Jump to content

28 Sqn AVRO 504K double trouble


Recommended Posts

 

On 3/27/2022 at 2:40 PM, TheBaron said:

There has to be a German compound noun for that gradual process of realizing that a photograph/drawing contains a series of unforeseen consequences that only become apparent  by the addition of a third dimension.

 

I think that can be simplified to dummkopf  

 

21 hours ago, Fritag said:

Noted…….

 

check 

 

11 hours ago, perdu said:

We can wait, and bask...

 

your wait is over mon frère

 

I managed to grab some time on the laptop while the cement was drying and as luck would have it, things turned out a bit better than originally anticipated.  That isn't saying that things were easy - just not as complicated as first thought. It's all relative.

THings aren't made any easier by the discrepancies in the drawings.  Once I found out that the cross sections weren't to the same scale as the rest of the drawing I had to figure out a way around that.  It wasn't hard to figure, just a pita to carry out.  things weren't helped by the drawing not having the plan view and the side view directly above one or the other.   

I could get the height of the fuselage at each section, but not the width - for those I had to go with the plan view.  I took the distance between each section  and then had to transfer those section locations to the plan view and then from there I could get the width at each section.  Lots of interpolation guesswork going on here

I believe the phrase is functional, but not pretty. 

Screenshot-2022-03-27-175400.jpg

 

There were also some discrepancies between the plan and the side view.  For example, the rearmost part of the spine as shown here in the side view dimensions out at 20.44mm and some change. In the plan view it was 17mm or so.  Who's guess is it anyway?

 

Screenshot-2022-03-27-103110.jpg

 

Onwards and upwards.

 

I found some great shots at the National Air Force Museum although you have to scroll through the shots one by one to get to what you need - which was this great shot which was crucial in determining how a lot of the fuselage went together, and therefore how the overall shape progressed from tail to nose. Note the ply sheeting directly at the tail and the ply sheeting just behind the cockpit opening. Those surfaces need to be smooth, but with "ribbing" in between. This shot also explained how the rudder was fixed which was almost impossible to tell from other photos I have.

 

Screenshot-2022-03-28-3-07-46-PM.png

 

All I had to do was replicate that smooth to ribbed transition and back again. Due to the complex cross sections throughout the fuselage I knew I had to use lofted surfaces. Lofts can be incredible useful - they can also be incredibly annoying when things don't go quite right. As luck would have it, this was the easy part. Almost.

The drawing does not show a cross section directly at the point where the ply sheet ends, so using a combination of plan and side view I figured out where the "section" lay in relation to the tail end and created a new plane at that point.  Using the same two views I calculated the height and the width and created a new section at the transition point.  Did I mention that lofts were finicky? 

When lofting between two sketches if the number of segments are not the same on each sketch, things can go a bit awry.  Note the sketch on the far right here is made up of two vertical lines joined by a single horizontal line at the bottom, and connected at the top by a single arc... except the two "vertical" lines are actually three distinct lines aligned vertically.  Make sense?  

The reason for doing that is that as the fuselage progresses forward, the sides start to bow out into a weird octagonal  shape with an arc replacing one of the sides. If the tail section didn't have the same number of segments as the sketch forward of it, the control points would not know where to go - the control points are shown connected by those yellowish lines below.

 

Screenshot-2022-03-28-115612.jpg

 

ANyhoos, that gave a fuselage section with a nice smooth curvature along the spine. So far so good.  Now to transition to the ribbed section.

I created another sketch on the same plane that the previous section terminated on.  This time to create that smooth-to-rib transition I created a duplicate of the previous sketch but this time broke the arc into 5 distinct segments. On each progressive sketch forward, I replaced those arced segments by straight lines. One of the benefits of doing things this way is that I can constrain the entities on the new sketch to the entities on the underlying sketch ensuring they are identical in all respects with the exception of the new sketch having a segmented arc. 

 

 

Screenshot-2022-03-27-104529.jpg

 

At the front end I did something similar but in reverse - the sketch at the extreme left below has 5 distinct arc segments while the sketch immediately to the right of it has 5 straight lines forming the turtle back.  Since all the sketch here have the same number of control points/segments, lofting along them was easy.

 

Screenshot-2022-03-27-104638.jpg

 

All that resulted in this.  Although it's hard to tell from a screenshot like this, that spine does transition from a smooth curve to 5 ribbed sections, back to a smooth curve again - I double checked by creating multiple sections along the length.

