Buck Jumping on Mass

User avatar
Will L
Posts: 1624
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:54 pm

Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby Will L » Thu Sep 19, 2013 10:00 pm

As Crewe Area Group has more or less concluded that Knutsford is coming to the end of it's active exhibition attending life, or more accurately, many of those whose efforts are needed to exhibit it feel that they are coming to the end etc. etc. , there seems little point in my continuing to produce stock suitable for Knutsford, particularly as my own proclivities are more inclined to things Great and Eastward leaning. So I've been looking around for a new project to actively involve my modelling urges.

My first instinct is to be generally inclined toward something Wisbech and Upwelly. I already have 4 of the D&S W&U tramway coaches. They were built while I was in the progress of migrating towards P4, but at that stage I had only got as far as EM. As a result their wheels will need some attention if I am to maintain my general disinclination to follow the Goodall approach to P4 wheel dimensions. These W&U tramway coaches once pipped a David Jenkinson 7mm scale 12 wheel Midland dinner to the coaching stock first prize at the Derby show. While I am very happy with my W&U coaches I was always somewhat mystified by this result. I can only assume that perhaps Mr Jenkinson had won a few times before?

The W&U depot at Outwell Village would make a fine model, with an interesting and quirky track plan which includes, right at its heart, a significant bend. Always useful when trying to get a layout into a limited space. The real glory is the setting. Coming from Wisbech, the roadside tramway enters Outwell in close proximity to the Wisbech canal which then locks down into the Well Creek a navigable waterway. This in turn curves round the tramway deport that exists in part to serves a wharf on the creek. To reach the deport, the tramway bridges the creek and enters the depot yard about one third of the way along its length, making for an interesting track plan. If you choose your period with care, it featured a siding that crosses the running line on the flat. Then the pièce de resistance was the last (or first) point which is situated in the middle of the T road junction outside the yard. From here the track leaves the village along the bank of the creek on its way to Upwell.
outwell.jpg

As well as the tramway itself, within the likely bounds of any layout are the canal, the creek and much of the domestic housing for Outwell village, and the church. The down side for such a layout would be a certain lack of operational interest as, from the tramway’s point of view this, was not even a train crossing point. While I suppose it is just as viable as the average shunting plank, I do like the ability to run a good variety of trains that do an interesting variety of different things while "on stage". I can envisage spending years building the layout and particularly its associated array of buildings, then dying of terminal boredom half way through the first morning of exhibition running. And of course Outwell Village Deport has been done before, at least twice.

Alternatively, if looking for something with greater operational interest, I probably need something that was a proper railway, and I do find Wells-next-the-Sea a very appealing prototype. The station itself is ideally model sized, requiring little if any compression to make a reasonable centrepiece, although the same cannot be said for the three approaching tracks from Heacham, Dereham and the harbour branch. These spread themselves out to nearly all points of the compass and would need some form of compromise to generate a layout that wasn't entirely surround by fiddleyard.
Image
There are lots of characterful features, like the platform road with platform faces on both sides, and the engine shed, one road of which doubled as the goods shed during the day. The whole track plan was a testament to the GER’s total lack of fear of complicated point work. Working the station in the way the GER did also presents a few operational issues as, despite being the terminus of all three approaching lines, it originally had no run round loops, at least not for passenger train use. As built it was equipped with ticket platforms on the approaches to the station at which the trains stopped. Then, while the tickets were checked, the loco was removed and the journey was completed by allowing the coached to roll into the station proper, conveniently down hill, by gravity. Another interesting modelling challenge.

There again there is also the possibility of combining my interests. This suggests that perhaps the GER, rather more pleased in my imagination with the success of the W&U than it actually turned out in truth to be, built a second Tramway in the Wells area. Following this line of thought I have an outline Templot generated track plan which incorporates the bulk of the existing Wells station with the addition of as W&U-esk tramway in lieu of the Harbour Branch, with a roadside tramway platform in the station forecourt. We can all dream. However the truth remains that I am unlikely to start a new layout from scratch as those parts of chez Will into which such a thing might just fit, already have other dedicated uses, and are already full.

So, falling back on something requiring a lot less work or room, I considered the Un-Built Kits Pile. Not surprisingly given my declared interests, it happens the UBKP contains a London Road Models – nee Riceworks – J69, not to mention its little brother an un-rebranded Ricework J65. These tickled my fancy, particularly as Exactoscale have produce exactly the right wheels for the job, the same ones being used on both loco’s so long as you're careful which class members you chose. Also I was at least intellectually interested by the Exactoscale approach to wheel system design. Others might describe this as having more money than sense. The question remained which loco would I go for.

At this stage C&L had just taken over the distribution of the Exactoscale wheels, and I was, at best, unsure how you decided from their website, what a full set of the necessary bits for a single set of wheels actually entailed. Lets just say that there are rather more bits per axle than the experience of other manufactures products might lead you to expect. Assuming that C&L would know what I wanted, not as it turns out a necessarily safe assumption, I sent off a letter to Mr Llewellyn requesting an appropriate set of 6 with all the trimmings, and the necessary additional assembly tools. It was arranged that I would collect my purchase at Scalefour North, and, on being handed a neatly wrapped and remarkably heavy package, I was just a bit surprised at the size of the overall bill. I knew they were expensive, but not that expensive… Being very English and not wishing to cause a fuss, more money than sense prevailed and I paid up. Careful inspection of my purchase revealed that my order for 6 x 4’0” 10 spoke wheels plus all the bits had been interpreted as 6 axles of… . I haven’t bothered to review my letter to see if it was Mr Llewellyn's reading or my writing that was responsible for this mixup, I just accepted that a choice had been made for me.

