LokBuild 3D Print Build Surface, sticky back sheet, quick, clean removal of printed parts, versatile (SINGLE PACK 12″ (305x305mm))

THE SOLUTION Are you having difficulties getting your 3D prints to stick without warping? Struggling to remove your finished model after printing? Tired of messing around with inadequate solutions such as kapton, blue builders tape, hairspray and ABS slurry? LokBuild is the answer! LokBuild provides the perfect printing surface for 3D models to adhere and also allows completed objects to be removed easily. LokBuild is a durable sheet that sticks to the bed of 3D printers. WHAT IS LOKBUILD? LokBuild is the ultimate 3D printing surface for FFF/FDM 3D printers. It is a long lasting alternative to films and tapes. LokBuild can be easily cut to suit the exact shape and size of your 3D printers build surface. LokBuild is made from uniquely textured sheets that attach to your build plate easily with heat-resistant adhesive backing. LokBuild replaces the need for blue masking tape or polyimide films such as Kapton Tape. It is made from heat-resistant materials to provide a stable build platform for 3D printed models whilst allowing completed models to be removed easily. LOKBUILD MATERIALS We are constantly testing new materials. Here is a list of just some materials that have been successfully printed on LokBuild… ABS, PLA, HIPS, PET colorFabb_XT, colorFabb nGen, colorFabb_HT, colorFabb XT-CF20 (carbon fibre) Woodfill, Bronzefill, Copperfill, Brassfill Polymaker PC-Plus (polycarbonate), Polymaker PC-Max (polycarbonate), Polymaker PolyFlex, Ninjaflex HOW TO USE LOKBUILD If you have ever used tape or films you will know that they are difficult to fit. LokBuild is more rigid and really easy to apply to your build plate. Also it is almost impossible for air bubbles to get trapped beneath the LokBuild surface. LokBuild can be removed from the build plate cleanly in one piece and leaves no residue behind.

Product Features

  • Build sheet adheres to a print bed to help the filament stick during printing, while also enabling quick & clean removal of the printed part afterward
  • Durable construction allows for multiple uses with either the same or different filament material, Single sheet design installs more quickly and with fewer bubbles than tape or films
  • Optimal 3D Printing Surface, Improves Model Adhesion, Reduces Warping, Easier Nozzle Height Calibration, Durable and Long Lasting
  • Protect your Build Plate, Easy Removal of Completed Prints, One Build Surface suitable for most materials, Easy to Install and Remove.

Visit The Website For More Information…

Google AI sees 3D printed turtle as a rifle, MIT researchers explain why

Nov 2, 2017 | By Benedict

Researchers at MIT have carried out an investigation into “adversarial examples,” objects that can fool AI vision into thinking an object is something completely different. The researchers made a 3D printed turtle that fooled Google’s Inception-v3 into thinking it was a gun, even from multiple angles.

Take a look at the 3D printed turtle above, and you’ll be hard pressed to find anything particularly threatening about it. Perhaps the 3D printing filament used to make it was slightly toxic, but ultimately, it’s just a plastic turtle.

That’s not how Google’s Inception-v3 AI image classifier sees it though. Through the eyes of the artificial intelligence system, that innocent-looking 3D printed sea creature looks just like a rifle.

The 3D printed prop is what is known as an adversarial example—something designed to trick an artificial intelligence system into thinking it’s something else entirely. In this instance, MIT researchers engineered the plastic turtle to make Google’s AI see it as a dangerous weapon.

It’s obviously quite funny on some level: who knows how many millions of dollars are being pumped into image classification systems, yet some still think a plastic toy is a rifle. It’s the same impressive yet amusing quality that made those nightmarish Google DeepDream pictures so mesmerizing.

But adversarial objects—or adversarial images in the 2D world—are actually highly significant, and potentially very troublesome.

AI neural network systems like Google’s Inception-v3 are, of course, incredibly smart. But they work on complex, human-made algorithms, not common sense. And if you’re familiar with the precise rules and logic behind an AI system, you can potentially exploit it.

Because Google’s Inception-v3 is open source, the MIT researchers—Anish Athalye, Logan Engstrom, Andrew Ilyas, and Kevin Kwok, who are together known as “labsix”—were in the perfect position to exploit it, by looking at the exact criteria for “rifle” recognition and trying to somehow squeeze those characteristics into something not very rifle-like at all: a turtle.

The MIT researchers aren’t the first to create adversarial objects, of course. People can use certain tricks to fool facial recognition systems into misidentifying a person—something that border security services, for example, are currently trying to curtail.

