Date   

Throwing Turnouts, was Re: Truck bearings: Solid vs. RB

George Simmons
 

--- In STMFC@..., "soolinehistory" <destorzek@...> wrote:



--- In STMFC@..., w m <bulletmims@> wrote:

I agree with Mike. "Throwing a turnout" (and "throwing a switch") is commonly used by those who work in the railroad industry (although it is not usually literally done in anger)...
Harumpf! The operating people on a railroad have very little idea what a turnout is, since all they deal with is the switch.
I don't know it I would necessarily agree with that as a blanket statement. I have MOP employee timetables from the 1950's, in the Special instructions item 3-C is titled "THROUGH TURNOUTS AND CROSSOVERS, AND SPRING SWITCHES". So, I would expect that the trainmen and yard crews would know what the turnout was even if they only lined the points.

George Simmons
Dry Prong, LA


Re: "Freight Traffic" Book

Charles Hostetler <cesicjh@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., asychis@... wrote:

Is anyone familiar with a publication, actually I think a yearly book
entitled "Freight Traffic?" I have seen it occasionally on e-Bay and wonder
what useful information it might contain.

Jerry,

It contains a discussion of definitions, forms, rules, rates, tariffs, ICC regs that influence freight movement (not restricted to rail freight).


You can download a copy of the 1920 edition here:

http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Freight_traffic_red_book.html?id=qRopAAAAYAAJ

I have the 1955 edition; feel free to contact me off-list if there's something specific you're looking for around that time frame.

Regards,

Charles Hostetler


Re: Truck bearings: Solid vs. RB

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Dave Evans wrote:
In the cyc's definition of terms, there are two entries - one for Journal Bearings, and one for Roller bearings. There are also a WHOLE bunch of entries for "Journal xxx", but no "journal roller bearing", or "roller journal bearing". The definition of journal is the part of an axle or shaft on which the journal bearing rests.
The 1953 Cyc has this definition for Roller Bearing: "The general term applied to a group of journal bearings which depend on the rolling action of a set of rollers in order to reduce rotational friction."
To me this is pretty clear evidence of calling all these bearings "journal bearings" whether or not roller bearings were involved. That's why I would object to terming a solid bearing as merely a "journal bearing," because in railroad definition that is not separated from a roller bearing.

But I would note that the terms "friction bearing", "plain" bearing and "solid" bearing do not appear in the cyclopedia. Anti-friction bearing does appear in some of the ads to describe roller bearings.

In the same Cyc, you will find that Magnus refers to their bearings as solid bearings. Railway Age ads and editorial material use both "solid" and "plain" as adjectives for conventional journal bearings.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Erie info

Clark Propst
 

I would like to model Erie box car 86026. Can anyone supply info on this car or number series?
Clark Propst
Mason City Iowa


More Combo door cars

Chad Boas
 

All,
I have posted pictures of the sides for the Brianard Built NP, the CB&Q and the riveted and welded GN combo door sides. These will be avalible withing a week or so. The "kit" will be just the sides. I am casting the sides without the right side door. The NP will come with a seporate 5/5/5 door. The others will need a 4/5/5 door from Intermountain or Branchline. The GN has a 6' plug door. To finish the car, you will need Branchline ends, roof and ladders and a flor from Accurail.
The kits will be $13 plus $1 for S/H each. As usuall, please keep sales questions off list and send them to me.
Thanks, Chad Boas


moving cars on summary waybills

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

In following up on an earlier blog post about handling cuts of cars, my friend Larry Kline put me in touch with Gene P. Schaeffer, who was kind enough to send me copies of additional "mine ticket" bills used to move coal traffic, and to explain how they were used. I have now written a second post to present this additional information. My own interest is in the general subject of this kind of car handling, not specifically in coal handling, but I feel these documents are quite intriguing in that general sense as well as in the specifics of coal traffic. If interested, here is a link:

http://modelingthesp.blogspot.com/2012/04/waybills-23-cuts-of-cars-update.html

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: Weathering Lighter Colored Cars

Aley, Jeff A
 

Michael,

First of all, your photos are now approved, and members may view them at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/photos/album/1111246025/pic/list

Second of all, very nice weathering! You have a achieved the very delicate balance between "heavily weathered" and "overdone". The cars all have a natural look to them (compared to some of mine that scream "look! I've been weathered!").

