Date   
Re: Static Grass

Mike Conder
 

Mich appreciated, nice job. 

Mike Conder

On Sun, Apr 5, 2020, 4:14 PM Steven Haworth <haworth7@...> wrote:
Nice job, and a great write-up too!  Looks great!

- Steve Haworth
RGS history - http://www.rgsrr.info/
Blog - http://rgsrr.blogspot.com/               FB - https://www.facebook.com/stevesrgs/


On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 4:42 PM Jeff Young <jeff@...> wrote:
Nice work!



FS: B.T.S. McCabe Lumber Co. MoW Speeder

Joseph Melhorn
 

Thinning the herd! B.T.S. #28281-020 - McCabe Lumber Co. MoW Speeder (Hon3) New, unbuilt kit. From the B.T.S. website: The body kit consists of laser-cut basswood, plywood, cardstock, and brass & white metal detail castings. The standard features of B.T.S. kits are there... positionable window sashes, slot and tab construction, brass door knobs, unique character, and well-engineered construction providing fast and easy assembly. And the seats, load, and driver are included! The fully-assembled mechanism is American Made, tested, and ready to run right out of the box. It features a sheet brass frame, lost-wax end beams and steps, can-type motor, and NWSL wheelsets.

Opened only to look at kit. This kit is out of production. Asking $135.00. Shipping from 85629 is extra. PayPal F&F, check or M.O. accepted.  Reply off-list to: toyman@...

Joe Melhorn

Sahuarita, AZ

 

Re: Static Grass

Steven Haworth
 

Nice job, and a great write-up too!  Looks great!

- Steve Haworth
RGS history - http://www.rgsrr.info/
Blog - http://rgsrr.blogspot.com/               FB - https://www.facebook.com/stevesrgs/


On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 4:42 PM Jeff Young <jeff@...> wrote:
Nice work!



Re: Static Grass

Jeff Young
 

Nice work!

Re: Static Grass

Mark Rosche
 

👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

Regards,

Mark

Don‘t take life too seriously...no one gets out alive anyway....

On 5. Apr 2020, at 23:17, Craig Linn <drgw346@...> wrote:



Hey Everyone. 


Like everyone I’m sure...I’ve been spending some time on the layout, working a little scenery. 

I’ve done a little write up on the experience. 

https://www.riogranderr.com/ModelRailroading/Construction/Tips-and-Techniques/Static-Grass/

Now time to make trees!  Need a bunch in the corner area before the siding.

Thanks for reading. 

Craig

Static Grass

Craig Linn
 

Hey Everyone. 


Like everyone I’m sure...I’ve been spending some time on the layout, working a little scenery. 

I’ve done a little write up on the experience. 

https://www.riogranderr.com/ModelRailroading/Construction/Tips-and-Techniques/Static-Grass/

Now time to make trees!  Need a bunch in the corner area before the siding.

Thanks for reading. 

Craig

Re: New Splines

kevin b
 

forgot something.....

some times, you need to attach a block of wood to the grid work before you can attach the riser, due to the grid work itself not being at the same angle as the direction of the track.
hope that makes sense.

Kevin.

Re: New Splines

kevin b
 

this may help:

my way of making splined road bed.

I use luan.
it is 5 mm thick.
basically, it is 1 ply (sorta) plywood.
some people refer to it as door skin.
anyway, I use a table saw.
i set it at 1.5 inches, and rip a sheet of it all the way down.
(rip means to cut long ways) so I end up with a stack of strips 1.5 inches wide and 8 feet long.
ripping strips could also be done with a hand held circular saw.
use a cutting guide for the saw to run against and re set it every cut.
personally I think a table saw is the best way.
anyhow:
after I have a stack of strips, I then cut a few of them up into 1.5 X1.5 pieces.
once I have a paint can full of those, I start making the road bed.
first I establish where I want the road bed.
then I cut a few more strips into whatever length they need to be to make risers that go from the grid work up to the height of the splines.
so now, I have a single strip of luan at elevation and whatever course I want the track to take. winding, straight, curved whatever.
I attach the single strip to the riser with glue and clamps.
next I use glue and clamps and I put a spacer from the paint can every so often. then after that dries, or dry enough to mess with, I attach another 8' strip. then another series of spacers. then a full length strip. and repeat that till I have the width I want.
a sheet of luan (here) is less that 15 dollars.
I can make quite a bit of roadbed from 1 sheet of it.
(i have been known to use my air nailer to put small brads in and or staples, but, you don't really have to)
I want to add this:
I do not hand lay track any more.
I use flex track.
my method, makes it difficult to hand lay track due to the voids between the strips and so on.
if you want to hand lay track, with my spline and spacer method, you could lay a piece of the same luan flat down on top of the splines and hand lay track into that.
as for ballast:
I use wide masking tape and cover the splines.
the ballast does not fall through the tape.

anyway, that's how I do it.

I hope this helps.
thanks.
Kevin.






How do you accurately cut these narrow strips from plywood? I have used a straightedge guide. This must be clamped on to the 4x8 sheet and is slow to use. I have tried edge guides that are attached to the circular saw base, but the edges of the cut are not exactly perfect. Is this how you do it? Also, is there any particular way to cut those nice curved ply roadbed sections? Isn't a lot of plywood wasted between the curves? What particular plywood grade is best? A lot of typical 1/2" 4-ply has voids. Thanks -- John Hutnick

Re: New Splines

John Hutnick
 

How do you accurately cut these narrow strips from plywood?  I have used a straightedge guide.  This must be clamped on to the 4x8 sheet and is slow to use.  I have tried edge guides that are attached to the circular saw base, but the edges of the cut are not exactly perfect.  Is this how you do it?  Also, is there any particular way to cut those nice curved ply roadbed sections?  Isn't a lot of plywood wasted between the curves?  What particular plywood grade is best?  A lot of typical 1/2" 4-ply has voids.  Thanks -- John Hutnick

