Date   

Shapeways for Dummies

np328
 

Stepping well around the prior postings about.......Hmmmm, I'll say pattern acquisition of 3-D printing.


      I had meant to post this earlier, as a follow up to the comments of Tom Madden, and when he talked about Shapeways. I saw the following one evening and I took it as one idea on where things are at right now with 3-D printing.  One of the comment made by Tom (printing orientation) is addressed with the  - cheek to jowl - comment once they get to the Shapeways site.  It is a 8.5 minute video, and if the link does not do it, Google up  - PBS Newshour - and then search with the term - Shapeways.   

  Here is the link : http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/3d-printing-revolution/   


                                                                                                       James Dick - Roseville, MN


Train shed cycs.

CJ Riley
 

I have 4 volumes for sale that may be of interest:
 No.11 Freight cars 1879-1943
No 26 Railway Service Cars
No. 29 Freight Cars 1892
No 48 Hoppers, Industrials, Lettering (Part 2) 1931
I would like to sell as a group $25 plus shipping

I also have a number of the Structure, Passenger Car and Locomotive series for those interested.
Off line please: cjriley42@...


Re: RR Tie Brown / Grimy Black recipe

Burl Rice
 

I'm using it for weathering - specifically freight cars.  I need acrylic for what I'm doing.

I could have sworn I saw someone post a recipe for it a year or two ago.  Must have been on another list.

For my rails, I have been using the Krylon Camo Brown straight from the can.  I have been pretty happy with it.  I also use it for a base coat for truck sideframes, and sometimes boxcar roofs.


Re: RR Tie Brown / Grimy Black recipe

Gary Ray
 

I needed to paint my rails and ties and needed a large quantity.  I decanted Rustoleum’s Camouflage colors by hot gluing a flex straw to the tip.  I mixed 6 parts earth brown (#1918) with 1 part (#1917) for a close but not exact match to Floquil Rail Brown.  Didn’t know what you were going to use RR tie brown for, but very happy with my track and ties with this mixture.  Oversprayed some areas lightly with Rust.  Used airbrush set at 20#.  Cost was a little over $5 for over 12 oz. of paint.  Hope this helps.

Gary Ray

 

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of burl@...
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2014 12:13 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] RR Tie Brown / Grimy Black recipe

 




Does anyone have a recipe that approximates PollyScale “RR Tie Brown” and  “Grimy Black”?

 

Thanks,

Burl Rice

Sparta, TN





Re: reverse engineering or copying?

Tony Thompson
 

Dennis Storzek wrote:

All these technologies follow the same course:
First they are a gleam in someone's eye .
Then they become a buzzword.
Then they become "high tech."
Then finally they become a commodity process, IF they hadn't fallen by the wayside because they really didn't live up to their promise.
That's when they finally become affordable in this industry.

        When I was in materials research, and repeatedly heard about "wonder materials" just over the horizon, a saying emerged, that you should write down the first thing you hear about a new material, because it's the best thing you will ever hear.

Tony Thompson             Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705         www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history





RR Tie Brown / Grimy Black recipe

Burl Rice
 

Does anyone have a recipe that approximates PollyScale “RR Tie Brown” and  “Grimy Black”?
 
Thanks,
Burl Rice
Sparta, TN


Re: reverse engineering or copying?

Dennis Storzek
 

Kent,
That's the popular misconception. You hadn't heard of "3-D printing", to use the current buzzword, but those of us who had a legitiment use had, ten, twenty, and even more years ago. 3-D printing springs from Stereolithography, first patented in in 1986:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereolithography

I've been waiting my entire career as a model railroad manufacturer to see if this will prove useful, and as of yet, it hasn't. The same way with laser machining, yeah, it does have uses, the little AJAX on our brake housings was engraved in the mold cavities with this process, but it also has a LOT of limitations, and cost makes it the choice only when there is no better way.

All these technologies follow the same course:
First they are a gleam in someone's eye .
Then they become a buzzword.
Then they become "high tech."
Then finally they become a commodity process, IF they hadn't fallen by the wayside because they really didn't live up to their promise.
That's when they finally become affordable in this industry.

Dennis Storzek


---In STMFC@..., <nvrr49@...> wrote :

"I'm sure 3-D scanning will have a place, but it is hardly a panacea; nowhere in the foreseeable future are you going to be able to point your "Instamatic Scanner" at a prototype and send the file out to Shapeways to get a model back, and certainly not anywhere near a price modelers will feel is reasonable."