It was not either the J69 or the J65, it was going to be both.
Buckjumpers.jpg

By now the reasons for my thread title should have become clear, and further posts will be more factual than aspirational, starting with those wheels. I just hope Mr Rice forgives me for pinching his artwork off the box tops.

Will

User avatar
jayell
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 8:20 am

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby jayell » Fri Sep 20, 2013 8:11 am

hi

Do you have a copy of Peter Proud's booklet "The Great Eastern 0-6-0T's", there is a small b&w photo of 7247 in it.

John

PS I have a few other bits & bobs of GE related stuff, like the above booklet which I'll bring to scaleforum to pass on to you or anyone else interested in the GE.

PPS I forgot to mention there is also a Spanish colour postcard of a model of no 87
Last edited by jayell on Fri Sep 20, 2013 9:32 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Flymo748
Posts: 2160
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 6:00 pm

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby Flymo748 » Fri Sep 20, 2013 8:24 am

Will L wrote:It was not either the J69 or the J65, it was going to be both.


[Facebook] Like! [/Facebook]

:-)
Flymo
Beware of Trains - occasional modelling in progress!
www.5522models.co.uk

User avatar
Ian Everett
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 9:43 pm

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby Ian Everett » Fri Sep 20, 2013 10:44 am

Will L wrote:However the truth remains that I am unlikely to start a new layout from scratch as those parts of chez Will into which such a thing might just fit, already have other dedicated uses, and are already full.
Will


<declares interest>

There's always the Standard Gauge Workbench - perfectly designed for people in your situation.

<undeclares interest>

Ian

User avatar
Andy W
Posts: 819
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 8:11 am

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby Andy W » Fri Sep 20, 2013 4:00 pm

Will, I think Wells is very interesting. My in-laws moved to North Norfolk and I visited the town and the old railway station a few times. The station is still there but you might have to buy some jam and pottery from the shop that now occupies it if you visit. It should be interesting to operate as, if I remember rightly, all traffic heading along the coast line had to back out to continue the journey - plus you have the yard and the harbour line for extra value.

Not sure how you deal with the gravity coach working though?
Make Worcestershire great again.
Build a wall along the Herefordshire border and make them pay for it.

User avatar
Tim V
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:40 pm

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby Tim V » Fri Sep 20, 2013 4:16 pm

Ealing wrote:Not sure how you deal with the gravity coach working though?


DCC coach!
Tim V

User avatar
Will L
Posts: 1624
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby Will L » Fri Sep 20, 2013 8:00 pm

Ealing wrote:.. if I remember rightly, all traffic heading along the coast line had to back out to continue the journey --

If only it was that simple. Normally the two branches trains stuck to their own lines. The problem to which you refer was the arrival of pilgrim specials destined for Walsingham, one of England's premier pilgrimage destinations. Walsingham is just one stop from Wells on the Dereham line and was even less well equipped for turning rains than Wells. Most often these pilgrim specials arrived from the Dereham direction, the pilgrims de-trained at Walsingham and the train went on to Wells for reversal. As it happens Wells was only good for 4 coach trains at the best of times, and these specials were often significantly longer than that. Turning the empty stock could be quite a performance. The occasional Pilgrim specials which arrived, still full of passengers, off the North Norfolk caused a not dissimilar amount of chaos though of course these had to he handled full rather than empty. Perhaps fortunately the pilgrimage traffic only really got going after the 1931 addition of the extra connection between the two branches beyond the signal box which made running round passenger trains of the normal 4 coach length reactively simple, such a pity that the pilgrim specials didn't restricted themselves to anything so prosaic as a normal length.

Not sure how you deal with the gravity coach working though?


Tim V wrote:DCC coach!


Yes that's certainly an option but on the basis of the "getting it all right" mantra, I think I'd start by using gravity and I have considered ways and means. However it is also worth remembering that the ticket platforms were far enough out of the station to be difficult to include in the model so it likely that arriving trains would need to travel enginlessly from the fiddleyard. I not sure I fancy trying to explain to a sceptical public that the arrival of a light engine, followed shortly after by a loose rake of coaches, was intentional. The simple answer to to model a more recent era when trains arrived in the way we have grown to expect. That would also avoid having to scratch build all those early period GER loco's and coaches.

Will
Last edited by Will L on Fri Sep 20, 2013 10:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
jayell
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 8:20 am

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby jayell » Fri Sep 20, 2013 9:36 pm

Will L wrote:The simple answer to to model a more resent era when trains arrived in the way we have grown to expect. That would also avoid having to scratch build all those early period GER loco's and coaches.


For me it wouldn't be the GE without T19 Intermediates, D15 Clauds, Y14 and the J series of 0-6-0 locos plus varnished teak coaches. Aldeburgh was always the station I wanted to model, the Colne Valley Railway was a close second but not very practical to model.

