|
Talking T Gauge The Original Forum Dedicated to the World's Smallest Model Railroad Scale
|
Important Notice:
We regret to inform you that our free phpBB forum hosting service will be discontinued by the end of June 30, 2024.
If you wish to migrate to our paid hosting service, please contact billing@hostonnet.com.
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
DanMacK
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 Posts: 127 Location: London, Ontario, Canada
|
Posted: Fri Sep 05, 2008 10:49 am Post subject: Thoughts on T Gauge steam |
|
|
Since I first heard about T gauge (and found A.A. Sherwood's models over a decade ago), I've been fascinated by small trains (That's why I got into Z gauge). Sherwood's 4-6-2 was a marvel of engineering, and I always thought if he could do that in the 70's, why can't we do that now?
I've been thinking about how to do a T-gauge steam loco, and I come to 2 feasible options. Powered tender and dummy loco or possibly use the Eishindo drive truck as a pilot or trailing truck and have the drivers idle.
I'm not sure how one would fit a solid frame with a drive gear into only approx 2.5mm, but I'm sure that could also be done. Hardest part would be getting accurate sized drivers, but possibly Z scale could serve a function here. A 72 inch diameter driver is 4mm in T gauge, possibly Marklin or Micro-trains wheels could serve a function here. Micro trains wheels would be blind (no spokes), but could be used for testing (possibly mill out and put etched spokes in the centre?
I'm interested in what everyone's thinking on this.
Regards,
Dan MacKellar |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Skibbe
Joined: 05 Sep 2008 Posts: 11
|
Posted: Fri Sep 05, 2008 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Shicoh Engineering makes smaller motors that are 3.2mm and 2.8mm in diameter... not quite the 2.5mm you're looking for, but may allow hood units. I have no idea if they have enough torque to get you anywhere either... but building your own gearboxes from Mikrotriebe or Didel .2mm modulus gears may be an option there. _________________ Mike Skibbe |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DanMacK
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 Posts: 127 Location: London, Ontario, Canada
|
Posted: Fri Sep 05, 2008 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Totally forgot about Didel, but the current motor should be sufficient. possibly have MU'd locos if the smaller motors aren't up to the task?
I was more worried about the frame and getting it to roll freely. Possibly drive the tender, but you would need at least a 40' tender, pretty rare for smaller locos. Possibly power a car behind as well and use the loco as a dummy for power pickup.
The hardest thing I think would be making the frame if one was to do a powered loco, as the halves would have to be insulated if it was done in brass. Plastic or insulated drivers are also an option and pickup through the pilot and trailing wheels as well as the tender, no need to really worry about wipers on the drivers, just gears.
Loco and tender would pretty much be an integral unit at this scale. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pray59
Joined: 05 Sep 2008 Posts: 88 Location: Fremont, CA
|
Posted: Fri Sep 05, 2008 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have been doing all kinds of experiments, and came to the conclusion that as many cars as possible should be powered. When one stalls, the others push and conductivity is restored. Only the steamer and tender up front do not need to be powered, but everything else should be.
I ran a train with 6 powered cars, and even though they all run at different speeds by themselves, they run at very acceptable slow speeds when there is 6 powered cars running. Might just be enough combined torque to push a malley with magnet wheels.
Yes I think that a free rolling mechanism with magnetic drivers might track best, maybe just adding electrical pickup for the headlight and a firebox flicker that starts at <1 volt. The run several powered cars behind it to push the train. _________________ -Robert Ray |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TBA
Joined: 08 Sep 2008 Posts: 120 Location: Massachusetts
|
Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 5:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
If someone makes micro-sized universal joints, you could put the motor in the tender and a gearbox in the loco chassis. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
shashinka
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 Posts: 24 Location: Maryland
|
Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 9:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
pray59 wrote: | I have been doing all kinds of experiments, and came to the conclusion that as many cars as possible should be powered. When one stalls, the others push and conductivity is restored. Only the steamer and tender up front do not need to be powered, but everything else should be.
I ran a train with 6 powered cars, and even though they all run at different speeds by themselves, they run at very acceptable slow speeds when there is 6 powered cars running. Might just be enough combined torque to push a malley with magnet wheels.
