged machine or to fix a broken basic part on a vehicle. Many engineers restructure

systems using advanced manufacturing techniques, with the fundamental idea of solving

problems. Reverse engineering (RE) is one way of solving such problems, and it consists of

deconstructing a system, identifying broken or nonfunctional parts, and redesigning prototypes

to improve the system in general. In this research, we examined the field and process of RE, by

applying rapid prototyping (RP) and scanning techniques as a tool for the development of

discrete parts and components, particularly primitive geometric shapes, which functioned as

test artifacts. By scanning several test parts, we identified the variability in reproduction of

these shapes, which permitted the assessment of discrepancies. Through these calculations, the

errors in measurement were calculated. The measurement error when printing and designing

was analyzed by scanning the part, then creating an STL (STereoLithography) file, and

subsequently, printing the parts in three dimensions (3D).

Using different machines and components, the proposed method for experimental

accuracy was applied to the geometric shapes, in order to determine the best technique to

reverse engineer them. The methodology involved several known primitive shapes, and

comparisons of their scans to investigate both, absolute accuracy and acceptable tolerance.

6

Background Information

The role of engineers, particularly those engaged in design and manufacturing of any

product, has changed over the years due to the emergence of powerful and sophisticated RP

tools. Such shifts have required extensive research, some of which is reviewed in this section.

Three-dimensional (3D) laser scanning technology can be used to acquire a large

amount of target surface point cloud data that can identify the exact depth and real life

measurements of a part, when scanned. The measurements can be analyzed with the auto

surface command, which generates the surface model of the product. The auto surface

command also registers the point errors and accuracy on the measurements faster than other

commands involving manual manipulation of the point cloud data (Meng, 2015). In recent

years, much research have been conducted to streamline the point cloud data to reduce errors

and tighten tolerances. There are many specific ways to streamline the point cloud data, such

as: uniform grid method, plane fitting, and algorithm point cloud analysis (Wang, Luo, Wu,

2015).

Point clouds are generated using contact and noncontact methods. Contact methods use

physical probes that navigate the interior and exterior surfaces of components with point-to-

point measurements. Noncontact methods use devices such as lasers and LIDAR (Light

Detection And Ranging), to collect high-density spatial image data. The former is more

accurate but slower and labor-intensive; the latter, is less accurate but faster, and generates

denser point clouds. These methods are generally used in conjunction with software

applications that can translate point cloud data into geometry. Software applications are crucial

in extending the functionality of a scanner. Research presented by Kaner (1998) focused on

7

interoperability of software applications and identified areas in RE techniques where these

applications are essential.

RE is applied is to reduce product development costs, lead time, and idle time due to

system non-availability when a component has failed. CAD data can be obtained to

manufacture a replacement, when it is not available. According to Thilmany (2012), engineers

are increasingly using RE since hardware and software have become more affordable, thereby,

helping engineering companies (especially smaller ones) speed-up development and cut

production costs (Thilmany, 2012). Reducing the timeline for product development saves

money in the overall time-to-market scenario. The integration of RP and scanning techniques

provides a fresh way to achieve the goal of RE.

RP techniques allow for automatic construction of physical models, and are used to

significantly reduce the time for the product development cycle, improving the final quality of

the designed product. Before the advent of RP, computer numerical controlled (CNC)

equipment, or manual machines and tools, were used to create prototypes (either directly or

indirectly) using CAD data (Nasr, 2006). CNC and other machining processes are subtractive

in nature, and consist of the removal of material in order to achieve the final shape of the part.

In contrast, the RP operations models are usually built by adding material layers, until the

whole part has been constructed.

In order to have a good generic representation of the designed object for Computer-

Aided Manufacturing (CAM) applications, and especially for process planning, the overall

designed object description and its features need to be represented in a suitable, structured

database. An object consists of manufacturing features that can be classified into form features,

which decompose into either simple or compound/intersection features (Nasr, 2006). Features

8

are further classified into concave or convex0as attributes in the generic feature class. The

hierarchy of different features help determine the attributes that are needed and the ones that are

not needed.

Project Plan and Methodology

The objective of this project was to develop a reliable and repeatable methodology. As

shown in Figure 1, the project consisted in applying 3D scanning techniques and equipment, as

well as related software tools to reverse engineer various geometric shapes. The project was

conducted in three phases. These phases demonstrated how the cycle of RP and RE come

together. The cycle shown in Figure 1 was followed to identify the measurement difference

• CAD DesignPhase 1

• STL File

• Part PrototypingPhase 2

• Part Scanning

• Sketch Extraction

Phase 3

Figure 1-Reverse Engineering Cycle.