For me the railway has gone downhill since those first rail buses and DMUs started running on GE branch lines. I lived in East Anglia when steam was vanishing and branches being ripped up, so I guess it is nostalgia that makes me want to model railways from the early steam age, today since I live in GWR territory that railway has become the focus of my interests, The SR barely impinged on my thoughts when I was growing up in Bournemouth back in the 40s and 50s.

The modern era has no interest for me other than as a very occasional means of transport.

John

User avatar
Flymo748
Posts: 2160
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 6:00 pm

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby Flymo748 » Mon Sep 23, 2013 6:58 am

johnlewis wrote:For me it wouldn't be the GE without T19 Intermediates, D15 Clauds, Y14 and the J series of 0-6-0 locos plus varnished teak coaches. Aldeburgh was always the station I wanted to model, the Colne Valley Railway was a close second but not very practical to model.

Hi John,

Are you aware that earlier this year, a comprehensive history of the Aldeburgh branch was published by the Oakwood Press?

I have a copy that I picked up when it was published. That was for inspiration purposes, as I agree with you that the station would make a lovely model. There is also a 43 (!) page article in British Railway Journal no.75 that contains some lovely photos.

My personal choice for a GER prototype is currently resting with Hadleigh as favourite. However for that, I have to wait for the arrival of a house with the space for a railway room in which it could be built in situ. For the next couple of years I think that I'll be restricted to the micro-layout size...

Cheers
Flymo
Beware of Trains - occasional modelling in progress!
www.5522models.co.uk

nigelcliffe
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:31 am

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby nigelcliffe » Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:44 am

Flymo748 wrote:
My personal choice for a GER prototype is currently resting with Hadleigh as favourite. However for that, I have to wait for the arrival of a house with the space for a railway room in which it could be built in situ. For the next couple of years I think that I'll be restricted to the micro-layout size...


Ah, you need Bentley crossing at the other end of the Hadleigh branch, just before the junction with the main line; a rather nice bay-fronted crossing keeper's cottage (still there, though recently extended a bit on one side), trains in trees alongside a stream, and a church on the rising ground behind, the signal protecting the line from branch onto the junction....


- Nigel, Bentley, Suffolk.

User avatar
jayell
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 8:20 am

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby jayell » Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:00 am

Flymo748 wrote:
Are you aware that earlier this year, a comprehensive history of the Aldeburgh branch was published by the Oakwood Press?

I have a copy that I picked up when it was published. That was for inspiration purposes, as I agree with you that the station would make a lovely model. There is also a 43 (!) page article in British Railway Journal no.75 that contains some lovely photos.


No that is a new one for me, I'll see if I can get it on inter-library loan. I haven't seen the article either

My personal choice for a GER prototype is currently resting with Hadleigh as favourite. However for that, I have to wait for the arrival of a house with the space for a railway room in which it could be built in situ. For the next couple of years I think that I'll be restricted to the micro-layout size...


I don't remember ever going to Hadleigh although I was at RAF Wattisham for a few months in 1951 before being posted to RAF Gutersloh but I travelled on the Stour Valley & Colne Valley lines fairly frequently when I was living in Haverhill in the 60s.

I have a copy of a booklet, The Eastern Union Raileay published in 1946 by the LNER, but that makes no mention of the Hadleigh branch. It will be included in the small collection of GE related stuff I'll be bringing to Aylesbury. I think I'll keep the Middleton Press Branch Lines book on the Aldeburgh branch though.

John

User avatar
martinm
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:49 pm

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby martinm » Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:49 am

For more information on Aldeburgh, there is quite a lot available on the internet, particularly in Wikipedia and http://www.disused-stations.org.uk.
I also just happened to have been browsing a recently acqired copy of 'Designing a Layout' by Barry Norman which has a suggested scheme for a model of the station.
martin

User avatar
Will L
Posts: 1624
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby Will L » Thu Sep 26, 2013 10:06 pm

On Exactoscale wheels

Having acquired a wheel bonanza, its seems a good time to have a close look at those wheels and see what I have so extravagantly let myself in for. After all Exactoscale driving wheels are not what you'd describe as common currency, so having a good look at what I’ve got should be interesting. In what follows I don’t want to repeat the published instructions, which can be found here, but neither do I want you to spend all your time flicking back and forward, so most of the info to understand what I’m on about is included here. What I do want to do is give you an idea of how the published theory worked out in practice, for me, so far.

This is what I got

For those who have never come across the Exactoscale driving wheels, they are plastic moulded into recessed stainless steel tyres which shouldn’t ever falloff. Most of the metalwork is stainless steel so assume anything metal is that, unless I say otherwise. Also moulded into each wheel is are hollow steel stub axle that forms the axle bearing surface for that wheel and has lubrication retaining groves in the surface. What happens inboard of these stub axles I’ll come to in a minute.

The width of the wheel rims is 1.83mm with very little variation, so is at, or just below, the society standard minimum. Their Back to Back Gauge is machined to 17.77mm, so is at, or slightly, above the society standard maximum. It also happens to be a perfect match for the standard L shaped B2B gauge I’ve been using all my P4 life.