Re: New Splines

Steve Hatch
 

  Mike I have to think you've never tried my lam method.  Trust me it isn't anywhere near as
difficult to do as ANY of the old methods.  It's simple.  The two lams are already spread out along
the right of way. They are confined by screws in the top of the up right.
  You stand there. Spread glue on both sides of the block.  Smear it with your finger.  Insert it between
the two lams (that are already there and held in place.)  insert the block up snug to the last one
and then stick a clamp on it.  Take a look at the photos I've posted.
   To fool with a nailer or stapler or anything would be a useless waste of time and effort.  Thank you for the
idea but it's been tried and rejected as useless and unnecessary.   
Give it a try and surprise yourself. It's easy and fast and cheap.   The three commandments of model railroading.
Stephen Hatch

Re: New Splines

Steve Hatch
 


 I used 1/2 inch exterior ply for the frame and 2x2 blocks in the corners.
Turnouts are simple.  splice another lam to the side and glue an angled block there and that starts the turnout.
I cut angle blocks for a 6 angle an 8 angle and a 12 angle depending on what turnout I'm going to use there.

here's some more lam done today.   The route is layed out. The grade is a perfect 2 all the way. now just fill in the blocks
Should be done tomorrow some time and start laying ties.

http://www.railwayeng.com/9030railroad/Build/newspline7.jpg
http://www.railwayeng.com/9030railroad/Build/newspline8.jpg
http://www.railwayeng.com/9030railroad/Build/newspline9.jpg
http://www.railwayeng.com/9030railroad/Build/newspline9a.jpg

Stephen Hatch

Re: New Splines

Mike Van Hove
 

Nice work, Steve,

However, I learned a long time ago, I never have enough clamps.  (and, I have quite a lot of clamps.)

A wise man suggested I use the same glue as you are using, but just shoot 2 brads into the glued joint to hold it while the glue dries.   1 brad holds the joint tight, but 2 keeps the joint from racking. 
That way you don’t have to mess with the clamps.
Clamps require at least 3 hands, to hold the joint together, and get the clamp in place, plus tighten the clamp.  And the joint nearly always slips while trying to get the clamp in place.
Don’t ask me how I know this. 🙄

I found the brad nailer really speeds up the process, and at our age, we need all the time we can get, right?

let me know if this works for you.

Mike Van Hove

On Apr 3, 2020, at 11:44 PM, Steve Hatch <hatch@...> wrote:

Over the years I came to realize that screw or nails or any of that wasn't necessary if you
use the right glue.  For these lams, white glue doesn't work but furniture grade aliphatic resin glues
(both the brown and the yellow) , hold for about 150 years so that's good enough for me.
They are right next to the white glues in Home Depot.
  The dark brown aliphatic resin glue is even recommended for  out-door furniture.
So...... I use it and no staples or nails or screws......you just don't need them
I do have an air stapler and brad nailer etc. but they just aren't necessary.
BUT   they must be clamped for maximum holding power.  Also it's best to smear the glue on the whole surface
of the block  to ensure maximum strength contact.  I just use my finger to cover the two faces then insert the block.
Simple quick and dry and holding in about 2 hrs in the winter.
Stephen
Here's the glue I use
www.railwayeng.com/9030railroad/Build/Spline-glue.jpg

Re: New Splines

Steve Hatch
 

Over the years I came to realize that screw or nails or any of that wasn't necessary if you
use the right glue.  For these lams, white glue doesn't work but furniture grade aliphatic resin glues
(both the brown and the yellow) , hold for about 150 years so that's good enough for me.
They are right next to the white glues in Home Depot.
  The dark brown aliphatic resin glue is even recommended for  out-door furniture.
So...... I use it and no staples or nails or screws......you just don't need them
I do have an air stapler and brad nailer etc. but they just aren't necessary.
BUT   they must be clamped for maximum holding power.  Also it's best to smear the glue on the whole surface
of the block  to ensure maximum strength contact.  I just use my finger to cover the two faces then insert the block.
Simple quick and dry and holding in about 2 hrs in the winter.
Stephen
Here's the glue I use
www.railwayeng.com/9030railroad/Build/Spline-glue.jpg

Re: Evolution of the K-27

Bill Lugg
 

Very interesting.  It occurs to me that Denver looked a lot different in the 1920s and 1930s than it does today.


Thanks for the info, gentlemen.

Bill Lugg

On 4/3/20 6:27 PM, Earl Knoob wrote:
The D&RGW's Burnham shops in Denver were quite capable of designing and building the replacement valve gear pieces.  In fact much of the K-27's Walschaert Valve Gear pieces closely imitate those on the K-28 engines.

The valve gear hangers could easily be made in the D&RGW shops.

The K-37 were built using existing standard gauge 2-8-0 boilers on home-built running gears assembled at Burnham using their own castings, plus some larger castings (cylinders and frame) made by a nearby foundry.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* HOn3@groups.io <HOn3@groups.io> on behalf of John Stutz <john.stutz@...>
*Sent:* Friday, April 3, 2020 5:59 PM
*To:* HOn3@groups.io <HOn3@groups.io>; Bill Lugg <@luggw1>
*Subject:* Re: [HOn3] Evolution of the K-27
Bill

The D&RG never had any narrow gauge Mallets. BLW did build a 3' gauge OF compound 2-6-6-2 for the Manati Sugar Co, of Cuba. This was e a very near duplicate of a pair of IF meter gauge Mallets built in 1913 for the E.F.Victoria-Diamantina of Brazil. The Brazilian engines were fairly small, about 131,000lbs on drivers with only 29,500lbs rated tractive effort, neither figure much more than a K-27's and notably less than the D&RGW K-36s of 1925. But the remarkable similarity between the two Mallets suggests that any of the meter or 42" gauge designs built for export could thus be narrowed to 3' gauge. The smaller standard gauge logging Mallets would also be reasonable candidates. Such conversions would actually mimic BLW practice for new design proposals, as in the case of the 30" gauge OF 2-6-6-2T proposed to Braden Copper Co of Chile, a downsized version of the Uintah's 3' gauge pair.

