Date   

Re: Cricut Maker Questions

Alan
 

Glad you made the move to try one out. How many passes did you make on the material?

Alan

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Dusty
Sent: Wednesday, December 9, 2020 11:35 AM
To: HOn3@groups.io
Subject: Re: [HOn3] Cricut Maker Questions

 

I finally got into the Cricut Modelers Facebook Group. My first project is a small building using Evergreen .040 x .030 Corrugated for roof and siding. I couldn't cut clean thru. A couple of strokes with  #11 scalpel lubed with Novus plastic polish freed the door and window openings very easily. I hate laying out the cuts on the material so Design Space was very much a relief from the dreaded layout task. I had no Design Space experience so it took a few Google searches and some trial and experience acquisition. A few test trials in #80 card stock and I was on my way.

Dusty Burman 

 


Re: Cricut Maker Questions

Dusty
 

I finally got into the Cricut Modelers Facebook Group. My first project is a small building using Evergreen .040 x .030 Corrugated for roof and siding. I couldn't cut clean thru. A couple of strokes with  #11 scalpel lubed with Novus plastic polish freed the door and window openings very easily. I hate laying out the cuts on the material so Design Space was very much a relief from the dreaded layout task. I had no Design Space experience so it took a few Google searches and some trial and experience acquisition. A few test trials in #80 card stock and I was on my way.

Dusty Burman 


Re: Ikea and model railroading....

tonyk537
 

Nice!  Was digging through Dick's Rio Grand Ultimate Pictorial vol 1 & 2 the last few nights while working out of town.  Sounds like my railroad.  Durango and the Chili line on one end and Como on the other.  Gotta do what you like and I like all the Colorado narrow gauges.


Re: 2020 Annual

Rick Rhode <rvrhode@...>
 

Haven't seen mine yet here in Bunn, NC, although I got a notice that it is on its way.  Also, a shout out to Bill Miller and any other alum of Doug's Hobby Shop!
                                     Rick Rhode

On Wednesday, December 9, 2020, 10:44:49 AM EST, Ted Wilton <twilton@...> wrote:


Mine arrived in the Reno, Nevada area on December 8, and it was very well packaged! Nice job on the content Chris! Some excellent photography of outstanding modeling of mine buildings!

Ted Wilton
Spanish Springs, Nevada


Re: 2020 Annual

Ted Wilton
 

Mine arrived in the Reno, Nevada area on December 8, and it was very well packaged! Nice job on the content Chris! Some excellent photography of outstanding modeling of mine buildings!

Ted Wilton
Spanish Springs, Nevada


Re: 2020 Annual

Bill Miller
 

Still waiting on mine in Southern Maryland

 Bill Miller


-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Bowie <buybruce@...>
To: HOn3@groups.io
Sent: Wed, Dec 9, 2020 9:39 am
Subject: Re: [HOn3] 2020 Annual

Got mine on Monday.  Northern Ohio.

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020, 9:31 AM Mark Lewis <narrowrails12@...> wrote:
Brian,

Has not been delivered yet, here in the Piedmont area of NC.
Waiting...

Mark Lewis 
Narrow gauge modeling in N.C.

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020, 9:25 AM Brian Kopp <kc5lpa1@...> wrote:
Over on the FansofHOn3annual group.io list Chris Lane indicated the new HOn3 Annual is in the mail. Anybody seen it yet? (I am standing by my mailbox in anticipation =)  )
--
Brian Kopp
Jacksonville, FL


Re: 2020 Annual

Bruce Bowie
 

Got mine on Monday.  Northern Ohio.


On Wed, Dec 9, 2020, 9:31 AM Mark Lewis <narrowrails12@...> wrote:
Brian,

Has not been delivered yet, here in the Piedmont area of NC.
Waiting...

Mark Lewis 
Narrow gauge modeling in N.C.

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020, 9:25 AM Brian Kopp <kc5lpa1@...> wrote:
Over on the FansofHOn3annual group.io list Chris Lane indicated the new HOn3 Annual is in the mail. Anybody seen it yet? (I am standing by my mailbox in anticipation =)  )
--
Brian Kopp
Jacksonville, FL


Re: 2020 Annual

Mark Lewis
 

Brian,

Has not been delivered yet, here in the Piedmont area of NC.
Waiting...

