GREEN COAL ON THE FOOTPLATE CLASSIC BRITISH SINGLE DRIVERS

THE MAGAZINE FOR MODEL ENGINEERS

DECEMBER 2021 ❙ £4.50

Problem solving
New series – ‘de-snagging’
a used locomotive buy

MAKING A
TOOL TO TUR
N
LARGE RADII
ON THE
LATHE

MAKING A WATER FEED PUMP

FOR THE EIM STEAM PLANT
CONTENTS DECEMBER 2021 Volume 43 Number 6

11 20 36

EDITORIAL

Is there still a place for the

06 DE-SNAGGING A USED
LOCOMOTIVE BUY
by Peter and Matthew Kenington
‘instruction manual’ builds?
W
elcome to the December EIM and as this is the 12th
edition of the year, seasonal greetings are in order –
11 PROJECT No.1 – A
5-INCH RAILMOTOR
by Andrew Brock
though of course the vagaries of the modern magazine
world mean that most readers will already have read the January
issue by the time Christmas arrives, as it publishes on 16th
December, some nine days before the festive holiday!
14 HARRY’S GAME –
GREEN COAL & MORE
by Harry Billmore
We have some sad news this month with the passing of Ted
Jolliffe, a contributor to EIM over very many years. While I have
only been in the editorial hot seat for a little over three years I

18 MAKING A VALVE GEAR

DRILLING JIG
by Dr Alex Ellin
quickly came to know Ted as an enthusiastic and knowledgeable
model engineer and I always appreciated receving his latest submission – he will be missed.
An appreciation of Ted appears on page 43.
I had an interesting letter from a reader recently – I always welcome your correspondence,

20 TURNING LARGE RADIUS

DOMES ON THE LATHE
by Rich Wightman
even when it’s critical as this one was! Our writer was asking why what he described as the
‘major construction series’ have disappeared from our pages. As an example he quoted the
series on building a 5-inch gauge ‘Evening Star’ locomotive that commenced in January 1983
and ran to some 57 parts.
Looking back at this series it is very much nut-&-bolt, describing every process almost
25 AEIMFEED PUMP FOR THE
STEAM PLANT
by Martin Gearing
instruction-manual like, to the point where one could build exactly the same locomotive
simply by reading the words. Our correspondent suggested that the construction series we
run these days are more “how I did it” rather than how to do it.
He has a point, but the lack of such series is not a deliberate change in emphasis by
29 CLASSIC BRITISH
SINGLE-DRIVER LOCOS
by Rodger Bradley
ourselves – it has a lot to do with what I see as a change in the hobby. Today those who
embark on such major builds seem must less keen to write down every detail of what they do
and so such series are very difficult to secure. I have also had one or two readers suggest that

34 YOUNG ENGINEERS –
AN AWARD TO ENTER
by Matthew Kenington
they find such a style of feature less enjoyable to read, which leaves me in a bit of a quandry!
So I’m throwing this open to the EIM readership. Write and tell me what you would
prefer! And if you have a detailed build to share with your fellow readers, then yes, I’d like to
hear from you. Enjoy your EIM. Andrew Charman – Editor

36 3-IN TRACTION ENGINE

– WHEELS & HUBS
by Jan-Eric Nyström
The January issue of Engineering in Miniature publishes on 16th December.

Editor: Andrew Charman Technical Editor: Harry Billmore

Email: andrew.charman@warnersgroup.co.uk Tel: 01938 810592
39 LETTERS/REVIEWS
Making an impact
Editorial address: 12 Maes Gwyn, Llanfair Caereinion, Powys, SY21 0BD
Web: www.engineeringinminiature.co.uk

40 GENERAL NEWS
A new Polly loco
Subscriptions: www.world-of-railways.co.uk/Store/Subscriptions/engineering-in-miniature
FOR SUBSCRIPTION QUERIES call 01778 392465 – the editor does not handle subscriptions.
41 CLUB & TRACK NEWS
Heading into winter season
FRONT COVER
John Arrowsmith caught serial EIM contributor
Matthew Kenington and fellow Hereford member
James Knight busy with some loco maintenance
at the club’s summer steam-up earlier in the year.
This month Matthew and his dad Peter begin
describing how they sorted out some issues on a
locomotive they bought secondhand.
Facebook: www.facebook.com/engineeringinminiature
Publisher: Steve Cole
Email: stevec@warnersgroup.co.uk
Design & Production: Andrew Charman
Advertising manager: Bev Machin
Tel: 01778 392055
Email: bevm@warnersgroup.co.uk
Advertising design: Amie Carter
Email: amiec@warnersgroup.co.uk
Ad production: Allison Mould
Tel: 01778 395002
Email: allison.mould@warnersgroup.co.uk
Marketing manager: Carly Dadge
Tel: 01778 391440
Email: carlyd@warnersgroup.co.uk
Published monthly by Warners Group
Publications Plc,
The Maltings, West Street, Bourne,
Lincolnshire PE10 9PH.
Articles: The Editor is pleased to consider
contributions for publication in Engineering
in Miniature. Please contact us to discuss
your work.
© Publishers & Contributors
All rights reserved. No part of this publication
may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted in any form or by any
means electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording or otherwise, without the prior
permission of the Publishers. This periodical
is sold subject to the following conditions;
that it shall not without the written consent
of the publishers be lent, resold, hired out, or
otherwise disposed of by way of trade at a
price in excess of the special recommended
maximum price, and that it shall not be lent,
resold, hired out, or otherwise disposed of in
mutilated condition, or in any unauthorised
cover by way of trade, or affixed to as part
of any publication or advertising, literary or
pictorial whatsoever.
Whilst every care is taken to avoid mistakes
in the content of this magazine the publishers
cannot be held liable for any errors however
arising. The reader, in pursuing construction
and operation of any product, should exercise
great care at all times and must accept that
safety is their responsibility.
Engineering in Miniature – ISSN 0955 7644
 & Presents...

THE NORTH’S PREMIER MODEL

RAILWAY SHOW
DISCOVER SHOP
√ HANDPICKED BRITISH LAYOUTS √ STOCK UP ON ESSENTIALS FOR YOUR HOBBY
IN MAJOR SCALES, GAUGES AND ERAS √ LOOK OUT FOR COLLECTABLES, PRE-OWNED
√ TRADERS / SOCIETIES ITEMS, TOOLS, BOOKS & MORE!

