|
Post by lightning on Oct 13, 2016 23:27:35 GMT -9
The homestead process made my Star Wars love flare up. With the new movie coming up I have decided to start working on a U-Wing transporter. This is a first prototype rendering of the geometry I have figured out so far. In the proper scale for 28-30mm minis it will NOT be a small model
|
|
|
Post by lightning on Oct 15, 2016 5:14:17 GMT -9
I wanted to see if I can make the model with moveable wings. To achieve that I needed to figure out how the parts would have to be to allow for this. So in theory I have worked this out in this schematic sketch of the core structure. The blue is the central part, constraining the movement of the wings. The wings are orange (closed) and red (open) where the white tube show the rotational point. The top and bottom grey are the part holding it all together. Not sure if this will work, but now I have a plan to test
|
|
|
Post by lightning on Oct 15, 2016 23:42:08 GMT -9
Today I started to work on a prototype of the engine. This is a first and very rough try. The seams of the parts look bad, I know, but during this build I already got so many ideas on how to improve it :-) Still I like the way it looks, the size, the promise of more to come!
|
|
|
Post by alloydog on Oct 16, 2016 0:58:46 GMT -9
Just out of interest (having never actually designed a paper model like that myself), but why use flat faces? Why not use tubes and cones?
|
|
|
Post by lightning on Oct 16, 2016 4:20:50 GMT -9
Good question :-) I guess one reason is old habits. The other is that for prototyping this is faster. At least for me. Once I am happy with the design approach I can up the resolution to make it full circle.
But I also just like this look. For example a dome like in the homestead I can only do at a "lower resolution", else the "fingers" in the unfold will be too many and the build starts to get messy. If you print it without the fold lines it still looks almost round and not flat faced. So it's also a matter of staying in this style.
Maybe I will make both versions. Which one would you guys like better? Is the flat faced version not to the public taste? I have no idea what the majority would prefer ...
|
|
|
Post by Punkrabbitt on Oct 16, 2016 8:42:27 GMT -9
Today I started to work on a prototype of the engine. This is a first and very rough try. The seams of the parts look bad, I know, but during this build I already got so many ideas on how to improve it :-) Still I like the way it looks, the size, the promise of more to come! Ermahgerd! We can build POD RACERS out of that thing!
|
|
|
Post by Vermin King on Oct 16, 2016 15:42:25 GMT -9
|
|
|
Post by lightning on Oct 17, 2016 5:09:23 GMT -9
For the rotating wings? No, that would be too weak. The wings will probably have to be a couple of mm thick. Have not started the wings test yet ...
|
|
|
Post by Vermin King on Oct 17, 2016 6:23:39 GMT -9
Gotcha. Your best bet may be to just use a dowel
|
|
|
Post by lightning on Oct 17, 2016 10:38:38 GMT -9
Gotcha. Your best bet may be to just use a dowel I am hoping to make a paper version of a dowel. Am a little bit of a purist Today I had another go at the engines. I have included an inner support structure to make the part more durable and improved the assembly process of the outside hull. The tubes and cones now fit seamlessly. One thing I need to figure out is how much smaller the inner parts have to be so that this does not happen. I have assumed with the rather thin paper (160gsm) it would be no problem, but I have been proven wrong. Obviously the small differences add up too much if I use the same dimensions for outside and inside parts. Does anyone have experience with this? I Would rather calculate the different measurements needed. But maybe just trial and error is easier ...
|
|
|
Post by Vermin King on Oct 17, 2016 10:49:43 GMT -9
Paper thickness has to be considered, but not knowing what thickness the end-user is going to use makes it difficult. When I do inner/outer parts, I usually reduce the inner to 99% of the outer part's size. But that may or may not work. The hard part here is that the inner part is formed first. If the outer part is done first (which I would have to give some thought to build order to know if it is even possible), the inner part can be trimmed if there is excess. With inner being first, you don't have that luxury
|
|
|
Post by lightning on Oct 18, 2016 4:24:12 GMT -9
OK one thing could be a paper recommendation. Another would be a inner structure that could be fine adjusted by the end-user. For now I'll try the 99% approach :-)
|
|
|
Post by Vermin King on Oct 18, 2016 4:30:57 GMT -9
I've seen this used on aircraft models with moving wings. You can make an axle 'plug'. Basically a very thick disk, by mounting a circular disk on thicker cardboard, cut it out and put another disk on the opposite face. Most of the modelers that I have seen doing this will use super glue on the edge and then sand it smooth to allow easier rotation.
