2023 24th International Conference on Process Control (PC)
June 6–9, 2023, Štrbské Pleso, Slovakia
An application of 3D overprint using PLC
Tadeáš Vojtko1 , Marek Noga1 , Martin Juhás1, Martin Gulan1 , Jana Gulanová1,2
1
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava, Slovakia
2
Lattice s.r.o., Piešt’any, Slovakia
{tadeas.vojtko, marek.noga, martin.juhas, martin.gulan}@stuba.sk, jana.gulanova@lattice.sk
2023 24th International Conference on Process Control (PC) | 979-8-3503-4763-0/23/$31.00 ©2023 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/PC58330.2023.10217683
Abstract—Applications of 3D printing, being a type of additive
manufacturing, have recently experienced a tremendous develop-
ment. This technology uses various methods to create an object,
mostly from scratch. This tends to lead to a considerable amount
of defective components in the prototyping phase, even when only
a part of an object is wrong. In an industrial environment with a
significant emphasis on sustainable or zero-defect manufacturing,
it presents one of the drawbacks of this technology. To tackle this
problem, we present an application of ‘3D overprint’ using PLC
control, which is more suitable for industrial deployment. More
specifically, we also address some of the challenges that we con-
sider essential for a successful overprint. The proposed overprint
augmentation procedure based on the fused deposition modeling
technology can clearly reduce time and material consumption in
the prototyping phase and even during the whole life cycle of the
manufactured object.
Index Terms—additive manufacturing, 3D printing, overprint,
scanner, PLC control, MATLAB, G-code
I. I NTRODUCTION
Additive manufacturing attracts a lot of attention nowadays.
In particular, 3D printers are now commonly used in manufac-
turing and even as a hobby for many people in the comfort of
their homes. They can be used for printing of various objects,
most commonly from scratch. This is due to the cost of a new
3D printed part that is generally lower than when manufactured
with other methods. Based on the kinematic structure of given
3D printer, there is a way for those capable of moving in 3D
space to generate a path, which allows already existing objects
to be augmented, repaired, or generally modified to achieve a
desired functionality or purpose. Modifying an existing object
is indeed more sustainable as there is no need to print a new
one, or if an object is repaired using this method, there is no
need to replace it.
Before augmenting an existing object it is necessary to con-
sider, among other things, how it will be attached to the 3D
printer and which attachment technique should be used to join
the object with a new part that will be printed over it. Another
question is how to obtain the data of an object which will be
augmented and how to generate a path for the 3D printer.
One of the most common 3D printing technologies is fused
deposition modeling (FDM) [1], [2], where the 3D printing
material (filament) is deposited layer by layer to create enough
adhesion, while using a heated bed. There are ways to increase
adhesion, see e.g. [3], [4]. To create enough adhesion for the
objects that cannot preheat or attach to a surface because of
their shape, glue can be used to create enough adhesion layer.
Most 3D printers rely on the G-code programming language.
To generate a tool path for a printer, any 3D slicing software,
979-8-3503-4763-0/23/$31.00 ©2023 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Yuan Ze University. Downloaded on April 01,2024 at 04:01:11 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
professional or hobby, capable of translating a CAD model
into printing instructions can be used to generate the G-code.
Based on a particular method, various benefits can be achieved.
For some more sophisticated slicing methods see e.g. [5], [6].
To augment any existing object and achieve desired results,
positioning of a printer is crucial. Most basic 3D printers have
at least limit switches used to calibrate them. Nevertheless, this
is often not sufficient to augment particular objects. In [7] the
authors introduced a software for 3D printed augmentation,
capable of creating the path and the G-code for three types of
attachments: print-over, affixed, and interlocked.
In case of the print-over and affixed attachment techniques,
their authors generally assume that the objects that are to be
augmented as well as the 3D augmentations to be printed, have
been acquired as CAD models. There are various methods for
bringing real 3D objects to the virtual world. Either an object
can be drawn using a CAD software, or a camera or scanner
can be used to obtain a 3D model of the object. These devices
work in various ways, as presented e.g. in [8]–[10], and their
use offers a lot of new possibilities. In addition to data about
the object, it is also possible to obtain information about its
position and orientation in space. This is convenient if there
is a way to process this information and exploit it during the
preparation and process of 3D printing.
