I've got an American Flyer 342 that was given to me last year. It needed re-wiring, brushes and an overall cleaning and lube. I re-wired around the tender as the step motor was not functional so the engine would at least run in the forward mode. I re-assembled and tested on the bench with everything working flawlessly. Problem is even at full throttle (15V AC) it would go around the track about medium speed. This year after dusting it off from the box and setting in on the track, I find it's got even less torque or pull.
Question, do you think the motor/armature is at fault? Like I say it runs great on the test bench, but when you place it on the track even under its own weight without cars, it just has no ummphhh! I have to practically push it around the track for it to go......
Hi Hector: For me, a bench test only serves one purpose; it tells me that the reverse unit cycles properly, the motor spins freely under voltage in forward & reverse, the smoke box produces smoke and the head lamp lights up. What it doesn't tell me is how that loco will perform on the track under load. For that test, I place my loco on the track with from 3 - 5 cars. I have deduced that the bench test shows the loco off to the max because; 1) as we both pointed out, it is not under load and 2) there is no appreciable wattage drop from the transformer directly to the tender wheels via short leads whereas there is an appreciable drop through the bus wires, feeder wires and the rails themselves - not to mention any extraneous things are concurrently operating from the fixed voltage post.
Assuming that you have properly lubed the loco and checked all points of friction - including a gummed-up gear box, then that leaves only one thing that I can think of; the open-frame motor itself. I usually keep a spare AC open-frame motor or three that I know works well installed in the correct loco. Those armature and field coils were wound some 60+ years ago with enameled wire that was rather state-of-the-art back then. Perhaps over the years the resistance value in either or both pieces has increased a lot. Rewinding a field is no big deal for me. I've done it successfully several times. I would not attempt to re-wire an armature. Frankly, unless it is some freakishly unique piece, I would just toss it and replace it if I determined that it was not up to spec. Resistance values for both pieces are known and published if you want to test them with a meter. I don't have those values. Perhaps someone else on this list with some books can look it up for you. There was also a factory test set of specs for each loco under load. I think the load was 3 cars on an oval of Flyer track. Again, I don't have those loco test specs.
So that is what I look at when faced with a situation as you have described. Perhaps someone else on this forum can give good input.
Regards,
Timboy
Hi again: Some other thoughts. I would pull the open-frame motor out and inspect the chassis where the armature shaft goes through it. I wonder if there could be some - I don't know - cat hair or something in there fouling things up. I would look at the worm drive for the same thing. I have experienced brushes that won't seat properly on the armature face and I have tracked that down to a dirty brush tube. One quick swipe with a pipe cleaner or Q-tip and problem solved. It could be as simple as that. Maybe an armature bushing has come part way out? Maybe some gunk in the brush plate where the armature shaft is? Could it also be a field out of alignment that causes the armature to be whacked out of line so slightly that it's extremely hard to see and only manifests itself under power? Not common in steamers, but possible, I guess. Anyone else?
Timboy Hi again: Some other thoughts. I would pull the open-frame motor out and inspect the chassis where the armature shaft goes through it. I wonder if there could be some - I don't know - cat hair or something in there fouling things up. I would look at the worm drive for the same thing. I have experienced brushes that won't seat properly on the armature face and I have tracked that down to a dirty brush tube. One quick swipe with a pipe cleaner or Q-tip and problem solved. It could be as simple as that. Maybe an armature bushing has come part way out? Maybe some gunk in the brush plate where the armature shaft is? Could it also be a field out of alignment that causes the armature to be whacked out of line so slightly that it's extremely hard to see and only manifests itself under power? Not common in steamers, but possible, I guess. Anyone else? Regards, Timboy
Tim,
I cannot add anything to what you have already said, but I have similar speed and pulling problems with my old AF steam engine. I agree with you that age and time probably have a lot to do with this kind of performance issue with the motor.
Would it be sacriligious to replace the 60+year old motor with a modern can motor?
Be gentle on me !
