2mm magazine dec jan 2012 13 mag dec jan 2012...the 2mm magazine dec/jan 2012/13 ... historical...

Magazine Section 101 Dec/Jan 2012/13

The Magazine Dec/Jan 2012-13


Above - A modern freight train composed of HEA coal hoppers makes its way through WeltonDown. The layout was constructed by Bill Rankin then converted to operate in the modern era

by Jim Allwood. (Photo - Dave Stratton)Below - Heavy haulier with a lightweight load. A nice scene on Edward Sissling’s Niddbeck

Bridge with his Q6 0-8-0 63417 on a pick up freight.(Photo - Steve Flint reproduced courtesy Railway Modeller)


The 2mm Magazine Dec/Jan 2012/13

www.2mm.org.uk

Turning chimneys domes & buffers.DG Coupling ConstructionRapid PrototypingFinal thoughts on the 08Ordinarily I tend not to mention show appearanceshere but on this occasion I have to say what a mostenjoyable weekend Wansbeck Road operatingteam and those who manned the 2mm ScaleAssociation Road Show stand had at Scaleforumrecently when we appeared as the guest society.What a lot of nice comments were passed byvisitors to the show, who I assume were largely4mm modellers, not only about our layout and the‘bonus’ layout British Oak brought along by MarkFielder but 2mm scale generally. There were also anumber of familiar 2mm faces who came to sayhello too. A grand weekend all round.

We start this time with Tony White’s deliberationson the subject of fabricating items to sit atop theboiler of a steam locomotive, very functional on thereal thing of course, but sometimes difficult to makein 2mm scale.

Brian Hume follows this with some thoughts onDG couplings. A good many people use DGs so itmay very well be of interest to many to seesomeone else’s slant on construction.

Richard Brummitt has put his toe in the water ofrapid prototyping and enlightens us all on hisexploits. Your editor has never looked at a drawingprogram seriously so this would be something of anuphill struggle for him. But it’s grand to see othersgetting a result.

Finally, Graham Ross sent me some notes on thefinal stages of his 08 kit build. The 2mm ScaleAssociation’s Locomotive Kit No 1. I said it when

he started writing about his experiences of the buildand I repeat it here. I think he made a smashing jobof it, and yes he knows where the bits are that he’snot too happy with but we probably wouldn’t knowif he didn’t tell us.

Next time I will be catching up on some of thosearticles which by their very nature have had to be‘serialised’. This means, amongst other things, thatI can continue with the remainder of the trackworkitems in addition to some material on the subject ofthe etched chassis replacements for ‘N’ Gaugelocomotives. Watch the space as they say.

Until then the editorial team wish you all a veryhappy, healthy and productive festive season.

Or, put another way - Merry Christmas.

Mick Simpson

Front Cover photograph - Does this picture lookfamiliar? It is in the now well established style of afestive wintry painting for our Christmas issue. Forthose of you who need a bit of help, it’s your editor’svery own Wansbeck Road expertly reproduced inwater colour by Mike Raithby. Once again mythanks to Mike for enabling me to perpetuate thestyle again.

Rear cover photograph - An impressive wide viewtaken on Highbury Colliery with a Somerset &Dorset 0-6-0 passing through on a freight.(Photo - Steve Flint. Reproduced courtesyRailway Modeller).

ContentsTony WhiteBrian HumeRichard BrummittGraham Ross


Historical review

There have been numerous articles and sectionsin books over the years explaining andencouraging modellers to have a go atproducing their own boiler fittings such aschimneys, safety valves and steam domes thatI thought a review of the advice given over theyears might be helpful after I had tried all themethods suggested.

There have been a number of techniquesdescribed over the years and the differencesrelate mainly to the production of the saddle tosit on the boiler or smokebox because all haveinvolved some means of turning the upper halfalthough this didn’t necessarily involve a lathe(Balfour 1979) and (Watt 1972), both of whomdescribed a method for those fearful of metalturning and soldering, a way of making suchfittings in plastic.

