Presentation:
My thoughts on how the presentation went to today are mainly that I think the presentation went well overall with the exception of our group running out of time in the preparation to get a proper ‘Voice Over’ for the presentational video done.
This was due to the problem, which all the groups faced, of the time it took to render the animation in 3D Studio Max. Mostly the overall average rendering time for all the groups were between 20 -60 hrs, our groups rendering time was 20 hrs even when rendering our animation on 6 separate machines. This limitation caused most of the group’s animations, when presented, to seem a bit segmented instead of running smoothly.
There were several recommendations and alterations suggested to all the groups from both our module leader and the 3 representatives from the ‘Museum of Power’.
The suggestions made to our group were:
• To slow down the rotation of the ‘Griffon Engine’ in our animation so that the viewers would not feel so queasy after watching the video.
• To re-record our ‘Voice Over’ for the video and to edit the content of the script to the ‘Voice Over’ to a less detailed description of the ‘Griffon Engine’ and it’s inner workings to simplified level suitable for younger viewers.
Module Reflection:
For this Module during the past semester I have found the work both interesting and challenging. I have learned several new techniques and modelling styles through following the tutorials during week’s 2 to 5 while constructing the 3D, animated Model of my own head, granted if I had had more time then I would have done a lot more on the 3D Modelling aspects of actually building the head, but out of what I do I feel I learned quite a lot and have extended my knowledge and understanding of the 3D Studio Max Software.
The part about this Module I found most challenging was possibly working under pressure to get select parts of both briefs done in accordance to a set time frame. An example is in trying to do as much as I could on the 3D Head as I could in the limited time I had and to not get left behind everyone else who, in some cases, had actually finished their heads and even partially animated them.
The part of this module which I most enjoyed was being able to work in a group and be part as a team to create a product at the end of the semester. I particularly found the topic we chose quite interesting, Mk 14 Griffon Engine for the Spitfire Fighter plane used in the 1940’s. I found this topic so interesting because it gave me a chance to research the engine and find out about the mechanics behind it and how it was used through the 2nd World War.
In conclusion I feel that I have gained quite a bit of experience from this module through 3D modelling techniques and also historic as well which I didn’t expect. I’m looking forward to next semester with this module to see what we shall be doing next.
Tuesday, 8 December 2009
Sunday, 6 December 2009
Sem.1 Week 11: Voice Over Script
I received an email during mid week of week 10 by a member of the group asking if I could type up a script for a Voice Over which will be included in the presentational Video.
The topics to be covered were:
-Why the MK 14 Griffon Engine was Designed and Developed.
-How the Griffon compares with it's smaller predecessor the Merlin Engine.
-Why is the Griffon, being a V12 engine, better than a Radial engine?
I was able to find a considerable amount of information for comparing the Griffon and Merlin engines and in the Griffon engine'd Design and development but very little on why the V12 Griffon is better than a radial engine.
I produced the script after resaerching about all three engines on the below 3 sites and by asking a local expert about the engines.
Griffon
Merlin
Radial
From this research I was able to produce the below Script:
Person 1:
Hello. This is a virtual representation of an MK 14 Griffon engine.
The ‘Griffon’ engine was originally designed and developed by Rolls-Royce to be interchangeable with its predecessor the ‘Merlin’ engine, and was to be used for low altitude naval aircraft such as the Fairey Firefly. However, during its development, it was suggested that the ‘Griffon’ engine would be adapted to fit in a Spitfire. This suggestion was made by Supermarine’s chief design engineer Joe Smith in 1940.
Later on in the engine’s development however, work on the ‘Griffon’ engine was halted to move focus and concentration to the smaller 27 L ‘Merlin’ which had already surpassed with the early ‘Griffon’ engine design. This was made so, on the order of Lord Beaver Brook, the Minister of Aircraft Production.
The Griffon, when compared with the designs of its earlier predecessors, had several advancements in its design. Physically it was only slightly larger than the Merlin in spite of the Griffon’s larger fuel capacity of 37 litres to the Merlin’s 27. The other main difference was the Griffon’s camshaft and magneto drives were built into the propeller reduction gears at the front of the engine rather than being driven from the back of the camshaft.
This, in turn, allowed the overall length of the engine to be reduced which proved to make the Griffon engine more reliable and efficient, not only by reducing the engine’s length but also due to the idea of fitting the Griffon with an internal oil flow system which contributed to the lubrication of the engine and required less maintenance compared to the Merlin’s external oil lines which required much more maintenance and were prone to leakage.
The topics to be covered were:
-Why the MK 14 Griffon Engine was Designed and Developed.
-How the Griffon compares with it's smaller predecessor the Merlin Engine.
-Why is the Griffon, being a V12 engine, better than a Radial engine?
I was able to find a considerable amount of information for comparing the Griffon and Merlin engines and in the Griffon engine'd Design and development but very little on why the V12 Griffon is better than a radial engine.
I produced the script after resaerching about all three engines on the below 3 sites and by asking a local expert about the engines.
Griffon
Merlin
Radial
From this research I was able to produce the below Script:
Person 1:
Hello. This is a virtual representation of an MK 14 Griffon engine.
The ‘Griffon’ engine was originally designed and developed by Rolls-Royce to be interchangeable with its predecessor the ‘Merlin’ engine, and was to be used for low altitude naval aircraft such as the Fairey Firefly. However, during its development, it was suggested that the ‘Griffon’ engine would be adapted to fit in a Spitfire. This suggestion was made by Supermarine’s chief design engineer Joe Smith in 1940.
Later on in the engine’s development however, work on the ‘Griffon’ engine was halted to move focus and concentration to the smaller 27 L ‘Merlin’ which had already surpassed with the early ‘Griffon’ engine design. This was made so, on the order of Lord Beaver Brook, the Minister of Aircraft Production.
The Griffon, when compared with the designs of its earlier predecessors, had several advancements in its design. Physically it was only slightly larger than the Merlin in spite of the Griffon’s larger fuel capacity of 37 litres to the Merlin’s 27. The other main difference was the Griffon’s camshaft and magneto drives were built into the propeller reduction gears at the front of the engine rather than being driven from the back of the camshaft.
This, in turn, allowed the overall length of the engine to be reduced which proved to make the Griffon engine more reliable and efficient, not only by reducing the engine’s length but also due to the idea of fitting the Griffon with an internal oil flow system which contributed to the lubrication of the engine and required less maintenance compared to the Merlin’s external oil lines which required much more maintenance and were prone to leakage.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)