Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

Hey Joe, you're a hell of a guy, eek.gif

 

these overwhelming shots are coming like a bolt out of the blue, gewitter.gif wherefore I need to explain it briefly. 8)

 

After Joe was modeling the Track shows so awesome, I had asked him if he could also still model these Main sprockets, of which I need 16 pieces, which Shapeways should then print in FUD.

 

2014-2223.jpg?itok=bZz5UCIt
Source: NASA
 

Therefore I had sent him this drawing, with which he started some days ago. :clap2:

 

WJwknQ.jpg

Source: microartwork.com (Mischa Klement)

 

Initially, he had only used the front view of the drawing  and apparently had some problems with the implementation in his CAD program (Solidworks), especially with the dimension 33,6''.

 

But then I've pointed him to the side view, which shows that this is the measure at the lowest point of the lower curve of the wheel, what he probably did not notice. 

 

Q2vcCi.jpg

 

 

And with that he seemed to get along, as his following pictures show.

 

45289058141_4682659583_b.jpg

 

44566579584_094d77808d_b.jpg

 

 

44566580884_015c99d79b_b.jpg

 

44566579514_faf6ac6a59_b.jpg

 

As it looks the modeling seems to be pretty tricky,  but he'll get it done, I'm pretty sure, so let's keep fingers crossed! JC_doubleup.gif

I can only watch again and be amazed, the new shots look so cool, thanks Joe ... 00003423.gif

 

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Thanks for your kind words, :worship:

 

you're right, this is really a great collaboration between us, and Joe is a fantastic and helpful designer, as I said, a hell of a guy. smiley250.gif

 

But I think, that not much is missing now to make a suitable 3D printing set out of it. And that's why I've thought about the most favorable arrangement/orientation for printing and think that the sprockets could be arranged flat in a set consisting of two rows of nine wheels, whereby I would have two spare wheels. smiley215.gif

 

Now I'm curious to see what will come out in the end and what such a Set of 18 in FUD will cost.  up040577.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys!  : )    Manfred, don't celebrate just yet  : )  We still don't know if it will mesh well with the track shoes : (   Maybe I should upload just one first and you can test with the tracks?

Edited by crackerjazz
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's right, Joe, caution is definitely wise.  :worship: 

 

Therefore one condition schould be guaranteed,  W2 must fit into W1, so W1 should be larger then W2, but that would fit, right? :hmmm:

 

7vYYUH.jpg

Source: microartwork.com (Mischa Klement)

 

But I fully agree with you, it's better to first print only one sprocket, maybe in FUD and FXD, afterwards we can decide about the final Set of 18top.gif

 

Therefore lay the sprocket flat, because I think that this should be the best print orientation for less support wax residuals, okay? up040577.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Karl for your nice words and especially for your staying power and stay tuned. :worship:

Although I have the goal clearly in mind, the way is still far ... up040577.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everyone,

 

meanwhile my friend Joe was hardworking and has already uploaded his Main Sprocket model. cool.gif

 

710x528_25216025_13732650_1539812796.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

 

I was a bit scared when I looked at the 3D view and saw that the sprocket is hollow, which was completely new to me, analintruder.gif

 

ThoHpP.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

 

especially since the sprockets of other crawler modelers in the Raumcon forum are full and not hollow, which I had in mind. shocked.gif

 

up064180.jpeg
Source: raumfahrer.net (Sascha1990)

 

fvcluk.jpg
Source: raumfahrer.net (slimgo)

 

Therefore, I was very skeptical at first and have immediately searched for suitable photos to clarify this. But in my archives I did not find anything at first, because on the normal crawler pictures you can not really see the drive wheels under the chains. rolleyes.gif

 

In this photo, I found the first signs of cavities, if one looks closely.  cant-believe-my-eyes-smiley-emoticon.gif

 

lGsSwX.jpg
Source: forum.nasaspaceflight.com (AnalogMan)

 

But in the NASASpaceflight-Forum there is a special Crawler-Transporter thread about the modification of the CT-2 for the mighty launchers of the future Space Launch System (SLS) of NASA, in which I then have indeed found clear evidences.  up045518.gif

 

cIps7j.jpg
Source: forum.nasaspaceflight.com (MechTech)

 

Here to see beautiful in the falling sunlight.  

 

Nfvj3U.jpg
Source: forum.nasaspaceflight.com (sprtnsky)

 

And here's a Hi-Res look into a drive wheel or through it out, which would also eliminate the last doubts. top.gif 

 

 

1uEJNI.jpg
Source: forum.nasaspaceflight.com (MechTech)

 

And so I ordered two sprockets at Shapeways, both in FUD and in FXD in order to be able to test their interaction with the Track shoes.   up040577.gif
 

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

crackerjazz's ability to research the heck out of his renderings is remarkable!

He's really demonstrating his amazing 3D skills and satisfying your quite high standards, Manfred!

 

And your ability to find these obscure reference photos ... WOW ... both of you are quite a TEAM!

