A L I E N Narcissus

NS4

Well-Known Member
Ah ok, I misread it, I thought the $99 option was still limited, actually pretty fair as it does seem to work very well. One question relating to the photomatch in Sketchup, have you ever have it do something weird if you are moving something while it does an autosave. Twice now it has changed the origin point in a weird way such that I have had to resort to a previous save.
Well technically, it is limited to 2500 images in a project, but that is unlikely ever to be an issue for what I need it for...

Can't say I've seen any issues like that in SU. Although the way I work is that I only use it for referencing the photomatch. All moving/modelling is done in my other software.
I do find it to be quite a resource hog of the RAM though. For that reason, I tend to shut it down and restart at regualar intevals.
As I work on the primary model in other software not SU, what I ended up doing was just saving the SU with matched photos but no geometry.
Once I'd matched the photos, there was really no need. I added a reference line in SU (to the tip of the nose in my models case) and when importing my model, I'd use the line to position it. Once I'm done, I exit without saving. I also made sure to keep a backup copy of the SU file just in case!
 

Firefox3D

Well-Known Member
Yeah I have several backups, actually thought I had lost the missile models I made ages ago, but found them in an old save!

I kind of know it's a problem as it happened in the past. In SU2015 when I was dragging a large amount of geometry and the autosave happened it could cause a mangled mess and actually break the undo option. I turned off autosave because of it and just got into the habit of saving when I had a section done ok, SU2017 does seem better.
 

NS4

Well-Known Member
Wow, OK - I haven't seen that behavior (luckily).
I disabled autosave as well, as it seemed to get a bit bogged down with large amounts of geometry and would break my rhythm.
It was at that point that I opted to just remove the geometry from the file and only use it as reference.
 

NS4

Well-Known Member
It took a little work, but I have managed to covert a copy of my CAD model into a single solid file.


Capture97.jpg Capture98.jpg


I'm going to look into the possibilty of getting a scaled version of the model 3D printed.
I need to study the design guidlines on Shapeways to see if it is achievable or not...
 

seven

Sr Member
More than likely you can get it printed via Shapeways no problem (Depending how small the model is). At any scale, if there are any wall thickness less than 0.7mm the model wont be able to be printed it in most materials (Frosted Detail, and ultra frosted detail being the only remaining option). Anything less than 0.3mm would be unprintable even in frosted. This will require you to bulk up some areas the smaller you scale the model down. Any part that is 0.3mm thick will be really fragile and snap off easily in the Frosted materials.

It would be a huge cost savings if the model was hollow, which would require an exit hole. In other words, if the ship is hollow, but water tight (ie no water can leak out) the cost estimate will be the same as a solid model.

To get it printed Studio Scale, based on my experience, you're looking at probably well over $1000 from Shapeways.
 

NS4

Well-Known Member
Thanks for the info Seven,

It wouldn't be studio scale. I plan on creating studio scale patterns to build a SS replica (as per the original) shortly.
I'd probably 3D print something along the lines of the Halcyon model (around 8.5" / 21cm).

I don't think I'd have issues with thin walls as most (all?) of the fine detail is contained within the kit parts.
Obviously, at small scale many of the smallest details will be unprintable, but I'm OK with that compromise.

I will definitely hollow it out.
I was even thinking it might be a good idea to split the model like this too:



Capture99.jpg


It should reduce the cost considerably and be a fairly straight forward exersize to glue the two (hollow) halves together, with little cleanup required (apart from the engine cowles underneath).

What would be the optimal shell thickness of the model body?
If I know that, I can model it so that it ends up correct once it is scaled down.
 

joberg

Master Member
Looking very good. As for the true scale printing, now that you have the file, a future project like that could still happen;)
 

NS4

Well-Known Member
Looking very good. As for the true scale printing, now that you have the file, a future project like that could still happen;)
Thanks Joberg.

I plan on doing a full size SS replica, but it will follow the original in it's construction rather than be 3D printed ;)

- - - Updated - - -

If you do this, please add some registration pins, for alignment.
Good thinking LD - I'll make sure to do that :thumbsup
 

NS4

Well-Known Member
So, for the past week I've been studying the Shapeways guidlines and preparing the model for possible 3D printing.

With the idea of going with a size similar to the Halcyon offering (around 8 1/2 inches), I scaled the ship down and split it in two.
I didn't worry about hollowing it out at this stage as I just wanted to get some feedback from the automatic checking system as to whether it would be a viable print or not.

As it turned out, it looked good in the FUD plastic (now called Fine Detail?). There were only minimal issues with wall thickness that I needed to correct.
The price for a "solid" model was aorund $700 !
Strong and flexible (now called Versatile Plastic?) for the same "solid" model came in at $350 (but was much less forgiving with regards to wall thickness and would need more work).

Shelling the model (I assumed), would reduce the cost right down...
I tweaked the model based on the FUD feedback, and then shelled it out.
The difference between a "solid" model and a hollow one (in FUD) is only $140??
The shelling had a more dramatic effect on the Strong & Flexible material, bringing it down to $150, but with a few issues that would require some of the detail to be removed.

