Digital Versions of Model Kit Components

Discussion in 'Studio Scale Models' started by minifig, Apr 20, 2016.

  1. minifig

    minifig Well-Known Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    847
    Hi all,

    During the making of my scaled versions of the Death Star Modules, I have ended up making some digital versions of kit components in order to make life easier when doing the different sizes of the modules. I thought it might be a nice thing to share these components so that anyone can use them.

    Although I have had to 'best guess' some components in the past, I am only going to make available, at the moment, components that I have actually measured from the original kits that I own, or have had access to. If people do want to see my versions of things I've best guessed (like my droid strip) then I will make sure they are suitably labelled as being not accurate. Hopefully though, one day, I will have the accurate versions of all the components for the droid strip.:)

    I know the list is limited for now, but I hope to keep adding the components as I need/make them. I might also take specific requests for people if they require a specific part from a kit!

    Minifig
     
  2. minifig

    minifig Well-Known Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    847
  3. moffeaton

    moffeaton Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,860
    AAAAH this is the future and it's terrifying awesome.
     
    minifig, Enhancer4004 and swpropmaker like this.
  4. NS4

    NS4 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    511
    Kudos to you Minifig for posting your work :thumbsup
    How cool would it be to eventually have a repository of digital kit parts on the RPF to be able to 3d print off as needed!!
     
    minifig likes this.
  5. swpropmaker

    swpropmaker Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    Hey mini.. if you want.. I can provide you with any kit part you want to digitally recreate... maybe the top 20 rare expensive kit parts... I can also provide a 3D UltraHD scan of part too.. accuracy .007. A digital kit part inventory... I agree Jason these are wonderful times!!!
     
    minifig likes this.
  6. Lee S

    Lee S Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,910
    We made a fair few of them in 2001, not accurate to .007" but close :-D
    bsg_009.jpg
     
    Pro Mod likes this.
  7. minifig

    minifig Well-Known Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    847
    swpropmaker ... that would be awesome, and I'd be quite willing to do it, the scans I'm sure would be useful too, the more the merrier I should think (you scare me with your imperial measurements though).

    I can't deny that the versions I 'm making are slightly idealized...the scans would be more accurate when it comes to replicating mould lines and ejector pin witness marks and other imperfections in the actual kit parts. There are even discrepancies between the same component on copies of the same kit. Like all these things there are going to be personal preferences and pros/cons for each approach. I'm just happy with something that is accurate to withing 0.1mm or so (notice the use of metric!).

    The other advantage of this is that the files will always be editable if 'conflict' arises!!!

    M
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 8, 2018
    struschie likes this.
  8. Lee S

    Lee S Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,910
    0.007th of an inch is just under 0.2mm :)
     
  9. MonsieurTox

    MonsieurTox Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,575
    Just under 0.02mm ;)
     
  10. minifig

    minifig Well-Known Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    847
    ...sorry MonsieurTox ... Google tells me that Lee S is the winner :lol

    - - - Updated - - -

    ...proof that no-one really knows what .007" is...
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 8, 2018
  11. MonsieurTox

    MonsieurTox Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,575
    That's correct ! :D

    That's not that great then when most 3D printers can print under 0.02mm :(
    Probably good enough for larger parts but 0.2mm is quite huge when It comes to smaller parts or large parts with fine details. :/
     
  12. DaveG

    DaveG Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,370
    Those of us that haven't been corrupted by the metric system know exactly what .007" is! :lol Just over the thickness of two sheets of notebook paper.

    Great work on the part models Minifig! I've got several parts models for the Y wing project that I can contribute.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 8, 2018
    minifig likes this.
  13. Lee S

    Lee S Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,910
    :-D
    I think 0.1mm is a good and 'close' enough for most measurements. A 3D model will fill in the gaps and so even if a printer is way better than that, all the better.
    So if Steve has a scanner that goes to 0.007" then that should be great.

    - - - Updated - - -

    .007" is a very small secret agent working for MI6 :)

     
    moffeaton and Joseph C. Brown like this.
  14. MonsieurTox

    MonsieurTox Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,575
    You are my hero Dave !! :lol
     
  15. DaveG

    DaveG Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,370
    That is of course 20 pound notebook paper!
     
    minifig and rbeach84 like this.
  16. MonsieurTox

    MonsieurTox Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,575
    Haha ! ;)
     
  17. swpropmaker

    swpropmaker Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    Well the .007 was referring to my scanner capabilities... tolerances in parts vary more than that kit to kit.
     
  18. minifig

    minifig Well-Known Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    847
    ...Well I think you would be as good a judge as any, as to whether or not the accuracy is good enough!...
     
  19. swhite228

    swhite228 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    747
    minifig likes this.
  20. OlivierC

    OlivierC Active Member

    Trophy Points:
    361
    Hi guys,

    my name is Olivier, I have been visiting this board a lot but never posted until now, mostly because I did not have much to show or say. I have been watching the amazing work people post here, mostly on the star wars and the models forums.

