Looking to Print a Caboose...

[Philip H]

http://edslaw.org/

Wow.  What's the history on that frankenfurter?

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Wow.  What's the history on that frankenfurter?

The PC bought a handful of ex-ATSF cars and "upgraded them".

You can learn all about them in the upcoming Conrail caboose book: https://store.garbelypublishing.com/conrailcabooses

[wm3798]

That thing reeks of the strange brew of Union work rules that the Penn Central was force fed to approve the merger... I'll look forward to reading more about it in the book...

Then I guess I'll get out the dremel tool and go after my green SF caboose!!
Lee

[Maletrain]

Back to the caboose to print. 

Although the I-5 diagrams I sent all show 4-pane windows, pictures indicate that it was only the I-1s that had those 4-pane windows. 

And, the I-1s looked substantially different from the I-5s, because they had wooden ends (not metal) and their cupolas had vertical sides and were about 2'5" shorter in length than the I-5s while being the same height.

The I-1s did have narrow end platforms with passenger car steps when first built, but those were widened when the vertical steps were added.

The original I-5s had 15' bolster spacing, like the I-1s, but most of the I-5s were later given a 19' bolster spacing, which necessitated the vertical steps because it placed truck wheels between the steps.

The early cabooses were on archbar trucks.  Since the last I-1 wasn't retired until 1977, I suspect it eventually had more modern trucks like the I-5s ended up with.

Although B&O probably had a lot of Frankencabooses near the end, I would prefer to run models that are more representative of the classes. 

But, it would be hard to say "The B&O never had one of those," because they did build an I-5 with metal sides and they did repair some cabooses with plywood that was done well enough to look like welded steel.  Heck, the I-5a, I-5b and I-5ba models were the first of the steel wagontops, and the b and ba versions had porthole windows on their ends, but then the I-5c and I-5d versions were the rebuilds of the I-5 cupola models.

If you want the I-1 diagrams, I can scan those for you, too.

[cjm413]

http://edslaw.org/

Some of them were converted from cars with rounded roofs matching the Atlas model rather than the peaked roof on this one.

http://conrailphotos.thecrhs.org/node/26147

The incorrect truck spacing on the Atlas underframe is relatively easy to fix by cutting the frame on both sides of the bolster and reversing them to match the shorter distance between the bolsters on the car body.

I used spare passenger car couplers rather than stock underslung couplers since I already had them, also to use the extension to mount the couplers where the hole for the screw would not be visible (vs drilling through the end platform)

[Chris333]

Anyone do work on this B&O caboose yet?

I'm mostly interested in drawing board gaps in N scale. 

[GimpLizard]

Anyone do work on this B&O caboose yet?

I'm mostly interested in drawing board gaps in N scale. 

I'm still working on the CAD model. It's a lot fussier than I had expected. What exactly do mean by "drawing board gaps"?

[Chris333]

Well I can draw them to scale, but you won't see them in the print. I draw them .010" deep and wide for HO, but that might look silly in N.

[peteski]

Well I can draw them to scale, but you won't see them in the print. I draw them .010" deep and wide for HO, but that might look silly in N.

Depending on the printer's resolution, they should be made barely visible, but deep and wide enough not to be filled by a thin layer of paint.  They will have be larger than in scale but by how much?  Experimenting with the printer should give good results.  it will likely take few test prints to get the optimal width and depth.

[Chris333]

Just seeing if someone figured it out for me 

[GimpLizard]

By chance, does anyone know how wide those siding boards are?

I just doubled the size of the 'V' grooves, on my CAD model, to .006W x .003D and they look rather large. I made the board width .020" (scale 3.2"). But I'm thinking that might be too narrow. That works out to 90 boards, per side, to cover 24'. Best I can count from a prototype photo, that's about right... I think.

[peteski]

By chance, does anyone know how wide those siding boards are?

I just doubled the size of the 'V' grooves, on my CAD model, to .006W x .003D and they look rather large. I made the board width .020" (scale 3.2"). But I'm thinking that might be too narrow. That works out to 90 boards, per side, to cover 24'. Best I can count from a prototype photo, that's about right... I think.

The bottom of that V-shape will  likely be filled solid during the printing process, so it will be even more shallow.  The gaps look large because you are looking at them magnified on the screen. Even when viewed smaller, the minimum line thickens that represents the gap on the screen (basically the dot-pitch of your monitor) will likely exaggerate their appearance.

I guess this  is where the art of designing scale models comes in.  The model cannot just all be exact 160th of the 1:1 dimensions. Some things just don't scale well.  If the board gaps were scaled correctly they would not really show on the model, but if they are exaggerated too much, they will make the model look toysh.  I think the only way to receive best results would be to experiment with different depth and width of the gaps (again, depending on the specific printer the model will be rendered on).

[GimpLizard]

Here's a screen shot of what I'm talking about. The boards are .020" wide and the 'V' grooves are .006" wide.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[peteski]

So the flat portion of the boards is actually 0.014" (not 0.020") wide?  I wonder if it would be better if you made the flat part of the boards 0.020"? I don't know how wide were the 1:1 boards.

[wm3798]

Whatever the size and spacing on a Micro trains wood caboose is would look fine, if the printer can reproduce it...
Lee