As mentioned before, many 3D printers are used as hobby
devices. For most standard 3D printers, microcontrollers are
frequently used as their central control units. They are capable
of controlling the entire device, and there is a large community
focused on developing them. However, such a control is not
always appropriate and applicable to industrial applications of
additive manufacturing. The most significant difference is that
industrial controllers are built to withstand conditions on shop
floor, such as shock, vibration, electrical noise, or temperature.
In this light, controlling such applications using the industry-
standard programmable logic controllers (PLC) presents unde-
niable benefits. Some of them can be found in [11].
Based on the above motivation and our literature overview,
we formed the following research questions:
• How to perform the overprint in manufacturing for vari-
ous kinematic structures?
• How to avoid nozzle collision and damaging the base part
by extensive heat?
• How to align the position of the base part with the coor-
dinate system for the overprint?
These, among other things, will be discussed in the following
sections.
246
 (f)

(g)
(a)
(h) (i) (j)
(b)

(c)

(d) (e)

Fig. 1: Photograph of the laboratory 3-axis 3D printer testbed.

(a) – laser scanner, (b) – extruder, (c) – heatbed, (d) – 3-axis manipulator, (e) – electrical distribution box (not shown in picture), (f) – HMI
for heat control, (g) – electronics for the extruder and heatbed, (h) – MATLAB app and graphs, (i) – local PC, (j) – HMI for device control.

II. L ABORATORY TESTBED A. Kinematics

Figure 1 shows the developed laboratory 3D printer testbed,
which is currently used for research. For all measurements and
for creation of a digital 3D copy of the area, where we want
to overprint given parts, we used a 2D/3D laser profile sensor
scanCONTROL 2950-100 (a) from Micro-Epsilon. Our printer
shares the basic elements with conventional 3D printers, name-
ly an extruder (b) and a heatbed (c). Their linear movements
are provided by a 3-axis Cartesian manipulator (d). Below the
manipulator there is electronics, more specifically an electrical
distribution box (e) which, among other electrical components,
contains also the main PLC for the control of the manipulator.
It is a PLC from Siemens with product type designation CPU
1511T-1 PN. The manipulator with PLC control is used as an
alternative to a robotic arm. Extruder and heatbed temperature
can be set via a human-machine interface (HMI) touch panel
(f) connected to the second electrical distribution box, which
contains electronics for heat control (g). Same as the first one,
it also contains a PLC. It is a Siemens PLC with product type
designation CPU 1214C DC/DC/DC, used to control heating
of the extruder and the heatbed. Machine control as well as
evaluation of measurements is performed on a local PC (i). It
runs a custom MATLAB app for evaluation of scanner data (h)
and simulation of another HMI control panel (j) that enables
to control the entire device—from controlling the movement
of the individual axes, starting the scanning procedure, to the
eventual start of the 3D overprint procedure.
The following subsections aim to provide better understand-
ing of this testbed, why it was designed this way, and how it
practically works.
The purpose of the proposed testbed is to enable the use of
the 3D overprint with various kinematics. There are, however,
several aspects that need to be considered in order to exploit
the versatility of 3D overprinting. To begin with, it should be
known that the most common kinematic structures used with
the FDM technology, to which overprinting might potentially
be applied, include:
• Cartesian structures,
• delta structures,
• structures based on the polar coordinate system,
• robotic arm-based structures.
The current version of the testbed uses a Cartesian structure,
where the extruder moves in the z-axis, i.e. it only performs
linear up-and-down motion. In the x- and y-axes, the motion is
performed by the surface on which the print is applied, i.e. the
heatbed. Although the extruder performs different movements
than the heatbed, it is necessary that all movements in all axes
are synchronized, which is due to the application of a nonstan-
dard printing path where the transitions between layers are not
abrupt but smooth, such as in the case of 3D printing of con-
tinuous fiber reinforced plastics.
Isolating the extruder and the manipulator with a separated
control may increase the versatility of the system by means
of different types of kinematics, especially robotic arms. By
doing so, it is only needed to simply replace the manipulator
with another one and keep the original extruder parts. For this
reason, the printer and the manipulator must be modularized.
Note that together with modularization, these parts also need
to be network synchronized.

247
Authorized licensed use limited to: Yuan Ze University. Downloaded on April 01,2024 at 04:01:11 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Another important feature is synchronizing the manipulator
speed with the extrusion speed, especially when considering
the use of a robotic arm for the application of 3D overprint.
