I agree with Kurt's suggestion of drinking straws.

While many of the straws on the market are oval shaped I finally found some
at a local coffee shop that were truly round (or so close to it that I
couldn't tell the difference.

They are 8" long x 200 thou dia with a wall thickness of 6 thou, so in HO
about 58' long x 1.5' dia.

The owner gave me two handfuls and that will do for all the pipe loads I'm
ever likely to need.

To "tie them down", I've bought some 1/64 black chart tape from a local art
supply house, to replicate the steel banding used.

Apart from the chart tape my cost was nil.

Cheers

Dave.

I suspect much of that may be "brand identification", i.e. Westinghouse vs. GE vs. Allis-Chalmers and so forth, but there does seem to be better ability to deal with excess heat these days leading to cleaner casings with less fins and heat exchanger pipes than in the past. Try searching on the OWI or Google/LIFE photo sites for "electrical", "transformer", "substation" and so forth and you ought to be able to find lots of dated photos. Yout typical hydroelectric dam, nuclear plant, or TVA article ought to have good pictures.

KL

Folks,

In looking at the Walthers Northern Power and Light Substation, it looks
like there are a number of transformers that might make interesting loads.
My concern is that the main transformer has relative sharp corners - ie a
very boxy shape. Many older transformers seem to have rounded ends. When
did box shaped transformers come into use?

Regards
Bruce

Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL

Lee wrote

Many thanks for the info. Many, many, many, many, many..... Well,
you get the idea. I wonder what caused the multiple posts to the
list? I hope it is not some sort of nasty viral bug.

Nothing on my end. It's a mystery. May be a Comcast hiccup.

Anyway, great info, but can you translate the shorthand with regard to
"RP roof?" I'm not totally versed in roofs.

Sorry that's how I write "Rectangular Panel" roof. I use DP
for "Diagonal Panel".

Also, what is the subject of Ed Hawkin's RMJ article? Is it GM&O
cars, or does it deal with 40' box cars, or is it on AC&F?

From my notes: RMJ 10/1999 pp.43-51 Ed Hawkins covers postwar 10'4"
to 10'8" boxcars with the 4/4 Improved Dreadnaught (rolling pin) ends
-- photos DRGW/ATSF/NP/ERIE/MONON/CNW/IC/CB&Q/AA/A&WP

Tim O'Connor

Brian

I got 9 copies! Don't ask me... I only sent it once.

Tim O'Connor

And it's hard to think of anything made of latex that would be corrosive
and dangerous to put into
an unlined tank car. But then, you're the materials guy, and you have a
better chance of knowing
than I do . . .

If it'd make a difference... the latices in question would probably be
things like unfinished (i.e., uncoagulated) styrene-butadiene or other
synthetic rubbers. The liquid output after the ingredients (styrene and
butadiene for SB rubber, aka GR-S or Buna-S) are co-polymerized (using
other chemicals as catalysts, emulsifiers and retardants) is called a
latex; the latex is then fed into another tank, where it's mixed with
brine and sulphuric acid to make it coagulate into little flakes of
solidified rubber that's then baled and shipped off in 40lb bales (likely
the contents of the UP boxcar I saw in another photo of the Polymer Corp.
plant).

Now, whether this latex described above would be corrosive or otherwise
dangerous to put into an unlined tank car, I don't know... perhaps someone
who understands polymer chemistry a bit more could answer that.

Frank Valoczy
Vancouver, BC

Mark Feddersen wrote:

"I assume your need to constantly make snide remarks is compensation
for manly deficiencies."

As Schuyler noted, this remark is blatantly in violation of the rules. The concept and philosophy of the STMFC is to allow members to freely make comments in opposition to another member's view. That does not mean, however, that the opposing view need be accepted and views in opposition to it are welcome. At no time, however, may personal attacks be levied at any member. I would appreciate it if the members will simply move on...ignoring this comment...which will be removed from the group's archives. Normally I don't comment about a rule violation requiring a jail sentence but, in this case, the temptation to reply to the message requires a public comment.

The sound you might have heard is the sound of the closing of a door in the new wing of Moderate Jail.

My, my...lot of people in the new wing. One guy asked me if Notre Dame was still number one.

Mike Brock
STMFC Owner and Head Judge

I'm with you, Rich, but i think there is an easier way than
finding either a vertical boring machine or even a drill press to
reduce the thickenss of the wall to use this sort of material to
depict 1/87th scale pipe. With styrene products this is a very easy
fix, nearly the same with aluminum and only a little less so with
copper, depending on how it is alloyed. Deburring tools can be
purchased quite inexpensively and can be used to ream out the inside
of the ends of whichever material you might use for HO scale pipe.
The sharper the angle of the deburring tool, the better it will work
for this purpose. Once this is done and the "pipe" is painted in
realistic colors one will have to look hard to realize the walls of
the "pipe" are thicker than they appear to be at their ends.

