Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    United Kingdom

Recent Profile Visitors

305 profile views

Parker's Achievements


Newbie (1/9)



  1. Thanks for that but I’ve been advised not to use the RR logos unless I have permission. It’s a shame but not the end of the world.
  2. Time for another update; I’ve been scratching my head quite a lot recently at how I can make the alloy wheel pattern by hand. That is to say, hand operated machines. The second of the two mini projects I’m doing (the first being the theoretical key for FAB1 on the first page of this thread) is to make a pattern of the alloy wheel. The main emphasis with this project is to investigate the pros and cons of using different fabrication techniques. The wheel being is made using 4 different methods; FDM 3D printing (the common layered up melted plastic from a reel of filament technique) SLA 3D printing (a higher detailed method using a liquid resin cured by UV laser at a much finer layer thickness than FDM printing) CNC milled on a 3 axis cnc mill (a more precise method but limited in detail due to cutter size) Traditionally hand made (as in made by hand operated machines and tools, no automated processes involved at all, including jigs etc) The first two are more of less a matter of producing a CAD file 3D model of the wheel then processing it through the various pieces of software for each of the 3D printers. The CNC mill is a similar process, but requires more thought and effort into the setting up of the machine, especially with choice of cutter and direction of cut. Although the CNC mill software has preset feed and speed rates, the operator can change these, or simply overclock the machine to increase all settings together. The 3D printers by comparison are simply a mater of loading a build plate and pressing print. Although easier to get going, the 3D printers can’t be sped up so you’re at the mercy of “it’ll take as long as it takes”. The 4th wheel, made by hand operated machines is a complete different ballgame. Material selection, tooling, speeds and feeds, depths of cut, set up, calibration and order of processes are all things for the operator to consider. There’s also the major aspect of experience and skill set giving the ability to work at greater speed. But there is also the pitfall of human error, and ways of rectifying mistakes if they occur. There’s tacit skills involved where once accustomed to conventional hand operated machines, the operator will have an understanding of how different materials ‘work’ and behave, and how different tooling will enable faster cutting times. This knowledge, in the form of raw data of feed and speed rates can then be directly transferred to cnc machines. Likewise, an operator who starts their learning curve on cnc equipment will be able to take note of the preset feed and speed rates of a machine and transfer them into the operation of hand operated equipment. However, an operator progressing from cnc to hand operated machines will only have the knowledge of preset settings on possibly a limited number of different materials, and in some cases only a particular type of tooling. Skills and experience aside, the task of making a complex form such as the alloy wheel is a relatively complex process itself. The wheel pattern is to be made from 10 pieces; the outer rim, turned from aluminium and 9 ‘spokes’ cast in resin. The 9 resin spokes are cast from a separate pattern which is documented here. First a block of modelboard is marked out with a circle slightly bigger than required and the outline rough cut on a bandsaw. The centre is drilled to 8mm dia so the piece can be mounted on an M8 threaded bar mandrel held in the chuck of a centre lathe. The piece is then turned down to the required outside diameter and faced off as much as the mandrel will allow. The details of the back face of the wheel are now turned into the piece. At this stage I made an error in the profile. Namely I wound the handle on the cross slide and not the toolpost slide, sending the tool straight into the piece instead across it at an angle. A liberal application of cag saves the day and gives fresh material to have another go at. After a second attempt things are looking much better. Note that the bore for the bearing the wheel will mount on hasn’t been turned in at this stage. The piece is now cut off from the excess using a bandsaw. After having the excess bandsawn off, the rough face left from the bandsaw is faced off. All this time the toolpost is kept set at the angle of 66 degrees. Any machining on the X or Y axis are done using the cross slide and main carriage handles. The piece is now held on the hub area of the wheel, on the back face. The biggest issue here is having enough grip to securely hold the piece but not too much to damage the material, which is substantially softer than aluminium. Another consideration is the torque created when turning large diameters held by considerably small ones. The angled face of the front side of the wheel can now be turned in, taking great care to cut very light passes so as to not create too much torque which could pull the piece loose from the chuck. Because the angled face on both sides of the wheel needs to be the same, the toolpost (set at 66 degrees) has had to stay set where it is. Once this face is done the toolpost will be free to be set back at 0 again. A test fit on the aluminium rim shows things are a little tight. A cut of 0.2mm off the outside edge reduces the piece’s outer diameter just enough for a nice fit into the rim. Now the bore for the recess in which the wheel’s bearing will sit can be turned in. A large slot drill set in the tailstock gets things started before the bore is opened up with a boring tool in the toolpost. Then disaster strikes again. Just as I finish the boring stage, the piece comes free from the chuck. Even a rapid action of an emergency stop doesn’t save the wobbling piece hitting the boring tool, taking gouge out of the angled face. Another application of cag before returning it saves the job once more. Et voilà! A finished wheel pattern.... ish. Now an exact 40 degree slice needs to be cut from this wheel. Before I do that, I’ll take a mould off this so that if any mistakes occur I can quickly cast a replacement out, Saving me the job of returning the whole lot from scratch. Next stage, moulding, casting and milling on a rotary table! more soon..... everyone can follow along here and on the facebook group here; https://m.facebook.com/groups/373568053080542
