Geomagic wrap 2017

Manufactured by 3D Systems

Sourced in United States

Geomagic Wrap 2017 is a 3D scanning and reverse engineering software developed by 3D Systems. The software is designed to transform 3D scan data into high-quality, watertight 3D models that can be used for a variety of applications, including product design, engineering, and manufacturing.

Automatically generated - may contain errors

Lab products found in correlation

Amira 6, by Thermo Fisher Scientific (1 mentions) Geomagic studio 2013, by 3D Systems (1 mentions) Solidworks 2020, by Dassault Systèmes (1 mentions) Phoenix nanotom m, by GE Healthcare (1 mentions) Vgstudio max, by Volume Graphics (1 mentions)

Close spelling variants of this product

Geomagic Wrap

12 protocols using geomagic wrap 2017

Volumetric Wear Analysis of Dental Antagonists

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols

To measure the volume loss and maximum wear depth of the antagonist, high-resolution (1 μm) tomography scanning of the antagonist wear crater was performed on a Lasers canner LAS-20 (SD Mechatronik, GMBH, Germany). The resulting information was exported as stereolithography files for wear measurements using a specific software (Geomagic Wrap 2017, 3D systems, South Carolina, USA). The original spherical topography was reconstructed by means of mesh editing, and the maximum wear depth and volume loss were obtained by comparing the same 3D models before and after reconstruction.

Alves L.M., da Silva Rodrigues C., de Carvalho Ramos N., Buizastrow J., Campos T.M., Bottino M.A., Zhang Y, & de Melo R.M. (2022). Silica infiltration on translucent zirconia restorations: effects on the antagonist wear and survivability. Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials, 38(12), 2084-2095.

+ Open protocol

+ Expand

3D Periodontal Scaffold Design Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols

In this section, the proposed methodology for 3D periodontal scaffold design is outlined. The initial data used for testing this methodology were the anonymized DICOM files of the mandibular CBCT scan of a patient diagnosed with periodontal disease by his/her dentist. The NewTom VGi EVO scanner was used, with a voxel size of 150 μm and a field of view (FOV) of 100 mm × 100 mm. The 3D Slicer open-source medical image editing software, version 4.11.20210226 [50 ] was used for the segmentation of the CBCT dataset and the generation of the first version of the 3D models of the alveolar bone and the teeth. The Geomagic Wrap 2017 commercial software package (3D Systems, Rock Hill, SC, USA—now developed and supported by Artec3D, Luxemburg City, Luxemburg) [51 ] was used to process the two generated 3D models of the alveolar bone and teeth, creating the final merged 3D model of the periodontal defect and designing two types of scaffolds for the specific patient, i.e., a periodontal defect customized block graft and an extraction socket preservation customized graft.

Verykokou S., Ioannidis C, & Angelopoulos C. (2023). CBCT-Based Design of Patient-Specific 3D Bone Grafts for Periodontal Regeneration. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 12(15), 5023.

+ Open protocol

+ Expand

Reconstructing Anuran Cranial Morphology

Cited 1 time

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols

We reconstructed and processed meshes from microCT scans of crania for 173 anuran species, including representatives from all extant frog families and the mummified Eocene Thaumastosaurus gezei^{107 (link)} (Fig. 2 and Supplementary Table 5). A recent phylogenetic analysis suggests Thaumastosaurus gezei is a ranoid with African affinities^{107 (link)}, nested within the Natatanura clade from Frost et al.¹⁰⁸. Although complete, undeformed 3D fossil material for anurans is limited, inclusion of any fossils increases our temporal sampling and has been demonstrated to improve estimates of evolutionary rate^{109 (link),110 (link)}. Meshes from microCT scans were created in Avizo Lite 9 (FEI Visualisation Sciences Group, Burlington, MA, USA) and VG Studio MAX¹¹¹ and processed in Geomagic Wrap 2017 (3D Systems, Rock Hill, South Carolina, USA) to remove noise and small surface foramina, as previously described¹¹². Scan information can be found in Supplementary Data 1.

Bardua C., Fabre A.C., Clavel J., Bon M., Das K., Stanley E.L., Blackburn D.C, & Goswami A. (2021). Size, microhabitat, and loss of larval feeding drive cranial diversification in frogs. Nature Communications, 12, 2503.

+ Open protocol

+ Expand

Periodontal Disease CBCT Imaging Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols

The data processed in this study were the anonymous DICOM (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine) data of the CBCT scan of a patient who has been diagnosed with periodontal disease by his/her dentist. The authors had no other previous knowledge of the patient or other relevant information on the diagnostic or treatment parameters. The entire patient’s maxilla was included in the imaging volume and was centered in the imaging volume. The CBCT parameters were reported to the authors as outlined in the following.

CBCT scanner: NEWTOM VGI evo CBCT machine (CEFLA, Imola, BO, Italia).

