Boulton's Number 11

[bertiedog]

Things are not exactly going to plan with this.

 

I decided to scale the drawing to 4mm so I could measure up the saddletank and to make sure that I had got the finished size of the drawing right I put some of the castings in the scanner and scanned them to the same dpi as I did the drawing.

 

The length and height of the frames match but the axle spacings don't. Another problem is the smokebox/cylinder casting. As you can see it is of a greater overall depth than that on the drawing, which means the boiler will end up being higher and the gap between the rail tops and cylinder block will be smaller.

 

problems.jpg

 

I don't know if the drawing is wrong, the castings are wrong, or even if the original locomotive prototype was different to the prototype that the castings are intended to build up into, so I can't decide whether to just go with the castings as they are, or to have to do a lot more scratchbuilding than I expected.

The width of the front plate across the cylinders is the factor with the castings it must be under the back to back, and I would assume the castings were for 00 gauge.if the cylinders do fit the back to back, then the drawing may be wrongly scaled.

The. proportions of the casting look about right if the BB fits. They could have allowed more for 18/P4 of course, but, but I would take the front as correct, although it could be lowered a bit by removal above the cylinder end plates and the smoke box

 

Stephen.

[Ruston]

The width of the front plate across the cylinders is the factor with the castings it must be under the back to back, and I would assume the castings were for 00 gauge.if the cylinders do fit the back to back, then the drawing may be wrongly scaled.

The. proportions of the casting look about right if the BB fits. They could have allowed more for 18/P4 of course, but, but I would take the front as correct, although it could be lowered a bit by removal above the cylinder end plates and the smoke box

 

Stephen.

This project is dead, bereft of life, it rests in peace - it has run down the curtain and joined the choir invisible - it is a dead project!

 

I have measured the width of the cylinder block casting and it is 16.45mm. As the drawing shows the leading wheels being so far forward that they are either side of the cylinders then it means that I can't use it as I am doing OO. In fact I'm not sure that I can't build this at all now. I could make my own, narrower, cylinder block to give clearance for the back to back of the wheels but it's all going to look very odd. I suppose it all depends on how much of the cylinder block can be seen from the front and how much it will show that the smokebox is as wide as the gauge and actually has the wheels inside/under it. There's also no room for the inside set of frames.

 

I now think that the drawing in the book is simplified. Going from the known dimension of the driving wheel diameter,  I have scaled the drawing of the Sharp Roberts 0-4-2 that is also in the book and that loco is said to have had the same 14x20" cylinders as No.11 but compare the two cylinder blocks below...

 

[Killian keane]

That really is a pity, I was looking forward to seeing that get built (might go so far as to attempt her myself some day), but on the bright side, you still have the castings so you could build it up as intended or even build Trent if you're willing to make new frames for the 0-4-2

Edited November 27, 2017 by Killian keane

[burgundy]

This project is dead, bereft of life, it rests in peace - it has run down the curtain and joined the choir invisible - it is a dead project!

 

I have measured the width of the cylinder block casting and it is 16.45mm. As the drawing shows the leading wheels being so far forward that they are either side of the cylinders then it means that I can't use it as I am doing OO. In fact I'm not sure that I can't build this at all now. I could make my own, narrower, cylinder block to give clearance for the back to back of the wheels but it's all going to look very odd. I suppose it all depends on how much of the cylinder block can be seen from the front and how much it will show that the smokebox is as wide as the gauge and actually has the wheels inside/under it. There's also no room for the inside set of frames.

 

 

Before you give up on this one completely, I attach a couple of photos (sorry about the Hogwarts livery) to show how the front end looks and how much of the cylinders you can actually see in EM gauge. Not a lot - although, on yours, they would sit a bit lower with the smaller wheels fitted by Mr Bolton.

