What have you been printing.

Rhinochugger said:
Pedestrians walk - definition of pedestrian.

Runners, according to the Highway Code should run on the same side as the traffic :nod: :nod:
Click to expand...
Depends who's doing the running! Obviously highly embarrassing for the runner who gets overtaken by a pedestrian.
People running, or walking, on the carriage way SHOULD always face the oncoming traffic, except on bends where crossing over to be more visible, or for better forward views may be the better option. Unfortunately, as in all things, there's some right gits out there who think they're above such things as courtesy. PS don't get me started on the total tw*ts who use the pavements as their very own veloton.
 
Paul M said:
Depends who's doing the running! Obviously highly embarrassing for the runner who gets overtaken by a pedestrian.
People running, or walking, on the carriage way SHOULD always face the oncoming traffic, except on bends where crossing over to be more visible, or for better forward views may be the better option. Unfortunately, as in all things, there's some right gits out there who think they're above such things as courtesy. PS don't get me started on the total tw*ts who use the pavements as their very own veloton.
Click to expand...
As Paul say, Highway Code rule 2:

Rule 2
If there is no pavement, keep to the right-hand side of the road so that you can see oncoming traffic. You should take extra care and

  • be prepared to walk in single file, especially on narrow roads or in poor light
  • keep close to the side of the road.
It may be safer to cross the road well before a sharp right-hand bend so that oncoming traffic has a better chance of seeing you. Cross back after the bend.
 
JimmyB said:
As Paul say, Highway Code rule 2:

Rule 2
If there is no pavement, keep to the right-hand side of the road so that you can see oncoming traffic. You should take extra care and

  • be prepared to walk in single file, especially on narrow roads or in poor light
  • keep close to the side of the road.
It may be safer to cross the road well before a sharp right-hand bend so that oncoming traffic has a better chance of seeing you. Cross back after the bend.
Click to expand...
Paul M said:
Depends who's doing the running! Obviously highly embarrassing for the runner who gets overtaken by a pedestrian.
People running, or walking, on the carriage way SHOULD always face the oncoming traffic, except on bends where crossing over to be more visible, or for better forward views may be the better option. Unfortunately, as in all things, there's some right gits out there who think they're above such things as courtesy. PS don't get me started on the total tw*ts who use the pavements as their very own veloton.
Click to expand...
There does actually seem to be confusion, and amongst running clubs as well - the point is that runners are not pedestrians; the Oxford dictionary definition of a pedestrian is 'walking', but more recent dictionaries have broadened that to 'travelling by foot' which would include runners.

As a driver, I would rather have runners on the same side as traffic, because if they are running towards the traffic, and frequently they don't want to slow or stop, then a driver can be put in a compromising position with on-coming vehicles.

Certainly, the advice that I read a few years ago seems to have gone by the board, and is not mandatory.
 
I'm just in the process of printing out the 54 parts needed to make the beam engine for the boneworks. I'll let you know how it goes.

The two base sections took over six hours each to print and the two halves of the flywheel took 4 hours each - so it might be a while before I have everything printed

The Thingiverse link is - Beam Engine by cabbageheart

Rik
 
Rhinochugger said:
There does actually seem to be confusion, and amongst running clubs as well - the point is that runners are not pedestrians; the Oxford dictionary definition of a pedestrian is 'walking', but more recent dictionaries have broadened that to 'travelling by foot' which would include runners.

As a driver, I would rather have runners on the same side as traffic, because if they are running towards the traffic, and frequently they don't want to slow or stop, then a driver can be put in a compromising position with on-coming vehicles.

Certainly, the advice that I read a few years ago seems to have gone by the board, and is not mandatory.
Click to expand...
Runners as a group, though officially covered by the same regulation, clubs with markers choose to run with the flow of the traffic.

Wikipedia says:
A pedestrian is a person travelling on foot, whether walking or running.
 
