Lambton, Hetton and Joicey Colliery (Kitson) No.29 build

[Atlantic 3279]

I'm glad I'm not having to spend time struggling with the CAD learning process. I'm quite bewildered enough by multiple simultaneous learning and decision-making challenges at present. That loco rendition looks promising though......

[Paul_sterling]

Thanks Graeme,

In all honesty CAD, whichever software package you choose, once you get your head round it, is pretty straightforward. I used ProE for 4 and a bit years as Design Engineer at Cummins, and use CATIA from time to time now. These paid-for packages are generally better than the free stuff like RS's software, at least in respect of available functions, though CATIA does have its own "special" PITA features.

I've caved and ordered a chassis, its a compromise, but much much closer than the J72, so some revisions will be needed once it arrives, but should just consist of changing the datum planes, and some minor additional pockets.

Paul.

[Paul_sterling]

Sometimes you really do get the feeling that someone has sent you a sign (or devine intervention!) either way, pouring through the recent Railway Modeller, I found that The Model Centre at Goathland (where else!) had a Midland 1F in for under £60, so I took a chance on one (I had one already which I didn't want to dismantle, for reasons of damaging it, pathetic really), and have just had the chassis off.

It turns out that all of the gubbins on the 1F are at the front end, so when reversed to get the wheelbase correct for No.29, it al goes to the firebox end of my loco, which is excellent news, so I should be able to fully shape the boiler and smokebox (which I couldn't using the J72 chassis), and have a little daylight underneath.

The wheelbase is 0.5mm short on one span, but correct on the other, and the wheels are 1.2mm too big, but these are minor compared to the discrepancies on the J72 when used in this manner.

Happy days!

Paul.

[Paul_sterling]

So with all this in mind, the first steps will be to create some new reference planes on the CAD model, to allow a mimic of the underside of the 1F body, to be pocketed out of the underside of No.29. The usual reference technique of using the rear axle of the chassis will be used again here to work out the position of the mimic. I will probably mount the training axle off of the body rather than the chassis so that it's position can be made correct.

The brake gear of the 1F may have to be removed, to make a more reflective arrangement to that on no.29

Paul.

[Paul_sterling]

What with a number of other projects on the go (not just railway ones), and a need to distil ideas on the arrangement of No.29, this week has been the first chance I've had to do any substantial work on the CAD for the loco.

Changing from J72 to 1F was relatively major surgery on the CAD, and its often a case that somewhere I've inevitably left a dimensional feature in which is tied to the features that were created for mount the J72 chassis onto, and when these are deleted, the model "falls over" (!) I've now managed to get back most of the parts and features, aligned with the 1F. The 1F chassis has also allowed me to put the front axle in the right place, which removes the need for over-extended splashers, a feature of the DJRM and my own early attempt at No.29.

Anyway, I've started a mule print to check that the new running plate frames, and smokebox match up with the 1F chassis, and I will progress the CAD from there.

Off-CAD I have also been populating the hand sketched drawings with the dimensions gained from my visit to Grosmont, so I'm now somewhere near the correct dimensions throughout.

Finally, for those who may not be aware, No.29 is now all but complete and likely to steam again very soon, having been stripped down to receive replacement cylinders.

IMG_20190628_143043[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

Paul.

[Paul_sterling]

I found an unusual fault on the Bachmann 1F today

It turns out that the coupling rods foul the chassis on every top dead centre pass, there is no clearance, and the only reason why this doesn't cause it to click or stall, is that the chassis mounts are quite flexible!

Anyway, for No.29, I've added in some clearance channels on the underside for the rods.

I'll pop a pic up tomorrow.

Cheers, Paul.

[Paul_sterling]

I had further head scratching trying to get what appears to be a simple chassis fit fit on a flat surface

IMG_20190705_144850 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

But it turns out I was over-complicating things, I've created pads for the sanders (?) to sit on, but had made them 1mm too long, so was deflecting the plastic at each end of the chassis, some filing cured that.

IMG_20190705_144834 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr
The pencil points out the channel required to provide clearance for the coupling rods, the 1F relies on the end flexibility of the chassis to allow flexure to minimise the noise from the rods clashing on the underside of the bodyshell.

