impressive the number and quantity of details in the models.
it is undoubtedly hard work.
really not easy to master all the constraints of positioning and location of all the components of the car …
you must have a lot of Cplanes recorded in the scene. to be able to navigate between the components and modify them at the same time
very good work !
impressive the number and quantity of details in the models.
Ah, yes, the CPlane system of Rhino is very helpful and is a real time saver, especially when it’s combined with Named views. I can’t imagine doing many of the tasks without CPlanes. For large projects like that it’s vital to name every part to be able to select parts by object name, as well as assign proper names to the CPlanes and Named views for easier navigation.
In my early projects, like 15-18 years ago, I didn’t understood the importance of setting an organized scene, complete with layer trees and object names. It was a mistake that I underestimated initially, until I started to work on some more complex projects that teached me a lesson and two.
Also, one good habit is creating of a library of 3d components inside individual layers that are saved separately. That way, they could be conveniently imported into the main scene when needed.
I also used the help of two great resources:
“McMaster-carr”, which has a large library of 3d models of actual components that could be ordered from their on-line store.
BoltGen plug-in for Rhino that allows you to generate your custom screws and nuts.
Dude, this is incredible! Congratulations!
That’s a wicked and elegant piece of art!
I love that you guys have managed to keep the aesthetics coherent around the car, letting it have similar characteristics when viewed from different angles, while keeping the shape interesting.
Truly a master piece!
@bobmcneel I think it would be really cool if you made an article on how Rhino was used to in this project, if they would let you. Maybe you need to buy a car first, I think you should actually, it makes perfect sense that you drive a car designed with the software you made possible
Thank you for the nice words! I basically spent almost 1/5 of my life on this project, so it’s very special for me. I had the privilege to work together and make great friends at the company.
For anything related to legal and publishing materials for the car anyone interested would need to contact the manufacturer directly, because I’m just the design engineer of the project.
Without Rhino that project would not see the light of day, so I thank “McNeel” for providing such a complete toolset capable of covering many aspects of the design process! It truly deserves more recognition among various industries. One thing that I particularly like in Rhino is that it’s relatively forgiving when using multispan surfaces. The Blend surface could chain and build a single transitional surface along gazzilion number of input surfaces, which shortens the modeling work, despite that it also means the models could not be considered class-A.
With regards to the goal to keep all shapes coherent to each other, it was funny when I had to figure out how to integrate the round tail lights into the very edgy rear end. But with some visual tricks on the tail light housing it got about right, I think.
That’s just such a massively impressive project, @Rhino_Bulgaria! Congrats!
I think those tail lights are a nice counterpoint in the design and I think you did it justice with how that shape flows into the edged surroundings. To me that rear looks like a patient predators growl as the car passes you by.
Unfortunately, we don’t have enough writing staff to write up every interesting project that we see every week… at least a dozen. But we are happy to pass the details along if someone has a short description, image, and a link to more details.
@Rhino_Bulgaria : amazing project. My favourite Rhino project so far. I am amazed by your mechanical parts. I have one question in my head. Was it hard to correct all mechanical parts without a fully parametric engine? I`ve thought that is the place where Rhino users use Solidworks because you had to put all construction lines for every mechanical part and all booleans sources. Because every part may change during project evolution so it would be a waste not to have all sources for all operations. My main question is: what advice you would give me to manage changes in such a big Rhino project without having a fully parametric engine like Solidworks (storing construction lines and all sources for all commands, storing history, blocks, GH)? I wonder how it looks from a practical side.
Hi Marcin, I’m glad that you like this project so much! I appreciate it.
To reply your question, I will have to repeat what many others said over the years: Since there is no parametrization history in Rhino, the user have to use brute force, i.e. delete some portion of the model and then do the corrections needed to suit the design intent. While this is sometimes slow and repetitive, this also means that the user have more freedom on how to shape the model. Rhino is a free-form modeling program and that has its pros and cons. On one hand, Solidworks, Inventor, Catia and other specialized parametric CAD programs are very well suited for general mechanical design and in most cases changes on the shape and size could be done much easier than in Rhino, but on the other hand they don’t have the flexibility that Rhino has with free-form shapes.
Due to the lack of mechanical simulation in Rhino I had to rely on Solidworks for verification of the suspension geometry (turning left/right, stroke, camber angle, caster angle, bump steer, collision detection etc). Initially, I did a simple test with a great free online parametric suspension simulation program called “VSusp” (Vehicle suspension): http://vsusp.com
When I was kid in the 90s I created a simple wooden/cork/paper experimental scale model of the multi-link suspension that I wanted to implement in a real car some day. You can see the model in motion here:
I decided to implement that multi-link layout instead of the typical double-wishbone design, because it’s a very smart way to gain camber angle and caster angle, which translates to a better grip and lesser movement of the wheel towards the front or rear of the car (when seen from side view). The latter reduces the occupied volume of the front wheels, and thus allows to slightly increase the feet room, which is always too tight in mid-engined cars with cab-forward design.
Once I was happy with the general layout of the suspension according to my settings in the “VSusp” program, I used the same dimensions in Rhino and created the 3d A-arms and uprights there:
Since the “VSusp” program is 2d and made to specifically test double-wishbone layout, it was unable to properly simulate the behaviour of my multi-link front suspension design while turning the wheels left and right, so I did a series of approximations in Rhino using the
! _Orient3Pt command to relocate the curves in the 3d space that represented the upper toe links. It proved to operate great in Rhino’s viewport, but I also had to test it in various positions to ensure that it will will be safe to use on a real car. Unwanted bump steer is the most critical thing that had to be addressed, because having two upper toe links as a substitution to a regular upper A-arm means that the camber angle and caster angle vary quite a lot, thus the distance between the steering toe links is also affected. And that may lead to bump steer of the suspension is not tuned properly. This is why I needed to do some little adjustments in Solidworks to make sure the suspension layout is safe to drive.
Pictured below is an old rendering that shows the initial suspension that used steel lower A-arm, however, the newer version uses CNC-milled A-arms on all wheels that are much lighter.
! _Orient3Pt command was also used to test the door lift system:
! _ClippingPlane was very helpful to examine the profile of the suspension and the interior panels, too:
Another great tool in Rhino is the
'_CPlane command that allowed me to set custom planes and create 3d models at the desired orientation. Pictured below is the door latch and the solenoid that pulls or pushes the rod connected to the former. The other pictures show the solenoid and latch for the bonnet.
The first image below shows the old scissor-like design of the window actuator and rails, but we had to scrap the idea, because the moving arms that raise the frameless door window were too long and unable to deliver good and fine movements. Another problem was that the door glass was too heavy, because it’s much longer than those on the regular cars and also needed to be deep inside the door panel even when it’s fully raised due to the frameless design.
This is why recently I designed a more reliable cross-wire window actuator that delivers constant speed rate and the front and back end of the window and is capable of accurate fine movements, because the rails closely follow the shape of the window and its moving path. All rails are entirely made out of CNC-milled aluminum, because the window actuator needed to be as light as possible to reduce the overall weight of the door. Both window actuators benefited from using multiple CPlanes.
@bobmcneel , I tried to write some of the more interesting details regarding the design and use of Rhino in the post above. Feel free to edit and use it at your liking if you decide to make a short article on the project somewhere.
Wow. Wow. Wow. Amazing Titan work. Respect!!!
Phenomenal, mind-blowing project! Feeling inspired.
Thank you for the kind words, guys! I’m glad that you like it. Cheers! Bobi
your work is without equal- thanks for sharing!
Thank you for the kind words! Without Rhino and its developers that car would not be possible in the way it is.