Atlas Code 55 Frog Plating Test

[mmagliaro]

Okay... so I decided to throw myself on the sword on this one and set up a test.   There was discussion in another thread about what happens to Atlas code 55 turnouts when the plating on the frog starts to wear through.  I suggested that I would try repairing it by using a brush-plating electroplating kit from Caswell to put a fresh nickel layer onto the frog.

Wanting it to be a somewhat real-world test, I chose a #7 turnout on my mainline where trains run virtually 99% of the time that I ever have the layout in operation (not some obscure little-used siding).  I went at the frog with some 220 grit sandpaper.

It took a good 5 minutes to get the copper underlayer to start showing through.  But it didn't show everywhere - just on the frog itself, not on the guard rails.  I continued on, thinking I must not have gotten through it yet.  Well, a minute or two more and the copper was gone and I was back to a silver-colored metal, so I assume there is a thin copper layer and then some base metal under that.  I never did get any copper to show on the guard rails.

There is no perceptible change in the rail height, so we are talking only a few thousandths of an inch here, at most.

So, now I have polished it up with 800 grit and 1200 grit so it's nice and smooth again.  I'll take a photo and then I'll nickel-plate it and take another photo.

But so far, it sure looks to me like that plating is mighty tough and it would not be easy to wear it off in the first place.

[Chris333]

I never had it wear down. On many of my (long gone) turnouts the frog was higher than the rail. I would plane it down with a large flat file. And well you know the rest.

[MichaelWinicki]

Okay... so I decided to throw myself on the sword on this one and set up a test.   There was discussion in another thread about what happens to Atlas code 55 turnouts when the plating on the frog starts to wear through.  I suggested that I would try repairing it by using a brush-plating electroplating kit from Caswell to put a fresh nickel layer onto the frog.

Wanting it to be a somewhat real-world test, I chose a #7 turnout on my mainline where trains run virtually 99% of the time that I ever have the layout in operation (not some obscure little-used siding).  I went at the frog with some 220 grit sandpaper.

It took a good 5 minutes to get the copper underlayer to start showing through.  But it didn't show everywhere - just on the frog itself, not on the guard rails.  I continued on, thinking I must not have gotten through it yet.  Well, a minute or two more and the copper was gone and I was back to a silver-colored metal, so I assume there is a thin copper layer and then some base metal under that.  I never did get any copper to show on the guard rails.

There is no perceptible change in the rail height, so we are talking only a few thousandths of an inch here, at most.

So, now I have polished it up with 800 grit and 1200 grit so it's nice and smooth again.  I'll take a photo and then I'll nickel-plate it and take another photo.

But so far, it sure looks to me like that plating is mighty tough and it would not be easy to wear it off in the first place.

Agree on the original plating not being as weak/soft...  The only places I've had it show up is where I've put the file to it. 

[mmagliaro]

The quick result is that the rails plate fine, and they look good, although a bit more dull than the surrounding rail.  But that's to be expected.  Pure nickel plating is not nickel silver or whatever "chrome" stuff they are using on that frog.

One thing I do notice is that there was a dip in conductivity on that frog until I polished the surface after plating.  The surface was
a little dull and needed to be shined up by rubbing hard with a paper towel and some alcohol.  After that, it seems to work fine.  I could creep an engine back and forth across the frog with no problems.

Photos later tonight. 

I think it's a workable solution if you have copper showing through and you don't like it, but it's hard to get through that top plating to begin with.  Some of you folks have really worn that off just by running trains over it?  I really had to sand
to get it to show and I can't believe that wheels running over the rail could ever abuse the rail surface as much as what I did.

[MichaelWinicki]

Thank you for doing that Max!

[davefoxx]

I've been back into N scale for over ten years using Atlas Code 55 track (it's the product that brought me back to N scale), but I've never worn a frog through it's plating.  I'm also one of those guys who's guilty of using a Brite-Boy on my track as the primary method of cleaning rails.

DFF

[Cajonpassfan]

Thank you for doing that Max!

Yes, thank you Max!
I only have two turnouts with the wear issue, but good to know!
But "only $40" for the kit? Ouch..... I think I will wait to see how my other 80 or so Atlas turnouts fare and wear...
Appreciate the homework though!
Otto K.

