Rain, Steam and Speed - William's Workbench

[Lacathedrale]

First coats of paint going on...

http://imgur.com/gallery/WB0BdPL

[Lacathedrale]

I'm sure there's a reason for the big white line under the numbers on the Fox Transfers sheet, but I'll be buggered if I can figure out how to use it. That said, it's coming together nicely.

 

 

The paint looks a little dark because I've used a gloss varnish to apply the decals onto and take an oil wash a little later on.

[RichardBenn]

You probably don't want to hear this but the SR changed to the small style of lettering in c1936 and this is probably more appropriate to the ply SR vans as they weren't introduced until c1945. Only the even planked vans were built whilst the large lettering was current.

 

Sorry :-)

 

Richard

Edited December 17, 2018 by RichardBenn

[Lacathedrale]

Hi Richard,

 

That's a bit of a bummer, but I didn't buy this model/transfer combo specifically so it doesn't hurt too bad. The van was part of a triple pack of even, 2+1, and ply bodied wagons, and the transfers were literally the only 2mm transfers available from Fox! I've got half a dozen dodgy Peco/Grafar wagons that I'm also painting up as well just to get my eye in, so even if this little idiosyncrasy lives on - I'll survive!

[justin1985]

You probably don't want to hear this but the SR changed to the small style of lettering in c1936 and this is probably more appropriate to the ply SR vans as they weren't introduced until c1945. Only the even planked vans were built whilst the large lettering was current.

 

Sorry :-)

 

Richard

 

But the large lettering is so much more attractive!

 

The line on the Fox transfers is ostensibly to help you line up the numerals with the right alignment - supposedly easier to judge whether or not the line is in a neat line than the numbers on their own. However, I think while that might work in larger scales, its more of a pain than a help in 2mm!

 

J

[Lacathedrale]

Excellent - I'm slightly short of SR transfers (in general I think there are alot of improvements that could be made to the Fox sheet - like those lines you mention, and the dearth of usable assemblies) so one of the wagons will have to sit unmarked. A generous helping of Microsol and Microset has allowed the transfers to settle nicely into planked grooves - do I need to re-gloss them before an oil wash?

 

I'm really chuffed with my little backlog for the festive period  - hopefully I can keep improving slowly. From my original plan, I just need to decal and weather the remainder of the wagons and that's done.

 

The Jinty returns to mind as an important next step. I still don't have any 0.3mm bits (father Xmas should hopefully bring some), but I've realised I have a tiny five point broach that may suit to open up holes in the interim. Also, with this recent GW bent I've realised that the 1076 class saddle tank has roughly the same coupled dimensions and drivers as the Jinty, so may investigate my options there with regard to 3D printing, etc.

Edited December 18, 2018 by Lacathedrale

[Ian Morgan]

Personally, I would give a light spray of Testors Dulcote to protect the transfers before doing any weathering.

[Lacathedrale]

I've been reliably informed that a gloss coat is best when you're using oil/enamel washes (as I'm planning, unless someone can advise me strongly to the contrary) ? I will also be using pastels/powders but I imagine those are in an intermediate matt varnish stage later on...

[Caley Jim]

I've been reliably informed that a gloss coat is best when you're using oil/enamel washes (as I'm planning, unless someone can advise me strongly to the contrary) ? I will also be using pastels/powders but I imagine those are in an intermediate matt varnish stage later on...

As I said, I don't varnish, other than if I want a satin finish and the moisture in the atmosphere seems to be enough to 'fix' the powder colours I use for weathering.  I often breath on it!  Of course, I don't use transfers, so maybe that makes a difference.

 

Jim

[justin1985]

 Of course, I don't use transfers, so maybe that makes a difference.

 

Jim

 

You definitely want to use a varnish to seal transfers before weathering, especially if it's going to involve any kind of washes or oil based paints. But in any case I wouldn't trust the transfers own adhesive long term, so the varnish is essential to seal them on. Make sure you leave it plenty long enough for the decal to be totally dry before varnishing though!

 

I wouldn't have thought Matt, satin, or gloss would make too much difference if you're then going to weather on top, but I guess try and match to the finish on the rest of the wagon at that point.