This is such a treat to watch your journey ... even after 82 pages!  :yahoo:

Thanx!

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Pete for your impressive hymn of praise for both of us, :worship: our cooperation and the results are nothing to sneeze at.

 

And the best part is that we all have lots of fun together and can always inspire each other. :yahoo:

 

Therefore, look forward to more exciting chapters ... up040577.gif

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi friends,

 

now I also got the corresponding screenshot with the Support Material showing the expected arrangement. cool.gif

 

Zmzz8k.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

 

The big lot of support wax would also explain the relatively high price of the Sprocket, half as much wax would certainly have been enough too, I guess ... default_hmmm.gif 

 

Therefore I also asked my friend Joe, also to upload a model with an upright print orientation of the sprocket. I think that this would require less support material, so the price might be slightly lower. top.gif

 

The side effect thereby is, that the top side should be smooth and the bottom rough, which in turn is important for cleaning.  up040577.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everyone,

 

we were just getting happy together and then Shapeways comes with the next unwelcome surprise and has stated that they can not print the Main Sprocketyikes.gif

 

Supposedly they have informed the designer about the problems with the part, but which is a smooth Fake Newsup043952.gif

 

So slowly I start to doubt this club, I can't think of anything more ... :hmmm:
 

The strange thing is that the shape of the Sprocket is less complex than that of the Track shoes, and the wall thicknesses are all according to specs, as Joe says. smiley215.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi friends,

 

after I was first informed on my astonished enquiry that my already well-known SW friend Mitchell Jetten from the Track shoes story would answer me, now came this joke message ... Awesome!!! erschrocken3.gif

 

oF0JR9.jpg

 

This reinforces my impression of SW, that's an case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand's doing ... i5684_no2.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey thanks guys!   Hi Manfred, I've uploaded the upright-printed one to Shapeways.   Was wondering, remember that time when Shapeways said the track shoes weren't printable and you did some magic trick to make them print it?    How'd you do that exactly -- maybe you can do the same?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Joe for uploading the  upright-standing Sprocket:worship:

 

710x528_25289846_13758355_1540035088.jpg

 

which I have just ordered in FUD and FXD8)

 

And this is the distribution of the Support Material which looks a bit bizarre. :woot.gif:

 

45446294601_d7756cd944_b.jpg

 

And then I tried the same trick from the Track shoe story again and bravely ordered once again the sprocket in flat printing orientation, which now, strangely enough, is only offered in FXD:hmmm:

 

Now I'm curious how this story will continue ... up040577.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everyone,

 

but I have at least achieved a partial success, because the upright standing Sprocket variant, which I ordered in FUD and FXD, went through Processing and is meanwhile In Production. yahoo.gif

 

xtnI2K.jpg
Source: shapeways.com

 

The again ordered flat lying variant, however, is still under review (Processing), but still not rejected at least. smiley215.gif

 

No matter how, at least that would prove that the Sprocket is printable, and so I have an argument in hand to demand the printing of the flat version as well. top.gif

 

So far there is also still no explanation why this variant could not be printed at the first attempt. So SW is somehow in a tight spot, let's see how it goes out ... up040577.gif 
 

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everybody,

 

this is the reason for SW's rejection what my friend Joe will check now. rolleyes.gif

 

rejection?orderId=2671214&fileName=ol551
Source: shapeways.com (Mitchell Jetten)

 

That's strange, because that is the same model as used for the upright standing sprocket, which is in production. Why can this be produced and the flat lying sprocket not?  hmmm.gif

That is a contradiction, which SW should explain, whereupon I am curious. up040577.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello friends,

 

here is the answer of "my" SW-Service Team employee Mitchell Jetten:

 

It looks like these 2 orders are checked by 2 different people.
One of them didn't mind the 0,21 mm thickness while the other engineer did catch it and rejected the model for this reason: 

?name=inline-935794967.png
Source: shapeways.com (Mitchell Jetten)

 

So right now the order 2672981 is being produced! These are the two standing variants (FUD & FXD).

 

As all models are subject by manual checking, if a part does't meet the minimum required the 0,3 mm thickness, there are chances it gets rejected 😞
Would you be able to ask the designer to increase the thickness to 0,3 mm to make sure these are not being rejected again?

 

There you look!!! This is the same nonsense as at the Track shoes dispute. smiley_worship.gif

 

I just wanted to answer him that this change would mean quite an effort for the designer, and that it would be easier if SW internally would enforce that this flat variant is to be printed since it is based on the same 3D model as the current upright standing variant which is just in production. rolleyes.gif

 

Only well, that for the umpteenth time I've checked the processing status of the newly ordered (previously rejected) flat version, because lo and behold, suddenly this sprocket is now also In Production ... 00000016.gif

 

zviKRa.jpg
Source: shapeways.com

 

What does that tell us? One has to go only long enough on the SW-species' nerves to the motto Steady drops hollow the stone, then it works already ... speak_cool.gif

Now I can sit back and wait until both variants are there to inspect the wax residuals ...  smiley271.gif

And then we can decide from which variant my friend Joe should upload a Set of 16. up040577.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everybody

 

today, the Main Sprockets have arrived, which should not be printable at first and were rejected by Shapeways because of too small wall thicknesses (< 0,3 mm) were.  cool.gif

 

When looking at the photos, one has to take into account that FUD/FXD prints do not provide much contrast when unpainted, which makes it difficult to see details. rolleyes.gif

 

In the following pictures I have to differentiate between the upright and the flat print orientation, which I wanted to test with regard to the supporting wax problem.

