With all the exciting news about the capabilities of 3D printing I wonder if it does deserve a separate forum - just to make ist easier to find information about that amazing technology. have fun Michael
Looking on the Shapeways site... I was a little stunned to see that things can be printed in metal....stainless steel.... http://www.shapeways.com/materials/stainless_steel and silver: http://www.shapeways.com/materials/silver The silver process is lost-wax, basically an expensive and high-tech way to do what I was talking about. Considering the properties of bronze and brass powders, it would seem possible that 'print your own brass locomotive' is at least forseeable here. OK, I'm just a little confused.... was your 2-6-6-2 printed in the 'frosted ultra detail' or was it something else? The ability for Shapeways to print something in some other material (that you didn't even design to) appears to be a bit of a hole in the logic.... or do you as the designer pick the material and lock it down?
Aside from expense, silver looks good, but doesn't allow the fine detail of Frosted Ultra Detail, not to mention you're limited by the material's thickness. However, you could create a basic boiler and other non-critical details in silver, then add handrails and such from FUD, brass wire, or retail brass castings.
Ok, I'll be watching this one for sure. Would love to see some closeup pics of the boiler detail, maybe outside in brighter light? Curious how bad the stepping is on the curved parts. There is a steam project I'm probably going to go ahead and try to see how it works... Thanks for taking the plunge on this. Can't wait to see it on a mechanism. -jamie
I'll add it to the spreadsheet I'm building! There is actually a relatively high chance that I'd try this one if I could get enough people on board - the cleaner/more pipe free a locomotive is the happier I am You have a particular mechanism in mind? The floor is four scale inches thick - which I believe works out to .63 mm (the absolute FUD minimum is around .3mm). The problem is that the tender's under body detail is relatively low (and slotted) so it does not provide much support. It's no worries, I'm planning to add internal braces to support the tender contacts as well as a possible decoder mount anyway . I would scale after you convert to STL - netfab (which you will learn to love) makes scaling relatively quick and painless. It looks like you have a good start there! Just out of curiosity, what are some of your minimum dimensions? Just as a reference point - my rivets are 2.5 scale inches across - oversize I know, but I haven't been able to get details much smaller than that to come through reliably. Thanks for the kind words! And yes, to answer your question, the model is as light as a feather. The fact that it doesn't need to be cast opens up a world of new design possibilities though (as I'm sure you recognize) - the entire model is a single strong integral piece for example. As for casting things in general, I am sure that you are far more of an expert then myself... And yes you characterize Shapeways' pricing scheme accurately. Unfortunately, we N and Z scalers have this technique - at least to this same level of smoothness and detail - pretty much to ourselves at least for the time being. As for heat, I have no idea. That said, running them underneath hot tap water both corrects much of the warping that arises during shipping and makes them noticeably softer. I have heard of people boiling them for short periods to remove wax though... I'll add it to my list! The metals are indeed cool, but to my knowledge cannot achieve even close to the same level of detail - that's why I'm sticking with FUD for at least for the time being. You can build your model to whatever specifications you wish, but for most materials at least, your model is subjected to an automated test before they print it. I designed my models with the FUD specifications in mind (minimum detail, wall thickness, etc.) and consequently cleared those checks. My locomotive would in all likelihood be rejected if I tried to print it in WSF for example - at least that's my understanding, I've never actually tried -. That said, if details do not come through or parts break, they generally send you the model anyway with suggestions for improving your design... If by "stepping" you mean visible layering (as in from offset layers of material during production) than there is essentially none, especially after it has been painted. One can however see the 'planes' that Sketchup used to define the curves on the side of the boiler and cab roof - but that is a fault in my design, not a problem from production.
i have a con-cor hudson drive here .... would most likely be the best fit for a bc rail royal hudson.
