Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, crackerjazz said:

We might even save more if it were a set of 40 or 50 -- you want to do that?  Or maybe try the 20 first to see if any modifications are required?

 

Do they still have a polygon limit?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Joe,

 

please wait with uploading, because I wanted to make sure that I understood SW right, and therefore have asked the guy once more. And let me know the price of this 40 set in FUD and FXD before. :worship:

 

Maybe the 20 set ist better for handling during unltradonic cleaning, or I have to to devide it.

 

I think that this is the most favorable orientation, which I do not see here in ARC, but only in the email, funny !!! :hmmm:

 

30185906698_2ba94ba64f_b.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Joe,

I did send you a PM with my proposal of the next steps, siehabenpost.gif because the dialogue with SW's Service team is only high speed idle ... smiley_worship.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/13/2018 at 9:20 AM, spaceman said:

And furthermore I did ask, what arrangement of the shoes in the set is more favorable for printing, upright like in Simpson's set (above), or when the shoes would lie flat? hmmm.gif

 

And the answer was:

 

The position doesn't really matter, though it's favorable to keep the parts flat and as close as possible (smaller footprint).
If you keep them flat (rather than stacking on top) it will reduce the amount of wax required to print in Fine Detail Plastic (so less support material sticking to your model),
which seems to me very important ... eek.gif

 

Good morning Joe and Hi folks,

 

Thank goodness! pray.gif 

 

After a week is finally over the confusion about the SW information keep the parts flat, which had confused me and led to the misunderstanding between flat and upright standing Track shoestop.gif

 

The arrangement of the 20-set in Joe's offer is the preferred orientation for FUD/FXD prints with the fewest wax residuals.

 

710x528_24493326_13419734_1534247326.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

 

But as SW did remark, the wall thickness in the picture is only 0.2 mm and needs to be corrected, because the minimum wall thickness for these materials is 0.3 mm. schlaumeier.gif

 

up064516.png

Source: Shapeways (Mitchell Jetten)

But at this statement from SW I can only laugh, if I think of my FUD Intertank  ... muaha.gif

But keep in mind that Shapeways removes the wax.
We ship the models after we have removed the wax and cleaned the model.
The only thing we recommend the customer to do is use a bit of soap before starting to paint since a bit of oil could still be left on the model (used to remove the wax). :whistle:

 

I think I'll have to send SW an image with greetings from the Dental lab ... up040577.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everybody,

 

in the meantime, my friend Joe (crackerjazz) has corrected the wall thickness to 0.3 mm :worship:  and uploaded both a Set of 20

 

710x528_24569974_13454947_1534881940.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

 

and a Set of 40 Track shoestop.gif

 

710x528_24580331_13459575_1534947378.jpg 
Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

 

These sets are very inexpensive, and therefore I ordered immediately the Set of 20 in both FUD and FXD for comparison and I'm curious to see what the Track shoes will look like. up040577.gif

 

BTW, a Set of 100 is not possible. Because the file size is too big Shapeways doesn't accept  the upload. hmmm.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everybody,

 

as a Raumcon friend told me, the maximum file size is 64 MB or 1.000.000 polygons. This friend already has a lot of experience with 3D printing and lets himself print a lot at SW. 

 

BTW, he also has an interesting assessment regarding the wax residuals and thinks that the flat arrangement of the set would be more favorable for cleaning for the following reasons:

 

In the arrangement with upright standing Track shoes, one has indeed less support wax, but in places which are difficult to clean, such as e.g. the grooves on the surface and between the joint parts. In addition, the lower side is touched by the support wax and has a rough surface, while the upper side is not touched by the wax, and therefore is smooth.

 

Therefore, he would take the flat set arrangement, because here the support wax touches almost exclusively the tread, which is smooth and therefore easy to clean.

 

By using Fine Detail Plastic no overhangs can be printed , so everything has to be supported from below with supporting wax.

