3D printed buildings - almost rtp

[Nick Holliday]

Is the Grange Road one 10ft 6in wide or 11ft. I now have both sizes.

Changed first design, and now door looks more in proportion.

 

I could not get onto that signal society website. Got an error - server not found. Hopefuly only temporary.

According to both Wagstaff and the SRC Register, Grange Road box was 14' x 12' x 5'. However, it is described as a wooden box with brick base, which is why I didn't include in my analysis, but, looking at photos of it, it seems to be all brick, as per Isfield, so perhaps this is one that they've got wrong, since there are no changes recorded against it.

[rue_d_etropal]

I wonder if those dimensions are correct. Counting the bricks on side and it comes out nearer to 10ft wide.Main reason I used Grange Road as an example is the good photos of it online.Would like to see one of the rear as well. As a small station it has a lot packed into a small space, even a footbridge(although  think that had gne by BR days) which was a bit OTT considering it ws only a single track.

 

Also interesting to note that a certain chap by the name of Beeching lived locally!

 

 

Just had another look at Grange Road photos and it is definitely only 10ft wide(unless there is an extention at back not visible in photos!), and 14ft long. Were window sizes altered to fit different lengths of boxes, otherwise how has 12inches been lost!

Edited July 4, 2018 by rue_d_etropal

[Joseph_Pestell]

IIRC, Saxby & Farmer were very active abroad as well. So an HO version should do well.

[rue_d_etropal]

IIRC, Saxby & Farmer were very active abroad as well. So an HO version should do well.

that is planned. just want to get OO version correct first. I am finding out more about various mesurements each time I look at design.

Windows, i thought would be same size, now don't appear to be. Ones atfront on a 15ft work out at 3ft 4in , ones at back are nearer to 2ft 6in. Side ones should be 3ft 4in in as well, but then door is only about 2ft 3in wide(narrow, but is a standard door size).

On the 14ft box, the front windows must be 3in narrower. Not so sure about side ones, as counting bricks comes out less, but overlap might account for some reduction.On Grange Road the side windows at door end are narrower than other. Fairly easy to count bricks on this.

Edited July 4, 2018 by rue_d_etropal

[Nick Holliday]

I don't think there were any standard sizes. Most construction companies, such as Longleys, had their own joinery works, and would make doors and windows for each job. There was probably a bit of leeway in the build dimensions, too, as long as the frame could be accommodated in the structure. The difference between side and end windows is particularly frustrating. When D&S produced some window frets they provided two types, side and end, but they were only usable for the box they worked from.

[rue_d_etropal]

In this 15ft by 11ft example,the side and front windows are the same(just), certainly near enough in model form. For other sized boxes , windows may be different.

 

I have now done more on modularising the design, mainly making the windows and door separate design components which I then incorporate into final design. Makes it a lot easier to modify, and create different sized windows. In theory I can do a version with a window open(but only if asked specifically). I don't want too many versions, to maintain.

 

One advantage ofhaving different builders, is that differences did exist, so if my version is not an exact copy, then that is less important. Perfect for freelance, which is what most modellers build anyway.

[rue_d_etropal]

I think it is now ready. versions with door either side. Now available in 4mm/ft scale. Plan to now do other scales.

 

Edited July 5, 2018 by rue_d_etropal

[rue_d_etropal]

I find buildings take a lot longer, all those bricks slow my comuter down. In the end the design is composed of lots of different parts. It is quicker working on one wall of bricks than a cimplet building, and I just have to make sure they all line up.

Something made the version for 3mm/ft go odd. It looked like it fitted together(it should have done so, as each part was a simple resize), but for some reason the stl file was getting corrupted. I have founf the Windows program 3D Print very useful, as it can view stl files, and in this case came up with an error message. Eventually pinned it down to the corner ridge tiles on roof, and slightly changed design.

Ihave also found that I need to have components in a sequence with a large one first. It seems that something doesc not quite work, and not all components ge picked up properly. It seems to pass the stl test, but on uploading to Shapeways , goes wrong. Fixed that problem by making sure a big componet was firs in list. resume it must do some internal component size checking based on first item.

Anyway got there in the end, but have only resized in O, HO and TT3. In theory N would be possible.

Found that Oo version just crept over the minimuminternal space, so worked out cheaper than expected. My original version was based on a 10ft 6in wide box and that was more expensive, than the 11ft one I eventually did. The HO one, as it does not have enough internal space, costs the same as the OO one.

Still not sure why the O scale version comes out so much more. I even thinned dow walls as much as I could.

[rue_d_etropal]

Got back onto my Nissen hut design. Originaly I did this as a modular system, partly because the file size for a complete hut was too high. My modules have the corrugation on both insde and outside, as well as includng the framing. Ideal if it was visible, but for a complete building possibly a bit unnecessary.

Anyway, I have done a version without inside corrugations, and these modules can then be built up into a complete Nissen hut. I can alter the design with different doors and windows. I am also considering how I could join huts together at right angles.

