More Pre-Grouping Wagons in 4mm - the D299 appreciation thread.

[Compound2632]

28 minutes ago, Northroader said:

I don’t know if this applies to British wagons, but in American wagons the limiting factor to the load rating of the wagon was the Journal size. It could be quite possible that when you filled the wagon up to the top with coal, it came in on the weighbridge as noticeably less than the rated load of the running gear. Kind of built in factor of safety after things like the prang on the MSLR west of Penistone in the 1880s, you know the one.

 

That is certainly the case; each wagon diagram gives the capacity both by weight and by volume. As you say, journal size is the determining factor for weight. (See also the comments above about the L&Y's large wagons and that company's large business in transporting bales of imported cotton.) On that basis, the maximum density of material that you could completely fill a Midland D299 wagon with would be 61 lb per cubic foot (8 ton wagon, capacity 294 cubic feet); 976 kg/m3. This point was discussed some considerable way up-thread in relation to limestone - 8 tons of limestone would fill a D299 up to about the top of the third plank. 

 

Some figures for the density of coal:

 

Typical Bulk Density of Coal

Anthracite Coal : 50 - 58 (lb/ft3), 800 - 929 (kg/m3)

Bituminous Coal : 42 - 57 (lb/ft3), 673 - 913 (kg/m3)

Lignite Coal : 40 - 54 (lb/ft3), 641 - 865 (kg/m3)

 

Bituminous Coal is probably the nearest there to Yorkshire household coal being delivered to Skipton; the range of volumes for 8 tons of that is 314 cubic ft - 426 cubic ft; alternatively, the range of load in a 294 cu ft wagon is 5 t 10 c 1 q to 7 t 9 c 3 q.

 

So I think you* have given me the answer to this question that was puzzling me - many thanks. However, I feel the need to do the calculation for various PO wagons, since I feel sure that there an attempt was made to match volume to load, taking into account the type of coal to be carried. I understand that of the RCH 1923 12 ton designs, 8-plank wagons were favoured over 7-plank wagons, precisely because Yorkshire coal was less dense than coal from other coalfields. (No doubt varied from seam to seam too.)

 

The Midland D299 was designed as a general-purpose merchandise and mineral wagon, with dimensions not tied to any particular traffic. But perhaps it should have been made just a bit bigger!

 

*and @jamie92208 who posted wile I was writing the above.

 

Edited October 30, 2021 by Compound2632

[jamie92208]

The other factor that affected wagon size was the loading facilities at the pits. In those days the wagons were run under the screens with each road loading a different grade of coal. Many of these were quite low and collieries were loath to update and rebuild them. A 7 plank wagon might well not have fited under many screens in 1893. In the Dales, the limiting factor was the height of the loading platforms at the kilns where the lime was barrowed straight from the kiln to the wagon. These were usually built for 5 plank wagons, which were used till the early 1960's in some cases. Some were modernised to take 7 plank wagons. Spencers Limes , Swinden and Giggleswick  did this in the 1920's.

 

Jamie

Edited October 31, 2021 by jamie92208

[Compound2632]

I had been puzzled by CMC, Cudworth, who supplied the Railway Servants [Coal Association, presumably - a sort of co-op] at Skipton, in that organisation's own wagons or in other PO wagons cryptically identified by the initials RJG (possibly - hard to decipher!). A bit of hunting around online makes the connection with Grimesthorpe Colliery, at that time operated by Carlton Main Colliery Co. Ltd.

[jamie92208]

The rsilway servants coal associations were quite common and supplied cheaper coal to their members. There was one at Carnforth who bought their own wagon which was varnished wood finish with full letering. Cost £100 with £10 depodit rsised and the rest from the Wagon Finance Co. It was delivered new to a colliery then obviously went full to Carnforth. It would make a nice model on Green Ayre. I can imagine the ptidevwhen thehey shunted their own wagon to it's unloading position.

 

Jamie

[turbos]

This video appeared on another site I’m a member of, I hope it hasn’t appeared here before, the pre-group wagon(s) of interest are from 8:40.

 

Brian.

 

https://www.ampthill.tv/playvideo.html?id=94&fbclid=IwAR3eZd3oo2SmzR3lPCLlZFnI0z2UhhIrzBpa1gesRaXH8i5pKFLCL8hqur0

[Compound2632]

6 hours ago, turbos said:

This video appeared on another site I’m a member of, I hope it hasn’t appeared here before, the pre-group wagon(s) of interest are from 8:40.

