Stanier 8F in S7

Len Cattley

Western Thunderer
Hi Steph, I think they might be a bit small for the middle crank pin, I will have to find out later. Sorry for the high jack David.

Len
 

DavidinAus

Western Thunderer
I'm sorry, readers, but I just couldn't resist this.

Small The first run on test track 001.jpg

....it moves!

This is the first-ever run of my model under power. I don't know how to upload a video, or I would do that just to show you, but this is very important (to me) - it shows that my project is still "on track" [couldn't resist that one].

Small The first run on test track 2.jpg

I have a two metre length of MDF with some old (32mm) Peco Flexitrack widened to S7 (cut down the centre) fixed into a long reverse curve of about 2m radius in either direction, with a double-pole relay triggered to reverse the polarity when the switch is triggered at either end by the loco. running into it. So the engine runs up and down continuously when power is connected. It's my way of "running-in" a mechanism whilst also ensuring that it'll go round curves.

It doesn't look much like an 8F, and the motion isn't all connected yet (I decided to try running it with the connecting rods in place but before I try the return cranks, etc.) but it shows that the tender pickups are working and that the assembly so far is acceptable.

I had to wait to try out the running until the tender pickups were done, because I decided on that idea from Mickoo (see further up the thread). It had the advantage for me that it would, I thought, make it easier to construct the chassis of the locomotive itself. So I have arranged split axles by Steph.s "Method 3", and put wires to connect the brass axle-bearings up on all three axles, and will arrange wires through to the locomotive.

Small Tender electrics.jpg

Here's the underside of the tender as constructed so far, with the compensation mechanism able to work (I have left loops in the wires to allow this, but there's still a lot of gear to go into those spaces, so I'm not sure how well this will work) and the temporary connections visible going to the loco. chassis on the right. The split axles can be seen.

It runs better forwards than reverse at the moment, but goes OK at 7V drawing 100-200 mA, and it's still running without any lubrication.

So there you are.

David

LATER:
here's the video:

 
Last edited:

DavidinAus

Western Thunderer
Onto the best bit (for me) - building the loco body (I've never built a tender before, but that should be good as well). Actually going on to building the superstructure may be good mainly because I am stressed out about making the wheels go around without binding, so when the chassis is complete I breathe a sigh of relief and relax ....

Early on in the build comes the boiler and smokebox construction. Now the instructions say that both are "pre-rolled", but only my boiler was treated this way. The smokebox was a pair of flat etches (there is a beautiful thin overlay with all the detail on it). So this is the dilemma: I have never tried to roll a piece of flat metal into a cylinder, so is this the right time to start? Do I risk ruining my lovely MOK kit, or do I beg someone to roll it for me? If so, who? Or do I buy a special rolling tool (about $90 here in Aus., which I may never use again)?

The instructions talk about rolling the (much thinner) overlay using a metal bar and some cloth so press it down onto. So the main structural part of the smokebox should surely be bend-able in the same way ....
So I try rolling the (0.5mm thick) nickel silver sheet with a bar about 25mm diameter, using towelling as a base. The curve of the result was the sort of bend that on trackwork you could easily run an 0-8-0 around without gauge-widening (that has surely to be the ultimate "in-joke").
However I thought about this for a while and decided that the problem was with the surface that I was rolling the sheet into. So I used instead of cloth a strip of the neoprene wet-suit material that I use to provide a springy surface for my trackwork.

Small Smokebox and boiler 01.jpg

Using this as a base, the next curve in the smokebox was maybe 20cm diameter, and adding layers of the squashy neoprene allowed a tighter radius to be made. I had to use a smaller diameter rod as well (about 15mm) but in the end the 38mm diameter smokebox could be formed. nerve-wracking, but satisfying in the end.
Having the formers to make the accurate cylinder was useful as well. This picture shows the copper wire (from mains electricity cable) used to squeeze the inner cylinder of nickel-silver down onto the formers. Thicker copper to hold it in place, then thinner copper to squeeze the metal down.

