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

Hello everybody,

today, still a supplement to the 3D Intertanks.

Meanwhile, Michael Key still also offers a further modified Airfix-IT. And that is the Early SLWT, which was flown since the STS-91 (ET-96), which here is presented in the new Shapeways Design.


Source: shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place)

For this he only needed to modify a few details on my previous IT,

which he thankfully has done too.

Here once again the front side with the 26 Integral Ribs and the 7 Circumferential Ribs in the Thrust Panels, etc.,

and here the back with the Graphite Composite Access Door and the Vent.

This configuration of the Early SLWTs was flown up to the STS-107 (Columbia disaster), starting with the STS-114 the PAL Ramps were omitted at the Late SLWTs, and from STS-122 then also the 7 Circumferential Ribs.

There are now three versions of the Airfix IT (1:144), my Early LWT, which is now on its way to me, and next to the Early SLWT also the Late SLWT can be ordered at Shapeways both in WSF as well in FUD.

3 Likes

Nose cone and lower segment are looking good .

I fully agree with you.

Can the admins please stop this awful advertising? It’s painful to watch! https://images.raumfahrer.net/up043952.gif

1 Like

Hello everybody,

meanwhile, I did ask my ARC friend Joe (crackerjazz) if he would not even have time and inclination for modeling the Crawler Track Shoes in 1:160, whereupon, to my surprise, he has started right away.

BTW, he did also the great 3D design of the Aft Skirt Thermal Curtains (ASTCs) for my SRBs.

And what the CAD expert has delivered with the help of the drawing without further ado, is simply stunning again, I think.

There’s nothing like a good technical drawing with measurements, even if they are just so on the limit of readability. https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/rolleyes.gif


Source: arcforums.com (crackerjazz)

Now he has to downscale the Track shoe “only” still to 1:160, whereon I’m really curious.

Hopefully there will be some left over from the details after 3D modeling, especially as one can see based on David Maier’s Paper Kit how small these things are in 1:160. https://images.raumfahrer.net/up037692.gif

While the holes in the Pin lugs (Ø 3,3’') with Ø 0,5 mm (1:160) and the 0,4 mm (1:160) wide grooves (green) should still be printable,

the small holes (pink) with Ø 0,2 mm (1:160) should unlikely to be printable, although one should be able to live without them, because later they are hardly recognizable anyway from a normal viewing perspective. https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/undecided.gif

Now I’m curious what my friend Joe is going to say, whereby Shapeways has the last word anyway.

5 Likes

Ahhhhh tracks …… its almost a tank !! :grin:

The Crawler Transporter is indeed a true power monster. https://images.raumfahrer.net/up037692.gif

2 Likes

Hello everybody,

there are good news, because the Track Shoes look amazing after the download to 1:160.


Source: arcforums.com (crackerjazz)

But the exciting question is and remains, how these tiny shoes will look in the printed state? https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/undecided.gif

Now my friend Joe should connect the shoes but still together to a set, as can be seen in Simpson 3D Design, because referring to printing it should be more favorable and therefore cheaper than 20 separate parts.


Source: shapeways.com (Simpson 3D Design)

This has also been confirmed to me by Shapeways because the production team only needs to handle a single model instead of 20 separate parts when printing a set with sprues. As a result, planning the models for printing and cleaning/post-processing is cheaper. And although there are more material costs, the labor/handling costs for a set are lower!

Then I was still interested, which arrangement of the shoes in the set would be more favorable for printing, standing upright as in Simpson’s set, or if the shoes would lie flat?

And the answer to that was very interesting and extremely important.

Although the position for Shapeways doesn’t really matter, it’s favorable to keep the parts flat and as close as possible (smaller footprint).

If one keeps 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 the set), which is very important for subsequent cleaning the sets, if I remember the pull-ups at my FUD-IThttps://images.raumfahrer.net/up037692.gif

4 Likes

Hello friends,

meanwhile we are one step further, but unfortunately still not at the finish because the shoes are still pinching a bit.

My friend Joe has now inserted the supports into his 3D-Model, which corresponds to the configuration of Simpson 3D Design, but has in my view not selected the most favorable arrangement of his model (see below), which I had actually recommended him after consultation with SW.


Source: arcforums.com (crackerjazz)

At first he had uploaded the upper version with upright standing 20 shoes, for whatever reason, whose price (10,80 €) but seemed suspicious to me, https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/rolleyes.gif especially since from Simpson 3D Design the set of 20 (1:144) for 7,81 € is offered. https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/huh.gif

And the result is now the lower variant, which would be acceptable in terms of price (7,61 €), but does not seem to be the preferred direction for minimal support wax residues, if I did understand SW correctly.

