Templot Club forums powered for Martin Wynne by XenForo :

TEMPLOT 3D PLUG TRACK - To get up to speed with this experimental project click here.   To watch an introductory video click here.   See the User Guide at Bexhill West.

  • The Plug Track functions are experimental and still being developed. Some of the earlier pages of this topic are now out-of-date.

    For an updated overview of this project see this topic.   For some practical modelling aspects of using Plug Track see Building 3D Track.

    The assumption is that you have your own machines on which to experiment, or helpful friends with machines. Please do not send Templot files to commercial laser cutting or 3D printing firms while this project is still experimental, because the results are unpredictable and possibly wasteful.

    Some pages of this and other topics include contributions from members who are creating and posting their own CAD designs for 3D printing and laser-cutting. Do not confuse them with Templot's own exported CAD files. All files derived from Templot are © Martin Wynne.
  • The Plug Track functions are experimental and still being developed.

    For an updated overview of this project see this topic.   For some practical modelling aspects of using Plug Track see Building 3D Track.

    The assumption is that you have your own machines on which to experiment, or helpful friends with machines. Please do not send Templot files to commercial laser cutting or 3D printing firms while this project is still experimental, because the results are unpredictable and possibly wasteful.

    Some pages of this and other topics include contributions from members who are creating and posting their own CAD designs for 3D printing and laser-cutting. Do not confuse them with Templot's own exported CAD files. All files derived from Templot are © Martin Wynne.

Experimental Plug Track: 3D-printed, CNC-milled, laser-cut

Quick reply >
sliding rail into the taller chairs is about 25% harder than the lower chairs as the tall chairs flex sideways more as the rail slides through,

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the feedback. At the expense of extra resin, the pyramids could be made much stiffer by making them wider at the base. That's another setting I could add. If the tall ones flex more than the short ones it can only be the pyramids flexing.

Does dipping the rail in 50-50 washing-up liquid help? As when threading injection-moulded chairs.

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 5263
Hi Martin,
My experience with chairs cured for 4 seconds was that I still had 40% failures when clipping.
I have now tried with 5 seconds cure time and had 100% success rate (perhaps I am being more careful when snipping)
I will try another section with lubricated (50/50) chairs & report back.
As my plywood slots are narrower than 2.0mm I produced some resin print sleeper sections with default slots , 8mm gauge based on EM but with 54" sleepers for experimenting with your plugs..
Just a bit of fun on a rainy afternoon.
20221107_174703.jpg
I reduced the depth of the timber web/flange depth to 0.5mm in order to save a bit of resin., seemed to work ok

11 sleepers which after printing measured 102.5mm across the outside edges of the end timbers as opposed to 100.9mm on the templot ruler.
Printed with default shrinkage of 1.5%.
I will attempt a more accurate measurement.
Regards Steve
 
_______________
message ref: 5264
I still had 40% failures when clipping
@Steve_Cornford

Hi Steve,

Can you clarify that -- 40% failure with anything is not good. Clipping what? Removing the chair from the support pyramids? I've never had any failures and I don't really see how it could fail?

I've just remembered that's not true -- it was a dreadful failure when I tried in the early days to do what you are doing -- running the rail through a raft and then trying to clip the chairs one at a time with ordinary cutters. The cutters lift the chair and rail, breaking it out of the adjacent uncut chair. The solution is to use a razor saw to cut the chairs free.

2ft gauge with 95lb/yd bullhead is interesting. :) I have changed the default shrinkage allowance to 0.5% now, if you try that you should get closer to the correct dimension (after a full cure). I don't remember where the 1.5% came from, I must have got it from somewhere.

Did you print that in one-piece ready chaired, or using sockets and plug-in chairs? If the latter, how close was the fit in the resin-printed sleepers? How much force was needed to bash fit them, and did any sleepers break in the process? All questions which I could easily answer myself of course.

Thanks again for the feedback.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 5265
I am doing things a bit different but I find it works for me. After printing I wash the chairs in IPA swishing them around in an old food container and giving them a good brush with an old paintbrush with particular emphasis on the jaws. Then I transfer them into a freezer bag which has some IPA in it and give it a really good shake. Then after 20 seconds or so I remove the print and slide a piece of rail through the chairs and then remove it and then leave the print lying on the window ledge for a day or more. I don't have any clever gadgets for cleaning or use UV apart from in the printer but I find it all works fine and providing the resin is within date it cures ok. I did use some out of date resin but found the output remained 'tacky' and that wouldn't go away - a new bottle fixed that. I am using Anycubic standard grey resin not ABS like - that was the one out of date and tacky so I thought I would try something else and it works!