 

Screenshot-2022-03-27-104738.jpg

 

Another loft along a few sections up to the problem point.  Things are still going smoothly.

 

Screenshot-2022-03-27-105338.jpg

 

In case you were wondering, if you view directly on the nose (or tail) it looks like this

 

Screenshot-2022-03-27-103754.jpg

ah... the problem point.  My apologies but I forgot to take a screenshot, but the real challenging area is where the fabric skin meets the metal cowling at the front as shown here.  Once again we go from ribs to a nice smooth curvature.

The problem lies in that angled join and the fact that it has three distinct sections with a small step in there to boot.  Damn. With this configuration there is no way to create a single plane which would allow a loft to form between the fuselage and the engine cowling.

 

d14.JPG

 

This needs a different approach.  Lets approach it from another angle, or to be more precise - form the other end. The front end.

I ignored the angular joint for this exercise and once again interpolating dimensions from newly created sections I formed a loft of just the engine cowling, ensuring I left a small gap between this and the fuselage.

 

Screenshot-2022-03-28-165434.jpg

 

I then created an extruded cut through the cowling to end up with the angular section join. 

 

Screenshot-2022-03-28-165407.jpg

 

So far it all appears to be working - now I just have to fill in the gaps between the engine cowling and the fuselage.

Step one - create a new sketch on the front end of the fuselage which corresponds to the small section on the lower end of the engine cowling.

 

Screenshot-2022-03-27-113208.jpg

 

That small section was lofted then I repeated the exercise for the vertical sections at the top. Now we just have that missing section in the middle to fill out.

 

Screenshot-2022-03-28-115720.jpg

 

That was a lot easier said than done.  The stubborn part of me refused to create another sketch on that angled surface and just use the surface alone.  It would have been a lot simpler just to create the sketch and be done with it, but sometimes you just can't beat stupid.  Eventually however... it was done

 

Screenshot-2022-03-28-165512.jpg

 

There is a slight mismatch in that upper loft at the forward end, but it's in the region of 0.0003mm so I'm not going to sweat over it right now as it will be covered by taped seams later. (it's still annoying me though so I'll probably attack it when I get a chance... maybe)

 

A few cuts later - one revolved cut to provide a nice secure mount for the front cowl and engine, and another extruded cut to provide that curved undercut from the firewall back into the fuselage.

 

Screenshot-2022-03-28-165549.jpg

 

Looking at that shot, there may be some tweaks needed to ensure the fuselage to engine cowling join is a smooth transition, but the hardest part has been done. Those tweaks, if needed,  should be minor.   Until I print something this is all supposition.

 

With the main body of the fuselage complete I could now shell out the body. I chose a wall thickness of 1.2 mm - mainly because any other thickness seemed to blow up the model or fail.  More tweaking required probably, but this will work for now.

 

Screenshot-2022-03-28-165644.jpg

 

Looking down inside

Screenshot-2022-03-28-165707.jpg

 

and a section view.  

 

Screenshot-2022-03-28-165735.jpg

 

I know I said I wasn't going to do it until I had printed off a fuselage or two but I couldn't resist adding some detail, in this case the cowling access panels.

To make things easy I chose to sketch the panel on the center plane, then simply extruded the sketch to offset from surface with a distance of 0.2mm and chose the cowling as the target surface.  Choosing the offset to surface option forces the extruded surface to maintain that 0.2mm distance - which means it is forced to conform to the same curvature as the cowling. (by default it always seems to offset to the inside - which is why I have selected "Reverse offset" in the dialog).  Note how I left that block shape in the interior - that is going to serve a purpose later.

 

Screenshot-2022-03-28-115828.jpg

 

A few more greebles were added and then I mirrored the panel and fixings and I now have a continuous block across the interior of the nose.  Why?   With a bit of tweaking that block is going to provide a nice secure mounting platform for the engine when I get around to creating it 

 

Screenshot-2022-03-28-115919.jpg

In between frustrations I started working on the engine cowl. From the photos I have scoured there appears to be several versions of this cowl (as well as those access panels I just modeled) so I'm choosing modelers licence.

This is just the groundwork as I haven't put any thought as to how it's going to be fitted later.

 

Screenshot-2022-03-28-165855.jpg

 

Throw them altogether and what have we got?

 

Screenshot-2022-03-28-165918.jpg

 

A top view and I'm beginning to think things are finally getting there.  No doubt there will be some rework, but overall at this stage I'm quite happy with how it's going.

