Making revealed : Visible display for current maker projects and a method to interpret them

[Amanda McLaren]

This is the thread for the making revealed brief:

The rear lift information that was requested is: Max weight 1500lb

Max Dimensions taking into account the light fixture and the alarm fixture 145cm deep (front to back) 152cm width and 188cm high - clearance definitely needs to be factored in, and you might want to re:measure for you own piece of mind!

[Daniel Martin]

Hi all, 

Thanks for pulling the measurements together, Amanda. If the extreme height of the display unit remains at 5ft we will have plenty of clearance. 

The brief in full for this element of the project is attached to this post. Let mew know if anyone can't access it.

Jonathan: If you're please able to put together a cutting list for the perspex that would be really good. We've put all the 50mm lengths to one side for your use for this project.

Everyone: It'd be great to have your input at every stage of this build and when thinking about the programming around it. The more input we have from everyone at this stage, the more fit for purpose the finished unit will be. 

As promised, I'll keep this tab for Google Groups open throughout the day so I should be able to pick up on your posts fairly regularly. See you all next Wednesday!

[Morgan Barke]

A few thoughts...

Rather than having padlocks for each compartment, or everyone unlocking on a large mechanism, how about...
RaspPi or Arduino controlled Solenoid Locks for each door. Only £3.88 each from aliexpress.com

Ref: www.aliexpress.com/item/Mini-Small-Size-Solenoid-Electromagnetic-Electric-Control-Cabinet-Drawer-Lock-DC-12V/32570608202.html

Square or rectangle compartments, rather than hex. Maybe mix up the sizes of the box for different size projects. 

Cheers, Morgan

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Derby Makers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to derby-makers...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to derby-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/derby-makers.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Al Johnson]

On Thursday 07 January 2016 05:14:35 Amanda McLaren wrote:
> This is the thread for the making revealed brief:
>
> The rear lift information that was requested is: Max weight 1500lb

> *Max* Dimensions taking into account the light fixture and the alarm

> fixture 145cm deep (front to back) 152cm width and 188cm high - clearance
> definitely needs to be factored in, and you might want to re:measure for
> you own piece of mind!

Does that include clearance for someone to push the buttons? I don't remember
the operational restrictions on that lift...

[Al Johnson]

Much as I love electronic things, for budget and timescale a simple cam lock
might be better. CPC have them starting round £2.50 each, next day, while Ali
can supply 10 for under 5 quid - eventually. I don't know where the discussion
got to yesterday on that front though - there were questions about the
aesthetics of all the locks.

From what I remember the budget looked quite tight for something approaching
the maximum size for the lift. Can anyone provide an update on where
discussions got to please?

On Thursday 07 January 2016 21:06:24 Morgan Barke wrote:
> A few thoughts...
>
> Rather than having padlocks for each compartment, or everyone unlocking on
> a large mechanism, how about...
> RaspPi or Arduino controlled Solenoid Locks for each door. Only £3.88 each
> from aliexpress.com
> Ref:
> www.aliexpress.com/item/Mini-Small-Size-Solenoid-Electromagnetic-Electric-Co
> ntrol-Cabinet-Drawer-Lock-DC-12V/32570608202.html
>
> Square or rectangle compartments, rather than hex. Maybe mix up the sizes
> of the box for different size projects.
>
> Cheers, Morgan
>
> On 7 January 2016 at 14:16, Daniel Martin <dan...@derbymuseums.org> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Thanks for pulling the measurements together, Amanda. If the extreme
> > height of the display unit remains at 5ft we will have plenty of
> > clearance.
> >
> > The brief in full for this element of the project is attached to this
> > post. Let mew know if anyone can't access it.
> >

> > *Jonathan: *If you're please able to put together a cutting list for the

> > perspex that would be really good. We've put all the 50mm lengths to one
> > side for your use for this project.
> >

> > *Everyone: *It'd be great to have your input at every stage of this build

> > and when thinking about the programming around it. The more input we have
> > from everyone at this stage, the more fit for purpose the finished unit
> > will be.
> >
> > As promised, I'll keep this tab for Google Groups open throughout the day
> > so I should be able to pick up on your posts fairly regularly. See you all
> > next Wednesday!
> >
> > On Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 1:14:35 PM UTC, Amanda McLaren wrote:
> >> This is the thread for the making revealed brief:
> >>
> >> The rear lift information that was requested is: Max weight 1500lb

> >> *Max* Dimensions taking into account the light fixture and the alarm

[Amanda McLaren]

Yeah, if u push in close doors and run (or walk leisurely) up stairs and call the lift. You dont have room to be in as well.

