-
#1420 by DaveS on 16 Feb, 2018 20:57
-
For Michael Key's 3D-Modeling this realization is coming too late unfortunately, but which is not a problem, because I can glue this door with the two handles later on, especially since it is very small (9 mm x 8 mm), as one can see here.
Maybe you could ask him to just remove the door altogether and make it a separate piece just like the real thing. The door is completely removed from the ET whenever access to the I/T interior is required. In fact, STS-1 rolled out to the pad with the multi-piece red metallic colored GSE door still installed.
-
#1421 by roma847 on 17 Feb, 2018 06:24
-
Thanks Keith,
good to know this trick.
-
#1422 by roma847 on 17 Feb, 2018 06:36
-
For Michael Key's 3D-Modeling this realization is coming too late unfortunately, but which is not a problem, because I can glue this door with the two handles later on, especially since it is very small (9 mm x 8 mm), as one can see here.
Maybe you could ask him to just remove the door altogether and make it a separate piece just like the real thing. The door is completely removed from the ET whenever access to the I/T interior is required. In fact, STS-1 rolled out to the pad with the multi-piece red metallic colored GSE door still installed.
It's okay in this way, I do not want to cause him still more stress than necessary.
BTW, I have seen the red STS-1 Access Door.
Source: NASA
-
#1423 by roma847 on 26 Feb, 2018 00:01
-
Hello everyone,
now it goes on with the 3D Intertank journey, which went into the next round, which keeps me in suspense.
Unfortunately I have yet overlooked an important detail that was not yet correct in the last pictures of Michael Key's 3D model and consequently could not remain, what was to be seen 14 days ago in this picture.
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)
I had circled the part already, but at first I was only interested in the bottom plates of the two Fairings.
After I had Michael Key pointed this and had been once more showing the still too high Carrier Plate, he wanted to get back to with the final model for the final checkup, for what I specifically had asked him befor a possible upload to Shapeways .
Almost at the same time DaveS came up with this, so far unknown Access Door, how it most likely had looked like at ET-8 during STS-6.
Source: georgesrockets.com (George Gassaway)
About this I have informed Michael Key and told him at the same time that he should not change the door, because I could scratch this little detail as well.
After that he surprised me with his final Intertank version, in which he had even considered this door in addition to the lower located Carrier Plate, which of course I was pleased.
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)
And here are further pictures of his 3D model:
After I have begun to wonder about the arrangement of the two Fairings as well as the PAL Ramps and Cable Trays
at this close-up my hair suddenly stood on end.
Apart from the somewhat too crude shape of the big LO2 Fairing, both fairings are next to each other almost at one height, but what is not true, although in turn was clearly visible on previous photos, but what apparently he has not registered and consequently not so implemented.
In reality, the arrangement of the fairings however looks like as at these two photos.
Quelle: NASA
Source: NASA
But the bafflement was following, by telling me at the same time that he had uploaded his model to Shapeways, which would have allowed everybody to order immediately, but what was agreed otherwise, by the way, for EUR 58 (WSF) or EUR 91 (FUD), but with these errors. 
And in the 3D panorama view of the Intertank in his Shapeways Shop, this error was also clearly visible (see red dashed line).
Furthermore, I wondered about the tapering shape till the top of the two PAL Ramps and the resulting gap to the Cable Trays, which is not true.
Source: shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place)
Then I have immediately communicated Michael Key this change requirement on the basis of these earlier photos,
Source: NASA
Source: NASA
what I have marked on this image again.
Source: shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place)
Because of these mistakes, I have asked him to remove his offer from his shop site immediately, which he then has done.
A controversial point is still the form of the fairings and the arrangement of the GH2/GO2 Press. Lines, for which he has sent me this picture, in which I have marked my changes in red.
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)
And as one can see in these photos, the two Press. Lines should run closer to the LO2 Feedline .
Source: NASA
Source: georgesrockets.com (George Gassaway)
As far as the current state.
Slowly but surely, but somehow we'll crack the hard nut like the squirrel.
-
#1424 by Ronpur50 on 26 Feb, 2018 00:21
-
This is going to be beautiful when it is ready!! I will have to rebuild my model!
-
#1425 by roma847 on 26 Feb, 2018 07:01
-
Thanks Ron,
that's why it's called so beautiful: Haste makes waste, Rome also wasn't built in a day.
