Reverse Engineering - Revision history

Eric: Added some more links under the "Internal Links" section

2023-05-09T01:12:45Z

Added some more links under the "Internal Links" section

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:12, 9 May 2023
Line 66:		Line 66:
	**Another thing could be determining what type of plastic, or what alloy of metal was used for a structual member		**Another thing could be determining what type of plastic, or what alloy of metal was used for a structual member
	**Finally, even at the PCB level some companies will attempt to hide what they are doing/what they used. IC Packages can be De-Lidded and investigated with various microscopes to determine what they are, and thus better fill in the schematic		**Finally, even at the PCB level some companies will attempt to hide what they are doing/what they used. IC Packages can be De-Lidded and investigated with various microscopes to determine what they are, and thus better fill in the schematic

			=Interesting Case Studies=
			*[[Rocketdyne F-1]] / [[F-1b Engine]] (As per [https://youtu.be/ovD0aLdRUs0 This Video by the YouTube Channel "Curious Droid" Titled "Why Can't we Remake the Rocketdyne F1 Engine?" ] ('''~5 Minute Watch''') (Basically all of the Fuel/Oxidizer Injectors Were ''Hand [[Brazing \| Brazed]] Into Place'' and the Skill that required (Practically it's own profession, similar to [[Boilermakers]] but more obsolete) was gone, and they didn't [[Document Everything]] )
			*[[FOGBANK]] (A material used in thermonuclear weapons, believed to be an [[Aerogel]] . It was made, then the plants were shut down and people moved on. Decades later they needed to make more when refurbishing the USA's arsenal. They had to spend ''millions'' to reverse engineer it, then it turns out chemical impurities (for better or for worse) were essential to it's function, in a similar manner to how [https://youtu.be/evV05QeSjAw This Video by the YouTube Channel " [[Tom Scott]] " Titled "How they saved the holes in Swiss cheese" ] mentions that the wholes only form around essentially dirt particles. Granted again security reasons applied in this circumstance, but it shows the importance of detail in reverse engineering and how [[Documenting Everything]] prevents the need

	=Internal Links=		=Internal Links=
	*[[Chinese Reverse Engineering]]		*[[Chinese Reverse Engineering]]
	*Interesting Case Studues:		*[[Items of Interest for Reverse Engineering]]
	**[[Rocketdyne F-1]] / [[F-1b Engine]] (As per [https://youtu.be/ovD0aLdRUs0 This Video by the YouTube Channel "Curious Droid" Titled "Why Can't we Remake the Rocketdyne F1 Engine?" ] ('''~5 Minute Watch''') (Basically all of the Fuel/Oxidizer Injectors Were ''Hand [[Brazing \| Brazed]] Into Place'' and the Skill that required (Practically it's own profession, similar to [[Boilermakers]] but more obsolete) was gone, and they didn't [[Document Everything]] )
	**[[FOGBANK]] (A material used in thermonuclear weapons, believed to be an [[Aerogel]] . It was made, then the plants were shut down and people moved on. Decades later they needed to make more when refurbishing the USA's arsenal. They had to spend ''millions'' to reverse engineer it, then it turns out chemical impurities (for better or for worse) were essential to it's function, in a similar manner to how [https://youtu.be/evV05QeSjAw This Video by the YouTube Channel " [[Tom Scott]] " Titled "How they saved the holes in Swiss cheese" ] mentions that the wholes only form around essentially dirt particles. Granted again security reasons applied in this circumstance, but it shows the importance of detail in reverse engineering and how [[Documenting Everything]] ~~prevents the need~~


	=External Links=		=External Links=

Eric: Added some more information

2023-05-09T01:11:26Z

Added some more information

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:11, 9 May 2023
Line 68:		Line 68:

	=Internal Links=		=Internal Links=
	*		*[[Chinese Reverse Engineering]]
			*Interesting Case Studues:
			**[[Rocketdyne F-1]] / [[F-1b Engine]] (As per [https://youtu.be/ovD0aLdRUs0 This Video by the YouTube Channel "Curious Droid" Titled "Why Can't we Remake the Rocketdyne F1 Engine?" ] ('''~5 Minute Watch''') (Basically all of the Fuel/Oxidizer Injectors Were ''Hand [[Brazing \| Brazed]] Into Place'' and the Skill that required (Practically it's own profession, similar to [[Boilermakers]] but more obsolete) was gone, and they didn't [[Document Everything]] )
			**[[FOGBANK]] (A material used in thermonuclear weapons, believed to be an [[Aerogel]] . It was made, then the plants were shut down and people moved on. Decades later they needed to make more when refurbishing the USA's arsenal. They had to spend ''millions'' to reverse engineer it, then it turns out chemical impurities (for better or for worse) were essential to it's function, in a similar manner to how [https://youtu.be/evV05QeSjAw This Video by the YouTube Channel " [[Tom Scott]] " Titled "How they saved the holes in Swiss cheese" ] mentions that the wholes only form around essentially dirt particles. Granted again security reasons applied in this circumstance, but it shows the importance of detail in reverse engineering and how [[Documenting Everything]] prevents the need


	=External Links=		=External Links=

Eric: Added some more links under the "External Links" section

2023-05-09T00:14:48Z

Added some more links under the "External Links" section

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:14, 9 May 2023
Line 71:		Line 71:

	=External Links=		=External Links=
			*[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_engineering The Wikipedia Page on Reverse Engineering]
	*Seminal work from Bunnie Huang on reverse engineering of hardware - [http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=4297]		*Seminal work from Bunnie Huang on reverse engineering of hardware - [http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=4297]
	:*Bunnie's video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msrTR3hNDQM#t=161		:*Bunnie's video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msrTR3hNDQM#t=161
	*Software reverse engineering - [https://www.eff.org/issues/coders/reverse-engineering-faq]		*Software reverse engineering - [https://www.eff.org/issues/coders/reverse-engineering-faq]

Eric: Updated the page to the more recent formatting style

2023-05-09T00:13:58Z

Updated the page to the more recent formatting style

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:13, 9 May 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
			=Basics=
			*The process of taking an ''engineered'' device/software (thus it is already "engineered" / built and needs no further engineering), and backtracking/deducing how it is designed, and why it was designed that way
			*It can even be done to determine what something is/what it was used for, although this is more relevant for archeologists/museums etc, not OSE's context
			*For OSE's Context it is mainly taking Old Hardware that has been seldom used/redesigned (due to being obsolete in today's conventional economic system) and reverse engineering them to regain that foundation pre-iterating on it:
			**An example would be acquiring an old [[Stationary Engine]] ( such as a [[Hot Bulb Engine]] or [[Crude Oil Engine]] ) and reverse engineering it. After that one could take that foundation and build a modular version made with modern methods, that hopefully also meets modern emission/efficiency standards etc (not a 1-to-1 duplication)

	=OSE Reverse Engineering Protocol=		=OSE Reverse Engineering Protocol=

Line 61:		Line 67:
	**Finally, even at the PCB level some companies will attempt to hide what they are doing/what they used. IC Packages can be De-Lidded and investigated with various microscopes to determine what they are, and thus better fill in the schematic		**Finally, even at the PCB level some companies will attempt to hide what they are doing/what they used. IC Packages can be De-Lidded and investigated with various microscopes to determine what they are, and thus better fill in the schematic

	=Links=		=Internal Links=
			*

			=External Links=
	*Seminal work from Bunnie Huang on reverse engineering of hardware - [http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=4297]		*Seminal work from Bunnie Huang on reverse engineering of hardware - [http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=4297]
	:*Bunnie's video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msrTR3hNDQM#t=161		:*Bunnie's video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msrTR3hNDQM#t=161
	*Software reverse engineering - [https://www.eff.org/issues/coders/reverse-engineering-faq]		*Software reverse engineering - [https://www.eff.org/issues/coders/reverse-engineering-faq]

