Rudititanic Posted December 18, 2018 Author Share Posted December 18, 2018 Having been kindly invited to look over Sem34090's 'Derwent' design, the following is a provisional list of projects for the near future. Other duties mean this may well be slow-going, and this is far from definitive or fixed (if circumstances prevent any design), but hopefully will be of interest. Previous suggestions not listed here are still under consideration, but may be less imminent. As before, do feel free to suggest prototypes or even to discuss a commission....! Rocket rebuild version in 00 (already complete in N) Derwent Northumbrian Agenoria Locomotion No 1 (scratch aid) Crampton engine (undecided which variant as of yet) Sandy-Potton Railway/Wantage Tramway Shannon Borrows well tank ‘Windle’ Hetton-le-Hole Colliery Engine Similarly as a longer-term plan, more development work will go into the potential dual-gauge Brunellian track, in time hopefully to be joined by suitable stock. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sem34090 Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 If only I had enough money to buy all of that lot! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudititanic Posted December 18, 2018 Author Share Posted December 18, 2018 Much to do till then, but in the meantime there's plenty of others (not so subtly!)... https://www.shapeways.com/shops/newman-miniatures 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killian keane Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 Of that list I would definately buy at least the Borrows tank and the Hetton le hole loco, and if you're looking for drawings of Cramptons, Mike Sharmans book is a must, if it wasnt already for those of our predilection, as for Shannon I heard tell via fb that another 3d printing establishment may be doing her, possibly 2a rail, whom I would contact to avoid duplication 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudititanic Posted December 19, 2018 Author Share Posted December 19, 2018 Of that list I would definately buy at least the Borrows tank and the Hetton le hole loco, and if you're looking for drawings of Cramptons, Mike Sharmans book is a must, if it wasnt already for those of our predilection, as for Shannon I heard tell via fb that another 3d printing establishment may be doing her, possibly 2a rail, whom I would contact to avoid duplication Good to know thanks. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Simpson Posted December 19, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 19, 2018 (edited) I'm not sure about the demand for this suggestion, but I've always thought that the standard locos produced by the leading builders and bought by lots of early railway companies would be very useful. They may not be as charming as some of the one-off locos, but they would allow the modelling of many more lines. The Stephenson Patentee (easily bashed into the clones produced by other builders) and the Bury 0-4-0 are certainly a good start here. Many congratulations on having such a good range already. Personally I'd love to see Sharp Roberts and Rennie singles, which would make it possible to model the early railways south of the Thames, and a Bury 2-2-0 would be wonderful as well. [EDIT: But in fairness, only early railway geeks would spot many of the differences between one single and another. Perhaps a basic generic 2-2-2 single with different domes, chimneys and outside frames for individual builders available as extras might work?] And to be completely unrealistic, 3.5 mm versions of some of these models would be amazing. (Some of the standard designs were sold to European railways as well.) Edited December 19, 2018 by Ian Simpson 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudititanic Posted December 19, 2018 Author Share Posted December 19, 2018 Interesting thoughts and thanks for the kind words. Valid point regarding multi-company designs and I have been thinking about some of the singles, notably the prospect of a Jenny Lind type. My main reservation so far is for 'larger' models I would rather have internal power than a motorised coach/van, which raises difficulties with finding appropriate chassis etc (especially in N). Hopefully this can be resolved though, opening things for various other prototypes. 'Pieces' like chimneys etc are also an idea, though this could risk duplication with other designers. As for alternate scales, with enough demand or a commission I'd certainly be open to it, but again would first rather be familiar with what commercial parts are available than just offering something requiring substantial scratch-building to complete. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwardian Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 I'm not sure about the demand for this suggestion, but I've always thought that the standard locos produced by the leading builders and bought by lots of early railway companies would be very useful. They may not be as charming as some of the one-off locos, but they would allow the modelling of many more lines. The Stephenson Patentee (easily bashed into the clones produced by other builders) and the Bury 0-4-0 are certainly a good start here. Many congratulations on having such a good range already. Personally I'd love to see Sharp Roberts and Rennie singles, which would make it possible to model the early railways south of the Thames, and a Bury 2-2-0 would be wonderful as well. [EDIT: But in fairness, only early railway geeks would spot many of the differences between one single and another. Perhaps a basic generic 2-2-2 single with different domes, chimneys and outside frames for individual builders available as extras might work?] And to be completely unrealistic, 3.5 mm versions of some of these models would be amazing. (Some of the standard designs were sold to European railways as well.) ... great suggestions. Did someone mention E B Wilson? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarriageShed Posted December 20, 2018 Share Posted December 20, 2018 ...but again would first rather be familiar with what commercial parts are available than just offering something requiring substantial scratch-building to complete. In N gauge terms it may be worth having a chat with Nick Tilson of N Brass Locos. He already produces a range of loco spares such as chimneys, domes, smokeboxes, etc, and is pretty open to producing new parts if there's a need. Working with him would certainly allay any fears of duplication. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudititanic Posted December 21, 2018 Author Share Posted December 21, 2018 In N gauge terms it may be worth having a chat with Nick Tilson of N Brass Locos. He already produces a range of loco spares such as chimneys, domes, smokeboxes, etc, and is pretty open to producing new parts if there's a need. Working with him would certainly allay any fears of duplication. A useful suggestion, thanks. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudititanic Posted January 20, 2019 Author Share Posted January 20, 2019 Some news for those who may be interested: I have now painted up all three N Rocket variants (below), completing the historical set. I must admit the poor modern remains are becoming a favourite despite being only a static model! The 00 version of the post-Rainhill rebuilt Rocket is now available via: https://www.shapeways.com/product/YKRE6P66G/00-scale-rebuilt-rocket-loco-scratch-aid https://www.shapeways.com/product/83QW9XCNZ/00-scale-rebuilt-rocket-tender-scratch-aid Lastly, and what I suspect many will want to hear, work has now started on 'Derwent' with the main structure complete in N and details beginning to be added. To cope with the available wheels it has had to be stretched a scale two feet, but when reworked for 00 it will be modified back to correct dimensions. The 00 version will also house two motor bogies (a dummy unit is already available if preferring to fit only one) and I am looking into options for the Hackworth-style wheels. Keep tuned for updates! 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudititanic Posted January 22, 2019 Author Share Posted January 22, 2019 Detail work is developing on Derwent, but pointers are always welcome. The second dome needs reworking and it's still early days, but do give opinions on work so far. 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Holliday Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Detail work is developing on Derwent, but pointers are always welcome. The second dome needs reworking and it's still early days, but do give opinions on work so far. #DerwRend2.jpg I don't know if it is just the rendering process, but to me the boiler cladding looks wrong, giving the impression that the boiler either steps down in size towards the chimney, or the boiler bands stand proud of the planking.Looking at this photo from Shildon 1925 and the drawing and photos in the HMRS book I would have the planking as a continuous run from firebox to chimney, with the bands being just that, thin metal straps to keep everything in place. I would also halve the width of the individual planks, as the drawing shows approximately eighteen planks per side, rather than the nine or so on the rendition. It's difficult to tell with the light blue piping, which may be that size to allow reliable printing, but, to me, it looks as if the main distribution pipe from the dome should be larger in diameter than the feeds from the manifold to the cylinders. There are a number of other points, such as the planking on the dome, that no doubt will be resolved as you sort out the final details. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwardian Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Looking good. This is I understand the CAD for the 2mm version, so less detail is possible. Depending upon material, query whether the name and number plates will succeed in the print. Those on the prototype print didn't (4mm scale). Defining the planking is a challenge. It was quite subtle on the prototype print. However, the CAD image suggests quite pronounced troughs when compared with the prototype. The boiler bands are also less pronounced on the real thing. Perhaps it is for technical reasons that we have a 'backing strip' to the motion. Perhaps to support it in due course? The bracket here could do with slimming down if possible in the 4mm version. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudititanic Posted January 23, 2019 Author Share Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) Thank you both for the images and comments. To respond in turn: The boiler cladding are continuous planks from front to back and the bands are somewhat proud to ensure they can be printed, but I'll look to reducing them where I can. As for the number of planks, this is problematic simply owing to the limitations of what can be printed in each material (wall thickness etc). Measuring the plans and photos the pipes are apparently all equal diameter (or close as). I'd missed the dome planking - thanks. Indeed this is the N Gauge version; how much extra detail will be added to 00 has yet to be seen as some may be easier to scratchbuild rather than having printed over-scale. Useful to know re name/number thanks; they might work in N (as top-quality print) but in 00 may have to be deleted then. Planking is somewhat exaggerated in the CAD model but when printed from experience should give around 1/4 to 1/2mm gaps maximum in 00, which diminish further with priming/painting (please see photos of other examples in this thread). The bracket is appropriated from my N Gauge 'Rocket' to support slide bars and ensure operative coupling rods; a necessary compromise alas. I am thinking about ways of adding faux slide bars in front to mask it, and hopefully worse come a dose of black paint will blend it into the frames a bit. In N it is only 2.5mm wide though; the CAD is crueler on the eye than the model will be! Edwardian, just to query - what was the diameter of wheels you used (in 00)? Edited January 23, 2019 by Rudititanic 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwardian Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Thank you both for the images and comments. To respond in turn: The boiler cladding are continuous planks from front to back and the bands are somewhat proud to ensure they can be printed, but I'll look to reducing them where I can. As for the number of planks, this is problematic simply owing to the limitations of what can be printed in each material (wall thickness etc). Measuring the plans and photos the pipes are apparently all equal diameter (or close as). I'd missed the dome planking - thanks. Indeed this is the N Gauge version; how much extra detail will be added to 00 has yet to be seen as some may be easier to scratchbuild rather than having printed over-scale. Useful to know re name/number thanks; they might work in N (as top-quality print) but in 00 may have to be deleted then. Planking is somewhat exaggerated in the CAD model but when printed from experience should give around 1/4 to 1/2mm gaps maximum in 00, which diminish further with priming/painting (please see photos of other examples in this thread). The bracket is appropriated from my N Gauge 'Rocket' to support slide bars and ensure operative coupling rods; a necessary compromise alas. I am thinking about ways of adding faux slide bars in front to mask it, and hopefully worse come a dose of black paint will blend it into the frames a bit. In N it is only 2.5mm wide though; the CAD is crueler on the eye than the model will be! Edwardian, just to query - what was the diameter of wheels you used (in 00)? I was party only today to a conversation about the need for the grooves in 4mm rolling stock planking to be slightly exaggerated - looking right is preferable to absolute scale, even where the latter is possible. It would not surprise me to learn that it would be difficult to produce the correct number of 'planks' on the boiler cladding, and a challenge to reproduce the fact that this is not a smooth curved surface with grooves, but is in fact faceted; each 'plank' being flat, not curved, in profile. You can only do the best you can in any given scale. Some detail will undoubtedly be incapable of being printed, and some best not printed. I think here of all components involving thin wire; e.g. spectacle plate stays, the spring valves. Sem had, sensibly in my view, looked into commissioning etched plates from Narrow Planet, IIRC. The rods/motion/slide bars etc might be best engineered in metal. Bolt head type detail I think should be attempted in 4mm, as within the capability of the better materials. Sem concluded, I think it's fair to say, that the subject required a kit approach with components commissioned in other materials. If this is to be a successful scratch-aid, I think it is important that the necessary components can be source separately. unlike the other models of yours I have looked at, these do not yet exist! BTW, now the pressure is off my income, I determined to try your Lion kit. I got as far as buying the motor bogie before discovering that the necessary Hornby spares are presently unavailable. Note to self, must check again soon. The wheels I used were 5'/20,mm Romfords with card overlays very kindly laser-cut by Linny of this parish. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sem34090 Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Certainly I felt that, for a 4mm/ft scale model the nameplates and motion would be better done in Brass. Narrow Planet told me they'd be happy to work from CAD supplied to them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudititanic Posted January 24, 2019 Author Share Posted January 24, 2019 Indeed Edwardian – the issue is that each material has a minimum thickness for etched and embossed detail. The more planks, the thinner these measurements become until it is either indistinct or simply unprintable. That said, I’d failed to compensate for enlarging my usual boiler shell (which I know prints ok), so have modified to increase the planking number slightly. I’ve tried making them smaller for the dome (being thinner than boiler planks so it seems); worse come the uniform paint job should mask any limitations. As said, can but do one’s best! I agree some details won’t be printed – regulator handle for example (although the spectacle plate hole will be provided for easy fitting), although a basic safety valve structure should be do-able in 00. For anyone wanting finer detail, this can of course