|
Post by vulcanbomber on Jul 8, 2016 21:00:44 GMT
Well, a productive week has been had on the 9F. But not as i had initially had planned. The reason being that through a bit of bad luck and a pretty spectacular crash, we've had 2 lathes out of action at work so i've been demoted onto the milling section for the last week and with the Pro not required for works work.... i've been using it.. (the Pro is a 3 axis milling machine with the prototrak milling control I use on the other machines.... the good thing with this one is, once its set, it only needs me for tool changing, so it can run in works time with no one getting upset). So, something ive had sat waiting for this opportunity is a stretcher for the Tender... The front, lower one to be precise. this is 4 of them after first op was completed, this was programmed and set last friday night, and run all of Monday and Tuesday... at 4 hrs each. Wednesday saw me finish the Pony truck Pivot stretchers, these need to see Ed for soldering on of some pads and a Bronze Bushe in the center hole. I couldnt really get a useful pic of these.. Thursday saw me removing the Turret of our Hardinge Cobra 42 lathe... And Today, saw the 2nd side of the Stretchers started, and the first one finished. And the plan now is to finish the stretchers next, they need 4 rivet holes in each end and then they are complete.
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Jul 8, 2016 21:37:37 GMT
Hi Dave, That all looks very nice. I'm curious to know the sequence of operations and how you held them?
|
|
|
Post by vulcanbomber on Jul 8, 2016 21:53:53 GMT
Hi Dave, That all looks very nice. I'm curious to know the sequence of operations and how you held them? There held in a small vice with about 2mm in the jaws. Mill the edges, helix through the holes and middle pocket to make plenty of room for swarf to get out then mill the main pocket away. 8mm end mill, 3mm cuts. Change tool to 5mm end mill and repeat to finish. Change tool to 3mm to rough the corners away and then 2.5mm PCB ball nose to finish the inside frame if you like to create the rads. Op 2 is held in the big vice with a packer in the middle to stop it squeezing, Mill the top off and the 2mm rad cutter for the rads. easy peesy.
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Jul 9, 2016 6:21:22 GMT
Thanks Dave, I'm always looking for ways to hold things.
|
|
|
Post by vulcanbomber on Jul 9, 2016 7:27:14 GMT
The guys that work our Machining Centers get quite upset if they can't hold everything in a vice Roger.
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Jul 9, 2016 18:24:52 GMT
That sounds like a lack of imagination or just laziness to me! I doubt if I use a vice for more than half of the things I make.
|
|
|
Post by vulcanbomber on Jul 9, 2016 19:06:03 GMT
That sounds like a lack of imagination or just laziness to me! I doubt if I use a vice for more than half of the things I make. To be fair, the vices are very precisely ground so we can change the jaws and they will repeat to within tenths when refitted next time round. What they do is mill a female into the jaws to hold the job. It does work well but it's a method I'm not overly a fan of. I'll try and get some pictures of a few different bits they do for you to see.
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Jul 9, 2016 19:09:47 GMT
Thanks Dave, I'd be very interested to see that.
|
|
|
Post by 92220 on Jul 10, 2016 18:32:26 GMT
Indeed that looks good, maybe worth starting your own thread to save your efforts getting confused with my own? I will have to look at my build photos. Although I have taken photos throughout the build, they were for my own record, and lighting was not very good. I will see if there is enough to get a thread going. I did notice further up this page, the photo of the 9F buffer beam. I did notice that there is no semi-circular cut-out for a carriage heating valve. Although never fitted to 9Fs in service, all 9F buffer beams had the cut-out and associated bolt hols in both loco and tender buffer beams. I know that it is not common knowledge, so most 9Fs that get built, don't have this feature. If you would like the details, I will look them out and post dimensions.
|
|
|
Post by vulcanbomber on Jul 10, 2016 20:41:01 GMT
They all had the holes.... Not all had the cut out.. 92079 that I plan to model had the holes but not the cut out, so that's what I've done. There's no mention of it on the works drawings or any literature I've read.
|
|
|
Post by 92220 on Jul 11, 2016 14:04:14 GMT
Hi Vulcanbomber. That's interesting, - I stand corrected. Shows you should never believe everything you read in a book...nor read on British Railways drawings!!! - because the works drawing, SL/BR/806 Buffer Beam Arrgt dimensions the cutout and holes and at the bottom right of the sheet is the list of orders and it does refer to the order that included 92079 (4th order down at bottom right hand - 92067 - 92086). I have attached scans of the drawing. I have also found a photo of the front of 92003 which has the holes but not the cutout. It does go to show that even though a feature is included on a drawing that is relevant to a particular loco, the feature may not have been included on the loco and photographs of all features of a loco will be needed to guarantee accuracy.
|
|
|
Post by 92220 on Jul 11, 2016 14:33:34 GMT
Hi Vulcanbomber. I've just been looking further through my books on the 9F. Some time ago you asked about info on 92079 as the Lickey Banker. on pages 28/29 of the book BR Standard class 9F, published by Bradford Barton, theer are 4 photos of 92079, showing both sides of the loco between 1956, when she was completed, to a photo of the other side of her in 1962, but neither photo shows a cutout in the tender for coaling, but there are 2 front view photos that clearly show the headlight if that is any help.
|
|
|
Post by vulcanbomber on Jul 12, 2016 19:09:46 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2016 10:58:29 GMT
I've just been looking further through my books on the 9F. Some time ago you asked about info on 92079 as the Lickey Banker. On pages 28/29 of the book BR Standard class 9F, published by Bradford Barton, there are 4 photos of 92079, showing both sides of the loco between 1956, when she was completed, to a photo of the other side of her in 1962, but neither photo shows a cutout in the tender for coaling, but there are 2 front view photos that clearly show the headlight if that is any help. If you can lay your hands on a copy of the RCTS history of the BR standards, volume 4 - the 9F class, there is a very clear picture on page 28 showing the cut-out in the coal hopper on 92079. The same book confirms that the half-moon notch in the buffer beam for the non-existent train heating cock, was only provided on the Swindon-built engines, and the final Crewe batch. This means it appeared only on 92087-92096, and 92187-92250. I trust the rivet counters among us will find this interesting! Ron
|
|
stan
Seasoned Member
Posts: 110
|
Post by stan on Jul 13, 2016 21:28:02 GMT
Hi Ron I have photos of all the 9Fs and must disagree with your numbers 92222 and 92239 don't have it. Stan
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2016 8:48:17 GMT
Hi Ron I have photos of all the 9Fs and must disagree with your numbers 92222 and 92239 don't have it. Stan Well, that proves there are exceptions to every rule! The RCTS book notes that 92087 also lost its half-moon notch at some time, and concludes that the buffer beam must have been replaced during a works visit. Unlikely though this may seem, some 9Fs did sustain front end damage. I recall that 92220 was withdrawn due to crumpled front end, and was nearly scrapped because neither BR or the curator of historical relics could agree on who should pay for the repairs. Ron
|
|
|
Post by 92220 on Jul 14, 2016 9:18:34 GMT
This just goes to show that photos of the actual loco are necessary to ensure visible accuracy. It also seems as if 92079 may have had different tenders at different times, bearing i8n mind the photos in the Bradford Barton book. Another interesting point regarding the 9Fs built at Swindon, Evening Star has a fully riveted frames/stretchers assembly. 'Morning Star' 92207, awaiting restoration at Shillingstone station, has a partially bolted frames/stretchers assembly, yet Evening Star and 92207, were built in the same batch of 18 locos. None of the frames arrangement drawings, including 'The Alteration to Frames Arrgt' drawing, show the horizontal stretchers as a bolted assembly. They all have riveting specified. Anyone know of ANY other loco with bolted frames. I've attached a photo to show I'm not imagining it!!
|
|
|
Post by standardsteam on Jul 14, 2016 9:51:38 GMT
Interesting photo, but it appears as though there is are weld lines going through those horizontal stretchers - is this a result of a repair?
|
|
|
Post by 92220 on Jul 14, 2016 15:54:08 GMT
I hadn't noticed that! Yes it does look like weld lines. There are a number of them on that stretcher and it looks like another on not the next one but the one beyond that. If they are repairs, which they do look like, the breaks are very odd because the frames would have to have massive distortion to actually break those stretchers. The main stress lines would be into the corners at the vertical stretchers, but how could they possibly move. That frame/stretcher arrangement could take a massive amount of loading and not move. Far greater than the weight of the loco. I did look at my other 92207 photos and it looks as if all the horizontal stretchers are bolted and all the vertical stretchers are riveted. Look at the rivets holding the motion bracket to the frames too. The heads look cylindrical with just a slight doming of the heads. All very odd!!
|
|
|
Post by miketaylor on Jul 14, 2016 17:19:21 GMT
Surely those stretchers were manufactured that way - pieced up from pieces of plate rather then each stretcher being cut clean from a single piece. That would have been very uneconomical use of plate. The welded up version should have been just as strong as clean plate.
Mike
|
|