Mount Woodville Works

A forum for participants in the Standard Gauge Workbench.
User avatar
RobM
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby RobM » Tue Jan 17, 2017 5:27 pm

Armchair Modeller wrote:
Small diesel shunters are a good choice - very atmospheric and they cry out for customisation and weathering.


Richard, I've re read your thread on the Judith Edge Ruston a few times but sad it it came to an abrupt end... :( .......the links you provide are useful.
At this stage (not yet purchased the kit) just wondering if a different High Level gear box, such as the HumpShunter, would allow the motor to go under the bonnet instead of into the cab.....will have to wait and see but it will only involve driving one set of wheels which is what the RSH's do......
Rob
http://www.robmilliken.co.uk
Updated December 2016

Armchair Modeller

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby Armchair Modeller » Tue Jan 17, 2017 8:19 pm

My new chassis is still on the to do list, unfortunately - and may be so for some time yet.

I originally tried the Ruston to gain experience and know-how. Then, I realised that a glut of small shunters wouldn't have much to do on Neversay in the short term, so I quietly put it away for a while. Mind you, since then I have bought a Hornby Peckett and a DJH Hunslet, so I don't follow my own logic.

The gearbox and chassis come with the kit, though I am sure you could negotiate. The advantage of the designated chassis is that it drives both axles. Also the gear train is more or less invisible. A normal gearbox wouldn't do all that. There are no coupling rods, so it would only drive one axle. You would have to devise a way of linking the two axles together - or put up with one axle drive, which is not ideal.

I really do need to sort out a twin axle drive design, as there are several locos to do - not to mention railcars. With the Ruston, there is plenty of room under the bonnet to hide a small motor, yet still have room for weight. I was thinking of either a sprung/flexible chassis, or compensation with the compensation beam along one side of the chassis. Mini gearboxes on each axle (maybe Mousa/Bill Bedford) and additional reduction gears to reduce the ratio further. One reason for the 'invisible motor bogie' idea for the Ford railbuses is to test my ideas.

Of course, High Level do two diesel shunters with coupling rods, with a third to come soon. They may offer a quicker and easier solution for you.

User avatar
RobM
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby RobM » Wed Jan 18, 2017 7:46 am

Armchair Modeller wrote:Of course, High Level do two diesel shunters with coupling rods, with a third to come soon. They may offer a quicker and easier solution for you.


Forgot about the High level kits......From what I can glean there were only 6 of the Armstrong Whitworth's built and non found their way to any salt glazed works or the likes. So now its between the RSH Husky or the Ruston and Hornsby.......may well wait until S4 North or just get both!
Rob
http://www.robmilliken.co.uk
Updated December 2016

Armchair Modeller

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby Armchair Modeller » Wed Jan 18, 2017 9:09 am

RobM wrote:Forgot about the High level kits......From what I can glean there were only 6 of the Armstrong Whitworth's built and non found their way to any salt glazed works or the likes. So now its between the RSH Husky or the Ruston and Hornsby.......may well wait until S4 North or just get both!
Rob

AW had a relatively short life as a loco builder and though a pioneer, built few diesel locos. They withdrew from loco building in 1937 and the Scotswood factory was transferred to war production.

If your Works owned any IC locos pre-WW2, much more likely to be a Motor Rail Simplex or derivatives thereof.

aMotor-Rail.jpg


Postwar, the options were much wider.

User avatar
RobM
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby RobM » Wed Jan 18, 2017 5:44 pm

Armchair Modeller wrote:
If your Works owned any IC locos pre-WW2, much more likely to be a Motor Rail Simplex or derivatives thereof.
Postwar, the options were much wider.


John Knowles only ran steam locos........on the standard gauge there were 4 Hunslets and 1 Barclay, 3 were bought from new from 1879 to 1920 and 2 second hand in 1875 and 1901.

I just needed a break from just steam locos so persuaded the board of Mount Woodville to invest in a diesel or two.........there will be one (or more) RSH steam loco(s) and since this morning's post I have placed an order for the Judith Edge kit and will soon order an RSH 'Husky'............will enjoy the ski....... ;)
Liked your Motor Rail Simplex or derivative thereof but scared off by the men in white coats..... ;)
Rob
http://www.robmilliken.co.uk
Updated December 2016

Armchair Modeller

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby Armchair Modeller » Wed Jan 18, 2017 7:53 pm

RobM wrote:I just needed a break from just steam locos so persuaded the board of Mount Woodville to invest in a diesel or two.........there will be one (or more) RSH steam loco(s) and since this morning's post I have placed an order for the Judith Edge kit and will soon order an RSH 'Husky'............will enjoy the ski....... ;)


Nice choices. I look forward to seeing them with great interest.

