7mm The Derby Line - Rolling Stock

[dibateg]

The experience I have had with DCC has shown that it is much more sensitive to dirt and pick up problems than DC, so my philosophy is ( and always has been for that matter ) to fit as many pick ups as possible. That's just the way I do it and it works for me.
Regards
Tony

 

[alcazar]

Thanks. I had been led to believe it was less prone to problems. Seems I need to do more research.
What about these "stay alive " modules?

 

[dibateg]

Some of the Heyside group have fitted quite large capacity stay alives to the decoders, they are very effective.

 

[SteadyRed]

Thanks. I had been led to believe it was less prone to problems. Seems I need to do more research.
What about these "stay alive " modules?

Sounds like a capacitor which continues to provide power if the loco looses power from the track.

Dave

 

[oldravendale]

My personal experience with DCC has been that it is more reliable in terms of pick up than analogue. I've not found it necessary to fit capacitors/"stay alive" modules either on my locos or those so far converted at club, although these are no smaller than 0-6-0 tanks and normally have pick ups on all wheels except those with split axles where I've not tried splitting the driven axle.....yet. However, all the locos with split axles have sprung hornblocks which helps the wheels keep in contact with even pretty poor track. Even my 0-4-0 Sentinel seems to run perfectly although I will be fitting it with a stay alive module as I'm sure there will be circumstances where a short wheel base 4-wheel shunter at very slow speeds will run in to problems.

In fact I can't remember when I last cleaned the wheels on one of my locos, although the club track, where I run them, is cleaned regularly. I suspect that the constant 18V DC improves pick up and slow running.

Brian

 

[alcazar]

That's what I was told when I bought mine. Also given a heads up that stay alive modules were being developed.

Sadly, it's still in it's boxes, layoutless and unused.

 

[mickoo]

My personal experience with DCC has been that it is more reliable in terms of pick up than analogue. I've not found it necessary to fit capacitors/"stay alive" modules either on my locos or those so far converted at club, although these are no smaller than 0-6-0 tanks and normally have pick ups on all wheels except those with split axles where I've not tried splitting the driven axle.....yet. However, all the locos with split axles have sprung hornblocks which helps the wheels keep in contact with even pretty poor track. Even my 0-4-0 Sentinel seems to run perfectly although I will be fitting it with a stay alive module as I'm sure there will be circumstances where a short wheel base 4-wheel shunter at very slow speeds will run in to problems.

In fact I can't remember when I last cleaned the wheels on one of my locos, although the club track, where I run them, is cleaned regularly. I suspect that the constant 18V DC improves pick up and slow running.

Brian

Brian I think it's AC which is why you shouldn't really put a DC loco on a DCC track.

Regarding dirt build up, your correct, the higher voltage will reduce carbon build up, we have a lot of problems with small contactors that pass small voltages and currents and the contact faces dirty up regularily. The solution is to interface those small circuits into higher voltages of say 110V to do the switching, or, more correctly, pay the extra money for contactors specifically designed to operate at low voltages and currents.

I suspect the dirt build up is mainly from when running at slow speeds (say 3-8v range etc), shunting and anything below maximum, which for many layouts will be a lot of the time, therefore DCC 18V AC will have a distinct advantage.

 

[oldravendale]

Brian I think it's AC which is why you shouldn't really put a DC loco on a DCC track.

Doh!!!. I know that so well. Wonder why my fingers wandered to the D instead of the A?

(Note to self: always read what you are writing before hitting the "send" button. I already have a history of doing this on this forum. Must be the fluence..... Or p'raps Scotch.)

However, my comments regarding running remain the same. I've always found DCC to provide excellent running characteristics.

(All duly checked to make sure I've used the correct worms.)

