Jump to content

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Mikkel said:

 

Very interesting stock in that pipeline, not least this one. You'll have to build in a "tail wag" !

 

https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrha669a.htm

 

Incidentally, is the caption under that photo wrong as it seems to say that 3541 was 0-4-4T from the outset?

 

Yes hopefully it will have a bit of a waddle!

 

There were 3 sub classes in the 3521/3541 class (and I don’t have the rcts bible in front me to check numbers): an 0-4-2st, an 0-4-4t (both BG) and an 0-4-4t SG, then post 1892 all BG ones were rebuilt as SG 0-4-4ts.....which were very unstable so all were rebuilt as 4-4-0 tender engines (Peter K used to do the small boilered one and Falcon brass did both large and small boilered tender varieties)

D

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 31/03/2020 at 20:02, monkeysarefun said:

I found Blender pre-version 2.8 to be impenetrable, and I've had 40 years plus experience using some pretty involved software, firstly geoscience applications and now defence related packages.  However it all clicked into place when they released the 2.8 version, the interface suddenly worked for me.

 

That said, I'm a believer in horses for courses and think that for straight line non-organic engineering type modelling - rolling stock etc - Fusion360 or Solidworks is much more appropriate.

 

I used to have access to Solidworks (~20yrs ago!), designed many parts for my race bike with it and found it very easy to use. I was self-taught, just using tutorials I found online and loved designing the parts with it, sending off the drawings to my friendly machinist and finding parts fitting first time. When I lost the access I looked at buying my own copy and instantly choked on the cost when it would just be for personal use.

 

Seeing there is a wealth of "free to use" 3D CAD applications now, is there anything similar to Solidworks in use that anyone would recommend to try? I'm assuming this would be easiest for me to pick up (if I can remember that far back as to how to use it!) or would it be easier just to learn another package?

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, 57xx said:

.

I did get access to Solidworks a couple of years ago by joining some US experimental aircraft organisation, which cost about $50 a year but gave me a complimentary Solidworks licensed and a magazine about experimental  planes!

I don't right now recall who it was but I'll look it up some time today when I get a chance. I do recall shortly after joining that I discovered another legal way to get access to Solidworks for free, again I'll see if I still have that info. 

I have to admit that since I started down the SketchUp path I've found that does all I need to do, and if it doesn't someone has invariably written a plug in for it that does, so I dropped Solidworks.

Sketchup now is a choice of subscription based pro version or a cutdown freebie cloud based one but the 2017 Make version is still available for free which is a full application plus allows use of all the plugins, unlike the cloud one. 

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, kipford said:

Try Solid Edge, free for hobby users and much better than F360 to use IMO.

I'd be interested in what you prefer about Solid Edge.  I'm currently using F360 but struggle at times!

 

Mike

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, billbedford said:

 

 The best software to use it the one that does what you want and you have most experience with. No?

Yes, I agree Bill but if @kipford found something of interest in Solid Edge, I'd be interested to know what it is.  I'm still using ancient versions of programs such as 'Photoshop', because I'm very familiar with them and feel no pressure to change.  I'm still on a learning curve with 'Fusion 360', however, so am open to alternatives if  I see a good reason to change.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 27/03/2021 at 08:03, njee20 said:

You’ve probably honed your technique since last year, but I’d consider smaller support contact diameter and depth. I use 0.2mm for both, I only ever use light supports, and you get markedly less scarring from the supports. Remove them under warm water and they virtually fall off. 

Is this top for the form 2 using form labs resin or the Mars 2 (if Mars 2 which resins do you use)?

Duncan

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, drduncan said:

Is this top for the form 2 using form labs resin or the Mars 2 (if Mars 2 which resins do you use)?

Duncan


I’ve got a few printers (including a Mars 2 Pro, no Formlabs), and use the same support settings on all of them; I go for light supports regardless of model size, with small contact diameter and depth, and increase the density depending on the model, not to say that’ll work for everyone!

 

Anycubic resin usually, with a 1:3 blend of Siraya Tenacious:Anycubic on bits I want some flex in, like bogies, coupling pockets etc. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, njee20 said:

 


I’ve got a few printers (including a Mars 2 Pro, no Formlabs), and use the same support settings on all of them; I go for light supports regardless of model size, with small contact diameter and depth, and increase the density depending on the model, not to say that’ll work for everyone!

 

Anycubic resin usually, with a 1:3 blend of Siraya Tenacious:Anycubic on bits I want some flex in, like bogies, coupling pockets etc. 

Thanks! Very helpful.

 

When I have been experimenting with the form 2 I had got down to 0.4mm contact points but after a lot of trials with no raft and different densities I was finding that rafts with 100% densities were giving the most reliable results.  The biggest problem I found with reduced density of supports (and I never went below 75%) was poorly formed headstocks and some bars.

 

Im looking forward to experimenting with the Mars 2.

 

BTW, who is the cheapest supplier of Siraya tenacious?

 

D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought mine ages ago, I forget where from, but it was about £80/litre - it’s now on Amazon for ~£60/litre. It lasts ages because I’m only generally using it on small items.

 

I always sense check auto supports and add some manual ones, but I’m often more like 40%. I tend to use a raft, but mainly because it’s easier to get the model off in tact. Obviously that’ll depend entirely on your model, the orientation, plus the other support settings, as you say, have a play around. 
 