9

between the designed CAD model, the 3D printed part (using hand tools such a Vernier caliper

to measure), and the dimensions detected by 3D scanners.

CAD Design

Three test parts were either manufactured using RP or selected from a fixturing kit to

implement the RE cycle. These parts included a sphere, with an axial hole (SphereHole)

(50.800 mm, 50.800 mm, 101.600 mm); a cube, with an axial hole (CubeHole) (50.800 mm,

50.800 mm, 38.100 mm); and a clamp component (TPart1) (50.800 mm, 50.800 mm, 20.300

mm). While some of the test parts were used in early testing and for validation, most of the

testing focused on the SphereHole. A steel 1 x 2 x 3 block was also used to validate scanning

accuracy on a metrology artefact of known dimensions.

The dimensions of the three test parts as designed are shown in Figure 2. It should be

noted that x, y, and z dimensions were used by the scanning hardware and software to establish

Figure 2-Dimensions of Sample Parts

10

locating planes for a given part. The z-axis dimensions are commonly shown as z/2, reflecting

user-inserted planes of symmetry.

STL File & Part Prototyping

In order to print part prototypes using RP machines (also referred to as 3D printers),

CAD models were translated into a neutral file format used by all 3D printers. This format,

called the STL file, converts a CAD image into a tessellated model using polygons and points.

Highly curved surfaces employ many polygons, resulting in very large files. These files are

sliced along the z-axis by the software, which is resident on 3D printers based on their native

resolution. As a result, any 3D object may be printed in additive fashion, by stacking layers of

x- and y- point data. In this phase, the CAD files of the test specimens were converted into the

STL format, and printed on 3D printers using various materials. Printed artefacts were

removed from the build platform, stripped of any supports, and cleaned using solvents and a

waterjet (when needed).

Part Scanning & Sketch Extraction

The objective of this phase was to scan the printed, physical objects, in order to develop

3D CAD models. Laser digitizers (also referred to as 3D scanners), were used to capture data

points from these objects and develop dense point clouds for further processing. Software tools

were used to condition these point clouds, and reconstruct the part design in CAD by extracting

key datum points, reference planes, and reference geometry. This information can be used to

recreate 3D CAD models. Additionally, for RE purposes, key measurements were evaluated by

comparing the CAD design measurements with the 3D printed outcome measurements.

11

Experimental Setup

The experimental setup implemented in this project was comprised of the following list

of machines and materials, which permitted the implementation of the aforementioned

methodology.

Hardware Tools

1. FaroArm Edge: the FaroArm® is a machine with an articulated arm that terminates in a

hard, spherical probe or a hand-held laser line probe that provides both contact and non-contact

measurement.

Figure 2- Specifications FaroArm Edge (Ltd, 2016)

12

Unlike other scanning systems, the hard probe and the laser line probe can digitize

interchangeably without having to remove either component. Users can accurately measure

prismatic features with the hard probe, then laser scan sections requiring larger volumes of data

— all in one tool (Ltd, 2016). The user identifies what needs to be scanned, and manually moves

the arm to position the probes. The operator can scan millions of cloud points with the laser

scanner, and export those points to native Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) software or

other commercially-available packages for further processing. The arm connects to a host

computer via USB, and uses a device driver that permits the live-transfer of images and

measurements. The detailed specifications of this machine are shown in Figure 2. Images

produced by this device are featured in Appendix A.

2. E-Scan Optix 500: The E-Scan Optix 500 is a fixed device that is similar in objective to

the FaroArm. The difference is that this device captures point data while fixed in position in

relation to the object. As a result, this device is capable of scanning one view at a time.

Figure 3- E-Scanner (TECH-LABS, 2016)

13

Parts may be indexed manually or using a turntable. Capture images are manually

clarified, and may be transferred to RE software via a proprietary device driver. The scanner and

its specifications are shown in Figures 3 and 4, respectively. Images produced by this device are

depicted in Appendix B.

