This technology is really great for N-Scale guys....the size of their projects can keep the price down quite a bit. HO guys have some wait time yet until the price Shapeways charges settles down a bit. Just an FYI...the detail Shapeways can do right now blows away the machine I use that we just bought 6 months ago- to the tune of $45k. Ouch.
We are witnessing the beginning of a whole new aspect of the hobby!
Dave
-------------------------
Dave Absolutely and I stand amazed what the N Scalers are doing with -call it as you will..
Understand as a kid I seen my dad take brass stock and build a steam locomotive that would fit a Penn-Line or Varney drive..
Now I'm seeing N Scalers using a computer program to design locomotives,cars etc and have them built.
Its so mind boggling.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
I may have missed it, but the NMRA calls it "Rapid Prototyping" and yes it is permissible for "scratch building". Rapid Prototyping is just another tool to use and requires considerable knowledge and skill to use. There are a couple restrictions at the moment such as: The modeler must have entered all the information into a CAD program himself/herself and actually been the one to push "send"..... It is being discussed (big time) as to how it will change contests and the AP program. It is being embraced as the new "WOW" in the hobby. Major discussion this week on one of the NMRA Yahoo sties.
I may get one myself as the price goes down. What I will have to do is actually learn how to use a CAD program..... I had one on the old computer and couldn't make heads nor tails of it!
73
Ray Seneca Lake, Ontario, and Western R.R. (S.L.O.&W.) in HO
We'll get there sooner or later!
I've been watching this for years and keep waiting to buy one as they get better and cheaper. To me, it is definitely a model making process--since that's what you're doing for work or play. They're 3D models to some scale if not a prototype.
It takes a lot of work, education and skill to get it right and include the details/dimensions to scale. Not the craftsman skills in typical scratchbuilding however. Maybe another use of the term CAM--Computer Aided Modeling.
Kind of reminds me of the digital vs film camera debate.
Richard
I tend to agree with NP2626. I need to escape computers after being lashed to one at work. That's what model railroading is about; relaxing and doing things that are personal and pleasurable.
That being said, I can see a real area for modeling small human figures, barrels, machine tools, etc that are normally rather expensive castings. The issue is getting a good model in software to send to the 3D printer. Therein, comes the rub...........There are many pre-done computer models, but how much in MR has been done?
If I can't fix it, I can fix it so it can't be fixed
bigpianoguy!
Very funny! Thanks for the humour. Forward us your address from prison!
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
Good point, since like I stated in my previous reply, there is considerable skill involved getting a nice model out of a 3D printer, but it is a completely different set of skills than is needed to turn a box of wood and styrene into a nice model.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
To me, as long as the modeler has built a unique, "one of a kind" model, its "Scratchbuilt" (as opposed to buying a kit or finished model from a manufacturer). The fact that one can easily make more of them is not really the point as once you have made one you could cast more whether in metal, resin, or 3D printer plastic. For contests however, maybe there should be subcatgoies of "Hand-crafted" and "Machine-crafted". The tricky naming point is that even for a truly hand crafted project, you might use CAD to draw plans and then use traditional manual methods to cut out / fabricate so can;t just say Computer or No-Computer. On the other hand, if you call it 3D printing, is that too limiting? What if one uses photo-etch and or CNC milling machines etc?
Anyway, I think Mark Watsons models are pretty fantastic. My main interest lately is building HO Brass locomotives for CB&Q for which no one makes in Brass or Plastic. I am currently using CAD to do the designs, and Photo Etch, CNC, and lost wax casting to make the parts. While I am not interested in making 3D printed plastic locomotive models (I guess I am a metal snob), I think this will be the way to go for making casting masters.
Also, I have found that the hardest/longest part of a project is finding good prototype information (drawings, clear photos etc) regardless of how the model will be made. Throw in conflicting information from different sources and the fact that locomotives were modified over time and...but thats a different topic.