 

Screenshot-2022-03-28-170002.jpg

 

 

oh, nearly forgot the skid - again, a work in progress

 

Screenshot-2022-03-28-124612.jpg

 

 

I think I'll aim for running a print this coming weekend - if I can get all the other real life stuff out of the way first that is.

 

Screenshot-2022-03-28-170203.jpg

 

 

and that folks, was most of my Sunday.  and a bit of lunchtime today.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 11
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s fascinating to me how what you’re doing is such great modelling, in such a generationally advanced mode.  Absolutely fascinating. However, the downside (for me at least) is every time you post one of these master class lessons on digital modelling I lose any slight confidence I might have developed in being able to some day do similar.  That last statement must not be taken to mean I want you to stop, on the contrary I’ll live my best digital modelling life vicariously through your posts instead.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blistering pace Alan!  Very much looking forward to seeing this emerge from the vat, despite its glaring inaccuracy:

10 hours ago, hendie said:

There is a slight mismatch in that upper loft at the forward end, but it's in the region of 0.0003mm

Biplane cognoscenti already referring to this as Quantum of Avro....

 

You make the production of raised detail look effortless when I know from experience the mental exertion required to translate observation into shape via appropriate techniques:

10 hours ago, hendie said:

This is just the groundwork as I haven't put any thought as to how it's going to be fitted later.

 

Screenshot-2022-03-28-165855.jpg

Just superb.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hang on, I can't find the gobsmacked emoticon..........?

 

Amazing and very informative update Alan. A bit of a tutorial for me actually.

 

11 hours ago, hendie said:

lofting along them was easy.

 

There you go Steve @Fritag, past training in lofting techniques should help there no doubt?

 

Terry

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, hendie said:

There is a slight mismatch in that upper loft at the forward end, but it's in the region of 0.0003mm so I'm not going to sweat over it right now as it will be covered by taped seams later. (it's still annoying me though so I'll probably attack it when I get a chance... maybe)

 

1 hour ago, TheBaron said:

Biplane cognoscenti already referring to this as Quantum of Avro....


…which translates to a real-world error of 0.55 thou, a tolerance I would be mightily impressed with were Avro building to it back in the day.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/28/2022 at 10:31 PM, hendie said:

and that folks, was most of my Sunday.  and a bit of lunchtime today.

 

And I call that working at light speed.  Or least warpfactorsnot.  Brilliant update.  It’s taken me multiple readings to extract full value from it :D

 

On 3/29/2022 at 9:01 AM, TheBaron said:

You make the production of raised detail look effortless

 

Don’t he just.  Hendie Accelerated Raised Details or HARD.  Which is a sort of ironic acronym given he makes it look EASY.

 

On 3/28/2022 at 10:31 PM, hendie said:

I could now shell out the body. I chose a wall thickness of 1.2 mm - mainly because any other thickness seemed to blow up the model or fail. 

 

Fusion absolutely refused to shell the body of my coaming whatever thickness I tried; and notwithstanding that it’s an incomparably simpler shape than the 504 fuselage.  It wouldn’t thicken a surface inwards either (would do so outwards - which weren’t much good to me).  In the end I had to create inward offsets on the cross section sketches and use a new loft as a cut.  Dunno why.

 

Hark at me speaking gobbledygook as if it means summat and I know what it means….:blush:

 

On 3/29/2022 at 9:57 AM, Terry1954 said:

There you go Steve @Fritag, past training in lofting techniques should help there no doubt?

 

Mud mover, Terry.  We didn’t go in for much lofting.  Sort of the antithesis of what we did…….

 

Edited by Fritag
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/28/2022 at 6:20 PM, mark.au said:

Absolutely fascinating. However, the downside (for me at least) is every time you post one of these master class lessons on digital modelling I lose any slight confidence I might have developed in being able to some day do similar.

 

I feel that way everytime I read what I've just posted

 

On 3/29/2022 at 1:49 AM, giemme said:

So it's all done now, right Alan? 

 

:frantic:  :frantic:

 

Impressive skills on display :worthy:  :clap:

 

Ciao 

 

you forgot to mention paint this time Giorgio

 

On 3/29/2022 at 4:01 AM, TheBaron said:

You make the production of raised detail look effortless when I know from experience the mental exertion required to translate observation into shape via appropriate techniques:

 

It's a bit like making a digital cake. First you make the sponge (sketches and cross sections). Then cover it with marzipan (lofts), then with fondant (extrudes). Then you get to add the icing (greebles) and the sprinkles (more greebles) and all the glittery bits (assembly).