 

J

[Lacathedrale]

Here's a weathered Peco wagon alongside it's untouched compadre - it's not perfect but I'm fairly pleased with it:

 

[justin1985]

If you're keeping the PECO chassis, there is a little trick you can do with a razor saw, aligned against the back of the W irons, to cut through the chunky brake lever mouldings etc and give it an "airyer" look without the effort of building a whole new etched chassis.

 

Filling in the gap in the bufferbeam with some plastic strip, and adding new buffers (PECO ones are very short, to suit their unsprung couplers), make a big difference too.

 

J

[Lacathedrale]

 I'm considering the peco wagons as a half dozen blood sacrifices to the getting used to 2mm modelling. Unless something piques my interest, I'm going to be leaving these wagons with the original chassis. Thank you for the tip, and illustrating it yesterday in person, my workbench is presently filled with Horn baseboards, but I will separate that into a Layout thread I think

[Lacathedrale]

I'm sure these don't look all that different from the previous picture - but they've been decalled, varnished and oil washed.

 

 

The technique is something new to me, but I'm very pleased with the results. After your stock has been painted and decalled to a 'factory fresh' look, you must cover it in gloss varnish. When the varnish has cured, you can apply a glaze of oil paint. t's important to decant the oil paint out onto some kitchen towel for the oil to be absorbed before adding it your palette - since we're using it as a wash the extreme working time that the oil carrier bestows is something of a detriment (unless you prefer waiting 3 weeks for your paint to harden).

 

I cut the black oil with some titanium white and burnt umber to bring it to a dirty dark grey, and diluted to the consistency of a glaze - though it is named as a wash it is nothing like using inks and goes on fairly opaque.  At this point everything looks ruined, but you can dry up the models very quickly with a hairdryer (it's enough that they are no longer 'wet') and then swipe away with cotton buds and tissue. If you need to get more back to the base colour you can add a little oil thinner to the bud, but be careful you don't flood the area because the paint is VERY soft. In this method, the wash should be fully hardened after a few days and can be varnished and further weathering applied.

[Lacathedrale]

Today I spent a good amount of time clearing out the workshop and rearranging things; it gave me the mental space to restart a Jinty chassis, this is how far I've gotten in an afternoon or so:

 

 

Justin1985 suggested to me about this time last year that 2FS (and finescale in general) benefits spindly edwardian locomotives with lots of air around them - and after seeing this in the flesh I cannot but resoundly agree.

 

I soldered in simpson springs as per Nick Mitchell's Jubilee build videos, but then I could not fit the blasted thing into the box jig provided on the etch. I'm sure I could have got away with using the screw-on chassis alignment jigs provided by the society but I decided to err on the side of caution and remove the springs and follow the instructions properly,

 

On his example, this too was my first time using flux paste in anger and I liked it.

 

I decided to sit the Jinty body onto the chassis just to see how it looked - and it's very much train shaped:

 

 

The instructions are a bit nebulous on what to do next - they show examples with the 3" dummy axles threaded with all muffs and gears in place to test the gears, but the muffs are a super tight fit. Am I OK to do this? I don't want to end up with a muff captive inside the chassis that I can't get out without breaking something!

 

EDIT: have a sneaking suspicion the body is on backwards in the previous photo

Edited January 1, 2019 by Lacathedrale

[Chris Higgs]

Today I spent a good amount of time clearing out the workshop and rearranging things; it gave me the mental space to restart a Jinty chassis, this is how far I've gotten in an afternoon or so:

 

 

Justin1985 suggested to me about this time last year that 2FS (and finescale in general) benefits spindly edwardian locomotives with lots of air around them - and after seeing this in the flesh I cannot but resoundly agree.

 

I soldered in simpson springs as per Nick Mitchell's Jubilee build videos, but then I could not fit the blasted thing into the box jig provided on the etch. I'm sure I could have got away with using the screw-on chassis alignment jigs provided by the society but I decided to err on the side of caution and remove the springs and follow the instructions properly,

 

On his example, this too was my first time using flux paste in anger and I liked it.

 

I decided to sit the Jinty body onto the chassis just to see how it looked - and it's very much train shaped:

 

 

The instructions are a bit nebulous on what to do next - they show examples with the 3" dummy axles threaded with all muffs and gears in place to test the gears, but the muffs are a super tight fit. Am I OK to do this? I don't want to end up with a muff captive inside the chassis that I can't get out without breaking something!

