Any Question Answered

[queensquare]

I’ve used these. Designed to be stomped on so pretty robust!

 

Jerry
 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/201959954052?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=epYYP6OZRny&sssrc=4429486&ssuid=O-adfSP-SR-&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY

[Ian Smith]

11 hours ago, queensquare said:

I’ve used these. Designed to be stomped on so pretty robust!

 

Jerry
 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/201959954052?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=epYYP6OZRny&sssrc=4429486&ssuid=O-adfSP-SR-&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY

Jerry,

I have used the same for the uncoupler electromagnets on Modbury - in series with a multi-way switch.

Ian

[yaxxbarl]

13 hours ago, queensquare said:

I’ve used these. Designed to be stomped on so pretty robust!

 

Jerry
 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/201959954052?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=epYYP6OZRny&sssrc=4429486&ssuid=O-adfSP-SR-&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY

Jerry,

 

Yes, I rather like them - they do indeed look like the sort of thing used on Guitar FX boxes!

 

Cheers,

 

John

[John57sharp]

Just wondering if anybody has considered these as a 2mm conversation? https://www.ebay.com/itm/126479286931?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=xppipioeqnk&sssrc=4429486&ssuid=&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY

 

PAF Alumina wagons from Peco grain hoppers.

 

John

 

 

[tom s]

Through some user error and the limitations of the resin track prints, I have failed to get 9.48mm gauge. I will try to get a more consistent gauge through some rail untwisting, adhesive and a track gauge, but the model error would mean starting over to get 9.48 and I don't think I can bear that after all the restarts and slow progress. 


Anyway, the question just getting the label correct, would this still be considered 2mm finescale? It will be 1:152 stock, but does it not being the association standard 9.48mm mean it is singly considered 2mm scale now? 

Cheers, Tom

Edited May 16 by tom s

[ShadowinLinby]

Where did your figure of 9.48 come from Tom. The association std for 4'8 8.5" track is 9.42. I'm also guessing you've assumed wrongly that you can make track from the components and gauges available from the 2mm shops.

 

ChrisB

[Izzy]

7 hours ago, tom s said:

Through some user error and the limitations of the resin track prints, I have failed to get 9.48mm gauge. I will try to get a more consistent gauge through some rail untwisting, adhesive and a track gauge, but the model error would mean starting over to get 9.48 and I don't think I can bear that after all the restarts and slow progress. 


Anyway, the question just getting the label correct, would this still be considered 2mm finescale? It will be 1:152 stock, but does it not being the association standard 9.48mm mean it is singly considered 2mm scale now? 

Cheers, Tom

Hello Tom,

 

The term 2mm scale covers a lot of bases these days although to be strictly accurate it means 1:152 stock on track to 2FS. However the 2mm association is a very broad church where everybody is welcomed whatever particular mix of standards they choose to use to suit their personal needs. I for example use both 1:148 and 1:152 stock on my 2FS layouts as do many others although I try and keep to 1:152 whenever possible. 
 

As far as track to 2FS is concerned I cannot advise on the 3D based pointwork as I haven’t used any but the gauge should be a minimum of 9.42. Being a bit wider is of no real concern so long as the checkrails do their job of stopping a wheel set from riding up over the crossing nose. What would be an issue is if the track was under-gauged, which can be disastrous and cause stock to de-rail. 
 

So my advice would be to run some wheels and/or complete items of rolling stock through the pointwork. Only this will show if a problem exists. 

cheers,

 

Bob

[Izzy]

22 minutes ago, ShadowinLinby said:

I'm also guessing you've assumed wrongly that you can make track from the components and gauges available from the 2mm shops.

 

ChrisB

 

I’m sure you don’t really mean this, or am I reading this all wrong?
 

