thanks Stephan, i'm heading out shortly.
try this...start with a 12 sided circle,
stretch and pull the vertices
into the desired positions.
maybe, over simplified,
but, you get the point, right?
thanks Stephan, i'm heading out shortly.
try this...start with a 12 sided circle,
stretch and pull the vertices
into the desired positions.
maybe, over simplified,
but, you get the point, right?
sometimes the magic works.
sometimes it doesn't.
Hello Smilo,
Getting into the wingroot sub-assembly parts with the Draw - Edit Chain menu, I managed to alter the shape of the wing-root by pulling up the trailing-edge vertices. The originally plano-convex wingroot, made with 8-sided simple profiles, is still a bit flat at the bottom, but the shape seems to be getting closer to what I want.
Maybe the next step would be to cut out a bottom middle section to make the bottom surface convex too, so that the sloping angle upwards to the trailing edge starts further aft.
In the screenshot you can see the original templates in blue (horizontal blue base lines), and the white lines are at newly positioned angles giving a higher trailing edge. Possibly this is partially what you were referring to editing the shape before, but it isnīt really the template that has been edited.
Regarding the 12-sided circle you mention for forming a template into a desired shape: I would have expected that kind of template to be for a fuselage bulkhead, so it would be at 90 degrees to the wingroot cross-section profile type template I need... ...but Iīll try it out anyway!
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
"Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"
Hello Smilo, hello folks,
The wingroot now has the desired bi-convex shape, with bottom surface less curved than the top.
The only way to do it was to manually edit the sub-assembly itself, moving vertices and adding panels.
But... the kicker is, it wonīt compile - I hadnīt tried that yet, and previous versions wonīt compile
either, so at least, the flaw is not in the wingroot shape-improvement itself, which is a relief.
Stupid... I forgot about changing all the polygons in the listings because they donīt have textures yet...
thatīs why it wonīt compile yet!
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
"Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"
have spent the past few hours
fiddling around with templates.
basically, trying to remember.
as i recall, i said the hell with it.
i don't have the time for the aggravation.
first off, section temples can be made
to be viewable from different planes.
click on the radio buttons at the top
and select x0y, y0z or x0z
to get a top, front or side view.
unfortunately,
template configuration is very limited.
too bad there is not a random option
which would enable one to place
vertices wherever desired.
as you've discovered,
the wing profile options are also lacking.
just for fun, i drew an 11 point chord shaped chain.
next, i clicked the 'build a cylinder' option
using said chord chain.
after is was built,
i 'enlarged' the original 'template' chain by .25%
i now have a tapered cylinder
that looks a lot like a wing.
as an added bonus,
there are two vertices
forward of the trailing edge.
one upper and one lower
that will align with the aileron and flap joints.
sometimes the magic works.
sometimes it doesn't.
Hello Smilo,
Thanks for the instructions, and I appreciate the effort that went into discovering how it works. Iīll use the idea!
I was under the impression that the cylinder option would force the use of the same profile at both ends, but obviously this wouldnīt make much sense.
For the moment, Iīve obtained a wing-root by using an 8-sided profile, modifying the sub-assembly by adding 1 side underneath and pulling up the trailing edge slightly. Itīs still only only 9-sided though, but it works.
However, adding further sides to improve the shape will be more laborious than using your idea to build a new 11 or 12 sided profile-chain, and making a tapered "cylinder" with it. This will also be a much easier way to make the outer wing.
Iīve also managed the sequencing for the two wingroots and the central fuselage - it wasnīt complicated (this time...).
Thanks again for the solution!
Update: The way to build a nicely shaped 11-sided inner wing works very well.
The only difficulty is that the intersection option does not apply here, and it appears that vertices will have to be lined up manually with the fuselage and the engine nacelles. Nothing is perfect in this life!
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
Last edited by aleatorylamp; June 14th, 2017 at 10:17.
"Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"
yes, it's true, this is not a perfect solution.
if you've tried it, you've seen
the new cylinder end is a duplicate configuration
of the original chain, (minus the chain)
with the vertices tied together.
the cool thing is, if you want,
you can change the shape
and move the original anywhere.
you can also change it's size.
the new end...not as easily.
unfortunately, the intersection option is gone.
so, there will be handwork.
another issue will be,
figuring out the proper wing taper.
i'd say, start with a chord chain
the size of the wing root.
and set it up at the wing cap location.
create a cylinder back to the root location.
now, you can use the enlarge option
to reduce the size of the wing at the tip.
use the copy/translate option
to move the tip chain up/down
or forward aft to get it's proper location.
next, how to achieve wing/fuselage
or nacelle vertices intersection alignment.
sometimes the magic works.
sometimes it doesn't.
Hello Smilo,
Yes, interesting! The resulting shape itself is actually incredibly good using this system, and very easy to make.
