Newman Miniatures: N and 00 Scale 3D-Printed Scratch Aids

[Killian keane]

I've just measured my Jenny to find the boiler has 40 planks each 1.14mm wide with a 0.12mm wide and deep gap betwixt them, thats not as fine as the ks lion by the look of it,  but what it'll look like printed we shall see 

[Edwardian]

50 minutes ago, Killian keane said:

I've just measured my Jenny to find the boiler has 40 planks each 1.14mm wide with a 0.12mm wide and deep gap betwixt them, thats not as fine as the ks lion by the look of it,  but what it'll look like printed we shall see 

 

That does seem a reasonable representation for 4mil, though

[Rudititanic]

Interesting to read the comments on this thanks – a lot to consider for future development.  Some thoughts in response from my perspective:

 

Edwardian; glad you’re enjoying Lion and thanks for the feedback.  These models are intended as simple entry-level items and are sold as ‘scratch aids’ rather than complete kits per se.  Because of this some parts are deliberately included to provide a ready-fitted option for beginner modellers, but conversely I fully expect these to be altered by those more experienced (such as handrails).  Other parts are also limited by the material specifications (notably tender faring) – more on this below. 

 

Considering boiler lagging/bands, I see your point and this is something I am beginning to look into more.  Lion was my first 00 build (of any sort, not just 3D printing) and lessons were learned – Derwent by comparison was designed with finer slats/bands.  That said, the vast majority of purchases appear to lean towards the cheaper WSF which has coarser tolerances so limiting both detail and how to-scale parts can be.  Then when filling/sanding and painting these can (for example) reduce the gaps between slats even further, as you noted regarding necessary over-scaling with Killian.  Not being a 00 modeller I’ve not experimented on this personally, but would be concerned lest the detail disappears altogether.  Killian, I look forward to seeing how yours comes out – which material are you planning on using? 

 

Most pertinently, I only produce 00 variants as people have requested them and, ironically, to date they have sold infinitely poorer than their N Gauge equivalents.  Some ‘requested’ models have effectively not sold (Derwent has been clamoured for by many people to Sem & myself but I’ve only sold one in 00 as opposed to two in N [which nobody had previously asked for!]) while others designed purely for myself have gone like the proverbial hot cake (even Bulleid’s Leader…).  I rather suspect marketing has something to do with this, but it raises the question of balancing time in what is really just a hobby. 

 

I should also note though that commissions in 00 are naturally done to that scale and in all rescaled models some parts have been redesigned for 00 – the rescaling work I do is not a quick or simple task.  I’m also still very much learning and am looking into improving bands/slats where I can. 

 

Importantly though I appreciate the constructive feedback and I will take it on board where I can, so thank you.  It’s all a learning curve after all! 

[Joseph_Pestell]

I am enjoying this thread and might consider a small 1850s project at some time.

 

Certainly in 4mm scale, it would seem better to me not to try and print the boiler bands at all but to use brass strip.

 

The cab spectacle plates inevitably come out way too thick. Etched brass (some producers will do very short runs) would be much better for this or even scratchbuilt from brass sheet.

[Regularity]

Shim is good: you can also cut it with a scalpel. Also, cigarette paper. Pre-painted and lined, it can the be glued in place as one of the final steps before varnishing and any weathering.

[Killian keane]

2 hours ago, Rudititanic said:

Interesting to read the comments on this thanks – a lot to consider for future development.  Some thoughts in response from my perspective:

 

Edwardian; glad you’re enjoying Lion and thanks for the feedback.  These models are intended as simple entry-level items and are sold as ‘scratch aids’ rather than complete kits per se.  Because of this some parts are deliberately included to provide a ready-fitted option for beginner modellers, but conversely I fully expect these to be altered by those more experienced (such as handrails).  Other parts are also limited by the material specifications (notably tender faring) – more on this below. 

 

Considering boiler lagging/bands, I see your point and this is something I am beginning to look into more.  Lion was my first 00 build (of any sort, not just 3D printing) and lessons were learned – Derwent by comparison was designed with finer slats/bands.  That said, the vast majority of purchases appear to lean towards the cheaper WSF which has coarser tolerances so limiting both detail and how to-scale parts can be.  Then when filling/sanding and painting these can (for example) reduce the gaps between slats even further, as you noted regarding necessary over-scaling with Killian.  Not being a 00 modeller I’ve not experimented on this personally, but would be concerned lest the detail disappears altogether.  Killian, I look forward to seeing how yours comes out – which material are you planning on using? 

