Peter Insole
Western Thunderer
Thank you Tim T. I must admit that doing all this metallic knitting is pushing me to the limit. It might be a good time to take two tomorrow to come up for some air?!
Pete.
Pete.
Finescale - of a sort?!
- Thread starter Peter Insole
- Start date
Tim Watson
Western Thunderer
Completely agree Peter. It’s sometimes good to have a change from intensive modelling stuff. I had a very relaxing couple of hours painting a back scene this weekend.
Tim
Tim
Peter Insole
Western Thunderer
I must admit that while I do still enjoy playing around with plastic and ply, whittling wood and even mucking about with some metals from time to time, it is the completion rather than the process that gives me the greatest pleasure. There are some tasks that, after the initial excitement of discovery, now tend to fill me with dread at the prospect.
There will be a mightily jolly, happy chappie here when the final copper pipe is bent and installed... let alone the three remaining, downright awkward, tapered brass, ninety degree angled gauge glass valve levers!
Some new 6mm brass rod, of sufficient quantity and specifically ordered for the latter purpose had been delivered an absolute age ago, but I have never seemed to be in quite the right mind to do anything about it since... until now that is.
After a brief rest, I determined to get myself back to the business of mangling more non ferrous stuff:
Everything was going fine - if rather hard working with files in the usual manner - and apart from making a slip and accidentally removing a bit too much metal from one, (at the top in the above image) was fairly pleased with the finished shape.
It was just before reaching this point that I realised that there was a serious (and yet again self-imposed) design issue arising! I was terribly aware that I had to be absolutely sure that any resolution that might involve turning down any part of the levers in the valve area was properly sorted out before the fearful bending process was started!
The trouble was; I just couldn't quite make up my mind... so rather than taking a more considered, rational approach, decided instead to impatiently "throw caution to the wind", (actually, I used another expression!) and get the gas torch out!
"I'll sort it out when I get there" was a bit of a risk, but luckily it turned out alright! Also mercifully, two of the three bends worked, again amazingly without any anticipated breakages, (!) and the levers were eventually dropped, loose fitting, into the valve bodies to check their appearance:-
I had deliberately turned the tapered handles over long at first, primarily to provide sufficient leverage during the bend, but also because I will never trust a G/A to give accurate dimensions or proportions of detail parts... preferring to directly compare the article with photographs wherever possible.
As it turned out, I only needed to trim a mere 5mm or so off the ends to visually compare with my reference collection, whereas the original Horwich GA's suggested somewhat more required to be removed!
When I made the fittings around four years ago (?) I had concluded that as I had neither the tools or knowhow to make properly tapered and seated valves, a plain threaded bore would suffice. What I had completely failed to consider is that there would not only be far too much "slop" in a hand cut thread, but there was also a risk of accidental over tightening at the bottom end of the travel! The gauge glass bodies are of quite the same pattern as my recently completed steam brake, so at first I naturally assumed that doing these would simply be a repeat exercise - despite the presence of the pre-cut threads down the central hole in the male cap nuts.
On the prototype, the valve has the widest part of the taper at the top, lever end, while the narrow part is toward the enclosed base of the chamber. The bore of the cap nut can slide over the end (including the curve) of the lever, to then drop down and be tightened to retain the valve and lever.
Having already chosen smaller metric sizes suitable for a straight screw in from the top arrangement on the model, there was no way of even getting the cap over the head of the handle! This had not previously been a problem with the brake valve, as the handle in that instance was screwed down and locked from the top, so I was able to turn a collar as part of the spindle, and insert it from below the nut, prior to assembly.
I would have to come up with something completely different this time.
The little shoulder at the base of the new levers, at the point where it enters the cap nut and valve body, is representative of the genuine shaft diameter, but on the model is acting as a containment to prevent the lever from dropping down into the body, and I had roughly shaped the spindle below that shoulder to be a sliding fit in the existing cap, with allowance for a short projection below same.