Regards,

-Jeff


From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of atsfnut
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 8:39 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Weathering Lighter Colored Cars



Dear Charles and Group,

I've been reading with interest the postings about weathering lighter colored cars and, with respect to washes, wanted to share some of my experience.

To begin with, I wash with solvent-based paints, usually enamels (Model Master, Testors, etc.) or tube oils, because I find that acrylics dry too quickly for me to control their application. These are always applied over a fully cured acrylic matte finish which protects the factory paint and lettering.

Several types of treatments have been described in the postings. One is the attempt to provide an overall "fade" or bleached look to the factory paint. You may be familiar with modeler and author Pelle Søeborg, who accomplishes this by airbrushing a thinned solution of Model Master "sand" to his models.

I customarily use washes to give depth to a model-"shadows," if you will. This typically consists of a darker, sympathetic shade of the base color applied with a brush, then wiped away with cotton swabs, sponges, etc. Most is removed, but the residue of this wash settles into cracks, depressions and along rivet lines, providing visual interest. The philosophy for lighter cars is exactly the same as with darker cars: use a darker, harmonious version of the base color applied with a much greater proportion of thinner to paint-a "tinted thinner," if you will. By "harmonious," I mean that warm colors (gold, bronze, copper, brown, tan, yellow, red, orange, maroon, off-whites) are applied to warm colors, and cool colors (black, pure white, silver, blues, greens, grays and some purples) are applied to cool.

For a boxcar red model, I will typically wash with a darker version of that red: raw umber or burnt sienna, for example. For an orange or a yellow car, I might use something lighter: light yellow ochre, or a raw sienna. Again, something darker, but in harmony with the base color.

There are no "rules," as the amount and intensity of the wash is up to you. The guiding principle must always be harmony: a darker version of the base color makes an effective color-contrast wash.

Mind you, I use this type of wash only as a first step, and usually apply other weathering effects: atmospheric (rain, sun, etc.); terrestrial (dirt, soot, wheel-throw); and man-made (dings, scrapes, spills, etc.) only after applying the wash.

There are many ways to do this and many tools available for your use, but this is the method I use, and I trust it provides you with another set of options.

Cheers!

Michael Gross
La Cañada, CA

--- In STMFC@...<mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com>, "Charles Hostetler" <cesicjh@...<mailto:cesicjh@...>> wrote:

Good Evening,

My first three weathering tries were on basic black hoppers. I just finished weathering a PCCX hopper in the yellow scheme, hoping to get some experience with a lighter colored car before I tackle my Shake N Take Hormel reefers:

http://cnwmodeling.blogspot.com/2012/04/pccx-6401-6425-usra-twin-hopper.html


I think I found out that a lighter colored acrylic wash is necessary for application to a lighter colored car. The darker wash ended up looking "muddy" (and I don't mean that in a good way) before I scrubbed it off and lightened it up a lot. Would some of you with more experience be willing to comment on this observation?

Regards,

Charles Hostetler
Goshen, IN


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: "Freight Traffic" Book

Aley, Jeff A
 

Jerry,

IIRC, these are merely issues of Railway Age. Every so often (quarterly? Annually?) Railway Age would designate a magazine issue as the "Freight Traffic" issue.

Regards,

-Jeff


From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of asychis@...
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2012 7:31 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] "Freight Traffic" Book



Is anyone familiar with a publication, actually I think a yearly book
entitled "Freight Traffic?" I have seen it occasionally on e-Bay and wonder
what useful information it might contain.

Thanks,

Jerry Michels


Terminolgy (Was: Re: Roller Bearing advantage)

mopacfirst
 

I too am a mechanical engineer, and I thought I was the one who pushed Richard's button.

