William's Workbench - LBSCR, LC&DR & SER in 4mm, and Gauge 1

[Regularity]

On 09/05/2021 at 19:29, Lacathedrale said:

1/2" to the foot is Imperial:

Yes, but Williams Models are to 13.5mm to the foot scale…

 

(Gauge 3 was originally ½” scale, with a gauge of 2.5” measured between the centres of the rail, rather than the inside faces. With ⅛” wide strips for rail, this made sense. Unfortunately, somewhere along the way, this, 5” gauge and 0 gauge in the UK stuck with the gauge, but used the inside faces of the rail, and adjusted the scale to suit, rather than keeping the scale and making the gauge more accurate. And the “Oh yes, I get a bigger boiler that way” argument doesn’t wash, as why not just move up a scale?)

 

Although it wouldn’t be imperial, 12mm to the foot models on gauge 3 track (63mm, sometimes a bit more) would be spot on!

[Lacathedrale]

This isn't strictly a scale model so also doesn't fit in the exact theme of the thread. It's a Stuart 10V stationary engine, all but finished now. This video was taken during the first trial assembly and is missing the valve components:

 

 

I've got to repair a damaged valve spindle and bolt it together, and it's finished.

 

And now I find myself in something of an impassé for my next project. I think I've narrowed it down to four options: all are well established and documented designs and I have the tools and physical capacity (if not the skills) to either.

 

A 5" Gauge SECR L-class 4-4-0.
My 'apex predator' project has always been a 5" Gauge loocmotive, but really I've no idea if I have the skills to pull it off and it's a huge undertaking over a very long period indeed. The complexity of this build is several orders of magnitude more challenging than anything I've ever done, and the cost in time and money is very high - £3,000+ over 4 to 6 years. The main carrot for this is that when the project is complete, there is a local track less than a mile away that would love to have more locomotives and drivers to pull public trains, and it would in theory have some level of utility when it's done. While not my favourite locomotive, it's certainly very attractive and has the benefit of being a well proven design.

 

 

 

A coal fired 2.5" Gauge LBSCR H2 4-4-2.

I went as far as to buy laser cut steel frames and materials for a good part of this locomotive already. While still pricey, it would account for around a quarter of the investment in time and money in comparison with the 5" Gauge L-class. There's significant less to do with this model when it's done, however. Indeed, my love affair with 2.5" cooled somewhat when I came to realise there was precious little in the way of tracks, clubs, or people in the south of the country - but it's a solid condender for a beautiful locomotive, and I have a strong affection for the locomotive and the line, this photo being taken about 100yds from my house in 1925 was definitely a big influence!

 

 

The following two are a pair of options which are less about the result and more about the process: I could build a much larger stationary beam engine, i.e. the Tubal Cain "Mary" Non-condensing Beam Engine. It's more complex than the Stuart 10V above, but significantly less than the H2.

 

 

I could also build a Gauge 1 LMS 4F - it's the simplest live steam locomotive and can be produced entirely by fabrication with the exception of the wheel castings. It's by far the cheapest option, clocking in at around £250 including the wheels, and would likely be the quickest - less than a year to complete if I pulled my finger out.

 

 

The unfortunate thing is that I couldn't care less about the 4F, and the other G1MRA locomotive builds such as the SECR D-class or H-class while attractive are at least as costly and complex as the H2 - which defeats the object of doing something in Gauge 1 entirely!

 

I appreciate this is a railway modelling forum than a model engineering one - but I would appreciate any thoughts or feedback.

[Mikkel]

All fascinating projects. As a  complete ignoramus, a logical approach seems to be doing the 1F first as practice, then the L class?

 

But of course logic is not always important in such undertakings.

 

Edited September 29, 2021 by Mikkel
typo

[Florence Locomotive Works]

On 13/09/2021 at 07:05, Lacathedrale said:

This isn't strictly a scale model so also doesn't fit in the exact theme of the thread. It's a Stuart 10V stationary engine, all but finished now. This video was taken during the first trial assembly and is missing the valve components:

 

 

I've got to repair a damaged valve spindle and bolt it together, and it's finished.

 

And now I find myself in something of an impassé for my next project. I think I've narrowed it down to four options: all are well established and documented designs and I have the tools and physical capacity (if not the skills) to either.