Bob

Edited May 17 by Izzy

[ShadowinLinby]

I'm sure I typed can't which is what I meant to say Izzy

 

ChrisB

Edited May 17 by ShadowinLinby

[ShadowinLinby]

The point I was trying to make was that there are a mass of people (speaking in general term rather than 2mm specific) who use the word can't before they even try the thing. I witness it all the time on the 2mm roadshows, my favourite being I can't see that! There is also a fear of failure as people wrongly assume failure is in the opposite direction to competence. Failure is actually part of the process of gaining competence. Have a go, get it wrong and learn.

[Izzy]

31 minutes ago, ShadowinLinby said:

The point I was trying to make was that there are a mass of people (speaking in general term rather than 2mm specific) who use the word can't before they even try the thing. I witness it all the time on the 2mm roadshows, my favourite being I can't see that! There is also a fear of failure as people wrongly assume failure is in the opposite direction to competence. Failure is actually part of the process of gaining competence. Have a go, get it wrong and learn.

 

Oh, yes, you’re dead right there, understand now, sorry. Seems very widespread across a wide range of subjects/disciplines, this fear of doing something because of the risk of failure. 
 

Bob

[Donw]

If I remember correctly Tom's track has come out at around 9.15. As he said the problem was shrinkage it may well not be consistent.

The options seem to be;

 

firstly see if 2mm stock with the correct BtoB can run through. I think this could be problematic on the curved routes through turnouts.

Assuming if will not run through you can either build your stock to cope with your track this may throw up issue such as etched frames being too tight . It will also preclude running your stock on other layouts or others stock on yours.

Bite the bullet and rectify or replace the track. Cutting through some chairs in tight spots  and using araldite to fix brass slips under the rail  and soldering the rail to them using a 2mm gauge to hold the rail out , would be one possibility.

Is there any reason why you have had shrinkage but Wayne doesnt seem to have the problem. (perhaps Wayne allows for the skrinkage  I know little of 3D printing)

 

As for whether it counts as finescale None of us can see the difference in 0.3mm so it would be finescale but not to the 2mmSA standard.

 

For what it is worth if it is just a few turnouts I would want to get the gauge near to the 9.42 standard some tolerance is acceptable . It may just be that you have to do something in one or two spots. Could you cut the timbers and edge the two halves apart? That is probably the route I would try.

 

Don

[ShadowinLinby]

Or he could build them using 2mm shop stuff, a system that works. Whilst 3D printing has a place in 2mm modelling I remain to be convinced of of it's long term suitability for trackwork despite Wayne's efforts. Its another example of coming up with a solution for a problem that doesn't exist. 

Edited May 17 by ShadowinLinby

[Donw]

Well the 3D printed bases for the association are selling well and I haven't heard of any problems and templot is now providing the files for printing for all gauges so we will soon hear if there are issues. I would be interested to know what sort of tolerances are achieved by those using soldered track and easitrac components. I do not have a digital calliper. I am not sure that my vernier calliper will allow 2 decimal places in measuring millimetres seeing as it depends on my eyesight.

Another thought has occurred to me that a few strokes with the file on tight spots may be enough.

 

Don

[martin_wynne]

17 minutes ago, Donw said:

and Templot is now providing the files for printing for all gauges

@Donw

 

Hi Don,

 

Folks tend to say "3D printing" without saying which method they mean. The several methods are utterly different.

 

For the timbering bases we have established that home resin printing is unsuitable due to unpredictable shrinkage and curling.

 

The files from Templot for the timbering bases are intended for FDM printing (3D filament printing), or laser cutting, or CNC milling. But not really suitable for resin printing.

 

3D resin printing is used to make the plug-in chairs with fine detail. FDM printing is not suitable for fine detail.

 

This is FDM base with resin plug-in chairs in EM gauge:

 

 

 

 

 

And the same in 0 gauge with two different base thicknesses:

 

 

 

 

When mentioning 3D printing from Templot it is important to make clear what methods are being referred to. Otherwise I'm going to be spending the rest of my life clarifying misunderstandings. 🙂

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

Edited May 17 by martin_wynne

[tom s]

Thanks for the replies!
Yes I think the 4' 8'' part of the standard gauge had merged with 9.42 in my head over time, my mistake! 
There was definitely an element of the fear of soldering when I initially decided to stick to N gauge, but I was having success with the printer and 3D modelling and thought it was worth trying my own designing. Also in cost, I wanted to keep it low as everything is very expensive in the current day. Templot made it achievable, and I used the 3D models it produced as a template for my own chair design & positions that was a bit simpler for my pc to handle, and beefier to print something durable enough in 2mm scale.

