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

Re: [z_scale] Low speed Operation

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 9 , Nov 3, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      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 2 of 9 , Nov 3, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        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 3 of 9 , Nov 3, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          --- 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 4 of 9 , Nov 4, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            --- 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 5 of 9 , Nov 4, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              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.