Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Rail head "Gleaming"

21277 views
40 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Sunday, August 6, 2017 1:41 PM

auro

Simichrome is a polish and as such it removes the top layer of oxide. The only left over inhorganic compound seems-iron oxide: i.e. rust ! if the particles of iron oxides are very small, they will be transparent. Like zinc-oxide (yellow) and titanium-oxide (white) particles in sunscreen (transparent).

 

 
It does more than remove the top layer of oxide.  It also removes the top layer of the subject metals.
 
I believe the iron oxide is a critical ingredient, in the form of rouge:
 
 
 
I have done a bit of jewelry polishing (professionally), and using rouge is commonly the last phase.  Already being familiar with Simichrome, I used it for that purpose instead of the "official" stuff.
 
I believe Simichrome's pink color is caused by the rouge.
 
 
Ed
  • Member since
    December 2015
  • From: Shenandoah Valley
  • 9,094 posts
Posted by BigDaddy on Sunday, August 6, 2017 9:30 AM

Revised my post above, no chromium.

Henry

COB Potomac & Northern

Shenandoah Valley

  • Member since
    August 2017
  • 5 posts
Posted by auro on Sunday, August 6, 2017 7:02 AM

well, looks like the only chrome in Simichrome is in the name of the product. Like silver in nickel-silver. Simichrome is a polish and as such it removes the top layer of oxide. The only left over inhorganic compound seems-iron oxide: i.e. rust ! if the particles of iron oxides are very small, they will be transparent. Like zinc-oxide (yellow) and titanium-oxide (white) particles in sunscreen (transparent).

Stefano (US based, but currently living in Germany for work).

 

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Saturday, August 5, 2017 10:11 AM

BigDaddy

Perhaps Stefano means Simichrome.  My tube lists chromium as a content.  I thought chromium was a hazard, but maybe that is another form of chromium. 

The ammonium, white spirit and kerosene are consided the hazard.  Use gloves

 

I wonder at the context in which chromium is listed.

I've got a tube of Simichrome, and it doesn't mention chromium as an ingredient.  Nor does the MSD:

http://www1.mscdirect.com/MSDS/MSDS00025/36962975-20071213.PDF

which does mention iron oxide. 

 

 

I've used the stuff for over 50 years, and it is a superb polish.  For "light" work, I don't see the need for gloves.  But I have used the stuff, at times, for fairly large tasks; and it will do nasty things to your fingers if you overdo it.  

I intend to continue to use it.

 

 

Ed

  • Member since
    December 2015
  • From: Shenandoah Valley
  • 9,094 posts
Posted by BigDaddy on Saturday, August 5, 2017 8:54 AM

Perhaps Stefano means Simichrome. EDIT It's an old tube looked at by old eyes,  It really says Ammonium My tube lists chromium as a content.  I thought chromium was a hazard, but maybe that is another form of chromium. 

The ammonium, white spirit and kerosene are consided the hazard.  Use gloves

Henry

COB Potomac & Northern

Shenandoah Valley

  • Member since
    August 2017
  • 5 posts
Posted by auro on Friday, August 4, 2017 2:50 PM

paul,

in the initial rubbing you are smearing the scratches & pores of both the rail and the washer. The vodoo magic is the use of a material with: fcc chrome inside, ductility similar to the rail... a bit of luck helped.

the thickness of the chromium is not that important. As long as the pores are full and you have enough surface chromium to passivate the surface with a few layers of oxide you are set. However, i would avoid damaging it with scratches. Some wear is normal (wheels rolling, electric arching), and to reduce it, a very thin coat of lubricant seems right to me, especially because the lubricant would increase the wheel-rail interface and thus reduce the density of current. It seems no-ox suffices..
Well, these are my guesses based on reading + knowlede and intuition.let`s hope we got it right.
Stefano C

 

 

  • Member since
    August 2017
  • 5 posts
Posted by auro on Friday, August 4, 2017 2:18 PM

no, you need metallic chromium compatible with the metal of the track.

 

  • Member since
    August 2017
  • 5 posts
Posted by auro on Friday, August 4, 2017 2:17 PM

patric

chromium plated has a bcc (body-centered-cubic) crystal structure and it is very shiny hard and brittle. the source of chromium must be compatible with the track. Nicker-Copper has a fcc (face-centered-cubic) structure and thus it is ductile and malleable. Natural iron is fcc but if you stabilize the austenitic phase, you can make it fcc and you can also dissolve chromium and retain the fcc organization. Then you have a supply of fcc-chromium which is compatible with the fcc track and would stick on it upon burnishing...these are my 2 cents... well washers.Stefano C

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Friday, August 4, 2017 10:52 AM

NVSRR

Would a chrome based polish work then?

