Worseter - update

[Killybegs]

Work has commenced in earnest on the latest project with 70010 Owen Glendower slowly morphing into 70018 Flying Dutchman. As part of this process, the smoke deflectors have been removed and new WR ones have been ordered from Judith Edge Kits. Similarly, the lamp irons have been removed to be replaced by the WR variety. That didn't take very long but removing the overhead electrics warning transfers was another matter. Patient work with IPA (no, not beer!) and a cocktail stick finally achieved a reasonable result. Hopefully the shiny patches will disappear with a little light weathering. A similar process was adopted to remove the 0's and replace the with 8's (from HMRS).

 

 

70018 is being mated up with a Comet chassis. As I will be making a few modifications to this, the body outline and chassis details have been worked up in Autocad which will, hopefully, eliminate any hiccups later on. Full details will follow.

[Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71]

....some smashing modelling going on here John....keep up the good work!

 

Dave

[Killybegs]

I made a start on the Comet chassis at the weekend. First up were the coupling rods as these are needed to set up the chassis jig. I should not have done this while also trying to watch the rugby, especially as I had decided to try and make forked connections (as per the prototype) using the components on the etch (designed to be rigid or articulated on the crank pin). While the first one was successful, I decided that it was a bit fragile so decided to start again. Fortunately, I was able to use the other coupling rod (still on the etch) as a master to cut a new one out of n/s sheet.

 

This time I made a lapped joint but articulated the coupling rod as per the prototype, not on the crank pin. To do this, everything has to be turned back to front. The Comet coupling rods come in three pieces: a rigid backing piece and two half etched front pieces. The backing piece has a half etched break point for articulation. This break point is ignored and the rod separated as per the prototype. These now become the outside face of the rods with the redundant break point to the rear. The half etched front pieces now become the backing. I used the fluted rods for extra strength. Prior to separating the rods, a complete one was used to drill three holes in a block of hardwood. Drill bits placed in these holes were then used to locate the parts when laminating the rods. As the loco carried plain rods, the bosses at the front were built up with brass shim (I didn't have any nickel silver that thin) and the depth of the top webs of the fluted rods at the back were thinned down a bit. The (now) rear rod has a half etched representation of the articulated joint which weakens it a its most vulnerable point, so a small shim was soldered over this. The joint was made with a brass pin with the head filed flat. I also countersunk the front face of the rod slightly so that the pin sat well. The pin was then soldered at the rear and filed down flush with the adjacent afore mentioned shim. For the soldering process, I separate the two halves of the joint with a slip of tissue paper soaked in clock oil. This can be teased out afterwards and gives a little lateral flexibility to the joint.

 

I hope the photograph clarifies the rather long winded description!

 

[Dave Holt]

70018 is being mated up with a Comet chassis. As I will be making a few modifications to this, the body outline and chassis details have been worked up in Autocad which will, hopefully, eliminate any hiccups later on. Full details will follow.

Hope you're going to have the frames at the correct spacing (only 3'-43/4" outside on a Brit).

[Killybegs]

My book says 3'5", although I have to admit I hadn't picked that up. That would mean OO spacers and a lot of washers. I will have to think about it.

 

Done a bit more checking. On the prototype the frames were narrowed so that they were on the centreline of the hornblocks, this 'avoided offset loading through the spring hangers'.  There would not be room, on the model, for the gearbox to fit between normal configuration hornblocks with the frames at prototypical spacing. I regret to say that I am therefore going to put on my Philistines' hat and stick with the wider frame spacing! 

 

Notwithstanding that Dave, thanks for the info as it made me do a bit more research, which is always worthwhile.

Edited March 25, 2015 by Killybegs

[Killybegs]

As we are now into April, I thought it was time for a progress report. The basic chassis has been assembled along with the motion bracket and the support for the lubricators. As the project progresses, I find more discrepancies between the prototype, the Hornby body and the Comet chassis! Most of these can be overcome although the inspection hole in the valance for the reversing gear, which is too far forward and doesn't match up with the motion bracket, will have to stay as I don't want to repaint the body! The support for the lubricators is a little too far back on the chassis but I can live with that, but I have had to raise it quite a bit. Interestingly, the lubricating mechanism from the Hornby chassis is a perfect fit between its location on the Hornby body and the Comet chassis. I have had to dispense with the mounting bracket/ frame spacer for the motion bracket as it interferes with the compensation. The mounting bracket has been reinforced with a length of brass tube which is an interference fit between the frames and has its upper side sitting on top of the frames. This all helps with location. I have added a bit of extra detailing on the LH motion bracket.