Small Smokebox and boiler 02.jpg

After that it was easy (relatively) and both the smokebox and the taper-boiler could be made accurately.

Small Smokebox and boiler 03.jpg

You can see in the above picture that I slightly over-did the curve on the detail overlay, but that did not matter in the end.

It is now, for the first time, possible to look at a preview of what this kit is going to be like when it is finished. OK, I accept, it takes a deal of imagination still ....

Small Rough assembly 01.jpg

David
 

oldravendale

Western Thunderer
Congratulations! I've always found rolling boilers beyond me although I have many diameters of rod and used all sorts of softish material as a base. I wonder if the trick is to use deeper and softer base material? My concern in doing this is that pressure on a small roller may end up with a crease but I'll look for some scrap etch and try again. Your result is first class - in fact, to my eyes stunning!

Brian.
 

3 LINK

Western Thunderer
Brian,

Regarding a " softish material as a base " I have always used an old Yellow pages with good results.

Martyn.
 

DavidinAus

Western Thunderer
It's beginning to look a bit more like an 8F (admittedly I have placed the pony truck in place and the smokebox door just for this picture, though).

Small Boiler meets frames.jpg

A question however: when I started this project, Dikitricki posted a picture of his lovely model 8F in brass-and-whitemetal finish - see the start of this thread. I was looking forward to the day when mine might look similar - but how can that be done if I am also going to have to paint parts of it before I complete construction?
I guess it doesn't matter really, but if I am to have a realistic painted finish in places like the frames behind the driving wheels, surely this will have to be done by taking the wheels off. Especially if I wish to have a good finish on parts like the springs, which are right behind the wheels, of course. As you'll observe from the above picture, I haven't put the braking gear in place yet. Once I have done that the wheels will be very difficult to take off. At present the wheels can be removed easily, because the excellent design of the MOK kit allows the motion bracket, valve gear and wheels to be removed as a unit.

So, how do modellers like Richard manage it?
How do you make a whole brass-and-whitemetal kit up, and later get a good finish on it, without giving yourself a huge amount of unnecessary work dismantling all the careful modelling done to put it together in the first place?

Small Boiler meets frames 2.jpg

David
 

Scale7JB

Western Thunderer
Hi David,

Looking good!

You'll probably find that even with the brake gear on you'll still be able to remove the wheels.

JB.
 

Dikitriki

Flying Squad
Hi David,

I always make sure that I can wiggle my wheels past the brake blocks - I always use Slater's wheels which unscrew at the boss. Further, the cylinder and valve gear can be lifted off as a unit, and dismantled further as necessary, and you are down to a basic chassis to paint. With a bit of thought, it is possible to do the same with inside valve gear, and the most complex loco I have done this for was my Lord Nelson - see http://westernthunder.co.uk/index.p...e-l-y-crab-temporarily.100/page-32#post-94363 post 623 onwards for a few pages.

Richard
 

DavidinAus

Western Thunderer
Thanks, Richard.

I've looked at your thread about dismantling, and it has posed another question: I had thought of changing over to DCC, but have been very put off by someone saying that you have to isolate the motor from the frames, or the chip gets burned out/fused/something bad. Yet looking at your Lord Nelson, the motor doesn't seem to be isolated from the frames or wheels. So what's going on?
I'd actually thought to myself "how the lleh do you ever isolate a motor with a metal can, a metal gearbox,etc, from the frames?", and actually given up on the idea (especially with a two-motor Garratt and a tiny L&Y 0-4-0 pug to do as well) of going the DCC route.

David
 

Scale7JB

Western Thunderer
Well in theory the axle and frames should be electrically dead anyway, so no problem with the gearbox being in contact with either for dcc. Not sure how it would work with American style pickup...

JB.
 

mickoo

Western Thunderer
The easiest way to isolate a can motor from the frames is with a thin bit of foam between motor and frame, or just wrap some electrical tape around it ;) You could also use some appropriate heat shrink I suppose, we have some at work that'll go around 75 mm dia cables easily.

To be honest, I've never heard of this issue, mind I've not dabbled in DCC that much of focused on it to be fair, so good tip to remember if it is true.