RobM wrote:Liked your Motor Rail Simplex or derivative thereof but scared off by the men in white coats..... ;)
Rob


The bank manager doesn't scare you then? ;)

Impetus used to do kits of the LNER and GWR versions of the Simplex, but they are no longer available. Have you seen Nigel Lawton's narrow gauge version? http://www.nigellawton009.com/20HP_WD_Simplex.html

User avatar
RobM
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby RobM » Thu Jan 19, 2017 7:08 am

Armchair Modeller wrote:The bank manager doesn't scare you then? ;)

Nope.....Spending the kids inheritance (SKIing), they don't need it.
Armchair Modeller wrote:Impetus used to do kits of the LNER and GWR versions of the Simplex, but they are no longer available. Have you seen Nigel Lawton's narrow gauge version? http://www.nigellawton009.com/20HP_WD_Simplex.html

Very neat....
http://www.robmilliken.co.uk
Updated December 2016

Terry Bendall
Posts: 1739
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:46 am

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby Terry Bendall » Thu Jan 19, 2017 8:33 am

The Motor Rail and Tramcar Company built a number of different versions of standard gauge Simplex locos some of which look more attractive than the 40HP example that Armchair posted. There were of course numerous narrow gauge examples as well. A fairly new book called Motor Rail Ltd by Alan Keef was published last year by Lightmoor Press, ISBN 9781 911038 09 2 is well worth a read by anyone interested in the breed. I gather that a second volume on the Simplex story is due to be published later this year.

Terry Bendall

User avatar
RobM
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby RobM » Wed Jan 25, 2017 6:04 pm

Well, the Judith Edge kit arrived and a start has been made.
First off was the gear box. Everything fine until fitting the gears in the swing link. Scratch head.........Looked at what I had folded up and then the drawings, bit of a 'spot the difference'. In my fret there was a solid section along the top, in the drawing there was an opening. So, piercing saw and file remedied the issue (arrowed in photo) and the gears fitted. The gear box was tested and was perfect.......I expect nothing more from Chris... :thumb

gearbox.jpg
gearbox.jpg (27.86 KiB) Viewed 4780 times


Trawling the net I found a post on RMweb by Gordon A (steamraiser?) and saw a number of pitfalls on his excellent account of the build.
So, since then the inside frames have been assembled, dis-assembled, assembled and so on.............clearances have been made for the gear box.
The compensating axle pivot was a bit out so a modified pivot was constructed. The front axle does leave a bit to be desired in respect of its sideway play. Back to back gauge......um......cannot get one in so some mods needed to get a bit of the gauge in. Currently sorting out the pick ups.......just working on getting the motorised section working before getting on with the rest........
Rob
Last edited by RobM on Sat Jan 28, 2017 7:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.robmilliken.co.uk
Updated December 2016

Armchair Modeller

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby Armchair Modeller » Wed Jan 25, 2017 10:58 pm

RobM wrote:Well, the Judith Edge kit arrived and a start has been made.
Rob


Rob, glad to see you have made a start. Your problems seem slightly different to mine.

I wasn't really happy with the floppy arm arrangement for the front axle - plus the fact that the motor intrudes into the cab. As you know, I decided in the end there must be a better way, but its a low priority at the moment.

I will be very interested to see how you sort things out.

User avatar
RobM
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby RobM » Thu Jan 26, 2017 7:05 am

Armchair Modeller wrote:
I wasn't really happy with the floppy arm arrangement for the front axle - plus the fact that the motor intrudes into the cab.

I will be very interested to see how you sort things out.


The front axle has a lateral movement of just under 4 mm!....so today it is thermals on and into the garage to turn up some spacers. I had considered putting some sort of packing behind the axle box representation on the outer frames but think spacers on the axles will be better. I've also sorted out a fix to keep the 'floppy arms' parallel to the frames and allowing up and down movement. I've also snipped off metal below the axle bearings which will allow one leg of the B to B gauge to get in. Once done I'll get some photos.
http://www.robmilliken.co.uk
Updated December 2016

User avatar
RobM
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby RobM » Mon Feb 06, 2017 5:57 pm

Armchair Modeller wrote:I wasn't really happy with the floppy arm arrangement for the front axle - plus the fact that the motor intrudes into the cab. As you know, I decided in the end there must be a better way, but its a low priority at the moment.
I will be very interested to see how you sort things out.

