taff
Hi-poster
President of City of Newport M.E.S. Chairman, Rivet Counters Fellowship.
Posts: 161
|
Post by taff on Feb 14, 2013 17:33:11 GMT
Hello all, I was wrong, trying again. [/img] Taff. Attachments:
|
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,901
|
Post by jma1009 on Feb 14, 2013 21:32:45 GMT
hi peter,
lovely drawings as usual! i am quite a fan of anything done by Harold Holcroft, so think you have made a splendid choice.
do you plan to simplify the boiler and omit the raised firebox? this would considerably simplify construction of the boiler and saddle tank IMHO and make the loco appeal to a larger range of builders, as well as making both cheaper quicker and easier to construct. or perhaps 2 alternative designs of boiler and saddle tank?
do you anticipate any difficulties in increasing the valve travel from scale to something that equates to the sort of travel expected in a 5"g loco these days, and would this create any problems in the position of the boiler vis a vis the allan valvegear?
cheers, julian
|
|
taff
Hi-poster
President of City of Newport M.E.S. Chairman, Rivet Counters Fellowship.
Posts: 161
|
Post by taff on Feb 18, 2013 23:26:32 GMT
Hello Julian and all, Many thanks for your kind comments about my drawings and I agree about Holcroft's work at Swindon. His 4301;s were, of course, another of his brilliant designs and I'm happy to say I have done some work on them. Regarding the boiler for a 1361, I have not yet thought far ahead enough to decide on what type of boiler to use but I would not normally regard a raised round top firebox as particularly difficult even for a beginner. If I do decide to alter the boiler design it would probably be to allow the saddle tank to be more easily made although not too easy otherwise we are in danger of running out of designs for model engineers to stretch themselves on.
Taff.
|
|
wiltsrob
Part of the e-furniture
Posts: 279
|
Post by wiltsrob on Feb 19, 2013 8:33:49 GMT
i know its going to sound a silly/or not so question..
on the boiler would it be worth looking at using something like to butch/chub boiler as they are available from the pletherer of boiler makers and you wouldnt need to get RSA approval for it plus saving the £2K it would take to get the rubber stamp..
Robert
|
|
smallbrother
Elder Statesman
Errors aplenty, progress slow, but progress nonetheless!
Posts: 2,269
|
Post by smallbrother on Feb 19, 2013 9:08:58 GMT
Hello Julian and all, Many thanks for your kind comments about my drawings and I agree about Holcroft's work at Swindon. His 4301;s were, of course, another of his brilliant designs and I'm happy to say I have done some work on them. Regarding the boiler for a 1361, I have not yet thought far ahead enough to decide on what type of boiler to use but I would not normally regard a raised round top firebox as particularly difficult even for a beginner. If I do decide to alter the boiler design it would probably be to allow the saddle tank to be more easily made although not too easy otherwise we are in danger of running out of designs for model engineers to stretch themselves on. Taff. I think a contemporary and prototypical design of an "easier" build would be wonderful. The growing popularity of kits and ready to run locos shows people are interested. I can't see the point in putting folk off building their own. Pete.
|
|
taff
Hi-poster
President of City of Newport M.E.S. Chairman, Rivet Counters Fellowship.
Posts: 161
|
Post by taff on Feb 19, 2013 23:09:43 GMT
Hello all, Just a few words about this design and what has been said. Robert, as far as the design of the boiler is concerned it will be to my own design which I feel I am capable of doing and in the apparent absence of a British Code of construction practice it will be designed to conform to the Australian Code which I find is superb and I'm sure that RSA approval for it would be no great problem. Pete, I'm not quite sure what you mean by "contempoary prototypical design easier to build". The design will contain most information required to build a authentic detailed model and it will be up to the builder to decide what he wants to include, e.g, if he wants to fit a scale lamp iron the information will be on the drawing and he will not have to trundle of to a museum or preserved railway to put his rule against an engine. I agree I don't see the point in putting people off building their own but at the same time I recognise that there are "rivet counters" out there who do want something to get their teeth in to (and after all I am the Chairman of the Rivet Counterrs Fellowship).
Taff.
|
|
smallbrother
Elder Statesman
Errors aplenty, progress slow, but progress nonetheless!
Posts: 2,269
|
Post by smallbrother on Feb 20, 2013 12:47:02 GMT
I think a set of drawings prepared in 2013 could have the potential for easy amendments and alternatives. However, you mention using a pen so I guess you are doing this the traditional way.
Sorry if I misunderstood.
I looked at some LBSC and Martin Evans designs before embarking on Scamp by David Malcolm - the explanatory notes were much easier to follow.
A freelance design is OK but a "real" one would have been more attractive.
Pete.
|
|
|
Post by ejparrott on Feb 20, 2013 16:46:42 GMT
When I spoke to RSA last week they said not to bother with the Australian code. Nothing wrong with it, it just isn't necessary in the UK. Use the formulas used by M.Errors, or any of the other authors, and proven example.
|
|
taff
Hi-poster
President of City of Newport M.E.S. Chairman, Rivet Counters Fellowship.