-
#1426 by roma847 on 26 Feb, 2018 21:20
-
Hello everybody,
the Intertank in Michael Key's Shapeways Shop currently looks like this, but still with the important note Not For Sale, what will hopefully change soon.
Source: shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place)
While everything looks awesome on this side, there are a few detail problems to solve on the other side.
But we can do it together, in any case I have supplied the necessary reference ammunition.
-
#1427 by roma847 on 27 Feb, 2018 22:55
-
Hello everybody,
Michael Key has still modified the shape of the two Fairings a bit, which looks really better now.
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)
And the arrangement of the details now agrees fairly well with the original and can therefore remain so. 
Source: NASA
And since the wall thickness of the LO2 Fairing is only 0,25 mm in 1:144, we have agreed on to insert no opening for the LO2 Feedline (Ø 3mm), so I can glue the line directly.
With that Michael Key has now reached the home stretch and the final is heralded.
-
#1428 by mike robel on 27 Feb, 2018 23:06
-
A big milestone there Manfred.
I do not think this needed development means the MLP is finished, though, nicht wahr? -
#1429 by roma847 on 28 Feb, 2018 07:36
-
Thanks Mike for your nice compliment,
yeah, this Intertank chapter was very tricky and has been on my mind for a long time already,
but now on the fourth attempt the time has come and together with Michael Key we are successful. 
Therefore, the MLP had to be parked in the cupboard in the meantime and will be continued now again.
-
#1430 by Bubbinski on 28 Feb, 2018 15:18
-
I will be ordering this intertank piece when it becomes available as I’m getting started on a similar project, though with the Dragon orbiter w/cutaway mounted to an Airfix ET/SRB
-
#1431 by roma847 on 28 Feb, 2018 15:24
-
That's a cool idea, and Michael Key will be pleased.
-
#1432 by roma847 on 28 Feb, 2018 15:26
-
Hello everybody,
so friends, we are just before completion.
At first still this small addendum, which I have reached out non-binding to Michael Key, without knowing whether he would go into rapture in view of my previous special requests.
But I thought, asking does not cost anything, either-or?
On this image of the STS-6 one can see these two areas, in which the Stringer-Valleys are filled up with Insulating foam, which would perfectly complete the already nicely detailed Intertank.
Source: retrospaceimages.com (J. L. Pickering)
The white part (left) is the RSS Antenna, as well as an Aerodynamic Vent in the middle of the right-hand area, as I found it in George Gassaway's ET collection,
here at STS-37 (ET-37),
Source: georgesrockets.com
as well as here at STS-36 (ET-33).
Source: georgesrockets.com
And what should I tell you, in his final version, he has even implemented these two details.
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)
This surprise he really succeeded.
-
#1433 by roma847 on 28 Feb, 2018 21:38
-
Hello everybody,
after the events have almost happened in quick succession today, it is now done.
But always nice in turn step by step.
After Michael Key had uploaded his model to Shapeways, he sent me the link, from which the following images are taken, which are showing the awesome Intertank in different views, as one can see.
Based on the large number of pictures you can already see how much the end product thrilled me ...
Thereupon I immediately ordered a print for 95,99 EUR incl. shipping.
In the midst of the delirium of joy then came a friend from our Raumcon Forum with his damper regarding the shrinkage problems at FUD and FXD, as well as in connection with the costly stiffening rings, which one would have to consider.
Based on these legitimate hints, Michael Key responded immediately and after a few changes has uploaded his model again, and now lets print it 0,8% larger.
He also pointed out that one possibly might have to sand a bit, either on the printed Intertank or on the ET parts of the kit, but that would not be unusual and should be feasible.
However, as this model, with a wall thickness of about 0,7 mm, is quite thin, he would not recommend removing the stiffening rings. Instead, he has reduced their mass by enlarging the holes in the middle, which has fortunately resulted in a cost savings of about 20 EUR, that one can not complain about.
And those changes looked like this.
Thereupon I immediately have canceled my first order and reordered new, and here is the current Link, over which one now can order the Airfix Intertank (1:144) for 71,83 EUR in FUD, and in the 3D view (top right) one can keep a close eye on it from all sides.
Source: shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place)
Now I hope that Shapeways can also print the part with all its details, wherefore all available thumbs are needed,
to make it to a round matter in the end in the truest sense of the word.
-
#1434 by roma847 on 02 Mar, 2018 08:56
-
Hello everybody,
my next project will be the Ice/Frost Ramps on the LH2 External Tank, and I hope that Michael Key can help me with this as well.