Rich
Alton Junction
Hi Rich: "sacriligious"? No! Would I do it myself right now? No! Seriously, replacing vintage open-frame motors with modern can motors is a mixed bag, as we used to say. They run with less draw on old transformers. That said, the smoke box can suffer from a lack of too much voltage. Enter 1/2-speed cans. That would seem to mitigate the smoke box problem. Downside? The 1/2-speed cans are not offered with a flywheel to my knowledge. What does a flywheel do? It allows the loco to coast through bad places on the track. What happens when you put a can motor in a loco and the can motor doesn't have a flywheel? It can come to a crashing stop when you least want it to; just like the Franklin can suddenly go into reverse (for a different reason). Okay, let's add another variation to this party. Electronic reverse units. Some have a capacitor that can again cause the loco to coast through bad spots on the track. Some don't. Bottom line. Do you want to run vintage-style Flyer loci as they came from the factory or do you want to do something else with them? If you want to do something else with them, then why not just pony up and buy new stuff that looks great and runs great as well. MY BOTTOM LINE? Keep 'em as original as possible or buy all new. Have a set-up that will allow you to run vintage or new if you must have both. Usually, a toggle switch or two is all you need.
Alternate bottom line. Rehab old loci to run on DCC. That is an under-the-hood modification. The Flyer "look" will be maintained AND they will run like a race horse on steroids. Going with DCC is the single best reason I can think of right now to replace open-frame motors with can motors of any kind. Otherwise, I wouldn't bother.
That's my thoughts. Your's may differ. They always do.
OBTW: TMI? Welcome to MY world and now you know the demons I have wrestled with over the years; winning and losing. OMG! LOL
Hi Hector: Me yet again. Does the chassis even have a bushing for the armature shaft? If not, then that could explain the armature getting thrust out-of-line when power is applied and the loss of "umph". I don't know where you got that piece from. I've had them where the bushings have been removed. Why? Because a can motor that doesn't need one used to be housed there and now there is an open-frame motor again that does need one. I think the thing I'm driving at the most in my post is that there is a reason and that reason can always be determined either by direct observation or by testing with a meter. Be the detective of the defective.
The specifications for the 342AC are:
"Tested at: 12 volts A.C....using 140"oval of track.
"(A) Motor to be tested with Remote Control Unit at 12 Volts and not to draw more than 1.55 amps.
"(B) Locomotive to run at a minimum of 9 RPM or 9 times forward around 140" oval of track per minute.
"(C) Locomotive to run at a minimum of 8.5 RPM or 8 1/2 times reverse around 140" oval of track per minute.
"Load: Not to draw more than 2.1 amps while pulling 4 box cars.
"Motor: Universal A.C. or D.C."
Neither the resistance of copper wire nor of any properly made solder joints will increase with age. However, other types of connnections that might exist (like the faston connection to the fuse block of my car's horn circuit yesterday) may indeed increase in resistance over time (48 years).
Bob Nelson
Hector,
Did you install new springs when you replaced the brushes? Weak springs will cause weak performance. Also be sure that the metal wheels on the tender are clean and bright and that the contacts are applying pressure to the axles because these two issues aren't always apparent on the bench.
Timboy Hi Rich: "sacriligious"? No! Would I do it myself right now? No! Seriously, replacing vintage open-frame motors with modern can motors is a mixed bag, as we used to say. They run with less draw on old transformers. That said, the smoke box can suffer from a lack of too much voltage. Enter 1/2-speed cans. That would seem to mitigate the smoke box problem. Downside? The 1/2-speed cans are not offered with a flywheel to my knowledge. What does a flywheel do? It allows the loco to coast through bad places on the track. What happens when you put a can motor in a loco and the can motor doesn't have a flywheel? It can come to a crashing stop when you least want it to; just like the Franklin can suddenly go into reverse (for a different reason). Okay, let's add another variation to this party. Electronic reverse units. Some have a capacitor that can again cause the loco to coast through bad spots on the track. Some don't. Bottom line. Do you want to run vintage-style Flyer loci as they came from the factory or do you want to do something else with them? If you want to do something else with them, then why not just pony up and buy new stuff that looks great and runs great as well. MY BOTTOM LINE? Keep 'em as original as possible or buy all new. Have a set-up that will allow you to run vintage or new if you must have both. Usually, a toggle switch or two is all you need. Alternate bottom line. Rehab old loci to run on DCC. That is an under-the-hood modification. The Flyer "look" will be maintained AND they will run like a race horse on steroids. Going with DCC is the single best reason I can think of right now to replace open-frame motors with can motors of any kind. Otherwise, I wouldn't bother. That's my thoughts. Your's may differ. They always do. OBTW: TMI? Welcome to MY world and now you know the demons I have wrestled with over the years; winning and losing. OMG! LOL Regards, Timboy
As always my thoughts differ, LOL.