My next thought was to try a 1/2 studio scale (at around 15 inches long)...
The FUD blew out to $2.5K lol
The S&F came in at $450.
The larger scale eliminated most of the wall issues too, so very little would be lost at this scale.

Would either of these models be of any interest to anyone?
 

mktodd

Well-Known Member
Have you thought about breaking it down into more sections, in a manner similar to the Halcyon kit? It's not as easy as it sounds, I know. I've tried to make a complex 3D model for printing and it took some work to get it to a state that was printable but still be able to assemble the parts easily, but it might make it less pricey to print considering that a lot of the hull consists of large flat panels. It would also open up the possibility of having an interior as well, though that could be a separate model to offset the extra cost.

Interested in the model, by the way...

Cheers
 
  • Like
Reactions: NS4

NS4

Well-Known Member
Yes. I'm definitely interested!!!
Which size would you go for?

Have you thought about breaking it down into more sections, in a manner similar to the Halcyon kit? It's not as easy as it sounds, I know. I've tried to make a complex 3D model for printing and it took some work to get it to a state that was printable but still be able to assemble the parts easily, but it might make it less pricey to print considering that a lot of the hull consists of large flat panels. It would also open up the possibility of having an interior as well, though that could be a separate model to offset the extra cost.

Interested in the model, by the way...

Cheers
Yeah, I did think about it, but considering what it's taken to get the current model to a state where it is close to being ready to print, I dont think I'd want to spent an extended period splitting it even further.

Essentially what you're suggesting is a full 3D printed kit. It could be done, but it's a lot of work.
The model is really just a by-product of my work to create the full SS replica and was never intended to be the end product.
I just thought I'd throw it out there in case there was any interest.

Which of the two sizes would you go for if they were both available?
 

ProfKSergeev

Well-Known Member
NS4, I'd be very interested in a sub-studio-scale model of the Narcissus, especially one as frighteningly accurate as yours. To keep costs (and MSRP) down, have you considered printing a master and then molding it? I can only imagine it would be cheaper and probably less frustrating than printing them on-demand through Shapeways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NS4

NS4

Well-Known Member
Hi Prof,
Although it would be a great idea to 3D print a "master" and cast it, I'm afraid it won't happen.
I have neither the experience or the desire to outlay for the equipment and supplies I would need to do it.
As per my earlier post - the digital model was never intended to be used create a 3D printed kit or for molding as a whole, but was purely a step in the creation of the SS model.
 

mktodd

Well-Known Member
Which size would you go for?



Yeah, I did think about it, but considering what it's taken to get the current model to a state where it is close to being ready to print, I dont think I'd want to spent an extended period splitting it even further.

Essentially what you're suggesting is a full 3D printed kit. It could be done, but it's a lot of work.
The model is really just a by-product of my work to create the full SS replica and was never intended to be the end product.
I just thought I'd throw it out there in case there was any interest.

Which of the two sizes would you go for if they were both available?
The Larger the better, if you ask me!!

Yeah, I get it about it being a time sink, it's not a simple task and can take a lot longer than you'd think...

Cheers
 
  • Like
Reactions: NS4

32buds

Well-Known Member
I'd be interested in a split 3d model- something I could scale to my own needs, if that would be ok.
I'll be getting a cr10 in a month or so, so having a few "good things" to print would be interesting.
 

NS4

Well-Known Member
I'd be interested in a split 3d model- something I could scale to my own needs, if that would be ok.
I'll be getting a cr10 in a month or so, so having a few "good things" to print would be interesting.
Hi 32buds,
Sorry, but I won't be releasing the digital model.
 

NS4

Well-Known Member
The beauty of having a digital model is that you can "build" it in the virtual world.
That way you can work out exactly how it should go together (in theory at least!)
For the past couple of weeks, this is what I have been working on...

Creating patterns from a digital model is not as simple as it sounds.
I've put much thought into how it all should go togther, and particularly in which order.

The acrylic frame will be built around a welded steel armature - just as the original was.
I will be using locating "pins" to aid in positioning some of the parts.
As noted previously, due to the nature of a hand built model made in the 70's, things are not always symetrical, or square.
This will allow me to replicate these "quirks" as best I can in order to stay as true to the original as possible.
That being said, the original model had some bondo work in places too, so as a consequence I have opted to use 3D printed parts in these locations to replicate the finished "bondo work". It will be indestinguishable from the original when done, but will make construction just a little easier.

I will use magnets to make some of the panels removable (the underside of rear hatch area and the cockpit) and possibly for attachment of the armature "plugs".

The model as it currently stands uses 66 locating pins, 14 magnets and just under 150 individual acrylic parts.
Here is a rough animation of how I see it going together:


Moving forward, I will need to organise to get an armature welded up and get the acrylic sheets sourced and cut.
From there I can move onto the physical build...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top