Dennis Storzek

We are a lot closer than you think.  MakerBot already has a scanner available that will scan an item, and make a file that can be sent directly to their printer.  It does not do the quality you and I would want, but I am 58, and I think I could see the day when it will do what we want.  Ten years ago I would have said, "what is a 3d printer?".  Now I own one!

Kent Hurley
nvrr49.blogspot.com


Re: reverse engineering or copying?

csxt5555
 

Well actually it's closer than you may think.  I am working on parts for my Clinchfield challenger and have done a few parts this way. For example I did the exhaust steam injector this way.  I have a guy who has a mobile scanner so he just went to the muesum and scanned the real one.  The scan was uploaded into solid works  and cleaned up and converted to an stl file.  I then printed it in 7 parts and bolted all the parts together just like the real one.  Very very cool stuff and now just about 
Anything can be created if your willing to pay for it.

Kevin Sprayberry


On Mar 13, 2014, at 2:51 PM, <nvrr49@...> wrote:

 

"I'm sure 3-D scanning will have a place, but it is hardly a panacea; nowhere in the foreseeable future are you going to be able to point your "Instamatic Scanner" at a prototype and send the file out to Shapeways to get a model back, and certainly not anywhere near a price modelers will feel is reasonable."

Dennis Storzek

We are a lot closer than you think.  MakerBot already has a scanner available that will scan an item, and make a file that can be sent directly to their printer.  It does not do the quality you and I would want, but I am 58, and I think I could see the day when it will do what we want.  Ten years ago I would have said, "what is a 3d printer?".  Now I own one!

Kent Hurley


Re: reverse engineering or copying?

nvrr49@...
 

"I'm sure 3-D scanning will have a place, but it is hardly a panacea; nowhere in the foreseeable future are you going to be able to point your "Instamatic Scanner" at a prototype and send the file out to Shapeways to get a model back, and certainly not anywhere near a price modelers will feel is reasonable."

Dennis Storzek

We are a lot closer than you think.  MakerBot already has a scanner available that will scan an item, and make a file that can be sent directly to their printer.  It does not do the quality you and I would want, but I am 58, and I think I could see the day when it will do what we want.  Ten years ago I would have said, "what is a 3d printer?".  Now I own one!

Kent Hurley
nvrr49.blogspot.com


Re: reverse engineering or copying?

cinderandeight@...
 

This issue extends well beyond just copying models.  What about the wide spread scanning of photos?  I feel that this has lead to photo dealers cranking up their prices because they know that once a single image is sold, it will be scanned and maybe a dozen of more people will have it, who in turn will scan it for a dozen more..., which soon makes selling additional copies difficult.
This problem was brought home to me at an RPM several years ago.  I'd loaned a set of photos to one of the model magazines, and after a couple years of no action with them I requested their return only to be told they "couldn't find them".  They were photos from my personal collection that I'd never printed for others, but fortunately I owned the negatives and was able to reprint a set for my collection.  At this RPM I attended a show on a topic involving the same cars as my missing set of photos.  It was a very informative show and I enjoyed it, but I was a bit taken aback with it because a third of the illustrations were my "lost" photos, with no credit to my collection mentioned.  I would have gladly shared the photos with the show giver if I'd known his interest.
All I am saying is that perhaps those who freely share other's photos should consider what this might mean down the road as the sources of new photos dry up because there is little reward for the work of printing (or scanning) them.  The same can be said for the copying of models.  Someone had to do the work of developing the original patterns, and if his work is "pillaged" (thanks Pierre, good word for it) what incentive does he have to do more such work for others?  It's a matter of recognizing the efforts of others more than any money involved.  In the end we all work pretty much for free for this hobby.
    Rich Burg


Re: reverse engineering or copying?

Dennis Storzek
 

Aw, heck, the microwave oven had already attained its highest use in in 1970, in the student break room at U of I Chicago Circle, where the students would load it up with ketchup packs and watch them pop. The history of cooking with microwaves is all downhill from there.

There has been technology available to turn hand built pattern work into injection mold cavities for almost as long... I should know, I gave it a whirl in the eighties. The reason most of these processes are no longer available is simply that they offered NO real advantage. It's hard to build good looking and accurate patterns in HO scale, and the inherent inaccuracies run right up against the tighter tolerances required to have a functional mold that will run production.

The art of toolmaking has always been about technologies that will turn gross hand motion into precise movements of a tool; the handles on a milling machine are one way to accomplish this, a pantograph is another, and Computer Numerical Control is just another in a long line of such steps. The problem has always been the finer the resolution required, the more time (and expense) will be involved to obtain a satisfactory result. Scanning doesn't really change this. It's great, as Bill said, for large freeform shapes that are hard to define, and will see increased usage there. But for our models, which are really just a myriad of little geometric shapes, so long as there are drawings available, it's quicker and cheaper to just model it in CAD. And there are more drawings available now than ever before.

