posted
Ok, since no fan in the history of fandom has ever soaked a starship model into a container full of water, I think I'll go to NYC tomorrow and look for miniature keychains to soak into water.
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
Well, now that I'm home, and have access to my semi-large no assembly required models of the E-D and E-E and I have absolutely nothing better to do until the rest of my friends come home, I'll see if I can jury rig a little experiment. And I would imagine that the larger the models, the more accurate the results.
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
For the water displacement method, the bigger the model, the better. Key chains are so small that the level of uncertainty for any measurement would probably be very high. A key chain is, what, about 6 cm long? That's 1/10,000th of the length of the "real" Ent D and about 1/10^12 the volume. Make sure to get a nice graduated cylinder! Simple paper geometry would probably give you just as good a figure.
Instead of water, you might try using sand and hollow, larger-scale models. Sand is less likely than water to get inside the model. You could also just tape together an unbuilt model to measure different parts of the ship separately. You could even wrap a finished model in Saran Wrap or something to protect it.
I actually tried using water to measure a plasticine model of one of my own ships. I didn't have the right tools. I only had a kitchen measuring cup, so I abandoned the attempt pretty quickly. The wife also told me to stop making such a mess.
-------------------- When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
How's this for a plan:
1. Measure the volume of an empty bathtub.
2. Fill it to the aforementioned volume.
3. Submerge both models separetly and measure the difference.
The only problem I have is finding a way to measure the difference in the filled bathtub.
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
I hate to dis these enterprising techniques, but is there anyway to do this with a 3d model? im not sure which programs can measure what, but it seems like you could take the model and convert it into simpler shapes and measure their volume (therefore revealing the vessels displacement) rather than this wet solution
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
Won't work. You'd have to create your own models to exacting perfection.
Let's say we used the extant 1/1400-scale AMT Galaxy & Sovereign models. Never mind that they're hollow, they also aren't consistent. That is to say, the plastic used with differe from each kit & sometimes WITHIN each kit. Varying thicknesses, differing densities, & general materiels composition would drastically fuck with the numbers.
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
Mike: breaking a wireframe/CGI model apart isn't too difficult, but it would result in a *large* number of (irregularly shaped) geometric pieces. Thus, you'd still only have an approximation of the volume... though a more accurate one than could be obtained via ol' Archimedes.
[ December 13, 2001: Message edited by: Cartman ]
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Shik: That would alter any attmepted mass values, but it wouldn't have any effect on measuring volume via displacement. As long as no water gets inside the model, you'll still get an accurate figure.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I've asked several people about getting volumes from CGI models, but no one has ever come through. They either say that it can't be done, or they simply won't do it. Now, if you had a CAD program, which is designed to calculate volumes of materials for manufacturing...
Anyways, how accurate do we actually need these calculations to be? Is plus or minus 10% good enough? If you dealing with something like EntD, whose volume is something over 6 million cubic meters, is greater accuracy going to help you much? I don't trust my calulations much past three figures (6.30x,xxx m3), but that's good enough for a ship this big, I think.
Measuring displacements of scale models in water is tricky because they're hollow. Unless they're sealed tight, water will get in, but if they're sealed tight, they won't sink in the water because of trapped air. So, they have to be sealed tight and maybe filled with a material that will make them sink or prevents water from filling the interiors. If you want to avoid water you could fill a hollow plastic model with sand and measure the sand to get a rough underestimate of the volume. Another way would be to get make a papier mache model using your plastic model as the inner mold. Cut it off and fill each piece with sand. Measure the sand.
The easiest way to measure volume by water displacement is to stick the object you want to measure in a big graduated cylinder with numbers on the side and partially filled with water: you drop in the object and see how much the water level goes up. If you don't have a large graduated cylinder, you can measure fluid differences by overflow replacement. Take a bucket or other container of water and fill it to overflowing. You have no idea of its volume, but it doesn't matter. You then put in the object you want to measure, and the water overflows. Take out the object (tying a string to it would help) and let all the water drain back into the bucket. Then see how much water it takes to fill the bucket to overflowing again. That should be the volume of your object.
If you're using sand instead of water, put your object in a container slightly larger than the object, then fill the container with sand. Take out the object, then see how much sand it takes to fill the container up again. That amount is the volume of your object. Again, the total volume of the container is not important.
-------------------- When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
If we use the overall density of EntD of 0.71 t/m^3 (4.5 Mt/6.3 Mm^3), EntE should weigh 1,439,000 tons.
The big difference between EntE and EntD is the primary hull. That of EntD is enormous, its volume (3.7 Mm^3) is more than the whole EntE.
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
Oooooo...
*drains bathtub*
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
Cubic Centimeter
Ex-Member
posted
You could also place the model in your container then fill it with water. Pull it out and measure the amount of water needed to fill it to the top and you should have your volume.
The Defiant would mass roughly 50,000 tons assuming a Galaxy-class density. However, it's overgunned and overpowered for its size; specifically, we know its SIF can't withstand the full power of its engines. Since a lot of a ship's mass is in its warp coils, I wouldn't be surprised if the Defiant massed 100,000 tons or more.
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