The production of the saddle involves threemain techniques

• Filing• Shaping the bottom into a bell and bashing• Flycutting

The filing method is described by Stewart Hine(1968) in his article on building a 2mm GWR4-4-0 River Fal. The earliest descriptions I canfind are those by Roche & Templer (1947-51)who advocated the second method, and whichwas repeated in their book of 1968. The earliestreferences to flycutting in non live steam

models is Guy Williams (1979) and he makesno claim to have invented the method but saidit was based on some articles written years agoby a modeller now deceased. However I cannotlocate the original reference. It is more precisethan any idea of flattening the skirt of a fittingdown on to the boiler.

All the methods require some sort of machineto rotate the work piece but descriptions havebeen given in the literature of modellers doingthis with electric drills and hand-pieces held ina clamp or vice although a lathe makes the jobeasier. These need not be the expensive sort asI know of a colleague who bought an oldwatchmakers lathe headstock and base with bedand tool support on eBay for about £20 andwith a graver made from a broken file producedvery nice 2mm fittings.

Research for data and dimensions

Whatever method you use, all authors ofprevious articles agree on one thing, you musthave the main dimensions of the prototypechimney and dome otherwise it is unlikely toever look correct although I’m sure somepeople can judge the turning by eye and get itto look right. So, for sources, I have suggestedin the Appendix a number of suitablepublications that I have used and of coursethere are very many more.

As a word of warning though from personalexperience it is worth checking that you haveidentical dimensions from two sources as

Turning chimneys, domes & buffersTony White (drawings and photos - the author)


sometimes I’ve found mistakes in drawings.Sometimes however if you read the text of theaforementioned books you will discover thatthis is not an error but a difference in date ofmanufacture of chimney.

As an example Roche (1965) in his book ofdrawings gives the standard Drummondchimney height of the LSWR/SR M7s as 3ft0in with 2ft 1¾in at lip and 1ft 3ins at bottomof barrel, whereas Peter Swift (Swift 2010)gives height as 3ft 2in and 2ft 2in at lip withintext and drawings. However if you read furtherinto the book you discover there were twoversions of this chimney both 3ft 2in tall boththe earlier version 1ft 4in at bottom and 2ft 2inat lip, whereas the later ones were 2ft 1in at lipand 1ft 2½in at bottom of barrel.

As Guy Williams pointed out (Williams 1988)“These fittings, being so distinctive, have to becorrect in form, and many drawings publisheddo not really set out to show them in their trueshape, and official weight diagrams are notmade for model makers at all. There are gooddrawings here and there but the modeller mustbeware and be his own judge of their validity.”

Drawings and plans

A study of photographs is also very helpful toconfirm if all the engines of the class had thesame chimney, dome or safety valve cover.Many of the older engines had several varietiesin their lifetime. From the prototypedimensions it is useful although not critical toproduce a scaled dimension sheet. So it meansa little work with a calculator to convert all themain prototype dimensions into modeldimensions and that depends on whether you’remaking the model in 10mm, 7mm, 4mm, 3mmor 2mm scale.

If you are without a dimensioned drawing youmay be able at least to establish the overallheight and then do some work on comparativeheight and width from photographs. Once youare fairly sure make a sketch to the scale

required with a fine pencil and also it isimportant to establish the diameters of theboiler or smokebox, where they have to fit, andthe various diameters of the fitting.

Next on a strip of white card mark with a verypointed thin pencil the exact lines of the base inside view, changes of curvature, cap or castinglines, edge of lip or height of the capuchon orsmoke deflector and so on. Then mark next tothose lines as exactly as possible the diameterin your usual units. I always work inmillimetres but some engineer trainedmodellers are quite happy using thousands ofan inch.

Preparation

You can turn the fitting with either end facingthe chuck but I find it simpler to turn the tophalf with the top of the chimney facing awayfrom chuck and the bottom of the fitting facingthe tailstock.

Although there are a number of stages there aretwo main basic operations• Cutting the base to fit the smokebox orboiler by:

• Filing (that I will not discuss further)• Belling and Bashing• Flycutting and Burring• Turning the upper half to dimensions• Free hand turned• To precise dimensions with cross slide

Preparing the blanks

You firstly need a piece of brass, phosphorbronze (a good copper substitute) or nickelsilver rod, according to preference and whetherthe chimney is plain or has a copper top, (I findit easier to copper plate the top rather than turncopper) of slightly over the diameter of thebottom of the chimney or dome and of a lengtha little over chimney height (distance from theextreme top to the extreme bottom of thechimney in the side elevation, and not in the


front elevation, otherwise the chimney will betoo short if the front elevation is used as a basisas it has to be saddled over the boiler) plus thelength you decide to place in the chuck orcollet. I will call this the blank.

