Jump to content

Space Shuttle Launch Pad 39A with Challenger STS-6 (1:144)


Recommended Posts

Hi Pete,

 

yep, it's starting to get scary and spoil all the fun with tiny details, up043952.gif but maybe that's the curse of the many grooves. noidea2.gif

 

On the one hand the cleaning of this Intertank with its many fine grooves obviously is an extremely hard nut and very difficult to handle. s-boese-wand02.gif

 

But on the other hand it also seems to be a problem of the post-treatment and cleaning of prints by Shapeways itself, because the third IT seems have been treated more thoroughly and consequently to be cleaner than this first IT. Other guys have also noticed and complained about this different quality of the post-treatment, as I've read in several forums. :rolleyes:

 

Maybe Shapeways would have to let him in the oven for longer to melt out the residual wax completely. smiley215.gif

 

In this context, I remember a passage in Shapeways Magazine (1. Model Prep) with the following interesting tip, which could be a broad hint for all users.  zaunpf.gif&key=a1d4dea3b4ed5a4571413e5b2

 

**TIP** If you notice an excess amount of residual support material or details are distorted, this may call for a reprint. Please send an image and order number to service@shapeways.com. 

 

And then the following thing does not go out of my mind. hmmm.gif

 

This is the BANDELIN video about the ultrasonic cleaning of a chain I posted March 14, where one had cleaned for about 4 h at 70°C until all the wax was dissolved. eek.gif

 

up062005.jpg

 

This longer time we will take into consideration when cleaning the final IT in the Dental Lab next week. up040577.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

To dissolve the wax, you'll need a non-polar hydrocarbon.  Have you tried gasoline or lighter fluid?

 

 Acetone is very polar, as is water.  Polar solvents will need heat to melt the wax and a soap-like additive to suspend the wax that comes off the piece.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello friends,

 

meanwhile, I also got the WSF-Intertank, which gives me a comparison between these two materials. cool.gif

 

vMj8wl.jpg

 

And I have to confess that I'm quite surprised, especially since the details come out well despite the slightly grainy surface. speak_cool.gif

 

jH9eaP.jpg

 

9o0N1H.jpg

 

7WhkN4.jpg

 

txUOGC.jpg

 

And since there is no shrinkage in the WSF material during printing, the IT fits exactly between the two ET parts.  up045518.gif

 

Ey9Rql.jpg

 

jmUXCz.jpg

 

eVQNDt.jpg

 

Of course, the roughness looks blatant on these macro shots, 

 

38iEz4.jpg

 

oZFVPJ.jpg

 

but already with some distance from the normal viewing perspective, it looks much friendlier up045518.gif

 

AAsoTH.jpg

 

And if the IT will be painted, he should also fit optically well to the other two ET parts, which additionally shall get their insulating foam look. top.gif

 

lB6QCe.jpg

 

Since WSF printing uses powdered plastic and no support wax, the parts have only a slight powdery residue that can be removed by slight rinsing off in dish water, as Bill (niart17) has reported for his 1/72 WSF-Intertank

In this context, it would be interesting if Bill could tell us, what kind of primer coat and paint he did use for his WSF-IT. hmmm.gif

 

Because WSF is porous and sucks up a lot of moisture, one should let dry the parts for several days, before one applies a primer.  

 

But all in all it means, that cleaning of WSF parts should be less expensive than of FUD parts.  up040577.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Manfred,  

 

For the WSF parts a high build or scratch filler primer works great to fill in some of the texture.  I started doing this on a WSF car body to smooth it out.  On the IT it won't be easy to sand all the primer smooth with all the small grooves but the IT will look OK with some texture.  Considering all the problems you are having with cleaning off the wax and the fit issue the WSF IT may be a better option.  

 

Mike. 

 

 

Edited by crowe-t
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Mike, :worship:

 

I'm still thinking too, but I hope I will get a grip on the cleaning of my final FUD-IT in the Dental lab. up040577.gif

 

Then I will paint both variants and can compare them. 

