Jump to content

Any Question Answered


Pixie
 Share

Recommended Posts

@Jayk, As far as track construction goes I would strongly recommend that you get a copy of the book 'Track, how it works and how to model it', available from the Association shop.  As well as the gauges you mention, the button gauges are invaluable for setting the gauge either side of the crossing nose.

 

Jim

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
11 hours ago, Izzy said:

 

I believe that currently those fitted to some Farish coaches are the only ones. So quite expensive, and only if you can find them. Keep you eyes open for cheap s/h offerings. It's how I obtained them for my class 309's. They are under some of the newer blue riband MK1's, and older Pullman restaurants. Not available as spares at the moment.

Thanks Izzy,

 

Looking at the prices commanded it would an expensive way to source the bogies.

 

I'll have a go at fabricating them from plastic. That way they will come into stock on the Bachmann spares site as soon as in finish!

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Klaus ojo said:

Jayk,

N brass has a 3F body. I´m just in the midst of constructing one.

As I said: my class 22 is waiting for boies and I was thinking about something similar as you wrote. Let´s see who of us is faster and will  get a bloody nose first...:) Sounds we should keep in contact for this purpose...

For the points I´ve used the 2mm gauges as well but always with a 9mm wagon chassis at my side as well. 

 

Klaus

 Hi Klaus,

Do you have any photos of the 3F please? Do you know if the etch is dimensionally accurate? The first set of these that N Brass had shot down ended up a little overscale somehow.

 

Regards

Simon

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Jayk said:

Yes, sorry. I meant the class 02 for my first loco, a class 03 or 04 would be a possible and I'd either not noticed or forgotten there was a body etch available for the 04. I just like the look of the 02. I'll have to take a look back or fiddle with the search box to find the previous discussion, having to add a gearbox doesn't sound too daunting - having looked through the documentation for the societies chassis kits I can always steal their homework.

 

 

I built an 02 from the Worsley etch, well over a dozen years ago.   The advice I have for the chassis is "chuck the etch away" other than perhaps the coupling rods.   The chassis design is for 3mm modeller's practice, fits with typical 3mm scale components.    The body parts are fine, and assemble pretty well, with only a few things needing local modification.  

 

For the chassis of the 02, I used a similar approach to the DY1 I had built earlier; quarter inch square brass bar for lots of weight low down, with cut-outs to clear gears and muffs, with a thin PCB outer layer, fitted with bearings to carry the wheels and pickup.  The DY1 chassis is documented in a 2mm Magazine (in the backnumbers available to members on the website).   The only major difference for the 02 was that I made use of my milling machine for the brass block (rather than hand-tools for everything on the DY1), and the 02 is a rod-driven axles, rather than gear-driven axles of the DY1. 
If doing it again today, I'd swap to a different motor.  There are many decent cheaper 8mm diameter motors around, so a "£cough-how-much-Faulhaber" isn't the only option.  

It has a DCC chip fitted (above the motor in the bonnet), and stay alive capacitors (in the cab, below the window line), with those, it is a very reliable runner, even over quite rough track.   

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Caley Jim said:

@Jayk, As far as track construction goes I would strongly recommend that you get a copy of the book 'Track, how it works and how to model it', available from the Association shop.  As well as the gauges you mention, the button gauges are invaluable for setting the gauge either side of the crossing nose.

 

Jim

 

Sounds like a good idea. I was hoping to get some time between now and early/mid Jan to have a play with templot, but all info is good info. Although I'm not planning anything particularly prototypical, more something to just trundle the things I make back and forth. But I guess the finer the standards the more applicable prototype guidelines become.

 

1 hour ago, Nigelcliffe said:

 

I built an 02 from the Worsley etch, well over a dozen years ago.   The advice I have for the chassis is "chuck the etch away" other than perhaps the coupling rods.   The chassis design is for 3mm modeller's practice, fits with typical 3mm scale components.    The body parts are fine, and assemble pretty well, with only a few things needing local modification.  