 

 

I am also working on fabricating the bottom section of the boiler/smokebox below the footplate. This will be done in styrene.

[Killybegs]

I haven't made as much progress in the last week as I would have wished. I blame all this fine weather, not to mention holiday weekends. Anyway, as there will be zero progress in the next two weeks, I thought I had better post a progress pic. At least it's now sitting on its drivers and everything appears to be level and at the correct height.

 

[bgman]

Like others before me I've just picked up on your excellent and totally atmospheric photographs, really enjoyable read, far better than watching that gogglebox thing in the corner !

Looking forward to more of your fine work.

 

Happy modelling

 

Grahame

 

 

Editid dew two Spilling mistak !

Edited April 21, 2015 by bgman

[Killybegs]

Back from my break in the UK, I thought I had better make the most of the two weeks before I go away again to make more progress on the Brit.

 

The trailing truck is now finished and tested. Many thanks to 'Mike G' for the etch that makes up into the basic structure (kindly hand delivered at Trainwest). I have added a few tweaks of my own: reinforcing the corners with short lengths of square brass tube (this makes the whole thing a lot more rigid) and soldering a length of rectangular brass tube on the top of the rear cross member. This acts as a bearing pad and sits up against two posts soldered to the chassis. This is more or less a reverse of what happens on the prototype! The posts were cut slightly over size, soldered in place and then filed to the correct height. This was done slowly, checking regularly with the rolling chassis (with truck fitted) on the track until there was a good electrical connection between both rear drivers and the track.

 

The wheels are sprung as per Mike's design but I have also used two lengths of spring wire mounted on the chassis and bearing down on the bearing pad on the truck to exert a little downward pressure.

 

The axle boxes/springs were rescued from the Hornby donor. I did have to spend a couple of hours filing about a millimetre off the rear faces but that was a lot quicker than starting from scratch. The Comet ones would have required the same treatment and are not as accurate. The rear of the axle boxes were drilled out to accommodate the sprung pin point bearings.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 30, 2015 by Killybegs

[Dave Holt]

I like the load-bearing approach to the rear truck. Having contact between chassis and truck at the rear end makes all the difference to the appearance of solidity that real loco chassis have, in my view. Hope you'll apply the same principle to the front bogie - side bearers rule OK!

Dave.

[Killybegs]

I like the load-bearing approach to the rear truck. Having contact between chassis and truck at the rear end makes all the difference to the appearance of solidity that real loco chassis have, in my view. Hope you'll apply the same principle to the front bogie - side bearers rule OK!

Dave.

 

Agreed. Still finalising the design of the bearers!

[Mike G]

That looks very nice John. I like the idea of the side bearers (I had not thought of sharing the load like that)- as Dave says - you've made a better job of that than I have mine. I'll have to get some more etched and send one over for you to complete!

 

As for the front, I used the masokits job, which if I'm honest I found a fiddle (yes, I know it's in the name!). The next Brit - when I get round to it - will have my own sprung version, using the diminutive high level bearings and a big, bad brass rubbing plate on top of it. As we briefly spoke, I can never understand folk who are happy for their wheels to run in, what amounts to, a cut out. Just doesn't seem a good engineered practice. If I may ask Dave a question, what have you used in some of your bogies on your 4-6-0 and 4-6-2's?

 

Right, I'm off to do battle with my 45xx and try and get it finished this evening...yeah right!

 

Good to have seen you again.

 

Mike

[Killybegs]

As for the front, I used the masokits job, which if I'm honest I found a fiddle (yes, I know it's in the name!). The next Brit - when I get round to it - will have my own sprung version, using the diminutive high level bearings and a big, bad brass rubbing plate on top of it. As we briefly spoke, I can never understand folk who are happy for their wheels to run in, what amounts to, a cut out. Just doesn't seem a good engineered practice. If I may ask Dave a question, what have you used in some of your bogies on your 4-6-0 and 4-6-2's?

