|
|
Post by merlin747 on Jul 18, 2013 22:44:30 GMT
Hi all, I cannot purchase a gauge 7.25 site feed lubricator anywhere (unless you know better), so I will try and make on. If one of you knowledgeable people can draw me a simple plan ,with suitable dimensions, for a 7.25 of the lubricator that looks like the attachment. I would like to ask if it is ok to join this system to a present mechanical lubricator pipe but with a switch that will turn off the flow from the mechanical lubricator when hydrostatic lub. is fully underway. Thanks. GB. |
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,913
|
Post by jma1009 on Jul 19, 2013 7:53:42 GMT
hi GB,
referring pack to your previous thread and this thread there is no reason why a sight feed lubricator sold for 5"g cannot be used on a 7.25"g loco - in fact it will be more 'scale'.
it is unnecessary to have both a mechanical and 'sight feed hydrostatic' lubricator. unlike a mechanical lubricator, a hydrostatic lubricator will feed oil as soon as 'steam's up'. it will give the steam chest a healthy dose of oil before you go onto the track.
there is quite a lot of work in making a mechanical lubricator and all it's parts, and quite a lot of work in making a sight feed hydrostatic lubricator. have a look at PRESIDENT by Roy Amesbury and TORQUAY MANOR by Martin Evans in ME, and GEORGE in LLAS by Don Young. i have never fitted the atomisising arrangement on my GWR locos which Martin Evans copied from Fred Cottam but i have fitted the GWR 'quadrant' around the regulator with actuating mechanism linked to a 'stop valve' on the oil delivery from the displacement tank to the sight feed. also if you copy the TORQUAY MANOR design i think the size of the jet is too big in the sight feed... though for 7.25" you could reduce the jet size by just a bit. there isnt really anymore work in making the sight glass assembly when compared to making a water gauge fitting.
cheers,
julian
|
|
|
|
Post by peterseager on Jul 21, 2013 17:24:55 GMT
Agreed. I made a hydrostatic system for my Simplex which had the sight glass gubbins incorperated with the tank, behind thr buffer beam. Emptied the tank very quickly.
Perhaps we should point out the conclusions of another thread - there are true hydrostatic lubricators such as the Martin Evans/ Fred Cottam design and what one might call hydrodynamic lubricators where the full steam pressure forces the water into the tank and the oil through the metering device. The talk in thread 1 seemed to be about this type. The devices available from Reeves are of this type.
Peter
|
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,913
|
Post by jma1009 on Jul 21, 2013 19:43:22 GMT
hi peter,
im not sure about 'hydrodynamic'.
instead i recall an arguement by the late basil palmer that our 'hydrostatic' lubricators are really no more than 'displacement' lubricators with a sight glass added.
the additional atomising arrangement of fred cottam ala GWR doesnt alter the above one jot.
just to be pedantic!
cheers,
julian
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2013 19:49:22 GMT
while on this subject a guy at my club has an A4 built from Don Young's 'Doncaster' drawings and is having problems with the hydrostatic lubricator... I don't know the whole story but it seems that the system is pumping oil out everywhere...I don't know how closely this loco has followed Don's words & music but was wondering what may be causing this. The owner didn't build this loco so is a little blind as to what's going on.. any ideas guys?
Pete
|
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,913
|
Post by jma1009 on Jul 21, 2013 20:35:51 GMT
hi pete,
don young only once described and published drawings for a sight feed 'hydrostatic' lubricator... his 3.5"g FR loco GEORGE.
this was not unreasonably to protect his own business of supplying such fittings ready made.
i cannot for the life of me imagine why a 'hydrostatic' lubricator would be "pumping oil out everywhere".
i dont think that any other supplier of these fittings came anywhere the high standard of those supplied by don. but like lots of things like injectors, 95% of faults are not the fittings themselves but what the builder has made to go with them or where he has wrongly connected them up or doesnt know how to use them! it would only require someone to be hamfisted tightening up the needle valve and ruin its seat, or poke a bit of wire down the jet damaging it, or using the wrong size pipework (and no choke), and too large a steam supply valve on the manifold to give an erratic performance. alternatively it could be a sightglass from one of the cheaper suppliers with a jet that is far too big and not enough of a fine thread and taper on the needle valve.
my jets are drilled No. 76 or 78, and my needle valves have a fine 10BA thread with a long taper.
cheers,
julian
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2013 21:09:34 GMT
Thanks Julian I'll try to find out more about the loco, seems a shame to see it sitting in the steam bay unable to take to the mainline over this weekend. couple of pics...   being built from the same drawings as my 4472 I'm naturally interested in seeing this fine loco steam...  Pete |
|
|
|
Post by peterseager on Jul 22, 2013 6:54:00 GMT
See:
for a discussion of this including Basil Palmer's article.