We've have always been advised to face the traffic mainly because you're more likely to see anything coming towards you from coming from behind ( no rudeness please) this is more pertinent if, like me, your hearing isn't up to much.
Politeness should also dictate that if you're running, it's down to you to make way, although as I've said some people are gits, both walkers and runners, who don't know what politeness is
 
JimmyB said:
Runners as a group, though officially covered by the same regulation, clubs with markers choose to run with the flow of the traffic.

Wikipedia says:
A pedestrian is a person travelling on foot, whether walking or running.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is a more modern interpretation - the Romans didn't run to keep fit :oops::oops:

Pedestrian comes from the Latin pedester meaning "going on foot" but also "plain." As a noun, it's someone walking around — sidewalks are for pedestrians. As an adjective it means "lacking wit or imagination." If someone calls your new poem pedestrian, they mean it's dull
 
ge_rik said:
I'm just in the process of printing out the 54 parts needed to make the beam engine for the boneworks. I'll let you know how it goes.

The two base sections took over six hours each to print and the two halves of the flywheel took 4 hours each - so it might be a while before I have everything printed

The Thingiverse link is - Beam Engine by cabbageheart

Rik
Click to expand...
That is a super piece of kit, something hypnotic about watching a beam engine doing its stuff even when it is not actually doing any real work. Hope it all prints out ok. Sad that the vid did not give a clear view of the ooerating mech as it was a nice slow quiet movement.
 
dunnyrail said:
That is a super piece of kit, something hypnotic about watching a beam engine doing its stuff even when it is not actually doing any real work. Hope it all prints out ok. Sad that the vid did not give a clear view of the ooerating mech as it was a nice slow quiet movement.
Click to expand...
I think I caught a glimpse - the spindle of the motor runs direct against the rim of the flywheel - making it a stupendous reduction gear ;););)
 
Acquired one of these in a very sorry state of affairs. Been broken down into salvageable parts, tinkering with an idea to convert it into a waiting room on an island platform.

PIKO 62119 Cheese Shop.PNG

DaveB2 DaveB2 , very kindly sent a selection 3D files, one being of a window.

Required re scaling to fit, refer to ge_rik ge_rik post here for a guide or how to, TinkerCAD - G Scale Central

Using tinkercad, remixed DaveB2 DaveB2 original window (4 pane style on the left) to fit the opening on the PIKO building, once one window type is designed and fits in the existing aperture, just a case of remixing for alternative designs.

PIKO 62119 alternative windows.png

All were printed out using 'brim', and on fast print settings, which is useful for tasks like this, in the majority of cases, would be to print the window first and then make the opening to fit, some what slightly difficult to do it the other way about, bit of trial and error to adjust to make it fit, and having the ability to fast print with minimum usage and wastage of filament, saves on the environment!
 
Last edited:
Pleased that those building things have been useful. :)

So I've been making ridge tiles for one of the buildings I mentioned.

ridge tiles.JPG

The new ones are obviously the light grey the darker one on the right is original.

Dave
 
The Shed said:
Required re scaling to fit, refer to ge_rik ge_rik post here for a guide or how to, TinkerCAD - G Scale Central

Using tinkercad, remixed DaveB2 DaveB2 original window (4 pane style on the left) to fit the opening on the PIKO building, once one window type is designed and fits in the existing aperture, just a case of remixing for alternative designs.
Click to expand...
Glad to hear my TinkerCAD blog post has been helpful

Rik
 
When you show something that you have printed, can you please say if it was printed with PLA or ABS filament?
My test print was with PLA and it seems to be a bit 'rubbery ' ( the test dog) is this correct or do I have the wrong filament?
Thanks
Dave
 
If I am printing for things to be left outside I only ever print in ABS or PETG, I never use PLA as it doesn't like the Sun , I get in my back garden, it breaks down easy or seemed too and delayers and becomes very brittle. Actually I don't print anything in PLA at all anymore all my engines / wagons etc have all been printed in ABS or PETG..

