We're back in the throes of the net-nanny 403 forbidden codes, so I have to try some combination of grammar to get the following across:
The sandpaper discs are likely no better than a Bright Boy for 'track maintenance' if that's the only thing you use.
Note that in this discussion, the Masonite is being used first to pick up after wet cleaning, and only afterward for maintenance.
If you want sanding, use discs of 3M lapping film, perhaps attached to thin elastomer that can 'dome' on an MDC piston, and go through some or all the progressive stages appropriate to 'gleaming', followed by wet cleaning via CMX or similar to remove the residues from sanding, and then a pass with the Masonite disks to absorb the dissolved material the wet cleaning has lifted.
Then use the Masonite for maintenance cleaning of the now-smooth railheads.
PC101The disks/pads that came with the MDC/ROUNDHOUSE TRACK CLEANER are 17/32'' OD. That will be a small hole saw.
That will be a small hole saw.
You'd probably want to sandwich at least 4 pieces of masonite and cut 'all at once'.
I am of the opinion that you'd 'bevel the edge' by using fairly coarse sandpaper, to 'raise the grain' and preserve the cleaning action. It occurs to me that you could easily 'dome' the pad to the shape described by MDC if the resulting Masonite surface has the right 'tooth'.
The disks/pads that came with the MDC/ROUNDHOUSE TRACK CLEANER are 17/32'' OD.
PC101 Overmod I do not have a clue at this time when I bought my MDC ROUNDHOUSE with TRACK CLEANER stamped on the box end. The pistons have a convex face and the "cleaning disks" are not felt but a very fine sandpaper with a sticky backing. The pads that have been used have a circle buildup of brass and dirt 3/8'' in the center of the face of the pads. That says that the edges of the pads do nothing. So with that, flat "pads" would be better with the whole ''pad'' being used. I just looked at the assembly instructions for the track cleaner parts. In reading #2 of the instructions. Attach cleaning pads (28135) to both shoes (28131). Remove protecting backing from pad and attach. Press pads firmly to the shoe; make sure that it attaches compleatly and has a "dished" (rounded apperarance). We have made the shoes especially this way in order that they will clean over uneven rails. I do feel that something flat with beveled outer edges like masonite would be the better way to go after removing that "dished" face of the shoe.
Overmod
I do not have a clue at this time when I bought my MDC ROUNDHOUSE with TRACK CLEANER stamped on the box end.
The pistons have a convex face and the "cleaning disks" are not felt but a very fine sandpaper with a sticky backing.
The pads that have been used have a circle buildup of brass and dirt 3/8'' in the center of the face of the pads. That says that the edges of the pads do nothing. So with that, flat "pads" would be better with the whole ''pad'' being used.
I just looked at the assembly instructions for the track cleaner parts.
In reading #2 of the instructions. Attach cleaning pads (28135) to both shoes (28131). Remove protecting backing from pad and attach. Press pads firmly to the shoe; make sure that it attaches compleatly and has a "dished" (rounded apperarance). We have made the shoes especially this way in order that they will clean over uneven rails.
I do feel that something flat with beveled outer edges like masonite would be the better way to go after removing that "dished" face of the shoe.
Simon
PC101 snjroy I would say that the felt pads are unecessary if you go with the masonite option. And the holesaw would leave a hole that would affect the performance of the unit. But I could be wrong. Simon You would ''sandwich" the masonite tightly between wood thicker then the pilot bit is protruding from the hole saw. Start the pilot bit into the outer wood so that the hole saw cuts into that outer wood to make a "guide" cut, BUT the pilot bit has not cut/drilled into the masonite. Remove the pilot bit and contuniue through the masonite. There, a masonite circle with no center hole.
snjroy I would say that the felt pads are unecessary if you go with the masonite option. And the holesaw would leave a hole that would affect the performance of the unit. But I could be wrong. Simon
I would say that the felt pads are unecessary if you go with the masonite option. And the holesaw would leave a hole that would affect the performance of the unit. But I could be wrong.
You would ''sandwich" the masonite tightly between wood thicker then the pilot bit is protruding from the hole saw.
Start the pilot bit into the outer wood so that the hole saw cuts into that outer wood to make a "guide" cut, BUT the pilot bit has not cut/drilled into the masonite. Remove the pilot bit and contuniue through the masonite. There, a masonite circle with no center hole.
Overmod There is a good video (from Darth Santa Fe) that shows the construction of one of these cleaners. The original pads were a type of felt, with a little more compliance than the 'back side' of Masonite. They were made with an adhesive film to stick onto the 'pistons' with minimal height. "Ideally" gluing the top face of a Masonite pad onto one of the felt pads would give the desired compliance while preserving the ability to 'rotate' the pad and piston to use more of the backside area as it becomes contaminated. Looks to me as if the length of the 'tubes' that hold the pistons might need shortening (and internal chamfering) to allow the pistons the necessary travel, and the pistons themselves might need to be slightly shortened so they don't hit the caps retaining the tops of the springs. Perhaps the easiest way to do the Masonite pads would be to cut them with a hole saw, and there are 'rings' of foam with double-stick tape sold for attaching things like appliance feet that could substitute for felt.