With the otherwise completed levers in hand, I thought long and hard about the best way to deal with that bottom containment! I kept rejecting the notion of drilling a hole through the spindle for any sort of pin - mainly as that could be problematic if I then went on to use my preferred (and proven) wax filling method for providing a smooth, "feel" to the lever operation.
After much rummaging, I managed to find a length of K&S brass tube that was a perfectly tight, press home fit on one of the spindles, and a very slightly loose fit on the other! Having got that far, I weighed various ideas for locking these little collars, and plumped for yet another risky option: I reckoned that this would have to be the luckiest bit of soldering I have ever done, or at least could hope to have managed at any time previously?! I knew full well that I would have to be incredibly slick with both the amount of flux applied, and the briefest of touches with the solder wire to allow just sufficient wicking under the collar, but not enough to spread into the touching cap nut section beyond!
With a tremor present in both, but notably worse in my right hand, I have taken to holding the solder wire in the left, although I can't even trust that these days! I broke the habitual rule this time, and clamped the lever handle between two pieces of scrap wood in the bench vice, then wedged my hand by leaning against the vice to prevent any sudden movement. It made me a bit too close to the flame for comfort... but it worked a treat nonetheless!!
I apologise for not taking any pics of the progress, but I only remembered to take the last two images when I had finally got by breath back - and then only after cleaning up and shaping off the collars!
The tight one was tackled first - to hopefully build a little confidence... and it was fine. The slightly loose one was a heartstopper for a moment though! I had kept a spanner handy on the bench to quickly grab and twist the cap in the hope that I could keep it moving before the work cooled.
It was a frightfully close run thing that time, and I did feel the very slightest initial snatch of a drop of solder that had obviously crossed the minimal gap, but it has rotated perfectly freely thereafter!
Whewee!
I still have the gauge blow-down cock to do, but even as I was finishing with these two... my torch started puttering!
There was just enough gas remaining in the cannister to warm and pour the wax filling before the flame disappeared with a pop and a terrible pong!!
Pete.
There will be a mightily jolly, happy chappie here when the final copper pipe is bent and installed... let alone the three remaining, downright awkward, tapered brass, ninety degree angled gauge glass valve levers!
Some new 6mm brass rod, of sufficient quantity and specifically ordered for the latter purpose had been delivered an absolute age ago, but I have never seemed to be in quite the right mind to do anything about it since... until now that is.
After a brief rest, I determined to get myself back to the business of mangling more non ferrous stuff:
Everything was going fine - if rather hard working with files in the usual manner - and apart from making a slip and accidentally removing a bit too much metal from one, (at the top in the above image) was fairly pleased with the finished shape.
It was just before reaching this point that I realised that there was a serious (and yet again self-imposed) design issue arising! I was terribly aware that I had to be absolutely sure that any resolution that might involve turning down any part of the levers in the valve area was properly sorted out before the fearful bending process was started!
The trouble was; I just couldn't quite make up my mind... so rather than taking a more considered, rational approach, decided instead to impatiently "throw caution to the wind", (actually, I used another expression!) and get the gas torch out!
"I'll sort it out when I get there" was a bit of a risk, but luckily it turned out alright! Also mercifully, two of the three bends worked, again amazingly without any anticipated breakages, (!) and the levers were eventually dropped, loose fitting, into the valve bodies to check their appearance:-
I had deliberately turned the tapered handles over long at first, primarily to provide sufficient leverage during the bend, but also because I will never trust a G/A to give accurate dimensions or proportions of detail parts... preferring to directly compare the article with photographs wherever possible.
As it turned out, I only needed to trim a mere 5mm or so off the ends to visually compare with my reference collection, whereas the original Horwich GA's suggested somewhat more required to be removed!
When I made the fittings around four years ago (?) I had concluded that as I had neither the tools or knowhow to make properly tapered and seated valves, a plain threaded bore would suffice. What I had completely failed to consider is that there would not only be far too much "slop" in a hand cut thread, but there was also a risk of accidental over tightening at the bottom end of the travel! The gauge glass bodies are of quite the same pattern as my recently completed steam brake, so at first I naturally assumed that doing these would simply be a repeat exercise - despite the presence of the pre-cut threads down the central hole in the male cap nuts.
