Date   

Re: Dennis Storzek's Kits

Pierre <pierre.oliver@...>
 

In fairness it's both.
I've had my hands on many of those kits and have never had an issue with a flawed casting. And I maintain that those masters remain to this day some of the best ever marketed.
Pierre Oliver

--- In STMFC@..., Jim Hayes <jimhayes97225@...> wrote:

It's not the casting. It's the very high quality of the masters.

Jim Hayes
Portland Oregon
www.sunshinekits.com


On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Brian <cornbeltroute@...> wrote:

**


I'm soon entering a casting phase and would love to know what makes
Dennis's kits special. Those are lessons I'd love to learn about. Dennis?

Thanks much,

Brian Chapman
Evansdale, Iowa



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


Re: Dennis Storzek's Kits

Jim Hayes
 

It's not the casting. It's the very high quality of the masters.

Jim Hayes
Portland Oregon
www.sunshinekits.com


On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Brian <cornbeltroute@...> wrote:

**


I'm soon entering a casting phase and would love to know what makes
Dennis's kits special. Those are lessons I'd love to learn about. Dennis?

Thanks much,

Brian Chapman
Evansdale, Iowa



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


Re: Dennis Storzek's Kits

Brian <cornbeltroute@...>
 

I'm soon entering a casting phase and would love to know what makes Dennis's kits special. Those are lessons I'd love to learn about. Dennis?

Thanks much,

Brian Chapman
Evansdale, Iowa


Re: modified AAR 1937 height difference to AAR 1937 steel boxcar

Clark Propst
 

The CGW cars were bought from Pullman and have Pullman ends. Sometimes referred to as PS-0 ends.
Clark Propst

--- In STMFC@..., "Benjamin Scanlon" <benjaminscanlon@...> wrote:

hi clark,

thank you. i was enjoying several online photos of your models of the louie last night. i did notice that they (and the CGW) were represented in the buyers of the original 1937 design but other big granger RRs were not.

regards, ben


Re: modified AAR 1937 height difference to AAR 1937 steel boxcar

Dave Nelson
 

It was the design that was modified, not any existing cars.

Dave Nelson

-----Original Message-----

Where was the extra height added? Throughout the side, or was there some
sort of weld line at the top where the 6" was added?


Re: modified AAR 1937 height difference to AAR 1937 steel boxcar

Benjamin Scanlon
 

--- In STMFC@..., "scottpitzer2002" <scottp459@...> wrote:

The granger roads served "the wide open spaces" where there were few tunnels or tight overhead highway bridge clearances. But the bigger cars were more useful for general merchandise, which could "cube out" the interior space of earlier box cars before reaching the weight limit. (While as Clark said, bulk grain would hit the weight limit first.)
Scott Pitzer
thanks scott, that does sound a more logical explanation. regards, benjamin


Re: modified AAR 1937 height difference to AAR 1937 steel boxcar

Benjamin Scanlon
 


It WAS that noticeable on the real thing, and the varying heights of house cars
is a hallmark of a steam-era freight train.  This is noticeable even from the
prototype equivalent of "three feet":
http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/fsac.1a34690/?co=fsac


Ben Hom

thank you for the info and clarification, ben. handy to know.

benjamin


Re: modified AAR 1937 height difference to AAR 1937 steel boxcar

Benjamin Scanlon
 

Ben, The M&StL continued to buy 10' IH cars, because the weight of the grain would 'fill' the car before reaching the roof. There were lines stenciled on the car's inside walls showing how full to fill the car with each type of grain.
Clark Propst

hi clark,

thank you. i was enjoying several online photos of your models of the louie last night. i did notice that they (and the CGW) were represented in the buyers of the original 1937 design but other big granger RRs were not.

regards, ben


Re: modified AAR 1937 height difference to AAR 1937 steel boxcar

Scott Pitzer
 

The granger roads served "the wide open spaces" where there were few tunnels or tight overhead highway bridge clearances. But the bigger cars were more useful for general merchandise, which could "cube out" the interior space of earlier box cars before reaching the weight limit. (While as Clark said, bulk grain would hit the weight limit first.)
Scott Pitzer

--- In STMFC@..., "Benjamin Scanlon" <benjaminscanlon@...> wrote:
I've noticed that Rock Island, CNW, CB&Q and other grangers seemed to prefer the modified version. Maybe for extra grain capacity?