But just that would be strived for the Ultrasonic cleaning of the FUD shoes, which I still well enough know from my FUD-IT know.

But, as I’ve heard from others, SW is principally indifferent to this aspect because they print the models (against better conscience) as they are uploaded by the designer, as the customer ultimately pays for it, which is why I’m going to grill SW once again because of the preferred variant.

Regarding the prices, I was surprised that the even finer version Smoothest Fine Detail Plastic, formerly FXD if I’m not mistaken, is only marginally more expensive (7,78 €)!!!

Unfortunately I only have a comparison between FUD (left) and FXD (right) based on my ASTC Rings, which do not have as small details as the Track Shoes, as one can see here, https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/huh.gif

which is why I’m not sure if FXD would actually make a noticeable difference in the details of the shoes? https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/undecided.gif If so, I would prefer FXD for these little shoes (14,3 mm x 2,5 mm).

Therefore I made my friend Joe still aware once again and asked him to turn the middle arrangement 90° and put the shoes flat on the running surfaces as this in my view should be the most favorable arrangement of the model, if I understood SW correctly, so that during printing (FUD/FXD) as little as possible wax residues remain. https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/huh.gif

Now I’m curious what will come out …

5 Likes

Hello everybody,

Thank goodness!

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 shoes. https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/undecided.gif

As my ultimate demand at [color=blue]Shapeways[/color] has shown, the arrangement of the 20 Set in my friend Joes’ offer is the preferred arrangement for FUD/FXD prints with the fewest wax residuals.

But as SW did remark, the wall thickness in the image is only 0,2 mm and needs to be corrected, because the minimum wall thickness for these materials is 0,3 mm. And if SW says that, it will be true. https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/huh.gif


Source: Shapeways (Mitchell Jetten)

But the too small wall thickness should not be the problem now, maybe it would be a useful compromise, to reduce the width of the grooves from 0,4 mm to 0,3 mm and to move them by 0,1 mm to the center, then the wall thickness would also be 0,3 mm, which would be the demanded value.

This would mean that also the small holes (Ø 0,2 mm) have to be slightly shifted, whereby it is questionable whether they can even be realized.

But at this statement from SW I can only laugh, if I think of my FUD Intertankhttps://images.raumfahrer.net/up037692.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).”

I think I’ll have to send SW an image with greetings from the Dental Lab

5 Likes

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. And then, on top of that this sudden price increase for the Track Shoe Sets, which can be seen in this overview.

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

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 € for FUD.

The more surprised I was, when it was offered a few days later for almost double the price of 12,68 €, whereupon I have confronted SW with it of course.

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. https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/huh.gif

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

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.

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. https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/huh.gif

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

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

What strikes one immediately is the fact that almost all the fine details come out well, https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/huh.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.

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.

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).

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 my 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.

6 Likes

Hello everybody,

in the meantime my ARC friend and designer Joe has uploaded the new Set of 20 in flat orientation to check the pricing.


Source: arcforums.com (crackerjazz)


Source: arcforums.com (crackerjazz)


Source: arcforums.com (crackerjazz)

But that’s only half the battle. Unfortunately that’s not the most favorable orientation of the set for printing, what fairly surprised me, because I explained it to him in a PM and email exactly on the basis of this SW image, modified by me. https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/hmmm.gif


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 for printing, 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.

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 …

Therefore pressing the red button ‘Save Orientation’ ist very important before uploading any 3D models.

Then the preferred orientation will be used everytime for printing the model.

Therefore I asked him, to select this flat orientation for the new Set of 20 in the 3D Tool and to save it once and for all.

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.

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.

And Joe’s set arrangement with upright standing shoes would look similar, and therefore he should select and save the flat orientation.

6 Likes

Hello everybody,

because there was going on here something strange, I wanted to get to the bottom of things and wanted to know from my friend, if he has selected a different Print orientation for the last Set of 20 (Flat Ori) than at the first set. https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/hmmm.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 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. https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/huh.gif

And so it came about that he had canceled the order because the designer was not determined orientation, which is why SW can not guarantee the printing orientation. Great right?

Therefore, I should make sure that my friend sets this set orientation step by step and saves it.

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

Opening the model in 3D Tool:

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

Set 3D Printing Orientation:

Save Orientation:


Source: arcforums.com (crackerjazz)

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

That in contrast to the offer still the flat lying set is displayed, is apparently a system bug, as SW had to admit. And that after three weeks controversial discussion …

Since my friend Joe had convinced me more, I finally ordered this set, even though its upright position made me doubt. https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/undecided.gif


Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

Since I still had lack of clarity about the expected wax residuals of the set, I asked my friend 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. https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/huh.gif

He 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.

