What do you get when you do your daily work as a medical histopathologist interested in 3D printing and programming? You will get a fully mature open source microscope, especially the portable and upgradeable modular economy (or PUMA), and that's it. This is not a toy microscope. By combining off-the-shelf electronics, a pound or two of filaments, and a handful of high-quality optical components that are available almost anywhere, PUMA is likely to create one of the best open source microscope experiences we have ever tasted.

GitHub user [TadPath] is a medical pathologist and knows exactly one thing or two about what a great instrument is, so we are really happy to see this delicious project laid out in such a complete way. Many times, we checked a high-profile project, but found a bunch of STL files and some special parts that are difficult to obtain. But not here. This is deliberately designed and can be built by almost anyone with access to a 3D printer and eBay account.

The project has not yet been certified for medical diagnostic purposes, but it may only be a matter of money and time. The value of education and research (especially in developing countries) cannot be overemphasized.

Modularity allows a variety of configurations, from simple ambient light illumination, a single objective lens (very suitable for use in the field without electricity), all the way to the trinocular setup with a TFT-based spatial light modulator, which can achieve such as schlieren contrast Advanced methods (for example, it allows visualization of fluid flow in living cells) and head-up displays for measurements from samples. PUMA is specifically designed to be quickly and easily broken down in the field, which helps busy researchers on the stick while on the go.

The GitHub repository contains all the details needed to build your own configuration and appropriate add-ons, including CAD files (FreeCAD source code, so you can remix it deep inside your heart) and detailed materials for sourcing parts List.

We have introduced fluorescence microscopy before, and many other microscopy-related stories over the years, because it is simple, microscopy is a very important topic. Hell, this humble scribe has a binocular and a trinocular microscope on the bench next to him, which he doesn't even think is unusual. If you crave a range that is easy to crack, expandable, and cost-effective, then this may be exactly what you are looking for.

Thanks [linus] for the delicious tips!

"PUMA is probably one of the best open source microscope experiences we have ever experienced."

Did your word processor confuse the article with the article about coffee machines? B^)

Or do we just boil it down to another WordPress "feature"? B^)

Thinking further, in an article on pathology mentioned "taste" and "cook"... Ewww! B^)

Maybe it doesn't suit your taste, but it wets my appetite.

Add code to stabilize shaking images/videos without worrying about the physical aspects of vibration.

Although I like FreeCAD very much...it just lags behind Fusion 360 and the like. I check it often because I really want to use FLOSS software...but in the end it always goes back to F360 :-(

I think it was what you learned first. I tried the F360 from Rhinoceros and found it to be very clumsy. The 3-hour tutorial almost prevented me from doing the simplest things.

After installing FreeCAD, I started making (admittedly bad, but better) models after 10 minutes.

For certain things, I will still go back to my old version (ie: Windows 7 is required) copy of Rhino (FreeCAD does not handle things like text extrusion very well), but not more.

This is my experience, even from Rhino. F360 has good tools, but it is not my first choice.

I use nekoplanetd here. In many ways, I would say that FreeCAD is better than Fusion. It is not true that none of the functions can be easily done (at least it is), but it is easier to do a very specific operation in different degrees. Or that...

Just like any tool, you have to learn how to use it correctly-using it correctly is what really matters-get Martin from Wintergatan and his MMX marble machine. Through its development, you have seen his skills and Use CAD tools, because now he does use it "correctly"-following better practices than before, making the change of the whole thing easier, and the design process of such a complex thing is smoother.

I'm sarcastic here...but:

> There is really any function that one person can not easily do (at least more)

……For example, define the distance between two parallel lines? ;-)

(Yes...you can use additional construction lines to make them orthogonal to the two lines and define their length...but this is a common task)

I actually started with OpenScad, and then tried FreeCad for a while, until someone convinced me to try F360... Since then, I will try FreeCad every once in a while. And I can definitely see it getting better, but for me it is a PITA :-(

If you use the "distance" constraint, you cannot select the two lines themselves to set the parallel distance. However, as long as the lines have been constrained to be parallel (using the "parallel" constraint), you can set the distance between the end points of the two lines, or the distance between the end points of one line and the other line itself.