On the prototype, the valve has the widest part of the taper at the top, lever end, while the narrow part is toward the enclosed base of the chamber. The bore of the cap nut can slide over the end (including the curve) of the lever, to then drop down and be tightened to retain the valve and lever.
Having already chosen smaller metric sizes suitable for a straight screw in from the top arrangement on the model, there was no way of even getting the cap over the head of the handle! This had not previously been a problem with the brake valve, as the handle in that instance was screwed down and locked from the top, so I was able to turn a collar as part of the spindle, and insert it from below the nut, prior to assembly.
I would have to come up with something completely different this time.
The little shoulder at the base of the new levers, at the point where it enters the cap nut and valve body, is representative of the genuine shaft diameter, but on the model is acting as a containment to prevent the lever from dropping down into the body, and I had roughly shaped the spindle below that shoulder to be a sliding fit in the existing cap, with allowance for a short projection below same.
With the otherwise completed levers in hand, I thought long and hard about the best way to deal with that bottom containment! I kept rejecting the notion of drilling a hole through the spindle for any sort of pin - mainly as that could be problematic if I then went on to use my preferred (and proven) wax filling method for providing a smooth, "feel" to the lever operation.
After much rummaging, I managed to find a length of K&S brass tube that was a perfectly tight, press home fit on one of the spindles, and a very slightly loose fit on the other! Having got that far, I weighed various ideas for locking these little collars, and plumped for yet another risky option: I reckoned that this would have to be the luckiest bit of soldering I have ever done, or at least could hope to have managed at any time previously?! I knew full well that I would have to be incredibly slick with both the amount of flux applied, and the briefest of touches with the solder wire to allow just sufficient wicking under the collar, but not enough to spread into the touching cap nut section beyond!
With a tremor present in both, but notably worse in my right hand, I have taken to holding the solder wire in the left, although I can't even trust that these days! I broke the habitual rule this time, and clamped the lever handle between two pieces of scrap wood in the bench vice, then wedged my hand by leaning against the vice to prevent any sudden movement. It made me a bit too close to the flame for comfort... but it worked a treat nonetheless!!
I apologise for not taking any pics of the progress, but I only remembered to take the last two images when I had finally got by breath back - and then only after cleaning up and shaping off the collars!
The tight one was tackled first - to hopefully build a little confidence... and it was fine. The slightly loose one was a heartstopper for a moment though! I had kept a spanner handy on the bench to quickly grab and twist the cap in the hope that I could keep it moving before the work cooled.
It was a frightfully close run thing that time, and I did feel the very slightest initial snatch of a drop of solder that had obviously crossed the minimal gap, but it has rotated perfectly freely thereafter!
Whewee!
I still have the gauge blow-down cock to do, but even as I was finishing with these two... my torch started puttering!
There was just enough gas remaining in the cannister to warm and pour the wax filling before the flame disappeared with a pop and a terrible pong!!
Pete.
Last edited:
Yorkshire Dave
Western Thunderer
Will the sight gauge be filled with a colourless liquid? water, gin or vodka..... 
Peter Insole
Western Thunderer
Thank you to all for the lovely ideas! Thank you too Giles for the great compliment!
I do really wish it was a genuine steamer, but I just couldn't have entertained, let alone managed the engineering skills and accuracy required to achieve that.
The fact that what is essentially a "cardboard replica" (!) engine, (to my perpetual and utter amazement) actually fulfils the real purpose of hauling passengers... and perhaps in particular, be safely driven by minors or indeed "rookies" of any age!
Most of the time, that is sufficient compensation?!
Pete.
I do really wish it was a genuine steamer, but I just couldn't have entertained, let alone managed the engineering skills and accuracy required to achieve that.
The fact that what is essentially a "cardboard replica" (!) engine, (to my perpetual and utter amazement) actually fulfils the real purpose of hauling passengers... and perhaps in particular, be safely driven by minors or indeed "rookies" of any age!