Something else to consider is steam locomotive parts such as domes. You are already a step ahead in that you have done domes (sand and steam) on your D&SL boiler... having an alternative to some of the details currently available on models would be a great boon to those who are modeling outside the box. Models such as the Bachmann 2-8-0 and 4-6-0 and the Model Power 2-8-2 and 4-6-2 could benefit from having different domes that can be placed on the boilers and I am sure that there are other models that could benefit from such as well, for those who are wanting to model something other than the stock model. Of course, replacement boiler shells would also be good (though the MP's are cast metal which might affect their pulling ability if some other material is used to create the boiler). As a clarification, I would be using any 2-6-6-0 boilers I acquire for my freelanced roads since they are a good representation of early articulates, which is why I would not need the smoke lifter (no tunnels, just steep grades). Surprised at the idea that they boiler will fit a Bachmann 2-6-6-2 but if it can be done that would be a great boon for me. I am anxiously awaiting the shots of the boiler on a chassis... but only as you have time to share them...
Hmm okay I'll have to look into that... The problem with detail parts and domes is Shapeways' "startup fee." In effect, a $5 fee is automatically added onto the material cost right at the beginning. As such, in order to bring the price per unit down enough, I would need to place a fair number of domes in each batch (how many domes might people want?). I also don't know what sorts of detail parts/domes kitbashers need - this is my first kitbashed/modified locomotive, ever, in any scale . When I say the shell fits on the Bachmann mechanism, I say that it fits after some strategic cutting to the frame. I've attempted to minimize the number of cuts as much as possible, but they still need to be made. Hopefully I'll be able to post pictures this weekend - it's almost finished
Looking forward to this! Also, could you put a Rock Island R-67b 5000 series 4-8-4 on the list? After all, they had the most 4-8-4's of any road out there.
Just another idea fire in my head ( to put on your spreadsheet?): It's a long time now I try to find a solution to have a good runner 0-6-0 steam switcher in N scale ( I model SP so here below a picture of what I'm speaking ). Interesting is that many RR companies have similar switchers from Baldwin. If only we can identify a good industrial mechanism .... a Model Power tender will fit! View attachment 44716
I think the solution to the small parts fee is to combine things on very thin sprues so that it is 'one part'. I do that a lot in resin molding as well. I saw that $5 setup, that's still more than reasonable, but people have to understand from the get-go that its in there. I've just started the Google Sketchup tutorials. That 'seems' to certainly be the tool of choice here. It's been a long time since I tried a new 3D CAD tool, and the last one was kind of a failure. Invested a lot of time in it though. Has anybody discovered anything that simply won't work in Sketchup that typically relates to railroad designs? I guess to me the ultimate test would be some of the complex curves found at the end of a diesel hood, F-unit nose, etc. If you look at Shapeways, there's apparently few limits there. I ordered the little Barnhart loader kit also because of the curved roof...want to see how that works. On a three-axis orientation... do they decide the best way to make it or do you? I know that when resin-casting, deciding the axis of orientation is just critical; most shells are cast upside down and I do several of them on end now. The other thing I see that puts the economic model on its head is there is no volume price break... or is there? If you order multiple quantities in an order, does that $5 only count once?
