Jump to content

Holes in thinner plastic scans


---
 Share

Recommended Posts

---

Is there a magic formula for scanning thinner plastic samples, without ending up with holes in the mesh? I seem to go back and forth in troubleshooting this issue. Less kV, more exposure and more image averaging seem to work on some projects, more kV with less exposure works better at other times. Struggling with a project currently, no matter the settings, seem to be having issue getting decent polygonization. Have attempted to utilize multiple variations of pol. settings as well. Have as much angle on the sample as I can manage. I'm left wondering if there was a "standard" setting to begin with regarding.

Thanks as always to the group for any assist. 

Holes in mesh.JPG

Holes in mesh_2.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

---

Please sign in to view this username.

 I have scanned A LOT of small plastic samples of all densities with our Metrotom 6 Scout. Your machine should be able to handle this just fine. Is "Use reliable surfaces only" unchecked? What does your volume look like (any problems visible)? What software are you using? Make sure beam hardening correction is off. When you double click the volume, a menu on the right side of the screen pops out. Go to "Display" and change your absorption length to a smaller number to increase the amount of material visible in the volume.

Edited
  • Like! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

---

Volume has a lot of thin areas as well. I will look at the Metrotom, I have not purposefully enabled beam hardening. I had not tried/ was unaware of the absorption length setting, will definitely give that a try, appreciate the suggestions, will report back on results!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

---
Posted (edited)

I'm using Zeiss Inspect 2025----beam hardening is off----- reliable surfaces remains unchecked-----the absorption length is interesting, played around with it, did seem to fill in a bit, but ultimately this particular sample was pushing the boundaries of volume limitation, so I could not get enough angle on the sample. resigned to scanning and capturing what I could with more angle solved the problem here. It's likely that there is no getting around utilizing a substantial angle for shorter path, is what this scan issue has seemingly shown.

Appreciate the help as always, this is a great spot for learning these systems

Edited
Link to comment
Share on other sites

---

Please sign in to view this quote.

Please sign in to view this username.

 Can you elaborate on the bold portion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hey DWC, the bolded portion shown explains that adding more angle to my sample, so that there is a shorter path for the X ray to travel through, helped in this instance. The sample was large enough to have barely fit into my scanner's available capture window. When I added more angle to the sample (removing a lengthier path of a flat surface, the scan captured more successfully. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to view this quote.

Please sign in to view this username.

 I understand. Do you know how to use vertical view extension for parts that are taller than your max view window? It's very useful.

Edited
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...