Crymlyn A Shop Techniques. Barry Railway F Class.

[davey4270]

123f. . The Tank 6.




The picture shows the tank support brackets soldered to the boiler. I didn’t need to unsolder the 2 tacks holding the tank in its correct position as they had worked loose at some point when I was soldering the tank supports. Fortunately, for once, the tank had not moved out of alignment meaning the brackets didn’t need correcting. Looking at the brackets on the boiler, they don’t appear to be level with each other but are evenly spaced. The unevenness is correct due to parts of the tank bottom having the extra thickness of an overlay.
I marked out the position of the balance pipe and the water outlets at the rear of the tank to the R/H side injector and a smaller pipe which enters the L/H cab front. The purpose of this pipe is unclear, my best guess is that it leads to some kind of tank level gauge? The class of locomotives in GWR days appear to only have one GWR style injector on the R/H side so perhaps there was another different type hidden in the cab? Anyway, I drilled pilot holes in the required positions and soldered 10BA washers over the holes to represent the flanges where these components would be attached.




The tank has had another clean up and most of the solder “stain” has gone but for some reason the overlays look dull compared to the shiny tank surface in the picture. Looking at the tank in my hand the parts are exactly the same. How strange.

 

[davey4270]

124. The Lifting Rings.




A picture of 726’s tank. Look under the chimney on the right and you can see the front lifting ring. I tried to place it on the model just above the row of rivets on the front tank overlay. On the rear of the tank this would place the lifting ring in one of the holes for the filler cap handrails. So, are the holes for the handrails in the wrong place? Instead of diving in I gave it some thought and spotted that there is no horizontal row of rivets on the prototype!




The kit’s tank with the horizontal rows of rivets on the overlays just below the chimney and dome which are placed for effect. I have made a light scratch on plates 2 & 4 to mark the plate overlaps on the prototype.




I filed off the unwanted row of etched rivets on the front plate and estimated the lifting ring anchor to be 5mm in from the front and just above where the line of the 2nd & 4th plates would overlap. I drilled a 0.5mm hole and gently widened the hole away from the front using the drill in a sawing action. Important Notice, no tools were harmed in the making of this blog. I was fortunate in having 4 spare lifting ring anchors and plates from an earlier Agenoria kit so I inserted the loop through the hole, tinned the plate and positioned it over a blob of flux. Holding it straight with an old tweezers, a quick dab from my 40w iron secured it in place. From underneath, I put a dab of flux on the loop’s tail and a blob of solder made it double secure. Repeat for the other 3 anchors. A small loop of wire will be added to represent the ring after painting. See my earlier blog on CWM MAWR. A friend asked about scratch building these? I would use split pins with a small square of brass to represent the anchor plate again with a small hole towards the inner end of the brass square and the same soldering method.
The incorrect row of rivets on the 3rd plate have yet to be removed. There is no sign of an overlap on the first and third plates so I’m guessing that it is on top of the tank and mostly hidden underneath the chimney and dome.

 

[daifly]

Take care with removing rivets - they're easier to remove than add later!

With several different builders of these locos, there are likely to be differences in the platework and positions of internal tank baffles etc.
Which loco number are you actually building?
Dave

 

[michael080]

are you planning to reproduce the poor fit of the prototype dome cover? I'm doing that all the time.

Michael

 

[daifly]

I've noted that one or more of these locos appeared to have no lifting rings.
Dave

 

[davey4270]

Take care with removing rivets - they're easier to remove than add later!
View attachment 140199
With several different builders of these locos, there is likely to be differences in the platework and positions of internal tank baffles etc.
Which loco number are you actually building?
Dave

It’ll be 726 whose tank is pictured. I always loose a few rivets around the corners of the bunkers and replace them with dots of superglue before priming.

 

[davey4270]

are you planning to reproduce the poor fit of the prototype dome cover? I'm doing that all the time.

Michael

I’ll probably fit mine better then 726’s! A few rivets need to be removed on the top at the front and back underneath the dome, it’ll sit flush then.

 

[davey4270]

I've noted that one or more of these locos appeared to have no lifting rings.
Dave

Yes, I suspect the GWR fitted them as all pictures I have in Barry ownership don’t have them but some GWR do.
This is the finish I’m aiming for with the full GREAT WESTERN on the tank side I don’t know if 726 carried this livery though but it looks quite smart although it’s still ugly!

 

[davey4270]

125. The Valve Chest Cover.




Rummaging through the box I use to contain parts for the kit I found amongst the bits of scrap etch a fold up valve chest cover and what could be the frame extensions which run from the cab and past the smoke box. Once again there is no suggestion of these parts in the kit’s instructions. The fold up valve chest cover wasn’t interested in reforming itself into something approximating what the designer intended it to with gentle folding but a small vice and some Iron Maiden persuaded it to change its mind.
I’m not worried about the sides as they will eventually be between the frame extensions.




