Chuffer Davies

Hi Jeff, I believe it to be a mistake to elongate the crank pin holes in the coupling rods associated with the driven axle. The driven axle is my reference and everything else is adjusted to be compatible with that. However, If the driven axle is coupled to the other axles via a hinged joint in the coupling rod life is slightly more complicated and in that case I may choose to adjust the crank pin holes of the driven axle having first ensured that the next two axles have been sorted and run smoothly without binding when turned manually. Most of my 6 or 8 coupled models are driven off the rear axle and so this is the only way I’ve come up with sorting binding. Regards, Frank

Can J suggest that a simpler way to check if this is the problem is to remove the coupling rods and then put power to the motor to test that the driven axle turns smoothly when not connected to any other axle. Regards, Frank

With regards the quartering of friction fit plastic driving wheels I personally have a fairly simplistic approach which has never caused me any concerns. It has previously been documented on WW that the wheels on opposite sides of a chassis do not need to be at exactly 90 degrees offset. It has been confirmed that the prototype 120 degree offset associated with 3 cylinder locomotives can be successfully made to work in model form. The 90 degree offset is therefore a cosmetic rather than mechanical constraint, and wIth that in mind: It must be said that it is critical that the axle hole spacings exactly match those of the coupling rods. Get this wrong and you are pretty well doomed to fail. When building models with rigid chassis it is hoped that the alignment will have been guaranteed by the manufacturing process. If building compensated or sprung chassis which utilise horn blocks and guides it is essential that every effort is taken to ensure that these are spaced accurately and that the guides are vertical. Some sort of jig will be critical to achieving this. Personally I have the Avonside jig that was available from Eileen's Emporium but pretty much any jig will do, although some are easier to use than others. Once the axle bearings are all installed, the first stage is to fit all the driving wheels at roughly 90 degree offset (by eye). As a rule the right hand side crank pins lead the left hand by 90 degrees but this is not an absolute rule for all prototype locomotives, but I always apply that rule on my models (Rule 1). As a rough guide if the wheels have an even number of spokes then the spokes on opposite wheels should be in alignment, whereas for wheels with an odd number the spokes should be midway between their opposites. I next fit the coupling rod to all the wheels on one side only of the loco, it doesn't matter which side is chosen. The wheels are then rotated so that all the crank pins are at approximately either top or bottom dead centre. I now turn the chassis round and check the alignment of all the crankpins on the side without a coupling rod and make any adjustments (again by eye) until all wheels appear exactly aligned. I now fit the other coupling rod and check for any tight spots when turning the wheels by hand. Nine times out of ten the wheels will turn without tight spots. If there is a tight spot then before doing anything else I recheck that all the crankpins along one side still look to be in alignment making any adjustments as I go. If there remains a tight spot then if the loco has more than two axles, then it is normally possible check the rotation of the chassis two axles at a time. If the coupling rod is rigid throughout then you will need to remove one or more axles from the chassis leaving the driven axle and one other. Check if the tight spot still remains, try adjusting the quartering of the non driven axle to see if this cures it, but if there remains a tight spot then set the quartering to minimise the tightness and then attempt to see which crankpin holes needs opening out to cure the problem. I never adjust crank pin holes with a broach, I always elongate the crankpin holes (on the non driven axle) with a rat tailed needle file, one way or the other depending upon which side of the crankpin hole the crankpin is pressed up against. This takes some very careful investigation to make sure the hole is elongated in the correct direction. Once the tight spot has been eliminated on a pair of wheels I then introduce the other axle/s one at a time and repeat the process knowing that if the new axle has re-introduced a tight spot then the issue must be with the wheels on the new axle. This can be quite time consuming but it is important to be patient and to only remove material from a crankpin hole once you are certain this is required and even then only take a very small amount of metal each time and retest to confirm that this is improving the situation rather than making it worse (in which case you've got the wrong crankpin). This is very much my approach and others may do it differently. I do see this as a bit of a black art, and definitely a skill that can only be acquired through personal experience. It is always better to get the hornblocks correctly spaced in the first place and then you will not need to adjust the crankpin holes at all. Regards, Frank

Does it depend on whether the chip has the Stayalive control built in or whether a separate interface has been used? I use small Zimo decoders which need a separate interface wired directly to the common (supply) rails on the chip. I don’t see how the chip could then differentiate from power supplied via the track and power being taken from the capacitor.