Brian

 

[dibateg]

The Welsh Wizard warned me about the DJH 9F, he was right and I'm starting to have a few disappointments, or am I just grumpy. In principle it is ok, but there are a few weak design faults, such as the injector support brackets that seem to have the shortest tab possible, why not have a longer tab so that it can be soldered neatly from the inside? The motion brackets are designed to be attached by screws to a thin stretcher about 0.5mm thick that has been pre tapped, one extra turn and that's the thread gone... So those have had to be beefed up with thick plate, drilled and tapped. Also the right hand one seems incorrect in that the lightening hole in the angled section seems too shallow - as the whole section there is not deep enough. It is rather, Ragstone to the rescue... Even after reading Raymond Whalleys review, I still forgot to solder a nut for the front pony in the leading box section, that area is now completely inaccessible... so a think washer soldered underneath and tapped...

 

[Scanlon]

Commiserations!
Roger

 

[alcazar]

Now if you'd built one, then the next, and so on........

(Runs for cover....)

 

[oldravendale]

Yes, I ran in to the same problems with mine, and my solutions have been roughly the same, although the injector bracket has now fallen off three times, so I'm fitting a small brass angle bracket behind it and hope that'll hold it in place.

Watch out for the regulator linkage which is considerably too low at the cab end if compared with the prototype. Also the expansion link (by memory) clouts the motion bracket and limits the angle you can put on the outside crank on one side - I think it's the LHS, which is strange, as the opposite side fits and runs fine.

Overall I found the use of screw treads in thin metal to be unsatisfactory and in all cases have modified by using soldered joints or beefing up the metal thickness. It's been a reasonably frustrating build here and there, but when it's good it's very good!

All in all I agree that it's a disappointment although it looks the part - if not perfect - when completed.

Brian

 

[dibateg]

Happy New Year all...

Not much modelling done, but some Ivatts gathering on Heyside..

 

[dibateg]

I couldn't face using the white metal slidebar bracket, so replaced the entire assembly with Ragstone parts, crosshead and all. They are far better than that in the kit. It's taken a little time to fettle and work out how to attach them to the chassis. I made some spacers from 1mm thick brass and with a stroke of genius for once worked out that I could use the etched slot in the chassis to pass a 12BA screw through to a hole tapped in the plate and casting. The position can then be set as required without requiring 6 hands to solder the thing into place.
Just a couple of grab shots to show progress, 4 slidebars ready and one chassis set up.

 

[Nick Dunhill]

Hi Tony
Thought you might be interested in this. It's a DJH 9F that I didn't build but I had it on the bench for what turned out to be quite a biggish chassis rebuild. Whoever had built the chassis had done it reasonably well but had incorporated miles too much end float in the axles and hadn't trimmed the crankpins properly so everything came into conflict with everything else. I just tidied it up and it then ran beautifully.

I built new crankpin nuts and altered the expansion links so that they worked prototypically. The radius rod was then able to slide up and down the slot in the expansion link through the mid position. The pivot pins were then attached to the expansion link (as per crude drawing!) and I couldn't help making the mechanical lubricator linkage reciprocate. I made tiny joints to facilitate this. More madness!





Nick

 

[dibateg]

Thanks Nick - I know I've used some castings like that in the past, probably Sans Pareil I think.
Regards
Tony

 

[demu1037]

Thanks Nick - I know I've used some castings like that in the past, probably Sans Pareil I think.
Regards
Tony

Tony,

These may help......or not!


LHS expansion link



RHS expansion link

RHS lubricator

Andy

 

[alcazar]

I made tiny joints to facilitate this.

I think most of us would need those if we were to try that.......

 

[Nick Dunhill]

Hi Tony
The expansion links were fabricated from the supplied etchings. I wish I'd known there were some commercially available at the time though...

Nick

 

[dibateg]

Thanks Andy - excellent shots- and what they do show is that the 'wings' of the expansion link are pretty well invisible.

Nick - yes, I have some castings from the Sans Pareil Standard 5, but getting another 2 pairs would be nigh on impossible I think!

Regards
Tony