HMS Bellona 1760 by SJSoane - Scale 1:64 - English 74-gun - as designed

[AON]

Good afternoon Mark,

As per your request in our earlier PM's I am posting the info here regarding another method to create a scale insignia, or more properly... "Relief sculpting methods for model details".  We had our local club meeting on Sunday and I've just updated our website with blogs and photos from that meeting.

The method used to sculpt small details was with Weldbond Adhesive.  He applies it with the pointy end of a tooth pick and says he has about 5 minutes time before the supply source (he had deposited on a card that he picks off of) sets up.  Then he simply squirts some more onto the card and takes droplets from it with his tooth pick and touches it to his model to shape and build up his insignia.  It is white (like white glue) when wet and cures transparent.  He says it can be scraped and sanded after cured and if it is still not quite right it can be added to afterwards.   It works best on porous material (wood) but he is presently using it on copper tubing successfully.  He has examples of actual royal insignia on cannons but they are stored away in his son's garage and to use his words, it was too darned cold out there so he gave up looking!

 

For anyone that wants to try this, he suggests you play around with it a bit to get a feel for it and the setup time before you use it on your model.

 

He will be giving a demonstration at our April 14th meeting.  For anyone interested in seeing a small sample of his sculpting a photo is posted on our club website:  https://modelshipwrightsofniagara.weebly.com/     Please go to our BLOG page and scroll down to January 13th.

Edited January 15, 2019 by AON

[SJSoane]

Hi Alan,

 

I might still be trying that. I learned more about photo etching today, getting as far as exposing and then developing the resist. I discovered (after talking to the great tech support at Micro Mark) that I had probably not cleaned the metal enough and/or run it through the laminator enough times. The resist had not stuck properly to the metal, and washed off completely in big areas.

 

So, the artwork is good, now I need to start again with the metal prep, exposure and development of the resist.

 

My wife is very patient about me taking over the guest bathroom for my developer studio...

 

Mark

 

 

Edited January 15, 2019 by SJSoane

[bartley]

Yes Mark, I had the same problem getting the resist to take evenly.  In the end I cleaned my plates by first rubbing well with 400 wet & dry paper and then flushing wit acetone.

 

John

[SJSoane]

John, thanks, that sounds very helpful. A bit frustrating to have it all wash off.

 

Mark

[SJSoane]

Hi everyone,

 

Well, I am going to have to admit defeat at the hands of photo-etching. Third attempt today, and the entire resist washed off in the developer. Not even a trace of the resist.

 

I may not have the right mind-set or aptitude for this kind of work. There are dozens of steps, each of which requires judgment as to how clean, how much water, how much exposure, how much brushing, etc. At any point, the process can fail, and then you start all over again from scratch. I had thought that the third time through to the development stage, I would have learned from most of my mis-judgments, so it was a surprise when this was the worst example of losing the resist altogether.

 

I somehow managed to get through my entire education with only physics and no chemistry. Either I was not suited to something like chemistry, or the lack of this education put me at a big disadvantage when it comes to the mysteries of chemical actions in photo-etching!

 

Maybe I will come back to this another time, but for now I will explore a couple of other ways to get these xxx$?x& cyphers onto my cannon masters. I only need 4...

 

I tip my hat to those of you who have mastered photo-etching!

 

Best wishes,

 

Mark

 

[shipmodel]

Hi Mark - 

 

Sorry your first experiment with photoetch did not work out.  There is something quite satisfying about working your way up the learning curve and doing a difficult job yourself.  That said, there is also something satisfying about achieving a desired result, even if it takes some help from someone else.

 

Take a look at the monograms that Chuck Passaro is producing over at Syren Ship Models.  They are very realistic, they come in 3 sizes. and cost only $12 for 90 of them.  https://www.syrenshipmodelcompany.com/turned-brass-cannon.php#!/Monograms-English-1750-1820-for-brass-cannon-3-sizes-90-per-pack/p/58972038/category=5764759.

 

For the record, I am a friend of Chuck, but have no connection to the company other than being a happy customer.

 

Best of success.

 

Dan

[SJSoane]

Hi Dan,

Yes, it is disappointing not to have learned this skill; maybe another time I will try again on another project. But for now, I want to keep moving forward with another idea than photo-etching.

