Paul_sterling Posted January 26, 2021 Share Posted January 26, 2021 (Posted originally on the LNER.info Forum) The Lambton Trust, and the NYMR have made a start on the strip down of R.Stephensons' No.5 in the NELPG Deviation shed. The locomotive is at the very least cosmetically, in poor condition, and will need quite a bit of work to return to steam, and with work, also time, the NYMR is an incredibly efficient Motive Power Depot these days, but also incredibly busy, and with 44806 likely getting a partial jump up the ladder, work on No.5 could potentially be quite steady. No.5 last run in the early 1990's, so I cannot remember seeing it run, being born in '87, I've been visiting the NYMR all of my Life, but early memories of particular engines don't stand out (perhaps beyond No.60007, 3672, or 34101, but even those were by mid 1990s anyway. With this in mind, I needed to get the dimensions and pictures of the engine as quick as possible, so last Wednesday I took a trip up to Grosmont to do just that. Happily, with the salient parts of the engine still intact, I've actually ended up with a better, more complete set of drawings for No.5 than I did for No.29. the shape is slightly less difficult to conceptualise, as No.5 doesn't have the Lambton Cab of No.29, which features a compound curve that is a nightmare to dimension. No.5 has simple reference points to work out the radius of the cab roof, and that is about it! Even better, via the Rhomney Railway Class R/Class M, No. 5 is an ancestor of the GWR 56XX, so much to my delight, the wheelbase, both coupled and trailing, are identical to the 56XX, with the minor exception of the 56xx having 1.5" dia bigger wheels. The downside of this is that I cannot just update the planar references on the CAD of No.29 to save time in creating No.5, I'll have to start from scratch, but thus far I've created all of the reference planes I measures (such as axle centre-lines, boiler CTR, smokebox front etc etc.) in readiness for receiving a Bachmann 56XX, from which I'll create the underside pocket. Though I've never had the same affection for No.5 as I have for No.29, I am very much looking forward to this project, but do intend to finish the other two off first! Paul. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul_sterling Posted January 26, 2021 Author Share Posted January 26, 2021 (Posted originally on the LNER.info Forum) I purchased a Bachmann 56XX, DCC ready loco. I thought about just buying a chassis, which was slightly cheaper (only slightly), but ultimately decided to get the whole loco, as that would give a valuable reference to the internal body profile and where it integrates with the chassis. I had wondered how Bachmann had approached the issue of the fixing of the trailing truck. On No.29 I used two arcs on the loco to allow the truck to rotate about the rear axle, without having a linked connection to it. Bachmann have used a cylindrical mount to provide rotation, and a narrow chassis with lots of sideplay to provide the variance factor. It works well, but means the chassis is seriously skinny at this point, no great problem for my project, as much of this is hidden behind the footsteps into the cab. A more significant challenge is the chassis itself. In this case, Bachmann have made the chassis U shaped so that the side tanks are weights, which is fine, but they extend 10mm further forward on the 56XX than the side tanks of No.5 do, so some machining required. The false underside of the boiler/smokebox that is used for housing the DCC socket will also have to be factored in, so unlike No.29, where I turned the chassis around and had the socket in the firebox, No.5 will have a pocketed front on the boiler, right into the smokebox, with care in the CAD design, this shouldn't be visible. Thanks, Paul. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul_sterling Posted January 26, 2021 Author Share Posted January 26, 2021 Work continues on No.5 After a break in the summer, working on other projects, I've been able to get back on with No.5, and the main thing has been establishing overlaps between the current donor chassis, and the proposed model. View 1 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr In this pic, I've modelled the front cut outs of the chassis block, which is nominally 5mm inboard, and 4mm back on the U shaped casting of the 56xx chassis block. this will allow the tanks to be modelled dimensionally the same as No.5 really is, so no forward extensions of the tanks. It would be better if a full 4mm slice was removed from the U of the block, so that there is daylight under the boiler, as No.5 has. View 3 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr View 2 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr This is how she's looking at present, she's a lovely loco to CAD up, much easier than No.29 was, though I do have a better set of drawings for No.5, and with better knowledge of DLP printing now (as well as another printing experiment with the Q1) I can print complete locos in one go satisfactorily, so stronger, combined structures, and better options on detailing, not to mention, leaner, thinner structures. I'm using a less time consuming method this time, of CAD'ding just one side, and mirroring it, asymmetrical details added last. All of the Stephenson 0-6-2's at Lambton, at one point or another seem to have sported small boxes on the running plate behind the tanks/to the sides of the cabs, sometimes, on one side, or the other, or both. These little boxes will help with packaging the rear of the chassis, as well as giving a secure support point to sit the shell on the chassis, but there is always a risk of criticism, as No.5 doesn't have these at present. So the alternative is to also cut this area of the chassis, have the boxes excluded, and then add them if needed. I won't deny, I had never been a huge fan of No.5, not compared to No.29 at least, it doesn't have the iconic hooter, is a more austere looking engine, and hasn't really run in my lifetime, or not in my memory anyway, so I don't have the same affinity with it, but the more I work on this project, the more I'm warming to it, especially as I'm hoping that any subsequent kit sales, will go towards financial support for the LLT in bringing her back to steam. Thanks, Paul. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul_sterling Posted January 26, 2021 Author Share Posted January 26, 2021 IMG_3537[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr Front sand boxes and splashers are now flanged. they are modelled about as thin as I can get away with printing, 0.5mm, they're quite a tight fit in full size nevermind OO. IMG_3536[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr Next is the internal structure of the tanks. retaining a good quantity of the Bachmann chassis block will eliminate the need for me to ballast the tanks like I had to on No.29, but it does mean they will benefit from additional bracing, important to reduce the amount of external support structure required on the printer. The ribs are a 0.1mm clearance from the chassis block, so will contribute towards good alignment and support of the body when assembled. Paul. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul_sterling Posted January 26, 2021 Author Share Posted January 26, 2021 Capture 20201110 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr Smokebox door has been modelled, I've laid the picture besides a shot of No.5 in Pickering, I will attribute this right hand picture to its owner, once I find out who it is. Chassis mods Chassis mods has been a significant part of this project. Obviously I avoid modifying things where I can, but in the case of No.5, an awful lot of the features would have disrupted the accuracy of the locomotive. To do this work, I removed the wheelsets, with care. I covered the motor and gearbox with gaffer tape, and regularly blew them out with compressed air, nothing appears to have got into the motor/gearbox, but others would have probably removed them to do this work, I didn't as I did not know how to without damaging anything. All cuts were made with a junior hacksaw and second file. IMG_3605 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr The rear of the side tank upright weight has been brought forward 2mm, the rear footplate/backhead section, has been cut inwards towards the centre of the chassis by 3.6mm. IMG_3607 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr IMG_3606 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr The top surface of the side tank weights has been reduced by 1mm. The front is where the heaviest modifications has been made, and largely the most cruical to the project IMG_3609 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr The side tanks were brought backwards by 5mm, and the boiler undersection, was narrowed to 12mm. IMG_3761 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr Front sandboxes but off, but brake equipment left on (needs a bit of care in this area to avoid chopping both off). IMG_3762 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr and 1.8mm off the front end of the plastic section of the chassis. Thanks, Paul 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul_sterling Posted January 26, 2021 Author Share Posted January 26, 2021 (edited) With the chassis done, I was able to make a first off mule test print to see how the CAD matched up in reality. THis is just an FDM "Mule" print for fit trial. IMG_3764 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr First fit wasn't brilliant, (I don't go in expecting them to be) there was significant clashes at the front end, but these could be amended with a small file, and the changes noted to amend the CAD. A lot of the issues stemmed from how I was measuring the Bachmann chassis, and any errors I had introduced there, now happily dialled out. IMG_3766 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr Later prints will be in resin, so surface finish and detail will be improved. IMG_3767 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr IMG_3770 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr I couldn't resist giving it a whisp over with black paint, even if it does show up the crudeness of the surface finish. IMG_3774 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr LOL! This is the pic I've been waiting for, just under two years this Lambton project has been going for, and I have finally been able to picture 29 and 5 together. IMG_3775 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr IMG_3776 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr Edited January 26, 2021 by Paul_sterling 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul_sterling Posted January 26, 2021 Author Share Posted January 26, 2021 After the trial FDM print, I was able to resolve some minor tight spots on the shell, and produce a couple of resin prints. This is the first loco I've designed for printing in one homogeneous build, though the Q1 now successfully prints in one piece in resin as well. The first two prints were comparative trials to see what slice height i would use, 0.02 or 0.03, both printed well, but whilst 0.03 was a 27 hour print, 0.02 was 47, for not a lot of real gain. Both were angled at 50 degrees to fit on the build plate, the loco is too long to fit on the Photon S flat, and curved surfaces print better at an angle anyway. Happy with the prints, I made some revisions to the cab roof (better internal ribs, and slightly thicker roof plate. I've since been concentrating on the detail features, though some of these will probably be somewhat diminished by the time prints are finished. 