I mentioned before that there are a surprising number of additional bits to complete each wheel. Per wheel this comes to
• a hard plastic stub axle
• a half share in a tubular mental axle centre piece,
• a metal axle end cap.
• A 10mm M1 screw for the crank pin, and to go with it
• an aluminium bush,
• a phosphor bronze crank pin bearing,
• a round crank pin “nut”, and
• a nice little etch of crank pin washers also in phosphor bronze.

Some but not all of these bits are visible in the following photograph. .
exwheel 3.jpg
exwheel 3.jpg (165.96 KiB) Viewed 12858 times


The C&L interpretation of my, possibly rather vague, order was met by providing,
• 6 wheel pair packs, each pack includes an aluminium crankpin bush per wheel (no spares)
• 2 packs of 4 centre axles, consisting of 8 plastic stub axles in sprues of 2 and 4 tubular metal axle centres (2 spare sets),
• 6 crank pin assembly packs that contain all you need for one axle worth of wheels. i.e. 2 of the M1 screws, crank pin bearings and round crank pin nuts, and a fret of 5 washers( with the exception of the washers, no spares),
• 2 packs of ten axle end caps (8 spairs)

Also available to order on the C&L list are packs of ten of the following, M1 screws, Crankpin Bearings and Crankpin Nuts, both round as provided or hexagonal (presumably Standard M1 nuts?) and crankpin bearing extensions (not needed for the J65/9s although a reason why I might need these will become apparent in due course).

I did wonder of I might like to have had bulk packs of individual bits and hence spares available to meet the sacrificial demands of the Great Carpet God. Careful analysis does show that what I got was the cheapest way to complete my order. It is cheaper (C&L pricelist as at 26th September) to buy the crankpin assemblies than packs of the individual items, so to get spares of these, order one or two extra one axle packs. The axle centres only come in packs of 4 (why 4?) and the Axle End Caps only come in packs of 10, which is sensible given these items are only lightly glued to the finished wheel, and are likely to be greatly favoured by the GCG. As for those little aluminium crankpin bushes, once inserted in the wheel I doubt they are going to fall out or otherwise get lost very easily. Therefore spares will only be required if your clumsy when opening the wheel packs or when pushing them into the wheels. Get that job done when you first receive the wheels and put your spares order in early, but only if required.

To finish the job you also need their special wheel press tool and it is helpful to have their Back to Back gauge as well, as it is designed to work together with the press tool. Hopefully you will only ever need one each of these. The press tool and B2B gauge illustrated below were a significant part of the cost and weight of that package I received from C&L. The press tool, which is really just a fancy G clamp, comes with a turned anvil, the shiny thing fitted into one end of the tool, and a turned sleeve which fits over the end of the screw which does the pressing. You use different combinations of these fittings depending what you are trying to do. The tool is designed for finger operation and no more force than that is required to get a wheel locked firmly on an axle, or to get it off again.
exwheel 2.jpg
exwheel 2.jpg (154.63 KiB) Viewed 12858 times


On to assembly - the wheels and axle

I gather that in the best engineering circles, fitting a wheel to an axle so that it stays square and won’t move is best achieved by having a tapered end on the axles with a matching tapered hole in the wheel. As the wheel is forced onto the axle these tapered sections will lock together and the wheel will not move on the axle in use. An earlier incarnation of this idea was tryed by Maygib, who produced driving wheels which had a metal insert with a tapered axle hole. They were fitted on a solid axle with tapered ends. They locked on a treat but, given the gentle angle of the taper and overall manufacturing tolerances, the back to back dimension at which the wheels locked solid was a bit hit and miss, and was in no way adjustable. Time for a rethink, and most wheels these days have strictly parallel sided axles and axle holes, leaving us with wheels prone to move on their axle.

I understand that Exactoscale wheels are intended to avoid many of the known deficiencies in current wheels, and not least the slipping wheel syndrome, therefore the tapered axle idea has been revived. To get over the difficulty in ensuring an accurate B2B, their axle design uses a three part composite assembly, and the result is insulated, which should please those who consider split frame pickup to be the only way to go. The basic design of the wheel and axle assembly looks like this, and explains some of those bits on the parts list. As I probably won’t mention it elsewhere, I should point out that the axle end cap just tidies up the hole in the wheel centre when you’ve finished.
exwheel 1.jpg
exwheel 1.jpg (71.78 KiB) Viewed 12858 times


The hard plastic stub axles are moulded as a sprue of two, from which they must be carefully parted, as the surface can tear away leaving you with something that is less than round. I also found that, before they would reliably fit into the central tube section of the axle, it was necessary to file a slight chamfer on the parallel end.

Assembly starts by fitting the tapered end of a plastic axle into the tapered hole in a wheels stub axle, and using the press tool to push it in as far as it will go. When you’ve done that to two wheels, Loctite 603 is smeared over the parallel ends of the plastic axle stubs and inside the centre axle tube. All three bits are then slid together positioned in the B2B gauge and held there. Once the Loctite has gone off you have a nice composite axle which holds that pair of wheels at exactly the right back to back dimension.