I spend a considerable amount of time trying to get young engineers to use the specific terminology or the terminology that's actually used in standards, and the best I can get is that, after they've already picked up all the informal terms and the terms that became obsolete thirty years ago that everyone still uses, that some of them can remember to use the proper terminology when they come to see me because they know I'll correct them.

So much for leaving the world a better place.....

Ron Merrick


"Freight Traffic" Book

asychis@...
 

Is anyone familiar with a publication, actually I think a yearly book
entitled "Freight Traffic?" I have seen it occasionally on e-Bay and wonder
what useful information it might contain.

Thanks,

Jerry Michels


Re: decals derailed

James Babcock
 

Thank you for the notice. I hope that the situation resolves itself quickly.
Jim
 
________________________________

From: Gerald Glow <jerryglow@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2012 8:54 AM
Subject: [STMFC] decals derailed




 

I regret to inform you that effective immediately, I'm suspending all
decal sales. The mechanical issues with the printer at the print house
that does my printing continues to worsen making it impossible to
guarantee delivery in a timely manner. I will post here when the
situation is solved and sales resume.

I will do my best to fill any current open orders with decals on hand,
and refunds partial or full issued.

My web site will also contain notification when the situation improves
so check it occasionally.

--
Jerry Glow
The Villages FL
http://home.comcast.net/~jerryglow/decals/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Roller Bearing advantage

devansprr
 

John,

First, full disclosure. While I am a mechanical engineer, I am not a bearing design engineer. Engineers that go into that field are making a life-time professional commitment. It is a very sophisticated field.

So I am not an expert, but the theory behind roller bearings, and the reason they are referred to as "anti-friction" bearings, is that in the ideal design there are NO sliding surfaces anywhere in the bearing. ALL loaded surfaces involve rolling "point" or "line" contact with NO slippage (just as the "ideal" line contact for a steel wheel on steel rail should not have any slippage). If there is no slippage, then there is no "friction" (but there are other losses - fortunately they are much lower than sliding friction).

I believe that the "ideal" is VERY difficult to attain in nearly all bearing applications - but I think you can come pretty close in some applications, and freight car wheel bearings may actually be one of them.

What surprised me last night going through the 1940 CBC was how "primitive" (by today's standards), the roller bearings were for the STMFC era (20 years prior to the end of the STMFC era). The SKF bearings were somewhere between spherical (ball bearing) and taper. As a result, while portions of the contact area were truly rolling, near the edges of the contact area there was slipping under load. And if there was slipping, it must be lubricated. So it looks like they immersed the roller bearings in oil.

But with all of that oil being squeezed and pushed around, the roller bearing is beginning to look like the automotive equivalent of a gear driven engine lube oil pump - but without a discharge. So a lot of work is done to move that oil around - but only as speed increases (which explains why the rolling resistance of a 1942 era roller bearing was comparable to a journal bearing at higher speeds.)

In this era I am sure there was also considerable conservatism from a business standpoint. I can imagine a tapered roller bearing engineer telling management that these bearings really DO NOT require oil immersion - and management unwilling to take what they perceived as significant financial risk and/or having to convince every railroad mechanical engineering head that lubrication was not required. I am 99% sure the engineer would lose that argument. So in the 1940 CBC the roller bearing ads focused on "Journal boxes" that would maintain lubrication of the roller bearing while keeping out the dirt.

In a quick scan of the 1940 CBC, it did seem that Timken was a lot closer to the "ideal" tapered roller bearing than the others, which is likely why they were using "Timken Bearings" as a trademark of sorts.

Fast forward 70 years to today's modern tapered roller bearing. In these bearings, machined to mirror finishes, the "line" contact areas that carry/transmit the "principle" loads (car weight and thrust loads in curves) are truly rolling along the entire contact area. So no sliding friction from the "primary" loads. But there are locations in the bearing where secondary loads involve some sliding (e.g the forces that may keep the rollers in the proper location), so some lubricant is required. The bearing designer's challenge is to minimize these forces at sliding points of contact. In the case of modern freight car bearings, the lubrication is a "lifetime" surface lubricant (I think defined as 6 years - but I am not sure), and the bearings do NOT have lubrication fittings (introducing grease would likely ruin the bearing).