 

Michael Key highly recommended a spray called Mr. Surfacer for the WSF-IT , which is available in 500, 1000, and 1500. hmmm.gif

 

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B002DTL7NU/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=

[IMG]

 

Do you know this stuff? smiley215.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Manfred,

 

The WSF might be the way to go. As you know, the ET is not smooth. It has a foam texture. So maybe the WSF intertank, once you have it covered in filler primer and all the final coats of paint, might be perfect. No need for the FUD to be smooth and wax-free then. Plus, WSF is cheaper! I'll be watching to see what you end up going with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Manfred,  

 

I haven't used Mr. Surfacer but it seems to be a filler primer which will work.  A filler primer goes on a bit thicker to fill minor imperfections and scratches.  I used Duplicolor Filler primer on the car body but it doesn't matter what brand is used.  The Mr. Surfacer will do the same thing.

 

Mike. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2018 at 3:28 AM, Hotdog said:

Manfred,

 

The WSF might be the way to go. As you know, the ET is not smooth. It has a foam texture. So maybe the WSF intertank, once you have it covered in filler primer and all the final coats of paint, might be perfect. No need for the FUD to be smooth and wax-free then. Plus, WSF is cheaper! I'll be watching to see what you end up going with.

 

Hi Brian,

 

yep, the WSF-IT surprisingly looks really awesome. speak_cool.gif

 

But I do not give up the ghost and I hope to get a grip on the FUD-IT still and give it a new chance, when I can use again the better possibilities of the Dental laboratory. up045518.gif

 

Meanwhile, I talked to a BANDELIN expert who gave me valuable tips on ultrasonic cleaning conditions I never heard before and might be the key to success. up040577.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2018 at 5:14 AM, crowe-t said:

Manfred,  

 

I haven't used Mr. Surfacer but it seems to be a filler primer which will work.  A filler primer goes on a bit thicker to fill minor imperfections and scratches.  I used Duplicolor Filler primer on the car body but it doesn't matter what brand is used.  The Mr. Surfacer will do the same thing.

 

Mike. 

 

Thanks Mike, 

 

I will try both variants and then choose the best. up040577.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everybody,

 

before I go into detail about with the final FUD-IT, here are both IT variants one more time in comparison.  cool.gif

 

up063112.jpg

 

up062995.jpg

 

In preparation for the cleaning campaign in the Dental Lab I have again scrutinized the FUD-IT under my new magnifying glass spiegel-smilies-0002.gif and taken macro shots all-around, in order to be able to better control the critical points on site, whether or how far the wax residuals have been removed.  up045518.gif 

 

up063113.jpg

 

As I have already described, the last of the three FUD-ITs has the fewest wax residuals, once more confirming the different quality of the Shapeways aftertreatment. smiley_worship.gif

 

In the circled areas one can see clusters of wax residuals in the grooves, rolleyes.gif

 

up063114.jpg

 

which are visible more or less well due to the low FUD contrast.  up047089.gif

 

up063115.jpg

 

up063116.jpg

 

up063117.jpg

 

up063118.jpg

 

up063119.jpg

 

up063120.jpg

 

up063121.jpg

 

And after a full circumnavigation of the IT, I'm back at the starting point at the two Fairings

 

up063122.jpg

 

wherewith I want to let it go at that for today. up040577.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Manfred. Sorry man, I totally missed the question you'd posted about the primer I used. Actually on the intertank for my build I didn't use a primer at all since I was painting the tank with the multitone texture paint. It pretty much acted like a primer before I painted the tank with Citadel Vomit brown (which I think they renamed the color to something else now) I don't know if that will help in your case since you're in a smaller scale and may not want ot use the heavier texture paint. I guess trial and error may be in order.

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hallo Bill,

 

on these images one can see your not painted WSF Intertank, sitting between the other two ET parts, which are painted with the Texture Spray.

 

uINhNI.jpg

 

up043092.jpg

 

And here the whole ET is painted with the orange paint, and the IT does not look like that it's primed before with the Texture Spray. But maybe that's wrong too.

 

up043093.jpg

 

So again my question of how you primed your WSF Intertank before you painted the whole ET with Citadel Vomit brown. up040577.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

ahhh...yes I was mistaken. I did not prime the intertank at all. The nose cone and lower tank was sprayed with the texture paint and then the whole thing was painted the brown color. Hope that helps.

