Information on Lionel Post-War Galvanized Track

[JTrains]

I haven’t always had my track (most of it early PW, when my father was young) stored in ideal conditions, but with few exceptions the rails have shown very little rust over the years.  It had a dull grey appearance and felt a bit meat-ier than the more shiny track sections, but I like that look anyway and never thought much about it.

 

I recently bought some used track which is of a similar look and feel - and the seller indicated that this track was in fact manufactured by Lionel using a galvanized finish.  So my question is: does anyone have information to share on Lionel track that was manufactured using galvanization?

[webenda]

Well, well, JTrains… three days and not even a guess. It would seem we don't know very much about the metallurgical history of Lionel tubular track on CTT forum. I confess I know nothing except it works very well with magnetraction.

 

I often read about galvanized Lionel track, but always suspect the writer does not know Lionel tubular track is tin plated.

 

There is an easy way for you to find out if your "galvanized" track is galvanized or tin plated.

 

Galvanized means either hot dipped or electroplated with zinc. The half cell potential of zinc is -0.76 volts. The half cell potential of tin is -0.14 volts. The half cell potential of copper is +0.34 volts.

 

If we make a battery using copper and zinc the potential difference should measure approximately +0.34 - (-0.76) = 1.1 volts. A copper and tin battery should have a potential difference of approximately +0.34 - (-0.14) = 0.48 volts. The reason I call these voltages approximate is because we are going to use a weak acid for the battery electrolyte, white vinegar. It will not be a strong battery. Expect the voltage to be a little low.

 

For the copper electrode I use a copper ground wire or strip a length of copper insulated wire. I stripped an eight inch length of 14 AWG house wiring for this test. For the zinc electrode I cut an eight inch length of 16 AWG galvanized steel wire. For the test rail I removed one 8 3/4 inch rail from the ties of a piece of track.

 

Scrub the the electrodes with steel wool. The sample pieces have to be bright and shiny because we do not want to measure the voltage of copper, zinc or tin oxides. The samples have to be cleaned down to elemental metal. (If you use an SOS pad, be sure to rinse/wipe all the SOS soap off the electrodes.)

 

Connect a voltmeter positive lead to the copper wire (because the copper will be the positive terminal of our battery.) Connect the negative lead to the rail and place the electrodes into a container of our electrolyte (vinegar.)

 

Let's look at the results from this test.

[cwburfle]

Lionel did make galvanized track for a brief period. I have not commented before because I don't know the details. I do know that one of my train buddies was looking to acquire some in order to complete a boxed set.
I assume there was a materials shortage, so I would guess the track was made either right after WWII or during the Korean war.
I will try to remember to ask my buddy the next time I see him.

[ADCX Rob]

The ties were galvanized, but not the rails.

[cwburfle]

The ties were galvanized, but not the rails

I am going to write my buddy. I think the rails were galvanized.

 

[webenda]

Thank you CWBurfle. Hope you friend can shed some light on Lionel Galvanized track.

Here is one of the "often read about galvanized Lionel track" sites I refered to:

"Things you need to know....

...but they don't tell you....

Traditional O/O27 track consists of three galvanized-steel rails connected by three metal ties."

Reference: http://www.thortrains.net/needful1.html

 

We may run into a problem with semantics on the meaning of "galvanized."

 

Word Origin and History for galvanize:

 

"1802, from French galvaniser, from galvanisme (see galvanism ). Figurative sense of "excite, stimulate (as if by electricity)" first recorded 1853. Meaning "to coat with metal by means of galvanic electricity" (especially to plate iron with tin, but now typically to plate it with zinc) is from 1839."

 

Reference: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/galvanized

 

The modern rail I tested was tin plated but I still am curious if Lionel tubular track was ever zinc plated.

[cwburfle]

Below is what my buddy wrote back. I did an internet search on "Lionel Grey Track", and found a thread on another train board. Folks interested in the subject might want to do the same.

 

Question: Do you remember when it was made, and what was galvanized? Was it the ties, rails or both?
I thought it was the rails.

Answer: Rails only.  I recall getting galv 027 in an original boxed set I got from Ransome, I believe it was a 1948 set.  My factory layout came with galvanized 0-gauge track and switches, it was from 1952.  Until i got the set from Ransome I always assumed Korean War production.  I have a bunch if anyone wants some.

 

I have seen Lionel track with silver ties instead of black.