 

Most pertinently, I only produce 00 variants as people have requested them and, ironically, to date they have sold infinitely poorer than their N Gauge equivalents.  Some ‘requested’ models have effectively not sold (Derwent has been clamoured for by many people to Sem & myself but I’ve only sold one in 00 as opposed to two in N [which nobody had previously asked for!]) while others designed purely for myself have gone like the proverbial hot cake (even Bulleid’s Leader…).  I rather suspect marketing has something to do with this, but it raises the question of balancing time in what is really just a hobby. 

 

I should also note though that commissions in 00 are naturally done to that scale and in all rescaled models some parts have been redesigned for 00 – the rescaling work I do is not a quick or simple task.  I’m also still very much learning and am looking into improving bands/slats where I can. 

 

Importantly though I appreciate the constructive feedback and I will take it on board where I can, so thank you.  It’s all a learning curve after all! 

Hey Rudi,  Im planning on using the FUD material (HDP is it called now?), ideally Id go resin as some of the detail is very small indeed (my rivets being 0.3mm diameter hemispheres) 

[Edwardian]

3 hours ago, Rudititanic said:

Interesting to read the comments on this thanks – a lot to consider for future development.  Some thoughts in response from my perspective:

 

Edwardian; glad you’re enjoying Lion and thanks for the feedback.  These models are intended as simple entry-level items and are sold as ‘scratch aids’ rather than complete kits per se.  Because of this some parts are deliberately included to provide a ready-fitted option for beginner modellers, but conversely I fully expect these to be altered by those more experienced (such as handrails).  Other parts are also limited by the material specifications (notably tender faring) – more on this below. 

 

The beginners bit - and I'm a beginner, never having tackled any loco kit before - is in the ease of assembly.  It is not inconsistent with an enhanced level of detailing.

 

it is perfectly possible to produce a tender in FUD with fine faring and fine rivets. I estimate these rivets are about 0.3mm.  These are Shapeways FUD prints, sprayed with filler primer and smoothed to the extent necessary, so far on the body.  Note the detail to the springs. No reason why these could not have been printed with this detail on Lion. Actually, these springs are smaller than Lion's, and are more detailed and accurate than whitemetal equivalents. 

 

 

 

3 hours ago, Rudititanic said:

 

Considering boiler lagging/bands, I see your point and this is something I am beginning to look into more.  Lion was my first 00 build (of any sort, not just 3D printing) and lessons were learned – Derwent by comparison was designed with finer slats/bands.  That said, the vast majority of purchases appear to lean towards the cheaper WSF which has coarser tolerances so limiting both detail and how to-scale parts can be.  Then when filling/sanding and painting these can (for example) reduce the gaps between slats even further, as you noted regarding necessary over-scaling with Killian.  Not being a 00 modeller I’ve not experimented on this personally, but would be concerned lest the detail disappears altogether.  Killian, I look forward to seeing how yours comes out – which material are you planning on using? 

 

There is room for compromise, the essence is to achieve something that looks right in a given scale. For OO narrower bands and smaller gaps would be appropriate.  

 

3 hours ago, Rudititanic said:

 

Most pertinently, I only produce 00 variants as people have requested them and, ironically, to date they have sold infinitely poorer than their N Gauge equivalents.  Some ‘requested’ models have effectively not sold (Derwent has been clamoured for by many people to Sem & myself but I’ve only sold one in 00 as opposed to two in N [which nobody had previously asked for!]) while others designed purely for myself have gone like the proverbial hot cake (even Bulleid’s Leader…).  I rather suspect marketing has something to do with this, but it raises the question of balancing time in what is really just a hobby. 

 

My position on Derwent was that, having effectively sponsored the original model by Sem for my daughter's school project, I was  keen to see this as a more fully realised model.  You took up the baton, for which I'm grateful. I am, as I've said, building up to Derwent, which is really my ultimate goal in terms of early locomotives.  I am going to look at the design more critically in the light of Lion and may look to some comfort regarding the specifics of the OO design, as it remains a project very close to my heart. 

 

The other point with Derwent is that it is adaptable, either by you in CAD or by the modeller, into other Hackworth twin-tender types.  I'd like to produce a decent Derwent and go on to similar locos. 

 

3 hours ago, Rudititanic said:

I should also note though that commissions in 00 are naturally done to that scale and in all rescaled models some parts have been redesigned for 00 – the rescaling work I do is not a quick or simple task.  I’m also still very much learning and am looking into improving bands/slats where I can. 

