Part 23 (+15)
06.2023 - 10.2024
So, we’ve gradually arrived at the present… well, almost. To truly start, we need to take another step back into the past. The topic is quite extensive. I’m not sure how many posts it will take before I get to showcasing the actual construction, but a prologue is unavoidable. The introductory section will be titled:
"
Trials and Errors" in
3D Modeling and 3D Printing.
Note! This post contains many photos with mistakes, unsuccessful experiments, and trials, and I repeat – MISTAKES. Please do not perceive these results as representative of 3D printing as a whole. I just want to show what to avoid, and later in the posts, I will present the successful results!
The model features a significant amount of carved decorative elements. While this particular ship doesn’t have an overwhelming amount, there are still notable pieces, such as the figurehead, the patterns surrounding it, the stern gallery, and numerous other carved details. These need to be created somehow. Ready-made options that fit my scale are either nonexistent, of poor quality, or prohibitively expensive. Hand-carving them or ordering CNC work wasn’t an option for me. So, I needed another solution.
That’s when I came up with a promising idea: **scanning figurines** (wherever I could find them) and then adjusting them in a 3D modeling program to fit my requirements.
Later, I had an even crazier idea: **scanning the entire model** and using that scan to create nearly everything—deck details, rigging, and more. However, I soon abandoned that notion, deciding instead to maximize the use of wooden components. Despite this, the idea of using 3D modeling for decorative elements remained viable.
I managed to acquire a figurehead and several other tin parts from colleagues who were building using partwork kits...
View attachment 485223
I was able to acquire several other decorative elements from DeAgostini assembly magazines. I scanned all of them using an intraoral scanner—being a dentist, this was no trouble for me.
This method allowed me to capture highly detailed digital replicas of the parts, which I could then modify in 3D modeling software to better suit my project. It turned out to be an efficient and precise solution for replicating intricate decorative elements.
View attachment 485224
The quality of the scans wasn’t perfect, but they provided a solid foundation for further modeling. Specifically, they served as a base for design corrections in **Blender**, where I could adjust the scale, enhance the level of detail, and fix any imperfections. This approach will come into play later when I focus on refining the primary decorative elements.
For now, I’ll list all the key trials and errors, along with the corresponding solutions, below. Let’s get started!
1. Scale Issues
Each model has its specific scale, but it’s crucial not to overlook the technical limitations of your 3D printer. While you can design details down to a micron, the printer might not be able to reproduce them accurately.
I encountered this issue while printing cannons. The rings and eyelets on the carriages were so thin that even if they printed successfully, they broke during post-processing.
Solution:
In subsequent designs, I accounted for this by increasing the thickness of rings and other fragile details. Additionally, some elements need to be intentionally exaggerated in size because they would otherwise be invisible on the model. Balancing realism with practicality is essential when working with such small-scale projects.
View attachment 485238
By the way, I didn’t initially plan to delve deeply into this topic, and since my wife was familiar with the 3D program Blender, she was the one who modeled the first cannons and carriages for me. However, I later realized that it was interesting, and I started studying everything in detail myself. In the photo below, you can see a model printed with small elements that broke. Next, I will show how I changed everything. In the meantime, on to the next point...
View attachment 485239
View attachment 485240
2. Positioning and supports.
When printing, it’s crucial how you position the part. Avoid placing it horizontally. This will result in numerous supports, the part may warp into an arch during curing, and most importantly, flat surfaces can detach and cause the print layers to delaminate. Regarding supports, don’t position them so that their flat areas rest against the part. In such cases, they’ll be difficult to remove without damaging the part.
Solution: Position parts either vertically or at a 45-degree angle (depending on the part itself; I’ll show examples later). Place supports manually so that only their tips touch the model, not their bodies.
Also, avoid creating a single continuous base for all elements, as it will deform and result in defects. Instead, divide all elements into groups or separate them so that the base is fragmented.
View attachment 485241
View attachment 485242
View attachment 485256 View attachment 485257
View attachment 485243
Incorrect positioning (the carriages placed horizontally, plus it will be difficult to align the surface of the gun barrel after the supports).
View attachment 485244
View attachment 485245
Correct positioning (the carriages at an angle, and the guns with the rounded part facing down, which will be easier to polish after removing the supports).
View attachment 485246
3. Painting and Preliminary Processing. Print Layers!
I combined these two points into one because the end result for us is a painted part. The most important aspect of its appearance after painting is the visualization of the print layers. I recommend using only photopolymer printing and only at 20 microns, no more. I tried 10 microns, but it increases the risk of defects, and at 30 microns, the print layers (steps) become clearly visible. As for painting, you should only choose deep matte aerosol acrylic paints. I tried others – neither enamel nor other options work. Enamel gives a plastic effect, while not matte paints give a toy-like effect. I chose matte camouflage aerosol paints based on acrylics for myself. The photo below shows the print layers and how the wrong paint looks.
View attachment 485250 View attachment 485251
View attachment 485252 View attachment 485254
View attachment 485255
I’ll repeat! These are unsuccessful attempts. And this paint is not suitable. The one that works for plastic will be shown in the next posts.
The material on 3D printing is still in progress, and I will continue to talk about mistakes and nuances in future posts. What I wanted to add is that over time, I got better at modeling, and here are a couple of samples.
Some of this I have already redone... and not just once, fortunately, I got a printer at home (I took it from work when we did an update there), so now I can print whatever I want and as much as I want.
View attachment 485261
View attachment 485262
View attachment 485263
View attachment 485264
I will go into more detail about all this later with specific examples, but for now, I just kept printing and painting...
View attachment 485265
View attachment 485266
View attachment 485267
In the upcoming posts, I will talk about and show the final models and how I process and paint the printed details. And of course, I will demonstrate how I adapt these details into the wooden hull so that they don't look toy-like, but rather as if they are made of wood, just painted.