Eric: Added some more information

2023-05-09T00:07:41Z

Added some more information

@@ Line 35: / Line 35: @@
 *[[Industrial CT Scanner]]
 *[[Electron Microscope]] / [[Atomic Force Microscope]]
 =Links=

Eric: Added some more information

2023-05-08T23:17:09Z

Added some more information

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:17, 8 May 2023
Line 6:		Line 6:

	Using Baidu (China's Google) and knowing some chinese gets you to design schematics online, from China with love.		Using Baidu (China's Google) and knowing some chinese gets you to design schematics online, from China with love.


			=Reverse Engineering Lab=
			*[[Reverse Engineering Lab Construction Set]]
			Essentially Though:

			==External Structure / Large Component Measurements==
			**[[3D Scanner]] (Large Handheld Type) (Also [[Photogrammetry]] )
			***And/or [[Calipers]] + [[Tape Measure]] + [[Level]] / [[Protractor]] / [[Rotation Dial]] / [[Angle Dial]]
			**[[CAD]]

			==Internal Structures / Small Components Measurements==
			*Typical Tools for Disassembly (Stuff For Fasteners, Stuff For Removing "Permanent" / [[Tamper Evident Seals]] (Re: [[iFixit]] 's toolkits)
			*[[Overhead Camera]] / [[Tripod]] , or even a separate person acting as the Videographer to capture what all went into taking it apart (To make re-assembly etc easier)
			**Taking photos before each step can work to an extent, but can leave gaps in the knowledge
			*Labeled Parts Bins/Containers
			*[[Calipers]] and/or [[scAnt]] / [[Smartphone Photo Studio for #3DBenchy and tiny stuff]] / similar Small Part Turntable Style 3D Scanners

			==Material Analysis==
			*In Order of Increasing Cost/Complexity:
			*A Well Trained Person + Simple Tools Like a [[XACTO Knife]] etc
			**RE: [[BOLTRs by AVE]]
			*[[Optical Microscope]] (Etchants/Laser Engravers can be used to [[Delid IC Packages]] if they are unlabeled to learn more
			*[[Universal Testing Machine]]
			*[[Plastic Scanner]]
			*[[OpenRaman]]
			*[[XRF Gun]]
			*[[Industrial CT Scanner]]
			*[[Electron Microscope]] / [[Atomic Force Microscope]]

