Dock Green

[AJon30]

OK Understood. M&M Models produce kits of various container wagons and they have lost brass tensioners etc. Don't know if they sell them separately?

 

Rgds Andrew

[Simond]

Chaz

 

I think either rope or chain would be acceptable, particularly for a crate, but my guess is that something like a lowmac would probably be supplied with chains, as they would certainly be a better choice for restraining something wheeled, and I guess that wheeled loads were a staple for such vehicles.

 

If you do use "rope" then I think it might well be several turns, rather than just two. The issue becomes one of tying a rope that would be big enough to withstand the loads. Ships use cleats or bollards for mooring so can use big ropes (say 2" diameter / 6" circumference or more) but you couldn't tie, still less tension such a rope (they're spliced or whipped to provide a loop) by hand. I'd doubt if anything bigger than an inch in diameter would be practical, so you're looking at ~0.6mm thread on your model.

 

Just looked at a website for matelots, apparently the breaking strength of Manila rope in tons is given by 2D^2 / 300, and the safe working load is one sixth of this, (D in mm), which gives, for 1" rope, an SWL of about a third of a ton. I'm guessing you probably want three or four loops on each lashing. You could finish with a "trucker's hitch" to tension it, and tie off with a couple of half hitches.

 

I think your approach of four separate lashings at each end would be much better than the original - it would prevent sliding in any direction, and roll, so it should be fine.

 

Enjoy your knitting.

 

Best

Simon

[chaz]

OK lads, chains it is. I spent a few minutes this morning looking for some fine chain....and look what I found.

 

 

Slater's M7022 - chain shackles for containers, bought some time ago and forgotten until I found them today. The lost wax castings are four to a pack and I found two packs. I find the safest way to release the castings from the sprue is to file through the feed with a triangular needle file. Some of the sections are thinner than the feeds and will break if you treat them roughly.

 

I gave them a quick going over with a fibreglass pencil.

 

 

That is an extreme close up which is most unkind to the castings - but if you think they need fettling please post photos when you have done yours. I promise to be impressed.

 

I blackened them with Casey's Brass Black. (Usual warnings about great care with this very toxic chemical)

 

 

 

Chaz

Edited January 6, 2016 by chaz

[chaz]

Chaz

 

I think either rope or chain would be acceptable, particularly for a crate, but my guess is that something like a lowmac would probably be supplied with chains, as they would certainly be a better choice for restraining something wheeled, and I guess that wheeled loads were a staple for such vehicles.

 

If you do use "rope" then I think it might well be several turns, rather than just two. The issue becomes one of tying a rope that would be big enough to withstand the loads. Ships use cleats or bollards for mooring so can use big ropes (say 2" diameter / 6" circumference or more) but you couldn't tie, still less tension such a rope (they're spliced or whipped to provide a loop) by hand. I'd doubt if anything bigger than an inch in diameter would be practical, so you're looking at ~0.6mm thread on your model.

 

Just looked at a website for matelots, apparently the breaking strength of Manila rope in tons is given by 2D^2 / 300, and the safe working load is one sixth of this, (D in mm), which gives, for 1" rope, an SWL of about a third of a ton. I'm guessing you probably want three or four loops on each lashing. You could finish with a "trucker's hitch" to tension it, and tie off with a couple of half hitches.

 

I think your approach of four separate lashings at each end would be much better than the original - it would prevent sliding in any direction, and roll, so it should be fine.

 

Enjoy your knitting.

 

Best

Simon

 

No knitting, Simon. I've joined the chain gang...

 

Looking at photos of Lowmacs - you are quite right, they all have sets of chains - why wouldn't they use them?

 

I'm thinking of two diagonal chains at each end - replacing the green ropes in my sketch above.

 

Chaz

Edited January 7, 2016 by chaz

[brianthesnail96]

I'd agree Chaz, chains & tensioners to the diagonally opposed outer lashing points.

 

Enjoyed watching someone who knew what he was doing lash down a rather valuable traction engine the other day, a surprisingly satisfying thing to watch being done well. He used a vaguely similar arrangement (with some additions due to the awkward shape of his load).

[chaz]

I'd agree Chaz, chains & tensioners to the diagonally opposed outer lashing points.

 

Enjoyed watching someone who knew what he was doing lash down a rather valuable traction engine the other day, a surprisingly satisfying thing to watch being done well. He used a vaguely similar arrangement (with some additions due to the awkward shape of his load).

 

You didn't by any chance get some photos did you?

[brianthesnail96]

'Fraid not. It was wet, and my hands were covered in brass polish, vaselene and steam oil having helped give her a clean before sending her on her way!

 

It wasn't quite the same as he used the front and rear towing points (back up with a strop around the perch bracket for good measure) in the centre of the engine to strap down to, instead of something on the outside edges (e.g. the wheels). Effectively making an X shape with the chains with the engine in the centre of the X, as opposed to your suggested X X with the crate between the two Xs (if that makes sense!). However the principle of diagonal chains both ends to stop both axial and longitudinal movement was the same.  