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Bill, :worship:

 

I already suspected that, so the IT is not primed with the Texture Spray. In a Shapeways tutorial I also found  the same, that no primer is necessary.

 

Therefore, but again a question about the painting of the ET with the brown/orange color.

 

Since I suspect that you have not just airbrushed only one layer, how many layers have you applied and how long have you dried it in between? :hmmm:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Manfred, I'm sorry I don't recall specific times or number of coats, I just sprayed until it looked right to me. I'm sure it took at least 3 coats on the unprimed inter tank. Wish I could give you more but I have a hard time remembering what color socks I wore yesterday.  😁

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everybody,

 

in preparation for the decisive cleaning of the last FUD-IT in the Dental lab, I have dealt more intensively with the matter and looked around further. cool.gif

 

In the already shown BANDELIN Video of the ultrasonic cleaning of the chain the intensive cleaner TICKOPUR R 60 (10%) was used for approx. 2 - 3 h at 70 °C.

 

In a corresponding product information of the DR. H. STAMM GmbH I found this information, which made me unsure referring to the cleaning time, as they are much shorter.

 

Application with ultrasound 
Dosage: 2 - 20 %
Cleaning time: 1 - 10 min. 
Temperature: 20 - 80 °C

 

Application without ultrasound
Dosage: 10 - 30 % 
Cleaning time: up to 12 h
Temperature: 20 - 80 °C

 

Therefore I have contacted BANDELIN and received the following answer from the DR. H. STAMM GmbH (Plant Manager Stephan Herzberg), what amazed me at first. rolleyes.gif

 

The cleaning time in removing the support material is a special application, which deviates considerably from the usual vleaning times, which are recommended in the product information, but have been determined by tests and have already been used successfully by several customers.

A soapy water will probably not bring the desired cleaning result even with prolonged time, which you can of course test.

We recommend the use of TICKOPUR R 60 with the application parameters given in the video.

 

Thereupon I contacted the manager and first learned that the DR. H. STAMM GmbH historically belongs to the corporate group BANDELIN and cleaning and disinfection preparations for SONOREX Ultrasound Technology developed and produced.

 

Then he willingly gave me information to my questions about the application parameters given in the video , as well as special advice for cleaning my Intertank.  speak_cool.gif

 

Since the strongest ultrasound effect in the trough occurs from below, the IT should not be upright during the cleaning because of the grooves, but lying longitudinally in a glass insert, and by stepwise rotation about the longitudinal axis after about 15 minutes in TICKOPUR Bath at 70 ° C cleaned and checked in between.  up045518.gif

 

For the best cavitation performance, the glass insert should have a distance from the bottom of the tank of approx. 2 - 3 cm and, because of the connection itself, also be surrounded by water + cleaning agent, otherwise losses would occur. 

 

Considering the filigree grooves of the Intertanks he thinks that longer cleaning times of about 2 - 3 h might be necessary, which is why checks after shorter intervals would make sense. huh.gif

 

Now all I have to do is wait for the ordered TICKOPUR, and then I will go back to the Dental lab for the Final Countdown.  up040577.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Manfred,

 

Have you tried using sand paper in the grooves to remove the wax or tried scraping it out?  The WSF IT may still be the better option if you can't figure out a good way to clean the wax.

 

Mike.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mike,

 

yep, I've tried scraping it out off the Stringer valleys with the steel ruler, cool.gif

 

up062698.jpg

 

but thereby it can happen that you break through the valley, as it happened here at the IT which I have cleaned with oven spray. eek.gif

 

1ibWl6.jpg

 

But I think I'll manage it with the final IT at my next trip to the Dental Lab if I follow the instructions of the BANDELIN expert. up045518.gif

 

Otherwise I'll take the WSF Intertank, which fortunately has no support wax, as we learned from Bill. up040577.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello friends,

 

due to some short vacation in the Dental lab the Ultrasonic cleaning of the FUD-Intertank will take some time, I've thought again about the further building process and came to the following decision. cool.gif

 

Since I've been working intensively on the External Tank/Intertank lately, it actually makes sense to keep going and completing it as the basic building block for the Shuttle Stack, i.e. including the related details such as LO2 Feedline, GO2/GH2Press. Lines, the Ice/Frost Ramps and PAL Ramps, as well as the Orbiter Attachments

