26 replies ·
posted June 6, 2020 5:13am
A bit late to the party...
Didn't start this earlier, because there was not much to show; I must have started from scratch on the front axle, about 17 times!
This was because I couldn't 'understand the shape of it...(Still need to figure out how the steering is connected to the axle...)
I submitted this yesterday, because it was time and I am not unhappy with where this is going:
There are however some intersections with the Chassis adrian2301 and the axle should actually be able to rotate quite a bit on the Y-axis and there doesn't seem to be a lot of wriggle room there:
Although it has room on one side, so maybe that is ok, have to re-watch that video that blanchsb linked me to...
The engine enclosure however aartifact and ddoulos4iesou is completely in the way;)
I think we will see more conflicts moving forward haha. Just gives us opportunity to collaborate more.
We may have to share files back and forth I dunno? Maybe theluthier can share some best practices during the live stream.
Really need to work with adrian2301 and ppfbourassa more. I dropped the ball with them this month haha.
spikeyxxx I have updated the chassis as we found it was to narrow to fit the rear axle. While adjusting for duerer rear axle I lined up the front to fit the engine enclosure. Check the sheet for the file for the updated version. I’m writing this on my phone at the moment. So can’t post a link here. If Kent hasn’t resolved the comment yet I’ll post it tomorrow.
Here's the LINK as promised spikeyxxx
I had a quick look and I need to adjust the cross beams and put a hole in them for the fixings.
spikeyxxx made small adjustment to the cross beams, need to put the hole in them, can you confirm the location of the axle, should the hole be offset from centre ? or can the axle move over a fraction? It's currently off centre from the world.
My bad, it should be right in the center, it wouldn't make any sense to me for it to be off-centered.
I'll fix that right away, thanks.
Here's the fixed version:
I only moved the hole/cylinder; the rest of the beam appeared to be in place already...
This also just consists of 'my' Collection, so it's 'cleaner', smaller and easier to work with;)
adrian2301 this updated version already looks a lot better:
Oh, and here is some of the wireframe madness:
I think that is looking great spikeyxxx I can wait to see the actual non-subdivided wireframe.
blanchsb Thanks, you can check it out at the Google sheet for the Collaboration. You can read all the Comment boxes (where there is a little orange triangle in the upper right corner) and thus have access to all contributions...
There are still a few tiny mistakes in that (second) file, they have already been fixed now, but I didn't want to update my submission again (there were some non-quads, because some verts hadn't merged at some point...and one 'ugly' quad, I mean shaped like an arrow head.).
That's funny because I resubmitted last night lol. Oh well hopefully Kent doesn't harp on it too much. I'm such a rebel.
Oh No My Wheel is too Big! and when I aPend it It deletes all the objects except the tyre. I cannot scale it down or it will make the tyre thinner. can you Help?
Started on this part:
just out of curiosity (how I would handle this) and because I spend so long on the 'housing' and still haven't figured that out yet;)
theluthier will probably reduce my points because of the non-planar quads (and a six sided pole...), but I think it just works here.
It feels like 'How to get away with....'
Now I am going to work my way inwards...let's see how that goes...I think I will go with holes, then we will have a 'holed' and a 'solid' version.
If that is the section with the issues. I think it could be overcome with more geometry to work with on the circles. But it also means more things to connect the geometry too haha. Maybe this is good advice and maybe it isn't lol.The center circle may have enough sides to work with to be honest.
blanchsb you're absolutely right, but I don't want to add more geometry, because it's not an issue for me;)
I like how it looks subdivided, it gives the exact right transition imo, so I'll leave it as it is even if costs me some points...
If it looks good then it's ok.
Yeah I think that is a decent response. Good mentality to have especially if the mesh is not deforming.
Sometimes you just gotta break the rules...
I would have saved more time with that mentality. I have been stressing tooo many of similar details during my assembly.To be honest though, I am still learning so I think it was time well spent just because of that.
You should of course not start with breaking the rules and when you get shading artefacts then that needs to be resolved, but when you feel confident and know what you are doing, breaking rules can be very rewarding (not in XP's of course)!
Maybe something like this:
Now I have to make one with the correct size, as this is just a test, made 'freehand' from looking at one reference picture...
That looks....so good. My wife was talking to me when I loaded this post and I interrupted her with "woah that looks great" ha
Having another go at the 'housing'(?):
Again just testing the geometry, sizes not correct yet.
These cast parts look so organic haha. I guess you can do that when the metal is a liquid and poured to fill the desired shape. They remind me a little bit of bones.
Indeed Shawn, it's organic hard surface modelling; that's what makes these parts so difficult, but at the same tome challenging!