One thing you can't do is to select one line and then select another line to set the parallel distance, which is what you are talking about. But since you can do the same thing by simply selecting the endpoint, this is not a deal breaker for me.

Hmm...but it only works if the starting point of your line is...er...orthogonal? To each other. If you want to build a trapezoid shape that doesn't help.

To be clear: I fully support FLOSS, and F360 is actually the only commercial software I often use.

I do this often. There are some long-standing errors that annoy me, and there is a bad example of "working for me" on the forum.

Try FreeCAD link branch through realthunder. Very pleasant to use, fixed terrain naming issues (and other errors), and some additional features.

Ah, he has an assembly workbench. I noticed, thank you!

This is a very clever concept, not 100% worth selling, but definitely worth considering. Of course, an important step has been taken on the road to any very professional microscope, and you may also want to build it into other things...

But to me, I think designing for 3D printing is a wrong idea for microscopes, designing it to be easy to laser/water jet out of paper stock and ready-made pipes and threaded parts seems to me a better idea -It is more appropriate and then you can choose the material, especially for the "travel" bag decomposition type use case.

In summary, I may only need to make one or modify the version according to my needs, because I have been looking for zoom options, and it at least seems to be a well-thought-out starting point...

Assuming the availability of 3D printers, designing this kind of thing is difficult enough without having to deal with the complexity of dealing with parts with only locally available sizes, thread sizes, unknown tolerances, etc.

In any case, 3D printers are now cheap and widely available. Oops, the cost of a decent 3D printer is lower than most brand-name power tools.

I think that basic materials such as PVC or metal pipes can be bought in almost any size. At the same time, there are some universal sizes that are almost universal. Threaded parts do not need to use the same thread, but only need to pass through the same hole size, although the thread The parts are also as long as you do not deliberately use some obscure old threads, or highly specialized ultra-fine threads...

Of course, budget 3D printers are also very common now, but this does not make the almost universal basic raw materials difficult to obtain or use for this role. I think designing around using most (if not completely) better material choices can actually be Creating life is easier-no need for bloating and filling, so 3d printing has some hope of survival, just use ready-made threads, etc.

I'm not knocking on 3d printers, I love them, they can do great things, but it is just silly to print out a large flat plate with a few holes and a long featureless tube. Maybe you still use some 3D printing to make things they are good at, strange geometric shapes, "precise" adapters, but the whole thing like this seems to be a bad move-so many structural parts are relatively weak and can be used. It is made of curved plastic and takes a long time to wait for printing-for example, those large papers in the base may be completely hand-cut and drilled from the paper template in a shorter time, and get better Structural effect. The relatively delicate long tube takes a few seconds to cut and polished to length on any material-maybe you still have 3D printed shapes to make the tube suitable for optics or other things (because machining these drills requires a lathe and some skills ), but it is a more powerful, faster, and possibly cheaper result...

It’s a bit irrelevant, but since building my Voron 2.1, I’ve been convinced of the design concept of “3D printed parts as the “glue” for off-the-shelf rods and rails”. This summer, I built a vertical axis wind turbine using aluminum rods, and I can 3D print blades and connector parts. This is very effective. (Except that basically no energy can be obtained from the 0.6×0.5m vawt :-))

My view is that the more constraints, the harder it is to solve the problem. The 3D printer eliminates various limitations, so it only makes sense to solve the problem first, and then resolve other limitations in v2.0 (or let others fork your design and adjust it).

Is it possible to use a method similar to that of a stereo microscope? I don't know how to make it zoomable or parfocal, HUD is great for troubleshooting/reverse engineering.

Do you mean something like the stereo configuration in the title photo of this article?

That is binocular-focusing from a single point of view, and then splitting the image for the two eyepieces. Stereo microscopes observe specimens from two angles to provide depth perception, and usually have a lower magnification (for example, 3-20 times) and a larger depth of field.

Please be kind and respectful to help make the comment section great. (Comment Policy)

This website uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how to handle your comment data.

By using our website and services, you explicitly agree to the placement of our performance, functionality and advertising cookies. learn more