An attempt to model a ship hull in software.....

[Richard Dunn]

Hi Kevin

1 has history but it get slow, I never use it and dont need to.
2 yes and variable radius fillets, they are the most stable fillets I have ever seen.

3Rhino rarely crashes and if it fails there are tools to diagnose problem and fix surface

4 Rhino has more options and customisable but that's not important

5 I've done whole REAL ships with no slowdown

6 use IGES or nurbs surface formats

7All rhinos tools are solid and you will only end up using a  small collection to do anything.

8 Never needed support or help but heaps of training and good forum exist
If I have ever had an issue I have been able to find fix in google in seconds, always in forum or knowledge base.
I am not really interested in comparing the 2 programs, I don't have time for that, Rhino is superior for marine ...period

Otherwise its Maxsurf, ship constructor or some other boat design program that does the same thing, don't forget grasshopper to, Rhinos scripting interface that uses nodes, you can do ANYTHING in that and make plugins etc.

 

 

[Kevin-the-lubber]

Thanks Richard, sounds good. I guess I'll have to see, when I try it, what it's like not using a design history, how you can go back and tweak things if you need to.

[Richard Dunn]

To be honest Kevin most programs have some degree of history, Maya does, Max does Modo does, Rhino does BUT that does not make it a procedural program, what you seem to want is that, where you add an effect into a chain and can go back and tweak at later time.. personally I have never had use for it as it destroys the ability to be creative. you will find in hull creation its a burden not a help.
if any other professional  marine designers are watching , please confirm this.

procedural modelling IMO is for small projects where you say for example add or Boolean solids and might need to tweak size of those solids after they have been filleted.
In Naval Architecture modelling the tweaks are much much  more targeted and might be aimed at just points on a curve or trims, things that cant be done on a procedural level without breaking the chain or redoing it.
That my experience anyway.

Edited October 29, 2021 by Richard Dunn

[Richard Dunn]

Kevin I did not answer part of question.
When working in Rhino you keep copies of all construction data on layers so you can go back and re loft, but you will see soon enough why its a hassle if it were procedural, the only time I use history is to loft a surface and then have to make changes to input curves, but 98% of time I turn it off.

You have to plan ahead and once you have the idea its still fast.

The only tool that Rhino lacks and I can say this is real-time updating sections, currently you have to re-project the lines every time you want to check them unless you spend 2-3k on ORCA plugin which has it, awesome tool but not for just that feature.
you could probably script it in Grasshopper or make a macro to do it but I am nota programmer by any means, thats my wifes role, she is the coder.
 

[Kevin-the-lubber]

Having history has allowed me to design on the fly - not good practice, a complete break with my training and not always even sensible, but it is kind of handy when you’re not exactly sure how things are going to need to fit together or intersect. But I’ll be the first to admit you can instead pre-plan.  History can be problematic in F360 as well and I know some people don’t use it. I think so long as I’m able to retrace my steps it’ll be fine.

[Egilman]

11 hours ago, Richard Dunn said:

You have to plan ahead and once you have the idea its still fast.

I've been watching that online tutorial you posted earlier Richard... I can say yes, it's fast, once you are comfortable in Rhino's environment... Thank you for the link.....

 

 

Edited October 30, 2021 by Egilman

[Haze Gray]

Kevin,  for me 99% of the time I keep history on in Fusion 360 - so if I discover an error in my work I can attempt to go back and fix/change it.  Sometimes that's works great, and sometimes it also drives downstream effects and completely wreck things ...but it does provide a chance.  Sometimes I'll save a particular state and then remove the history and save as a separate version and carry on from there. It's all personal choice of course.... 

[Kevin-the-lubber]

Yes, that's more or less me as well. It's particularly useful right now, when I'm also needing to experiment a lot with the printing. For instance I've found that 0.5mm locating pins (out of necessity, space is very limited) are perfectly printable but they break off too easily when removing supports. So I've just gone back through every item in the assembly, swapping to rectangular pins, which give them a lot more meat. Although this is fairly straightforward, down the line I'd know I need to design around that from the outset, but right now I appreciate how easy this it is in F360 to make a change like this. It may be that I continue using F360 in parallel to SW or Rhino, just as a tool that's good in some situations but not all.