For most adversarial objects or images, however, the “trick” only works from certain angles. You might fool a neural network into thinking a bag of chips is a face from a certain angle, but move it around slightly and the AI will likely correct its mistake.

But the 3D printed turtle, as well as the MIT researchers’ other 3D examples, are different. They actually fool the Google AI from multiple angles, rather than just one, making them far more devastating than your typical adversarial object.

In addition to the turtle that seems like a rifle, labsix also 3D printed a baseball that gets recognized as espresso. They also made digital models of a barrel that gets interpreted as a guillotine, a baseball that can appear like a green lizard, a dog that the AI thinks is a bittern, and several other examples.

The researchers were able to easily make more examples of these objects after creating an algorithm for “reliably producing physical 3D objects that are adversarial from every viewpoint,” working at almost 100 per cent accuracy. They call this algorithm “Expectation Over Transformation” (EOT).

In a sense, the team is pleased with its achievements, but it’s also worried by how easily it managed to pull it off.

“[EOT] shouldn’t be able to take an image, slightly tweak the pixels, and completely confuse the network,” Athalye told Quartz. “Neural networks blow all previous techniques out of the water in terms of performance, but given the existence of these adversarial examples, it shows we really don’t understand what’s going on.”

Of course, this isn’t just a bit of fun for the MIT researchers. They believe that their research proves beyond doubt that “adversarial examples are a practical concern for real-world systems.”

If, say, hackers were able to ascertain the complex algorithms behind a non-open AI system—the “eyes” of a self-driving car, for example—they might be able to cause real damage by manipulating real-world objects into making the car behave in erroneous ways.

This might all seem like a remote possibility—after all, Google’s open Inception-v3 isn’t used for any critical applications—but the MIT research certainly makes a strong point about the fallibility of visual AI systems.

The team even plans to look further into creating adversarial objects that challenge AI systems whose mechanics are hidden.

The MIT group’s research paper, “Synthesizing Robust Adversarial Examples,” will be presented at ICLR 2018, the sixth International Conference on Learning Representations. It can be read here.

Posted in 3D Printing Application

Maybe you also like:

US Marines' 'Ripper Lab' used to manufacture 3D printed 'Nibbler' drones in Middle East

Oct 2, 2017 | By Tess

A U.S. Marine Corps task force has set up a 3D printing lab on the ground in the Middle East, using it to 3D print quadcopter drones, tools, medical supplies, and more. Dubbed the “Ripper Lab,” the facility is allowing the task force to print devices and replacement parts on-demand and at a lower cost than shipping them in.

Over the past year, the U.S. Marine Corps has made significant strides with the adoption of additive manufacturing technologies, developing 3D printed components for future smart trucks, experimenting with 3D printed munitions, and perhaps most significantly, manufacturing low-cost drones.

Just months ago, a Marine Corps battalion evaluated the X-FAB system—a self-contained, mobile additive manufacturing lab which consists of four 3D printers, one 3D scanner, and CAD software. The X-FAB lab, which is still in development, would enable devices such as surveillance drones to be produced on-demand and, importantly, on the ground.

As another Marine Corps task force based in the Middle East has shown, 3D printing is already in use and is proving to be a critical technology in the fight against ISIS.

The Marines of Special Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force Crisis Response-Central Command recently established an on-the-ground 3D printing facility equipped with 3D printers, materials, CAD software, etc. in the Middle East.

Named “Ripper Lab,” the 3D printing test operation was set up to see how well 3D printing could support the troops. A first of its kind, the 3D printer lab is operated by a team of 48 and has been used to manufacture tools such as wrenches, medical supplies, various replacement parts, and a number of quadcopter drones known as “Nibblers.”

These 3D printed drones, of which there are already about 25, are designed for increasing “situational awareness” on patrols. The adaptable UAVs are capable of flying for 20 to 25 minutes at a time, and can be used to monitor and protect the U.S. military’s positions from drones sent by the enemy.

Of course, there are still a few setbacks with the technology. For one, the Nibbler drones cost about $2,000 each to 3D print, quite a bit more than their off-the-shelf counterparts (which reportedly go for about $500 apiece). But the cost difference doesn’t seem to outweigh the advantages of in-situ manufacturing and the easy and cheap production of replacement parts.

(Images: U.S. Marine Corps)

“Across the entire Marine Corps… it takes time to get the training and then the resources, i.e., money to buy the materials and 3D printers and things like that,” said  Col. Bill Vivian, the commander of the 7th Marine Regiment which led the 3D printing operation. “But 3D printers are coming to each installation in the Marine Corps and that’s starting to unfold now, so I think those possibilities are getting close.”