I have a couple of these deburrers on my reloading bench to
be certain the inside of rifle cases are properly deburred and
chamfered before reloading them. Bullets seat a lot easier in cases
that have been trimmed to the proper length only after the inside of
their necks have been chamfered with such a tool. They are a hand
tool that is simple to use. Any machinist can help you locate one
or they can be found under the "reloading tools" part of
eBay's "Sporting" section, often for very little money.

Hope this helps,
Don Valentine



--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, SUVCWORR@... wrote:

Dean:

For larger diameter pipe (24 - 36") I have used 1/4" or 3/8"

copper tubing.

Cut it to length then use a vertical boring machine or a drill

press to thin

the walls to a depth of 1/4 inch or so. This give a visually thin

wall but

maintains the overall integrity of the pipe. Paint to match the

color of the

company manufacturing the pipe -- US steel black, J&L steel

tuscan, Armco

steel dk blue, anything from American Bridge was orange although

that was

mostly structural steel for bridges. Not sure the correct color

for Bethlehem

steel pipe. Also adds some weight to the gon. Brass or aluminum

tubing would

work just as well.

Rich Orr

In a message dated 11/27/2008 11:02:50 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
1payne1@... writes:

I've got two pending resin orders, but I've noticed that I've got a
lot of empty gons. The W&LE served the South Lorain pipe works, so
I've decided to model a bunch of pipe loads. I can't afford to

buy

commercial loads for all these without having to reduce my resin
order, so...
Are there any especially good sources for "pipe"? I've got a

bunch of

coffee stirrers, of course, but I don't know if there is something
better. (Mine are a scale 35' 8" or so, 10" approx. OD) I seem to
remember seeing something about someone who found a source of
especially nice stirrers, but don't remember the source.
The pipe load from Life-Like (on sale at Walthers) looks too
thick-walled for my tastes (and a little too "plastic-ey").

Dean Payne


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links







**************Life should be easier. So should your homepage. Try

the NEW

AOL.com.
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-

dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000002)

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

Frank Valoczy wrote:

Would the latex lining not react somehow with the latex then loaded
into the tank?

The statement of "latex lining" could have meant
"latex-resistant lining."

Tony Thompson, Editor

No, Tony, there is no way that the term "Latex Lining" could possibly be construed to mean "Latex
resistant lining." If it meant that, it would SAY: "Latex Resistant Lining."

And it's hard to think of anything made of latex that would be corrosive and dangerous to put into
an unlined tank car. But then, you're the materials guy, and you have a better chance of knowing
than I do . . .

SGL

Lee Gautreaux wrote:

Anyway, great info, but can you translate the shorthand with regard to
"RP roof?" I'm not totally versed in roofs.

Rectangular Panel, the predecessor to the diagonal-panel roof.

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@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history

Tim,

Many thanks for the info. Many, many, many, many, many..... Well,
you get the idea. I wonder what caused the multiple posts to the
list? I hope it is not some sort of nasty viral bug.

Anyway, great info, but can you translate the shorthand with regard to
"RP roof?" I'm not totally versed in roofs.

Also, what is the subject of Ed Hawkin's RMJ article? Is it GM&O
cars, or does it deal with 40' box cars, or is it on AC&F?

By the way, my GM&O pages are in the beginning stages at the following:

http://www.railgoat.railfan.net/other_cars/gmo_cars/

Again, many, many thanks,

Lee A. Gautreaux - The tryptophan-filled RailGoat
http://www.railgoat.railfan.net/

Frank Valoczy wrote:

. . . they moved a lot of latices in tank cars (which I assume would
have been cars like this . . .

I assume this plural is formed by false analogy with "index,
indices?" <g>

This is the plural I have fairly consistently found in the relevant
technical literature that I have consulted. As to its origin, I don't
know, I've worked mostly with Finno-Ugric languages, not Romance and
Germanic ones. ;) (Interestingly enough, the spellchecker says
"Finno-Ugric" is misspelt, but "latices" is not.)

Would the latex lining not react somehow with the latex then loaded
into the tank?

The statement of "latex lining" could have meant
"latex-resistant lining."

That would make sense. What would be used for such a lining? I'd guess not
glass, but perhaps some particular plastic?

Frank Valoczy
Vancouver, BC

You can have some of mine.<G>Armand Premo

Six?I recieved Nine.Armand Premo

Frank Valoczy wrote:

. . . they moved a lot of latices in tank cars (which I assume would have been cars like this . . .

I assume this plural is formed by false analogy with "index, indices?" <g>

Would the latex lining not react somehow with the latex then loaded into the tank?

The statement of "latex lining" could have meant "latex-resistant lining."

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@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history

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

On Nov 27, 2008, at 9:24 AM, Brian Leppert wrote:

Please don't forget Tahoe Model Works' Buckeye ARA truck. I think
it's a closer match than Accurail's.

Oops. I should have thought of Brian's Buckeye truck. I probably
didn't because it represents a double-truss truck, but the double
truss feature of the sideframes is subtle, and in other respects

it's

actually a better choice than the Accurail truck - especially on a
tank car, where the fine brake rigging detail on the Tahoe truck

is

quite visible.