1950 ORER Spreadsheet

Nelson Moyer <ku0a@...>
 

I downloaded the spreadsheet to look for CB&Q models and noted an error for
XM-32 box car numbers. The spreadsheet lists 130250-134250, but the
130251-134250 series was for XM-21/22/23 box cars. XM-32 box cars built
between 1940-44 were numbered 30000-33827, 34000-34171, 43200-34599, and
34900-34999. FW&D XM-32 box cars were numbered 8001-8500. The full roster of
XM-32, XM-32A, XM-32B, XM-32C, XM-32D, XM-32E and XM-32F box cars was
published in Burlington Bulletin No. 7. XM-32C and above were built in 1951
or later, so they're not candidates for the list.

The 1950 ORER is a wonderful resource, and I appreciate all the work that
has gone into it. Perhaps others will fill in the blanks, particularly for
CB&Q.

Nelson Moyer


Re: modified AAR 1937 height difference to AAR 1937 steel boxcar

Clark Propst
 

Maybe for extra grain capacity?

Regards

Ben
Ben, The M&StL continued to buy 10' IH cars, because the weight of the grain would 'fill' the car before reaching the roof. There were lines stenciled on the car's inside walls showing how full to fill the car with each type of grain.
Clark Propst


Re: Modeling techniques - Resin casting - suggestions for reading

hacketet <hacketet@...>
 

For some reading, join the scratchbuilding group.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Scratch-building/

I have posted a detailed description of how I make castings in the files section. It is a bit dated, but I still use the same materials and processes with good success. I say its dated because I'm now developing what I refer to as the lost wax method, which allows for far more accurate and detailed parts. The next project will be that monster depressed center flat at the Railroaders Museum in Altoona, PA. I just finished taking the detailed photos and will be producing the drawings in the next month or so.

--- In STMFC@..., "Stephan" <steve_wintner@...> wrote:

Hey guys,

been fiddling about with making some resin castings, very unsuccessfully. Now that I have a full trash basket and and empty bag of patience, does anyone have any suggestions for reading up on techniques ?

the research I have done up till now obviously wasn't sufficient...

thanks
steve


Re: modified AAR 1937 height difference to AAR 1937 steel boxcar

Benjamin Hom
 

Ben Scanlon asked:
"Was there much external, visible difference between an AAR 1937 steel boxcar
and

a modified AAR 1937 boxcar?"

and

"Where was the extra height added? Throughout the side, or was there some sort
of

weld line at the top where the 6" was added?"

The extra height was added throughout the car.  There was no visible weld line
as the cars were built new with side sheets and ends incorporating the taller
height; the visual clue is in the ends, which were typically 5/5 Dreadnaught
ends vs. the 4/5 ends of the 10 ft inside height car.  The numbers indicate the
number of major corrugations in the top and bottom panels.

"There's this shot which seems to indicate a big difference:
http://www.railroad-line.com/discussion/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=17350
... but it's a model and I don't know whether the difference was as noticeable
on the real thing."

It WAS that noticeable on the real thing, and the varying heights of house cars
is a hallmark of a steam-era freight train.  This is noticeable even from the
prototype equivalent of "three feet":
http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/fsac.1a34690/?co=fsac


Ben Hom


modified AAR 1937 height difference to AAR 1937 steel boxcar

Benjamin Scanlon
 

A question that has probably been asked before, and more competently than I will. But I'm kind of new to appreciating differences in US stock.

Was there much external, visible difference between an AAR 1937 steel boxcar and a modified AAR 1937 boxcar? I've noticed that Rock Island, CNW, CB&Q and other grangers seemed to prefer the modified version. Maybe for extra grain capacity?