 

It is appreciated that an OO version is not a simple or quick matter, and your efforts to date are both impressive and appreciated.  There is no reason, however, why an OO modeller should not want more detail, such as bolts and rivets, and components closer to scale fineness than is possible in OO. 

 

Why, for instance, would an OO modeller not want a representation of leaf springs? 

 

FUD and FXD can take the detail.  Perhaps WSF cannot, but WSF is not really a good enough material for locomotives and coaches. 

 

So, the OO FUD purchaser is making quite an investment at Shapeways prices and will naturally be interested in reasonable details and proportions. 

 

It might be better to include detail for these purchasers, while warning WSF customers (who will struggle to get a decent finish even with a lot of work) that some detail will not be well represented in the print and my be lost in sanding and filling.

3 hours ago, Rudititanic said:

 

Importantly though I appreciate the constructive feedback and I will take it on board where I can, so thank you.  It’s all a learning curve after all! 

 

Thank you. Criticism intended as constructive by someone who very much believes in your range.

[sem34090]

Interesting to note that Derwent hasn't sold so well in 00 - I had five Shapeways PMs asking me to get on and finish it, and even had one person buy a few bits of it (which I ought to remove, I suppose). I think I may know who purchased it. I had one request to do it in N and once it was done I forwarded details of your model.

[Rudititanic]

True, ‘beginner’ does not preclude detail, but most scratch aids offer the basic shape with no detail whatsoever.  Furthermore, as noted FUD models sell much less than WSF (which would have to be binned outright as an option as Shapeways would refuse to print the finer detail, unless a third coarser version was developed) while the detail proposed would massively increase production time for models with lower sales in a scale I do not even work in personally.  I appreciate more detail would be beneficial and I do my best (adding details that in N have to be scratchbuilt outright), but I have to balance time and returns – it is solely a hobby and I have no intention of taking on Hornby or Bachmann any time soon! 

 

Ultimately I consider my models to be akin to the ‘Railroad’ range and priced accordingly – I only have a profit margin of a couple of dollars per engine – as opposed to finescale detailing which immaterial of the time element would come close to quadrupling the price of each model (in production if not also in potential commission fee) so pushing many people away.  This is the intended benefit of these models – for those happy with something simpler they can be virtually plug-and-play, whereas for those with greater requirements it can be a basis for improvement without the difficulty of scratchbuilding in its entirety, something that previously was the only option available. 

 

The original comment re boiler slats/bands nonetheless remains valid and is something I will look into more for future models (as done already with Derwent) such as trying N scale parameters transferred directly rather than rescaled in this regard.  Similarly, some other details may be possible to develop (such as improved springs) without compromising the material and time limitations already noted.  In this hobby there is always something that can be improved; it’s just a case of also being pragmatic. 

 

Sem, I don’t doubt you for a second & thanks for your support.   I rather think the N request was me! 

[sem34090]

Surprisingly enough it wasn't you, Rudi!

 

 

[Killian keane]

I can only echo Rudis point on the time factor,  I design my models to what might be generously called some kind of finescale and it does take a significant amount of time,  hence why only now are we starting to see the first prints,  if I were asked to scale up to 0 for instance which I don't model in I would do just as he's done and do it but leave the detail unaltered 

[sem34090]

This is exactly what I've done with my recent narrow gauge Maunsell tank.

[Rudititanic]

9 hours ago, sem34090 said:

Surprisingly enough it wasn't you, Rudi!

 

Oh!  XD

 

7 hours ago, Killian keane said:

what might be generously called some kind of finescale

 

Your work is excellent & I hope goes well for you.  I try to do similar for my N models, even if you can't necessarily see as much!

 

[CarriageShed]

Wouldn't it be a good idea for one 3D producer - such as Rudi who excels in N gauge - to team up with someone who specifically works in another gauge - such as 00 - and then allow that person to fine-tune the specifications for printing in that gauge? Or is that too simplistic? It would also mean that N gauge specialists could work on reducing 00 specifications for the N market.

[Rudititanic]

The theory is sound (chassis/wheels etc notwithstanding as that varies in availability between prototypes), though at the end of the day the only real issue all ways round is time.

[CarriageShed]

In terms of time I know exactly what you mean. I can just about manage around an hour of modelling each evening and perhaps no more than three or four hours each week on building a layout (five years old and not even all the track is down yet). But I've found that by making small increments in each session, you get there in the end. Little and often still produces results even if they take longer to achieve.