 

This includes then also the imitation of the Instafoam insulation structure of the front and rear ET parts by the special "Flour technique" as well as the final priming and paintwork.  top.gif

 

Then it will continue with the SRBs and the Orbiter, which finally complete the Shuttle stack.  up045518.gif 

 

Only then will I proceed to the construction of the Launch Tower (FSS/RSS), whereby the complete stack MLP will be available for control, in particular when it will depend on every millimeter for increasing the tower to the needed height. hmmm.gif

 

Furthermore I decided for not to let be modeled the Ice/Frost Ramps as a 3D set, but rather to use the filigree ramps from the already presented Newware Kit (NW131)speak_cool.gif which one can not do better actually, which is why I have now bought myself this kit, which I would like to introduce here again briefly in some images.

 

fMyYyA.jpg

 

These are predominantly resin parts

 

5FXx2R.jpg

 

as well as a PE sheet with finest details for the ET and the SRBs as well as for the orbiter, incl. some Decals.

 

BGW98g.jpg

 

Although the kit is designed specifically for the Revell Shuttle Stack (1/144), some parts can also be used for the Airfix Stack, so such as here among others the fine structured SRB Forward Frustum & Nose Cone, if I measured correctly. top.gif 

 

Below are some of the tiny Ice/Frost Ramps and one of the filigree SSME engine nozzles.

 

i38QKE.jpg

 

Here is the PE sheet once again. 

 

YpDVu5.jpg

 

For the engine nozzles, I actually wanted to use the kit from RealSpace Models, which I had set aside already long time ago and now could compare to the Newware nozzles.  cool.gif

 

RBw0KL.jpg

 

It immediately stands out that the RealSpace SSMEs look more squat and seem to be slightly larger than those of Newware.  rolleyes.gif

 

llcGBd.jpg

 

And once we're comparing already, I also added the nozzles of Revell (left) and those of Airfix (grey), from which you can now choose what you like better ... up035091.gif  

 

1i8cNh.jpg

 

For my taste, then the SSMEs of Revell and Airfix quickly discards, whereby this begs immediately the question of the dimensions in comparison to the original. smiley215.gif

 

I have only found these SSME dimensions by Pratt & Whitney:

 

Lenght: 168 in. = 4,30 m = 29,9 mm (1/144)
Diameter: 96 in. = Ø 2,40 m = Ø 16,7 mm (1/144)

 

Unfortunately this is only the total length of the SSME, but not the length of the engine nozzle.  rolleyes.gif

 

Maybe someone can help. up040577.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on drawings and photos in the book(s) by Dennis Jenkins the Realspace parts look to be overly bell shaped (too much curvature at top) where the Newware parts might be too slim?  Hard to tell without a better side view. 

 

Jenkin’s book lists dimensions as 7.8 ft (93.6”) diameter and total height as 13.9 ft (166.8”).  Scaling dimensions from that drawing I would say the height of the bell is ~100” at the point where the heat shield intersects the bell. In 1/144 that would make the bell diameter 0.65” (16.5 mm) and bell height 0.7” (17.8 mm). Scaling from the same drawing the outer diameter of the bell at the top (at heat shield) would be ~45” or 0.31” (7.9 mm) in 1/144. 

 

edit: found the same drawing on someone else’s website:

 

SSME.gif

 

Edited by habu2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Manfred,  I can't wait to see the stack come together.  The Real Space SSME's are a bit oversized but once installed/painted and the whole stack is together they'll look fine.  I used them on my Revell shuttle stack.  I actually like how they look, being slightly larger than they should be.

 

The Newware SSME's are more accurate looking.  Maybe not 100% accurate but are more accurate.  I do believe the openings of the Airfix SSME's are somewhat accurately sized and they look about the same size as the openings of the Newware SSME's.  With the stack in the upright position the SSME's won't be seen too much.  

 

Mike.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2018 at 3:59 PM, K2Pete said:

It'll be so-o-o nice to see you building again!   :popcorn:

 

And my vote goes to the New Ware SSME nozzle.

Pete

 

Thanks Pete,

 

I can fully understand, that you want to see action ... up037311.gif

 

As matters stand I would also prefer Newware's nozzles. up040577.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...