 

Right, I'm off to do battle with my 45xx and try and get it finished this evening...yeah right!

 

Good to have seen you again.

 

Mike

 

I am using the Comet bogie but modified to take sprung bearings and beefed up a bit. It will slide/rotate on a pillar, with side bearing pads to keep things 'solid'. Pics to follow in due course (holidays permitting!).

 

Best of luck with the '45'.

[Killybegs]

It's a pretty miserable wet day. The 'girls' have watched a movie then gone out for a walk, so I have been able to do a bit of work on the bogie. The first pic shows just how much the axle slots had to be enlarged to take bearings. I opened up those in the main member first before soldering the overlay in place and opening it up to match. The axles are sprung on guitar string threaded through holes drilled in the downstands on the cross member. 

 

 

The second pic shows the bogie loosely in position with styrene packing to check the height required for bearing pads. This works out at 2.25mm o/a, but there are three more layers of 0.35mm nickel silver to go in first, leaving 1.2mm for the bearing pads.

 

Edited May 2, 2015 by Killybegs

[DLT]

I'm following this with interest.  I've never had the greatest success with front bogies, so I'm keen to see how you do it.

 

Cheers, Dave.

[Killybegs]

Apart from a few bits of detailing, the bogie is now finished and has successfully completed its test runs through some pointwork.

 

 

This pic of the underside shows the strip which, in addition to keeping the bogie in place, also retains the wheel sets

 

 

This pic of the top of the bogie shows the two bearing rails (2 x 1mm brass rectangular tube). The side pieces are merely cosmetic and are slightly lower than the rails. This was my original design which I think gives more stability than a pair of pads bearing on the outer edges of the bogie. It also shows the spring wires that bear on the top hat bearings. These needed a bit of tweaking. Too little down force allows the wheels to lift, too much lifts the front drivers off the track.

 

 

The last pic shows the pillar on the chassis. This is a 10BA bolt with a short length of 2.35mm od brass tube. 

 

 

[Rail-Online]

 

This pic of the top.................... It also shows the spring wires that bear on the top hat bearings.

 

 

John,

 

What stops the top hat bearings rotating?- do they have flats on the sides?

Excellent work BTW!

 

Cheers Tony

[Killybegs]

John,

 

What stops the top hat bearings rotating?- do they have flats on the sides?

Excellent work BTW!

 

Cheers Tony

 

Nothing I'm afraid! There is degree of rotation with the bearings within the slots but most of it takes place between axle and bearing. Good point though, if I had filed flats on the bearings, I wouldn't have needed to file away as much of the bogie as I did. Something to remember for the next time.

[Dave Holt]

That looks very nice John. I like the idea of the side bearers (I had not thought of sharing the load like that)- as Dave says - you've made a better job of that than I have mine. I'll have to get some more etched and send one over for you to complete!

 

As for the front, I used the masokits job, which if I'm honest I found a fiddle (yes, I know it's in the name!). The next Brit - when I get round to it - will have my own sprung version, using the diminutive high level bearings and a big, bad brass rubbing plate on top of it. As we briefly spoke, I can never understand folk who are happy for their wheels to run in, what amounts to, a cut out. Just doesn't seem a good engineered practice. If I may ask Dave a question, what have you used in some of your bogies on your 4-6-0 and 4-6-2's?

 

Right, I'm off to do battle with my 45xx and try and get it finished this evening...yeah right!

 

Good to have seen you again.

 

Mike

As a rule, my bogies are part of the overall compensation system, incorporating a hollow pivot tube to allow weight transfer onto the external compensating beams used on Stanier and BR Standard bogies. However, the arrangement of side bearers and axle boxes would be equally applicable to a sprung arrangement. The main problem, as John points out, is making sure the bogie carries enough but not too much weight. This is more easily controlled in compensated locos.

Unfortunately, I haven't got any good photos which clearly illustrate my arrangements, but the following (very rough) sketch and photo of the underside of a recent chassis give some idea of the arrangements.

First the sketch:-

Std 5 bogie0130.pdf

You can see that there are bearing pads attached under each mainframe and these rest on top of an extended bearer plate screwed to the top of the bogie. This plate has a slotted hole which allows the bogie to pivot and also slide sideways under the influence of the side control springs (not shown). This arrangement replicates the full size arrangement, at least visually from the outside, but does require the bogie side frames to be at the prototype spacing.