In fact, grease can be viewed as a "dirt" magnet in these bearings. The real design challenge today is making seals, which DO include sliding surfaces, that last 6 years and keep dirt out of the bearing's internals.

As for modern road trucks and their roller bearing use - I really do not know why they are using oil immersion. Bearing design is very complicated, and often involves taking many other factors into consideration - including the nature of the equipment it is being installed into. But an oil filled roller bearing will have higher losses than a dry roller bearing. Whether that dry roller bearing survives in a truck is another matter.

Dave Evans

PS - for more info, Google Timken and check out their web site - they have a number of interesting pdf downloads for railroad wheel bearings.

--- In STMFC@..., "John Hagen" <sprinthag@...> wrote:

Dave,

I don't see how the immersion in oil could have much of affect on increased
resistance. Oil is less viscous than grease at all temperatures so I don't
understand how they would add resistance. Trucks use oil immersed bearing
for reliability and less resistance. I always thought (when I thought about
it which is all that often) that the reason railroads don't use oil bath
rollers bearings the susceptibility of the housing/reservoir to damage from
all the crap that ends up on the right of ways.



John Hagen




--- In STMFC@... <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com> , "Mike
Brock" <brockm@> wrote:

Well...what the hell...everyone else seems to have commented on some
part of
this subject so why not me?

From The Steam Locomotive by Ralph Johnson, Chief Engineer of Baldwin
Locomotive Works, 1942, "Roughly it may be said , that the ratio of
resistance in starting a car equipped with roller bearings, as compared
to
one equipped with solid bearings is eight to one in favor of the roller
bearing". "As the speed of the train increases the difference in
frictional
resistance between the two types of bearings decreases rapidly, and
above 10
mph the difference becomes very small. In cold weather the starting
resistance of a train with solid bearings is quite high and therefore
the
acceleration of a train equipped with roller bearings is aided very
materially". " As a general propostion it may be stated that, by the use
of
roller bearings, the journal friction will be reduced 50% at starting,
approximately 10% from 5 to 35 mph and nothing above 35 mph".

Reckon he knows anything?

What do I call non roller bearings? Depends upon how many beers I have
consumed.

Mike Brock
Mike,

I hope my latest post does not drive you beyond a six pack....

This seems like a good starting point for 1942. What surprised me from
reviewing the car builder's cyclopedia was the immersion of roller bearings
in oil. This would no doubt significantly increase the friction of roller
bearings.

There has been significant progress in reducing roller bearing friction
since then - not sure where things stood at the end of this group's era
(1960), but roller bearing friction today, at speed, is much less than the
JOURNAL bearings of old. Friction that results from trucks tracking through
curves is also reduced (by a combination of better bearings and better truck
geometries), such that the old curve compensation standard for laying out
right of way may be out of date (note - this is a theory based on some
analysis of a very complicated subject a few years ago that I am not going
to get into again - not worth my time.)

One 2003 engineering report I have from a prototype truck manufacturer
indicates that rolling resistance of modern freight car trucks on tangent
track is only 1.8 pounds per ton of car weight - without any speed
dependency. The increased car resistance with speed is now mostly
aerodynamic. Tapered roller bearings have come a long way.

Dave Evans







decals derailed

jerryglow2
 

I regret to inform you that effective immediately, I'm suspending all
decal sales. The mechanical issues with the printer at the print house
that does my printing continues to worsen making it impossible to
guarantee delivery in a timely manner. I will post here when the
situation is solved and sales resume.

I will do my best to fill any current open orders with decals on hand,
and refunds partial or full issued.

My web site will also contain notification when the situation improves
so check it occasionally.

--
Jerry Glow
The Villages FL
http://home.comcast.net/~jerryglow/decals/


Re: Weathering Lighter Colored Cars

atsfnut <michaelEGross@...>
 

Dear Charles and Group,

I've been reading with interest the postings about weathering lighter colored cars and, with respect to washes, wanted to share some of my experience.