[mmagliaro]

Well, yes, $40 isn't chump change, but considering all the plating you can do with it, it is very economical.  If you
don't have anything else to plate with it, then yes, it's not very economical.

As promised, here's a photo.  The guard rails (top and bottom, marked with red arrows) show the copper metal because they aren't plated.  The frog in the middle has been replated with nickel.  I think it looks good. 

I bet that going at that frog with a Bright Boy or other abrasive might start taking that plating off.  I only plated by rubbing the wet swab of solution back and forth over the frog for about 3 minutes.  You might want to do it for, like, a half hour if you are really determined to lay on a thick plating.  You can see all the messy fibers down in the ties from the paper toweling that I used on the wand to  apply the solution.

I think this does work.  I'm still surprised that people are wearing the original plating off in the first place, given how hard it was for me to get through it with sandpaper.

[mmagliaro]

... and when I say "thick" plating, I mean, may, .0005" ( a half of a thousandth of an inch).   Somewhere on Caswell's site I remember reading that with these wand/brush systems, expect it to take an hour to build up even .001"

But it's surprisingly durable.

[MichaelWinicki]

Wow!

That looks great!

Again thank you Max for coming up with the idea and testing it.

[peteski]

I really had to sand
to get it to show and I can't believe that wheels running over the rail could ever abuse the rail surface as much as what I did.

In my experience it is not the running trains which wear out the plating - it is several years of cleaning the track with a Bright Boy block.  This is more of a cosmetic than reliability issue. I still dislike Atlas c55 switches for the same reasons you do (unreliable welds, floppy point hinges, and thin and flexible throwbar).

[robert3985]

That's great Max!

However, the copper plating on the frog was put there first to get the final plaing layer to stick.  In the Micro Mark catalog where they sell plating kits, it shows a pot-metal part being plated, with a first layer of copper having been applied.

Also, I don't believe I've read anybody claiming that the Atlas "chromy" plating has come off due to normal wear from trains running over it, but from filing and use of abrasive cleaners.   Truthfully, on the Atlas turnouts I've installed on customers' modules, they look better after painting, then "Bright-Boying" the not-yet-cured paint off, which dulls the plating on the frogs, guard rails and closure points railheads to look more like the actual NS stock rails.

Hmmm...half an hour of swabbing on the frog and guardrails???  That, combined with the efforts underneath to solve the electrical continuity problems would put total effort into that particular turnout at around an hour (give or take half an hour depending on how thick you want the plating to be, or how good the soldering goes on the pot-metal frog).  Ahem!!...Seems to me...yup...seems to me that hand-laying is getting more and more attractive, since hand-laid turnouts don't have electrical or material problems that Atlas C55 turnouts are evidently having, and take about the same amount of time to make, as to fix this particular turnout.

Additionally, to those of us who are more detail-oriented...you also get a properly proportioned turnout, which is additionally much more reliable, and saves a potful of money at the same time.

Just sayin.... 

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[mmagliaro]

Yes,  that makes much more sense, that the plating would eventually wear off from a lot of cleaning with an abrasive
cleaner (or even a Bright Boy).

And also yes, I presumed that they must have had to put that copper layer on first in order to plate over it with something else.
You can even plate copper over plastic! (and then you could plate nickel over that for a harder wear surface).

I am not at all surprised at how good the nickel electroplating looks.  Once I tried it on my brass wheels, I was a fan.

[peteski]

Yes,  that makes much more sense, that the plating would eventually wear off from a lot of cleaning with an abrasive
cleaner (or even a Bright Boy).

Bright Boy is quite abrasive actually.  But that is what my friend likes to use (and has done that for decades - a habit which goes back to his NTRAK days).  I'm also thinking that that not using solid nickel-silver was a cost-saving measure. But then OTOH, it is surprising that a multi-step process (molding the white-metal frogs, then plating them twice) is cheaper than just making a nickel-silver casting.  But maybe those Atlas castings are cast in large numbers in a steel slide-mold, while nickel-silver might require casting using the lost-wax casting process.

[MichaelWinicki]

Received my kit yesterday and went out today to do some testing on some frogs/points where the copper was showing due to aggressive filing done by me (ahum)...

The kit worked like a champ!

Didn't spend all that long on each turnout.  Just long enough to plate over the copper.

Highly recommended way of solving this issue.