Posts: 161
|
Post by taff on Feb 27, 2013 13:07:41 GMT
Hello all, There has been no posts for a few days so I assume that all which is going to be said has been said and therefore its down to me to tie things up. I have decided to continue and have a go at designing a 1361. As far as the boiler is concerned nothing has bee said which would change my mind about complying with the Australian code and I'm sure that such a boiler would be acceptable to RSA Inspectors who would apply the CE mark if needed and when necessary. I'm not sure where the 2k comes from but I've never been asked for that before. Regarding this design I can make it simple or I can do it super detailed so in order the gauge the market I would approiciate how prospective constructors would like to see it = Simple or S/detailed ?. So here we are, let's dive in and see what happens.
Taff
|
|
|
Post by ejparrott on Feb 27, 2013 13:19:04 GMT
no nor me....they told me £800 for my large steel boiler to be certified, then inspected 3 times before rubber stamping....
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2013 14:41:42 GMT
Hello TAF---------- same as me ie}---- SIMPLE please !!.......... Detailing can always be added on according to "taste"...
|
|
RLWP
Part of the e-furniture
Posts: 319
|
Post by RLWP on Feb 27, 2013 15:48:14 GMT
Simple or super-detailed
How about draw all the parts to scale, dimension up the essential parts, include the super detailing on the GA for those who want to go further
Richard
|
|
|
Post by ianholder on Feb 27, 2013 17:33:10 GMT
Taff, you know as well as I that there isn't anything much simpler than a steam loco. Looking at all the designs produced over the years, there is simple and there is crude, and knowing you, you don't do crude. 1361's and 1366's are pretty simple locos and I doubt if you could simplify it much, but having said that Keith Wilsons 7 1/4 1366 could be called crude but it certainly goes well. A friend years ago used it as a basis for a 1361 and added all the detail to turn it into a first class model. Do it proper and then people can leave out or add what they want to, regards Ian
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2013 17:55:58 GMT
The more details the better imho.. as long as the drawings are easy to read I'm sure most will be able to work through them...good luck with your new venture Pete, I for one will be following it closely.. regards Pete
|
|
peteh
Statesman
Still making mistakes!
Posts: 760
|
Post by peteh on Feb 28, 2013 3:29:28 GMT
Don't know if I would build one (am still only partway through my first loco) but I would say detail the drawings. If a ME wants to simplify it he can.
|
|
smallbrother
Elder Statesman
Errors aplenty, progress slow, but progress nonetheless!
Posts: 2,269
|
Post by smallbrother on Feb 28, 2013 8:22:25 GMT
Simple for me as I couldn't/wouldn't consider a detailed one.
Pete.
|
|
wiltsrob
Part of the e-furniture
Posts: 279
|
Post by wiltsrob on Feb 28, 2013 9:07:54 GMT
morning...
detailed please .. ill add it to my project list to do after my 16da ..
Robert
|
|
taff
Hi-poster
President of City of Newport M.E.S. Chairman, Rivet Counters Fellowship.
Posts: 161
|
Post by taff on Mar 3, 2013 13:58:17 GMT
Hello all, I've already typed this once, I went to get a coffee and every thing disappeared befoe I got back. Does this happen to anyone else or is it just me. Well Ive decided to go for detailed rather than simple my reasoning being that if the information is on the drawing you can include it or leave it out as you wish, to make things simple. Therefore I'm going to include as much information, both mechanical and historical, as I have at my disposal so I hope the design will be interesting. GW fans amongst us will know that in the 1930's the class was developed into pannier tanks and the 1366 class were built virtually to the same design and having exmined the works drawings there seems to be no difference except for the belpaire firebox and tanks and cab. I've made a start and set out the mainframes and found no problems. In view of what has been said I have made a sketch of the boiler to scale and I'm surprised at how small the firebox comes out. The inner box is 3. 9625"long x 2.937" wide, barrel at 4" dia x 9.5" long and outer firebox at 4.187" long makes a total of 13.687 in length. The firebox seems small to me and I can see ways of increasing its size without losing the scale effect inside the cab. I would like to hear from anyone who has experience of steaming a 5" gauge loco boiler with this size of firebox. That's all for now, back to the drawing board.
Taff.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2013 17:19:38 GMT
Hello Chaps-------Despite wot I rote earlier (Blame that on Morecambe & Wise !!) ;D ;D------ with hindsight TAFF, I think that's the right decision...Now, those firebox dimensions ---- off the top of my head at the moment--- sound similar to my Martin Evans O - 6 - 0 "Metro" Tank .... and that both steams and pulls very well indeed.. Alas I don't have the drawings to check for you -- but it's a start !!.. That's a Belpaire firebox as well...........
|
|
|
Post by dinmoremanor on Mar 3, 2013 19:30:45 GMT
My O2 has a boiler and firebox very close in dimensions to what you are proposing Peter, it has 1 7/16" cylinders and steams very well indeed. Has far exceeded my expectations for such a small engine easily dragging 12 scale wagons, quite a few of them loaded, plus my weight up a 1 in 45 gradient on a tight curve, on the mark all the way. Look forward to seeing details of this as they develop, lovely looking engine and it sounds like easy to produce 1366 variant too.
|
|