|
|
Post by alanstepney on Mar 12, 2015 20:50:55 GMT
Its great to see those parts.
Right now I am betting that the process is too expansive for "us", but given the way prices fall, I doubt that it will be too long before we can consider it for our models.
Perhaps out-sourced to a company at first, but it may not be too long before we can have something similar in our workshops.
|
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,918
|
Post by jma1009 on Mar 12, 2015 21:33:01 GMT
i sometimes have great difficulty persuading some people to drive my locos because they say the controls are too 'fiddly' or cant be seen clearly...
the 'fiddly' bits are all made as per Roy Amesbury and dont cause me any problems because i can use them blindfolded rather like changing gear on a car without looking.
however so far as 'scale' boiler fittings are concerned there is a certain large proportion of miniature loco builders who prefer big chunky fittings that are overscale and easily seen and accessible.
hopefully adam's excellent work, and that of others will persuade many more that big chunky boiler fittings are not required - something Roy Amesbury advocated 40 years ago, and Bill Carter 50 years ago!! many of Don Young's locos have excellently designed boiler fittings that are well within the capabilities of those adept at silver soldering and fabrication.
for me the backhead is the bit i see of the loco when im driving so want it to look 'right'. im not too bothered about intricate bits that are 'hidden' and i cut corners here.
there are a few areas where i think 3D or Adam's lost wax 3D will be very useful. one is brass dome covers with the correct contours requiring no machining and just a bit of file work. the other is brake shoes which is one of my pet hates to machine out of solid!
i had a large number of ex Jackson and Bonds O' Euston castings - ive still got quite a few. Steve (shooter) had some for his current project. the quality of these castings was quite excellent. so part of the current problem is the quality of current castings.
lost wax casting isnt anything new - it was used for Church bells in medieval times! the same process was being still used by the French in the early 1910s for the bells of Quarr Abbey on the Isle of Wight with the most intricate beautiful detailing!
cheers,
julian
|
|
|
|
Post by joanlluch on Mar 12, 2015 21:34:35 GMT
I investigated a bit further the Shapeways service by sending a part that could be actually made and found some interesting stuff. The part being considered is the Locomotive Buffer Socket updated to include a M12 male thread in it:  BufferSocketThread2 by joan.lluch, on Flickr This is the document with prices of the part for several materials according to shapeways: hmipad.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/edit-model-buffersocketthread2-shapeways.pdf Is is interesting that among metals, Stainless Steel is the cheapest one at 55.12 €. If you want the same in Raw Brass, price goes up to 166.59 € Castable wax is as much as 88.63 € !! It is interesting to note that Stainless Steel is a highly advantageous material for additive manufacturing -contrary to subtractive machining- and printing Stainless Steel is cheaper than printing wax. Question: Does anyone have any experience on printing metals?, More specifically, do you think that a printed M12 thread will result in enough accuracy to work with a standard M12 nut? |
|
|
|
Post by ejparrott on Mar 12, 2015 21:44:58 GMT
Given enough resolution then yes, the thread will be made to standard ISO tolerances.
|
|
|
|
Post by simplyloco on Mar 12, 2015 22:08:24 GMT
i sometimes have great difficulty persauding some people to drive my locos because they say the controls are too 'fiddly' or cant be seen clearly... the 'fiddly' bits are all made as per Roy Amesbury and dont cause me any problems because i can use them blindfolded rather like changing gear on a car without looking. SNIP julian Valves as per Roy Amsbury... Well happy. John  |
|
|
|
Post by joanlluch on Mar 12, 2015 22:14:06 GMT
Given enough resolution then yes, the thread will be made to standard ISO tolerances. Ed, does this mean that you have used or you use regularly 3D print technology to print METAL parts directly? One reported problem with shapeways is that they do not guarantee printing orientation, so some users get inconsistently layered parts, i.e not printed in the orientation they expected. |
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,918
|
Post by jma1009 on Mar 12, 2015 22:32:33 GMT
hi john,
you have made a superb job of the valves!
it is such a shame that your commercially made boiler has the boiler bushes as per LBSC's design, with the water gauge in the wrong position plus a second could easily have been added. i do not like check valves below the water line. if i can fit 2 water gauges on Stepney into into a 3 3/4" dia boiler then it is achievable! all my other locos are GWR so only one water gauge, apart from my 3.5"g FR LINDA which has 2 gauges.