Most of the time, that is sufficient compensation?!
Pete.
Peter Insole
Western Thunderer
While I have been trying to keep the momentum going with finishing off the brassware, I must admit there was a terrible low point at the beginning of this week. It had been going a bit too well lately perhaps, so it was particularly frustrating to completely loose a full days worth of effort, let alone the waste of precious materials to a number of errors and unfortunate breakages!
Feeling fairly confident, I kicked off by bending the third, (and last!) gauge glass blow-down cock lever. Forever a fraught exercise, but thankfully successful once again!
However, when tightening down the original keep nut into the valve body there was a horrible snap, and the damned head sheared clean off.
It took an age to dig that wretched, threaded section back out!
Fortunately, I still had a short(ish) length of appropriately sized brass hex - so would just have to make a new one.
Then my blasted number blindness struck again! I had got my measurements mixed up, and laboriously turned the shank on the "wrong" side for cutting an M8 male thread!
Meanwhile, my prized bit of hex was now somewhat shorter... and becoming similarly so was my patience...
The second go, (or maybe the third if counting the wrecked original) was complicated by now having to work closer to the spinning chuck jaws, but at least I kept in mind the correct diameter this time... (?)
Maybe I had been slightly over cautious though?
I thought the die seemed a wee bit tight when cutting, but it kept going squeakily, though seemingly fine...
Until I reached the head...
One final turn... and.... snap!!!
"bleep-bleep-ble-e-e-ep-ble-e-e-ep"!
It took an age to dig the wretched, threaded section out of the die block!
An awful M8 thread cuts coarse and deep, so I have no idea why I insisted on a 6mm internal bore for the lever? There was clearly never going to be enough meat in between... and I have not the foggiest as to how I managed to get away with it for the previous two attempts...??
Reducing the bore to 4mm, on yet another try, on yet another day, may have sorted that problem... but was a nightmare working with a tiddly stub of brass remaining in the whirling chuck jaws!
Even more of a nightmare was reducing the diameter of the (pre-bent) lever to fit the latest hole! I couldn't spin it, so had to do the whole thing by eye (and with needle files of course!) in the bench vice. To give myself half a chance of getting the shaft reasonably cylindrical was to use dies - in reducing stages, to cut a thread, then slowly working round, file down the highs until the faintest trace of the lowest cut remained all round, then repeat, twice more!
Goodness knows how, (?) but it worked out, and went in, in the end!
If the truth be told though; I ended up a bit more "off the handle" than the handle itself at times!
Pete.
Feeling fairly confident, I kicked off by bending the third, (and last!) gauge glass blow-down cock lever. Forever a fraught exercise, but thankfully successful once again!
However, when tightening down the original keep nut into the valve body there was a horrible snap, and the damned head sheared clean off.
It took an age to dig that wretched, threaded section back out!
Fortunately, I still had a short(ish) length of appropriately sized brass hex - so would just have to make a new one.
Then my blasted number blindness struck again! I had got my measurements mixed up, and laboriously turned the shank on the "wrong" side for cutting an M8 male thread!
Meanwhile, my prized bit of hex was now somewhat shorter... and becoming similarly so was my patience...
The second go, (or maybe the third if counting the wrecked original) was complicated by now having to work closer to the spinning chuck jaws, but at least I kept in mind the correct diameter this time... (?)
Maybe I had been slightly over cautious though?
I thought the die seemed a wee bit tight when cutting, but it kept going squeakily, though seemingly fine...
Until I reached the head...
One final turn... and.... snap!!!
"bleep-bleep-ble-e-e-ep-ble-e-e-ep"!
It took an age to dig the wretched, threaded section out of the die block!
An awful M8 thread cuts coarse and deep, so I have no idea why I insisted on a 6mm internal bore for the lever? There was clearly never going to be enough meat in between... and I have not the foggiest as to how I managed to get away with it for the previous two attempts...??
