spaceman Posted February 15, 2018 Author Share Posted February 15, 2018 (edited) Hello everybody, and now back to the 3D Intertank, where Michael Key is coming down the stretch after his considering of my last little changes. And just now, my "special" friend and helper DaveS in the NSF Forum comes out of the wood and presents me this interesting photo of the Access Door at STS-31 (1990), unfortunately without source. But after I've found the image in Google, I recognized it from the URL, according to which it comes from the collection of George Gassaway, which I know by now. Source: georgesrockets.com (George Gassaway) And since I found a similar photo of the STS-30 (1989), I suspect that since the use of the Leightweight Tanks (LWT), starting at STS-6, such doors were installed, which apparently also had a foam insulation. Source: georgesrockets.com (George Gassaway) For this also militates this photo of my friend James MacLaren, which also shows such a door in the background. The image shows the Challenger on Pad 39-B, probably during the preparation for her fateful final mission STS-51L (1986), what I still will find out. Source: forum.nasaspaceflight.com (James MacLaren) Consequently the photo used so far for the 3D modeling shows a Graphite-Composite door, as has been used later on the Super Lightweight Tanks (SLWT), Source: NASA like here at the STS-133 (2011). Source: NASA For Michael Key's 3D-Modeling this realization is coming too late unfortunately, but which is not a problem, because I can glue this door with the two handles later on, especially since it is very small (9 mm x 8 mm), as one can see here. Edited February 16, 2018 by spaceman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 Hello everyone, now it goes on with the 3D Intertank journey, which went into the next round, which keeps me in suspense. Unfortunately I have yet overlooked an important detail that was not yet correct in the last pictures of Michael Key's 3D model and consequently could not remain, what was to be seen 14 days ago in this picture. Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key) I had circled the part already, but at first I was only interested in the bottom plates of the two Fairings. After I had Michael Key pointed this and had been once more showing the still too high Carrier Plate, he wanted to get back to with the final model for the final checkup, for what I specifically had asked him befor a possible upload to Shapeways . Almost at the same time DaveS came up with this, so far unknown Access Door, how it most likely had looked like at ET-8 during STS-6. Source: georgesrockets.com (George Gassaway) About this I have informed Michael Key and told him at the same time that he should not change the door, because I could scratch this little detail as well. After that he surprised me with his final Intertank version, in which he had even considered this door in addition to the lower located Carrier Plate, which of course I was pleased. Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key) And here are further pictures of his 3D model: After I have begun to wonder about the arrangement of the two Fairings as well as the PAL Ramps and Cable Trays at this close-up my hair suddenly stood on end. Apart from the somewhat too crude shape of the big LO2 Fairing, both fairings are next to each other almost at one height, but what is not true, although in turn was clearly visible on previous photos, but what apparently he has not registered and consequently not so implemented. In reality, the arrangement of the fairings however looks like as at these two photos. Quelle: NASA Source: NASA But the bafflement was following, by telling me at the same time that he had uploaded his model to Shapeways, which would have allowed everybody to order immediately, but what was agreed otherwise, by the way, for EUR 58 (WSF) or EUR 91 (FUD), but with these errors. And in the 3D panorama view of the Intertank in his Shapeways Shop, this error was also clearly visible (see red dashed line). Furthermore, I wondered about the tapering shape till the top of the two PAL Ramps and the resulting gap to the Cable Trays, which is not true. Source: shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place) Then I have immediately communicated Michael Key this change requirement on the basis of these earlier photos, Source: NASA Source: NASA what I have marked on this image again. Source: shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place) Because of these mistakes, I have asked him to remove his offer from his shop site immediately, which he then has done. A controversial point is still the form of the fairings and the arrangement of the GH2/GO2 Press. Lines, for which he has sent me this picture, in which I have marked my changes in red. Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key) And as one can see in these photos, the two Press. Lines should run closer to the LO2 Feedline . Source: NASA Source: georgesrockets.com (George Gassaway) As far as the current state. Slowly but surely, but somehow we'll crack the hard nut like the squirrel. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 Hello everybody, the Intertank in Michael Key's Shapeways Shop currently looks like this, but still with the important note Not For Sale, what will hopefully change soon. Source: shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place) While everything looks awesome on this side, there are a few detail problems to solve on the other side. But we can do it together, in any case I have supplied the necessary reference ammunition. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted February 27, 2018 Author Share Posted February 27, 2018 Hello everybody, Michael Key has still modified the shape of the two Fairings a bit, which looks really better now. Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key) And the arrangement of the details now agrees fairly well with the original and can therefore remain so. Source: NASA And since the wall thickness of the LO2 Fairing is only 0,25 mm in 1:144, we have agreed on to insert no opening for the LO2 Feedline (Ø 3mm), so I can glue the line directly. With that Michael Key has now reached the home stretch and the final is heralded. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hotdog Posted February 28, 2018 Share Posted February 28, 2018 Manfred, is this for the Airfix shuttle ET? It appears skewed in the latest 3D drawings. Which would make sense for the Airfix tank since it is tapered. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
