| Scrap metal sculpture [message #23530] Mon, 07 February 2011 23:27 UTC |
 |
|
Vijay (aka. VirtualV) has recently helped us to create a digital model of a scrap metal sculpture. We just gave him a set of photos. The project went very well and many thanks to Vijay for a job well done.
Since we had only asked for a generic model without material and size considerations, we still had to do that piece of the game.
The first set of files for glass, sandstone and plastic is now pretty much done and we are about ready to place the orders.
The rusty one will be in sandstone and the other materials in two colors, the girl in white, the boy in black. We are very curious to see how the glass variation works out and we may even want to try steel in two finishes.
May the wall thickness lottery begin and let the Shapeways-gods have mercy ...
|
|
|
| Re: Scrap metal sculpture [message #23543 is a reply to message #23530 ] Tue, 08 February 2011 05:30 UTC |
 |
|
Cool! I'll be excited to see how it looks when the printers replicate already well-known industrial objects (like those screws).
Community Manager | Shapeways
|
|
|
| Re: Scrap metal sculpture [message #23660 is a reply to message #23530 ] Thu, 10 February 2011 13:29 UTC |
|
|
|
Perhaps I am missing something but what is the point of a digitised copy of a sculpture made from scrap ? surely it would be more work and cost than making one from ........... well scrap!
|
|
|
| Re: Scrap metal sculpture [message #23663 is a reply to message #23660 ] Thu, 10 February 2011 14:48 UTC |
|
|
Well say you need 50 identical pieces for a game you're prototyping. You'd like to test it out with your friends and other demographics... you'd like the pieces to look identical and have the users feel like they're not playing with trash.
this is just one example.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Scrap metal sculpture [message #23683 is a reply to message #23674 ] Thu, 10 February 2011 17:36 UTC |
|
|
My post was not a criticism , I am trying to get an idea of what the thoughts are of users of this manufacturing system.
I can understand the need to "test" the limitations of any system and have done a fair amount of " experimenatation" myself , with Shapeways and other RP suppliers , but if I required several identical models then I would go the silicone rubber mould route as the cost of RP and the quality of reproduction would be to expensive for the first and not good enough for the second .
Just my view of course but I get the impression that there are not many "hands on" people using the forum facility , plenty who know how to use the software maybe but with limited experience in the working of metals and other materials.
[Updated on: Thu, 10 February 2011 17:37 UTC]
|
|
|
|
| Re: Wall thickness lottery has started [message #23688 is a reply to message #23687 ] Thu, 10 February 2011 20:37 UTC |
|
|
I vote for thin walls on the screw's threads & tops xD
Kaetemi
|
|
|
| Re: Wall thickness lottery has started [message #23710 is a reply to message #23688 ] Thu, 10 February 2011 23:57 UTC |
|
|
Seconded on that. Those areas seem the most likely to 'fail' the check.
When in doubt... Duct tape!
|
|
|
| Re: Wall thickness lottery has started [message #23716 is a reply to message #23710 ] Fri, 11 February 2011 08:00 UTC |
|
|
Is that for color print, by the way?
What's the diameter of those screws?
Long 3mm tubes *do* in fact break off easily during production (and even after infusion) if they're not attached solidly to the mesh on both sides.
The threads will likely have some minor damage, as they seem a bit thin, the heads of the screws should not be a major issue, aside from the fact they add additional complexity in the outer point of the screws increasing chances of the screws breaking off, basically.
Imagine it's like they're taking cookies out of a large block of heavy sand.
[Updated on: Fri, 11 February 2011 08:01 UTC]
Kaetemi
|
|
|
| Re: Wall thickness lottery has started [message #23717 is a reply to message #23716 ] Fri, 11 February 2011 08:47 UTC |
|
|
This has been ordered in several materials and sizes. From the screen alone, you can never know how it looks and feels.
The one above was for glass, the sandstone order was also rejected for another (understandable) reason. We'll resubmit shortly.
We actually *want* an amount of imperfection on the surface and details. They are supposed to look a little rough, aged, corroded, ... we are a bit worried that the machine operators won't realize that.
|
|
|
| Re: Wall thickness lottery has started [message #23766 is a reply to message #23687 ] Sat, 12 February 2011 23:35 UTC |
|
|
You are going to need to bury the limbs of this figure into the body section. If you want it to look like found object scrap metal try creating "weld beads" around each section joint(just like actual welded scrap metal art. Parts fail (a lot) when sections and elements just lightly kiss. This design is a poor candidate for glass printing due to the amount of shrinkage in the manufacturing process. Even if the print turned out it would be extremely fragile in glass. They would never withstand board gaming.
"Where the spirit does not work with the hand, there is no art."
Leonardo da Vinci
|
|
|
| Re: Wall thickness lottery has started [message #23805 is a reply to message #23766 ] Mon, 14 February 2011 08:30 UTC |
|
|
Yes, Sir, done that.
BTW, glass is pretty much out of consideration. From what we've seen, it just looks and feels way too 'cheap' for the effort.
Attachment: bead.jpg
(Size: 96.89KB, Downloaded 402 time(s))
|
|
|
Search
0 / 0%