Regarding the K-27's replacement cylinders, I do not know enough about the D&RGW's shop capabilities to judge. Some roads could have designed the new valve/cylinder/half-saddles, made the patterns, cast new ones, and machined them. The SP could certainly have done it at their Sacramento Shops, as could many other major railroads' shops, but I do not know anything about Burnham's capabilities. The alternative would be to purchase new designs, fully machined, from BLW, and I have seen reference to new Vaulcan cylinders supplied for NdM 3' gauge 2-8-0s in a circa 1930 issue of "Baldwin Locomotives".

My reference to Lima was regarding their "Super Power" sales slogan. ALCo built the K-28s, and BLW built the K-27s and K-36s. The later K-37s used rebuilt boilers salvaged from SG 2-8-0s, on new BLW chassis.

John Stutz
On April 3, 2020 at 10:09 AM Bill Lugg <@luggw1 <mailto:@luggw1>> wrote:


John, thanks for the very interesting discussion of the K27 valve
replacement program.  So, if I understand you correctly, the OF 2-6-6-2
idea never materialized, right?

In regard to replacing slide valves with piston valves.  This of course
would require an entirely new cylinder casting.  Would they have gone
back to Lima and contracted for these or is that something they could
have fabricated locally?  Likewise for the valve gear parts; were these
supplied by Lima or another contractor or fabricated in-house?

Bill


On 4/2/20 11:14 PM, John Stutz wrote:
Bill
I am not a D&RG guy either.
The Loree evaluation of the D&RG was commissioned in 1917. Mr Hess did
the motive power aspects, Those regarding the narrow gauge power were
generally ignored. Hess recommended that the K-27 engines be upgraded
with piston valve cylinders for better steam distribution, outside
valve gear that would be much easier to maintain and less subject to
wear and damage, and super heating for the by then well documented
steaming improvements. The D&RG's only immediate action was to fit
four engines with piston valves.
Repeating O'Berry's quotation of Hess regarding this: "...We find that
5 of these locomotives have received new cylinders in the past 2 or 3
years, and that the majority of the balance of this series will
require new cylinders in the near future, account of valve bridges
being broken. It would be my recommendation that in applying new
cylinders a piston valve cylinder be applied. This style of cylinder
would cost about $200.00 more per locomotive than the slide valve
type. An outside design of valve should be applied as locomotives pass
through the shop for general repairs. With the application of piston
valves, cylinders, and an outside design of valve gear, these
locomotives would be easy to superheat. As they are the heaviest class
of narrow gauge power now on this line, they will undoubtedly be
maintained for long period of time."
In a slide valve engine, the valve bridges are the thin walls that
separate the cylinder ports from the exhaust port at the valve face,
over which the valve body slides to time the inlet and exhaust of
steam from the ends of the cylinder. With a broken valve bridge, steam
in the corresponding end of the cylinder can exhaust throughout the
piston stroke This gives a very uneven pull, and could greatly reduce
the available tractive. So with broken bridges cylinder replacement a
very high priority, which is doubtless why it was being done. And
since a piston valve's bridges are machined in an inserted cylindrical
liner, instead of the cylinder casting itself, this explains why the
four early conversions were never replaced by the later style, with
the valve chambers aligned for outside valve gear.
Hess's recommendations regarding outside valve gear and super heating
were not acted upon until almost two years after 10/23 arrival of the
K-28s. The K-28s were a thoroughly modern version of the then twenty
year old K-27s. They were effectively a super power version, though
Lima had not yet publicized the term. A K-28 could take a K-27's load
anywhere a K-27 could go, and do it while making significant
improvements on either the K-27's time over the road or the K-27's
fuel and water use. As the D&RGW's new principal NG freight power,
they demonstrated what could be gained by modernizing the K-27s. That
program starts as soon as the K-36s arrived to take up the load, and
proceeded until falling traffic on the remaining lightly bridged lines
could not justify further conversions. By then upgraded track and
bridges had allowed the much heavier K-36 and K-37 classes to take
over the heavy freight traffic, and the K-28s had been largely
relegated to passenger service. The much lighter power remaining from
the 1880's did not long survive the unimproved lines that could not
handle the by then medium weight K-27s and K-28s.
Mike - regarding tenders:
O'Berry states " In 1918 new rectangular shaped tender tanks were
drawn up and began to be fabricated at Burnham. Although the plan
called for a six inch radius on the rear corners the first two
fabricated, for locomotives 453 and 464, had virtually square corners.
..." I suggest a good second look at his historical section. While he
largely limits himself to abstracts, Dennis clearly had access to a
lot more details than have turned up in this discussion.
John Stutz
On April 2, 2020 at 9:11 AM Bill Lugg <@luggw1 <mailto:@luggw1>
<mailto:@luggw1 <mailto:@luggw1>>> wrote:

I'm not a D&RG guy so bear with me...

You mention the recommendation by Mr' Hess to replace scrapped
locomotives with OF 2-6-6-2s.  Was this recommendation followed?  I
don't believe I've ever seen a photo of one of these beasts.

Thanks
Bill Lugg


On 4/2/20 2:27 AM, John Stutz wrote:
...
The following shows the conversion dates from Earl Knoob
<'s" rel="noopener"
target="_blank">'s" rel="noopener"
target="_blank">https://sitemailxchange.gate.com/appsuite/ui#>'s <https://sitemailxchange.gate.com/appsuite/ui#>
<https://sitemailxchange.gate.com/appsuite/ui#> AEF data book, with
entries beginning 12.1919, supplemented by simpling information in
O'Berry p12.  See O'Berry p13 for quotes from G.L.Hess, motive power
expert for the Loree evaluation of 1917, regarding advisable
improvements in the D&RG's NG motive power - essentially to upgrade
the K-27s, scrap everything else, and replace with OF 2-6-6-2s.
...

