FUD vs Photon

[Chris333]

The FUD (not FXD) piece is on the left in all photos. The FUD model is five 3D parts glued together and the Photon is all one piece. I added wood end planks and a wire through the center on both of them. Also a styrene bottom door as added. The board gaps on the FUD are .005x.005", on the Photon they are .008x.008".
Raw:


With tan camo paint:





Overall it is hard to tell them apart. You can see things up close though. The under side is more crisp with FUD. On the Photon this is where all the supports were. To drill and tap all the holes the Photon seems less brittle, but the FUD works too. No photo but on the ends there is a lot of open space and there is slight sagging of the Photon car, hard to see really, but it is there. Inside the car you can see the wax support lines on the FUD, the ends were printed standing up, figured the fuzz was better on the inside. (I didn't try to sand it)

I would have been perfectly happy with the Photon car if that is all I had. In a train you really couldn't tell them apart.

I tried printing the Photon car in pieces like the FUD car and since the backs had the supports and slight sagging they didn't interlock with each other very well, but as you see the Photon car printed just fine as one piece. If I would have printed the FUD car in one piece there would be fuzz all over the sides and a fuzz streak under each bolt head. So flat parts were really needed for FUD.

[Chris333]

And lets see if either of the cars start to form crystals after 6 months.   

[Chris333]

This is the sagging on the ends I was talking about (on the right)

[tom mann]

What about cost per car? FUD is slightly crisper but I’m sure you don’t notice under normal viewing.

[Chris333]

I'm not sure of the costs. I grouped the FUD cars so I got 3 cars at a time. That would come to $45.16 at Shapeways. A 500ml bottle of resin for the Photon is about $39.00. There is no telling how many Photon cars I could print using the whole bottle, but I'm guessing waaaaay more than 3 cars.

I should add the the FUD cars took 28 days to show up on the porch. The Photon cars took about 5 hours.

This was my timeline:

**Oct 26th I placed a Shapeways order for 5 items all in FUD.

**Nov 5th (10 days later) decided to buy my own 3D printer.

**Nov 14th printer is on my porch. A few hours later I already had my first print finished.

**Nov 16th Shapeways says my order is still in production, but the estimated ship date is for later today. Their estimate for me to receive the package is Nov 29th.

**Nov  22nd my Shapeways order showed up. So 28 days it took.

[AlwaysSolutions]

I should add the the FUD cars took 28 days to show up on the porch. The Photon cars took about 5 hours.

This right here is my number 1 reason for purchasing the photon earlier this year.  When doing prototypes for Shapeways for a new model, the turn-around time a was killing me and took forever to get a complex product out the door.  Not to mention the costs!  Now I'm doing new parts all the time, experimenting, all of which would have cost the same as my printer if done through Shapeways.  Now with them tinkering with their pricing, the photon might take over completely.

A couple advantages of FUD that I've found so far though - interlocking parts.  Just can't do it with my photon at tolerances I need (but I sure can work around that!)  And second, I haven't been able to get a clean planar surface on the support side.  It always seems I have resin trapped in the forest of supports which cures just enough to cause an imperfect surface - but that's probably a topic probably best served for another thread to discuss specific issues.  The advantages of having a photon far outweigh the disadvantages IMO, that's for sure.

-Mike

PS.  On the sagging - you may consider adding some support in your model's file that has just barely the tips digging into your structure (to minimize blemishes when removed).  I've gone to doing all of my supports manually in CAD, but that is tedious.  Nothing says you can't have both some manual supports "built in" while letting the slicer software do the bulk of it..

[narrowminded]

It looks like all of the Photon edges are slightly "softer" but also maybe more precisely placed?  In your drawing, were all of the edges around the perimeter and the reliefs for details like the coupling pockets left as sharp intersections or had you specified an edge radius, regardless of how small? 

For example, where you said the board reliefs were .005" x .005" on the FUD and then increased to .008" x .008" for the Photon print, were they drawn as straight crisp edges?  I suspect that what appears to be better definition is probably a mix of the edge softening effect as well as a slightly larger starting dimension.  I'm guessing that the increase of .003" was  only partially realized, maybe a .002" or so actual change after the softening effect occurred and as a result of the natural flow of the material around edges. That might explain what appears from the pictures to be a better defined detail, or maybe I should say smoother defined detail.

These are things that I still have to learn as I go.  If this was machining, those edges untouched and without an edge spec would be literally sharp.  If it didn't get a ride in the tumbler and/ or some real edge breaking, it would look contrived, not a model of a heavy timber.