When I use the chairs I file a wedge shaped point on to the rail and slide it through all the chairs in a row. Then I push the rail side to side and all the chairs break off the supports after which I can then clean up the spigots left on with cutters and/or a file (maybe this is the difference using a non-ABS like resin, it is a bit more brittle?). I am finding this works perfectly well and has the advantage that the chairs are all slid onto the rail ready for use on the timbers. Never snipped individual chairs off using snips, just push the rail back and forth and they break off and yet the jaw remains tight enough to hold the rail steady. I have just laid another 4ft of track over the last 2 days using this technique.

Ralph
 
_______________
message ref: 5266
@ralphrobertson

Hi Ralph,

Many thanks for the info and feedback. Does window cill curing work ok at this time of year, even through glass? The Met Office web site has an hour-by-hour forecast for UV, and it never gets above 1 on the scale for the next few days (click Show Full Forecast button):

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/forecast/

Have you tried printing the loose-jaw chairs? I posted some STL files a few days ago:

https://85a.uk/templot/club/index.p...3d-printed-cnc-milled-laser-cut.229/post-5232

They avoid any need to thread the chairs on the rail, or file the rail ends. :)

I'm trying to decide whether to adopt loose jaws as standard for the special crossing chairs, or leave it as a quirky option just for those who want it. I need to know if the loose jaws print and work ok for all users of different printers and resins.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 5267
The technique I am using is to press with one thumb on the rail above the chair about to be snipped, the forefinger supportimg the raft but about half an inch along the rail from the target chair, then with the other hand snip the chair from the pyramid with the flat side of the snips towards the underside of the chair, so the pressure between the thumb and the snips stops the rail rising, the raft drops down as i snip, so that chair and the remaining chairs on the rail are ok.

Yes a slight wedge point to the rail end, and a very slight rub of the rail bottom at the end on a sheet of wet and dry, then I make sure the rail is clean by wiping with an IPA soaked tissue (unti it squeeks!). This removes any residual gunge and glue that might be present from any adhesive tape used to bundle the rail for storage.

The sleeper strip was printed without chairs, then chairs produced from the two level .STL file you posted slid onto rail as described above, then rail plugged into the sleeper strip. No real force required, just a slight click as they went in.
I suspect that the sockets are just a smidgeon too large, but I only used the printed sleeper bases as the test ply sleeper sockets that I got printed a long time ago are far too small.
I will try printing other sleeper strips with lower shrinkage values. They cost 14p for two strips (bbecause i used a very short sleeper length.
Having exported the 11 sleeper long template I had to rotate it by 90 degrees to fit on build plate so printed two in landscape mode as it were.
All I was really doing was experimenting with the concept of sliding the chairs onto the rail before snipping rather than snipping and then individually sliding the chairs on. The advantage being that at least they are all the same way round with the keys on the outside!
Steve
 
_______________
message ref: 5268
20221107_222910.jpg
Sleeper strip without chairs.
Laid onto of a printed template that originated the .STL file.
You just see that it goes out of register on right hand end.
It does suffer from elephants foot, especially in bottom of sockets, but not an issue as unlikely to be resin printed in anger.
Steve
ps the sleepers are very shiny!
 
_______________
message ref: 5269
Thanks Steve.

How did the sleeper thickness work out? Design size is 3.24mm.

The elephants foot shouldn't be a problem. The design size for the plugs is 2.67mm deep at the edges. The 0.57mm difference is an allowance for the pyramid attachment and any broken remains of it, and that will be away from the edges. Above dims for 4mm/ft scale.

Have you tried using the brick connector clips to build up longer lengths? How well do they fit together for resin printing with the design sizes?

https://85a.uk/templot/club/index.p...mbering-brick-from-a-track-plan.295/post-4031

I had a boiled egg for lunch today. Plenty in stock. :)

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 5271
Hi Martin,
Timber depth sampled at middle and over sockets 3.20-3.21 mm. SHrinkage current default of 0.15% in all 3 planes.
I did change a parameter from 0.96 down to 0.50 mm but cant remember the name of the parameter.

Later today I will have a go with adding clips, but will probably need to reduce sleeper count to 10 to accomodate, I have looked at the instructions you linked to.

I there a clever way to get the clips to align on the centre line of plain track as I would hope to produce something like a piece of "duplo" track

:)

I will use OO-SF this time rather than the fictional 8mm gauge!
At least I could actually roll some stock on it!

