3d printed GWR coaches - something big...a D51

[The Great Bear]

I've had a go at another coach, a D46 56' brake. This time printed in Shapeways FUD. Fair bit more detail added since the first full coach I got printed - including shell vents, end steps. I also had a go at doing the door grab handles. The idea being I suppose to mean that all that has to be done is put the body, interior and underframe together, add bogies and paint. No fiddling around adding extra bits other than few grab rails at the ends.

 

Full view from the side looks pretty good, I think

 

 

 

Getting in closer things aren't so convincing. I've added detail on the ends including steps, lamp irons, corridor, jumper cables. Some of necessity fairly over-scale to meet minimum thickness requirements (and FUD is less stringent than other materials )

 

 

The view does rather cruely show the stepping in the printing on the tumblehome. Doesn't look good in this view, really.

 

Detailed view of the door grab handles

They are a bit overscale again to meet requirements but they don't look too bad to me and pleasantly suprised they came out at all half decent. (The one on the other side that broke off was due to my over-zealous cleaning of the bare model.)

 

The detail on the sides on the doors is good and the shell vents look ok.

 

I am not really sure what to expect from this material, whether what has come back is representative? From normal viewing distances it looks good, close up a few things niggle and the finish doesn't strike me as being particularly clean, and not as clean as say the iMaterialise resin I tried before in a little test. That works out as the same price but has a lot more onerous design requirements (rather a pain to get things through to printing) so most of the details like handles and steps would have to be omitted and the walls thickened up a fair bit too. I might try that again or other resin printers.

 

Painting may hide some of these issues I suppose.

 

Any thoughts on the above welcome,  as I say I am not sure what to expect.

 

All the best

 

Jon

[Quarryscapes]

I've had a go at another coach, a D46 56' brake. This time printed in Shapeways FUD. Fair bit more detail added since the first full coach I got printed - including shell vents, end steps. I also had a go at doing the door grab handles. The idea being I suppose to mean that all that has to be done is put the body, interior and underframe together, add bogies and paint. No fiddling around adding extra bits other than few grab rails at the ends.

 

Full view from the side looks pretty good, I think

 

 

 

Getting in closer things aren't so convincing. I've added detail on the ends including steps, lamp irons, corridor, jumper cables. Some of necessity fairly over-scale to meet minimum thickness requirements (and FUD is less stringent than other materials )

 

 

The view does rather cruely show the stepping in the printing on the tumblehome. Doesn't look good in this view, really.

 

Detailed view of the door grab handles

They are a bit overscale again to meet requirements but they don't look too bad to me and pleasantly suprised they came out at all half decent. (The one on the other side that broke off was due to my over-zealous cleaning of the bare model.)

 

The detail on the sides on the doors is good and the shell vents look ok.

 

I am not really sure what to expect from this material, whether what has come back is representative? From normal viewing distances it looks good, close up a few things niggle and the finish doesn't strike me as being particularly clean, and not as clean as say the iMaterialise resin I tried before in a little test. That works out as the same price but has a lot more onerous design requirements (rather a pain to get things through to printing) so most of the details like handles and steps would have to be omitted and the walls thickened up a fair bit too. I might try that again or other resin printers.

 

Painting may hide some of these issues I suppose.

 

Any thoughts on the above welcome,  as I say I am not sure what to expect.

 

All the best

 

Jon

 

Yes, that is entirely representative of what you get in FUD. SLA Resins will always be better finish, but are prone to warping and have unpredictable support locations. 

[Guy Rixon]

I presume that this coach was printed right-way-up. That gives two problems in FUD.

 

First, the resolution in the horizontal plane is less than that in the vertical direction, and this makes the stepping worse on the turn-under. Even if you go to a higher number of facets in that part it's hard to get it smooth.

 

Second, every part of the panels is overhung slightly by the roof, so is in contact with support wax, and this makes the finish worse on flat, vertical areas.

 

Both problems can be solved by printing the vehicle as separate sides, ends and roof, with the decorated faces upwards. Mike Trice has demonstrated this and he gets a better finish than your coach.

 

You do seem to have avoided two FUD issues that have plagued me: disappearing relief on vertical sides and "chequerplate" effect on vertical panels that should be flat. Congrats on that, and perhaps you could tell us how far your mouldings are raised above the panels?

 

PS: If I were doing such a coach, I'd make the grab handles as separate, sprued parts that plugged into holes in the side. That way, the builder has a choice of using the printed bits or replacing them with finer parts from brass. Also, losing the grab handles from the main print reduces the problems with support wax.

 

Also, well done! This is starting to look quite usable.

Edited April 6, 2018 by Guy Rixon

[MikeTrice]

It also works out cheaper as there is far less support material used.

[rue_d_etropal]

Always concerns me, close up photos. In reality much of what some say is not visible and it is not worth while getting worried about. 

 

Shapeways normally print coaches or anything like them with a roof upside down.

 

Full kits are not the way to go, as most people these days are not building them. All too easy to start chasing a very small group.

[Knuckles]

Coach looks good. You no doubt will need to smooth it but effort will pay off.

 

Question for Guy: How are you/we supposed to add the grab handles as separate detail parts when we are plagued with Shapeways' catch 22 effect?

 

By that I mean they refuse to let you have too many loose parts in a file and for every extra they do they charge more, yet they also discourage sprues yet insist on them being at least 2mm's thick (despite details being less) meaning the detail parts will break instead of the sprues when removing them.

 

Retarded nonsense and inconsistent print rejection battles do my nut in!

[The Great Bear]

I presume that this coach was printed right-way-up. That gives two problems in FUD.

 

First, the resolution in the horizontal plane is less than that in the vertical direction, and this makes the stepping worse on the turn-under. Even if you go to a higher number of facets in that part it's hard to get it smooth.

 

Second, every part of the panels is overhung slightly by the roof, so is in contact with support wax, and this makes the finish worse on flat, vertical areas.

 

Both problems can be solved by printing the vehicle as separate sides, ends and roof, with the decorated faces upwards. Mike Trice has demonstrated this and he gets a better finish than your coach.

 

You do seem to have avoided two FUD issues that have plagued me: disappearing relief on vertical sides and "chequerplate" effect on vertical panels that should be flat. Congrats on that, and perhaps you could tell us how far your mouldings are raised above the panels?

 

PS: If I were doing such a coach, I'd make the grab handles as separate, sprued parts that plugged into holes in the side. That way, the builder has a choice of using the printed bits or replacing them with finer parts from brass. Also, losing the grab handles from the main print reduces the problems with support wax.

 

Also, well done! This is starting to look quite usable.

 

Thank you. Relief on the side panels is 20mm full size, the droplights a bit more. Regarding the printing orientation on Shapeways, I hadn't appreciated these nuances, just had a play and it was set to the cheapest arangement, model sitting upright - changing to anythign else increases cost by at least 50%

 

Good point about the grab handles - would save me breaking them off for a start!

 

Thanks

 

Jon

[The Great Bear]

Always concerns me, close up photos. In reality much of what some say is not visible and it is not worth while getting worried about. 

 

 True, Simon! I went to bad last night with doubts based on the close up photos. Going back in the shed today looking at the model in the flesh at sensible distances looks good enough for me. Hopefully my painting doesn't ruin it.

 

All the best

 

Jon

[Guy Rixon]

Question for Guy: How are you/we supposed to add the grab handles as separate detail parts when we are plagued with Shapeways' catch 22 effect?

 

By that I mean they refuse to let you have too many loose parts in a file and for every extra they do they charge more, yet they also discourage sprues yet insist on them being at least 2mm's thick (despite details being less) meaning the detail parts will break instead of the sprues when removing them.

 

Retarded nonsense and inconsistent print rejection battles do my nut in!

 

In FUD, I've never had problems getting sprued parts accepted. This goes both for products that are sprues of many small, repeated parts and larger prints - wagon chassis - with some parts sprued for later assembly.  Rules are probably different in other materials. It may help if the human checkers can't work out what which bits are sprues and which are parts of the model.

 

Most of my sprues are 1mm x 1mm and S. have never objected to those. If the sprues did have to be 2mm thick it wouldn't add much to the cost as the resin volume isn't driving the overall cost.

[rue_d_etropal]

Jon, concentrate on the coach body, not the fittings.With repect to painting, a quick coat of primer but then use thin coats of acryllic or any water based paint. Thin coats are better, especially as they dry faster.

Edited April 6, 2018 by rue_d_etropal

[The Great Bear]

Yes, that is entirely representative of what you get in FUD. SLA Resins will always be better finish, but are prone to warping and have unpredictable support locations. 

 

I've had a design rejected by iMaterialise for risk of warping, which frustrated me. I may revisit this, so am wondering how to fix this? Would it be case of making walls thicker, ideally just the lower coach sides so stiffen the model on its longest axis?

 

Thanks

 

Jon

[Guy Rixon]

What would happen with iMaterialise's resin if the coach were printed with partitions? Would it stay flat between the partitions, or would it bow inward?

[Mikkel]

Thanks Jon for sharing your experiments, and for helping to move the hobby forward.

 

I especially appreciate the close-up photos. Unlike the glitzy looking digital previews on Shapeways, your photos give the rest of us an honest chance of assessing what 3D printing can and can't do. We can then all draw our conclusions, and take our chances as we see fit. 

[Knuckles]

Quote snipped

Thanks Guy.

 

They are so inconsistent and I've had multiple orders cancelled by them (mine and customers) due to sprues not being fat enough. They have been failing sprues that are not 2mm thick even in FUD in some cases and I just can't risk it any more.

 

They have this policy that they will reject a sprue if it is too thin regardless of if a detail is much thinner...because it is a sprue.

 

I had some stainless steel 7mm scale coupling rods that were to be ready articulated that were nominally 1.5mm x 2mm thick and because the sprue was not 2mm thick literally a shade under, 1.8mm x 2mm if I remember correctly they rejected it...in stainless steel of all things. It can print down to 1mm.

 

But as they recognised the part as a sprue they reject it. Complete moonatiks.

I had it out with them proving their complete inconsistent standard logic lack and they surprisingly agreed.

They didn't have much choice when cornered by a perfect argument.

 

When will it stop?

 

I guess, Guy, you have been really really lucky so far. :-/

 

They have been better lately but I can't see how to sprue lots of little handles on without them rejecting the print.

Edited April 7, 2018 by Knuckles

[Knuckles]

 

 

...Unlike the glitzy looking digital previews on Shapeways, your photos give the rest of us an honest chance of assessing what 3D printing can and can't do...

 

The previews have been improved on some materials where they even render the expected textures and you can check them out in 3D now, an improvement that really gives you a much better idea what they model looks like. The the interactive renders in metal and WSF show the effect well. FUD is still smooth.

 

The WSF render really needs a new background though. Looks too much like a Polar Bear in a snowstorm.

[The Great Bear]

 

They have been better lately but I can't see how to sprue lots of little handles on without them rejecting the print.

 

Inside the model, the sprues running across between the coach sides, maybe? (Similar might get around the iMaterialise warping issue too, easy enough to snip off later and not noticeable if not neatly done...)

[MikeTrice]

Going back to printing in FUD/FED orientation is everything.

 

Breaking down the model into separate sides means you can control the angle they are printed at. With sides printed flat so the detailed face is pointing upwards some stepping is visible in the waist beading however other detail is good:

 

Reorienting the sides to something like 30 degrees results in this print. At this point surface texture on the face of the print is hardly affected by the support wax, however a greater amount of support wax is used underneath so the price is higher:

 

Changing the angle to something like 80 degrees some surface texture is caused by the support wax however most of the rest of the print is showing banding:

 

The texture caused by the support wax is visible in the unpainted side:

 

For comparison this side has been printed in the original flat orientation but in Frosted Extreme Detail:

 

One of the ends, again printed flat in FUD with no support wax marring the surface. A good quality print (please ignore the red lines):

[The Great Bear]

Thanks Jon for sharing your experiments, and for helping to move the hobby forward.

 

I especially appreciate the close-up photos. Unlike the glitzy looking digital previews on Shapeways, your photos give the rest of us an honest chance of assessing what 3D printing can and can't do. We can then all draw our conclusions, and take our chances as we see fit. 

 

 

Thank you, Mikkel. I am a latecomer to this, as you can see tentatively finding my way. Credit really goes to people like Rue_d_Etropal for inspiring me to give it a go via the A7 autocoach (http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/26456-marlingford-begbrooke-a-weekend-of-weathering-wagons/?p=2973057) and also people like Mike Trice and Quarrysccapes for sharing their experience.

[Quarryscapes]

You're welcome. The key to getting the best from 3D printing is to know the limitations and work with them. Partitions might well work for an i.Materialise resin print, I haven't tried. Everything I've had done from them has been naturally quite chunky and has been warp free. 

 

This is an i.Materialise body with FXD details: 

[The Great Bear]

You're welcome. The key to getting the best from 3D printing is to know the limitations and work with them. Partitions might well work for an i.Materialise resin print, I haven't tried. Everything I've had done from them has been naturally quite chunky and has been warp free. 

 

This is an i.Materialise body with FXD details: 

 

The finish and detail on that wagon is very very good. What scale is it in please?

[Quarryscapes]

The finish and detail on that wagon is very very good. What scale is it in please?

 

4mm. All 3 wagons in the 1st pic are 3D printed. The Cambrian GPV is a High Def Acrylate one piece print (it warped though) and the Bolster is a kit of FUD and etched parts. 

[The Great Bear]

Here's the finished D46. My painting has improved a little bit from the previous effort. Again photography is cruel, in the flesh looks better.

 

 

 

 

I had a bit of an accident with this side you can see the remnants of in the middle at the top of the windows, managed to crack the model when trying to prise the sides apart a bit as they were a bit warped. Then I tried putting in hot, just boiled, water and hey presto model softened and could reshape, put on chasis to get fit. The pilot holes in the sides for the grab rails at the ends of the sides did not come through hence my wonky application of the handrail on the left side here!

 

The body is not screwed to the underframe yet hence why it looks a bit wonkly. Of course you notice need a few remedial bits of paint on the end after you have taken the photo...

 

Detail of the underframe (and my dodgy transfer application!)

The underframe was done in SLS nylon (same as Shapeways WSF) hence its texture when looked at close up like this. Quite a few bits have had to be thickened to meet minimum thickness requirements (0.8mm) but from a distance again looks reasonable to me. Still not convinced about positioning of the elements, looking at photos in Russell it varies, but also as in the shaddows in a lot of the pictures therein you can't see the underframe, often only clear in the side on works portraits.

 

Making progress, I think.

 

Some more experiments in hand, more anon.

 

All the best

 

Jon

[The Great Bear]

Another thing I wasn't sure of, couldn't see in photos, was whether the doors from the corridor to the luggage compartment should have windows in? Also I should add some grilles to the windows in the luggage part.

[Guy Rixon]

The grilles on the windows were quite fine in GWR stock. They won't print to scale in any material and would look rather coarse if printed to minimum size. I'd leave them out. Etchings are available for those who want to add detail.

[The Great Bear]

The grilles on the windows were quite fine in GWR stock. They won't print to scale in any material and would look rather coarse if printed to minimum size. I'd leave them out. Etchings are available for those who want to add detail.

Thanks, yes, that's what I have in mind, Brass masters or something