I started off with two chains for the inner and outer profile, correctly sized for taper and dihedral (sizes and placing obtained from the diagrams). One of them was going to be the profile to make the cylinder, and the other the reference to adjust for taper and dihedral. Then I made the cylinder and adjusted its profile to match the reference profile.
The next step is more difficult: To manually fit the vertices to the fuselage. After that, it will be the turn for the engine nacelles, and the fitting of the inner wing vertices there. Then comes the outer wing and wingtip - the latter will be easy, as the build is quite automatic!
I still have to think about whether fitting all the vertices manually to the fuselage and engine nacelle will be more difficult than using my previous system - i.e. standard 8-sided profile templates, fit automatically with "intersection" to fuselage and engine nacelle, and then later adding 3 extra parts to the inner and outer wing profile covers, and pulling up the trailing edges. I wonder. Iīll see how it goes.
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp.
"Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"
..."fitting all the vertices manually to the fuselage and engine nacelle"
okay, try this...for each wing vertices,
create a correctly sized fuselage template,
located exactly in line with each vertices.
yes, that's a lot of templates,
but, there will be no guess or by golly
aligning the wing vertices with the fuselage.
you will know exactly where the skin is.
sometimes the magic works.
sometimes it doesn't.
Hello Smilo,
I was already trying to get the individual vertice intersection option to work, but it wouldnīt.
It couldnīt find the required templates.
OK, so Iīll do it as you say. Making all those templates will be much easier than any other procedure.
Great, and thanks very much!
Aleatorylamp
"Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"
Hello Smilo,
It worked, and surprisingly, all at once!
First I made all the fuselage templates, fitting to all the points where I wanted the inner-wing panels to intersect with the fuselage vertices. Then I re-read (again and again) the help-instructions for chain intersections. These asked for the selection of a plane, which I supposed it had to be one of the fuselage side panels; then for a point; then for another point, but seemed to be working, and was all rather confusing.
Suddenly, however, I noticed that all of the inner-wing panels, which had originated at the fuselage centre-line, were now perfectly aligned with the outside fuselage surface!
Now the inner wing is much smoother - of course, it would be, now that it has 11 instead of 9 parts!
Well, well, it was quite unexpected how fast it went!
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
"Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"
it looks great! nicely done.
i love it, when a plan comes together.
imagine how quickly it will go,
now, that you know what you're doing.
(i'd suggest writing down the procedure)
here's a new challenge,
basically, start over....aaargh
this time, move the inner wing chord chain
away from the fuselage,
make another wing cylinder,
except enlarge the fuselage side chord profile.
now, do the intersection procedure.
if done correctly, there should be
a wing root fillet...yes?
sometimes the magic works.
sometimes it doesn't.
Hello Smilo,
Yes, itīs very satisfying!
Now, the procedure has to be repeated for engine nacelles and outer wings.
Iīll pay attention to exactly when it all clicks into place!
Using normal wing-profile templates, i.e. a centrally-aligned template and then a smaller outer one, automatically gives the taper, so the size of the centrally aligned template has to be larger than the size of the wing-root on the fuselage skin.
With the different system we are using to get a better shape, the centrally aligned wingroot-base-chain moves parallelly outwards, so it has to be sized on the fuselage skin, without taper compensation inwards, and it is too large, as I had accounted for taper.
Minor Update: The correction went perfectly by moving vertices in point mode, so it was quite easy, although making a new inner wing wouldnīt have been complicated either!
Well, now for the engine nacelles and restly wing!
Hmmm... interesting about how to make wing-root fillets. Iīll keep that in mind for the future, as only the prototype Electra L10 had them. It also had completely a different wind-screen and cockpit-roof, like a shipīs bridge, but these were changed on the production version, and fillets were discarded.
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
Last edited by aleatorylamp; June 16th, 2017 at 10:10.
"Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"
Hello Smilo,
Iīm making the engine nacelles, and itīs difficult to fit them.
Initially I had 16-sided polygon template crossections, but this makes them too difficult to match to the inner wings, so I think 12-sided bulkheads will be better.
As the nacelles are only inserted in the forward half of the wing, the Intersection option doesnīt work either.
Possibly Iīll have to fit all the vertices by hand, but before I do that Iīll see if it works better with 12 instead of 16 sides.
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
"Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"
am anxious to see
what you come up with.
sometimes the magic works.
sometimes it doesn't.
Hello Smilo,
Me too... I think that one of the requirements for an inserted component is that it has to be smaller that the one into which it is to be inserted.
Thus, my plan is to make the nacelle in 3 instead of 2 different sections - one that fits into the wing without portruding forwards, a middle section and then the nacelle-nose, which will be jump-planed with the engine bitmap and the propeller.