Peter
|
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,913
|
Post by jma1009 on Jul 22, 2013 8:48:36 GMT
 i have added this pic elsewhere before of my 5"g GWR ARMSTRONG GOODS loco but it shows the GWR type quadrant actuated by the regulator working a stop valve on the oil delivery to the sight glass, and the sight glass bottom left with its glass painted on the outside gloss humbrol white. the small steam supply valve to the displacement tank is top left. there isnt much room under the footplate for a displacement tank, and although behind the rear axle has insulation wrapped around it to keep it relatively cool. there is nothing in the pic that i didnt make myself apart from the freddie dinnis pressure gauge and bit of chain attached to the firehole flap. pete's post of the A4 cab looks terribly clean by comparison and doesnt look like it's been used much if at all! cheers, julian |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2013 8:56:10 GMT
pete's post of the A4 cab looks terribly clean by comparison and doesnt look like it's been used much if at all! cheers, julian It's new and unused Julian.. they were hoping to steam it by now but with all of the oil being forced out they decided not to risk it which is why I thought I'd ask for advice from you guys. Pete |
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,913
|
Post by jma1009 on Jul 22, 2013 9:17:26 GMT
hi pete,
i would suggest taking the sight glass assembly off the A4, cleaning thoroughly in white spirit (and painting the backs of the glasses gloss humbrol white so you can see clearly the blobs of oil being delivered), then doing a simple air test by blowing through the oil delivery connections to check whether the needle valves close properly and how 'free' one can blow through them when opened say a quarter of a turn. it should be quite difficult to blow through with lung pressure. after removing the top filler caps from the sight glasses the size of the jets can be checked. bearing in mind one sight glass only needs to feed enough oil for one cylinder on the A4 i would suggest anything more than a No.76 hole in the jet is too big. my jets screw in place after removing the glass.
it is also quite possible that the 'choke' has been omitted from the oil supply pipes where they join the steam pipes at the front of the loco and ordinary fittings and nipples have been used by mistake. the steam supply valve from the boiler to the displacement tank doesnt need opening much... you hear it when it is first opened enough if you listen carefully.
the needle valves on the bottom of the sight glasses should be exactly that - it is quite possible they are out of line with the seats or not fine enough. there shouldnt be any slop in the thread where it screws into the fitting as this destroys the ability to accurately regulate the oil supply.
it is also possible that the jets in the sight glass are loose and oil is coming around the jets not through them. some cheaper versions have the jets press fitted in place - but this requires a very good fit to avoid problems.
if the whole gubbins has been properly made and fitted then there is no reason why it shouldnt work perfectly!
cheers,
julian
|
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,913
|
Post by jma1009 on Jul 22, 2013 9:28:56 GMT
i would also take all the handles off the steam valves in the A4's cab and check that they are fitted to the spindles with 'squares'. they look suspiciously like the type held on by friction of a screw/nut only which is asking for trouble! i dont like brass handles or spindles... they get too hot. i always make mine out of stainless. the A4s have quite distinctive handles and it is a shame the A4 in your pic hasnt got them fitted.
i also dont like brass blowdown spindles.
seems such a shame to spoil a lovely loco by using poorly designed commercial fittings. is it one of the modelworks thingys rather than the don young design?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2013 9:48:43 GMT
i would also take all the handles off the steam valves in the A4's cab and check that they are fitted to the spindles with 'squares'. they look suspiciously like the type held on by friction of a screw/nut only which is asking for trouble! i dont like brass handles or spindles... they get too hot. i always make mine out of stainless. the A4s have quite distinctive handles and it is a shame the A4 in your pic hasnt got them fitted. i also dont like brass blowdown spindles. seems such a shame to spoil a lovely loco by using poorly designed commercial fittings. is it one of the modelworks thingys rather than the don young design? Thanks julian I'll pass your comments on.... I fully agree about it being a shame that certain items have been used which for a loco like this shouldn't have...imho no corners should be cut for a loco of this stature... I'm afraid if you looked closer at this loco you'd see a lot of short cuts from don's fantastic drawings.. personally I don't like it but would like to be able to help the owner get her in steam and enjoy her... i believe she was built as a commission which may be why certain things have been left off... perhaps due to price or even the builder making to a strict time-scale... no vac brakes, sandboxes...or any fine detail whatsoever.... such a shame...  still she is a DY design so not all bad... |
|
|
|
Post by merlin747 on Jul 24, 2013 19:06:19 GMT
Wow...lots of discussion about a deceptively simple device.It aint so simple is the answer.
Get it correct,however,and it is a super reliable way to lubricate..........it seems!
Lovely A4 BTW............In my humble opinion,the best of the best...the A4:)
Just one thing Julian....the choke! Are you saying that the pipe needs to be narrowed
before entering the ,say, valve chest to compensate for pressure fluctuations in that chamber?
