What About The Bee

Hi @threelink Never give up! Thomas Edison, famous inventor of the photograph and light bulb, said something in 1932, as published in Harpers Magazine. During the interview, the interviewer asked about Edison's genius. "Genius is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent perspiration" What I am doing is certainly not genius. I am not attempting to wear that cloak. But the ethos in Edison's statement is clear. Work hard. Never give up. Problems occur. Work harder. You can do this. Bee

@Peachy On your cellphone, it is under the + symbol at the top. Same place as add new topic or image. Bee

Thanks @96RAF I will see if I can find the tolerance setting. I was fairly astonished when it permitted +/- 2 mm without complaint. Bee

Hi Deem The H&M Duette was rated at 1 amp, so should easily handle anything on Son of Triangman's marvelous list of 1970s current draw. Do you know how old your Duette is? Bee

Recent discussions in another thread caused me to wonder, what is the tolerance that SCARM uses to suggest that your track layout joins. I decided to use R600, a 168 mm straight. I then set a new start points, near to 168 mm The first thing of note is that SCARM blesses your layout in two different ways, as a function of the overlap / gap. At the top and bottom, SCARM shows the double arrows, indicating a fairly big disconnect. At +2 mm from 168, double arrows. At -3 mm from 168, double arrows. Smaller disconnects are just indicated by double lines. You may observe them at 166, 167 and 169 mm. It is only at 168 mm that a single line appears at the gap. SCARM permits you to zoom way in, so you may inspect each join to see if its really good or just a so so join. Here is a very zoomed in image at another join, 0.059 mm apart Two lines at the join. SCARM will not show you the double arrows, since it is within 2 mm or so. But in reality, SCARM is still warning me, those tracks aren't aligned. What about 0.001 mm of error, will you see double lines? Why yes, yes you do. SCARM will tell you when you are 1 micron out, but only if you look! Bee

The enveloped gear caused a cascade of issues, but I think I found my way back out. I chose Markits Deluxe Crankpins, as the crankpin bushings thread onto the post. Unfortunately, as you can see on the right hand side, the bushing does not bottom out, there is a gap. This necessitated a complete redraw of the crank pin assembly, shown here As this pushed the piston connecting rods outboard, I was finally forced to provide a notch instead of a through hole for the cross head. The side mounted footplates became ridiculously wide and I was forced to accept that the detail shown by Issac Shaw would not be. Shaw has the crosshead going through the footplate. And then the fun began. Can I make OO Twin Sisters go around a second radius curve. The first consideration is the the mid axle is trapped by the enveloped gear. It cannot move laterally. This also means that the chassis cannot shift like OO Experiment. I check the equations for the requirements of the second axle to fit and found that indeed it will fit Since the chassis cannot move, full compliance must be permitted on both sides of the chassis for the 1st and last axles. I ran the equations https://community.hornbyhobbies.com/forums/topic/36321-round-the-bend/?do=findComment&comment=394450 I found that when I injected the result (0.499 mm per side), that the chassis was too wide. I was forced to completely redraw the chassis, not only because of the lateral compliance, but that the dimensions I used for the motor did not account for any real world tolerance. I have added in some false floors in the front and rear. The boilers are now printed in parts and assembled with magnets. The electrical traces are let into the walls of the chassis, hiding them away. Its been a real struggle, but I think it resolved. Bee

Here are the equation results that resolve the lateral compliance for OO Twin Sisters. In the top of the image, I check the lateral compliance Y against the flanges of the center axle. I find that I will need 0.012 mm (12 microns) of lateral compliance. As Q, the track gap is 0.148 total, the lateral compliance Y is much less than Q. There is no issue with a fixed center axle. It will fit into the curve. The first and last axles must now have full compliance on each side. The chord formed by the first and third axles must always have the middle axle fixed, and further, the chassis does not shift. Thus, knowing the chord length Wt, I can find Y for the first and third axles, being 0.499 mm. Bottom half of equations. Note, same equations as above. With the redesign accomplished for the new parts (see OO Twin Sisters), I show here that indeed it will clearly go around a second radius curve Bee