your blower valve pipe where it connects to the nipple on the blower valve shows a lack of silver solder on the joint, and the pressure gauge small bore pipe could easily have been extended to the manifold without the increase in size of pipe inside the cab.
small details i accept, but easily corrected in the case of the pressure gauge pipe.
i dont see much point in trying to build a 'scale' loco if you get all the boiler fittings in the wrong place and dont attend to the pipe work properly!
cheers,
julian
|
|
|
|
Post by simplyloco on Mar 12, 2015 22:44:18 GMT
hi john, you have made a superb job of the valves! it is such a shame that your commercially made boiler has the boiler bushes as per LBSC's design, with the water gauge in the wrong position plus a second could easily have been added. i do not like check valves below the water line. if i can fit 2 water gauges on Stepney into into a 3 3/4" dia boiler then it is achievable! all my other locos are GWR so only one water gauge, apart from my 3.5"g FR LINDA which has 2 gauges. your blower valve pipe where it connects to the nipple on the blower valve shows a lack of silver solder on the joint, and the pressure gauge small bore pipe could easily have been extended to the manifold without the increase in size of pipe inside the cab. small details i accept, but easily corrected in the case of the pressure gauge pipe. i dont see much point in trying to build a 'scale' loco if you get all the boiler fittings in the wrong place and dont attend to the pipe work properly! cheers, julian Hi Julian. Well, I was still learning at the time...  John |
|
|
|
Post by joanlluch on Mar 12, 2015 22:45:02 GMT
Please can we stick on the topic of additive manufacturing? The subject is interesting enough. Thanks.
|
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,918
|
Post by jma1009 on Mar 12, 2015 22:54:00 GMT
hi joan,
i think the point i was making (hopefully) was that john's superb valves dont need 3D! mine dont either! (though i wouldnt class mine as superb).
ive made some pretty fiddly stuff just by fabrication and silver soldering. ive made quite a few 'scale' GWR steam brake and combined vacuum brake valves in 5"g for my own locos and friends. one can either go down the expensive route of 3D - or you can make them yourself for peanuts, if you dont mind some fiddly lathe and milling etc and delicate silver soldering!
this is perfectly 'on topic' as the traditonal alternatives ought to be considered in the equation!
cheers,
julian
|
|
|
|
Post by joanlluch on Mar 12, 2015 23:12:22 GMT
Ok, Julian.
But to me this thread it is not about what it is needed or required.
As you know, I do not fancy purchasing a lathe or mill for myself, but this has nothing to do with 3D printing, because I am making everything out of laser/water jet cut, and CNC machining, which are still among the traditional ways to manufacture both industrial parts and ME models.
This ME forums are already well served by discussions on the 'traditional' ways, i.e subtractive machining. This is why I think it is worth to leave this particular thread focused on the additive stuff.
|
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,918
|
Post by jma1009 on Mar 12, 2015 23:24:18 GMT
hi joan,
i think you will find both that 3D will be of little use to your loco, plus you will need in due course a lathe and drilling machine and all the odds and ends the rest of have in our sheds/workshops!
adam and others have clearly shown how 'scale' parts can be made via 3D but still require some very careful machining, tapping, fitting of parts etc. what you end up with is a ported casting that requires little external profiling or finishing, but still requires a lot of work that needs a lathe and mill and drilling machine.
apologies in advance if this is 'off topic'!
cheers,
julian
|
|
|
|
Post by joanlluch on Mar 12, 2015 23:46:24 GMT
Julian, seriously, I do not get your post. I think I already answered to that. I am ALREADY using CNC, and I do not pretend to replace that by 3D printing. Simply because it is not possible. Also I am not going to make super-detailed 'scale' parts because that's not the subject that interests me, so neither for this I will have an use for 3D printing in the way Adam does.
On the other hand I am not sure if you understand that we are talking about printing parts directly in Stainless Steel, (or other metal), not through a casting. This is not at all what Adam does.
I fancy experiencing with it and I found at least one part of the locomotive that could be done like this, which is the buffers. So that's all. Buffers made out of direct 3D metal printing do not need machining, at most they will require some polishing. So this is already one possible use of the technology. I am just asking in case someone in this forums has tried it before, otherwise I will be the first.