 

At the flat arrangement of the set, the track shoes lay on their treads, everything above it has no overhang, so it does not need support wax. But if one puts the shoes on their side (upright standing shoes), one needs a support wax on the side that matches the shape of the shoes.

 

In the following image he has marked the areas that are touched by the wax.


GAtb9z.jpg

 

Rose = set with upright standing shoes
Green = flat set arrangement (the entire smooth underside is touched by the wax)
Orange = is touched by the wax in both arrangements

Since I find his point of view comprehensible, I confronted SW once again with it, let's see what they will say this time. up047089.gif

 

From the point of view of the model builder, that would mean that one should choose the flat set arrangementsmiley215.gif

 

That's why I want to see the two Sets of 20 first and judge their quality, then I can make a decision as to which arrangement is more favorable for printing of the remaining shoes. up040577.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Hello everybody,

 

to anticipate it, since a week I try so far in vain to get an information from the Shapeways customer service regarding the image of my Raumcon friend with the support wax, which is sad, but true.  smiley_worship.gif And then, on top of that this sudden price increase for the Track Shoe Sets, up043952.gif which can be seen in  this overview.

 

sEzkth.jpg

 

Right at the beginning I had ordered a Set of 20 both in FUD (5,18 €) as well as in FXD (5,98 €), which I would like to introduce to you soon. cool.gif

 

After that, in consultation with my designer Joe (Crackerjazz) I let him model and upload a Set of 40, which was economically priced and has costed 6,80 € (8/21/18) for FUD

 

The more surprised I was, when it was offered a few days later for almost double the price of 12,68 € (08/25/18), whereupon I have confronted SW with it of course. boese.gif

 

I would not like to comment on the unpleasant chewing gum discussion here, whereupon SW would introduce a new price structure in order to remain competitive with other companies and not to lose any money. Therefore, one would charge a surcharge on smaller offers in order to be able to better compensate for the overall costs. erschrocken3.gif 

 

Supposedly, one would previously inform the shop owner about such price increases, what my friend Joe could not confirm. nono.gif

 

On the other hand, it is just as surprising that the FUD Sets of 40, 52 and 56 with 12,68 € have the same price, what would speak in the end for the Set of 56.  

 

And now to the two sets, which were already eagerly awaited, of which I was pleasantly surprised.  top.gif

 

From the normal observer's perspective, you can not see much more than the actual size, and at first glance, I was rather surprised by the small sets in the SW bags, which is why one has to take a little closer view. huh.gif

 

WmtFPB.jpg

 

On the left side of the pictures one can see the FUD Set, and right next to it the FXD Set.

 

MTWN8d.jpg

 

PGAcBD.jpg

 

pmiJ0k.jpg

 

oOOZpn.jpg

 

As one can see in this picture, the FXD Set (right) seems to be a bit more detailed,  speak_cool.gif at least I imagine it.

 

d5jRKG.jpg

 

What strikes one immediately is the fact that almost all the fine details come out well,  cant-believe-my-eyes-smiley-emoticon.gif both the drillings in the Pin Lugs (Ø 0,5 mm), as well as the fine grooves (0,3 mm) in the slanting upper sides, which for such tiny booties 14,3 mm x 2,5 mm was not necessarily to be expectable.  klasse4.gif?w=510 

 

Even the small slants at the ends of the treads can be seen, only the small holes (Ø 0,2 mm) have apparently fallen by the wayside, but what one can get over. 

 

TNRWHK.jpg

 

First of all, I drilled the holes in the pin lugs with a thin twist drill (Ø 0,45 mm), and cleaned them this way of possible wax residuals, and then threading the shoes on insect pins (Ø 0,3 mm). cool.gif

 

eCTIjh.jpg 

 

9qdSvQ.jpg

 

So for now, the result is extremely pleasing, and in my view one would not necessarily need the FXD Set, especially since the differences at those small parts are really low. 

 

I will now ask our  friend Joe (crackerjazz) to upload the Set of 20 in the proposed Flat set-arrangement to see if or how the price is possibly changing, in order to decide on the final variant. up040577.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those tiny cleats / treads / shoes do look pretty good!