In particular, a robotic arm cannot maintain a defined constant
speed for the entire duration of printing. If the material feed
is set at a constant speed and the robot slows down at certain
points during printing, there could be an increase in the amount
of material at the points of slowdown. By network integration
of the extruder's controller and the manipulator's controller, it
is possible to exchange information about the speed of manipu-
lator and change the extrusion speed based on this value.
In addition to software modification of the extruder, i.e. the
extrusion speed, it was also necessary to modify the hardware
part of the extruder. Since the manipulator does not allow tilt-
ing of the printer head, which would be possible when using a
robotic arm, it was necessary to modify the extruder to prevent
the extruder from colliding with the base part. By using a spe-
cial nozzle with an extended tip, as in high-detail 3D printing,
probability of such collision can be minimized. It is also nec-
essary to protect the base part from damage caused by heat
from the extruder. This problem was also solved with the use
of the extended tip, resulting in greater distance between the
hotend and the base part. With this free space, an additional
cooling fan could be added to cool the printed material.
Starting from the design of kinematics and solving the asso-
ciated issues, it is further necessary to address the acquisition
of the position of the base part.
B. Coordinate measuring machine
Information regarding the x and y coordinates of the base
part as well as the rotation of the part, i.e. the angle α, are
required to perform the overprinting. To obtain the coordinate
of an object, contact or non-contact coordinate measuring ma-
chines (CMMs) are used. Both the contact CMMs represented
by a touch probe and the non-contact CMMs represented by
a laser scanner were employed and tested.
Contact CMMs provide a high measurement precision at the
measured point, but a limitation is that predetermined move-
ments must be specified before the measurement. As the shape
of the part becomes more complex, the number of measuring
movements increases, which in turn increases the coordinate
measurement time and thus the overall overprint time. On the
other hand, non-contact CMMs offer the possibility of a dyna-
mic and more efficient way of area measurement than contact
CMMs. Unlike contact CMMs, non-contact CMMs only need
a single motion to measure, reducing time and cost of produc-
tion. Based on the advantages of non-contact CMMs and the
more difficult way of obtaining the resulting coordinates and
rotation angle from the touch probe data, only the laser scanner
was further used.
The employed scanCONTROL 2950-100 scanner is mainly
used in industrial measurements to acquire various 2D parame-
ters or 3D data and images for image processing. Since the
scanCONTROL laser scanners feature a built-in controller, an
external control unit is not required. This renders the wiring
much easier to integrate into confined spaces or on a robot.
248
Authorized licensed use limited to: Yuan Ze University. Downloaded on April 01,2024 at 04:01:11 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
z
y
x
Fig. 2: A G-code based path generated in MATLAB for a non-
standard continuous 3D overprint of a stadium shaped part.
The scanner uses the laser triangulation principle for two-di-
mensional profile detection on different target surfaces [12].
It also supports the GigEVision protocol, through which a 2D
image can be loaded into MATLAB. However, this does not
represent a profile, but contains merely the data from which
the profile needs to be parsed. A custom application thus had
to be developed for MATLAB.
C. Work procedure
Before we proceed with the description of the scanning and
3D overprinting procedure, it is necessary to know the purpose
which the testbed was designed for and what needs to be done
before running the application itself.
The device is designed for the augmentation of an existing
object—the base part, with a preselected shape. We therefore
need a 3D model of the part to print over, to get a correct
information about its position on the heatbed and to create the
print path. In our case, we use the model of a conical stadium
shaped part for the application of overprint.
In order to determine the path of the overprint on the base
object, i.e. to create the G-code, it is necessary to obtain the
spatial points of this object. These points were obtained using
a MATLAB script. To locate the nodal points of the stadium
part, simple goniometric functions were used since it has the
shape of two truncated cones. After finding these points, the
program was configured to allow setting an arbitrary position
of the stadium centre, based on which it fits the positions of
the spatial points. Thanks to these points it was also possible
to design different shapes for overprinting on the stadium and
to generate the corresponding print path (Fig. 2) and G-code.
As mentioned, the G-code was generated for a nonstandard
print path. The conventional 3D printers use an instantaneous
transition between the layers, where it causes a thickened spot
decreasing the overall quality of the print. This phenomenon
can be avoided by assuming a smooth shape-copying layering
of the material. The 3D printing with continuous movement in
the z-axis may also provide enhanced mechanical properties,
which can be achieved by orienting the printed fibers in the
direction of stress and using rigid additive fibers that are not
 Start scan
Position
acquisition
MATLAB Movements
Data transfer
Data from G-code
MATLAB Augmenting
MovePath
Movements Extruder / Heatbed
control
3D overprint
Fig. 3: Block diagram of the proposed work procedure.
fused, such as carbon filaments [13]. Such a smooth transition
has been also used in printing of some of the proposed shapes.