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

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.

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


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,


Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

whereby I suspect that this should look something like this.


Source: shapeways.com (Mitchell Jetten)

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

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 nine of these 52 Flat Ori-Sets, and with a total of 468 Track Shoes then I would have more than enough for the Crawler, which needs 456 Track Shoes.

3 Likes

Hello friends,

but now the confusion gets totally crazy, https://images.raumfahrer.net/up037692.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.

Unfortunately, we are unable to manufacture [color=blue]Crawler Track-1-160-scale-Set of 20-Flat Ori[/color].

I should contact the designer and discuss with him what to do next. https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/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 €.

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,


Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

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

Now my friend 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, which proves his inspection once again.


Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

This cannot 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. https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/rolleyes.gif

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

Yesterday I got an email from SW that this is the real issue …


Source: shapeways.com (Mitchell Jetten)

The strange thing is that they’ve already printed this out twice successfully and without complaint. The only difference being the orientation of the shoes on the sprue. https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/undecided.gif

While the stacked set arrangement is printable,


Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

the flat one is not printable …


Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

That may understand, who wants …

Maybe their printers are also weather-sensitive like my wife …

3 Likes

Hello friends,

regarding my objections that both sets have already been printed in FUD and FXD, I received from SW this wise answer: https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/rolleyes.gif

The current rejected model file has not been printed before which is why it was checked again.
Only when a model is printed before we skip the checking process.

While the geometry in the model could be the same as the order we printed before, it’s a new upload, which is why it’s checked again.

The designer requires to make it 0,3 mm thick in order to pass.

Well roared the lion, I thought so with me.

But there is another possibility, as I know meanwhile.

This is the SW feature Print It Anyway, with the help of which the designer can “force” a print to see how the part comes out, admittedly without warranty, but nevertheless interesting.

Maybe we still should try this …

Hello everybody,

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

Somehow, this idiotic rejection of the upright standing Set of 20 with flat-lying shoes did not convince me and therefore did bother me.

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


Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

and chased then curious the course of the order.

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. https://images.raumfahrer.net/up037692.gif

And today I got the email Shipped!, which has blown me away. I have actually outsmarted them, unbelievable …


Source: arcforums.com (crackerjazz)

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

2 Likes

Nice updates and a good read … Track links look very good … It will be a big old platform that’s for sure.

Hello everybody,

today, the 52 Set-Flat Ori (FUD) came as if there had never been any problems with printability. Unbelievable, but SW is really unpredictable …

And I must say, the set not only looks good, but even better than the previous two sets with the upright standing shoes.

Here is the top side of the set, right next to it, the three connected shoes from the previous 20 FUD set.

And here the bottom side with a view of the treads, which feel a bit rougher, but which is explainable, since they were touched by the support wax, but which is not a problem. But the top and side surfaces are smoother because they were not in contact with the wax.

And if one looks carefully, one can even see the small holes (Ø 0,2 mm), although not on all shoes, but one could even drill out them, if it should be, although they later are hardly visible anyway.

Here’s a little closer view.

And so I will seize the moment and order a further seven sets, wherewith I would then come on the required 456 Track shoes, but I will still order additionally a further Set of 20 to be on the safe side.

3 Likes

Hello everybody,

today, Shapeways’ big Track Shoe delivery arrived with the seven Sets of 52, which of course were immediately unpacked.

And these are the total of 456 Track shoes for the Crawler. The new sets look well, though there are small differences in quality between the sets, as one can see on the two encircled sets, which should be due to different thorough after-treatment/cleaning. https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/rolleyes.gif

But that is no problem, because I will try anyway, to let the sets being cleaned professionally again in the Dental Lab, as usual.

And the replacement delivery with the Set of 20 (FXD), which had been interconverted, is already on the way.

For the connecting bolts, I’ve also still found a suitable solution, for which I would use instead of the insect needles (Ø 0,3 mm) now Nickel silver rods (Ø 0,4 mm), which fit closely through the Pin lug holes.

And with a length of 7 mm per bolt comes together a total length of more than 3 m , which would correspond to 11 rods à 30 cm, which I will reorder.

4 Likes

Hello everybody,

today came the complained Set of 20-Flat Ori (FXD),


Source: shapeways.com (Crackerjazz)

which looks impeccable, and one can even see at all shoes the small holes in the treads.

Only the sticker on the bag makes me perplex, which displays the upright set. https://forum.raumfahrer.net/Smileys/yabb/rolleyes.gif

Unlike the last Sets of 52-Flat Ori (FUD), which all had rough treads, the treads of this set are nicely smooth, as if they were not lying on the support wax, weird …

But I don’t care at all.

2 Likes