Upright fold block model
Obliczymy ostateczną cenę na podstawie wybranego pliku. Sprawdzisz ją i zaakceptujesz przed płatnością.
Zapisane na tym urządzeniu.
A simple geologic block model showing a fold.
- Ocena
- 0 / 5
- Polubienia
- 3
- Pobrania
- 47
- Wydruki
- 0
- Wyświetlenia
- 222
- Oceny
- 0
Aktualizacja u źródła:
Informacje o modelu
- Źródło
- Printables
- Kategoria
- Other 3D Objects for Learning
- Licencja
- Creative Commons — Attribution
A simple block model showing a geological fold. Depending on how you hold it in your hand, you can show and antiform or a synform. It has a removable core for stimulating additional discussions during the class. We use them in our GEOL101 labs and Geological Field Techniques classes. This is one of eight models used by students during a GEOL 101 structural geology laboratory.
These models would typically require the use of a dual-extrusion printer and can be printed in a variety of materials. PLA has been our choice and has worked well for us. The dual-extruder printer files folder contains four .stl files. The folds_layers1and3 and folds_layers2and4 files can be merged in the printing software and get assigned different colors. The drill core model gets printed separately. Remember to have core body and marker bed pieces match the filament color of the folded layer pieces.
It is of course also possible to print the pieces individually and glue them together as well! The second folder, named “single-extruder printer files”, contains each of the pieces that can be printed separately. This way, you can print each of the folded layers in different colors. Don't forget to check the folds reference photo to see how each piece of the model is named.
If you want to read more about our experience in using these models in Geology 101L, please check this publication: Joseph Gutierrez, Sinan Osman Akciz, Natalie Bursztyn, Kevin Nichols & John Thurmond (2023) Testing the efficacy of 3D-printed geologic models as tools for fostering spatial visualization abilities, International Geology Review, 65:8, 1320-1330, DOI: 10.1080/00206814.2022.2084647