To begin with, I wash with solvent-based paints, usually enamels (Model Master, Testors, etc.) or tube oils, because I find that acrylics dry too quickly for me to control their application. These are always applied over a fully cured acrylic matte finish which protects the factory paint and lettering.

Several types of treatments have been described in the postings. One is the attempt to provide an overall "fade" or bleached look to the factory paint. You may be familiar with modeler and author Pelle Søeborg, who accomplishes this by airbrushing a thinned solution of Model Master "sand" to his models.

I customarily use washes to give depth to a model—"shadows," if you will. This typically consists of a darker, sympathetic shade of the base color applied with a brush, then wiped away with cotton swabs, sponges, etc. Most is removed, but the residue of this wash settles into cracks, depressions and along rivet lines, providing visual interest. The philosophy for lighter cars is exactly the same as with darker cars: use a darker, harmonious version of the base color applied with a much greater proportion of thinner to paint—a "tinted thinner," if you will. By "harmonious," I mean that warm colors (gold, bronze, copper, brown, tan, yellow, red, orange, maroon, off-whites) are applied to warm colors, and cool colors (black, pure white, silver, blues, greens, grays and some purples) are applied to cool.

For a boxcar red model, I will typically wash with a darker version of that red: raw umber or burnt sienna, for example. For an orange or a yellow car, I might use something lighter: light yellow ochre, or a raw sienna. Again, something darker, but in harmony with the base color.

There are no "rules," as the amount and intensity of the wash is up to you. The guiding principle must always be harmony: a darker version of the base color makes an effective color-contrast wash.

Mind you, I use this type of wash only as a first step, and usually apply other weathering effects: atmospheric (rain, sun, etc.); terrestrial (dirt, soot, wheel-throw); and man-made (dings, scrapes, spills, etc.) only after applying the wash.

There are many ways to do this and many tools available for your use, but this is the method I use, and I trust it provides you with another set of options.

Cheers!

Michael Gross
La Cañada, CA

--- In STMFC@..., "Charles Hostetler" <cesicjh@...> wrote:

Good Evening,

My first three weathering tries were on basic black hoppers. I just finished weathering a PCCX hopper in the yellow scheme, hoping to get some experience with a lighter colored car before I tackle my Shake N Take Hormel reefers:

http://cnwmodeling.blogspot.com/2012/04/pccx-6401-6425-usra-twin-hopper.html


I think I found out that a lighter colored acrylic wash is necessary for application to a lighter colored car. The darker wash ended up looking "muddy" (and I don't mean that in a good way) before I scrubbed it off and lightened it up a lot. Would some of you with more experience be willing to comment on this observation?

Regards,

Charles Hostetler
Goshen, IN


Re: Roller Bearing advantage

John Hagen <sprinthag@...>
 

Dave,



I don't see how the immersion in oil could have much of affect on increased
resistance. Oil is less viscous than grease at all temperatures so I don't
understand how they would add resistance. Trucks use oil immersed bearing
for reliability and less resistance. I always thought (when I thought about
it which is all that often) that the reason railroads don't use oil bath
rollers bearings the susceptibility of the housing/reservoir to damage from
all the crap that ends up on the right of ways.



John Hagen




--- In STMFC@... <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com> , "Mike
Brock" <brockm@> wrote:

Well...what the hell...everyone else seems to have commented on some
part of
this subject so why not me?

From The Steam Locomotive by Ralph Johnson, Chief Engineer of Baldwin
Locomotive Works, 1942, "Roughly it may be said , that the ratio of
resistance in starting a car equipped with roller bearings, as compared
to
one equipped with solid bearings is eight to one in favor of the roller
bearing". "As the speed of the train increases the difference in
frictional
resistance between the two types of bearings decreases rapidly, and
above 10
mph the difference becomes very small. In cold weather the starting
resistance of a train with solid bearings is quite high and therefore
the
acceleration of a train equipped with roller bearings is aided very
materially". " As a general propostion it may be stated that, by the use
of
roller bearings, the journal friction will be reduced 50% at starting,
approximately 10% from 5 to 35 mph and nothing above 35 mph".

Reckon he knows anything?

What do I call non roller bearings? Depends upon how many beers I have
consumed.

Mike Brock
Mike,

I hope my latest post does not drive you beyond a six pack....

This seems like a good starting point for 1942. What surprised me from
reviewing the car builder's cyclopedia was the immersion of roller bearings
in oil. This would no doubt significantly increase the friction of roller
bearings.

There has been significant progress in reducing roller bearing friction
since then - not sure where things stood at the end of this group's era
(1960), but roller bearing friction today, at speed, is much less than the
JOURNAL bearings of old. Friction that results from trucks tracking through
curves is also reduced (by a combination of better bearings and better truck
geometries), such that the old curve compensation standard for laying out
right of way may be out of date (note - this is a theory based on some
analysis of a very complicated subject a few years ago that I am not going
to get into again - not worth my time.)

One 2003 engineering report I have from a prototype truck manufacturer
indicates that rolling resistance of modern freight car trucks on tangent
track is only 1.8 pounds per ton of car weight - without any speed
dependency. The increased car resistance with speed is now mostly
aerodynamic. Tapered roller bearings have come a long way.

Dave Evans


Re: Roller Bearing advantage - busted

devansprr
 

Looks like it will take some concentration on my part to stop using "friction bearings". Meant Journal bearings. Busted. Correction below

--- In STMFC@..., "Dave Evans" <devans1@...> wrote:

--- In STMFC@..., "Mike Brock" <brockm@> wrote:

Well...what the hell...everyone else seems to have commented on some part of
this subject so why not me?

From The Steam Locomotive by Ralph Johnson, Chief Engineer of Baldwin
Locomotive Works, 1942, "Roughly it may be said , that the ratio of
resistance in starting a car equipped with roller bearings, as compared to
one equipped with solid bearings is eight to one in favor of the roller
bearing". "As the speed of the train increases the difference in frictional
resistance between the two types of bearings decreases rapidly, and above 10
mph the difference becomes very small. In cold weather the starting
resistance of a train with solid bearings is quite high and therefore the
acceleration of a train equipped with roller bearings is aided very
materially". " As a general propostion it may be stated that, by the use of
roller bearings, the journal friction will be reduced 50% at starting,
approximately 10% from 5 to 35 mph and nothing above 35 mph".

Reckon he knows anything?

What do I call non roller bearings? Depends upon how many beers I have
consumed.

Mike Brock
Mike,

I hope my latest post does not drive you beyond a six pack....

This seems like a good starting point for 1942. What surprised me from reviewing the car builder's cyclopedia was the immersion of roller bearings in oil. This would no doubt significantly increase the friction of roller bearings.

There has been significant progress in reducing roller bearing friction since then - not sure where things stood at the end of this group's era (1960), but roller bearing friction today, at speed, is much less than the JOURNAL bearings of old. Friction that results from trucks tracking through curves is also reduced (by a combination of better bearings and better truck geometries), such that the old curve compensation standard for laying out right of way may be out of date (note - this is a theory based on some analysis of a very complicated subject a few years ago that I am not going to get into again - not worth my time.)

One 2003 engineering report I have from a prototype truck manufacturer indicates that rolling resistance of modern freight car trucks on tangent track is only 1.8 pounds per ton of car weight - without any speed dependency. The increased car resistance with speed is now mostly aerodynamic. Tapered roller bearings have come a long way.

Dave Evans


Re: Roller Bearing advantage

devansprr
 

--- In STMFC@..., "Mike Brock" <brockm@...> wrote:

Well...what the hell...everyone else seems to have commented on some part of
this subject so why not me?