[Albyn]

On 28/05/2019 at 15:07, Rudititanic said:

Interesting to read the comments on this thanks – a lot to consider for future development.  Some thoughts in response from my perspective:

 

Edwardian; glad you’re enjoying Lion and thanks for the feedback.  These models are intended as simple entry-level items and are sold as ‘scratch aids’ rather than complete kits per se.  Because of this some parts are deliberately included to provide a ready-fitted option for beginner modellers, but conversely I fully expect these to be altered by those more experienced (such as handrails).  Other parts are also limited by the material specifications (notably tender faring) – more on this below. 

 

Considering boiler lagging/bands, I see your point and this is something I am beginning to look into more.  Lion was my first 00 build (of any sort, not just 3D printing) and lessons were learned – Derwent by comparison was designed with finer slats/bands.  That said, the vast majority of purchases appear to lean towards the cheaper WSF which has coarser tolerances so limiting both detail and how to-scale parts can be.  Then when filling/sanding and painting these can (for example) reduce the gaps between slats even further, as you noted regarding necessary over-scaling with Killian.  Not being a 00 modeller I’ve not experimented on this personally, but would be concerned lest the detail disappears altogether.  Killian, I look forward to seeing how yours comes out – which material are you planning on using? 

 

Most pertinently, I only produce 00 variants as people have requested them and, ironically, to date they have sold infinitely poorer than their N Gauge equivalents.  Some ‘requested’ models have effectively not sold (Derwent has been clamoured for by many people to Sem & myself but I’ve only sold one in 00 as opposed to two in N [which nobody had previously asked for!]) while others designed purely for myself have gone like the proverbial hot cake (even Bulleid’s Leader…).  I rather suspect marketing has something to do with this, but it raises the question of balancing time in what is really just a hobby. 

 

I should also note though that commissions in 00 are naturally done to that scale and in all rescaled models some parts have been redesigned for 00 – the rescaling work I do is not a quick or simple task.  I’m also still very much learning and am looking into improving bands/slats where I can. 

 

Importantly though I appreciate the constructive feedback and I will take it on board where I can, so thank you.  It’s all a learning curve after all! 

I have just come across this thread.  I have been considering buying an OO scale Derwent but as the complete set up is quite expensive I was waiting to see what somebody else made of it.  Also the power bogie doesn't seem to be available at present and Romford wheels are difficult to get.  Also not sure what material to specify.  The resin based ones give finer detail but are rather fragile and prone to warp while the nylon ones are stronger but the texture is coarser.  Perhaps not a problem on a loco like Derwent.  The other thought is making valve rods, coupling rods etc that look reasonable.  What do folk think on these matters? 

[Edwardian]

17 hours ago, Albyn said:

I have just come across this thread.  I have been considering buying an OO scale Derwent but as the complete set up is quite expensive I was waiting to see what somebody else made of it.  Also the power bogie doesn't seem to be available at present and Romford wheels are difficult to get.  Also not sure what material to specify.  The resin based ones give finer detail but are rather fragile and prone to warp while the nylon ones are stronger but the texture is coarser.  Perhaps not a problem on a loco like Derwent.  The other thought is making valve rods, coupling rods etc that look reasonable.  What do folk think on these matters? 

 

I certainly will be buying and tackling Derwent at some stage, i hope in the not too distant future, and, as I do so, I will chart progress here, although that is of no immediate help, of course. 

 

Personally, I would avoid White Natural Versatile Plastic as unfit for purpose; it needs too much finishing at too great a cost to the printed detail.  I do use it for printed chassis, but there are no separate chassis in these models. I would say go for the finer material.  Smoothest Fine Detail Plastic I cannot comment on, as I've never felt rich enough to try it.  Smooth Fine Detail Plastic needs some finishing, more on some planes than others, due to the angle it's printed at, but a very acceptable compromise of price versus finish, in my view. My Lion print, from the same pride, is in this material, though I tend to refer to it by its old name of FUD.

 

 

An equivalent power bogie - different name, exactly the same thing (used in Lion above - perfect fit)- is available from Scalelink, who also sell Romford wheels, though I cannot comment on availability as I have not checked recently.

 

If and when you do tackle the model, I have 4mm scale plans and quite a number of photographs of the original that i can provide if that would help.

 

I hope this encourages you to have a go.

Edited June 8, 2019 by Edwardian

[rue_d_etropal]

As pointed out the finer detail plastic(origially known as FUD) is far more fragile than the coarser nylon material(originally called WSF) . The nylon can be smoothed down, it just takes a bit of skill and time(if it actually bothers you), but is far easier to paint as you can use any water based paint.