The generated G-codes are then inserted into the PLC program
as data blocks and further used in the program.
After determining the part to be printed on, determining the
shapes to be printed, generating and inserting the G-codes into
the PLC program, we can move on to the work procedure of
the proposed application, schematically illustrated in Fig. 3.
The work procedure starts with data acquisition, i.e. scan-
ning of the base part. Afterwards, the data is sent to the local
PC where the MATLAB application does the data processing.
Data processing involves converting the raw data into machine-
readable form, using the correct fitting method to filtering out
the noise and determine the base part compensation coordi-
nates from the resulting point cloud data. For determination of
the orientation of the body in space, a method described in Sec.
III was used. From the MATLAB application, the compensa-
tion parameters for the location of the part are sent to the PLC
via the OPC server in form of x-coordinate, y-coordinate, and
α-angle compensation. These parameters from MATLAB and
the data block with the G-code for printing the desired shape
are further processed and transformed into commands for the
kinematics of the device, i.e., the motion of the manipulator.
The 3D overprint itself can then be started.
249
Authorized licensed use limited to: Yuan Ze University. Downloaded on April 01,2024 at 04:01:11 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 4: Transmission and scattering of the light beam emitted
from the scanner's light source when using different types of
the material. From left to right: matte black PLA, matte white
PLA, transparent green PETG, and transparent white PLA.
III. R ESULTS AND DISCUSSION
One of the main objectives of this project was to obtain a
3D image of the base part from which it will be possible to
calculate the compensation coordinates necessary for a correct
application of the 3D overprint. In obtaining the compensation
data, two issues were encountered, namely the more complex
shape of the base part and the optical properties of the material
from which it was made.
The laser scanner produces a laser beam which is projected
onto the surface of the scanned object. This beam reflects from
the surface of the object. However, if the surface is transparent,
the laser beam does not always reflect off the surface of the
body. As it can be seen in Fig. 4, in the case of stadium parts
made from more transparent materials, there is a transmission
and scattering of the laser beam, which will eventually affect
quality of the measured data from the scanner as well as the
less accurate determination of the compensation coordinates,
and consequently result in a lower quality of the overprint.
Figure 5 shows the difference in scanner data when scanning
stadium objects of a different color. For comparison we have
selected three colour variants of filament, namely green trans-
parent, white glossy, and black matte. By comparing particular
scans, the scanner had the most difficulty with the transparent
material. The point cloud data from the scan of the stadium,
made from black matte filament, are all accurately bounded
by the model envelope. In the case of transparent materials,
however, there is a transmission which can be seen in places
where the point cloud passes outside the model envelope, and
in empty areas within the envelope that are created because
the laser beam did not fully reflect off the surface of the base
part, but penetrated the surface and reflected somewhere inside
the body of the base part.
In Fig. 6 it can be seen that in some cases, due to incorrect
or missing measured data caused by transmission, the MAT-
LAB script had trouble calculating the correct compensating
coordinates and angle of rotation. The inaccuracies associated
with scanning bodies made of glossy or transparent materials
could be avoided by employing a scanner that utilizes a blue
laser for data acquisition. The laser scanners with blue laser
line are preferably used for profile measurements on red-hot
z (mm)
x (mm)
(a)
z (mm)
x (mm)
(b)
z (mm)
x (mm)
(c)
Fig. 5: Visualization of data obtained by scanning the stadium
shaped part printed from (a) matte black PLA, (b) transparent
green PETG, and (c) glossy white PLA, compared to the enve-
lope of its 3D model.
glowing metals, as well as on transparent and organic surfaces.
While allowing for a significantly higher stability, the blue-vi-
olet laser beam does not penetrate the measured object [11].
This problem can be easily solved by using different hardware,
which is out of scope of this paper. To avoid it, we have used
primarily base parts printed from the white matte filament.
From the scanned data, the next objective was to determine
the shape of the scanned object, find the coordinates of the
center of the object, and the rotation angle of the object rela-
tive to a reference coordinate system that represented an ideal
model, and to create a quality criterion for the measured part
that would determine whether the object was suitable for over-
print or not. Different methods for obtaining information about
the position of the object and its rotation were thus tested.