Yes I think that a free rolling mechanism with magnetic drivers might track best, maybe just adding electrical pickup for the headlight and a firebox flicker that starts at <1 volt. The run several powered cars behind it to push the train. |
That actually makes sense. Of course if you have a generic enough car, you could use it in multiple train configurations. Eg, two of a 4 car sleeper set could in theory work by having a different locomotive (EF65, EEF81) and so forth. Makes for a pretty flexible system. _________________ Do not feed the densha. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DanMacK
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 Posts: 127 Location: London, Ontario, Canada
|
Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 10:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
I was thinking along the lines of 50' boxcars and/or baggage cars as pushers. that way you can have either a freight or passenger train and use the same loco. Of course if you have a 4-6-2 and a 2-8-2 say, you can use the loco and tender as pickup as well.
It'll be interesting to see what possibilities there are, I'm looking forward to ordering some soon. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DanMacK
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 Posts: 127 Location: London, Ontario, Canada
|
Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2008 1:18 pm Post subject: More thoughts |
|
|
I've been doing more thinking on this and looking at photos of the mechanism (still waiting to get money to order mine ) Anyway, I've drawn up a T Gauge 4-8-4 based on Canadian National U2 class dimensions and it occurred to me that it would be possible to power the trailing truck.
This would allow the traction with the magnetic wheels and the current chassis could be used as a base. I was thinking brass for the loco frame, and if the centres f the drivers are plastic, then it should be relatively easy to use a block of brass for the driver chassis.
Height over the boiler is 9mm, and from what David S has said, this shouldn't pose a clearance issue. Wrapper would have to be thin, but it is doable. Front could be weighted down with lead shot or even tungsten if one could find it. This coupled with the brass bolster block for the drivers could add sfficient weight (rolling stock would be powered as well of course)
Bigger locos are definitely preferable to smaller ones in T for obvious reasons. Just for fun I scaled down a Challenger and with tender, it was less than 4" long.
Drivers I was thinking could be turned from 5mm steel tubing with styrene tubing for centres and possibly brass for axles. By telescoping these (Steel, styrene tube, brass tube and brass or steel axle), a simple yet effective driver could be constructed rather quickly and inexpensively.
Tender trucks, depending, would have to be either scratchbuilt or kitbashed from existing eishindo trucks. Pickup would be through the pilot wheels on the loco as well as the tender. could also include the drivers in that mix as well.
Rods may have to be ethed from stainless steel.
Once again, these are just thoughts, comments welcomed _________________ Regards,
Dan MacKellar |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TBA
Joined: 08 Sep 2008 Posts: 120 Location: Massachusetts
|
Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2008 5:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I thought this Boston & Albany 4-6-6T might be doable, in simplified form.
http://public.fotki.com/BrianAustin/reference_library/architectural_and/railroad_reference/ba466.html
The drive could fit in the bunker/cab/firebox, but then the motor would have to be moved up into the boiler to clear the drive wheels (which could be non-movable dummies). Here's where a worm-gear drive would have to come into play, as presently the motor is mounted low in the chassis.
The other main issue, which applies to almost all steam locos, is the lead truck, which is of the inside-bearing type. Judging by the photos posted, the T-Gauge cars have fat axles, which complicates matters. I suppose one handy with a lathe and photo-etch could whip up some a new truck in metal. One could overlook the discrepancy and use a stock T-Gauge truck, but then I think the cylinders would be in the way. Maybe mount fake cylinders on the truck sideframes? It would look funny on curves.
Then there's the matter of making and mounting drive rods...
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
TBA
Joined: 08 Sep 2008 Posts: 120 Location: Massachusetts
|
Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2008 7:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I neglected to mention the loco I posted above ran on a commuter branch (in and out of Boston, MA), so you could just disguise the T-Gauge power cars as coaches instead of worrying about fitting the motor in the loco. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DanMacK
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 Posts: 127 Location: London, Ontario, Canada
|
Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Commuter locos would be perfect.
Below is a possible proposed mechanism for a 4-8-4. The tender trucks are actually commonwealth, but given the size, a 3 axle sideframe could be used for the eishindo trucks and stand up under all but close scrutiny.
_________________ Regards,
Dan MacKellar |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Will J
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 Posts: 2 Location: Kidderminster UK
|
Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2008 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
~post moved to narrow gauge section!~ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|