Source: NASA
And so the ramps for the GO2/GH2 Press. Lines look like in detail.
Source: NASA
I know that my friend Bill (niParts) has modeled a set of these Ice ramps in 1:72, but in 1:144 they are unfortunately much smaller.
Source: shapeways.com (niParts)
In reality these ramps are 2' x 2' x 1' , that means 2 mm x 2 mm x 1 mm for the ET (1:144).
The diameter of the LH2/GH2 Press. Lines is 2'' = Ø 0,35 mm (1:144) and should be the reference.
The openings in the ramps are slightly larger, approx. Ø 0,5 mm, as one can see in this image.
Maybe that these very thin wall thicknesses could be a problem for Shapeways 3D printer?
-
#1435 by roma847 on 05 Mar, 2018 15:56
-
Hi everybody,
Shipped!
Just now, I've got Shapeways' pleasant message, that they have shipped the Intertank (€ 73,26).
Consequently Michael Key's 3D model seems to have been print-ready.
Now I'm very curious what the part will look like.
-
#1436 by roma847 on 11 Mar, 2018 21:43
-
Hello everybody,
meanwhile, the long-awaited package of Shapeways has arrived, at first again only a feather-light box with lots of air in it, which was carefully let out.
And before the last shell fell, one could already see the object of desire.
Compared with the accustomed images of the 3D model, the Intertank looks at first glance rather inconspicuous, because one can not really perceive the details due to the semi-transparent FUD look and really must look very closely, especially as there is sticking a lot of supporting wax in the fine grooves of the Stringers and Ribs, which still has to be removed. But stable feels the part anyway. 
But what has attracted my attention immediately was the fact that the inner support tube was missing, through which I want to thread the support rod for the SRBs, which surprised me a lot and I can not explain, 
especially since the tube still was to be seen on Michael Key's3D model images,
as well as in the 3D view on Shapeways' website, which is very strange ...
Source: shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place)
The later-planned steel rod (Ø 1.5 mm) could not at first be inserted into the opening and pushed through, but after a few attempts it was still possible, albeit with some difficulty.
After this first disillusionment I've tried out the provisionally taped front part of the ET,
which let fit tightly onto the intertank.
And here are some more images with an attempt to catch some of the details but what was not easy.
Here is a look at the two Fairings as well as the PAL Ramps and Cable Trays, although the latters can hardly be recognized.
In contrast to the narrow fit of the front part, I noticed perceptible clearance of the parts when setting the Intertank onto the rear part of the ET.
But otherwise the part is coming out quite well, I think.
And I just when I wanted to put the Intertank together with the ASTC rings in my new ultrasonic bath for cleaning,
as I noticed that the rear inner ring was broken and had detached nearly over half the length from the inner wall, as if it had not been tied to it at all.
How this can happen is completely obscure to me, especially since the laser melts together the wafer-thin layers of powder when printing, really strange ...
To this amazing finding and the missing inner tube I have to consult Michael Key and hear what he means, then we'll see.
-
#1437 by Ronpur50 on 12 Mar, 2018 15:51
-
It looks awesome! I had something similar happen to one of my octowebs for my Falcon 9, when the wax gets between parts of the print. I had to remove the piece and re-attach with super glue.
-
#1438 by roma847 on 12 Mar, 2018 16:13
-
Thanks Ron,
are there any fundamental problems with gluing 3D prints? Is CA the only way out?
-
#1439 by roma847 on 12 Mar, 2018 16:14
-
Hi everybody,
now again to the missing inner tube, from which even Michael Key was very surprised, because when he has checked the number of parts of the model on Shapeways' website, there was displayed it with "1", which means, that everything is connected.
Then I looked at the 3D Panoramic view of the model at Shapeways' website once more very closely and found a setting where one can see that the tube on both sides clearly is not connected to the inner wall of the tank, which will now be the main subject of my complaint to Shapeways next to the crack of the inner ring.
As Michael Key has told me, it would be Shapeways' standard method of sending a reprint, whereupon I'd like to renounce because I don't want to have a part with the same errors. Instead, I should ask them for a refund and say that there are some other issues with the model, whereat I have informed the designer, who is ready to modify his model for a better version. Besides I could casually mention Shapeways' 100% Satisfaction guarantee" with which they apparently advertise.
I have informed Shapeways about this today and hope for their goodwill, to grant me a refund, in order to get an improved Intertank with inner tube in the second attempt.