Re: New Splines

Steve Hatch
 

New spline work today after an op session.  $ of us ran trains on the first have of the RR.
 Got the main laid out with spline and the single loop all glued up in the room addition.
Next week laying rail I reckon


http://www.railwayeng.com/9030railroad/Build/newspline6.jpg

Stephen Hatch
Dewey AZ

Re: Evolution of the K-27

Earl Knoob
 

The D&RGW's Burnham shops in Denver were quite capable of designing and building the replacement valve gear pieces.  In fact much of the K-27's Walschaert Valve Gear pieces closely imitate those on the K-28 engines.

The valve gear hangers could easily be made in the D&RGW shops.

The K-37 were built using existing standard gauge 2-8-0 boilers on home-built running gears assembled at Burnham using their own castings, plus some larger castings (cylinders and frame) made by a nearby foundry.


From: HOn3@groups.io <HOn3@groups.io> on behalf of John Stutz <john.stutz@...>
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 5:59 PM
To: HOn3@groups.io <HOn3@groups.io>; Bill Lugg <luggw1@...>
Subject: Re: [HOn3] Evolution of the K-27
 
Bill

The D&RG never had any narrow gauge Mallets. BLW did build a 3' gauge OF compound 2-6-6-2 for the Manati Sugar Co, of Cuba. This was e a very near duplicate of a pair of IF meter gauge Mallets built in 1913 for the E.F.Victoria-Diamantina of Brazil. The Brazilian engines were fairly small, about 131,000lbs on drivers with only 29,500lbs rated tractive effort, neither figure much more than a K-27's and notably less than the D&RGW K-36s of 1925. But the remarkable similarity between the two Mallets suggests that any of the meter or 42" gauge designs built for export could thus be narrowed to 3' gauge. The smaller standard gauge logging Mallets would also be reasonable candidates. Such conversions would actually mimic BLW practice for new design proposals, as in the case of the 30" gauge OF 2-6-6-2T proposed to Braden Copper Co of Chile, a downsized version of the Uintah's 3' gauge pair.

Regarding the K-27's replacement cylinders, I do not know enough about the D&RGW's shop capabilities to judge. Some roads could have designed the new valve/cylinder/half-saddles, made the patterns, cast new ones, and machined them. The SP could certainly have done it at their Sacramento Shops, as could many other major railroads' shops, but I do not know anything about Burnham's capabilities. The alternative would be to purchase new designs, fully machined, from BLW, and I have seen reference to new Vaulcan cylinders supplied for NdM 3' gauge 2-8-0s in a circa 1930 issue of "Baldwin Locomotives".

My reference to Lima was regarding their "Super Power" sales slogan. ALCo built the K-28s, and BLW built the K-27s and K-36s. The later K-37s used rebuilt boilers salvaged from SG 2-8-0s, on new BLW chassis.

John Stutz
On April 3, 2020 at 10:09 AM Bill Lugg <luggw1@...> wrote:


John, thanks for the very interesting discussion of the K27 valve
replacement program.  So, if I understand you correctly, the OF 2-6-6-2
idea never materialized, right?

In regard to replacing slide valves with piston valves.  This of course
would require an entirely new cylinder casting.  Would they have gone
back to Lima and contracted for these or is that something they could
have fabricated locally?  Likewise for the valve gear parts; were these
supplied by Lima or another contractor or fabricated in-house?

Bill


On 4/2/20 11:14 PM, John Stutz wrote:
Bill
I am not a D&RG guy either.
The Loree evaluation of the D&RG was commissioned in 1917. Mr Hess did
the motive power aspects, Those regarding the narrow gauge power were
generally ignored. Hess recommended that the K-27 engines be upgraded
with piston valve cylinders for better steam distribution, outside
valve gear that would be much easier to maintain and less subject to
wear and damage, and super heating for the by then well documented
steaming improvements. The D&RG's only immediate action was to fit
four engines with piston valves.
Repeating O'Berry's quotation of Hess regarding this: "...We find that
5 of these locomotives have received new cylinders in the past 2 or 3
years, and that the majority of the balance of this series will
require new cylinders in the near future, account of valve bridges
being broken. It would be my recommendation that in applying new
cylinders a piston valve cylinder be applied. This style of cylinder
would cost about $200.00 more per locomotive than the slide valve
type. An outside design of valve should be applied as locomotives pass
through the shop for general repairs. With the application of piston
valves, cylinders, and an outside design of valve gear, these
locomotives would be easy to superheat. As they are the heaviest class
of narrow gauge power now on this line, they will undoubtedly be
maintained for long period of time."
In a slide valve engine, the valve bridges are the thin walls that
separate the cylinder ports from the exhaust port at the valve face,
over which the valve body slides to time the inlet and exhaust of
steam from the ends of the cylinder. With a broken valve bridge, steam
in the corresponding end of the cylinder can exhaust throughout the
piston stroke This gives a very uneven pull, and could greatly reduce
the available tractive. So with broken bridges cylinder replacement a
very high priority, which is doubtless why it was being done. And
since a piston valve's bridges are machined in an inserted cylindrical
liner, instead of the cylinder casting itself, this explains why the
four early conversions were never replaced by the later style, with
the valve chambers aligned for outside valve gear.
Hess's recommendations regarding outside valve gear and super heating
were not acted upon until almost two years after 10/23 arrival of the
K-28s. The K-28s were a thoroughly modern version of the then twenty
year old K-27s. They were effectively a super power version, though
Lima had not yet publicized the term. A K-28 could take a K-27's load
anywhere a K-27 could go, and do it while making significant
improvements on either the K-27's time over the road or the K-27's
fuel and water use. As the D&RGW's new principal NG freight power,
they demonstrated what could be gained by modernizing the K-27s. That
program starts as soon as the K-36s arrived to take up the load, and
proceeded until falling traffic on the remaining lightly bridged lines
could not justify further conversions. By then upgraded track and
bridges had allowed the much heavier K-36 and K-37 classes to take
over the heavy freight traffic, and the K-28s had been largely
relegated to passenger service. The much lighter power remaining from
the 1880's did not long survive the unimproved lines that could not
handle the by then medium weight K-27s and K-28s.
Mike - regarding tenders:
O'Berry states " In 1918 new rectangular shaped tender tanks were
drawn up and began to be fabricated at Burnham. Although the plan
called for a six inch radius on the rear corners the first two
fabricated, for locomotives 453 and 464, had virtually square corners.
..." I suggest a good second look at his historical section. While he
largely limits himself to abstracts, Dennis clearly had access to a
lot more details than have turned up in this discussion.
John Stutz
On April 2, 2020 at 9:11 AM Bill Lugg <luggw1@...
<mailto:luggw1@...>> wrote:
>>
>> I'm not a D&RG guy so bear with me...
>>
>> You mention the recommendation by Mr' Hess to replace scrapped
>> locomotives with OF 2-6-6-2s.  Was this recommendation followed?  I
>> don't believe I've ever seen a photo of one of these beasts.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Bill Lugg
>>
>>
>> On 4/2/20 2:27 AM, John Stutz wrote:
>>> ...
>>> The following shows the conversion dates from Earl Knoob
>>> <'s" rel="noopener"
>>> target="_blank">'s" rel="noopener" target="_blank">https://sitemailxchange.gate.com/appsuite/ui#>'s
>>> <https://sitemailxchange.gate.com/appsuite/ui#> AEF data book, with
>>> entries beginning 12.1919, supplemented by simpling information in
>>> O'Berry p12.  See O'Berry p13 for quotes from G.L.Hess, motive power
>>> expert for the Loree evaluation of 1917, regarding advisable
>>> improvements in the D&RG's NG motive power - essentially to upgrade
>>> the K-27s, scrap everything else, and replace with OF 2-6-6-2s.
>> ...
>>

