Kagou Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 Hi guys . Sorry but my question wasn't innocent . I read on others forum some modelers has problem with hangs paint , a reaction between the paint and the resin Acrylic resins (Shapeways) must be cooked at the end of the process using a "bath" of ultraviolet rays ,but often parts remain incompletely treated for lack of time or care by the manufacturer . The best way is a UV oven to finish the process and eliminated the bad surprise .You can make a oven with a few euros : a UV led ribbon (400 nanometers minimum) , a connecting cable , transformer 12V 4A and a blanket (for reflect the UV light Inside the box) Pierre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roma847 Posted March 30, 2018 Author Share Posted March 30, 2018 Thanks Pierre for your interesting tips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roma847 Posted March 30, 2018 Author Share Posted March 30, 2018 Hello everybody, Shapeways' shipping did not take so long, if you have been wondering about the send pause. The reasons for that I still want to explain before the holidays, but the devil is often in the detail, or better said in this case in the Shapeways' tolerances, which I have not yet known so far. And if one or the other in the mean time has clicked on the link of the SW website in my Reply #1413 then he will has been surprised. Oops!!! Outwardly, the second Intertank looks really great, but already the test fitting of the ET front part was not possible because the connection diameter D2.1 was still slightly larger than that of the first IT, namely instead of 53,5 mm it was now even 54,1 mm. You could have knocked me down with a feather!!! Instead of getting a little smaller by Michael Key's adjustment for a better matching the Airfix IT-values, the dimensions became in spite of taking shrinkage (0,8%) into account amazingly even a bit larger, which is still mystery to me. This is shown by the comparison of the dimensions of the two ITs with the Airfix-IT, whereby I've tried to measure as accurately as possible. While the larger length is less a problem for the fit of the parts, the resulting diameters all the more so as the overall IT was printed too large, which can also be seen at the back overhang of the IT, which is just too big for me. Of course, Michael Key was also very surprised, because according to the SW website, the visible length of the IT (without front connecting ring) should be around 48,9 mm (48,5 mm x 1.008 shrinkage), as it was indicated in his CAD file. He then removed his shop offer and contacted Shapeways for anew refund, which I've received in the meantime. While the tolerance for FUD on the SW website is indicated with Accuracy ± 0,1 - 0,2 mm for every 100 mm, we have now been told that the actual tolerance of the material is up to 0,4 mm, so one can not guarantee that the IT is perfectly sized, which is inconsistent and in my opinion difficult to accept it. However, in a sketch by Michael Key with all dimensions of his CAD model without and with shrinkage (0.8%), I discovered a small flaw that may have contributed to the enlarged diameters, which he has now corrected. With these last changes, he has uploaded the model again, and here it can be found. Now he will also upload a WSF version, which does not have to consider shrinkage and which will surely become a bit cheaper. Now I'm curious what kind of egg this time Shapeways will put into the nest me. Otherwise, I wish you all and thank you for looking in on me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichO Posted March 30, 2018 Share Posted March 30, 2018 0.4mm is a big gap Manfred. For the price you are paying for this item you should get the tolerances quit a bit closer. I hope everything works out finally in the end for this great build. I know it will tho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roma847 Posted March 30, 2018 Author Share Posted March 30, 2018 Hi Rich, I fully agree with you, normally it is absolutely a No go!!! It is unacceptable for the customers that SW simply declares new tolerances that are twice as large if the specified limits are not met. And therefore I will inform SW that I'm expecting their guaranteed FUD accuracy of 0,1 - 0,2 mm for every 100 mm for the proud price of this print. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roma847 Posted April 9, 2018 Author Share Posted April 9, 2018 Hello everybody, today with a short update from the Shapeways Team. I just could not stand for this contradiction regarding the FUD tolerances and I asked the friendly Shapeways lady, who initially wanted to give me only a lapidary, meaningless answer , to explain this dilemma to me. Thereupon was it confirmed by a production colleague that the maximum accuracy that SW can achieve at FUD is actually 0,4 mm, and that the SW guidelines should be adapted, to what one would now work on. Well at least something for which my effort has been worthwhile, although still to this day one finds the unchanged previous precision specification of ± 0,1 - 0,2 mm for every 100 mm ... Meanwhile, the third IT is on its way to me, and I'm curious what it will look like. In the meantime, I've looked around a bit on the SW pages and now I can better imagine the matter with the Support wax, whereto I have found this nice image at the end of the FUD website with the following explanation. Source: www.shapeways.com/materials/frosted-detail-plastic