 

EDIT: have a sneaking suspicion the body is on backwards in the previous photo

 

Looks the right way round to me.

 

You need to shorten the muffs to fit easily between the bearings. You cannot use muffs with the dummy axles to test the gears and then use them again for the wheels, they will almost certainly be too loose. I have a special set of muffs for testing the gears which are the ones you will have seen in the instruction photos.

 

The instructions become 'nebulous' once you reach the part where it is back to generic stuff about building 2mm chassis, and where there are a number of different techniques used, for example muffs gripping the wheels tightly or looser and then then gluing the wheels in. Or indeed SImpon springs or not.

 

Nigel, Nick and others are better at loco construction than me and can add advice. Just don't expect it to always be the same advice. :-)

 

Chris

Edited January 1, 2019 by Chris Higgs

[Lacathedrale]

Thanks Chris, that does clear it up - I do appreciate the instructions are meant to cover a lot of eventualities, this comes primarily from my inability to fill in the spaces with experience.

 

I gather I would use simpson springs if I was intending to open out the bushes to 1.6 for a bit of sprung compensation, as opposed to an explicit requirement?

 

I gather the next step is to establish that, and then clean up and fit the gears to the muffs either way. Is the assumption that I test fit the worm gear now, but then it gets removed and stays out of the picture until near the end of the process where I fit the motor?

[Chris Higgs]

Thanks Chris, that does clear it up - I do appreciate the instructions are meant to cover a lot of eventualities, this comes primarily from my inability to fill in the spaces with experience.

 

I gather I would use simpson springs if I was intending to open out the bushes to 1.6 for a bit of sprung compensation, as opposed to an explicit requirement?

 

I gather the next step is to establish that, and then clean up and fit the gears to the muffs either way. Is the assumption that I test fit the worm gear now, but then it gets removed and stays out of the picture until near the end of the process where I fit the motor?

 

Ask Mr Simpson about the 'springs' - some people just think they are really pickups as if it really is a form of springing, it is a mighty unscientific one.

 

There is an awful lot of information on here scattered across threads about how to build these chassis. My latest chassis don't have the cantilever gearbox incorporated any more as a lot of people prefer to adjust the worm by having it mounted on the motor and using a form of motor support cradle to adjust the mesh. If you retain the gearbox then you can just leave the bearing in at the end away from the motor, and adjust the mesh by moving the motor up and down, or you can leave both bearings in and use a dog clutch to attach worm to motor. Or probably other ways.

 

Chris

[Lacathedrale]

I didn't realise they were mainly for pickups - that has eased my mind somewhat that my springs are a bit dodgy.

 

I'm really cross with myself, as though I did get the muffs cut down, the gears fettled and attached, worm trimmed. - I bent the chassis while trying to insert the motor shaft into the worm inside the gearbox. It seems to have un-bent OK and all the axles turn freely, but what a confidence hit. I've tried to get started using the association quartering jig but clearly I must be doing something wrong, as the pins used to attach the plates appear to be too big to fit into the jig's holes? This part (that is, extreme tough pushing/pulling and squeezing of a chassis made of very thin etched brass) just feels very wrong. Overall, not a great evening if I'm honest.

[Caley Jim]

I've never used the quartering jig, so can't comment.

 

My method is to set the driven axle to roughly 90° and then adjust the others to match.  I outlined it in an article in the Magazine on quartering, December 2006 p115.

 

Jim

[Chris Higgs]

I've never used the quartering jig, so can't comment.

 

My method is to set the driven axle to roughly 90° and then adjust the others to match.  I outlined it in an article in the Magazine on quartering, December 2006 p115.

 

Jim

 

I think the question is not whether you use the jig or not, but rather whether the muffs are tight or loose. Obviously if tight you have to press hard to move the wheels home. And adjusting the angle of quartering once they are in is perhaps asking for trouble in terms of potentially twisting the frames in that case.

 

Using the jig means the pressure is applied firm and square to the ends of the wheels and in theory all the wheels will then be quartered meaning no adjustment is then needed. There should be no pressure or twisting being applied to the loco frames which are hanging between wheels and muff if you are doing it right.

