Shapeways and practical design considerations

[DKS]

It's not always that satisfying if the project turns out like crap- it just feels like a total waste.

Depends on how often this happens. You can't expect every project to work out fine; besides, the very best way to learn is to fail, so there is some benefit to the occasional project that "turns out like crap." If that happens the majority of times, then it may indeed be time to find another modeling avenue.

 

[Lemosteam]

Depends on how much you just paid for something that is now effectively ruined, cost and time is very much a factor sometimes.

[robert3985]

I agree that scratch-building, or kit-bashing, or just building a good kit is pretty satisfying.  I also find building wooden, premium pine benchwork highly satisfying as well as making all of my turnouts on the bench.  When I'm planning my layout sections, I plan them in Cadrail first, right down to the thousandths of an inch since it's easy to do that.  Although it's computer time, I also find that to be highly satisfying and just as creatively fulfilling as any other aspect of the hobby, especially when I've built the layout section in conformance to my plans I've created and it all fits...exactly.

Since some of the cars and engines I want badly for my era-specific layout are not commercially available, and probably never will be, and I definitely want more than one of each...such as 14 ea. CA-1 cabooses, 25 ea. various hoppers for my Park City Local, 40 ea. various hoppers for my UP coal service trains and setting out at eventually three coaling towers and powerhouses on the layout...I'm pretty sure that scratch-building and/or kit-bashing all of these cars with my X-acto knife and sheet Styrene ain't gonna cut the mustard....and I haven't even mentioned the heavy UP MacArthurs, Baby and Veranda Turbines, or TTT's I want on the layout.

To make building models more precise and quicker, I've invested in a lot of various tools to help with that...such as a lathe, a vertical mill, a resistance soldering station, my computer, and all of my woodworking equipment in my shop as well as a full suite of investment casting equipment.  A 3D printer is only a tool that takes a modeler's concepts and turns those concepts into actual (analog) models or parts, just like a drafting table and all of those other tools  do...but in a much more advanced manner, allowing much greater production numbers, as well as accuracy, for a larger volume of work when needed.

Certain projects still beg for the individual cutting and fitting of parts on the workbench...such as pilot models or one-off structures, but if I've got more than one or two I want for my layout, both the 3D printer and LASER cutter will be used...and I'll feel no diminishing of my creativity because I didn't cut the parts with my X-acto knife, or draw the plans on my drawing table...because I still created them, using my tools at hand.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[randgust]

I'm designing and building an animated/operating western PA 'hit and miss' oil well field and powerhouse, and the mechanism based on a 1000:1 Pololu gearbox, and an ample supply of old junk mechanisms and bins full of material.   Got some nice nylon gears out of Ebay, started fitting up bearings and shafts, and various junk, real material, gluing it up and testing every step of the way.

I feel like a dinosaur, but feeling the materials interact; how the bearings lay up, how the torque back to the drive rig feels, drills going into metal... it's all very tactile and real.  I still really enjoy scratchbuilding from the raw material up, pretty much working to the parts I have rather than designing something digitally even though I've done it.   Discovered that a 'permanent' driveshaft was too hard to align precisely from an under-table drive, needed a universal, scavenged one from an old Atlas Roco chassis that happened to fit precisely inside K&S driveshaft tubing; epoxy that in and keep going... yeah, that's fun.   

I really admire the design skills I see out on Shapeways, but the entire concept of designing something without actually working with real material and then selling it to others without ever actually working with it still seems so antiseptic. 

I turned to resin casting for the same reason Bob did his work, suddenly you realize that making multiples (in my case what started it was Climax truck sideframes back in 2005) is distressing and you have to find a better way.