Reducing the bore to 4mm, on yet another try, on yet another day, may have sorted that problem... but was a nightmare working with a tiddly stub of brass remaining in the whirling chuck jaws!
Even more of a nightmare was reducing the diameter of the (pre-bent) lever to fit the latest hole! I couldn't spin it, so had to do the whole thing by eye (and with needle files of course!) in the bench vice. To give myself half a chance of getting the shaft reasonably cylindrical was to use dies - in reducing stages, to cut a thread, then slowly working round, file down the highs until the faintest trace of the lowest cut remained all round, then repeat, twice more!
Goodness knows how, (?) but it worked out, and went in, in the end!
If the truth be told though; I ended up a bit more "off the handle" than the handle itself at times!
Pete.
Last edited:
michael mott
Western Thunderer
Glad to see that it all worked out in the end, I can empathize with your challenges, having started over many times in the past. It is the main reason I have a fair amount of odd bits of material.
Michael
Michael
Peter Insole
Western Thunderer
Thank you to both, and yes Michael, I too keep all the oddments and fragments.
I call it "one day". My wife calls it what it is though!
Pete.
I call it "one day". My wife calls it what it is though!
Pete.
Tim Watson
Western Thunderer
Amazing work Peter. People often say ‘you must have a lot of patience’. It’s not patience it‘s perseverance, especially when we make silly mistakes, but it all pays off in the end.
Tim
Tim
Peter Insole
Western Thunderer
Thank you Tim. I continue in the hope that it might be!
Before reporting the latest progress, I would like to take the opportunity for yet another speculative diversion: Whilst I am aware that for the purpose of modelling it is not absolutely necessary to know how any particular part of the prototype machine works, but it seems that I never will be able to resist the temptation of delving into a new mystery!
Although I am not a steam engineer, I do recognise the benefit of having tapered valves and seating's - especially when dealing with liquids, vapours or gasses subjected to high pressures, in that such fittings have by their nature a tendency to "wear in", rather than "wear out"! Likewise, in the case of boiler water level gauges, the use of (relatively) long levers instead of handwheels for the top, bottom and blow-down cocks - where the facility to be able to rapidly get in and "knock them off" is essential in the event of a severe leak or a broken glass!
It makes perfect sense to have such valve levers in a vertical position, either standing or hanging parallel with the sight glass and backhead, so that while they are in the "normal", open position, they are readily visible and available to operate from any point on the footplate. What can be inferred from this is that in all the usual designs, the hole bored through the tapered valve spindle should always be at right angles to the lever.
The Gorton and Horwich drawings, such as they are, and an abstract of the following image, (which is also apparently the earliest available so far, purportedly having been taken in 1899) goes some way towards confirming the presumed arrangement :-
(Unknown copyright, shown here for illustrative purposes only)
The gauge levers must surely be fully open in that picture of "Dot", as the engine is not just evidently in steam - she is merrily "blowing her nuts off" while posing for the photographer!
Yet strangely, look at the top cock in the following shot of "Fly" - taken just a few years later :-
(unknown copyright, shown for illustrative purposes only)
This engine was also posed, and making a similar display of accumulated boiler pressure... but this time revealing a somewhat contradictory position for the top cock!!
All subsequent images, including "Wren", that was the last one in steam, (before failing with a cracked cylinder sometime in 1957!) show the same, peculiar arrangement!
While studying my reference pictures of BP's own "Dot" at Tywyn, I spotted a number "2", clearly stamped into the elbow of the top cock handle. (see below):
Ah huh?!
Now of course, Wren's top fitting, original (or otherwise) is missing altogether, while Dot too is cold and dry, with the lever randomly "parked", so admittedly without being able to dismantle the valve for further inspection, I do still find myself wondering if that number is pertinent here?!
Recalling being informed that these engines were designed to be driven from alongside (horse shunting fashion) as well as from a more conventional (albeit slightly awkward and uncomfortable) position on the footplate - and that in response to that statement I had tested the theory by standing alongside Dot in the museum, confirming that the essential controls (regulator and steam brake) were effortlessly accessible from either side - got me thinking...