BruceC
as some have already said, scratchbuilding suggests one of a kind ... handcrafted
and while a lot of effort may be required to design and create the files for the printed (i write, test and review software, and know how time consuming even something simple may be), once done, the same result can be reproduced ... hence it is no longer one of a kind.
too bad there isn't a name for the design/drawing process
how long will it be before people can design/draw something on their computer, and send files to some web page and get a fabricated model (like getting printed circuit boards)?
imagine being interested in a particular 2-8-0 engine for some small railroad and being able to create or modify a CAD file,and get a 3D printer house to fabricate the engine shell that can be put on an existing 2-8-0 engine chassis.
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
Well, I think that 3D printing is just fantastic; a Star Trek-style 'Replicator'. An image in the 'pattern buffer', & a few seconds (lol) later - you've got your Z-scale whichamacallit.
I really don't think that copyright is going to come into it too much. ALPS printers, for example, COULD print money, but I haven't seen any arrests - the cost of the equipment keeps it in the hands of the more serious graphics designers, instead.
All that said, I have an ALPS savings fund started, & I also want one of these...maybe I could get the ALPS to pay for the 3D printer..hmm...or should I do the credit card on the 3D printer & use that to buy the ALPS? Decisions, decisions...
Why couldn't the NMRA have a separate category for Computer Designed 3D printed models? I must say that tiny stagecoach is very impressive.......
Wayne
Modeling HO Freelance Logging Railroad.
Gidday, Whatever the process is eventually called when it comes to the competition aspect it, to my mind, would surely have to be entered into a separate category. The disciplines involved may be similar but the skills are not and before I start offending folks, please let me explain.
From time to time in my day job I'm required to work from drawings and while I've had no formal education in that area have been called on to draw up various repair schemes and modifications, something I not only am comfortable with, but also enjoy. However if I was asked to do the same thing using a computer, I wouldn't know where to start and personally don't think that I have the inclination to learn. (Old dogs, new tricks). That is definitely not to say that I don't see the huge advantages that CAD drawing and design offers and also realize that it's not "magic" but the result of some fairly serious learning and hard work, and as Mark points out, "...lets not forget the extensive task of programming the software..." , which is why I think that a separate category is required to recognise those particular skills.
I would presume that the "competition" in that category would come from who was prepared to put in the hard yards when it came to scale fidelity and detail, though I presume that could be limited by the level of technology that an individual was able to access.
Besides, without wishing to reopen that can of worms, look what happened when the model railroading publications first allowed digitally enhanced photographs to be entered into their photo competitions!
Lets not go there!!, just think how we're lucky to witness an exciting new development to this already fascinating hobby.
Cheers the Bear.
"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."
I can't speak for other designers out there, but I grow a strong attachment to the first delivery, or what I call "test models" or "test prints". If the test print passes QC, that model joins my roster and earns a spot front and center on the layout. When I commission the bulk order, I tend to see those like any other manufactured model.
I should also note, perhaps some members here will remember my traditionally scratch-built "Supply Caboose" that I built in this thread: http://cs.trains.com/TRCCS/forums/t/204256.aspx
Well as I began working on the Pickle Car, and the upcoming Steamdonkey Crane on Flat car, I completely forgot I had just built that Supply Caboose. And I was really excited about the Supply Caboose too! I hope that's not a sign of A.D... oh, look! Shiny!
Re: NMRA contests. I think the ruling committee would have the easy job. In rational thought, it's easy to see how scratch-building on a computer can be just as labor-some, if not more so, than scratch-building by hand. And for proof, if I wanted to enter a 3d printed model, being the designer of that model, it would be very easy to prove I did in fact design it. Heck, I could design my signature into the undercarriage if I wanted. ;)
The difficult part would be in explaining all this to the guy your 3d printed model just beat. Ever since the advent of computers, the assumption is that anything a computer does is "automatic". While this is no doubt true for many things, it's also more often than not completely false. Drafting for example. A computer makes it easier to draft a building, however the amount of design, skill, and time that goes into it is no different than the days of paper and pencil. Ok, it might save a bit of time in plotting the design, however "drawing it out" is only a small percentage of what it takes to be an architect. And let's not forget the extensive task of programming the software...
