A Slicer-Independent Framework for Measuring G-Code Accuracy in Medical 3D Printing

一种与切片软件无关的医疗3D打印G代码精度测量框架

阅读:2

Abstract

In medical 3D printing, accuracy is critical for fabricating patient-specific implants and anatomical models. Although printer performance has been widely examined, the influence of slicing software on geometric fidelity is less frequently quantified. The slicing step, which converts STL files into printer-readable G-code, may introduce deviations that affect the final printed object. To quantify slicer-induced G-code deviations by comparing G-code-derived geometries with their reference STL modelsTwenty mandibular models were processed using five slicers (PrusaSlicer (version 2.9.1.), Cura (version 5.2.2.), Simplify3D (version 4.1.2.), Slic3r (version 1.3.0.) and Fusion 360 (version 2.0.19725)). A custom Python workflow converted the G-code into point clouds and reconstructed STL meshes through XY and Z corrections, marching cubes surface extraction, and volumetric extrusion. A calibration object enabled coordinate normalization across slicers. Accuracy was assessed using Mean Surface Distance (MSD), Root Mean Square (RMS) deviation, and Volume Difference. MSD ranged from 0.071 to 0.095 mm, and RMS deviation from 0.084 to 0.113 mm, depending on the slicer. Volumetric differences were slicer-dependent. PrusaSlicer yielded the highest surface accuracy; Simplify3D and Slic3r showed best repeatability. Fusion 360 produced the largest deviations. The slicers introduced geometric deviations below 0.1 mm that represent a substantial proportion of the overall error in the FDM workflow.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。