Now the levers are installed on the model, I could set up a scenario, and while thinking in terms of a scale body, imagined reaching for an almost fully open regulator on a moving locomotive.
Bingo!
The top cock lever, in it's original downward position, is at such an angle, and so close at the elbow to the raised regulator that it falls slap bang in perfect alignment to accidentally get caught and slide up a driver's sleeve as he attempts to close same!! It is equally in way of the steam brake too! However, moving the handle to face forward completely removes that - or indeed any other potential snagging risks as far as I can see!
Might it follow therefore, that such a vital modification, with a (hidden) spindle hole set at 90 degrees to the norm, is the reason for a specific, numerical identification; in this case being a "No. 2 fitting"?
Pete.
Before reporting the latest progress, I would like to take the opportunity for yet another speculative diversion: Whilst I am aware that for the purpose of modelling it is not absolutely necessary to know how any particular part of the prototype machine works, but it seems that I never will be able to resist the temptation of delving into a new mystery!
Although I am not a steam engineer, I do recognise the benefit of having tapered valves and seating's - especially when dealing with liquids, vapours or gasses subjected to high pressures, in that such fittings have by their nature a tendency to "wear in", rather than "wear out"! Likewise, in the case of boiler water level gauges, the use of (relatively) long levers instead of handwheels for the top, bottom and blow-down cocks - where the facility to be able to rapidly get in and "knock them off" is essential in the event of a severe leak or a broken glass!
It makes perfect sense to have such valve levers in a vertical position, either standing or hanging parallel with the sight glass and backhead, so that while they are in the "normal", open position, they are readily visible and available to operate from any point on the footplate. What can be inferred from this is that in all the usual designs, the hole bored through the tapered valve spindle should always be at right angles to the lever.
The Gorton and Horwich drawings, such as they are, and an abstract of the following image, (which is also apparently the earliest available so far, purportedly having been taken in 1899) goes some way towards confirming the presumed arrangement :-
(Unknown copyright, shown here for illustrative purposes only)
The gauge levers must surely be fully open in that picture of "Dot", as the engine is not just evidently in steam - she is merrily "blowing her nuts off" while posing for the photographer!
Yet strangely, look at the top cock in the following shot of "Fly" - taken just a few years later :-
(unknown copyright, shown for illustrative purposes only)
This engine was also posed, and making a similar display of accumulated boiler pressure... but this time revealing a somewhat contradictory position for the top cock!!
All subsequent images, including "Wren", that was the last one in steam, (before failing with a cracked cylinder sometime in 1957!) show the same, peculiar arrangement!
While studying my reference pictures of BP's own "Dot" at Tywyn, I spotted a number "2", clearly stamped into the elbow of the top cock handle. (see below):
Ah huh?!
Now of course, Wren's top fitting, original (or otherwise) is missing altogether, while Dot too is cold and dry, with the lever randomly "parked", so admittedly without being able to dismantle the valve for further inspection, I do still find myself wondering if that number is pertinent here?!
Recalling being informed that these engines were designed to be driven from alongside (horse shunting fashion) as well as from a more conventional (albeit slightly awkward and uncomfortable) position on the footplate - and that in response to that statement I had tested the theory by standing alongside Dot in the museum, confirming that the essential controls (regulator and steam brake) were effortlessly accessible from either side - got me thinking...
Now the levers are installed on the model, I could set up a scenario, and while thinking in terms of a scale body, imagined reaching for an almost fully open regulator on a moving locomotive.
Bingo!
The top cock lever, in it's original downward position, is at such an angle, and so close at the elbow to the raised regulator that it falls slap bang in perfect alignment to accidentally get caught and slide up a driver's sleeve as he attempts to close same!! It is equally in way of the steam brake too! However, moving the handle to face forward completely removes that - or indeed any other potential snagging risks as far as I can see!