 

 

I am curious.  Could you cite an example of chrome based polish?

 

Ed

  • Member since
    January 2010
  • 2,616 posts
Posted by peahrens on Friday, August 4, 2017 9:26 AM

Stephano,

Thanks for adding this insight.  Indeed it would be interesting if someone could determine it the chromium transfer is actually happening, along with how much that aspect created additional performace improvement (vs. the smoothing).  And if a certain SS type tool or washer (vs. whatever Home Depot stainless type I used) is much more effective per amount of effort expended.

When I did my track, I noted that with the initial rubbing (after the sandpaper steps) with the SS washer I could feel the reduction of the initial roughness.  That gave me a guide on when I had achieved pretty good rail smothness improvement and when additional effort likely was reaching the point of diminishing return.  It would be interesting to know, for example, whether additional rubbing had significant performance impact (due to more chromium transfer).

 

Paul

Modeling HO with a transition era UP bent

  • Member since
    March 2011
  • 1,950 posts
Posted by NVSRR on Friday, August 4, 2017 9:25 AM

Would a chrome based polish work then?

A pessimist sees a dark tunnel

An optimist sees the light at the end of the tunnel

A realist sees a frieght train

An engineer sees three idiots standing on the tracks stairing blankly in space

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 1,500 posts
Posted by ROBERT PETRICK on Friday, August 4, 2017 9:13 AM

auro
Hi there. My experience is of a materials-scientist, theoretical metallurgist, teaching materials in a research university. I have given some thought about gleaming... In my personal opinion, gleaming is more than burnishing. Burnishing is the plastic deformation of a surface due to sliding contact with another object (see wikipedia), and for the purpose of increasing surface hardness (by creating surface stress) and reducing corrosion it is usually performed with a tool which is stronger than the material to be burnished. So, technically, the process of making the rail shine and smooth could be performed with a piece of hard (yet brittle) cast iron. However the best reports have always stressed the need of a "stainless steel" tool (washer). This made me think that there is something else going on. The Vickers hardness of nicker-silver (nickel-copper) is roughly half the one of stainless steel (Vickers hardness measures the resistance of a material to be indented, e.g. made a dent/scratch, see Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickers_hardness_test) and therefore it seems plausible to me that some of the chromium of the stainless steel washer might migrate on the surface of the rail. The rail and the washer are burnishing each other. Chromium is quite hard, per se, but it can alloy with copper giving softer solutions. Chromium also forms a very thin layer of chromium oxide on the surface, very stable against corrosion and pitting, and therefore good for electrical arching between rail/wheel and normal wear. If this is the case than: 1) we have chromium on the surface of the rail. This can be checked if one raises the temperature of a test rail and there is some blueish-oxide-compound forming on the surface (remember the stainless steel exhaust manifolds of engines turning blue. 2) we could increase the strength of gleaming by increasing chromium cladding. This could be performed if one choose a high-chromium stainless steel washer to start with. Normal 304 Stainless Steel contains ~18-20% of Chromium. If somebody wants to do some tests, I can look into higher chromium content tools. Opinion ? thanks Stefano C.

If chromium deposition is the key, why not just drag an el cheapo K-Mart chrome plated socket behind the caboose? About 1" for N scale; 1-1/2" for HO.

LINK to SNSR Blog


  • Member since
    August 2017
  • 5 posts
Posted by auro on Friday, August 4, 2017 4:17 AM
Hi there. My experience is of a materials-scientist, theoretical metallurgist, teaching materials in a research university. I have given some thought about gleaming... In my personal opinion, gleaming is more than burnishing. Burnishing is the plastic deformation of a surface due to sliding contact with another object (see wikipedia), and for the purpose of increasing surface hardness (by creating surface stress) and reducing corrosion it is usually performed with a tool which is stronger than the material to be burnished. So, technically, the process of making the rail shine and smooth could be performed with a piece of hard (yet brittle) cast iron. However the best reports have always stressed the need of a "stainless steel" tool (washer). This made me think that there is something else going on. The Vickers hardness of nicker-silver (nickel-copper) is roughly half the one of stainless steel (Vickers hardness measures the resistance of a material to be indented, e.g. made a dent/scratch, see Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickers_hardness_test) and therefore it seems plausible to me that some of the chromium of the stainless steel washer might migrate on the surface of the rail. The rail and the washer are burnishing each other. Chromium is quite hard, per se, but it can alloy with copper giving softer solutions. Chromium also forms a very thin layer of chromium oxide on the surface, very stable against corrosion and pitting, and therefore good for electrical arching between rail/wheel and normal wear. If this is the case than: 1) we have chromium on the surface of the rail. This can be checked if one raises the temperature of a test rail and there is some blueish-oxide-compound forming on the surface (remember the stainless steel exhaust manifolds of engines turning blue. 2) we could increase the strength of gleaming by increasing chromium cladding. This could be performed if one choose a high-chromium stainless steel washer to start with. Normal 304 Stainless Steel contains ~18-20% of Chromium. If somebody wants to do some tests, I can look into higher chromium content tools. Opinion ? thanks Stefano C.
  • Member since
    August 2006
  • From: Nashville, TN area
  • 713 posts
Posted by hardcoalcase on Thursday, March 23, 2017 3:55 PM