[alhoop]

I agree with everything Lee has said. For Years I have wanted a Southern GP30 in N-scale.
I decided to use a 3D printed high nose to convert an Atlas low nose unit. Not only does the
unit have visible striations but I managed to crack one side wall and break the bell off.
Wish I had followed Jim Kelly of Model Railroader instructions(July 1979) on how to make the conversion. 3D printing may look good but if the item is broke and/or gone it leaves a lot to the imagination .
Al Hooper

[Lemosteam]

I agree with everything Lee has said. For Years I have wanted a Southern GP30 in N-scale.
I decided to use a 3D printed high nose to convert an Atlas low nose unit. Not only does the
unit have visible striations but I managed to crack one side wall and break the bell off.
Wish I had followed Jim Kelly of Model Railroader instructions(July 1979) on how to make the conversion. 3D printing may look good but if the item is broke and/or gone it leaves a lot to the imagination .
Al Hooper

This is EXACTLY the reason I reduce detail on the printed part (for sanding/cleaning, etc.) and provide mounting holes in the shell and pins on the mounted parts where possible, just like a sprued kit.  Good instructions are imperative as well:

[bbussey]

I rarely use one medium anymore for a project. FXD is really good for detail parts, or as masters for resin castings. Any superfine details get etched, and most of those out of stainless steel for extra strength if standalone.

[randgust]

What's amazing is that there's virtually no limit that I've seen on what can be printed in one piece.  That Mack AC truck is just phenomenal, just too lightly designed.   I'm pretty sure it would have flunked printing design before because the minimum cross-sections were so tiny, but now, with the precision of the printer, they can print what won't actually survive the real world.    I know even when I was doing mine I had cross-sections that were 'too thin' to print that now would likely be printed.   

We've come a long way from 'make my models' and printing out in thick toothpaste (remember the golf carts?)

[peteski]

We've come a long way from 'make my models' and printing out in thick toothpaste (remember the golf carts?)

I have a Make my Model horse trailer.  Those seem to have been printed using the same printing method that Shapeways uses for their FUD/FXD printouts (but much coarser resolution).  I never seen their golf carts, but I have made some in the late '80s for a friends golf course NTRAK module.  That was one of my early resin casting projects.



Couple more photos here.

[nickelplate759]

Pete - where DO you get those oversize comedy dimes that keep showing up  in your photos?   

[CRL]

Pete - where DO you get those oversize comedy dimes that keep showing up  in your photos?   

Now there’s a thought! Hmmmm...

[peteski]

Pete - where DO you get those oversize comedy dimes that keep showing up  in your photos?   

I'll never tell - it will be my secret forever!

Now there’s a thought! Hmmmm...

You are a fairly recent member - the giant coins in my photos are a running joke around here.  I also have a giant Quarter, and a Nickel too. 

[randgust]

On of the better pieces of fiction is that you can use a FUD print for a resin casting master.

Wow, did that not work.   First, the FUD print is a lot more porous than you'd think.  Air in it.  So when you do a rubber mold, it outgassed like crazy, with tiny bubbles coming out on the surface.  Attack with primer....sorta works.

And it's brittle, so you're pretty much likely to wreck the master getting the mold off.

And the striations reproduce perfectly if they are there at all, so you'll spend a lot of time sanding, filling, priming.    It's better now that it was, but.... remember, you're likely to damage it pulling the mold off so it's a lot of work for a one-time mold build.

And the designer may not truly understand the nature of resin casting and part design; i.e. the undercuts that save you a micron of material have to all be filled in on the inside of say, a carbody, if you're doing a plunge-style mold.

And, much to my surprise, the longer one I tinkered with; a passenger car body, shrank noticeably.   I've done a lot of resin casting with my own scratchbuilt masters and never had a problem, what was interesting was that I was able to document the FUD (over an 85' car) actually shrank down about a scale foot, leading to some real 'WTF' moments when fitted back to the car frame.   I thought the resin was shrinking, imagine my surprise when I found out it was the master.

Now, I think the smoother self-supporting resin prints might work a lot better, but I've seen some pretty awful warpage in those.  But at least they are smooth(er) surface.    That's half the battle.   I think if it cured right, and was designed right to compensate for material factors, there's hope.   

[CRL]

I'll never tell - it will be my secret forever!

You are a fairly recent member - the giant coins in my photos are a running joke around here.  I also have a giant Quarter, and a Nickel too. 

I assumed such.

[Maletrain]

I assumed such.

What we need for a true representation of scale is a picture of Peteski sitting on his giant dime.  (Maybe DKS can help with that?)  Then we can drift this thread  into how to "get Peteski off the dime."