Might it follow therefore, that such a vital modification, with a (hidden) spindle hole set at 90 degrees to the norm, is the reason for a specific, numerical identification; in this case being a "No. 2 fitting"?
Pete.
There is always the working proposition that any fast acting valve (1/4 turn type ) should fall to off position, so in the event it is loose or caught it turns off rather than on. A gauge glass would be the opposite of this as it is only a safety device when when it's on to show the contents.
Sometimes we stripped and turned valves to get better access in restricted spaces, so they no longer complied with approved practice, but needs must.............
Sometimes we stripped and turned valves to get better access in restricted spaces, so they no longer complied with approved practice, but needs must.............
simond
Western Thunderer
Pete,
I don’t think so! Most if not all quarter turn valves in my experience are “on” when the lever is parallel to the pipe in which the valve is mounted. Certainly the case on every boat I’ve ever been on. Gas taps too. It’s a long time ago when I fired on the Ffestiniog, like fifty years, but if memory serves at that distance, the same is true on locos.
it’s a very visual indicator of “on/open” and “off/closed”. Indeed it’s the only indicator.
The passage is therefore not at right angles!
atb
Simon
jcm@gwr
Western Thunderer
The same applies to all plumbing equipment I've ever used, fitted or dealt with!
Peter Insole
Western Thunderer
Thank you Simon and jcm@gwr, you are correct.... but as you say Class 27, except in the peculiar case of locomotive boiler water level gauges - including the most commonly adopted patents!!!
On such fittings, the isolating valves are mounted "behind" the top and bottom "nuts" - where the "line of flow" is at right angles to the backhead. If the levers are set as suggested; then they would be facing outwards into the cab when in the open position.
It might be worth noting that in most circumstances, gauge glass levers cannot face away from the footplate - as there is not normally sufficient standoff to allow a long lever to turn fully without coming into contact with the backhead. Besides, even if it was not so, any levers in that position would also be difficult to reach in an emergency! The exception to that rule in this particular case, is that the top fitting under discussion is unusually mounted directly on a branch of the steam manifold, ("fountain") and is therefore completely unobstructed.
Indeed, what I am suggesting therefore is that the "standard", (evidently a "No.1") fitting (which by necessity is non-standard) is replaced by a non-standard, no.2 fitting... which of course is actually a standard one!
Ahem!
Now, back to that promised progress report:
In my usual fashion, and for whatever long forgotten reasons, there are still a good many unfinished tasks, that in retrospect would have been much better if completed at the time! One such regular niggle has been an annoyingly naked hole in the front of both the top and bottom gauge glass fittings. Putting that right correctly proved to be something somewhat off-putting:
For a start, I had presumably, and rather cautiously drilled the holes significantly under size for their intended fittings, probably because I could not make my mind up about how I was going to go about making them? I have however reached a point, with this part anyway, where the desire to finish slightly outweighs any concern for absolute accuracy..!
I realised that the only practical way of producing the distinctive "bump" on what were originally cast brass (or bronze?) units was to open out the holes to a full bore for some 6mm rod. Not a task that I was relishing, as I could anticipate all manner of means to accidentally destroy the precious earlier work!
The rods would also have to be sweated on too... and hopefully without disturbing any of the existing, and immediately adjacent joints:
A bit of cleaning up was needed afterwards, but none could have been more surprised than me when everything stayed firmly... and in the intended alignment too!
Drilling tiny (ha,ha, well, for me anyway!) M3 holes through the finished "lumps" was a walk in the park by comparison with what went before, but there was still a problem finding some appropriately small brass hex for a pair of cap screws.
Much rummaging later, I found an ancient nut-runner tool... with a nice, slender brass hex handle...
that is now, guess what (?) - a little bit shorter! :-
The slightly elongated screw heads are just a touch over scale, but I am nonetheless quite happy that they look suitably "business like" when in situ!
Another minor item that has been a source of disproportionate bother to me was an earlier attempt at making an end cap for the top fitting. In that example, the hex was disquietingly burdensome!
