Jump to content

KrisWood

Members
  • Posts

    295
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. That is what I thought. I found the equivalent of Max's FFD boxes. It's called Cage and CageEdit. It takes a little getting used to but gets it into the right ballpark and I can improvise from there, though it's never going to be exactly accurate.
  2. Two questions for you all... 1. How do you project curves onto a surface in Rhino? 2. My reference materials from the stems are, I think, based on Johannessen's reconstruction drawings and Sofie Krafft's detailed drawings of the carvings. They do not line up with Ms Bischoff's reconstruction. In my game modeling days in 3D Studio Max there was a tool called Free Form Deformation that could scoot curves into place en-mass in situations like this. Is there an equivalent in Rhino?
  3. Now to do the aft stem and then I'll be ready to slice it into printable layers. Edit: oh wait, I still need to figure out how to project the carvings onto the stems...
  4. And next question is, depth of rabbets, drawn in CAD or just the placement of the rabbets and cut them to depth physically when building? Edit: Here's a fun diagram to explain how to draw the depth of the rabbets on any Viking ship that has them. It's actually surprisingly easy. The following is a cross section of the stem at a point where I have no numbers beyond those calculated from the documentation for top and bottom width of the keel / stems. The plans have lines for the top and bottom of the rabbet and the bottom of the keel in profile view. I've drawn these as horizontal lines in RED. Given the measurements of the widths from the documentation, I can now make a trapezoid shape connecting the dots, which I've done in BLUE. Next I draw the depth of the keel as two circles, centered at the intersection of the red lines with the blue line, which I've drawn in GREEN. I'm not bothering to taper my planks, so my circles have a diameter of 2.5cm along the entire length of the keel / stems. To get the correct ANGLE of the rabbets, draw a line connecting the two circles from the intersection of the top circle with the top red line to the tangent of the bottom circle, which will give a perfect right angle to the bottom of the rabbet, drawn in BLACK.
  5. Question: Is there a good (free?) automated tool for importing ship plan drawings from any raster format into any vector format which can be imported into Rhino? I've tried a number of methods but they all end up with curves drawn as bubbles around the black lines rather than through the middle of the black lines. I've got photoshop if anyone knows of a method there as well.
  6. Finished the port-side fore-stem carvings, moving on to the "tingl".
  7. So many carvings to get into the right format. This will take a while...
  8. Drawing the carvings for the first time. I'm going to need to print them on card and then paint over the parts that are too small to cut. It's fun to be doing art instead of math for once on this project. And with that I'd better get some sleep!
  9. Ok, I'll start a new one when I start my card build and return to this one when I can work with wood again. 🙂
  10. Hi everyone! It's decision time. I am unable to proceed with a wood project at the moment. In the meanwhile I'm going to proceed with card unless anyone has a CNC mill and wants to collaborate on making parts. (Anyone here interested?) Now I'm considering two questions: What is a good scale for working with card? 1:75 fits the entire keel on a single US Letter sized sheet of card stock so I can print it in one piece, but I think the parts will be too tiny to get the level of detail I'd wanted for my project. I've decided to go with 1:50 Since this thread is for my wood project, should I start a separate one for my card project, or just keep posting here? I've also got a separate thread for my CAD related questions in the CAD forum.
  11. Ha. Hahaha. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.... 🤪 I went and added my beautiful, new, mathematically derived lines for the stem back into my guesstimate that I'd made before the new, more detailed plans and numbers were published. All that work and none of the lines moved by more than a centimeter... My old guesstimate was as close as makes no difference at scale... 😆 That said, I guess I'm going back to a previous save and simply converting my files to a card-friendly scale/format... Edit: Also, the way I ended up getting a three dimensional stem-top was to take Johannessen's cross sections and adapt them to Bischoff's numbers, then voila, it matched Saga Oseberg. In doing so, I realized a simple truth about all Oseberg reconstructions. Every last one of them is historically inaccurate. In Mr Finderup's "Saga Oseberg" book, he explains that they ran out of time at the end of the project to fully analyze the remaining fragments of the stem top, so they went with a mathematically derived approximation in a single solid piece, even though the original used multiple pieces. Comparing excavation drawings to both Johannessen's and Bischoff's reconstructions, the original stem top would have been somewhat larger and at a different (somewhat unknowable) angle. Because it makes zero difference to the functioning of the ship, I think Ms Bischoff's approach is the correct one. Johannessen did what looked good for the museum display. Bischoff did what functions given the most probable dimensions of the planks which made up the hull of the ship.
  12. Ok I'm stumped. I couldn't figure out how to model with solids like you did, so I did it my own way using open curves. I've forgotten how to get solids out of these though....
  13. Count me amazed. How do you do that so fast? Are you using Rhino? The rabbets can be modeled more simply as being perpendicular to the inside of the stem and not cut out. That's how they were made on Saga Oseberg. They didn't cut them until they were ready to lay the next plank down, and then they cut it to the depth of that plank.
  14. Hmm when saving it as a jpg it blurred the numbers horribly
  15. Here's all the relevant details. Bischoff reconstruction on the left, Johannessen reconstruction on the right. How in the world would you model the transition from stem to stem-top?
×
×
  • Create New...