Running Duration - typical

[atom3624]

Just curious.

When it was really cold I may have skipped some running time, and perhaps only ran for limited periods.

Similarly, during the recent hot spell, I would either skip, or only run for perhaps 20-40 minutes.

Normally, when I run a 'healthy' locomotive / train set, with known good running gear - like all Bachmann recent diesels, most Hornby Steam / Diesel, and several others besides, I'll generally run between 40-60% for around 2 hours each time.

Some Bachmann steam locomotives are good, but most have relatively weak 3-pole motors which can get quite warm after 35-40 minutes' running, so that's their limit.

How long do you guys run yours for normally?

Al.

[Gricer]

I have plenty of rolling stock and so I have the advantage that I can run to a busy Summer or reduced Winter service timetable. Trains will usually do two or three circuits as a timetabled train before stopping at a platform or in a siding. Often they can return as a different scheduled service later. This means that over a running session I have engines that are often in use but not for long periods.

I do sometimes just let trains run round but even then I would not expect to run the same train for up to 40 minutes. At one time there used to be people setting “world records” for the longest continually running engine or train. Often at model trade events or in model shops. Good publicity but not really transferable to most modellers who are more interested in having running sessions over many years.

However it raises a question. Has anyone done any research on whether the little-but-often or the continuous long running is more detrimental to the engine’s long-term life? 

[What About The Bee]

However it raises a question. Has anyone done any research on whether the little-but-often or the continuous long running is more detrimental to the engine’s long-term life? 

 

 

Hello Gricer

One component is duck soup obvious. The electric brush type motor.

The brushes and commutator wear against each other. It is strictly a function of time until (typically) one of the brushes wears out.

The same amount of running time is achieved, yet in calendar time, the brief run model will outlast the continuous run model. It is perception. It lasted longer because the brush life was used more judiciously.

It is for this reason you will see references in industrial literature about brushless motors. There is no magic, instead of the coils rotating, the magnets do. The stationary coils produce the advancing magnetic field, which attract the permanent magnets attached to the rotor. Viola, no brushes and therefore no brush wear.

Bee

[Rallymatt]

Meanwhile in the world of TT:120…. Motors are an issue. I have had two seized solid on Hornby launch A4’s after around 20 hours (total) running and it’s always been 20-30 min session with a direction change that kills them. I run locos at scale speeds so probably half what they are capable of. I have a Roco BR108 that is back in Austria (3 months now) that suffered motor failure after only 7/8 hours running… mainly shunting speeds (German modellers are throwing those motors away in brand new models and swapping to something else I have since found)

There is some speculation that some of these iffy motors might have wipers instead of traditional carbon brushes… like the ones that caused so much grief in past… but it is speculation until someone opens a motor up.

Even so, I probably have a loco running for 20 mins before it’s ‘arrived’ and others trains are doing stuff.

My old OO stuff from 70/80s ran for hours and hours, day after day. Model shops had layouts that ran almost non stop for years (seemed like it)

Has the motor now just become a service replacement part like an oil filter?

[atom3624]

The other thing with the carbon brushes, is I've come across various different 'applications'.

There's the Dapol ones which simply have tension on a copper strip, with graphitic carbon on the end - obviously as they wear, pressure onto the commutator surface decreases - nothing to compensate for wear, accepting a little 'springiness' in the Cu itself.

The other aspect, whilst I totally agree, the best condition motor is the one kept in a sealed packet and never used, is how it has been used. Mild loading with no more than perhaps 60-65% power, if the brush surface contact with the commutator has been bedded in by light running in, etc., should limit surface arcing.

If regular and prolonged use of high-to-full power is applied, this will be exaggerated.

I would see this in more extreme 'brushed motors' in R/Control cars.

I used to have 2x '9-turn' motors, which had thicker wire, few - relative to the 'industry standard 27-turn' - turns, and produced up to at least twice the peak power, and with 25%+ higher revs. These would wear brushes down quickly, often with extreme arcing which could damage the commutator.

Locomotive motors nowadays are generally 'use and discard' non-serviceable units, with lower revs / smoother power considerations, so their application should be 'considered'.

Personally, I just like having trains circulating!

I liked the time-tabled multi-track operation mentioned above, but I'm nowhere near that league at present.

Al.

[ntpntpntp]

Has the motor now just become a service replacement part like an oil filter?

 

 

Well it is noticeable the number of cheap "sealed can" motors now fitted to models, those for which you cannot replace the brushes and are often sold as not needing lubrication in their lifetime. They're not usually a "user replaceable part" either, at least not without some soldering and maybe transfer of the worm gear.

I've replaced failed sealed can N gauge motors for myself and others, and found on opening them up that invariably it's been the metal wiper brushes or commutator that's died.