 

For the chassis of the 02, I used a similar approach to the DY1 I had built earlier; quarter inch square brass bar for lots of weight low down, with cut-outs to clear gears and muffs, with a thin PCB outer layer, fitted with bearings to carry the wheels and pickup.  The DY1 chassis is documented in a 2mm Magazine (in the backnumbers available to members on the website).   The only major difference for the 02 was that I made use of my milling machine for the brass block (rather than hand-tools for everything on the DY1), and the 02 is a rod-driven axles, rather than gear-driven axles of the DY1. 
If doing it again today, I'd swap to a different motor.  There are many decent cheaper 8mm diameter motors around, so a "£cough-how-much-Faulhaber" isn't the only option.  

It has a DCC chip fitted (above the motor in the bonnet), and stay alive capacitors (in the cab, below the window line), with those, it is a very reliable runner, even over quite rough track.   

 

 

 

That sounds a little more major than I was expecting. I was assuming that the chassis would fall under basic at best, but workable with modification. Maybe the idea of going with the society 03/04 chassis with the WW 04 body as a first build is the better option and save the 02 for attempt 2. It's great that there are online back-issues available as well, maybe I really should just join now rather than waiting to maximise shop time.

 

Thanks to you both,

Jayk

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jayk said:

 

Sounds like a good idea. I was hoping to get some time between now and early/mid Jan to have a play with templot, but all info is good info. Although I'm not planning anything particularly prototypical, more something to just trundle the things I make back and forth. But I guess the finer the standards the more applicable prototype guidelines become.

 

That sounds a little more major than I was expecting. I was assuming that the chassis would fall under basic at best, but workable with modification. Maybe the idea of going with the society 03/04 chassis with the WW 04 body as a first build is the better option and save the 02 for attempt 2. It's great that there are online back-issues available as well, maybe I really should just join now rather than waiting to maximise shop time.

 

Thanks to you both,

Jayk

If you can hold on for about another 3 weeks (until 15th Dec) before applying then your membership will run until spring 2023 instead of spring 2022.

 

Don't forget that the Association 03/04 chassis is designed to fit the N scale Farish body, so you'll need the N scale 04 from Worsley Works (they are the same price etc.). The size difference is only slight though.

 

Bob Isgar (Izzy here on RMweb) wrote up the construction of his class 15 diesel loco in Model Railway Journal 279 and it is well worth a read if you're interested in bogie diesels. From memory he used part of a Bachmann American bogie diesel loco for parts of the mechanism.

 

Andy

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jayk said:

 

[ on the 02 chassis]   ....That sounds a little more major than I was expecting. I was assuming that the chassis would fall under basic at best, but workable with modification. Maybe the idea of going with the society 03/04 chassis with the WW 04 body as a first build is the better option and save the 02 for attempt 2. It's great that there are online back-issues available as well, maybe I really should just join now rather than waiting to maximise shop time.

 

 

I'd suggest the DY1 chassis (the basis for my 02) is less work, and less complicated than the Association etches for the 03/04.   

The DY1 was deliberately designed to be really simple to build: basic handtools only: file, saw, Archimedean spiral drill (cheap tool nearly every small scale modeller has), pin-chuck, couple of drill bits, one tap for threads, scriber for marking out (knife will do), ruler, soldering iron.    

You could copy that design for an 04 if intending to build the tramway version.  

 

There's an obsession with "kits" where people assume a kit will be easier to build.  It isn't always the case.  

 

 

- Nigel

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 2mm Andy said:

If you can hold on for about another 3 weeks (until 15th Dec) before applying then your membership will run until spring 2023 instead of spring 2022.

Don't forget that the Association 03/04 chassis is designed to fit the N scale Farish body, so you'll need the N scale 04 from Worsley Works (they are the same price etc.). The size difference is only slight though.

Oh, didn't know about that. I'd intended to join once I was ready to actually make a start with the assumption being that memberships ran for a calendar yeah from the date of joining. Nice catch with on the 03/04, pretty sure I'd have overlooked that. Thank you.

 

 

3 hours ago, Nigelcliffe said:

I'd suggest the DY1 chassis (the basis for my 02) is less work, and less complicated than the Association etches for the 03/04.   

The DY1 was deliberately designed to be really simple to build: basic handtools only: file, saw, Archimedean spiral drill (cheap tool nearly every small scale modeller has), pin-chuck, couple of drill bits, one tap for threads, scriber for marking out (knife will do), ruler, soldering iron.    

You could copy that design for an 04 if intending to build the tramway version.  

 

There's an obsession with "kits" where people assume a kit will be easier to build.  It isn't always the case.  

