1. Introduction
Overview of 3D Object Visualization
Advancements in 3D display technologies have revolutionized various fields, including mechanical engineering, defect detection, and interactive design. The ability to visualize and manipulate 3D objects accurately plays a critical role in improving engineering workflows, reducing manufacturing errors, and enhancing quality control processes.
Importance of Accurate Defect Detection
For mechanical engineers and IT professionals, identifying flaws in 3D models is crucial to ensuring product integrity. Traditional monitor-based defect detection often lacks depth perception, making it harder to spot irregularities. Emerging stereoscopic and holographic displays offer enhanced visualization, allowing users to detect even small defects in complex mechanical parts.
Comparison of Two Key Display Technologies
This study evaluates two advanced 3D visualization methods:
- Glasses-free stereoscopic 3D laptop – Utilizes integrated eye-tracking cameras to create depth perception without external glasses.
- Holographic projection display – Embeds silver-threaded fabric screens to reflect light waves, producing realistic holographic projections.
Purpose of the Study
The experiment aims to determine which display technology provides superior defect detection in mechanical engineering models. The research compares accuracy, usability, and visibility, analyzing how each enhances 3D object visualization in real-world applications.
2. Understanding Display Technologies for 3D Objects
3D Objects: Stereoscopic 3D Technology
Stereoscopic glasses-free displays rely on dual eye-tracking cameras positioned above the laptop’s monitor. This real-time tracking adjusts the image based on user movement, eliminating the need for external 3D glasses.
Key Features of Stereoscopic 3D Technology:
- Depth perception enhancement for more realistic object visualization.
- Glasses-free operation, improving convenience and reducing equipment reliance.
- Applications in education, training, and design, making it suitable for technical industries.
However, visual fatigue can occur, especially for users unaccustomed to long-term stereoscopic exposure. The study examines whether these drawbacks outweigh the benefits in defect detection accuracy.
Holographic Projection Technology
Holographic projection uses silver-threaded fabric screens to create floating projections of 3D objects. The light-reflecting threads produce an illusion where the displayed image appears to exist in physical space rather than on a screen.
Key Features of Holographic Projection Technology:
- Enhanced depth perception without the need for external viewing equipment.
- Highly immersive visualization, allowing users to see objects from multiple perspectives.
- Ideal for interactive simulations, making it valuable in engineering and medical fields.
One limitation is dependency on lighting conditions—holographic projections require controlled environments with minimal ambient light for best clarity. The study evaluates whether this lighting restriction affects defect detection efficiency.
3. Methodology: How 3D Objects Defect Detection Was Analyzed
Experiment Design
The study was designed to evaluate how different display technologies influence the accuracy and efficiency of defect detection in 3D objects. Participants worked across three separate workstations to assess defects in mechanical engineering components.
- Workstation 1: Stereoscopic 3D laptop using eye-tracking depth perception.
- Workstation 2: Holographic projection display utilizing silver-threaded screens for realistic 3D visualization.
- Workstation 3 (Control Group): Standard monitor, using traditional CAD software for defect identification.
Each participant completed tasks in all three environments, ensuring a balanced evaluation of accuracy, ease of use, and visual clarity across different 3D display technologies.
3D Objects: Selection of CAD Models
To ensure real-world applicability, the study selected mechanical engineering components commonly used in design and manufacturing. Each 3D model contained intentional defects representing realistic flaws in industrial applications, including:
- Cosmetic defects affecting surface finish.
- Structural inconsistencies impacting functional integrity.
- Manufacturing defects introduced via random alterations in the 3D model geometry.
The models were formatted in STL and OBJ file types, ensuring universal compatibility across different workstations.
Table 1: CAD Model Defect Classification
| Defect Type | Example | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Cosmetic Defect | Surface irregularities | Reduces aesthetic quality |
| Structural Inconsistency | Misalignment in connections | Compromises functionality |
| Manufacturing Defect | Unwanted protrusions | May cause assembly issues |
| Missing Triangle | Gaps in 3D print structure | Weakens material integrity |
Data Collection & Survey Process
Participant feedback was gathered using structured surveys and direct interviews, categorizing responses based on:
- Accuracy – Number of correctly identified defects per workstation.
- Ease of use – Participants’ comfort levels in each environment.
- Visualization clarity – Ability to perceive depth and object irregularities effectively.
4. Working Mechanism: How Display Technologies Influence 3D Objects Defect Detection
Impact of Stereoscopic Displays
The stereoscopic display laptop uses eye-tracking cameras to adjust the depth perception dynamically, eliminating the need for external 3D glasses.
Key Advantages:
- Provides enhanced depth in object inspection.