That you wish to change the subject. You have no analysis to contradict the extensive proof provided against your original assertion. R2 is 438 mm, not 438.15 mm (17¼"), as demonstrated. It may have been this historically, but no more. Further, your diagram could also mean that the design you offered to SCARM is marginal. It can be forced to join, as SCARM will accept track as joined whenever the ends are within tolerance. But if they fall just outside that tolerance, SCARM says they don't join. SCARM does not demand that the ends are in mathematical agreement, just that the ends are "close enough". So depending upon exactly how those pieces are placed can cause your design to be joined or not. Interesting as the design may be, its a deflection with little to do with the definition of a second radius. Bee

Hi LT&SR_NSE What is the current draw of a 1970s locomotive? Here is what @The son of Triangmanhas to say https://community.hornbyhobbies.com/forums/topic/8858-a-helpful-guide-average-current-draw/?do=findComment&comment=122374 So, the answer is: it varies. It could be under, it could be over 500 milli amps. I believe the P9000 is rated at 500 milli amps. @nashjukDo you have a multimeter? We can measure the current draw using the batteries as the supply and insure that the controller you buy is sized to your locomotive Bee

One of the true benefits of being a regular correspondent here on the Forum is the wealth of knowledge present and if that correspondent is paying attention, that knowledge can be absorbed. Plenty of buyers exist who do not have the discernment to know what has value, what does not. They could get some of that discernment right here, but may skip the Forum. I learned that a Hornby "Limited Edition" certificate has little value, right here. So could others. Buyer beware Bee

Is it still a rumor if Hornby says it? An Important Message for Our Loyal Customers As one of our valued customers, we wanted you to be one of the first to know that we are adjusting our prices from 1st September 2024.

https://uk.hornby.com/products/br-class-b175-4-6-0-61670-city-london-era-4-r30137 Listed as "Last Few" Have you checked your account to confirm your pre-order @ChrisBWC? Likely you have, of course. Probably me just being over cautious. Bee

Hi @nashjuk To get you started, here is a link to HORNBY TRACK. Unfortunately, I can not pre-filter it for you. Select the "filter" tab, then "Gauge" and "OO". TT:120 track will not work with your locomotive. Its for a smaller gauge than your locomotive. There's lots of guys doing TT:120. Its a new and exciting scale. Lots of new guys getting on board too. Check out the TT:120 sub forum to see what it is about. You may like it better! Bee

Battery on the right needs to be rotated 180°. Its backwards. Nashjuk, if you like the locomotive, then the price of some track pieces and a DC controller (to get away from the batteries) is going to be far less than a new set, which will include a new locomotive. In other words, the expensive bit of kit is the locomotive, followed by the carriages and wagons. A DC controller and track pieces are much more reasonable, provided you do not go nuts with track. Bee

"Limited Edition" is a phrase Hornby marketing uses to create a sense of rarity and fear of missing out among customers. It has been repeatedly shown that this has little distinguishing value as compared to an item that is not called "limited edition" but it sounds marvelous! 😉 Deem, I get the sense you are trying to decide which locomotives to sell, in your quest for a new controller. If this is one you don't like, for what ever reason, then out the door it goes. Make sure to use the "limited edition" phrase in your title, for the exact same reason that Hornby does. Just make two piles. One pile is keep. The other pile is sell. I know you really want to keep them all, but requirements drive the issue. Bee

The part you have highlighted in red is what I called the lubricator rod. The return crank is on the left, connected to it. This drives the pump rod, connected to the lubricator rod, on the right. Now in real life, the pump rod should just oscillate back and forth, with equal strokes on either side of the pump itself, here a black lump of plastic. The return crank drives the lubricator rod, as a function of wheel rotation. But if the return crank is not well adjusted, there can be too much stroke. Rotate that wheel about 180°. You will see that the return crank and the lubricator rod become almost in line. This is because the return crank is at an angle to the crank that drives the connecting rod. The return crank should go right back over the top of the wheel axle. From your image, I see it does not. It's about 15° out of phase and I suggest that this angle causes the extra stroke that Going Spare speaks of, and the alignment that I suggest may be happening. The return crank needs to be put back in phase Bee

Coming from you Fishy, that's high praise. Thank you Bee