The first method was based on obtaining coordinates using
the Curve Fitting Toolbox found in MATLAB. However, this
approach did not work because a single function expression of
a given shape does not exist. The second attempt was directed
towards fitting only the base of the object. Here, however, after
fitting the function, it was found that the equation describing
the base of the object gradually takes complex numbers, thus
the method was unsuccessful.
The second tested method was based on the principle of
singular value decomposition (SVD). Eventually, this method
was also not used. This was due to the algorithm inaccurately
determining which of the sides of the scanned object was be-
250
Authorized licensed use limited to: Yuan Ze University. Downloaded on April 01,2024 at 04:01:11 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
y (mm)
x (mm)
(a)
y (mm)
x (mm)
(b)
Fig. 6: Comparison of calculated positions of scanned stadium
shaped parts printed from (a) matte black PLA and (b) trans-
parent green PETG.
ing expanded and hence the principal component vectors were
indeed rotated by the correct angle but in the wrong quadrant.
This was reflected in the expression of the incorrect rotation
angle. Since another method was found for determining the
resulting parameters, the solution to the SVD error was not
performed and the method was abandoned.
The third method is based on the tool ‘A suite of minimal
bounding objects’ [14] that is freely available under MATLAB.
It works on the principle of describing the boundary points of
point cloud data by a polyhedral 2D object which forms the
shape of the outer envelope. The tool splits the 3D object into
multiple 2D envelopes (Fig. 6). For each of these rectangles,
its centre is calculated, and the result is averaged. The result
represents the compensating x- and y-coordinates of the solid.
To obtain the rotation angle of the base part, a modification
was made to the original code where the tangent function was
used to calculate this parameter.
After the calculation of the compensation coordinates a few
parameters had to be adjusted in the printing setup. The first
parameter to configure was the appropriate distance between
the layers that are printed during the base part augmentation,

(a)
(b)
Fig. 7: CAD modelled (left) and real-world (right) overprints
of the stadium shaped part; (a) zigzag and (b) propeller shaped
overprint.
and the second was the extrusion speed. Both parameters have
so far been set based on the visual spectrum, so that there are
no significant defects on the print that would devalue the result.
The overprint results are shown in Fig. 7 where modelled
and real-world overprints are visually compared. For example,
a correct spacing between the layers of the augmented part was
tested by printing the entire visible surface of the body. The
spacing was set until the surface was all covered by augmented
part and there were no significant gaps nor a stack of the fila-
ment fiber was made. The problem of setting an appropriate
extrusion speed occurred at the edges of the overprints with
an increase in thickness. Due to the inertia, more filament was
extruded than necessary when the direction of the printer head
movement changed abruptly. The overall quality of the over-
print generally decreased because of the filament that had col-
lected by being forced further into the extrusion nozzle. The
speed was tested until the thickness on the edge was the same
as on the rest of the overprinted part.
Based on the experimental results we consider the applica-
tion of PLC controlled 3D overprint with a 3-axis manipulator
successful. In our opinion, the achieved results clearly demon-
strate the applicability of this method for 3D printing. At the
same time, they revealed the limitations of the hardware part of
the device in the given configuration of the laboratory testbed.
IV. C ONCLUSION
The paper presented a 3D overprint application using PLC
control. Testbed, workflow, and used software and hardware
were presented. The proposed 3D printing method can benefit
industrial additive manufacturing by saving time and material
using printed parts as the base for the new parts. The authors'
ongoing work aims to combine this method with a 6 degrees-
of-freedom robot for non-planar 3D printing. In the future, we
also want to focus more on the use of a scanner to reduce the
number of required 3D models and use it more in the process,
as well as on testing the adhesion of the printed parts.
251
Authorized licensed use limited to: Yuan Ze University. Downloaded on April 01,2024 at 04:01:11 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors gratefully acknowledge the contribution of the
Slovak Research and Development Agency under the grants
APVV-18-0023 and SK-AT-20-0021, and the Cultural and Edu-
cational Grant Agency of the Ministry of Education of Slovak
Republic under the grant 012STU-4/2021. The authors would
also like to thank Juraj Bavlna, L’ubomír Jablonský, Lukáš Va-
dovič, Lukáš Dlugoš, and Dávid Bezák for their valuable con-
tribution to the project within their master's theses [15]–[19].