On the floppy front axle swinging arm I bent up some waste etch and soldered in place which keeps the arms parallel to the frame.

arm-retainer.jpg
arm-retainer.jpg (27.05 KiB) Viewed 4573 times


However once the wheels were pressed home with the turned spacers it was not that necessary, anyway, belt and braces.

inner-chassis.jpg
inner-chassis.jpg (33.6 KiB) Viewed 4573 times


The slight twist in the frames have been rectified.....
In the case of the B to B gauge I had overlooked the fact of the final drive gear and was only able to get half a millimetre of the gauge into one point. I used the GW wheel press hoping that the wheels pressed home parallel, one axle was perfect, the second axle shows signs of a very slight wobble, whether this will affect the running will be seen later.
I then turned to the cab and bonnet. I left out the grill and bonnet side overlays in order to get the soldering iron/RSU into the inside to solder to the base. The instructions say that the assembly should be built with the base screwed to the outer frames, greased, then soldered. Had a go but Vaseline just got everywhere where it was not wanted! So made a jig to hold the base out of MDF, keeping the 6 screws and their nuts in place then prodded away with the RSU to solder the cab and bonnet to its base.

cab-bonnet.jpg
cab-bonnet.jpg (34.65 KiB) Viewed 4573 times


So far so good. Trial fit of inner frames with motor.........surgery required......quite an amount of metal had to be removed from the front cab and rear bonnet former.

motor-clearance.jpg
motor-clearance.jpg (40.97 KiB) Viewed 4573 times


Other things I have to accommodate are the Dingham couplings which require some clearance around their slot. The outer frames and cab/bonnet base had to be hacked into.
So, slowly moving forward. Grill and bonnet side etches are now fitted and now adding weight to the front within the bonnet and rear within the cab area. This is meant to have DCC fitted and the only place for a chip is within the cab area. My intention is to disguise the intrusion of the motor and DCC chip by painting them matt black and hopefully with the addition of glazing the illusion will be completed......me thinks I can live with that.
In the meantime and jumping ahead, no etched lamp brackets but have fabricated my own. Nuff for today.......as LBSC would say........
http://www.robmilliken.co.uk
Updated December 2016

Armchair Modeller

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby Armchair Modeller » Mon Feb 06, 2017 9:34 pm

Good to see you are making progress again, Rob.

Your work reminds me of a couple of other 'issues' I had with the kit.

1. Your pivot for the compensated axle looks more robust than the one provided in the kit. I was a bit worried that the designed one would wear quickly against the axle.

2. On mine, there is a fair bit of fore and aft movement in the pivoted axle.

I was thinking there ought to be room for a small chip under the motor, but hadn't worked out the detail.

Keep up the good work! :thumb

User avatar
RobM
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby RobM » Tue Feb 07, 2017 8:02 am

Armchair Modeller wrote:Good to see you are making progress again, Rob.

Your work reminds me of a couple of other 'issues' I had with the kit.

1. Your pivot for the compensated axle looks more robust than the one provided in the kit. I was a bit worried that the designed one would wear quickly against the axle.

2. On mine, there is a fair bit of fore and aft movement in the pivoted axle.

I was thinking there ought to be room for a small chip under the motor, but hadn't worked out the detail.

Keep up the good work! :thumb


When I came to the pivot I inserted the two spare bushes into the frame, not the swing link, and inserted the axle. I was unable to get the supplied pivot to fit between axle and frame so into the fret waste box to find a piece with an etched fold line to make a right angle. Measured the distance between axle and frame, less thickness of fret, less half diameter of pivot pin, drilled, pin inserted and by luck the pivot pin was in the correct place. The pivot pin is 0.9 brass wire. This was then soldered to the frame.
I have no fore and aft movement of the axle which can only be from the swing arms, either their pivots too slack or oversized holes where the axle passes through.
I had guesstimated that I could get the chip on top of the motor (just) but before checking I had leapt ahead and soldered the grille and side panels so couldn't see how much space there was..... :(
Under the motor was another consideration but it would have come too close to the gears. I opted to glue lead under the motor instead. The chip will be located in the cab just behind the gear box as will a load more lead, all of which well below window level.