3. Dimension Elite Printer: The Dimension Elite is a 3D printer that uses fused deposition

modeling, otherwise known as FDM Technology. It is capable of printing in various colors

using real ABS (Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene) plus thermoplastic. The build volume of this

printer is 203 × 203 × 305 mm (8 x 8 x 12 inches). Catalyst, the software application running

this machine, allows the user to print using fine (0.178 mm or 0.007 in.) and coarse (0.254 mm

or 0.010 in.) resolutions for layer thickness (Ltd., 2016). A picture of the Dimension Elite printer

is furnished in Figure 5.

Figure 4- E-Scanner Specifications 3D Digital Corps-- 3ddigitalcorp.com (TECH-LABS, 2016)

14

4. Connex2: The Connex printer was the first 3D printer in the world to simultaneously 3D

prints multiple colors and materials (Ltd., 2016). The build volume of this printer is 255 × 252 ×

200 mm (10.0 x 9.9 x 7.9 in.). The layer thickness is as fine as 16 microns (µm or 0.0006 in.),

and the build resolution is x-axis: 600 dpi; y-axis: 600 dpi; z-axis: 1600 dpi. Numerous

composite materials can be manufactured by mixing the raw materials concurrently while

printing, including digital ABS, rubber-like materials, blended colors in rigid opaque, translucent

colored tints, and polypropylene-like materials with improved thermal resistance (Ltd., 2016).

The materials used for the 3D prints were FL X980 (Tango Black Plus) and RGD835 (Vero

White Plus). A picture of the Connex printer is provided in Figure 6.

Figure 6-Connex2 3Dprinter (Ltd., 2016)

Figure 5 - Dimension Elite 3D Printer (Ltd., 2016)

15

Software Tools

5. Geomagic: The software used for CAD design was Geomagic Design X® (refer herein as

Geomagic), a program intended to highlight and design a part or shape of any kind. This

software is similar to SolidWorks®, a well-known commercial software package for 3D

modeling. However, Geomagic has the additional capability of manipulating point cloud data

and convert that data into a parametric CAD model. Geomagic supports RE by combining CAD

tools with 3D scan data processing to create feature base, editable solid models, which are

compatible with a wide range of commercial CAD software packages. The software contains

three modules: DesignX, Control, and Wrap. These process scanned point data, generating

polygons, surfaces, and parametric CAD. The architecture of the software is depicted in figure 7.

Figure 7- Software’s capability Geomagic (Geomagic, 2014).

Design X

NURBS-Reverse

Engineering

Solid Sheet

RAPID Forms

CONTROL

Polygons

Inspection

WRAP

NURBS Polygons

Points

Points

Points

16

Implementation

Initial tests were conducted using a combination of test parts and machines for prototyping

and scanning. In Figures 8 and 9 we provide an overview of the application of the Geomagic

software and the FaroArm to the scanning process and the specific steps followed to create a

parametric CAD model from the point cloud. These figures are representative of the procedures

Figure 8- Flow Process to Scan and Extract Measurements.

17

also followed using the E-Scan device. A data flow diagram used to connect the FaroArm to the

Geomagic software in order to scan and collect point cloud data is shown in Figure 8. It was

assumed that the arm was calibrated when initially installed. Recalibration is required only when

the system is moved or the backup batteries are replaced. When the system is initialized, the

three software modules within Geomagic interact with the arm and laser scanning head in two

different ways, as shown in Figure 8. In both cases, manual movement of the arm initiates the

operation of the encoders. A trigger on the FaroArm causes a point location to be recorded in the

Cartesian coordinate system based on the encoded values at each joint in the arm. This is similar

to the kinematics of an industrial robot arm. When configured with the laser scanning head, the

trigger stays on, and continuously records point data until the trigger is manually turned off.

Both of the modules used allowed the user to set various switches to control the operation of the

software. Early testing focused on Geomagic Wrap and Control. With the upgrade to the

software, much of the functionality needed for RE was embedded within Design X. As a result,

the majority of the scanning employed this software module.

The steps followed to convert a point cloud to either a non-parametric surface (mesh) or a

parametric CAD model (sketch and design intent) are shown in Figure 9. This enables the user

to connect point cloud processing, mesh processing, auto surfacing, and the identification of

design intent. During the processing of the point cloud(s), multiple point clouds (one point cloud

was generated for each scanning operation. For example, a cube might require as many as six

scanning operations to fully capture all six faces to fully represent the scanned object. These

point clouds were inserted into the work space and aligned to resolve translational and rotational

differences between multiple scans of the same artifact from different perspectives. Following

this step, the point cloud was manipulated to eliminate noise such as background, over scans, or

18

Figure 9 - Step- by- Step after scan and create the final STL File Software: Geomagic Design X (Gliffy, 2015)

19

false positives from unrelated geometry. The point clouds were further processed to smooth out

and reduce the data set, generating the mesh representing the scanned surface. A mesh may be

linked to a fine net, being snugly draped over an object. This net represents the geometry of the

part using polygons, vertices, and edges, which are techniques commonly used in surface

modeling. Each of these steps had associated software settings that could be manually controlled

by the user, in order to approach specific problems in processing point clouds. Nonetheless, the

entire process could be automated using default settings in the software through the mesh

buildup wizard. Test parts were scanned using both operator-controlled and wizard-controlled

setups, and no appreciable differences in scans were observed. Consequently, the majority of the

scans were completed using the software wizard. The point cloud process terminated in the

generation of the mesh, giving the user the option of processing these data to generate a surface

or discern design intent. Both of these options are shown in Figure 9, and were used to generate

additional prototypes (auto surfacing) or extract features, curves, surfaces, and solid models

(design intent). The auto surface data was exported to a STL file format, and the test parts were

reprinted on the Connex2 as well as Dimension Elite printers for validation. Although not used,

design intent data supports STEP/ IGES exchange of information between different CAD

systems. The process shown in Figure 9 was applied to all test parts, with multiple replications.

Establishing a Reference Plane

An important step in generating a valid scan involved establishing a reference or

scanning plane. Omission of this step could yield inaccurate point cloud data. The first parts

were scanned over a white background to provide high contrast and aid in detecting the part.

However, it became apparent that separating the point cloud of the part from the point cloud of

the background was complicated and prone to human error, because it was hard to identify the

20

essential points of the image. The results in which the variability in scanned data resulted in

inaccurate results is depicted in Table 1. The data shown are from eleven scans, with the

software set to minimum point spacing, two filter angles, and the maximum error allowed by the

user.

The solution to resolving the variablity in scans consisted of eliminating the background

plane by elevating the object to be scanned. This method offers several advantages, including

faster and more complete, accurate, and reliable scans.

Results

Table 2 is a summary of test part dimensions, as compared to original CAD dimensions.

The first set of five columns shows the Cartesian coordinates of the bounding box of the part, the

Table 1- Inaccuracy in results resulting from variability

Table 3 – SphereHole Analysis

Table 2 – SphereHole Analysis

21

sphere diameter, and the diameter of the axial hole. As designed in CAD, the part was a sphere

with a diameter of 101.6 mm, with an axial hole with a diameter of 90.0 mm. The next set of

five columns represents dimensions obtained from the 3D printed part using a Vernier caliper.

These dimensions represent the average of four measurement trials. The final set of five

columns represents dimensions obtained from the 3D printed part using the FaroArm and the

Geomagic software. These dimensions represent the average of four scans and resulting

measurements from extracted sketches. Study 1 represents the cycle using the Dimension Elite

printer and RGD835(Vero White Plus) material. Study 2 represents the same cycle using the

Connex printer and FL X980 (Tango Black Plus) material.

The difference in measurements between the part as designed and as measured using two

different methods (calipers and scanner) appears at the bottom of the table, for each key

dimension on the part. For example, in study 1, the difference between the diameter of the

sphere as designed and as measured using the caliper was 101.600 mm - 99.441 mm = 2.159

mm (2.120% error). This was characterized as the measurement error for the caliper. Positive

values for the error indicate that the measured part was smaller than as the one designed in CAD,

and vice versa. Similarly, the measurement error for the same dimension, measured using the

FaroArm, was -0.200 mm (-0.200% error). Another key dimension on this test part was the

diameter of the axial hole (90.0 mm). The measurement error for the caliper and the FaroArm

was -0.600 mm (-0.670% error) and 0.200 mm (0.221% error), respectively.

The measurment errors for study 2 also appear in Table 2. The difference between the

diameter of the sphere, as measured using the caliper, and the FaroArm was 101.600 mm -

99.822 mm = 1.778 mm (1.750% error). This was characterized as the measurement error for the

caliper. Similarly, the measurement error for the same dimension, measured using the FaroArm

22

was 0.180 mm (0.180% error). Another key dimension on this test part was the diameter of the

axial hole (90.000 mm). The measurement error for the caliper and the FaroArm was -0.100 mm

(0.111% error) and 0.020 mm (0.021% error), respectively. The measurement errors for the

CubeHole part are shown in Table 3. It was constructed in identical fashion to Table 2.