All the best

Mick
 

Dikitriki

Flying Squad
Hi,

I often resort to making one side of the chassis (therefore body/ motor etc. live). I have had no problems with DCC, but I do make absolutely sure that the chip is sheathed, and that no part of it can come into contact with any metal, either on chassis or body.

I will also say that I am moving towards an insulated hornguide/split axle method of chassis construction which ameliorates the problem anyway, though I would still sheathe the chip in case of inadvertent shorts.

Richard
 

richard carr

Western Thunderer
It's not normally an issue as the frames are often electrically dead anyway.

If they are not then you need to make sure the motor cannot come into contact with the frames. As Mick said wrapping the motor body in plastic tape will solve the problem. The same goes for the chip it must be electrically insulated from the frames but most have a clear plastic sheathing to do this some of the larger ones such as the loksound XL s don't so you do need to be careful that it cannot possibly come into contact with anything live if it does there is a good chance that will be the end of the chip.
This might sound a bit off putting but please don't let it be as dcc is the best control system around.

Richard
 

DavidinAus

Western Thunderer
I am pleased about the DCC, and will try that in due course. However, back at the frames ....

Looking at the descriptions by people who have made up a model completely, and then have spent lots of effort systematically pulling them apart so that they can then be painted, I don't think I can do that (or at least, it isn't what I want to do). I do not think pictures of the unpainted model are so important, so I will paint the frames behind the wheels at this stage (and probably most of the stuff in-between the frames also).

The first stage is to take the wheels and the motion off the frames. Fortunately this doesn’t prove too difficult.

Small Chassis dismantled 1.jpg


This will also give the advantage that I can put the balance weights on the wheels whilst they are flat on the desk, rather than mounted on the frames. The frames themselves will be easy to paint I hope, although I will have to mask off the sliding hornblocks, and avoid painting the compensation mechanism on the insides of the frames.

Small Chassis dismantled 2.jpg

Note the paper masking off the hornblocks, the exhaust steam injector with pipe leading to it, and the driving wheel springs in place.

Now the balance weights will have to be chosen. I hadn’t realised, but there are many variable configurations of balance weights between different individual locomotive which are otherwise indistinguishable. The MOK instructions don't make this point, but there are 32 etches to go onto the eight wheels! The instructions say that the balance weight etches are "sandwiched together in pairs" - which I assume means that one goes on the inside of each wheel, and an identical one on the outside. Does it?

That still leaves 16 types between eight wheels. Looking at my books and on the 'net is quite confusing, and it appears that what I must do is now choose a particular locomotive, and choose the appropriately-shaped balance weights to suit it. Then I must put two identical etches on each side or the wheel, probably cutting a little of the spokes away to allow the etches partially to be countersunk into the wheel (less so on the driving wheel with the connecting rod, as that one appears from photo.s to stand out from the wheel much more that the other wheels). Do I then fill in-between the etches with something like Araldite?

I will need to find a picture of a locomotive in the area where I want to model (not too important) with a rivetted tender (which I think looks nicer), and then try to match the available parts from my kit to make the appropriate balance weights on my locomotive. So, does anyone know where I can find a side-on view of a Stanier 8F, pulling a tender with lots of rivets on the side, on the Settle-Carlisle Railway (or, at a pinch, anywhere in Lancashire or the North-West)?

Thanks

David
 

David Varley

Western Thunderer
I will need to find a picture of a locomotive in the area where I want to model (not too important) with a rivetted tender (which I think looks nicer), and then try to match the available parts from my kit to make the appropriate balance weights on my locomotive. So, does anyone know where I can find a side-on view of a Stanier 8F, pulling a tender with lots of rivets on the side, on the Settle-Carlisle Railway (or, at a pinch, anywhere in Lancashire or the North-West)?

Thanks

David

Like this one? http://mikemorant.smugmug.com/Train...SR-and-BRM/LMSR-2-8-0-locomotives/i-DJsqqGh/A

Quite a few more on that site that might be helpful.

Regards,

David V.
 
Top