Still having concerns about the wobbly wheel and the fact that I couldn't get the B to B gauge in and relying on callipers instead. If all fails it can just be a rusting disused hulk in the under growth!!!
Rob
http://www.robmilliken.co.uk
Updated December 2016

Armchair Modeller

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby Armchair Modeller » Tue Feb 07, 2017 8:45 am

A rusty diesel hulk would be unlikely in your time frame ;)

I actually bought the Ruston thinking it would give me positive insights to help me with the inevitable scratch-building that is to come in future projects. Your experiences and mine suggest that this kit (at least) is a bit of a blind alley. I am also ideologically uncomfortable about this form of rocking axle compensation. I decided in the end that I would learn more by designing my own mechanism than persevering to the end with the chassis supplied in the kit. I just haven't got around to it yet.

Looking again at the body though, the kit does have the potential to become a really nice model. I got a bit further than you have so far, adding the detailing. This is quite nice, if a little delicate in parts.

I really must get back to it sometime soon - maybe when the track-laying is done on my layout. Drop-in wheel sets with a checkable BTB are essential IMHO.

User avatar
RobM
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby RobM » Tue Feb 07, 2017 5:49 pm

Armchair Modeller wrote:Your experiences and mine suggest that this kit (at least) is a bit of a blind alley. I am also ideologically uncomfortable about this form of rocking axle compensation. I decided in the end that I would learn more by designing my own mechanism than persevering to the end with the chassis supplied in the kit.

I fully agree. Looking more closely at the rocking axle which on its own works but add in the gear box and all becomes quite rigid. Anyway today I finished off getting in a load of lead, managed to get the weight of the loco to 50 grams. I used a piece of wood with a cocktail stick glued to it and progressively added the weight until it balanced out midway between the wheels. Temporarily wired up as DC, cab and bonnet just plonked on and tested on the layout......was surprised how well(ish) it ran through my not so perfect track work albeit a few hands of God to get through some dead areas which were not consistent going backward and forward so hopefully when DCC fitted it may be sorted.

ruston-hornsby.jpg
ruston-hornsby.jpg (83.42 KiB) Viewed 4447 times


Looks like it is front heavy but it was the camera angle.

Armchair Modeller wrote: Drop-in wheel sets with a checkable BTB are essential IMHO.


Again I would fully agree but the problem will always be that final drive gear which is almost the same size as the wheels. A modified B to B would have to be devised to clear the gear. At the end of the day, if all works well, then I'll leave well alone, however, my thoughts are with coming up with a better inner frame design with drop in/out wheels and perhaps drive to just one axle. I certainly would not build another albeit a nice looking loco...... :(
Rob
Last edited by RobM on Tue Feb 07, 2017 6:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.robmilliken.co.uk
Updated December 2016

David Knight
Posts: 663
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby David Knight » Tue Feb 07, 2017 6:06 pm

The deep buffer beams might be a bit tricky for the loop end on your (and my) Dinghams Rob. Have you figured out a workaround?

Cheers,

David

User avatar
RobM
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby RobM » Tue Feb 07, 2017 6:27 pm

Doooooh!!.....thanks David and am very pleased that you have seen this and pointed that out, I'd completely overlooked this, originally I had wanted the loco to run forwards from left to right as the wagons are already set up, will now need to run backwards from left to right so there is just the hook. May now have a complete re-think.
Thanks again.....Rob
http://www.robmilliken.co.uk
Updated December 2016

Armchair Modeller

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby Armchair Modeller » Tue Feb 07, 2017 8:15 pm

RobM wrote: Temporarily wired up as DC, cab and bonnet just plonked on and tested on the layout......was surprised how well(ish) it ran through my not so perfect track work albeit a few hands of God to get through some dead areas which were not consistent going backward and forward so hopefully when DCC fitted it may be sorted.Rob


Full marks for persevering to the end and getting it running :thumb Some sort of stay-alive capacity may help, if you hadn't already thought to include it.

Armchair Modeller wrote: Drop-in wheel sets with a checkable BTB are essential IMHO.