    However this thread caught my attention because that's something I'm interested in and I think I can help. I'm a 3d modeler, that's my job, I make characters, props and set for animated features for a living. I work mostly with maya, and while it's not CAD software per say, you can set it to use millimeter units and it can produce some pretty accurate parts. I already modeled and 3d printed some parts that need to fit some specific requirements and it worked great.

    So I'm willing to model parts. If you have good reference photos and at least basic measurements, I can model it. One of the biggest flaw I see on some 3d printed parts is the segmentation, people don't smooth their models and rounded parts are segmented. This won't happen with me. My model are clean and I can guaranty they will print well, as long as the printer definition allows it (I can model tiny details if needed, but they might not print correctly). I'm experienced with 3d printing, I own a 3d printer, I will make sure they models are sliced correctly in Cura or similar software.

    I can then export the meshes to OBJ and STL and make them publicly available.

    you can checkout some of my work here http://oliviercouston.com , it's mostly characters but I can model accurate hard surface stuff too. I actually learned modeling doing star wars space craft 15 years ago

    Why would I do that? Well, I'd love to model a screen accurate ywing or bwing some day. I have been trying to gather references and to ID some parts but I don't have nearly as much as some people here. I know how much works goes into identifying those parts and that it's frowned upon to come here and ask for info without contributing to the community first.
    So I'm offering to model parts on demand for those same people, hoping that some will be kind enough to share with me some of the parts required for those two ships (which I will eventually model and share here too)

    I hope some of you will be interested. Let me know
     
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2016
  21. minifig

    minifig Well-Known Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    847
    That all sounds fantastic.

    I don't want to speak for everyone else, but like I said earlier I think the more the merrier!

    One thing I would say, and that its that I think we need to make sure the creator has the actual kit part in front of them, whether they scan it or sculpt it. I don't think any amount of picture reference, or even basic dimensions, can replace being able to put calipers on the actual piece. I don't think we should be confusing things with 'best guess' models...I think there could possibly be disagreements with even the most accurate copies as it is!

    I don't know what the best way of 'cataloguing' these is ( I'm just going to edit my 2nd post as I add stuff), but I just hope it doesn't get hard to find the kit you want, or if the part has been done. But I think multiple versions of the same part, or in lots of different file formats, isn't a problem, it's just about trying to keep it useful and accessible.

    M
     
  22. swhite228

    swhite228 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    747
    I think the ideal way to do this would be like they sort kit scans at Studio Scale Modeler, a section for each kit maker, then thread for each kit. A post with the basic info on the kit like yours is fine but I would suggest that if possible include basic print info if possible. The print info makes it easier for the person using the file to set up their print job.
     
  23. bwayne64

    bwayne64 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    815
    Could you explain the "print info" part. I've built parts in 3d for various models, but I'm new to 3d printing. I'm also trying to figure out the water tight business, and whether quads can be used or should it be triangles. I work in LightWave 3d, and it is a polygonal modeler. Thanks,

    Joe
     
  24. DaveG

    DaveG Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,370
    Joe,

    Quads or triangles will both work for printing, doesn't really make any difference. Water tight means that the mesh (or surface model) has no holes or edges and that it defines an absolute interior volume. For computer graphics is doesn't matter if a mesh is a water tight closed solid or an open mesh with edges. That's one reason why it can be so hard to convert a model designed for rendering into a model suitable for 3D printing. There are some pretty good mesh repair programs out there, some of them are free. GOM Inspect is one I like. Many mesh modelers now have mesh repair capabilities as they are being used for 3D printing as well as graphics. Not sure if Lightwave does or not.

    In general avoid "shrink wrap" programs that claim to be able to wrap any open mesh and make it water tight. In my experience they don't work very well. As to the "print info", that will really vary from printer to printer. What works well on one might not work well on another.

    One of the things you will discover about the world of 3D printing is that there is a lot of trial and error involved in getting good prints!
     
  25. Tsophika

    Tsophika Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    566
    Olivier, I remember you from the scifi-3D boards. I have always held your work in high regard.

    Minifig, great work as well. You beveled your edges! A digital kit part library is a flexible tool to have, let me know if you need anything specific for your tiles.

    Craig
     
  26. swhite228

    swhite228 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    747
    Ok, but keep in mind David G's line "One of the things you will discover about the world of 3D printing is that there is a lot of trial and error involved in getting good prints!"

    I've been printing stuff now with a business partner for about a year and we both have moments where someone gives us a file and asks us to print it for them. Unlike a word document where you can just hit print and get good results 3d printing comes with a learning curve, and it isn't unusual to need to tweak a file and reprint it to get the best results. Everything from filament used , heated or non heated bed, to the way the file is printed on the print surface , and strangely color of the filament effect the final print.