Now out for a walk before rain arrives... again...

Steve
 
_______________
message ref: 5274
I did change a parameter from 0.96 down to 0.50 mm but cant remember the name of the parameter.

Later today I will have a go with adding clips, but will probably need to reduce sleeper count to 10 to accommodate, I have looked at the instructions you linked to.

I there a clever way to get the clips to align on the centre line of plain track as I would hope to produce something like a piece of "duplo" track
@Steve_Cornford

Hi Steve,

That would have been the timber flange and web thickness:

index.php


1. slide the peg along the track centre-line (CTRL+F8 mouse action) to where you want the clip.

2. tools > make split > make split at peg.

3. put the notch under it (DIVIDE | NUMPAD-SLASH) or geometry > notch > .

4. add new clip at notch in the background shapes:

clip_notch.png


5. change to the other template. Change the brick colour. Click on the clip and then add a paired clip. Changing the colour is important because otherwise you will be printing both halves of the clip at the same time, interlocked.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 5275
Hi Martin,
By following your instructions I managed to make a green brick template with left hand clip first and then added a paired right hand clip to a blue brick template.
After that I think I manged to clip to the right end of the green, and to the left end of the blue template, then exported the green, then exported the blue.
I am currently printing a set of 2 green & 2 blue sleeper bases with clips.
As the maximum number of sleepers I could get on a landscape brick was 10 + clips, and as there are 25 sleepers per 60 foot panel I decided to go for bricks of 5.
I know there is the situation of a closer sleeper spacing at rail joints so in reality (if I was going to use resin sleeper bricks in ernest) there would need to be 2 types of sleeper bricks, one for the 5 sleepers next to a joint (brick J), and one for 5 evenly spaced sleepers (brick N), to be used J - N - N - N - J to make up a panel.
For the moment I assume my green and blue bricks are both type J. But this is just a test to see if the clips work etc so bear with me if I haven't got them quite right.
Hopefully they are printing at the moment.....
Here are the box file and shape file:-
 

Attachments

  • sleepers_clips.box
    24.2 KB · Views: 98
  • sleepers_clips.bgs3
    3.4 KB · Views: 93
_______________
message ref: 5279
@Steve_Cornford

Hi Steve,

Looking good. :)

You have your end clips attached only to the timber flanges. It is better to re-size the clips to overlap into the actual timber, see:

https://85a.uk/templot/club/index.p...mbering-brick-from-a-track-plan.295/post-4041

But in 00-SF you have to be careful not to conflict into the sockets.

Because of the varying timber spacings, this adjustment has to be done manually for each clip.

On the Mars I think you could do it in 3 bricks, 8 + 9 + 8 sleepers:

mars2_bricks.png


But it does illustrate the difficulty of doing the timbering in 4mm/ft scale on the small resin printers.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 5281
I printed your file Martin on my Anycubic Photon and it came out fine apart from losing a large number of keys on the first and second washes. They are tiny and I am afraid that my eyes are past making track using individual keys. On that basis I am sure I am not alone and I would recommend that you make this way an option rather than a must.
20221110_105057.jpg


Other than that this whole process had been excellent, the option to make fully chaired plain track by making everything yourself has, for me, been a magic experience. Today I will be laying the final piece of my track on the layout that is viewable and I will post something on the method I have used elsewhere as I know it is not how you intended this to be used. I have to paint, ballast and detail it all yet but the last section of the layout has been laid much quicker now I have developed a method to follow. It won't work for everyone but I applaud you for providing another superb tool in the finescale modellers collection.

Ralph
 
_______________
message ref: 5284
I am afraid that my eyes are past making track using individual keys
@ralphrobertson

Hi Ralph,

Many thanks for your feedback, and for making the test prints.

Just to clarify, even I am not mad enough to suggest individual keys in 4mm/ft scale, to be inserted between a fixed chair jaw and the rail. These are a complete jaw+key, and come with a longish pin by means of which to hold them and insert them into a slot.

Knowing how fast misunderstandings can propagate on the web, never to be removed, I just hope this isn't another one that I have to correct on various forums, over and over again, forever.

But I agree they are small. What I would really like to know is -- as printed on your setup*, do they actually fit in the slot? You may need a magnifying glass to find out.

There is a third option, which I have been wondering about, to have a complete plug-in part chair:

plug_in_jaw.png


This would differ from the split chairs I have done for the switches, in that it doesn't slide on the rail. They would need to be fitted individually after the rail is in place. It can't be a bash-fit, because the key couldn't then pass under the rail head (for the loose jaws the pin flexes, and the key clips back under the rail head). The plug would need to be a loose fit in the socket, to be secured by some other means, such as a gap-filling adhesive. It's bigger to handle than the loose jaws, at the expense of a lot more faff in the fitting.

On balance I think the loose jaws are the better option, IF folks can arrange some form of magnification to see them, and IF they can actually print them.

Other than that, it is back to the split chairs, as on the switches, for the special crossing chairs. Which makes preparing and fitting the rails a lot more fiddly.

I have to make a decision on this before I can go any further with the special crossing chairs. Other options could come later, but unlike for the ordinary chairs, it's not possible to make the options interchangeable in the same timbering base. So it would be a lot of additional work to add the options.

*If your slicer uses the Image Blur option, as on the Mars/Chitubox, it almost certainly needs to be switched off in order to print small parts which fit together.

Many thanks for your kind words. :)

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 5285
Sorry Martin, I did mean 'jaw and key', my mistake.

I have just tried the Photon print to make sure it does all fit and the answer is yes, it does. I haven't applied them to a timber but left them on the 3D print and as you can see from this photo it works very well. I have every reason to think it will work with resin printed timbers if I ever got round to doing it that way. Having a laser cutter it is much easier for me to use that to make timbers.

There are many modellers who have produced great looking trackwork as a result of Templot and to me it is the best tool that has been made available to get modellers away from the 3ft radius mentality. In our own club there are very few who really understand the prototype meanings of things like B6 etc and Templot is the best tool to make them aware of proper model railway track.

Ralph

20221110_133306.jpg
 
_______________
message ref: 5286
Forgot to add, I use the Anycubic slicer as it comes and it is very basic so there is no option to image blur. I really do need to get my head around Chitubox but I always seem to have something else to do!
 
_______________
message ref: 5287
Hi Martin,
Loose Jaws
So far I have only experienced loose jaws by printing the sample S1 and P slide chair examples you posted in this topic, but in my opinion they are easier to handle than some of the very small Exactoscale special crossing chair components.
Would it be worth proceeding with the check rail chairs as a further test of proof of concept?
I am assuming that these would have fixed jaws on the stock and the outer jaw of the check rail with a loose jaw on the inner jaw (the one nearest the middle of the track?
Steve
 
_______________
message ref: 5288
Hi Martin,
Resin printed sleeper bases
Just to re-iterate I am only printing these to get some sleeper bases with the right size sockets until I either get an FDM printer or start using laser cut ply sleepers in anger.

Some more feedback
OO-SF attempt 1
I printed someOO-SF (rather than 8mm gauge!) bases using the templates that I previously posted.
In essence the two templates were created by following your helpful "slide peg, make split at peg" etc instructions.
So calling the template to the left of the rail joint A, and the one to the right B, the clip between A & B is positioned as a result of your instructions and lies at the joint, let me call this the joint clip. I then added further clips at the opposite ends of template A and B, let me call these outer clips.
Having printed A and B when I tried to join them using the Joint clip i found it difficult. If I then transposed A and B so that I was joining them using outer clips they connected ok.
Part of the problem with the Joint clip was the elephants foot, but the major problem was that as it was at a rail joint the sleepers were closer together and part of the jaw of the clip coincided with the sleeper flange, so I had to tidy up with a file in order to get a connection.
I am not complaining, just making an observation about the difficulty and providing a reason for my next step, which was similar in a way to your suggestion on how to break up a bit of plain track into suitable components (for my testing).

OO-SF attempt 2
It seemed to me that it would be best to avoid (for my purposes) having a clip at the rail joint as this is a narrower space, so hit upon the idea of having a template of sleeper base with 5 sleepers 1 side of the joint and 4 sleepers the other side so that the rail joint and revised sleeper spacing is contained within the middle of the sleeper brick, let me call this the joint brick.
Then another template adjoining this with just 8 sleepers, let me call this the plain brick
Joint brick + Plain brick + Plain brick + Joint brick + Plain brick etc etc.

By using the real > shove timbers option I was able to determine the x position of the sleepers by the position that I wanted clips, then used the slide peg option to position the peg to a position calculated as target sleeper position +(or midus) half the stanadard distance betwwen sleeper centrelines (for me this rounded to 4.91mm), then geometry > notch > put notch to peg before adding the clip.

I used the calculation method as I found that using the
tools > make split > make split at peg not only splits off the template but moves the rail joint and adjusts all the sleeper spacings accordingly.