But, seriously, I appreciate your comments.
I wonder if there isn't a middle ground between running vintage American Flyer as original equipment or buying stuff that looks great and runs great as well. If a modern can motor can do the trick, why not swap the older poor performing vintage motor for a new can motor inside your vintage engine in order to keep it running and the memories flowing.
My thoughts. Yours may differ. They always do.
RichHotRain
Rich: Why not? The last thing in the world I would try to tell you is how YOU should run YOUR trains. When I rant, I am telling you how I run MY trains. I don't really care what YOU do. I am always willing to try to help you do what YOU want to do.
Thank you for the helpful replies. I am going to tear it apart on the bench tomorrow and do another thorough cleaning of the armature and brush tubes. I can't remember whether I replaced the springs or not, but I believe I did. I'll add new brushes as well. I didn't replace them last year as the old ones still had plenty of material left.
Bob:
And I quote, "Neither the resistance of copper wire nor of any properly made solder joints will increase with age." End quote. Could it then be that one pole of an armature is shorted out? If so, perhaps the armature still turns during a bench test because there is low friction & low load, but the motor's power would be greatly reduced under load? Is this a valid thought?
Thanks,
In some ways I am like Tim, I like to keep my Flyer as it was when made. However I have change out a poor performing motor with a 1/2 speed can motor. The results were worth it, however this particular steamer still has the Gilbert mechanical reverse unit with at Bridge recifier across it. Port Line hobbies has the parts for the conversion. I say or for it!
Bob: I suspect I am right and that a given motor (with a low friction load) COULD turn with one pole shorted out, but not so much under full load.
You made a statement that I want to revisit and examine further. And I quote: "Neither the resistance of copper wire nor of any properly made solder joints will increase with age. However, other types of connnections that might exist (like the faston connection to the fuse block of my car's horn circuit yesterday) may indeed increase in resistance over time (48 years)." End quote
While that may be a true statement, I feel that it derails (pun intended - lol) the problem-solving of why that motor will spin well during a bench test but poorly under load.
This is what I wish to promote:
The armature resistance is known and published and is usually measured from one commutator plate to another by the average repair guy. The resistance measurement taken gives a clue to the repairman that maybe a coil's enamel insulation has been damaged by heat, age, etc. A common complaint and diagnosis after taking the above measurement is a "weak armature". Given your true statement that the resistance of copper wire does not increase over age, aren't I putting the problem into a better context? (edit)That context being that the resistance of the coil or coils in an armature may indeed change over age due to what I noted above. And when that happens, a partial or total coil failure can happen.(/edit)
I believe I have a valid argument.
Tim, I was responding to your statement, "Those armature and field coils were wound some 60+ years ago with enameled wire that was rather state-of-the-art back then. Perhaps over the years the resistance value in either or both pieces has increased a lot." The armature resistance, as I meant to suggest, can increase for other reasons, such as a broken wire or a bad solder joint, but not because the copper wire can deteriorate or because of insulation failure. Bad insulation will instead decrease the resistance. It will also create shorted turns, which are a disaster for AC operation. This is also true for the field winding. I often suggest trying to run a suspect motor on DC just to try to detect shorted turns, which may have little or no effect on DC operation.
As for testing the armature, simply comparing the three possible resistance measurements (for a three-pole motor) will almost certainly expose any failure, whether open circuits or short circuits.
I don't have my service manual here; but I recall that many Flyer steam locomotives supply the headlight by placing it in parallel with the field or armature, to avoid having a fifth wire in the tether. If the 342 is one of these, it might be a good experiment to disconnect the headlight.
Thanks. Good reply. At this point, I think we pretty much have all bases covered on what the problem could be with that particular loco. And all these areas are good ones to look at in any similar loco with the kind of problem Hector originally described.
I hope Hector can do a good analysis and will respond back what he found and what he did to correct it. I think we could all benefit from feedback like that.
