Jump to content
 

Whats on your 2mm Work bench


nick_bastable
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium

Here are a couple of pics of a LNWR arc roof composite I'm making. The body and underframe are from an Ultima etch, livery will be plain BR crimson.

 

1719622975_LNWRComposite.JPG.07ba9182087b50ec31edcdbd496ef36e.JPG

 

 

268040215_LNWRComposite(3).JPG.d2cdf698633b194d681e993172db52e3.JPG

 

I initially used plasticard strip for the (full length) bogie footboards, but they bent/ broke off so I'll try some brass ones next.

 

Nig H

  • Like 9
  • Craftsmanship/clever 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Nig,

 

For my Ultima Gresley suburbans I used very small L section strip to make 8X supports each side. I let cutouts into the step board. SO far they have stayed in one piece. Touch wood!!

 

Lovely looking job,

 

Alastair M

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Today I got to try out my Elegoo Mars printer for the first time.

 

The initial trial was quite disheartening as the prints attached themselves to the clear plastic film at the base of the tank rather than to the build plate... :angry:

 

After trawling the online forums and doing a few minor tweaks, I manage a result - several dozen sets of these L&Y 3 bolt buffers. These are printed in an "ABS like" resin and right now are very flexible. I hope that they retain a little bit of spring once fully cured. We will see. 

 

Tomorrow I'd like to try a van or two.

 

 

DSC_0008.jpg.a30d7cd45fccaf420543261709ce55aa.jpg

 

  • Like 14
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Over the weekend I worked on the second of a pair of BH Enterprises (John Grey) GCR / LNER Fish vans, that had come to me built up using superglue and painted as GN vans. With this one, I just left it in Fairy Powerspray until the glue dissolved and just rebuilt it from step one.

 

The chassis are built from the Association 10' LNER fitted kit. 

 

IMG_20200330_205619.jpg.c300526c63894a4c7c0426030ef877ae.jpg

 

(Also the open that I had incorrectly finished as private owner, repainted correctly as an MR d299 wagon)

 

With the fish vans, I can't help but think they look a bit top heavy - the chassis are so much narrower, they seem to disappear into the shadow. Clearly the body is oversized to fit a PECO chassis. I also have a pair of Bill Bedford etches for the same vans, which I picked up from an exhibition bits box. These are a good few mm shorter than the ones here, and no less than 1.75mm narrower. 

 

So, I'm actually thinking about taking these chassis off (use them on the Bill Bedford kits), and fitting PECO ones again. The 10' chassis seems much better detailed than the others by PECO, and they might not have enough brake shoes, but I can't help but think the width would be more important in looking "right" here.

 

IMG_20200330_205053__01.jpg.f179d3cf923f6ec5ef4dfedb740d4bf9.jpg

 

Any thoughts?

 

Justin

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, justin1985 said:

Over the weekend I worked on the second of a pair of BH Enterprises (John Grey) GCR / LNER ...

 

Any thoughts?

 

 

I was trying to remember who it was who was 'collecting' these. I have one made up. Remind me to give it to you at some time in the future. That is if you are still collecting...

Link to post
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, justin1985 said:

Over the weekend I worked on the second of a pair of BH Enterprises (John Grey) GCR / LNER Fish vans, that had come to me built up using superglue and painted as GN vans. With this one, I just left it in Fairy Powerspray until the glue dissolved and just rebuilt it from step one.

 

The chassis are built from the Association 10' LNER fitted kit. 

 

I'm not sure that the GC vans ever got LNER fitted unframes Justin. I used the Association replacement for the Peco chassis for mine. It isn't correct either but looks closer compared to photos I have. I'm considering using the LMS fitted chassis for the other three I've got to build.

 

1902040491_GCRFishVans.jpg.18769a4c10429343f226c927f26ac0ed.jpg

 

Vac pipes and door handrails have been added since this photo was taken.

  • Like 9
  • Craftsmanship/clever 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Attempting soldered pointwork with chairs and chairplates using Laurie's one-piece etches:

 

nFjS0Z0.png

 

(NB: the plastic chairs are not fixed yet, hence the fishbelly on the RH of the pic)

 

The first time I tried this, it felt almost impossible - but now with a bright work area, magnifying tools and significantly more patience than before, it's almost workable. Certainly it's a little challenging getting the jaws up to the correct angle, and not deflecting the rail while still getting the chair up in the right place.