I printed several sets of joint and plain bricks, and found with the gentlest of brushes with a smooth file on the outside of the tommy bar part of the clip to remove any trace of the elephants, they clipped together with a satisfying clip sound. Tommy bar down onto claw part

Obviously if had chosen a 7/6 sleeper joint brick arrangement and a 6 sleeper plain brick, i could use the two bricks to make 45 foot and 60 foot panels using the right combo, but 13 sleepers won't fit on my build plate!

It has let me produce a fair length of timber base and then test plugging in a longish run of S1 chairs on a rail, worked fine.

Any way I have had fun designing and making these with Templot and have learnt al lot of the joys of Templot along the path, so thanks again Martin for Templot.

Steve
ps. neighbours begged me to stop doing the rain dance!
 

Attachments

  • oo-sf_plain_resin_sections_22_11_10_0952_49.bgs3
    3.4 KB · Views: 68
  • oo-sf_plain_resin_sections_2022_11_10_0952_15.box
    30.2 KB · Views: 54
_______________
message ref: 5289
I've been following this topic on and off since it started (27 pages ago!) But I must admit I'm getting a bit lost in it all - probably because I'm not actively doing any of this (although I have the kit to do so - but I've not tried resin printing yet).

But given the plugs/sockets set the gauge, have you given any thought to gauge-widening on curves?

Regards

Richard.
 
_______________
message ref: 5291
Hi Richard,
believe I am right in saying that when a particular template is output, whether to paper printer, DXF file, or .STL file the gauge is output as defined for that template, so I assmume if you have gauge widened a particulr EM template (18.2mm nominal) to say 18.3 mm, then that is what gets printed. If outputting sockets they will be positioned (for that template) so that when the chairs are plugged in, the gauge will be 18.3mm. It is all driven by Templot, which you are in control of.
Steve
 
_______________
message ref: 5293
20221110_125518.jpg
Two parts of a clip, before trimming the web on the end of the sleepers to allow mating to take place.

Both the jaw and the Tommy bar just overlap the flange rather than overlap an actual sleeper. I did this so that with the standard size clip the two sleepers end up at the correct distance apart. Seems strong enough as integrity only needed until sleeper base glued down.


Now for a squirt of primer etc, then stick down and have a go at ballasting and plugging, or should that be plugging then ballasting?
 
_______________
message ref: 5295
@Steve_Cornford

Hi Steve,

There is a recess around the underside of the clip to allow for elephant's foot. For the amount of EF you are getting, you need to increase the bottom offset setting:

clip_elephant_recess.png


To get the clip where you want it without disturbing the sleeper positions, instead of make split at peg, click do > blank up to peg menu item.

Sorry, in my previous post I simply posted enough to let you test the printing of the clips. If you want to use the results for an actual model, there is rather more to it. Generally the brick templates are intended to be derived separately from the track plan templates, rather than replace them. For the full chapter and verse you need to read this topic from the start:

https://85a.uk/templot/club/index.php?threads/extracting-a-3d-timbering-brick-from-a-track-plan.295/

and then ignore all the experimental bits which I have since changed. :)

One day I will get all this stuff written up properly, but if I stop to do that now I never will get any more chairs done.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 5300
@richard_t @Phil O

Hi Richard, Phil,

I'm aware of the need for gauge-widening, and transitioning into and out of gauge-widened sections, and the widened check-rail gaps resulting therefrom.

I have several ideas for how best to achieve it. But unfortunately I can't do everything at once. I said at the the start of this Plug Track project that it will be a long, long, road -- but I don't think anyone believed me. :)

It will be a major achievement just to get to a complete single straight turnout -- I haven't even got that far yet.

As Phil says, for a constant gauge-widening on plain track, you can use gauge > modify current settings > modify track gauge... and it will work fine for Plug Track. But don't do that for pointwork templates, because it will change the geometry.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 5302
.
Sorry, more brain-fade. Mixed up Steve and Phil. Apologies.
 
_______________
message ref: 5303
Hi Martin,
Thanks for the tip, its good to try out & learn something new each day.
This is not for an actual model, it is just so I can try out ballasting that covers 3D printed timber flanges & clips etc, and compare that with using laser cut ply timbers glued to a cork sub-base (emulated with 3mm ply at present) using locator plugs etc.
To help guide decision making regarding purchase of an FDM 3D printer for the bases, or stick with out-sourcing laser cut ply timbers.
I know this is all experimental but it is great fun trying this out, as long a sit doesn't try your patience.
I can see that there is a bit if faff gluing the timbers down individually with locators, then removing locators before plugging in the rail mounted chairs, but this might be balanced by the time taken to produce all the 3D printed bricks.
I can see that resin printed bases are not ideal, as they are not really a "bash" fit in the way that your FDM printed timber bases are designed to accomodate a "bash" fit,

The latest resin timber bases I printed were still at the default shrinkage allowance of 0.15% and measuring them (along the rail) I suspect that in the x direction 0.05% or even 0.00% would be better.
Having plugged some chairs in the gauge seems to be more like 16.3 than 16.2 so the y direction also needs reducing (for use on my printer), and this perhaps re-inforces the need to reduce shrinkage % as you have previously noted.