Mark Lewis 
Narrow gauge modeling in N.C.

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020, 9:25 AM Brian Kopp <kc5lpa1@...> wrote:
Over on the FansofHOn3annual group.io list Chris Lane indicated the new HOn3 Annual is in the mail. Anybody seen it yet? (I am standing by my mailbox in anticipation =)  )
--
Brian Kopp
Jacksonville, FL


2020 Annual

Brian Kopp
 

Over on the FansofHOn3annual group.io list Chris Lane indicated the new HOn3 Annual is in the mail. Anybody seen it yet? (I am standing by my mailbox in anticipation =)  )
--
Brian Kopp
Jacksonville, FL


Re: Cricut Maker Questions

Alan
 

Good luck! I have been trying to join and or contact the Facebook Modeling with the Cricut Explorer for over a year now. During that year I learned my way around the Cricut Maker and the Design Space App. Sometimes you just don’t need a group!

 

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Michael Dunn
Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2020 4:51 PM
To: HOn3@groups.io
Subject: Re: [HOn3] Cricut Maker Questions

 

Ian, appreciate your reaching out off list as well.

 

Membership is still pending and the group admin has ignored two DM's.

 

Either I have the wrong super secret squirrel code, I've been deemed unworthy or Facebook has figured out I don't use their services enough to warrant "inclusion". Likely a combination of all three! LOL

 

Mike

 

> On Nov 30, 2020, at 8:59 AM, Michael Dunn <mdunn@...> wrote:

>

> Thanks Mark. Thanks Jim. Let me reach out to the page's admin and see what's going on.

>

> Mike

 

 

 

 

 

 


Re: Cricut Maker Questions

Michael Dunn
 

Ian, appreciate your reaching out off list as well.

Membership is still pending and the group admin has ignored two DM's.

Either I have the wrong super secret squirrel code, I've been deemed unworthy or Facebook has figured out I don't use their services enough to warrant "inclusion". Likely a combination of all three! LOL

Mike

On Nov 30, 2020, at 8:59 AM, Michael Dunn <mdunn@rarwy.com> wrote:

Thanks Mark. Thanks Jim. Let me reach out to the page's admin and see what's going on.

Mike


Re: One More LO&S

John Stutz
 

John
My recollection matches Dave's.  And his comments are the primary reason why I sold my Hassenger, since the problems are worse with the four truck engine. 

The powered truck needs to pivot to follow curves, but also needs to resist the vertical torque.  Short of duplicating Nakamura's complete rearrangement of drive, one solution is to move the upper right angle gearbox, the one on the locomotive frame, onto the truck.  This puts the input torque on the longitudinal axis where it can be restrained by the bolsters.  Another would be to substitute a NWSL worm drive gearbox on the truck axle, with a torque arm to the truck's bolster.  Space would again be a problem, and the upstream drive's speed reduction would need to be reworked.  Probably the the best would be to follow Nakamurra's lead: rotate the axle drive to horizontal and add a transfer gear case or belt drive in the firebox, so lowering the drive.  A Nigel Lawton / Hollywood Foundry style square belt drive would be quietest, but requires multiple belts in this high torque application.  

Note that I haven't tried any of these, which are just possibilities coming up as I write.  I will be very interested to see what the Shay Fixer came up with.

Dave's earlier comment about the differences between PFM's Shay drives and Westside's are quite relevant.  PFM's approach, a worm driving a small gear on the line shaft, requires a bit of a-prototypical concealment, but ensures that all of the line-shaft/axle gear pairs are loaded to about the same degree.  Westside's approach eliminates the concealment problem.  But the 3/4 to 7/8 of the power that goes to the line-shaft, now goes through the driven axle's gears, with consequent wear and potential for early failure.  So watch the lubrication here, on Westside's or any similar Shay drive.