Last bit first; For me it's less that a kit would be easier and more that with a kit there is documented (typically), proven path to success with it.

I'd seen that WW class themselves as "scratch aids" rather than kits so that it would be something to build off of and having the included chassis gave me a base to work from. A kind of half-way step between a proper chassis kit and doing it from the ground up. I did find your DY1 under "articles" and that does make it look an awfully lot more achievable. I was thinking much more in terms of imitating an etched kit having read through and seen the approach taken with the replacement chassis kits available.

 

Thank you both,

Jayk

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Track contruction. You do not need to use templates you can simply use the appropriate lead for the crossing angle. The lead is the distance from the blade tips to the crossing nose. I provided some tables for leads for various switches and crossing angles in an article on making curved turnouts in the asociation mag nearly ten years ago now it would be available online via the members area from the 2mm website. 

All you do is either mark where the blades tips go and measure along the rail line to where the crossing nose goes or work out where a line joins the track and mark the crossing nose and measure the angle then measure the appropriate leads to the blade tips. It works fine for gentle curves for sharper curves you need to use a more gentle urnout where the diverging route is on the inside to avoid too sharp a curve. For a Y point you can halve the crossing angle as the lead is on both sides known as split leads.  

However if you are good with computers Templot will allow you to choose any normal turnout from a 9ft straight switch 1:5 crossing to an E16 and then let you curve it before printing.

I made my first crossing Vs with a few panel pins in a piece of wood just drew the crossing on the wood and then carefully put the pins in. That said the association crossing jigs are good. But if you fancied the E14 the panel pins would be the answer for what would probably be a one off.

For making the blades  the planing angles are 1/24 for 9ft and A switches  1/32 12ft/B 1/40 15ft/C 1/48 18ft/D  our rail is 0.5mm wide so for a 1/32 blades the distance from the tip to the end of the taper is 16mm.

 

Don 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hi Jayk,

 

As Andy has said I have built a class 15 using commercial bogie parts as that seemed to be the easiest and simplest way to achieve a decent result. There are a lot of design aspects that have to be taken into account with bogie drive and the RTR makers have got it sorted now. TBH the easiest but perhaps not cheapest route (given their current retail prices) to the first decent 2FS loco is one of the latest Farish Bo-Bo diesels, 20/24/25, fitted with drop-in wheels. It gives a known standard, which in running terms is v.good under either DC or DCC. Older Farish can also be given the drop-in’s, but the running can be more variable.

 

Perhaps more importantly, and what I think Nigel (Cliffe) was alluding to in his wise advice with regard to chassis in particular is that weight is an important aspect of 2mm locos. Without a decent amount haulage and current collection can verge on the dismal. A loco simply made from etched parts for both body and chassis won’t produce enough and adding weight would be vital. A solid brass type chassis helps in this respect. For example the N7/3 I have just made using thin brass sheet for both (!) has had sheet lead stuffed into every spare nook and cranny to get the weight up to 54gms and produce decent haulage. In this aspect using Farish 03/04/08 bodies on the etched chassis is better as they are mostly cast metal. However, I could not in all conscience say they are an ideal first chassis to make, and especially the 08 with the added complication of outside frames and cranks, ( I currently have another one under construction on the workbench).


Nothing is beyond anyone of course given a bit of determination, but some ways of doing things are just easier than others, and especially in 2mm.

 

good luck with what you try,

 

Bob

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob's point about weight affecting performance is very relevant.  A number of people on here have sought advice when the performance of their first chassis has been somewhat erratic when running it 'bare'.  My advice is always to stick some weight to it, even a chunk of Blu-tack, which can make all the difference.  Also you can't have too much weight when it comes to haulage.  Lack of adhesion will always be the limiting factor in that respect, especially in small locos.

 

Jim

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 23/11/2021 at 09:38, 65179 said:

 Hi Klaus,

Do you have any photos of the 3F please? Do you know if the etch is dimensionally accurate? The first set of these that N Brass had shot down ended up a little overscale somehow.

 

Regards

Simon

Hi Simon,

I did not care much for the exact scale so far but you might easily find it out with help of the photo.

Length is 57.? mm, width 17.3mm.

I most probably will make my own chassis for it with 0.8mm P bronze sheet as Henk did suggest.