And remnants of this stuff one has still to remove off afterwards from the printed parts, although the cleaning at SW actually belongs to the standard procedure, but what is apparently not quite enough. On this site you will also find an interesting Video in which the individual steps of the multi-stage production process are clearly presented by a SW production engineer. After printing, the models are placed in a freezer to help detaching the parts, and then into an oven, where the wax base melts. Then they are placed first in an ultrasonic oil bath and subsequently in an ultrasonic water bath to remove residual wax and oil residues, and finally, after thorough water rinsing, they are dried and finally tested. Here is an image of the second IT, which looked a bit cleaner than the first one. The traces of grease on the paper show, that remnants of the wax/oil remains for the customer unfortunately, here during the sunbath of the two ITs for the allegedly necessary complete curing of uncured microscopic resin areas under UV light, which was proposed by a shapeways designer named Model Monkey, who is presenting some useful tips (FAQs) on how to use Shapeways prints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roma847 Posted April 10, 2018 Author Share Posted April 10, 2018 Hey everyone, meanwhile, I have received the third IT, which makes a much better figure than the first two, and fits also better between the two ET parts, as one can see here. And here the LOX Feedline from the Revell Stack was laid down experimentally. As my remeasurement has shown, but no shrinkage seems to have occurred, so one would probably get along without the 0.8% addition. Then I started with the tests for ultrasonic cleaning of the IT, for what I used the 2nd IT. To grope me step by step to the required cleaning time, I have each set the longest interval (600 sec.), which was repeated several times in succession. First, I put the IT on the rear end and cleaned it in from this side a total of 30 minutes, with about 80% were immersed. After this first cycle, the water looked rather cloudy, and was therefore renewed for the cleaning of the other side, which then also took 30 min.. After that the IT looked like this, whereby one could see at a closer look but still wax residues in the grooves, which is why half an hour apparently was not enough. Therefore, I helped along with the electric toothbrush under running water, because the fine grooves between the stringers are obviously the purest wax catchers, which I had already feared. But since even after this action still small wax remains were to be seen, then I grabbed the cutter and went on carefully further cleaning out the interspaces, which is also quite effective, as can be seen at the stripped off residues on my thumb, as well as at the cutter tip. This stuff seems to sit so firmly in the grooves, so one will need much longer cleaning times in the ultrasonic bath, as initially suspected. Therefore, I've added another pass of 30 min., which now gives a total cleaning time of 1 h, after which the water is always still cloudy. But as one can see at these photos, there are still areas with more or less wax residue. That immediately reminded me again of the 3-4 h cleaning time in the BANDELIN-Video during cleaning a FUD chain ... So I will either extend the cleaning time still significantly, or sometimes have to try Aceton, or are there any ideas of the Shapeways experts here in the forum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichO Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 Nice video Manfred. Be careful the Aceton dose not melt the plastic you are working with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roma847 Posted April 11, 2018 Author Share Posted April 11, 2018 Thanks Rich, have you any experience with Shapeways and with this ultrasonic cleaning stuff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichO Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 The Crawler treads were so clean when I received them, I just used soapy water to clean them. Your piece seems to have a lot of thin fins to catch everything used for support. Try using a stiff tooth brush for the small areas. Good Luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roma847 Posted April 12, 2018 Author Share Posted April 12, 2018 Thanks Rich, I will do my best ... BTW, here is a vivid video Cleaning Process Comparison: MJM vs PolyJet by PCSEngineering about the sequence of postprocessing steps of MJM 3D prints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roma847 Posted April 12, 2018 Author Share Posted April 12, 2018 Hello everybody, following a hint in our German Raumcon Forum, I looked in my Dremel accessories and also found a Nylon Rotor Brush and a Nylon Brush, which I have immediately tested at medium speed. In addition to the disadvantage of the many fine grooves, the Intertank has the advantage that it has no protruding small details that can easily break off when brushing, and also it is quite robust. That's why I was able to ride across the grooves relatively easily and smoothly with the rotor brush, whereby it was already visible to the naked eye how the white wax residues gradually disappeared and the grooves slowly became clean, which pleasantly surprised me. While cleaning in the area of the Stringer Panel is relatively easy due to the continuous grooves, one has to do