The LNER Encyclopedia

Ive being reading on rmweb, how a n1 body was created . has anbody any thoughts about some sutiable prototypes this technolargy would be sutiable for. I hope if stated thought process going. And how to keep cost down for all intrested in it.

I've been using this technology on and off for several years now. With 3D printing it is almost a case of if you can design it, it can be printed. I say almost as the design must follow design rules which are in place to ensure that the printer can print the model within the design limits of the machine/materials.

I'm sure many people could provide ideas as to what could be a suitable model to print, although I'm not sure your suggestion of a K1 using an L1 chassis would work (different wheelbase?), maybe a Bachmann K3 would be a better starting point - although I'm not familiar with post Gresley designs...

Some pictures of some N gauge models I've printed in the past are below:


LNER K3/3 printed in Prime Grey (iMaterialize) - really must finish this one off!

Gresley 51' suburban stock printed in Prime Grey.

Draft J50 body printed in White Strong and Flexible (Shapeways) mounted on a handbuild chassis (Hans Starman).

Draft GNR six wheel full brake printed in White Strong and Flexible.

Draft C1 printed in Strong White and Flexible mounted on a modified Dapol B1 chassis - early work on a project.

The White Strong and Flexible models are a cheap(er) method of getting a 3D representation of your design for checking. The quality isn't anywhere near the level of Prime Grey or FUD but serves very well as a proving model and (hopefully!) prevents expensive errors on the final model.

As I'm sure you've seen the parts need some cleaning up and rubbing down before they are truly usable but this technology is coming on the leaps and bounds!

Thanks you are operating on the same line of thinking, Perhaps a poll of types that people would like to see made.

Atso
How did you do the lining on the K3 (excellent)

Bill Bedford @ Mousa Models has some LNER locos on offer/in the pipeline.

Hmmm, a pole might not be such a bad idea...

Mick, thanks for the kind comment - having seen you're painting and lining, I'm dead chuffed!

The lining on the K3 was done using a bow pen. I've cheated though and used the mouldings around the cab windows to guide the pen. The same story with the running plate and (Farish) tender underframe but holding the pen at an angle so that the pen intersects with the edge of what ever I'm lining. The printed tender body was lined with the aid of a ruler and the boiler bands are scotch tape cut to 0.5mm width with a thin red line drawn down either side. Shame that I've done the top of the tender lining a bit too high but I'm not inclined to change it now!

Polls, if the types proposed are popular, i think this could be a good way to get models that people like hornby,bachmann and other makers of rtr models would not consider sutch as the thompson pacifics or gresely w1 or the p1 and p2, the list could go for ever if you add the pre grouping companys. Any body any thoughts.

3D printing of complete bodies has pros and cons compared to the add-on resin chunks for mainstream RTR bodies that I've already been working on for all of the Thompson Pacifics and soon the W1 (others may follow).

3D prints can offer you a straight, square, correctly aligned "complete" body that nominally needs only the addition of final details and a paint job to finish it off, so no real construction skills are need and a lack of these cannot ruin the final product. BUT, at present, all 3D prints I've seen are covered in a mass of fine ridges and various bits of detritus clinging on, all off which must be skillfully scraped, filed and sanded off to reveal the intended shape and details, yet without damaging the surface finish and the details in that cleaning-up process. A smooth and sharply defined model will not be produced without a fair amount of skill and patience being devoted to that cleaning-up exercise. Also of course, there's a full paint job to execute, with lining and insignia. Getting that just right isn't a two minute unskilled job!

Resin add-ons are only useful if you can make careful, straight, square cuts in existing bodies without ruining other parts of the model, file cut edges to perfection, join the new parts properly in place and blend the joints invisibly where necessary. Construction skills are therefore required. BUT resin parts don't need to be laboriously de-ridged before use and in many cases those that I've so far designed and produced allow you, by selection of a particular version of RTR loco as your starting point, plus careful work during the structural conversion, to largely dodge the tricky and time consuming parts of the livery application.

Horses for courses.

A 3D print of a P1 body won't get you very far at present if you want it on the right sort of running gear, unless you can build a chassis (such as a kit from an O2 but with bigger wheels and add on a rear Cartazzi unit).

The P2 would be interesting but with three styles of boiler casing covering P2/1, P2/2 and P2/3 (four if you count the single chimney variant, five if we throw in the outward evidence of Wolf's long combustion chamber), plus two cab styles, all within a class of just six locos, the arguments about which version to print could be interminable. At least you could use a Bachmann A2 chassis with major adaptations to make it eight coupled and to relocate the cylinders & motion. More fun still if you want the Lentz gear!

Mr King is right, you'll need a suitable chassis to mount the body on and we're not all as crazy as he is with regard to butchering chassis blocks!

However, some people have been experimenting with printing chassis blocks with integral gearboxes. These have been designed to accept commercial bearings, wheels, gears, etc and mostly use Gibson universal coupling rods where required.

I have not yet been successful in making a working chassis using 3D printing and, to be honest, I'm concentrating on trying to get a range of kits permanently on the market at present. I will revisit this concept in the future though.

One final thought, 3D printing while becoming more affordable is still expensive and most (at least all the affordable ones) processes still leave a visible stepping which, IMHO, would be a dissuading influence for most potential customers. Post cleanup/corrective action these can be use very successfully for resin casting though. One exciting thought is that some companies are now experimenting with 3D printed injection moulding tools. The quality is questionable and the process is too expensive for the likes of myself but it is showing potential...

I am glad that gears are turning and people are looking at new techonlegey and its suitabilty for railway models.

I've been puzzled why the older carriages, specifically but not only clerestory ones, are not available in any ready-to-run range or even limited-run. I'm talking N gauge here - yes, I do know about the Langley one - but think my comment also applies to r-t-r OO gauge. A lot of modellers create branch lines, where such older carriages would have been found. Farish Mk.Is look out of place behind a Union Mills J-25, and I'm not sure that the new Gresley mainline coach would be that much more appropriate. Is this not a suitable subject for 3-D printing?