So hopefully I should get a running loco even if it were a bit overscale.

Well - it would be a bit of a pity if it would exceed the size of the Deeley compound.

As I am having some overscale MR vans as well: one or the other will match.

At any rate soldering to the boiler so far was easier :-)

cheers

Klaus

nbrass MR 3F etch.jpg

nbrass MR 3F.jpg

Edited by Klaus ojo
length on photo
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Klaus.

 

3Fs are standard Midland 8ft-8ft 6in wheelbase. I assume, although I haven't got a drawing to check, that they have the same 8ft wide footplate that the bigger 4Fs do.  So those etches are a little over the 16mm for 2mm scale (or 16.5ish for N).

 

It looks to be coming together nicely.

 

Regards,

Simon

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Simon,

you´re right. The footplate is 1.4mm wider than the  footplate of the Worsley Works´MR Deely compound and the cab very similar.

Thanks for pointing my attention on this. But I suppose I will not tear the parts apart to minimize this. 

A bit of filing on the footplate sides perhaps?

The 3F is not my priority #1 at the moment, so much time to think about it.

cheers

Klaus

Edited by Klaus ojo
Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Klaus ojo said:

Simon,

you´re right. The footplate is 1.4mm wider than the  footplate of the Worsley Works´MR Deely compound and the cab very similar.

Thanks for pointing my attention on this. But I suppose I will not tear the parts apart to minimize this. 

A bit of filing on the footplate sides perhaps?

The 3F is not my priotity #1 at the moment, so much time to think about it.

cheers

Klaus

 

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. It's a shame because even if you can live with everything being overscale it probably rules out the various obvious chassis options (Association Raithby 4F kit replacement chassis or modified Farish 4F or Jinty chassis).

 

Simon

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 24/11/2021 at 08:35, Izzy said:

As Andy has said I have built a class 15 using commercial bogie parts as that seemed to be the easiest and simplest way to achieve a decent result. There are a lot of design aspects that have to be taken into account with bogie drive and the RTR makers have got it sorted now. TBH the easiest but perhaps not cheapest route (given their current retail prices) to the first decent 2FS loco is one of the latest Farish Bo-Bo diesels, 20/24/25, fitted with drop-in wheels. It gives a known standard, which in running terms is v.good under either DC or DCC. Older Farish can also be given the drop-in’s, but the running can be more variable.

 

Perhaps more importantly, and what I think Nigel (Cliffe) was alluding to in his wise advice with regard to chassis in particular is that weight is an important aspect of 2mm locos. Without a decent amount haulage and current collection can verge on the dismal. A loco simply made from etched parts for both body and chassis won’t produce enough and adding weight would be vital. A solid brass type chassis helps in this respect. For example the N7/3 I have just made using thin brass sheet for both (!) has had sheet lead stuffed into every spare nook and cranny to get the weight up to 54gms and produce decent haulage. In this aspect using Farish 03/04/08 bodies on the etched chassis is better as they are mostly cast metal. However, I could not in all conscience say they are an ideal first chassis to make, and especially the 08 with the added complication of outside frames and cranks, ( I currently have another one under construction on the workbench).


Nothing is beyond anyone of course given a bit of determination, but some ways of doing things are just easier than others, and especially in 2mm.

 

good luck with what you try,

 

Bob

 

I had seen the drop-in replacement wheelsets for diesels and while it's an option to get something up and running quickly (I do have some diesels from circa 2000-2005) I **really** want to make as much as I possibly can. Which is also why I'm also shying away from modifying RTR chassis so they can be mounted in other bodies. I am planning on cribbing heavily from their practices though. Once I spotted the loco carrying wheels came in the same dimensions as the drop-ins as well as being available as discs and work with the axle muffs so there's no need to worry about using the drop-ins and figuring out a keeper plate combined with the 3D printed CV joints, it looks like what is in my head should work relatively easily.

 

Weight..... gargh. I'll add that to the list of things to remember not to forget. Obviously once I start looking at bogie diesels it becomes much easier, both in terms of having places to shove additional mass and also with the machined brass gearboxes that are available. I think I may not be realising quite how small the DY1 / CL02 actually are. The CL08 chassis kit isn't something I'm currently looking at, the outside framing with extended cranks scared me off. I'm definitely leaning towards the CL03/04 chassis with an etched body as a first go. The etched body is, again, down to me wanting to make things and probably is a silly choice if you were to look at it objectively. The Farish body can be picked up new (spares) for ~£19 with the etch being £12 and then needing paint / transfers / detailing on top as well as weighting (I remembered).