Hand turning may need practice so it is betterto experiment on a few pieces of scrap beforethe actual job is commenced. When theoperator thinks he can tackle the jobsuccessfully, then measure off the drawing witha pair of dividers.

Now prepare the metal and make a blank to:-

• Maximum diameter, usually the base, but sometimes the lip• Long enough to do the job, not forgetting the sides come down further than the front and back. Do not believe all the drawings on this so give yourself a millimetre or so to play with.

Next prepare the blank for holding during laterstages of production. There are two mainmethods

• Drilled and threaded for a suitable size bolt• Drilled and suitable for soldering onto a mandrel produced to match.

For the first method the blank is turned upcarefully and drilled and tapped to a suitableBA size depending on scale right through andfaced truly both ends. I have used 6BA for4mm and 10BA for 2mm work though it’sworth checking for a suitable size beforecommitting.

However my preferred method is the secondmethod for holding the blank to work on. Fromeither end drill a hole down the centre at thisstage, the size of the opening at the top of thechimney, making sure that if it is a taperedchimney this is not too big for the narrowestpart, and also ensuring that there is sufficientmetal around the periphery to support thefinished product in handling. I find it tends to

run more truly than when on a threaded fitting.

Techniques Used -Lower half (or saddling)

Apart from getting the right shape the mainproblem with making chimneys and so on is thefitting down on to the boiler. This is the part Ifind most difficult, not because of the actualcutting but getting it truly symmetrical. Thereare two methods that I have called the Rocheand Williams method although they may nothave invented the technique, they are themethods described in their respective books.

• Bell or Countersink method described by Roche (1947) modified Williams (1979) modified Wright (1996)• Flycutting method described by Williams (1979)

Bell or Countersink Method

There are three different methods of using thistechnique described by Roche (1947) althoughit is possible there were earlier descriptions. Itis also a method that has been described byothers including Wright (1996) and is said towork perfectly well for chimneys of moderatesize on moderately sized smokeboxes. Here themethod of saddling used, i.e., tapping on thetop with a hammer over a piece of steel thediameter of the boiler. He recommends firstannealing the fitting by holding it in a flame fora few seconds until all the brightness has fadedaway, taking care not to hold the fitting longenough to get it red hot as this is not necessary.

Now with a piece of steel or brass bar the samediameter as the smokebox placed in a vice anda piece of lead or hard wood placed on the topof the chimney, gently tap with a hammer untilthe chimney or dome seats itself over theformer. It is important to tap it vertically on thetop otherwise the fitting will saddle itselfcrookedly. If you’re afraid of being unable tostrike with the hammer straight up and down,then a peg, the diameter of the internal bore ofthe chimney, can be used and the chimney


placed on that, then proceed as before. Thiscannot, of course, be done with domes unlessthey are very tall, so care will have to be takento get them saddled straight. With a taper boilerthis can be a tricky manoeuvre.

Note that during this process the front and rearof the bottom of the chimney will curveupwards and the sides will curve downwards,(Fig 1 above) therefore the fitting will be thecorrect height when it is saddled if dueallowance is made for this when forming thetop of a chimney first.

Williams (1988) does not advocate a bashdown on a bar but to use a large nut and boltwith washers on a suitable tube and screw itdown, pressing the sides down with a round barwhen the height is correct. Wright (1996)describing the technique for 2mm workrecommends the use of a vice pressing theembryo chimney onto a bar the size of thesmokebox, but having a peg on the bar asdescribed above as an aid in Roche’s earlyarticles that fits the hole in the chimney thuskeeping the pressure symmetrical.

It does not matter if you turn the lower outsidefirst or after forming the bell mouthed aperturebut care must be taken not to go through this oryou will have to start again. The illustrationswill, I think, make all this clear.

Which ever technique is used in the bendingprocess there are three main dangers:

• Turning the skirt of the chimney too thin• Pressing the fitting so that the seating is observed to be symmetrical, although the assistance of the peg described helps.

