Er, what was the classic mistake, Michael?First major scewup I set the height gauge to measure the 10.486 length of the sole bars
View attachment 208973
Marked both and cut them when laid next to my ruler they were too short?
View attachment 208977
A few naughty words echoed around the room!
View attachment 208975
First glance 10.486…… what was happening
View attachment 208976
Ah a classic mistake!
So I had to make two new bars it was a good job I had left the mill set up so after bending new bars I milled the new ones. So much work for .1”
View attachment 208978
Time for tea.
The RCH drawing here shows the central spring https://www.cs.rhul.ac.uk/~adrian/steam/RCHWagons/images/rch1001.PDFI spent most of the day yesterday studying all the photos and drawings that have been procured. The net result is a bit of a change in the layout of the steel for the frame. The 4wheel Dean coach restoration picture of the frame, and the pictures that Simon posted and one drawing I found on the web helped rework the frame. The frame is only 21 foot 5inches long and from the info In Russell’s booklet to the rework. Withou a definitive drawing of this particular coach built in 1876 I realize there might be some differences or errors. The new layout seems reasonably close and will support the other elements that form part of the Dean clasp brakes.
The first basic design.
View attachment 209128
The current layout.
View attachment 209130
And the updated drawing.
View attachment 209131
By placing the 2 center angles to create a channel it allows for the bar that connects the coupling hooks. The one part that is still unclear is how a bar that connects the hook at each end works with the traverse leaf springs at each end. The only way I can see is if there is a spring device at the center of the bar.