[HN Gopher] IBM open sources fully-functional Lego microscope de...
___________________________________________________________________
IBM open sources fully-functional Lego microscope design (2020)
Author : Tomte
Score : 409 points
Date : 2022-03-06 09:41 UTC (13 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (ibm-research.medium.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (ibm-research.medium.com)
| the_alchemist wrote:
| *Cost will vary by location between $300-$400
| notum wrote:
| And cost could likely be mitigated by NOT using LEGO, which is
| a buzzword that makes the article, and rather opting in for
| literally anything else: like Meccano if it has to be a toy.
|
| Stay tuned for my $2000 Cheetos(R) four axis CNC.
| justinc8687 wrote:
| If you look at the BOM, the Legos are only $60 of the cost.
| Luc wrote:
| "Of course, the microscope doesn't have to be made out of
| LEGO -- it's possible to 3D print all the components or mill
| them. But those approaches take a lot more time, and it would
| be tricky for people to do it at home. Another advantage of
| LEGO, Temiz says, is that the bricks are very precise and
| easily obtainable. And it's possible to modify the structure
| by simply replacing a piece with a different one or assemble
| the microscope in a completely different way to take cross-
| section images, for example."
| lancewiggs wrote:
| Lego is produced to very fine tolerances - so it's smart, as
| well as engaging, for this.
| Arcanum-XIII wrote:
| Which would be incredibly cheap for a CNC... for a small one,
| in 80/20 profile I would be higher than this :D
| [deleted]
| zomglings wrote:
| I didn't know much a consumer microscope goes for these days.
|
| Apologies if I missed this in the article: What is the difference
| in power/quality between this microscope and the microscopes
| available for ~$100 on Amazon?
| timzaman wrote:
| He wants to reduce glare and fails to put on a polarization
| filter :facepalm:.
| radicalbyte wrote:
| I see a new Lego Ideas set coming..
| avar wrote:
| Is there a name for or community centered around the practical
| non-toy use of Lego?
| ezconnect wrote:
| 300USD for that flimsy shaking setup, you can buy a very decent
| microscope for 300USD with HD camera and solidly built.
| nix23 wrote:
| But is it opensource and from ibm? ;)
| waynesonfire wrote:
| link?
| foobarbecue wrote:
| What's the magnification? I'm not sure I would call this a
| microscope... it's more like a motorized hand lens.
| nieksand wrote:
| If you are interested in assembling your own microscope and have
| access to a 3D printer, I highly recommend:
| https://openflexure.org/
|
| For me the interesting part was the build process. If you care
| more about microscopy than tinkering, you are probably better off
| just buying a pre-made scope.
| JackMcMack wrote:
| If you do want to try out openflexure, I recommend 3d printing
| the v7 version [0]. At the time of writing it is still in
| alpha, but it's on par with v6 and the build instructions are a
| huge improvement.
|
| And definitely read through those build instructions, and the
| forums. It's an incredibly capable microscope, but there are
| some rough edges. I would suggest trying the raspi camera with
| 40x objective, and then see if you can source all the required
| parts. You can find everything you need on aliexpress, if you
| don't mind the long shipping times.
|
| If you don't need the motorized axis (eg for autostitching for
| research, or for autofocus), I would suggest skipping the
| stepper motors and driver board. The official board is not
| available, and stuffing cheap stepper drivers in the base is a
| hassle. You can always decide to add the motors/drivers later.
|
| [0] https://build.openflexure.org/openflexure-
| microscope/v7.0.0-...
| runjake wrote:
| I don't want to crap on this project -- it's totally cool.
|
| But, a word to some interested in building this: if you have an
| iPhone 13 Pro and some good lighting, the macro camera will give
| equal or perhaps better results with good ambient light and
| keeping the iPhone still.
| pengaru wrote:
| > "We have advanced microfluidic technologies for applications
| related to healthcare and life sciences, and often we have the
| challenge of visualizing microfluidic chips because they
| typically have reflective surfaces,"
|
| Isn't this typically overcome using a polarized filter and
| appropriately polarized light? Seems preferable to making a
| rickety articulated structure if so.
| gattr wrote:
| On a related note, if one's willing to forego proper mechanics
| and lighting, for imaging small stuff you only need a digital
| video camera and a microscope objective lens (or just a
| photographic lens with some macro rings). I got good results [1]
| with a machine vision camera from PGR (comparable to RPi camera
| module) on a tripod pointed at a slide held in a "third hand",
| with desk lamp shining from behind ("oblique illumination"). Yes,
| one can easily move it sideways and focus by hand.
|
| [1] https://vimeo.com/user12237688 (technical details in the
| description)
| WithinReason wrote:
| Or just buy a 5$ adapter and put on your existing lens
| backwards: https://photographylife.com/reverse-lens-technique-
| for-macro...
| unixhero wrote:
| Where would IBM be if they openaourced their entire mainframe
| ecosystem and entire Unix ecosystem? Genuine question.
