Yet another toy is getting finished now. This time around it will have wider front wheels (285 mm). The photos here show the new wheels installed on the old suspension. However, in the coming days the latter will be replaced with all new A-arms that are optimized to allow a greater turning radius with wider wheels.
I also added a couple extra videos in post #59.
9 Likes
The front suspension went for a massive diet, thus the new version weights about 3,5 kg less than before. This also means approximately 1,5 kg less unsprung mass. The lower A-arm got rid of the bent tube, replaced by two straight pieces to reduce the cost and time needed to build the whole part.
The upper A-arm and the push rod also use a thinner tube.
This is a comparison of the weight between the old front A-arms (left side) and the news ones (right side).
The CNC-laser cut machine requires a fully closed region for the tubes, this is why the ones with partially missing walls had to include thin bridges to support the walls. Those will be removed with an angle grinder subsequently. This is a comparison between the original part (bottom) and the version for laser cutting (top) with added bridges.
9 Likes
Recently I’m having some fun with 3d scan data. Despite the occasional crashes of Rhino 7 due to memory limitations related to the Undo stack (forcing me to save, close and re-open both Rhino and the 3d model every few steps to avoid more crashes), I will never stop to praise the unmatched user-friendly camera manipulation in Rhino compared to any other CAD program I have ever tested in my life. Navigation in the 3d space around very tight spots via 3d mouse is extremely easy and pure joy! 
2 Likes
hi @Rhino_Bulgaria any reason why you don’t orient the pieces by defining two planes and using RemapCplane / Orient3Pt?
2 Likes
Do you have in mind some copy/orient actions I did in the recent two videos above? If so, could you tell me the exact time these appear in the videos?
I typically avoid “Remap CPlane”, because it’s not reliable enough. As I mentioned in another topic recently, Rhino tends to lose accuracy that way. It’s a very annoying bug. Sometimes objects copied and oriented by that particular command get scaled in the process. For example, an object with a length of 200 mm gets transformed into 200,000009 mm, resulting in a decimal number instead of a whole number. I even had cases where cylinders and circles lost their true arc nature, hence Rhino was unable to snap to their center anymore.
“Orient 3pt” produces much less errors, even though it also leads to very tiny inaccuracies. I guess that this can’t be avoided entirely due to the way the viewport coordinates work in the world of 3d graphics.
A similar bug occurs while using the “Distribute” and “Align” tools, as well. As explained by some of the Rhino developers, those tools rely on rough bounding boxes with a lesser precision for the transformation process.
1 Like
I was referring specifically to the last video where you are orienting the scanned objects. I cannot imagine that an inaccuracy of 0.000009mm is going to make a difference there, and it could save you a lot of time. If you have an example where RemapCplane or Orient3pt produces an inaccurate result, I’d like to share that with our devs.
While some tiny deviation would not make any difference in the real part, seeing that there is an accuracy is a warning for me that something is wrong with my 3d model.
Sometimes I also notice that there is no proper tangency on lines built with the ! _Line _Tangent _Pause command around an arc or circle, when I check it with the ! _GCon command. It may require a second try to build a proper tangent line. This usually happens on CPlanes with random orientation (not parallel to the world axes).
As for examples that produce deviation with ! _RemapCPlane, I will have to start using that command again to find out if there will be another bug like that. I completely ignore that command recently.
It’s impossible to define a plane for the engine, because the 3d scan data is way too rough and therefore it will not provide a proper flat area to use as a reference. This is why, I had to adjust the orientation of the small scanned objects along the engine multiple times, using just my understanding what would be the most appropriate position. Also, one of those real engine mounts (the larger one) is slightly bent, while the second one (the smaller) had a broken mounting point that was glued slightly improperly by someone. My job was to create replacements of these parts from laser cut plates, in order to make the engine mounts much stronger and avoid the high cost of buying them separately. The original engine mounts are made from a very light cast alloy (either aluminum or magnesium) and so far they always bend or break easily.
The second reason is that two of the lower mounting points are not flush with the remaining ones, meaning they are on a totally different plane. One of them is also inclined to a certain degree.
Pictured above is by far the most complete version of the Aeromaster LMP (2003 Bentley Speed 8 replica). It was sold recently to a happy new customer as a display car.
There is an even more ambitious new build now that aims to use a new AUDI engine coupled with a Holinger racing transaxle. The chassis received numerous upgrades, including a totally new front suspension with lighter A-arms and wider wheels. The images below show some of the stuff made in the past few months.
15 Likes
As always, incredible work, thanks so much for sharing. Are you in that picture as well?
1 Like
Thank you for the kind words! I appreciate your opinion. 
The two gentlemen in the photo are the owners of the company that buys and sells rare racing cars and sports cars.
1 Like
Recently, I made some modifications to the bell housing for the transmission of Aeromaster LMP.
7 Likes
“Sponsored by PTC, engineered and modeled in Rhino!”
1 Like
PTC - Products Toilets Consume
What was this about?
What do you mean with “PTC”?
There is a PTC sticker on the car. Which implies they were a sponsor.
After a quick search on Google, I found that logo. Probably “PTC” stands for “Power to create” as per this article:
Not sure if this is the same company, but with changed logo:
There are plenty of stickers on the car, because it’s a replica of the original Bentley Speed 8 that won LeMans in year 2003.
1 Like
No, technically, it stands for Parametric Technology Corporation. At least that is what the original company name was. The geniuses at work may have tried to change it though. However, I like my definition much better. LOL
1 Like
Ha-ha, every fillet I created in Rhino on this project is totally not parametric. Just a manual work with lots of mouse clicks. Hopefully, Rhino 10 will finally have some sort of parametric fillets and chamfers.
1 Like