 

[JTrains]

So, this is why I love this forum - one member asks an informational question, and another member goes and creates a research experiment!  Nice job webenda!

Anything more than simple battery design goes beyond my chemistry knowledge, but I offer a couple of questions on constructing as accurate of an experiment as possible:

• In the case of track, would having a bi-metal cathode alter its potential?  Only the outside of the rail is either tin or, potentially (ha – chemistry joke!), zinc    the inside is still steel.  Using rails in both batteries would seem logical to cancel any effect – but perhaps there’s something in the interaction between the differing plate metals and the steel that could introduce unknown variation?
• Also, does the relative mass of the cathode vis-à-vis the anode introduce another variable that materially alters its observed voltage potential?  IOW, could making a cathode using a wire of mass A in one battery and a track rail of mass B in the other introduce a confounding variable?

I’ll add a few other comments/suppositions to the thread:

• I have quite a bit of old track that would seem to fit this “galvanized” profile.  If galvanization was used, unless my father just happened to buy it all at some precisely “correct” moment in time this would lead one to conclude this was the standard manufacturing technique for some period of time in the 1940s or early 1950s.  In this vein…
• …there seem to be few references to this topic on the Internet (thus my reason for asking my question).  This tends to makes me think that it wasn’t – for if it had been, it would seem to be the sort of fact that would have been researched and discussed many times over in authoritative Lionel history analyses.  Much more obscure aspects of Lionel production history have been covered in much greater detail than something as widespread as this would seem to have been had it actually occurred.

Might be some time for an experiment later today.  If only I had one of those cheap spectrometers…

[cwburfle]

there seem to be few references to this topic on the Internet

Most people don't care about track, regular "O" and "027" track has little value.

[ADCX Rob]

I'm from Missouri, so I will say still there was no galvanized rail used for Lionel "O" or O-27.  O-27 ties, perhaps.

It seems reports of galvanized rail is actually the patina taken on by track used & stored in different environs. I've seen a literal cornocopia of different patinas, or tin plating, but never any galvanization.

[ADCX Rob]

cwburfle

Most people don't care about track, regular "O" and "027" track has little value

The value on this subject is more about Lionel's production methods and adjustments based on materials available during difficult times.

[webenda]

JTrains

In the case of track, would having a bi-metal cathode alter its potential?  Only the outside of the rail is either tin or, potentially (ha – chemistry joke!), zinc    the inside is still steel.  

Yes, a bi-metal cathode would produce two voltages, confounding the results. The rail is plated on both sides so the steel will not confound the results... except some steel is exposed on the cut end. That might explain the slightly low voltage. I probably should have painted some nail polish on the end before placing it in the vinegar.

 

Using rails in both batteries would seem logical to cancel any effect – but perhaps there’s something in the interaction between the differing plate metals and the steel that could introduce unknown variation?

I made one battery with known zinc plating as a test standard to compare to the unknown plating on the rail. If the rail produced the same voltage, I would know it was zinc plated. Because the rail produced a voltage predicted for tin, I was convinced it was tin. 

Having rails in both batteries would have added tin ions to the zinc/copper battery. Better to keep the experiment pure.

 

Also, does the relative mass of the cathode vis-à-vis the anode introduce another variable that materially alters its observed voltage potential?  IOW, could making a cathode using a wire of mass A in one battery and a track rail of mass B in the other introduce a confounding variable?

Mass and surface area are related to current capacity, not voltage, so no, makes no difference in an ideal battery. Of course, an ideal battery does not have one electrode end with two elements exposed to electrolyte. If I had thicker wire the higher current capacity might have overcome currents between the tin and steel at the cut end, resulting in voltages closer to predicted.

 

Aside--The battery I made is actually called a "Galvanic Cell," so named by Alessandro Volta after Luigi Galvani who gave Volta the idea from his "animal electricity" experiments with frog's legs. It was Volta who discovered the different voltage potentials of the elements by trying different metals in his Galvanic Cell.

[8ntruck]

For whatever this is worth -

My initial train set was a 1958 027 outfit.  The track had shiny rails.  Some of 'dad's' track that got mixed in to expand the set had a dull grey finish. 

I never gave it much thought, other than 'dad's track is different than mine'.  I now have what I assume to be dad's first train.  It is 027 and dates to the early 20's.  This might date the track with a dull grey finish to the 20's?