The photo shows the latest version of such a bogie, in this case under a Stanier Class 5 Caprotti chassis.

You can see my current arrangement for bogie axle boxes made from round and square brass tube, sliding in horn guides of brass angle soldered to the outside of the bogie frames - again per prototype. In earlier bogies, the axles just ran directly in the bogie frame slots. This doesn't appear to have caused any problems (with excess wear) so far.

Sorry to butt in but hope this gives some ideas.

Dave.

Std 5 bogie0130.pdf

[Phil Bullock]

Wonderful work on a very fitting loco John

 

Many thanks for sharing

 

Phil

[Killybegs]

As a rule, my bogies are part of the overall compensation system, incorporating a hollow pivot tube to allow weight transfer onto the external compensating beams used on Stanier and BR Standard bogies. However, the arrangement of side bearers and axle boxes would be equally applicable to a sprung arrangement. The main problem, as John points out, is making sure the bogie carries enough but not too much weight. This is more easily controlled in compensated locos.

Unfortunately, I haven't got any good photos which clearly illustrate my arrangements, but the following (very rough) sketch and photo of the underside of a recent chassis give some idea of the arrangements.

First the sketch:-

Std 5 bogie0130.pdf

You can see that there are bearing pads attached under each mainframe and these rest on top of an extended bearer plate screwed to the top of the bogie. This plate has a slotted hole which allows the bogie to pivot and also slide sideways under the influence of the side control springs (not shown). This arrangement replicates the full size arrangement, at least visually from the outside, but does require the bogie side frames to be at the prototype spacing.

The photo shows the latest version of such a bogie, in this case under a Stanier Class 5 Caprotti chassis.

IMG_1363.JPG

You can see my current arrangement for bogie axle boxes made from round and square brass tube, sliding in horn guides of brass angle soldered to the outside of the bogie frames - again per prototype. In earlier bogies, the axles just ran directly in the bogie frame slots. This doesn't appear to have caused any problems (with excess wear) so far.

Sorry to butt in but hope this gives some ideas.

Dave.

 

Very nice Dave. Your solution is a lot more sympathetic to the prototype than mine! 

[Mike G]

Thanks for taking the time to illustrate that Dave, a bit beyond my abilities but very nicely worked idea that will give the bogie real balance and more importantly load bearing ability.

 

Mike

[Killybegs]

I have managed to get a bit more done since we came back from France.

 

The basic cylinder assembly is now fairly complete. To get it a little further forward and still match the valve gear, lubricator supports etc., I had to chase out the footplate drop so that the whole chassis could slide forward. The oversize cut outs in the chassis to clear the bogie wheels may be responsible for this error as the front slope of the chassis could not be cut back any further without clashing with these cut outs. Anyway, the mounting brackets now line up with the cut outs in the valance and the cylinders are 'almost' correct in relation to the centre line of the bogie. I made up a n/s plate to accurately locate the cylinders and to raise them by 0.4mm as they sat a little low as designed. Ah, the problems of matching up the prototype, a ready to run body and a proprietary chassis! I also had to pack out the rear face of the basic cylinder structure prior to fitting the overlays. This is shown in the pic below.

 

 

Before finishing off the cylinders, I made a start on the valve gear to make sure everything fitted. The pic below shows most of it, less the drop links, eccentric rod and return crank (which have been made up and checked for fit). I soldered the return crank to a crank pin nut and tapped it for the crank pin before reducing the thickness of the nut. There's a bit more to do on this side, but, having sorted out the problems, hopefully, the other side won't take so long. I might even get it done before I come over to the UK at the end of the week!

 

 

I need to modify the slide bars to more accurately represent the prototype and have ordered a selection of n/s strip to do this. 

 

Edited May 31, 2015 by Killybegs

[Killybegs]

A couple more connections made and time for a trial fit. In this shot, the connections to the motion bracket and the return crank are temporary. The lubricator is from the Hornby 'host' and is a pretty good fit!

 

[45609]

Looking good John although, wanting to build a Brit of my own using a similar set of components, I can't help getting a little disheartened by all the mods your having to make to get the chassis to fit and approach something close to the prototype dimensions.

 

Cheers....Morgan