DJH 9F 2-10-0

[Steph Dale]

Hehe, plumbing and rodding seems to be DJH's 'blind spot'. If you want a challenge try one of their German loco kits you can probably start to see how I used to spend around £loads/loco on detail parts with other German manufacturers, such as Weinert...

Worth both the perseverance and cost I think though

Steph

 

[mickoo]

Brian,

For your delection, I've left these original size but compressed for web browsers. I did a photo shoot of 92220 the other month, 79 random detail shots all told, your welcome to them if you think it might help, some will be of no use as they are intended for scratch building details and CAD work etc, but some might help.

I do need to go back and take some more photos as well as measurements and some GA's from the library, the call for beer and pie at the Tap bar on the station was too strong this last time around




Where did we ever get the notion that cab spectacle screens were flush glazed

I believe the regulator rod is virtually parallel with the footplate, the slant being an optical illusion due to the fire box top which rises up toward the crown at the throat ring, just a fraction higher off the rail head than the cab roof crown. The DJH diagram is incorrect, it shows the firebox top to be flat and the linkage tipping down.

I think the kit hole may be for the small pipe that's for....I think....the whistle? and not the regulator rod which is just soldered to the front face and then covered by that steel plate, why provide a hole if your going to cover it up?

I do like that cab, and, nice to see the kicking plate added around the inside of the footplate over the wheels

 

[oldravendale]

Looking at the photo above and others it appears the linkage comes out of the cab front higher up from the plate at right angles to the firebox rather than the angled piece with the spectacle plate.

David

I think you are right, David. I'll have a look at the drawings tomorrow. I'm anticipating drilling a hole in the same vertical plane but a bit higher up.

Brian

 

[mickoo]

Looking at the photo above and others it appears the linkage comes out of the cab front higher up from the plate at right angles to the firebox rather than the angled piece with the spectacle plate.

David

David, your right it does come out higher up, but still through the angled front sheet and very close to the bend, it was one point I wanted to double check and took detail photos to be sure.

 

[oldravendale]

Just following up on that, David, there is a cover over the exit of the rod from the cab so the initial appearance can be misleading. Mickoo's photos give the guide.

B

 

[oldravendale]

Brian,

For your delection, I've left these original size but compressed for web browsers. I did a photo shoot of 92220 the other month, 79 random detail shots all told, your welcome to them if you think it might help, some will be of no use as they are intended for scratch building details and CAD work etc, but some might help.

I do need to go back and take some more photos as well as measurements and some GA's from the library, the call for beer and pie at the Tap bar on the station was too strong this last time around

Where did we ever get the notion that cab spectacle screens were flush glazed

I believe the regulator rod is virtually parallel with the footplate, the slant being an optical illusion due to the fire box top which rises up toward the crown at the throat ring, just a fraction higher off the rail head than the cab roof crown. The DJH diagram is incorrect, it shows the firebox top to be flat and the linkage tipping down.

I think the kit hole may be for the small pipe that's for....I think....the whistle? and not the regulator rod which is just soldered to the front face and then covered by that steel plate, why provide a hole if your going to cover it up?

I do like that cab, and, nice to see the kicking plate added around the inside of the footplate over the wheels

Oh, so useful, Mick! I'd love to see some more.

I thought the large diameter copper pipework was wrapped in insulation! The pipework parts in the kit are, believe it or not, white metal and textured like insulation. I'd replace with copper wire anyway, but the question was how to create the insulation look. I've just been through about 100 photos and still feel that the large diameter pipework looks insulated. However.......you have the photos of "Evening Star" and the model will now have plain copper pipework!

I'll also ensure that the cab spectacle frames are polished and the glass recessed!

You might be right about the optical illusion. I'll measure the position of the rod vis a vis the footplate on a drawing. On the model the firebox does rise from the cab and the DJH diagram may look incorrect because I didn't lay it flat for the photo.

I'm about as certain as I can be that the etched hole in the cab is not for that small pipe - it's too large and the etched plate round the hole is round, not square. Neither is that small pipe on the DJH drawings or instructions. In fact, I think the pipe to the whistle is pretty well at the centre top of the cab and goes in to large brass distributor casting on the top of the firebox. However, you've answered the question for the fitting of the regulator rod at the correct height. I'll hide it behind the plate (which is provided as an etch). The original hole gave it a good, positive location though.

This is so much help, Mick.

Best regards.

