|
|
Boxcar type Ge
About Truespace Archives
These pages are a copy of the official truespace forums prior to their removal somewhere around 2011.
They are retained here for archive purposes only.
Boxcar type Ge // Work in Progress
Post by spyfrog // Feb 2, 2009, 12:44pm
|
spyfrog
Total Posts: 181
|
18000
Since this forum is getting a bit slow, I was thinking that I should perhaps add my new project, Swedish state railway boxcar mod Ge.
As you might remember, I did an effort to model a T43 diesel-electric locomotive for a MMC for some months ago. However, I never got the texture mapping and UV correct for this model.
My thinking is that I should use this much simpler model to experiment on and perhaps manage to finish my T43 project later and then use both models to make a train, which as we know consists of wagons and engines... ;)
I would very much like to have criticism and suggestions regarding this project.
My current plan is to have a UV map for each large section of the wagon, ie one for the wheels, one for the roof, one for the body and one for each little detail like brakes etc.
I also plan to keep my hierarchies less complex than on the T43, with only 2 levels if possible: the whole wagon and all small pieces that makes up the wagon (like wheels, buffers, boxcar, roof). |
Post by jamesmc // Feb 2, 2009, 12:47pm
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
uh oh...
I like trains... I will be watching. |
Post by wally // Feb 2, 2009, 1:04pm
|
wally
Total Posts: 21
|
I like trains too! Your audience is growing.
wally |
Post by RAYMAN // Feb 2, 2009, 1:31pm
|
RAYMAN
Total Posts: 1496
|
Heres another one watching from the fence !
I love trains !
Peter |
Post by tahnoak // Feb 4, 2009, 1:24am
|
tahnoak
Total Posts: 487
|
<pulls up a chair along the fence and stands on it> Me too! |
Post by spyfrog // Feb 4, 2009, 11:17am
|
spyfrog
Total Posts: 181
|
18023
Wow, quite an audience here. I feel shy - hope I don't make a fool of myself! :o
Anyway, beginning to make the thing that attaches the wheels to the wagon. My problem is that my drawing isn't really detailed and I don't have any detailed photos either. The only thing I have is a model of another related wagon (a later model Gbs wagon) and that ain't so detailed either. So I have to guess how it could look. I will see if I can get hold of some good photos, but it isn't easy since these wagons isn't in operation anymore.
I think a good deal of artistic freedom is necessary when it comes to the details - if it looks good it is good. |
Post by tahnoak // Feb 4, 2009, 3:16pm
|
tahnoak
Total Posts: 487
|
I agree. I am not looking for details. I am watching with interest on technique :D |
Post by kena // Feb 4, 2009, 3:53pm
|
kena
Total Posts: 2321
|
Yes. The important thing is to have the details look the way you think makes the final object look good. |
Post by v3rd3 // Feb 4, 2009, 6:22pm
|
v3rd3
Total Posts: 388
|
spyfrog how did you settle on a swedish boxcar?
The best way I can think of for getting some detail on the wheel housing and suspension would be to find the information on the manufacturer and look for passenger cars made during the same period. The chassis and wheel assemblies were typically the same for freight and passengers. The passenger cars usually garnered more attention from photographers and artists of the period and you might get better drawings to decipher the structure.
If I understand correctly, the Swedish rail development at the time of the GE type was usually oriented to servicing mines and mining camps. I cannot recall whether the engine technology was from Britain, the US or Germany so I could not begin to suggest possible sources.
My father was an avid collector of train books so I will see if there is anything I can dig up on the next trip to see my mother. I do seem to recall he had 2 or 3 books focussed on the rail history of specific European countries. |
Post by spyfrog // Feb 5, 2009, 10:08am
|
spyfrog
Total Posts: 181
|
spyfrog how did you settle on a swedish boxcar?
The best way I can think of for getting some detail on the wheel housing and suspension would be to find the information on the manufacturer and look for passenger cars made during the same period. The chassis and wheel assemblies were typically the same for freight and passengers. The passenger cars usually garnered more attention from photographers and artists of the period and you might get better drawings to decipher the structure.
If I understand correctly, the Swedish rail development at the time of the GE type was usually oriented to servicing mines and mining camps. I cannot recall whether the engine technology was from Britain, the US or Germany so I could not begin to suggest possible sources.
My father was an avid collector of train books so I will see if there is anything I can dig up on the next trip to see my mother. I do seem to recall he had 2 or 3 books focussed on the rail history of specific European countries.
v3rd3, the reason why I choose a Swedish boxcar i simple - I am Swedish. That it became the Ge type was because that was one of the few I had drawings for.
Regarding the technology in Sweden - the Ge type is a postwar boxcar. They where manufactured in great numbers after WWII when the railroad in Sweden was rather run down (despite not having been in the war, the railroads was heavily used during the war and most material was in need of replacing). The design of the boxcar is typically Swedish I think. Sweden had quite good railroad equipment manufactures during the whole 2000th century - ASEA (electric locos) and Nyqvist & Holm (steam and later diesel electric with GM EMD engines) supplied most locomotives.
