Hi Gang,
Some of you have been following my posts in the Diner about scratchbuilding a somewhat unusual rotary snow plough. This is the plough:
The idea of building the plough was put in my mind by Brent who added a picture of it to one of his posts in mid January. I have built many different snow removal mechanisms and Brent's picture really caught my fancy. I will admit to not having done much modelling over the past few months. Hopefully Brent's snow plough will be the kick in the butt that I needed to get back to modelling again.
Here are a few other pictures of the plough, including one with some interesting information:
Bear supplied this picture of a more typical rotary plough from the same era. The diagram provides some insight into how the side discharge plough may have been powered. Somewhere in the documentation that I have read it was suggested that the plough may have had twin 'engines' but I suspect given the time frame (1901) that they may have meant twin 'cylinders' since fitting two complete steam engines side by side in the available space doesn't seem to be a practible solution:
I am bidding on an old time 4-4-0 with a similar shaped boiler to see if it will fit. If not, I will scratchbuild a boiler. The 4-4-0 comes with a tender that would fit the era too.
I have done a couple of sketches to work out the proportions. I am basing the underframe on a 36' box car. I have an Accurail 36' car on order. Here is the side view as it currently sits:
I have designed both a fake steam engine and an actual drive system for the blades. This is an interior view showing the steam power unit as well as the drive mechanism for the blades. If all goes as planned the motor will fit inside the steam unit and the angled drive will be supported by brass sheet:
Sorry, I can't get the image to load. I have a new printer, and like every other change that we make to our computer systems, figuring out is a PITA!!!
Once I figure it out I will start a new post.
Cheers!!
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."
Good morning
Looks like a fun project Dave. I'll be interested to follow along with your progress
TF
hon30critter The idea of building the plough was put in my mind by Brent who added a picture of it to one of his posts in mid January. I have built many different snow removal mechanisms and Brent's picture really caught my fancy. I will admit to not having done much modelling over the past few months. Hopefully Brent's snow plough will be the kick in the butt that I needed to get back to modelling again.
Your second mistake was choosing such a complicated scratchbuild project to re-enter the hobby after your unforced layoff.
Are you intending to build the standard version of the rotary snow plow or the side discharge version? Most of the Google Images show the standard rotary snow plow which seems like a bit easier to scratch build.
Whatever you do, I hope you make the rotary snow plow operable! Good luck.
Rich
Alton Junction
What, exactly, is a "plough"? How do you pronounce that, plo-ugh?
Why do we need to use extra letters in a word when spelling is hard enough?
I suppose the next thing we'll have to do is have the metric argument all over again.
Rant complete. Now we return you to your normally scheduled conversation.
Dosn't look too hard to scratchbuild unless you need evey rivit in place as you could start with a kit from the likes of Northeastern or others that would give you everything except for the special blades, beleive the plow part could be modified from the included to one that can hold the new blade, almost looks like that is how it was built in the first place.
maxman What, exactly, is a "plough"? How do you pronounce that, plo-ugh? Why do we need to use extra letters in a word when spelling is hard enough?
Yet when you make a statement like, "I seen the out-of-control car (plow) through the snow bank", it's spelt like this Dick
The out-of-control car does the same thing as the snow (plough) as it plowed threw the snow bank but it's spelt like that, even when it ain't evan spelled right.
The Canadians have a different colour of spelling up there I gathered when I lived on the border.
Although I never completely understood why you trade the A for an E when you flip the box car eh.
I went up to visit my friends a few years ago having this conversation when we were all ploughed and I don't think we ever got it all figured out
I think you drop the (ugh) and add (w) or something
A 1:22.5 scale would be interesting to watch being put against real snow just to see. shane
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
Track fiddler maxman What, exactly, is a "plough"? How do you pronounce that, plo-ugh? Why do we need to use extra letters in a word when spelling is hard enough? Yet when you make a statement like, "I seen the out-of-control car (plow) through the snow bank", it's spelt like this Dick The out-of-control car does the same thing as the snow (plough) as it plowed threw the snow bank but it's spelt like that, even when it ain't evan spelled right. The Canadians have a different colour of spelling up there I gathered when I lived on the border. Although I never completely understood why you trade the A for an E when you flip the box car eh. I went up to visit my friends a few years ago having this conversation when we were all ploughed and I don't think we ever got it all figured out I think you drop the (ugh) and add (w) or something TF
"Canadien" is in French spelling. Canadian is English spelling.
