WSF/FUD 3D printing - Please Ask don't grumble!

[AndyID]

I think that is called a kit, not an almost r2r/aid to scratchbuilding model. Sorry that is not something I am prepared to do. The big advantage 3D printing has over kits is that complete(or almost complete) body shells can be produced. More in the hobby(and maybe those not already in the hobby) expect this. Look at the way good quality r2r has hit the kit market(I have talked to some in the trade).

FUD requires extra supports,and those cost money, not just to produce, but also to remove. The longer the support the more it costs.

 

Quite right, it would be a kit and I can understand why you might be reluctant to head in that direction.

 

I ran some numbers and while the height does have a significant effect on the "machine volume" cost, that cost is typically much less than the cost of the resin itself. It would probably only become significant on a very thin print, and then the support material cost could eliminate much of the advantage.

[JCL]

Hi Simon, you make some good points. 

 

Many businesses identify their ideal customers, find their niche and do well there. Your niche is bodyshells, and I hope you do well at it. Don't feel pressured to do kits if that's not what you want to do, and if that's not what your customers want. Others do kits and have their own customers and I've exactly the same sentiments for them.

 

On costs, we have only dealt with the easy comparison so far - the difference between WSF and FUD on a single model. Obviously FUD will always have a higher cost before margins are added in this instance - or at least I expect it to. I've said higher cost, because that is different to expensive - what is expensive and what isn't is in the eye of the beholder.

 

The comparison that hasn't been done, is between a kit in FUD and a bodyshell in WSF. If someone is willing to put four sides and a roof of a coach together themselves, would there really be a great difference in price between a WSF bodyshell and a FUD kit?

 

The price of a model depends on:

• the fixed setup cost (if applicable)
• the model's volume in the machine
• the amount of material (including support) it takes to create the model
• the margin the model's creator adds.

I want to say before going further that the margin a model creator adds is completely up to that person and nothing to do with anyone else, and I am not going to make any comment about that. After all, if the creators put a real margin onto their models that took into account the hours/days it took to get a model to a point where it could be sold, nobody would be able to buy them.

 

So then, some sort of comparison. I'm in Canada, so please bear with me on this. I've tried to find a vehicle type to compare, and ended up with a 1:76 scale 6 wheel coach with sides, ends and roof but no partitions and no floor. Prices are rounded down to the nearest $Canadian, which is what I see here, but clicking on each link should give you UK prices if you are in the UK.

• FUD kit $56.5 CAD, (includes 1/2 of the underframe kit for 2 coaches)
• FUD bodyshell $69 CAD , different vendor, no solebars, but includes 1/2 of the above underframe kit for 2 coaches
• WSF bodyshell $57 CAD. Includes buffers, solebars and axleboxes, etc.

I know they aren't all the same vehicle, but are all about the same size. I've included Mike Trice's underframe kit for the first two examples to make them as comparable as possible to the third one. You may not agree, but to me, these are all close enough to be roughly comparable.  

 

My thought process from RTR to 3D printed model (so therefore not brass kit etc) would be:

• is there an RTR model of the vehicle I'm after (after all, I don't have a lot of spare time) at a price I like?
• if not, is there a Shapeways model of the vehicle I'm after?
• is it in the right format for me (bodyshell or kit)?
• is the model in the material I want to model in?
• does the the quality look acceptable to me?
• is the price of the model right for me?

I think it merits repeating. WSF or FUD, bodyshell or kit, each option has its own pros and cons, and each will be attractive to a certain type of modeller and/or model creator.

 

I think I've just written a long winded way of saying horses for courses.

 

cheers

 

Jason

[Knuckles]

After all, if the creators put a real margin onto their models that took into account the hours/days it took to get a model to a point where it could be sold, nobody would be able to buy them.

I feel the need to quote this.

 

It's a major understatement!

 

My Furness J1 on Shapeways was the most challenging model I have thus far created.

 

Over 6 months of actual CAD modelling, made difficult by the high number of rivets (and counting!) and the extra polygons causing slow down and hang up issues. Was an absolute slog. Then you take in to account all the research and photograph scrutinizing on zoom then the 2-3 months it took me to actually complete the model in physical form; both for my own self and also for product photographs and a video of it working.

 

Combine all those hours and if I make a sale great but it won't buy me a Lambo!

 

Unless we go elsewhere we have to purchase our own models on Shapeways.....this means we will need to make SEVERAL sales just to break even. Add cost of wheels, motor and gearbox etc and any actual profit from multiple sales if we manage to make them will be lucky.

 

As said on my previous post this is why variant bodies with aesthetic changes do not need test printing once one has been finalised; unless we require one ourselves it is a pointless loss of money.

 

Add more hours on since re-scaling as you can now also get a 7mm body (with chassis if want) and an N gauge body.

Edited March 27, 2018 by Knuckles

[rue_d_etropal]

It would be interesting to find out which loco kits sold best in the 60s-70s. I am pribcipally thinking Wills, K's, and GEM. K's all as far as I remember had their own kit chassis , and the associated problems. Both Wills and GEM produced body kits and complete kits. I suspect those that fitted r2r chassis sold better than the full kits.  I could possibly tackle a simple chassis kit, some were simply screw together, but then add valve gear etc, and no way. I would recon most modellers would shy away from building those, and still do. Fortunately , now we have so many more good quality r2r chassis, and most would prefer a slight bodge than a complete non working mess.

I do sometimes get people sending me photos of models using my bodyshells, and ther are some ingenious modellers, and some quite happy to cut up (not cheap) chassis.

For some of the models I have completed myself, I have had the extra complication of modelling in HO, not OO, and it is not easy finding small enough chassis to fit some models. One reason why I am drifting up to Gauge One, which is also a challenge, but at least I can model some small industrial locos.

 

I suppose if I had been trained up professionally to use CAD, and had spent my working life doing it, then I might expect to cost in my time, but over past 5 years I have been learning on the job(I used to work in IT, and more often than not that was how you learned new sklls in programming). I have added in new CAD tools as I go on, and sometimes go back to an earlier design and do some rejigging. It is still early days for 3D printing, and possibly not enough understanding of what it can do a can't do, and how to complete models which use it.

[Knuckles]

So far only my A0 Pacific range has been designed to fit RTR chassis, everything else I offer a fixed chassis for although I'm working on a new system to offer that so far is working well and easier to set up.

 

Most indeed just buy body shell and meld them to RTR chassis but some do buy my chassis.

 

Thing is I don't want to design the bodies to fit a particular chassis because not only will accuracy be lost but it assumes you are using the RTR chassis that everyone has or wants to use. In most cases someone will want or choose to use something different and have to do a bit of bashing.

 

For this reason I design my own chassis and if people want to find ways to get various RTR chassis to fit be my guest.

 

So far people have used the Hornby E2 chassis and more popularly the Bachmann Jinty chassis to fit my E2 body shells.

 

I prefer to build the chassis designed for them.

 

 

Regarding rods and valve gear they do scare everyone off. They scare me off. Not simple stuff but the thought of doing a Duchess for example.

 

Getting an 0-6-0 can take enough skill as it is to run well and I don't personally feel ready for crossheads and slide bars etc.

Edited March 27, 2018 by Knuckles

[rue_d_etropal]

Sometimes I think manufacturers are also scared of doing valve gear etc.The latest Minitrain Decauville has a simple rod, not dissimilar to original N gauge from the 60s! Given that both Roco and Fleischmann have done a more complex chassis for N gauge this is surprising. Cost is probably reason, as Minitrains pitch their locos at a certain price range.

As for 3D printing a chassis, one reason I have not, has been my experience over small variations in the print process. Not such a problem for bodies, but if axles don't line up then it won't work properly. I had a lot of problems initially with my inset track system, till I realised I could not get it to be one way all the time, so set it to a compromise.

It has been talked about in narrow gauge circles, that like when OO9 started lists of suitable r2r chassis wee produced. The most common question I get asked about is , what chassis to use. I have desined a couple of models for a particular chassis, problem then being getting hold of the chassis when the manufactuer stops producing the orininal loco. This is a problem many kit manufacturers have, sometimes within days of a new kit being released. At least with 3D print design, it takes a lot less time(and money) to go from original scale drawing to a 3D printed model in production.

[cal.n]

I make things on Shapeways because I enjoy it, and I am yet to pass the threshold to make any money, so all my test prints have meant making a loss.

 

Therefore, the only things I have test printed is things that I am genuinely concerned will not print, and although if Shapeways cannot print something, the customer will get a refund, I don’t want that to happen because I have advertised it as being printable. Basically, I don’t want to use potential customers as ‘free test prints’.

 

I know what will print on Shapeways so only new concepts are test printed or when I am pushing the boundary of what can be done in different materials.

 

 

A 4mm mark 5 coach bodyshell in FUD

 

 

 

4mm Headboard in FUD

[rue_d_etropal]

There are times when Shapeways annoy me(slightly), and that is when something that has printed OK(possibly 4 years ago), and I actually had test prints, and have still got them, and then someone orders one and it gets rejected.

Probably a good thing, as I am adding FUD and FED to options for smallest items, and in this case it was Z scale narrow gauge. Decided to modify all the locos in that range, by resizing the N scale ones, and make them available only in FUD and FED.

Done the locos, will look at the wagons next, but there is less hurry with those.Might then look at the N scale ones, and use the 1/76 versions resized down. This time I will keep the originals and use the new ones as fine scale versions. Eventually I will work through all the smaller scales, certainly up to OO9 ones. Beyond that the price starts to jump a lot, but if anyone asks i will have a look.