Just got to find my bags of ballast.

Steve
ps before actual modelling begins I will have to stop dithering between OO-SF, EM and P4
 
_______________
message ref: 5304
Would it be worth proceeding with the check rail chairs as a further test of proof of concept?
I am assuming that these would have fixed jaws on the stock and the outer jaw of the check rail with a loose jaw on the inner jaw (the one nearest the middle of the track?
@Steve_Cornford @ralphrobertson

Hi Steve, Ralph,

We now have 3 of us who have succeeded in printing the loose jaws, to the intended size, and inserting them on some rail.

So I'm going to proceed on that basis for the check rails at least. That means the check rail chair bases will be in one-piece, slide-on for the stock rail, and a loose jaw at the inner end against the check rail.

For anyone not happy with the loose jaw, unticking the relevant option will cause the chair to be printed as one piece with a solid inner jaw for slide-on both rails. That will mean either a) bash-fit both stock rail and check rail at the same time, or b) fit the check rail afterwards by sliding it through the chairs, the flare angles being "persuaded" through the chair jaws. In some complex formations there won't be room between other rails to slide it into place, and a) would be the only option.

But using the loose jaws makes it easier -- IF you can see them. The check rail can be prepared to match the paper template, tried in position until it is just right, and then finally fixed by inserting the loose jaws. If it is still not quite right, the loose jaws can be pulled out* and the rail modified or replaced as required. If the rail is a bit loose, the jaws can be pulled out and replaced with ones having a slightly thicker key. And because the check rail does not need to slide though the chairs, there is no need to file a lead-in chamfer on the rail end -- the ends can be dead square and flat as the prototype by touching them against a sanding disc.

The same ease of assembly with loose jaws would apply to the wing rails and knuckle bend at the crossing -- no need to get it dead right first time. IF you can see them.

*pulling out the loose jaws without damaging them is quite tricky -- they are locked under the rail head. It's best to regard them as disposable, and use a fresh one. You can print about 1000 for 10p, so that's not likely to be a hardship. To remove them I have found the easiest way is to grip them gently with the tip of the Xuron cutters, and pull them away from the rail. If you accidentally cut through one in the process, the remains can be pushed out from below.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 5306
@Steve_Cornford @ralphrobertson

Hi Steve, Ralph,

We now have 3 of us who have succeeded in printing the loose jaws, to the intended size, and inserting them on some rail.

So I'm going to proceed on that basis for the check rails at least. That means the check rail chair bases will be in one-piece, slide-on for the stock rail, and a loose jaw at the inner end against the check rail.

For anyone not happy with the loose jaw, unticking the relevant option will cause the chair to be printed as one piece with a solid inner jaw for slide-on both rails. That will mean either a) bash-fit both stock rail and check rail at the same time, or b) fit the check rail afterwards by sliding it through the chairs, the flare angles being "persuaded" through the chair jaws.

But using the loose jaws makes it easier -- IF you can see them. The check rail can be prepared to match the paper template, tried in position until it is just right, and then finally fixed by inserting the loose jaws. If it is still not quite right, the loose jaws can be pulled out and the rail modified or replaced as required. If the rail is a bit loose, the jaws can be pulled out and replaced with ones having a slightly thicker key. And because the check rail does not need to slide though the chairs, there is no need to file a lead-in chamfer on the rail end -- the ends can be dead square and flat as the prototype by touching them against a sanding disc.

The same ease of assembly with loose jaws would apply to the wing rails and knuckle bend at the crossing -- no need to get it dead right first time. IF you can see them.

cheers,

Martin.
My previous post about the separate jaws and keys was made before I tried to use them and despite several being separated in my hand washing process I have to say that with the aid of an Optivisor and my regular fine tweezers which I always use I found the process actually quite easy. Would I want to make a complete turnout that way - probably not, but for a few chairs it would not be a problem and my eyes really are getting bad these days. I never seem to be able to wear the right specs for the job, always swapping them over!