You can gleam as you go.  Worst case is that you may want to wipe down the track when you're finally done.

Jim

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • From: Moneta, VA USA
  • 1,175 posts
Posted by gdelmoro on Wednesday, March 22, 2017 5:44 PM

sounds like I want to try it.  Can you do some track - run trains - do some more and so on until you're done? Or do you have to complete the job once you start ?

Gary

Moderator
  • Member since
    May 2009
  • From: Waukesha, WI
  • 1,764 posts
Posted by Steven Otte on Thursday, November 19, 2015 9:20 AM

I've appended your post to an earlier thread answering your question. We only really need one thread on this issue, I think. Smile

--
Steven Otte, Model Railroader senior associate editor
sotte@kalmbach.com

  • Member since
    March 2015
  • 5 posts
Track Gleaming
Posted by Jersey Jimbo on Thursday, November 19, 2015 1:47 AM

I read a post or an article a while back on track gleaming. Does anyone have imformation and/or opinion on it.

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Under The Streets of Los Angeles
  • 1,150 posts
Posted by Metro Red Line on Thursday, November 19, 2015 1:47 AM
I can testify to the Gospel of the Gleam! After gleaming, all I need to do to clean my track after a long hiatus of no train running is to vacuum the dust off of it and rub over any few trouble spots with a small chunk of spare cork roadbed.
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Bradford, Ontario
  • 15,797 posts
Posted by hon30critter on Wednesday, November 18, 2015 10:39 PM

OK, I'm going to cause a huge uproar here!

The proper term for polishing track so that it 'gleams' is 'gleening', with an 'n'. 'Gleening' is a verb, i.e. the process by which a track (or whatever) is made to 'gleam', or 'reflect brightly'.

I can just imagine the responses this will incur.

Check the dictionary before you shoot me.

XOXO

Dave

I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!

  • Member since
    April 2004
  • From: Ontario Canada
  • 3,574 posts
Posted by Mark R. on Wednesday, November 18, 2015 10:31 PM

A Google search for "track gleaming" also returns results ....

Mark.

¡ uʍop ǝpısdn sı ǝɹnʇɐuƃıs ʎɯ 'dlǝɥ

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Bradford, Ontario
  • 15,797 posts
Posted by hon30critter on Wednesday, November 18, 2015 10:22 PM

Jersey Jimbo:

This will link to a detailed explanation written by the late Jeffery Wimberly. Scroll down to his post:

http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/88/t/212742.aspx

Dave

I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!

  • Member since
    January 2015
  • From: Southern California
  • 1,682 posts
Posted by Lone Wolf and Santa Fe on Wednesday, November 18, 2015 9:39 PM

It is kind of hard to search these posts but there has been detailed information here somewhere. I didn't comment so I can't find the link. Sorry. I haven't tried it yet but I believe the basic theory is that the top of the rail is so finely sanded that there are no nooks and crannies for dirt to get a hold in so the track stays cleaner.

Modeling a fictional version of California set in the 1990s Lone Wolf and Santa Fe Railroad
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 10,582 posts
Posted by mlehman on Monday, December 17, 2012 8:34 AM

Unless your layout is in a clean room, it will still collect dust and other stuff. Use of an ionizing air cleaner can help, along with more familiar ways to limit dust. I can't see how "gleaming" will prevent the need for all cleaning, just make it less frequent.

One thing that turns me off to the idea is that it does leave the rail head completely shiny. If you look at real rail, it's not, just the inside of the rail head. I use CRC 2-26, in part because it does NOT leave the rail shiny. Instead, CRC 2-26 leaves a dull metallic look that better resembles prototype rail. Application is simpler, just wet the cork with it and rub it on the rails, but there's no need to polish. Your track should be clean first and you'll usually need to wait overnight for it fully dry for best performance.