Letīs see how that goes.
I seem to remember a "punch out" option, possibly only available in AD2k2, whereby you could cut out shapes from a plane or part, but maybe it would only be for windows. Iīll have to investigate that a bit.
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
"Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"
as i recall, i didn't have much luck
with the insert feature
and didn't have the patience
to go figure it out, so i bagged it.
consequently, there was a lot of hand work,
which, in the end, didn't get done on the A-20.
there's another ad2k vertices feature
that's gnawing at my brain.
the terminology has escaped me
and i can't explain what it is.
(boy, that's helpful, huh?)
something about hovering the mouse
above a vertices, left click, hold+ctrl,
then dragging it to a vertices of another chain.
i guess i'd better warm up the big screen,
fire up ad2k and see if i can find it.
wish me luck
sometimes the magic works.
sometimes it doesn't.
found it...
in the help file index, click on
align a vertex, move a vertex, or select a vertex.
all bring up the same page.
check out, align a vertex with another vertex
and capture a vertex.
i believe both techniques can be very handy.
sometimes the magic works.
sometimes it doesn't.
Hello Smilo,
Thanks for the tip, Iīll try it out this afternoon.
Weīre having a heat wave - they said it would be over for the weekend, but itīs not - and Iīm rather sleepy...
More later!
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
"Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"
Hello Smilo,
Itīs getting a bit too tedious, and Iīm completely stuck, after only having done the mid-fuselage section and the inner wings.
Vertex alignment for the inner half of the nacelle and outer part of the inner wing just wonīt happen. It should be automatic, with the facilities provided, but itīs impossible.
I am very tempted to revert to AF99 with all its limitations, because at least I can get the job done reasonably well with that.
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp.
"Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"
just got home from a very late night out
and decided to drop in before dropping off.
would you please send me a copy
of the chord chain and a couple nacelle templates?
i make no promises, but, would like to have a look.
oh, what the heck, please send me the mid fuselage,
inner wing and what you have of the nacelle.
i'm off to dreamland.
sometimes the magic works.
sometimes it doesn't.
Hello Smilo,
I hope you enjoyed yourself last night - presumably with the band! Good stuff!
Iīve just e-mailed the Electra model to you, to see if you can help me out.
As seen on the screenshot, the inner-wing fastening to the fuselage section went very well.
Not so, however, the engine-gondola to the inner-wing.
The forward nacelles are separate sections, which will later have to be sequenced to the wing
with a front/rear jump-plane instruction.
Thank you very much for your offer!
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
"Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"
thank you, Stephan...i received your email.
as i said above, i make no promises,
but, i can feel a little itch to solve this problem.
all i need to do is make time.
looking at the screen shots,
it doesn't look that tough.
(gosh, i hope i'm not bragging)
please, don't take this the wrong way,
i know you are excited about making progress,
but, in my opinion, you are getting ahead of yourself.
if this was my project, i wouldn't bother
mirroring the wing and nacelle
until one side is completed.
same goes for the forward section.
again, just my opinion,
there's too much unnecessary stuff
interfering with the view of close work to be done.
looking at the images, i would add nacelle templates
at each point where there is a chord chain vertices.
both at the top and bottom of the chord chain.
as with the fuselage, this should make finding
the points of intersection much easier.
yeah, it's tedious hand work,
but, i'm sure you will get the results your looking for.
the trick now is to test my theory
and see if i know what i'm talking about.
one final thought, have you completed
the aft end of the nacelle?
if so, please send it to me as well.
oh yeah...one more.
if you are more comfortable building with af99,
do it, then, save the afx and import it into ad2k.
remember, make it as complex as you like,
but, keep it simple....yeah, that's an oxymoron.
what i mean is parts only...
no components or structures.
okay, i'm off...lots to do this weekend.
sometimes the magic works.
sometimes it doesn't.
Hello Smilo,
Thanks for your indications, and for your time! Iīll see what I can do as regards the suggested extra templates.
If all else fails, I can always revert to AF99 then, and import the parts into AD2K! OK.
The lower rear part of the nacelles would slant up backwards, disappearing inside the wing, and there would be a portion of the tucked in main wheel portruding.
I understand what you mean about the mirrored parts, but I get a better feel of what Iīm doing if I see the aircraft taking shape more or less simmetrically. Thatīs another reason for me to build all parts in their correct positions, because I donīt like building things at the 0,0,0 point and then shift them into place later.
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
"Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"
of course, your method is valid
and makes sense.
i merely offer another perspective
that seems to work for me.
as the old saying goes,
to each his own.
sometimes the magic works.
sometimes it doesn't.
is this what you had in mind?
it took a while to figure it out,
but, this is what i came up with.
sometimes the magic works.
sometimes it doesn't.
Bookmarks