BOOK Adult: £12.00 | Children(5+): £7.00

&SAVE! SAT 10AM - 5PM & SUNDAY 10AM - 4:30PM SUBSCRIBERS
Kindly
supported by:
ADVANCED TICKET HOLDERS 9:30AM EARLY ENTRY
FREE PARKING | DONCASTER RACECOURSE, DN2 6BB
£10.00
To Book - www.model-railway-shows.co.uk | 0844 581 9900
Terms & Conditions: The above prices are advance ticket prices. Calls are charged at 7p per minute, plus your phone company’s access charge. Fee applies for postal tickets. E-Tickets are free of charge.
 RAIL LOCOMOTIVES
Rome wasn’t built in a Day
Peter and Matthew de-snag their new Romulus-derived ‘Maggie’ 0-6-0 in the first of
a series of articles on solving problems with a used locomotive.
BY PETER & MATTHEW KENINGTON Part one of a short series
F
or those of you unfamiliar with
the foundation of the city of
Rome and the Roman empire, in
Roman mythology it is reputed to have
been founded by twin brothers
Romulus and Remus. Romulus then
killed his brother and became the first
King of Rome – despite my assurances
to the contrary, Matthew long believed
I was probably there as an eye-witness,
although he did very well in his recent
GCSE history, so he may have worked
out that I’m not quite that old…
Matthew and I purchased a
little-used Romulus-derivative loco
during the first easing of lockdowns in
2020. The design is a ‘Maggie’, which
is essentially an 0-6-0 Romulus with
Walschaerts valve gear. We were
unable to run it until earlier this year,
due to the closure of our club track
(Hereford) for virtually the whole of
2020, although we were expecting
some issues.
We were able to test the loco on a
very short length of track, prior to
purchase, and this highlighted that it
had a major ‘dead-spot’ in reverse,
although it seemed to run okay
forwards. We could clearly only test it
at a very low speed on the available
track, and this did mask a few
problems which we will discuss in
future articles.
The price we paid was very
reasonable, however, especially given
that it had a copper boiler. The loco
had been built largely for a friend of
the owner who rapidly lost interest
once it was complete. As the owner
had many other locos, this one
became surplus to requirements.
A Very ‘Woke’ Loco
As you can see from Photo 1, ‘Idris’
(as we have named the loco) is an
unconventional Romulus and is
officially classified (on its boiler
paperwork) as a ‘Sweet William’, due
to it being fitted with a marine boiler
built to the Sweet William design.
This has the side-benefit that it
qualifies us to enter the ‘Sweet Pea’
rallies and we attended the most
recent of these, which was
conveniently hosted by Hereford SME.
One thing is for certain, there will
not be another loco like it anywhere
(although the EIM letters page may
correct me here, we’ll see) and it is not
easy to categorise or ‘label’ it in a
conventional sense (is it a Romulus, a
06 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE
“We
returned
1
from
respective
running days
having found
a few
more issues
each time...”
PHOTO 1:
Matthew driving
Idris on her first
outing (minus
nameplate at
this stage) – EIM
correspondent
John Arrowsmith
is hiding his
terror very well.
PHOTO 2:
safety valves Maggie or a Sweet William?)– quite A Long List
as originally ‘woke’ and certainly in keeping with So, what issues did we encounter with
configured. the modern zeitgeist. Idris? It is a pretty long list and,
indeed, formed about three separate
PHOTO 3: False Sense of Security lists as we returned from respective
Tubes funnel We are not entirely new to purchasing running days having found a few
the escaping ‘new but virtually unused’ engines more each time (and solved a few in
steam out of – our first loco (which we still own) the interim). We will cover all of the
the cab. was a ‘Super Simplex’ which had been issues, both large and small, in this
built, test-run, and then left on a shelf series and it will hopefully illustrate
PHOTO 4: for 10 years. It was a well-engineered that even a ‘finished’ and ‘working’
Original valve example but, due to its lack of use, had loco can (and almost certainly will)
stems – far never been ‘de-snagged’ – a task left to have snagging issues to sort out. Far
from identical! us as new (and inexperienced) owners. from being a source of angst, these
It took us a long time to get have the benefit of ‘forcing’ you, as a
FIGURE 1: ‘Roselea’ to perform to the standard new owner, to really learn how your
Can you spot she does now, mostly due to us not loco works. This will dispel any fears
why this safety understanding what she ‘should’ be you may have when it comes to fixing
valve wasn’t like, although even her imperfect state things which go wrong later on (as
very usable? was very good. In most cases, a little they inevitably will); think of
(note that the tweaking here and there was all that de-snagging as a blessing in disguise.
spring, valve- was required, although some issues I hope this series doesn’t give the
stem and such took a bit more tracking down. impression that the loco we purchased
are deliberately For example, the holes drilled in was in any way ‘bad’ or a ‘Friday-
omitted, as the blower jets were too small, so the afternoon job’. It is a nicely-built loco
they are not the blower was never quite powerful which was finished to a working
source of the enough, but not so lacking in power standard rather than being fully-
problem...). for this to be obvious. In short, we sorted – we purchased it as such and
were ‘lucky’ with our first purchase with our eyes open.
All photos and and this could have lulled us into a All of the important aspects are
diagrams by false sense of security when later sound – the boiler is lovely, the basic
the authors purchasing a used loco. motion runs smoothly, with no
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk

2 Although this was not the first issue
3 on a given safety valve, in order to
particular tight spots (especially
impressive, given that it has not really
been run-in yet) and the fittings are of
good quality – for example using
bronze for the safety valves rather
than brass.
Any steam leaks from the fittings
were very minor, the oiling system
works (although we’ll come back to
this in a future article) and she steams
very well (almost too well). Some of
the changes we made don’t come
under the heading of ‘fixing
problems’, more of ‘improvements’ or
‘enhancements’ (the water-feeding
arrangement being an example of this
– again, this will be discussed in a
future article).
4 sensible pressure, at least at a pressure
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
Safety First
we tackled (it did not come to light
immediately), this opening article will
concentrate on the safety valves. The
loco is fitted with twin safety valves
(Photo 2) and these are large, to cope
with the substantial volume of steam
which can be generated by the Sweet
William boiler (it has a capacity of
approximately 17 litres, 3¾ gallons).
In normal operation, the safety
valves are topped by tubes which
funnel the escaping steam out of the
cab (Photo 3). Whilst this is essential
in preventing the driver from being
scalded whilst trying to operate the
injector steam-feed valve (injecting
being a useful way of using the excess
steam and, simultaneously, calming
down the boiler), it makes it rather
harder to ‘tap’ the top of the plunger
re-seat it if it is wisping steam. It is
therefore perhaps more important
with this arrangement of safety valve,
for it to seal well without assistance.
Referring back to Photo 2, one
issue with the original safety valves is
quite obvious – the valve stem on the
left-hand valve does not protrude
above the adjustable (steam-exhaust)
cap (unlike that of the right-hand
valve). This would make re-seating of
the valve impossible using the
above-mentioned ‘light-tap’; it is also a
slightly odd arrangement.
Odd but Operational?
“One Other than being slightly odd (and
problem was inconvenient for re-seating), what was
the problem with our safety valves?
particularly The answer is that it was a bit of a
annoying: strange one (the problem that is), at
neither of least to diagnose initially. Almost the
the safety first thing we did when lockdowns
eased enough to allow it, was to get a
valves new hydraulic and steam test
seemed to performed. We had not run the loco at
re-seat at all at this point, and so were unaware
a sensible of most of the issues, the plan being to
get a freshly-minted boiler certificate
pressure...” and then take her out on the track
straight afterwards.
The boiler test was a pass, with the
safety valves blowing off at 80-85psi
and seeming to re-seat okay at a fairly
with a nodding-acquaintance to their
80psi operating value.
We then took her for a run around
RAIL LOCOMOTIVES
the track, which highlighted a number
of problems – most of which we’ll
come onto in future articles – but one
was particularly annoying: neither of
the safety valves seemed to re-seat at a
sensible pressure – in one case, not
re-seating until around 40psi!
This had not been evident at the
steam-test earlier in the day, but was
unarguable now. We tried adjusting
the valves multiple times but could
not find a position at which they blew
off at a safe pressure and then
re-seated at a sensible point. This
made running impossible and
therefore was propelled to the top of
our (long) list of ‘issues to be resolved’.
Taking the Plunge(r)
We removed and disassembled our
safety valves and produced an
approximate drawing as an aid to
diagnosing our issues (Figure 1 shows
the key elements for diagnosis of the
main problem, as will be discussed).
The two valve stems were also very
obviously different (Photo 4), as were
the corresponding springs – the
difference in their lengths matched
the difference in length of the valve
stems. We used the longer spring as a
starting point for our own spring
design (discussed below) along with
an online spring calculator.
The issue we had is pretty obvious
from the drawing in Figure 2 – see if
you can guess before reading on…
Okay, time’s up. The answer is that
the ball, which provides the valve’s
seal, is only just larger than the bore of
the hole which it is attempting to seal.
The ball is therefore prone to getting
stuck in the hole, requiring a relatively
larger pressure to unseat it. Thus, the
‘correct’ setting for the spring tension
is relatively low, in order to get the
valve to blow at the correct pressure.
Once the ball has been unseated,
the relatively weak spring setting
means that the ball will only re-seat at
a much lower pressure. In our case, if
the valve was set to blow at 80psi, then
it would not reseat until around 40psi.
Furthermore, the degree of ‘sticking’
of the ball to its seat was not consistent
with time – this was more notable on
one valve in particular, which would
re-seat at a higher pressure, but would
not reliably blow off and re-seat at
consistent pressures.
▲
This situation is obviously
FIGURE 1
Reproduced approx full-size
07
 RAIL LOCOMOTIVES
unusable in a working loco – or,
alternatively, could be viewed as a
drastic means of instilling firing
discipline (to the extent that the loco
is never allowed to blow off). It could
make for an interesting driving
competition – a sort of Speed meets
IMLEC, the International Model
Locomotive Efficiency Competition)...
(If you haven’t seen it, Speed is a
thriller about a bus that is rigged by a
mad bomber to explode unless the
driver maintains a speed which never
falls below 50 miles per hour).
Note that Figure 1 shows the
ball-seat in the body of the valve as a
simple ‘shelf’ – it was difficult to see
exactly what had been used as a seat,
as it is far down in the body of the
valve and we didn’t spend too much
time trying to do so, on the basis that
it was what it was and we weren’t
about to change it. If this seat is, in
reality, tapered or chamfered, then
this will make the ball-sticking issue
even more pronounced.
Figure 2 shows an exploded view
of our modified valve. We found a
paper from an Australian model
engineer which included a calculation
for the approximate ball size required
08 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE
FIGURE 2
(discussed below) and used this as the
basis for our re-design. This indicated
“This could that a much larger ball was required
be viewed and hence a larger cup and,
consequently, a modified spring. To
as a drastic complete things, new valve stems were
means of also needed, as the originals were
instilling solver-soldered into their ball-cups
firing and it was far easier to make new ones
discipline...” (notwithstanding the fact that one of
them was too short anyway!).
The key parts of the modified
valve are shown (and dimensioned) in
Figure 3. The calculations we used in
order to arrive at the dimensions are
shown below (with the spring design
and dimensions being discussed later).
Square hole, round plug
As discussed above, we assumed that
the edges of the hole in the base of the
safety valve were square, likely
FIGURE 2: produced by, say, an end-mill, and
Form of safety needed to be sealed by a suitable
valves used choice of ball bearing. We knew, or at
on ‘Idris’. least surmised, that it needed to be
rather larger than the original, but
FIGURE 3: how much larger? There are two
Dimensioned conflicting requirements at play here:
drawing of 1) Ideally, the ball would be as large as
safety valve. possible, to minimise any act of
sticking or jamming in the hole which
it is sealing
2) The ball shouldn’t be so large as to
unduly restrict the flow of steam
exiting the boiler.
As in all things, there are
diminishing returns from making the
ball excessively-large – so long as it
doesn’t stick, why make it any larger?
So, how large is ‘large enough’? The
answer is that it should, ideally,
present a tangent to the orifice, at the
point of contact, which is 45 degrees
or greater – anything significantly less
than this and the ball is increasingly
likely to get stuck to some degree.
To achieve a 45-degree tangent at
the interface between the ball and the
hole it is being designed to fill, the
ball’s diameter should be:
Ball diameter = sqrt(2) * orifice diameter
= approx. 1.4 x orifice diameter
In our case, the diameter of the
hole which the ball is required to seal
is approximately 8.5mm, leading to an
ideal ball diameter of 12mm. This is,
conveniently, a standard diameter for
stainless-steel ball bearings, making
our choice easy.
Note that if your safety valve is of
the ‘pop’ type, it is likely to have a
stepped valve seat (see Figure 4). In
this case, the size of ball required
should be the next-smallest size to
that calculated by the above method.
So, for example, if the calculation
suggests that an 11.5mm ball would be
ideal, then an 11mm diameter ball
should be used. Whilst this (slightly)
breaks the 45-degree rule, it will
ensure that the ball seats in the lower,
primary, orifice and not in the upper,
secondary, orifice, thus maintaining
the ‘pop’ nature of the valve (and
preventing precisely the jamming
issue we are trying to solve from
taking place in the secondary orifice).
Note that the above argument
assumes that the valve body has been
designed and constructed correctly in
the first place, which should, of
course, be checked (for example by
gently inserting suitable sizes of rod or
the shank of a drill or end-mill). Great
care should be taken here to avoid
damage to the valve seat and, ideally,
plastic or wood should be used, if
available. We only need to check that
the chosen ball diameter will clear the
FIGURE 3
Reproduced
approx full-size
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk

upper orifice, so high-precision is not
required in this measurement.
Go With the Flow
Dealing now with the second issue,
namely that of not unduly restricting
steam flow, there are two ways of
looking at this (assuming that an
existing safety valve is being modified,
rather than one is being designed
from scratch):
1) Design from first-principles, as if it
were a from-scratch design
2) Assume that the original valve has
been designed correctly, at least from
the perspective of its steam-
exhausting capacity, and use this as a
basis. In this case, if the safety valve(s)
are able to hold the boiler at its
maximum designed working pressure,
despite not re-seating at an acceptable
boiler pressure, then they are probably
correctly-designed in terms of their
steam-exhausting capabilities and
their characteristics can be exploited
in the calculation of the size of a
replacement ball.
We took the latter approach, as the
engine had passed a number of steam
tests, including one we witnessed, so
the steam-exhausting capabilities of
the valves are clearly adequate. The six
holes in the top of our safety valves are
each approximately 3mm in diameter.
This provides a total cross-sectional
area from which steam can escape of:
6 x pi x 1.5^2 = 42.4mm2.
So long as the cross-sectional area
5 6
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
around our new ball and plunger are
appreciably larger than this figure,
then the six holes will be the limiting
factor. Since we already know that
these are adequate, we can be
reassured that our choice of ball (and
ball-cup) diameter is also acceptable.
The overall length of the ball-cup
was 10mm and its diameter was
12.5mm (only just larger than the
ball). The cup needs to be as small as
FIGURE 4 possible whilst still centring the ball
– it could arguably have been made
smaller in diameter whilst still
fulfilling this function, however this
diameter was adequate to allow
sufficient steam to pass without
unduly throttling the valve’s
operation, as will now be discussed.
The inner-diameter (measured) of
the screw threads into which the top
cap screws, on our safety valves, is
14.7mm. This suggests that the thread
could be a 5/8-inch UNC or UNF type,
FIGURE 4: although we didn’t attempt to confirm
Stepped form this as we had no need to do so, since
of valve seat we planned to re-use this part
found on unmodified. The minimum cross-
pop-type sectional area of the inner ‘tube’ of the
safety valves. safety valve is therefore:
Inner diameter = pi * (14.7/2)^2 = 170.0 mm²
PHOTO 5:
Empty safety Likewise, the cross-sectional area
valve body of the ball-seat located at the base of
showing its the valve-stem, and which restricts the
internal bore. above cross-section, is:
Restriction = pi * (12.5/2)^2 = 122.7mm²
PHOTO 6:
Safety valve Subtracting these two results gives
caps, along an unrestricted cross-sectional area of
with original more than 47mm2. This is comfortably
(smaller) and greater than the 42.4mm2 available
new (larger) from the holes in the top cap, meaning
ball-bearing that they are still the main restriction
seals. Note the to the steam exhausting through the
small amount valve. This, therefore, suggests that a
of corrosion 12mm diameter ball, housed in a cup
on the old ball, which is just larger than this diameter,
which won’t is acceptable.
have helped Photo 5 shows the (empty) safety
its sealing valve body, with the base uppermost.
properties. Note the chamfer on the edge of the
ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021
RAIL LOCOMOTIVES
central hole, presumably to reduce
turbulence in the escaping steam.
Photo 6 shows the original and
replacement balls – the new ‘correct’
ball is a good deal larger! This photo
also shows the original valve steam-
exhaust caps (which we didn’t modify)
and their six steam-exhaust holes.
A Fresh Spring
Even without the modified ball-
bearing size discussed above, it was
obvious that we would need to make at
least one new spring for our safety
valves. One of the original springs was
about 20 per cent shorter than the
other(!), reflecting the differing
lengths of the valve stems shown in
Photo 4. We decided that we might as
well make two new springs, as we
would need the same set-up to produce
both and the incremental time and
cost in manufacturing the second
would be small. That way, we would
start out with a known-quantity in
terms of the materials and design.
In order to design the springs, we
needed to calculate the force they
would need to operate under and
determine an acceptable displacement
to allow the steam to escape. Again,
the gap through which the steam
needs to escape should be of a similar
order to, or larger than, the six holes
through which the steam will
ultimately escape into the atmosphere.
The spring ideally needs to be made
from corrosion-resistant spring wire,
since ordinary mild steel could rust
quickly. We opted for a low-alloy steel
with a zinc-phosphate coating, to
minimise corrosion in such an
essential component. Stainless steel or
bronze would be better, but are not so
easy to obtain.
Calculating the force acting on the
spring is relatively easy: since pressure
= force per unit area, it follows that:
Force on spring = Boiler pressure x
cross-sectional area of orifice
s
So, for a working pressure of 80
09
 RAIL LOCOMOTIVES
PSI (reverting to imperial units here):
Force on spring = 80 x 0.088 sq. inches
(area of an 8.5mm diameter aperture)
= 7.0 lbs = 31N
What do we need our spring to do?
1) We need a distance of travel
(compression) sufficient to easily
allow our steam to escape
2) We require a reasonable adjustment
range to allow us to fine-tune the
pressure at which the valve opens
3) We need a spring internal diameter
which does not unduly impede
movement of the valve stem during
operation of the valve (in other words
so the spring is not ‘tight’ on the stem)
4) Likewise, we need an outer diameter
for the spring which is not so large as
to interrupt or impede the flow of the
steam exhausting from the valve
5) The partially-compressed length of
the spring (when correctly adjusted) is
a function of the internal length of the
valve body – something which was
beyond our control (short of making
an entirely new valve) so we worked
with what we had in this regard.
The parameters of the spring we
designed are summarised in Table 1
Table 1: Spring design parameters
Parameter Value
Wire diameter 1.2
Spring outer diameter 8 mm
Free length 50
Number of active coils 24
Table 2: Results from online spring calculator used
Rates & Loads
Spring Rate (or Spring constant), k :
True Maximum Load, True Fmax :
Maximum Load considering Solid
Height, Solid Height Fmax :
Safe Travel
Potential True Maximum Travel w/
longer Free Length, True Travelmax :
Maximum Travel considering
Solid Height, Solid Height Travelmax :
Minimum Loaded Height:
Physical Dimensions
Diameter of spring wire, d:
Outer diameter of spring, Douter :
Inner diameter of spring, Dinner :
Mean diameter of spring, Dmean :
Free length of spring, Lfree :
Number of active coils, na :
Number of total coils, nT :
Solid height, Lsolid :
Type of ends:
Spring index, C :
Distance between coils, Coilpitch:
Rise angle of coils:
10 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE
and Table 2; the latter is taken directly
“Not all coils from the spring calculator we used
on a spring (www.thespringstore.com/spring-
actually calculator.html). Examining the table,
it is evident that the spring constant is
contribute approximately 2.72N/mm. The spring’s
to its deflection at 31N (7lb) of pressure
‘springiness’...” should therefore be around 11.4mm.
As the steam expands, having
passed through the orifice which is
sealed by the ball and into the wider
tube, its pressure could be expected to
drop, although this tube is, itself,
restricted by the ball and ball-seat,
complicating matters a little.
Exploring this in more detail:
Cross-sectional area of orifice = pi *
(8.5/2)^2 = 56.8mm²
It is evident from a comparison of
this figure with that of the total
cross-sectional area of the six holes in
the top of the safety valve and of the
unobstructed cross-sectional area of
FIGURE 5: the main tube section of the safety
Identifying valve (both calculated previously), that
the active the above orifice is not the limiting
and inactive factor in terms of the volume of steam
coils on a which can escape per second. The
coil spring. limitation is the total area provided by
the six holes in the top cap of the valve.
To resist the steam pressure within
Units the boiler, the spring will need to be
mm compressed by 11.4mm (adjusted by
the cap at the top of the valve, when
setting-up the valve). This is notably
mm
less than the maximum deflection of
the spring of 17.6mm, allowing the
valve to open by some 6mm or so, if
required. The actual amount of
compression needed will be a complex
amalgam of a number of factors: the
2.722 N/mm fact that the ball is round and not a
78.727 N flat surface, the turbulence of the flow
47.903 N of steam past and through the various
elements of the valve and such like.
28.925 mm
17.600 mm
32.400 mm
1.200 mm
8.000 mm
5.600 mm
6.800 mm
50.000 mm
24
26
32.400 mm
closed & squared
5.667
1.933 mm
5.17 Degree
A Note on Active Coils
When is a coil not a coil? Not all coils
on a spring actually contribute to its
‘springiness’ or, to be more scientific,
its spring-rate. This is most obvious
when considering a spring with
ground ends.
Figure 5 shows a diagram of a
spring, almost the same as the ones
discussed in this article – it has been
changed very slightly to illustrate a
point. The ends of this spring have
been ground to leave a flat surface (for
the purposes of this discussion, we
assume that they are more or less
entirely flat across the whole of the
end of the spring, which is not quite
the situation shown in Figure 5).
Clearly the ground-down wire will not
be as ‘springy’ as an unmodified wire.
Likewise, most commercial
springs, at least, are formed such that
the start of the first turn of wire
touches the end of this same turn. For
both of these reasons, this turn will
not act as a spring. This first turn is
therefore deemed to be ‘inactive’ and
therefore effectively does not count
when calculating the number of turns
required in a given spring’s design.
The upper picture in Figure 5 shows a
spring with 23½ active turns, but a
total of 25½ actual turns.
In our spring design, we require
24 active turns; this means making a
spring with around 26 actual turns,
depending upon how we form and
grind it. When using a ‘spring
calculator’ (as discussed above) it is
important to enter the number of
active turns into the relevant box,
ignoring the inactive ones. EIM
n Peter and Matthew continue their
redesign of the safety valves in the next
episode of this series.
FIGURE 5
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
 LOCOMOTIVES

Project No.1 – a 5-inch

gauge Railmotor
Andrew describes the progress of his first model engineering project, which is now
close to completion – a mere 15 years after he first steamed it!
BY ANDREW BROCK

D 1
uring the summer of 2006, a
distant 15 years ago, my first
model engineering project had
its initial steaming (Photo 1). Another
12 years earlier, I had been advised
that a 5-inch gauge ‘Railmotor No.1’
would be a very suitable ‘starter’
project and so in 1994, at the age of 14,
‘Project No.1’ commenced. After
many, many hours of hard work
(Photos 2-3) and with plenty of help
along the way, the first fire was duly lit
12 years later.
At the time, I wrote a piece for
EIM about the project, which I hoped
would inspire other would-be young
model engineers to have a go at a
locomotive project and this was
published in June 2007. Now 15 years
down the track, and after a lot of miles
under her belt, ‘Railmotor’ is finally
nearing ‘completion’, so I thought it
would be nice to write another article
or two about the intervening years
and upgrades along the way.
The first steaming back in 2006
was undertaken with the locomotive
in her barest form. With limited
experience fabricating locomotive
2
fittings they were functional if by no
means perfect, but enough to obtain a
steam test and get her wheels turning.
The first lap of my home track was
really special, after the hundreds
(possibly more than a thousand) hours
of construction that had been
ploughed into the project to date. The
locomotive had come alive and an
ambition once joked about at school
was now a reality – I had achieved
what I set out to do. PHOTO 1: A
3
special moment
Pressing faults – the Railmotor
The list of ‘faults’ following the first project, the
run was not that bad but certainly the author’s first,
lubricator and water pump bypass steams for the
valve were the most pressing. first time.
The lubricator was not actually a
‘fault’ as such; just that it pumped too PHOTO
much oil. The lubricator itself had 2-3: Stages
been kindly donated to the project by in the initial
John Gange, a very good friend of construction
mine and one which he had built a of the loco.
batch of.
Originally it was made with a All photos in
⅛-inch stainless steel ram and I have this feature by
▲