• Guy William felt the front view ofthe chimney was usually not quite rightusing this method and it certainlyrequired some filing to correct this. Notall chimneys sit on a circular base and itis interesting to check dimensionswhere one can find them.

• There are problems with large domes on small diameter boilers as described in a later section.

There are however some possible advantages

• The blank stays in the chuck all the time.• No jigs are required unless you fit a peg

on the bar to bash skirt onto.

Set the dimension of top of chimney on theblank with a pair of odd legs or dividers, andwhile turning the lathe by hand scribe a linefrom the bottom of the bar right round it. Thisline will represent the top of the chimney. Itneed hardly be said that the bar must be facedoff before this operation is carried out.

Dimension lines representing the top lip, topflange, top beading, etc., can now all be scribedon the bar, and there only remains to turn it toshape with the tools either in tool post or handheld. With hand rest in the tool post make surethe rest is a little below centre, although thehand tool is worked at centre height, and do nothurry, take small amounts of the metal. Slowlyis the best advice in hand turning. The shape ofthe hand tool is important too, probably a roundnosed tool throughout is best, only using aparting type of tool for the top lip and partingoff.

Flycutting Method

With many modellers now having lathes flycutting and turning of seating is a neater optionas it ensures an accurate fit to the boiler andhaving a really accurate side view but has oneproblem:

Above - Fig 1


• Getting rid of some excess metal from the lower sides, usually done after turning the upper half.

This is solved with burrs that are readilyavailable these days. To get the cut symmetricalI use the method described by Williams (1979).

And one main disadvantage

• You need three jigs

But they will enable you to produce as manychimneys, domes and safety valves as youdesire.

Tools and Jigs required

There are three jigs required for the flycuttingmethod that are not necessary for the bell orcountersink method described by Roche (1947-51 and 1968).

The Flycutter

Obviously if you are not going to use theflycutting method you won’t need a flycutter orits attendant mounting jig, both of which aredescribed here.

The first essential is to obtain or make a flycutter as shown in Fig. 2. The cutting bit can bea piece of needle file stoned to shape.

The bar is quite a simple turning exercise with

a tapped hole in the end for the set screw. 6BAshould be adequate and 6BA tapping is anexercise needed for securing the parts to beturned in any case.

For 2mm scale fittings as the boiler diameterscan sometimes be rather small, I have used endmills about 3/8 “ (9.5mm) or 10mm diameter.

The Mounting

With a fly cutter you need some means ofmounting the blank or work piece on deadcentre and Williams (1979) acknowledges hismethod to the late Alan Taylor. Mount a pieceof square section brass that will fit into yourtool post like a lathe tool. Mark the top surfacefor future reference and set it up so that a centredrill fitted into the lathe chuck meets it at rightangles as the tool post is advanced sidewaystowards it. Ensure there is adequate metal allround, advance this piece on to the centre drillto start the hole. Back off and replace with a

tapping size drill for whatever mounting screwsize you are using or open this hole out toclearance size thread you want or if like me youuse a soldered fixing, a drill of appropriate sizeto fit the blank. Having drilled right through,the block in the tool post can be removed andtapped, and we have a mount for all our futurework which is exactly on centre.

Using my soldered method you don’t need tobother with taps and threading. I also confess tonot bothering with soldering sometimes andjust using Superglue or Loctite and a little heat

Above - Fig 2


to remove them later.

However, if you have made one you now havea jig that will provide a mounting for any pieceto be fly cut which has a hole on dead centre.You can of course add further holes along thisjig to mount various size pieces but this jigshould now be preserved carefully. I also findit helpful to put things such as this into a plasticbag marked with its use.

The Mandrel

This third useful jig is again not strictlynecessary for those not using either method, butit does make turning and finishing a whole loteasier.

It is made by turning a piece of circular orhexagonal bar (hexagonal bar is easier to refitexactly in a 3-jaw than round bar), to have areduced diameter end with a carefully drilledand tapped appropriate hole down its centre (tofit whatever size you are using or tapped themount jig) and maybe right through it.

It needs to be marked so that it will always goback into the 3 jaw chuck the same way as noself centring chuck is that good so do notremove it from the chuck until you have clearlypunched a mark to show you where it was heldin relation to jaw number one, for example, asit must always go back that way if it is to betruly on centre. Thus we have a mounting forall the chimneys and domes etc. we will evermake which is true and will accept the fittings

either way round.

