Shapeways and practical design considerations

[randgust]

I've got several wonderful things from Shapeways, and did a couple designs myself.

Pretty much everything I've done or bought is in what's in fine detail plastic, or FUD (frosted ultra detail) in the previous life.

They've obviously upped their game with printing precision over the years, as well as their ability to print things that don't work all that well but still pass the analysis.   And that stuff is REALLY brittle, particularly after it has been cleaned.

A couple years ago I got a forklift with front forks printed so fine that they broke off when it just tipped over.  ACC'd that back together, very careful not to ever bump it again.

I just got two more, one being an exquisite Mack AC truck from the 1920's.   Printed in one piece in N.  Astounding resolution.   The steering wheel column couldn't be any more than .008".   The roof is so thin it is virtually transparent, I haven't mic'd it yet but it feels like about .010 or thinner.   There are individual spokes in the wheels.  It's well beyond what is normally injection-molded in plastic.

I was beyond careful with it, just sat it gently down on the workbench.   Went to pick it back up. and the front wheels - which were apparently only held on by scale-size leaf springs- shattered.   I think it is repairable.   That's typical of a design that would work well in HO, and now, you can just change the scale, resubmit it, and see if it passes.   Before it probably would have been rejected due to violation of minimum cross section.  Now it will actually print, but the print result is just absurdly fragile.    I also got two forklifts of a different design, in multiple pieces, and yes, the forks are scale sized and absurdly fragile looking.   Holding my breath on those.

So I think they really have reached the point where they can print detail so fine that you either can't see it, or it's so fragile it can't even be handled to assemble or paint it.  So for all they guys that are out there designing back to actual scale where the rule is 'just rescale it smaller, see if it passes', the real world says you've finally reached the point of absurdity where you can maybe print a radio antenna on an N automobile but it can't possibly hold up.

I normally soak all these in Bestine, but that also tends to make them even more brittle..... just sayin'.

I know some of the newer printers have a material with better surface qualities and a little less brittle characteristics, but I've shattered a corner step on a locomotive shell there, too.

One of my biggest criticisms of Shapeways is the number of designers that will put something out there that they've never actually finished or assembled themselves.   Most photos are renderings instead of finished models, which tells me the designer hasn't even tried it, and if they did, they'd make some changes before buyers got it.  Guys like Walter Vail (WBV and Showcase) are experienced designers working backwards into Shapeways and you'll see them fudge components in Shapeways for practical assembly considerations, but not everybody else does.  A good example is Walter's corner stirrups on his cars - done heavier than they have to be, although now you could probably print them to scale cross section, and they'd snap off just by assembling the car.

[wm3798]

You sound like me when I'm looking at plans from an architect that clearly has never built anything in the field... Everything works on paper, but it still takes someone with practical experience putting those models on the road to know when enough is enough.

Really, this is just an extension of the old discussions about added on- vs. molded on details in N scale.  While some of those cars look really nice in up close photography, in practical use, those pretty etched metal walks eventually expand and contract their way off the glue at one end or the other, the fine wire grabs get hung up on something and break off, and to my old guy eyes anyway, once they're weathered, they don't look all that much different an older model from 3 feet away, especially in a moving train.  There is always a compromise between fine scale detail and construction that's sturdy enough for regular handling.  For most applications, I'll take sturdy as the priority every time.

The designers do need to take into consideration handling and finishing, and add some bracing in discreet locations to help beef up the structure of their N scale models so they are more practically put to use.

Lee

[Chris333]

Now with my own 3D printer I can find files online and resize them to N scale, but some of the files are very detailed with items you listed like real sized leaf springs and under body detail.

This was found online and sized to N

[wazzou]

Should be a one piece windshield. 

[Chris333]

I can cut it out 

[PiperguyUMD]

[/quote]

Where? I could go for a few of those!

[robert3985]

...
Really, this is just an extension of the old discussions about added on- vs. molded on details in N scale.  While some of those cars look really nice in up close photography, in practical use, those pretty etched metal walks eventually expand and contract their way off the glue at one end or the other, the fine wire grabs get hung up on something and break off, and to my old guy eyes anyway, once they're weathered, they don't look all that much different an older model from 3 feet away, especially in a moving train.  There is always a compromise between fine scale detail and construction that's sturdy enough for regular handling.  For most applications, I'll take sturdy as the priority every time.

The designers do need to take into consideration handling and finishing, and add some bracing in discreet locations to help beef up the structure of their N scale models so they are more practically put to use.

Lee

Lee @wm3798 , In essence I agree with you as far as what designers need to take into consideration, but my actual experience with metal add-on detailing is just the opposite of yours.  I've added etched stainless and brass running boards to both engines and cars and I've never had one "walk" its way off the glue I've applied.  I've had that happen to some RTR models, but it was easily fixed.  On the other hand, I've had plenty of separate plastic running boards break on MTL cars during my Ntrak years just because they got roughly handled at shows by other, less careful club members.

