Wright writes.....

[Dave John]

Some interesting comments about motors and drives. I suspect many modellers think it is all a bit odd, but I'm  happy to see others having a go at motors , drive technology, battery systems and so on.  I do enjoy playing with new  ideas, some fail miserably and others work out rather well. 

 

I have always regarded railway modelling to be a hobby that increases my knowledge and skills. I have learned much by observing the work of others but I have learned just as much by setting myself problems and messing about till I solved them. 

 

Thanks all. 

[lezz01]

2 hours ago, 1471SirFrederickBanbury said:

can I have a super agree button?  I will also add that I'm experimenting using epoxies and superglues to fill in the commutator gaps to reduce friction and dirt build up hopefully, and can not the polishing the commutator with a cotton buffing wheel and Brasso helps a lot.

Have you tried UV activated super glue Rohan? I find it very good for gap filling although it isn't the panacea that they claimed when it first came out it still has it's uses. The better the UV torch you use the stronger the bond is. 5210 oily glue is also very good as an alterative to standard SG, it takes a bit longer to set than standard SG but it's quite a bit stronger and will stick anything to anything else. It's also less likely to stick your fingers together than normal SG as it takes longer to cure and gives you a chance to get it off with a injection swab.

Regards Lez. 

[Tony Wright]

I've found the discussions regarding motors fascinating. Thank you for all your comments. 

 

I certainly won't be modifying any of mine.

 

Some of the quoted prices seem incredibly low, but if the motors they refer to are excellent then that's to the good. It certainly puts into perspective the prices being asked (by some) for Mashima motors after production ceased. 

 

Regarding older, open-framed motors, didn't Guy Williams (or a contemporary) suggest filling the gaps between the motor segments with Araldite to reduce the mechanical noise? Certainly, when I was given access to the 'inside' of Pendon some years ago, his locos were still going strong (a few with Araldited XO4s?), if a bit noisy. 

 

Personally, I don't mind a little mechanical noise from what I build. Not too much, of course, and certainly not the whirr, whirr whirr of a motor/gear out of sync. But a full mechanical noise emanating from a whole train racing by (a long, fast and heavy train) - the sound from the (steam-outline) loco, the clatter of its wheels and those of the whole train (especially if it's all-metal) as it runs over joints, points and crossings is particularly satisfying. 

[Captain Kernow]

12 hours ago, lezz01 said:

Strip it down and replace the brushes with something better eg. silver or gold, if they are sprung fit better springs

Maximum respect to you and Rohan and others who do this kind of thing, but I just wouldn't know where to start or what to do (in practical terms) with the individual components. I'd probably wreck the motor anyway.

 

I do admire old dogs who can learn new tricks, but I'm a 'traditional' old dog, who cannot.

 

It's like computers, 3-D printing, CAD etc. - some of us have brains that are wired up to learn and master that kind of thing and some of us haven't...

 

I can build loco kits with Walschaerts valve gear and other things in 4mm scale but only I know the bodges, blood, sweat, tears and terrible language that goes on before a satisfactory outcome is achieved.

 

I find it's better to know one's own limits and accept them, rather than be seduced by something 'far above one's pay grade' and the consequential disappointment that comes from the inevitable failure that will result....

 

Edited Wednesday at 08:48 by Captain Kernow

[t-b-g]

11 minutes ago, Captain Kernow said:

Maximum respect to you and Rohan and others who do this kind of thing, but I just wouldn't know where to start or what to do (in practical terms) with the individual components. I'd probably wreck the motor anyway.

 

I do admire old dogs who can learn new tricks, but I'm a 'traditional' old dog, who cannot.

 

It's like computers, 3-D printing, CAD etc. - some of us have brains that are wired up to learn and master that kind of thing and some of us haven't...

 

I can build loco kits with Walschaerts valve gear and other things in 4mm scale but only I know the bodges, blood, sweat, tears and terrible language that goes on before a satisfactory outcome is achieved.

 

I find it's better to know one's own limits and accept them, rather than be seduced by something 'far above one's pay grade' and the consequential disappointment that comes from the inevitable failure that will result....

 

 

I couldn't agree more. So much of our modern lives revolve around keyboards, mobile devices and screens. My hobby is all about doing something that doesn't involve such things. Apart from things like RMWeb of course! I am not anti technology at all and I am happy to use such things for keeping in touch with people or for searching out photos or details for modelling purposes. When it comes to building models, give me "old school" any day. If I could scan a drawing and have software turn that into a 3D Cad that could be printed in 3D and the finished result looked fantastic, I would have no interest at all in going down that route.