- Allows real-time interaction with 3D models.
- Reduces reliance on additional hardware.
Challenges:
- Visual fatigue reported among some participants after prolonged use.
- Limited field of view due to screen size constraints.
Holographic Projection Displays for 3D Objects
Holographic projection creates floating 3D visuals using silver-threaded fabric screens, offering immersive defect analysis with intuitive spatial perception.
Key Advantages:
- Allows 360-degree visualization of 3D objects.
- Enhances defect identification in complex structures.
Challenges:
- Lighting conditions significantly impact projection visibility.
- Requires controlled environment to minimize external interference.
Table 2: Performance Comparison of Display Technologies
| Workstation | Technology Used | Accuracy in Defect Detection | User Comfort |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stereoscopic Laptop | Eye-tracking 3D Display | Moderate | Some visual fatigue reported |
| Holographic Projection | Floating 3D Visualization | High | Requires controlled lighting |
| Standard Monitor | Traditional 2D CAD | Highest | Familiar and easy to use |
Comparing Display Technologies
The findings show that:
- Standard monitor users detected the most defects, owing to familiarity and straightforward object handling.
- Holographic projection users excelled in depth perception, identifying subtle defects better than stereoscopic displays.
- Stereoscopic laptop users had moderate accuracy, but reported difficulty adjusting to the eye-tracking mechanism.
5. Results and Key Findings
Comparative Analysis of Display Technologies
The results of the experiment revealed notable differences in defect detection accuracy, user comfort, and visual effectiveness across the three workstations.
- Workstation 3 (Standard Monitor):
- Achieved the highest defect detection accuracy, with participants identifying defects at a consistent rate.
- Familiar interface led to faster identification of structural and manufacturing defects.
- Users reported least strain, making it the most accessible option for long-term defect detection.
- Workstation 2 (Holographic Projection):
- Provided better depth perception, improving visibility of complex geometrical defects.
- Required a controlled lighting environment, limiting usability in varied working conditions.
- User performance improved significantly once adapted to projection distortions.
- Workstation 1 (Stereoscopic 3D Display):
- Struggled with adaptation, as users initially found eye-tracking disorienting.
- Some participants reported visual fatigue, limiting extended use.
- Moderate defect detection accuracy, particularly with smaller surface irregularities.
Key Observations
- Experienced users performed better across all workstations, regardless of the display type.
- Lighting conditions significantly influenced holographic projection workstation performance.
- Display resolution, defect size, and object complexity impacted defect detection rates.
- User preference leaned toward standard monitors, despite enhanced depth perception in holographic projections.
Table 1: Display Technology Performance in 3D Object Defect Detection
| Workstation | Technology Used | Defect Detection Accuracy | User Comfort | Best Use Cases |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Stereoscopic 3D Display | Moderate | Some visual fatigue reported | Surface defect detection |
| 2 | Holographic Projection | High | Requires controlled lighting | Complex 3D structure analysis |
| 3 | Standard Monitor | Highest | Familiar, easy to use | General defect detection |
6. Conclusion and Future Perspectives
Significance of Advanced Display Technologies
Display technology advancements play a critical role in engineering defect analysis, allowing specialists to optimize workflows, reduce errors, and enhance product reliability. This study underscores the importance of choosing the right visualization method based on application needs.
Challenges in Technology Adoption
Despite their advantages, holographic and stereoscopic displays face significant barriers to adoption, including:
- User learning curves—new users require adjustment periods before effectively utilizing stereoscopic tracking.
- Lighting dependencies—holographic projection displays function best under low-light, controlled conditions.
- Integration into existing workflows—traditional monitors remain dominant due to accessibility and familiarity.
Future Applications of 3D Object Display Technologies
The next phase of 3D visualization could explore:
- Artificial intelligence-assisted defect detection, leveraging machine learning for automated analysis.
- Automated quality control integration, where 3D scanning is paired with holographic displays for real-time validation.
- Improved stereoscopic calibration, minimizing eye strain and improving usability across industries.
Final Thoughts
- Standard monitors remain the most reliable option for general defect detection.
- Holographic displays show potential for interactive engineering analysis but require environmental optimization.
- Stereoscopic 3D technology needs refinement to enhance adaptation and minimize strain.
- Future research should assess AI integration with 3D visualization technologies for precision defect analysis.
Reference
Kozov, V.; Minev, E.; Andreeva, M.; Vassilev, T.; Rusev, R. Comparative Analysis of Different Display Technologies for Defect Detection in 3D Objects. Technologies 2025, 13, 118. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies13030118.
License
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 License. This means it can be freely shared, adapted, and used, as long as appropriate credit is given to the original authors. License details: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.