John Stutz

On December 8, 2020 7:35 AM climax@... wrote:

John
I think it involved soldering a wire on the truck that went into a soldered on loop on the locomotive bottom.  This prevented the truck from twisting when power was applied due to torque.  The only problem was that the truck would not turn much either thus limiting the amount of turn the loco could negotiate.
dave
-----Original Message-----
From: John Cytron
Sent: Dec 8, 2020 10:26 AM
To: "hon3@groups.io"
Subject: Re: [HOn3] One More LO&S

    OK, thanks John Stutz and Dale Buxton on the engineering/torque aspects of the West Side Shay drives. It was very informative. I have both a Westside #8 narrow gauge and a West Side Shay two truck standard gauge (I cannot remember if it was a 37 or 42 ton Shay).
    I recall in some old messages that there was a way to fix the drive truck to keep the Shay on the rails by soldering in some braces. I have been having some computer problems and c annot find those messages.
    Could someone repeat the fix?  Thanks in advance.

John
_._,_.


Re: One More LO&S

Sean
 

The Shayfixer had a video on either YouTube or his own site showing how he corrected it. But it’s been sometime since I watched it, I inquired once for my 4 truck but haven’t done more than that.
Sean


On Dec 8, 2020, at 07:26, John Cytron <rgsjohnny@...> wrote:


    OK, thanks John Stutz and Dale Buxton on the engineering/torque aspects of the West Side Shay drives. It was very informative. I have both a Westside #8 narrow gauge and a West Side Shay two truck standard gauge (I cannot remember if it was a 37 or 42 ton Shay).
    I recall in some old messages that there was a way to fix the drive truck to keep the Shay on the rails by soldering in some braces. I have been having some computer problems and cannot find those messages.
    Could someone repeat the fix?  Thanks in advance.

John


Re: One More LO&S

Climax@...
 

John
I think it involved soldering a wire on the truck that went into a soldered on loop on the locomotive bottom.  This prevented the truck from twisting when power was applied due to torque.  The only problem was that the truck would not turn much either thus limiting the amount of turn the loco could negotiate.
dave

-----Original Message-----
From: John Cytron
Sent: Dec 8, 2020 10:26 AM
To: "hon3@groups.io"
Subject: Re: [HOn3] One More LO&S

    OK, thanks John Stutz and Dale Buxton on the engineering/torque aspects of the West Side Shay drives. It was very informative. I have both a Westside #8 narrow gauge and a West Side Shay two truck standard gauge (I cannot remember if it was a 37 or 42 ton Shay).
    I recall in some old messages that there was a way to fix the drive truck to keep the Shay on the rails by soldering in some braces. I have been having some computer problems and cannot find those messages.
    Could someone repeat the fix?  Thanks in advance.

John


Re: One More LO&S

John Cytron
 

    OK, thanks John Stutz and Dale Buxton on the engineering/torque aspects of the West Side Shay drives. It was very informative. I have both a Westside #8 narrow gauge and a West Side Shay two truck standard gauge (I cannot remember if it was a 37 or 42 ton Shay).
    I recall in some old messages that there was a way to fix the drive truck to keep the Shay on the rails by soldering in some braces. I have been having some computer problems and cannot find those messages.
    Could someone repeat the fix?  Thanks in advance.

John


Re: One More LO&S

Climax@...
 

Seems the only really successful drive system is to use the original system that shay did and United/PFM did by using the side drive on the trucks them selves.  Never had a problem with any of those drive systems.  Why reinvent the wheel?
Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: Dale Buxton
Sent: Dec 7, 2020 9:38 PM
To: HOn3@groups.io
Subject: Re: [HOn3] One More LO&S

I see your points. When Nakamura went with that vertical input shaft to the powered axle, they created secondary path for the torque resistance to travel through. It was also at a right angle to the intended direction of travel. So without some sort of a torque arm to limit torque transfer to the the power truck, the whole truck twisted.
 
But, I can personally attest to the fact that adding a torque arm to the power truck of the No. 8 model also prevented the model from negotiating the tighter radius curve that Shays were famous for being able to do. It was very disappointing and the reason why I got rid of the model.

But when the No. 12 came out a few years later. The simple act of rotating the input shaft to the power truck just 90 degrees eliminated the torque problem. Because 1. This shaft also acted as its own torque arm. And 2. Now the torque was pushing to the right or left sides of the power trucks bolster pin, instead of at the center of the the trucks intended rotation path. 