 

I will happily use a casting/resin/3D component in a model but when I see one part printed complete bodies of a wagon, carriage or loco, I don't see where the fun of "building" it comes in. It is the difference between hand crafting and manufacturing. If you have created the means to mass produce something, that is more like manufacturing than modelling to me.

 

I know others feel quite differently and they enjoy the process and would happily 3D print everything if they could. Good luck to them but it isn't for me!

 

I find it interesting that people are still tinkering with motors to improve them in this day and age. Back in the day, the available motors were a bit rustic in may ways and improving them was a good way to improve the running of model locos. Nowadays, there are so many really good motors available that it becomes the preserve of those who enjoy taking a cheap, poor quality motor and seeing if they can make it run better. It is an exercise in electrical and mechanical engineering for those who enjoy such things rather than a necessity. 

 

Given that we all have a certain number of hours of modelling time, I would rather spend mine on making the bits we can see look better and I am quite happy to pay the going rate for a decent motor. I wonder how many hours goes into replacing the bearings, brushes and balancing the armature of a poor motor. Putting a cost on time at a reasonable hourly rate, it would probably cost more than buying a decent motor in the first place.

 

 

 

[Michael Edge]

You can do all the fancy stuff you like with the motor but much of the noise and most of the friction/roughness usually comes from the gearbox. Our gearing arrangements have suffered far too long from very inefficient worm drives, Portescap showed the way forward by eliminating the worm drive (not their idea it was copied from a Leeds model Co. O gauge gearbox from the early fifties) but then fell down over badly moulded and ultimately very noisy bevel gears. A better way forward is using skew gears (Hornby Dublo had these in the thirties) but they are not common in 4mm scale, the last Comet gearbox designed by Geoff Brewin used these and it's excellent. Best option with worm drives is to keep them as coarse as possible and then use plastic pinions to reduce the speed, High Level gearboxes go down this route and work very well with any motor.

[t-b-g]

29 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

You can do all the fancy stuff you like with the motor but much of the noise and most of the friction/roughness usually comes from the gearbox. Our gearing arrangements have suffered far too long from very inefficient worm drives, Portescap showed the way forward by eliminating the worm drive (not their idea it was copied from a Leeds model Co. O gauge gearbox from the early fifties) but then fell down over badly moulded and ultimately very noisy bevel gears. A better way forward is using skew gears (Hornby Dublo had these in the thirties) but they are not common in 4mm scale, the last Comet gearbox designed by Geoff Brewin used these and it's excellent. Best option with worm drives is to keep them as coarse as possible and then use plastic pinions to reduce the speed, High Level gearboxes go down this route and work very well with any motor.

 

The best worm and gear drives I have ever seen are the ones I was shown recently that were made by Sid Stubbs. Using a multiple start worm (I can't recall if they were two or even three start) allowed the teeth at a good "skew angle". So they have just a single worm and wheel but are reversible and as smooth as any drive I have ever seen.

 

 

[St Enodoc]

1 hour ago, t-b-g said:

 

The best worm and gear drives I have ever seen are the ones I was shown recently that were made by Sid Stubbs. Using a multiple start worm (I can't recall if they were two or even three start) allowed the teeth at a good "skew angle". So they have just a single worm and wheel but are reversible and as smooth as any drive I have ever seen.

 

 

On the borderline between a worm drive and helical gears, by the sound of it.

[Pebbles]

1 hour ago, t-b-g said:

 

The best worm and gear drives I have ever seen are the ones I was shown recently that were made by Sid Stubbs. Using a multiple start worm (I can't recall if they were two or even three start) allowed the teeth at a good "skew angle". So they have just a single worm and wheel but are reversible and as smooth as any drive I have ever seen.

 

 

Tri-ang/Hornby 20:1 ratio gears of many years ago were two start. 

[lezz01]

2 hours ago, Michael Edge said:

You can do all the fancy stuff you like with the motor but much of the noise and most of the friction/roughness usually comes from the gearbox. Our gearing arrangements have suffered far too long from very inefficient worm drives, Portescap showed the way forward by eliminating the worm drive (not their idea it was copied from a Leeds model Co. O gauge gearbox from the early fifties) but then fell down over badly moulded and ultimately very noisy bevel gears. A better way forward is using skew gears (Hornby Dublo had these in the thirties) but they are not common in 4mm scale, the last Comet gearbox designed by Geoff Brewin used these and it's excellent. Best option with worm drives is to keep them as coarse as possible and then use plastic pinions to reduce the speed, High Level gearboxes go down this route and work very well with any motor.