There is a good video (from Darth Santa Fe) that shows the construction of one of these cleaners.
The original pads were a type of felt, with a little more compliance than the 'back side' of Masonite. They were made with an adhesive film to stick onto the 'pistons' with minimal height. "Ideally" gluing the top face of a Masonite pad onto one of the felt pads would give the desired compliance while preserving the ability to 'rotate' the pad and piston to use more of the backside area as it becomes contaminated.
Looks to me as if the length of the 'tubes' that hold the pistons might need shortening (and internal chamfering) to allow the pistons the necessary travel, and the pistons themselves might need to be slightly shortened so they don't hit the caps retaining the tops of the springs.
Perhaps the easiest way to do the Masonite pads would be to cut them with a hole saw, and there are 'rings' of foam with double-stick tape sold for attaching things like appliance feet that could substitute for felt.
Edit. I just found a "BAD ORDER" slip dated Aug. 8, 1994 in the box for this M of W Engine #371 (split/cracked cross universal drive) goes on the worm shaft. I guess it is time to make the repaires with a sleeve of brass tubeing.
jjdamnit Hello All, snjroy I took out my MDC track cleaner for a few pics. I have three (3) of these; two (2) with the track cleaning pistons, one is converted to DCC. It uses the OEM motor and gearing. It runs slowly and loudly so I cannot included it in a MOW track cleaning consist because of its speed- -or lack there of. The use of masonite pads is brilliant! Can you describe in more detail how you made them? Thank you in advance. Hope this helps.
Hello All,
snjroy I took out my MDC track cleaner for a few pics.
I have three (3) of these; two (2) with the track cleaning pistons, one is converted to DCC.
It uses the OEM motor and gearing. It runs slowly and loudly so I cannot included it in a MOW track cleaning consist because of its speed- -or lack there of.
The use of masonite pads is brilliant!
Can you describe in more detail how you made them?
Thank you in advance.
Hope this helps.
I kinda remember having to make some adjustments to make the pads functionnal, something like some filework on the inside pistons because the components were too long as a result of the added layers (pads). I don't remember it as being particularly difficult.
snjroyI took out my MDC track cleaner for a few pics.
"Uhh...I didn’t know it was 'impossible' I just made it work...sorry"
Hi there. I was away last week, so I'm catching a bit on this thread.
I took out my MDC track cleaner for a few pics. You can see below how the homemade masonite pads were sanded smooth. I can't remember how I glued them but it was probably CA. I noticed that I also managed to keep the original springs inside the cylinders - so there is a bit of a value-add here in terms of pressure on the track. Mine is not motorized, it needs to be towed. I actually don't use it that much, I did it for the fun of it (I'm a bit of an MDC junkie on the lookout for pretty much all they did in terms of engines).
It works very well, I just don't like the space it takes on my smallish layout. I keep the tracks clean by simply rubbing the rails with a clean, dry piece of cloth.
IMG_20240724_210905 on Flickr
IMG_20240724_210920 on Flickr
The contact points between an RP-25 wheel and standard railhead are almost explicitly on the inner edge of the railhead and similarly and the corner of the wheel tread as that's the only point of consistent contact. None of the model manufacturers have a curved shape to the top of their rail so gleeming, if it means also rounding the rail head ever so slightly could in fact be an improvement just because it creates more contact surface. Though that may or may not decrease arcing and may or may not decrease "gunk"
I would imagine that any arcing would degrade any flim. Or also a graphite/graphene layer (I'm hesitant to describe it as graphene when it isn't laid down preciesly, but the general electrical properties of Graphite in thin layers vs. thick apply. )
But if the theory is that the solvant is also leaving a film or otherwise reducing arcs, then it would stand to reason that fewer cases of that would occur.
In the case of La Mesa, they are super regimented and will run the cleaning train even if it isn't technically needed.
While at the same time, some report a reduction in "liquid" cleaning of months. Again. Nothing we can call data. Maybe anecdata.
There are also other variables. A layout with naught but classic athearn sintered metal wheels that have not been polished or replaced is going to see more arcing and more gunk collection. That's a mechanical difference.
Similar traditional Kadee metal wheels have a blackening product on them that comes off on the rail. Again, a mechanical gunk creator.
Oh, and perhaps it's time for a poll: what do people here think is the meaning of 'polar' and 'non-polar' in this context?