. I took the engine apart and cleaned everything once again. Replaced the brushes and springs. Tested for binding. Everything moving smoothly. I placed it on the track and had to push it to go. After that it took off, but still hesitated. After about 12 laps it stopped again on the track. I had to push it once again for it to move. It's still too slow IMHO. Something is still not right. I completely bypassed the tender coil and still no change.
Again, I can lift the engine from the track with the tender still resting on the track and the thing runs like a bat outta hell free wheeling. I'm not sure if I'm not getting good continuity on this 50 year old track or what. I'm thinking of buying another American flyer steamer on Ebay for 60 bucks just to make sure it's not the track. I should have another one anyway...
Frustrated......Down.......but not out.
Hector: When it hesitates, is it on a straight or on a curve? I'm just wondering if you have a loose drive wheel rim that will make brief, intermittent contact with the chassis. That happened to me once with similar symptoms of what you describe and yet it would "bench-test" like a run-a-way. When I saw where the loose wheel was, I solved it by thoroughly degreasing the drive wheel and rim where they meet and cementing them back together. Then I cut out a small circle of paper from a brown paper bag; cut a hole in the middle for the axle and cut a slot in the paper to the hole in the middle. I was able to work that onto the axle to act as an insulator. Okay, that was a "meatball" fix, but two years and running...
It does sound like an electrical problem and they can be a bugger to - well, de-bug. You can go around the track with a meter set for AC and see how constant the track voltage is.
Another thing to check are all your solder joints. As one of the last resorts I do, I re-solder all joints to make sure they are good.
You bypassed the tender reverse unit, so I'm thinking we can eliminate that. Sometimes one of those fingers make just the lightest contact to the drum and that can cause similar track-running problems.
You may as well check the gauge of your drive wheels. Nothing to lose doing that. I had a loco once with one set of drive wheels that were out-of-gauge too narrow and they managed to intermittently contact the chassis. Darndest thing!
C'mon guys! What are we missing here?
Timboy C'mon guys! What are we missing here?
I can understand an electrical problem causing it to stop intermittently, but this performance issue really sounds like more of a mechanical problem to me. The fact that it runs freely when there is no pressure on the drivers, but hesitates when setting on the track, leads me to believe that there is something wrong with the suspension.
Hector, have you tried just running the chassis without the shell on it? That way you can get a good look at the internal mechanism, the worm and the dive gear, in action. See if there is any play in those parts that might be causing the drive train to bind under load. A missing thrust bearing could be causing the armature to move in and out while under load
I'm, also wondering if you might have a wheel with a bent axle. If you push the chassis by hand, do any of the drivers seem to wobble? Are the drivers quartered properly? If you run it with and without side rods do you see a difference? If the thing runs fine with no shell on it, then you have to look at what other parts of the body might be binding against the mechnaism.
I have figured out what is wrong with my brain! On the left side nothing works right, and on the right side there is nothing left!
Timboy Hector: When it hesitates, is it on a straight or on a curve? I'm just wondering if you have a loose drive wheel rim that will make brief, intermittent contact with the chassis. That happened to me once with similar symptoms of what you describe and yet it would "bench-test" like a run-a-way. When I saw where the loose wheel was, I solved it by thoroughly degreasing the drive wheel and rim where they meet and cementing them back together. Then I cut out a small circle of paper from a brown paper bag; cut a hole in the middle for the axle and cut a slot in the paper to the hole in the middle. I was able to work that onto the axle to act as an insulator. Okay, that was a "meatball" fix, but two years and running... It does sound like an electrical problem and they can be a bugger to - well, de-bug. You can go around the track with a meter set for AC and see how constant the track voltage is. Another thing to check are all your solder joints. As one of the last resorts I do, I re-solder all joints to make sure they are good. You bypassed the tender reverse unit, so I'm thinking we can eliminate that. Sometimes one of those fingers make just the lightest contact to the drum and that can cause similar track-running problems. You may as well check the gauge of your drive wheels. Nothing to lose doing that. I had a loco once with one set of drive wheels that were out-of-gauge too narrow and they managed to intermittently contact the chassis. Darndest thing! C'mon guys! What are we missing here? Regards, Timboy
That sounds promising. I always seems to stop on a curve.
