Here’s the paper where they explain it. Basically, they make subtle fluctuations in layer height, adding or subtracting small amounts that are not visible to the naked eye, to encode 0s and 1s. So, maybe in principle this could run at the firmware level on your printer. Then, someone can use a microscope to read off the code from pieces of the printed part.
I would have some doubts about how reliable this is, given the relatively large tolerances I fdm printing, but they have a section about that in the paper, so I guess they at least have thought about it.
Seems similar to 2D printers. It shouldn’t be that hard honestly. Sure, it’s probably very prone to errors, but if it repeats over the entire print then the errors should average out.
Here’s the paper where they explain it. Basically, they make subtle fluctuations in layer height, adding or subtracting small amounts that are not visible to the naked eye, to encode 0s and 1s. So, maybe in principle this could run at the firmware level on your printer. Then, someone can use a microscope to read off the code from pieces of the printed part.
I would have some doubts about how reliable this is, given the relatively large tolerances I fdm printing, but they have a section about that in the paper, so I guess they at least have thought about it.
Seems similar to 2D printers. It shouldn’t be that hard honestly. Sure, it’s probably very prone to errors, but if it repeats over the entire print then the errors should average out.
i wanna see them try to get this into marlin
So if anyone anneals their part, this fingerprint goes away.
Also these are still made of petrochemicals and thus easily incinerated during disposal