Having built a number of 1:1 helical drive systems, there are some torque considerations to take in that traditional worm and worm gear drives don’t need to worry about as much. Mostly because of the drive line and gearbox setups.

I have all the old Finelines. I’ll see if I can find what you are talking about.

Dale Buxton

On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 14:23 John Stutz <john.stutz@...> wrote:
Dale

It is not gears that were at fault.  Helical gears would have worked just as well in Grandt's drive, but he could mold and cast bevels, so used those.   And bevel gears would have had the same problem as helical gears, if used in Westside's arrangement of the vertical shaft drive.

When a motor is powered up, and exerts a torque on its shaft, there is an opposite torque on the motor housing.  For example: take any free motor, power it up, and try to hold the shaft.  The motor housing will try to twist the opposite direction of the shaft.  This is the torque reaction, and if there is nothing to restrain it, the motor spins while you hold the shaft. 

Both torques must be carried through the drive train, and balanced against each other throughout.  Otherwise some part of the drive train will be free to respond to the reaction, and twists out of position.

For us, the canonical example is the necessity of restraining the gearbox of a model steam locomotive.  If the gearbox is free to rotate on the driver axle, it will.  With the old rubber tube shaft couplings, the rubber carried the torque reaction back to the motor shaft, and through its bearings to the motor frame.  With a dog-bone or sliding shaft coupling, a torque arm or other arrangement is required to keep the gearbox aligned.  On the longitudinal axis, a gearbox is restrained by its bearings on the axle.  If the bearings are loose, the box will rock laterally when power is reversed.

The torque reaction path can be much less obvious than the drive path, but is no less necessary.  With a conventional diesel model, the torque reaction between motor and trucks is restrained at the bolsters or equivalent.  Put most model diesels between two stops and switch power full on - the body will lean slightly to one side, until the bolsters resist the reaction.  Switch power to the opposite polarity, and the body leans the other way.  Within each truck, the spread between leading and trailing axles provides more than enough restraint to keep the trucks from rocking like free gearboxes.

In the Westside Shays the second truck doubles as a gearbox, transferring motor torque from the body to the driven axle, and via the bevel gears to the Shay's flexible drive shaft and other axles. Working backwards, the torque reaction from the flexible drive shaft is resisted by the body and truck bolsters, which are held together by a spring.  The torque reaction from the driven axle is constrained by weight transfer between the truck's two axles.  The torque reaction from the truck's drive shaft depends on if that shaft is vertical or horizontal.  If horizontal, the bolsters provide the reaction.  If the shaft is vertical, there are only the wheel flanges to keep the truck/gearbox from spinning.  So the truck twists off in one direction when going forward, and the other when going back. 

When Westside's builder rotated the truck's driving shaft from vertical to horizontal, they eliminated the vertical torque, its reaction and the derailment problem.  

The Kemtron 37-B On3 Shay came out in the early 1960s, and used a vertical truck drive shaft like the Westside Shays.  But the axle drive was through a 13:1 worm, reducing vertical torque by a factor of 13, relative to the Westside 1:1 drive.  This may have sufficed to keep the truck from spinning off the track.  See the attachments for details.  Cliff Grandt's pilot model used a different arrangement, but not all details were shown in the Kemtron documentation.  Cliff's revised drive came out in the late 1960s, using a vertical Fulhaber motor and gearhead mounted rigidly on the truck and extending into the tank.  The rigid mount solved the torque problem, but 50+ years on, I don't recall any more details.  Perhaps someone who still has a set of Finelines can locate an advertisement.  PSC roughly copied Cliff's arrangement in their 21-A T-boiler shays of 1977, where the motor mount is above the deck and bolted to the truck's bolster, doubling as the truck's pivot. 