 

Here one can see the sprockets in FUD (left) and FXD (right), printed in upright standing orientation, whereby one can see the clearer details of the FXD Sprocket. top.gif

 

NuTFXA.jpg

 

hVhl4r.jpg

 

And now still the FXD Sprocket (left) in flat print orientation comes in addition, in the middle the FUD Sprocket (upright print orientation).

 

iVcJjD.jpg

 

In this picture below the two FXD Sprockets lay side by side, on the left the flat and on the right the upright print orientation. But I have to say, I can not see any differences in the surface roughness between the two variants, which could have been due to the different support wax arrangement. huh.gif

 

E53JM2.jpg

 

And here once again the FXD Sprocket (upright orientation) in mounting position,

 

HQNu2k.jpg

 

as well as on four Track shoes that go well together, which I had hoped for.

 

iXlJN0.jpg

 

WH15qu.jpg

 

XhNIxt.jpg

 

As matters stand I will probably decide for a Set of 16 (FXD) with flat print orientation, which my friend Joe could have to model now. top.gif

 

From close up, it looks pretty big and clear on those macro shots. But with a little more distance (about 30 cm), the chain is clearly shrinking already,  cant-believe-my-eyes-smiley-emoticon.gif

 

A1RAYV.jpg

 

so that I could probably live well with FUD Sprockets.  up040577.gif 
Therefore, we first wait for the Set of 16 model and then continue. Maybe in the end SW will throw again their arms in the air ... smiley_worship.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello friends,

 

in the forum NASASpaceflight.com a friend has remarked critically that the chains have to go around the sprocket about 110°, which one would not be judged by the sprocket I've shown so far with only four shoes, wherewith he is certainly right first.  up047089.gif

 

At first, my only concern was to check that the Sprocket wreath (1,75 mm) would fit into the Pin Lug gap (W1 > W2). 

 

Here's an original photo, where one can see that the Pin Lugs of six Track shoes are in direct both-sided contact with the Sprocket, which corresponds to an angle of about 150°. up045518.gif

 

7CwKoi.jpg
Source: NASA

 

I checked it out and connected eight shoes and put them around the drive wheel. cool.gif

 

Xinlk0.jpg

 

And as one can see, these eight shoes are in direct contact with the sprocket, which normally does not happen, as the first photo shows.

 

oJ6DzK.jpg

 

Therefore, this criterion of the accuracy of fit of the chain is also fulfilled. Anything else would have surprised me too, considering the great Hi-Res drawings and Joe's fantastic 3D skills. up040577.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everybody,

 

and now back to the Main Sprockets, for which my friend Joe (crackerjazz) has meanwhile also modeled two variants of a Set of 16bow.gifbow.gifbow.gif

 

Here is the set with the flat arrangement of the wheels, although the set is upright standing in the picture, rolleyes.gif

 

44981905244_697b8319d4_b.jpg
Source: arcforums.com (crackerjazz)

 

45706702361_ac1d984cf2_b.jpg

 

and here the set with upright standing wheels.

 

31836562208_9e26e89b40_b.jpg

 

30768129567_6c36530d87_b.jpg

 

I mean, he should upload the Flat arrangement, but whereby Joe has to be careful to select and save also the Flat print orientation! schlaumeier.gif 

 

Hopefully there is no Déjà vu experience with Shapeways ... up040577.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everyone,

 

my friend Joe has uploaded the two Sprocket Sets of 16 faster than expected and also sent me the screenshots of the related Support Material. cool.gif

 

Here is the support wax arrangement at the Flat set variant,

 

44811399995_34148f2a42_h.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

 

and here at the Upright variant

 

44811399355_449b1382c5_b.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

 

And here one can find both sets at Shapeways. up045518.gif

 

evdXNu.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

 

BVS888.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

 

I have now ordered the Set of 16-Flat Ori (FXD), and I'm curious if SW will print it without any trouble, what I expect, or if they will pull themself up again at the wall thicknesses (< 0,3 mm). up040577.gif

Edited by spaceman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everybody,

 

my expectations of SW have been met, the Main Sprocket Set of 16-Flat Ori (FXD) was already let pass without hesitation and is In Production, speak_cool.gif wherewith also my 3D print projects would have been finished for now. yahoo.gif
Why not immediately so! up040577.gif

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...