Westlake Publishing Forums
December 15, 2019, 07:45:33 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:     REGARDING MEMBERSHIP ON THIS FORUM: Due to spam, our server has disabled the forum software to gain membership. The only way to become a new member is for you to send me a private e-mail with your preferred screen name (we prefer you use your real name, or some variant there-of), and email adress you would like to have associated with the account.  -- Send the information to:  Russ at finescalerr@msn.com
 
   Home   Help Search Login  
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24
  Print  
Author Topic: The Google SketchUp Thread  (Read 173825 times)
Lawton Maner
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 559


« Reply #300 on: May 20, 2015, 11:54:16 AM »

Acceptable.
Logged
marc_reusser
Curmudgeon
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4504



WWW
« Reply #301 on: May 20, 2015, 02:42:43 PM »

Nice. Should be very easy to model/extrude in S.U. the parts are pretty much repetetive/duplicteas from one side and end to the other ...they can be copied and flipped and then tweaked/adjusted for any differences that they may have.

What will be the important and harder part is figuring out how you want it to assemble and ..and thus how the parts are to be done so they fit and work together; also material/wall thicknesses, and then on the frame, whether you are going too detail it like a prototype frame interior...or straight/simple like a static or powered RR model. Other than that it is just push/pull/extrude/tug/rotate and Bob's you're uncle.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2015, 02:49:57 PM by marc_reusser » Logged

I am an unreliable witness to my own existence.

In the corners of my mind there is a circus....

M-Works
finescalerr
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5499


« Reply #302 on: May 21, 2015, 01:22:38 AM »

I can't believe how rusty I am on SketchUp. I spent a good part of the day blundering around to re-familiarize myself but now I'm very slowly underway. -- Russ
Logged
finescalerr
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5499


« Reply #303 on: May 23, 2015, 04:56:36 PM »

Here is the Plymouth so far. The first two images show the overall frame and the end. -- Russ


* Plymouth End 300 dpi.jpg (85.17 KB, 1328x920 - viewed 722 times.)

* Plymouth DL Frame 300 dpi.jpg (115.93 KB, 2400x761 - viewed 793 times.)
Logged
finescalerr
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5499


« Reply #304 on: May 23, 2015, 05:03:31 PM »

The final two show the frame side(s), front and back.

I have questions:

 1. The little stanchions on the front side probably won't print well in 1:32 scale and I suspect, if I do print them, they should be as separate pieces. Comments please.
 
 2. To ensure the frame goes together correctly I am thinking about creating matching holes on the ends of the frame sides and the rear of the frame ends. A piece of brass rod could fit into the holes to keep the frame square and the sides accurately spaced. Yes? No? Better idea?

The sides have a lot of detail. Will the nuts and bolts, lettering, and other parts print cleanly in a scale as small as 1:32? I'm open to any and all comments. Thanks!

Russ


* Plymouth Frame L Front 300dpi.jpg (152.84 KB, 2302x568 - viewed 750 times.)

* Plymouth Frame R Back 300 dpi.jpg (86.87 KB, 2078x768 - viewed 687 times.)
Logged
lab-dad
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2083



« Reply #305 on: May 25, 2015, 08:33:11 AM »

I would like to see the "bearings" a separate component.
That way the axles could be assembled.
I would be interested in having the bearings printed in brass/bronze as an option for those model that will move.


Also, here are my parts printed, washed in acetone, air erased,scrubbed with acetone again and painted.
I see the layers upon magnification but not without.
I dont feel it is a big deal as these parts were cast (even though the lines dont look like casting marks) but for "ultra" detail well I'm not impressed. I do not see a way to sand them either.
The parts are .375" wide.



Marty
Logged

     Martin G. Jones Photography
    Go not where the path leads
Go instead, where there is no path,
           And leave a trail
Chuck Doan
Mr. Wizard
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2476



WWW
« Reply #306 on: May 25, 2015, 02:32:23 PM »

Those actually look pretty good!
Logged

“They're most important to me. Most important. All the little details.” -Joseph Cotten, Shadow of a Doubt





http://public.fotki.com/ChuckDoan/model_projects/
lab-dad
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2083



« Reply #307 on: May 28, 2015, 02:07:12 PM »

Good news Russ!

On a similar note i did some renderings in sketch up today!