This is a test sample I have done. Scales HO, OO, and 5.5mm/ft.

Edited August 12, 2018 by rue_d_etropal

[Joseph_Pestell]

IIRC, Saxby & Farmer were very active abroad as well. So an HO version should do well.

 

Since writing the above, I have found that Architecture & Passion also do a Saxby & Farmer box in HO. But in typically French fashion, the roof is zinc rather than slate.

[rue_d_etropal]

Since writing the above, I have found that Architecture & Passion also do a Saxby & Farmer box in HO. But in typically French fashion, the roof is zinc rather than slate.

Looks nice,but not cheap given you still have to build it. I think a 3D printed version would come out at a similar price. Just some detail not so fine, and I don't include an interior.

[rue_d_etropal]

Current Hornby magazine have a paper kit for a 1940s era ARPsignal box in it. I bought a copy as I thought it might help me design my own version.

On checking the detail, I noticed many features which were not correct for an LMS version, wich it puported to be based on. Firstly the windows, but I thought I could substitute the correct ones, then i noticed the window frames should be concrete , not brick, and it also should have a solid concrete roof. At least the brickwork was the correct English bond, but it did not swap over correctly from fron/back to sides.

In fact the print is a mixture of LMS and GWR design. Nice but not quite right.

 

No harm done. I did more research and came up with my own design, roughly the same size. Most of the LMS  ARP boxes were 5 windows minimum  at front, They were usuallyin locations that required bigger boxes. But the very last LMS ARP box built was in 1949 on the Ormskirk line, and that was a 3 window box, so in theory a small box could be justified.

I decided I should vave a versions with stps at either end, and also have solid brick sided steps and an more open version with concrete panels(The Ratio version will be of this type, but bigger). .

All those bricks drove my computer bonkers! Just needed a bit of patience(and I could get on with some real model making whilst the computer finished its jobs).

 

I have had to estimate some measuremrnts , but there would have been variations depending on what was required. Overall I think I have captured the overalll appearence, not pretty but it is functional. I might have a go at the GWR version at some time, as that is better looking, ut again it is mainy a big signal box.

[rue_d_etropal]

Decided to take 3D printed building ndesgn to another level, or is that another dimension.

Most of us have used persectives in backscenes. I tend to dio my own so I can fore it the way I want. Modelling 3D perspective is diddicult, and can sometimes only work if you look at it from one position.Jack Nelson used it effecively in his model railway dioramas, but look behind the models and you see a very differnt model. IThey work partly beca=use of a picture box type viewing angle so you only can look at it from one view.

There has been a bit written in magazines recently, and there was thar 3D effect background on the TV challenge program.

 

But... I have been wanting to use 3D printing to design simething that woud have a perspective in it. I was tempted by the flat on street , looking down it, but with 2 angles of perspective in same view it sometimes only works if viewed correctly, so started on a design for a street scene going in one direction of perspective.

Using my own house designs as a start point, and coming up with an arbitrary angle. I kept the top of the roof level , and a 87% reducton i size 9in effect) from one house to the next. Starting with 1/76, I worked down to 1/152. Oddly one house is 1/100(TT3) and the second is obvously1/87 (HO) .I can go bigger( Gauge 1), and even smaller(down to Z).

The one above with a range from 1/76 down to 1/152 is only about 10in long, and an inch deep.

Each house is a separate ite, which can be joined to any other of correct scale. I plan to do stone and other types of brick, as well as shops , and industrial buildings. As it is a street, I then thought about a tramway, then possibly plain track.

Now sme might say, or wonder why this is better than a 2D printed background.

I initially started ti see if it was possible, then realise, it would be pssible to add correcly scaled bits at certain parts, 9eg people, lampposts even small vehicles). Lampposts could even be proper working ones using LEDs, and lights could be fitted in buildings.

 

Then , I thought, why not have a railway wagon, or string of themin perspective. I would then actually have an OO/HO wagon !! The front end being OO and the backend being HO scale .

 

I want to do some more work on this, but I think I have wored out the main problem areas. I will keep to the same relative angles etc so everything is compatible. For me it is antinesting way, nt just for model making but crossing over into areas of artwork I have been inolved in.

[Knuckles]

Pretty cool for the buildings I must say.  Not sure the wagon would work though!  That might look a bit odd.

[rue_d_etropal]

As long as you are looking at wagon, from direction you think is correct, it will work. One reason I am not doing too big a scale reduction over 60mm length(the standard measuement I have used). That is pretty close to a standard wagon length. The other side of wagon will be blank, but there will stil be a dummy axlebox and wheel. I need to do the track first, to determine exact gauge for positions of wheels.

The perspective values are not exact, but they can't be. Part of the effect , in fact a major part is optical illusion, and you canplay withthe mind, forcing it into beleving what it sees is correct. Just don't give t too much info9egtwo perspectives) to confuse it.

[rue_d_etropal]

Moved this latest update on 3D perspective to here http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/139266-3d-perspective-using-3d-printing/.

Edited December 7, 2018 by rue_d_etropal