Imaging protocol: high resolution (HR) protocol with a voxel size of 150 microns (0.15 mm).

Exposure settings: 110 KV and a total of 109.2 mAs.

Field of view: standard 100 mm × 100 mm.

Scanning procedure: based on manufacturer’s recommendations.

The 3D Slicer open-source medical image editing software, version 4.11.20210226 [26 ] was used in all experiments for image segmentation and generation of a first version of the 3D model of each segment of the oral system, defined by the segmentation. The Geomagic Wrap 2017 commercial software package (3D Systems, Rock Hill, SC, USA–now developed and supported by Artec3D, Luxemburg City, Luxemburg) [35 ] was used for processing the 3D reconstruction generated by 3D Slicer and generating the final 3D models.

Verykokou S., Ioannidis C, & Angelopoulos C. (2022). Evaluation of 3D Modeling Workflows Using Dental CBCT Data for Periodontal Regenerative Treatment. Journal of Personalized Medicine, 12(9), 1355.

+ Open protocol

+ Expand

Archosaur Coordinate System Standards

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols

We present our archosaur ACS, JCS, and reference pose standards with figures of a Helmeted Guineafowl (Numida meleagris) and an American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis). These representatives of the two archosaur crown clades are referred to as “guineafowl” and “alligator” for simplicity. We likewise minimize excessive repetition by omitting vector normalization; all vectors should be unit length when constructing ACS axes. Guineafowl and alligator figures were constructed in Adobe Illustrator CC 2020 and Photoshop CC 2020 using renderings from Autodesk Maya 2020, within which coordinate system models were created and placed. Patch selection and primitive fitting were done with Geomagic Studio 2013 and Geomagic Wrap 2017 (3D Systems) using .obj format polygonal models created in Amira 6.0 (Thermo Fisher Scientific). Scans of guineafowl and alligator elements were made with a Nikon Xtek microCT (Nikon Metrology) at 115–120 kV, 125–130 μA, 0.063–0.090 mm slice thickness, and 2000 × 2000 resolution.

Gatesy S.M., Manafzadeh A.R., Bishop P.J., Turner M.L., Kambic R.E., Cuff A.R, & Hutchinson J.R. (2022). A proposed standard for quantifying 3‐D hindlimb joint poses in living and extinct archosaurs. Journal of Anatomy, 241(1), 101-118.

+ Open protocol

+ Expand

Facial Landmark-Based 3D Scanning Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols

Non-invasive optical 3D scanning was carried out using the multi-camera non-contact 3dMDface System scanner (3dMD Ltd., London, United Kingdom; www.3Dmd.com). Each patient was scanned from a frontal view, with the head in a natural position and was instructed to have a neutral facial expression. Age-appropriate cartoons were played on a TV in front of the children to attract their attention and “stabilize” their frontal view towards the 3D camera. Scans were edited using the Cliniface (www.cliniface.org^{22 (link)} or Geomagic Wrap 2017 analytical software (www.3dsystems.com²³. Landmarks were placed automatically by Cliniface, representing defined consensus anthropological points of the face²⁴. Nineteen landmarks were used for the analysis^{20 (link)}. Positions of the nineteen landmarks were verified manually in each studied case (Fig. 1).Figure 1

Measured distances (blue) between the 19 landmarks used (red). Landmarks comprised: glabella, nasion, subnasale, labrale superius, pogonion, superciliare lateralis right, superciliare lateralis left, exocanthion right, exocanthion left, palpebrale inferius right, palpebrale inferius left, endocanthion right, endocanthion left, alare right, alare left, cheilion right, cheilion left, crista philtri right, crista philtri left. Green dots—unused landmarks.

Schwarz M., Geryk J., Havlovicová M., Mihulová M., Turnovec M., Ryba L., Martinková J., Macek M J.r., Palmer R., Kočandrlová K., Velemínská J, & Moslerová V. (2024). Body mass index is an overlooked confounding factor in existing clustering studies of 3D facial scans of children with autism spectrum disorder. Scientific Reports, 14, 9873.

+ Open protocol

+ Expand

Quantifying Helmet-Head Fit Using HFI

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols

Ellena et al. [17 (link),29 ] developed a method known as the Helmet Fit Index (HFI) to quantitatively evaluate the fit between helmet liners and human head shapes. This approach combines 3D anthropometric data with computational tools, enabling researchers to examine the consistency between a specific helmet model and the entire head surface covered by the helmet. By incorporating Standoff Distance (SOD) and Gap Uniformity (GU), the HFI can calculate a fit score for a given helmet and individual head, ranging from 0 (indicating an extremely poor fit) to 100 (indicating a perfect fit). The calculation procedure for HFI is elaborated in equation (4).

Equation 4.