 

A 5" Gauge SECR L-class 4-4-0.
My 'apex predator' project has always been a 5" Gauge loocmotive, but really I've no idea if I have the skills to pull it off and it's a huge undertaking over a very long period indeed. The complexity of this build is several orders of magnitude more challenging than anything I've ever done, and the cost in time and money is very high - £3,000+ over 4 to 6 years. The main carrot for this is that when the project is complete, there is a local track less than a mile away that would love to have more locomotives and drivers to pull public trains, and it would in theory have some level of utility when it's done. While not my favourite locomotive, it's certainly very attractive and has the benefit of being a well proven design.

 

 

 

A coal fired 2.5" Gauge LBSCR H2 4-4-2.

I went as far as to buy laser cut steel frames and materials for a good part of this locomotive already. While still pricey, it would account for around a quarter of the investment in time and money in comparison with the 5" Gauge L-class. There's significant less to do with this model when it's done, however. Indeed, my love affair with 2.5" cooled somewhat when I came to realise there was precious little in the way of tracks, clubs, or people in the south of the country - but it's a solid condender for a beautiful locomotive, and I have a strong affection for the locomotive and the line, this photo being taken about 100yds from my house in 1925 was definitely a big influence!

 

 

The following two are a pair of options which are less about the result and more about the process: I could build a much larger stationary beam engine, i.e. the Tubal Cain "Mary" Non-condensing Beam Engine. It's more complex than the Stuart 10V above, but significantly less than the H2.

 

 

I could also build a Gauge 1 LMS 4F - it's the simplest live steam locomotive and can be produced entirely by fabrication with the exception of the wheel castings. It's by far the cheapest option, clocking in at around £250 including the wheels, and would likely be the quickest - less than a year to complete if I pulled my finger out.

 

 

The unfortunate thing is that I couldn't care less about the 4F, and the other G1MRA locomotive builds such as the SECR D-class or H-class while attractive are at least as costly and complex as the H2 - which defeats the object of doing something in Gauge 1 entirely!

 

I appreciate this is a railway modelling forum than a model engineering one - but I would appreciate any thoughts or feedback.

William, if I were you, I would construct the Atlantic rather than the Maid of Kent. As I see you have already completed a Stuart 10v you certainly have a good understanding of model engineering and I would advise that if you want to build a loco, definitely go with Gauge 3. Five inch gauge is good if you have oodles of time and and storage for the loco at a track, but if you don’t then I’ve heard it can be a world of pain. A Maid of Kent will probably weigh over 180 pounds when finished. 
 

The other option would be to scratch build something in the style of some of great tinplate makers of the Edwardian era, like Bing, Carette or Schöenner. This is my current project, a 2 inch gauge “Coupé Vent” French semi streamlined engine from the early 1900s, in the style of Schöenner for Bassett Lowke. It’s taken about 4 months to get to this stage.

 

You may also remember me from a comment I left on a your video about a Gauge 3 exhibition, a few months back. I hadn't realized who the channel proprietor was!

 

 

Here’s a link to a ever so slightly boring video I made on the engine, before I decided to make it a Coupé Vent.

 

 

Douglas

Edited September 29, 2021 by Florence Locomotive Works

[Lacathedrale]

I decided to go with the Gauge 3 / 2.5" Gauge LBSCR H2 Atlantic and it's plodding along:

 

 

[Lacathedrale]

I'm not sure that I can explain P4 as Imperial except as the target of representation..

 

REA B8 using exactoscale components, 45' panels of 9' x 10" sleepers and a series of 12" timbers for the turnout.

 

1:8 bullhead, filed bent and filed again to ensure the web is central, held in a jig with an aluminium hair clip for Z-axis alignment

 

Soldered up - needs a bit of tidying. The angle across the top is a reflection as I've attempted to put a very slight angle in the head of the rail as per prototype.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 7, 2021 by Lacathedrale

[Lacathedrale]

I soldered up some 20 thou brass shim to the bottom of the blades under where the chairs will sit, then filed it flush with the inside edges of the rail:

 

 

I understand it's common practise to leave these extended and use them to fix the wing rails in place, but unfortunately I do not have a jig to hold the vee in alignment with the wing rail while soldering, and I am using plastic timbers so can't do this in-situ on the turnout.

 

Threading on the chairs for the plain rail, the check rail was bent up and referenced against the spare print out on the workbench:

 

 

Though difficult to see, I soldered an etched fishplate to the end of the rail to carry contact to the exit road of the turnout  from the straight stock rail.

