Shapeways FM switchers: Cleaning FUD

[Chris333]

That'll buff out...     who made those?

http://www.shapeways.com/model/493024/nn3-ebt-3bay-4pk.html?li=productBox-search

On the other hand the trucks look great.

[bbussey]

See, with no globs of wax, why not cast it like that with the smooth surfaces?

No globs this time as what is in DKS' photo.  But the wax is there, you just can't see it in the photo.  The surfaces are uneven and not as smooth as they appear in the cellphone photo.

The masters will be soaked to remove the wax and oil, then primed before being sent off to casting.  The primer will seal the porous surface and prevent the rubber from encroaching and sealing itself to the master.

[Dave Schneider]

So Bryan,

Just to clarify, were your gondola masters produced by a manufacturer other than Shapeways? Can you comment on the surface texture issues? Do these have the "shadowed" texture issues like what I am seeing on my FMs?

Best wishes, Dave

[bbussey]

Will wax fix this?

If you look at the interior, you can see the print head traveled across the car (side-to-side).  It might have rendered better if the model orientation was rotated 90 degrees, but you don't know until you try.  I probably would have turned the car on its side.  Or, I would have rendered it as is, but allowed for a .005" thick etched brass side to slide between the ribs and the body, then cast it in urethane.

[bbussey]

So Bryan,

Just to clarify, were these produced by a manufacturer other than Shapeways? Can you comment on the surface texture issues? Do these have the "shadowed" texture issues like what I am seeing on my FMs?

That is correct.  The G32C masters are rendered at the highest ProJet resolution (XHD) which is beyond the capabilities of Shapeways, and is about twice the rez of UHD (FUD).  The texture issues are still present, but the resolution is more fine so it's not as noticeable.  That increases your build options, but you still don't end up with a model that is as smooth as injection molded plastic.

There is no way you could render membranes that are .0025" thick with Shapeways.  I don't think it's possible at the FUD resolution, but it's academic since that is well below the minimum thickness that Shapeways will accept.

[peteski]

The texturing on the outside is what i'm hoping can be addressed with alternative cleaning methods.

That's a negative (unless your alternative cleaning method is mechanical in nature (and abrasive).  Or find a way to melt or fill them with some sort of non-waxy filler material which will smooth them (but that is not cleaning, is it?)  But either way, the wax has to be fully removed first.

The more comments like this you make, the more I wonder if you have actually owned (and played with or tried to clean) a rapid-prototyping produced item?  Or are you theorizing?

[Mark W]

I beg to differ that a water pick is non-destructive. The water may be benign, but under pressure it's going to start removing small details like a laser. As for the surface being totally wax-free, I have my strong doubts.

As stated, I use the water pick technique for ALL my cleaning.  Please forgive the blatant captions. 

[Lemosteam]

Cool Mark, I've seen those images before! 

Do you use hot water or cold?

DKS, not to be gross but a waterpik does not pressurize the stream enough to hurt my ears so I doubt it would harm a model as Mark clearly shows on his saleable products.

Earlier in the thread highway70 mentioned a thick filler/primer.  Anybody tried that stuff on one of these?

Was thinking it may fill the low spots on Chris333's hoppers.

[TiVoPrince]

Man, 
I always wanted a stuccoed railcar...

[DKS]

As stated, I use the water pick technique for ALL my cleaning.  Please forgive the blatant captions. 

I will concede that you have an excellent touch. I still wonder at the complete removal of the wax; regardless, the outcome is grand.

[Mark W]

So far I have yet to see any paint job deteriorate over time (aside from the growing desire to re-paint the ugly detail spots on the Dry Bulk Trailer).

I am confident in the process and have experienced the difference in painting a truly clean model vs a not so well cleaned model.  Even the smallest amount of wax residue causes paint to bead like water on a window.  After cleaning with the water pick (temperature about what you'd set for a hot shower), the material soaks up the paint like a sponge.  I do use high pressure on low detail surface and lower pressure on highly detailed areas.  Parts do break if you're not extra careful, however when careful all details on the Dry Bulk Trailer and Steamdonkey Crane hold up just fine under the water pick.

[Mark W]

Mark W, I'm not saying anything bad about your designs. Just think if they turned out just like they look on your computer screen though. You and me would both be happier and I would order many more parts from Shapeways. (and I would learn 3D myself)

I am 100% satisfied with all parts I've received from Shapeways.  However, after seeing your hopper, I consider myself fortunate.

By chance was that model ordered around spring/summer of 2010?  I know around that time, when I first experimented with the Telescoping Boom Forklift, Shapeways had a spurt of terrible quality with FUD.  Following that and based on my experience thus far, there was likely a print error with that hopper.  I would even speculate if the acrylic was printing at too high of a temperature, allowing the support wax to creep in on each layer.

I would demand a re-print or refund if I ever received a model in such a condition.  Especially knowing they can (and should) look as well as how the Dry Bulk Trailer turned out.


My biggest gripe with Shapeways is, as a designer, once a model is proven "printable" there must be a tag for all future orders.  In these past few months, I've had nearly all my designs rejected.  All of them having printed successfully dozens of times before.  Furthermore, they are being rejected based on terms outside of the material guidelines.  If .3mm is defined as the minimum wall thickness, why is a .45mm thick wall cause for rejection?  This is a step backwards, not forwards.  However that is maybe a discussion for another time and place. :/

[Dave Schneider]

I ordered some Mr. Surfacer and Mr Color Thinner to see if I can produce a better finish. It should make it to Alaska in 46 weeks, and will share my results...if it works out.

Here is an example. http://www.one16thtiger.com/SBS_MrSurfacerGapFilling.html

Best wishes, Dave

[wcfn100]

The more comments like this you make, the more I wonder if you have actually owned (and played with or tried to clean) a rapid-prototyping produced item?  Or are you theorizing?

More comments like what?  That I don't think you have to dissolve the wax to get a clean surface?  How'd that turn out?

Why is it so hard to believe that a solvent that effects the transparency, could be effecting the surface of what's soaking in it?  And it may not be a direct effect, but rather something that happens when the wax gets dissolved or removed.

I'm sorry I don't have a chemistry degree like you and everyone else who has this all figured out.  I guess I'll just keep making stupid, uninformed posts until I get the answers I'm looking for.

And to answer your other question, I've started designing and printing Rapid Prototype parts since before Shapeways was around.  I've cleaned enough SW parts to have the opinion that Bestine (I've also used Bleche White which seems to work similarly) may not be the best option.  Or at least that it's worth it to spend some time trying other things.

I'm out to get a water pick tomorrow and I need to follow up with the WD40 when I get a larger part.

Jason

[mmyers05]

Will wax fix this?

Wow, that's just about the worst finish that I've ever seen (in person or in pictures)! I've requested/received reprints for models way less crummy looking than that...