I do like a High Level gearbox they are easy to build and do the job very well. They also come with lot's of options and configurations the components are well made. I'm also a fan of exactoscale components although the final drives can be problematical the reduction boxes and UJs are very good. The main problem with them is that they are like hens teeth now. The UJs however are easy to reproduce and work very well and are totally silent and you can replicate them very easily. Just a length of silicon tubing and a small ball bearing, genius really. 

Regards Lez. 

 

[92220]

Good morning Tony,

 

A couple of recent projects, that I hope will be interesting, now almost completed.  
 

Both have Comet underpinnings, correct Markits drivers, Mashima motors and High Level boxes, and latest generation Hornby bodies and tenders. The tenders both have pickups which I’ve retained but created my own connectors from brass tube and split pins.  Both have a few modifications with scratch built lower fireboxes and ashpans. 46256 is more ambitiously modified than 46211, especially around the trailing truck, rear frames, crosshead and cylinders.  46256 weighs in at 649g with lead in practically every place I could, and 46211 somewhat less.  Both are now ready for cleaning, painting of added components and then cylinder lining; renumbering for 46211, plus final detailing including draincocks and etched nameplates.  Not to mention straightening a cinder guard or two.  I tend also to use 3-4 thin coats of Klear on Hornby and Bachmann liveries, which really lifts the paintwork, and seals everything before weathering.

 

46211 Queen Maud with 12 on:

 

Will be a regular on expresses to and from Liverpool. 

And 46256 with 16 on:

 

 

Sir William will also be a regular, but on the Royal Scot, Caledonian and others.  This is the second 46256 I’ve built (well the third if you include the modified previous generation Hornby one that I dropped on the morning when I first came to visit you).  The other one - a much modified DJH one - you saw half-painted some time ago.  Once Geoff Haynes had painted it properly, it looked a good bit better.  
 

https://youtu.be/F-M9JATYcRo?si=hqg09gm3FRI0w4WD

 

As it is now:

 

Also seen in action at 2:14 and 6:22 on here:  

 

https://youtu.be/etZrqfFx9CQ?feature=shared

I guess it’s up to me if I have two examples of the same loco, as long as they aren’t both on scene at the same time!

 

I look forward to showing you these and others in person one day soon.

 

Best wishes,

 

Iain

[Tony Wright]

18 minutes ago, 92220 said:

Good morning Tony,

 

A couple of recent projects, that I hope will be interesting, now almost completed.  
 

Both have Comet underpinnings, correct Markits drivers, Mashima motors and High Level boxes, and latest generation Hornby bodies and tenders. The tenders both have pickups which I’ve retained but created my own connectors from brass tube and split pins.  Both have a few modifications with scratch built lower fireboxes and ashpans. 46256 is more ambitiously modified than 46211, especially around the trailing truck, rear frames, crosshead and cylinders.  46256 weighs in at 649g with lead in practically every place I could, and 46211 somewhat less.  Both are now ready for cleaning, painting of added components and then cylinder lining; renumbering for 46211, plus final detailing including draincocks and etched nameplates.  Not to mention straightening a cinder guard or two.  I tend also to use 3-4 thin coats of Klear on Hornby and Bachmann liveries, which really lifts the paintwork, and seals everything before weathering.

 

46211 Queen Maud with 12 on:

 

Will be a regular on expresses to and from Liverpool. 

And 46256 with 16 on:

 

 

Sir William will also be a regular, but on the Royal Scot, Caledonian and others.  This is the second 46256 I’ve built (well the third if you include the modified previous generation Hornby one that I dropped on the morning when I first came to visit you).  The other one - a much modified DJH one - you saw half-painted some time ago.  Once Geoff Haynes had painted it properly, it looked a good bit better.  
 

https://youtu.be/F-M9JATYcRo?si=hqg09gm3FRI0w4WD

 

As it is now:

 

Also seen in action at 2:14 and 6:22 on here:  

 

https://youtu.be/etZrqfFx9CQ?feature=shared

I guess it’s up to me if I have two examples of the same loco, as long as they aren’t both on scene at the same time!

 

I look forward to showing you these and others in person one day soon.

 

Best wishes,

 

Iain

Good afternoon Iain,

 

Lovely work -thanks for showing us. 

 

I saw both the full-sized locos in question many times during my 'spotting days at Chester, Liverpool, Hartford and Crewe.

 

I look forward to seeing them run on Bytham when you visit later in the autumn. 

 

Have you thought of turning one of the 45256s into 46257? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

Geoff Haynes popped over this morning, bringing models for photography. Including.............

 

 

 

This Chowbent O Gauge Stanier 2-6-4T which he built, painted and weathered. 

 

And.............