Of course, the Ge boxcar follows the European norms for brakes, size, buffers etc. I will probably try to go the museum this weekend to see if I can get some reference photos of similar wagons. |
Post by RAYMAN // Feb 5, 2009, 10:49am
|
RAYMAN
Total Posts: 1496
|
Heres some detailed views of boxcars not the one you are making but
some good plans here
http://www.m-niggemann.com/modellbau_lok_Gueterwagen_1plan.htm
http://www.m-niggemann.com/modellbau_lok_Gueterwagen_1.htm
http://www.m-niggemann.com/modellbau_lok_Gueterwagen_4.htm
Hope they are usefull enough !
Peter |
Post by v3rd3 // Feb 5, 2009, 8:24pm
|
v3rd3
Total Posts: 388
|
Wow, I am way off on the time in history. Somehow I got it in my mind that the design was earlier in history. My father was the student of railroads, not I :D.
Where did you get the drawings? I searched for blueprints and images of Swedish boxcars and saw there were actually very few, at least on the sites I found. Were they from a model kit?
I will still have a look at my father's library of books to see if there is anything there you can use. |
Post by spyfrog // Feb 17, 2009, 11:17am
|
spyfrog
Total Posts: 181
|
Progress is slow. I blame the poor economy that everyone talks about - it has the strange effect that it forces me to work overtime... the reason being that we need to finish projects in record time to not get downsized.
Despite this effort, it seam like I soon will get a whole lot more time for 3D since the layoffs continues and as a consultant you can be sure to be among on of the first to go...
18345
Anyhow, I have started to add more details. Unfortunately I couldn't do the trip to the museum this weekend so I am still guessing how things should look - I think this should be more of called an artist impression of a Ge wagon than a model of one. ;)
One question that appears after I opened the metal frame with holes (to make it lighter I guess and save steel) is the obvious question of how the part that holds the wheels connected with the steel undercarriage - I know as a fact that the floor in old Swedish boxcars was made of wood so I couldn't only connect to it. It would need some kind of strengthening. It is interesting how these construction questions pops up when you model and that they needs to be answered to get a good model. :)
I apologies to you who follows this for lack of updates. I am going to speed up. However, the whole forum seams more vivid now - perhaps you haven't really missed me. Many great things are in progress - keep up the good work! :D |
Post by kena // Feb 17, 2009, 2:34pm
|
kena
Total Posts: 2321
|
Usually, when a car has a wooden bottom, there is a brace that goes across to support the box on the wheels without collapsing. |
Post by v3rd3 // Feb 18, 2009, 12:08am
|
v3rd3
Total Posts: 388
|
I took my first run at my fathers collection this weekend. Most of what he has is steam trains. I have found a few images of locomotives but nothing showing passenger or cargo cars. Will keep looking next time I see Mom ;) |
Post by spyfrog // Feb 19, 2009, 12:13pm
|
spyfrog
Total Posts: 181
|
Slowly adding detail to the undercarriage.
18382
I have hidden the layer with the wagon body. My plan is to model the wagon with doors that you can open so I needed to add texture to the floor in the wagon. This was a new idea, from the beginning I was thinking of a closed door but now I think that it will look nicer if I add the possibility to have it either closed or opened, even if this mean that I have to add some interior textures. |
Post by v3rd3 // Feb 19, 2009, 12:22pm
|
v3rd3
Total Posts: 388
|
Looks really good. Have you settled on the engine to pull this car? |
Post by spyfrog // Feb 20, 2009, 10:20am
|
spyfrog
Total Posts: 181
|
Looks really good. Have you settled on the engine to pull this car?
I was thinking of getting my old T43 model updated with better textures and use that one. |
Post by v3rd3 // Feb 20, 2009, 10:51am
|
v3rd3
Total Posts: 388
|
I didn't realize you did so many rail models... If I find anything in my father's collection that may be of interest I will let you know.
Are you interested in other railroads or are you focussing on Sweden? |
Post by spyfrog // Feb 22, 2009, 5:06am
|
spyfrog
Total Posts: 181
|
@vr3d - I have only made two models. This and the T43... :)
Well, now I have a problem that I hope I can get some help with: my geometry have to be wrong but I can't find it.
In this solid rendered view, you see no holes in the undercarriage. But as the wireframe shows, it should have holes! How to fix this?
18429
18430
This error wasn't from the beginning, this has appeared now later. After I modified the undercarriage framework last. I can't understand how it can happened when you don't touch the object? |
Post by marcel // Feb 22, 2009, 5:19am
|
marcel
Total Posts: 569
|
@vr3d - I have only made two models. This and the T43... :)
Well, now I have a problem that I hope I can get some help with: my geometry have to be wrong but I can't find it.
In this solid rendered view, you see no holes in the undercarriage. But as the wireframe shows, it should have holes! How to fix this?
