#1761
|
||||
|
||||
This is taking modeling to levels I would never expect to see here. No stone left unturned.
__________________
Non Sufficit Orbis-The world is not enough. |
#1762
|
||||
|
||||
Thanks Ed for your nice words,
I'm happy if I can offer you some entertainment, although not everything is made of paper, sorry, my faithful friends ...
__________________
Greetings from Germany Manfred Under construction: Launch Pad 39A with Challenger STS-6 (1:144) |
#1763
|
||||
|
||||
Hello verybody,
there are good news, because the Track Shoes look amazing after the download to 1:160. Source: arcforums.com (crackerjazz) But the exciting question is and remains, how these tiny shoes will look in the printed state? Now my friend Joe should connect the shoes but still together to a set, as can be seen in Simpson 3D Design, because referring to printing it should be more favorable and therefore cheaper than 20 separate parts. Source: shapeways.com (Simpson 3D Design) This has also been confirmed to me by Shapeways because the production team only needs to handle a single model instead of 20 separate parts when printing a set with sprues. As a result, planning the models for printing and cleaning/post-processing is cheaper. And although there are more material costs, the labor/handling costs for a set are lower! Then I was still interested, which arrangement of the shoes in the set would be more favorable for printing, standing upright as in Simpson's set, or if the shoes would lie flat? And the answer to that was very interesting and extremely important. Although the position for Shapeways doesn't really matter, it's favorable to keep the parts flat and as close as possible (smaller footprint). If one keeps them flat (rather than stacking on top) it will reduce the amount of wax required to print in Fine Detail Plastic (so less support material sticking to the set), which is very important for subsequent cleaning the sets, if I remember the pull-ups at my FUD-IT ...
__________________
Greetings from Germany Manfred Under construction: Launch Pad 39A with Challenger STS-6 (1:144) |
#1764
|
||||
|
||||
Hello friends,
meanwhile we are one step further, but unfortunately still not at the finish because the shoes are still pinching a bit. My friend Joe has now inserted the supports into his 3D-Model, which corresponds to the configuration of Simpson 3D Design, but has in my view not selected the most favorable arrangement of his model (see below), which I had actually recommended him after consultation with SW. Source: arcforums.com (crackerjazz) At first he had uploaded the upper version with upright standing 20 shoes, for whatever reason, whose price (10,80 €) but seemed suspicious to me, especially since from Simpson 3D Design the set of 20 (1:144) for 7,81 € is offered. And the result is now the lower variant, which would be acceptable in terms of price (7,61 €), but does not seem to be the preferred direction for minimal support wax residues, if I did understand SW correctly. But just that would be strived for the Ultrasonic cleaning of the FUD shoes, which I still well enough know from my FUD-IT know. But, as I've heard from others, SW is principally indifferent to this aspect because they print the models (against better conscience) as they are uploaded by the designer, as the customer ultimately pays for it, which is why I'm going to grill SW once again because of the preferred variant. Regarding the prices, I was surprised that the even finer version Smoothest Fine Detail Plastic, formerly FXD if I'm not mistaken, is only marginally more expensive (7,78 €)!!! Unfortunately I only have a comparison between FUD (left) and FXD (right) based on my ASTC Rings, which do not have as small details as the Track Shoes, as one can see here, which is why I'm not sure if FXD would actually make a noticeable difference in the details of the shoes? If so, I would prefer FXD for these little shoes (14,3 mm x 2,5 mm). Therefore I made my friend Joe still aware once agian and asked him to turn the middle arrangement 90° and put the shoes flat on the running surfaces as this in my view should be the most favorable arrangement of the model, if I understood SW correctly, so that during printing (FUD/FXD) as little as possible wax residues remain. Now I'm curious what will come out ...
__________________
Greetings from Germany Manfred Under construction: Launch Pad 39A with Challenger STS-6 (1:144) |
#1765
|
|||
|
|||
I noted with some interest that you could have had the tracks made from platinum for as little as $1831.41 CAD for each set of 20!
