I wanted to join two WTCs together and have the various cables from T200s and lights being as short as possible to reduce drag and the clutter at the bulkhead as minimal as possible. I have made a couple of these and like what they can do. The thruster guards are just 3 mm ABS shaped with a heatgun and a bottle.
Do you mean the joiner or the ROV? ROV flies well but needs a tiny bit of extra buoyancy in. the rear. I think I will use the 400 mm length tube and that gives me a small payload as well as positive bouyancy.
Seriously impressive I wish I had the skills for that, I am like a guy with lifted 4x4 only driving down the block. I have a cnc and 3d printers and scanners but never got good at the cnc so now its there to constantly remind me of my shame :-). In my head I thought I would use the cnc to mill hdpe I bought but after consideration I thought this wheel is already invented, and now I have water proof shower shelves lol.
Sounds like we have the same skill set. I wouldn’t even attempt something like that or some of the other stuff I have designed but I do have a good relationship with one of the best machine shops on the planet.
This kind of idea has come up previously here, but in my imagining of it I was thinking of a single piece to serve as a slot for penetrators as well as a flange connection on either side.
I’m curious why you opted for the approach you took - was it mostly for penetrator accessibility (presumably they’re easier to install with such direct access), or were our existing flanges just available at a low enough cost that machining a larger composite part would have needlessly made your part more complex without saving much on cost?
I considered putting the flanges into the design but wanted to see firstly if a more basic unit could be made where I got to test just how well the complexities of the inner workings of the WTP plug had been machined. Having established that this has been achieved I will may now try getting a piece with the flanges incorporated in the piece. This will result in a 12 mm length reduction, negate the need to bolt the pieces together and make the entire piece lighter. Of course, that may add such cost to the piece that I am better sticking with BR flanges as part of the assembly.
I just received another permutation of that design last night being a sort of combination endcap. Photo attached.
It takes both the full WTPs, sensors etc and also just the WTP plugs for the thruster and light cables.
As a side note, when I read the comments made in the links in your reply, I was interested to see that some of the CAD files available on the BR site may not be accurate to prevent duplication by third parties. I have incorporated those CAD files many times in previous pieces I had had made and had on more that one occasions thought they were not correct. Particularly regarding o rings. Do you intend to make the true files available to those of us looking to utilize those parts in our own designs?
For some extra context on this, I’ve been told the current version of the watertight enclosure models on our website are in fact accurate (I’m not certain whether they always have been or if that was a more recent change), but some of our other product models aren’t entirely accurate or have parts left out (the main ones I’m aware of are the propeller blades, WetLink penetrator internals, and the internals of our assembled products (like our sensors and actuators)).
That’s not my call to make, but if there’s a file we’ve intentionally modified the public version of to avoid duplication of the primary/critical engineering work then providing the unmodified source would only be possible on a case-by-case basis, and presumably under some form of NDA. That kind of request would be best handled via our support email (email@example.com).