Of course if you have collets rather than a 3-jawthen in my experience life is easier as you canuse round bar and not worry too much aboutmarking the position.

If you use the threaded system, once tapped anda long screw is run through, leave enoughprotruding to mount any dome or chimney.

It must be possible to remove this screw toaccommodate domes which may incorporatesoldered in mounting screws. These can bescrewed into the mount from the front, whereaschimneys are normally mounted from the base.

It is important that both the horizontal androtary mounts have the holes tapped, and not toclearance sizes, as the pieces must be veryfirmly held in place and the two threads (one inthe mount and one in the piece) can be used tolock against one another to prevent any unfor-tunate movement. If these pieces are carefullypreserved they will last for years and theproduction of many fittings.

My personal preference though is not to botherwith this tapped mandrel jig as I always glue orsolder my chimneys and domes onto a length ofbrass rod turned down to a fit on the inside holeof the fitting.

Next time I will discuss the technique.

Below - Fig 3


Having used the DG coupling on both 4mm and2mm for many years I was interested in thearticle originally from the N Gauge Society thatappeared as a page filler on page X of theFeb/March 2010 2mm Newsletter. Having triedthe one piece loop and dropper wire I realisedthat it would probably work better and stay inplace if an extra couple of bends were put inand the dropper threaded through one of themounting holes such that it laid central to thecoupling and therefore more likely to bedirectly over the magnet, in my case Seepelectromagnets.

To make this clearer I took a photo of the fivestages, the photos are of a “OO” gaugecoupling as I was making some at the time andI thought it would be easier to photograph.

From Left to right the 1st photo shows thefollowing stages

a) Wire as formed on DG wire bending jigto make one loop only, with an extra few mmfor the dropper. I usually cut off about 40mm

to start with.

b) Wire with jig holding portion cut off anddropper wire bent down

c) Wire as above but dropper is now curved,I find this works better. Yes I know it is on theopposite side, I’m not very consistent but itreally does not matter.

d) The loop finally squared up

e) Fitted to the coupling. The dropper willrequire cutting to lengthto clear the railhead onpoints.

The 2nd photo tries toshow first fitting the tailof the loop through oneof the mounting holesand finally thecompleted coupling.

DG Coupling constructionBrian Hume (photographs - the author)

Above and below- The sequence of construction as described in the text.


Introduction

There are a number of ways to create parts in thisadditive manner. (Sometimes rapid prototyping iscalled additive layer manufacturing or ALM - aterm coined by the industry to try and get peopleto think about using the technology for more thanthe prototype stage of the product) One of themore common is SLS (selective laser sintered)parts where a 'bathtub' of powder is fused togetherby a number of lasers one 'dot' in 3D space at atime. The accuracy is based on the size of the 'dot'of powder that is fused (directly related to the sizeof laser beam) and the resolution of thepositioning of the laser beam in the three principalaxes. A more accurate machine has lasers withthinner laser beams and has better positionresolution for them. Not only are the moreaccurate machines more expensive to buy butmaking a part with smaller 'dots' takesproportionately longer and costs proportionatelymore. A similar analogy applies with the othertypes of process available, such as SLA(sterolithography) where a liquid resin is usedrather than powder, or FDM (fused depositionmodel) where a molten 'filament' is extrudedthrough a nozzle or print head. The latter is acheaper process but the models are generally notas dense, with lower resolution and not so suitedto machining. SLA most commonly represents thehighest resolution with a good surface finish, butoften the materials that are used for this processcan be brittle. The SLS process still offers goodresolution with reasonable surface finish. Thematerials that can be used are much more suited tofurther cutting, shaping or other secondaryprocesses.

In my professional capacity as an industrial design

engineer I use '3D printing' or 'rapid prototyping'(RP) on a regular basis to create physical parts forprototypes for presenting design concepts. Thebureaux that the company goes to for these itemsgenerally use a machine with a realistic achievableaccuracy of +/-0.3mm or 3%, whichever isgreater, and the terms and conditions state that anyareas where material thickness is below 1mm maynot appear at all. Not so useful for 2mm scalemodelling then!