John Stutz
On December 7, 2020 5:30 AM Dale Buxton <dbtuathaddana@...> wrote:


The problem with the early Westside Shays were the twin mated 1:1 helical gears on the power truck. With the one on the vertical plane right next to the pivot point of the trucks bolster. It exerted left or right torque on the helical gear on drive axle depending on the direction of travel. This twisting moment was strong enough to in turn twist the whole power truck in its pivot point. It was worse going forward than back. There were some vertical pins in power truck bolster of the Westside No. 8 to limit the twisting movement of the power truck. But it didn’t work all that well

If Nakamura had used 1:1 bevel gears like Grandt did on the drive axle of his Shay and Climax drives instead of helicals, this truck twisting problem would have been averted in the beginning.

Dale Buxton 

On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 12:24 John Stutz < john.stutz@...> wrote:
David

The LO&S vertical drive shaft, between body and truck, is rare because it is mechanically unsound: There is nothing between body and truck to sustain the drive's torque reaction, so the truck's wheels' flanges must carry that load.  The builders got away with it in the LO&S car because its tractive force is very light.  But pulling a trailer might have been chancy, regarding derailment of the power truck. 

Logging modelers may remember that some of Westside Models'  HO Shays used a mechanically similar vertical drive shaft between the body and the powered truck.  Under high tractive load that truck tends to twist itself off of the rails.  The bigger the Shay, the worse the problem.  I once owned one of Dick's HOn3 "Hassenger" Shays, nominally a 90-D but actually a C&O or N&W 150-D on NG trucks.  It came with an aftermarket brace for the powered truck, to restrain that truck's pivoting.  Later Westside Shays used a redesigned drive, with a longitudinal shaft between body and truck, where the torque reaction is easily restrained by the bolsters.

American Hoist & Derrick's ditchers used a vertical shaft through the rotating platform's pivot to drive the trucks.  But there is a gearbox under the car body, and final drive from the body to the trucks is via either longitudinal shafts or flexible chains.  The operator also had to restrain the platform's rotation when powering the trucks.

Kemtron or Grandt once offered (ca 1970?) an On3 Shay drive with a vertical motor.  That design worked because the motor was mounted on the truck, with a rigid path to carry torque reaction back to the motor shell. 

John Stutz
On December 4, 2020 8:07 PM climax@... wrote:

George:    ....  The drive system on the LO&S intrigues me though.  Where can I get more information on it.  Do you have drawings or what?  I am working on full filling the last Certificate of Achievement of the 11 in the NMRA, Motive Power.  I have the other 10 and actually received the MMR status back in 1993, #200.  I have one rail bus I built and this will be #2 of the three required.  ....

David Barron
Winter Graden, FL




Re: Ikea and model railroading....

Don Peterson
 

Tony,
Hah! That's just one of 4 bookcases filled w/ RR books. Rest assured there are enough RGS and C&S/South Park books  to go around. The Layout is primarily the Rio Grandes Silverrton Branch.That is the SIlverton yard above my workbench. But the layout also has a lot of Silver ton Northern and South Park scenes just to add to the confusion.

Don

On Tuesday, December 8, 2020, 12:19:21 AM MST, tonyk537 via groups.io <tonyk375@...> wrote:


Don, you must be a Rio Grande guy!  Don't see any of the Dorman RGS books in that book case. :)


Re: Ikea and model railroading....

tonyk537
 

Don, you must be a Rio Grande guy!  Don't see any of the Dorman RGS books in that book case. :)


Re: One More LO&S

Dale Buxton
 

I see your points. When Nakamura went with that vertical input shaft to the powered axle, they created secondary path for the torque resistance to travel through. It was also at a right angle to the intended direction of travel. So without some sort of a torque arm to limit torque transfer to the the power truck, the whole truck twisted.
 
But, I can personally attest to the fact that adding a torque arm to the power truck of the No. 8 model also prevented the model from negotiating the tighter radius curve that Shays were famous for being able to do. It was very disappointing and the reason why I got rid of the model.

But when the No. 12 came out a few years later. The simple act of rotating the input shaft to the power truck just 90 degrees eliminated the torque problem. Because 1. This shaft also acted as its own torque arm. And 2. Now the torque was pushing to the right or left sides of the power trucks bolster pin, instead of at the center of the the trucks intended rotation path. 

Having built a number of 1:1 helical drive systems, there are some torque considerations to take in that traditional worm and worm gear drives don’t need to worry about as much. Mostly because of the drive line and gearbox setups.