Genuine replacements for some of these motors are not cheap, but fortunately you can find very similar motors more cheaply. Accepting those will probably not last long either.

[Rallymatt]

I’d rather pay more and have something high quality. The thought of restricting running in case it wears out seems to be counter intuitive with the hobby, I like watching trains pass by as well as some involved shunting and marshalling.

[atom3624]

Some interesting comments.

It would be nice to replace the brushes / clean the commutator when needed.

Al.

[JJ73]

I usually run mine for the length of time for which I make a YT / TT Video for - could be from couple of mins for a review to about 5 or 6 mins if it is just a 'Running Session'!!! 😉🚂

[ntpntpntp]

Typical continuous running duration for my locos is about a minute at a time. I have a fiddleyard with capacity for around 24 trains to take their turn.

I'd get bored with the same train running round and round for many circuits, so other than running-in and testing they don't usually go "roundy roundy". At an exhibition I'll sometimes route a train round a couple of times if someone asks or some kids are really enjoying it:)

[threelink]

I have some old Triang stuff which has run for many many hours on and off over the last 60 years or so with nothing more than the odd drop of oil and the occasional replacement brush. Some of the locos are so old that the axle holes have worn oval but they still run. The X03/04 motors really are indestructible and will happily run non stop for hours at a stretch with no sign of distress. As I understand it, they were originally designed to operate camera equipment in photographic reconnaissance Spitfires in WW II, so reliability was inherent in the design. I cannot vouch for the accuracy of this information, but it seems believable

[atom3624]

I remember 'ovalling' my R579 4983 Albert Hall driver axle chassis holes, and my mechanic Dad 'gently centre punching' them to close them up slightly!

Seems like I like 'roundy, roundy' !!

I just like movement and have various viewpoints.

Long-term plan is obviously to install 'a proper' large layout, with multiple loop options, but I have single operation at one end, doubled up for perhaps ~85% of the loop.

Al.

[Gricer]

When I asked the question above on whether the little-but-often or the continuous long running was better for engines I had almost expected someone to immediately say “How long is a piece of string?” But as usual the forum has come up with some useful analysis and comments. Many thanks.

 

Threelink - I did have a quick look at my engines as I have some purchased in the mid-1970s when I first started my layout. My earliest Hornby Hall and 57xx tank locos can still run (but with an occasional push) while my Airfix 14xx tank can run perfectly, as does Hornby’s Lord of the Isles (but with its ancient pick-ups not across any of my points). I doubt that I have any working electrical kit in the house from the 1970/80s, but many of us are still appear to able to happily run engines that were bought many years ago.

   

[Tony57]

Hi Gricer,

Careful running in of motors will help them last longer as will running them at 3/4 power rather then at full power the motor will last longer.

The running time limit for the standard Hornby can type motor is between 100 and 200 hours the better quality of the motor fitted the longer the run time.

The Ringfield type motor bogie / tender drive is 200 hours plus before new carbons are needed, Life span of the motor unknown.

The X04 type motor is also 200 hours plus before new brushes are needed, the life of the motor is unknown.

The Hornby Dublo ringfield motor is of the same duration of 200 hours plus before needing new brushes

I have 3 secondhand Class F7 transcontinental locos with the MK1 motor bogie with X04 motors that were made in 1955 that are still working today. That makes them 68 years old.

I wonder how may of todays Hornby Loco running on layouts today will make it pass 5 years let alone 10 years.

 

[threelink]

Triang X03/4 motored locos will not just run forever, they will tolerate appalling abuse. I bought an ebay job lot, accurately described as a "barn find", comprising 4 locos and a pile of rolling stock, all Triang from the late 1950s. It had been in water or worse for a very long time. The locos were just seized up blocks of corrosion, mud and insect body parts. Everything was stained bright rust red inside and out, and stank of cow. It took a long time but eventually 3 of the 4 locos and all of the stock ran just fine - quietly and smoothly. The only replacement parts required were 2 brushes, 3 insulating sleeves, a Britannia port side valve gear set and a steeple cab pantograph. I can't see modern products tolerating that sort of thing.

[atom3624]

T57 mentioned careful running in of the motors - excellent comment.

I remember from my R/C years we would even break in higher performance brushed motors - now most are brushless so not necessary now - under water, at light load power, to control any arcing, permitting excellent bedding in of the brushes.

I'm not saying to run your locomotive under water for the first hour of its life, but .... I wonder .... !!

Sam's done it before now.

Al.

[atom3624]

T57 mentioned careful running in of the motors - excellent comment.

I remember from my R/C years we would even break in higher performance brushed motors - now most are brushless so not necessary now - under water, at light load power, to control any arcing, permitting excellent bedding in of the brushes.

I'm not saying to run your locomotive under water for the first hour of its life, but .... I wonder .... !!

Sam's done it before now.

Al.