Scan of Metal Part 1 x 2 x 3 Gage Block

In order to verify whether coating a specular surface with powder might introduce small

errors in accuracy, an additional scan was conducted on a reference prismatic part of known

dimensions (Figure 10). This was a prismatic part with the following dimensions: length=3 in,

Scanned Image: Exact

Measurements E

Figure 10- FaroArm Scan (Using SprayON WL 745).

Table 4- CubeHole Analysis.

23

breadth=2 in, and height=1 in. The part had several holes that were not considered for the test.

This part was sprayed with ON WL 745, a powder spray, to make it less specular and enable

scanning. The part was processed in identical fashion as the other two test parts, and resulted

in null measurement errors for both calipers and the FaroArm.

Conclusions

The purpose of this project was to develop a framework to efficiently and accurately

reverse engineer mechanical components. The following conclusions were drawn:

A framework utilizing CAD tools, precision manual measurement instruments, laser

scanners, and RE software was developed and successfully implemented on several

primitive objects and test parts with compound features.

The RE software was successfully applied to point clouds to extract features that were

used to generate parametric CAD models, thereby, meeting the fundamental objective

of RE.

In general, laser scanning using a movable scanner produced higher quality results

with low measurement errors. For the devices used, the fixed scanner did not

produced results that were comparable to those generated by the movable arm.

The laser scanner allowed for the generation of high quality scans with virtually no

part fixturing. This is typically a time-consuming and complicated process involving

several components such as a base plate, clamps, and other devices.

Convex and concave cylindrical and spherical features were more accurately

measured using the scanner in comparison to the Vernier Caliper. Further, multiple

features can be captured and extracted in a single setting, as opposed to manually

24

measuring individual features of a given part. This also enables the user to quickly

establish the spatial relationship of various features in relation to a datum or to each

other.

Linear and planar features were comparable when measured using the caliper or the

scanner. However, the caliper provided a quick means of verifying simple

measurements and may, therefore, be used to accelerate the RE process when such

features are scanned.

The success of 3D scanning depended on several critical factors:

o Prior to initiating a scan, it is important to analyze the geometry of the part,

and position/orient the object to produce a quality point cloud.

o In order to achieve a successful scan, it may be necessary to divide the process

into multiple scans. The fragmented point clouds are then stitched together to

generate a complete image of the part. Alignment of fragmented point clouds

is critical to successful RE. It is possible to automate this step by using an

indexing device, such as a turn table.

o Fragmented point clouds or overlapping scans produce a large number of

duplicate points. Software utilities within the RE package should be used to

filter the point cloud to delete duplicate data, reduce noise, and order the data

before processing the point cloud into a mesh. Failure to do so, will generate

large STL files, where the polygons are not closed, resulting in invalid part

geometry.

25

Recommendations for Future Work

Recommendations for further work are:

1. The use of analysis of variance principles would add a solid scientific foundation and

statistical rigor to studies in which an extension to the work presented here is attempted.

2. Analysis similar to the one presented here may be conducted using a Coordinate

Measuring Machine (CMM), in order to further analyze measurements errors.

Measurement tools such as micrometers, height gages, and bore gages could be used to

validate manual measurements.

3. Similar analysis can be replicated and should be conducted for new parts with varying

geometries. It would be of interest, as well, to determine additional “tipping points” in

geometry that would result in a particular methodology or measurement instrument

being preferred over another.

The results reported here should always be considered with caution, as the rapid

advancement of technology will irremediably render the equipment and methods used in this

project obsolete. Intelligent systems may, in a not so distant future, reduce, streamline, or even

eliminate many of the steps described here.

References

AppliedArtsNEWTRIER. (2012, May 7). IED: Examples of reverse engineering designs.

Retreived 11/20/2015

Chua C. K., L. K. (2003). Rapid Prototyping. Singapore 596224: World Scientific Publishing Co.

Pte. Ltd.

26

Montgomery, G. DC. (2011). Engineering Statistics, Fifth Edition. Arizona State University:

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Fernandes, V. R. (2008). Reverse Engineering. Springer-Verlag London: British Library

Cataloguing in Publication Data.

Gary King, J. P. (2014). Reverse-engineering censorship in China: Randomized experimentation

and participant observation. Vol. 345 no. 6199, 345.