The press tool can then be used to press the wheels off and on as often as you like, but once you’ve assembled a pair of wheels on an axle, those wheels must always go back on the same axle and preferably on the same end. Re-assembly is best done around the B2B gauge, and the press tool and gauge are designed to work together. While I suppose the wheels will set somewhere close to gauge without using the B2B I have to doubt if they will do it with sufficient accuracy to satisfy us. And can we be sure they will go on fully square? I don’t have any spare wheels so I’m not about to do the experiments needed to find out.

The crankpin assembly

Again a picture helps visualise the bits
exwheel 5.jpg
exwheel 5.jpg (61.73 KiB) Viewed 12858 times


The wheel has a stepped hole moulded in for the crank pin assembly, and there is a little aluminium bush that presses in to this hole. The M1 screw fits through the bush from the back and the Phosphor bronze crank pin bearing screws on from the front to lock everything up solid. The round crankpin nut is just a thinner version of the crankpin bearing and screws down to hold the coupling rods in place.

Quartering

As work on the chassis has hardly started, quartering the wheels isn’t something I’ve tried yet. The instructions suggest that if you mount the wheels on an axle just finger tight, the quartering will be adjustable and the "sighting through the spokes" method is recommended. There should even be enough grip between wheel and axle to test that the quartering is good before using the press tool to fix the wheels firmly on their axles.

A Few Quibbles

Not that I wish to knock the wheels, they are beautifully made certainly look the part, but in getting this far I’ve found an issue, and there are some problems I can see coming. I still full expect successful results, assuming I can get my hands on a sub 2mm ball bearing.

1. There is an issue with the depth of the crankpin bearings. They measure out at about 53 thou deep (sorry to drop into thou’s here but there is a reason) of which the rim is about 11 thou, leaving only 43 thou for the coupling rods. On both the J69 and the J65 these rods are made from two laminations of nominally 20 thou metal. In fact in one case the etch is only 19thou thick, but in the other it is actually 21thou. i.e. the laminated rods will be just 1thou thinner than the crankpin bearing they have to fit on, assuming the solder join takes up no space. I don’t think that is going to work, and the rods will need a bit of thinning. Basically I think those crankpin bearings could do with being a bit deeper to start with.

2. While mounting and demounting these wheels from the axles is easy in isolation, it becomes much more of a problem if there happens to be a chassis round the axle. It’s not clear to me how practical it will be to use these wheels on a chassis that does not allow the assembled wheels and axles to be dropped out. Those of us that normaly make our chassis this way won’t be troubled, but I find it ironic that doing so was, at least in part, a way to avoid having to assemble wheels on their axles more than once, and hence to minimise the tendency for wheels on traditional parallel axles to slip.

3. Having said that mounting the wheels on their axle away from the chassis is no problem, there is an exception. While the B2B gauge can be used on a wheel set with axle blocks and a gear wheel in place, if you want to use a gearbox which mounts on the drive axle and it is more than 8mm wide, you’ll find it won’t fit down the hole in the middle of the B2B gauge. This includes most of the HighLevel gearboxes but not, as it happens, the one I have selected for the J65/9s which will fit. However other B2B gauges are available.


4. The most troubling problem that I’ve come across is the regrettable fact that, as the press tool is used to push the wheel tight down onto the taper, it also turns the wheel. This isn’t obvious/doesn’t matter when you assemble the wheels on their stub axles, but it will matter when you’re trying to quarter the wheels. Hopefully, the reason why this happens is made clear by the following diagrams.
exwheel 6.jpg
exwheel 6.jpg (168.03 KiB) Viewed 12858 times


As you can see I do have a solution. By putting a hard ball bearing between the trip of the screw and the sleeve, the sleeve will not now be forced to turn by its contact with the shoulders of the screw, and the ball should turn easily against the tip of the screw. Net result, it will be easy enough to stop the quartered wheel from turning while it is being pressed down tight. All I need now is a supply of ball bearings, (close to but no larger than 2mm in diameter), to prove it works. Anybody know where I could get such a thing?
Last edited by Will L on Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:14 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
jayell
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 8:20 am

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby jayell » Fri Sep 27, 2013 11:56 am

Will L wrote:As you can see I do have a solution. By putting a hard ball bearing between the trip of the screw and the sleeve, the sleeve will not now be forced to turn by its contact with the shoulders of the screw, and the ball should turn easily against the tip of the screw. Net result, it will be easy enough to stop the quartered wheel from turning while it is being pressed down tight. All I need now is a supply of ball bearings, (close to but no larger than 2mm in diameter), to prove it works. Anybody know where I could get such a thing?


Try a (proper) bike shop with a resident mechanic, small ball bearings are used in pedals for example. I recently dumped all my stock of cycle spares so cannot offer any myself, though having said that I do have a pair of pedals left and could dismantle those if all else fails, to see if the bearings are suitable.

John

User avatar
Tim V
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:40 pm

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby Tim V » Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:41 pm

Thanks for the extensive post, which looks like a candidate for the S4 Wiki Will.
Tim V

User avatar
jayell
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 8:20 am

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby jayell » Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:06 pm

johnlewis wrote:Try a (proper) bike shop with a resident mechanic, small ball bearings are used in pedals for example. I recently dumped all my stock of cycle spares so cannot offer any myself, though having said that I do have a pair of pedals left and could dismantle those if all else fails, to see if the bearings are suitable.