I have also found out if you leave ABS outside with no paint for a year its rather brittle , but the same thing painted seems to fair better, I tried an experiment with a bridge section, unpainted it just fell apart and snapped easy when you tried to bend it :) The painted version was just about as good as when it was first printed

Building windows and doors I have printed all mine either in ABS or PETG and all are painted with a plastic primer then the color of choice and all are doing OK after a couple of years life outside, the oldest I have will be my signal boxes with printed stairs windows doors etc. etc and they all look OK , but I am not going to do a destruction test on one to see if they have stood up to life outside for three years.
 
I think the jury is out, on the longevity of printed components?

UV stability, mechanical integrity through heat/cool cycles, and loss of plasticiser over time, will all contribute to a bad (end) user experience.


A LGB wagon, can sit outside for several years, and still be quite robust.
If I am paying for a mixed-media kit (possibly a quite expensive kit) it should still be good in 5, 10, 15, 20 years time..

I do wonder if the rush to technology as going to leave a bad-taste for consumers in a few years?

PhilP.
 
PhilP said:
I think the jury is out, on the longevity of printed components?

UV stability, mechanical integrity through heat/cool cycles, and loss of plasticiser over time, will all contribute to a bad (end) user experience.


A LGB wagon, can sit outside for several years, and still be quite robust.
If I am paying for a mixed-media kit (possibly a quite expensive kit) it should still be good in 5, 10, 15, 20 years time..

I do wonder if the rush to technology as going to leave a bad-taste for consumers in a few years?

PhilP.
Click to expand...
Again, not wishing to knock anybody's modelling work in any way, but I do have some sympathy with Philp's question.

I had a 3D printed gearbox which didn't stand up to much hard wear. Don't know whether it was the oil, the grease, or strain, but it fell apart in a pretty short space of time.

This is not a knock, or a put down, but how do we research the longevity?
 
well ive had a few PLA buildings out in the Australian sun for just over 2 years now and other then the odd bit of bowing on a water tank stand made out of individual sleepers i havent had any problems. it seems to be that you need to make the structures extremely rigid and to make sure you have reasonable infill. I definitely wouldnt recommend a 3d printed gearbox though especially when theres such a massive range of brass gears and bearings available on EBay for such reasonable prices.
 
PhilP said:
I think the jury is out, on the longevity of printed components?

UV stability, mechanical integrity through heat/cool cycles, and loss of plasticiser over time, will all contribute to a bad (end) user experience.


A LGB wagon, can sit outside for several years, and still be quite robust.
If I am paying for a mixed-media kit (possibly a quite expensive kit) it should still be good in 5, 10, 15, 20 years time..

I do wonder if the rush to technology as going to leave a bad-taste for consumers in a few years?

PhilP.
Click to expand...
When I lived in Luton I left some LGB stock outside for around 10 years with no issues. a PM Water Column survived outside for even longer being outside at Hemel as well probably in excess of 15 years. Some of the parts became brittle but not the water tank that is still doing service but inside now.
 
Tropic Blunder1 said:
well ive had a few PLA buildings out in the Australian sun for just over 2 years now and other then the odd bit of bowing on a water tank stand made out of individual sleepers i havent had any problems. it seems to be that you need to make the structures extremely rigid and to make sure you have reasonable infill. I definitely wouldnt recommend a 3d printed gearbox though especially when theres such a massive range of brass gears and bearings available on EBay for such reasonable prices.
Click to expand...
There are a couple of manufacturers making gearbox casings by 3D printing - brass bearings and this one had brass gears.

Apart from the fact that I stripped the brass gears :oops::oops: (and that's another story) when I went to dis-assemble the gearbox, the casing fell apart.

Now it may be, that the casing fell apart for the very same reason that I stripped the gears - I think it could have been Rhino overload - so we have to be careful before we criticise, but it's worth asking the questions :think::think:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top