The study for 'microarcing' damage needs to start with a careful analysis of exactly where the contact points between wheel and rail are, and how the pitting from the arc plasma develops.
This used to involve something like a metallurgical microscope but I believe there are current cameras with the resolution and lens capability available at a size and weight that could allow deployment "by rail" to many locations on a given layout in reasonable time, and then servo positioning to precise alignment.
Obviously isopropyl alcohol doesn't form a 'barrier layer' at all; the only 'science' here might be to see if the redeposited contaminants have any effect. I certainly think that the "absorbent pad" closely following alcohol application (this including Masonite for analytic convenience) ought to be SOP even before any 'proof' of its efficacy can be developed.
Mineral spirits is certainly a reasonable alternative solvent but not because it is 'more non-polar'. Again, picking up the detritus that has been solvated is important.
A problem I think is potential with microarcing in the presence of a hydrocarbon film is that the arc plasma will degrade components of the film to carbon and other material. Perhaps this, in addition to nickel and copper oxide, is in the 'black' deposit recovered from cleaning.
I continue to think that one of the purposes, and indeed the last step in particular, of "gleaming", is to form an actual railhead rather than a random square shoulder from the rail drawing process for the wheel to run against. Then if necessary to follow an analogue to the 'magic wear rate' for full-size rails that periodically dresses out any microarc damage, or periodically apply a conductive material that fills the pits (which is something I believe the graphite application would do).
As I said, if we want to extrapolate the known efficacy of dielectric materials like the various "no-oxidation" formulas, we have to translate from clamped static contact to dynamic rolling contact with weight replacing clamping force. I think there has been at least one set of experiments with this (perhaps in Australia?) but it needs to be a prerequisite to any discussion of TOR films in model rail maintenance.
I've seen the previous threads. A lot of pontificating and showing how much of our chemistry we remember. Not a lot of helpful explanation of any results one might actually have. Of course, many posts were deleted. One might charitably guess that all the actual practical posts were lost to the server gods.
But I think the root question to be asked is what is the explanation for the observed results
Specifically:
Traditional suggested products like Wahl clipper oil or Gun oil, CRC-26 and CRC contact cleaner and Protectant. are non-polar as is mineral spirits.
Neverstall is non-polar, Track Magic is as well. No-Ox-ID is non-polar(which is I guess the source of the conductive lubricant bruhaha. given it is not the same as "normal" no-ox), Bachmann track cleaner is somewhat in the middle, but certainly low-polar.
These products are some of the core "old wives tale" products along with modern cleaning products. What explains their popularity and consistantly falling in the non-polar category?
Further, we have the well publicized results from the La Mesa club.
They have of course not done any sort of scientific experimentation, but they do have far more hours of run time than the average model railroad and the difference in reliability of the railroad and effort to clean between IPA and Mineral Spirits is so significant that they made the explicit point to remark on it.
What is the the theory of why this is the case? Why, given how poorly IPA worked for this critical model railroad, should anyone rely on it?
My experience at our club was similar. Once we removed IPA from the equation and stuck with Minieral spirits. Oxidation related wheel and track filfth reduced significantly.
But I also have not set up a scientific experiement. And we've since had to tear down and move. The new layout requires the far more practical cleaning efforts related to construction dust and mess.
A lot of the actual theories are not fully defended for sure. There is a thought that the film that the non-polar products leave is reducing the microarcs as well and that the complete drying IPA does is actually part of why oxides form more quickly. Nobody has run that experiment.
Something also accomplished with graphite traditionally. Or gleeming for those with a lot of time on their hands.
Plastic wheels have different gunk spreading properites compared to metal car wheels as well. Generally the theory is the harder metal rejects particulate dirt more than softer plastic. But there are other theories.
Alas that nobody has done a true experiment with scientific rigor, but a robust theory on why these results persist would have more weight to me than rejecting that the results exist at all.
A high dialectic-content solvent would be Marxist! The word you want is spelled 'dielectric' and it implies that the solvent is a good insulator even in thin films.
The point of using alcohol is that it evaporates completely without leaving a residue. But it is a solvent, not a detergent, so when it evaporates, whatever contaminants it 'solved' go right back plated onto the track again -- clean your smartphone screen or mirror with alcohol to see the effect. You have to mechanically wipe up or absorb the dissolved schmutz while still wet, and that is precisely what the prior posts are saying.
We have had previous threads about the actual function of 'dielectric grease' in electrical contacts. Static clamped contact is different from rolling weighted contact, and there is an enormous amount of wack theorizing that gained considerable traction in the model railroad community. Not quite the wack theorizing in the highly-related 'conductive lubricant' lunacy, but you could see it from there.
I can't speak to finding the kit, but building your own masonite car is pretty easy and lots of examples out there.
A few thoughts on wet cleaning.