On 8 Jan 2016 18:59, "Al Johnson" <al...@mazikeen.demon.co.uk> wrote:

On Thursday 07 January 2016 05:14:35 Amanda McLaren wrote:

> This is the thread for the making revea...

> *Max* Dimensions taking into account the light fixture and the alarm

> fixture 145cm deep (front to back) 152cm width and 188cm high - clearance

> definitely needs to be...

Does that include clearance for someone to push the buttons? I don't remember
the operational restrictions on that lift...

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Derby Makers" group....

[Jonathan]

Hi all

Just started sketching something up for this.

In sorting the 50mm wide strips of ply, do you know if we have more of the 25mm thick or the 18mm thick?  Thickness makes a difference when working out the lengths, and subsequently the sizes of perspex we will need.

The idea we came up with on Wednesday was something like this:

any thoughts or comments?

[Paul Stevens]

Looks great Jonathan.  Impressed by the sketch.

Cheers

paul

[Tony Brookes]

I wasn’t part of the discussions, but you seem to have made the design able to cope with different sized “boxes”. I like. I’ll let others decide the actual dimensions…..

Comments

If it were possible to remove/slide out the vertical perspex sheets then flexibility for odd sized things could be provided - I’ve no idea if this is a useful suggestion.

Stability. This is a tall potentially thin design, there must be a way of working out how stable it is on it’s casters. I’m assuming casters so it can be moved, don’t forget to allow for their height in the design. (I’ve seen people forget to allow for such things in other jobs).

Power. Assumption - internal lights will need cabling for power.

Mad idea - why not make it an L or an H or an X shape when viewed from above? Loads more space in the unit, much improved stability.

Tony

 

On 9 Jan 2016, at 18:54, Jonathan <scratch...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Morgan Barke]

Looking good!

[Jonathan]

a couple of updated images.

I've reworked the original to use 25mm thick ply for the front and back, using the 18mm for the internal and ends.  The third version is with the front and back leaning inwards by 2.5 degrees - it means a little more work but I think it looks a lot better - more stable too.

Still need to work on the base...

[Daniel Martin]

This looks fantastic, Jonathan! Really looking forward to talking through the designs on Wednesday evening.

One quick thought: Are we progressing with solid sides? If not, we just need to think about how we interpret and provide information on the makes held inside. The side would give us space to either attach vinyl directly or attach some sort of screen/card holder for interpretation.

[Paul Stevens]

It may be way over budget but how about a video running showing progress or the completed project in action?

All the best
Paul

[Daniel Martin]

Hi all,

I've been down to talk with Steve about these provisional designs for the cabinet and, while he really likes it, he has a couple of concerns. The primary one is strength across the design. Steve's not convinced that this design wouldn't twist under load. Another concern is complexity; Steve reckons there's about 2-3 weeks full time work involved in putting together a cabinet with this many components and joints. A few more boarded sections (sides, base, top and shelves) may help with the simplicity and rigidity without compromising the sleekness of the design too much.

One point from me would just be to be mindful of the budget. The design as it stands would be very heavy on perspex, without considering the cost of door furniture or lighting.

We can have a proper chat about it on Wednesday but just wanted to flag up Steve's initial thoughts ahead of Wednesday so we've got time to think about any alterations that may be needed!

Cheers everyone,

Daniel

On Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 1:14:35 PM UTC, Amanda McLaren wrote:

[Al Johnson]

If that would be useful we may be able to Re:Purpose a RaspberryPi that would
otherwise be used for CodeClub - possibly keeping track of which one if we
need to buy codec licenses. h264 would be better though - lower streaming rate
and/or storage requirement, plus no need to buy the codec. There are several
kiosk-mode distros, and looping video wouldn't be a problem.

Adding a touchscreen later might make it more useful and interactive, but that
doesn't need to be in place right away.

On Monday 11 January 2016 11:07:41 Paul Stevens wrote:
> It may be way over budget but how about a video running showing progress or
> the completed project in action?
>
> All the best
> Paul
>
> On 11 Jan 2016 11:05, "Daniel Martin" <dan...@derbymuseums.org> wrote:
> > This looks fantastic, Jonathan! Really looking forward to talking through
> > the designs on Wednesday evening.
> >
> > One quick thought: Are we progressing with solid sides? If not, we just
> > need to think about how we interpret and provide information on the makes
> > held inside. The side would give us space to either attach vinyl directly
> > or attach some sort of screen/card holder for interpretation.
> >
> > On Sunday, January 10, 2016 at 2:16:19 PM UTC, Jonathan wrote:
> >> a couple of updated images.
> >>
> >> I've reworked the original to use 25mm thick ply for the front and back,
> >> using the 18mm for the internal and ends. The third version is with the
> >> front and back leaning inwards by 2.5 degrees - it means a little more
> >> work
> >> but I think it looks a lot better - more stable too.
> >>
> >> Still need to work on the base...
> >>
> >>