The RP process had occurred to me for modelmaking, but I knew that the resolution was notgood enough from our regular suppliers and hadconsidered that it would be an expensive venturefor what I presumed would be disappointingresults. I was introduced to Shapeways throughfrequenting the 3D printing and CAD group onwww.rmweb.co.uk. A couple of members wereposting pictures of what appeared to be reasonablequality parts from the FUD (fine ultra detail)material and process from this company. I alreadyhad the tools to create the file and now saw a routethat had potential to produce a good result.

A Suitable Prototype

I wanted a prototype that had detail or features thatwould be awkward or time consuming to createfrom scratch or as an etched kit. I required all thefeatures on one vehicle for a test piece; planking,louvres, panelling, rivets, strapping &c. I chose aGWR Beetle passenger cattle box to diagram W7.These have a lot of layered features and fulfilledthe criteria reasonably well. To create a reasonablerepresentation from an etch would require aminimum of 4 layers for the sides!

There are clear drawings and pictures in Tatlow

Rapid PrototypingRichard Brummitt (photographs - the author)


'Historical Carriage Drawings Vol 3 NonPassenger Coaching Stock' as well as Russell 'APictoral Reference of Great Western Coaches Vol2' and 'Great Western Coaches Appendix vol 2'.

Making a Model

Having selected a prototype I checked out theprice. This seemed a sensible first step before Icommitted several hours into drawing somethingthat I wasn't then prepared to pay for. I drew athin-walled box of approximately 52x16x16mmabout the size of a scale 26' body shell. The pricereturned was, a quite reasonable in my opinion,around 10USD. Pricing for the Shapeways serviceis by material volume with a standing charge permodel. The minimum order value meant that Iwould have to order around four times theamount, but putting them all in the same filewould mean that I paid a single standing charge.

After some note taking, scaling, scribbling andaround 10 productive hours on Pro/Engineer I hada 3D CAD model from which I had created a .stlfile to upload for 'printing'. The .stl file creationcan be done automatically in this software. All Ido is to ensure that the file has the maximumnumber of triangulated points possible to achievea high quality finished part. (This could be likenedto having a high megapixel count in a photograph.)

At this point I wish to apologise for glossing overthe creation of the 3D CAD and .stl file but I don'tthink that it is within the scope of the article. There

are a huge number of 3D CAD programs availableall with their own quirks, limitations, andparadigms and I am only accustomed with one ofthem. Fortunately my employer pays the annualmaintenance fee for the software. It wouldotherwise be well beyond my reach. Many of theprograms are well supported on the internet bytutorial sites and community forums.

Taking Delivery

A couple of weeks later the parcel was collectedfrom the sorting office and the box opened withhesitant excitement.

It still remained to be seen whether the modelwould be any good and fortunately they were.Working within the design rules on the serviceprovider’s website alongside a little practicalexperience gleaned from some helpful people onthe aforementioned forum had produced asatisfactory result.

Generally speaking I built the body up inmultiples of 0.125mm to be consistent with anyetched rolling stock built up from 0.010" layers,this being the same thickness as half etching.

The thickness of the underlying structure is anominal 2mm. This produced a sturdy finisheditem without containing unnecessary material.Plank lines of 0.1mm wide by 0.2mm deep werenicely visible and compared well with mouldeditems of rolling stock. The rivets at 0.15mm

Above - The two model vans produced using the techniques described here.


diameter by 0.125 deep form to give a little lumpif you look for them, not unlike the detail on theresin bodied Minks available from shop 2. Thequality of the overall surface, whilst acceptablefrom anything other than very close up, is not asgood as these very nice resin body kits. Ribs werekept to 0.2mm thick. I did include some 0.3mmholes for adding the handrails, but these havedisappeared somewhere in the process. It drillsquite easily - comparable to soft plastic. I made thelouvres 0.2mm thick with a depth equal to the wallthickness with 0.2mm spacings.

There was some excess powder to clear away andon one of the models these louvres did not survivemy cleaning process involving a scratch brush. Infuture I would produce louvres with a series ofribs protruding from a recessed surface. Thiswould make the model more easily converted to amaster for resin casting. However the latter wouldrequire some further cleaning up of any flatsurfaces to achieve the best results. The process isnot quite repeatable and so the parts differ a littlefrom one to the next. This is most noticeablewhere there are some additional lines on one of theends of an otherwise quite good body. There isalso some surface texture owing to the materialand the way it is built up. It is possible to get bettersurface finishes using other providers (atincreased cost) and I have seen some excellentexamples on the aforementioned forum. Theywould be beyond my budget for a one off, butbetter suited to producing a master for resincasting.