Where was the extra height added? Throughout the side, or was there some sort of weld line at the top where the 6" was added? There's this shot which seems to indicate a big difference:

http://www.railroad-line.com/discussion/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=17350

... but it's a model and I don't know whether the difference was as noticeable on the real thing.

Regards

Ben


Re: Modeling techniques - Resin casting - suggestions for reading

Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

One could look at it as barbaric, or just simple. It works well for home
casting. It aids the flow of the resin on the surface and causes no
discernable effect to the surface finish of the molded part.



Note the instructions I gave though. There should be an almost
imperceptible dusting of talc. I doubt this would protect anything when
metal casting.



KL



From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of
soolinehistory

--- In STMFC@... <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com> , "Kurt
Laughlin" <fleeta@...> wrote:

Dust the mold with talcum powder and shake it clean before each cast.



KL
Talcum powder? That sounds absolutely barbaric. That's the stuff the white
metal casters put on those truck tires they use for molds. The purpose is to
put a layer of dust to keep the metal from initial contact with the rubber,
which increases mold life.


Re: Modeling techniques - Resin casting - suggestions for reading

soolinehistory <destorzek@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., "Stephan" <steve_wintner@...> wrote:

Dennis,

If only I could describe my many problems in just a few words ...

;-)
You gotta tell us more, Steve... What resin, what rubber, what's the problem. It is possible to mold usable simple parts using five minute epoxy in molds made of silicone bathtub caulk... I described that in my "Trevor Depot" article in RMC back in the eighties. The key is slow setting materials. Everybody wants to make parts RIGHT NOW, and the craft suppliers sell fast setting resins to provide that instant gratification. I wonder if anyone realizes that when I was in production, I filled a run of molds once every 24 hours... the key was, I ran enough molds at once to make it worthwhile.

I'll defer to Tom on the more recent technical aspects of production molding. Never tried any pressure casting, but did try some plug molding of 3D parts (think complete carbodies) back in the eighties; made the judgment that it was feasible, but the costs of making multiple molds was more than the market would bear. If I would have had access to the shop I have now, perhaps things would have been different, but then again, if I would have had access to the shop I have now, I would have turned to injection molding, as indeed I did. Life is just a continuum of learning; nothing says you have to take the same lessons away that I did.

If I have Tom's permission to post his clinic notes from long ago, I will see if I can find them; I posted them once, and was severely chastised for doing so (not by Tom). I thought the theory was useful, even if the products have changed.

Let us know what your most compelling problem is, Steve, we'll start there and work it out.

Dennis


Re: Modeling techniques - Resin casting - suggestions for reading

pullmanboss <tcmadden@...>
 

Dennis Storzek:

The absolute best reference on resin casting as it applies to the parts we want is a paper done by Tom Madden some years ago. I don't know where or if it can be found on the web... perhaps Tom would be kind enough to point us to it.
Thanks for the kind words, but I'm not sure just what paper you're referring to. The ones I remember from the 1990's are all obsolete, because the more casting and mold making you do, the more you learn. And the more you realize how little you knew back when you thought you knew it all!

Not knowing exactly what Steve's problems are, I recommend checking out STMFC post #31047 in the archives. It's from June 2004 and was posted as a reality check on resin casting. I also posted a treatise on bubbles and trapped air to the Yahoo Casting group back in 2000, a portion of which I quote here for your amusement and possible enlightenment:

BEGIN QUOTE
There are three sources of bubbles in cast resin parts. First is from air mixed in when you stir the two components together. For conventional (>5 min gel time) resins, this can be taken care of by vacuum de-airing the mix before pouring it into the mold. (For fast-cure resins, pray for low viscosity so the bubbles escape easily.) Second is from air trapped in the mold during fill. If you're pouring into an open-faced mold, vacuum de-airing the filled mold will eliminate this. For a closed mold, you need to pay particular attention to the location of gate and vents, and fill from the
low point. (Gate in one corner, tilt the mold to fill, vents located at all the high points.) (Or actually fill the mold while it's in vacuum, but this is an industrial technique, well out of the hobby realm.) The third source of bubbles is reaction product gasses produced during curing.