That's not what the Stayalive does. Its purpose is to maintain power to the chip in the event track current is temporarily interrupted. The chip is just like any other computer-like processor and goes back to its start configuration (resets) if power is interrupted. This is particularly annoying when you have a sound chip fitted as the loco will go through all the start up sounds before it gets going again. Stayalive just lets the chip continue to perform the last instruction it received be that continue, speed up, slow down, finish blowing the whistle, etc. Its ability to supply traction current is critically dependent upon the capacity of the device. It wont keep supplying power indefinitely but it usually only needs to maintain traction current for a split second before the supply is restored. The more power hungry the demand the less time it will be able to maintain current for. I can't think of any situation where the Stayalive will have a negative effect except when the panic button is pressed because in my experience locos fitted with a Stayalive will continue to run until the capacitor is exhausted which may mean it doesn't stop in time to avoid the disaster you hit the panic button for in the first place.

I’m not aware that a stay alive can be turned off unless it is disconnected. It is connected to the common rails and is not (for instance) switchable by CV changes. Reducing it would require replacing the capacitor with a lower value. What is the problem that is concerning you with the stayalive? Frank

Is there any information about the gearing? The first release had a ratio of approximately 18:1 which gave them a ridiculous top speed and at low speeds whilst smooth some were reportedly a bit twitchy to control. Hopefully they have changed the ratio to make low speed control easier and a more prototypical top speed.

Hi Neal, whilst you might be correct in saying that even if the model has a sound decoder it may not generate a sound under DC control (although that has not been my limited experience), I think it is safe to say that without a sound chip there is no possibility of a model creating a sound under either DC or DCC control. That is what I believe Mike had asked. That having been said I think Triang once attempted to recreate a chuff sound using sand paper rubbing against a revolving cam connected to an axle. No sound chip required for that solution. Frank

You said it.

I’m delighted to say that despite living in the “No Deliver Zone” mine arrived today care of the Royal Mail having been dispatched Friday. The model looks stunning, but sadly the wheels are too close together by a factor of 2mm. That’s the downside of modelling in EM. I now need to work up the courage to start dismantling the model to re-gauge the wheels. P.S. the chimney was still firmly attached to the top of the boiler, but thanks for the warning anyway. Frank

Hi Tony, I’m interested so I’ll mail you if it hasn’t gone yet. Frank

I received an email (Friday) to say it’s been dispatched even before the status was updated on the website. I’m hoping it will be delivered early next week on that basis. Frank

Do we know whether date order means the order in which the original orders were placed or is it the order in which the re-orders and payments were placed about a year ago? Frank

Yet another year has passed since our last update regarding the building of Clayton (EM) by members of the Shipley MRS. With only 4 of us regularly down at the clubrooms working on the layout itself it is inevitable that progress will be slow and I don't want to bore readers with insignificant items but I thought it worth giving you a progress update as we commence 2024. Barry and Andrew continue to work hard on creating the extensive grass land surrounding the line running through Clayton. We are using hanging basket liner to represent the grass. This is glued face down onto the surface of the layout and once dry the backing sheet is torn away to leave the fibres. The matting is then trimmed to length first using some electric dog sheers to get the majority of the work done followed up with a pair of scissors to get down to the required the depth. The matting is then coloured to represent typical Yorkshire Pennine pasture which tends to be a rich green because of the amount of rain that the area attracts. Barry and Andrew intend to go back over the area to add weeds and bushes but I think it is already possible to get a feel for the likely look of the finished product. Meanwhile I have been building bridges although I leave the painting to Barry because I don't have an artistic bone in my body despite being the son of two artistic parents. I am building two under bridges, one which went over a farm track giving access to Holt's Farm and the other larger bridge at the start of Pasture Lane which in reality runs near parallel to the railway from this bridge all the way to beyond Clayton Station before turning through 90 deg's and crossing the railway on the over bridge shown in the above photo. The basic shape of the bridge is first cut from 3mm Birch ply. This is then coated with a thick wash of PVA glue to act as a key for the next layer. Once thoroughly dry the ply is covered with a skim of plaster which has been strengthened with a blob of PVA glue. The PVA reduces the risk of the plaster chipping as well as giving the plaster a degree of flexibility so it doesn't crack whilst being worked. Once the plaster is dry the surface is rubbed smooth with glass paper and a representation of Yorkshire stones is then scribed onto the surface of the plaster by hand. The scribing took several day long visits to the clubrooms to complete but I don't think it was time wasted in the end as I am very happy with the end result now that Barry has painted it. I chickened out in one respect in that the curved roof of the under bridge was formed from embossed plastic card as I couldn't face attempting to scribe stones into a curved surface. I have to say the first bridge was far more of a learning curve than I had ever expected. Bridges are far more complicated than I had previously appreciated and some of the model took three attempts before I was happy with the finished article. I therefore decided to create a card mock-up of the 2nd bridge so that I could resolve all the issues before committing to cutting wood and scribing plaster, the stage I have just reached. HOLT FARM BRIDGE: PASTURE LANE BRIDGE: At home work continues on building the motive power for Clayton (and some other projects). Progress can be followed on my Chuffer's Workbench Topic elsewhere. Apologies for the Great Western loco in the above link, I don't appear to be able to swap it for a more appropriate picture, but the majority of Chuffer's Workbench relates to the building of LNER locomotives for the Clayton layout. Bye for now. Frank