Simon
The impellers were driven by the then-new Morse silent roller chain, probably with multiple widths (see the final drive on a McKeen car and beef it up).
You can probably improve on the drive by using a Weller tensioner to absorb the (considerable!) shock force that the description implies; in theory, the steam engine driving it was underpowered for it not to penetrate drifts but for the rotating inertia to give the ~50yd penetration with chunks too hard for shovels to break up...
Since the drive is transverse, the engine(s) will be, too. There is no angle drive, no expensive gears, and any reduction is easily handled with chain sprockets on heavy countershafts.
If I were designing this I would build the engine as a steeple compound, with cylinders inline like the Willans engine in the Heilmann locomotives, perhaps with clutches and drives at both ends to the countershaft that drives the impellers. That will balance torsion loads on the (expensive) engine crankshaft...
You might also build the engine symmetrical around a center pinion, like the old Honda F1 engine, which decreases the torsional load on the crank; you might make this a V-2 or Heisler-like V4 on either side.
The thing apparently missing from the design is the ability to throw the cleared snow long distances in a fine 'coherent' stream, as in plowing double track or where stations or yard tracks are adjacent. The Boss Sno-Flyr design was supposed to be adept at this...
And why bother with that silly spelling of the word? I believe the company was from Ontario, and it says right there on the side of the thing that it is the IDEAL SNOW PLOW CO. I somehow doubt they were just saving a little paint by using that spelling...
richhotrainDave, your first mistake was letting yourself be influenced by Brent. That will always cost you time and money.
Do you realize how long I have been trolling Dave over in the diner? Throwing out photo after photo waiting for him to bite. The cost of rum and Pepsi alone was horrendous while I waited and waited. Then WHAMO! I hooked' em and when he ordered his first parts I had him in the boat.
I am looking forward to watching this project chug along.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
Brent, I don't know what came over me in that moment when I posted that slur. As I think about the amount of time that you have spent trolling Dave in the Diner, I now realize the error of my ways. You're right. Let Dave labor away on this project.
snjroy Track fiddler The Canadians have a different colour of spelling up there I gathered when I lived on the border. Although I never completely understood why you trade the A for an E when you flip the box car eh. I went up to visit my friends a few years ago having this conversation when we were all ploughed and I don't think we ever got it all figured out I think you drop the (ugh) and add (w) or something TF "Canadien" is in French spelling. Canadian is English spelling. Simon
Track fiddler The Canadians have a different colour of spelling up there I gathered when I lived on the border. Although I never completely understood why you trade the A for an E when you flip the box car eh. I went up to visit my friends a few years ago having this conversation when we were all ploughed and I don't think we ever got it all figured out I think you drop the (ugh) and add (w) or something TF
I remember hearing something like that when I was up there just out of International Falls visiting my old buddies Simon.
Leon came down from Fort Frances and we were all having beers around the bon fire. He was telling me there's one French guy who lives in Canada with the same name as him except its spelt (spelled) Lyon and he can't pronounce Canadian spelt with an (A) so out of respect they spell it with an (E) on the other side of the box cars so he can read it OK.
So I asked Leon, But what if the train is going the other way though? ............There was a big pause and Leon said, Well, you ain't supposed to think like that, either they got some of the cars flipped or he can't read it then
We all busted a gut and I'll remember that night for a long time. Leon is a card and you'ld have to be there. Everyone loves Leon
Hi guys, Thanks for all the answers and suggestions.
Rich:
I am definitely doing the side discharge blade model. I already have a couple of the more common rotary ploughs with the big blade in front. One is an Athearn BB kit which is waiting to have the drive motor installed, and the other is an old Roundhouse 3 in 1 kit which is currently unpowered.
The plough itself won't be difficult to build but the blades may be a challenge. I'm going to use brass and copper. I already have the brass sheet and I bought a couple of copper pipe fittings which will be used as the impeller drums. I have some six spoke RC car tires on the way that I might be able to use for the spokes although I suspect they will be too large.
The blades will be driven by a motor connected to a worm with the worm gear on the blade shaft, much like a power truck. I had a suitable worm on hand and I ordered a 10 tooth worm gear as well as the bushings and shafts from NWSL. I wanted the smallest worm gear available so the blades would spin faster without having to rev the heck out of the motor.