Ralph
 
_______________
message ref: 5309
Hi Ralph,
When you say complete turnout that way, if I take a C10 turnout for example, I calculate there will be 102 fixed jaw chairs, and 32 loose jaw chairs needing 40 loose jaws between them, so perhaps not so onerous. (based on Scalefour Society commissioned LNER C10 turnout template).
It is good to know that you are actually using a combination of lasercut card sleepers and S1 plug chairs on a real working layout.
Steve
 
_______________
message ref: 5310
My previous post about the separate jaws and keys was made before I tried to use them and despite several being separated in my hand washing process I have to say that with the aid of an Optivisor and my regular fine tweezers which I always use I found the process actually quite easy. Would I want to make a complete turnout that way - probably not, but for a few chairs it would not be a problem and my eyes really are getting bad these days. I never seem to be able to wear the right specs for the job, always swapping them over!

Ralph

Hi Ralph,

I'm like you, my normal glasses are verifocals, but for close modelling work, I have a pair of x3 reading glasses, which has made one helluva difference, but I need to swap between them quite frequently, sometimes and on some occasions I even resort to the x3 glasses, plus an optovisor. The joys of getting old, I think not! The glasses were courtesy of a BOGOF deal.
 
_______________
message ref: 5313
To help guide decision making regarding purchase of an FDM 3D printer for the bases, or stick with out-sourcing laser cut ply timbers.
I know this is all experimental but it is great fun trying this out, as long as it doesn't try your patience.
I can see that there is a bit if faff gluing the timbers down individually with locators, then removing locators before plugging in the rail mounted chairs
@Steve_Cornford

Hi Steve,

Not trying my patience at all, I value the feedback greatly. It's encouraging me to get on and make some progress with this project.

I'm glad you are finding it fun -- me too. That is the purpose of a hobby. :)

I have now ordered yet another FDM printer -- this one:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B09BN55WQR

which is currently available at a good price. It should be here tomorrow. It requires much more assembly work than the later Neptune 3 version, but that costs over 40% more for much the same printer. Also I prefer the manual levelling on the older version for printing something dead flat and the same thickness all over -- such as a timbering brick. The new "auto levelling" function doesn't physically adjust the build plate, it simply compensates the thickness of the first layer to allow for an unlevel build plate.

I don't actually need a third FDM printer, the BIBO is still working fine. But it's now 5 years old and seemingly no longer available. So it's not likely anyone else making plug track is using one. I want to be able to test the plug track and set the defaults based on the type of printer most users are likely to have. I know one or two are thinking of getting into 3D printing purely on the strength of plug track, so I want to be able to make a video saying "get one of these, click this, do that" and so on. At present I can do that for the chairs, but not for the timbering bricks.

but this might be balanced by the time taken to produce all the 3D printed bricks.

The big difference there is that an FDM printer runs unattended. Yes it can take hours rather than minutes, but you just set it running and walk away. With no afterwork needed. It prints tomorrow's timbering base (ready to use) while you are building the one it printed yesterday. :)

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 5314
Hi Martin,
Ah yes I was going to ask you about the Neptune 2S, as it seems to have the same x-y build plate size as the Neptune 3, just a smaller z size, but we do not need a great height for timber bases.

I have ordered a set of your tweezers and the reading glasses!

I think you will have more fun tomorrow assembling your Neptune!

Steve
 
_______________
message ref: 5315
Hi Martin,
Ah yes I was going to ask you about the Neptune 2S, as it seems to have the same x-y build plate size as the Neptune 3, just a smaller z size, but we do not need a great height for timber bases.

I have ordered a set of your tweezers and the reading glasses!
@Steve_Cornford

Hi Steve,

I've never used the BIBO at anywhere near the full Z capacity, and I doubt I will ever do that with the Neptune. I can't think of anything 10 inches tall that I might want to print for modelling.

One issue at the back of my mind which I want to resolve (and the real reason for getting the Neptune) is the X-Y resolution for this style of open-frame FDM printer -- there are a lot of them about. The BIBO claims 0.05mm, and so does even the little MINIBO. The Neptune says nothing about resolution (travel per motor step) but claims +/-0.1mm accuracy for the finished print. That's not very impressive. :(

On both the BIBO (and the MINIBO with Templot's backlash correction function) I've achieved very good accuracy by careful measurement and adjustment of the shrinkage settings, better than +/-0.1mm. It's important for the socket sizing of course.