-Mark
www.MarkWatson3D.com
Tom
Even if the modeler makes more than one copy I would still say it qualifies as a form of scratch building as long as the modeler created the original design from scratch. However, you do raise another issue with the process i.e. when does it become 'manufacturing'? This discussion can get complicated. Does only the first unit get called 'scratch built' or 'scratch modeled' and the rest 'manufactured'?
As someone already said, I'm not sure I would want to be on the NMRA group assigned with the task of coming up with the official rules.
hon30critter Texas Zepher and others I should have phrased by question differently, i.e. does 3D printing qualify as scratch building, assuming that the design is a one off created by the modeler? Dave
Texas Zepher and others
I should have phrased by question differently, i.e. does 3D printing qualify as scratch building, assuming that the design is a one off created by the modeler?
Dave,
If the above is true then what happens if the modeler makes more than one of a given item? Is it no longer scratch-building?
I still think scratch-modeling is a more apropos label for this sort of thing.
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
jasperofzeal If one of the models in question was entered into an NMRA contest as scratch built, would it be accepted as such?
If one of the models in question was entered into an NMRA contest as scratch built, would it be accepted as such?
Good question, and I'm glad I'm not on that rules committee!!!
I have figured out what is wrong with my brain! On the left side nothing works right, and on the right side there is nothing left!
hon30critterSo, my question is: What do you call the process of using a 3D printer to create a unique model?
Everyone:
Very interesting opinions and arguments. Thanks for participating.
I think the one thing we can all agree on is that 3D printing requires some considerable skills if you are designing something from scratch.
Please keep the opinions coming. The pot is simmering quite nicely now
I agree with Chad. Rapid Prototyping is exactly what this is. The process was developed in engineering to speed up the process of producing a solid model of a new part. It used to take a tool and die shop weeks to produce a model of a new part. The rapid prototype process reduced it to a couple of days and reduced the cost of the model. Early RP models required a lot of clean up and filler work to make the model usable. The only real difference between the new "3D Printers" and the earlier rapid prototyping machines that have been around for the last decade or more, is the cost of the technology. You still need the appropriate three dimensional CAD file (solid model, to be exact) to feed to the "printer" and that is where the "modeling" comes in. This hobby is all about replicating the prototype railroad subject, so why would the term "Rapid Prototype" not be applicable? The real discussion is how much modeling is there in the finished item?
Jim - Preserving the history of the NKP Cloverleaf first subdivision.
Pretty much my thoughts. A 3D printer doesn;t just magically create things out of thin air. A lot of skill is required to draw the item and get it set up to "print" properly. Perhaps not the same skills as required to cut up and glue together sheets of styrene or wood, but a skill nonetheless.
One issue though might be 'proving' you did the original design as opposed to picking up a file from someone else and producing the item.
I for oen can;t wait for a true replicator. Then instead of the time I'm takign to build 3 covered hoppers, and probably build half a dozen more, I could simply built one to the utmost best of my ability, and then crank out however many I need. And then move on to somethign else - and have all the cars I want instead of relying on what's available and how many I can build by hand in a given amount of time.
mononguy63 While it's not scratchbuilding in the traditional sense using physical materials, modeling something three-dimensionally in a virtual environemnt is simply utilizing a different skill set. You still have to be able to visualize the overall project and break it down into its individual components and subassemblies, and then put them all together. That's no trivial thing. Jim
While it's not scratchbuilding in the traditional sense using physical materials, modeling something three-dimensionally in a virtual environemnt is simply utilizing a different skill set. You still have to be able to visualize the overall project and break it down into its individual components and subassemblies, and then put them all together. That's no trivial thing.
Jim
Jim,
I totally agree with you. I've used SolidWorks for designing and have done a fair amount of CNC machining in the past. You do have to be able to visualize the overall project. Even with CNC, you have to know how to break down a project in order to minimize both tool and part changes. (I sometimes liken it to a big puzzle.)
I also agree that, even though it doesn't necessarily incorporate hand skills, the "art" of 3D modeling does take a different discipline and talent; skills that must be learned and honed like hand skills are. I can, therefore, accept the label of "scratch-modleing" for building something with a 3D printer.
Although Pelle Soeberg designs, creates, and assembles his own models for his layout, he does use some sort of X-Y sheet cutter to cut out the individual pieces. (Essentially what we are doing when we put together a kit.) To me - scratchmodeling would aptly describe this type of work.
I see we're getting into two separate areas of definition. Manufacturing and Designing.
Well, we all know that Manufacturing means making exact copys/replicas/duplicates of a prototype on a large scale. There are different forms of manufacturing, all of which are given and discussed by their specific names. Do you call injection molding replication? Do you call casting copying? Is the lost wax process duplication?
Well, yes and no, but why use a purely generic term for something that already has a specific definition? If that's the case, we might as well call ALL mass produced model railroad products copies/replicas/duplicates. Everything made by Kato, Atlas, Athearn, ect. It's all just "replication" if you ignore the correct terminology. ;) This manufacturing process is called "3d printing". No need to call it anything but.
Now, for the designing side of the manufacturing process, why not scratch building? Before one can mass produce a product, there must be that first "master" prototype. As with all the other manufacturing types there's no kit or cheat to building that first master any other way than from scratch. There are different processes to do so, but they all require creating something from nothing. If you assemble the virtual model for use with a 3d printer, I deem you a scratch builder, just as I would someone who assembles a physical "master" for casting or any other manufacturing process. :)
I think the NMRA should be the one defining what category 3D printing belongs to.
TONY
"If we never take the time, how can we ever have the time." - Merovingian (Matrix Reloaded)
Since I'm being blamed for this whole thing I may as well throw my in.
To begin I do think you can't really call it "scratchbuilding". To me that phrase requires the physical manipulation of materials in sub-assemblies to create a finished product.
Still, as my son is studying this technology in college, I am well aware that it is not at all in the same category as buying something in a box from a hobby shop, and ploppling it down on the layout. Heavy design skills and specific technical knowhow are required. So this is no accomplishment to sneeze at.
And to complicate the matter even further, the technology is currently available to 3D print in color. Meaning you can even skip the painting part of the process if you want to. (And have the $ to afford it!)
If we are taking a vote, I'm in favor of "replication" as previously suggested.
Let's take a page from Star Trek and call it "Replicator Modeling". As the technology advances "printing" may not be an accurate description.
Now where's my flip phone?
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
tstage hon30critter: Does 3D printing qualify as scratch building? I would have to say no, Dave. 3D printing does not qualify as scratch-building because the printer is doing ALL of the "building". For me, it falls into the realm of designing or design manufacturing. Scratch-building - in whatever degree - involves a certain amount of hand skills of some kind. Other than inputting information into the printer's program to tell it what to do, 3D printing is pretty much a "hands-off" experience. Tom
hon30critter: Does 3D printing qualify as scratch building?
Does 3D printing qualify as scratch building?
I would have to say no, Dave. 3D printing does not qualify as scratch-building because the printer is doing ALL of the "building". For me, it falls into the realm of designing or design manufacturing.
Scratch-building - in whatever degree - involves a certain amount of hand skills of some kind. Other than inputting information into the printer's program to tell it what to do, 3D printing is pretty much a "hands-off" experience.
I would disagree to a certain extent. I work with 3-D software on a daily basis doing engineering work to finance my train habit. While it's not scratchbuilding in the traditional sense using physical materials, modeling something three-dimensionally in a virtual environemnt is simply utilizing a different skill set. You still have to be able to visualize the overall project and break it down into its individual components and subassemblies, and then put them all together. That's no trivial thing. It could easily be called scratchmodeling, or more simply, just modeling.
"I am lapidary but not eristic when I use big words." - William F. Buckley
I haven't been sleeping. I'm afraid I'll dream I'm in a coma and then wake up unconscious. -Stephen Wright
hon30critter Does 3D printing qualify as scratch building?
When they first came out they were called Rapid Prototyping machines, used for Rapid Prototyping components to be reviewed by engineering before being given to the tool & die makers to make from the desired materials.
I call it Rapid Prototyped models.
However on the flip side, I no longer say I wil Xerox a copy for you, or PhotoStat a picture.