2012, ASTM accepted a standard format called Additive Manufacturing Format (AMF), capable of storing color, materials, lattices, and constellations , unlike STL format contain only surface mesh information of CAD model. I see that AMF fits nicely for the needs of additive manufacturing for gradient component or multi-material fabrications and is better than STL. But, I don't know why this format is not widely accepted.
STL file structure was developed many years ago, additive manufacturing is a recently new process. The multi color printing heads are just now becoming common. It's easier to write a slicing program that can incorporate multifunctional data. That, being based on a machine capable of reading the code. G-code is still the language of the machine processor, I program multi-axis 3-D milling projects using 2-D data. The skin of an STL file is truly the only data necessary for both additive and subtractive processing. My biggest interest would be in having an affordable application that can fully manipulate and repair an STL model, closing the manafold is tiresome. It's a legacie thing really, not many CADD programs can translate to STL
Its all about interfacing the mind and the machine. We can imagine complex structures, but telling a machine how to create it in binary code is a completely new ball game. I see a big future in additive processing, when we can "print" using molecularly bonded (welded) metal within .0001" tolarance, the Art will have been perfected. Until then
The STL file format has been the de facto standard since it was created in the late 1980s. However it does have limitations which cause some problems. It does not store the units of measurement of the original model so they need to be assumed. Also the file size becomes very large when trying to save a model with a high level of surface curvature.
In response to these limitations, the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) introduced the AMF file format in 2011.
Then in 2013 Microsoft intended to do the same with its own 3MF format. This format became natively supported in all Windows operating systems since Windows 8.1. 3MF has since garnered considerable support from large companies such as HP, 3D Systems, Stratasys, GE, Siemens, Autodesk and Dassault Systems although it is unknown how many actively use this file format.
STL is still the file format of choice for almost all 3D printing. However, a newly signed liaison agreement between ASTM and the 3MF Consortium may bridge some differences between AMF and 3MF and create one new standard file format to replace STL.
Ultimately, why people aren't using AMF, lack of software support, both in 3D CAD export, but also in 3D printing import. There are only a small number of CAD packages that export anything other than STL, and those have only been implemented in the last year or two. AMF import is even more scarce.
In addition to above, you have to hack the STL file standard in order to account for multiple materials and different colors.
As others pointed out already AMF has some advantages as it supports colours, lattices, constellations, ... However it is not that technology has come to a standstill. There is another file format that has the same capabilities and that is getting more and more attention from CAD companies (PTC, ...) and manufacturers of 3D printers and that is 3MF. More information about this format can be found on http://www.3mf.io/what-is-3mf/3mf-specification/
The new formats of AMF and 3MF will be more suitable for the situations when we have multi-material, variable densities and lattices with gradients need to be printed. The AM technology is still evolving to meet the new situations like this. I believe, stl will be substituted by the new formats to meet out new technological situations.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Computer Science and Engineering
- Artificial Intelligence