This error wasn't from the beginning, this has appeared now later. After I modified the undercarriage framework last. I can't understand how it can happened when you don't touch the object?
If you send to me the wrong objet, i can try to repare it.
delord@crea-vision.fr |
Post by Weevil // Feb 22, 2009, 5:32am
|
Weevil
Total Posts: 534
|
Try triangulating the object |
Post by v3rd3 // Feb 22, 2009, 7:58am
|
v3rd3
Total Posts: 388
|
If you post your scene we can look at trying to find the issue.
I noticed that your solid display appears to have the camera closer to the objects than the wireframe. Sometimes when you are using the solid colour display at a close up the model view of the object distorts the appearance of the geometry. The real test then is to render your view at that same camera range to see if the effect is a problem with the model view as opposed to the render. |
Post by spyfrog // Feb 22, 2009, 9:42am
|
spyfrog
Total Posts: 181
|
Thank you for all your suggestions.
I managed to fix it by reloading a older version of the object.
This proves how important it is to save the objects and not only the scenes... |
Post by TomG // Feb 23, 2009, 3:57am
|
TomG
Total Posts: 3397
|
This one is an n-gon / holes issue. In effect you have a face defined by many hundreds of edges / vertices, when render engines prefer 3 or 4 edges at most.
Triangulation is the answer - you can use Triangulate on the Model side, or Quadrify or Split Polygons on the workspace side. However, your model will be harder to work with using auto triangulation, which may not give nice results. Manual triangulation might work best, though a lot of work across so many edges - what I did in a similar situation with a gurney was to actually make each hole a separate model, so I could just triangulate it once and then copy it into its final required location (http://www.tmgcgart.com/html/gurneygallery.htm )
These are the sort of results that can come from Booleans, and the sort of situation that can cause problems with render engines, exports to other 3D software or game engines, etc.
HTH!
Tom |
Post by RAYMAN // Feb 23, 2009, 4:48am
|
RAYMAN
Total Posts: 1496
|
These are the sort of results that can come from Booleans, and the sort of situation that can cause problems with render engines, exports to other 3D software or game engines, etc.
HTH!
Tom
Only half right Tom !
Booleans for poly modeling you must say here !
Thats one of the reasons I made such a big fuss about nurbs the other day !
You simply dont have that problem with nurbs booleans..... and thats one of the biggest advantages of them. You can use shapes to cut and curve
things out of a bigger block and that multiple times.
Only the funny thing is and always has been that Truespace never supported
Boolean operations with nurbs !:mad:
I will show you how elegantly they work if you have them ....
If some of the people dont see any necessity for nurbs any more in TS 8
well please think again !
Edit : Examples were made only with boolean cutting and adding like explaned above ...
Note that many props for films including the famous Minority report etc. were made with them..
Peter |
Post by jamesmc // Feb 23, 2009, 6:11am
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
Oh, I disagree Rayman about nurbs being needed.
In this case and in my opinion, the right tool was used, but the wrong choice in the type of boolean was used.
to make extremely clean "cuts" in an object, one uses create cut edges.
One can use any shape, at any angle and get extremely clean cuts, leaving four-sided polygons.
The trick here is that once this method is used, the mesh once cut becomes a new mesh and one must right click again to make it active - no big deal.
The other thing, is that one only has the cut and must use sweep or some other method to extrude or sweep the cut in the direction one must go.
Look at the wires on this unsubdivided cube primitive from the workspace side. They are extremely clean with no artifacts.
So, one must use create cut edges in order to get really clean cuts on unsubdivided meshes. |
Post by jamesmc // Feb 23, 2009, 6:31am
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
Here's another example on the same cut primitive, using a reasonably complex cylinder with some extrusions as the cutter. Notice the details and geometry are preserved.
So, one could draw out their cutter and make extremely complex cutouts for extrusions in depth or to sweep out. |
Post by RAYMAN // Feb 23, 2009, 8:16am
|
RAYMAN
Total Posts: 1496
|
This is a text from Michael Gibson the man who made Rhino !
http://moi3d.com/forum/index.php?webtag=MOI&msg=2420.14
He must know well James !;) |
Post by jamesmc // Feb 23, 2009, 8:25am
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
This is a text from Michael Gibson the man who made Rhino !
http://moi3d.com/forum/index.php?webtag=MOI&msg=2420.14
He must know well James !;)
I'm sure he knows well, but this forum is not the Rhino or the MOI forum. It's the trueSpace forum.
If you have a suggestion about putting NURBS into trueSpace in an advanced methodology put it in the appropriate topic as a suggestion. But you seem to post it in every thread and cheer lead your support for NUBRS from programs other than tS.
It's unnecessary and doesn't help anyone who has neither program.
Sorry if that sounds harsh, but as I said, this is not the Rhino or MOI cheer leading forum, this is the trueSpace forum.
Now back to your regularly scheduled forum topic. |
|
