1. Registered forum members do not see this ad.

It would be feasible to create a mesh of points then play with the z value, re triangulating every time, to get something that has a stone face look. Using multiple plines may be another way and create a mesh. A 3d camera would solve the problem very quick.

Have you looked on google ? Try 3ds max objects 1st.

For any one have a play with this just made an array of points started to edit the points Z and retriangulated re CIV3D, turned on contours and starting to get a shape. The 3dfaces are in layer c-tinn-view.

2. Originally Posted by LGGreen
I thought that may be a solution. Big learning process there for a stone that is only 2mm x 4mm! But here goes, nothing ventured, nothing gained. Where is my manual!!!
2mm x 4mm? I would call that a bb.

3. Originally Posted by BIGAL
It would be feasible to create a mesh of points then play with the z value, re triangulating every time, to get something that has a stone face look. Using multiple plines may be another way and create a mesh. A 3d camera would solve the problem very quick.

Have you looked on google ? Try 3ds max objects 1st.

For any one have a play with this just made an array of points started to edit the points Z and retriangulated re CIV3D, turned on contours and starting to get a shape. The 3dfaces are in layer c-tinn-view.
I have looked at the block.dwg. Is it an extruded rectangle to form a box. On top of this is an array of 3D surface independent triangles. To move a vertex each of the surrounding triangles needs to be selected then the group of vertices can be moved in the Z direction to form a sort of pyramid. Not sure what the function of the points is at this stage. Finally I assume the triangles have somehow to be joined to make a single surface. This then needs to nbe the top surface of the box to make a 3D solid.

4. On could probably apply this technique (in Blender) to a mesh instead of individual blocks.

5. Lggreen you are right I just did that as a make a shape using points. Randomising the points to get a more irreguar pattern would be better. Again find some one with a 3d scanner and a few minutes work.

This is a 3d scan of a stormwater drain if you look closely you can see the stone faces in 3d unfortunately image has been scaled down to allow posting.

6. Originally Posted by BIGAL
Lggreen you are right I just did that as a make a shape using points. Randomising the points to get a more irreguar pattern would be better. Again find some one with a 3d scanner and a few minutes work.

This is a 3d scan of a stormwater drain if you look closely you can see the stone faces in 3d unfortunately image has been scaled down to allow posting.
I think I finally managed to 3D model an individual stone. I created a box mesh slightly larger than the final stone size of 3.8mm x 1.8mm (small!).Then by moving the faces/vertices/edges of the top surface of the box I made a rough looking stone. This was converted to a 3D solid with smoothing. This created a box with rounded edges. These were sliced off to reveal the final stone. I am currently 3D printing a prototype. I will post a picture of the result later.
Although no one managed to come up with a realistic solution your ideas and posts helped me enormously. Thanks for your help guys.

Screen Shot 2018-04-17 at 16.08.09.jpg

7. Originally Posted by BIGAL
Lggreen you are right I just did that as a make a shape using points. Randomising the points to get a more irreguar pattern would be better. Again find some one with a 3d scanner and a few minutes work.

This is a 3d scan of a stormwater drain if you look closely you can see the stone faces in 3d unfortunately image has been scaled down to allow posting.
This is a 3D printed 20mm cube with the stonework added. Not bad for a first attempt! I need to model a few more stones together with a few 180 degree rotations and mirrored versions to get a more random effect.

IMG_8669.jpg

8. I would be interested to see the results, what type of printer are you using? in general, a layer thickness of 0.2 to 0.3mm seems the average which isn't going to give you much detail on something that small.
I hit send and there it was, that actually looks pretty good, well done

9. Registered forum members do not see this ad.

Originally Posted by steven-g
I would be interested to see the results, what type of printer are you using? in general, a layer thickness of 0.2 to 0.3mm seems the average which isn't going to give you much detail on something that small.
I hit send and there it was, that actually looks pretty good, well done
I am using a Flashforge Dreamer and Simplify3D slicing software. My layers are 0.1mm and I run the outer layer at a fairly slow speed in order to get the detail.