Where, SOD is the average distance between the head and the inside mesh of the liner. The optimal value of SOD should be greater than zero to ensure thermal control of the helmet and comfort, with the addition of thin foam padding [6 ]. GU represents the standard deviation of the gap distribution, and is a critical parameter for analyzing the dispersion of the distance distribution. An optimized fit is achieved when the GU approaches zero, indicating a more uniform distribution of the standoff distance. In this paper, the Geomagic Wrap 2017 (3D Systems Inc., USA) was utilized to assess the fit of the helmet by measuring the gap between head and the interior liner.

Zhu Z., Huang Y., Ji W., Zhu J, & Wang W. (2024). A parametric design framework for the mass customization of bicycle helmet. Heliyon, 10(5), e27409.

+ Open protocol

+ Expand

Lumbar Spine Osteotomy Modeling

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols

We recruited one healthy male volunteer, 26 years old, with a height of 174 cm and a weight of 75 kg. Firstly, CT images were imported into Mimics to extract bone tissue, and then further optimized in 3-matic. The reconstructed model from 3-matic Research was imported into Geomagic Wrap 2017 (3D Systems, Inc. Geomagic, United States) for smoothing. Following this, cancellous bone, cortical bone, intervertebral discs, cartilage endplates, and facet joints were reconstructed using Solidworks 2020 (Dassault Systèmes, United States). We constructed a complete model of L3-L5 (Figures 2A,B).
Based on the aforementioned changes in osteotomy volume and clinical experience, we proceeded with the construction of the trephine osteotomy surgical model in Solidworks 2020. To investigate the effects of trephine angle, diameter, and number of osteotomy attempts on lumbar spine mobility and stability, we selected one attempt of osteotomy at 30° and 60° directions with an 8 mm diameter, two attempts of osteotomy at 50° direction with an 8 mm diameter, and one attempt of osteotomy at 50° direction with a 9 mm diameter. We constructed complete models and surgical models with five different trephine osteotomy attempts for subsequent analysis (Figures 2C–G).

Liu Y., Zhang Q., Ji N., Wang J., Li J., Du J., Zhao J., Ouyang P., Qin J., Li H, & Wang D. (2024). Stability simulation analysis of targeted puncture in L4/5 intervertebral space for PELD surgery. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, 11, 1298914.

+ Open protocol

+ Expand

Laser Scanning and Micro-CT Imaging

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols

Femora and pelves were collected from a single specimen of 18 species in total housed in the collections of Naturhistorisches Museum Vienna (NMW), Austria, and Museum für Naturkunde Berlin (MfN), Germany (Supplementary Table S1). The bones were scanned with a surface laser scanner via the software “Scantools” (Kreon “Skiron” laser scanner for MicroScribe, Solution Technologies, Inc., Oella, United States) or, if too small for surface laser scanning, using a µCT scanner (Phoenix Nanotom M, General Electric, Boston, United States) with the software VGSTUDIO MAX (Volume Graphics, Heidelberg, Germany). Minor defects of the meshed surface models were repaired using the software MeshLab version 1.3.3 (Cignoni et al., 2008 ) and Geomagic Wrap 2017 (3D Systems, Rock Hill, United States).

Löffler L., Wölfer J., Gavrilei F, & Nyakatura J.A. (2022). Computational Modeling of Gluteus Medius Muscle Moment Arm in Caviomorph Rodents Reveals Ecomorphological Specializations. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, 10, 806314.

+ Open protocol

+ Expand

Osteophyte Model Generation for OA Analysis

Cited 1 time

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols

Osteophyte models for each OA bone were generated by Boolean subtraction of the reference bone model from the OA bone model (Geomagic Wrap® 2017, 3D Systems, SC, USA); (Figure 2, Step 4). For the trapezium, the osteophyte model was limited to the distal periarticular region using an automated trimming workflow, which truncated the trapezium using a sectioning plane parallel to the radial-ulnar and volar-dorsal axis of the ACS that passed through the trapezial centroid (Figure 2, Step 5). Similarly, the first metacarpal osteophyte model was trimmed with a sectioning plane parallel to the radial-ulnar and volar-dorsal axis of the first metacarpal ACS; offset from the first metacarpal ACS origin the same magnitude as the trapezium ACS origin to trapezium centroid. Since both bones have more than one articular surface, and thus the potential for multiple regions of osteophyte formation, the trimming was performed to focus the analysis on only the trapezial-first metacarpal joint. Sensitivity analysis of ACS generation has been previously reported as repeatable and robust.^{34 (link)}

Morton A.M., Akhbari B., Moore D.C, & Crisco J.J. (2019). Osteophyte Volume Calculation Using Dissimilarity-Excluding Procrustes Registration of Archived Bone Models from Healthy Volunteers. Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society, 38(6), 1307-1315.

+ Open protocol

+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!