Re: Evolution of the K-27

John Stutz
 

Bill

The D&RG never had any narrow gauge Mallets. BLW did build a 3' gauge OF compound 2-6-6-2 for the Manati Sugar Co, of Cuba. This was e a very near duplicate of a pair of IF meter gauge Mallets built in 1913 for the E.F.Victoria-Diamantina of Brazil. The Brazilian engines were fairly small, about 131,000lbs on drivers with only 29,500lbs rated tractive effort, neither figure much more than a K-27's and notably less than the D&RGW K-36s of 1925. But the remarkable similarity between the two Mallets suggests that any of the meter or 42" gauge designs built for export could thus be narrowed to 3' gauge. The smaller standard gauge logging Mallets would also be reasonable candidates. Such conversions would actually mimic BLW practice for new design proposals, as in the case of the 30" gauge OF 2-6-6-2T proposed to Braden Copper Co of Chile, a downsized version of the Uintah's 3' gauge pair.

Regarding the K-27's replacement cylinders, I do not know enough about the D&RGW's shop capabilities to judge. Some roads could have designed the new valve/cylinder/half-saddles, made the patterns, cast new ones, and machined them. The SP could certainly have done it at their Sacramento Shops, as could many other major railroads' shops, but I do not know anything about Burnham's capabilities. The alternative would be to purchase new designs, fully machined, from BLW, and I have seen reference to new Vaulcan cylinders supplied for NdM 3' gauge 2-8-0s in a circa 1930 issue of "Baldwin Locomotives".

My reference to Lima was regarding their "Super Power" sales slogan. ALCo built the K-28s, and BLW built the K-27s and K-36s. The later K-37s used rebuilt boilers salvaged from SG 2-8-0s, on new BLW chassis.

John Stutz

On April 3, 2020 at 10:09 AM Bill Lugg <luggw1@...> wrote:


John, thanks for the very interesting discussion of the K27 valve
replacement program.  So, if I understand you correctly, the OF 2-6-6-2
idea never materialized, right?

In regard to replacing slide valves with piston valves.  This of course
would require an entirely new cylinder casting.  Would they have gone
back to Lima and contracted for these or is that something they could
have fabricated locally?  Likewise for the valve gear parts; were these
supplied by Lima or another contractor or fabricated in-house?