Actually it's nothing like making a cake but it sounded like a reasonable analogy

 

... until I saw it in print

 

On 3/29/2022 at 4:57 AM, Terry1954 said:

Hang on, I can't find the gobsmacked emoticon..........?

 

Amazing and very informative update Alan. A bit of a tutorial for me actually.

 

 

There you go Steve @Fritag, past training in lofting techniques should help there no doubt?

 

Terry

 

thanks Terry. If anyone's taking notes while reading my posts, at least they should have a good idea of how not to approach something

 

On 3/29/2022 at 5:17 AM, mark.au said:

 


…which translates to a real-world error of 0.55 thou, a tolerance I would be mightily impressed with were Avro building to it back in the day.

 

wouldn't they just pull the string a bit harder to get in back into tolerance?

 

On 3/30/2022 at 8:11 AM, Fritag said:

Hark at me speaking gobbledygook as if it means summat and I know what it means….:blush:

 

 

Mud mover, Terry.  We didn’t go in for much lofting.  Sort of the antithesis of what we did…….

 

 

oh, a year ago that may have been (partly) true but those of us who have been following a certain Hawk thread all know different these days Steve.

 

and a good :rofl2: for the last part

 

On 3/30/2022 at 9:30 AM, Brandy said:

Very impressive, I must say.

I'll be happy when I can get a simple bloody bomb rack to print properly!

 

Ian

 

thanks Ian.  Dunno what you're muttering about - those last ones looked pretty darned good to me.

 

The end of the basement construction is in sight. I got a lot of work done over last week and the weekend so modeling time was limited but I did make some meagre attempt at progress.

White metal parts were cleaned up and drilled out, making them even weaker and more prone to deformation when trying to make them not quite as ugly.  I gave up at this point.

 

P3310001.jpg

 

The seats required some attention too. The one on the right is after some thinning work. The one on the left is too, but not quite as much as the one on the right. Both have since succumbed to a stricter diet and have thinned down to something more appropriate for flight duties.

 

P4010002.jpg

 

Since Giorgio is watching this thread I thought it was about time I did some coloring in to keep him quiet.  Model Master "Wood" on the white metal followed by some umber oils.  MM aged white with slapdash red oxide hidden by masking tape in the fuselage while I attempt to paint the longerons in the fuselage.

 

P4020004.jpg

 

which has since been stripped back to bare plastic since most of it peeled off with the masking tape. And no Alclad to blame this time around either.  It's now been given a good scrub with IPA and I'll have another attempt later.

 

I did get time to play though.  Look! See what arises from yonder gloop - it's my first test print 

 

P4020003.jpg

 

More on that later but first, a tail skid.

I designed this part to accept two brass rods which will lock into the fuselage (in a perfect world) and save me a lot of hassle later.

 

P4020006.jpg

 

I wish my camera was capable of capturing the detail that this printer spits out.  Even with my last Mars I was taken aback at the level of detail everytime I printed something, but the 3 just has the edge on sharpness of detail on those miniscule features.  The original Mars would still have been capable of printing them, just not quite as crisp as the 3.   

 

The auxiliary fuel tank just as impressive and just as much out of focus.  The overscaled mounting legs don't look nearly as overscale in the print as they did on the digital form - another happy outcome.

 

P4020008.jpg

 

Rudder came out fine too.  I think I got the height of the rib tapes about right as they'll become even more subtle after a coat of paint or two.

 

P4020010.jpg

 

I also threw in a test print of the beginnings of an engine while I had space on the build plate.  The cylinder fins appear to be nice and sharp - I just need to make the grooves deeper to make the fins more obvious.

 

P4020012.jpg

 

But how did the fuselage turn out?

 

I'd say so far, so good.  I knew there would be tweaks ahead and this gave me a good insight into what needs done for the next version. 

 

P4020014.jpg

 

While the ribs are definitely there I think I need to make them a tad more pronounced (rear arrows). Another area which requires more attention is the fabric to metal cowling join.  There are some weird angular surfaces going there so I need to alter a few dimensions, and also swap some lines for some arcs and I think that issue will be resolved.

 

P4020015.jpg

 

The detail on the cowl came out really nice but I think I'll make another few tweaks just to make sure I don't lose any detail under my heavy handed coloring in process.

