Modelling the Solar System with OnShape

by SpoonUnit Aug 27, 2016
Download All Files

Thing Apps Enabled

Please Login to Comment

I've tried with Sketchup and a few other programs without any luck of making this a solid object. I am trying to avoid the hollow bottom. I think the curveball is the small spheres and the editing processes. Does anyone know what direction I can go with this?

Open the file in onShape, remove the shell process, and export. This was a two second job if you know how to use onShape. I've done this and uploaded a new STL file which is solid. Hope that helps.

Thanks for the help. When I followed your link to onshape, it showed the relative size file. Then I copied for edit and then it showed the file with the large sun. I gave up at that point.

Are all the planets to scale? :)

All the planets are to scale according to details from NASA. The only thing not to scale are the rings around Saturn. As stated in the thing details, the planetary dimensions used are from https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/docs/modelingsolarsystem_20070112.pdf, and the rings from Saturn are thickened to 6500km (or they wouldn't print).

Sorry, I meant the distance between them. I was being a wise-guy.

There are two models. One aims to show only relative planets sizes. The other makes an attempt to show relative interplanetary distances. However, the same scale is not used for both the distance between the planets and the size of the planets in that model. The reason is that there's no scale that would work to fit a planet you could see and the distance between them into a small model you could print. Either the model would have to be thousands of miles long (typically challenging for most printers), or the planets would be nano-meters in size (making them challenging to see). The problem here is reality. To quote Douglas Adams, "Space is big. Really big. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space." So, in that second model, the distances between the "center" of each planet is accurately modeled, with the mercury>sun distance being scaled down to 1mm. If we were to put the planets at the same scale however, none would be visible. The calculations should all be visible in the model if you want to double-check.

I understand all that. Did you not get that I was joking? The joke was that it's impossible to do.

Hilarious. I'll have to get my sides stitched back together.

You accidentally made a cylindrical sun.

Haha. Brilliant :) I probably did the same with all the planets too:)

Oh hang on ... cylindrical ?

"Even though we seem to have decided that Pluto is no longer large enough to classify as a planet, I decided to leave it in both models."

LOL! I had to zoom way in to see Pluto, I didn't even notice it was there until you mentioned it. :)

Haha. Yep, it's just a speck of dust at these scales really.

I don't understand how to modify the OnShape model (which is set as the "bookend" style) to be like the original model.

Nevermind, I was on the Relative Distances tab, not the Relative Sizes tab.

You can't modify my model. You'll need to make a private or public copy of it for you to play with before you can make any changes.

I know. That's what I did. Only I ended up on the Distances tab instead of the Sizes tab, and didn't notice it. It's fixed now.

OK. I see what you mean. Glad you figured it out.

Now I'm curious what you changed :)

Just got rid of Pluto. Nothing else. Or I might later put Pluto back in, and add Ceres in between Mars & Jupiter.

Poor Pluto :) I was also thinking of adding a few rocks as a belt out at Pluto and possibly between Mars and Jupiter.