 

Brian.

 

https://www.ampthill.tv/playvideo.html?id=94&fbclid=IwAR3eZd3oo2SmzR3lPCLlZFnI0z2UhhIrzBpa1gesRaXH8i5pKFLCL8hqur0

 

Ah yes, I saw that on the LNWR Society Facebook page, posted by noted West Coast wagonista Mike Williams, whose comment is worth reposting: "Quite a variety of wagons from GNR, LBSC, NER, GCR, MR, TVR, GWR, CR and SECR. But this is an LNWR page, so what interests me is the LNWR wagons. The first we can see is a D53 coal wagon (not merchandise wagon), there are a couple of D9s or D84 but exciting to me (I know – sad!) are two pairs of unusual D10 20ton sand wagons., one of the with flaps over the axleboxes. The last van is a D17B brake van but unusual to have a white roof." 

 

There are a couple of D299s in the mix, as one would expect. It's 1921, so pooling of ordinary opens is in full swing, though the Taff Vale wagon might count as esoteric. I did comment in reply that although my modelling is c. 1902, the early 20s are the true wagon modeller's paradise!

[Mikkel]

What a parade of wagons! Thanks for posting that. I note how the boards are arranged to get the barrows into the wagons. It's a bit casual for something that must have been a recurring job.

[jwealleans]

What struck me was how many of the wagons are loaded above the sides with no apparent means of restraining the piled bricks in the case of a rough shunt.   The three plank fairly well up the train was a case in point - you'd be shouted down if you produced a model load like that.

 

The load levels are very variable as well.  How did they decide when a wagon was full: work out how many bricks they'd stacked, or just look at the springs?

[sir douglas]

unusual little loco at 1:30 ive never seen anything like it

[Rail-Online]

4 hours ago, sir douglas said:

unusual little loco at 1:30 ive never seen anything like it

I think it is an early NG sentinel with chain drive between the wheels.  There are actually two TVR wagons and two LBSC ones in the departing train, both of which are not really 'Keeping the Balance' to quote the late Don Rowland.

 

Tony

[Compound2632]

7 hours ago, Rail-Online said:

There are actually two TVR wagons and two LBSC ones in the departing train, both of which are not really 'Keeping the Balance' to quote the late Don Rowland.

 

Well, you're hardly likely to get 1/47th or whatever of a wagon! Statistics of small samples...

 

"Keeping the Balance" is a good starting point, as a counter-balance to all those 30s GWR BLTs populated with nothing but GWR wagons, but you then have to start working through the long list of caveats...

 

Edited November 4, 2021 by Compound2632

[billbedford]

13 hours ago, jwealleans said:

What struck me was how many of the wagons are loaded above the sides with no apparent means of restraining the piled bricks in the case of a rough shunt.   The three plank fairly well up the train was a case in point - you'd be shouted down if you produced a model load like that.

 

There was also a single plank wagon with the bricks arranged in a pyramid. 

 

13 hours ago, jwealleans said:

 

The load levels are very variable as well.  How did they decide when a wagon was full: work out how many bricks they'd stacked, or just look at the springs?

 

Some of the wagons have incomplete top layers of bricks, which suggests that there was a fixed number of barrow loads per ton of wagon capacity. It would also explain why the sand wagons have bricks loaded above the sides, since they were rated at 20 tons. 

[Mikkel]

The one-planker caught my eye too:

 

[Compound2632]

@jwealleans, in @Mikkel's screen-shot, note the difference in loading between the Midland 8 ton wagon and the Great Western 10 ton (presumed) wagon. Density of Flettons, 1795 kg/m3 = 112 lb/ft3; of London Stock, 1845 kg/m3 = 115 lb/ft3. So volume of 8 tons of Flettons = 160 cu ft; volume of D299 = 294 cu ft; 54% full. The wagon looks a bit fuller than that, maybe 70%, so perhaps these are less dense bricks. Does my density figure include the frog?

 

A Great Western O4 had volume 320 cu ft, so with 10 tons of Flettons would be 67% full.