My own variation on a Sharpie does not pretend to be an exact model. I simply took the 5&9 castings and added a bunker. I believe that the prototype data from which Chris worked was actually a South Eastern loco. At that time, Sharps was one of the preferred loco builders who delivered robust, serviceable locos (not a claim that all manufacturers could make). Over the 1840s, their standard design progressively evolved and enlarged so that all had a strong family resemblance - although possibly no two were exactly alike; certainly those belonging to the Brighton came in several slightly different sizes. Several ended up as tank engines and, as far as I can tell from the data available, one conversion was of a loco that was approximately the same size as the 5&9 model.

Since you will never have exact data of a loco like this (and others have pointed out the limitations of drawings of this period), I would be inclined to leave the ideas to percolate for a while and come back to it later.

Best wishes

Eric   

[Ruston]

Thanks, Eric.

 

I have been in the shed, this evening, and have made a start. I was going to build it up even if to have it in use only as a stationary boiler to provide steam to a workshop but the more I faffed about with it, the more I looked at how to make it go together to work.

 

So far I have filed down the cylinder block so there is nothing left but the front panel. This is to allow the leading wheels to fit and I will make the working frame butt up against the front. Hopefully the change in width won't be too noticeable once the working frames and the cylinder block are painted black. I have chopped the splashers off and have decided to replace the cast boiler barrel with brass tube. I'm hoping that this will allow the motor to fit inside the boiler, which cannot happen with the cast boiler as the walls are too thick.

 

Photos tomorrow.

[Ruston]

I have the smokebox/cylinder block soldered to the frames and the footplate also soldered in and the piece of tube is a push fit inside the firebox, which is not yet fixed down.

 

 

I have found a suitable gearbox in my scrap pile and the current plan is to fit it so the motor is vertical, through holes made in the boiler. The saddletank should be able to hide the part of the motor that stands out above the boiler.

 

I'm considering how to make the inner frames, which isn't going to be as straightforward as something with wheels that are all of the same size, which is what I am used to with my experience of building industrial 4 and 6-wheeled tank engines and diesels.

 

When I work that bit out, the plan is to have pickup on all 6 wheels with the front axle rocking on a knife edge, the centre (driven) axle fixed and the rear axle just going along for the ride and being able to move up and down freely with light springing provided by springy pickups bearing on the wheel treads.

[ianmaccormac]

I have been trying to find a contact in Switzerland who was working on Sharps about a dozen years ago. I copied some of the drawings from his blog and apologise if these are copyrighted at all. I have a vague memory of something about the drawings being in metric measurement. They show the inner frame being very wasted to the rear of the cylinders and butting up to the firebox which seems to have been a structural part. The front and rear carrying wheels do indeed appear to just be fixed in place by the outside frames and only the driving wheels were supported by the inside frames.

I will be trying to draw some chassis parts for Chris of 5&9Models over the coming months.

Cheers

Ian in Blackpool

Edited November 29, 2017 by ianmaccormac

[ianmaccormac]

And then I found the other drawing I was looking for!

I photographed this at the NRM several years ago. It is a Sharp from 1852 with 14 x 20 cylinders so should help.

Cheers

Ian in Blackpool

[Ruston]

I have drawn up this to use as a template for the frames of the working chassis. It is cut short at one end as the width of the cylinder block is greater than that of the chassis and is angled to avoid the blobs of solder on the inside of the cylinder block, where it has been soldered to the outside frames. The cross members of this working chassis will also serve to screw the bodywork to it and at the front end the knife edge will be substituted for a screw. The screw will also serve as a ride height adjuster/leveller.

Now to turn it into metal...

Edited December 5, 2017 by Ruston

[ianmaccormac]

Just need to tab everything but this is the first go at the loco and tender for Chris at 5&9. It may help a bit with sorting out frames etc.

HTH
​Cheers

Ian

Edited December 6, 2017 by ianmaccormac

[burgundy]

 

Just need to tab everything but this is the first go at the loco and tender for Chris at 5&9. It may help a bit with sorting out frames etc.