Finally, I do not machine parts using my time, so I must pay for that. Now, just look at the prices I posted from shapeways for the particular part I mentioned above and compare the same part produced by a machining service. It turns to be that both are comparable.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cro on Mar 12, 2015 23:53:20 GMT
Julian,
You are still on topic there because as you say we can produce lovely items using very accurate printing and casting but this is not the end product. My brake valves are a good example of this, the main body is a lovely casting and its half of what makes it so realistic but the other half comes down to make the valve disc and other items that define the fitting - even the newer larger models I am making for 7 1/4" will still require a large amount of machining even though I am having 75% of the items cast and these need to be finished in a workshop not on a CNC. (Sorry if this sounds like blowing my own trumpet I don't mean to I am just going of personal experience here)
I think if you are looking at building a loco essentially in kit form the way you describe you will come across issues that you'll need to fiddle with and that's where the workshop comes in. Also Joan on your earlier comment about build orientation at Shapeways you don't get to specify its orientation and you can end up with print lines in any random direction which I found out when printing the manifold, it has lovely diagonal lines across it.
Adam
|
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,918
|
Post by jma1009 on Mar 12, 2015 23:58:19 GMT
hi joan,
i make my buffer stocks and buffer heads out of scrap ive been given and it costs me nothing apart from the electricity to run the lathe!
i am actually very interested in stainless 3D, and am aware that much more intricate castings can also be produced in stainless at the moment. i am not a complete 'luddite' so far as appreciating the advances in engineering, but my own budget and antiquated and basic workshop equipment and methods holds me back in the application!
cheers,
julian
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2015 0:28:19 GMT
The method used by Adam and others is as close to full size as humanly possible, to create a casting almost exactly the same as full size and then to machine it to get exactly what is required.
I would suggest that this is all on topic but then thats just me.
Alan is Joan a moderator?
Joan I would suggest you run a die down your proposed cast thread whatever it comes out like, sorry I know that is subtraction.
Sorry for the grumbling but it seems all threads are being plagued at the mo
Hopeful that normality returns
Ben
|
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,918
|
Post by jma1009 on Mar 13, 2015 0:48:31 GMT
here here Ben!
as a bit of an aside, and going back to my point about poor quality castings in recent years, the Linden and Grimmett miniature injectors all had cast gunmetal castings. Don Young got some cast to Arthur Grimmett's patterns in 1983 and the results were awful despite Don having very good connections with the best foundaries for our sort of stuff. most of the castings were porous and useless (ive got quite a few reject examples from these batches). so a 3D printed injector casting would be of great use to those of us who dabble in these things as amateurs, and of great use to the commercial injector makers, especially if cored for the check valve. i am not aware of any commercial injector maker using castings for the bodies since 1983 (i am not including the Hewson cast injector bodies in this respect as they are rather special and rather expensive!)
cheers,
julian
|
|
|
|
Post by Cro on Mar 13, 2015 0:57:41 GMT
Julian,
The wax process isn't always perfect and so far we have had to try a few foundries to get our bits right because if the burning out of the wax isn't done correctly then you get some left inside the investment cavity which will give you blow holes when cast (We found out the hard way and when you doing it as a wax print it means you have to print a new one each time it goes wrong) There is also another version of wax called Pro-cast which is a 3D printing material which a friend has experimented with and he has had these blow hole type issues as the "wax" doesn't burn out as well. I think injector bodies would be a great use for not only castings but metal 3D printing as you could get it extremely accurate but this again is the argument/balance of costs.
Adam
|
|
|
|
Post by runner42 on Mar 13, 2015 6:54:55 GMT
I was wondering what additional facilities are required for 3D Printing?
I assume that the model is developed on a PC with 3D CAD software and then there is 3D Printer software to convert the 3D CAD file to something the 3D printer understands. If the connection is through a USB then existing PC hardware would be compatible. If you were replicating an existing part is there a 3D scanner that you can use to produce the file for 3D printing?
So if my assumptions are correct then one must be able to use 3D CAD software before you are able to undertake 3D printing. Another instance where I am falling behind in the use of technology.
Brian |
|
|
|
Post by alanstepney on Mar 13, 2015 7:21:12 GMT
I believe that all the "work" is done on a computer, which then turns the drawing into something that the printer understands. As you assumed.
However, there is a technology that enables you to scan an existing part and then use the resultant copy to produce a wax/plastic replica which can then be used for lost-wax casting. (Jay Leno has one, but then he can afford it!)
The next generation of machines, which are already in industry, dont just make the patterns for casting.
They actually produce a finished item in metal.
That is going to be really interesting and could be useful for us.
|
|