Richard Hendrickson

My Buckeye ARA truck does NOT represent a double truss truck. It does
represent a side frame design where the lower chords are an "inverted
U-section", much like the upper chords. They differ from the upper
chords in that their sides curve in at the bottom and leave a lip
around the openings on the bottom.

Buckeye's ad in the 1928 CBC shows a side frame with this feature. I
don't know if Buckeye should get the credit for its design.

Symington incorporated this design into their "Improved Double Truss"
truck, which was introduced sometime between mid-1932 and mid-1933.
Symington added raised tapered ribs into the otherwise smooth upper
surfaces of the lower chords. These rib contours terminated at the
spring seat, providing a stronger and larger space for additional
springs.

The prototype trucks in the photo have normal U-section lower
chords. Notice that a raised beading completely encircles each side
frame window. The TMW Buckeye truck differs on this detail, but
still, I think, comes the closest with its spring plank, close spring
spacing, and open bolster end details.

Brian Leppert
Tahoe Model Works
Carson City, NV

FYI...A rare Simmons-Boardman book that combines the essentials of the 1951
Car Builders' Cyclopedia and the 1951 Locomotive Builders' Cyclopedia but
without such things as the advertising and AAR/ARA safety and standards boiler page
text, is on eBay. Enter "Railroad Car and Locomotive Plans" and search under
all categories.


**************
Finally, one site has it all: your friends, your
email, your favorite sites. Try the NEW AOL.com.
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&;amp;icid=aolcom40vanity&amp;ncid=emlcntaolcom00000006)

Steve,

Thanks for that. I'm curious, though: latex lining? Hearing from someone
who worked for the C&O and did extensive switching work at the Polymer
Corp. plant at Sarnia, they moved a lot of latices in tank cars (which I
assume would have been cars like this, and the photo seems to suggest
that, too; it wouldn't have been their own PCLX cars, since those were
105s and pressurized, and my best guess is, as I mentioned, that they were
used for butadiene and such things). Would the latex lining not react
somehow with the latex then loaded into the tank? Do you have information
on the specifications of such a latex lining?

On a tangent, from the above-mentioned ex-C&O employee I got some info
about the PCLX tank cars: he said they seemed 'different' from other tank
cars, were short (he guesses about 38' in length) and were a medium blue
colour. Unfortunately, he didn't get any photos, though he mentioned that
they had appeared to have been sitting disused for quite a while (rusty
wheels).

Barring a fluke discovery of a photo of one of the PCLX tank cars, I'm not
sure I'll ever get anything more detailed about them. So I'm curious as to
what these cars may have looked like, or what they were similar to: what
other tank car series were there that were ICC 105, about 38' in length?

Frank Valoczy
Vancouver, BC

According to the 1952 roster of UTLX tank cars, 25000 - 25100 were 10,000
gallon X-3 tank cars with insulation and jacketing. They were lined with
latex. My suspicion would be that these would have been renumbered from
earlier cars, probably when the special lining was provided. So that
could have been in 1950, as the reweigh date shows. Whether all 100 cars
were leased by and lettered for Polysar, is not known.

I hope that this is helpful. Thanks for sharing the photo!

Happy Thanksgiving.

Steve Hile
----- Original Message -----
From: Frank Valoczy
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 4:55 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Polymer Corp., Ltd / Polysar tank cars



In looking through old annual reports of the Polymer Corporation, Ltd.
of Sarnia, Ontario, I found a photo of a UTLX tank car, #25100,
wearing Polymer Corp.'s "Polysar" logo. I've scanned it and uploaded
to the files section, as "polysar4.png" in the "Frank's Randomness"
folder.

Does anyone happen to have information on this? When did the lease
start (the date visible on the car is 1950), and how many cars were
leased? Were they all in the same series?

A related question: Polymer Corp. had a number of its own tank cars
from 1946 till the 60s, all TPI ICC 105A300W (I assume for
transporting butadiene and such monomers that require transportation
under pressure to keep it liquid). They were numbered 143, 146, 170,
171, 181 and 183. Does anyone know where I might find information on
or photos of these cars?

Thanks.

Frank Valoczy
Vancouver, BC








------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links




!DSPAM:1291,492ef04389281061899279!

Frank Valoczy
Vancouver, BC

On Nov 27, 2008, at 7:31 AM, Dean Payne wrote:

The car number on the F&C website is 32329, I'm not sure what the
series was. However, the lot number is 275B. I'm looking for what
trucks it would have had in 1937 (I realize that there might have been
a couple of different styles at this stage.)

Lot # 275B consisted of 2,000 cars built for the P&LE in 1912 by the
Pressed Steel Car Co. and numbered P&LE 32000-33999. The same design
was built by the thousands in 1912-'13 for the NYC and its
subsidiaries (MC, Big 4, B&A, and CASO all got them, as well as NYC
and P&LE). I don't have any photos of the P&LE cars but both
builder's and in-service photos of other cars of this design built at
the same time show all of them with early Andrews L-section trucks
with one-piece sloping journal box retainers as modeled in HO by Kadee.

Richard Hendrickson