 

Similarly for the shaft that goes through the gearbox on which the worm mounts. No twisting must be applied to the gearbox at this point and holding the gearbox in a vice rather than in your hands would seem like a good idea. If in doubt, make the worm looser on the shaft and glue it in position.

 

Chris

Edited January 7, 2019 by Chris Higgs

[Izzy]

 

I am afraid I just don’t have the skills or confidence to build a fixed wheels & axles chassis like this. It is because of these aspects that I don’t feel comfortable coping with that I modify/make my chassis with drop out wheels/axles - just like the current Farish offerings really - so the wheels can be assembled/quartered before fitting, (all just done by hand/eye), and then the gearing and motor fitted as other sub-assemblies, so in individual stages where mucking up/not getting one quite right doesn’t wreck the others.

 

Izzy

[Chris Higgs]

I didn't realise they were mainly for pickups - that has eased my mind somewhat that my springs are a bit dodgy.

 

I'm really cross with myself, as though I did get the muffs cut down, the gears fettled and attached, worm trimmed. - I bent the chassis while trying to insert the motor shaft into the worm inside the gearbox. It seems to have un-bent OK and all the axles turn freely, but what a confidence hit. I've tried to get started using the association quartering jig but clearly I must be doing something wrong, as the pins used to attach the plates appear to be too big to fit into the jig's holes? This part (that is, extreme tough pushing/pulling and squeezing of a chassis made of very thin etched brass) just feels very wrong. Overall, not a great evening if I'm honest.

 

Are the pins attached to the plates, or the jig? And what diameter are they?

 

Although I designed the plates that go with the jig, I was never supplied with pins and just used some 1mm brass rod. Obviously either the pins are in the jig and the plates should be a sliding fit, or the other way around the pins should be soldered into the plates and a sliding fit  in the jig. And the pins must be parallel with each other otherwise they will never fit.

 

Chris

[Lacathedrale]

Hi all, thank you for the replies - I am happy to try both methods, but as this was my first chassis I thought it was important to give myself all the chances of success and remove as much fuzziness (such as adjusting by eye and feel) at first.  In retrospect however, using superglue to fix the worm to the motor shaft would appear be a bit of a no-brainer given that I had otherwise no idea about how to insert it. Luckily, the frames were teased back into square so I think that bullet has been dodged. The state of play now is that the motor shaft has a very tight fit onto the adapter tube, which is a tight fit onto the worm gear. The motor-side bearing is gone (as mentioned, it popped out!), but the motor is aligned into the correct position to mesh with the helical (spiral?) cut gear on the idler.  With a 1.4mm drillbit as an idler axle and the two gears on the muff, I can rotate the motor shaft and get a smooth movement which doesn't bind.

 

My next step will be to fit the idler gear in with a pair of corresponding half axles. I was planning on doing this by using the frame spacers from the quartering jig on the inside to maintain a little clearance, and then squeeze them from either side using a vice. I have already drilled airholes.

 

For the jig itself, in the package I recieved I have the jig, a pair of corresponding plates for the wheels I'm using, and eight steel pins with pinpoints on both ends. The pins do not fit into the holes in jig at all, and attempting to close the jig with the pins causes them to jam in place. I can certainly look to replace with brass rod. I'm at work at the moment, so will have to report back tonight.

 

Thank you all for help and comments, what a nice bunch

[MinerChris]

Are the pins attached to the plates, or the jig? And what diameter are they?

 

Although I designed the plates that go with the jig, I was never supplied with pins and just used some 1mm brass rod. Obviously either the pins are in the jig and the plates should be a sliding fit, or the other way around the pins should be soldered into the plates and a sliding fit  in the jig. And the pins must be parallel with each other otherwise they will never fit.

 

Chris

 

I think that the under etched plates are fine, I'll normally ream them ever so slightly to take the cusps off the inside of the holes, so that they are still a reasonably tight fit on the pins, to ensure as much accuracy in the jig as is practical. Once the plates are on the jig, I'd also recommend to solder them together to strengthen the set and to stop the different sets from getting mixed up with each other.

 

Even doing this, I've found that the jig isn't 100% reliable at quartering every time, you'll have to put the coupling rods on and look and feel for the bind to tell which one of the wheels is out. Usually there is enough give in the muff to twist the wheels ever so slightly to get the quartering spot on. Hope this Helps.

 

Chris.