Dennis Storzek


copying for you and me

Bill Lane
 

Sorry… I did not mean to start a hizzy. Shoulda known better because that is what happens here.

 

The easiest way is copy casting – old school. It does not take long for the details to fall apart. I never had interest in knocking off anything AC Gilbert did for my modeling. Too crude to begin with.

 

Same thing in reference the earlier thought of 3D scanning for later 3D printing. Even in the best circumstances you are not going to scan an HO brake valve and be wowed at what it looks like in O Scale. We are NOT there yet, and I have my doubts of it will be in less than 5 years. Better off making your own new design file.

 

I have taken a few castings off my models and had them copy cast for my use – were never sold. The items were not offered for sale by the importer.

 

The one item that was copied and sold was with permission. That amounted to about 25 pairs of trucks – hardly worth getting excited about it. It was more of a mercy project of helping a urethane N5c produced without any plans of making the trucks.

 

All the better reason to design and model digitally were they are parametric and can be any scale you want! Join us at Jackson Standard with files you want turned from virtual into real plastic!

 

Thank You,
Bill Lane

Modeling the Mighty Pennsy & PRSL in 1957 in S Scale since 1987

See my finished models at:
http://www.lanestrains.com
Look at what has been made in PRR in S Scale!

 

See my layout progress at:

http://www.lanestrains.com/My_Layout.htm

Custom Train Parts Design
http://www.lanestrains.com/SolidWorks_Modeling.htm

PRR Builders Photos Bought, Sold & Traded
(Trading is MUCH preferred)
http://www.lanestrains.com/PRRphotos.xls 

***Join the PRR T&HS***
The other members are not ALL like me!
http://www.prrths.com
http://www.lanestrains.com/PRRTHS_Application.pdf

Join the Pennsylvania Reading Seashore Lines Historical Society
It's FREE to join! http://www.prslhs.com 
Preserving The Memory Of The PRSL

 


Re: Lehigh Valley 41000 series hopper

John Evans
 

There's one thing you can say about the Lehigh Valley - they keep you guessing when it comes to their rebuilds.  Just start researching the cars they rebuilt into covered hoppers if you don't believe it. 


On Thursday, March 13, 2014 11:29 AM, Eric Neubauer wrote:
 

Doesn't the side design differ from the car pictured in the 1930s article? If so, does this car represent a rebuilt rebuild with new sides?
 
Eric 
The link to the photo of 42060 is at:


Very interesting in that this one was rebuilt with seven side stakes instead of six as shown in the photos of the other two examples.  This one does show the train line along the side sill.

Thank you for the answers to my query and the leads to another photo.

Lou Whiteley


On Thursday, March 13, 2014 6:49 AM, Benjamin Hom wrote:
 
John Evans wrote:
"If the question about the air line is in reference to the rebuilt cars (42000 series) the attached photo of 42060 posted by Ray Stillwell on the Railfan.net LV forum might help."

Can you post a link to the photo or upload the photo to the group website?  The list is set to strip attachments.

Ben Hom





Kadee trucks with code 88 wheels

SamClarke
 

Hello group,

 

I know many of you have been waiting for this, our two piece HGC trucks are now available with code 88 wheels. Product numbers are on our web site.  Also we have bulk packaged some of our popular couplers like the short #153 and shelf couplers. These are in 25 pair packages and are also currently available.

 

Sam Clarke

Kadee Quality Products


 


Re: reverse engineering or copying?

Tony Thompson
 

Dave Nelson wrote:

 
There is no legal protection whatsoever for the shape of a model made with high fidelity to a real world object.  Period.  Skill, effort, time, investment… it doesn’t matter, it is not protected.  Add artwork and the artwork – and only the artwork – might be protected by copyright… but only if it is creative.  Whether there is or is not a moral issue is, IMO, a somewhat different conversation and one I’ll skip for now.

      But most railroad models are NOT exact scale replicas. Decisions on how big the rivets should be (and how many), wheel clearances, coupler boxes, and many, many details (I bet Dennis Storzek can provide a REALLY long list) have to be made for both production and appearance reasons. These kinds of decisions ARE creative and do NOT represent high fidelity to a full-size object. Of course, Dave, anyone can go ahead and see if they can prevail in court on such an issue.
       Ethically, I doubt there can be much debate. Or I hope not.

Tony Thompson             Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705         www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history





Re: reverse engineering or copying?

kruegerp@...
 