Chassis building

The chassis was not included because I reasonedthat a more robust example with greater fidelitycould be constructed with our preferred n/smedium. Likewise the buffers will stand up tobeing used if added separately. It took quite sometime to put the chassis together and I borrowed alot of parts. I made the central footboards on themilling machine, reducing brass angle to asuitable size and assembled them squarely using aspecially created jig for holding everythingtogether. Solebars were added from 0.5x1.5mmn/s strip, with guitar string soldered alongside thebottom edge. The W irons are spares from myown etches, the new range of castings from shop2 providing the springs and axleboxes with brakeparts and door bangers 'borrowed' from a 2-361chassis kit.

Brake handles and hangers are from some DavidEveleigh DC Brake etchings I found in the bitsbox. A brass vacuum cylinder and an offcut of3mm dowel for a gas cylinder and things lookalmost complete. The foot steps at the corners areguitar string with some leftover steps fromBlacksmith clerestory kits. They are in a veryvulnerable position - I hope they last!

You will see from the photographs that somedetails were missing from the body and had to beadded separately from styrene sheet/strip/rod asrequired. This was entirely my fault because Imissed them off the CAD model.

Above - The level of detail incorporated into the underframes by the author is clearly visible here.


I hope I'm not the only one who discussesthings with themselves. These discussionsusually end with me giving myself a reason notto do something, but I had a very productiveone recently.

When I found out that a conversion chassis forthe N gauge Peco Collett Goods was beingdeveloped, I thought what a great new projectthat would be. But then I reminded myself thatI ought to finish that old project before startinga new one. And to be fair, I had to admit that Ihad a point. Particularly as I'd charted myprogress so publicly. So we agreed that I couldbuild a new loco once my 08 looked more likea shunter and less like a pile of bits in a box.

And I'm glad to report that putting those bitstogether wasn't too hard after all, and for thesake of completeness I've written some briefnotes on the final stages.

Adding the transfers

I'd been painting and lettering some wagon kitswhile this project gathered dust, so at least Inow had some ideas about how to approach thisstage.

I started with two coats of Vallejo acrylic mattvarnish - thinned with a little water, appliedwith a flat brush and allowed to dryhorizontally it leaves a reasonable finish forsuch a low-tech method.

I found that Fox transfer numbers F603 and2450 provided everything I intended to use -

diagonal stripes for the ends, vertical stripes forthe grilles, double arrows, numbers andwarning flashes.

For the cab end I cut the wasp-stripes to widthand coated the end with Micro-set beforesliding the stripes into place. You get severaltransfers on the sheet. This was fortunate as thefirst one slid irretrievably out of control. Oncedry I cut out the windows and trimmed the endswith my sharpest scalpel. Huge relief as I sealwith matt varnish.

The front end would be the real challengethough. I couldn't see me doing this in one go

Final Thoughts on the 08Graham Ross (photographs - the author)

Above - Front end with wasp stripes almostcomplete.


so I tackled it in sections, cutting each piece tosize. Again, it didn't work first time but wasworth the persevering.

Coming to the side grilles, I realised that I'dhave to piercethrough thetransfer to showthe holes. I didn'twant to do that forthe yellow sectionsthat were alreadycorrect so I onlyused the blackparts of the stripesand fixed themindividually

(hand painting thestripes was out ofthe question withmy unsteady hand).I used a broach tomake the holes,then fixed thegrilles.

Fixing windows

I found these prettyfiddly. They are cutfrom "Cobex"plastic sheet about

0.5mm wider than the window to fit into therecesses at the back, then secured with tinydribbles of epoxy around the edges.

A few days later I started experimenting withmatte medium, and I think that would havebeen a better way to go.

Fixing body to footplate

First thing to do was add more weight. There'sroom behind the nose, and scraping away someof the excess resin under the roof allowed me toadd some 1mm thick lead offcuts there. I'veused all-purpose adhesive to fix the lead. It

seems to hold well but could be removed ifnecessary. The paper glued to the front weightis to stop any short-circuiting if the weight fallsaway and onto the motor terminals.