Mike Lehman

Urbana, IL

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • 547 posts
Posted by eaglescout on Monday, December 17, 2012 8:03 AM

TA462:

What you say is true but how do you get by with cleaning dust only twice per year?  An awful lot of dust builds up in that amount of time.  

I have a homemade cleaning car with the masonite pad that floats along the track.  I run that in front of a locomotive every few days if I have not run trains.  I also have rigged it to carry a cloth pad soaked in alcohol to get any dust particles that are left.  Call it junk, but it seems to work as well as anything to keep the track squeaky clean.

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Monday, December 17, 2012 7:18 AM

NP2626

I wasn't really interested in causing a big "Ruckus" here!  Just interested in understanding the process of "Gleaming"! 

I agree.  It is not your fault, but the thread has taken on a certain undertone that the track cleaning car is somewhat of a fraud and that advertisers are trying to withhold valuable information about the gleaming process.

First of all, in my experience, track cleaning is not a daily process, or at least shouldn't be, in order to keep a model railroad in good operating condition.  Where the required track cleaning process is common, there is an underlying enviromental issue that needs to be addressed.

Second of all, why condemn the track cleaning car?  Many forum members swear by it.

Third of all, there are many effective track cleaning methods when track cleaning needs to be done, ranging from the Bright Boy, to various forms of alcohol, and many other equally effective methods.  Apparently, gleaming is one of them.

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    December 2011
  • From: Northern Minnesota
  • 2,774 posts
Posted by NP2626 on Monday, December 17, 2012 7:05 AM

I wasn't really interested in causing a big "Ruckus" here!  Just interested in understanding the process of "Gleaming"! 

NP 2626 "Northern Pacific, really terrific"

Northern Pacific Railway Historical Association:  http://www.nprha.org/

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: US
  • 1,774 posts
Posted by cmrproducts on Monday, December 17, 2012 7:03 AM

Rich

Obviously YOU don't read the forums much - as just about every week someone on this forum (as well as the many other forums I am on) asks about TRACK CLEANING!

And what is the FIRST thing the responders say to do to the OP?

Purchase a track cleaning car and use it !

WHY - no mention about Metal Polish or the GLEEM Process.

Because THEY don't believe in the methods as THEY have been told so many times that a CLEANING CAR is the answer.

And the METAL POLISH method WAS PUBLISHED in MODEL RAILROADER back in 2003 or so as THAT is WHEN read about it and tried it!

And as a NOTE - I was building my layout at the time so there was MORE dust than normal in my layout room.

so I had to clean the tracks before every OPs Session as I held them even though the layout was NOT done.

Once I Polished the track - I did not have to clean it every 2 weeks when my OPs Session came up.  And I am STILL building my layout!  When one has over 2500 sq ft of layout to build by himself - it takes a while.

Yet other layouts in the area were still having to run their $100.00  Tony Trains cleaning car or the Centerline car that states they do such a good job of cleaning their track

YET - they had to keep cleaning the track before each OPs Session.  The layout is in a climate controlled room and yet the cleaning continues.

Others are not so lucky and their basements are high humidity and somewhat dusty and the cleaning cars needed to be run.

BUT when they saw that I no longer had to clean my layout after the Polish - they tried it and NOW they NO LONGER have to clean the track on a monthly basis !

Apparently NOT EVERYONE is as LUCKY as YOU! ;-)

Again YMMV! ;-)

BOB H - Clarion, PA

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Monday, December 17, 2012 6:00 AM

cmrproducts

The only REASON I can think of for those that have not tried the Metal Polish is the Track Cleaning Cars are the ONLY Reason/EXCUSE they can find to RUN a TRAIN on their layout!

Well, then, you are not thinking very hard. 

Another reason not to gleam, or not to use a track cleaning car, is that there may be no need to clean track.  Except for those instances in which I have done track work modifications and needed to clean up the rails as a result, I just simply don't need to clean track on a regular basis.  I have had my layout in place since 2005, and most areas of my layout have not required a track cleaning since the initial installation of the track. 

Where do some of you guys have your layout?  In a swamp?  A dust bowl?

If gleaming were the end all answer, we would all have done it years ago.

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    July 2002
  • From: Jersey City
  • 1,925 posts
Posted by steemtrayn on Sunday, December 16, 2012 8:30 AM

Maybe it's time for Atlas to redesign their track cleaning car to follow the gleam process.

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!