 

I did consider Chuck's excellent monograms, but I think they are the wrong size for me. Based on the drawings in David Antscherl's Fully Framed Models, the sizes I need relative to the sizes of my cannon are ¼", ⅜" and 5/32". Chuck's are 5/32", ⅛" and 3/32". I would love to be wrong on the size and have Chuck's monograms work for me...

 

My next plan is to try Alan's colleague's idea of sculpting with Weldbond Adhesive. Let's see what happens.

 

I somehow knew this cannon project was going to take me all winter!

 

Best wishes,

 

Mark

[Hubac's Historian]

P.S. it’s Friday, and I have a few whiskeys in me...

 

but, what about paper?  Print ‘em, cut ‘em, glue ‘em, mold-master ‘em, cast ‘em.

 

If it doesn’t work, scrape ‘em off your masters.

 

I’m assuming - because I’ve lost track of the log conversation - that you might still be looking to cast resin guns.

Edited January 19, 2019 by Hubac's Historian

[bartley]

Pity, Mark, but yes time to move on.  Perhaps It helped when I did this that I am a chemist. But there are physical things like cleanliness of the plate and it has to be really flat during exposure.  I clamped mine to a piece of thick glass. I don't know what Micromark use but I used brass shim to etch onto.  They probably use ferric chloride as an etching solution but I used ammonium persulphate which is a bit less aggressive.

 

Another time perhaps.

 

John

[SJSoane]

Hi John, I like your advice about moving on. The MicroMark kit seems well designed, it includes two pieces of plexiglass and four clamps to get everything very flat. I don't know what the resist film is (it comes with a protective film on each side that has to be removed at various stages in the process); the resist developing solution is ¼ oz Sodium Hydroxide mixed into quite a bit more water. I never did get to the stage of actually etching the metal, although if I had, it uses Ferric Chloride. I regret that I never did study any chemistry to understand more of this.

 

Hubac's Historian, I should have had those whiskeys with you. After my technological failure with the photo-resist, yesterday I got a CD stuck in my Apple drive, and it won't come out for love or money. Not my day for technology...

 

You have got me thinking about paper. Why not? I may have been overthinking this whole thing. At 3/16" scale, these are really tiny, and I looked again at some earlier experimental pewter castings I made with a very good cypher given to me by Greg; after casting and darkening, they turn out as a general impression of detail, not anything close to the level of detail that I kept seeing in my mind's eye with the digital drawings.

 

I will get a fresh blade in my scalpel, and see what I can accomplish. A sheet of bond paper is just about as thick as the brass in the etching kit, giving about a ½" actual thickness to the cypher.

 

Mark

 

 

[Hubac's Historian]

That’s the spirit!  I’ve been thinking about paper, lately, and the many ways in which it can be used to detail our models.  I figure it’s a low-risk/high-reward proposition.

 

Personally, I want to experiment with using silkspan tissue to create a painted scrolling banner, with tendrilly ends, that I will paint to appear three dimensional.  The theory being that anything ornamental, below the stern chase guns, would be painted on, in order to circumvent an actual carving bring washed away by a following sea.

Edited January 19, 2019 by Hubac's Historian

[Katoom]

1 hour ago, SJSoane said:

You have got me thinking about paper. Why not? I may have been overthinking this whole thing. 

  As I recall, you were interested in the technique  of photo etching and if you could make it work you wanted to use it for many things.   

 I spent that last week or so reading this entire thread from start to finish (kind of like a fun novel!) so your motivations are probably fresher in my mind than your own. Also, I am certain that you will revisit the photo etching at some point as one thing that I have learned from this "story" is that you are very persistent.

[SJSoane]

On 11/25/2018 at 4:18 AM, Siggi52 said:

Good morning,

these pictures of cannons I made 2013 in Chatham. Most of the muzzles are like the one in Marks second drawing, not so step. So what is right?

 

 

 

The No 9 is the big mortar far back to the right, No 18 is the mortar where the explanations are lying on.

 

 

 

 

Looking at the cannon in Siggi's photos above, I  notice that the king's cypher is somewhat smaller than I had been drawing. Look at the second photo down, third cannon up; and the last photo.

 

It looks to me like the cypher is about one half the length of the distance between the mouldings on the second reinforce. Based on this, my required cyphers would be 3/16" and ⅛" (too small a difference between the 18# and the 9# to show). That would be Chuck's sizes for sale.