Edited November 5, 2021 by Compound2632

[Tricky]

49 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

@jwealleans, in @Mikkel's screen-shot, note the difference in loading between the Midland 8 ton wagon and the Great Western 10 ton (presumed) wagon. Density of Flettons, 1795 kg/m3 = 112 lb/ft3; of London Stock, 1845 kg/m3 = 115 lb/ft3. So volume of 8 tons of Flettons = 160 cu ft; volume of D299 = 294 cu ft; 54% full. The wagon looks a bit fuller than that, maybe 70%, so perhaps these are less dense bricks. Does my density figure include the frog?

 

A Great Western O4 had volume 320 cu ft, so with 10 tons of Flettons would be 67% full.

Mind boggling - and all before breakfast..?!

[Compound2632]

39 minutes ago, Tricky said:

Mind boggling - and all before breakfast..?!

 

While the early morning tea is mashing.

[Tricky]

19 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

While the early morning tea is mashing.

Ah I see. 

[Rail-Online]

I had assumed the bricks were heading for builders merchants to specific customer orders (1500 commons, etc). Therefore some wagons would not need to be fully loaded as the order for say, Bodgers Builders merchant of Sandy was a small order. This would explain the partial loads as not all would be loaded to wagon capacity.  

 

Municipal building of what would become Council Houses had not really started by 1921 so I doubt if theses despatches were to one large customer.

 

I, however, was surprised by the one plank but I suppose if there was either one small order or a residual from another wagons order it would be useful for this.  The loading foreman would have to work out what wagons he had for the days loading as soon as the empties arrived.

 

I also wonder if any of these wagons would normally be sheeted over (to keep the load from moving rather than dry), but as they were being filmed for publicity purposes this was dropped?

 

Tony

[jamie92208]

4 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

@jwealleans, in @Mikkel's screen-shot, note the difference in loading between the Midland 8 ton wagon and the Great Western 10 ton (presumed) wagon. Density of Flettons, 1795 kg/m3 = 112 lb/ft3; of London Stock, 1845 kg/m3 = 115 lb/ft3. So volume of 8 tons of Flettons = 160 cu ft; volume of D299 = 294 cu ft; 54% full. The wagon looks a bit fuller than that, maybe 70%, so perhaps these are less dense bricks. Does my density figure include the frog?

 

A Great Western O4 had volume 320 cu ft, so with 10 tons of Flettons would be 67% full.

I thought that an O4 was some sort of ex GC thing that boiled water on the Late and Never early.

 

Jamie

[Compound2632]

Just now, jamie92208 said:

I thought that an O4 was some sort of ex GC thing that boiled water on the Late and Never early.

 

Welcome to the alphabet soup that is the Great Western diagram books. To confuse matters further, in the Great Western goods stock diagram book, an O4 is an open wagon, in the Great Western coaching stock diagram book, it's a milk van. 

 

I believe the thing you were thinking of is more properly an 8K, at least in origin. 

[kitpw]

48 minutes ago, jamie92208 said:

Does my density figure include the frog?

...and the rainwater?  Bricks are commonly stacked in the open after firing and will have taken up - lots of variables here, type of clay, degree of firing etc - maybe up to 25% by weight.  I also wondered about sheeting in transit but since they are stored in the weather before transit, if they get wet en route, it won't make much difference to the weight of the load - storage on the building site is more important since too dry or too wet affects the performance of the structure.  Forders made fletton bricks: Phorpres ("four pressed") was their brand: I'm sure I've got a few somewhere outside weighing down mesh to keep the squirrels from excavating bulbs in the garden: maybe I should weigh one (not the squirrel, the brick).

 

Kit PW

[Compound2632]

I've had a look through the BR goods loading documents on the Barrowmore Model Railway Group's website; as far as I can see there were no specific instructions for the loading of bricks.

[Annie]

8 hours ago, Mikkel said:

The one-planker caught my eye too:

 

I do like that one planker brick load.  That would be a nice little project to make.

[Tricky]

40 minutes ago, Annie said:

I do like that one planker brick load.  That would be a nice little project to make.

If we hadn’t seen it here we would no doubt think it would look very odd as a model. 

[Compound2632]

To test the loading hypothesis, here's the calculation for those LNWR D10 20 ton wagons:

• 20 tons of Flettons at 112 lb/ft3 = 400 cu ft.
• Internal dimensions: 17'6" x 7'2" x 3'6" = 441 cu ft
• But the bricks in fact project 2 - 3 layers above the rave of these wagons, say another 6".
• Therefore the density of these bricks cannot be more than 89 lb/ft3 - only 80% of the density value I had been using.

Either that or the wagons are overloaded!