Digital Versions of Model Kit Components

minifig

Well-Known Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
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
 

swhite228

Well-Known Member
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
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.
 

bwayne64

Well-Known Member
I think the ideal way to do this woukld 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.
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
 

DaveG

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
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!
 

Tsophika

Well-Known Member
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.
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
 

swhite228

Well-Known Member
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
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.
 

minifig

Well-Known Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
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
 

DaveG

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
If the part was originally a surface model rather than a mesh model PLEASE post a STEP version as well as an OBJ.
 

minifig

Well-Known Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I think your probably right...
STEP for surface/solid
OBJ for mesh
PLUS
STL for all

That should be good for most software packages
 

swhite228

Well-Known Member
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.
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.
 

bwayne64

Well-Known Member
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.

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

Joe
 

vfxsup64

Well-Known Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
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.

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
 

swhite228

Well-Known Member
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
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?
 

swhite228

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

Joe
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.
 

maruska

Well-Known Member
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.
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 - - -

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?
I haven't modeled the missing bits. If anyone has files, I'll gladly post them to the GrabCAD archive.
 

bwayne64

Well-Known Member
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
 

Hammer3246

Sr Member
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.
Any update on this?

Sent from my SM-N915W8 using Tapatalk
 

DaveG

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
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.
 
Top