 

I used a steel rule onop of the chairs and against the head of the rail to keep that nice and straight

 

Lastly, I threaded on some chairs (I am not using L1 chairs for my 'real' layout, so decided to not buy any - the ones shown are S1 chairs cut down), and using the S4S triangular and check rail gauge, aligned it with the stock rail. I nudged it around a little until I felt the blunt nose was in the correct position on the timber relative to the line printed on the template underneath, then fixed all with Mek Pak and superglue (for the nose)

 

 

 

 

 

[Lacathedrale]

Got the set put in and the other stock rail down. For now it's only fixed opposite the vee and on the plain track past the toe:

 

 

Next job is to get the wing rails in - wish me luck!

[Lacathedrale]

First wingrail half down:

 

 

once this is set up , I will adjust it by sliding towards and away from the vee, and then glue the single chair all out there by itself to secure it.

 

Following @hayfield's method!

Edited December 9, 2021 by Lacathedrale

[hayfield]

Check the gauge tomorrow for gauge narrowing, in case the gauge has held the wing rail too tightly.  But spot on, as Mr Wynn stated this is the most important part as far as gauging is concerned to prevent the wheel hitting the tip of the vee

[Regularity]

It’s probably a slight distortion or parallax, but is that gauge square on to the stock rail?

[hayfield]

1 hour ago, Regularity said:

It’s probably a slight distortion or parallax, but is that gauge square on to the stock rail?

 

Well spotted one leg is on the flare of the check rail, plus is this not a check rail gauge but a standard gauge ?

[Lacathedrale]

0.742" for the gauge looks decent enough to me :

 

 

Now I'll use the check gauge to slide up the wing rail and glue the chair at the other end.

 

Not entirely sure of the next step? I THINK it should be to set out the curved stock rail by eye a little further along (right now it's fixed up to the tip of the vee) and then the other wing rail...

 

[hayfield]

The important gauge is the check rail, not the stock rail. The check rail guides the wheel away from striking the point of the vee

 

Certainly fix the curved stock rail by eye until you reach the plain (the straight section between the SET and the curve in the stock rail 

[Lacathedrale]

I did run downstairs and double check and the triangular gauge was indeed on the stock rail- it's def. the parallax effect in that photo although I was worried too!

 

It might be too late now but why would I use a check rail gauge in this scenario? The leg of the triangular gauge is narrow enough to fit between the stock rail and check rail, and the check rail is held to gauge by the check rail chairs?

[hayfield]

9 minutes ago, Lacathedrale said:

I did run downstairs and double check and the triangular gauge was indeed on the stock rail- it's def. the parallax effect in that photo although I was worried too!

 

It might be too late now but why would I use a check rail gauge in this scenario? The leg of the triangular gauge is narrow enough to fit between the stock rail and check rail, and the check rail is held to gauge by the check rail chairs?

 

The check rail stops the wheels crashing into the tip of the vee, as it happens I have been informed the stock rail cam actually be slightly over gauge as the wheels are wide enough to cope with this, but if the check rail is under gauge the wheels may bump into the Vee tip. other than stock jumping up a bit there is no damage, but on the prototype the tip of the Vee will be damaged

 

I do always say fit the check rail with a check rail gauge (including P4 where the chairs hold both check and stock rails).

[Lacathedrale]

Thank you, I know what the check rail is for - but it's not clear to my why I would use a check rail gauge - surely the part of the wing rail parallel to the stock rail should be set at the normal gauge from the stock rail?

 

My understanding was that the check rail gauge was used to space the check rail from the vee (or vice-versa), where the milled flat is used to sit ontop of the vee?

 

[hayfield]

The wing rail is gauged by using a strip of metal from the vee

 

The check rail is gauged from the vee/ common crossing using a check rail gauge flat or grooved

When using check rail chairs which grip both rails its OK for the stock rail to be slightly over gauge, as I said before. The check rail takes precedence over the stock rail 

 

The stock rail is usually set by either a roller gauge or 3 point gauge, why roller gauges have one let alone 2 inbuilt check rail groves is beyond me

[Lacathedrale]

Ah I understand now! Thank you!

[hayfield]

17 hours ago, Lacathedrale said:

Ah I understand now! Thank you!

 

I think a lot of misunderstandings were caused in years gone by by keeping things cheap. Lets face it no one is going to build a turnout if they have to spend between £30 & £50 on gauges, and of course you could with care and a digital calliper build a turnout to gauge without any expensive gauges.

 

Nothing wrong starting out with basis tools and either a cheap gauge or home made ones, plus 00 gauge is very forgiving

 

With P4 the tolerances are much tighter, and its best to follow the track building methods laid down by the various societies, then of course what is good for soldered construction may not be for chaired track construction. Its no wonder the novice gets confused. But a well made hand built gauge is just as good as an expensive one 

[Lacathedrale]

The upfront costs (while they can be minimised in some areas as you have discussed in your turnout thread) are quite high - certainly it's a break-even by about half a dozen turnouts, but when one has to make them successfully as part of that bargain, I can see why some balk at the idea. 