subsequently learnt this is normally the author

www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 11

 LOCOMOTIVES
4 but a few. The mileage accumulation
too big for a 5-inch gauge locomotive
and will over-oil, unless you are
running on an up-and-down track for
example where extra oil is desirable.
You can modify the ram to reduce
the stroke but I am never happy with
‘make do’, so instead I copied the
existing cylinder, ram and gland
design, except this time the ram was
made from 3/32-inch stainless steel but
with the same stroke.
This reduction has proven to be
excellent, with the locomotive using a
tank of oil for roughly every 10 miles
of use. Driven from a link rod off the
axle pump eccentric, this gives a
consistent throw for the drop arm on
the lubricator, which in turn drives
the ratchet wheel via two clock springs
– I have learnt that the clock spring
design is extremely reliable and
long-lasting (Photo 4).
My original water pump bypass
valve was functional but only about 75
per cent efficient, so this was replaced
and by another donation. A spare
quarter-turn tapered valve had been
removed from a friend’s locomotive,
so I was grateful for that to be donated
to the project. The only downside was
5 but unlike the full-size, the model has
12 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE
the efficiency of the new valve, so I
had to modify the clack because the
PHOTO 4: original would barely pass enough
The revamped water and made the loco bounce if the
lubricator and bypass valve was fully closed.
its drive.
Golden times
PHOTO 5: The With the initial gremlins dealt with, I
Railmotor in its ran the locomotive for the next few
‘golden engine’ seasons whilst in the meantime
period – the setting to and finishing off most of the
brass was hard platework, including the cab and
to keep pristine. lagging, as well as improving and
adding steam fittings that were not
PHOTO 6: essential for the initial boiler test. By
New draincock mid-2013 the loco looked more
arrangement – complete but still unpainted and was
better than auto. now nicknamed the ‘gold engine’
(Photo 5). The brass was a nightmare
PHOTO 7: to keep clean and with hindsight I
Vacuum ejector should have painted it much sooner!
in the cab. For the next five years I continued
to run (and gradually wear out) the
PHOTO 8: locomotive. Having spent so much
Andrew in a time building and subsequently
happy place, improving her, I was keen to run
running his loco where and when I could, both at my
with a fair home track in Haywards Heath and
rake of freight on other tracks including Basingstoke,
stock behind. Chelmsford and Maidstone to name
was a useful test for each improvement
and I continued to upgrade and add
more fittings.
I had experimented with
‘automatic’ draincocks, which quite
frankly did not work and I have yet to
see a locomotive with reliable ‘autos’.
They were supposed to work by water
in the cylinders destabilising the ball
on the seat of the outlet hole and then
sealing again once steam was present.
My experience was they had limited
effectiveness and therefore I took
inspiration from our club ‘Halton’
tank locomotive, which had a central
disc underneath the smokebox with
pipes leading to it from the end of
each cylinder.
As per our ‘Halton’, I linked this
to the cab by means of a wire in a
copper tube and once properly set up
it has proven to be an excellent and
reliable addition to the loco (Photo 6).
As well as the draincocks, I
changed the original blower and
injector steam valves. My first attempt
used conventional anti-clockwise to
open, clockwise to close valves but
instead I reversed these by locating the
seat on the inlet side. Now they are
clockwise to open and anti-clockwise
to close.
I found the back pressure helped
to keep the valve on the seat when
closed and there was no need for a
front stuffing gland because the
spindle side of the valve does not have
to take the full boiler pressure. By
their design they are also captive, so
cannot be inadvertently unscrewed
out of the body.
Vacuum fitted
The last significant addition was a
combined vacuum ejector and brake
valve. The design is loosely modelled
on a Gresham & Craven brake valve
just one steam cone and one exhaust
cone (Photo 7). The addition of this
valve meant the blower tube had to be
re-routed more centrally through one
of the longitudinal stays and this was
done at the same time as the new
steam valve for the blower.
The exhaust tube for the ejector
runs through another longitudinal
stay on the right-hand side of the
boiler. The valve itself was a complete
experiment and my first use of cone
reamers. Three superbly ground
injector reamers had been given to me
by another very good friend, Ron
Harris, and he was pleased that I had
found a use for these.
The steam cone is drilled no.73
and screws into the body on a ¼-inch
by 40tpi thread for fine adjustment to
the exhaust cone. I was concerned the
concentricity would not be good
enough for this to work but in fact it
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
 LOCOMOTIVES

proved to be very good, drawing

10-inches of vacuum at 45psi upwards.
I have successfully run the
6
locomotive with a vacuum-braked
driving car, the only downside being
the excessive water usage with
continuous use of the ejector. It is
possible to run but would be easier on
a locomotive with a larger boiler
capacity! It was three or four months’
work if memory serves me rightly but
a nice experimental side project if
nothing else!
With the locomotive now all but
complete, except for the outer dome
and paint, I ran her until the end of
the 2017 season (Photo 8). In the
spring of 2018 a leak was discovered
on one of the superheater tubes at the
smokebox end. Although this was a
little disheartening, my first attempt positive experience from an otherwise part 1 at the end of October 2021,
at boiler making had lasted for 12 difficult period in many of our lives. ‘Project No.1’ is now less than 10
years and quite a few fires! “Had it not The second and final part of this hours from completion – probably by
This leak would require the boiler been for feature will follow, and as I finalise the end of the week..! EIM
to be removed from the chassis for Covid-19
repair but at the time I was knee-deep
in building a couple of tanker wagons,
so ‘Railmotor’ was mothballed for the
and the
subsequent
7
short-term. The following year of 2019 lockdowns,
came and went, and still she sat in my ‘Railmotor’
lounge at home waiting for repair but
a nice ornament nonetheless! may well
have been
Lockdown opportunity waiting her
Then what we know now as Covid-19 turn yet a
struck. My life, as well as that of many
people, was halted in an instant but if
while...”
nothing else I still had my workshop
and a whole lot of enthusiasm to keep
busy during this somewhat surreal
time. Had it not been for Covid-19
and the subsequent lockdowns,
‘Railmotor’ may well have been
waiting her turn yet a while but
instead she is now repaired and very
nearly finished/painted. As a result, I
am sat here able to write about a