 

P4020016.jpg

 

I was however, very pleased with how the curve-to-ribbed-to-curve transitions turned out on the spine.

 

P4020017.jpg

 

Then a comparison shot between the Blue Max and the Hendified version.  You can clearly see where I need to emphasize the ribbed fuselage sides a bit more, but perhaps not as much as the Blue Max version - more studying of reference shots required before I make a decision there.

 

P4020018.jpg

 

I couldn't resist adding more detail - partly for the fun of it, and partly just to see how far I can push the capabilities of the printer.

Here I've added some reinforced fabric and some lacing.

 

Screenshot-2022-04-03-103327.jpg

 

For those of you who can't resist the urge to create some three dimensional stitching or fabric acing on your biplanes, here's my somewhat laborious method:

Step one was to create a construction line (on the center plane) along the path of the stitching (the middle of three parallel lines below). I then created an offset to that construction line.

I then drew a zig zagged line from the left construction line to the right construction line which automatically constrained the end points to those lines. DImensions were created to fix the first couple of lines, then I used constraints to make sure each / & \ segment were parallel to the previous segment.

Once that operation was complete I added a fillet between each of the zigzag lines.  This screenshot was taken after adding the fillet.  The (now missing) end sections of the lines are still constrained to those construction lines.

 

Screenshot-2022-04-03-103116.jpg

 

I normally only add fillets to a solid and only rarely at the sketch stage, but adding the fillets here saves me a bunch of work later after the line is extruded

 

As always in henderland, as soon as I spent ages doing that I realized that I only needed to draw the first couple of lines and fillet them, then I could just have done a linear array of the lines plus fillet and saved my self a whole bucket load of work. 

All that effort left me with this rather dangerous looking sketch

 

Screenshot-2022-04-03-103135.jpg

 

Which was then miraculously turned into an extruded boss using my almost standard offset to surface option and extruding the line as a thin feature.   I used the metal cowling as the target surface.

Had I not added the fillet at the sketch stage I would now have had to fillet each internal sharp on the zigzagged line with one radius, and the external shape on each and every segment with another radius.  By adding the fillet at the sketch stage and extruding as a thin feature, the software does all the work for me.

 

Screenshot-2022-04-03-103309.jpg

 

Using the offset to surface feature has some drawbacks, namely that it I have to offset the offset to prevent it extruding from the center plane and that's going to leave me some tidying up work to do later to clean up the fuselage interior. 

I may go back and redo the lacing using a split line method instead. 

If that works, I'll try and share that method next time around.

 

 

 

  • Like 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks good. 
 

FWIW I also found getting the transitions from the various angular fuselage sections to the smooth rounded shapes near the cowling one of the trickiest parts of the project. So you are not alone. I would agree that the ribbing on your first print looks a little bit ‘soft’. 
 

Looking really good though! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woooohhhhwwwaaaa. That was a catch up and a half. I wondered where I got the urge to do my latest build from then I read this thread and remembered. Not quite what you have here. In fact quite the opposite. You’ll see. Back to the wonderfulness of this. The prints have turned out really well. Your method is so….. methodical. 🙃 I tend to “just” model stuff. I do utilise lofts but if I can’t get em to work I’ll “just” use brute polygonal force.  For the stitching I would have tried making the shape “ stitches “ and then used a spline deform. Not sure if they do that in fusion? Either way. Colour me impressed.  Glad the Mars 3 is working out for you. Is the lighter bath ok?

 

Take care and thanks for the inspiration.

 

 Johnny.

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Impressive progress, Alan! :clap: The finesse of detail emerging from this printer are indeed outstanding!

 

And it was good to see some paint too, even though you had to strip it back.... :rofl:  :rofl: 

 

Ciao

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, hendie said:

Then a comparison shot between the Blue Max and the Hendified version

 

I feel sort of sorry for the Blue Max……

 

Awesome test prints - straight out of the gloop as ‘twere.  I reckon you’ll find you can use even smaller contact points on the small bits like the tail skid (in particular) and tank where the suction forces will be less.

 

15 hours ago, hendie said:

my almost standard offset to surface option and extruding the line as a thin feature.   I used the metal cowling as the target surface.

 

These screen grabs/explanations/mini-tuturials are superb Alan.  You’re not to stop them without submitting a written request 2 weeks in advance (don’t expect to receive approval to stop….) ;)

 

Did you leave the stitching extrude rectangular in cross section?  or fillet/radius it?

 

Masterful (obvs.)