anj4de Posted February 28, 2018 Share Posted February 28, 2018 ..." Which would make sense for the Airfix tank since it is tapered "... which I guess is not correct for the ET? thanks Uwe Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted February 28, 2018 Author Share Posted February 28, 2018 4 hours ago, Hotdog said: Manfred, is this for the Airfix shuttle ET? It appears skewed in the latest 3D drawings. Which would make sense for the Airfix tank since it is tapered. Hi Brian, yes, it has been designed by Michael Key, whom you know, for my Airfix Shuttle Stack (1/144). And this was also the tricky problem for Michael's 3D modeling, because the Airfix Intertank is a separate part of the ET and actually slightly tapered towards the front, which is unusual and initially surprised me a lot because one can not see it with the naked eye. Hard to believe, but true. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted February 28, 2018 Author Share Posted February 28, 2018 1 hour ago, anj4de said: ..." Which would make sense for the Airfix tank since it is tapered "... which I guess is not correct for the ET? thanks Uwe Hi Uwe, yep, that's the difference to your Revell ET Intertank, wherewith your doubts should be eliminated. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted February 28, 2018 Author Share Posted February 28, 2018 Hello everybody, so friends, we are just before completion. At first still this small addendum, which I have reached out non-binding to Michael Key, without knowing whether he would go into rapture in view of my previous special requests. But I thought, asking does not cost anything, either-or? On this image of the STS-6 one can see these two areas, in which the Stringer-Valleys are filled up with Insulating foam, which would perfectly complete the already nicely detailed Intertank. Source: retrospaceimages.com (J. L. Pickering) The white part (left) is the RSS Antenna, as well as an Aerodynamic Vent in the middle of the right-hand area, as I found it in George Gassaway's ET collection, here at STS-37 (ET-37), Source: georgesrockets.com as well as here at STS-36 (ET-33). Source: georgesrockets.com And what should I tell you, in his final version, he has even implemented these two details. Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key) Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key) This surprise he really succeeded. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted February 28, 2018 Author Share Posted February 28, 2018 Hello everybody, after the events have almost happened in quick succession today, it is now done. But always nice in turn step by step. After Michael Key had uploaded his model to Shapeways, he sent me the link, from which the following images are taken, which are showing the awesome Intertank in different views, as one can see. Based on the large number of pictures you can already see how much the end product thrilled me ... Thereupon I immediately ordered a print for 95,99 EUR incl. shipping. In the midst of the delirium of joy then came a friend from our Raumcon Forum with his damper regarding the shrinkage problems at FUD and FXD, as well as in connection with the costly stiffening rings, which one would have to consider. Based on these legitimate hints, Michael Key responded immediately and after a few changes has uploaded his model again, and now lets print it 0,8% larger. He also pointed out that one possibly might have to sand a bit, either on the printed Intertank or on the ET parts of the kit, but that would not be unusual and should be feasible. However, as this model, with a wall thickness of about 0,7 mm, is quite thin, he would not recommend removing the stiffening rings. Instead, he has reduced their mass by enlarging the holes in the middle, which has fortunately resulted in a cost savings of about 20 EUR, that one can not complain about. And those changes looked like this. Thereupon I immediately have canceled my first order and reordered new, and here is the current Link, over which one now can order the Airfix Intertank (1:144) for 71,83 EUR in FUD, and in the 3D view (top right) one can keep a close eye on it from all sides. Source: shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place) Now I hope that Shapeways can also print the part with all its details, wherefore all available thumbs are needed, to make it to a round matter in the end in the truest sense of the word. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hotdog Posted March 1, 2018 Share Posted March 1, 2018 Another outstanding job by Mr. Key! I remember my solution was to try and make a stringer wrap with engraved styrene sheet. Because of the 1mm taper, I had to warp the artwork for the wrap by 2% at the top. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted March 1, 2018 Author Share Posted March 1, 2018 Yes, he actually did it optimally although it was very difficult to implement my ambitious ideas. But now we can look at a great result and can be proud of. I tried to help him as much as possible and have picked out my best reference photos. All's well that ends well. Now only Shapeways has to realize it. BTW, how thin was your styrene sheet and could you use your idea successfully? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