Geomagic. (2014). Geomagic Design X Training. Geomagic Design X Training, (p. 200).

Raleigh, North Carolina.

Gliffy. (2015, November 29). Retrieved from Gliffy Flow Chart :

https://www.gliffy.com/go/html5/9540047?app=1b5094b0-6042-11e2-bcfd-

0800200c9a66. Retreived 11/25/2016

Ivo Rodrigues Montanha Junior, A. O. (2015, January 15). Guidelines for Reverse Engineering

Process Modeling of Technical Systems. Retrieved from Springer Science+Business

Mediahttp://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0C

CUQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.springer.com%2Fcda%2Fcontent%2Fdocument

%2Fcda_downloaddocument%2F9781846289750-c1.pdf%3FSGWID%3D0-0-45-

396731-p173742663&ei=BAIPVdnFOeKxsAST4YHYDg&usg=AFQjCN. Retrevied

11/08/2015

Kaner, C. (1998, July). Kaner.com. Retrieved from Article 2B and Reverse Engineering:

http://www.kaner.com/pdfs/RevEngShort.pdf

Kemper, L. U. a.-S.-S.-R. (2015, February 20). Fundamentals and Applications of Reverse

Engineering in Engineering Design. Retrieved from Prepared for the Handbook of

Environmentally Conscious Mechanical Design, Wiley:

27

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&ved=0CEwQF

jAG&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fprofile%2FKemper_Lewis%2Fpu

blication%2F235409503_Fundamentals_and_Applications_of_Reverse_Engineering_in_

Engineering_Design%2Flinks%2F0fcf

Ltd, F. T. (2016, 11 27). FaroArm Edge. Retrieved from Faro ScanArm:

http://www.faro.com/products/metrology/faro-scanarm/overview Retreived 11/25/2016

Ltd., S. (2016, 12 1). Stratasys. Retrieved from Connex - Dimension Elite:

http://www.stratasys.com/3d-printers/production-series/connex3-

systems#sthash.yOB5UNhH.dpuf. Retreived 11/28/2016

Manufacturing, C. (2015, March 8). 2015 Cox Manufacturing Company . Retrieved from Cox

Manufacturing Company: http://www.coxmanufacturing.com/ Retreived 11/25/2015

Nasr, A. K. (2006). Rapid Prototyping, Theory and Practice. Houston, TX, USA: Springer

Science+Business Media, Inc.

Noorani, R. (2006). RAPID PROTOTYPING. Los Angeles, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Obi, D. S. (2008, March 20). Improving Modern Manufacturing Systems. Retrieved from

Improving Modern Manufacturing Systems: http://www.engr.sjsu.edu/sobi/IMPROVING

MODERN MAN.htm

Otto, K. N. (2001). Product Design, Techniques in Reverse Engineering and New Product

Development. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458: Prentice Hall.

Pham, D. H. (2008). Reverse Engineering-Hardware and Software. In V. a. Raja (Ed.), Reverse

Engineering: An Industrial Perspective. London: Springer-Verlag.

Rafiq Noorani, P. (2006). RAPID PROTOTYPING. Los Angeles, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

28

Schwartz, M. ( 2001, November 12). Computer World. Retrieved from How-To:

http://www.computerworld.com/article/2585652/app-development/reverse-

engineering.html Retreived 11/25/2015

TECH-LABS. (2016, 12 1). Escan 3D Scanner. Retrieved from Technical Laboratory Systems,

Inc 1113 Avenue B Katy, TX 77493: https://tech-labs.com/products/escan-3d-scanner

Thilmany, J. (2012, February). ASME. Retrieved from The Rise of Reverse Engineering:

https://www.asme.org/engineering-topics/articles/modeling-computational-methods/the-

rise-of-reverse-engineering Retreived 11/25/2015

29

Appendix A: Images FaroArm

The following images were taken from the FaroArm:

First Scan of Metal Block

History Tree Shown in Geomagic Design X

30

Accuracy Analyzer (TM) - Curvature Dimensions

Accuracy Analyzer (TM) - Deviation Color Map

31

Accuracy Analyzer (TM) Top View

Accuracy Analyzer (TM) - Allowable Values

32

Accuracy Analyzer (TM)

33

Appendix B: Images from the E-Scanner

Front Plane Scan

Top View Scan

34

Top View Scan