 

I'm using 0.76mm solder balls, but I feel like I should use smaller, because as you can see there's a good amount of excess...

  • Like 3
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 29/03/2020 at 13:03, Nig H said:

Here are a couple of pics of a LNWR arc roof composite I'm making. The body and underframe are from an Ultima etch, livery will be plain BR crimson.

 

1719622975_LNWRComposite.JPG.07ba9182087b50ec31edcdbd496ef36e.JPG

 

 

268040215_LNWRComposite(3).JPG.d2cdf698633b194d681e993172db52e3.JPG

 

I initially used plasticard strip for the (full length) bogie footboards, but they bent/ broke off so I'll try some brass ones next.

 

Nig H

 

I used some T-section brass (2mm base, 1mm height) on some GWR coaches that needed a continuous footboard. A bit chunky and it covers up any etched detailing on the solebars, but it does come out dead straight.

 

Chris

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's looking pretty good William.  It took me several goes to get used to the chairs, and get them reasonably even.  The one claw that is a little low looks as tho' you could get the point of a blade under it and lever it up a tad - it's surprising how much you can tweak them when you're used to them.

 

I don't see much XS solder there at all - they all look nice and clean to me - and the painting will make them all look more uniform anyway.  If you want to compare, with the liquid rosin flux I use 3x 0.6mm diameter solder balls applied to the (flatter) inner claw as a first go, and  that secures the chair to the sleeper and rail to the chair but still leaves voids under the rail where the claws of the chair have been bent up, and at the sides (especially the outside) between the rail web and claw.  They wouldn't notice once painted, but I usually add another couple of balls to the outside claw, and that gets fully sucked into the cavities and leaves a clean chair on the outside.  You can still get away with another ball or 2 if you need to put some solder on the iron to remake the joint when adjusting the position of the rail later.

 

I'll leave it to you to do the sums and work out whether you are using a greater volume of solder than me with your 0.76mm balls!

 

Laurie Adams

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, here's about as far as I've got - missing a few of the chairs out of the equation by design, but I've accidentally using button gauges and moving things where I shouldn't so this has taken alot of re-fastening:

 

2bvMnen.png

 

I think I'm happy with the idea that I have the ability to use this system. I'm finding it a little hard to moderate the angle of the claws but I'm sure that'll come with time...

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 30/03/2020 at 22:11, Atso said:

 

I'm not sure that the GC vans ever got LNER fitted unframes Justin. I used the Association replacement for the Peco chassis for mine. It isn't correct either but looks closer compared to photos I have. I'm considering using the LMS fitted chassis for the other three I've got to build.

 

 

All of the images in Tatlow show an underframe fully braked with 8 brake shoes and vac pipes etc, so I just went with an LNER fitted chassis as ostensibly closest. Is the brake lever arrangement closer on the the LMS version? I was also wondering about the original generic 2-333 10' fitted chassis, which has the nice chunky fold up solebars?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, justin1985 said:

 

All of the images in Tatlow show an underframe fully braked with 8 brake shoes and vac pipes etc, so I just went with an LNER fitted chassis as ostensibly closest. Is the brake lever arrangement closer on the the LMS version? I was also wondering about the original generic 2-333 10' fitted chassis, which has the nice chunky fold up solebars?

 

Hi Justin,

 

I went the other way and decided that the single 'V' hangers on each side was more important to me from a visual perspective. Horses for courses as neither is correct really. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, 65179 said:

The J hangers on Chris's LMS chassis at least fit the bill though.

 

Simon

 

Is the 10' LMS fitted chassis still available? I can only see a 9' version in the shop list, but then I often can't find things that are staring me in the face! Or is it one of the many chassis designed by Chris have been very sadly culled from the shop? 

 

12 hours ago, Atso said:

 

I went the other way and decided that the single 'V' hangers on each side was more important to me from a visual perspective. Horses for courses as neither is correct really. ;)

 

To be honest, I think the most important thing, for me, visually is the relationship between the body and the solebars looking in proportion - hence still thinking about going back to the PECO chassis for these BHE bodies, to be honest! The wide body 'teetering' on the scale width chassis, no matter how correct the chassis might be, somehow just looks too wrong to me ... 