www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 13

 HARRY’S GAME
Green coal and other things
This month our resident engineer at the 12¹₄-inch gauge Fairbourne Railway engages
in eco trials and some more traditional work – or so he thought...
BY HARRY BILLMORE
L
ast month I mentioned briefly
that we had a batch of ‘Green
Coal’ delivered from a
manufacturer that wants to try to
1 PHOTO 2: The
2 3
4 5
14 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE
develop a fuel that could do the same What has so far been developed is
PHOTO 1: Green
job as coal, but with almost none of a briquette made from the leftovers
coal in the bunker
the ecological downsides of mining resulting from cold-pressing rapeseed
of ‘Russell’, of
and distributing traditional coal. oil – this still has a reasonable oil
similar size to the
content so the volatile content of the
coal normally used.
fuel is a little higher than traditional
prime product
Welsh steam coal. However it is far
less dense, so behaves in a very
from pressing different way to coal – using it is a
rapeseed – the cross between the techniques and
bi-product is quantity required for a wood-burning
compressed loco and a coal-burning loco.
into briquettes I was rostered out on the loco as
to burn. driver for three midweek turns which
seemed the perfect opportunity to try
PHOTO 3: The the green coal out, Phil, the
rag for lighting representative of the manufacturer
up is soaked in delivered three quarters of a ton to us
rapeseed oil – as on the Tuesday morning, just in time
green a product as for me to light up.
possible to match To give me a reasonable chance of
the green coal. learning how the green coal worked
and to ensure we could still run the
PHOTO 4:
Ignition – while
slower burning
service whatever occurred, I decided
to take ‘Russell’, the most free-
steaming member of our fleet.
than the diesel
normally used, Shape of things...
the oil does the
Having filled the empty bunker with
job adequately.
the green coal, the first thing I noticed
PHOTO 5: The was the fine dust coming from the
briquettes feed briquettes – this was significantly
through the bunker more floaty than coal dust, partly due
chute just like to the shape of the briquettes which
coal, though they have sharp triangular corners. One of
produce more the immediate suggestions we made
floating dust. for the next batch was to change the
shape of the briquettes to reduce the
PHOTO 6: The dust, something that would come into
fire is gradually play later on.
built up with the Phil had brought some of rapeseed
green coal. oil to with which soak a rag with and
6
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
 HARRY’S GAME

7 8

PHOTO 7: ‘Russell’ sat happily at the Point with the somewhat smoky exhaust from
the coal, potential improvements to the loco could help this.

PHOTO 8: The fire burning with a little blower put on to draw it a little.

PHOTO 9: The aftermath next morning, the black soot is from cleaning the tubes as
Harry forgot to take a picture before cleaning them! The fire bed was very similar to
that produced by normal coal. 9
PHOTO 10: Having started to clean the fire through it can be seen that there is a
reasonably high ash content and clinker.

PHOTO 11: The clinker that was pulled out in the morning.

provide a truly green first light-up.
This worked well though it took a
little longer to light and burned with
less intensity than the normal diesel
we use.
Having established a kindling fire
I started adding the green coal as I
would normal coal and the engine
came around in about the same
amount of time and using a similar
volume of coal as with Welsh steam,
the main difference being the amount
of smoke – this has a slightly acrid
smell and tends to linger for a while.
The rest of the light up and
preparation continued as normal and
I ran around onto a six-coach set (our
sets for the summer had been nine
shoulder season that we would not
require so many).
I built the fire up as I would have
with coal and received the right-away
from the guard – what followed was
certainly an interesting trip while I
got to grips with how the green coal
delivers its heat.
With a high volatile content and
low mass, combined with the shape of
the briquettes shape it gives heat very
quickly when the engine is working
hard, but it also burns through very
quickly. If you have not been to
Fairbourne, while the railway is on
the beach, it is anything but flat,
especially when running with a long
train around the reverse curves 10
s

coaches but we had assumed in the through the dunes and over the flood

11

www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 15

 HARRY’S GAME

12
defences. I found I was shovelling a lot
more after I had realised my mistake
in treating it like normal coal!
I used a little more volume of
green coal than I would have normal
coal but not significantly more. Due to
the trial being arranged at slightly
short notice I hadn’t had a chance to
come up with a properly scientific
method of weighing the coal usage
and comparing it against the green
coal – on the next batch, which will
have an updated shape, I will be
significantly more precise with it all.
I had reasonably got to grips with
the green coal by the second trip,
which was lucky as we had to
strengthen the train to nine coaches
PHOTO 12:
The following morning when
doing the preparation I found there
was no more than normal char in the
Russell’s valves
feathering at
front end and the tubes were no more the head of
coked up than with ordinary coal. The a larger train
one thing I did find, however, was a than expected,
large quantity of clinker – I believe this giving the
is from the dust causing issues with air coal a more
flow through the fire, then causing strenuous
incomplete combustion in places. work-out than
What followed was another day of was intended.
perfectly satisfactory running with the
very different firing style required, PHOTO
though with more attention paid to 13: A
cleaning the fire and making sure bit of manual
there was enough air flow through it. CNC employed
Overall the test was pretty to produce
successful, the green coal kept up with the rail roller
– this year has been full of surprises. the engine even when it was being shape – doing
With the extra load on and an worked hard, the downsides being the it this way was
improved firing technique, Russell smoke and the dust – the former could faster than
coped admirably with the weight and potentially be helped by the addition setting up the
was able to maintain steam and water of an arch in the firebox and some cross slide.
in the same amounts as if I was using more top air, although the coal PHOTO 14:
ordinary coal. manufacturer is also working on Boring one of
The rest of the day followed in reducing the oil content of the the rollers to
much the same way as I continued to briquettes which should help with the fit over the
develop a better firing technique and smoke too. The dust is also hopefully existing flat
refine my use of the green coal. The going to be addressed by the change in bar roller.
end of the day disposal was as normal the shape of the briquettes.
too – there was no significantly I am looking forward to further PHOTO 15:
increased amount of ash to deal with, trials with the improved batch next Adjusting
although the ash that was present was season and producing some more the fit of the
of a much lighter consistency and scientific results, as well as trialling it existing flat
tended to blow around a bit more in with different engines! bar roller to
the wind. take the foot
On a roll of the rail.

13 14 Alongside the trials of the green coal,

the regular running season has
continued with the odd minor fault to
PHOTO 16:
One roller
be attended to – these included the completely
failure of one half of a mechanical machined
lubricator due to gunge build-up in the from solid and
bottom of the tank, one of the steam one to fit an
joints to the drain cocks failing and a adapted flat
host of other minor jobs. bar roller – this
To add to all this I was asked to was due to not
build a rail roller for the upcoming having enough
winter track relay. Handily I had a material to
large, strong set of rolls at home that I machine both
used for rolling box section and plate. out of solid..
Unfortunately I didn’t have quite PHOTO 17:
enough to machine three rollers out of Welding up
the length so I had to make sleeves to the machined
section of the
15 16 17 roller onto the
original flat
bar roller.
PHOTO 18:
The roller sat
on a piece
of rail – it is
designed to
press on the
web of the rail
while keeping
it as flat as
possible to
prevent it
from curving
in two planes
at once.
16 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
 HARRY’S GAME

18 19 20

fit over the existing flat-bar rollers PHOTO 19: the compressor not producing enough boiler off to have the tubes removed
and weld them on – the pictures show CAD design for air and the fluid flywheels not and allow our boiler inspector to
the process a little better than my laser-cut bogie delivering the power to the final drive produce a proper assessment of the
words here. bearing holders. gearboxes correctly. So there is a little work required (while he is also
I have also been designing new bit more work to be done, but it is very carrying out the annual inspection on
bearing holders for the carriage fleet. PHOTO 20: nice to have the loco mobile again. Russell). then we will be able to decide
The current method of articulation for Better lighting The final bit of news this time is what we are doing with it – the chassis
the axles is using take-up bearings in a inside the the start of the overhaul of our North will stay as it is until the spring as the
flanged holder – these are designed engine bay Wales Narrow Gauge Hunslet-style normal running fleet maintenance
for use in industry to allow for poor of ‘Tony’. loco, ‘Beddgelert’, I have stripped the takes precedence. EIM
shaft alignment from the bearing plate
PHOTO 21:
– a spherical outer to the bearing fits
into the corresponding spherical
machined outer.
Tony moves
under its own 21
power for the
These are designed to be set to a
first time since
position and then left, however we
Harry started.
have been employing them differently
and using the spherical surface to PHOTO 22:
allow the axle to articulate. ‘Beddgelert’ in
Unfortunately this articulation its initial strip-
exposes the grease ways in the bearing down phase.
outer edge to the fresh air, which then
gets sand in it due to the railway PHOTO 23:
running on the beach. This is then Between the
forced into the bearing when the frames– the
carriages are greased, causing steam passages
premature failure. are cast in an
My solution is to use self-aligning interesting way...
bearings in a new housing – these
have two ball races running in
spherical outer housings, allowing the 22 23
bearing inner bore to articulate within
the outer without uncovering any
grease ways or using a bearing surface
in a way it is not designed to be used.
The CAD design in Photo 19 shows
the initial design of the bearing
housing, most of which is to be laser
cut and welded together before
machining to accept the bearing. This
design should also reduce the amount
of sand able to get at the bearings.

