Egilman

I primarily use Lychee, and it has the ability to save the STL file, project file and machine code file... (the file you give to the printer) I save all three.... To me, I would make the saving to STL and Machine code automatic, with the slicer project file optional... The ability to send the machine file directly to the printer isn't probably going to come around for a while, it's going to require the printer manufacturers to see the worth of making their printers USB capable... right now with the workflow of 3D printing using a Stick to transfer the file to the printer is the best way.... I believe that Autodesk sees F360 as a lead in to future Inventor users leaving it basically for the hobbyist.. (I can't believe they charge people for a "Pro" license for F360! given it's current buggy state) Proprietary is always bad for universal fit for exactly the reasons you explain.. It locks you into one system... Baselines should be universal...

Sounds like you got it sussed out brother... good deal.... dust her up real good though like your tank but heavier...

I'm assuming here that "Tool" as your using it is the software.... I can answer this one right now, no there is no 3D software capable of directly printing to a 3D printer, not even the slicers... All of them use the STL file for interfacing with slicer software... which outputs a machine readable file for the printer..... which to be honest is probably the next major inefficiency to be upgraded... I believe F360 had a slicer routine in it at one point or was directly interfacing with a slicer add in.... but it was removed... (and they have gone on to officially support a different file for transfer of 3D models as their default other than STL and OBJ, it is neither open source nor standardized, but F360 still will export in STL, you just have to specifically select it) This is the next workflow bottleneck to be dealt with in 3D printing, and if Autodesk is looking at it, you know the others are as well...

Well that would work, but I would at least do the hubs, blades are usually quickly repurposed but hubs last much longer....... leave a few windows off and maybe a couple of door panels, but yeah she's looking very much like a long disused bird...

Turn her into a hangar queen my friend, then the dust would be expected to be there, (in fact I would probably add more) the rest looks perfect for such....

A 216 is perfect for the period, but it would probably be bolted to a warner 3 speed top loader, the tranny on it looks more powerglide to me.... and tie down straps are '90's they would have used light chain fore and aft off the heads lifting lugs.... the pallet is good as it's first rest point after being pulled and before mounting to an engine stand, but I would put blocks, (simple 4x4's) under the engine mounts on each side to allow it to sit upright, (it wouldn't sit upright without them) your dude manipulating the chain hoist would be perfect situational image... You still amaze me with your vision and execution my friend... this should go in the gallery, it's not a ship true, but a masterwork on what's possible..... What everyone has said is valid and well earned brother... PS: yeah the wrench is a tad out of scale, I would go along with Keith's suggestion to leave it, but disguise it a bit... Newspaper or a Chilton's manual, the old blue book type, laid on top of it would be perfect....

Well Rick I've oversimplified the explanation a bit.... The ToO is the easiest way to create a hull section in the real physical world... Hundreds of years of practice prove that, so the easiest way is to take what they do on a Mould Loft floor and translate it into software and there is software routines that do that already... Always room to reinvent the wheel so to speak... The image I posted comes from the booklet of stability for the USS Cyclops AC-4 1910... Cartesian projection is the easiest way to show what the hull profile is going to look like at various angles so they can predict the other important points of hull design center of moment, center of gravity and the like at various angles and weights.... The radial center points express hull loading levels... Once they have calculated the predicted results on hull stability, they run the physical tests on the completed hull to proof the design.... They usually only draw one of these and it is usually on the midsection because they are not easy to draw correctly... so although a hull can be constructed from one, it's not the easiest way to do it... Point being a full set of hull lines are not really needed from an engineering perspective to build a hull in software, they just make it a lot easier..... We as modelers are looking for software that can take simple 3 views, profiles and deck plans, and create a reasonably accurate model from them... Heck even the drawn hull lines are not absolutely accurate, any draughtsman knows that... Cause everything is drawn in scale and a pencil line on a drawing will equal the thickness of a steel bar or a wood trim strip on a real ship... (depending on drawing scale) In reverse, a ToO is usually created by a naval architect off his drawing of the hull shape to start with..... Hence practicality sets in, the hull shape is perfect in the designers mind, but the moment he puts it to paper error starts to creep in.... As far as software design goes to effectuate this, we will never reach absolute accuracy the best we will reach is an approximation.... it needs to be fast, it needs to be easy to use, and it needs to point out obvious errors... (and hopefully tell you what is causing the error)... The subject is a heavy technical one though and the software designer is the genius that gets to resolve all the technical aspects into a format so relative idiots like me can use it.... Understanding it is the first step to mastering it...

The theory behind discrete multi planar curve modeling have been around for centuries... the ticket is to understand the relation of the points to each other... Which can be done with any number of mathematical projection methods, the table of offsets is just one way of recording such datum in a linear fashion... Another is cartesian projection.... For example... That is a cartesian projection of a table of offsets, it can be used to build a complete hull all you would need to know is the LBP and the distance between the stations... The angles and trigonometry allow you to draw the intervening stations anywhere along the hull... Quite the task though so it's not used for anything but mathematical calculations and the Mould loft builders work directly from the ToO... Solid block modeling is unable to replicate the precision of this style of calculations... The conversion of this style to software representation is surface modeling based upon discrete curve bounding... In software the issues come from stitching the surfaces created from the curves together into a solid object.... Personally I'm exploring the current software that is capable of doing this and hopefully see which is most accomplished at it.... The average to typical 3D cad based software can do this but doesn't do it well... Solid modeling software can do it but also has problem realizing the finished solid body in some cases.... I think Rhino can do it as it is specifically aimed at ship building and the incorporation of nurbs modeling makes it very accurate.. but I'm still learning it so I'm reserving judgment till I know more... The process of forming a discrete curved surface mathematically has been known for a very long time..... and to fully understand what we are trying to do here is is good to understand the history of it as well... So from the basis of fully understanding what we are doing, bring it on...

Amen brother....

I don't mind, but I was thinking more along the lines of software that is already out there, I'm not aimed specifically at 3D print modeling yet, just the easiest software to use to accurately represent a hull and somewhat of the steps to get there... As long as we can get back to that when the learning curve is flattening on Rhino, I don't mind at all...

I feel for ya... Dental resins... I have a friend who is a dentist, he is also a modeler.... Clear Dental Resins used for alignment braces come out of the printers or molds frosted just like all clear resins do... then they are ground to smooth them and polished.. When polished they come back crystal clear... What it means is surface smoothness is the answer for clear resins, none of them are smooth when formed and solid, like cast glass, lots of post processing before they look clear.... (probably why Invisalign is so expensive) Someone could do a little experiment with Future or one of the diamond finishes using a clear 3D printed model that's frosted and see what happens? maybe it is as simple as clear coating..... when they are in the printer and wet they are crystal clear...

This test was actually done by Nat Geo for one of their documentaries on the titanic.... they actually showed it in the sink tank.... Yes it floats with compartments 1-4 or even 2-5 flooded, add a compartment either way and she's a goner... They wanted to make sure that their computer simulations were correct, not only as to would she sink, and the time it took to sink, but would she break where most simulations say she would.... The strain gauges they put in the model hull say yes she would have.... (witness testimonies go both ways on the question of her breaking apart)

A masterpiece my friend, if you don't mind, can I link this to a few friends on the Space Modelers IO board? I'm sure they would appreciate and love it as well... A stunning piece of modeling....

open my friend, there is no other answer... (but, it is up to you, it is your creation)

And lets not forget the lens distortion, screen aberrations and scanner head tolerances... Realigning a print (squaring) I do in Gimp directly only takes a few minutes and the tools are easy.... removing the distortion is the difficult and tedious part... and in many cases, for modeling purposes, unnecessary....

Yes the STL, (Stereo Lithography) file is the current standard and it's been around almost as long as the OBJ file... They both do essentially the same thing... all the major slicers can work with either as well as most 3D software can import them, but those are the two most prevalent... (with STL leading the two by 20 lengths) Another thing, one of the advantages of Rhino is it can check for watertightness and it is absolute, it either is or it isn't, the same as checking for holes, (which need to be closed) and normal direction which in a good model they will all be pointing outwards.... This doesn't matter to FDM printing, it does in SLA printing... I would consider adding such an absolute feature to it and the reason is this... an STL file created to the absolute standard of rhino will print on any 3D printer without issue, one that is not, probably will still print on an FDM printer but might not on an SLA printer.... On that basis alone Rhino is a leap above other 3D software's that don't do this... The STL files you get out of Rhino will print on any 3D printer... I have model files that will to prove this beyond any shadow of doubt... Transparency, I have no experience with FDM printing so I will defer to the brothers that have, my experience with transparent resin is this... as the part is being printed, and is wet with resin, it is crystal clear, as it cures it takes a translucent haze and is no longer clear more a frosted appearance... Washed in IPA the frosting becomes even more opaque... Fully cured or left out in the sun for long periods it will take on a distinct yellow tinge... In my opinion there is no point in spending more for clear resin given this situation when basic grey gives essentially the same results, you will have to paint your model anyway... hopefully the engineers working on resins will be able to produce a resin that cures completely clear, but it's not on the horizon yet...