HTH

​Cheers

Ian

Ian 

Before you hit the send button to get this etched, had you thought about pivoting the balance beams off centre? If there is a bias towards the driving axle, this should transfer more of the weight of the body onto the driving axle than onto the trailing axle (where it will do nothing for the adhesion).

Best wishes

Eric  

[ianmaccormac]

Hi Eric

This is for a tender driven loco so I thought it wouldn't make any difference??

Cheers

Ian

[Ruston]

I didn't take any photos of my pattern-making but here are the parts, fresh off the profile miller. They need the burrs knocking off on an oilstone and holes opening out as required.

I have notched the front bufferbeam, thinking that in the absence of photograpic evidence to the contrary, this may have been necessary to allow clearance for the smokebox door flap with the deeper bufferbeams that were fitted during the rebuild to saddletank form. I have put additional holes in the bufferbeams for the safety chains - does anyone know where I can get some suitable etched hooks for these?

 

The tank shape is presumed from the sketched lines on the drawing and the text in the book saying that it was understood to have been  improvised in a great hurry and how "it rather looks as of practical Mr. Boulton had remorselesly confiscated the domestic cistern in his anxiety to fulfill the order".

[wagonman]

 

 

I have put additional holes in the bufferbeams for the safety chains - does anyone know where I can get some suitable etched hooks for these?

 

 

 

I think Ambis does some...

[Ruston]

A layer of 5 thou. shim is needed to cover the tank. I'm not sure if I'll punch rivets into that, or if I'll use Archers rivet decals. The motor in there is an old dead Mashima 10/20 that I am using to fit it all up. If I use a 10/15 there will be barely any of it in the tank space - space that can be used to get lead sheet in.

Edited December 8, 2017 by Ruston

[Ruston]

It's looking more like a locomotive now.

[ian@stenochs]

It's looking more like a locomotive now.

11-002.jpg

Looking very good but one wonders what use the spectacle plate will be behind that massive, relative term, saddle tank! I have a lot of respect for the footplate crews of old who must have been hardy men to withstand the weather. No wonder lives were short for the majority.

 

Ian.

[Compound2632]

Looking very good but one wonders what use the spectacle plate will be behind that massive, relative term, saddle tank! I have a lot of respect for the footplate crews of old who must have been hardy men to withstand the weather. No wonder lives were short for the majority.

 

Ian.

 

I've no doubt it would make all the difference when running backwards...

[Ruston]

I have been fitting the motor and looking at how and where to fit pickups. As it stands, the leading axle can rock on the end of a screw, the driving axle is rigid in the frames and the rear axle is free to move up and down in the hornguides.

 

The plan is to use the pickups on the rear wheels as springs; not to take weight but simply to lightly press on the wheels to keep them in contact with the rails. I have no experience of building engines with wheels that are not driven, so the question is will the pressure of the pickups stop the wheels from turning as there is no weight on them at all?

[ian@stenochs]

I have been fitting the motor and looking at how and where to fit pickups. As it stands, the leading axle can rock on the end of a screw, the driving axle is rigid in the frames and the rear axle is free to move up and down in the hornguides.

 

The plan is to use the pickups on the rear wheels as springs; not to take weight but simply to lightly press on the wheels to keep them in contact with the rails. I have no experience of building engines with wheels that are not driven, so the question is will the pressure of the pickups stop the wheels from turning as there is no weight on them at all?

Getting single driver locos to pull anything much is tricky and balance is all important but any weight carried on the carrying wheels is not aiding adhesion.

 

I built a single wheeler, 4-2-2, with a trailing wheel which carries no weight but had pickups bearing on the tread to do as you intend. Even with the pressure reduced as much as I could the wheels did not rotate reliably which looked really bad. The solution I came up with was split axles and pickup through the axleboxes. Now just the weight of the wheels is enough to keep them turning and picking up current.