Tony on the move

Meanwhile one of our team of
volunteers has been busy finishing off
the wiring of our bo-bo diesel ‘Tony’
while I have been finalising the
improved brake system. This led to
the first movements of the loco under
its own power since I arrived at the
railway, which of course showed up a
few more issues to deal with, namely

www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 17

 WORKSHOP
Making a valve gear
cross-drilling jig
Alex describes the construction and use of another helpful tool to make the
task of building model steam locomotives a little easier.
BY DR ALEX ELLIN
T
he various components of a accurately across the pin diameter
locomotive valve gear can either “Drilling 1mm and at the right distance from the
be held together by fitted bolts diameter shoulder was always a bit of a
or by using shouldered pins, cross- challenge. Some years ago, I schemed
drilled and secured with split-pins. I
split-pin holes out the jig that is the subject of this
prefer the latter technique but, in the accurately article and found that it worked as
smaller scales I normally work with, across the intended, always putting the holes
where the pins are only ⅛-inch pin diameter exactly where I wanted them.
diameter and the split-pins ⅓2-inch was always a I made my jig (Photo 1) out of an
diameter, I found that drilling the challenge...” offcut of 1-inch diameter stainless
1mm (No 60) diameter split-pin holes steel bar. Whilst I have produced a
dimensioned drawing of the jig, the
FIGURE 1 proportions of mine grew organically
as I machined it out of the solid. The
only critical dimension is the
0.04-inch positioning the 1mm hole
from the shoulder and, of course, the
placement of this 1mm hole on the
centreline of the ⅛-inch reamed hole
it transects. Instead of 5BA, I used M3
on mine.
I hope that the use of the jig is
obvious from the various
photographs, which show the jig being
used to cross-drill the pins securing
the Stephenson valve gear lifting links
and lifting arms on my 3½-inch gauge
Don Young GWR 43xx loco. Whilst a
socket-headed bolt is shown in the
first photo, I have only ever had it
FIGURE 2 finger-tight in use.
Reproduced approx The two parts to be linked by the
full-size pin are made first and then the pin
18 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE
turned to fit out of silver steel. I make
my pins about ⅛-inch to 5⁄32-inch
longer than the width of the lifting
arms with about a 1⁄16-inch tapered
lead on the end to ease assembly.
Once all the components are
made, the pin is slid home into the
joint, the assembly placed in the jig
and the bolt tightened to hold the pin
fully home (Photo 2). You will notice
that I have fitted the pin through both
the lifting arms and the lifting links
– whilst the lifting links could have
been omitted, leaving them in place
removes all risk that the slot in the
lifting arms will be closed up when
the jig bolt is tightened.
In use, the flat bottom of the jig
could be placed on the drilling
machine table and the jig held by hand
or, alternatively and preferably, the
shoulders can be used to position the
jig squarely in a machine vice. Not
obvious from Photo 2 is the fact that
the drill chuck on my drill press will
not close sufficiently to hold a 1mm
diameter drill. I have fitted a small
Jacobs size-0 chuck to a short length
of ¼-inch diameter bar (Photo 3) and
use this as an adaptor so I can hold
smaller diameter drills than the
machine itself is capable of doing.
Metric v imperial
Incidentally, whilst I generally think
and design in imperial units and
obviously use these on my Myford
M-type lathe, I generally use metric
dimensions on the digital readouts of
my small Warco vertical mill – don’t
ask me why! I do not own a set of
number drills but, instead use a box of
metric drills, 1mm to 6mm in steps of
0.1mm. I would be interested to know
who also uses metric drills – if it is, as
I suspect, many of us, the age-old
practice of quoting drill sizes by
number becomes less than helpful as
we have to convert them all to the
nearest metric equivalent before use.
The final image (Photo 4), shows
the joints with split-pins fitted. In the
lower assembly, you will note there is a
gap between the split-pin and the
shoulder; the reason for this being
obvious from the design of the jig. In
the upper assembly, a standard washer
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
 WORKSHOP

1 2

has been fitted before the split-pin, this
filling the gap nicely and preventing any
lateral movement of the shouldered pin
across the joint.
If, despite it being good practice to do so,
your preference would be not to fit a washer,
the jig will have to be used slightly
differently. Instead of using (in this case) the
lifting arm to set the position of the cross
hole in the shouldered pin, a gauge button
will have to be purpose made instead.
This button, made out of for example
5/16-inch diameter steel and drilled through
1/8-inch diameter, would need to be shorter
than the width of the lifting arm by
approximately 0.020-inch.
Placing this button on the shouldered pin
instead of the valve gear components should
leave the split-pin hole hard up against the
face of the lifting arm when the joint is
finally assembled. It goes without saying that
the shouldered pin should be cross drilled
before it is hardened.
Whilst the jig shown is for use with
1/8-inch diameter shouldered pins, other
similar jigs could be made for use with pins
of other diameters. EIM

“The age-old practice of

quoting drill sizes by number
3
becomes less than
helpful as we have to
convert them all to the
nearest metric equivalent...”

FIGURE 1: 3D CAD drawing of the

valve-gear drilling jig.

FIGURE 2: Dimensioned drawing of

the jig – though Alex points out that his
evolved to suit the purpose
4
PHOTO 1: The finished jig.

PHOTO 2: The jig in use, drilling holes

for split pins.

PHOTO 3: This small slave chuck allows

very small diameter drills to be used in a
large-capacity drill chuck.

PHOTO 4: The lifting arm and link

assemblies, the top one with a washer,
the bottom one without.

All photos and drawings by the author

www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 19

 WORKSHOP

Turning large-radius domes

Rich tackles another workshop challenge that many a model engineer is likely to
come up against at some point.
BY RICH WIGHTMAN

I
am currently fabricating the
smokebox for my loco ‘Chub’, a
Kennions 0-4-0 tank engine. The
smokebox door is domed and looks to
be of about a 5-inch radius – Figure 1
shows how I came to deduce this. I
have a commercial ball turner that fits
to the top slide of my Myford, Photo 1,
but it only has a capacity of 38mm.
I modified the ball turner with a
larger tool holder to increase the
capacity (Photo 2). I further modified
it to fit directly onto the bed of the
lathe with an even longer and taller
tool holder (Photo 3) which increased
HEADING: the capacity again, but to nowhere
The finished near the radius that I was looking for.
and domed
smokebox door Infrequent use
complete with The challenge was to make something
hinges and lock . that would machine the required
radius. From time to time the need to
PHOTO 1: carry out similar operations has come
A commercial up so I considered it worthwhile
ball turner. making something to achieve this. I
didn’t want to spend too much time
PHOTO 2: A on the construction as it is a tool that
suitably modified will get some use but not a great deal.
tool holder. The tool I would like to show you
is designed to fit my Myford ML7

1 2
PHOTO 3:
Commercial ball
turner fitted to
lathe but should be easily modifiable
to suit other makes of lathe. As is my
usual method of operation the first
the lathe bed. thing I do is go to my ‘that’ll come in
handy one day’ box and see what I can
PHOTO 4: come up with. I am including a few
Preparing the drawings (Figure 2-4) to give you
baseplate of the some idea of sizes but the tool is made
new tool. around whatever material is available
and not to specific sizes.
PHOTO 5: A First of all my usual apology for
pair of clamp mixing imperial and metric sizes but I
plates made up. do use whatever comes to hand and I
am happy to do so. Now what am I
All photos and looking to do? Basically, to machine a
diagrams by dome onto a piece of steel 3½ inches
the author in diameter. A casting is available for
the smokebox door but because I have