 

I will try the paper idea, and if that doesn't look good I will then reflect on how I feel about purchasing rather than making from scratch this detail.

 

The photo below shows how, at this scale with my skills, the cypher is just a suggestion of detail after being cast.

 

Mark

 

 

 

 

 

[SJSoane]

Katoom, thank you for your description of these postings as a novel! On reflection, posting updates to this website is a little like journaling for a writer--almost a flow of consciousness while trying to think things through. Only with the huge advantage of an international group of people with great insight and skill looking over my shoulder and helping out!

 

Mark

[mtaylor]

Mark,

Looking things over from a distance, a "suggestion" might be the best solution.  Cleaning up the cypher that's cast with the barrel might improve it, but given the whole model, the suggestion will work well.  Sometimes we go for too much detail of one tree that gets lost in the forest, so to speak.

[dvm27]

Mark, as sure as I knew you were a gifted ship modeler at one of our earlier workshops I know that you will not only solve this problem but that is will look spectacular. On full sized barrels I have seen the cypher is sort of inset into the barrel, not really proud of it. A subtle suggestion may work better that an in-you-face crystal clear cypher. Just one more opinion to add to the many you’ve received.

[GrandpaPhil]

23 hours ago, SJSoane said:

Hi John, I like your advice about moving on. The MicroMark kit seems well designed, it includes two pieces of plexiglass and four clamps to get everything very flat. I don't know what the resist film is (it comes with a protective film on each side that has to be removed at various stages in the process); the resist developing solution is ¼ oz Sodium Hydroxide mixed into quite a bit more water. I never did get to the stage of actually etching the metal, although if I had, it uses Ferric Chloride. I regret that I never did study any chemistry to understand more of this.

 

Hubac's Historian, I should have had those whiskeys with you. After my technological failure with the photo-resist, yesterday I got a CD stuck in my Apple drive, and it won't come out for love or money. Not my day for technology...

 

You have got me thinking about paper. Why not? I may have been overthinking this whole thing. At 3/16" scale, these are really tiny, and I looked again at some earlier experimental pewter castings I made with a very good cypher given to me by Greg; after casting and darkening, they turn out as a general impression of detail, not anything close to the level of detail that I kept seeing in my mind's eye with the digital drawings.

 

I will get a fresh blade in my scalpel, and see what I can accomplish. A sheet of bond paper is just about as thick as the brass in the etching kit, giving about a ½" actual thickness to the cypher.

 

Mark

 

 

I’ve successfully used cardstock for making small details in relief.  I would clear coat both sides of the cardstock first to make it stronger and easier to work.

 

Once it’s painted, no one will ever know the difference.

Edited January 20, 2019 by GrandpaPhil

[SJSoane]

HI everyone,

 

Another week of working on cyphers. The paper idea did not work, for two reasons: 1) ragged fibrous edges at this size, and 2) the angle of the scalpel blade got in the way of seeing where I was cutting to.

 

Then I tried cutting it out of copper shim, first attaching to thin wood with carpet tape. Using a 4/0 jeweler's saw and a 77 drill, I was able to rough out something that might work with more care the second time through.

 

I also purchased Chuck's cyphers, which are marvelous to see. The largest one is about the right size for the smallest cannon, and I may use this for the final because it is just about microscopic to see and therefore exceedingly difficult to create on my own. But these are too small for my larger cannon, and so I will have to keep working on cutting my own.

 

I have reflected on whether it is OK to purchase any parts at all for this build, since I want to say I made it all. But I did read in Longridges' The Anatomy of Nelson's Ships that he hired an engineering works to make a contour cutter for turning his cannon, and also hired Mr. Hammond, the great seal engraver at Hatton Garden, to make a steel die of the cypher. Longridge then used this to punch out thin shim cyphers, which he then soldered to the cannon. So obtaining a part which is then used to cast my own cannon doesn't seem quite so bad...does it?

 

If you don't obsess about this, and they fit your scale, Chuck's cyphers are truly spectacular.

 

I think I am getting dangerously fanatical about these things; the pewter cast below reveals how little of this really shows up, especially when it is blackened. I am not sure why I keep questing after something more perfect on this tiny detail. Some psychological help might be in order...