RRebell:
I'm using an Accurail 36' double sheathed box car as the donor for the floor, doors and the roof. My reasoning for the 36' car was that 40' cars would not have been that common in 1901 when the plough was built.
Overmod:
Thanks for the info on the drive system and motor styles. Most of the terms are foreign to me so I will have to do some research. Space limitations will probably mean that I can only model a semblance of the twin engines. Hopefully I can hide the electric motor under the model motors. The idea of using an actual chain drive rather intimidates me so I'm going to stick with something that I have a better understanding of and that I know how to adjust.
Bear:
Thanks for the video. I may have to use some artistic license when it comes to the back of the plough.
maxman:
We Canadians (Canadiens eh!) spell the word 'plough' both ways. They are interchangeable. I prefer the proper English spelling of most words when there is a choice. That's my mother's family's English roots showing. As for the metric system, the change to metric in Canada was a bit of a farce. We still use feet and inches for most smaller construction projects like roofing, interior design etc. That is, except where we don't! If I buy a 4' x 8' sheet of plywood the thickness might be in inches or it might be in millimeters, but it is still listed as being 4' x 8'. Go figure!
Brent:
If this goes south, it's all on you!!
hon30critterI prefer the proper English spelling of most words when there is a choice.
I agree Dave: no matter who's speaking it, it is the English language, and I generally try to spell those words in English.
Some Americanisms elide double consonants simply to save time and ink (or typing), which is quite understandable, given the rift which occurred well over two hundred years ago.The only one which really bugs me is the pronunciation of the letter "Z" as zee, a Dutch or German word for "sea". To me it sounds more like a lazy version of "C", easily confused and without the oomph of zed. A Zee26 Camaro is like a kid's lawn mower, compared to a Zed28 tank, which has heft.
In all fairness, though, I think that Zee came about solely because it helped folks complete the rhyme in the ABC song.
Wayne
PS. Not even worth but I still think the rear portion needs to be lengthened, 1/3 plough and blades, 1/3 door portion, 1/3 rear.
Hi Bear,
I'm inclined to agree with you. The photos of the original show a longer rear end. I was originally going by the normal truck positions on an early box car where there isn't a lot of overhang beyond the trucks, but the pictures don't lie and your suggested ratio of 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 makes sense. I'm not going to use the side walls of the 36' donor car because they aren't tall enough, so it will be easy to adjust the length.
OvermodIf I were designing this I would build the engine as a steeple compound, with cylinders inline like the Willans engine in the Heilmann locomotives,
Hi again Overmod,
I have spent some time looking at some of the engine configurations that you have suggested, and I am interested in coming up with something that would mimic their appearance. Would you be willing to make a few more suggestions?
First, my understanding of the engine configurations is still vague at best. Is this the type of engine style that you are referring to? (I realize that this is a much smaller version than would have been used in the plough):
If so, where does the steam come from? I'm guessing that there must be a separate boiler which is not shown in the picture. If so, can you suggest what it might have looked like?
I'm also assuming that the increased height of the plough body was a result of the height of the engines. Is that a reasonable supposition?
I appreciate the input that you have given me already and I hope that you will be kind enough to answer any of the questions above, or offer more suggestions.
Thanks,
hon30critter Rich: I am definitely doing the side discharge blade model.
I am definitely doing the side discharge blade model.
hon30critterIs this the type of engine style that you are referring to?
This is a steam motor (so called because it has its own crankshaft, bedplate, etc. as installed). Just like a normal locomotive 'engine' (and the side elevation of the rotary) it uses steam generated in a boiler, admitted by a throttle, to run.
The 'steeple' feature is that multiple 'compound' cylinder sizes are mounted on the same piston rod, vertically to 'save floor space'. Steam expands to do work in the smallest, then passes through appropriate receiver piping to the middle, thence to the largest. The mass of all the pistons and rod is counterbalanced at the crankshaft and therefore this design is often referred to as a 'high-speed engine' (you will find technical material on its detail design and construction as 'steeple compound' or 'Willans')
You will want a clutch in the arrangement for the same reason the Franklin 'reversible' booster provided one: so the engine can be idled to warm it up and lubricate the cylinders properly without having to drive the substantial load. "Ideally" (see what I did there?) this would learn from the McKeen car, and have some sort of slippable drive to get the rotors up to speed, a spring coupling (or 'feder' or quill drive arrangement) to cushion driveline shock when the rotors hit ice or rocks, and a Maybach or self-engaging dog clutch that can be thrown in when the rotors are up to speed.
