clovis wrench, arizona state museum, university of arizona, murray springs, 3d scan, 3d model, 3d, 3d print, deviation, 2D compare, 3D compare, archaeology, archeology


The original intent for the incorporation of computer aided inspection (CAI) in my work flow was to ensure that each model produced is as close to the original specimen as possible. However, following the integration of CAI, many additional benefits quickly became apparent. One of my favorite projects thus far has been to identify the optimal real-world settings for a specific 3D printer that would provide the best results for students in an educational setting.

Computer aided inspection for the original NURBS surface contrast with a mesh of a 3D printed replica.

CAI was also used for the analysis of post-processing work flows for a constellation of landmarks, comparing their locations to different meshes of the same object generated by different scanners (in this case, comparing CT and structured light scan results). These insights are helping us to make better, and more informed, decisions in a study of shape, form, asymmetry, and allometry for a large mixed-method data set by identifying the post-processing work flow that introduces the lowest deviation between the various outputs.

Comparison points on the freeform surface model are contrasted with numerous meshes that were processed using different algorithms.

One important result of the CAI studies indicates that the incorporation of 3D data from digital repositories is a great practice, but that users should evaluate those data before employing them in additional studies. Where possible, each specimen should be re-processed using the same protocols used in the new study.