I'm glad you received a set that you did not have to spend time cleaning up, Manfred!

 

And may I ask about your micro drill bits ... the set you showed in a photo look like what I just bought from Amazon, and the bits are all dull. Where did you get your set from and are the bits all very good quality?

 

Thanx Manfred!

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pete, and thanx for looking in again. :worship:

 

Yeah, Joe did a great job with these tiny Track shoes, I'm very happy ... :clap2:But I have to clean it anyway from the wax residuals and will sign up again with the Dental lab guys if I have all the shoes, but that still has time ... :whistle:

 

The micro drill bits I also bought some time ago at Amazon and am actually satisfied. :coolio: What I got was then a DURATOOL box.

But I have also heard that some customers were dissatisfied with the quality, especially when drilling in metal. :angry:

 

Here is a similar offer from Silverline Tools.

 

613ObxxcV4L._SL1000_.jpg

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Joe,

 

Thanks for the flat arrangement of the shoes in the set, :worship: but that's only half the battle. Unfortunately that's not the most favorable orientation of the set for printing, i5684_no2.gif what fairly surprised me, because I explained it to you in my PM and email exactly on the basis of this image. :hmmm:

 

5IYRMl.jpg

Source: shapeways.com (Mitchell Jetten)

 

Because important is not only the flat arrangement of the shoes in the respective set, but in particular the flat orientation of the set, and the designer has to set the 3D printing Orientation for FUD/FXD himself on the 3D Tools page before uploading the 3D-File to make sure that it is printed as well this way. up045518.gif

 

When this is not done, Shapeways will orientate the model at the production department in a way it will be printed most efficient, whatever SW may understand by that ... noidea2.gif

Therefore pressing the red button 'Save Orientation' ist very important before uploading any 3D models. schlaumeier.gif

 

Then the preferred orientation will be used if you set the orientation in the 3D Tools! Once that has been set, it will be used everytime for printing the model you set it on.

Therefore, please select this flat orientation of your new Set of 20 in the 3D Tool and save it once and for all, okay?

 

In the last 14 days I have intensively exchanged with Mitchell Jetten (SW customer sevice) about this problem of the different orientation of the parts during printing. Namely, the support structure (yellow) depends on this orientation in the printing process, which is illustrated by these pictures in every possible orientation of the set.

 

This orientation corresponds to the previous set arrangement with upright standing shoes.

 

?name=inline-1190049679.png 

 

?name=inline-889733047.png

 

In this arrangement with upright standing Track shoes, one has indeed less support wax, but in places which are difficult to clean, such as e.g. the grooves on the surface and between the joint parts. In addition, the lower side is touched by the support wax and has a rough surface, while the upper side is not touched by the wax, and therefore is smooth.

 

Therefore, our 3D expert (Halbtoter) would take the flat set arrangement with sprues, because here the support wax touches almost exclusively the tread, which is smooth and therefore easy to clean (left pic), while the top with the grooves does not come into contact  with the wax. Therefore, the reverse arrangement (right pic) would be conceivably unfavorable. :o

 

?name=inline257520733.png 

 

?name=inline678525854.png

 

And for the sake of completeness, here is the upright arrangement of the shoes, which is also out of the question. i5684_no2.gif

 

?name=inline-222383236.png ?name=inline301194050.png

Source: shapeways.com (Mitchell Jetten)

 

One should note that in theses pics the sprue was removed, so these examples are only applicable when one orders the shoes separately.
On a sprue much more support could be needed once shoes are stacked on top of each other.

 

?name=inline-2074665559.png 

 

?name=inline-101597872.png

Source: shapeways.com (Mitchell Jetten)

 

While the two upper shoes look good, the underlying ones are totally covered in wax as wax must be added on each shoe to support the overlying shoes. But that would mean immense subsequent cleaning effort.eek.gif

 

And Joe's upright set orientation would look similar like this, and therefore, dear Joe, select and save the flat orientationup040577.gif

 

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm..not sure why it shows that way from your end because I've already changed both (render and orientation).  Maybe give it a little while.   They are independent of each other, though:   

 

29571678827_74aeb461a0_c.jpg

 

And, yes, what you see in the orientation page is the orientation I've saved.