Bill


On 4/2/20 11:14 PM, John Stutz wrote:
Bill
I am not a D&RG guy either.
The Loree evaluation of the D&RG was commissioned in 1917. Mr Hess did
the motive power aspects, Those regarding the narrow gauge power were
generally ignored. Hess recommended that the K-27 engines be upgraded
with piston valve cylinders for better steam distribution, outside
valve gear that would be much easier to maintain and less subject to
wear and damage, and super heating for the by then well documented
steaming improvements. The D&RG's only immediate action was to fit
four engines with piston valves.
Repeating O'Berry's quotation of Hess regarding this: "...We find that
5 of these locomotives have received new cylinders in the past 2 or 3
years, and that the majority of the balance of this series will
require new cylinders in the near future, account of valve bridges
being broken. It would be my recommendation that in applying new
cylinders a piston valve cylinder be applied. This style of cylinder
would cost about $200.00 more per locomotive than the slide valve
type. An outside design of valve should be applied as locomotives pass
through the shop for general repairs. With the application of piston
valves, cylinders, and an outside design of valve gear, these
locomotives would be easy to superheat. As they are the heaviest class
of narrow gauge power now on this line, they will undoubtedly be
maintained for long period of time."
In a slide valve engine, the valve bridges are the thin walls that
separate the cylinder ports from the exhaust port at the valve face,
over which the valve body slides to time the inlet and exhaust of
steam from the ends of the cylinder. With a broken valve bridge, steam
in the corresponding end of the cylinder can exhaust throughout the
piston stroke This gives a very uneven pull, and could greatly reduce
the available tractive. So with broken bridges cylinder replacement a
very high priority, which is doubtless why it was being done. And
since a piston valve's bridges are machined in an inserted cylindrical
liner, instead of the cylinder casting itself, this explains why the
four early conversions were never replaced by the later style, with
the valve chambers aligned for outside valve gear.
Hess's recommendations regarding outside valve gear and super heating
were not acted upon until almost two years after 10/23 arrival of the
K-28s. The K-28s were a thoroughly modern version of the then twenty
year old K-27s. They were effectively a super power version, though
Lima had not yet publicized the term. A K-28 could take a K-27's load
anywhere a K-27 could go, and do it while making significant
improvements on either the K-27's time over the road or the K-27's
fuel and water use. As the D&RGW's new principal NG freight power,
they demonstrated what could be gained by modernizing the K-27s. That
program starts as soon as the K-36s arrived to take up the load, and
proceeded until falling traffic on the remaining lightly bridged lines
could not justify further conversions. By then upgraded track and
bridges had allowed the much heavier K-36 and K-37 classes to take
over the heavy freight traffic, and the K-28s had been largely
relegated to passenger service. The much lighter power remaining from
the 1880's did not long survive the unimproved lines that could not
handle the by then medium weight K-27s and K-28s.
Mike - regarding tenders:
O'Berry states " In 1918 new rectangular shaped tender tanks were
drawn up and began to be fabricated at Burnham. Although the plan
called for a six inch radius on the rear corners the first two
fabricated, for locomotives 453 and 464, had virtually square corners.
..." I suggest a good second look at his historical section. While he
largely limits himself to abstracts, Dennis clearly had access to a
lot more details than have turned up in this discussion.
John Stutz
On April 2, 2020 at 9:11 AM Bill Lugg <luggw1@...
<mailto:luggw1@...>> wrote:
>>
>> I'm not a D&RG guy so bear with me...
>>
>> You mention the recommendation by Mr' Hess to replace scrapped
>> locomotives with OF 2-6-6-2s.  Was this recommendation followed?  I
>> don't believe I've ever seen a photo of one of these beasts.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Bill Lugg
>>
>>
>> On 4/2/20 2:27 AM, John Stutz wrote:
>>> ...
>>> The following shows the conversion dates from Earl Knoob
>>> <'s" rel="noopener"
>>> target="_blank">'s" rel="noopener" target="_blank">https://sitemailxchange.gate.com/appsuite/ui#>'s
>>> <https://sitemailxchange.gate.com/appsuite/ui#> AEF data book, with
>>> entries beginning 12.1919, supplemented by simpling information in
>>> O'Berry p12.  See O'Berry p13 for quotes from G.L.Hess, motive power
>>> expert for the Loree evaluation of 1917, regarding advisable
>>> improvements in the D&RG's NG motive power - essentially to upgrade
>>> the K-27s, scrap everything else, and replace with OF 2-6-6-2s.
>> ...
>>

Re: Evolution of the K-27

Earl Knoob
 

The D&RGW had their own foundry at Burnham Shops in Denver, although for larger pieces, such as cylinder saddles, they frequently used another larger, local foundry, whose name escapes my right now.  This other foundry cast up the cylinders for the 490's when they were built.

BTW Baldwin built the K-27, not Lima.  The D&RGW did all the design and development work on the K-27s as they were modified through the years.

There were design proposals for articulateds on the narrow gauge, but they never got past the drawing stage.  Articulated engines would have required bridge strengthening among other improvements that the D&RGW was not willing to, or could not afford to make. 


From: HOn3@groups.io <HOn3@groups.io> on behalf of Bill Lugg <luggw1@...>
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 9:09 AM
To: HOn3@groups.io <HOn3@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [HOn3] Evolution of the K-27
 
John, thanks for the very iteresting discussion of the K27 valve
replacement program.  So, if I understand you correctly, the OF 2-6-6-2
idea never materialized, right?

In regard to replacing slide valves with piston valves.  This of course
would require an entirely new cylinder casting.  Would they have gone
back to Lima and contracted for these or is that something they could
have fabricated locally?  Likewise for the valve gear parts; were these
supplied by Lima or another contractor or fabricated in-house?