Doesn't the white plastic circle you see on the outside rim of the wheels insulate the body from the wheel? Do they need replaced on a regular basis? My wheels are not loose on the axle. All wheels are tight on the wheel shaft, but there is some play back and forth as you grab both wheels and axle together. You would need that in order for the wheels to move round.
Hector: The centers of the drive wheels are some kind of non-conductive material; plastic or bakelite or something like that. Don't worry about the white rims. If the metal wheel rims are firmly anchored to the centers, that's fine. There should be a little bit of play on the wheelset as you observed, but not too much. Many of the loco axle holes were not bushed - I can't tell you which were and which weren't. The ones that weren't would wear and get sloppy. Too much slop and they can find a way to short out against the chassis. To check if they are in gauge - if you don't own an NASG track gauge, just look at several other wheelsets on several other cars, etc. Compare them side-by-side with your loco or use calipers or a ruler. I mention to use several examples because Flyer wheelsets are notorious for getting out of gauge.
I also cannot disagree with Stebbycentral and it seems like you will have to go that route to get to the bottom of this problem. IMHO, that is actually a very logical approach. Tear it down as he suggests and start building it back up, running it as you go - looking for that fatal flaw. Spin the wheels on the chassis. They should run true and if there is appreciable wobble, then that's not good. If you know what the bushing looks like in the chassis for the motor shaft, check for that. Maybe it's missing or knocked out somewhat and that causes the shaft to thrust out of line and bind with the worm gear - all as Stebbycentral suggested. Also put your meter on continuity setting and put one probe on one face of the armature and the other probe on another face. You should get a reading, as you test each plate (pole). If you don't on one, then that indicates a shorted-out pole. A far different reading could indicate a weak pole. I mention this as more of an oh-by-the-way. If you are convinced that that problem is when the loco goes on a curved section, that is important and indicates either an intermittent electrical break or a binding somewhere. Forgive me if I'm either repeating my self or what Stebbycentral or someone else has mentioned.
Are the field and armature wired in series (correct) or parallel (wrong)?
Wired in series as the drawings indicate. The engine always stops on a curve... same right side curve on an oval layout. But again, I can go round 3 or 4 times, then it stops.......Nudging it slightly allows it to move once again. Hmmmmm...maybe I should construct a layout with straight's only
Well, I bought another loco on ebay. I'll test run that and see what happens as soon as I get it in. I'm wondering if the armature is coil winding is bad. The engine requires a little more torque going round the curve.....a possibility?
Layout in progress....Engine in question....
Hector: Does it always stop on that same spot on that same curve? If so, pull the track apart and make sure that both pins extend generously into both sections of track. Flare them out laterally just a bit so that as you re-connect the track, they make a positive contact with the inside of the hollow track. It could be that simple and not the fault of the loco at all - but that doesn't actually sound consistent with all you've noted in the past. OBTW, cute little layout!
Major In some ways I am like Tim, I like to keep my Flyer as it was when made. However I have change out a poor performing motor with a 1/2 speed can motor. The results were worth it, however this particular steamer still has the Gilbert mechanical reverse unit with at Bridge recifier across it. Port Line hobbies has the parts for the conversion. I say or for it!
Major,
When you replaced the open frame motor with a 1/2 speed can motor, how much did this affect the speed of your loco?
Ok, maybe some progress. I found out that the first set of wheels shorts to the frame when I rock them back and forth. This is the axle that has the worm drive gear on it. Can I just pry the wheels of the axle? I think all I have to do is insulate it like Timboy suggests....
If you can get your hands on a gear-puller it would help immensly. Pulling the wheels off any other way risks damaging the wheel or bending the axle.
Success! Thanks for everyones help especially timboy. All I had to do was pull the wheel out a little bit and that did the trick. No more short. I also needed to clean the track and several of the cars. The set was given to me and there was copious amounts of grease on several of the wheels. So clean track is a must. Here's a video of the train in action. I have it wide open. Is this all I can expect? It's a lot slower than my lionel engines.
http://s628.photobucket.com/albums/uu4/hectorgonzales222/?action=view¤t=MVI_3185.mp4
For some reason I can't get an imbedded video to work here.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Get the Classic Toy Trains newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month