Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [z_scale] Low speed Operation

Expand Messages
  • Reynard Wellman
    Hello John, Good ideas on both counts. However, I would not want extra power readily available when locos start to sputter and stall --it s too tempting to
    Message 1 of 9 , Nov 3, 2002
      Hello John,

      Good ideas on both counts. However, I would not want
      extra power readily available when locos start to sputter
      and stall --it's too tempting to push the throttle.

      The other good point: Independent trucks are better able to
      negotiate tight radius' and poor conductive areas.
      That's why it might behoove us steam
      fans to campaign for a Heisler shay (standard gauge
      of course) Only trouble is that these little gems have
      a somewhat slender boiler and it would take some
      serious engineering to hide the electric motor in it. And
      they wouldn't have much pulling power-- you need
      some kind of stiction* to haul those logging trains up and
      down those mountains.

      I anticipate that a Y6B or a Challenger with independent
      bogies would be nice performers in Z scale--as long
      a you don't try to operate them on tiny layouts.

      Something to ponder.

      Reynard

      *Stiction is an engineering term not found in standard
      dictionarys.

      John Cubbin wrote:

      > Hi Cliff,
      >
      > I find that a great alternative to the Marklin packs have been the MRC
      >
      > 1300 packs, although the rated output is higher than the Marklin...
      > you'd have to get the throttle way up there in the speed spectrum
      > before
      > this would be a real issue. Slow speed control is much better on these
      >
      > MRC units. An added bonus is that they are a priced much lower than
      > Marklin packs.
      >
      > As far as diesels being better runners than steam engines, it could be
      >
      > the gearing (not sure) but I tend to thing it's more due to the fact
      > that the steam engines are on a single, rigid frame where the diesels
      > and electrics have two independent trucks that help to compensate for
      > less than perfectly laid track. I believe this is why some people hook
      >
      > up the tenders on steam sets to pick up power as well, helps to offset
      >
      > the potential negative (electrical pickup) effects of a rigid frame on
      >
      > the loco.
      >
      > John
      > http://www.ztrains.com
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > "Z" WARNING! HANDLE WITH CARE! Highly addictive in Small
      > DoseZ!
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • John Cubbin
      Hi Reynard, After a quick search regarding the Heisler Shay you mentioned, I came across some really fascinating loco shots. I wonder if something like this
      Message 2 of 9 , Nov 3, 2002
        Hi Reynard,

        After a quick search regarding the Heisler Shay you mentioned, I came
        across some really fascinating loco shots. I wonder if something like
        this Climax:

        http://www.geocities.com/logging_info/climax.jpg

        could be adapted to a standard Marklin 4/4 chassis? Now I really haven't
        done any kind of research as to what was standard and what was narrow
        gauge so I'm not sure if there were any standard gauge Climax or Shays.
        If a metal shell could be developed around this type of locomotive I
        think it would be very interesting.

        John
        http://www.ztrains.com
      • mike chenoweth
        John, RLW is coming out with one of these in white metal to fit over a Z MT F-7 patterned after my masters. Unfortunately it s in Nn3, but the concept is the
        Message 3 of 9 , Nov 3, 2002
          John,
          RLW is coming out with one of these in white metal to fit over a Z MT F-7
          patterned after my masters. Unfortunately it's in Nn3, but the concept is
          the same. Shays and Heislers were used on both standard and narrow gauge
          roads.
          Mike

          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "John Cubbin" <jcubbin@...>
          To: <z_scale@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 3:56 PM
          Subject: [z_scale] Low speed Operation


          > Hi Reynard,
          >
          > After a quick search regarding the Heisler Shay you mentioned, I came
          > across some really fascinating loco shots. I wonder if something like
          > this Climax:
          >
          > http://www.geocities.com/logging_info/climax.jpg
          >
          > could be adapted to a standard Marklin 4/4 chassis? Now I really haven't
          > done any kind of research as to what was standard and what was narrow
          > gauge so I'm not sure if there were any standard gauge Climax or Shays.
          > If a metal shell could be developed around this type of locomotive I
          > think it would be very interesting.
          >
          > John
          > http://www.ztrains.com
        • Reynard Wellman
          Hello John, Well, that s an unusual one. Very interesting. But not my cup of tea. The Shay that I am thinking of for Z scale would be one of the larger Lima
          Message 4 of 9 , Nov 3, 2002
            Hello John,

            Well, that's an unusual one. Very interesting.
            But not my cup of tea.

            The Shay that I am thinking of for Z scale would
            be one of the larger Lima built ones like those
            delivered to the Texas & Pacific Railroad Co.
            back in the 30's for their East Texas timber hauling
            operations. This gorgeous locomotive had
            3 drive trucks and the great T & P colors such as a
            deep red cab, black boiler with a white smoke box.
            It has all the classic mechanisms and was
            heavy enough to out pull any 10 Wheeler
            or Mogul or American.