Matthew, Your timing on this thread is perfect. I actually asked this question about RP shells for steam locos on Inkaneer's PRR K4 1361 thread on this forum last week. "I wonder if someone could RP new PRR shells with Belpaire boilers for the Bachmann 2-8-0 and 4-8-2 to convert these to H-9/H-10 class and M1 class locos." Getting back to your earlier questions. Yes, I would be interested in some RP shells in the price range you mentioned. I have 2 Bachmann 2-8-0's that I purchased with the intent to convert these to PRR H9/H-10 class locos. So, I would be interested in 2 of those shells if you did them. I would also be interested in a shell for a PRR M-1 loco to convert my Bachmann 4-8-2 light mountain if you were to do one of those. I bet PRR fans would be interested in having the larger tenders with the doghouses. Anyway, this is a great idea and I look forward to following your progress on this. Scott
You might want to measure the awesome new Kato C62 4-6-4 (Kato Stock # 2017) for compatability. I belive the mech is more DCC friendly than the previous release. Drivers might be a problem, though. Andy Tetsu Uma
yes,the timing on this thread is right on. i just received the barnhart loader from shapeways yesterday and i am almost speechless. the surface of the curved top is not as smooth as a cast or injected piece,but it isn't rough or stepped either. very acceptable. the possibilities for n scale modeling is almost mind boggling. i too have downloaded sketchup and am working with the tutorials. fortunately i have a couple of friends with background in 3-D CAD and i just happen to have a key prr h-10 to work from. i am really looking forward to seeing where this goes. skipp
If you think of our N scale world as a Ven diagram.... you have three critical-mass intercepting interests here, really significant...the more I look at this I feel this is a huge emerging concept, right up there with some of the other ones we've seen in the hobby. 1) 'second generation' Google Sketchup, downloadable. I went through the basic training videos....wow. And I thought I was going to have to learn AutoCAD 3D here as well as get a license.... the design software has evolved rapidly and Google understand software 'intuitiveness' as well as anyone. 2) Shapeways themselves, and this new FUD material, as a third-party manufacturer. If you go on their website and search just for "N scale", you'll find a lot of jaw-dropping attempts here to do things, some for sale, some not, and some familar names out there already. I think I like the guy doing 400 pigeons in N scale. The europeans seem to have been tinkering with this as well, lots of odd stuff there. Not much US except for a handful of guys out there. And if you think you have 'missed the boat', I looked through every N model out there, and I'd put this locomotive concept in this thread right up at the tip of the spear. It's kind of a first - at least of a US-prototype steam locomotive shell with this level of sophistication. And the relationship between part size and price is VERY comperable to what people 'expect' to pay for N scale product. It sure wouldn't be for HO due to the material volume. For example, there's an N scale skyscraper out there that calculated out to $7,000+ because of the material used. N and Z don't have the problem; components like trucks and detail parts come out relatively comparable to what an injection-molded part would retail for in the Walthers catalog. 3) The general slow progress on new N scale product introduction during the recession... the impact of the changes in the Chinese economy... rising tooling costs.... and the general "HO envy" of N scalers create a heck of a demand here for low-run and prototypical product. The 'tooling cost' is really how much time you're willing to invest in developing a decent 3D model rather than grinding away on the workbench making patterns. The other thing I see.... the 'price of mistakes', and it is a paradigm shift of the first order. If you make a design error in injection molding, oh boy, big penalty. Even in my resin casting, it's still a bear as it is a minimum 3-day process to revise a master part and a mold if something just doesn't work. Same with photoetching, getting the pattern wrong and you've cost big bucks when you're a cottage manufacturer. Here.... if you have problems it would appear you can 'fix' the model, reload it, and the next guy to order it as a single unit immediately gets the revision. I can hardly wait to see my first material/kit sample. I find it difficult to restrain myself to stay calm until my normally-pessimistic self gets a physical grip on this stuff.
You are having the same revelations that I had when I discovered this whole process a few months ago. It opens a whole huge world of possibilities... A word of warning though - there are certainly caveats here. Designing in Sketchup can be a bit of pain (for technical reasons that I'll go into if people want) - mostly that successfully converting from skp to STL (the file format most 3D-printers accept) is not necessarily the easiest or 'cleanest' process. The models themselves are also more variable then many of us have come to expect - each one comes out a little differently depending on how each individual machine is calibrated and the orientation that Shapeways decides to print your model in (this isn't something that you - the designer - can define and is probably the biggest complaint people have against Shapeways). But then again as you have noticed - there's no up front cost whatsoever and hardly any risk to trying!
Oh and there are no curves/shapes too complicated to make in Sketchup if you have the time, patience and skill: http://www.sketchupartists.org/tutorials/sketchup-and-advanced-modeling/making-of-black-hawk/
I'll throw in some more support for a PRR H10/9/8 for the Bachmann 2-4-0 mechanism, an M1 for the Bachmann heavy 4-8-2 mechanism, and a B6 for the Bachmann 0-3-0 mechanism. I'd also be good for pretty much any other large PRR steam that gets produced.
