Jump to content
 

WSF/Polyamide - A Discussion


Recommended Posts

Hello!

 

I thought it may be worth having a discussion on WSF (Or 'Polyamide' if you use i.materialise because shapeways wouldn't accept your file!) and its various advantages and pitfalls. Having only had prints from i.materialise so far I cannot comment on Shapeways' finish, but have instead decided to post an example of a polyamide model that I, and the RMweb member I designed it for, are happy with. From what I gather the model wasn't sanded all that much. Some will recognise the model as my rendition of Stockton & Darlington Railway No.25 'Derwent'.

post-25673-0-52088400-1523383943_thumb.j

post-25673-0-09079000-1523383899_thumb.j

post-25673-0-84007500-1523383858_thumb.j

post-25673-0-41768900-1523383784_thumb.j

post-25673-0-69597200-1523383734_thumb.j

post-25673-0-96602300-1523383684_thumb.jpost-25673-0-69693600-1523655648_thumb.j

post-25673-0-02466400-1523655668_thumb.j

post-25673-0-08351100-1523709620_thumb.j

post-25673-0-59600500-1523715090_thumb.j

 

Personally, I think the finish is more than passable for general layout use, and the edges are nice and well defined. In my eyes the fact that the material is more durable and cheaper make it more appealing to me, but I appreciate that others don't feel this way.

 

So, as I open the floodgates, what do you think? I suggest using the above model in this discussion to keep it consistent. The model isn't the best designed, but I think it is a reasonable attempt.

 

FIRE AWAY!!!

 

Takes cover in 'Derwent's' front tender... watches ensuing raging stampede of anger and froth through small gap in planking... Exeunt Stage Left...

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I myself would probably end up sanding it, and I think some of the smoother bits may have been sanded by James (Edwardian) but due to time constraints the rest has not. 

 

May I also add that, due to a few file issues, the model was rejected by i.materialise, but James decided to go ahead and get them printed anyway as we were seriously running out of time. This may have caused issues?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Personally, I think the finish is more than passable for general layout use, and the edges are nice and well defined. In my eyes the fact that the material is more durable and cheaper make it more appealing to me, but I appreciate that others don't feel this way.

 

As much as I love 3D printing I don't like the finish of WSF at all for anything that will be seen.  The print itself isn't bad but there is far too much work required to finish it to what I would call a 'layout standard'

The mantra of 'cheaper' comes up often as does printing in one piece rather than orientating to get the best finish, 3D has many possibilities but I don't think it includes using WSF for bodies.

 

I've yet to have answered the question about what adhesives will work with WSF, as it failed with 4 different makes/formulas of Cyano and epoxy only just works.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SORRY IF THIS IS POSTED TO WRONG STRING!

In the last month I have had two Orders via Shapeways LIC

successfully printed on their Eindhoven HP-Nylon machine.

 

When I place an order on a second account direct via Shapeways

Eindhoven - the same item - it is rejected as a "First Print" without

any further option of "Print It Anyway"

 

After an exchange of e-mails I have yet to connect with anyone who

understands the tweaks of their product beyond their "Bible".

 

Automated systems still need someone at the helm.

 

Noel

Edited by Dazzler Fan
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a few mobile pictures of the CDC Design 4mm NLR 4-4-0T I just received from Shapeways in FUD.  So far it has been washed in warm soapy water and IPA.  There are some vertical bands on the cab front and back and the front of the cylinders, also some ridging on the boiler but generally the finish is quite good.  The material is very fragile and already one of the main springs and the destination board brackets have broken off.  I have not handled anything printed in WSF so cannot comment on the relative fragility.  The flat tank sides have bowed somewhat so will need strengthening.

 

post-7723-0-95466000-1523894924.jpgpost-7723-0-46651700-1523894944.jpgpost-7723-0-79764400-1523894961.jpgpost-7723-0-98852600-1523894978.jpgpost-7723-0-21023800-1523895007.jpgpost-7723-0-22648000-1523895028.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I find WSF just won't sand smooth and doesn't take glue well. It may well work for larger gauges but in 'N' it's a non starter. Below is the same coach in WSF and FUD. No remedial work was carried out, just washed and given a dusting of primer. No amount of sanding would ever recover the detail as it's not there in the first place.

U4qlUzV.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Gareth, what glue are you using. Some have found they had no problem, even managed to get it to stick to plastic(which I struggle with).I find cheap liquid superglue works well, especially if you glue card or paper to it.

For smoothing down, WSF is very tough! I have even used a mini drill with a rough attachment. Just have to be a bit careful. Best not to let WSF get wet(even paint) before sanding, as the liquid binds the WSF particles.

 

That wagon, I sometimes wonder what people want, a pristine out of the factory one or one that has actually been used. I have found that quality can vary though, and am now switching to FUD and FED for smaller models. Note this is not an option for bigger scales , and if so price goes up a lot.

Edited by rue_d_etropal
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've struggled with normal superglue but found Loctite gel has held so far. Luckily with a 3D print not much gluing is needed. It can be sanded with a lot of work but a lot of detail is already lost using WSF as can be seen in my comparison photo, there really isn't any point. For larger scales it probably is an option but in 'N' it's worth going FUD as I think in this case they only cost about £3 more. Well worth the extra.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the reasons I tried to get 3D print designers working together and having stands/workshops at exhibitions was not to just show the products but to show how to deal with some of the problems some have with it. Unfortnately there was no interest , so we keep blundering on. Maybe it needs to be exhibition managers who drive this. 3D printing is here now, so why do so many ignore it as a valuable tool for railway modelling.

When I started FUD was having a lot of problems, and was not necessarily being used for the right models. Large 'flat' surfaces warping was one problem, as was breaking of small items. For N gauge, many of these problems are minimalised, although you do still have to be careful with small items. Usually if they are just detail on a larger item there is less of a problem. I still keep some of that detail to a minimum, and as quite a few have said over the years, if you can't see it, why spend so long adding it.

Working in many scales and gauges, I can see how one stacks up against the others. Every scale/gauge in traditional modelling markets has its acceptable price range, and unfortunately OO is one of those where prices are possibly a bit high for 3D printing. Can't change that, but scales either side, such as N , OO9 ,O and G1 are better, as the traditional products for those tend to be more expensive.

The bigger scales don't have option of FUD, but N and OO9 can use it , and I am slowly moving that way(but keeping WSF as an option as some do actually like it, or are at least prepared to use it).

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is WSF, the body was ordered in "WSF - Polished" and the chassis in standard WSF. The body has had some sanding down, still exhibits slight 'pitting' though, but I'm more than happy with it as it's not meant to be a showcase queen. The chassis has had a very light sanding in some areas, but is mostly raw. 

 

I don't like the idea of using the 3D printing for all the detail, so handrails, buffers etc are separately fitted on this model, which gets around the detail issues and allows me to have more fun modelling it!

 

post-25124-0-97855100-1523958876_thumb.jpg

 

post-25124-0-63222300-1523958907_thumb.jpg

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

polished finish only works if you don't include too much detail,as it will rub much of it off. There is also a maximum size for items that can use this as well.

Buffers, I agree , 3D printing is not best method, but most people don't have access or know where to get buffers as seperate fittings(myself included).  therefore normally add them, and they can easily be removed if someone wants to. Far too many kits over the years have not included everything required, and therefore get ignored simply because sourcing those missing parts is difficult. It's a difficult balancing act, but from feedback I have had most seem happy with my approach.

3D printed chassis. Another area I tend to stay clear of as I have found that you need to be far more accurate with a chassis, and however good your design is, 3D printing is not always that accurate. Many would rather have a working chassis that runs well,but not look quite right, that one that looks near perfect but runs poorly. Been there, done it. How many replace Ratio bogies on kits with good running r2r ones?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Buffers, I agree , 3D printing is not best method, but most people don't have access or know where to get buffers as seperate fittings(myself included).  therefore normally add them, and they can easily be removed if someone wants to. 

3D printed chassis. Another area I tend to stay clear of as I have found that you need to be far more accurate with a chassis, and however good your design is, 3D printing is not always that accurate.

For buffers, I've used Bachmann spares code 36-035, they're easy to get hold of and pretty cheap if you don't want to model a specific type. I've found so far that 3D printing is fine for the chassis providing you're prepared to clean it up a bit and make minor adjustments - I'm doing some further experimentation into this at the moment, so we'll see how it goes.

Edited by TurboSnail
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

For buffers, I've used Bachmann spares code 36-035, they're easy to get hold of and pretty cheap if you don't want to model a specific type

Trouble that is not the case for everyone. 3D printing from companies such as Shapeways has a worldwide customer base, and even here in UK,it is not always easy to get supplies. In factI think it is more difficuly

t now with so much good quality r2r items,resulting in those companies which did supply the bits no one else did for updating r2r, closing down. I am hoping that 3D printing wll encourage people to look beyond the r2r models.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Trouble that is not the case for everyone. 3D printing from companies such as Shapeways has a worldwide customer base, and even here in UK,it is not always easy to get supplies. In factI think it is more difficuly

t now with so much good quality r2r items,resulting in those companies which did supply the bits no one else did for updating r2r, closing down. I am hoping that 3D printing wll encourage people to look beyond the r2r models.

 

 

In all honesty that couldn't be further from the truth. There are many suppliers in the UK* who are not only stockists but also manufacturing and adding to their range items such as buffers, just take a look at Lanarkshire models for one example.

 

As for those overseas purchasing from Shapeways, they are more than likely to be ex-pats and all are well aware of what is available and how easy it is to be able to purchase. 

 

*

Roxey

Wizard

Lanarkshire models

Peters spares

Dart castings

Branchlines

 

The list goes on and on...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we please not re-enter the debate of 3D Printing vs traditional kits... partly because there is no 'vs' about it!

 

I see it that 3D Printing is not the answer to everything, and certainly should not displace the superior traditional offerings. That said, it still has a part to play in the hobby alongside those traditional offerings and should not be seen as a competitor, but more as a stepping stone or as the right process for certain jobs. I personally feel that 3D Printing, as costs come down and standards improve, will allow a range of lower-priced basic loco bodies (it is not really all that suitable for coaches, in my opinion) in WSF and finer details to fit them can be offered in FUD. I also think that all applicable models should be offered in at least those two materials to allow the potential purchaser to choose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is not a finish I would ever describe as acceptable on a layout, at least on a piece of rolling stock, All SLS finishes are the same, there is a slight advantage in resolution to be had with the HP machines which will produce less stepping on angled/curved surfaces but it is still an issue and you can't cheat the grain size of the nylon powder. The best finish is Shapeways Premium but it is still only usable on large non detailed items due to the inability to print small detail in the first place and the polishing processes removing what detail is printed. 

 

In 4mm SLS materials can be quite good at representing brickwork, but that's about it. I use it a lot in 16mm scale though where I want a rough & pitted rusty finish as it does that very well.

 

This picture features 3 different 3D print materials (Form 2 Grey Resin, Premium WSF and HP Nylon), as well as cast resin parts, in 16mm scale.  

 

 

post-21854-0-57790900-1523999388_thumb.jpg

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

"This picture features 3 different 3D print materials (Form 2 Grey Resin,
Premium WSF and HP Nylon), as well as cast resin parts, in 16mm scale. "

 

This is one of the features of designing for 3D.Printing; the selection of

materials for their particular attributes, where they are needed

The SDJR 25a Loco has 4 different materials used for the 3D print of parts..

 

Noel

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is one of the features of designing for 3D.Printing; the selection of

materials for their particular attributes, where they are needed

 

 

Which brings us back to the need to design kits again, using multiple media.

 

I have a suspicion about 3D printing: I think the quality has probably improved almost as much as it's going to for quite some time. I don't think there will be much improvement in the ability to print very small parts, or in the quality of finish of surfaces [1], because I don't think there's much of a market for it. I don't believe that the finescale-modelling market is enough to drive the technology.

 

Therefore kits. Simon doesn't rate kits because most modellers won't build them any more. I say that we need a new approach to kits such that more folk are happy to build them. I think that a kit made from FUD-printed parts, designed for easy assembly [2], and with relatively few parts to assemble, can be made attractive.

 

 

Notes:

[1] Jewellery designers care about surface finish, are users of 3D printing, and possibly have some influence in the industry. But they're already sorted. One can print jewellery at Shapeways in precious metals, or in base metals plated with precious, and get an excellent finish; I've done this.

 

[2] "Easy to assemble" means glued assembly (using materials that can be glued easily) with parts that are self-locating and self-jigging so that they cannot readily be put together out of alignment. Think of Airfix kits and the locating pegs between halves of a fuselage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...