The plug axle needs to be a little thicker than the part that revolves around it
|
|
|
Post by squirmydad on Oct 21, 2016 8:41:08 GMT -9
As a rough guide I use an offset of .7mm to compensate for paper layers, so 1.4mm for two layers of paper affecting a parts dimensions. It gives me a good starting point at least.
|
|
|
Post by lightning on Oct 21, 2016 11:10:59 GMT -9
Will be refocusing on the transporter this weekend and going to try that. Thx!
|
|
|
Post by lightning on Nov 23, 2016 7:11:13 GMT -9
A coupe of update images for the U-Wing. I decided to make simpler version for now. Want to have it all finished before the movie is starting. So it will be a closed wing/landing position model for version 1.0 New simpler unfold is coming together nicley (with some test texturing via marker) The underside ... Also got an easy version of the engine build. This is a 15mm build and the previous one was too advanced for this size. The current version is using a core structure onto which you skin tubes. Here you see the core with the main tube already on. The aft tube is waiting for assembly. Today I textured the engines and started building them. Got two now. So the next step is texturing the main hull!
|
|
|
Post by lightning on Nov 24, 2016 8:13:25 GMT -9
Working on the top side of the hull. Adding the front and back parts but not 100% happy yet. Also the simplified guns are maybe too simple. Need to take a step back and let the solution come to me
|
|
|
Post by Vermin King on Nov 24, 2016 14:58:11 GMT -9
I'm not sure what the guns look like in the movie, but I would think hex tubes would look better
|
|
|
Post by lightning on Nov 24, 2016 22:10:15 GMT -9
I wanted to do a very easy version with the gun shapes just printed on it. But I think I will do that another way and add something as you suggested. So both absolute beginners and a little advanced have something they like.
|
|
|
Post by lightning on Nov 26, 2016 12:02:19 GMT -9
The pure paper solution for the guns is a - not hex- but triangle tube (hex was too much for the small size) with a paper band wrapped around the end. Or, if you don't care about paper purity, but more about stability you can also use a toothpick! I also decoupled the grey "front grill" block from the simple top half. It's just easier to build this way. So now I got everything finished (top and bottom hull) except some add on landing gear for standing position. TOP BOTTOM The end is coming into sight
|
|
|
Post by hackbarth on Nov 26, 2016 16:38:40 GMT -9
Use magnets for joints. It never wears out or tears the paper. This seems the perfect use case.
|
|
|
Post by lightning on Nov 27, 2016 1:25:16 GMT -9
Use magnets for joints. It never wears out or tears the paper. This seems the perfect use case. You mean for the rotating wing version?
|
|
|
Post by hackbarth on Nov 27, 2016 10:21:20 GMT -9
|
|
|
Post by lightning on Nov 27, 2016 23:04:30 GMT -9
Thanks for the info. When I do a moving version I will look into that. I usually try to make a pure paper version but it's always great to offer other options. This version will be non moveable wings though :-)
The challenge is not only just the moving of the wings but that when they are in open position there is not much holding them horizontal. Due to their length and weight they drop down. I would have to extend them towards the inside to get some counterbalance weight.
|
|
|
Post by hackbarth on Nov 28, 2016 6:20:18 GMT -9
Magnets would solve the wing drop down issue, it's a joint that never sags off.
|
|
|
Post by Punkrabbitt on Nov 28, 2016 9:00:16 GMT -9
Magnets would solve the wing drop down issue, it's a joint that never sags off. I think he means the wings bend under their own weight. I could be mistaken o.0
|
|
|
Post by lightning on Nov 28, 2016 9:32:06 GMT -9
Magnets would solve the wing drop down issue, it's a joint that never sags off. I think he means the wings bend under their own weight. I could be mistaken o.0 Yes :-) These wings are very, very long. So far I have worked with at least 4 layered 160gsm paper. Have to see if that changes if I use 1mm cardboard.
|
|
|
Post by lightning on Nov 28, 2016 9:37:46 GMT -9
Top side of the hull 99% textured. Some greeble details in the back are missing. But need to make a break before head explodes tonight Also no dirt/weathering yet. The movie transports seem very dirty!
|
|
|
Post by cowboyleland on Nov 29, 2016 3:54:26 GMT -9
To me, it looks better than the plastic one. They both do need dirt.
|
|
|
Post by Vermin King on Nov 29, 2016 5:35:53 GMT -9
Do save the clean version. I think some folks would like to have the clean version for desk display
|
|