[chaz]

'Fraid not. It was wet, and my hands were covered in brass polish, vaselene and steam oil having helped give her a clean before sending her on her way!

 

It wasn't quite the same as he used the front and rear towing points (back up with a strop around the perch bracket for good measure) in the centre of the engine to strap down to, instead of something on the outside edges (e.g. the wheels). Effectively making an X shape with the chains with the engine in the centre of the X, as opposed to your suggested X X with the crate between the two Xs (if that makes sense!). However the principle of diagonal chains both ends to stop both axial and longitudinal movement was the same.  

 

thanks for that information Matt.

 

There is a good wartime picture in J H Russell's "Freight Wagons and Loads...." (fig 294) which shows a tank loaded on a Warwell wagon which has two chains arranged in an "X" fixed to brackets on the front of the tank. Probably the rear of the tank is similarly chained. There are at least twelve loaded Warwells in the rake - must have taken some effort to get underway.

 

Chaz

[Simond]

Hi Chaz

 

The tensioner look very nice.

 

When you say "diagonal" I'm interpreting this as "not crossed" but diagonal (in side view) from top of case to the buffer on the same side. I think this would be entirely reasonable to prevent longitudinal sliding, given the crossed lashings (in red) which will prevent sideways movements or tipping.

 

HTH

Simon

[chaz]

Chained up...

 

 

...a tedious job...

 

 

...involving tweezers, snipe nose pliers and quite a lot of naughty words...

 

 

...and it took about 45 minutes...

 

 

...was it worth it?

[AJon30]

Nice. Are you going to have an unloaded Lowmac with the same number so you can show it departing/arriving empty? (Ducks for cover!)

 

Rgds Andrew

Edited January 7, 2016 by AJon30

[alant]

Yes, definitely worth it Chaz.

Edited January 7, 2016 by alant

[chaz]

Nice. Are you going to have an unloaded Lowmac with the same number so you can show it departing/arriving empty? (Ducks for cover!)

 

Rgds Andrew

 

No Andrew. The machinery in the crate is transported to Dock Green, taken down to a machine shop on the industrial estate for further work. Some time later it is re-loaded, shunted back up the hill and worked forward to its ultimate destination. So there.

 

Chaz

[Simond]

Mm, sorry Chaz, I suspect you need the other (red?) lashings too. I just know this isn't the response you want. Sorry!

 

There isn't much stretch in the tensioned chain, but I still think the short lashings diagonally or straight down from the crate to the deck to prevent roll would be required. It's rather taller than a tank (but of course, we don't know where the centre of gravity is) so I'd tend to fit these, per diagram 7.39 from the UNECE document

 

The castings & chain for the lashings that you have done are excellent. I shall shamelessly copy them at some point!

 

Best

Simon

 

Edited January 7, 2016 by Simond

[chaz]

Mm, sorry Chaz, I suspect you need the other (red?) lashings too. I just know this isn't the response you want. Sorry!

 

There isn't much stretch in the tensioned chain, but I still think the short lashings diagonally or straight down from the crate to the deck to prevent roll would be required.

 

The castings & chain for the lashings that you have done are excellent. I shall shamelessly copy them at some point!

 

Best

Simon

 

Simon, thanks.     I have noted your comment and will file it NFA.

 

Chaz

[Simond]

"Not for action"?

 

Understood!

 

Best

Simon

[chaz]

"Not for action"?

 

Understood!

 

Best

Simon

 

I believe it's "No Further Action".

 

I'm not convinced that you are right. Should the crate try to roll the chain that runs to the corner on what is trying to become the lower side will resist the movement. An analogy would be a mast braced on both sides. Your arguement would hold true if the chains were fastened in line with the axis of the roll but they are not. There is effectively a triangle formed by the vertical edge of the crate, the floor of the wagon and the line of the chain (which would be in tension and therefore remain straight). And a triangle is a stable shape. Tell me what's wrong with my reasoning.

 

Chaz

[Simond]

Chaz

 

I see nothing wrong with your reasoning, per se, but I believe that the weakness is that neither the chains, nor the crate, nor the wagon is really rigid.

 

They're all stiff, of course, but the wagon will surely flex, and the crate might have a bit if "give" in it, which could result in one or two of your chains getting a bit slack, and then it moves, and...

 

The chains are surely the stiffest of the three, but the greater the angle between the chain and its line of action, the less stiff it will appear to be to the load ( think about a guitar string, easy to "bend" a note with one finger,but you surely won't stretch it lengthways even with both hands).

 

So my take would be that the end chains stop it moving lengthways (and as you have crossed them, sideways too) and 4 vertical ties would prevent tipping (and these could also be crossed, but given the longitudinal pairs are, It might not be necessary)

 

As I suggested, it depends on the stability of the load itself. The tanks are chained in X X formation as your crate, but they are very stable, having a deliberately low c-o-g, as it's necessary for their function. If your crate contained a whacking great machine tool, for example, it might even be top heavy, and thus prone to topple.