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazing stuff Alan. I'm connected via mobile for a few days, but when I'm back on my big Mac (no food jokes please) and can run up Fusion, I must have a look in detail at all those extrude and loft (mud moving for @Fritag of course) techniques, used to produce the stitching. That will help no end in getting my head around it fully. A mini tutorial indeed!

 

Terry

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Terry1954 said:

big Mac (no food jokes please)

Don't worry.

Big Mac and food are not connected in any way, shape, or form.

 

Ian

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/04/2022 at 21:02, hendie said:

See what arises from yonder gloop

I’m trying to remember which horror/sci-fi movie that reminds me of…

 

Fantastic work. I assume the tank is filled with tiny elves wearing scuba gear carrying files and sandpaper…

 

Regards,

Adrian

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent work Alan. I do like the look of your 'magic' machine.

 

Colin.

 

PS. I have another Wessex underway in the Falklands War 40th Anniversary GB, this time Humphrey but a speedy build.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 4/4/2022 at 8:11 PM, Bandsaw Steve said:

Looks good. 
 

FWIW I also found getting the transitions from the various angular fuselage sections to the smooth rounded shapes near the cowling one of the trickiest parts of the project. So you are not alone. I would agree that the ribbing on your first print looks a little bit ‘soft’. 
 

Looking really good though! 

 

I've added another 0.1mm to the overall width and will check that on the next print.  I'll need to recheck my reference shots as I have a feeling that it's not as obvious on the 1:!'s as it is on the Blue Max offering

 

On 4/5/2022 at 2:30 AM, The Spadgent said:

Woooohhhhwwwaaaa. That was a catch up and a half. I wondered where I got the urge to do my latest build from then I read this thread and remembered. Not quite what you have here. In fact quite the opposite. You’ll see. Back to the wonderfulness of this. The prints have turned out really well. Your method is so….. methodical. 🙃 I tend to “just” model stuff. I do utilise lofts but if I can’t get em to work I’ll “just” use brute polygonal force.  For the stitching I would have tried making the shape “ stitches “ and then used a spline deform. Not sure if they do that in fusion? Either way. Colour me impressed.  Glad the Mars 3 is working out for you. Is the lighter bath ok?

 

Take care and thanks for the inspiration.

 

 Johnny.

 

 

 

I think Max has a better toolset for many of the visual features (for want of a better term) seen on aircraft like these.  See first photo below - trying to replicate those ripples and folds in the fabric covering is almost impossible to do in a tool like SolidWorks. I'm sure it can be done in SW, but I don't have the skills/knowledge, whereas in Max there are multiple easy to use modifiers that can be thrown at it. I haven't used Max in 20 years now so I'm sure it;s come a long long way since then.

 

On 4/5/2022 at 2:50 AM, giemme said:

Impressive progress, Alan! :clap: The finesse of detail emerging from this printer are indeed outstanding!

 

And it was good to see some paint too, even though you had to strip it back.... :rofl:  :rofl: 

 

Ciao

 

More paint has been spilled Giorgio, but no photos this time around I'm afraid. You'll just have to trust me... I'm a modeler

 

On 4/5/2022 at 7:39 AM, Fritag said:

 

I feel sort of sorry for the Blue Max……

 

Awesome test prints - straight out of the gloop as ‘twere.  I reckon you’ll find you can use even smaller contact points on the small bits like the tail skid (in particular) and tank where the suction forces will be less.

 

 

These screen grabs/explanations/mini-tuturials are superb Alan.  You’re not to stop them without submitting a written request 2 weeks in advance (don’t expect to receive approval to stop….) ;)

 

Did you leave the stitching extrude rectangular in cross section?  or fillet/radius it?

 

Masterful (obvs.)

 

 

 

Ah yes Steve, lots of experimentation lies ahead with the printer. I'l sure you'll be able to give me some good pointers now that you're a black belt gloop Sensei 

 

I did fillet the stitching first time around.  Though at 0.075mm width I'm doubtful if it has any real effect on the finished part.  The key term there was first time around - you can see from the screenshot below that I encountered some issues with the stitching on other areas, notably along that top row seen here.  It would have printed fine and at that scale the flaws would be invisible to the old MkI - but it drove me nuts so I started a new version.

 

Screenshot-2022-04-09-075046.jpg

 

 

On 4/5/2022 at 11:29 AM, Brandy said:

More "food for thought" as usual. I do like that idea for the stitching.