20201207 build pic 3 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr The features below the running plate are my own design of sacrificial frame, so that the full length of the running plate it supported by very strong build supports, and then just cut away with a scalpel, this removes a key issue that has been a blight on resin prints (for me), which is sagged or not straight running plates, and why I persisted with printing No.29 with FDM running plates. I now use this feature on almost all of the "start points" for the builds, so that these edges are crisp and straight. 20201207 build pic 3 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr Same shot, without the frame 20201207 build pic 4 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr The footplates on the rear of the tank are heavier than the originals (which would be around 0.175mm thick and very borderline for printing). 20201207 build pic 5 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr 20201207 build pic 6 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr No.5 has an LMS Vacuum Ejector fitted, pretty much since the beginning of its preservation life, I could not quite replicate the tapering outlet to the flange, but it is reasonably representative. Anyone who does an NCB/LHJC version, or even 42/10, probably won't need this feature much! Inside motion by Paul Sterling, on Flickr The 56XX donor chassis has a large flat area below the boiler, these days Bachmann would probably fill it with inside motion, so I've made up a small card with some crude Stephenson link motion parts visible. 20201207 build pic with inside motion by Paul Sterling, on Flickr Not likely to really show that well with No.5's lubricators blocking the view, but during most of her working day, she only had one on the right hand side, and 10 used a twin set up on the left, 57 was largely the same as 5, 42 had one on each side. No.5 got the same set up as 42 during the NCB era. Paul. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul_sterling Posted January 26, 2021 Author Share Posted January 26, 2021 I've also made the CAD modify-able, to allow me to print the other members of the class, 10, 42 and 57, as well as No.5 "as built", 5 and 10 were supplied together in 1909, 42 followed in 1920, and 57 arrived in 1934, under the guise of Hawthorn Leslie, indicative of the merger of RS and HL, which did not officially take place till 1937, but I believe was largely in place when 57 was built in Newcastle, rather than Darlington. They had loads of modifications during their Lambton time, particularly the bunker raves, as they all started with a fenced/coal rail, and a curved/flare to the rear of the bunker, but No.5 ended up with solid raves, and no rear flare on the bunker. Lubricators, no two of them were the same really. 5 started with one on the RHS splasher, and finished with one on each side, 42 had a Siamese twin set of lubricators on the left, 10 had a similar setup to 42 for a period (the end of its career '62-69), and 57, the camera-shy one, was similar to No.5, at some points. Their works plates were either on the front Left splasher, or front left side of the cab, cabside tool boxes (or are they sand boxes) were changed at various points, sometimes they had one on each side, sometimes one on a side, they were different sizes from side to side etc. Cab steps were changed as well, 5 has a wide flare on the rear steps, by largely parallel on the front, 10 and 42 had the same as 5, but 57 had parallel steps with a small flare at the bottom, front and rear, and its steps were in a slightly more sensible position than the other 3, the front steps allowing the crew to climb onto the running plate, whereas 5, 10, 42 all has their steps "half and half", half on the running plate, and half beside the tanks! Safety valves changed across each engines life too, short and tall ross-pops, a very tall type which I'm not familair with. Whistles even more so, 5 has sported a similar hooter to 29, in both vertical and horizontal cab-top position, as well as a complicated firebox top arrangement that would make a brass band proud. Paul. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul_sterling Posted January 26, 2021 Author Share Posted January 26, 2021 A few more pics of the resin printed shell(s). IMG_3828 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr IMG_4073 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr IMG_4094 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr IMG_4096 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr The green one isn't a real Lambton, its an 0-6-0 version of 29, I produced. IMG_4112 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr IMG_4114 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr IMG_4115 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr IMG_3818 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr IMG_3819 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr Paul. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hodgson Posted January 26, 2021 Share Posted January 26, 2021 Only right & proper that it has a worm drive ..... Whisht! lads, haad yor gobs, An' aa'll tell yers aall an aaful story, Whisht! lads, haad yor gobs, An' Aa'll tel yer 'boot the worm. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon A Posted January 26, 2021 Share Posted January 26, 2021 Are you going to print the front lower part of the boiler? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul_sterling Posted January 26, 2021 Author Share Posted January 26, 2021 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Gordon A said: Are you going to print the front lower part of the boiler? No need, the 56xx has it as part of it, and they match up quite well. Post six shows the shell and 56xx chassis side on, and once both are the same colour, its a good match, even the boiler bands are pretty good. Shy of cutting that part of the shell out and making the motion insert include more of the boiler, its as good as the manufacturers do. Paul. Edited January 26, 2021 by Paul_sterling Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon A Posted January 26, 2021 Share Posted January 26, 2021 Hi Paul, I was thinking of those of us who may be interested in putting an etched chassis under your body, assuming you would be happy to sell some of the bodies. Gordon 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul_sterling Posted January 26, 2021 Author Share Posted January 26, 2021 (edited) 22 minutes ago, Gordon A said: Hi Paul, I was thinking of those of us who may be interested in putting an etched chassis under your body, assuming you would be happy to sell some of the bodies. Gordon Hi Gordon, i havent produced cad for the underside, so that would have to be done for that to work, with SLA/DLP printing being what it is, the support structure for the print is done manually, so minor cad changes (it would just be removal of a pocket to make the boiler “whole” is upset by needing to completely Redo the supports for printing. Re selling, Ive actually just put out some feelers on Facebook for people to place orders, as I’m donating a portion of the income to the LLT to support No.5’s restoration. Surprisingly Got a few orders in already. Thanks. Paul Edited January 26, 2021 by Paul_sterling 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sludger Posted February 18, 2021 Share Posted February 18, 2021 Hi Paul, i would be interested in buying a couple of prints from you. I do not do Facebook hence this message. Tremendous idea to support the restoration too. Regards, Trev. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold phil_sutters Posted February 18, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 18, 2021 (edited) Although I am sure you have as many photos of No.5 as you need, here are two more, with best wishes for your build. Edited June 8, 2023 by phil_sutters Replacement of lost photos. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul_sterling Posted February 18, 2021 Author Share Posted February 18, 2021 2 hours ago, Sludger said: Hi Paul, i would be interested in buying a couple of prints from you. I do not do Facebook hence this message. Tremendous idea to support the restoration too. Regards, Trev. Hi Trev, Yes i should be able to print a couple of shells for you, if you want to drop me a private message, I’ll be able to add you to the list, got a little backlog to process as well, owing to being ill recently (not covid thankfully, though equally frightening). thanks. Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul_sterling Posted February 18, 2021 Author Share Posted February 18, 2021 1 hour ago, phil_sutters said: Although I am sure you have as many photos of No.5 as you need, here are two more, with best wishes for your build. Perfect thanks Phil, all photographs are appreciated as No.5 changed so much over the years. thanks. Paul 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sludger Posted February 19, 2021 Share Posted February 19, 2021 16 hours ago, Paul_sterling said: Hi Trev, Yes i should be able to print a couple of shells for you, if you want to drop me a private message, I’ll be able to add you to the list, got a little backlog to process as well, owing to being ill recently (not covid thankfully, though equally frightening). thanks. Paul Hi Paul, trie to PM you but it came back saying you could not receive messages. Regards, Trevor Scott. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul_sterling Posted February 19, 2021 Author Share Posted February 19, 2021 1 hour ago, Sludger said: Hi Paul, trie to PM you but it came back saying you could not receive messages. Regards, Trevor Scott. Hi Trevor, I can't think why that would be, my RMweb messenger is open to new messages, and my inbox isn't near its limits, very strange. Paul. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Tim Hall Posted February 19, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 19, 2021 Here it is at Levisham, 19th May 91. Very handsome. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul_sterling Posted February 22, 2021 Author Share Posted February 22, 2021 On 19/02/2021 at 18:00, Tim Hall said: Here it is at Levisham, 19th May 91. Very handsome. Thanks Tim, I can't wait to see it run again, hopefully the shell sales will help a little. I had one shell purchaser sent me a video of their work trundling around the layout, really pleased with how its come out. Paul. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Tim Hall Posted February 22, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 22, 2021 11 minutes ago, Paul_sterling said: Thanks Tim, I can't wait to see it run again, hopefully the shell sales will help a little. I had one shell purchaser sent me a video of their work trundling around the layout, really pleased with how its come out. Paul. I lived in Redcar from 1985- 2001 and was a regular visitor during that time. It's a bit far now, but may get up there on holiday next year perhaps. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul_sterling Posted February 22, 2021 Author Share Posted February 22, 2021 1 minute ago, Tim Hall said: I lived in Redcar from 1985- 2001 and was a regular visitor during that time. It's a bit far now, but may get up there on holiday next year perhaps. Small world Tim, I worked in Redcar for a period, though after you'd moved away. Lackenby Beam Mill / Teesside Beam Mill. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Tim Hall Posted February 22, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 22, 2021 1 hour ago, Paul_sterling said: Small world Tim, I worked in Redcar for a period, though after you'd moved away. Lackenby Beam Mill / Teesside Beam Mill. I was over the road, ICI/ BASF/ Targor. Link to post 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