	=Links=		=Links=

Marcin at 16:20, 2 June 2017

2017-06-02T16:20:22Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:20, 2 June 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	=OSE Reverse Engineering Protocol=		=OSE Reverse Engineering Protocol=
	*It is useful to take technical drawings and convert them to real parts, a la Cad1919 - from 2d paper to real 3D. Clear instructional on that.
	*Second, it is important to reverse engineer existing CAD drawings- for example if we have CAD from Lyman Extruder or McMaster Carr - at that point we can create modifiable parts from scratch by adding underlying sketches to CAD that doesn't have underlying sketches, such as STEP imports.
	*To RE exiting STEP Import or where dimensions are not shown. First step is to show dimensions, and that is best done via Dimensioning Workbench. Dimension placement can be done for 3 different selected views - in a few minutes we generate all relevant dimensions. With these as working drawings, we open one FreeCAD tab with these dimensions, and in a second window we do Sketcher - or even paste the 2D right into the working window, so we have a workflow like in the Arch workbench. But let's say for now you have a 2D dimensioned Fab drawing - at best put that right in your working window while you work with Sketcher. So you generate sketches from drawings in the same window.
	*To RE simplifications for complex assemblies, we want to use a strategy where we take a given assembly in a Google Drawing, and then we identify by number all the existing features/parts that we need to include ('''Simplification Diagram'''). This document is reviewable - so we end up with a formal paper trail of how a file is made. To this we can add the original complex part, and document how that entire part was made in detail - to complete the 'part modification process'.
	For full transparency on part generation, a peer-reviewed part generation workflow should be documented. Video. So we have a full file - with its version history - that includes verification of constraints, editable sketches, and a Tree View that is fully annotated and transparent. One should be able to go through the Tree View and justify every single design step. Optimization would involve generating the same part - but with fewer steps in the tree view. In fact, a formula should be created for the number of items in the tree view - such as #=#sketches + #blocks + #constraint. Further, a formula should be obtained for Acceptable Memory Size Calculation of an object - so one can verify from the tree view how much memory an object takes, and thus predict file size directly from the '''Simplification Diagram'''. Simplified formula based on 'Simplification Diagram' should be #parts x BM - where BM_x is Base Memory of underlying shape x. Such as rect solid should have BM_rectsolid=3BM_cube - we should be able to understand basic memory requirements, and at that point completely predict file sizes. File size can be verified by examining Simplification Diagram. We impose a requirement - every part is 100k or less - and a final assembly limit is 50 items for 5 MB. Parts are worked on independently, so all basic geometries are imported - and made transparent via a Construction Set document. The construction set basic doc shows the critical design decisions. One side is the existing part libraries, then there is a list of 20-40 Design Decisions. The Design Decisions are broken into basic - here is the 12 steps for basic design - and then 48 steps for complete funky design. Define each clearly. Such as select frame material, length of axis, number extruders, size of print bed, extruder type, extruder nozzle, power supply DIY, etc.

	=Notes=		=Notes=

Marcin at 17:23, 31 May 2017

2017-05-31T17:23:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:23, 31 May 2017
Line 4:		Line 4:
	*To RE exiting STEP Import or where dimensions are not shown. First step is to show dimensions, and that is best done via Dimensioning Workbench. Dimension placement can be done for 3 different selected views - in a few minutes we generate all relevant dimensions. With these as working drawings, we open one FreeCAD tab with these dimensions, and in a second window we do Sketcher - or even paste the 2D right into the working window, so we have a workflow like in the Arch workbench. But let's say for now you have a 2D dimensioned Fab drawing - at best put that right in your working window while you work with Sketcher. So you generate sketches from drawings in the same window.		*To RE exiting STEP Import or where dimensions are not shown. First step is to show dimensions, and that is best done via Dimensioning Workbench. Dimension placement can be done for 3 different selected views - in a few minutes we generate all relevant dimensions. With these as working drawings, we open one FreeCAD tab with these dimensions, and in a second window we do Sketcher - or even paste the 2D right into the working window, so we have a workflow like in the Arch workbench. But let's say for now you have a 2D dimensioned Fab drawing - at best put that right in your working window while you work with Sketcher. So you generate sketches from drawings in the same window.