Having looked at said pedals I decided they were too old to be re-used so proceeded to dismantle one. Ended up using a hacksaw only to find one end of the axle was a plain bearing and the other a caged bearing so balls inside that would be far too small. Remnants of that pedal and its mate are now in rubbish bin.

try this link if you don't have a friendly bike mechanic available:-

http://simplybearings.co.uk/shop/Loose+ ... index.html

Ball Diameter: 1.98mm = 5/64 inch @ £2.85 for 10, ex. VAT

also to be found on ebay

John

nigelcliffe
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:31 am

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby nigelcliffe » Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:16 pm

Or, try the industrial bearing supplier, located on a small industrial unit in many moderately large towns.

- Nigel

Clive Impey
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:09 am

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby Clive Impey » Fri Sep 27, 2013 8:13 pm

Will,

Chronos sell 1/16 diam phosphor bronze balls 5 for £1.00. http://chronos.ltd.uk/acatalog/Phosphur ... Balls.html

Clive

User avatar
Will L
Posts: 1624
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby Will L » Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:20 pm

GER Buckjumpers a potted history

To say that the history of the selection of Great Eastern 0-6-0 tanks, collectively known as Buckjumpers, was complicated, is hardly to do them justice. The story started with GER class T18 (LNER J66), these locos were built starting in 1885 because of a pressing need for new shunting engines. One was fitted with the Westinghouse brake and tried on the Enfield line where the trains were getting beyond the four coupled locos then in use. They proved to be the answer to the maiden‘s prayer and the last ten were built as passenger locos having screw reversing gear, Westinghouse brake, and after a while, balanced wheels with only 10 spokes. The small four foot coupled wheels gave them very smart acceleration from a standing start, if not much in the way of top speed. They were ideal for the GER's intensively worked suburban services. The Tl8s were followed by the E225 (LNER J65), which were somewhat smaller, then the R24s, S56s and C72s (LNER J67, 69 and 68) which are what your really thinking about when you use the term Buckjumper.

Lets just get the E225s (J65) out the way. Image A lighter version of the T18s they appeared in 1819 and had smaller cylinders side tanks and cab although they shared a boiler, wheel base and wheel size. Intended from the start as passenger engines, they had screw revers and the ten spoke balanced wheels fitted to the passenger T18s. Put to work on the intensive Fenchuch Street/Blackwall service, over time they gravitated to the GER periphery and occasionally beyond, doing good service on various byways such as the Colne Valley and the Mid Suffolk Light. Some even spent their declining years shunting docksides, though never apparently suffering the ignominy of lever revers and unbalanced 15 spoke wheels that was the lot of their bigger cousins given similar jobs. A relatively simple development history saw the occasional boiler upgrade, extra coal rails, the fitting of higher profile metal roofs and loss of the distinctive GER stovepipe chimney that occurred to most GER classes. J65s had the endearing habit of appearing in public slightly undressed, that is with the front coupling rods removed to make them 2-4-0s. The last one left us in 1956.


The real action started with the R24s which first appeared in 1890. These had a six inch longer wheelbase than the T18s plus other subtle structural differences which actually made them slightly shorter overall. 140 were built, only 40 of which were for shunting (lever reverse and 15 spoke unbalanced wheels). Condensers were fitted to passenger locos from 1893, this required a rectangular chamber to be fitted to the top of the side tanks. Engines built with condensers from new had tank side sheets stepped up to cover it, but when fitted to existing locos the addition was exposed to view. This visual difference persisted through all that followed. In 1902 the passenger locos began to receive a new boiler which was slightly longer and which carried a higher pressure. At the same time most received 5 inch wider tanks. The GER being a frugal concern widened the tanks and footplate but left the cab and bunker alone. Locos so rebuilt were known as class R24R (R24 rebuilt). As not all locos were rebuilt this gives rise to 5 variations in body outline.

The S56 loco appeared in 1904, a development of the R24R's having wider cab and bunkers to suit the tanks (variation No 6). Finally in 1912 the C72s appeared, again very similar to the S56, but having a new commodious cab with large windows all round (variation 7). Some were built as shunting engines without condensers (variation 8). Generally speaking, the low pressure boiler R24's became LNER class J67, and were shunting engines, the high pressure boiler R245, R24Rs and S56s became J69s, and the C72s all became J68s. There were exceptions!

Are you with me so far?

The boilers on classes J65 to J69 were interchangeable, and although no J65 or J66 ever received a high pressure boiler, all the other possible changes that could occur, did. With the arrival of classes of larger locos to work the suburban trains, many were converted from passenger to shunting, swopping wheels, brakes and reversing gear in the process. Locos under general repair tend to swap bits, so, as a result, some got converted back again. With the other possible variations in boiler fittings and the increase in use of vacuum brake etc. the effect was kaleidoscopic. Everybody gets confused at some point, the LNER certainly did. Confused or not, the class lasted until 1962, GER No 87 an S56, was preserved and now can be seen on display at York in full GER blue. The picture is no 65 an S56 in original condition.
Image

The nickname? Well some will tell you that it was because they had the ability to start from the station platform like a startled rabbit. Others say that it was because at any speed approaching about 40 m.p.h. they developed a very distinct fore and aft motion that was transmitted to the first few coaches of the train. Certainly you can imagine that the original E22s with unbalanced wheels may have bucked and jumped a bit as they hurried across Hackney Marsh.