 

 

Edited by crackerjazz
Link to post
Share on other sites

Very strange ... :hmmm:

 

Does it mean, that you saved this flat orientation in the 3D Tool,  which is shown in your last image Material Render Pose?

 

vagkLX.jpg

 

But why then your other offers are displayed lying flat on the SW site, and not standing upright like your last set of 20?

 

I have this moment checked the offer, but the 20 Set in the display is still standing, while all the others are lying.

 

Can you quickly contact SW to clarify this?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everybody,

 

in the meantime, we had a difficult and sometimes controversial dialogue with SW regarding the setting of the 3D Printing Orientation, which determines the arrangement of the support material. ::)

 

But because there was going on here something strange, I wanted to get to the bottom of things and wanted to know from Joe, if he has selected a different Print orientation for the last Set of 20 (Flat Ori) than at the first set. smiley215.gif Because there must be a reason why my first two Sets of 20 so far are displayed like all other offers in a flat set arrangement and the last set since then in an upright aarrangement, what I have also asked SW.

 

Then SW's Mitchell Jetten suggested that I could order the last Set of 20 (Flat Ori), then he could see if this orientation was saved, if not, he would cancel the order, which I then have done and told him the order number. huh.gif 

 

And so it came about that he had canceled the order because the designer had allegedly not determined orientation, which is why SW could not guarantee the printing orientation. Strange, right? eek.gif

 

Therefore, I should make sure that the designer sets this orientation step by step and saves it.

 

Of course, Joe was very surprised about that and said that he did that several times, what he could show with several screenshots, so that the confusion was perfect. smiley_worship.gif

 

That's what he did.

 

Open in 3D Tools:

 

29606228717_2d5cfa332f_c.jpg

 

Selection of the material Smooth Fine Detail Plastic (FUD):

 

42735238190_4d2443f18b_c.jpg

 

Set 3D Printing Orientation:

 

29606228687_64f09ff95a_c.jpg

 

Save Orientation:

 

29606228667_f049b806c9_c.jpg

 

42735237940_55a0fc9eab_c.jpg
Source: arcforums.com (crackerjazz)

 

After Joe had informed SW about it, Mitchell Jetten then backed down verlegen.gif and said that I could now order the Set of 20 (Flat Ori)

The fact, that in contrast to the offer still the flat lying set is displayed, would be apparently a system bug, as SW had to admit. And this awkward revelation after three weeks controversial discussion, unbelievable  ...  erschrocken3.gif  

Since Joe had convinced me , I finally ordered this set, top.gif even though its upright position made me doubt. undecided.gif

 

710x528_24758811_13525578_1536240465.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

 

Since I still had lack of clarity about the expected wax residuals of the set, I asked Joe to send me a Screenshot of the location of the Support Material color], which can be displayed in the 3D Tool, as indicated by our expert Half-Dead. huh.gif

 

Joe did that as well, and this screenshot provided the final clarity and at the same time proof that he had actually saved the flat orientation before the upload.  speak_cool.gif

 

42745187580_dba46fa5f6_b.jpg 

 

And that is exactly the desired support wax arrangement, which facilitates the final ultrasonic cleaning. up045518.gif 

 

Then I asked Joe to upload the Set of 52 also with the flat orientation, what he has done in the meantime, as these pictures show. cool.gif

 

44506575882_599f8556c6_c.jpg

 

Surprisingly, this 52 Flat Ori-Set in the SW shop is also displayed in an upright position, as the Set of 20, up047089.gif which does not bother me anymore. 

 

625x465_24796836_13541235_1536432104.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

 

It would be interesting now to see the support structure of the first two Sets of 20 with the upright standing shoes, 

 

710x528_24569974_13454947_1534881940.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

 

whereby I suspected that this should look something like this.