It felt like a good time to finally sort that one out:
Try as I might though, I couldn't find any marginally less bulky donor... but as I regarded this one as a bit manageably larger, I decided to simply cut it down to size, with both needle files and eye... and perhaps a dollop of desperation for good measure?!
Oops, damn and blast! The photo reveals that one of the facets definitely ain't quite right - but at least thanks to the slimming exercise it has lost the all round overhang though!
I wish it was that easy for myself these days, but then, the less said about unseen things... that should remain unspoken of... eh?!
Pete.
On such fittings, the isolating valves are mounted "behind" the top and bottom "nuts" - where the "line of flow" is at right angles to the backhead. If the levers are set as suggested; then they would be facing outwards into the cab when in the open position.
It might be worth noting that in most circumstances, gauge glass levers cannot face away from the footplate - as there is not normally sufficient standoff to allow a long lever to turn fully without coming into contact with the backhead. Besides, even if it was not so, any levers in that position would also be difficult to reach in an emergency! The exception to that rule in this particular case, is that the top fitting under discussion is unusually mounted directly on a branch of the steam manifold, ("fountain") and is therefore completely unobstructed.
Indeed, what I am suggesting therefore is that the "standard", (evidently a "No.1") fitting (which by necessity is non-standard) is replaced by a non-standard, no.2 fitting... which of course is actually a standard one!
Ahem!
Now, back to that promised progress report:
In my usual fashion, and for whatever long forgotten reasons, there are still a good many unfinished tasks, that in retrospect would have been much better if completed at the time! One such regular niggle has been an annoyingly naked hole in the front of both the top and bottom gauge glass fittings. Putting that right correctly proved to be something somewhat off-putting:
For a start, I had presumably, and rather cautiously drilled the holes significantly under size for their intended fittings, probably because I could not make my mind up about how I was going to go about making them? I have however reached a point, with this part anyway, where the desire to finish slightly outweighs any concern for absolute accuracy..!
I realised that the only practical way of producing the distinctive "bump" on what were originally cast brass (or bronze?) units was to open out the holes to a full bore for some 6mm rod. Not a task that I was relishing, as I could anticipate all manner of means to accidentally destroy the precious earlier work!
The rods would also have to be sweated on too... and hopefully without disturbing any of the existing, and immediately adjacent joints:
A bit of cleaning up was needed afterwards, but none could have been more surprised than me when everything stayed firmly... and in the intended alignment too!
Drilling tiny (ha,ha, well, for me anyway!) M3 holes through the finished "lumps" was a walk in the park by comparison with what went before, but there was still a problem finding some appropriately small brass hex for a pair of cap screws.
Much rummaging later, I found an ancient nut-runner tool... with a nice, slender brass hex handle...
that is now, guess what (?) - a little bit shorter! :-
The slightly elongated screw heads are just a touch over scale, but I am nonetheless quite happy that they look suitably "business like" when in situ!
Another minor item that has been a source of disproportionate bother to me was an earlier attempt at making an end cap for the top fitting. In that example, the hex was disquietingly burdensome!
It felt like a good time to finally sort that one out:
Try as I might though, I couldn't find any marginally less bulky donor... but as I regarded this one as a bit manageably larger, I decided to simply cut it down to size, with both needle files and eye... and perhaps a dollop of desperation for good measure?!
Oops, damn and blast! The photo reveals that one of the facets definitely ain't quite right - but at least thanks to the slimming exercise it has lost the all round overhang though!
I wish it was that easy for myself these days, but then, the less said about unseen things... that should remain unspoken of... eh?!
Pete.
timbowales
Western Thunderer
Peter, what lovely looking brasswork
Peter Insole
Western Thunderer
Thank you Tim, it is starting to look rather "busy" with all the shiny, twinkly stuff piling up on board now!
I have always been minded to allow it to naturally tarnish for a more authentic, every-day, Horwich appearance, but then again......
Pete.
I have always been minded to allow it to naturally tarnish for a more authentic, every-day, Horwich appearance, but then again......
Pete.