Bill


On 4/2/20 11:14 PM, John Stutz wrote:
> Bill
>
> I am not a D&RG guy either.
>
> The Loree evaluation of the D&RG was commissioned in 1917. Mr Hess did
> the motive power aspects, Those regarding the narrow gauge power were
> generally ignored. Hess recommended that the K-27 engines be upgraded
> with piston valve cylinders for better steam distribution, outside
> valve gear that would be much easier to maintain and less subject to
> wear and damage, and super heating for the by then well documented
> steaming improvements. The D&RG's only immediate action was to fit
> four engines with piston valves.
>
> Repeating O'Berry's quotation of Hess regarding this: "...We find that
> 5 of these locomotives have received new cylinders in the past 2 or 3
> years, and that the majority of the balance of this series will
> require new cylinders in the near future, account of valve bridges
> being broken. It would be my recommendation that in applying new
> cylinders a piston valve cylinder be applied. This style of cylinder
> would cost about $200.00 more per locomotive than the slide valve
> type. An outside design of valve should be applied as locomotives pass
> through the shop for general repairs. With the application of piston
> valves, cylinders, and an outside design of valve gear, these
> locomotives would be easy to superheat. As they are the heaviest class
> of narrow gauge power now on this line, they will undoubtedly be
> maintained for long period of time."
>
> In a slide valve engine, the valve bridges are the thin walls that
> separate the cylinder ports from the exhaust port at the valve face,
> over which the valve body slides to time the inlet and exhaust of
> steam from the ends of the cylinder. With a broken valve bridge, steam
> in the corresponding end of the cylinder can exhaust throughout the
> piston stroke This gives a very uneven pull, and could greatly reduce
> the available tractive. So with broken bridges cylinder replacement a
> very high priority, which is doubtless why it was being done. And
> since a piston valve's bridges are machined in an inserted cylindrical
> liner, instead of the cylinder casting itself, this explains why the
> four early conversions were never replaced by the later style, with
> the valve chambers aligned for outside valve gear.
>
> Hess's recommendations regarding outside valve gear and super heating
> were not acted upon until almost two years after 10/23 arrival of the
> K-28s. The K-28s were a thoroughly modern version of the then twenty
> year old K-27s. They were effectively a super power version, though
> Lima had not yet publicized the term. A K-28 could take a K-27's load
> anywhere a K-27 could go, and do it while making significant
> improvements on either the K-27's time over the road or the K-27's
> fuel and water use. As the D&RGW's new principal NG freight power,
> they demonstrated what could be gained by modernizing the K-27s. That
> program starts as soon as the K-36s arrived to take up the load, and
> proceeded until falling traffic on the remaining lightly bridged lines
> could not justify further conversions. By then upgraded track and
> bridges had allowed the much heavier K-36 and K-37 classes to take
> over the heavy freight traffic, and the K-28s had been largely
> relegated to passenger service. The much lighter power remaining from
> the 1880's did not long survive the unimproved lines that could not
> handle the by then medium weight K-27s and K-28s.
>
> Mike - regarding tenders:
>
> O'Berry states " In 1918 new rectangular shaped tender tanks were
> drawn up and began to be fabricated at Burnham. Although the plan
> called for a six inch radius on the rear corners the first two
> fabricated, for locomotives 453 and 464, had virtually square corners.
> ..." I suggest a good second look at his historical section. While he
> largely limits himself to abstracts, Dennis clearly had access to a
> lot more details than have turned up in this discussion.
>
> John Stutz
>> On April 2, 2020 at 9:11 AM Bill Lugg <luggw1@...
>> <mailto:luggw1@...>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> I'm not a D&RG guy so bear with me...
>>
>> You mention the recommendation by Mr' Hess to replace scrapped
>> locomotives with OF 2-6-6-2s.  Was this recommendation followed?  I
>> don't believe I've ever seen a photo of one of these beasts.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Bill Lugg
>>
>>
>> On 4/2/20 2:27 AM, John Stutz wrote:
>>> ...
>>> The following shows the conversion dates from Earl Knoob
>>> <'s" rel="noopener"
>>> target="_blank">https://sitemailxchange.gate.com/appsuite/ui#>'s
>>> <https://sitemailxchange.gate.com/appsuite/ui#> AEF data book, with
>>> entries beginning 12.1919, supplemented by simpling information in
>>> O'Berry p12.  See O'Berry p13 for quotes from G.L.Hess, motive power
>>> expert for the Loree evaluation of 1917, regarding advisable
>>> improvements in the D&RG's NG motive power - essentially to upgrade
>>> the K-27s, scrap everything else, and replace with OF 2-6-6-2s.
>> ...
>>
>



Re: Evolution of the K-27

Bill Lugg
 

John, thanks for the very interesting discussion of the K27 valve replacement program.  So, if I understand you correctly, the OF 2-6-6-2 idea never materialized, right?

In regard to replacing slide valves with piston valves.  This of course would require an entirely new cylinder casting.  Would they have gone back to Lima and contracted for these or is that something they could have fabricated locally?  Likewise for the valve gear parts; were these supplied by Lima or another contractor or fabricated in-house?

Bill

On 4/2/20 11:14 PM, John Stutz wrote:
Bill

I am not a D&RG guy either.

The Loree evaluation of the D&RG was commissioned in 1917. Mr Hess did the motive power aspects, Those regarding the narrow gauge power were generally ignored. Hess recommended that the K-27 engines be upgraded with piston valve cylinders for better steam distribution, outside valve gear that would be much easier to maintain and less subject to wear and damage, and super heating for the by then well documented steaming improvements. The D&RG's only immediate action was to fit four engines with piston valves.

Repeating O'Berry's quotation of Hess regarding this: "...We find that 5 of these locomotives have received new cylinders in the past 2 or 3 years, and that the majority of the balance of this series will require new cylinders in the near future, account of valve bridges being broken. It would be my recommendation that in applying new cylinders a piston valve cylinder be applied. This style of cylinder would cost about $200.00 more per locomotive than the slide valve type. An outside design of valve should be applied as locomotives pass through the shop for general repairs. With the application of piston valves, cylinders, and an outside design of valve gear, these locomotives would be easy to superheat. As they are the heaviest class of narrow gauge power now on this line, they will undoubtedly be maintained for long period of time."

In a slide valve engine, the valve bridges are the thin walls that separate the cylinder ports from the exhaust port at the valve face, over which the valve body slides to time the inlet and exhaust of steam from the ends of the cylinder. With a broken valve bridge, steam in the corresponding end of the cylinder can exhaust throughout the piston stroke This gives a very uneven pull, and could greatly reduce the available tractive. So with broken bridges cylinder replacement a very high priority, which is doubtless why it was being done. And since a piston valve's bridges are machined in an inserted cylindrical liner, instead of the cylinder casting itself, this explains why the four early conversions were never replaced by the later style, with the valve chambers aligned for outside valve gear.

Hess's recommendations regarding outside valve gear and super heating were not acted upon until almost two years after 10/23 arrival of the K-28s. The K-28s were a thoroughly modern version of the then twenty year old K-27s. They were effectively a super power version, though Lima had not yet publicized the term. A K-28 could take a K-27's load anywhere a K-27 could go, and do it while making significant improvements on either the K-27's time over the road or the K-27's fuel and water use. As the D&RGW's new principal NG freight power, they demonstrated what could be gained by modernizing the K-27s. That program starts as soon as the K-36s arrived to take up the load, and proceeded until falling traffic on the remaining lightly bridged lines could not justify further conversions. By then upgraded track and bridges had allowed the much heavier K-36 and K-37 classes to take over the heavy freight traffic, and the K-28s had been largely relegated to passenger service. The much lighter power remaining from the 1880's did not long survive the unimproved lines that could not handle the by then medium weight K-27s and K-28s.