            Yes, the Nn3 crowd has been enjoying white metal
            castings of Shays for over 20 years now, some more
            successful than others.

            It could happen for Z. However - in brass, not white metal.
            And the chassis should be original. Why settle for
            half baked when it is as well worth your effort to enjoy
            something fully cooked? I'll stick to the recipe.

            I'd rather someone else made a shell to stick on an F7
            chassis. It just doesn't interest me.

            Take care,
            Reynard





            John Cubbin wrote:

            > Hi Reynard,
            >
            > After a quick search regarding the Heisler Shay you mentioned, I came
            > across some really fascinating loco shots. I wonder if something like
            > this Climax:
            >
            > http://www.geocities.com/logging_info/climax.jpg
            >
            > could be adapted to a standard Marklin 4/4 chassis? Now I really
            > haven't
            > done any kind of research as to what was standard and what was narrow
            > gauge so I'm not sure if there were any standard gauge Climax or
            > Shays.
            > If a metal shell could be developed around this type of locomotive I
            > think it would be very interesting.
            >
            > John
            > http://www.ztrains.com
            >
            >
            > "Z" WARNING! HANDLE WITH CARE! Highly addictive in Small
            > DoseZ!
            >
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • de Champeaux Dominique
            ... Hi Reynard, Hi John (Cubbin). Very interresting indeed this topic about the performances of Z scale steamers. But are you sure that the apparent lack of
            Message 5 of 9 , Nov 3, 2002
              --- Reynard Wellman <micron@...> a écrit :
              > Hello John,
              >
              > Good ideas on both counts. However, I would not want
              > extra power readily available when locos start to
              > sputter
              > and stall --it's too tempting to push the throttle.
              >
              > The other good point: Independent trucks are better
              > able to
              > negotiate tight radius' and poor conductive areas.
              > That's why it might behoove us steam
              > fans to campaign for a Heisler shay (standard gauge
              > of course) Only trouble is that these little gems
              > have
              > a somewhat slender boiler and it would take some
              > serious engineering to hide the electric motor in
              > it. And
              > they wouldn't have much pulling power-- you need
              > some kind of stiction* to haul those logging trains
              > up and
              > down those mountains.
              >
              > I anticipate that a Y6B or a Challenger with
              > independent
              > bogies would be nice performers in Z scale--as long
              > a you don't try to operate them on tiny layouts.
              >
              > Something to ponder.
              >
              > Reynard
              >


              Hi Reynard, Hi John (Cubbin). Very interresting indeed
              this topic about the performances of Z scale steamers.
              But are you sure that the apparent lack of power of
              steamers (I have never operated a Z scale sample of
              them) is due to the single chassis design? when
              looking at what happens in other scales, I have never
              heard of lack of tractive effort with steamers,
              especialy in N and HO scale...When reading Model
              Railroader, I always fall on various scale layouts
              showing steamers with heavy trains behind....In my
              case I think the main problem with existing design,
              mainly Marklin if I understand (and it was the subject
              several days ago if I remember), is:
              1-lack of weight
              2-only the first and the last powered axles are in
              contact with the rails.
              So maybe these engines should be upgraded in the hands
              of "performant" kitbashers? Is someone in this list in
              permanent contact with Marklin to ask them if they
              would change their steamers' design? Or, to solve this
              problem, I think it would be possible to design a
              dummy steamer, powered by its tender. I saw this
              design when I was a kid on an HO model (european
              manufacturer Jouef, defunct now).
              Cheers
              Dominique

              ___________________________________________________________
              Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @... gratuite et en français !
              Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
            • Jeremy Brandon
              ... Hi Dominique. I ve always thought the problem with steamers is too many gears . As a kid I played with Meccano (an English metal construction toy) a lot
              Message 6 of 9 , Nov 4, 2002
                --- In z_scale@y..., de Champeaux Dominique <ddechamp71@y...> wrote:
                > But are you sure that the apparent lack of power of
                > steamers (I have never operated a Z scale sample of
                > them) is due to the single chassis design? when
                > looking at what happens in other scales, I have never
                > heard of lack of tractive effort with steamers,
                > especialy in N and HO scale...When reading Model
                > Railroader, I always fall on various scale layouts
                > showing steamers with heavy trains behind....In my
                > case I think the main problem with existing design,
                > mainly Marklin if I understand (and it was the subject
                > several days ago if I remember), is:
                > 1-lack of weight
                > 2-only the first and the last powered axles are in
                > contact with the rails.

                Hi Dominique. I've always thought the problem with steamers is "too
                many gears". As a kid I played with Meccano (an English metal
                construction toy) a lot and whenever my design had too many gears, it
                didn't work - too much friction or too much back-lash. So I've just
                done some measurements of the internal friction of my locos. Internal
                friction is what the motor has to drive against when the loco is
                running light.