[Egilman]

For me, I didn't even know such thig as history roll back even existed until I got four months into learning SW... In my experience as well it is hit or miss on if it messes something up downstream... But for small minor changes and adjustments it does work.... In Solidworks you can be pretty well assured if you roll back past a feature to make a change where the feature is involved in the change, it's going to complain..... Compound features (feature on top of a feature? will will almost always complain) I imagine it's the same in F360.....

 

I've been considering using both SW & Rhino as complementary to each other.... But I don't know how the files will interchange yet.... It will depend on how well the two confabulate meshes... I'm far enough into Rhino to know that it makes real solid solids, (and you can check for holes in your model) not solids that claim to be solids, for 3D resin printing that's a godsend....

 

 

[Haze Gray]

Kevin, overall how well are those square locating pins working for you?  Originally when I started designing hulls for 3D printing I decided not to use them since I wanted a solution that both located and applied some clamping pressure -  I use a kind of socket on either side of the hull sections to join and clamping tabs when mating them. 

[Kevin-the-lubber]

I'll be able to tell you later this evening, once the print run has finished. Your system sounds interesting, can you share a sketch or photo? I'm not sure I'd be able to work in clamping pressure, a lot of these parts are not even 1mm thick and are extremely fragile until glued together.

[Egilman]

4 hours ago, Kevin-the-lubber said:

swapping to rectangular pins, which give them a lot more meat. Although this is fairly straightforward, down the line I'd know I need to design around that from the outset,

 

57 minutes ago, Haze Gray said:

I use a kind of socket on either side of the hull sections to join and clamping tabs when mating them.

Have either of you thought about using a flange on the inside surface along the edges of mating parts? A larger gluing surface, and a reinforcement of the joint....

[Kevin-the-lubber]

That’s another good idea, won’t work in this situation though as these are parts that lie flat on others, just helps to have position pins. To answer the original question, they work okay, just need to run the sockets all the way through as some become suction cups and become filled in. I’ll cover it in more detail presently on my Victory log.

[Haze Gray]

I already use somewhere between 4-7mm (sometimes more) for the mating surface.  Rather than a flange along the entire length of the edge I use a reinforced flange but only in specific areas. 

[Egilman]

I found another tutorial for Rhino by researching the author and checking out his webpages....

 

He offers his courses at what I consider very reasonable prices....

 

I've found what I've been searching for for so long.... 

[mtaylor]

Sometimes it's better to pay for education than not.  This is probably one of them.  Hopefully he allows questions and answers.....

 

I had a quick look at his site... he is reasonably priced.

[Egilman]

Yes Mark very reasonably priced.... There are a number of course authors out there for Rhino, he is the only one truly reasonable... Most are over the $1K range... I'm a few lessons into the middle one on the page, the total nube course... VERY VERY thorough... He hasn't left any questions yet... And personally I would go thru the starter course before anyone tackles the ship course of his that Richard posted... The ship course is decidedly an intermediate course, he treats you as you should know the basics and be able to do some things without his explanations or hand holding... Just like any good professor would.... The nube course he steps you through, bringing you along first by explaining the interface, not requiring you to do anything as he explains and shows how the software works... Then he starts stepping you through the tools in a follow me basis you following him.... Mirroring what he does..... You soon get the hang of how the tools function....

 

But even more important, he explains what is important and what isn't, what you will be using and what you won't (or only occasionally) I guess if I run into any questions they can be asked on his facebook page and I guess you can e-mail him directly...

 

But the best part, he isn't droll he doesn't pass up his mistakes, (or excuse them, and he does make them) he runs you right on thru them showing you the correct way by correcting himself.... This is straight up education the way we remember it... {chuckle}

 

You get the feeling from the start that he expects you to learn it...