one's best in the subdivided areas of the Thrust Panel. Under the big magnifying glass, one can see more clearly the differences between areas with wax residue and already cleaned areas. And furthermore one can still see that in the two outer areas of the Thrust Panel on the right edge with the little "pockets" still sits a lot of wax, because they are worse reachable with the Rotor brush, which is why I there will try the Nylon brush that will probably get in better there. To be able to see such differences in detail even better, I always apply the following trick. To do this, I paste the photo into a Word document, then I increase the magnification, as shown here e.g. up to 300%, and take a screenshot, which I then upload. This closeness can no longer be captured by the autofocus of my digicam. This is the maximum possible closeness, if the image is still to become halfway sharp. And here I've tested the Nylon brush, and I have to say that does not look too bad. The cleaned area stands out clearly from the rest of the area, whereby one must consider that this IT was already 1 h in the ultrasonic bath. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichO Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 What a great idea with the photos! That will come in very useful. And nice save with the brushes. The piece looks nice and fresh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roma847 Posted April 12, 2018 Author Share Posted April 12, 2018 Thanks Rich, meanwhile there are other possibilities as I have learned, like this Clip-On Microscope Magnifier Universal Lens with LED/UV Lights for iPhone 7 6s 6, Samsung, LG and More Smartphoneshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3bXWcY2khI Nothing is impossible, that also seems to be a useful thing that one should try once ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roma847 Posted April 13, 2018 Author Share Posted April 13, 2018 Hey everyone, BTW, an interesting suggestion came from another modeler, after what I should put the IT completely in warm water with a few drops of detergent overnight, about 8 to 10 h. This time should be sufficient for the detergent to soften the bond between the wax and the FUD. Thereafter, the IT should be put into the ultrasonic cleaner to finally detach the residual wax. This "Long pre-soak" Method is known to be used in industry for quite a number of cleaning processes. This Intertank with its many fine grooves seems to be a prime example of a "wax catcher" and therefore obviously needs a combined special cleaning treatment. But I will not let up until I have found a way out, rely on it. Therefore I'm going to try the Pre-soak method (maybe a day or two) with my 1st IT, whereby it actually seems logical that soaked "dirt" can be removed better, as in grandmother's time ... And maybe the brushing out of the grooves with the Dremel brush can also be done under water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roma847 Posted April 23, 2018 Author Share Posted April 23, 2018 Hello everybody, the more one deals with the problem of cleaning of FUD-prints, the more partially contradictory opinions can be found, especially regarding the use of Acetone. While this substance is recommended by Shapeways itself, how has been previously shown, other users advise against it categorically, or warn of danger, such as Model Monkey, It is all the more astonishing that at Shapeways no more precise information on the application (time, temperature, etc.) let found, wherewith they oversimplify the matter themself, because quite so easy, as one writes, it is not. That's why I did a test with Acetone. Without thinking of something bad, I have put the 2nd IT into the ultrasonic bath, poured in my bottle of Acetone (250 ml) and turned on the timer, followed by a rather violent reaction, and the bubbling acetone became quickly milky-cloudy, which rather surprised me. When lifting the IT in the bath, I noticed a slight sticking to the floor, but which could be solved. But since the reaction has unsettled me a bit, I switched off the timer after about 3 minutes and put the IT in a water bath. While the FUD surface seems to be slightly roughened, at the sight of the basket, I was somewhat startled, who had suffered quite a bit, as one can easily see. I should have preferred to remove it before, but afterwards one is always getting smarter. Now still a current message, meanwhile Michael Key also has uploaded an IT-Version in White Strong & Flexible (WSF) without shrinkage allowance, which with € 36,22 is much cheaper. So far for today. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichO Posted April 23, 2018 Share Posted April 23, 2018 The slightly roughened might be the dissolved plastic from the melted basket sticking to the FUD part. Check that closely. Much more luck with the WSF part if you order that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roma847 Posted April 24, 2018 Author Share Posted April 24, 2018 I'm not sure, Rich, if one compares these two images, I rather think, that FUD is superficially slightly solvated by the Acetone. To the left only cleaned with detergent, to the right with the basket killer Acetone. But there are also opposite opinions on the effect of Acetone on FUD as in this impressive contribution Investigating the use of acetone to clean models printed in Frosted Ultra Detail Material by Dave Yale, which I found in the Shapeways