I think having the chair almost flush with the timber, having some ridge and bolt detail there to be picked out with a drybrush might make the end result look slightly more realistic than the other solutions... for anyone with a magnifying glass at least. I will make a build post on the process before long for anyone interested or even wanting to try it too, which is part of the reason why I wanted to know if still calling it 'finescale' would be appropriate in the description.

Currently I think my gauge issues have a few sources.
-User error in Templot, the default 2fs rail profile came out at 0.46mm width in the software, I should have used the custom rail profile input to get it to be the store's 0.5mm width rail. (minor effect overall but 9.38mm was the best case.)
-User error in printing, I should have checked the shrinkage (about 0.7%) in the first print and factored it into future prints, like I imagine the retail resin bases were. (down to 9.32mm now)
-Play in the chairs. The rail is free to rock away from vertical if it has twists in it, I plan to remove all the rails (almost none of them are glued yet) and make sure they are all as twist-free as possible as I ordered mine semi coiled in the box rather than a straight tube. Also to find a good thin glue to affix the rails after they have had the droppers soldered to them later.

For back-to-back I guess my initial aim will be 8.45, as my largest between-checks distance is 8.32, 0.06 narrower than the standard. The between checks are pretty consistent as the taper bend holds the rail correctly upright.
It might be sub-optimal performing but hopefully doesn't preclude running stock between association standard layouts and my one.

Cheers, Tom

[njee20]

1 hour ago, martin_wynne said:

Folks tend to say "3D printing" without saying which method they mean. The several methods are utterly different.

 

For the timbering bases we have established that home resin printing is unsuitable due to unpredictable shrinkage and curling.

 

The files from Templot for the timbering bases are intended for FDM printing (3D filament printing), or laser cutting, or CNC milling. But not really suitable for resin printing.

 

3D resin printing is used to make the plug-in chairs with fine detail. FDM printing is not suitable for fine detail.

 

 

 

I dispute that "we" have reached that conclusion. I have printed a base in resin successfully, as one piece with chairs. I would say it would be extremely viable (if not more desirable) in 2mm FS, in N I found the flanges tended to foul the chairs slightly (but it was marginal). 3D printing will always be used as a bit of a collective term, it's unrealistic to assume that everyone will start saying "Templot can output files for 3D printing where bases and filing jigs are designed for FDM and chairs are designed primarily for MSLA printing". You don't need to correct everyone.

 

I'd also highlight Wayne Kinney's Finetrax bases which are printed on a resin printer.

[Yorkshire Square]

I'd be interested to see some 2mm scale track (2FS or otherwise) made using Templot components. Looking at the O Gauge picture the chairs appear to be in two pieces. I'd imagine that would be awfully fiddly in 2mm.

 

As Chris says there are numerous components to enable members to build track and turnouts already available in the Association shops; solderable PCB and etched components, plastic and brass individual chairs, plastic sleeper strip, Easitrac in most every permutation and Finetrax turnouts.

 

It is worth mentioning that the resin used to print Finetrax bases is not a bog standard resin and is very flexible and resilient. However, like all photocuring resins it shouldn't be left in sunlight unpainted for too long.

 

I wouldn't dissuade anyone from trying to do it "their way", but I'd say don't be surprised when you spend more time and get less success than using tried and tested methods.

[njee20]

No, of course you're not going to do it with the most basic resins, and Wayne's products, being commercial, need a level of resilience which likely surpasses what a user would accept. Even printing in a good quality ABS-like resin (Siraya etc) you can roll a printed base up. I've got one on my desk here that's been there for 3 months, unpainted, and it's still fine.

