72754Re: electric pick-up problems Wheel spacing
- Apr 29, 2013Jeff,
I agree back-to-back isn't the best number which is why I recommended the S-4.2 document. But since it is specified as a derived value per the standard it is a little more useful than for guard track placement. It should include the variation of wheel placement and flange width (and implies a tread variation, if one assumes the goal is for the assembly to fit in the truck). But I'll bet a Mikado that at least one manufacturer uses it as a manufacturing standard since it's an easy production measurement.
I use the NZT clearance gauge as well as MTL's track/coupler gauge, but since we don't know the manufacturing tolerances for them, I'm not sure I recommend them to others. I prefer to rely on my digital micrometer.
--- In email@example.com, BAZ <sjbazman49@...> wrote:
> Well . . . the back-to-back sets a guide for inside turnout guard rails but doesn't account the variation in the flange and tread profile. Even the manufacturers have issues, with manufacturing tolerance on wheels to turnouts. MÃ¤rklin locos, turnouts and Rokohan track have never had gauge issues.
> I use both the Nn3 standard gauge (via Northwest Short Line) and MTL's track/coupler gauge. I find that if any manufacturers flange (that maximal diameter part) it's in the *middle* of the notch, it run on anything. A few thou either way (the width of that notch) and you can have issues.
> Rodney's tools made a wheel gauge tool. Needs a chamfer gradient files on one edge to allow it to get on under gauges axles. Still, check the flange. At least it makes the wheels parallel (some just put a screwdriver in there and wedge the wheel out, causing wobbling.
> SF Bay Area Z
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>