I printed these on my Mars 2 Pro this week - lifted from the build plate, but not rotated in any way, just about 10 light supports.
 

 

B49987F1-00B0-49CC-B869-611A732E6924.jpeg

217F7D88-133B-4A85-BA9A-AD3D8A085582.jpeg
 

edit: And at the other end of the size spectrum, this used exactly the same support settings, albeit a couple more! N gauge wagon for size comparison. 

 

072A072B-B35B-4748-B30E-BE2BA1C42FBA.jpeg.d5880868f5f263371098c602378899ea.jpeg

 

Edit edit: woah those photos are massive on PC, they looked normal on mobile mode, resized, apologies!

Edited by njee20
  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Well the Mars became a photon Mono after supplier problems. It’s been joined by a wash and cure and after some niggles (bloody disasters) with photon workshop resolved by chutibox I’m turning out ex CMR China clay wagons for Nampara. Here the first 6 are awaiting W irons axle boxes etc, buffers and couplings to get to the ‘I really ought to paint, letter and weather these’ stage...C6A82E33-7DF4-49EF-8301-A45F4551D8D8.jpeg.7d8b75c4852cb019b0e80d2b067efe94.jpeg

Edited by drduncan
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Good-looking wagons. That's a lovely curve of the handbrakes, must have been a bit tricky to draw?

 

I'm intrigued by the pin vice in the foreground. Quite a weapon!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mikkel,

The brake lever wasn’t too bad to draw in fusion, the brake gear was much harder to get right!  The pin vice has got a tapered reamer that is used to open up the holes in coupling rod - and yes it is a nasty looking thing. (The next instalment of the rtr conversion blog will reveal all). You can see the rods in question at the bottom of the photo and just creeping in is the top of the chassis they are for - an L & Y Barton Wright 0-6-2t (don’t ask...).

 

Duncan

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

  • 6 months later...

Not much activity on this thread - it’s been busier with CAD though…

 

I’ll be demonstrating 3D design and printing at today’s SHMRC show at Admiral Lord Nelson School in Portsmouth. I’ll have some hard copy examples if the stock being built for Nampara as well as electronic versions to critique! Do come by and say hello at Stand 17 if you are attending.

Duncan

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So having remembered that social media requires a bit of effort on the sociability front, I thought I’d update you on what I have (or haven’t) been doing on the 3D front.

 

Having been happily producing CMR iron China clay wagons as well as broad gauge 3 plank wagons I realised that a) I was running out of grease axle boxes and that b) the MJT ones, although lovely we’re going to be expensive in bulk. So having found some drawings (on RMweb oddly enough), I drew up a wagons worth and printed them:

4F6AF9E7-E184-4FDA-A995-0A75BC3953BB.jpeg.efea636047b49cbe67b3abe0ca72d2ec.jpeg

 

First impressions were ok, but there was some aliasing visible….

1C09367C-55F8-482C-8A2E-BB92A1DD9F95.jpeg.9946ceefa0c7d83f8ddb8a2c357d9341.jpeg

 

So back to chutibox and I’ll try increasing the x angle to much the 45 degrees I used on the y axis but this will make it a longer print.

 

D

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The West of England China Clay Co lidded China clay wagon is shaping up well and I’ve started adding the etched and cast parts to finish it:

235E663E-D6BC-4446-86EA-5A7B42F4C9D7.jpeg.020b587290f9b1521a527fc0333930ee.jpeg

Also in the shot is a very slightly revised broad gauge 3 plank wagon (horse hook holes were added and more rivets to the solebars- ironic really considering I started all this because I was fed up adding plasticard rivets to scratch built wagons…

 

The CMR wagons are below and once the axle boxes are printed and fitted this pair will be ready for the paint shop.

8B3527A8-688F-4A28-9030-9751751A240C.jpeg.b8fa184bd27d7af0c18de26fa6d87d6e.jpeg

Ive also been working on a B&E broad gauge goods brake. It’s a rather lovely 4w birdcage design but unfortunately the test print had insufficient supports on the end:

D4A3EBD9-35A1-42CF-8C4A-FED8CF981BD9.jpeg.cb9a9184f0aaaf7f75061d2515aa2912.jpeg

And the less said about the two attempts to print the chassis directly into the build plate the better!

Duncan

  • Like 1
  • Craftsmanship/clever 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, drduncan said:

So having found some drawings (on RMweb oddly enough), I drew up a wagons worth and printed them:

I've realised that after having built several different models, I now have a 'kit of parts' that I can draw on to create new models.  I find that printing several small parts together works quite well on my FDM printer.

 

2 hours ago, drduncan said:

And the less said about the two attempts to print the chassis directly into the build plate the better!

With my FDM printer, I always try to find a plain side to each of my models, so that I can start from the build plate.  Those support structures you use always bring to my mind roller-coaster rides :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not sure it’s necessarily insufficient supports FWIW, they just bracing. A lattice is much stiffer, and will resist bending. You may want to rotate slightly in the X (or Y) axis too, so it’s effectively twisted, that’ll mitigate those layers lines you’re getting at the points of maximum suction. 

  • Like 1
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...