Edited for spelling
Last edited by Will L on Fri Apr 03, 2015 10:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
John Bateson
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:39 pm

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby John Bateson » Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:59 pm

Will,
I have some scans of the Buckjumpers from Model Railways March 1972, sent to me by Mick Nicholson some years ago. I shall bring them with me to the next CAG meeting if you do not already have them.
The Buckjumpers name, so I was told, was drawn from their sudden starts with heavy loads, not to the fore and aft motion at speed. The guard would screw down the brake, driver would reverse to compress the buffers, driver would quickly move to forwards and the guard would release the brakes at the same time. This gave the train a 'leap' forward just like the Thompson's Gazelle can 'stot' from a standing start. I can't find a written reference to this at the moment.
John
Slaving away still on GCR stuff ...
Avoiding the soaps ...
http://www.greatcentralmodels.co.uk

User avatar
Will L
Posts: 1624
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby Will L » Sun Oct 06, 2013 7:54 pm

John Bateson wrote:Will,
I have some scans of the Buckjumpers from Model Railways March 1972, sent to me by Mick Nicholson some years ago. I shall bring them with me to the next CAG meeting if you do not already have them.
The Buckjumpers name, so I was told, was drawn from their sudden starts with heavy loads, not to the fore and aft motion at speed. The guard would screw down the brake, driver would reverse to compress the buffers, driver would quickly move to forwards and the guard would release the brakes at the same time. This gave the train a 'leap' forward just like the Thompson's Gazelle can 'stot' from a standing start. I can't find a written reference to this at the moment.
John


Hi John, thanks for the offer, yes I'd like to have a look at MR stuff if its easy to hand. There is a possibility I already have the original magazines, but I would be hard put to finding them easily.

You Buckjumper origin story is a new one on me, though that doesn't mean anything and it is quite as likely to be true as anything I have heard. I must admit the vision of Jazz services firing themselves out of stations courtesy of their buffer springs does have an appeal, although I also wonder about how this fits in with the efficiency/effectiveness of the Westinghouse Brake and what happens to the guards duty to observe the doors closed and train safely away from the platform while he engages in heroic and timely winding of the handbrake wheel.
Last edited by Will L on Fri Apr 03, 2015 10:06 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Will L
Posts: 1624
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby Will L » Mon Oct 07, 2013 1:17 pm

Back to the Exactoscale wheel press and the quest for Ball Bearings.

johnlewis wrote:Try a (proper) bike shop with a resident mechanic,.....

I'd though of that but, as it happens, our local bike shop has resently closed
try this link if you don't have a friendly bike mechanic available:-

http://simplybearings.co.uk/shop/Loose+ ... index.html

Ball Diameter: 1.98mm = 5/64 inch @ £2.85 for 10, ex. VAT

Yes I found these supplies too, and an order placed Friday was here Monday which is good service.
The 5/64 balls are just the right side to fit in the sleeve, and a smear of the grease I keep to lubricate gearboxes stops any tendency for the ball to drop out again. The result seems to work as intended and I even have nine spares. Looks like a result, but I won't know for sure until I quarter some wheels in anger.

Will
Last edited by Will L on Mon Oct 07, 2013 6:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

essdee
Posts: 376
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 4:47 pm

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby essdee » Mon Oct 07, 2013 1:27 pm

Hi Will,

I, too, found early on that the quartering slipped in the original guise of the Exactoscale wheelpress, but since adding the ball bearing and adding grease to this and the loose cap on the press tool, I have found that quartering became routine; I still grip the wheelset during the operation though, just to be sure. I am sure you will find it is indeed a 'result'.

Isn't it a lovely sight when a completed Exactoscale wheelset rolls away, with not a hint of wobble!

Now when do the MR/LMS wheel versions hit the market............

BW

Steve

User avatar
Will L
Posts: 1624
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby Will L » Mon Dec 02, 2013 3:42 pm

Exactoscale wheels – more experiences

The construction of both Buckjumpers has been progressing at a good steady pace and should be documented here shortly. But before I do that perhaps a few lessons learned in the process of fitting those Exactoscale wheels to the Buckjumper’s chassis may be in order.

Things that worked

There is no doubt that achieving a correctly assembled, accurately gauged and true running set of wheels just seems to happen. Well most of the time, we’ll come back to the exceptions.

There is also no doubt that the press tool, as supplied, does tend to rotate the wheel as you press it down onto the axle. See the diagram in the earlier post above. However as I suggested there, putting a 1.98mm (that was the size on the packet) hard steel ball bearing in the sleeve on the press tool solves the problem and wheel rotation on press down isn't now happening.

Despite having got out of the habit of quartering my wheels by eye since I acquired a GW wheel press, I wasn’t sure about having to return to it. Happily it turns out that given the ball bearing fix, the recommended method worked well. That is:
- quartering by sighting through the spokes;
- using finger pressure to push down the wheel on the taper so it will stay in place but can still be adjusted;
- trying it on the chassis;
- correcting till it runs nicely;
- finally squeezing it up tight in the press.
There is a snagette which needs remembering but we’ll come to that soon too.