 

Mark

Edited January 28, 2019 by SJSoane

[dvm27]

Don’t forget that the three most impressive objects on Longridge’s Victory, the stern lanterns, were made by another craftsmen. Besides, if you’re truly emulating a Navy Board Model, most of these specialty items were farmed out to jewelers and other specialists so you’d be in good company.

[druxey]

On the other hand - to play devil's advocate (translation: to mess with your mind!) - there's something to be said for "I made it all myself!"

[SJSoane]

Thanks, Greg, I forgot about the multiple teams of craftsmen of the 18th century. 

druxey, if you promise to send the social workers if this doesn't work out, I will try to make the little ones, just to see...

 

 

[Chuck]

I could always cut you some the size you need.  Just contact me via PM and we can figure out how large they need to be scaled up to.

 

Its a minor detail that will save you plenty of time indeed and they do work pretty well.

 

Chuck

[SJSoane]

Hi Chuck,

 

Thanks, I will likely take you up on that idea. I will try one more time to see just how small I can work with reasonable quality. You web site shows how great your's look really close up.

 

For everyone else, here is just how small these little puppies are. These are Chuck's small and medium.

 

Mark

[michael mott]

It is all about the journey isn't it!....You will find a way.

 

Michael

[SJSoane]

9 minutes ago, michael mott said:

It is all about the journey isn't it!....You will find a way.

 

Michael

Hi Michael,

 

Yes, it is. I can't imagine life without yet another building challenge to work through. And don't we hope these challenges build character when the going gets tough!

 

Mark

[SJSoane]

Hi everyone,

 

I went to the mountain top to reflect on 18th century cannon cyphers (view from the top of Whitefish Mountain ski resort, just west of Glacier National Park, looking towards the Canadian Rockies).

 

The mountains told me to stop spinning my wheels on the cyphers. Despite my usual perseverance, I discovered a limit to my tools and skill for making such tiny parts at the same standard as the rest of the build. So rather than compromise the rest, I am gratefully using Chuck's cyphers, made to the right size, for the master moulds. Maybe next spring, when the sun shows up again down in the valley where my shop is, I can try photo etching using the sun rather than an incandescent bulb (the mountains told me this was the problem, since the resist kept washing away even where the exposure was supposed to harden it). I really would like to find out what was not working. But I need to move on or I will never get this ship done.

 

I am proceeding to create the moulds for the cannon. I turned the gunheads using the Sherline compound angle device. I also added a little collar between it and the cannon; this appendage on the cast cannon will temporarily be clamped in the tailstock drill chuck of the lathe, to center the casting before drilling the bore and cleaning up the face of the muzzle.

 

The diagram shows two ways to vent the trunnions in the mould, one straight and the other curved. The curved one in "A" would allow the location dimples (the round circles) to sit closer to the muzzle, while "B" has a straight vent to the top. Experienced casters out there, do you see any strong reasons one way or the other to do "A" or "B"?

 

Best wishes,

 

Mark

Edited January 31, 2019 by SJSoane
typos

[druxey]

The locating keys of dimples need not be multiple. Four would be adequate.So no worries about complicating air vent passages with curves. If using RTV rubber moulds, make an outer plaster jacket so that there is no distortion when clamping the assembly.

Edited February 1, 2019 by druxey

[EdT]

No vent from the lowest part of the mold, Mark?

 

Ed

[SJSoane]

Thanks, druxey. I added more dimples in a second version of casting when the first version slipped around a little, leading to some offset castings. But I notice that my second set of dimples was a little deeper, which may have been the reason for greater alignment the second time around. I was also thinking that dimples closer to the master itself would help ensure alignment where it most matters. In both cases, I had enclosed the mound in a plaster shell.

 

Ed, I welcome your thoughts on a vent at the bottom. Neither of my previous casting efforts had a vent at the bottom, and the button filled without voids. But I did have problems at the muzzle end, of long, thin voids just on the surface (see below). I assumed that my gunhead was not big enough, and the pour right at the top was cooling before the last metal got in. But could it be that venting the bottom would have helped avoid this problem at the top?

 

These were done with my original pewter, which I now know melts at a temperature much higher than the rubber mould likes. Maybe this was part of the casting problem, in addition to degrading the moulds.

 

Mark

 

 

[druxey]

The mass of molten metal in your ladle should be greater than your pour. If there is too little, the end of the pour may have already cooled, resulting in those voids at the muzzle end.