Mike - regarding tenders:

O'Berry states " In 1918 new rectangular shaped tender tanks were drawn up and began to be fabricated at Burnham. Although the plan called for a six inch radius on the rear corners the first two fabricated, for locomotives 453 and 464, had virtually square corners. ..." I suggest a good second look at his historical section. While he largely limits himself to abstracts, Dennis clearly had access to a lot more details than have turned up in this discussion.

John Stutz
On April 2, 2020 at 9:11 AM Bill Lugg <@luggw1 <mailto:@luggw1>> wrote:


I'm not a D&RG guy so bear with me...

You mention the recommendation by Mr' Hess to replace scrapped
locomotives with OF 2-6-6-2s.  Was this recommendation followed?  I
don't believe I've ever seen a photo of one of these beasts.

Thanks
Bill Lugg


On 4/2/20 2:27 AM, John Stutz wrote:
...
The following shows the conversion dates from Earl Knoob
<'s" rel="noopener" target="_blank">https://sitemailxchange.gate.com/appsuite/ui#>'s <https://sitemailxchange.gate.com/appsuite/ui#> AEF data book, with
entries beginning 12.1919, supplemented by simpling information in
O'Berry p12.  See O'Berry p13 for quotes from G.L.Hess, motive power
expert for the Loree evaluation of 1917, regarding advisable
improvements in the D&RG's NG motive power - essentially to upgrade
the K-27s, scrap everything else, and replace with OF 2-6-6-2s.
...

Re: Evolution of the K-27

Seb J
 

John,

Clearly O’Berry had access to very good informations. Too bad there is not more of it in the book, or an open access to it...
Also, reading this again, those broken valve bridges might be the very reason in which engines got their cylinders replaced first !
Many answers probably lies in the mechanical records of the K27... ? Anybody know where are they ? at CRRM !?

Seb


Le ven. 3 avr. 2020 à 07:14, John Stutz <john.stutz@...> a écrit :
Bill

I am not a D&RG guy either.

The Loree evaluation of the D&RG was commissioned in 1917. Mr Hess did the motive power aspects, Those regarding the narrow gauge power were generally ignored. Hess recommended that the K-27 engines be upgraded with piston valve cylinders for better steam distribution, outside valve gear that would be much easier to maintain and less subject to wear and damage, and super heating for the by then well documented steaming improvements. The D&RG's only immediate action was to fit four engines with piston valves.

Repeating O'Berry's quotation of Hess regarding this: "...We find that 5 of these locomotives have received new cylinders in the past 2 or 3 years, and that the majority of the balance of this series will require new cylinders in the near future, account of valve bridges being broken. It would be my recommendation that in applying new cylinders a piston valve cylinder be applied. This style of cylinder would cost about $200.00 more per locomotive than the slide valve type. An outside design of valve should be applied as locomotives pass through the shop for general repairs. With the application of piston valves, cylinders, and an outside design of valve gear, these locomotives would be easy to superheat. As they are the heaviest class of narrow gauge power now on this line, they will undoubtedly be maintained for long period of time."

In a slide valve engine, the valve bridges are the thin walls that separate the cylinder ports from the exhaust port at the valve face, over which the valve body slides to time the inlet and exhaust of steam from the ends of the cylinder. With a broken valve bridge, steam in the corresponding end of the cylinder can exhaust throughout the piston stroke This gives a very uneven pull, and could greatly reduce the available tractive. So with broken bridges cylinder replacement a very high priority, which is doubtless why it was being done. And since a piston valve's bridges are machined in an inserted cylindrical liner, instead of the cylinder casting itself, this explains why the four early conversions were never replaced by the later style, with the valve chambers aligned for outside valve gear.

Hess's recommendations regarding outside valve gear and super heating were not acted upon until almost two years after 10/23 arrival of the K-28s. The K-28s were a thoroughly modern version of the then twenty year old K-27s. They were effectively a super power version, though Lima had not yet publicized the term. A K-28 could take a K-27's load anywhere a K-27 could go, and do it while making significant improvements on either the K-27's time over the road or the K-27's fuel and water use. As the D&RGW's new principal NG freight power, they demonstrated what could be gained by modernizing the K-27s. That program starts as soon as the K-36s arrived to take up the load, and proceeded until falling traffic on the remaining lightly bridged lines could not justify further conversions. By then upgraded track and bridges had allowed the much heavier K-36 and K-37 classes to take over the heavy freight traffic, and the K-28s had been largely relegated to passenger service. The much lighter power remaining from the 1880's did not long survive the unimproved lines that could not handle the by then medium weight K-27s and K-28s.

Mike - regarding tenders:

O'Berry states " In 1918 new rectangular shaped tender tanks were drawn up and began to be fabricated at Burnham. Although the plan called for a six inch radius on the rear corners the first two fabricated, for locomotives 453 and 464, had virtually square corners. ..." I suggest a good second look at his historical section. While he largely limits himself to abstracts, Dennis clearly had access to a lot more details than have turned up in this discussion.

John Stutz
On April 2, 2020 at 9:11 AM Bill Lugg <luggw1@...> wrote:


I'm not a D&RG guy so bear with me...

You mention the recommendation by Mr' Hess to replace scrapped
locomotives with OF 2-6-6-2s.  Was this recommendation followed?  I
don't believe I've ever seen a photo of one of these beasts.

Thanks
Bill Lugg


On 4/2/20 2:27 AM, John Stutz wrote:
...
The following shows the conversion dates from Earl Knoob
<'s" rel="noopener" target="_blank">https://sitemailxchange.gate.com/appsuite/ui#>'s AEF data book, with
entries beginning 12.1919, supplemented by simpling information in
O'Berry p12.  See O'Berry p13 for quotes from G.L.Hess, motive power
expert for the Loree evaluation of 1917, regarding advisable
improvements in the D&RG's NG motive power - essentially to upgrade
the K-27s, scrap everything else, and replace with OF 2-6-6-2s.
...

--
Cordialement

Sébastien Jubault
Vice-Président
AECFM - Chemin de Fer de Rillé