egt95 Posted March 1, 2018 Share Posted March 1, 2018 (edited) Wow. Looks like I’m gonna have to build another Airfix stack. The New Ware stack set has a wrap for the intertank section. It’s pretty good with the detail, but I think it’s going to be a challenge trying to adhere it to the plastic. Plus the Revell model (as it is intended for) requires a lot of work sanding down the molded ribbing. I think I posted a few photos in my discovery build. The wrap is very thin. This new piece will definitely make things easier. I will need to buy a few when they are available. Nice job Manfred. The research you do is incredible. Mike. Edited March 1, 2018 by egt95 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hotdog Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 Manfred, The styrene sheet I used was .010" thick. I made it as accurate as I could, but due to limitations of my Silhouette cutter, I could not scribe as intricately the intertank ribs like in 3D printing. The wrap did fit well (thanks to my hard work and calculations), but the tapered nature of the Airfix ET really bothered me once I became aware of it, and it became noticible to my eye even though I knew no one else would notice it. I may be willing to give the Airfix ET another look once I see how Mr. Key's solution looks on your model build. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted March 2, 2018 Author Share Posted March 2, 2018 (edited) Hi Brian, I can imagine, that it could have been a bit tricky for your Silhouette cutter with all the stringers and ribs of the IT, although the cutter seems to be a miracle weapon, right? BTW, have you applied this wrap, if so, I would be interested in an image, how it looked. Now let's see, how the new 3D Intertank will look like, then we are smarter, whereby I don't hope that Shapeways will say: Mission impossible. Edited March 2, 2018 by spaceman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted March 2, 2018 Author Share Posted March 2, 2018 (edited) Wow. Looks like I’m gonna have to build another Airfix stack. The New Ware stack set has a wrap for the intertank section. It’s pretty good with the detail, but I think it’s going to be a challenge trying to adhere it to the plastic. Plus the Revell model (as it is intended for) requires a lot of work sanding down the molded ribbing. I think I posted a few photos in my discovery build. The wrap is very thin. This new piece will definitely make things easier. I will need to buy a few when they are available. Nice job Manfred. The research you do is incredible. Mike. Thanks Mike for your compliments, the research and evaluation of all the details a well as the endless scaling of measurements was my humble job, and Michael Key has conjured thereout an outstanding intertank. BTW, I know the kit from your thread and had already considered whether I buy it ... Only for fun, if you would count the stringers and ribs in Newware's IT wrap, I do not think you'll find all the 108 Stringers and 52 Ribs, wanna Bet? Edited March 2, 2018 by spaceman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted March 2, 2018 Author Share Posted March 2, 2018 (edited) Hello everybody, my next project will be the Ice/Frost Ramps on the LH2 External Tank, and I hope that Michael Key can help me with this as well. Source: NASA And so the ramps for the GO2/GH2 Press. Lines look like in detail. Source: NASA I know that Bill (niParts) has modeled a set of these Ice ramps in 1:72, but in 1:144 they are unfortunately much smaller. Source: shapeways.com (niParts) In reality these ramps are 2' x 2' x 1' , that means 2 mm x 2 mm x 1 mm for the ET (1:144). The diameter of the LH2/GH2 Press. Lines is 2'' = Ø 0,35 mm (1:144) and should be the reference. The openings in the ramps are slightly larger, approx. Ø 0.5 mm, as one can see in this image. Maybe that these very thin wall thicknesses could be a problem for Shapeways 3D printer? Edited March 2, 2018 by spaceman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted March 5, 2018 Author Share Posted March 5, 2018 (edited) Hi everybody, Shipped! Just now, I've got Shapeways' pleasant message, that they have shipped the Intertank (€ 73,26). Consequently Michael Key's 3D model seems to have been print-ready. Now I'm very curious what the part will look like. Edited March 5, 2018 by spaceman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted March 11, 2018 Author Share Posted March 11, 2018 Hello everybody, meanwhile, the long-awaited package of Shapeways has arrived, at first again only a feather-light box with lots of air in it, which was carefully let out. And before the last shell fell, one could already see the object of desire. Compared with the accustomed images of the 3D model, the Intertank looks at first glance rather inconspicuous, because one can not really perceive the details due to the semi-transparent FUD look and really must look very closely, especially as there is sticking a lot of supporting wax in the fine grooves of the Stringer and Ribs, which still has to be removed. But stable feels the part anyway. But what has attracted my attention immediately was the fact that the inner support tube was missing, through which I want to thread the support rod for the SRBs, which surprised me a lot and I can not explain, especially since the tube still was to be seen on Michael Key's3D model images, as well as in the 3D view on Shapeways' website, which is very strange ... Source: shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place) The later-planned steel rod (Ø 1.5 mm) could not