 

Here's the one I knocked up quickly (and I mean quickly - so apologies for the dodgy soldering!). I'm in two minds about whether it's actual particularly beneficial. For me, where printing is really valuable, is in repetition and the ability to churn out identical parts repeatedly, and that's pretty moot for track. It's fun to play with though!

 

 

Edited May 17 by njee20

[grahame]

12 minutes ago, njee20 said:

 

I dispute that "we" have reached that conclusion. I have printed a base in resin successfully, as one piece with chairs. I would say it would be extremely viable (if not more desirable) in 2mm FS, in N I found the flanges tended to foul the chairs slightly (but it was marginal). 3D printing will always be used as a bit of a collective term, it's unrealistic to assume that everyone will start saying "Templot can output files for 3D printing where bases and filing jigs are designed for FDM and chairs are designed primarily for MSLA printing". You don't need to correct everyone.

 

I'd also highlight Wayne Kinney's Finetrax bases which are printed on a resin printer.

 

Yep, agree.

 

And my limited basic knowledge is that there are various types of resin. For example when I make resin castings (not 3D printing) the resin is SG2000 PU Polyol/isocyanate. I understand that with some casting resins there can be a 3% shrinkage on curing which needs to be taken in to account when making the master/mould. However 3D printing generally uses a type of acrylic resin although I understand there are various types/additives. Presumably if there is any shrinkage it is documented and taken in to account when printing if it is likely to effect the finish accuracy.

 

I also understand that FDM printing (fused deposition modelling) is rather old fashioned as many people using home 3D printers prefer SLA (stereolithography) where a liquid photopolymer resin is polymerised by shining a UV laser in to it where the laser hits a solid surface (either the build platform or the previous layer). But I could be wrong.

 

 

[njee20]

Most home (resin) printers are MSLA, which is "masked" SLA - rather than a laser 'tracing' each layer they use an LCD screen to cure an entire layer at a time with UV light. FDM definitely has its place. It's stronger, more useful for functional prints, but the detail is compromised versus resin for sure. Personally, I rarely use my FDM printer for anything railway related.

You're totally right about different resins though, and the ability to compensate for shrinkage, which is something which is becoming increasingly well understood.

[Donw]

I was very careful to say that I had little knowledge of 3D printing but am familiar with shrinkage in various materials which has to be taken into account in manufacturing. My mentions of Wayne and Templot were to say it can be done sucessfully. I seriously doubt that Martin would be offering the files if tests hadn't proved suitable.  My aims were to mention shrinkage in case it was something that Tom had overlooked and offer some suggestions as to possible resolutions.

I ought probably to try this printing lark myself

 

Don

[Izzy]

All I will say is that I think the individual parts available from shop 1 enable pointwork to be produced at quite reasonable costs in a variety of ways.

 

In respect to 2-part plug track in 2mm having only just recently been able to produce individually chaired pointwork satisfactory some 40 years after doing so in 4mm I say…..good luck…..

 

Bob

[njee20]

That was rather my conclusion Bob. I'm a big fan of printing stuff, but I'm just not sure it's overly advantageous in 2mm to print it, and it certainly complicates things in some respects. I get the impression the cost benefit is far more pronounced in the larger scales.

[Caley Jim]

7 hours ago, ShadowinLinby said:

The point I was trying to make was that there are a mass of people (speaking in general term rather than 2mm specific) who use the word can't before they even try the thing. I witness it all the time on the 2mm roadshows, my favourite being I can't see that! There is also a fear of failure as people wrongly assume failure is in the opposite direction to competence. Failure is actually part of the process of gaining competence. Have a go, get it wrong and learn.

Like @ShadowinLinby I get people coming up to the Roadshow stand and saying they 'can't solder'.  My response is always 'why not?'.  Usually it turns out that they've either been using too small a bit or not holding it in place long enough to let the heat transfer.  Once it is explained to them what the process involves and what is actually happening to the metal they seem reassured and willing to have a go.

 

Jim