Comparative Analysis of Different Display Technologies for Defect Detection in 3D Objects
This paper starts with an overview of current methods of displaying 3D objects. Two different technologies are compared—a glasses-free 3D laptop that uses stereoscopy, and one that uses front projection on a silver impregnated fabric screen that diffracts light to achieve a holographic effect. The r...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2025-03-01
|
| Series: | Technologies |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7080/13/3/118 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849339598282424320 |
|---|---|
| author | Vasil Kozov Ekaterin Minev Magdalena Andreeva Tzvetomir Vassilev Rumen Rusev |
| author_facet | Vasil Kozov Ekaterin Minev Magdalena Andreeva Tzvetomir Vassilev Rumen Rusev |
| author_sort | Vasil Kozov |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | This paper starts with an overview of current methods of displaying 3D objects. Two different technologies are compared—a glasses-free 3D laptop that uses stereoscopy, and one that uses front projection on a silver impregnated fabric screen that diffracts light to achieve a holographic effect. The research question is defined—which one is suitable for use by specialists. A methodology for an experiment is designed. A scenario for finding the solution to the problem during the experiment is created. An experiment environment with different workstations for each technology has been set up. An additional reference workstation with a standard screen has been created. Three-dimensional CAD models from the field of mechanical engineering were chosen. Different categories of defects were introduced to make the models usable for the scenario—finding the defects in each of the different workstations. A survey for participant feedback, using several categories of questions, was created, improved, and used during the experiment. The experiment was completed, short discussions were held with each participant, and their feedback was analyzed. The categories of the participants were discussed. The results from the experiment were discussed and analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed on the survey results. The applicability of the experiment in other fields was discussed. Conclusions were made, and the comparative advantages and specifics of each technology were discussed based on the analysis results and the experience gained during the experiment. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-ddc12defd47b4e03af40a0ea6478c208 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2227-7080 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-03-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Technologies |
| spelling | doaj-art-ddc12defd47b4e03af40a0ea6478c2082025-08-20T03:44:05ZengMDPI AGTechnologies2227-70802025-03-0113311810.3390/technologies13030118Comparative Analysis of Different Display Technologies for Defect Detection in 3D ObjectsVasil Kozov0Ekaterin Minev1Magdalena Andreeva2Tzvetomir Vassilev3Rumen Rusev4Department of Computer Science, University of Ruse, 7017 Ruse, BulgariaDepartment of Computer Science, University of Ruse, 7017 Ruse, BulgariaDepartment of Computer Science, University of Ruse, 7017 Ruse, BulgariaDepartment of Computer Science, University of Ruse, 7017 Ruse, BulgariaDepartment of Computer Science, University of Ruse, 7017 Ruse, BulgariaThis paper starts with an overview of current methods of displaying 3D objects. Two different technologies are compared—a glasses-free 3D laptop that uses stereoscopy, and one that uses front projection on a silver impregnated fabric screen that diffracts light to achieve a holographic effect. The research question is defined—which one is suitable for use by specialists. A methodology for an experiment is designed. A scenario for finding the solution to the problem during the experiment is created. An experiment environment with different workstations for each technology has been set up. An additional reference workstation with a standard screen has been created. Three-dimensional CAD models from the field of mechanical engineering were chosen. Different categories of defects were introduced to make the models usable for the scenario—finding the defects in each of the different workstations. A survey for participant feedback, using several categories of questions, was created, improved, and used during the experiment. The experiment was completed, short discussions were held with each participant, and their feedback was analyzed. The categories of the participants were discussed. The results from the experiment were discussed and analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed on the survey results. The applicability of the experiment in other fields was discussed. Conclusions were made, and the comparative advantages and specifics of each technology were discussed based on the analysis results and the experience gained during the experiment.https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7080/13/3/1183D display technologiespractical research experimentempirical experimentqualitative data analysis |
| spellingShingle | Vasil Kozov Ekaterin Minev Magdalena Andreeva Tzvetomir Vassilev Rumen Rusev Comparative Analysis of Different Display Technologies for Defect Detection in 3D Objects Technologies 3D display technologies practical research experiment empirical experiment qualitative data analysis |
| title | Comparative Analysis of Different Display Technologies for Defect Detection in 3D Objects |
| title_full | Comparative Analysis of Different Display Technologies for Defect Detection in 3D Objects |
| title_fullStr | Comparative Analysis of Different Display Technologies for Defect Detection in 3D Objects |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparative Analysis of Different Display Technologies for Defect Detection in 3D Objects |
| title_short | Comparative Analysis of Different Display Technologies for Defect Detection in 3D Objects |
| title_sort | comparative analysis of different display technologies for defect detection in 3d objects |
| topic | 3D display technologies practical research experiment empirical experiment qualitative data analysis |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7080/13/3/118 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT vasilkozov comparativeanalysisofdifferentdisplaytechnologiesfordefectdetectionin3dobjects AT ekaterinminev comparativeanalysisofdifferentdisplaytechnologiesfordefectdetectionin3dobjects AT magdalenaandreeva comparativeanalysisofdifferentdisplaytechnologiesfordefectdetectionin3dobjects AT tzvetomirvassilev comparativeanalysisofdifferentdisplaytechnologiesfordefectdetectionin3dobjects AT rumenrusev comparativeanalysisofdifferentdisplaytechnologiesfordefectdetectionin3dobjects |