The small pieces of brass on each side are notfor weight, they're to stop the short half-axlesfalling out (as happened during testing).

There's also plenty of room in the lower part ofthe cab. I wanted to be able to see what I wasdoing when I fixed the cab to the footplate, so Iadded some weight there later.

Next using epoxy I joined cab to bonnet on aflat surface following which I fixed thisassembly to the footplate while it was securedto the chassis.

I don't think I should have done it that way. Ihaven't liked the look of the cab ever since Ibent it inside out by mistake. Even so, I think Icould have got it more square looking if I'dfixed the cab to the footplate first (per theinstructions).

Above - A rather cruelclose up of the front grilleto illustrate the pointsexplained in the text.

Above - Bearing in mind the magnification ofthis image the glazing has been successfullyachieved.


However, doing it this way produced a notableimprovement in performance; without thebonnet, the motor would rotate a few degreesone way then the other as it changeddirection, and this could cause it to stallmoving into reverse. Now, with the bonnetholding the motor tightly in place, theresult is a well behaving chassis in bothdirections.

Fixing the connecting rods

I shortened the overlong pins with wireclippers, then with a sheet of slitted cardover the rod I fixed the nuts with tiny blobsof superglue gel. I thought that I mighthave to remove the rods sometime in thefuture, and superglue could be dissolvedwithout damaging anything else here.

The nuts are much thicker than theprototype, and it was only after I'd fitted

them all that I realised how clumsy they look.Perhaps I could find something more subtlesometime.

Above - An upturned view of the bonnet shows the extra weight stuck to the upper part of thebody. The paper (stuck in to avoid short circuits) is visible to the right just behind the grille.

Below - The author’s method for uniformly securing the side rod retaining nuts.

Above - This view shows the side rod retaining nutsas referred to in the text.


Final details - handrails

I had to re-drill the holes in the sides whichwere barely visible by now. Only problem I hadwas with one of the long 5-prong rails which Ihad to straighten out after failing to force it in.Once in place I secured them with some mattemedium dropped into the holes with a finepaintbrush. Coming to the cab it's now clearthat I've put the loco numbering too near the

cab (in fact the numbers are too large), and thecab rail covers the nearest number. Rather thango back and reapply the numbering (I doubt Icould do it as neatly again) I put the rail in at anangle.

For the front step rails I used 0.3mm brass, bentto a right-angle, painted and varnished, then cutto correct length and secured with supergluedroplets.

Marker lights

These and the rear bar are fixed with mattemedium. It was starting to look good now butwith my luck there had to be another problem.When I decided to unscrew the chassis to fit thebrakes I found it was harder than I expected sothat waited till a little later. I will be lightlyweathering the locomotive eventually, but nottill the pleasure of the new has worn off.

Above - The side rods referred to in the text as being ‘much thicker’ than the prototype.Below left - A general front end view of the locomotive.

Above - Front steps, fitting of which isdescribed on this page.


Some final thoughts

When I bought this kit it was the mostexpensive modelling purchase I'd made. I sawit as an investment that would help me learnnew skills and show a loco-newbie what'sneeded to "make the wheels go round" in apractical way. I've learnt a huge amount, oftenby making mistakes, and appreciate the helppeople online have offered.

I appreciate the pleasure of buying a "ready-to-run" loco and watching it move along the track.But it's hard to convey how much moresatisfying it is to see something I've builtmyself doing the same. And even though I'mconscious of all the inaccuracies I've introducedalong the way, you really can't see most of themwithout a close look.

Having said that the lack of brakes wasgnawing at me. Fortunately fitting them wasn'ttoo tricky and they help conceal the brightmetal flanges.

I hope to start another loco soon, this time withthe people at Peco having done the hard workon the body, so I can concentrate on makingfewer mistakes with the chassis.

Above - The cab detail showing handrail andmarker lights.

Below - The 08 before brakes were fitted.


Above and below - Two pictures taken of the model on the author’s layout. In the upper picturethe brakes are yet to fit but in the lower view the model is complete.

2mm magazine dec jan 2012 13 mag dec jan 2012...the 2mm magazine dec/jan 2012/13 ... historical...

Documents