Also, on my models that I apply separate, fine metal wire grabs to, I haven't had any "break"...none.  I've had some of them get squashed completely into the model's body, so that there's no space between the grab and the body of the car/engine, and on one or two, I've had a grab or two come out of the body enough so that I could see the shiny metal of what should be inserted into the plastic. However, all were extremely easy to fix and re-glue, with no reoccurrences.

On the other side of the coin, I've had PLENTY of plastic, cast-on and MTL separate end foot stirrups and brakewheels break, which is why I have several packages of replacement parts for them.  I've NEVER (not once) had an etched brakewheel break, or a turned brass caboose smokejack bust off (much more finely detailed than the plastic equivalent).  I've had inserted and glued-on metal end foot stirrups bend, but I've never had any break off, even after dropping the car...and I was able to bend them back to be fairly straight and then re-paint, which added a bit of "weathering" to the car as many prototype end foot stirrups are bent.

My brass steam locomotives with all of their soldered-on etched and wire details never break...except for the smoke lifters on my OMI FEF's, which were soldered on at the base, but not at any of the top braces.  Now, they're soldered at the base and also at the top braces, and they're solid as a rock.  Amazing what a resistance soldering station allows you to do....  The finely etched walkways on the sides of the locomotives have never come off, and all that extra detailing that I've applied to my brass cabooses has also never come off...even after dropping one from five feet when I missed the shelf they were displayed on.  Yup, they bent, but got re-bent back to like-new shape along with the roof overhang on the end platform and the investment cast ladder.

The etched metal stirrups on the sides of my F's and E's are much more sturdy than the original cast-on plastic ones which they've replaced.  I've broken several of the cast-on plastic ones just with regular handling, but I've never broken a metal replacement.

I have had problems with IMR separate plastic grabs and early tank cars.  The newer wire tank car grabs are not a problem, even though they're much finer in diameter than the original plastic ones.  But, even on the IMR cars, the plastic grabs were easy to Tenax back together, and I don't look at them as a "problem".  I just have to be more careful when handling them than with cars with cast on grabs.  Not a big deal at all.

On diesels where I have replaced the engineering plastic handrails with finer etched stanchions and wire rails...(MUCH finer!), I also haven't had any breakage.  They do get bent every now and then, but I just bend them back straight.  With the coarser Delrin parts, I have had problems with breakage, and the only solution was to replace them...some of which have been replaced several times.

And to my old eyes (70 years old 15 days ago) I can see the difference very plainly between cars and engines with more scale-sized detailing...and I'm not looking at my models very much from 3-feet away since my base railhead height is 52" on my layout...which I did to all my modules/section's legs because I got tired of bending over all the time when running trains.  AND, there are always Optivisors on my head when running trains.

I don't see any problems with separate finer details on cars and engines...especially with metal wire and etched parts...or investment cast brass detail parts and my luck with breakage has been exponentially lower with metal add-on parts  and separate stock detail parts than with both separate and cast-on features made from plastic.

Since the vast majority of my IMR reefers and boxcars were built as kits, I have a good stock of replacement parts for the grabs.  It wouldn't hurt IMR to include a painted small sprue of grabs for each car that has them, because some of them will inevitably break, or are already broken when brand-new.  As for cars that have separate metal running boards and other etched details...some better attachment protocols other than just gluing them on are definitely called for...and some cars have etched running boards and details that are mechanically attached and braced, and are no problem at all...and look GREAT! 

However, I don't see the positive progression of separate detail parts as being problematic at all, and view the trend as a very good thing for N-scale.  My mainline trackage is not littered with detail parts that have fallen off, nor do 99.99% of my cars and engines with separate small parts on them suffer from broken or bent parts the VAST MAJORITY of the time.

As for me, I will choose a well-detailed car or engine (or structure) with plenty of separate parts any day over the same with fugly, oversized cast-on parts, even if I can't see all the details from my arm's length, at which distance I rarely view them from seriously anyway.

I've noticed that when de-waxing my FUD "Q" trucks from Panamint Models for my U.P. CA cabooses, that I need to be careful because some of the details are incredibly fine, such as the supports for the exterior brake-bar at either end of the truck.  I broke those tiny rings on a couple of trucks when I first got them several years ago by brushing them with a soft toothbrush dipped in Bestine...which I don't do now (I use a soft watercolor brush now).  However, I have not had any breakage of these incredibly detailed trucks when painted & mounted and in operation because the fine details I was breaking when cleaning are not accessible to my fat fingers when mounted on the bolsters of my cabooses and they aren't supportive, structural parts.

Since my layout is portable, and designed to be easily broken down and transported to several shows a year in my Suburban and trailer, I'd have big problems with any models that had parts so fine on them that they shattered from merely setting the model on the scenery or from bouncing around a bit in a transport container.