| jdblair wrote:
| The same place they are now. Squeezing out an existence doing
| professional services.
| nix23 wrote:
| Well at least give out free z/OS z/VM z/VSE ADCD, and for the
| community that -> [1] would have bee a really good move for the
| community without loosing on single cent, and maybe spark a
| little bit interest in Mainframes again.
|
| 1 https://geronimo370.nl/blog/2019/06/18/a-sad-day-for-free-
| xa...
| ArtWomb wrote:
| One Microscope Per Child ;)
| robinsoh wrote:
| That's foreshadowing the utter disaster and waste of resources
| (for countries that could ill afford such wastage) that OLPC
| ended up being.
|
| "
|
| https://foreignpolicy.com/2009/09/09/why-did-one-laptop-per-...
| Once the laptop finally started arriving in the developing
| world, its impact was minimal. We think. No one is doing much
| research on their impact on education; discussions are largely
| theoretical. This we do know: OLPC didn't provide tech support
| for the machines, or training in how to incorporate them into
| education. Teachers didn't understand how to use the laptops in
| their lessons; some resented them. Kids like the laptops, but
| they don't actually seem to help them learn. It's
| time to call a spade a spade. OLPC was a failure. ...
|
| As Shaikh suggests, OLPC is a classic case of a development
| program more tailored to the tastes and interests of its
| funders, than the needs of the people it was supposed to help.
| Back to the drawing board. "
| foxhop wrote:
| This is the coolest shit I have seen in a long time. Also look at
| his shirt, i am dreaming over this setup! I want one but I have
| no desire to build one, is there a market for 3rd party lego
| scopes? : )
| wartijn_ wrote:
| We could create a market :D I think it would be really
| interesting to make one, but don't have any use for a
| microscope.
| donkarma wrote:
| Thinking quickly, Dave constructs a LEGO microscope using only
| some LEGO, a Raspberry Pi, and a camera
| warabe wrote:
| Great idea!
|
| Likewise, can we build low-cost MRI scanner for dogs and cats out
| of Lego?? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30208083
| rank0 wrote:
| Why are the comments so negative? Live a little guys...It's just
| a neat little toy project!
| [deleted]
| hahamrfunnyguy wrote:
| The main reason the guy built this was so he could photograph
| certain kinds of specimens on an angle and reduce glare. It seems
| like a fairly specialized use case.
|
| If you just want or need to look at stuff under a microscope,
| it's probably better just to buy an inexpensive one. You can get
| a pretty decent one in the $300-$400 range. I have one of AM
| Scope's stereo boom microscopes and works great for what I need
| it for. It is quality stuff and they have a range of different
| types of microscopes.
| waynesonfire wrote:
| Would I be able to examine the edge of plane iron blade on such
| a microscope? Blade is 0.125" thick and sharpened at a 35
| degree bevel. Or, would the this lego microscope be a better
| tool given it's been designed for angles?
| Damogran6 wrote:
| I was going to lambaste you for being pedantic and having no
| soul and then I went to an scope and looked at what was
| available and MAN can you buy a lot of microscope for not a lot
| of money. I'm assuming the quality is there.
|
| It's a far cry from the prices I recall in the 80's when I was
| a teenager. (Well, probably similar, but in 1980's dollars)
| samstave wrote:
| One of the top things gobbled up during the multiple tech
| failure times (like the first one in ~2001-ish and ~2008
| etc...
|
| Was the liqudating of assets from failed companies, and
| microscopes were abound, and were grabbed up super fast in
| the asset auctions.
|
| I never needed one, but I always regretted not buying one -
| ~$5,000 scope for $50...
|
| That and every Oscilloscope were always bought up fast as
| heck.
| dekhn wrote:
| yes, the amscopes are extremely high quality.
| blululu wrote:
| Can confirm. The quality and prices are if AmScope are good
| and microscopy is a fun hobby. If you just want to build a
| microscope then build one but IMO using a microscope is a
| more enjoyable hobby than building one. Also even if you
| start with a decent microscope there are a lot of interesting
| diy projects involving focus and lighting and computational
| imaging.
| freedomben wrote:
| Wow, that is indeed wild. A fellow student with me in the 80s
| broke a school microscope and I remember it being such a big
| deal that lawyers and lawsuits and even threats of violence
| broke out. I don't remember the dollar figure but I remember
| thinking you could get a car for a whole lot less than a
| microscope. I want to say it was 10s of thousands.
| d110af5ccf wrote:
| What sort of microscope though? A modern confocal
| microscope setup with something like a 100x oil immersion
| objective isn't cheap.
| MrYellowP wrote:
| > inexpensive
|
| > in the $300-$400 range.
|
| inexpensive, relatively speaking.
|
| $300-$400 might be inexpensive for a microscope, but it's not
| inexpensive per se.
| tjoff wrote:
| In the context, comparing it to a $300-$400 DIY solution it
| isn't expensive.
|
| A different thing, sure, but not more money.
| [deleted]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-03-06 23:00 UTC)