at first be inserted into the opening and pushed through, but after a few attempts it was still possible, albeit with some difficulty. After this first disillusionment I've tried out the provisionally taped front part of the ET, which let fit tightly onto the intertank. And here are some more images with an attempt to catch some of the details but what was not easy. Here is a look at the two Fairings as well as the PAL Ramps and Cable Trays, although the latters can hardly be recognized. In contrast to the narrow fit of the front part, I noticed perceptible clearance of the parts when setting the Intertank onto the rear part of the ET. But otherwise the part is coming out quite well, I think. And I just when I wanted to put the Intertank together with the ASTC rings in my new ultrasonic bath for cleaning, as I noticed that the rear inner ring was broken and had detached nearly over half the length from the inner wall, as if it had not been tied to it at all. How this can happen is completely obscure to me, especially since the laser melts together the wafer-thin layers of powder when printing, really strange ... To this amazing finding and the missing inner tube I have to consult Michael Key and hear what he means, then we'll see. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted March 12, 2018 Author Share Posted March 12, 2018 Hi everybody, now again to the missing inner tube, from which even Michael Key was very surprised, because when he has checked the number of parts of the model on Shapeways' website, there was displayed it with "1", which means, that everything is connected. Then I looked at the 3D Panoramic view of the model at Shapeways' website once more very closely and found a setting where one can see that the tube on both sides clearly is not connected to the inner wall of the tank, which will now be the main subject of my complaint to Shapeways next to the crack of the inner ring. As Michael Key has told me, it would be Shapeways' standard method of sending a reprint, whereupon I'd like to renounce because I don't want to have a part with the same errors. Instead, I should ask them for a refund and say that there are some other issues with the model, whereat I have informed the designer, who is ready to modify his model for a better version. Besides I could casually mention Shapeways' 100% Satisfaction guarantee" with which they apparently advertise. I have informed Shapeways about this today and hope for their goodwill, to grant me a refund, in order to get an improved Intertank with inner tube in the second attempt. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
crackerjazz Posted March 12, 2018 Share Posted March 12, 2018 I hope you get your refund, Manfred. Looking forward to more updates on your build! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
egt95 Posted March 13, 2018 Share Posted March 13, 2018 From the looks of your photos, Manfred, the piece turned out really good. I’m glad you caught the discrepancies and relayed them to us. I was about to purchase one. Kind of steap in price though. $75 US. But when I do it, it needs to be right. Oh and by the way. I apologize for not getting back to you on the PAL ramp dimensions from the New Ware products. I recently returned to work post ACL surgery and have been working nights. I’m still trying to readjust to a 3 on 3 off work schedule. Mike. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted March 14, 2018 Author Share Posted March 14, 2018 (edited) Thanks Joe and Mike, that's right. BTW, Shapeways is still remaining silent, whatever that may mean. Do not worry, Mike, about the Ice/Frost Ramps, another friend has helped me. First, get well soon, that's more important. Edited March 14, 2018 by spaceman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted March 14, 2018 Author Share Posted March 14, 2018 Hello everybody, today I tested my new Ultrasonic cleaning bath. Here is a vivid video of it by BANDELIN, on which one can see the ultrasonic cleaning of a chain in fast motion, and two images for comparison, in the initial state before cleaning, and afterwards. I was surprised by the time of about 4 hours, which may have been due to the selected object. But I did not let myself be guided by that when cleaning my first two ASTC Rings (FUD), especially since the device only allows max. 10 minutes. The device has 5 pre-set cleaning intervals, 90 sec., 180 sec., 300 sec., 480 sec. and 600 sec., which are automatically switched off by the timer. Obviously there is no on/off for security reasons, which I consider to be a disadvantage, especially when I think of cleaning the Intertank with its lots of fine grooves, which will certainly have to run for a longer time. That's why I asked the manufacturer if there is no other option than having to restart the timer over and over again. Anyway, I've let clean the FUD rings twice 600 seconds, so for a total of 20 minutes with some drops of rinse aid, after which they looked whiter than before, which has already been described by other guys. This can be seen by this comparison between the cleaned FUD rings (left) and the uncleaned FXD rings (right), although it is not serious. And here are the two FXD rings (right) after 20 minutes of cleaning. BTW, the liquid looked so cloudy after cleaning of total of 40 minutes cleaning time of the four ASTC Rings, which shows in comparison to the picture before the cleaning already a quite enriched state with detached wax. As far as to my first ultrasonic cleaning attempts. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted March 17, 2018 Author Share Posted March 17, 2018 Hello everybody, Shapeways has meanwhile accepted my complaint and granted me a refund. Now, Michael Key can do some minor changes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.