                It turns out to be quite easy to measure internal friction. Use a
                pulse-power controller and look at the counter-EMF generated by the
                motor between the pulses (you need an oscilloscope to see it).
                Counter-EMF is exactly proportional to speed, so what you see is the
                deceleration caused by the friction - a pulse winds the motor up to
                some speed, then it slows down until the next pulse winds it up
                again. I measured roughly by what percentage the motor slowed down in
                a 10 millisecond gap between pulses.

                Very interesting! The Swiss E44 electic loco slowed down by 20%, the
                new BR212 diesel shunter/Rangierlok/switcher by 5%, a Faulhaber
                powered wagon with a flywheel by 2%, but the big steamers (2-8-2 and
                4-6-2) by an incredible 50%, also the 2-6-0 by 50%, and the 0-6-0 by
                30%. My conclusion is that the steamers have 2 or 3 times the
                internal friction of the diesel and electric locos.

                If it is "too many gears" causing this effect, then it is a peculiar
                Märklin-Z problem as only that design has such a vast gear train to
                the wheels.

                Or does someone else have a different theory? Jeremy.
              • Reynard Wellman
                Hello Jeremy and Dominique, You guys are both right. Friction is a factor and so is good chassis engineering. But the key advantage that our Z scale diesels
                Message 7 of 9 , Nov 4, 2002
                  Hello Jeremy and Dominique,

                  You guys are both right. Friction is a factor and so
                  is good chassis engineering. But the key advantage that
                  our Z scale diesels have is the extra space within the
                  shell to run large flywheels. Flywheels are key to smooth
                  locomotive performance and should be attempted even
                  within the confines of Z scale steam boilers.

                  However, I have had some experience with well designed
                  gear boxes made by Micro-Mo and they have incredible
                  torque when the ratio is reduced. I will continue to
                  experiment with these miniature gear boxes and let
                  you know if they are as suitable to steam engines.
                  They might substitute for a big flywheel without needing
                  as much space.

                  Best regards,
                  Reynard

                  Jeremy Brandon wrote:

                  > --- In z_scale@y..., de Champeaux Dominique <ddechamp71@y...> wrote:
                  > > But are you sure that the apparent lack of power of
                  > > steamers (I have never operated a Z scale sample of
                  > > them) is due to the single chassis design? when
                  > > looking at what happens in other scales, I have never
                  > > heard of lack of tractive effort with steamers,
                  > > especialy in N and HO scale...When reading Model
                  > > Railroader, I always fall on various scale layouts
                  > > showing steamers with heavy trains behind....In my
                  > > case I think the main problem with existing design,
                  > > mainly Marklin if I understand (and it was the subject
                  > > several days ago if I remember), is:
                  > > 1-lack of weight
                  > > 2-only the first and the last powered axles are in
                  > > contact with the rails.
                  >
                  > Hi Dominique. I've always thought the problem with steamers is "too
                  > many gears". As a kid I played with Meccano (an English metal
                  > construction toy) a lot and whenever my design had too many gears, it
                  > didn't work - too much friction or too much back-lash. So I've just
                  > done some measurements of the internal friction of my locos. Internal
                  > friction is what the motor has to drive against when the loco is
                  > running light.
                  >
                  > It turns out to be quite easy to measure internal friction. Use a
                  > pulse-power controller and look at the counter-EMF generated by the
                  > motor between the pulses (you need an oscilloscope to see it).
                  > Counter-EMF is exactly proportional to speed, so what you see is the
                  > deceleration caused by the friction - a pulse winds the motor up to
                  > some speed, then it slows down until the next pulse winds it up
                  > again. I measured roughly by what percentage the motor slowed down in
                  > a 10 millisecond gap between pulses.
                  >
                  > Very interesting! The Swiss E44 electic loco slowed down by 20%, the
                  > new BR212 diesel shunter/Rangierlok/switcher by 5%, a Faulhaber
                  > powered wagon with a flywheel by 2%, but the big steamers (2-8-2 and
                  > 4-6-2) by an incredible 50%, also the 2-6-0 by 50%, and the 0-6-0 by
                  > 30%. My conclusion is that the steamers have 2 or 3 times the
                  > internal friction of the diesel and electric locos.
                  >
                  > If it is "too many gears" causing this effect, then it is a peculiar
                  > Märklin-Z problem as only that design has such a vast gear train to
                  > the wheels.
                  >
                  > Or does someone else have a different theory? Jeremy.
                  >
                  >
                  > "Z" WARNING! HANDLE WITH CARE! Highly addictive in Small
                  > DoseZ!
                  >
                  >
                  > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.