 

up064832.png
Source: shapeways.com (Mitchell Jetten)

 

And as this picture shows, I once again had the right nose. top.gif

 

44567348761_af9ec753b2_b.jpg

 

Thereby the annoying problem with the supporting wax would be now also clarified, and if the ordered 20 Flat Ori-Set looks good, then I can order eight of these 52 Flat Ori-Sets, and with a total of 476 Track Shoes then I would have more than enough for the Crawler.  up040577.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello friends,

 

but now the confusion gets totally crazy, eek.gif because I just received the message from SW that the Set of 52 - Flat Ori would not be printable. I want to spare you the bla-bla-bla explanation because it is bland and trivial. default_expl.gif  

 

Unfortunately, we are unable to manufacture Crawler Track-1-160-scale-Set of 20-Flat Ori.

 

710x528_24758811_13525578_1536240465.jpg

 

I should contact the designer and discuss with him what to do next. rolleyes.gif

 

While the previous Set of 20 has disappeared from the online store, there is now a Set of 20-Flat Ori but only in FXD for 6,39 €, whereas the previous set with upright shoes did cost  6,02 €.

 

710x528_24758812_13525578_1536240444.jpg

 

In this offer, both the set and the shoes are lying flat.

 

Strange in this context is that SW had pointed out in the meantime that the Set of 52 - Flat Ori would be printable only in FUD, but not in FXD,

 

43646740055_50e527fc9f_c.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

 

what I did not care, because I wanted everything in FUD anyway.

 

710x528_24796836_13541235_1536432104.jpg

 

Now Joe has just told me that SW has informed him that the set would not be printable because the walls would be less than 0.3mm, but what should not be true,  boese.gif which proves his inspection once again. 

 

42784511660_397be450d8_b.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

 

This can not be the true reason, because SW has printed the previous two sets with 0,3 mm wall thickness, after it had been changed in advance from 0,2 to 0,3 mm. rolleyes.gif

 

One could almost think, as if they want to sell us for stupid, so that is slowly becoming a nightmare ... default_expl.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Manfred I got an email from Shapeways that this is the real issue...

 

29669115517_5fd0105cd3_b.jpg[/url]

 

...which is this area:

 

43888357674_5fd0105cd3_b.jpg

 

29669115737_489166a351_b.jpg

 

The strange thing is that they've already printed this out for you successfully.   The only difference being the orientation of the shoes on the sprue.

 

Stacked (printable):

 

710x528_24569974_13454947_1534881940.jpg

 

 

 

Flat (not printable):

 

710x528_24758812_13525578_1536240444.jpg

 

 

Now, I'm assuming the only way they can print these (for any set -- whether stacked or flat)  is for the set to be lying on the table, and not standing on end.   So maybe for that 0.152mm wall -- the reason they were able to print it is because it's orientation on the table is such that that section is on its side, so adding material is no issue.      On the other hand, for the 2nd set (flat) above, the  0.152mm wall will be lying flat and adding a 0.152mm layer won't work.     So I'm thinking the "stacked" version is the only one that is printable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just started reading through the last parts of this thread and wanted to give a little unsolicited input about them printing things and then coming back later and marking them unprintable. I've had that happen more and more lately, and some have been on parts that have printed dozens of times. It seems that they sub-out some of their printing tasks (or at least that's what I was told) and some printers are more cautious about printing close to limits than others. I've even had some where they said it would print but couldn't be cleaned without breaking and I've told them that area that was breaking was just a sprue and didn't matter. As a matter of fact was preferred if it did break. BUT they still would not print. Just mention that only because I don't think they will print the part that failed regardless of the orientation. I could be wrong, and would be thrilled if I am. But I suspect they won't do anything until the model is fixed to be thicker in that area. Just my 2 cents. 

 

GREAT modeling cad work BTW. Very impressive.