 

But honestly, if the first one manages to trundle itself backwards and forwards I'll be counting that as a win.

 

Thank you,

Jayk

Edited by Jayk
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Here's a question... Soldering Irons what type do you use and at what Wattage?

I've got a couple of small Antex ones a 12w and a 15w, but I think they are a bit too small, I was doing something which should have been quite simple today (assembling an assoc quartering jig), but neither seemed to be giving enough heat.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Velocemitch said:

Here's a question... Soldering Irons what type do you use and at what Wattage?

I've got a couple of small Antex ones a 12w and a 15w, but I think they are a bit too small, I was doing something which should have been quite simple today (assembling an assoc quartering jig), but neither seemed to be giving enough heat.

 

 

Hi

 

I use an Antex XS 25w iron for my 2mm work which seems to have plenty of power (I’ve also used it for building 4mm items)

 

Cheers

 

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use an ERSA 80W temperature controlled iron, generally with a 2mm chisel bit, running at 300°C for 188 solder.  Plenty power and a decent sized bit gives you plenty heat which lets you get in and back out relatively quickly before the heat transfers and starts causing other parts to move.

 

My three requirements for soldering success are clean metal, flux and plenty heat.

 

Jim

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another vote for a quality temperature controlled iron.  I started with a 20w cheapie from Bunnings (local version of B&Q) and it was ok, but when I upgraded I wondered why I hadn't sooner!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve use an Antex 15w for most of my 2mm work, wagon chassis etc, with a suitably sized tip, the small chisel type (2mm). I also use it for much baseboard electrical wiring. With leaded solder (& phosphoric acid flux), never using unleaded which I understand generally needs more/higher heat. But as ever the size of the tip is key for the amount of heat in reserve. The fine 1mm I find good for such as decoder work. There is also a large 4mm chisel. 
 

Luckily I do have a range of irons if it proves to struggle, acquired over many years, 18/25/40/75, to use when a good amount of ‘bang’ is required and the work is the proverbial heat sink. It’s just their general size is such that I find them difficult to wield around easily with small & delicate work. 
 

Bob

Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, at least 50W, temperature controlled.

 

For soldering brass kits, track, rather than electronics, you need to be able to keep pumping the heat in (the workpiece acts like a heatsink)  ang get it up to temp quickly. Lingering with an underpowered iron is more likely to cause damage/frustration than a beast of an iron.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Izzy said:

 never using unleaded which I understand generally needs more/higher heat.

I tried unleaded once (free coil that came with a cheapo iron).  Never again!  Absolute rubbish for construction work as it didn't 'flow' in the same way as leaded.

 

Jim

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently I´ve made a mistake

when trying to build a turnout with the milled common crossing (2mm shop 1-423)  ABS sleepers and nonpegged chairs (1-180 an 1-181) and not using the kit. The cast is about 0.6mm higher than the rail and I even did not use the plastic interleave. Well, I´ll use a soldered crossing now, but where is my mistake and how could I use the milled crossing?

This turnout is a test for possibly more ambituous designs and will be a good company for the new finetrax 2mm turnout (I made the 1-456. The finetrax turnout was really straight forward and everything did fit without substantial afterwork. I only had to clean up residues at the solder joint at the tip and the sleeper base)

cast milled crossing V with BH and easitrac nonpegged chairs.JPG

Edited by Klaus ojo
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Not sure what has happened there. When test building a pegged turnout there was no problem. Possibly the pegged chairs hold the rail a fraction higher and the milled crossing is to match that. The only things I can suggest for your turnout is to mark the edges of the crossing onto the timbers/sleepers lift the crossing and then gently file away some of the timber height in the crossing area until the crossing placed on it matches the rail either side, or simply make up a crossing from rail. 

I found I could use  thin ply timbers instead of the plastic ones. I could then araldite thin NS shims to the wood under the crosing and solder the rail onto that. The araldite may softenen when soldering due to the heat but reset on cooling.

 

post-8525-0-58667400-1383245677_thumb.jpg

 

 

Don

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...