I certainly appreciate the capabilities of the 3D printers at Shapeways and from those available for home use nowadays, but I would definitely design any model I intended to produce either just for myself or for eventual sale to be robust enough to withstand normal handing and still take advantage of the printer's capabilities printed from a material that allows the finest details.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

 

[Chris333]

Where? I could go for a few of those!


I believe it was @rodsup9000 who found them and changed a few things around so they would print in N.

[wm3798]

Thanks for the feedback, @robert3985   But I have an Intermountain F unit with stainless grills that are forever popping off, and is missing a windshield wiper since the second time I ran it.  I also have a Lifelike GP 20 with molded on wipers that I hit with a silver sharpie, and it still looks and runs very well.  We won't discuss the cost differential between the two...
Freight cars, on the other hand, I can't help but marvel at the price tags that are on the most basic rolling stock any more.  For a modeler to accumulate a reasonable train of coal hoppers, or God forbid, auto racks or trailer flats, you're looking at an investment literally in the thousands by the time you have two or three high end locomotives pulling 25 to 30 cars.  Even adjusted for inflation, that's just plain ridiculous.  All those little fiddledy bits add to the costs.  They look wonderful, I have a fair number of them myself.  But it's startling to see how much some of this stuff fetches.  I guess it wouldn't if people weren't willing to pay. 

But that's not what the thread is about...  I probably shouldn't have made the comparison. 

Lee

[robert3985]

Thanks for the feedback, @robert3985   But I have an Intermountain F unit with stainless grills that are forever popping off, and is missing a windshield wiper since the second time I ran it.  I also have a Lifelike GP 20 with molded on wipers that I hit with a silver sharpie, and it still looks and runs very well.  We won't discuss the cost differential between the two...
Freight cars, on the other hand, I can't help but marvel at the price tags that are on the most basic rolling stock any more.  For a modeler to accumulate a reasonable train of coal hoppers, or God forbid, auto racks or trailer flats, you're looking at an investment literally in the thousands by the time you have two or three high end locomotives pulling 25 to 30 cars.  Even adjusted for inflation, that's just plain ridiculous.  All those little fiddledy bits add to the costs.  They look wonderful, I have a fair number of them myself.  But it's startling to see how much some of this stuff fetches.  I guess it wouldn't if people weren't willing to pay. 

But that's not what the thread is about...  I probably shouldn't have made the comparison. 

Lee

Lee, I agree completely about the prices.  I'm not sure it's the "fiddly bits" that are driving up the cost or just Chinese workers wanting and getting higher wages.  If I took into consideration my own hourly wage, I wouldn't be in model railroading, since it would be WAAAaaay too expensive!

But, I could also apply my hourly wage to sitting in front of the TV and watching Star Trek re-runs...but I won't since I want to keep doing that!

I must be lucky, because the models I've got that have the extra detailing just don't fall off or get caught on whatever.  I'm way more likely to have a bolster pin fall out, or break a Z-scale coupler than have the details fall off engines and cars.

I'm coming to the conclusion that the wave of the future, for me at least, is to buy my own 3D printer, 3D modeling software and design my own models which I need more than half a dozen of, and let the printer do 80% of the work while I'm asleep.  In addition, I'll be designing my own frets of etched metal parts for most of the structures, engines and cars I want...which will be another 10% of the work, saving me about 90% of the time expenditure needed to make multiple copies of the cars and other things I want and feel I "need" for my own use.

I'm getting to the point with my roster of rolling stock that I don't need many more cars for the kind of operation I'm planning on running on my layout, except some hoppers and gondolas for U.P. coal and ballast service...and Utah Coal Belt gons for my Park City Local...and more unobtainable U.P. cabooses of course...all with lots of fiddly bits.

Of course, the designing aspect will make me spend quite a bit of time in front of the computer, but at least it'll keep me outta the bars so my cats won't worry where I am at night!

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore 

[wm3798]

I would be totally into doing 3-D printing and designing stuff for it...  But I spend all day as it is in front of a monitor designing things... 


There's just something wonderfully satisfying about getting out the X-acto and the pot of glue and actually making something!

Lee

[Iain]

I am fully capable of doing 3D models for printing.  I have done it in the past, even.

The problem is that I sit down, fire up the CAD software, and have zero motivation beyond that.

[DKS]

There's just something wonderfully satisfying about getting out the X-acto and the pot of glue and actually making something!

This!

[Lemosteam]

This!

From my perspective, yes and no to this.  If you enjoy building model kits, what is the difference between building the kit using printed parts vs. injection molded parts (skip the surface quality bit please)?

I do however like scratch building/kitbashing sometimes too- depends on one's capabilities.  It's not always that satisfying if the project turns out like crap- it just feels like a total waste.

[CRL]

I do however like scratch building/kitbashing sometimes too- depends on one's capabilities.  It's not always that satisfying if the project turns out like crap- it just feels like a total waste.

That’s what hammers are for.