With the imminent arrival of our rail motors could someone from Kernow explain how the completion process will now work so we know what to expect? TIA Frank

Hi Tony, I can only surmise that if a prototype works with cranks offset at 120deg then in theory a model should also work with the same offset. As yet I have not built a model of a three cylinder locomotive but if I ever do I’ll certainly give it a go. I wonder if anyone on WW already attempted to do this? Frank

Can anyone suggest where I can get 4mm scale etched builder’s plates from. Ideally I need oval North British/Glasgow plates but given the writing will be illegible then any oval plates will do e.g. GNR plates. TIA, Frank

Martin, I was given a GW wheel press several years ago but have never used it and probably never will. If you want it message me your name and address and I’ll put it in the post. Frank

I have seen the rail and spikes used to recreate American HO track using balsa wood sleepers. The fibre sleeper bases of the Peco system are fairly unique to British OO and unsuitable for using with e.g. the plastic chairs of the C&L system so probably of no real use to scale modellers. Frank

That takes me straight back to the late 1960’s when I was in my mid teens. Every Friday evening I would cycle over to my Godfather’s house in the village of Queen Charlton (a 7 mile cycle ride across Bristol) to visit his Great Western terminus to terminus layout. Graham Dawes was a farm hand and Special Constable. When he discovered I was an aspiring railway modeller he sent me an Invitation to visit his layout. It was he who gave me my Chuffer Davies nickname. All the track on his layout was made from this Peco spiked track product laid on fibreboard to enable easy insertion of the spikes through the fibre sleeper bases. The rail was flat bottomed as I recall. The layout ran very well indeed and showed me how much better than standard set track, hand built track could be. Happy Days, Frank

Sounds a bit extreme to me but might be necessary if you want it to negotiate near right angled curves. What is your minimum radius likely to be? E.g. if your minimum radius is 3ft then you only need about 0.3mm either way on the centre axle. Most kits will easily provide that and more. I normally add washers to restrict side play on the outer axles and only allow the centre axle/s to move sideways. This reduces the risk of buffer locking. Once you have the basic chassis assembled you can experiment to determine the optimum number of washers needed to achieve sufficient side play by pushing the chassis around a length of radiused track. Frank

Looks more like the frames from a 1960’s K’s kit. Shame on DJH….. Frank

I am planning to experiment with self adhesive Copper Slug Tape from the local garden centre. It is very thin so can be cut with a scalpel blade, and more resistant to stretching/distortion than plastic tape. Has anyone else already tried this I wonder? Frank

For the Great Western there is a set of books authored by J.H.Russell. Great Western Coaches Parts1 & 2, plus the Appendix. Frank

Hi, I may have completely misinterpreted your intended approach but am I correct in thinking your reference to a 1219c means you have a small Portescap unit and you are considering fitting a HL worm on the 1219 motor? If so I must recommend caution. None of the Portescap motors have been configured to cope with the end thrust demands that a worm gear would place on them. Those who have tried have reported that whilst initially they seem to cope they soon fail. I am in no doubt that when Chris commissioned the HL coreless motors he will have requested alternate bearings to cope with the end thrust forces of his worm gears. Frank