As I recall, there is a valve for each piston, also stacked on a common drive rod, although I don't remember if there is any manifolding that crosses steam from HP to LP in different cylinders, as in the complex porting in the valve of a Vauclain Compound. The Willans engine in the original Heilmann locomotive had six steeples inline, for good running balance, with triple expansion; to get reasonable cylinder size for actual workable expansion thermodynamics this (to me at least) implies variable and very early cutoff on the HP, or some kind of riding cutoff a la Cuyahoga (which was essentially standard on express locomotives in the United States as long as slide valves were used, but is nearly forgotten in piston-valve/Schmidt superheat practice). I suspect you will want to google Willans and steeple compounds in 'contemporary' literature (I believe they were popular for fast marine use).
In a plow like this, I suspect you would have the rotor shaft very heavy, mounted in heavy bearing blocks on either side of a central sprocket cluster. You may be familiar with multiple-row Morse chain if you have repaired classic American V8 engines; this has multiple sets of rollers per 'link' (and to my knowledge there is no limit imposed by width as the thrust is carried on the rollers and promptly conveyed to the adjacent links in the chain). If I were doing this I might have two chains for 'redundancy', but one heavy one will certainly do the business (see the contemporary literature on early Morse silent chain design to see how the chains were made and marketed). There would likely be a spring coupling in the hub of the sprocket cluster...
A six-cylinder motor would be transverse, and could easily be made out of 'two groups of three' with their respective crankshafts phased appropriately and a central driving arrangement. The 'catch' here is the clutch arrangement, which you really, really, really need to get the engine fully warmed before driving the enormous inertial load of the rotors. This could be made to run concentrically on a central shaft between the 'two' engines, with the sprocket cluster teeth around its (extended) outer diameter. Alternatively the engine could be made in one piece, with balanced chain drive at both ends (to save torsional stress in the crank) to a countershaft with the clutch and main drive which might be located below the engine crank to save longitudinal space -- note in the rotary drawing how the cylinders and flywheels are located at either side of the boiler, much as in a locomotive engine, so a larger/longer boiler can be fitted in a given length of carbody.
As a note: a large, fat Garratt-style boiler, with as deep a firebox as possible (i.e. long water legs) rather than a converted or older locomotive boiler would be the thing to install here, and high pressure (this is still 'pre-superheater era' so the typical higher working pressure for triple expansion is going to apply) is an operating benefit. You might find a Vanderbilt marine boiler or even a vertical boiler arrangement if your master mechanic trained under the glinting eye of Eli Gilderfluke. If you are familiar with how steam rotaries 'sound' -- they are very much like geared locomotives like Shays, a lot of sound and fury at what sounds like 100mph.
hon30critterIf so, where does the steam come from?
Maybe you can use this drawing I scanned of an Alco rotary from a catalog I have in my collection.
ALCO_rotary (2016_08_17 08_08_12 UTC) by Edmund, on Flickr
ALCO_rotary_0001 (2016_08_17 08_08_12 UTC) by Edmund, on Flickr
ALCO_rotary_0002 (2016_08_17 08_08_12 UTC) by Edmund, on Flickr
ALCO_rotary_0003 (2016_08_17 08_08_12 UTC) by Edmund, on Flickr
ALCO_rotary_0004 (2016_08_17 08_08_12 UTC) by Edmund, on Flickr
There appears to be two engines on either side of the boiler plus I see evidence of a brake band centrally located on the main shaft. While not specifically mentioned in the operating instructions it is quite possible that one engine is used for C.W. running and the other for C.C.W. operation of the wheel?
This one has a pair of three-cylinder "Shay" engines:
https://donstrack.smugmug.com/UtahRails/Union-Pacific/UP-Snow-Plows/i-TWMJzT6/A
I would have to believe the boilers on the newer rotary as shown in the UP photo are oil fired thus no concern about getting coal to the firebox. I recall the venerable Athearn rotary model has the boiler oriented this way since the smokebox door is visible on the end bulkhead.
Good Luck, Ed
NVSRR A 1:22.5 scale would be interesting to watch being put against real snow just to see. shane
Overmod and Ed,
Thanks for all the information.