 

I guess if anyone asks, you could suggest that the machine therein has a very heavy base, and a large and fragile upper structure - a telescope or something similar

 

Best

Simon

[chaz]

 

I guess if anyone asks, you could suggest that the machine therein has a very heavy base, and a large and fragile upper structure - a telescope or something similar

 

Best

Simon

 

As it happens...

[wessy]

Good morning to all.  All the talk about loading and securing of containers has reminded me that I have a small pamphlet entitled 'Interim instructions for the loading and securing of containers' published by the Railway Executive in 1950. it appears that there was a problem caused by containers from the erstwhile railway companies being loaded on wagons from other companies, and so the pamphlet sets out instructions.  In terms of the current debate, there is a short section on securing covered containers other than on Conflat or chassis wagons.  Now presumably this does not apply specifically to non-standard boxes on specialist wagons, but the principles are useful to know.  Here are the scans of the relevant pages.

container ropes001.pdf

container ropes002.pdf

container ropes003.pdf

[chaz]

Good morning to all.  All the talk about loading and securing of containers has reminded me that I have a small pamphlet entitled 'Interim instructions for the loading and securing of containers' published by the Railway Executive in 1950. it appears that there was a problem caused by containers from the erstwhile railway companies being loaded on wagons from other companies, and so the pamphlet sets out instructions.  In terms of the current debate, there is a short section on securing covered containers other than on Conflat or chassis wagons.  Now presumably this does not apply specifically to non-standard boxes on specialist wagons, but the principles are useful to know.  Here are the scans of the relevant pages.

 

Thanks for the information, Wessy (?). Interesting to see that the roping illustrated in your source is around the buffer guides and the text specifically rejects using rope hooks. I wonder if that is to do with positioning - it's certain where the buffers are (they are always on the ends!)  - rope hooks will be in various places all around a wagon (usually just above the solebars).

 

Chaz

Edited January 8, 2016 by chaz

[Guest Isambarduk]

Very interesting information.  Thanks, Wessy.

"... the roping illustrated in your source is around the buffer guides and the text specifically rejects using rope hooks. I wonder if that is to do with positioning "
 
I would think it more to do with the rope hooks not being up to the job of securing a container; they were adequate for lashing down a sheet/tarpaulin and lighter loads but a full container is another matter.  Just my thought.

 

David

[raymw]

A bit late, but maybe OK for next time - problem with getting 'ropes' tight. You can get a sort of elastic thread, I think known as shirring elastic, used for smocking. I reckon would be better than cotton, say. It seems to be available in white or black. Could be fun trying to tie knots in the black, though. I've just bought a couple in 'The Range',  £1.29 for 20metres or so.

 

Best wishes,

 

Ray

[chaz]

Dock Green will be at the St Albans show next weekend. Should you be going come and say hello, I am always happy to have a chat with fellow RMwebbers.

 

There are going to be a very good spread of layouts - have a look at...

 

http://www.cmra.org.uk/stalbans.html

 

Chaz

[chaz]

A JLTRT SR 10' WB fitted van kit - All the parts in the box laid out.

 

 

The next photo' shows all the lost-wax castings for the buffers - housings, rams and retaining collars.

 

 

I cut the parts from the sprues with a piercing saw fitted with a fairly coarse blade.

 

 

Of course there are other tools you could use (slitting discs or heavy duty wire cutters) but I prefer the precise action of the saw. it took me 12  minutes to cut the parts for all four buffers from the sprues.

 

 

As you can see there are bits of the sprue that need filing away. I use a #0 cut flat needle file to clean up the parts - paying particular attention to the rams - which must be good enough to slide smoothly in the housings. It took me 19 minutes to file the parts up and to straighten the thin parts of the rams.

 

The housings need drilling out both to true up the holes and to clean out the powdery stuff which clogs them. I drill right through with a 1.6mm and then clean up the outer section with a 2.4mm. Be careful with the latter, you don't want to deepen the hole just to true up the inside for the fatter part of the ram and the spring. It took me 11 minutes to do the drilling. I also decided to polish up the buffer faces. I put the ram in a Dremel (fixed in a vice) and used 280 grit emery cloth. Some of my buffers had a fairly obvious mould parting line which polishing only emphasised. I used a #2 cut flat needle to flatten this mark and then resumed polishing with the emery. Polishing the buffer faces took 8 minutes. Total time spent getting the parts of all four buffers ready for assembly was 50 minutes.

 

 

I have to say this compares unfavourably with the time it would take you to prepare the buffer parts for a Slater's kit. Although they also have lost-wax cast brass housings that require much the same effort the rams are steel and ready to fit. The Slater's buffer housings are also somewhat finer - much closer to scale.

 

Chaz

Edited January 10, 2016 by chaz