Brian

 

[Steph Dale]

Dad,

I'd check things like the pipe insulation if it's concerning you - as you know from our survey of the 'River' things can be a bit different in preservation when compared to locos in BR service...

Steph

 

[oldravendale]

Hehe, plumbing and rodding seems to be DJH's 'blind spot'. If you want a challenge try one of their German loco kits you can probably start to see how I used to spend around £loads/loco on detail parts with other German manufacturers, such as Weinert...

Worth both the perseverance and cost I think though

Steph

Hmm. The pipework is pretty well drawn and the castings are good. Most are in lost wax brass. However, the pipework itself, as I mentioned to Mick, is white metal and will need bending in to the spaghetti shapes. Now we know it is copper and/or painted it makes the whole job so much easier.

I hope I'll get an afternoon in the workshop tomorrow and get the regulator linkages set up properly.

 

[OzzyO]

Hello Brian,

I've got one of these in my to do pile, IIRC when I looked at fitting the balance weights to the driving wheels the weights angled out towards the centre of the wheels. To get them to lay flat it looks like you have two options.
1] Add a thin shim at the rim of the weights.
2] Mill the spokes flat and thicken up the weights.
It's most noticeable on the one on the centre wheel.

OzzyO.

 

[mickoo]

Brian,

I think Steph is right, during their working lives the pipework is wrapped with an insulated lagging, certainly that above the footplate on the drivers side, on the firemans side that below the footplate appears bare but never polished.

Evening Star may have been different as even in BR days it was often cleaned for specials, so bright pipework may have occurred then, photos should help there where possible.

I'll sort the walk around photos tomorrow for you

Regarding balance weights, it looks like the spokes are constant thickness so milling the spokes flat or skimming the boss and associated part of the spokes in a lathe would be an option, it appears that the boss is almost the same thickness as the rim, there's very little clearance between coupling rods and tyres.

 

[David Taylor]

The pivoted 'crank' seems a bit long and a bit too vertical on the model to me. If it was either shortened or rotated clockwise (or both) the rod from the cab might take on a better angle.

 

[Ressaldar]

I wonder if they ever did a test build?

Your words not mine

Seriously though, is it not that the linkage 'arm' on the firebox is too long, thus pushing the wire further away from the correct angle. Is it possible to somehow trim/file a little off of part E165 rather than re-drill holes?

Best off luck.

Mike

ps posted before I read all of the posts, especially David's one immediately above

 

[OzzyO]

Hello Brian,

back to the motion, have you considered using Premier components parts?
PMP12 valve gear parts £26.00
PR 423 connecting rods £14.00 (not required if you use the valve gear parts)
PR 258 coupling rods £21.00 (or £28.00 if you get the jointed rods).

So for just over £50.00 you could have a very nice looking valve gear set up.

OzzyO.

 

[oldravendale]

Just updating with a bit more of my research. Thanks for all the comments. They are really appreciated and I'll try to comment here.

Firstly, I thought I'd see if I could find a photo of one of these built up. And there you go: http://www.raymondwalley.com/loco/other/9f.html#.U-zHLfldW4I Plain as the nose on your face (well, not if you're a Groblin from the Planet Zark, in which case your nose is probably anywhere except on your face - but I digress) the connecting rod from loco cab to the linkage arm goes "uphill". Exactly the problem which started off this last set of comments. My build is vindicated, and I am unanimous in that.

OzzyO. Thanks for your comments about the wheels. I'd not worried too much about the balance weights yet because I thought that they'd be an easy late addition once I've chemically blackened the wheels. Just another thing to look out for......

Mickoo and Steph. Yes, I've been caught out by using post preservation pictures and shy away from them now. I am actually pretty certain from pictures when in service that all the "production" locos ran with insulated pipework. Photos suggest that "Evening Star" started off with either blackened or insulated pipework but at some stage the pipework was polished. I have a photo when it was shedded at Cardiff Canton which suggests strongly that the pipework was not insulated. Once again I guess that you pays your money and takes your choice! Although the pipework may (or may not) be insulated on the one at Loughborough I'm kicking myself. I was up there last weekend and the loco was in use and easily photographed. I think, however, I'll build with copper pipework as it'll be so much easier than with the white metal castings. If the club then wants them "insulated" I'll paint them grey....