It looks like I have two choices for the engine(s). One is a setup like Ed showed at the beginning of his post with horizontal cylinders:
The other is a 'steeple compound' style with vertical cylinders. You can see a picture of a later model vertical cylinder engine here:
As Overmod suggested in an earlier post, the engines in my plough would likely have been mounted transversely in order to keep the drive system as simple as possible by using chains and sprockets instead of bevelled gears. I think I will model two twin cylinder steeple compound engines with a common drive shaft. The model engines will be mounted transversely. The actual electric motor shaft can run between the two banks of cylinders to the worm gear. The motor itself will sit inside the boiler. I'm not sure if I can model a semblance of a chain drive along with the electric motor shaft. We shall see.
Thanks again,
I started working on the six spoke hubs of the blade assemblies last night and I quickly discovered that my 45+ year old tin snips aren't up to the task of making clean cuts in brass sheet anymore. They are absolutely shot!
I can't complain. I have used them extensively and I will continue to use them for cutting lead sheet for weights. I just ordered a pair of smaller smooth jaw shears, one straight cut and the other for left hand cuts. They are only about 7 1/2" long so I'm hoping they will be suited for hobby work.
I had stated that I was going to model steeple compound engines but now I'm not sure that that's what I want to do. I discovered some reasonably detailed steam piston assemblies in my parts drawer and I think they would look neat inside the shell. I have no understanding whatsoever of how all of the rods and levers work, and quite frankly I don't care. (Overmod, please forgive me). The cylinders will have to be replaced because the design is too new, but that's easy.
Bear,
As you suggested, I have extended the back of the body. The proportions look much better.
You might as well show pictures of what you have and let us guide you a bit, if you're going to all that trouble.
Note that the engines shown in the Leslie elevation, which are a bit like a Climax drive, are essentially small-locomotive parts arranged 'backward' to drive a jackshaft instead of a driver pair. You could easily design a least-cost plow drive just by removing the flanges from a driver pair, tinkering with appropriate counterweights, and using all the rods and valve gear, adjusting 'wheel gauge' spacing and height to fit your boiler arrangement.
This is automatically in the right alignment for the prototype's chain drive, and in fact you could fake a pretty good sprocket just by putting a few grooves in the teeth of a model driver pair's center spur gear...
Hmmmm... fake up some thin elastic in such grooves, and a pulley on your rotor shaft... and you could drive the whole linkage, gears and pistons backward from your chosen motor and worm setup -- you could put the worm offset from the modeled chain drive and still get it to fit in the plow-nose space...
Delivery for Mr. Critter...
ERIE_special-flat by Edmund, on Flickr
Cheers, Ed
Nother delivery for Mr. Critter...
OvermodYou might as well show pictures of what you have and let us guide you a bit, if you're going to all that trouble.
What trouble? This is the best part of the hobby as far as I'm concerned.
I have been taking lots of pictures. I will post them once I have made a bit more progress. I'm stuck waiting for some parts and the new tin snips right now.
FWIW, I'm leaning back towards using twin steeple compound engines. I suspect that the engines they used would have been quite tall, hence the 14' height of the plough body. A conventional horizontal cylinder system wouldn't be all that tall. (I suspect the blade heights had something to do with the body height too).
hon30critter I will post them once I have made a bit more progress.
Looking forward to seeing them.
Your craftmanship has always been astounding.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
I got the new tin snips but I am a bit disappointed. The sales listing suggested that they had smooth edges but unfortunately they are serrated. They cut very nicely but the serrated edges leave a very rough cut which requires a lot of filing to smooth out. I'm not sure if I will return them or just live with the extra filing. Most of the edges will have to be filed to get the right fit anyhow so perhaps it is a moot point.
I did manage to get the spokes for the blade hubs cut out and filed smooth, and I have extended the floor to match the extra overhang at the rear of the plough, so I am making some progress. Pictures to follow soon.
Thanks for the updates, Dave
When I was planning some photoetched projects a while back I bought a pair of these Xuron photoetch snips.
https://xuron.com/index.php/main/consumer_products/4/81
I don't know how thick the brass is you are using for the slingers so these may not "cut it". They have smooth cutting faces and are very sharp and maneuverable and will shear .010" brass quite easily.
Good luck, Ed