	*To RE simplifications for complex assemblies, we want to use a strategy where we take a given assembly in a Google Drawing, and then we identify by number all the existing features/parts that we need to include ('''Simplification Diagram'''). This document is reviewable - so we end up with a formal paper trail of how a file is made. To this we can add the original complex part, and document how that entire part was made in detail - to complete the 'part modification process'.		*To RE simplifications for complex assemblies, we want to use a strategy where we take a given assembly in a Google Drawing, and then we identify by number all the existing features/parts that we need to include ('''Simplification Diagram'''). This document is reviewable - so we end up with a formal paper trail of how a file is made. To this we can add the original complex part, and document how that entire part was made in detail - to complete the 'part modification process'.
	For full transparency on part generation, a peer-reviewed part generation workflow should be documented. Video. So we have a full file - with its version history - that includes verification of constraints, editable sketches, and a Tree View that is fully annotated and transparent. One should be able to go through the Tree View and justify every single design step. Optimization would involve generating the same part - but with fewer steps in the tree view. In fact, a formula should be created for the number of items in the tree view - such as #=#sketches + #blocks + #constraint. Further, a formula should be obtained for Acceptable Memory Size Calculation of an object - so one can verify from the tree view how much memory an object takes, and thus predict file size directly from the '''Simplification Diagram'''. Simplified formula based on 'Simplification Diagram' should be #parts x BM - where BM_x is Base Memory of underlying shape x. Such as rect solid should have BM_rectsolid=3BM_cube - we should be able to understand basic memory requirements, and at that point completely predict file sizes. File size can be verified by examining Simplification Diagram. We impose a requirement - every part is 100k or less - and a final assembly limit is 50 items for 5 MB. Parts are worked on independently, so all basic geometries are imported - and made transparent via a Construction Set document.		For full transparency on part generation, a peer-reviewed part generation workflow should be documented. Video. So we have a full file - with its version history - that includes verification of constraints, editable sketches, and a Tree View that is fully annotated and transparent. One should be able to go through the Tree View and justify every single design step. Optimization would involve generating the same part - but with fewer steps in the tree view. In fact, a formula should be created for the number of items in the tree view - such as #=#sketches + #blocks + #constraint. Further, a formula should be obtained for Acceptable Memory Size Calculation of an object - so one can verify from the tree view how much memory an object takes, and thus predict file size directly from the '''Simplification Diagram'''. Simplified formula based on 'Simplification Diagram' should be #parts x BM - where BM_x is Base Memory of underlying shape x. Such as rect solid should have BM_rectsolid=3BM_cube - we should be able to understand basic memory requirements, and at that point completely predict file sizes. File size can be verified by examining Simplification Diagram. We impose a requirement - every part is 100k or less - and a final assembly limit is 50 items for 5 MB. Parts are worked on independently, so all basic geometries are imported - and made transparent via a Construction Set document. The construction set basic doc shows the critical design decisions. One side is the existing part libraries, then there is a list of 20-40 Design Decisions. The Design Decisions are broken into basic - here is the 12 steps for basic design - and then 48 steps for complete funky design. Define each clearly. Such as select frame material, length of axis, number extruders, size of print bed, extruder type, extruder nozzle, power supply DIY, etc.