    We have a few clients we work for that test print their design then pass the info on to whoever does their final print run usually info like but not limited to...
    printer type
    settings and temp
    filament info
    and size of the printed item.
    The info gives a person printing the file a starting point to set up their print job.
     
  27. minifig

    minifig Well-Known Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    847
    Not that I'm saying people shouldn't include 'how to print' guides, I just don't think it's the most important aspect of this.

    I think it's more challenging to agree if there should be a common file type. I would hope that every one should at least include an STL file.

    M
     
  28. DaveG

    DaveG Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,370
    If the part was originally a surface model rather than a mesh model PLEASE post a STEP version as well as an OBJ.
     
    minifig likes this.
  29. minifig

    minifig Well-Known Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    847
    I think your probably right...
    STEP for surface/solid
    OBJ for mesh
    PLUS
    STL for all

    That should be good for most software packages
     
  30. swhite228

    swhite228 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    747
    It isn't a how to print guide and should not be looked upon as such, it is more like the starting point on a map program..
    More 3d files are being placed on line with this information all the time and it is useful in a number of ways...
    It shows the file has been printed, it gives the file user at most a start point, and it gives them a size reference which makes it easier to verify the print before wasting material.

    If you have downloaded the Sealab 3d files and printed them you might have noticed a couple of them print big, it could be the software used for printing them, it could be the files themselves, it could be printer.
    I noticed it while looking at the hatch and with a part that needed to be placed on top of it and was able tocorrected the size.
    A a friend who has never seen a sealab kit printed a bunch of hatches for me as a gift with out knowing the size might be wrong, his prints were 1 inch wide when done.
     
  31. bwayne64

    bwayne64 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    815

    Thanks man. I get what you meant now. I thought there might be some info about the 3d model itself. Good to know.

    Joe
     
  32. vfxsup64

    vfxsup64 Well-Known Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    560

    If the Sealab parts referred to were the ones Maruska modeled and posted on Grabcad, would "bounding box" unit dimensions be helpful for each part?

    I have the vintage kit they were referenced and derived from.


    Regards,

    Andre
     
  33. swhite228

    swhite228 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    747
    They are the Grabcad files and yes info would be helpful. Thank you for offering the info and thanks to Maruska for doing them for us!
    I have a question about the files that you might be able to answer and that is did the 2 studio used missing parts ever get modeled?
     
  34. swhite228

    swhite228 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    747
    The model info isn't something that seems to make a lot of difference (other than file type), model physical size, orientation on the print bed. fill, raft or pads are all things that effect the print and are nice to know up front.
     
  35. maruska

    maruska Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    635
    Hey swhite228 - let me know what parts printed large and I'll double check the files on my end. Were they off by, say the extruder width - 0.2mm? Or were they off by a factor of 2.54 (mm to inch conversion error)? Or was it totally random?

    J.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I haven't modeled the missing bits. If anyone has files, I'll gladly post them to the GrabCAD archive.
     
    Hammer3246 likes this.
  36. bwayne64

    bwayne64 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    815
    I would love to see a better modeler than me tackle the Roco Minitanks used on the SS Galactica. I have a partially finished 215 I was modeling. Those almost microscopic details on the side are giving me fits, ;) I'm also curious as to how a filament type printer would do on those fine details. I haven't measured the smallest details, but they are hard to see, with my 52 year old eyes. But you would notice if the're not there. I work in LightWave 3d, so they are obj files. Polygon not surface. My problem building them for the group, would be the poly flow. I have never had to build objects for 3d printing. They just had to look good. But I need to adapt to this new world, and figure this out. I need to get the water tight issue down, and increasing detail, without adding to much file size. Question, are most objects to be printed all tri's are can they be quads, Cheers,

    Joe
     
  37. Hammer3246

    Hammer3246 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,266
    Any update on this?

    Sent from my SM-N915W8 using Tapatalk
     
  38. DaveG

    DaveG Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,370
    Joe,

    Quads, Tris, doesn't matter. As mesh models done with quads are usually smaller in file size they are preferable. But not all modeling programs can work in quads.

    The real Super Power in the 3D modeling for 3D printing world are surface modelers. Rhino and SolidWorks are a couple of examples. They are so much easier in keeping models water tight (a friend once described Boolean operations in mesh modelers as the "Spawn of Satan". Another major advantage to surface modelers is that they are resolution independent. you don't have to worry about having a high enough poly count, or one that is too high. The very last step is to output the surface model as a STL file, at which time you specify the resolution of the mesh.

    the truth is that very few of the finely detailed kit parts are going to look good printed on FDM printers. Even at .01mm layer height they are just kind of meh. But I still think a digital nernie library is a great thing as print qualities are getting better all the time and consumer level resin SLA printers are getting cheaper and easier to use.
     