RobM wrote:Again I would fully agree but the problem will always be that final drive gear which is almost the same size as the wheels. A modified B to B would have to be devised to clear the gear. At the end of the day, if all works well, then I'll leave well alone, however, my thoughts are with coming up with a better inner frame design with drop in/out wheels and perhaps drive to just one axle. I certainly would not build another albeit a nice looking loco...... :(


This is where we can learn from the secrets of advanced civilisations in other modelling universes. The 2mm Scale Association BTB gauges have clever recesses to get around gears and other obstructions. This is one example, from their products page...

Image

User avatar
jim s-w
Posts: 1781
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 5:56 pm

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby jim s-w » Tue Feb 07, 2017 10:02 pm

Hi rob

Could you bend the tail of the dingham forward and add a little magnet so that it opposes the ones under the track and pushes up? It would of course require all the under track magnets to be the same way round.

Just a thought

Jim

User avatar
RobM
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby RobM » Wed Feb 08, 2017 7:22 am

jim s-w wrote:Hi rob

Could you bend the tail of the dingham forward and add a little magnet so that it opposes the ones under the track and pushes up? It would of course require all the under track magnets to be the same way round.

Just a thought

Jim

Thanks Jim but after David pointed out my oversight the problem is easily resolvable. Just put the hook with latch on both ends of the loco. The loco will only need to propel the wagons from left to right and pull from right to left on the layout. All I have to do is swap the couplings on the wagons so the loop is facing to the left.
Rob
http://www.robmilliken.co.uk
Updated December 2016

User avatar
RobM
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby RobM » Wed Feb 08, 2017 11:15 am

Armchair Modeller wrote:Some sort of stay-alive capacity may help, if you hadn't already thought to include it.

Looking at a few options don't think there is room, also I'm a complete luddite where electronics are concerned.
Rob
http://www.robmilliken.co.uk
Updated December 2016

Armchair Modeller

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby Armchair Modeller » Wed Feb 08, 2017 12:39 pm

The only luddites that couldn't learn anything new were the poor, unfortunate ones sentenced to death. I doubt that applies to you - or me! ;)

I am not particularly experienced on this aspect of DCC myself, but did try it briefly in a Dapol/Model Rail Sentinel and it seemed to work well. It is 'temporarily' back in DC mode for track testing. Some stay alives are quite compact. You don't need the power to run any distance, just over the odd, minute speck of dirt. The technology has certainly been used in 2mm scale, e.g. here

User avatar
David B
Posts: 1200
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:30 pm

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby David B » Wed Feb 08, 2017 2:00 pm

Armchair Modeller wrote:The only luddites that couldn't learn anything new were the poor, unfortunate ones sentenced to death.


A tenuously connected ancestor of mine was a Luddite, known as The Nottingham Captain who was involved in the Pentrich Revolution where someone was unfortunately killed. Jeremiah was found guilty at Derby Assizes and whilst most of his compatriots were transported, he was to be hanged, drawn and quartered. The Prince Regent commuted the drawing and quartering but he was still hanged, after which he was beheaded. This was in 1817. There was a book written about it called 'England's Last Revolution'.

Jeremiah_Brandreths_head.jpg
From Wikipaedia Commons
Jeremiah_Brandreths_head.jpg (66.07 KiB) Viewed 4286 times


My apologies for the digression.

User avatar
RobM
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: Mount Woodville Works

Postby RobM » Wed Feb 08, 2017 5:57 pm

David B wrote:My apologies for the digression.

Thanks for your input David...... ;) , apology accepted........ :) .....don't see the family resemblance but then it was 200 years ago.......I won't hold it against you.......

RobM wrote:All I have to do is swap the couplings on the wagons so the loop is facing to the left.
Rob


Spent this afternoon sorting out the Dingham's.......First tried just removing the couplings but that cyno is pretty strong stuff so ended up cutting off the entire buffer beam and reversing the loop/latch...........all now rectified apart from some paint touch up.
Armchair Modeller wrote:I am not particularly experienced on this aspect of DCC myself, but did try it briefly in a Dapol/Model Rail Sentinel and it seemed to work well. It is 'temporarily' back in DC mode for track testing. Some stay alives are quite compact. You don't need the power to run any distance, just over the odd, minute speck of dirt. The technology has certainly been used in 2mm scale, e.g. here

Convinced but cataracts are a prob plus a steady hand for soldering........much of the cab taken up with lead..........if there was a 'fix all' with off the shelf solutions then I would go for it.......read Nigel's blog several times but think way beyond me...................
Rob
http://www.robmilliken.co.uk
Updated December 2016


Return to “Standard Gauge Workbench”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests