Re: Solid, Roller & Friction Bearing Journals


Amen Brother.
On Wednesday, August 24, 2005, at 11:38 PM, behillman wrote:

I have this very interesting book. It's entitled, "Railroad
Construction - Theory and Practice", by Prof. Walter L. Webb, C.E.,
and published in 1903.

This book covers EVERY aspect of railroad construction and operation
known then, and very well. It's defined as, "A text-book for the use
of students in colleges and technical schools." Published by: John
Wiley & Sons, NY, NY. 1903

Specifically, concerning the subject of "truck bearing journals",
the following is stated, under the section discussing, "Train-

"(b)Journal Friction of the Axles.

This form of resistance has been studied quite extensively by means
of the measurement of the force required to turn an axle in it's
bearings under various conditions of pressure, speed, extent of
lubrication and temperature."

(Long technical text)


"Roller journals for cars have been frequently suggested, and
experiments have been made with them. It is found that they are very
effective at low velocities, greatly reducing the starting
resistance, which is very high with the ordinary forms of journals.
But the advantages disappear as the velocity increases."

Throughout this long 675 page text, I have yet to find the
term "solid bearing". (But I'm not finished reading yet!) The only
terms found are "bearing-friction", "ordinary-journals" and "journal-

An interesting point though is the discussion in 1903 of, "Roller
Journals". Until now one might think that "Timken", et al, had
invented the roller-bearing in the '30's or '40's, but these old
boys were working on it like 30+ years earlier??

I'd think, that when the final advent of the roller-bearing came
into more popular being, that the term, "bearing-friction" was
swapped for "friction-bearing" in order to differentiate between the
two different approaches of starting-friction-reduction concepts. I
also don't think it would be erroneous for the RR men to pick up on
the change of terms themselves, either.

(I remember, in the '50's, the caboose-crews having to put their
feet up against the walls, or something, in order to brace for the
coming "jerk" when train-slack would be taken up because of the
engineer trying to get the whole train going because of high
starting resistance?) I would think that the RR men knew what terms
they'd chosen to use correctly.

Paul Hillman

Yahoo! Groups Links

Thank you
Larry Jackman
The 50-50-90 Rule: Anytime you have 50-50 chance of getting something right, there is 90% probability you'll get it wrong.

Join to automatically receive all group messages.