One, don't just do went cleaning. Follow it up with a dry cloth cleaning car to pick up residue and keep from spreading.
If you have a big layout and can afford it, then you can run what they do at San Diego on the Tehachapi layout. One CMX followed by 2 centerlines. At least that was the config a few years ago. I think they modified it with a masonite on car on front to dust and replaced the centerlines with cheaper home made versions.
But in function, that's what they provide. CMX to distribute liquid. Multiple centerlines to clean it up.
#2. Never use ISO alcohol. Always use a low dialectic constant non-polar solvent. Lacquer thinner, Mineral Spirits. CRC contact cleaner (check which version)
This forum, at least under Kalmbach discouraged linking to other sites, so I won't link to the full breakdown of why, but the upshot is, high dialectic constant polar solvents affect the electro chemical skin on the rail surface and incourage microscopic arcing which deposites oxidation on the track and the wheel.
Low dialect constant solvents do not do this. It will stay clean longer.
Again back to San Diego and La Mesa club. They used to use 90% ISO and couldn't keep the tracks clean longer than a few days. They switch to exclusively Mineral spirits and have had much much better success keeping things clean and reducing issues due to dirty tracks.
Wahls clipper oil was always a recommended hack...it's got a low dialectic constant which is why it works (though it is an oil, so that's not ideal)
OvermodBear, the word you want is 'chamfered', not 'chambered'.
"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."
Bear, the word you want is 'chamfered', not 'chambered'.
I recommend beveling all four edges of the Masonite, not just the 'leading edge' in the normal direction of motion.
Attach the Masonite to something that has 'weight', and attach the guide pins to that. Then if you want springs, mount them like 'side bearers' near the latitudinal centerline of the backing, I think at about railhead spacing. Leave a little 'rattling clearance' between the pins and the guides (plastic or brass tube is what I would use) in the chassis. The pad assembly should be able to rock a bit independently of the car for better following. I would use some method of attaching the Masonite that would let you 'index' the pad either side of 'center' so that as the contacting areas blacken and lose 'tooth' you can adjust until most of the Masonite area will have been used.
I think this does not replace a wet-pad cleaning car, using a solvent like 91% alcohol or lacquer thinner if desired. The Masonite car is run at some time after, when most of the solvent has evaporated but the remaining deposits will still be solubilized. The one thing you have to watch is the potential for more rapid 'varnishing' or deposits clogging the Masonite -- hence the desirability of fine lateral indexing.
Mine is stiil working like a swiss watch, roughly 43 yrs. later. Used Lacquer thinner for cleaner the whole time. Got it when they first came out. I push it to clean the rails, not pull it, with two Proto GP7's:
DC layout started in 1980......still runs today!
Take Care!
Frank
Having to clean track is prototypical! If a seldom used piece of track is signalled, railroads occasionally run a train over it to make sure the rails are clean enough to make electrical contact with the wheels of a train and activate the signals.
I used the A-Line track cleaning kit installed on a transfer caboose that I kitbashed from a crane tender car.
The cab was moved from one end of the car to the center to hide the nails connecting the masonite pad through the frame.
The use of springs would have been a great addition I didn't consider.
hon30critter Hi Dan, I believe that people have made their own track cleaners using a piece of masonite rough side down with the ends beveled, a couple of nails that are glued to the masonite and go up through holes in the bottom of the car, and a couple of soft springs to keep a bit of pressure on the pad. I have never done this myself. Maybe someone can provide a better description. Cheers!! Dave
Hi Dan,
I believe that people have made their own track cleaners using a piece of masonite rough side down with the ends beveled, a couple of nails that are glued to the masonite and go up through holes in the bottom of the car, and a couple of soft springs to keep a bit of pressure on the pad.
I have never done this myself. Maybe someone can provide a better description.
Cheers!!
Dave
I've done it, pretty much as explained by Dave. The key point is to sand the side of the masonite pieces smooth to prevent them from blocking against uneven track (e.g. turnouts). Works well.
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
When I built my first grown-up layout, I had a real underground subway system with 3 stations and a passing track. I had a number of liftoffs that I could remove for cleaning, but some had wiring and were awkward. There were some tunnel sections that were not easy to clean. I bought a CMX cleaning car, an expensive option, but it has served me well for many years and keeps my main lines and subway tunnels clean. It uses a cleaning pad, cloth, not abrasive, and has a large reservoir for cleaning fluid.
I know that your post isn't about buying an expensive accessory, but these things are pretty much universally accepted as the best way to go.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Does anyone know of a source for the MDC/Roundhouse track cleaning accessory kit that could be attached to either the Boxcab or Climax loco frame? I've checked "the 'bay," but the only ones listed there are $18 EACH! I can't help but think that there aren't some other, more reasonably priced ones somewhere else.
Thoughts / suggestions?
Thanks!
dlm