 

Well worth the minimal investment....

Edited November 1, 2021 by Egilman

[Kevin-the-lubber]

Agree, reasonable price and it looks like a lot of content for the cost. Are you doing the ‘Rhino 3D Tutorials, from beginner level to advanced level’ module? It took me quite a while to find the right ‘tutor’ for F360 (Kevin Kennedy), traversing everything from superhero show-offs to one who seemed to know less than even me! I installed Rhino yesterday, will hopefully find time to start learning within the next couple of weeks.

[Egilman]

I've paid for two already, the first was the ship course that Richard vouched for and after binge watching the whole thing, (and archiving it) I took the middle one of the six ... (it's exactly same as the one with the watch image) Yeah, the one that starts you out from nothing... 70+ lessons long.... (and I keep eyeballin' that Spit tut) Looks like he's got the basics covered....

[Richard Dunn]

https://www.ak3d.de/all/3d_car_tutorial_book_animation/

That some training I bought a few years ago,  never had time to do it yet but he's not a good trainer, but interesting course.

One of those if they mess up, cover it up kind of tutorials where you don't get to see mistakes, I always leave the mistakes in as its a great opportunity to show how you fix them, yes it makes for a longer course but oh well.

My katana modelling course on artstation was like that and ended up being about 80 videos.

Edited November 1, 2021 by Richard Dunn

[Egilman]

1 hour ago, Richard Dunn said:

I always leave the mistakes in as its a great opportunity to show how you fix them, yes it makes for a longer course but oh well.

My katana modelling course on artstation was like that and ended up being about 80 videos.

Yes, doing it this way also humanizes the instructor and provides many opportunities to show how it works in a real environment.... The details, it's all in the details....

 

Thank you my friend for the linkage, I can't wait to see how you do it.... (but I will have a solid basis of understanding when you start)

 

I guess he also offers them on Udemy (scroll down), at a higher price point but with full course materials... (he is also the highest rated Rhino instructor on Udemy, well deserved judging from the user commentary on his courses) Certainly is much superior to Linked-In Learnings offerings on Rhino...

 

Again Thank You Richard, this is the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow on Rhino for me....

 

The Authors Webpage....

 

And his Facebook Page....

Edited November 1, 2021 by Egilman

[Richard Dunn]

No problem
I hope it is turning out to be the revelation I suspected it would be.

My wife and I had a number of training courses on Udemy to at one time and they did well but due to the US tax laws we pulled them and I suspect it has had the effect of reducing a large number of good trainers from using the platform.
We put a lot of effort into training and one large course can take 5 weeks to prepare, My Katana one did for example, you have to do practice runs, record, edit ,It is a lot of work and then of course you pay Udemy for their cut, the problem is when we do our Tax we have to declare our earnings from Udemy in Australia which is fine and expected but what got us was the the US tax people decided to take a huge lump as well for Tax, so we got taxed Twice!!
This made it simply unviable to do sadly and I think that is why you will find many more on Gumroad now, but its much harder to find them, you have to know about it.

Edited November 1, 2021 by Richard Dunn

[Egilman]

On 11/1/2021 at 1:47 PM, Richard Dunn said:

I hope it is turning out to be the revelation I suspected it would be.

It is... I am becoming very attached to the Adjustable Curve Blend..... It is a VERY impressive tool for making drawing compound variable curves as easy as drawing a straight line....

[Richard Dunn]

Try out the curve boolean tool...its a life saver.
Going to be a bit quiet this week as I start a new job as lead artist and have a lot to absorb initially.

[Rick Lutowski]

Just found this thread, so am posting late. 