Problems I was expecting

As predicted the crank pin bearing bushes are not deep enough for coupling rods made of two laminates of 20 thou metal. C&L sell threaded crankpin bush extensions (plain threaded tube I understand) which are presumably what you’d need for a loco with outside cylinders. However buying a pack of these and then cutting off slivers 5 thou thick to extend the existing bush to suit my coupling rods seemed a worse idea than filing down the coupling rods from the rear, so I got filing.

The instructions do warn that you can’t really remove a wheel from an axle if you can’t take the whole wheel set out of the chassis. What they don’t say is if the axle of the wheel set is full of bearing blocks and gearbox, you still can’t get a wheel off when it’s not in the chassis. This is because there is no room on the axle to get the end of the press tool behind the wheel, and I have yet to find a none destructive way of doing it. This has a couple of implications. The first is that quartering the wheels is going to have to start with the driven axle, and once that one is tightened down, all the others will have to match whatever angle it is set to, because you have no easy way of changing it. The second is that if you really really must get a wheel off the axle again, the only way is to saw through the axle! Fortunately given the axles are sold in sets of 4 you are likely to have a spare.

And those I wasn’t

The Loctite assembly of the axles proved to have a hidden hazard. The instruction suggest that while a wheel set can be safely handled a short while after assembly, it is a good idea to then leave them aside overnight. Most of my wheel sets were so treated but after another issue intervened I had to assemble a new axle. The more perceptive of you will note a possible connection with the previous paragraph here. Anyway, once the Loctite holding the axle parts together had set, I decided for the sake of neatness to pop off one wheel and store the axle bearing blocks that went with it, on the axle. When I returned to them the following day the bearing blocks and the axle were one solid lump.

So how did that happen? I believe that excess Loctite accumulates in the space between the two plastic stub axles in the centre of the axle tube. In there it doesn’t go off as quickly as the working layer holding the axle together. Then the tube axle has a hole drilled strategically at its midpoint, presumably to vent this gap so air pressure isn't trying to push the stub axles out again before the Loctite sets. The still liquid excess Loctite can leak out of this hole. Net result axle bearing blocks Loctited firmly to the axle. Adult force showed no sign of breaking this bond without doing collateral damage to axle blocks and axle, and the only way I could find to brake this bond was by heating up the axle. That worked, but unfortunately enough heat to release the Loctite bond was also enough to soften and distort the plastic stub axles. Fortunately as I had brought two sets of wheels I had two spare sets of axle parts.

Then there’s the wobbly wheel problem, and the discovery that there is a relatively simple way of destroying one of these wheels. Basically if you use the press tool to tighten a wheel down onto the axle and something is preventing the wheels and axle sitting square in the BtoB gauge, you can break the bond between the metal centre and the moulded plastic section of the wheel. In the first instance this shows up as a wobbly wheel. You can pop it back true but the damage is done and it can’t be relied on to stay true. Ultimately the metal centre parts company with the rest of the wheel.

The circumstances in which I manage to make this error centred around trying to get an axle full of axle bearing blocks and a gearbox to fit squarely in the BtoB gauge, and the fact that you must ensure that the crankpin in the wheel closest to the press tool fame isn’t directly in line with it, as there isn’t enough room between wheel and frame for the crank pin. All avoidable problems, if you know what you’re trying to avoid.

See what I mean
Buck p3 3.jpg
Buck p3 3.jpg (295.52 KiB) Viewed 12144 times

The first pictures shows our failures, and the second just how full that driven axle gets. And yes I did manage to destroy two wheels as well as two axles. I was aware I’d made a mess of the first one so I just fessed up and brought another pair of wheels. Then I found I had a second wobbly wheel, although quite how that happened I’m not too sure. Given I now had a spare wheel I just accepted it was probably me being ham-fisted again. However should a third one turn up, given how much they cost, I may start having a conversation with the manufacture.

As a matter of interest, the gearbox shown in the second picture was put on the axle fairly shortly after the axle was assembled. I was aware of the possible Loctite problem by then yet, despite my best efforts to ensure there was no spare Loctite knocking about, the brass final drive is now firmly glued in position. Fortunately it is fixed in the right place.

After all that

You will be pleased to hear both chassis are now fully wheeled quartered and working. More on getting the chassis together will follow soon-ish.

Edited for spelling
Last edited by Will L on Thu May 08, 2014 5:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

essdee
Posts: 376
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 4:47 pm

Re: Buck Jumping on Mass

Postby essdee » Mon Dec 02, 2013 8:21 pm

Hi Will,

Interesting to hear your experiences with these fine wheelsets. You make a good point about setting the 'datum' quartering on the driven wheelset with gearbox installed, which can not be readily dis-assembled in the tools as provided.

However, for those who would like to be able to dismantle - or at least feel free to be able to dismantle - the gearbox wheelset, you might find Tom Mallard's neat solution on p 130 of MRJ No.223 of interest. It is a custom-made jig which allows him to dismantle an Exactoscale wheelset with his own gearbox installed, and as far as I can see, it should also work with High Level gearboxes etc?

Perhaps an idea for development by Exactoscale team/C&L to make the use of these wheelsets easier? Have a look and see what you think.

Best wishes

Steve


Return to “Will L”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest