Latest research from the mad norwegian professor...

[shropshire lad]

I'll use next time this 1512 gearhead for a new gas loco in 1:35 scale...

Franck

  Franck ,


   You talk about building a gas (mechanical?) loco in 1/35th scale . I believe you told me that it is going to be American , can you give a bit more information as I know that there are a number of people here , and elsewhere, who have been talking about building these sorts of locos in either the same scale or 1/32nd . I am sure they would be interested to hear about it , as , of course, I would ,


  Nick

[John McGuyer]

Yes the Deckel has a maximum of 10/1. So you do it in multiple steps. We've used parts made for 1" models as patterns for smaller models with great success. In this case, it would be that first step that would be hard. Getting that wood piece in the machine. Of course you could always do a larger model by hand then do that really difficult small pattern with the pantograph. The nice thing is that pantographs are cheap these days compared to CNC machines. And they don't require a computer with expensive CAD/CAM programs. Really, really wish I had room for one, but my little corner of a garage barely has room for my basic machinery.

John

[MrBrownstone]

Here is a link for making your own pantograph

How to Build a Pantograph  http://www.peter.com.au/articles/pantograph.html

Just in case someone wants to make their own

Mike

[Franck Tavernier]

Franck ,
You talk about building a gas (mechanical?) loco in 1/35th scale . I believe you told me that it is going to be American , can you give a bit more information as I know that there are a number of people here , and elsewhere, who have been talking about building these sorts of locos in either the same scale or 1/32nd . I am sure they would be interested to hear about it , as , of course, I would ,
Nick

Hi Nick,

Yes of course I can! It would be freelance models but inspired by 3 tons gas mechanical locos from Plymouth (TL or RL type) or Whitcomb...

A Plymouth model RL :







These photos were taken by my friend Philippe Paillon on the Chimot's brickworks at Marly, near Valenciennes, North of the France...

http://www.briqueterie-chimot.fr/

http://www.ingr.co.uk/chimot.html

A Plymouth model TL :





A Whitcomb model 5DM (?) :







These photos were again taken by my friend Philippe Paillon on the North's brickworks at Leers, North of the France...

http://www.briquedeleers.fr/

http://www.ingr.co.uk/leers.html

Franck

[Hauk]

Some progress on the SPUD project.
Here are two concept sketches:

The initial idea was to use motion belts and pulleys for transfering power from motor to wheels (upper drawing).
But I am starting to have second thoughts about this, as the efficiency probably aint all that great, and there are lots of pulley wheels to be machined.

So I looked into a Polish supplier of gears, and found module 0,3 gears that looked suitable for the setup. I think I read somewhere that brass against brass is not a good idea in drivelines, so I plan to use one brass and one polyacetal gear for each  axle.

Anyone that have opinions on my setup?
And do anyone kor how much teeth "overlap" you need when meshing up two module 0,3?

Regards, Hauk

[Hauk]

Thinkering continues on my SPUD. I want to have 3-point suspension on my trucks, and to achive this, I will make one axle (and that axles motor) rotate around an axle placed parallell to the rails.

In this section, two possible locations (in red and green) for this axle is shown:



Alternative "red" makes the wheels move a bit more sideways than positon "green".  In this detail you can see the lateral movement a bit better. Both the red and green wheelset has been rotated exactly 1 deg. The black is the wheelset with the wheel axle in an exact horizontal position.



I want to go for alternative red for placing the axle, but I wonder if it could give me problems to place it so high.
Comments or suggestions?

Regards, Hauk

[marc_reusser]

Interesting....

.....but I have to admit......you lost me several posts back  

..... please do continue with posting this project.......I am interested in learning from it.



MR

[Hauk]

Interesting....

.....but I have to admit......you lost me several posts back  

..... please do continue with posting this project.......I am interested in learning from it.

Well, I get lost  myself from time to time, but please let me know when I fail to explain myself!
This last "problem" is more based on intuition than any hard facts, so I might be just blowing smoke here.

Hope to be able to present a more detailed design in the near future.
But don´t hold your breath, I will probably disappear from the radar for a couple of weeks due to a trip to Egypt. Life is more than models!

Regards, Hauk

[RoughboyModelworks]

Havard:

I would definitely consider going with two different gear materials as you mention, one brass & one polyacetal. I expect you'll find it much smoother and certainly quieter. Concerning your axle design, I must admit I'm a little lost on that too, not quite sure what you mean by "I will make one axle (and that axle's motor) rotate around an axle placed parallel to the rails."

I've come across quite a few research papers online concerning optimum wheel-to-rail contact, flange angles and wheel profiles for prototype railroads. I found them doing research on the correct English prototype wheel profile for the radial axle project. Most of them were way more complex and mathematically incomprehensible to my mind, but you may want to do a similar search.