> >> <https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-4sgU5IhNMYU/VpJnbtZWEbI/AAAAAAAAAE4/m
> >> aKg4GPAUW0/s1600/New%2BPicture%2B%252812%2529.jpg>
> >>
> >>
> >> <https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/--zDDL1FI04s/VpJnhLUpjqI/AAAAAAAAAFA/6
> >> Ga7f6QQP-w/s1600/New%2BPicture%2B%252811%2529.jpg>>>

[Al Johnson]

We may need some input from you about trade off between conflicting
requirements, and whether we've correctly understood the brief. What are the
priorities? Do you want to be able to show lots of projects, with the volume
that entails, or would one good one in a smaller space be better? Can the
budget stretch for a more desirable design, or is it fixed? Same for the
deadline, and/or the hours we can work on making it.

The proposed design has good visibility for most of the volume (but requires a
lot of perspex). However it may provide too much visible volume depending on
how much work-in-progress you want to be on display.

How about using board rather than perspex for the bottom row or two of the
design? That way we:
* keep the general appearance
* keep reasonable visibility from low viewing height
* don't waste work so far
* improve rigidity
* reduce material cost
* provide some space for things that may not be ready to view yet

Other options would include scaling down - reduce it to 2/3 or half the length
to reduce materials use and work to do, or a combination of both. Or just make
a plinth with wheels and a perspex box on top...

On Monday 11 January 2016 07:58:03 Daniel Martin wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've been down to talk with Steve about these provisional designs for the
> cabinet and, while he really likes it, he has a couple of concerns. The
> primary one is strength across the design. Steve's not convinced that this
> design wouldn't twist under load. Another concern is complexity; Steve
> reckons there's about 2-3 weeks full time work involved in putting together
> a cabinet with this many components and joints. A few more boarded sections
> (sides, base, top and shelves) may help with the simplicity and rigidity
> without compromising the sleekness of the design too much.
>
> One point from me would just be to be mindful of the budget. The design as
> it stands would be very heavy on perspex, without considering the cost of
> door furniture or lighting.
>
> We can have a proper chat about it on Wednesday but just wanted to flag up
> Steve's initial thoughts ahead of Wednesday so we've got time to think
> about any alterations that may be needed!
>
> Cheers everyone,
>
> Daniel
>
> On Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 1:14:35 PM UTC, Amanda McLaren wrote:
> > This is the thread for the making revealed brief:
> >
> > The rear lift information that was requested is: Max weight 1500lb

> > *Max* Dimensions taking into account the light fixture and the alarm

[Al Johnson]

I've posted some thoughts about web site publishing, paper notes and QR codes
to the 'Technical DM Website Discussion' thread. The idea is to make it as
quick/easy as possible to do so we might actually do it.

On Thursday 07 January 2016 05:14:35 Amanda McLaren wrote:

> This is the thread for the making revealed brief:
>
> The rear lift information that was requested is: Max weight 1500lb

> *Max* Dimensions taking into account the light fixture and the alarm

[Daniel Martin]

I think it's exactly these points we need to discuss tomorrow night. The design, in principle, is a good one that meets the brief in terms of displaying your work and existing as a visually interesting piece of museum furniture. 

It may just be a discussion with Steve and I around what's achievable in the time and budget we have available. It's our feeling at this point that a few material and structural alterations may make this design more viable. The budget is pretty tight and ideally we'd stick to it so let's work on that assumption and see where we get to! 

Looking forward to seeing you all tomorrow night!

[Bob Scratchit]

Hi Dan

You mentioned some acrylic you found from an old display case.  I thought we might use this for the internal shelves to save making frames.  Can you let me know how much you have and how thick it is?

I'm trying to get some details finished to allow us to start making tomorrow so this will help.

Cheers

Jonathan

[Daniel Martin]

Just to clarify what we discussed and saw on Wednesday night - there are 4 sheets (2000x1000) 6mm acrylic which you're welcome to use. There are then additional, smaller offcuts should you need them for anything else. 

[neil...@googlemail.com]

Hi all,

Here's an idea of the plinth for the cabinet to sit on. It's 200mm high not including the castors, this should give a useable space for power pack and whatever, with castors it will still fit in the lift with about an inch to spare. No clever joints just a lot of biscuiting. Not sure of the budget and therefore what wood to use, was thinking MDF and then paint it rather than ply. Also hinges need to be thought about, was thinking kitchen cabinet hinges unless anyone has a better idea.

In tomorrow so any thoughts or ideas would be appreciated.

Neill

[neil...@googlemail.com]

Actually, here's the plinth...