Jerry (trains1941) is "supposedly" going to build the Maude Monroe mine.
He asked about the foundation and i thought I would try it in SU and get some more practice.
It turned out great (I think) but since it is a "foundation" it has a lot of mass.
wondering what i should print it out in???
The overall size is 3.13 x / 1.93 y / 0.897 z
The little square indentations are for o scale 8x8's


* maude monroe foundation.jpg (112.22 KB, 1362x617 - viewed 675 times.)
Logged

     Martin G. Jones Photography
    Go not where the path leads
Go instead, where there is no path,
           And leave a trail
lab-dad
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2083



« Reply #308 on: July 01, 2015, 08:24:15 AM »

WTF?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

I have drawn this a bunch of times and every time I get the same issue(s)
Some of my circles are smooth and some show the 96 "planes.
WTF?
I am working in a "decimal" model to the 6th place.
I do exactly the same thing on each side but get this result.
Look at the difference between the right and left radii.

HELP!!!!!!


* crap.jpg (108.93 KB, 899x582 - viewed 555 times.)
Logged

     Martin G. Jones Photography
    Go not where the path leads
Go instead, where there is no path,
           And leave a trail
mabloodhound
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 404



« Reply #309 on: July 01, 2015, 10:00:04 AM »

Marty,  Ive had that happen also and don't know why. 
But instead of drawing it again, why didn't you just copy and paste the one on the right hand over to the left side?
I do a lot of copy/paste because I hate redrawing the same thing over again.
Logged

Dave Mason
D&GRR (Dunstead & Granford) in On30
“A people that values its privileges above its principles will soon lose both.”~Dwight D. Eisenhower
finescalerr
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5499


« Reply #310 on: July 01, 2015, 12:37:14 PM »

Or select the one on the left and fiddle with the Soften/Smooth Edges dialog box until you have removed the lines. I tend to set the circle tool to 144 facets. You have to do that anytime you've restarted SketchUp because, as many of us, it forgets such things. -- Russ
Logged
eTraxx
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1019



WWW
« Reply #311 on: July 01, 2015, 01:10:47 PM »

If you are trying to expoert a rendering directly from Sketchup then it makes a difference. If creating a 3d mesh then it doesn't matter. IF you want a better rendering then install Kerkythea and plugin
Logged

Ed Traxler

Lugoff, Camden & Northern RR

Socrates: "I drank WHAT?"
lab-dad
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2083



« Reply #312 on: July 01, 2015, 07:09:54 PM »

I think it has something to do with when the arc or circle it touching another surface?
Anyway I got it "built"
Will add the sprue and send it off.......
-Marty



* cartercover2.jpg (100.54 KB, 843x617 - viewed 534 times.)
Logged

     Martin G. Jones Photography
    Go not where the path leads
Go instead, where there is no path,
           And leave a trail
marc_reusser
Curmudgeon
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4504



WWW
« Reply #313 on: July 04, 2015, 09:59:24 PM »

The fact that the lines show or don't show, has no effect on the 3D model on your screen....or the ensuing print. As Ed notes, you can use the "smooth tool" if it bothers you visually ...and by nudging it slightly up or down in value it will disappear.

When working and building the model, there is actually a better argument/reason for having the lines (defined surfaces) indicated rather than having them smooth.....if you smooth the surface/component it is much harder to work accurately, as there is a chance that you will accidentally miss a work-point or alignment...this is particularly true in beginner and intermediate level users, a there is the chance to accidentally nudge the intended work (IE line start location off point and end up somewhere on the surface or along the line).....I also seen extensive problems when the surfaces are smoothed too much, and the lines/points begin to "blend" (disappear) and lose "connectivity"/definement....and when the user goes to push/pull/move/extrude, etc. the part, some sections/areas don't extrude or some that you don't want to do, and you end up with odd plane fragments/pieces, or non co-planar or properly extruded parts/sections......which if caught immediately can be fixed.....but if they are not caught they can throw off the entire rest of the model...or at least create enough of a "bug" in the model that you have to spend inordinate amounts of time chasing down misalignment problems, gaps, holes, planes that won't form etc.
Logged

I am an unreliable witness to my own existence.

In the corners of my mind there is a circus....

M-Works
lab-dad
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2083



« Reply #314 on: July 05, 2015, 11:05:29 AM »

Thanks Marc, the lines make sense then.

How many sides should I set my circles to then?

Marty
Logged

     Martin G. Jones Photography
    Go not where the path leads
Go instead, where there is no path,
           And leave a trail
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!