 

For those wishing to model ships, buildings, and similar structures in 3D, there is a new open-source alternative to AutoCAD, Rhino, etc.  It is called CM Creator, where CM stands for Compartmentalized Model.  CM Creator's forte is modeling interior subdivision for early stage design, which is a different emphasis than the traditional CAD alternatives.  CM Creator contains some interesting capabilities not found elsewhere.  For example, after defining the interior decks and bulkheads (to any level of detail desired), the program can automatically generate descriptions of all compartments at the press of a single button.  It can also compute the geometric properties -- areas, volumes, centers -- of all exterior and interior surfaces as well as all interior compartments.  New users will appreciate CM Creator's integral user help capability; just hover the mouse over a button, data field or other control and the documentation for that control pops up -- no wasting time searching through a manual.

 

This thread started with a desire to 3D print ship hulls, and that was my incentive for writing CM Creator as well. The program is not yet ready to interface with a 3D printer, but that is on the development plan.  3D printing a ship involves more than just outputting the geometry in STL or OBJ files.  A lot of scaling and modularizing must be done as well since most home 3D printers are about a cubic foot, while any model ship worth its salt will be significantly larger than that.  Thus, the Compartmentalized Model created by CM Creator was conceived specifically for modularizing the 3D digital model in such a way as to permit 3D printing a ship or large building in assemblies, which can then be glued together into the final, complete structure.  Since CM Creator models interior as well as exterior geometry, 3D printing the hull using a material such as clear plastic would result in a model in which all interior structure could be seen as well as the usual exterior surfaces.

 

Currently, CM Creator has a user base of one (myself), and is being used to develop a comprehensive digital model of the USS Texas (BB 35) which is serving as a test case.  If anyone on this thread would like to become user #2 of CM Creator by using it to model your favorite ship, you can download it for free from https://github.com/rlutowski/CMCreator

The latest version is v0.5.  Download files are available for Linux, Mac, and Windows.  There is also a download file with the complete Java source code for anyone curious to know how CM Creator works, or wants to contribute to its development.  Since the program is so new, a novice user is bound to have questions. Thus, I am available to answer your questions at the email address supplied in the program's integral help system.

[Egilman]

Hi Rick,  Welcome to the thread...

 

You might want to pop over to the MSW new users thread and introduce yourself... 

 

Yes this thread is about modeling a ships hull in 3D software, ostensibly for the purpose of modeling said hull on a 3D printer...

 

It wasn't intended to rate one software over another or really compare them but I can see where one can make judgments based upon what is being posted here...

 

Soon I'm going to be posting about my test hull done in Rhino.... So far it's the best I've tried...

 

Someone might take a look at your software, they are sure welcome to try, and I hope they report back here about it.....

 

Again welcome to the Forum and thread...

 

EG

[Rick Lutowski]

Appreciate Egilman's tip to check the new user threads.  Have filled in my profile with a bit of  relevant background.  Once I learn the site better I can try uploading photos of some past creations to the gallery.

 

Hope no one minds if I blend the thread topic of 'modeling ship hulls in software' with a couple of additional site× observations.

 

First observation: there are a lot of other threads besides this one that deal with modeling ships with CAD. Digitally modeling ship geometry prior to building a model (either manually or by 3D printing parts) seems to be of interest to many.

 

Second observation: Many MSW users are trying a wide range of CAD tools searching for something suitable for ship model building.  Since current CAD offerings were designed for ship design and construction, not model building, observations such as "So far it's the best I've tried" are to be expected since we are likely to be using any current CAD tool outside its 'use case' envelope ('use cases' are a popular approach to software requirements development.)  For those interested in 3D printing, most mature CAD tools pre-date 3D printing so were not explicitly designed with that in mind, although many are backfitting 3D print capability.

 

I built model ship kits in grade school, and 'from scratch' ships in high school.  After retiring, I toyed with the idea of building a big R/C model battleship mounting 0.17mm BB/pellet guns for main armament.  However, I decided 'anybody' could build one of those (and the sheriff probably won't appreciate a functioning model BB), but only I could write CM Creator.  Lest that sound egotistical: as they say in Texas, "It ain't braggin' if it's true."  CM Creator incorporates two major capabilities I invented decades ago and are not available anywhere else --  automatic compartment generation, and classification list technology.  The former is key to efficient digital modeling of the complete compartmentation of a ship, while the latter is more ship design-related (and thus out of the scope of this thread).  Once 3D print capability is implemented, I fully expect CM Creator to be better-suited than other CAD tools for most model ship projects, especially those that seek to model the complete ship both inside and out. 