I tend to now only offer N gauge in the finer plastic, as that is what N gauge modellers prefer. It is also easier for me as all I have to do(normally) is resize my design.

The CAD software I use has a built in resize function, so I can do virtually any scale in virtually no extra time. It tends to take longer to upload print files and then make them available. It is always worth asking if someone wants a different material,or different scale.

What I do recommend is for anyone trying to use 3D models for first time, try out the different materials if offered.

 

For motor bogies for 16.5mm gauge I recommend contacting Locos n Stuff to see if they can produce a suitable motor bogie. N gauge is more difficult as those available from Japan come and go, so if you see something useful, buy a load

[Ian Simpson]

2 hours ago, rue_d_etropal said:

As pointed out the finer detail plastic(origially known as FUD) is far more fragile than the coarser nylon material(originally called WSF) . The nylon can be smoothed down, it just takes a bit of skill and time(if it actually bothers you), but is far easier to paint as you can use any water based paint.

 

Having just bought your excellent 3.5 mm coal wagon, I'd add that it's a pleasure to paint the WSF with enamels as well.

[Rudititanic]

Much has been amply covered (thanks all), but a few brief responses –

 

Albyn: I developed different materials to suit different budgets and, as others have noted, all can provide a good effect with the requisite amount of work.  As for rods, in 00 it will probably be best to drill some strip steel.  This is more simple than it sounds (I’ve done it in N) and would be more scale than turned wire, which is another workable possibility. 

 

Edwardian: thanks for the bogie details and positive words. 

 

rue_d_etropal: thanks for the explanation; very succinctly put. 

[Edwardian]

I don't want to lock horns with rue_d_etropal, or, indeed, to hijack the thread to discuss  White Natural Versatile Plastic, but I do have reservations and I believe they are legitimate.

 

As a result, I don't consider WNVP/WSF for anything other than chassis, where its virtues are an advantage and its roughness less of an issue.

 

On the other hand, FUD is a little brittle, so must be treated with more respect.

 

Personally I have found the best material to balance cost, mechanical properties and finish is ABS resin, as used in Photon home printers. Even paying retail prices for resin and adding a reasonable margin, a trader with one of these machines can produce a superior quality print much more cheaply than can be obtained from Shapeways.  For example, one trader, whose products I buy,  has both a Shapeways shop and a Photon printer.  One of his loco bodies cost £93 for FUD on Shapeways, but only £38 for his home-printed smooth resin, which is far better in terms of both mechanical properties and, particularly, finish.  Guess which I now buy?

 

Now not every designer/trader wants the faff and distraction of printing the designs themselves, and I understand that, but by the same token, their Shapeways output now has an alternative benchmark of better, cheaper, cottage industry prints, and that is bound to inform my perception of value and quality.

 

Some of the stuff on Shapeways, even in the humble WNVP/WSF seems eye-wateringly priced for the objects concerned.  Naturally a buyer will want to be assured of the quality of the product and understand if and how a good finish might be obtained. 

 

I like a lot of rue_d_etropal's designs, but at £50 off for a short 4 or 6 wheel coach in WNVP/WSF I need significant comfort and persuasion.  I'm quite prepared to revisit my assessment, but I've never seen really good close ups of the actual articles or seen how something like a panelled coach might be successfully worked up without loss of detail. 

[Killian keane]

Im working on the possibility of 3d printed stone sleepers and baulk road,  as such something cheap but with a rough texture is ideal,  WSF/WNVP presents itself as a possibility,  as always Im willing to send the files to anyone interested 

[Albyn]

Many thanks for the above posts and helpful suggestions.  Much to think about - i thought i had selected to receive posts on this topic but apparently not.  I have just received a printed brakre van from Rue D'Etropal in WNVP which seems to be much finer printed than previous items in this material.  I have too many projects on the go but will have a big think about Derwent.

regards,

Albyn

[Edwardian]

13 hours ago, Albyn said:

Many thanks for the above posts and helpful suggestions.  Much to think about - i thought i had selected to receive posts on this topic but apparently not.  I have just received a printed brakre van from Rue D'Etropal in WNVP which seems to be much finer printed than previous items in this material.  I have too many projects on the go but will have a big think about Derwent.

regards,

Albyn

 

Well, as the gauntlet has not been picked up, I still do not see any demonstration of the quality of the WNVP used, or of possibility and practicalities of achieving the necessary finish for a coach, without comprise of the printed relief. While I realise that a brake van might be left a little rougher, I would be interested to see close up WIP shots, in the absence of any Hi-Res pictures of the actual products being made available.