I have no idea how that works.
Thanks G.
|
|
|
|
Post by merlin747 on Jul 24, 2013 19:07:15 GMT
Wow...lots of discussion about a deceptively simple device.It aint so simple is the answer.
Get it correct,however,and it is a super reliable way to lubricate..........it seems!
Lovely A4 BTW............In my humble opinion,the best of the best...the A4:)
Just one thing Julian....the choke! Are you saying that the pipe needs to be narrowed
before entering the ,say, valve chest to compensate for pressure fluctuations in that chamber?
I have no idea how that works.
Thanks G.
|
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,913
|
Post by jma1009 on Jul 24, 2013 20:42:21 GMT
hi GB,
yes, there needs to be a restriction about 1/4" long of 1mm ID on the end of the pipe from the sight feed where it connects with the steamchest (the steam pipe from hot header to steamchest would be a better place for a connection). as previously stated the nipple on the end of the pipe (ive always used thinwall 3/32" OD copper pipe) drilled 1mm will suffice.
if you make your own mechanical lubricator innards IMHO sight feed hydrostatic/displacement lubricators are much simpler and easier to make, work perfectly and supply less oil, you can see them working, and add a bit of often prototypical interest to the inside of the cab - which after all is the bit we look at most of the time!
i might add that i fill my sight glasses with glycerine as recommended by roy amesbury.
however again as stated in previous threads they are probably not for those who get in a flap or muddle when steaming up and driving and disposing of a loco.
ive already made the sight glass assembly for STEPNEY and tested it and it is quite a bit smaller than previous ones ive made. in fact i might have ago at an even smaller one. i dont have the skill or facilities to accurately grind the ends of the sight glass... so do the best i can and fit 'O' rings around the glass with recesses made in the sight glass body for same. i use pyrex test tubes for the sight glasses.
the displacement tanks are just a bog standard silver soldering job. although i stated in your previous post to use copper tube, all mine till now have been made out of special high pressure bronze tube ex-RN, apart from the GWR 57XX rear R-H sandbox which was made into a tank and silver soldered out of copper.
my first loco i started when 16 years old (Don Young's RAILMOTOR) had an LBSC mechanical lubricator i'd made but after the first run the lubricator was sleeved from 1/8" ram to 1/16". i wear glasses and dont like them showered with oil!
a typical 4 hours running will produce an egg cup full of water condensate from a sight feed hydrostatic/displacement lubricator. that is considerably less than a mechanical lubricator will usually deliver!
i suppose my main reason for making them is the added interest inside the cab and the confidence you can see the oil being delivered. i enjoy making 'fiddly bits' to add interest to a backhead whilst i'm driving! though driving other people's locos i can tell very quickly if things have gone 'dry' with a mechanical lubricator (usually coz it's empty!).
cheers,
julian
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2013 21:39:45 GMT
I'm right with you Julian when it comes to back head detail.. alas 4472 had ditched her hydrostatic lubricators for wakefield mechanical type during the era that i shall be modelling her on. Just to show what could have been, here's an A1 backhead with hydrostatic lubricators ... details are: " cylinders lubricated by Detroit No.32A sight feed hydrostatic lubricators mounted on firebox back head fireman's side.Four feeds passed along the outside of boiler barrel at slight falling gradient of 1:72 to smokebox" unfortunately these were changed for Wakefield mechanical type( supplying cylinders and axles) when the long travel gear was fitted, which is how I'm modelling her so no hydro's for me...  here's how 4472's back head will look... btw I intend to spend an awful long time replicating the backhead as shown here as close as is humanly possible.  Great thread this... loving it... Pete |
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,913
|
Post by jma1009 on Jul 24, 2013 22:35:33 GMT
hehe reminds me when i was a 'nipper' and being on FLYING SCOTSMAN's footplate when at kensington olympia station! must have been about 1974.
|
|
denis M
Part of the e-furniture
Posts: 300
|
Post by denis M on Jul 25, 2013 21:02:54 GMT
I've bought nice hydrostatic fittings from Blackgates, Polly and Reeves in the past.
Denis
|
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,913
|
Post by jma1009 on Dec 16, 2013 22:56:24 GMT
 apologies for resurrecting an old thread but have taken a pic today of the sight feed for STEPNEY's hydrostatic lubricator to email to a fellow contributor on here, and so thought you might like to see same ((im steeling myself for a "not really, thanks" reply) if i could grind the ends of the 5/16" dia pyrex tube accurately i reckon i could make the body much smaller as on mine the 'O' rings go around the glass. the body has recesses carefully made in it for the 'O' rings. ive tested same on another loco, as the same connections hidden behind, and works very well. the glass is painted gloss white on the outside on the back. cheers, julian |
|