[bbussey]

It looks like the Photon is better for printing flat parts than FUD (they curl during heat removal of the supporting wax).

[Chris333]

It looks like all of the Photon edges are slightly "softer" but also maybe more precisely placed?  In your drawing, were all of the edges around the perimeter and the reliefs for details like the coupling pockets left as sharp intersections or had you specified an edge radius, regardless of how small? 

For example, where you said the board reliefs were .005" x .005" on the FUD and then increased to .008" x .008" for the Photon print, were they drawn as straight crisp edges?  I suspect that what appears to be better definition is probably a mix of the edge softening effect as well as a slightly larger starting dimension.  I'm guessing that the increase of .003" was  only partially realized, maybe a .002" or so actual change after the softening effect occurred and as a result of the natural flow of the material around edges. That might explain what appears from the pictures to be a better defined detail, or maybe I should say smoother defined detail.

These are things that I still have to learn as I go.  If this was machining, those edges untouched and without an edge spec would be literally sharp.  If it didn't get a ride in the tumbler and/ or some real edge breaking, it would look contrived, not a model of a heavy timber.

Everything is straight crisp edges in the drawing. After printing that test loco cab with the wooden boards I just figured the extra .003" would be better for the Photon. I'm still using clear resin so maybe the light bleed through causes the over exposure. Still waiting for a bottle of grey resin. These cars might be even better in grey.

[narrowminded]

Everything is straight crisp edges in the drawing. After printing that test loco cab with the wooden boards I just figured the extra .003" would be better for the Photon. I'm still using clear resin so maybe the light bleed through causes the over exposure. Still waiting for a bottle of grey resin. These cars might be even better in grey.

Thanks, Chris.  In the pictures I think the Photon looks better but that's so much a judgement call.   Does it look like you got an actual .008" or is it something less?  Or is the actual dimension .003" different from the FUD example?

[Chris333]

Thanks, Chris.  In the pictures I think the Photon looks better but that's so much a judgement call.   Does it look like you got an actual .008" or is it something less?  Or is the actual dimension .003" different from the FUD example?

Oh I can't measure the board gap on the models. I drew them .005" for Shapeways I believe this is the same .005" file on the Photon:

So for the Photon I drew the board gaps another .003" wider and deeper just so they would show up better. So you can get similar results if you alter the drawing slightly.

I drew cylinder saddles that have a gap for the loco frame. The gap on the Photon was like .0025" narrower than the Shapeways FUD part. You will have to do some testing and make changes as needed. You could make a test print with many different sized board gaps and see what turns out best in the print, then use that setting.

[Lemosteam]

Thanks, Chris.  In the pictures I think the Photon looks better but that's so much a judgement call.   Does it look like you got an actual .008" or is it something less?  Or is the actual dimension .003" different from the FUD example?

e

I disagree. Look closely at the details, particularly the top center spanner rod end plate, the bolts on the buffer ends, and those sags would never fly on any of my kits.

@Chris333 are you printing in the smallest layer thickness?

So far the only advantages I see are the time improvement, shipping and material cost save. Yes I see some really nice surfaces, but the supports on the support side basically negate that advantage.

[Chris333]

@Chris333 are you printing in the smallest layer thickness?

Yes .02mm layers  ( .0007"       )

And they were only tilted about 5-6 degrees. I think for best results most tilt like 30 degrees. That would make the supports and the whole model taller and double the print time.

Add someone with real 3D knowledge and it might turn out even better.

[wcfn100]

Chris's impatience once measured in days for Shapeways is now measured in hours. 

Jason

[narrowminded]

Everything is straight crisp edges in the drawing. After printing that test loco cab with the wooden boards I just figured the extra .003" would be better for the Photon. I'm still using clear resin so maybe the light bleed through causes the over exposure. Still waiting for a bottle of grey resin. These cars might be even better in grey.

I ordered a .5 litre of the gray resin with mine.  I've also ordered some resin from another vendor to do some trial parts to compare results in search of a more impact resistant/ flexible result.  And this before any of it has arrived.   It's nuts.

From all of the reading I've gotten to do it seems like the pigment in the colors might slow down the production a little from clear but as you mentioned, that should also effect the dimensions.  But then again, that could work the other way and in the process, too much or too little, also effecting the finish.  From what I've come to understand, right or wrong, this whole process is a balancing act between those forces.  And I suspect temperature of the print environment can be another variable.  But I also suspect that it can all be learned so that you have a pretty good shot at knowing how to accomplish what's doable and when to quit.