  3. Thank you guys. I can understand about the possibility of using any scale which suits the physical size of it. From what I can make out, and what I've experienced over the years is the range of 'set' scales for different subject matter. For instance in automotive models 1:76, 43, 36, 32, 24, 18, 12, 8, 4, 2 seem popular. Sure, you could choose anything, 1:36.75 scale but it's rather obscure. The biggest advantage over using one of the more popular scales is the ability to display along side other models and have a direct comparison possible. It's a form of standardisation really isn't it? I took on board what you both said and had a think last night. 1:12 is a good size and would result in a model about 525mm long, 170mm wide. My fear with 1:12 is physical space available inside the model for working features such as lighting etc. The use of real materials like wood veneers could be difficult. But being smaller makes it easier to display and cheaper to build. 1:10 is out as it's not hugely popular. 1:8 is a common scale, most publications such as the Eaglemoss DB5 and the DMC12 are both 1:8, making large impressive models. At this scale the model would be about 300mm wide and 790mm long. The large size makes details easy to achieve, allows the use of real materials and give more space inside for the extras. It will be more expensive in build materials and possibly more problematic to produce due to the maximum capacities of the machines parts will be made on. Displaying the model will obviously require more room. I think though that for 'Ultimate Collectors Edition' status though it does need to be physically impossing. 1:8 it is then.
  4. Bit of an update; The deadline for project proposal is looming ever closer and there's been some developments since I last posted. Not surprisingly Rolls-Royce haven't given permission for the use of their logos. It's not been a no, more a lack of response, but it's not looking promising. I started to try and address the matter of audience and while the notion of a theoretical new concept for FAB 1 sounded interesting, there isn't really a market for it. Who would buy or commission such a model? Not many people. Instead I've decided to make a model of FAB 1 from the latest TV show 'Thunderbirds Are Go'. The car won't be a Rolls-Royce, but that opens up the avenue of a new brand or using the IR logo on the car in the show, which hopefully won't be as problematic. The matter of audience is also sorted; An 'Ultimate Collectors Edition' type model for the serious enthusiast. But I've now got the matter of scale to consider. The original plan was 1:8, it's a popular scale and used by several part works publications and professional automotive model makers. But it's also huge, and the model will be expensive to build. It would be easier to achieve fine details at this scale though. Theres also 1:12, again a popular scale used by Kyosho for instance amongst others. Smaller and cheaper to build, but some fine details might not be physically possible at this size. An in between scale of 1:10 is feasible but not a hugely popular scale for automotive models as far as I'm aware. So the question is; What scale would you go for and why?
  5. Cheers, hopefully if the whole idea gets approval they'll be some progress to see soon.
  6. Not entirely sure how to take that.... guess it's a compliment? without starting a 'heated' debate can you expand a bit on that? Opinions are great but without specifics there's not much I can gain from it. im assuming you're meaning the views on BMW's ownership of Rolls-Royce are (in your opinion) nonsense, and hopefully not my work? Fingers crossed eh lol
  7. Am I right in assuming that the Bentleys are using engineering from VW that is derived from the kit bought up in the purchase of Rolls-Royce Motor Cars?
  8. Makes confusing reading, just read the wiki page on RR. Think it's a tad unfair to describe the Phantom as a 7 series in a bodykit, but I see your point. Funny to think the die hard thunderbirds fans would only see FAB 1 as a Rolls-Royce when the traditionalist Rolls-Royce fans wouldn't consider the latest Rolls-Royce as a 'real' Rolls-Royce at all....
  9. That's actually quite an interesting comment. I've researched Roll-Royce and how it prides itself on, from their point of view, the best in car manufacture. It's interesting how a manufacturer's image is changed when it's bought by what could be considered a 'foreign power'. Both Aston Martin and Jaguar, along with Landrover were once Ford owned, and being taken over by the Americans is still considered a tainted part of the companies history. Some would argue though that even if it were a 'bad thing', it was a necessary evil; without Ford's investment, Aston Martin in particular might have disappeared altogether. You could argue the same for Rolls-Royce; without BMW buying the firm and investing could it have ceased trading as well? But it's interesting to see how when a company is still based in the UK, with a product made and designed by a British workforce, and marketed and sold as one of the finest British products, suddenly becomes German because it's bought by a German parent company. It'd be quite interesting to find out how many BMW parts end up in the latest model of Phantom. It's no secret that car manufacturers share parts, especially ancillary items and switchgear. There's a clip on YouTube of a guy demonstrating how his Aston Martin vantage is built from parts from Volvo, Ford and BMW. But Rolls-Royce doing the same? As for FAB 1 being another make of car, now that's a very tricky. You could argue that there's many makes out there that fit the bill for a limo for Lady P. Primarily the focus would be British marques to mirror the quintessential character of Lady P. Rolls-Royce, Bentley, Aston Martin, Lagonda, Jaguar, hell maybe even a wildcard of Morgan. Outside Britain you can look at Maybach, Mercedes, Cadillac....... Chrysler. Not only was the 2004 Thunderbirds film awful from a cinematic viewpoint, the choice of Chrysler for FAB 1 was absolutely slated. Brand association is a very strong bond to break. There was hell to pay when James Bond drove a BMW, and applause when the Aston returned. For some, Lady P has always and should only be seen in a pink, 6 wheeled Rolls-Royce.
  10. Well I've hit a slight brick wall today. It's been 2 weeks and no response from RR, so I've been advised that without permission to use the iconic RR badge and spirit of ecstasy, I should prepare a 'plan B'. It's a shame in a way as the RR brand is an obvious recognisable indicator of a luxury product. On the flip side though it might be fun to create a parody..... Ideas anyone?
  11. Thanks chillidragon. On one side of things I don't want to spam up the forum, but equally I happy to share the progress and answer questions etc. Everyone's feedback along the way is very welcome so hopefully people won't be too shy and get involved. Never too old to learn and more than willing to take people's ideas on board.
  • Create New...