I would think that a company that wants to produce a model of something made by another company in a different scale would be better off purchasing the other company's data and working from that. As far as 3d scanning and printing goes, I see Staples now sells a system - links provided below. It seems like it is only a matter of time before something useful for scale model building hits the market. Paul Krueger Seattle, WA http://m.staples.com/touch/product.html?#399204 http://m.staples.com/touch/class.html?#CL205651


Re: reverse engineering or copying?

Pierre Oliver <pierre.oliver@...>
 

The age old debate, intellectual property rights vs the divine right of model railroaders. :-)
Pierre Oliver
www.elgincarshops.com
www.yarmouthmodelworks.com
On 13/03/2014 12:56 PM, Tony Thompson wrote:

 
John Dgnan wrote:

I fail to see why a manufacturer SHOULD (as opposed to could) care if his item is copied as long as the new product was not produced in his same scale.  I mean, why would an HO manufacturer who flat-out refuses to venture into S care if we duplicate his HO model in S since it will not in any way be competing for his market?!?  Yes, I understand the issue of design investment, but to that end, a small gratuity COULD be paid... if necessary... like most 1:1 scale railroads now charge for use of their logos/names/etc.

   John, perhaps you've heard of copyright? Intellectual rights to created objects are pretty well established, and it's the copyright holder who gets to decide what he or she SHOULD want, not you.

Tony Thompson             Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705         www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history




No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4336 / Virus Database: 3722/7190 - Release Date: 03/13/14



Re: reverse engineering or copying?

Tony Thompson
 

John Dgnan wrote:

I fail to see why a manufacturer SHOULD (as opposed to could) care if his item is copied as long as the new product was not produced in his same scale.  I mean, why would an HO manufacturer who flat-out refuses to venture into S care if we duplicate his HO model in S since it will not in any way be competing for his market?!?  Yes, I understand the issue of design investment, but to that end, a small gratuity COULD be paid... if necessary... like most 1:1 scale railroads now charge for use of their logos/names/etc.

   John, perhaps you've heard of copyright? Intellectual rights to created objects are pretty well established, and it's the copyright holder who gets to decide what he or she SHOULD want, not you.

Tony Thompson             Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705         www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history





Re: reverse engineering or copying?

Claus Schlund \(HGM\)
 


Hi List Members,
 
Dave makes an excellent point. every single one of our models is - by definition - already a copy. It is a copy of the prototype. Music has what is called "original content".  Our models have little original content, since they simply copy an existing (prototype) object.
 
That having been said, it seems silly for us to be making 'models of models' when what we really want is models of the prototype.
 
Morally it is more than tacky and cadish to copy someone else's work. Some folks have mentioned the notion of copying long out-of-production items which have no (or almost no) prospects of ever being re-run by the current owners (if such an owner even exists today), so certainly there are gray areas to this topic.
 
I say this from the position of a partner in a company that manufactures resin model railroad kits.
 
  -  Claus Schlund
 
 

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2014 9:10 AM
Subject: RE: [STMFC] reverse engineering or copying?

It might sound like the copying music debate but in fact it is very, very different.

 

There is no legal protection whatsoever for the shape of a model made with high fidelity to a real world object.  Period.  Skill, effort, time, investment… it doesn’t matter, it is not protected.  Add artwork and the artwork – and only the artwork – might be protected by copyright… but only if it is creative.  Whether there is or is not a moral issue is, IMO, a somewhat different conversation and one I’ll skip for now.

 

It might not sound fair but that’s the way it is.  See “Meshworks v. Toyota” for a full ruling on why cad files – or any other representation  made with high fidelity to a real world object  are not subject to copyright protection.

 

Dave Nelson

 

 

 

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of Pierre Oliver
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2014 6:28 AM



As a kit manufacturer, let me tell you I would be very unhappy if my product was scanned and copied regardless of scale, without permission.
A lot of hard work goes into creating product and effort should be rewarded not pillaged.
And a little consideration and good will goes a long way.
This is starting to sound like the whole online stealing of music debate again.

 


Re: reverse engineering or copying?

Gene Deimling
 

Bill
I am not sure why one would scan an old model to produce new tooling unless it is for reproduction of Flyer or Lionel parts.
Older models are more likely to suffer from inaccuracies .   You will need documentation to verify accuracy.   At that point, you might as well just do it.
As a pattern maker, I have a real problem with people knocking off the work of others.   It is unethical to copy work.   I realize that ethics is in short supply these days.  

Gene Deimling
El Dorado Hills, CA

60581 - 60600 of 183566