IMG_20190705_144840 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

I'm also adding some additional clearance for the crank pins, from the topside, this is all inside the tanks, so no impact on visuals.

Hopefully I'm now somewhere near with the chassis to shell interface, and I can resume work on the superstructure.

In a reversal from the Q1/2 method of filling the side tanks, I'm going to put a hole underneath on No.29 (a la Q1 bunker hole), and load the lead shot in from underneath. In this case that will mean the curve on the top of the tank of No.29 can be modelled in with no join visible, it hardly shows on the Q1, but it would be a lot more prominent on No.29. I am also considering using the point where the tank filling neck goes as a filling hole as well mind.

Paul.

[Paul_sterling]

Great news today on two fronts.

1. No.29 is getting slowly warmed up at Grosmont

2. the etchings have arrived from narrow planet!

I've been progressing with the CAD for the bodyshell of No.29, and its coming together nicely. There is still a long way to go as yet, and I am thinking of a proprietary truck for the rear rather than make one, and the fixing points could then be incorporated into the frames of No.29, so may have to have a look through Peters Spares catalogue......

Paul.

[Paul_sterling]

received_430386847554559 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

Paul.

[Paul_sterling]

Fantastic news folks.........

As of yesterday, No.29 (the real one!) is a runner again!

She made her first moves out of Grosmont MPD, up past the deviation shed and back.

In the meantime, I've been riveted.......

....or at least i've bought a pack of the Archer Rivets to use on No.29

If anyone on here is familiar with them, do they have any guidance on fitting them? I could not see any notes on the Archer web-page on application.

Thanks, Paul.

[Paul_sterling]

Quick question folks,

The LNER logo/numbering, what text format was it please?

I've had a brief look on the liveries page, but did not find a reference to it. I gather some of the nameplates were Gill Sans, but I can't recall where I heard that, or it it applied to the LNER and Numbers?

The reason being is that No.29's numbering and LHJC is done in the LNER text style.

Thanks, Paul.

[Paul_sterling]

slow and steady progress on No.29, but I do hope to have something physical to hand for when I go up there in August to see the real No.29.

Capture by Paul Sterling, on Flickr
Work from a couple of days ago. CAD rendering is never perfect, so this was as close to a layover as I could get.

20190722 Rendered by Paul Sterling, on Flickr
The cab is the current focus, getting the profile right is a devil! I've made some minor changes since this picture, and it now looks somewhere near.

The pockets for the cab entrance are hidden at this point, as I will have new definitions to create for them, based on the updated cab profile, if I had them "live" so to speak, it would cause issues with the reference points of the model no longer existing for what the pockets were created from (a very large portion of the model was replaced/modified in changing from J72 to 1F).

I'm likely to use a proprietary pony truck for the rear of No.29. the wheels are nominally 3'4" (I don't have the as new size, only the un-tyred size, which is 2'11.3/4"), and an LMS 8F or Fowler 2-6-4 truck is 3'3.1/2" so very close, and would give a decent starting point for a truck pivot, plus Peters Spares is local to me, so a chance to pop into the shop and buy it. the alternative is a P2 truck or L1 truck, both are 3'2" nominal, so passable for No.29, and at least green (!).

Paul.

[mick b]

29 up and running , halfway down page


https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index ... omLogout=1

[Dave]

Paul, very nice.
A couple of posts back you asked about Archer rivets, my advice is keep as much carrier film as possible, especially with singles.
Use Microsol or similar asap, then I usually cover when set with a bit of clear acrylic varnish, or prime if it's a one night job. They are very fragile and easily damaged, rubbed off,
but if you take care handling you will be fine.

[Paul_sterling]

Paul, very nice.
A couple of posts back you asked about Archer rivets, my advice is keep as much carrier film as possible, especially with singles.
Use Microsol or similar asap, then I usually cover when set with a bit of clear acrylic varnish, or prime if it's a one night job. They are very fragile and easily damaged, rubbed off,
but if you take care handling you will be fine.

Thanks Dave, that is great advice.

I've purchased the Micro-sol as well to be sure.

I was tempted to add them to the Q1 smokebox now I have them, but nope! I'll try them out on No.29, or possibly something else first!

Cheers, Paul