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, crackerjazz said:

Hi Manfred I got an email from Shapeways that this is the real issue...

 

29669115517_5fd0105cd3_b.jpg[/url]

 

...which is this area:

 

43888357674_5fd0105cd3_b.jpg

 

29669115737_489166a351_b.jpg

 

The strange thing is that they've already printed this out for you successfully.   The only difference being the orientation of the shoes on the sprue.

 

Stacked (printable):

 

710x528_24569974_13454947_1534881940.jpg

 

 

 

Flat (not printable):

 

710x528_24758812_13525578_1536240444.jpg

 

 

Now, I'm assuming the only way they can print these (for any set -- whether stacked or flat)  is for the set to be lying on the table, and not standing on end.   So maybe for that 0.152mm wall -- the reason they were able to print it is because it's orientation on the table is such that that section is on its side, so adding material is no issue.      On the other hand, for the 2nd set (flat) above, the  0.152mm wall will be lying flat and adding a 0.152mm layer won't work.     So I'm thinking the "stacked" version is the only one that is printable.

 

Hi Joe,

maybe you're right, but whether SW will see it that way, is uncertain, they say it today this way, and tomorrow that way ... smiley_worship.gif

It's almost like gamble, or trial and error ... hmmm.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Bill for your stepping in at this point, :worship: whereupon I had been waiting for it by now a longer time, if you'll have a look at my post from August 14,

 

because you are for me the ARC expert in 3D printing, like my friend Half-Dead (Halbtoter) in our German Raumcon forum, which gave the impetus to this discussion with this modified SW (Mitchell Jetten) picture, posted August 25. 

 

GAtb9z.jpg

 

Rose = set with upright standing shoes
Green = flat set arrangement (the entire smooth underside is touched by the wax)
Orange = is touched by the wax in both arrangements

 

I suppose you can agree with Half-Dead's reasoning when he says:

 

In the arrangement with upright standing Track shoes, one has indeed less support wax, but in places which are difficult to clean, such as e.g. the grooves on the surface and between the joint parts. In addition, the lower side is touched by the support wax and has a rough surface, while the upper side is not touched by the wax, and therefore is smooth.

Therefore, I would take the flat set arrangement, because here the support wax touches almost exclusively the tread, which is smooth and therefore easy to clean.

 

By using Fine Detail Plastic no overhangs can be printed, so everything has to be supported from below with supporting wax.

 

At the flat arrangement of the set, the track shoes lay on their treads, everything above it has no overhang, so it does not need support wax. But if one puts the shoes on their side (upright standing shoes), one needs a support wax on the side that matches the shape of the shoes.

 

That was also the ulterior motive of my considerations with regard to the necessary ultrasonic cleaning. smiley215.gif

 

But there is still another possibility that you have already referred in 2014 in your thread Parts for 1/144 Scale Space Shuttles.

 

That's the SW feature Print It Anywayup045518.gif which the designer can use to see how it will come out. Maybe we still should try this ...

 

What experience did you get with it? hmmm.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everybody,

but now hold your hat! Hard to believe but wonders will never cease! erschrocken3.gif

Somehow, this idiotic rejection of the upright standing set with flat-lying shoes did not convince me and therefore did bother me. i5684_no2.gif

And as befits a real Challenger, I went on the offensive and ordered the 52 Flat Ori-Set - Come hell or high water, yikes.gif

 

625x465_24796836_13541235_1536432104.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

 

and chased then curious the course of the order. smiley215.gif

And even though I had already expected the same rejection, my order at SW went against expectation through their process chain Processing, Pre-Production and was then actually In Production, I thought, I do not see right. cant-believe-my-eyes-smiley-emoticon.gif

And today I got the mail Shipped!, which has blown me away. erschrocken2.gif  I have actually outsmarted them, unbelievable ...1-13768.gif

Now I'm curious what the set looks like, at which the shoes with the treads did lay on the support wax. up040577.gif 

 

44506575882_599f8556c6_c.jpg

Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

Edited by spaceman
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...