From The Steam Locomotive by Ralph Johnson, Chief Engineer of Baldwin
Locomotive Works, 1942, "Roughly it may be said , that the ratio of
resistance in starting a car equipped with roller bearings, as compared to
one equipped with solid bearings is eight to one in favor of the roller
bearing". "As the speed of the train increases the difference in frictional
resistance between the two types of bearings decreases rapidly, and above 10
mph the difference becomes very small. In cold weather the starting
resistance of a train with solid bearings is quite high and therefore the
acceleration of a train equipped with roller bearings is aided very
materially". " As a general propostion it may be stated that, by the use of
roller bearings, the journal friction will be reduced 50% at starting,
approximately 10% from 5 to 35 mph and nothing above 35 mph".

Reckon he knows anything?

What do I call non roller bearings? Depends upon how many beers I have
consumed.

Mike Brock
Mike,

I hope my latest post does not drive you beyond a six pack....

This seems like a good starting point for 1942. What surprised me from reviewing the car builder's cyclopedia was the immersion of roller bearings in oil. This would no doubt significantly increase the friction.

There has been significant progress in reducing bearing friction since then - not sure where things stood at the end of this group's era (1960), but roller bearing friction today, at speed, is much less than the friction bearings of old. The reduction of friction in curves is also reduced (by a combination of better bearings and better truck geometries), such that the old curve compensation standard for laying out right of way may be out of date (note - this is a theory based on some analysis of a very complicated subject a few years ago that I am not going to get into again - not worth my time.)

One 2003 engineering report I have from a prototype truck manufacturer indicates that rolling resistance of modern freight car trucks on tangent track is only 1.8 pounds per ton of car weight - without any speed dependency. The increased resistance is now mostly aerodynamic. Tapered roller bearings have come a long way.

Dave Evans


Re: Truck bearings: Solid vs. RB

atsfnut <michaelEGross@...>
 

Much appreciate the clarification, Richard. I confess to being one of those who has used the term incorrectly, most likely because of its general usage. Proof again that if you tell an untruth often enough, it soon passes for the truth.

Cheers!

Michael Gross
La Cañada, CA

--- In STMFC@..., Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...> wrote:

Several times lately I have noticed members of this group using the
term "friction bearings" to differentiate solid bearings from roller
bearings, despite objections on previous occasions from myself, Tony
Thompson, and others. The correct terminology for solid truck
bearings is "solid." "Plain bearings" is an acceptable alternative.
"Friction bearings" is wrong and misleading. All bearings have
friction, including roller bearings. "Friction bearing" was invented
as an advertising ploy by roller bearing manufacturers to imply,
incorrectly, that roller bearings were frictionless. In fact, though
roller bearings have much less starting resistance than solid
bearings, they have considerable friction which - as with other
bearings - increases as load and speed increase. The term "friction
bearings" was never adopted by railroad mechanical engineers, who
knew better; it does not appear in the dictionary section of any
edition of the Car Builders' Cyclopedia. So please, guys, don't
perpetuate the mistake of calling solid bearings "friction" bearings.

Richard Hendrickson



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Truck bearings: Solid vs. RB

devansprr
 

-- In STMFC@..., Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> wrote:

Dave Evans wrote:
The Mechanical Engineer's definition of "journal" is that portion of
the shaft that rotates within a bearing, AND the relative motion
between the two is sliding. There is NO sliding motion in a roller
bearing, so a roller bearing does not have a "journal".
I urge you to check any Car Builders Cyc in the period of this
list. The definitions for railroad use are quite clear.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA

Tony,

A fair point. My 1940 Car builders cyc is actually rather schizophrenic on this - if we want to adopt a clear naming convention based on the prototype of our era - I believe the term is "We're hosed"

In the cyc's definition of terms, there are two entries - one for Journal Bearings, and one for Roller bearings. There are also a WHOLE bunch of entries for "Journal xxx", but no "journal roller bearing", or "roller journal bearing". The definition of journal is the part of an axle or shaft on which the journal bearing rests.

The confusion is that the definition of Journal bearing includes rollers and balls (and then a reference to see roller bearings), along with the "traditional" journal bearing components.

Looking through the vendor documents, you can sense the source of the confusion. All of the roller bearing vendors used the term journal in their adds, but generally in reference to the "journal" not the bearing itself.