A cropped close up of the valve cover on 726. You can see how it fits between the frame extensions and has a pair of handles to lift the cover for access to the valve/cylinder covers. I drilled 4 holes and soldered 2 staple shaped pieces of 0.7mm wire to represent the handles which was no easy task on the outside of the curved surface.

 

[davey4270]

126. Frame “Extensions”.

These weren’t really frame extensions but the actual frames visible above the footplate. On our model, possibly unless you model in Scaleseven, the frames/chassis usually sits below the footplate and is somewhat narrower for the Finescale standards. On the prototype the frames rise above the footplate to just below the top of the splashers. During yesterday’s rummage through the scrap bits of etch these parts were also pleasantly identified and cleaned up. The position of the splashers is slightly too wide for the correct position of these frames which also sit either side of the smoke box. The position of these is set by the fold up splasher sides in the footplate so was presumed to be correct and is not easily altered. Obviously on the prototype the smoke box would be supported on these along with the firebox at the rear. I contemplated fitting these extensions against the smoke box and filling the resulting gap against the 6 splashers but as the frame extensions behind each splasher would also need to be removed to clear the wheel this was rejected. Instead I soldered them against the inside edge of the splashers and onto the footplate as filling the gap at the front either side of the smoke box seems a much easier option. Also as the smoke box/tank/boiler is removable, a few coats of paint could prove to be a problem when reassembling. After carefully aligning the frames with the front of the valve chest cover and a few tacks it was all straight and could be fully soldered. The frames were heavily soldered inside either side of every splasher and then cut away inside the splashers to clear the wheels. I initially removed the unwanted part with a side cutters and then filed the remains closer to the curve of the splashers. This can be seen on the wheels at the far side of the picture.
I have arranged about 1mm side play on each axle (that’s 0.5mm either way) and the outside of the wheels comes within about 1mm of the inside of the splashers but it doesn’t look like this in the picture.

 

[davey4270]

127. The Brakes.




To give myself a break from my ongoing battle with the saddle tank, and also because I don’t have any handrail knobs, I decided to do some work on the frames. I had previously made up the laminations for the brake hangers and carefully opened up their mounting holes and the location holes in the frames only to discover that they were about 3mm to far forward! Possibly the brake hangers are the wrong shape or the chassis was designed for bigger wheels or, shock and horror, I’ve fitted the wrong size wheels!!! A quick double check proved that the wheels are the correct size so as the hangers and frames are on the same etch, you have to wonder! Anyway, new holes were drilled and you can see the old ones in the picture. I use 1.2mm brass rod for the hanger mounts passing through the frames with 12 BA washers against the outside of the frames to represent the mounting flange on the prototype. The brass rod is possible over scale but the brakes were hefty pieces of kit designed to stop several hundred tons of metal.




I soldered the lower cross rods in place after threading the brake pull rods in position. I have seen the pull rods in various positions varying from
outside the wheels, just inside the wheels, further inside away from the frames to a single rod in the centre. There appears to be a pull rod either side in prototype pictures but it’s not clear. I could not place them further out as the springs would be in the way and I would not be able to remove the axle boxes so I positioned them as close to the axle boxes as possible.




I will have to sort out a working arrangement at the rear. A pair of short etched links like a figure 8 are provided which, I think, would drop down from another cross bar through the 2 holes in the frames and link to the pull rods. There is also another etch for the handbrake connection and a steam brake would probably have been fitted underneath the bunker acting on this crossbar.

 

[davey4270]

128. Rigging the Brakes.




There is not even a mention of the brake rigging in the instructions so I was fortunate in having several pictures of the prototype where some of it can be seen. Carrying on from yesterday, there is a heavy cross bar behind the rear wheels with a threaded connection on the L/H side passing up into the cab. This must surely come from the handbrake so I’ll know where to position it in the cab. The locomotive is not vacuum fitted so there should be a steam cylinder which also acts on this crossbar. There is no sign of this cylinder in any of my pictures so it must be well hidden between the frames, unless someone knows different?
I chose to ignore this cylinder and model the cross bar with the link to the hand brake which is outside the frames. Two links which could be for this were soldered together with the smaller ends flares out to fit around a threaded bar from the hand brake. I threaded a piece of 1.2mm wire through the frames trapping another two smaller links. I placed more 12BA washers outside the frames to represent the hefty bearings on the prototype that supported the crossbar with the hand brake attachment on the L/H side and another washer outside that. These were all soldered in place from the inside to minimise cleaning up and the ends of the brake pull rods soldered to the shorter cranks with “pins” of 1.2mm brass wire.
Looking at the picture, the frames are posed upside down, application of the hand brake (on the left hand side) would cause anti clockwise rotation of the crossbar where the two short links attached to the brake pull rods would move the brake shoes against the wheels. Hopefully this is correct for the brakes to work.