I have all the old Finelines. I’ll see if I can find what you are talking about.

Dale Buxton

On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 14:23 John Stutz <john.stutz@...> wrote:
Dale

It is not gears that were at fault.  Helical gears would have worked just as well in Grandt's drive, but he could mold and cast bevels, so used those.   And bevel gears would have had the same problem as helical gears, if used in Westside's arrangement of the vertical shaft drive.

When a motor is powered up, and exerts a torque on its shaft, there is an opposite torque on the motor housing.  For example: take any free motor, power it up, and try to hold the shaft.  The motor housing will try to twist the opposite direction of the shaft.  This is the torque reaction, and if there is nothing to restrain it, the motor spins while you hold the shaft. 

Both torques must be carried through the drive train, and balanced against each other throughout.  Otherwise some part of the drive train will be free to respond to the reaction, and twists out of position.

For us, the canonical example is the necessity of restraining the gearbox of a model steam locomotive.  If the gearbox is free to rotate on the driver axle, it will.  With the old rubber tube shaft couplings, the rubber carried the torque reaction back to the motor shaft, and through its bearings to the motor frame.  With a dog-bone or sliding shaft coupling, a torque arm or other arrangement is required to keep the gearbox aligned.  On the longitudinal axis, a gearbox is restrained by its bearings on the axle.  If the bearings are loose, the box will rock laterally when power is reversed.

The torque reaction path can be much less obvious than the drive path, but is no less necessary.  With a conventional diesel model, the torque reaction between motor and trucks is restrained at the bolsters or equivalent.  Put most model diesels between two stops and switch power full on - the body will lean slightly to one side, until the bolsters resist the reaction.  Switch power to the opposite polarity, and the body leans the other way.  Within each truck, the spread between leading and trailing axles provides more than enough restraint to keep the trucks from rocking like free gearboxes.

In the Westside Shays the second truck doubles as a gearbox, transferring motor torque from the body to the driven axle, and via the bevel gears to the Shay's flexible drive shaft and other axles. Working backwards, the torque reaction from the flexible drive shaft is resisted by the body and truck bolsters, which are held together by a spring.  The torque reaction from the driven axle is constrained by weight transfer between the truck's two axles.  The torque reaction from the truck's drive shaft depends on if that shaft is vertical or horizontal.  If horizontal, the bolsters provide the reaction.  If the shaft is vertical, there are only the wheel flanges to keep the truck/gearbox from spinning.  So the truck twists off in one direction when going forward, and the other when going back. 

When Westside's builder rotated the truck's driving shaft from vertical to horizontal, they eliminated the vertical torque, its reaction and the derailment problem.  

The Kemtron 37-B On3 Shay came out in the early 1960s, and used a vertical truck drive shaft like the Westside Shays.  But the axle drive was through a 13:1 worm, reducing vertical torque by a factor of 13, relative to the Westside 1:1 drive.  This may have sufficed to keep the truck from spinning off the track.  See the attachments for details.  Cliff Grandt's pilot model used a different arrangement, but not all details were shown in the Kemtron documentation.  Cliff's revised drive came out in the late 1960s, using a vertical Fulhaber motor and gearhead mounted rigidly on the truck and extending into the tank.  The rigid mount solved the torque problem, but 50+ years on, I don't recall any more details.  Perhaps someone who still has a set of Finelines can locate an advertisement.  PSC roughly copied Cliff's arrangement in their 21-A T-boiler shays of 1977, where the motor mount is above the deck and bolted to the truck's bolster, doubling as the truck's pivot. 

John Stutz
On December 7, 2020 5:30 AM Dale Buxton <dbtuathaddana@...> wrote:


The problem with the early Westside Shays were the twin mated 1:1 helical gears on the power truck. With the one on the vertical plane right next to the pivot point of the trucks bolster. It exerted left or right torque on the helical gear on drive axle depending on the direction of travel. This twisting moment was strong enough to in turn twist the whole power truck in its pivot point. It was worse going forward than back. There were some vertical pins in power truck bolster of the Westside No. 8 to limit the twisting movement of the power truck. But it didn’t work all that well

If Nakamura had used 1:1 bevel gears like Grandt did on the drive axle of his Shay and Climax drives instead of helicals, this truck twisting problem would have been averted in the beginning.

Dale Buxton 

On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 12:24 John Stutz < john.stutz@...> wrote:
David

The LO&S vertical drive shaft, between body and truck, is rare because it is mechanically unsound: There is nothing between body and truck to sustain the drive's torque reaction, so the truck's wheels' flanges must carry that load.  The builders got away with it in the LO&S car because its tractive force is very light.  But pulling a trailer might have been chancy, regarding derailment of the power truck. 

Logging modelers may remember that some of Westside Models'  HO Shays used a mechanically similar vertical drive shaft between the body and the powered truck.  Under high tractive load that truck tends to twist itself off of the rails.  The bigger the Shay, the worse the problem.  I once owned one of Dick's HOn3 "Hassenger" Shays, nominally a 90-D but actually a C&O or N&W 150-D on NG trucks.  It came with an aftermarket brace for the powered truck, to restrain that truck's pivoting.  Later Westside Shays used a redesigned drive, with a longitudinal shaft between body and truck, where the torque reaction is easily restrained by the bolsters.

American Hoist & Derrick's ditchers used a vertical shaft through the rotating platform's pivot to drive the trucks.  But there is a gearbox under the car body, and final drive from the body to the trucks is via either longitudinal shafts or flexible chains.  The operator also had to restrain the platform's rotation when powering the trucks.

Kemtron or Grandt once offered (ca 1970?) an On3 Shay drive with a vertical motor.  That design worked because the motor was mounted on the truck, with a rigid path to carry torque reaction back to the motor shell. 

John Stutz
On December 4, 2020 8:07 PM climax@... wrote:

George:    ....  The drive system on the LO&S intrigues me though.  Where can I get more information on it.  Do you have drawings or what?  I am working on full filling the last Certificate of Achievement of the 11 in the NMRA, Motive Power.  I have the other 10 and actually received the MMR status back in 1993, #200.  I have one rail bus I built and this will be #2 of the three required.  ....

David Barron
Winter Graden, FL




Re: One More LO&S

John Stutz
 

Dale

It is not gears that were at fault.  Helical gears would have worked just as well in Grandt's drive, but he could mold and cast bevels, so used those.   And bevel gears would have had the same problem as helical gears, if used in Westside's arrangement of the vertical shaft drive.

When a motor is powered up, and exerts a torque on its shaft, there is an opposite torque on the motor housing.  For example: take any free motor, power it up, and try to hold the shaft.  The motor housing will try to twist the opposite direction of the shaft.  This is the torque reaction, and if there is nothing to restrain it, the motor spins while you hold the shaft. 

Both torques must be carried through the drive train, and balanced against each other throughout.  Otherwise some part of the drive train will be free to respond to the reaction, and twists out of position.

For us, the canonical example is the necessity of restraining the gearbox of a model steam locomotive.  If the gearbox is free to rotate on the driver axle, it will.  With the old rubber tube shaft couplings, the rubber carried the torque reaction back to the motor shaft, and through its bearings to the motor frame.  With a dog-bone or sliding shaft coupling, a torque arm or other arrangement is required to keep the gearbox aligned.  On the longitudinal axis, a gearbox is restrained by its bearings on the axle.  If the bearings are loose, the box will rock laterally when power is reversed.

The torque reaction path can be much less obvious than the drive path, but is no less necessary.  With a conventional diesel model, the torque reaction between motor and trucks is restrained at the bolsters or equivalent.  Put most model diesels between two stops and switch power full on - the body will lean slightly to one side, until the bolsters resist the reaction.  Switch power to the opposite polarity, and the body leans the other way.  Within each truck, the spread between leading and trailing axles provides more than enough restraint to keep the trucks from rocking like free gearboxes.

In the Westside Shays the second truck doubles as a gearbox, transferring motor torque from the body to the driven axle, and via the bevel gears to the Shay's flexible drive shaft and other axles. Working backwards, the torque reaction from the flexible drive shaft is resisted by the body and truck bolsters, which are held together by a spring.  The torque reaction from the driven axle is constrained by weight transfer between the truck's two axles.  The torque reaction from the truck's drive shaft depends on if that shaft is vertical or horizontal.  If horizontal, the bolsters provide the reaction.  If the shaft is vertical, there are only the wheel flanges to keep the truck/gearbox from spinning.  So the truck twists off in one direction when going forward, and the other when going back. 

When Westside's builder rotated the truck's driving shaft from vertical to horizontal, they eliminated the vertical torque, its reaction and the derailment problem.  

The Kemtron 37-B On3 Shay came out in the early 1960s, and used a vertical truck drive shaft like the Westside Shays.  But the axle drive was through a 13:1 worm, reducing vertical torque by a factor of 13, relative to the Westside 1:1 drive.  This may have sufficed to keep the truck from spinning off the track.  See the attachments for details.  Cliff Grandt's pilot model used a different arrangement, but not all details were shown in the Kemtron documentation.  Cliff's revised drive came out in the late 1960s, using a vertical Fulhaber motor and gearhead mounted rigidly on the truck and extending into the tank.  The rigid mount solved the torque problem, but 50+ years on, I don't recall any more details.  Perhaps someone who still has a set of Finelines can locate an advertisement.  PSC roughly copied Cliff's arrangement in their 21-A T-boiler shays of 1977, where the motor mount is above the deck and bolted to the truck's bolster, doubling as the truck's pivot. 

John Stutz

On December 7, 2020 5:30 AM Dale Buxton <dbtuathaddana@...> wrote:


The problem with the early Westside Shays were the twin mated 1:1 helical gears on the power truck. With the one on the vertical plane right next to the pivot point of the trucks bolster. It exerted left or right torque on the helical gear on drive axle depending on the direction of travel. This twisting moment was strong enough to in turn twist the whole power truck in its pivot point. It was worse going forward than back. There were some vertical pins in power truck bolster of the Westside No. 8 to limit the twisting movement of the power truck. But it didn’t work all that well

If Nakamura had used 1:1 bevel gears like Grandt did on the drive axle of his Shay and Climax drives instead of helicals, this truck twisting problem would have been averted in the beginning.

Dale Buxton 

On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 12:24 John Stutz < john.stutz@...> wrote:
David

The LO&S vertical drive shaft, between body and truck, is rare because it is mechanically unsound: There is nothing between body and truck to sustain the drive's torque reaction, so the truck's wheels' flanges must carry that load.  The builders got away with it in the LO&S car because its tractive force is very light.  But pulling a trailer might have been chancy, regarding derailment of the power truck. 

Logging modelers may remember that some of Westside Models'  HO Shays used a mechanically similar vertical drive shaft between the body and the powered truck.  Under high tractive load that truck tends to twist itself off of the rails.  The bigger the Shay, the worse the problem.  I once owned one of Dick's HOn3 "Hassenger" Shays, nominally a 90-D but actually a C&O or N&W 150-D on NG trucks.  It came with an aftermarket brace for the powered truck, to restrain that truck's pivoting.  Later Westside Shays used a redesigned drive, with a longitudinal shaft between body and truck, where the torque reaction is easily restrained by the bolsters.

American Hoist & Derrick's ditchers used a vertical shaft through the rotating platform's pivot to drive the trucks.  But there is a gearbox under the car body, and final drive from the body to the trucks is via either longitudinal shafts or flexible chains.  The operator also had to restrain the platform's rotation when powering the trucks.

Kemtron or Grandt once offered (ca 1970?) an On3 Shay drive with a vertical motor.  That design worked because the motor was mounted on the truck, with a rigid path to carry torque reaction back to the motor shell. 

John Stutz
On December 4, 2020 8:07 PM climax@... wrote:

George:    ....  The drive system on the LO&S intrigues me though.  Where can I get more information on it.  Do you have drawings or what?  I am working on full filling the last Certificate of Achievement of the 11 in the NMRA, Motive Power.  I have the other 10 and actually received the MMR status back in 1993, #200.  I have one rail bus I built and this will be #2 of the three required.  ....

David Barron
Winter Graden, FL



2581 - 2600 of 9678