Safe travels to Egypt... is this business or pleasure?

Paul

[Marc988]

on the suspension;

a lot of H0 finescale guys use a [ shaped frame which pivots around an axle (your red axle) so you shouldn't have a problem there from a suspension point of view.


I am also very interested in the way you intend to link the motors to the axles in combination with the suspension.

Looking forward to the next updates .

[jacq01]

  Lemaco is using already for years a pivot axis like Havard shows (red point)
  This axis is also used as driveline with two wormwheels mounted over the matching gears of the wheel axis.
  That way it is possible to fit all axle bearings with springs and have a fixed drive point for the motor attchment.
  Single axle drivemotors is also common with the larger scales by firms like Kiss etc..

Jacq

[Franck Tavernier]

Hauk,

I have used in the past this type of 3 points compensation with a pivot bolt on my Gmeinder, without problem !








Franck

[Hauk]

Havard:

I would definitely consider going with two different gear materials as you mention, one brass & one polyacetal. I expect you'll find it much smoother and certainly quieter. Concerning your axle design, I must admit I'm a little lost on that too, not quite sure what you mean by "I will make one axle (and that axle's motor) rotate around an axle placed parallel to the rails."

I've come across quite a few research papers online concerning optimum wheel-to-rail contact, flange angles and wheel profiles for prototype railroads. I found them doing research on the correct English prototype wheel profile for the radial axle project. Most of them were way more complex and mathematically incomprehensible to my mind, but you may want to do a similar search.

Safe travels to Egypt... is this business or pleasure?

Paul

I promised that I would disappear from the radar for a couple of weeks, but even in my rather dingy Cairo Hotel they have got free WLAN!

As for the gears, I have ordered brass and polyacetal module 0,3 gears.

Regarding the rather cryptic description of the mechanism, the drawings of the SPUD are somewhat misleading. They Show a rigid type of frame with no pivoting axels at all.

My  mind move faster than I can draw, so I havent gotten around to make drawings that are consistent with what I am trying to explain.
But take a look at this page:

http://www.clag.org.uk/
Look under "Micromotor suite", here you will find something similiar to what I am planning. My design will be simpler, since all the reducton neccesary is done in the motors intergrated gearhead.

Think of the motor/wheelset as a "package" that are fully intergrated with each other. If you move the wheelset, the motor moves with it.
So when the wheelset svivels, the motor svivels with it.

Please have patience with me on this one, It will all become clear when i post new drawings!

For now we can just as well refer to Fredericks drawing. I have earlier made a drive that basically uses the same principle, so I am pretty confident that the concept is sound when you place the center of the pivot bolt/ pivot axle so it almost or exactly crosses the centerline of the wheelsets axle.

So my concern was: What happens when you place the pivoting point much higher, as shown in my concept sketches?

An enigma almost on par with how the pyramids was built. Wich brings us back to my Egypt trip (smooth transition, I dare say!). It is an combined business & pleasure affair. First 10 days taking pictures for a research project on how the building sites of the pyramids was organised (no less) and then 4 days hanging out in Cairo with my wife .
To avoid any smart-ass coments, no,  it is not the first 10 days that is the pleasure part.   

Regards, Hauk

[Krusty]

So my concern was: What happens when you place the pivoting point much higher, as shown in my concept sketches?

Hauk

Many moons ago I built a couple of trammer models using a couple of the old-type pressed-metal Exactoscale gearboxes on a lay shaft for the final drive. For the equalisation I soldered a piece of rod to the cover (crossways to the axle) on one gearbox on each mechanism and mounted the gearbox so this rod rode on the underside of one of the PC board frame spacers. The axle bearings (top hat type - these were inside-framed mechanisms) could move vertically in the frame plates, but with minimal sideplay. The other wheelset and gearbox in each mechanism was fixed rigidly in the frame. A universal joint in the lay shaft allowed the moveable wheelset and gearbox to rock around the piece of rod as in any other 3-point suspension. This arrangement, of course, put the pivot point fairly high above the axle, much as you are proposing. It was one of the few aspects of the mechanisms that worked out fine (1024 open frame motors, NWSL flea transfer gearboxes and epoxied joints in split axles right next to bearings, not so much), so I see no reason why your design shouldn't work.

[Ray Dunakin]

Can someone explain to me what is the purpose of having a "pivot point" on the axle? Seems to me, if the axle has springs, each end would go up or down, following any imperfections of the track, regardless of whether there is a pivot. But then, I'm not very experienced with mechanical stuff.  So... what am I missing here?