A CR-10 or a Chiron is as close as your going to get, but that's only 500mm Z... {chuckle, without spending a ton} FDM isn't going away anytime soon just because somtin a little better comes along...... It has it's uses and isn't quite finished tech yet.. Laser sintering is like molding without the mold it's the gleam in the hobbyists eye right now, but it wasn't that long ago that SLA was the gleam.... Moores law.... probably has a relative in the 3D printing business as well...

I don't thunk I have a bench that could support that weight... {chuckle} But yeah the tech is great as far as what it does... someday my ship will come in...

I have a friend that is doing a Shuttle Stack in 1/160th scale mostly scratchbuilding... but some of the finer parts he has been getting thru shapeways using their ultra fine process... You can clearly see the ridges, the one on the right was SW's first attempt, the one on the left their last and best attempt, they are the right and left propel motors for one end of a crawler truck.... He also has a complete set printed from the same files that were done on a Photon Mono.... The 16 resin motors are in the top of the array, the bottom left is the shapeways ultra fine offering, and the white one is his scratchbuilt prototype.... You can clearly see the difference between the best commercial FDM printing available and the Photon Mono in a hobbyists workroom... There is absolutely no question that SLA printing is the way to go for detail accuracy, and one must remember this is a 1/160th scale model... I'm not sure how sintering would improve on that but willing to keep an open mind, my friend has decided that SLA is the way to go for all his 3D printed pieces.... Hard to argue with the proof... Right now SLA is the cutting edge....

OC if your looking for a crystal clear finish for clear plastic, dipping in acrylic floor finish, (future, klear, etc.) is the only way to go, if your looking for a polished shiny mirror finish over paint then acrylic floor finish is NOT the way to go... (it will come out semi-gloss every time.. (even with multiple coats) this has to do with the rough surface all paints have when dry especially flat paints... What you want for a mirror shiny finish over paint is diamond finish, the stuff car modelers use to get their mirror finishes... (it also comes in regular quart cans that can be used in an airbrush)

I believe the best FDM resolution is currently 120 microns? (someone correct me if I'm wrong) The standard for SLA is 50 microns... (and I believe 35 microns is right around the corner) So yeah, for larger models it's ok but you still have to deal with surface roughness after the print... My personal belief is that SLA will overtake FDM as the 3D printing standard within the next year and a half. the guys posting to the STL file download sites are already creating models with the option for SLA printing over FDM... The changeover is already happening....

Well, there are probably some here that will give it a shot, me I'm heavily invested in SLA at this point.. (I completely bypassed FDM printing) so software devoted to FDM printing is probably not going to work for me... But there are some that are invested in FDM and working out their workflow for incredible models already... It's a good idea and probably the best course is to develop it for FDM and when it is up, stable and functional then add in SLA printing to it... Me, I need SLA for it's precision and fine detail capabilities when I get finished learning, I'm going to be building something in the 6' long range at 1/72nd scale... the ability to print fine detail is a must... FDM isn't capable of that fine a level of detail... I hope it works for ya, if I can help in any way be sure to post....

Excellent... There is an easier way to design the mating surfaces as well which will use less resin and give you more gluing surface for a much cleaner look.... The look doesn't really matter cause it will be inside I know... but it will also make your design simpler and faster to execute... Let me know how it turns out my friend...

I do have a question, why are you printing the side pieces flat? if you printed them vertical you will need fewer supports... these are the side galleries correct? since they taper off to the hull going forward, print the aft side against the build plate and let the exterior just form itself in free space... The only thing you will have to clean up is the mating surface and interior which is very easily done...... Just a suggestion off the top of my head..

That final pic looks perfect..... Just the right amount of sag..... The adjustment you made fits the subject so it is completely hidden... Excellent work, much easier than doing it on a tank..... Sometimes getting the pitch of the tracks right (distance between pins) is the most difficult part of building tracks cause any error is cumulative...