 

So much of the visual character of wooden solebar wagons seems, to me, to be the chunkiness and prominence of the solebars, whereas steel solebars intrinsically seem to recede into the shadows because of the C section shape. I think in this respect Bill Blackburn's original 2-330, 2-332, 2-333 seem to capture this visual feel better than later designs. 

 

Justin

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Justin,

 

Yes the 10ft LMS chassis is no longer available, but the 9ft could be used as a source of J hangers (if the cast ones are no longer available). The 10ft SR 8 shoe chassis has offset V hangers that might be adaptable, but I think that is true 2mm rather than one of the N conversion ones.  I'm also wondering if it might be useful for anything GN and fitted.

 

I know what you mean about the width. I have a part built GC fish van (wrong period so it's of no use as if happens). I've failed to get all the edges neat folded up from the floor so mine is even wider! It's a shame they aren't as easy to narrow as the plastic vans are.

 

Simon

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lacathedrale said:

So pleased with how this has come to fruition - the chaired pointwork does just look very good, doesn't it? :)  Thanks again for all the help, everyone.

 

image.png.d252f8bff4c59fa7f3a56b80ec0c45d4.png

 

It does, yes. That checkrail spacing looks very (too) small though. 

  • Agree 2
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Rich!

 

The check rail is a little on an angle - it leaned in towards the stock rail, because the sliver of rail I deputed as a slide gauge rode up, not supporting the top of the bullhead.

 

I'm pretty confident with the rest of the turnout building process, so I'm not sure I'll continue with this particular example as it's raison d'etre was simply to highligh whether chaired turnouts were workable.

  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
18 hours ago, 65179 said:

Justin,

 

Yes the 10ft LMS chassis is no longer available, but the 9ft could be used as a source of J hangers (if the cast ones are no longer available). The 10ft SR 8 shoe chassis has offset V hangers that might be adaptable, but I think that is true 2mm rather than one of the N conversion ones.  I'm also wondering if it might be useful for anything GN and fitted.

 

I know what you mean about the width. I have a part built GC fish van (wrong period so it's of no use as if happens). I've failed to get all the edges neat folded up from the floor so mine is even wider! It's a shame they aren't as easy to narrow as the plastic vans are.

 

Simon

I used 2-333 and 2-337 to make LMS 10' 8 shoe fitted underframes for the vertical plank LMS 12T vans. I'm not sure if the resulting underframe was totally prototypical but it looked right to me. Apart from having steel solebars on the etch, what is the difference between 2-385 and 2-333?

 

Nig H

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those chairs look lovely and even, William - you've clearly cracked it now.

 

Re the check rail flangeway - rather than using a piece of rail (which is difficult to position because of the web recesses) to gauge it try and find  or fabaricate from shims a 0.5mm thick piece of steel or aluminium - or use the 0.5mm wide flangeway file (or a combination of them both).  But also test it with a roller gauge or home-made check-gauge (described in the "Track" book) as the critical functional dimension through a crossing is the back-to-back between the wing and check rails - it's easy to make this a fraction too wide so the wheels climb up instead of rolling through it.

 

Best Wishes,  Laurie Adams

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
18 hours ago, Lacathedrale said:

Thanks Rich!

 

The check rail is a little on an angle - it leaned in towards the stock rail, because the sliver of rail I deputed as a slide gauge rode up, not supporting the top of the bullhead.

 

I'm pretty confident with the rest of the turnout building process, so I'm not sure I'll continue with this particular example as it's raison d'etre was simply to highligh whether chaired turnouts were workable.

You shouldn't be gauging the checkrail from the stock rail anyway - check gauge should be set from the crossing v/wing rail.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
5 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

You shouldn't be gauging the checkrail from the stock rail anyway - check gauge should be set from the crossing v/wing rail.

 

Surely full size the check rail chairs hold the check rail a set distance from the stock rail.  The 2mm association plastic check rail chairs do so as well. It does mean the setting of the gauge of the stock rail from the crossing nose is more critical but surely that is the case anyway. This is one of the reasons I prefer to set the  stock rails from the crossing rather than vice versa.  With soldered construction you can set the check rail and the stock rail independant of each other. I just use a slip gauge when setting the wing rails and use the roller gauge to  set the  stock rail and the check rail from the crossing .

 

Don

  • Agree 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...