I wonder if there is a "Platinum Modellers Forum"? Seriously though Manfred, the crawler is going to be out of this world. Regards Kevin
__________________
Normally the most advanced tech I use is a pencil. |
#1766
|
||||
|
||||
Thanks Kevin,
nothing is impossible! The shoes are not printed yet, let's wait and see what is left of these giant boots with shoe size 14.3 mm x 2.5 mm (1/160) ... BTW, one original Track shoe has shoe size 90'' x 25'' = 2.30 m x 0.64 m and weighs 2.100 lbs. (953 kg), chain length about 37 m. Source: NASA
__________________
Greetings from Germany Manfred Under construction: Launch Pad 39A with Challenger STS-6 (1:144) |
#1767
|
||||
|
||||
Hello everybody,
Thank goodness! After a week is finally over the confusion about the SW information keep the parts flat, which had confused me and led to the misunderstanding between flat and upright standing Track shoes. As my ultimate demand at Shapeways has shown, the arrangement of the 20 Set in my friend Joes' offer is the preferred arrangement for FUD/FXD prints with the fewest wax residuals. Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz) But as SW did remark, the wall thickness in the image is only 0.2 mm and needs to be corrected, because the minimum wall thickness for these materials is 0.3 mm. And if SW says that, it will be true. Source: Shapeways (Mitchell Jetten) But the too small wall thickness should not be the problem now, maybe it would be a useful compromise, to reduce the width of the grooves from 0.4 mm to 0.3 mm and to move them by 0.1 mm to the center, then the wall thickness would also be 0.3 mm, which would be the demanded value. This would mean that also the small holes (Ø 0.2 mm) have to be slightly shifted, whereby it is questionable whether they can even be realized. But at this statement from SW I can only laugh, if I think of my FUD Intertank ... "But keep in mind that Shapeways removes the wax. We ship the models after we have removed the wax and cleaned the model. The only thing we recommend the customer to do is use a bit of soap before starting to paint since a bit of oil could still be left on the model (used to remove the wax)." I think I'll have to send SW an image with greetings from the Dental lab ...
__________________
Greetings from Germany Manfred Under construction: Launch Pad 39A with Challenger STS-6 (1:144) |
#1768
|
|||
|
|||
LOL! Yeah, I'd love to see their faces when they are looking at the images..! :-D
Mani, does that mean that the shoes need to be assembled one by one or do you have to assemble several arrays of 20 shoes? Will you glue them in place or make them articulated? (I know, the latter is pretty hard to do, but after all I have seen here I wouldn't be surprised ). |
#1769
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
unfortunately I only got this e-mail from Michell Jetten (SW) without a photo, in which they now eat humble pie ... Hi Manfred, Correct, there will always a bit of residue left on the model itself, which we can't completely remove. Though I was referring to the big chunk of wax which was used to support the model. You are right, and I see you have the right equipment that some manual labor would be needed to make sure there is 0% wax left. Ha, ha, ha ... Quote:
Source: scalemodelguide.com But because you know me, you do not have to be surprised, of course I want to try to make them articulated, so that the chains will sag pretty well. Remains only the question of the most skillful way of painting ...
__________________
Greetings from Germany Manfred Under construction: Launch Pad 39A with Challenger STS-6 (1:144) |
#1770
|
|||
|
|||
WOOOW!!! You are right, the fine detail has to be preserved while painting. Thin layers should do. As for a realistic sag: When I was making my Landram I used laminated textured strips of paper, wrapped them around the wheels and glued them into place. Then I added 80 ribs in total (did I ever mention how much I hate building the same piece over and over again? ). When the model was finished I noticed that the strips followed the curvature of the wheels and sagged a bit in the areas which were unconnected to the wheels. That was completely unintended but it gave a nice effect and looked pretty good.
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|