David T - the crank could, perhaps, be a little over sized. However, the angle is pretty good. I don't think this "oversizeness" is the cause of the issue - it's not just a bit out - I reckon it's probably 3 or 4 mm. As for the angle, that's pretty well set by the crank ends. (And I'm not up to building a replacement from scratch). In fact the centre of the crank is a bit higher than the hole in the cab so some surgery will be needed. And I should mention that the position of the crank centre looks about right when checked against other boiler/firebox detail. I'm becoming more convinced that the position of the hole in the cab front is an error. I wonder if DJH will have any RTR 9Fs at Telford. It'll be interesting to see what they look like!

Ressaldar - Mike. Your earlier words are vindicated! Cutting them down won't actually solve the problem, although it may make the location in to the cab a bit lower than will otherwise be necessary. In any case the end of the crank is shaped so that it can be drilled out to take the wire, and removing these would give no positive wire location. A good thought from you but I think I'll stick with what I have and fit the control rod higher up the cab front - there is room to do so.

And to OzzO again. May be worth at least more than a passing thought regarding the motion. I'll need club approval, of course, and the etched version is ready to go. The alternative fix of crank and pins is not a huge problem so I'll probably persevere with what I have for the present, in the knowledge that an alternative is available if I need it. Also the overun of the valve gear on one side is not sufficient to wreck the appearance of the loco when running, added to which the Premier Comonents parts may well suffer the same problem.

Right! Time to go back to the workshop and try to make this regulator stuff look "proper".

Brian

 

[Len Cattley]

Hi Brian, having looked at the photo's of Evening Star in 1964 she had the wide step on the front and no cladding on the pipes.

Len

 

[mickoo]

Brian,

If there's still the smallest amount of doubt regarding the 9F regulator rod then check out DJH's own build detail photos.

http://www.djhmodelloco.co.uk/prodpage.asp?productid=3296

Specifically this photo http://www.djhmodelloco.co.uk/product-photos/big/64.jpg where they have filled in the etched hole and repositioned the regulator rod at the correct height, but sadly on the flat face of the cab front and not the angled.

Brian Daniels also details some photos of his DJH 9F and the regulator rod is parallel to the footplate, those photos are on the old RMweb site page here http://rmweb.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=31970&sid=d46b00929d1932ca637a87668992a463

Hope that helps.

 

[oldravendale]

Hi Brian, having looked at the photo's of Evening Star in 1964 she had the wide step on the front and no cladding on the pipes.

Len

Thanks Len.

That's very helpful. I'm pretty sure that the copper pipes were in use before then but it's very helpful to have the date of 1964 confirmed. If I can find no definite proof that the copper pipes were in use a bit earlier, when the loco had the small front footsteps, then I'll put the wide footstep back.

Best regards.

Brian

 

[oldravendale]

Brian,

If there's still the smallest amount of doubt regarding the 9F regulator rod then check out DJH's own build detail photos.



they have filled in the etched hole and repositioned the regulator rod at the correct height, but sadly on the flat face of the cab front and not the angled.

Brian Daniels also details some photos of his DJH 9F and the regulator rod is parallel to the footplate, those photos are on the old RMweb site page

Hope that helps.

It helps indeed. They have cheated, then, which I have not! Mine is still on the angled front and matches very closely the detail photo you provided. The other hole is definitely too low as on checking it lines up with the centre of the "butterfly". As you gather from this I have the first part of the regulator linkage in place, and it looks good and parrallel.

Thanks for all your help.

Brian

 

[mickoo]

It helps indeed. They have cheated, then, which I have not! Mine is still on the angled front and matches very closely the detail photo you provided. The other hole is definitely too low as on checking it lines up with the centre of the "butterfly". As you gather from this I have the first part of the regulator linkage in place, and it looks good and parrallel.

Thanks for all your help.

Brian

Awsome

Yes DJH have cheated, probably because the white metal pipework that goes over the regulator rod won't take too kindly to being bent a little more to clear the rod if it were the correct distance from the firebox.

I've been turning my A1 tender wheels to S7 tonight but will add all the Evening Star images to a dropbox file tomorrow for y'all

 

[David Taylor]

In that DJH build photo the rod coming out of the cab looks way too high. Seems you're damned either way if you don't want to make a replacement part

My father-in-law has just done this part on a 5" gauge model of a NSW 38 class, which he claims had some influence on the design of cab you're struggling with. When I saw yours I commented on how similar it looked to what he'd been building with all the angles etc and he said BR took a look at our 38 and built a dummy cab to play with.

At least it isn't a kit you actually bought. That would be disappointing.