UP 4-12-2 Build

[mmagliaro]

Failure is an orphan......... while success has many fathers.


But this is different.  The idea of the frame itself on Jason's engine being epoxied to the motor to
keep the frame stable makes me very nervous.......I thought from the way you initially described it,
the frame add-on was glued to the motor to keep the frame stable.
?????
LOL-   Max- you initially understood it correct..... I think/

I do appreciate everyone’s concern and I do know it’s because I am putting so much hard work into the engine and you guys want to see this engine roll. I to do not want a motor failure, but realize there is the possibility.  I am sure that the motor can come out if there is a failure (without frame damage).  I have simulated it on other mechs today...... but not this one.  I feel that a frame joint failure is potentially a larger threat, so I have chosen to secure the frame in the additional location at the sides of the frames and edges of the motor.  I believe this in done out of necessity not laziness.

No no!  Not "laziness".  I didn't mean to imply that.  I don't think anybody else did, either.
Heck, I epoxy motors in, and it's not because of laziness.  It's because I can usually fit a bigger motor in there
than if I used a bracket.  Also, I can hold the motor in place, running with a milliammeter, and find the absolute
sweet spot on the worm mesh where the current draw is the lowest, and then put a drop of CA in there for tack it
in place while I back it up with epoxy.  I find it hard to do that fiddling around with a screw bracket.

My only concern is this.  If you're a little nervous about the frame needing reenforcement, thus epoxying it
to the motor, that makes me think that if you ever have to slice that epoxy to get the motor out, there is a
high risk that the frame will break when you try to do that.

 I guess it comes down to how much epoxy you put between that back frame section and the motor
and just how hard it would be to separate without stressing the frame joint.  I can't really see that from
the photos.

[superturbine]

It’s a thin bead of epoxy at both sized of the motor down to the frame.  And in all reality if the frame joint did break I should be able to install a new frame section in an hour. 

In the meantime here is a little work on the Boiler with an MTH HO 4-12-2 in the background.  My boiler is a ConCor S2 with a FEF cab installed.  The Con-Cor boiler is very close in proportions and will work.  BTW Adam Draskovich had many of the concepts used hear-

wet

[superturbine]

Boiler progress.....

A casting of the sand dome was made and "shrank" down using the HydoShrink meathod (this was done months ago).  The sand dome is installed cab ruffed in and new steam dome installed.

[mike_lawyer]

Yes, a Faulhaber with a 1016 will fit into the Kato cavity with some slight reaming of the frame sides.  Also, get one of the motors with a gearhead, it really makes the loco run at the right speed with tremendous torque and smoothness.

[peteski]

Jason, this is all very impressive but I am also disappointed that the motor is not removable. I mentioned this way earlier in the trhead and at that point you were planning on leaving it removable.  It really doesn't' make sense to me to put dozens or hundreds of hours into a a custom build project and not make it serviceable.  If it was a static model, then no problem, But any mechanical device will need to be serviced sooner or later.

The other thing is flywheel. What makes a huge difference in flywheel's performance is not its mass but the diameter.  I'm sure some of the math types on this forum can give you mathematical explanation of angular momentum and other such stuff.  Adding a second small diameter flywheel (or even making it out of tungsten) does not make it perform all that much better than the original small brass.

One Manufacturer (Fleischmann) started using large diameter flywheels in their small steam locos. It is a very thin (less than 1/8" thick) flywheel but it is as large in diameter as they could fit in the cab (since cab is wider and taller than the boiler).  I'm amazed how well that skinny but large diameter flywheel performs.   One of these days I'll take some photos of that loco and write up a thread about what (IMO) is an ideal design for N scale steam loco. That Fleischmann model comes really close to that goal.

[Kisatchie]

...What makes a huge difference in flywheel's performance is not its mass but the diameter....

Hmm.. this opens the
door to using styrofoam
flywheels...

[victor miranda]

oh why am I laughing?
Hi superturbine,

  Luck on your build.
victor

[superturbine]

Thanks Victor,
I appreciate your PM.

[UP4-8-8-4]

    Looking fantistic Jason, can't wait to get mine ------------------------- 




Ernie

[peteski]

Hmm.. this opens the
door to using styrofoam
flywheels...

You have a point Ms. Dee!  I should have phrased my statement differently.    It needs to have mass but the mass needs to be as close to the outside diameter as possible (and the larger the diameter, the better).  That is why old  stationary steam engines had giant flywheels which were spoked (not solid).  I'm not a physicists so I will not give the specifics.  We have people on this forum who could explain this better than I can. 

[robert3985]

Although I appreciate Peteski's point...maybe I'm just lucky, but I've never had an N-scale motor need to be removed for service or replacement.

However, knowing my luck, when/if it happens, it'd be on that one model I decided to epoxy it into!

[Chris333]

But you should stick a big old flywheel on there since you have room. Like an Athearn HO flywheel.

[superchief]

   WOW   looking good Jason........do you have any of your kids casting parts for you yet?  amazing on the speed of the build..........I see no problem in glueing the motor in if your not going to abuse the engine, I have not "burned up" a motor in 20+ years since I don't pull 100/200+ car trains on NTrak layouts anymore      when finished you will have a very rare engine that will NEVER build mass produced. Gordon

[SkipGear]

Jason has made his case for gluing things. I understand and I don't want to continue down that path.

My comment is to all the "I'm not going to abuse it" comments from others.

What is the point in building something like this if you are not going to use it. If you are going to use it, it will need service. My 2-10-2 was built to run and pull trains. The whole point to building these beasts is to pull the trains that they did in the real world. I am also building an EM-1 and it better be able to pull 75-100 cars on level or I haven't done my job right. Besides running on N-trak, I opperate on a friends layout that is a minimum 1% grade for over 500 feet and has sidings designed to handle 40 car trains on that grade. His layout is designed to run actual sized trains, no compression.  A 70 car test run on N-trak is a good test for running on his layout. My layout will eventually handle 25-30 car trains and have a rulling 2% grade and a helix with a 2% grade that these loco's will need to work on. My main enjoyment in N scale is the fact that I can run realistic trains without being in an auditorium.

Ok, rant over, back to a wonderful loco build. I can't believe how close the Concor boiler comes. I'm glad somebody finally found a good use for them.

[RWCJr]

Wondering what percentage of N scale modelers operate trains under the conditions described by Tony versus the percentage that run trains less than 30 cars pulled by engines that barely get broken in due to the number of engines in their fleet.