ASF promoted a roller bearing on the interior of the wheel that was supported by a fixed axle (good in curves since it will allow the wheels to rotate at different speeds.) Only the term roller bearing is used here - no journals.

Hyatt refers to the bearings as roller bearings only, although they were contained in a "journal box" and the "journal" part of the axle was where the bearing was pressed on. But their roller bearings are not referred to as journal bearings.

Timken uses the term roller bearing, or Timken bearing, but not journal bearing. They do stress the importance of a good journal box - mainly to maintain the oil supply - a feature no longer used today (just thin grease today, and only in select areas) (More on this later)

SKF seems to be the most confused - spherical bearings, spherical journal bearings, and even spherical roller journal bearing. Ughh..

Based on how the definitions and the ads are written, I would surmise that the industry knew it was confronting at least 50 years of long established journal bearing practice, and was caught between trying to promote a new and hopefully better technology while at the same time avoiding the perception that roller bearings were a major change that would obsolete equipment and the maintenance workforce (or require significant re-training).

Hence the conundrum.

But I would note that the terms "friction bearing", "plain" bearing and "solid" bearing do not appear in the cyclopedia. Anti-friction bearing does appear in some of the ads to describe roller bearings.

So while the prototype in the era may have been confused with the new technology and its terminology, we will either need to remain similarly confused, or adopt some form of standard convention.

As a mechanical engineer, I will stick with journal bearings (not to be confused with Journals, journal boxes, etc), and roller bearings. Plain, solid and friction are out for me. YMMV.

Dave Evans


Re: KCS Covered Hoppers series 29600-29649 and 29650-29749

Ed Hawkins
 

On Apr 26, 2012, at 4:15 PM, keyserlloyd wrote:

These four bay 40'-2" cars, built in 1946, were slab side all riveted construction. Possibly pre PS2 all welded cars? Originally delivered in black with white lettering. They had a "Load Limit cement-4'-4" below top of hatches". Can some one please tell me where these cars were loaded? Were they only loaded in cement? Were they on line cars only? I have a 1962 picture of a repaint that does not contain the cement load level line. I assure that by then they were in grain service.
Lloyd,
I cannot answer your questions about how and where these cars were used but will share some information about them.

I have 3 photos of these four-bay covered hopper cars. One is a Pullman builder's photo of 29621 from KCS 29600-29649, built 3-46, lot 5818 (photo also published in the 1949/51 CBC). The Pullman-Standard bill of materials for lot 5818 specified the cars were originally painted black with aluminum stencils. A 1" line about 3/4 the way up the car side has stencils above it stating "LOAD LIMIT FOR CEMENT 4' - 1 1/2" BELOW TOP OF HATCH".

The other two photos are KCS company photos of KCS 29671 and 29720. Both photos show a build date of 9-49. KCS 29650-29749 were built by GATC, builder's order no. 3013. They were shopped, repainted, and reweighed PG. (Pittsburg, Kansas) 3-53 and 6-54, respectively. The 29671 is painted black with aluminum (or possibly white) stencils while 29720 is painted gray with black stencils.

Interestingly, the lines on these two cars were drawn at different heights. The line on 29671 is lower, roughly 60% of the way up the side, but the stencils specify identical dimensions as the builder's photo. Perhaps the line was drawn in error (too low) since the stencils didn't change. The line on 29720 is at the same level as the Pullman builder's photo of 29621 with the same stencils.

The cubic capacity on the cars is 3190 cu. ft. In addition to hauling cement, it seems logical to me that the cars must have also been used for hauling lighter commodities in which the cubic capacity could be more fully utilized. For cement loading the cars were probably somewhere close to the purpose-built two-bay 1958 cu. ft. covered hoppers used extensively for hauling cement. The center of gravity would have been much lower on these cars when loaded to the line with cement. WIth 12 hatches and 8 outlets loading & unloading should have been faster than with conventional two-bay cars.
Regards,
Ed Hawkins

86961 - 86980 of 195507