 

MSW users can help guide this development by (1) trying out CM Creator to develop a Compartmented Model of your favorite ship and providing feedback (via email or MSW post), and (2) collaborating with CM Creator development if you know basic Java programming and are willing to volunteer.  With the help of a few, CM Creator could become the CAD tool of preference for many of us.

 

 

Looking forward to Egilman's post about his experience with Rhino.

 

[Richard Dunn]

How are you going Egilman?

[Egilman]

9 hours ago, Richard Dunn said:

How are you going Egilman?

It's coming along, I've had a few RL episodes I've had to deal with so it forced a break in the progress but I'll be ready.... 

[Egilman]

10 hours ago, Rick Lutowski said:

Many MSW users are trying a wide range of CAD tools searching for something suitable for ship model building.  Since current CAD offerings were designed for ship design and construction, not model building, observations such as "So far it's the best I've tried" are to be expected since we are likely to be using any current CAD tool outside its 'use case' envelope ('use cases' are a popular approach to software requirements development.)  For those interested in 3D printing, most mature CAD tools pre-date 3D printing so were not explicitly designed with that in mind, although many are backfitting 3D print capability.

Thanks for responding Rick...

 

Actually, 3D capability has been around for over 40 years, well known in the engineering fields as is additive manufacturing which has been around over 70 years.... It's only natural for the "normal" cad software creators/builders to start adding it to their repertoire's... The real thing is creating a straight workflow from 3D cad to 3D print in small scale to suit the burgeoning 3D printer market...

 

They all want a piece of that market.... And a software designed specifically to create a model and then print to 3D would be a kinda revolution in process, don't be surprised if the larger cad houses take the idea and incorporate it into their software... It is the next logical step....

That being said, we need to get to the crux of what we are doing cause model building, although a large market is still only a niche market... we deal in design with a lot of the same things full sized builders have to in general but there are specifics that only apply to modeling...

 

Most ship models, and models in general, deal with scale... much smaller than real life objects... A 1" plate in RL will only be .005" in scale in some of the scales we work in so compromises in design have to be factored in... Interiors although desirable in some models, are not in many others... (what the point of internal compartmentalization in a 1/350th scale warship for example or at 1/700 scale?) A 1/24th or 48th scale model would easily benefit from it depending on the model, but for most modern type ship models it doesn't...

 

Also, 3D printing has certain requirements, a model has to be a solid body to be accurately printed on the better 3D printers... It doesn't matter what the object being printed is for... (even if it is compartmentalized the compartment walls have to be what is called watertight solid) No edge gaps at all... And this is the biggest issue with 3D software at the present... As long as it was just FDM printing it really wasn't an issue but with the advent of Resin printing it does become an issue. many of the models on the download sites can't be printed on an SLA printer because of this...

 

Not trying to tell you not to proceed nor that it has no value, quite the contrary, your idea has great value and for modeling is to me the next logical step in creating a good workflow... But it has to be based upon real world material/modeling requirements. Some things are just plain too small to be modeled accurately.... (and computer cad can accurately draw/measure down to the fractional mil)

 

Any software that is designed for modeling has to take that into account when considering 3D printing... 

 

Resin when fully cured is very brittle and parts that are thin enough to represent say splinter shields on a battleship in 1/350th scale a lot of times get broken before they are even removed from their island bases so that has to be accounted for as well...

 

I will follow with great interest as you proceed, sounds like a great project.... I'm sure there are lots of modelers here with a lot of modeling experience as well as engineering experience that can help with getting the base requirements of a good design software for 3D printing for modeling...