Curing under pressure will eliminate reaction product bubbles when the vapor pressure of the reaction gasses is lower than the pressure in the pressure pot. Usually, 40 PSI is enough for this. On the other hand, curing under pressure will reduce but not eliminate bubbles from trapped air. Boyle's Law states that the volume of a gas is inversely proportional to the pressure. A 0.062" dia bubble in the resin at atmospheric pressure will still be 0.035" dia at 90 PSI. (That's 1/6 of the volume, but volume is a function of the cube of the radius.) If you're fortunate, at the reduced size it will
migrate away to a neutral surface and be out of harm's way.
END QUOTE

It's easier to discuss soultions to specific problems, and I'm willing to go that route either on- or off-list.

Tom Madden


Re: Modeling techniques - Resin casting - suggestions for reading

steve_wintner
 

Dennis,

If only I could describe my many problems in just a few words ...

;-)

Dennis and all who have replied - on and off list - thanks for the comments - more will be welcome. I think I need to think it through and some things to inspire some thoughts, so this has been helpful / will be helpful. Specific questions will come later.

thanks again
steve

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



--- In STMFC@..., "Kurt Laughlin" <fleeta@> wrote:

Dust the mold with talcum powder and shake it clean before each cast.



KL
Talcum powder? That sounds absolutely barbaric. That's the stuff the white metal casters put on those truck tires they use for molds. The purpose is to put a layer of dust to keep the metal from initial contact with the rubber, which increases mold life.

Steve hasn't said exactly what problems he's having, but I'm going to hazard a guess... bubbles. Not so much bubbles in the resin, but bubbles of air that are trapped in the fine surface details and turn a row if finely crafted bolt heads on the pattern into a row of perfectly spherical depressions on the part. It seems no matter how slowly and carefully the resin is poured, it still traps air on the surface of the pattern. Talcum powder will help, in that the grains of powder provide something for the resin to creep along by capillary action, but it runs the risk of completely filling tiny details, which then just powder away when the part is demolded.

I am just a bit behind the times, not having done any resin work for twenty years, but my solution was to spray the molds with primer; Krylon brand worked well, dried fast, and stank to high heaven. That's got to be the odor Ron's wife was complaining about, as by the time I sold the line I was using a urethane resin that was essentially odorless. The paint film, deposited one drop at a time, didn't bridge the fine details, and the microscopically rough surface tended to wet out with resin better. The layer of paint became the outer surface of the part.

I've also never had any luck doing complex castings without a vacuum chamber. Some references tell you to vacuum de-air the resin in the mixing cup, then pour. I used to pour, the draw a vacuum on the filled molds before capping their backs. The vacuum made any bubbles trapped on the mold surface expand and more likely to break, and the gentle boiling effect of the rest of the air expanding out of the resin helped wet the primed mold surface. The vacuum pump needs to be capable of drawing a high vacuum; a vacuum cleaner won't do. I used the style portable pump used to evacuate refrigeration systems during servicing, it was rated "25 microns" which I believe is 25 microns of a mercury column away from a perfect vacuum. Note that some resins can't withstand this degree of vacuum; the vapor pressure of some of the components is too low, and they boil and froth uncontrollably.

The absolute best reference on resin casting as it applies to the parts we want is a paper done by Tom Madden some years ago. I don't know where or if it can be found on the web... perhaps Tom would be kind enough to point us to it.

Dennis


1950 ORER boxcar listing

steve_wintner
 

Hello Gents,

I ran across a file of 1950 ORER boxcars from Larry Ostresh & Mike Aufderheide - I took the liberty of correcting & adding some info to the Soo line cars. (Hope no one minds)

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/files/Freight%20Car%20Distribution/

have fun
Steve


Lisle Presentations

Bill Welch
 

I wanted to let folks know that a list of presentations for Lisle (Naperville) is at: http://www.railroadprototypemodelers.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=66&Itemid=59

See you there!

Bill Welch

92081 - 92100 of 195345