I shall be very disappointed if I can't achieve the same on the Neptune by tweaking the settings. As usual it's proved impossible to get this sort of information from any website or by asking anyone, the only way to find out is to get one and see.

I think you will have more fun tomorrow assembling your Neptune!

I hope it can be called fun. :) As usual with these things, the quoted assembly time is how long you will need to lie in a darkened room afterwards. The actual assembly time is always a fortnight.

I'm currently working on the loose jaw pin holder for the tweezers.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 5317
Hi Martin,
Will (the holder) be FDM or Resin printed?
Steve
Hi Steve,

I'm intending to print it on the Mars (resin). Hopefully it will be strong enough. If not FDM. I will post the file here.

I might also try a brass version on the CNC if I can still see to make a 0.6mm D-bit on the cutter grinder.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 5322
Hi Ralph,
When you say complete turnout that way, if I take a C10 turnout for example, I calculate there will be 102 fixed jaw chairs, and 32 loose jaw chairs needing 40 loose jaws between them, so perhaps not so onerous. (based on Scalefour Society commissioned LNER C10 turnout template).
It is good to know that you are actually using a combination of lasercut card sleepers and S1 plug chairs on a real working layout.
Steve
@Steve_Cornford @ralphrobertson

Hi Steve, Ralph,

IF, big IF, you were prepared to do the whole thing loose-jawed, another option comes into play. If the timbering base is resin printed, the slotted chairs could be printed integral with the timbering base instead of separate bash-fit chairs. Saving a lot of time and improving the final accuracy (e.g. for P4).

So instead of getting a separate FDM printer and a small resin printer, it might be worth getting just a larger resin printer with a bigger build plate, to accommodate a more convenient size of timbering brick. IF you were prepared to do the whole thing loose-jawed. IF.

Just another thought to add to the mix. :)

But an FDM printer is useful for other things, such as the filing jigs.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 5323
@Steve_Cornford

Hi Steve,

I've never used the BIBO at anywhere near the full Z capacity, and I doubt I will ever do that with the Neptune. I can't think of anything 10 inches tall that I might want to print for modelling.

One issue at the back of my mind which I want to resolve (and the real reason for getting the Neptune) is the X-Y resolution for this style of open-frame FDM printer -- there are a lot of them about. The BIBO claims 0.05mm, and so does even the little MINIBO. The Neptune says nothing about resolution (travel per motor step) but claims +/-0.1mm accuracy for the finished print. That's not very impressive. :(

On both the BIBO (and the MINIBO with Templot's backlash correction function) I've achieved very good accuracy by careful measurement and adjustment of the shrinkage settings, better than +/-0.1mm. It's important for the socket sizing of course.

I shall be very disappointed if I can't achieve the same on the Neptune by tweaking the settings. As usual it's proved impossible to get this sort of information from any website or by asking anyone, the only way to find out is to get one and see.



I hope it can be called fun. :) As usual with these things, the quoted assembly time is how long you will need to lie in a darkened room afterwards. The actual assembly time is always a fortnight.

I'm currently working on the loose jaw pin holder for the tweezers.

cheers,

Martin.

Hi Martin,

To improve the resolution I swapped the X and Y steppers for ones with half the step angle and used the smallest belt drive cogs available on my (now antique) Folger printer. It improved the X-Y resolution a lot.

To minimize backlash the drive belts are held in tension with tie wraps.

Cheers!
Andy
 
_______________
message ref: 5324
@Steve_Cornford @ralphrobertson

Hi Steve, Ralph,

IF, big IF, you were prepared to do the whole thing loose-jawed, another option comes into play. If the timbering base is resin printed, the slotted chairs could be printed integral with the timbering base instead of separate bash-fit chairs. Saving a lot of time and improving the final accuracy (e.g. for P4).

So instead of getting a separate FDM printer and a small resin printer, it might be worth getting just a larger resin printer with a bigger build plate, to accommodate a more convenient size of timbering brick. IF you were prepared to do the whole thing loose-jawed. IF.

Just another thought to add to the mix. :)

But an FDM printer is useful for other things, such as the filing jigs.

cheers,

Martin.
Hi Martin,

For me that would be great for plain track, personally I prefer the ability to be able to 'manipulate' turnouts which is why I use ply and rivet. I know ready to run works but when you are modelling in P4 I have found that some adjusting of turnouts is often required in order to get good running. The resin printer I have would need replacing if I were to do this but I do think it is an option but please finish the rest of the turnout chairing before you spend time doing this - there are a lot of people out there waiting to complete their turnouts!

Ralph
 
_______________
message ref: 5325
Back
Top