Vivian added that since 3D printing has been adopted in the Marine Corps, he has seen a lot of interest amongst the troops: “Since we engaged and we let Marines at the lowest level know we’re wrestling with this new technology, we found out a lot of them were doing it anyway—several Marines had their own 3D printers. And so just taking advantage of natural talents we have out there, we were able to pull them in and use them to our advantage. It helped retention: Marines were very excited and we were able to do some things faster than we otherwise would have been able to.”

Currently, Vivian and his task force are working on improving the 3D printed Nibbler drone by integrating higher-quality cameras and increasing the vehicle’s flying time and range.

Posted in 3D Printing Application

Maybe you also like:

3D Printed Heart Valves Assist Cardiologists in Planning Patient Specific Replacement Surgeries

In the July issue of JACC Cardiovascular Imaging, our collaborative team from  the Piedmont Heart Institute and Georgia Institute of Technology published a paper titled, Quantitative Prediction of Paravalvular Leak in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Based on Tissue-Mimicking 3D Printing.  In this study, we demonstrated the feasibility of using 3D printing technologies to create patient-specific heart valve models that mimic the physiological qualities of the actual valves for pre-surgical planning transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Our goal was to improve the success rate of transcatheter aortic valve replacements by selecting the right prosthetic and avoiding a common complication known as paravalvular leakage (PVL).

3D Model of Aortic Valve viewed from aorta and left ventricle (Left) TARV Deployed in 3D Model viewed from aorta and left ventricle (Right)

Tens of thousands of patients each year are diagnosed with heart valve disease. TAVR is often considered for patients who are at high risk for complications with an open-heart surgery to replace the valve. Leakage occurs when the new valve doesn’t achieve a precise fit and blood flows backwards around the prosthetic .

PVL is an extremely important indicator of how well the patient will do short and long term with their new valve.  Our research team developed a novel in vitro TAVR pre-procedural planning platform to quantitatively predict the occurrence, severity, and location of post-TAVR PVL.

Using PolyJet 3D printing technology (Stratasys, Eden Prairie, MN), we produced 3D patient-specific models incorporating a variety of materials with variant hardness and pliability to replicate visually accurate anatomical models that mimic the tactile feel of aortic tissue. The team made use of the simultaneous multi-material printing ability to embed metamaterial structures during the printing process. Using our proprietary software, we designed directional wavy fibers into the 3D models to mimic the elastic fibers found in the extracellular matrix of human arteries. Creating these models using metamaterial design and multi-material 3D printing takes into account the mechanical behavior of the heart valves, replicating the natural strain-stiffening behavior of soft tissues that comes from the interaction between elastin and collagen, two proteins found in heart valves.

Our next step was to test how the prosthetic valves interact with the 3D printed models to learn whether we could predict leakage.  We placed sensors within eighteen models. The sensors enabled us to quantitatively predict the occurrence, severity, and location of any degree of post-TAVR PVL.

The results of this study are quite encouraging. We were able to identify a pre-surgical method that allows us to predict and potentially mitigate the risk of post-TAVR PVL. This will someday allow us to optimize the procedural technique using 3D model surgical simulation and, ultimately, improve patient outcome.

Even though this valve replacement procedure is quite mature, there are still cases where selecting a different size prosthetic or different manufacturer could improve the outcome. 3D printing will be very helpful to determine which one. Among certain high-risk patients, our technique may refine the current approach for the selection of the transcatheter valve type/size, and the selection of the appropriate valve deployment technique, such as the selection of the valve depth and the post-dilatation of the valve, and potentially reduce the rate of post-TAVR PVL.

Eventually, once a patient has a CT scan, we could create a model, try different kinds of valves in the 3D model, and identify which one might work best. We could even predict that a patient would probably have moderate PVL and utilize balloon dilatation to solve it.

The lack of high-fidelity printing materials that mimic the material properties of various soft biological tissues remains a bottleneck for the broader application of medical 3D printing. In addition, the lengthy image segmentation and modeling, the high printing cost, and the lengthy printing and model post-processing all hinder the widespread use of cardiovascular 3D printing. As substantial advancement in the software and hardware of 3D printing is expected in the years to come, these technical obstacles will be eventually cleared and cardiovascular 3D printing will potentially become an essential everyday clinical tool to improve patient care in interventional cardiology.

In the near future, as cardiovascular medicine shifts more towards personalized treatment, I believe 3D printing will play a more important role in patient-specific planning for heart procedures. It will help the physicians better select the right percutaneous device, assess the procedural risk, optimize the deployment technique, and practice for rare and difficult cases in vitro.