 

My example is in 7 mm scale and I used the Slaters insulated axleboxes. I don’t know if a similar product is available in 4 mm but you could fabricate an insulated box using brass tube and bit of square plastic ‘Plastruct’ tube,

 

Ian

[Caley Jim]

Split axle is standard practice in 2FS. As a result it's possible to pick up on all wheels, including bogie and tender wheels, no matter how little weight they are carrying, resulting in much more reliable current collection.

 

Jim

[Ruston]

Thanks, chaps. I think it's too late now to be rebuilding the chassis so I'll have it pickiing up on just 4 wheels. Everything else that I have built in OO has only 4 wheels anyway and they run well enough.

 

 

Looking very good but one wonders what use the spectacle plate will be behind that massive, relative term, saddle tank! I have a lot of respect for the footplate crews of old who must have been hardy men to withstand the weather. No wonder lives were short for the majority.

Ian.

This extract from The Chronicles,where the author quotes an extract from Mr. Boulton's diary shows how hardy they must have been.

 

"13th June, 1860. Engineman John Thomas, MS&LR, Gorton, left Manchester at 7.50am to Lincoln with a passenger special; then to Retford empty; then to Barnsley with a goods; to Lincoln empty; to Manchester with twenty-two coaches. Arrived 11.0 pm; finished Gorton at 12.0 midnight. Went out again at 3.45am on the 14th"

 

If he started from Manchester at 7.50, what time would he have got up on the 13th to be able to have breakfast, walk to work then get his engine ready and drive from Gorton to Manchester? Ridiculously dangerous hours to work, but imagine doing that on an open footplate in winter...

 

[Ruston]

I have slapped some paint on it, this evening.

It's not looking too bad but the running is unacceptable and I can't work out what is causing the problem.

I put it on rollers to check if it would run at all and to check the pickups. On rollers it runs sweetly and by lifting each end off the rollers I proved that it is picking up on both sets of pickups. One of the driving wheels does have a bit of a wobble on it though.

 

When put on my White Peak Limestone layout, to see how it would run through points, it will run through them with no problem as far as electrical pickup is concerned but the bigger problem is that it keeps slipping on track that isn't perfect as the end axles end up taking all the weight. It also tends to derail on facing points when running in reverse on the turnout..

 

I am going to take the rear axle out and file the hornguides to a greater depth to give more movement. I will also try some springing of the rear axle to try and stop it wandering through facing points. This will take a small amount of weight away from the driven axle but the thing weighs 190 grammes, so there ought to be plenty left. It is only ever going to be required to pull a couple of 4-wheel coaches, or no more than 5 goods wagons, or contractors side-tipping wagons, after all.

 

[Northroader]

I’ve made a couple of 2-2-2Ts, but in O guage. I make them with leading and driving axle installed in the frames as rigid unit and the trailing axle floating, with no pickup. Once assembled, I place the loco symmetrically on a short piece of smooth wood strip, put on top of a pencil transversely placed under the strip, then move the lot backwards / forwards over the pencil until it rocks, which will show me where the centre of gravity is. Then I can add extra ballast, plenty of it, until the c.o.g. is just in front of the drivers. You’ll find that the pull of the drawbar gives quite a lot of weight transference. As described, with the chimney leading it can pull about 15% more than if the bunker leads, but it will also push more chimney leading than it can pull. Once you’ve sorted the weight distribution out, I’m sure you’ll be quite satisfied with the performance. If not, possibly regearing with a higher ratio could be done. I think it’s making a really pretty loco.

P.s. there is light springing on the rear axle.

Edited December 12, 2017 by Northroader

[Northroader]

Following on from last nights post, here’s the two engines in question, with another one on the go, currently waiting for me to pull my finger out and roll the boiler. I feel this type of loco has some real “character”, and very fond of them.

I’m also putting in a sketch of the arrangement for building one, I published this in the GOG Gazette six years ago, and I think it’s worth pointing out that there’s no compensation on the axles, and with the latest one the trailing pony truck has weight added rather than being sprung.