 

 

 

The two latest Heljan 'Tangos' which he's weathered after I detailed them. 

 

 

[92220]

35 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good afternoon Iain,

 

Lovely work -thanks for showing us. 

 

I saw both the full-sized locos in question many times during my 'spotting days at Chester, Liverpool, Hartford and Crewe.

 

I look forward to seeing them run on Bytham when you visit later in the autumn. 

 

Have you thought of turning one of the 45256s into 46257? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Thank you, Tony.  I very much look forward to visiting.

 

A good idea, although I already have 46257’s tender, and another 46256 body to use for 46257’s body in due course.  That will have some detailing differences, and I’m not sure whether I should try deliberately to recreate its reputation as a rough rider, in contrast to 46256 which was one of the best.  My opinion is that 46256 was the worst non-preservation decision made.  Perhaps there is a parallel with Gresley in that he designed the loco bearing his name, so 4498/60007 was a worthy memorial, whereas 46256 was not designed by Stanier, and he is remembered through 46229, 46233 and others.   That is, of course, no more than an idle thought.  

 

In fact, when it comes to loco bodies, I think I may have what is sometimes termed “a problem”:

 

 

since that is some way from the full list now.  The liveried Britannia bodies are all slightly damaged so I think there are 2 good ones in total there.  I think there are also:

 

6 more cheaply acquired Hornby Scots and Patriots to rechassis since they did their usual thing of eating their gears
A LFB Jubilee to hybridise with one of those SFB Jubilees above

3 more Black 5s

2 Jinties

A Duke of Gloucester for which I will probably build a new set of frames.

 

plus a kit pile

I will have plenty to occupy me, I think.

 

Best wishes,

 

Iain

 

 

 

[Michael Edge]

4 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

The best worm and gear drives I have ever seen are the ones I was shown recently that were made by Sid Stubbs. Using a multiple start worm (I can't recall if they were two or even three start) allowed the teeth at a good "skew angle". So they have just a single worm and wheel but are reversible and as smooth as any drive I have ever seen.

 

 

If you can turn them backwards they are effectively skew gears, the old Hornby Dublo  ones can be reversed, Triang 2 start worm drives could not.

[t-b-g]

3 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

If you can turn them backwards they are effectively skew gears, the old Hornby Dublo  ones can be reversed, Triang 2 start worm drives could not.

 

Sid Stubbs wrote a very technical article in MRJ No 42 explaining his gear making. It appeared in the No 1 shop feature. He describes the angles and shapes of the gears in great detail. The helix angle on the worm was just over 12 degrees, so not really a big angle but enough for the gears to be reversible. They don't look to my eyes as if they should be reversible but they are. There is a full set of dimensioned drawings for anybody who wants to give it a try but I can't imagine many people having the skills or inclination to carry out such work nowadays. I am not saying that it was the just the fact that they were two start worms which makes them reversible. Sid explains in details how and why the different angles of a two start worm make it easier to reverse than a single start one but it doesn't mean that all 2 start worms should be reversible. It depends on other factors too, like the helix angles.

 

I was aware of the Triang 2 start worms. I recall reading an article where somebody replaced the worm with a single start one to increase the ratio to 40:1. You probably have to have pretty coarse teeth with plenty of slop for that to work.  

[1471SirFrederickBanbury]

15 hours ago, lezz01 said:

Have you tried UV activated super glue Rohan? I find it very good for gap filling although it isn't the panacea that they claimed when it first came out it still has it's uses. The better the UV torch you use the stronger the bond is. 5210 oily glue is also very good as an alterative to standard SG, it takes a bit longer to set than standard SG but it's quite a bit stronger and will stick anything to anything else. It's also less likely to stick your fingers together than normal SG as it takes longer to cure and gives you a chance to get it off with a injection swab.

Regards Lez. 

I have tried those UV cure superglues.  While they do have a place in some areas, I found that they struggled with adhesion somewhat, and that they were far behind my staple gap filling superglue mixes (BSI IC-2000 or IC-gel mixed with a bit of Tamia extra thin cement which is acetone and butyl acetate).  Adding a bit of a a strong solvent to thicker superglues strongly increases adhesion to plastic and metal alike, while not decreasing gap filling ability too significantly.  The important part for me is that rubber toughened/black superglues are far more resistant to knocks and bumps that cause most joints to crack.

[1471SirFrederickBanbury]

6 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

Maximum respect to you and Rohan and others who do this kind of thing, but I just wouldn't know where to start or what to do (in practical terms) with the individual components. I'd probably wreck the motor anyway.

 

I do admire old dogs who can learn new tricks, but I'm a 'traditional' old dog, who cannot.