 

I am by no means wealthy but my modelling is constrained more by time than money at this point - so getting the various gauges and jigs to avoid anciliary work was worthwhile to me. Similarly, though I actually have a lathe and milling machine, and in theory it shouldn't be a problem to produce my own roller gauge, mint gauge, etc. -  I would rather pay £5 and have it ready to use, than spend the few hours to make the parts.

 

I imagine as and when my situation changes (it's fairly horrid to think I'm over 50% through the average working career already) this may reverse.

 

Anyway - I have slotted in the centre section of a check rail gauge on the X-chair position, just placed loosely in the below photo, and glued down the straight section of the curved stock rail (i.e. to the tip of the wing rails):

 

The next job is to fit the other wing rail, this time using the check rail gauge , then the straight closure rail/blade, then the curved stock rail, then the curved closure rail/blade. Simple... right?

 

I would normally fit both stock rails, but I note that @hayfield lays the straight closure rail/blade before that, since there are functional spacers after the slide chairs to that may help align and vuide the curved stock rail a little.

 

[Regularity]

Make your own, using the late Norman Pattenden’s method:

Take a length of hexagonal bar stock, and chuck it in the 3-jaw chuck. Drill through and tap for whatever size studding you have available. Part off four lengths to be the distance over the check rails and tap the holes, or at least the ends. You can also buy threaded spacers for use in electronics, and put them onto threaded studding to adjust the gauge, if you don’t have a lathe.

Get some sheet material of the same thickness as you flangeways for straight straight track, plus the 3 gauge widenings used on the prototype. Cut two rectangles out of each, and drill a hole in the middle to clear whatever size of studding you are using. Cut 8 more rectangles out of sheet material, to the same width as the previous rectangles but shorter by about the full height of your rail. Drill holes centrally for tapping, and tap.

Assemble to create simple track gauges that will set the distances, but not clamp the rail (otherwise inclined rail will be made vertical, and removal of the gauges will lead to gauge narrowing).

 

They should look something like the following:

 

[Izzy]

One of the most crucial aspects to avoid with any point work is under-gauging. This is especially so with tighter radius where you might be pushing the limits of what can be run through it, indeed a bit of gauge widening is always helpful whether intended or not where as it’s the opposite for narrowing.

 

In order to prevent under-gauging I now lay down the rails in a specific order. The designated main stock rail, the crossing V gauged to it, followed by the stock wing rail and then closure rail/blade. I then gauge and lay the diverging stock rail with it’s set off the blade/closure/wing/V. The idea is that the set can follow the planning of the blade ( which if home done might not be ‘perfect’ - probably normal in my case), which is where most under-gauging can occur if both stock rails are laid first and the distance is not sufficient to accommodate both blades. The other wing rail and closure/blade is then laid. 
 

It’s all nip & tuck of course.

[Regularity]

Quote

You can also buy threaded spacers for use in electronics, and put them onto threaded studding to adjust the gauge, if you don’t have a lathe.

In which case, once you have the thing set correctly, apply epoxy or solder to set the whole thing solid:

 

[Lacathedrale]

Hmmm. Something's not quite right - the wing rail is gauged properly against the curved stock rail, but slipping the flangeway gauge through the curved route strikes the nose.

 

I used a straight edge to continue the curved rail parallel with the angle of the vee, but clearly it has drifted infinitesimally, so I had a real mare trying to get the wing rail aligned properly and had to tweak the angle slightly - which is presumably how the geometry's off there.

 

Either way, it appeared to roll smoothly through. I felt the faintest whisper of a rub around the knuckle area so to see if I could alleviate that, I shifted the new wing rail a little longitudinally to no avail. After a little bit of fiddling, now my wagon rides up over the knuckle

 

i really hope my work so far hasn't been wasted, gosh  I know it's rewarding when it works, but I'm not entirely sure where I've gone wrong here and that's quite a few hours down the pan

 

@Izzy are you talking about soldered pcb/etch construction or plastic chairs? I feel like doing this with all plastic chairs - particularly around the vee - is like trying to do it with one arm tied behind my back!

 

@Regularity thank you for the drawing of the gauges, next time I'm in the workshop I'll have a look - I think I have some 5BA studding laying around.

Edited December 11, 2021 by Lacathedrale