Thread Best way to clean frosted ultra detail model for painting?, who has soaked these FUD tables in each case 10 - 20 - 30 - 40 - 50 minutes and longer in Acetone and then examined, after which one FUD table only got soft "knees" after 2 h!!! And here another strange effect is described by Steve Larsen (Model Monkey) et al. in Powder Appearing On Fud After Storage, what one can see on this ship model of one of his customers. He had used Tamiya acrylic paint which was diluted with Methylethylketone (MEK), what seems to have been the cause of the observed incompatibility with the FUD parts and led to these unpleasant phenomena. Therefore, when cleaning my final Intertank, I will keep my hands off this Acetone and use only the gentler method of detergent/soapy solution, which I could see up close in action last week in the dental lab of my dentist, including post-treatment on more professional equipment, but more about that next time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roma847 Posted April 25, 2018 Author Share Posted April 25, 2018 Hi friends, over the weekend I took advantage of the bomb weather and bathed the final Intertank in the sun for half a day. Thereby not completely 'exposed' FUD/FXD should cure, which makes it easier to remove the wax. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roma847 Posted April 25, 2018 Author Share Posted April 25, 2018 Hello everybody, here's my report on my flying visit to the Dental lab last week. At my penultimate dentist appointment, I came up with the idea to confront my doctor with my Intertank cleaning problem and to ask if I could not even consult his colleagues in the neighboring dental laboratory. And friendly as he is, he agreed immediately and said that I should just bring along the tank at the next appointment. Said done, before my appointment last week, I was in the lab next door and I just happened to get to the nice manager, whom I showed me the original tank on a shuttle photo of the STS-6 and pressed him the Intertank in the hand, together with a short briefing to my previous chin-ups in the ultrasonic cleaning and the necessary parameters, i.e. mild medium (no Acetone!) and about 50°C. After the impression for an inlay I went back in the lab to the dental technicians 'with bite', as the name ChiliDent suggests already. This is the manager, Benjamin Geyer, and next to him on the wall stands a Sonorex high performance ultrasonic bath (Bandelin) with integrated heating. In this bath, he cleaned the IT in soapy water at approx. 50-60°C for approx. 15 minutes, whereby he carried out several visual inspections in between and brushed off the detached wax particles. Individual areas with remaining wax residues can then be removed in this Reitel Blast cabin, whereby finest glass beads (50 μm) are used. And then the IT can still be thoroughly rinsed with a high-pressure water jet. That's how I imagine the cleaning of the final IT for which I have already made a date. These are, of course, exclusive opportunities that I do not have at home and therefore thankfully like to use. One simply just must have a bit luck! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustermark Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 That’s quite a remarkable story, but perhaps not a manageable solution to the question for every Shapeways customer. Great to see you got the good result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roma847 Posted April 26, 2018 Author Share Posted April 26, 2018 Hello Mark, that's right, and I am also very happy that I can use this opportunity. But when you look closely, you can see that there are still areas with wax residuals left behind, which shows that the first cleaning was not intense enough, which is why I at home have thrusted them out of the grooves with the steel ruler. Completely without local mechanical post-processing of these fine grooves, it does not seem to work, or one has to invest more time and care in the ultrasonic cleaning before. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chief Smeg Posted April 27, 2018 Share Posted April 27, 2018 This might sound like a daft idea Roma, but have you considered getting a ‘comb type’ thing printed that would allow you to scrape the grooves clean? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass Posted April 27, 2018 Share Posted April 27, 2018 Manfred that is a very, very thorough approach you've taken. I wonder if, following your dentists experiment, firing pure water through an airbrush with a fine tip might help? It seems that you need some mechanical force after any treatment in a cleaning bath, and an airbrush and water is in most modeller's arsenals. You would also have good control over pressure and coverage and could avoid having to use any metal object that might mar the expensive castings. Ciao 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roma847 Posted April 27, 2018 Author Share Posted April 27, 2018 8 hours ago, The Chief Smeg said: This might sound like a daft idea Roma, but have you considered getting a ‘comb type’ thing printed that would allow you to scrape the grooves clean? Thanks Chief Smeg, but sorry, this tool is way too complicated. Unfortunately, you have to get into each groove to remove the wax residue, and therefor in addition to brushes a steel ruler or a dental probe are the most effective tools. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now