An order with sub contractor Taff Vale Models for a motor duly arrived in Dai Larfin’s stores and was attached to a reconditioned gear box.
The gearbox was previously fitted to Andrew Barclay 1140 and although it worked well was rather noisy. Upon testing it was found to be still noisy in one direction. Closer inspection found that moving the gear slightly to one side stopped this. The cut in the groves on the wheel are slightly deeper in the middle (concave?) and the start of the rather short worm when off centre must have been rubbing against one side of the gear wheel. A suitable shim to reduce side play solved the problem. The motor does sit a millimetre or so higher from the axle but with this model I think there’ll be plenty of room.
I find it ironic that a locomotive that looks like it was cobbled together from left over components in the erecting shops will be fitted with a previously condemned gearbox!
The motor is a skew wound, 5 pole specimen and a direct replacement for the Mashima 18/33 which is no longer available. It is supplied with mounting screws and is more powerful than the Mashima equivalent. I chose the longer shaft version, and as can be seen in the picture, the shaft just protrudes from the worm which is perfect. I have previously used some Mashima motors and the shaft ends a few millimetres inside the worm , although with no ill effects.




A quick preview of how the model will look with most of the body components posed together for the camera.

 

[john lewsey]

Hi Dave
It looks very nice to me
John

 

[davey4270]

Hi Dave
It looks very nice to me
John

Thank you John.

 

[davey4270]

129. Some Tidying Up.




Since I’d fitted the frame extensions there was an occasional rubbing sound coming from the model. Nothing was obvious but I decided that this needed investigating while I was waiting for some materials for the model. It was traced to the rearmost lower corners of the firebox making contact with the rear drivers at their innermost point of movement. As I will be shimming out some of the side play on this axle this shouldn’t be a problem but to prevent any chance of a short there was plenty of excess material here to file away. Annoyingly there was still a slight rubbing sound and this was traced to the blobs of solder inside some of the splashers against the frame extensions. I decided to tidy up where the splasher tops protruded below the footplate and also remove the excess solder from the frame extensions.
The lower splasher in the photograph has been dealt with while the upper splasher waits in anticipation. Please ignore the optical distortion at the top of the picture as both splashers are level and straight.




Next job will be to make the wheels look something like this. The picture shows the wheels from 726 which have some interesting features. The leading wheel set, right of picture, has the usual balance weight opposite the crank pin covering two spokes. Just beneath it is another small weight placed with a gap between them of one spoke. I have several prototype pictures and this extra weight is only on a couple of examples. Does anyone know the reason for this extra weight?
Moving on the the driven axle, the original balance weighs, which look to be cast with the wheels, have been drilled out with two overlapping holes between each spoke. I am sure if the balance weighs were riveted on they could have been removed completely. Surely a much easier task! A large crescent shaped weigh has been fitted covering five spokes directly to the other side of the crank pin.
I’m wondering what was the reason for this modification? Was it to improve the original balancing, was a different crank axle fitted or was there another reason. Can anyone help?

 

[simond]

Most curious, I have never seen anything like it. I guess there must have been a problem, and somebody decided that drilling out balance weights would offer a solution. I cannot imagine anyone would accept delivery of a new loco in that state.

Are you sure they were rivetted and not cast with the wheel?

 

[davey4270]

I'm certain they were cast with the wheel as the riveted plates could have been fairly easily removed. I think this is visible in the picture but surely it would have been easier to drill or burn off rivets than mount a set of wheels attached to a crank axle in a ginormous pillar drill or lathe. There are other Welsh pre grouping locomotives with similar modified balance weights on the centre axle. I have a Dragon Models Rhymney Railways R Class 0-6-2 no. 38 to which I have fitted similarly modified centre wheels. There is photographic evidence of this but I am wondering why this was done.

 

[Crimson Rambler]

The 'Jones Goods' 0-6-0s on the Cambrian Railways displayed a somewhat similar arrangement. The GWR added new balance weights to the driving wheels (crankaxle) and drilled out the original ones. I believe the reason was the original balancing was deemed incorrect.


Crimson Rambler

 

[daifly]

I have plenty of photos but no explanation although Adrian's would seem a good possibility.

Dave

 

[Dog Star]

Question for Dave (@daifly),

On your photo in the previous post... can you tell if the "solid" balance weight comprises plates and rivets?