be removed. As you equally note, r-t-r components are rather thin for such an engine (!) so I’ll need to include as much as possible while keeping costs/construction complexity down. Regarding slide bars, my current idea for 00 at least would be to provide them ready-done in situ, with the rod to be formed as a ‘T’ to slot inside them. The obvious question as you have the engineer’s proof model: are the slide bars strong/smooth enough for this to be a reliable system? If not I may have to look to a faux system to mask a simplified wire form (as already partially fitted). Glad you’re interested in Lion. Ultimately the only key measurements are wheel and axle/crank diameter so these potentially could be sourced elsewhere. Rods could also be formed from wire; the parts I list are primarily just suggestions. Hope you enjoy though! Lastly, thanks re the wheels. For ease of designing, is the 20mm inclusive of flange? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboSnail Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 For reference with printing nameplates, the numberplates on this model (in OO) are printed, and only just came out ok, any smaller and the text and surroundings start to blend into one another so it looks horrible once painted. And trying to paint it on the model was pretty tricky. Narrow Planet aren't particularly expensive, so I reckon it's worth it for that finishing touch! 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwardian Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 For reference with printing nameplates, the numberplates on this model (in OO) are printed, and only just came out ok, any smaller and the text and surroundings start to blend into one another so it looks horrible once painted. And trying to paint it on the model was pretty tricky. Narrow Planet aren't particularly expensive, so I reckon it's worth it for that finishing touch! IMG_20181027_092935.jpg And even then, that tends to show the superiority of poured resin. Shapeways, not so sure. Regarding slide bars, my current idea for 00 at least would be to provide them ready-done in situ, with the rod to be formed as a ‘T’ to slot inside them. The obvious question as you have the engineer’s proof model: are the slide bars strong/smooth enough for this to be a reliable system? If not I may have to look to a faux system to mask a simplified wire form (as already partially fitted). Lastly, thanks re the wheels. For ease of designing, is the 20mm inclusive of flange? The slide bars were not put to the test, as we failed to produce viable rods. I doubt that they would have been robust enough. They were quite distorted on one side. Heavens, I really must watch what I type! The wheels were 16mm Romfords, for 4' on the prototype. The measurement is over the tyres but excludes the flanges. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killian keane Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 You'll have seen this by now but the Tory class seem to have had variance, 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwardian Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 You'll have seen this by now but the Tory class seem to have had variance, 50461271_10161324954350574_7273567660267274240_n.jpg If our host can crack this, it should be possible to represent any Tory or Miner class Hackworth for which there is a visual record. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudititanic Posted January 25, 2019 Author Share Posted January 25, 2019 Turbosnail – thanks for the advice. That’s a lovely model you’re building! Edwardian – good to know re the slide bars, even if it means some licence will have to be taken. Thanks very much for the photo – particularly helpful. Killian/Edwardian – I’ve set myself up for that, haven’t I? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwardian Posted January 25, 2019 Share Posted January 25, 2019 Killian/Edwardian – I’ve set myself up for that, haven’t I? That, though, is the beauty of the 3D print. There are not inconsiderable challenges to producing this locomotive, but, once overcome, relatively minor changes to the CAD would allow other specific members of these late Hackworth classes to be modelled. This would be a different matter if injection moulding tooling slides were involved! A remaining technical challenge would be operating motion mounted vertically, as opposed to on the incline. If solved in due course, that would allow the Wilberforce Class to be modelled too! But, let us not get ahead of ourselves ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudititanic Posted January 25, 2019 Author Share Posted January 25, 2019 That, though, is the beauty of the 3D print. There are not inconsiderable challenges to producing this locomotive, but, once overcome, relatively minor changes to the CAD would allow other specific members of these late Hackworth classes to be modelled. This would be a different matter if injection moulding tooling slides were involved! A remaining technical challenge would be operating motion mounted vertically, as opposed to on the incline. If solved in due course, that would allow the Wilberforce Class to be modelled too! But, let us not get ahead of ourselves ... Very true and certainly possible if there was demand; my previous comment was merely tongue-in-cheek. As for working vertical motion, I've already scratchbuilt this successfully on Sans Pareil in N, so once done for Derwent it poses no difficulty at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now