 

It's like computers, 3-D printing, CAD etc. - some of us have brains that are wired up to learn and master that kind of thing and some of us haven't...

 

I can build loco kits with Walschaerts valve gear and other things in 4mm scale but only I know the bodges, blood, sweat, tears and terrible language that goes on before a satisfactory outcome is achieved.

 

I find it's better to know one's own limits and accept them, rather than be seduced by something 'far above one's pay grade' and the consequential disappointment that comes from the inevitable failure that will result....

 

Its not that difficult if you start small!  try grabbing an old X03/X04 motor, observe the copper windings, and cut the windings off.  Then, use a thin screwdriver to tease the steel plates I the armature into being skewed.  Using thinner (enamel insulated) copper wire, slowly wind the armatures in the same direction, but wind it 2x as many times as the original.  You should have a much smoother, more powerful, and slower motor.  Rewinding is actually cheaper than buying a new motor in some cases, considering how cheap magnet wire can be.  This video will help a lot: 

   

I wish you luck, but you won't need it!

 

 

[1471SirFrederickBanbury]

4 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

On the borderline between a worm drive and helical gears, by the sound of it.

Crossed Helicals!  Instead of having a worm at near 90 degrees to rotation and a pinion with almost 0, crossed helicals have the same helix angle, so they can be back-driven easily.  I'd prefer to use herringbone bevel gears though, as they are the quietest, most efficient, and strongest by far, but are hard to produce. 

 

https://www.differencebox.com/engineering/difference-between-parallel-helical-gear-and-crossed-helical-gear/

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herringbone_gear

Edited Wednesday at 16:00 by 1471SirFrederickBanbury

[1471SirFrederickBanbury]

5 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

The best worm and gear drives I have ever seen are the ones I was shown recently that were made by Sid Stubbs. Using a multiple start worm (I can't recall if they were two or even three start) allowed the teeth at a good "skew angle". So they have just a single worm and wheel but are reversible and as smooth as any drive I have ever seen.

 

 

Even better would be a double enveloping/globoid worm gear.  This is the most efficient form of worm gear set, but bevels are still better due to the ability to back-drive. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yibOUMWYNg&pp=ygUbZG91YmxlIGVudmVsb3Bpbmcgd29ybSBnZWFy 

 

[LNER4479]

3 hours ago, 92220 said:

This is the second 46256 I’ve built ...  I guess it’s up to me if I have two examples of the same loco, as long as they aren’t both on scene at the same time!

Hey, Iain - you can never have too many Duchesses 😆

 

 

Here's a quartet on my workbench - including MY second 46256 (black one at the back - as sold to me with a few defects by Tony). However, once repairs are complete, it'll get repainted as 46257.

[Tony Wright]

There are some really clever folk on here with regards to motors/gears.

 

Forgive me if I don't contribute to the discussion in a practical way. It's all rather over my head!

[Tony Wright]

Speaking of motors/gears, the ones inside Heljan's latest O2s are excellent - smooth, powerful, sweet and quiet. I certainly won't be altering them in any way.

 

This afternoon, the weathered pair has been set to work on Little Bytham..................

 

 

 

The 'missing' handrail on the tender is apparent here. 

 

 

Both performed impeccably, which is all one can ask of a drive. 

 

 

[Michael Edge]

4 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

Sid Stubbs wrote a very technical article in MRJ No 42 explaining his gear making. It appeared in the No 1 shop feature. He describes the angles and shapes of the gears in great detail. The helix angle on the worm was just over 12 degrees, so not really a big angle but enough for the gears to be reversible. They don't look to my eyes as if they should be reversible but they are. There is a full set of dimensioned drawings for anybody who wants to give it a try but I can't imagine many people having the skills or inclination to carry out such work nowadays. I am not saying that it was the just the fact that they were two start worms which makes them reversible. Sid explains in details how and why the different angles of a two start worm make it easier to reverse than a single start one but it doesn't mean that all 2 start worms should be reversible. It depends on other factors too, like the helix angles.

 

I was aware of the Triang 2 start worms. I recall reading an article where somebody replaced the worm with a single start one to increase the ratio to 40:1. You probably have to have pretty coarse teeth with plenty of slop for that to work.  

I used to do that with Triang gears, worked OK at the time.

[thegreenhowards]

I know very little about the engineering involved in gearboxes. But when I started dabbling in a O gauge, I quickly discovered helical gears and now use nothing else. They are so smooth, quiet and powerful while drawing lower amps - important in O gauge, especially with DCC decoders.

 

I can’t understand why helical gears don’t feature in 00 gearboxes.

 

Andy