 

Ian

 

I did too Ian.  Until it started fighting back.   Then I used a bigger hammer.

 

On 4/5/2022 at 12:18 PM, Planebuilder62 said:

Dear Hendie

Where did you find your Avro plans?
regards Toby

 

Toby, I found a number of free plans available through a simple google search and Mr Bandsaw of this parish kindly provided a set for me

 

On 4/5/2022 at 12:22 PM, Terry1954 said:

Amazing stuff Alan. I'm connected via mobile for a few days, but when I'm back on my big Mac (no food jokes please) and can run up Fusion, I must have a look in detail at all those extrude and loft (mud moving for @Fritag of course) techniques, used to produce the stitching. That will help no end in getting my head around it fully. A mini tutorial indeed!

 

Terry

 

Thanks Terry. Never hesitate to ask for clarification on anything, or if you need help with something in particular. My helpline is 1-800-CALL-FRITAG  :D

Seriously though, feel free to ask away anytime.  I'm using SolidWorks and I think most functions have an equivalent between the two,  SolidWorks terminology may not translate into Fusionspeak directly so it may take a bit of scrabbling around the menus and toolbars to find things.

 

On 4/5/2022 at 4:45 PM, AdrianMF said:

I’m trying to remember which horror/sci-fi movie that reminds me of…

 

Fantastic work. I assume the tank is filled with tiny elves wearing scuba gear carrying files and sandpaper…

 

Regards,

Adrian

 

:rofl2:

 

 

On 4/6/2022 at 2:03 AM, heloman1 said:

Excellent work Alan. I do like the look of your 'magic' machine.

 

Colin.

 

PS. I have another Wessex underway in the Falklands War 40th Anniversary GB, this time Humphrey but a speedy build.

 

Thanks Colin, I've been over to check things out - mental note to self: check in more often as it's not an area I tend to frequent.

 

Back to 504ery now.    Stickers. Transfers. Decals.  Call them what you will, but whatever they are, they have always provided a challenge to me in my choice of subjects and this time around is no different.  Instead of waiting until it's time to apply said stickers on and finding I don't have 'em I thought I would do a bit of preparatory work here - the work being to ask you lot for help.

Since no mainstream kits exist for the 504 it follows that there the interweb is not overflowing with decal sheets for hendie's chosen subject matter.  Does anyone know if there is an existing decal for that white text between the serial number and the roundel shown here?

 

Screenshot-2022-03-19-9-24-25-PM.png

 

AV ROE & Co Ltd, MANCHESTER in white of course.  It just had to be white... on a dark background. 

 

Screenshot-2022-04-10-8-12-28-AM.png

 

Printscale do a 1/72 decal sheet (PSL72380) for 504's which has this text in black.  I can't find a pic with decent enough resolution to tell if it is also provided in white - does anybody know?   My thinking is that most text in decals is oversized, so I might just get away with a 1/72 scale transfer, particularly if it avoids me having to have custom decals made just for this.  There's also some white text just by the pilots position that I'll need to figure out before long, but I may have something in the stash which can pretend to be that sticker.

 

 

WHat's been going on this week then?  To be honest, most of it has been coming off.  When I hit that issue with the stitching I struggled for a bit.  I tried brute force, then I tried bigger brute force, and even gentle coercion at one point but nothing worked.  The issue arose because I was trying to extrude the stitching across multiple surface types - lofts and extruded surfaces, and SW just didn't want to play nicely.  I kept getting error messages like Failed to extrude due to geometry conditions  ???  It would have been nice if they had informed me of exactly which geometry conditions, but no, of course not.

ANyways, after struggling with that issue for a few hours, I bit the bullet and decided to start another version.  A quick Saveas, delete out all the problem areas back to just the plain lofted fuselage and lets start again.

 

In Version number two, I had extruded the reinforced areas of the fabric - areas where the fabric had been folded over and where the sticking tangs were - then tried to extrude the stitching through that.  Since that didn't work and reversed the approach, this time creating all the stitching and only then creating the thicker fabric areas.

 

Using the (SW) front plane I created a sketch for the thicker fabric.  - I had already created the stitching using the same method as outlined previously and it provide a nice guide for the new sections. 

 

Screenshot-2022-04-09-082319.jpg

 

Then using the Split Line feature I projected that sketch onto the relevant surfaces.  A split line projects a sketch (shown in pinkish lines here) onto a chosen surface and "breaks" the surface into separate sections based on the sketch. This should become clearer in the next few shots.