R EFERENCES
[1] S. Daminabo, S. Goel, S. Grammatikos, H. Nezhad, and V. Thakur,
“Fused deposition modeling-based additive manufacturing (3D printing):
techniques for polymer material systems,” Materials Today Chemistry,
vol. 16, p. 100248, 2020.
[2] T. N. A. T. Rahim, A. M. Abdullah, and H. M. Akil, “Recent develop-
ments in fused deposition modeling-based 3D printing of polymers and
their composites,” Polymer Reviews, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 589–624, 2019.
[3] N. Kwon, H. Deshpande, M. K. Hasan, A. Darnal, and J. Kim, “Multi-
ttach: Techniques to enhance multi-material attachments in low-cost
FDM 3D printing,” in Proceedings of the 6th Annual ACM Symposium
on Computational Fabrication, New York, NY, USA, 2021.
[4] X. Zhang and J. Wang, “Controllable interfacial adhesion behaviors
of polymer-on-polymer surfaces during fused deposition modeling 3D
printing process,” Chemical Physics Letters, vol. 739, p. 136959, 2020.
[5] M. Wüthrich, W. J. Elspass, P. Bos, and S. Holdener, “Novel 4-axis
3D printing process to print overhangs without support material,” in
Industrializing Additive Manufacturing. Cham: Springer International
Publishing, 2021, pp. 130–145.
[6] W. Wang, H. Chao, J. Tong, Z. Yang, X. Tong, H. Li, X. Liu, and L. Liu,
“Saliency-preserving slicing optimization for effective 3D printing,”
Computer Graphics Forum, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 148–160, 2015.
[7] X. A. Chen, S. Coros, J. Mankoff, and S. E. Hudson, “Encore: 3D
printed augmentation of everyday objects with printed-over, affixed
and interlocked attachments,” in Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM
Symposium on User Interface Software & Technology. New York, NY,
USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2015, pp. 73–82.
[8] C. Rossi, , and S. Savino, “A robotic system to scan and reproduce
object,” Journal of Robotics, vol. 11, 2011.
[9] D. Lanman, D. Crispell, and G. Taubin, “Surround structured lighting for
full object scanning,” in Sixth International Conference on 3-D Digital
Imaging and Modeling (3DIM 2007), 2007, pp. 107–116.
[10] J. Franca, M. Gazziro, A. Ide, and J. Saito, “A 3D scanning system based
on laser triangulation and variable field of view,” in IEEE International
Conference on Image Processing 2005, vol. 1, 2005.
[11] Siemens AG, “Industrialization of additive manufacturing,” Online,
2023, https://assets.new.siemens.com/siemens/assets/api/uuid:9fb0c51d-
bd58-47ba-af84-2e98af725179/e20001-a1960-p610-x-7600-additive-
manufacturing-en.pdf.
[12] Micro-Epsilon, “scanCONTROL // 2D/3D Laser profile sensors, 1th ed.”
Online, 2023, https://www.micro-epsilon.com/download/products/cat--
scanCONTROL--en-us.pdf.
[13] T. Wang, N. Li, G. Link, J. Jelonnek, J. Fleischer, J. Dittus, and
D. Kupzik, “Load-dependent path planning method for 3D printing
of continuous fiber reinforced plastics,” Composites Part A: Applied
Science and Manufacturing, vol. 140, p. 106181, 2021.
[14] J. D’Errico, “A suite of minimal bounding objects,” MATLAB Cen-
tral File Exchange, 2023, https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/
fileexchange/34767-a-suite-of-minimal-bounding-objects.
[15] J. Bavlna, “Robotic 3D printing using a 6-axis articulated arm (In
Slovak),” Master’s thesis, Slovak University of Technology, 2019.
[16] L’. Jablonský, “Triaxial coordinate measuring machine (In Slovak),”
Master’s thesis, Slovak University of Technology, 2020.
[17] L. Vadovič, “Determining the shape and position of components using
a line laser scanner (In Slovak),” Master’s thesis, Slovak University of
Technology, 2020.
[18] L. Dlugoš, “3D printout augmentation using PLC controlled manipulator
(In Slovak),” Master’s thesis, Slovak University of Technology, 2020.
[19] D. Bezák, “Augmenting robotic 3D print (In Slovak),” Master’s thesis,
Slovak University of Technology, 2022.