  39. maruska

    maruska Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    635
    Not from me. I don't have access to the original parts, so I probably won't be creating the missing ones...
     
  40. Hammer3246

    Hammer3246 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,266
    I don't have them either, but thank you for trying.

    Sent from my SM-N915W8 using Tapatalk
     
  41. bwayne64

    bwayne64 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    815
    Thanks man, I have been looking at Fusion 360. I need a cam/cam program for a router table I'm building. Don't know if this is a surface modeler.

    I agree with your friends sentiment regarding Boolean Operations. Maybe not the " spawn of Satan" but pretty close, ;) They can and do mess up a model almost every time. That's part of my problem with poly flow. When you want to go from a large flat area to an area of denser mesh, I start pulling out my hair. LightWave is great for visualization and animation. As for objects it can output dimensionally accurate models, but that is not it's strong suit. It is not really for a car/cam application. Good to know about the limitation of current fdm printers. I can always build an object at a resolution that a printer cannot print. But these things , as you say, are getting better and better.

    The Rocos may be best reproduced the Ole fashioned way, rubber and resin.
    I'll still build them in 3d, just for the challenge. I'd like to have a 3d version of the SS Galactica, with every part built, but I need to build the real world version first, LOL. Thanks for the info. Cheers,

    Joe
     
  42. DaveG

    DaveG Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,370
    I think everyone is missing another benefit of having a digital nernie library. Not only is it valuable for reproducing parts for accurate studio scale replicas, but also to be rescaled and modified for use on original designs. A win-win!
     
    Vacformedhero and minifig like this.
  43. minifig

    minifig Well-Known Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    847
    ...That was exactly the reason i was doing it in the first place...if it was actually for studio scale builds i think i would be using castings of kit parts. One thing that the digital parts could be useful for to SS modellers is that they can be placed onto a 3d sculpt to help refine the dimensions of hand built structures, like an x wing fuselage or star destroyer hull...

    I use solidworks...mostly because the style of modelling is most similar to how i sculpt traditionally...measurements, extruded shapes and 'virtual machining'...it is pretty rubbish at truly organic shapes though!!!

    One of the reasons I find zbrush and other poly modelling programs hard to get on with is the way you have to consider the mesh structure. With solid/surface modellers, the way the model is structured just isn't visible or obtrusive.
     
    Last edited: May 23, 2016
  44. minifig

    minifig Well-Known Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    847
    Wow...my first double post error!

    I added a couple of more components by the way...
     
    Last edited: May 7, 2016
  45. swhite228

    swhite228 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    747
    Sorry for the delay I was working on a web site for a client.

    We went back to the original download of the files and tried printing them again and they came out correct. What happened it turns out is a problem with Turbocad and the way it deals with some files. Here is the link to a forum talking about the issue http://forums.turbocad.com/index.php?topic=6645.0

    Having never owned a sealab my friend who was doing the printing would open the file and find that their was no size on some of them so he would choose a size and then Turbocad would do its thing and the resulting part came out 20mm wide.
    1.jpg
     
    Hammer3246 likes this.
  46. minifig

    minifig Well-Known Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    847
    ...Good to know that the maruska Sealab parts are accurate...I've been using them to size things off of! :D ...
     
  47. mspaw

    mspaw Active Member

    Trophy Points:
    360
    Fusion360 is a solid modeler in the same vein as Solidworks.

    http://www.autodesk.com/products/fusion-360/overview

    Its free for students, teachers and educators, and you can download a trial version. I have to say its pretty slick.

    By the way I love this idea of a digital parts library. Would be great if it could be all open source and held in one convenient place.

    -Michael
     
  48. minifig

    minifig Well-Known Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    847
    ...thanks for the PM Michael, I've been trying out fusion 360 and it looks good, i'm just too institutionalized with solidworks at the moment!!!!!

    I would love for there to be a centralized library for everyone to contribute to and pull from, I just have no idea how to set up the infrastructure. It was cool to see they did a similar thing for The Force Awakens (via the archeology panel at celebration)...

    The biggest obstacle for me is just sourcing the original kit parts.

    M
     
  49. bwayne64

    bwayne64 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    815
    That was an awesome sight, all those 3d parts in one place. Id give an important body part to see something like that archive. Id have to redo all my 3d parts to make them printable. I just made them to look good, not for printing. Oh well I have more time than money.
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2016
  50. stonky

    stonky Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,390
    My only concern when it comes to downloadable 3D printable parts comes down to quality control. Unless I have the donor kit part in hand as well there is no real way for me to know that the printed part is accurate to within a reasonable threshold - I'm at the whim of the person who modelled it and the quality of the print. If we could come up with some sort of metric (side by side pics maybe?) I'd have a lot more faith in the parts.
     

Share This Page