The nice thing about using the split line feature is that I can project the same sketch onto both part and starboard fuselage sides at the same time.

 

 

Screenshot-2022-04-09-082944.jpg

 

After the split line operation we are left with this. Lines on a fuselage. Nothing more.

 

Screenshot-2022-04-09-083035.jpg

 

However, now that I have created these discrete sections on the fuselage I can now use the Extrude Surface option to thicken those sections - and this time it works without throwing any errors.

 

Screenshot-2022-04-09-083209.jpg

 

A test print will be required to see how this all works together.  Is the stitching way too proud? or not defined enough.  The features are all there (and working) now so after I have the print in my hands, tweaking the heights of features is just a few mouse clicks. 

 

I mentioned in last weeks episode that using the offset from surface provided some challenges in that I had to offset the start of the extrusion.  it sounds complicated and my explanation probably makes it even worse - The stitching sketch was created on the center plane. If I had simply extruded it from there, the zig-zagging solid would have stretch across the inside of the fuselage. I chose to offset the start of the extrusion, but with a fuselage being curved in cross section I had to start the extrusion where all of the stitching was in contact with the fuselage sides.  That means I end up with scraps of stitching inside the skin which I will have to tidy up later.

 

Screenshot-2022-04-09-084848.jpg

Now that I've written that I realize that it would have made not a blind bit of difference if I had started the extrusion from the centerline as I still have a bunch of thread to get rid of anyway. :rage:

 

Other than that, a few small holes were cut through the fuselage for rigging and a few more greebles added. Filler caps on the nose and I also made a start on the leather covering around the cockpit areas - simple lofting, sorry... mud moving. 

 

Screenshot-2022-04-09-131710.jpg

 

As of yesterday we have the fuselage at this stage.  There are a few more greebles to add, but not many.

 

Screenshot-2022-04-10-073552.jpg

 

I'll finish the greebling off over the next week and while doing that, start to think about how I'm going to break this up for assembly.  The Wapiti lent itself to a nice simple split at panel seams but the 504 not so much. Ideally I'd like to build the entire cockpit assemblies outside of the aircraft and slide them in once complete, but that might be challenging to achieve in a play nicely scenario.

 

Work was also started on other bits and bobs. Once of my pet peeves is having to mask tires and hubs for painting so since I have control here, I'm going to do it my way.  The entire masking process is eliminated by making the tire separate and having an inner hub and an outer hub.  Paint them all individually then just stick together when done. Can't be simpler than that can it?   At least until Elegoo release a printer that can print separate colored resins simultaneously.

 

Screenshot-2022-04-03-121031.jpg

 

The wheel is likely to become a little more complicated as after looking at the plans again, it would make sense to have the undercarriage mounting point attached to the inner hub.

 

and now, I hear the renovations calling.

Bye folks...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 9
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, hendie said:

Thanks Terry. Never hesitate to ask for clarification on anything, or if you need help with something in particular. My helpline is 1-800-CALL-FRITAG  :D

 

:rofl2:

 

20 minutes ago, hendie said:

Now that I've written that I realize that it would have made not a blind bit of difference if I had started the extrusion from the centerline as I still have a bunch of thread to get rid of anyway. :rage:

 

:rofl2: :rofl2:

 

22 minutes ago, hendie said:

The entire masking process is eliminated by making the tire separate and having an inner hub and an outer hub.

 

That’s great thinking.  Idea duly noted and stolen….. :D

 

31 minutes ago, hendie said:

Then using the Split Line feature I projected that sketch onto the relevant surfaces

 

I think that in Fusion the project (sketch) to surface option would do similar.  Sounds like it would anyway :D

 

Another brilliant update/masterclass Alan.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Fritag said:

Another brilliant update/masterclass Alan.

You boys are modifying my entire world with this aweinspiring stuff...

 

W O W !

 

Alan have you considered using the silhouette cutter to make masks for the AVRO lettering along the side?

 

Then instead of wondering how to print white decal lettering you can simply mask it off and Sprayaway!

 

If you can find me a version of it you like I will get it rendered off in Inkscape so you can Silhouette it

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the offer Bill.  It's an option I had considered.  I have a cutter - I just need to buy the software to operate it - which I seem to have been putting off for several years now, but seeing Tony's work makes me think I should remove the proverbial digit and get on with it. I just need to clear some bench space to make room for it.

I have a copy of PSP so making the masks won't be a problem - I appreciate the offer though

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...