	=Notes=		=Notes=

Marcin at 17:14, 31 May 2017

2017-05-31T17:14:56Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:14, 31 May 2017
Line 3:		Line 3:
	*Second, it is important to reverse engineer existing CAD drawings- for example if we have CAD from Lyman Extruder or McMaster Carr - at that point we can create modifiable parts from scratch by adding underlying sketches to CAD that doesn't have underlying sketches, such as STEP imports.		*Second, it is important to reverse engineer existing CAD drawings- for example if we have CAD from Lyman Extruder or McMaster Carr - at that point we can create modifiable parts from scratch by adding underlying sketches to CAD that doesn't have underlying sketches, such as STEP imports.
	*To RE exiting STEP Import or where dimensions are not shown. First step is to show dimensions, and that is best done via Dimensioning Workbench. Dimension placement can be done for 3 different selected views - in a few minutes we generate all relevant dimensions. With these as working drawings, we open one FreeCAD tab with these dimensions, and in a second window we do Sketcher - or even paste the 2D right into the working window, so we have a workflow like in the Arch workbench. But let's say for now you have a 2D dimensioned Fab drawing - at best put that right in your working window while you work with Sketcher. So you generate sketches from drawings in the same window.		*To RE exiting STEP Import or where dimensions are not shown. First step is to show dimensions, and that is best done via Dimensioning Workbench. Dimension placement can be done for 3 different selected views - in a few minutes we generate all relevant dimensions. With these as working drawings, we open one FreeCAD tab with these dimensions, and in a second window we do Sketcher - or even paste the 2D right into the working window, so we have a workflow like in the Arch workbench. But let's say for now you have a 2D dimensioned Fab drawing - at best put that right in your working window while you work with Sketcher. So you generate sketches from drawings in the same window.
	*To RE simplifications for complex assemblies, we want to use a strategy where we take a given assembly in a Google Drawing, and then we identify by number all the existing features that we need to include. This document is reviewable - so we end up with a formal paper trail of how a file is made. To this we can add the original complex part, and document how that entire part was made in detail - to complete the 'part modification process'.		*To RE simplifications for complex assemblies, we want to use a strategy where we take a given assembly in a Google Drawing, and then we identify by number all the existing features/parts that we need to include ('''Simplification Diagram'''). This document is reviewable - so we end up with a formal paper trail of how a file is made. To this we can add the original complex part, and document how that entire part was made in detail - to complete the 'part modification process'.
	*For full transparency on part generation, a peer-reviewed part generation workflow should be documented. Video. So we have a full file - with its version history - that includes verification of constraints, editable sketches, and a Tree View that is fully annotated and transparent. One should be able to go through the Tree View and justify every single design step. Optimization would involve		For full transparency on part generation, a peer-reviewed part generation workflow should be documented. Video. So we have a full file - with its version history - that includes verification of constraints, editable sketches, and a Tree View that is fully annotated and transparent. One should be able to go through the Tree View and justify every single design step. Optimization would involve generating the same part - but with fewer steps in the tree view. In fact, a formula should be created for the number of items in the tree view - such as #=#sketches + #blocks + #constraint. Further, a formula should be obtained for Acceptable Memory Size Calculation of an object - so one can verify from the tree view how much memory an object takes, and thus predict file size directly from the '''Simplification Diagram'''. Simplified formula based on 'Simplification Diagram' should be #parts x BM - where BM_x is Base Memory of underlying shape x. Such as rect solid should have BM_rectsolid=3BM_cube - we should be able to understand basic memory requirements, and at that point completely predict file sizes. File size can be verified by examining Simplification Diagram. We impose a requirement - every part is 100k or less - and a final assembly limit is 50 items for 5 MB. Parts are worked on independently, so all basic geometries are imported - and made transparent via a Construction Set document.

	=Notes=		=Notes=

Marcin at 17:08, 31 May 2017

2017-05-31T17:08:16Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:08, 31 May 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
			=OSE Reverse Engineering Protocol=
			*It is useful to take technical drawings and convert them to real parts, a la Cad1919 - from 2d paper to real 3D. Clear instructional on that.
			*Second, it is important to reverse engineer existing CAD drawings- for example if we have CAD from Lyman Extruder or McMaster Carr - at that point we can create modifiable parts from scratch by adding underlying sketches to CAD that doesn't have underlying sketches, such as STEP imports.
			*To RE exiting STEP Import or where dimensions are not shown. First step is to show dimensions, and that is best done via Dimensioning Workbench. Dimension placement can be done for 3 different selected views - in a few minutes we generate all relevant dimensions. With these as working drawings, we open one FreeCAD tab with these dimensions, and in a second window we do Sketcher - or even paste the 2D right into the working window, so we have a workflow like in the Arch workbench. But let's say for now you have a 2D dimensioned Fab drawing - at best put that right in your working window while you work with Sketcher. So you generate sketches from drawings in the same window.
			*To RE simplifications for complex assemblies, we want to use a strategy where we take a given assembly in a Google Drawing, and then we identify by number all the existing features that we need to include. This document is reviewable - so we end up with a formal paper trail of how a file is made. To this we can add the original complex part, and document how that entire part was made in detail - to complete the 'part modification process'.
			*For full transparency on part generation, a peer-reviewed part generation workflow should be documented. Video. So we have a full file - with its version history - that includes verification of constraints, editable sketches, and a Tree View that is fully annotated and transparent. One should be able to go through the Tree View and justify every single design step. Optimization would involve

			=Notes=
	How to reverse engineer anything.		How to reverse engineer anything.