3 modified the design slightly I have to

machine a door to suit.
I have seen this operation done by
machining a series of steps and then
finishing with files but I wanted to
achieve the finished shape by
machining. The ball turner I have is
easily controllable by hand and so is
the 11-inch brake disc rotary table
described in a previous article (EIM
Jan 2020) so I have no qualms about
using a hand-operated tool.
Firstly a few notes were made on a
scrap of paper. I don’t smoke so the

20 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk

 WORKSHOP

Smokebox front

5” radius Smokebox
door 3.5”

FIGURE 1
Reproduced half
full-size

FIGURE 2 – BASEPLATE
& SIDE WING
12mm thick steel,
reproduced half full-size

Clamps x2
FIGURE 4 – TOOLHOLDER
Reproduced half full-size

back of a fag packet wasn’t available

but you get the idea.
Pivot
I thought it would be handy if I
could make a tool that would turn
radii of 3 inches to 6 inches and not
just made to do the job in hand. After
considering several ideas that I came
up with, the following seemed to be
about the best. FIGURE 3
The tool, as stated earlier, must reproduced half full-size
Stepped washer
have a swing of 3 to 6 inches, by that I
mean from the centre of the pivot
point to the tip of the cutter. The only
way I could achieve this was to have
the pivot point underneath the chuck.
There was not a lot of room there but
there was enough, just.

What was to hand

This, however, presented another
problem. The workpiece did not
protrude far enough out of the chuck.
The material I had to hand was only
4 5
an inch or so thick. It would be nice to
go to my stock and pull out a bit of
3½-inch diameter steel 3 inches long
but that was not to be. The solution
was to mount another chuck into the
lathe chuck giving me the required
protrusion. Alternatively the work
piece could be mounted on a mandrel.
The first thing I needed to do was
make a baseplate for the tool, which
could be clamped solidly to the lathe
bed. The clamping would be similar to
how the tailstock works and how the
commercial ball turner was fitted to
the lathe bed. A piece of 12mm thick
steel bar 8⅜’-inch x 2½ inches had
two 10mm holes drilled in it and
s

countersunk (Photo 4).

www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 21

 WORKSHOP
6 7
A pair of clamp plates were
machined to fit under the lathe shears
and drilled and tapped 10mm (Photo
5). The pivot point was drilled and
tapped 8mm. My piece of steel plate
has a few holes in it already which are
visible in some of the photos, please
ignore these.
I decided that the pivot should be
as large as possible to help reduce any
play. Firstly I turned what I will call a
stepped countersunk washer from
9 10
11
22 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE
8
steel as per the drawing (Photo 6). PHOTO 6: you don’t have access to welding
Next a round piece of 10mm thick Turning up equipment. The bar has a series of five
steel with a diameter of 23/8-inch had a the stepped holes drilled and tapped M6 (Photo 9)
central hole drilled in it then opened countersunk to which the adjustable tool holder
out with a boring bar slowly and washer. will bolt onto.
carefully until the stepped washer was The tool holder is a piece of
a very close fit (Photo 7). PHOTO 7: 3/4-inch square steel 21/2-inch long with
The pivot has a notch machined Boring out a 6mm slot machined right through.
into it until a piece of 1 x 5/16 x the pivot. At one end a 1/2-inch hole is drilled
71/2-inch steel bar fits in (Photo 8). I and reamed (Photo 10). The end is
will eventually weld this bar in but it PHOTO 8: drilled and tapped 6mm to take a grub
could be pinned and silver soldered if Machining a screw for clamping the tool post in
notch in position (Photo 11).
The tool post is a piece of 1/2-inch
the pivot.
PHOTO 9:
round steel. Amongst my bits and
pieces I found a triangular carbide tip
Drilling and which I initially used (Photo 12). The
tapping the five end of the tool post was drilled and
holes in the bar. tapped M3 and then machined away
until the triangular tip was a snug fit
PHOTO 10: (Photo 13).
Machining the
tool holder. Cutting comment
In use this tool post worked okay but
PHOTO 11: didn’t cut as nicely as I would have
Drilling and liked. Maybe it was the wrong type of
tapping end of tip or the cutting angle was wrong,
the tool holder. I’m not sure. I made another tool post
from 1/2-inch round steel drilled and
PHOTO 12: tapped M6 and cross-drilled ¼-inch
A triangular (Photo 14). A piece of ¼-inch round
carbide tip tool steel ground to the profile shown
is a good fit. performed much better (Photo 15). I
12 13 14
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
 WORKSHOP

15 16 17

18

have some home-made tangential tool

holders which take this type of cutter
19 20
and they also perform well. The
grinding jig I used is from those tools PHOTO 13:
(Photo 16). Machining the
To help with setting the tool I tool post until
drilled and reamed a 5/16-inch hole in the tip fits
the pivot (Photo 17). A piece of correctly.
5/16-inch steel bar was drilled and
tapped M4 and then cross drilled PHOTO 14:
3/16-inch to take a pointed rod. When The Mk2 tool
dropped into the hole the point is set post design.
on the pivot centre. A steel rule can
then be used to measure from the PHOTO 15:
point to the tip of the cutter to set the Round tool steel
radius (Photo 18). after grinding at
Assembling the tool is a an angle.
straightforward process. The pivot is
lubricated with a drop of oil and PHOTO 16:
screwed to the base with an M8 Tool steel
countersunk bolt. A bit of fettling was grinding jig.
needed to get the pivot to move
smoothly but it needed to work with
no play.
The tool holder is fixed to the
PHOTO 17:
Drilling and
reaming 5/16-inch
21 22
pivot with two M6 socket-head screws hole in the pivot.
with two thick washers, the tapped
holes in the pivot giving a range of PHOTO 18:
radii. I set the radius with the setting Setting the radius.
tool and fixed the base plate to the
lathe bed with the two M10 PHOTO 19:
countersunk screws. Finally I set the Then setting the
tool height (Photo 19). tool height.

Testing time PHOTO 20:

Now then, will it work? Yes it does and The first light
surprisingly well. A piece of cuts are taken.
aluminium 4 inches in diameter was
chosen as a test piece. The tool was set PHOTO 21:
for a 5’-inch radius and a few light cuts Finishing cutting
taken by swinging the pivot across the radius on the
(Photo 20), until the required dome test piece.
was achieved (Photo 21).
I was pleased with the outcome of PHOTO 22:
the test piece so prepared a bit of Turning the steel
s

3½-inch diameter steel for the smokebox door.

www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 23

 WORKSHOP

24 23

partly because the pivot was

smokebox door. All went well initially
but as the cut approached the edge the
cutter came too close to the chuck
jaws for comfort so I had to improvise
with an oak mandrel and Super-glue
the steel smokebox door into it to
finish the machining (Photo 22). The
test piece of aluminium had not
suffered this issue as it was that much
thicker and away from the chuck jaws.
I noticed a bit of chatter from the
cutter when it came to the outer part
of the door. This was partly because I
had the lathe running too fast and
overhanging the base and not
supported so effectively. The cutting
force is downward and keeps the tool
pressed against the baseplate. I added
a wing to the side of the base which
cured the problem (Photo 23).
To advance the tool post in the
“Will it lathe I dropped in a piece of steel bar
work? Yes between the tool and the saddle as a
it does and spacer. I slackened the two M10
surprisingly clamping bolts and advanced the
well...” saddle by 10 thou or so to push the
tool along. I then re-tightened the
clamp bolts, started the lathe and took

25 another cut. This operation is

repeated as often as necessary (Photo
24). You will note in this photo that I
had not yet fitted the extra support
wing. Also shown is a fine-adjustment
PHOTO 23: screw that I originally fitted but later
Extra support discarded.
wing added to I was pleased with the end result
the baseplate. shown in (Photo 25) and in the
heading picture to this feature which
PHOTO 24: shows the smokebox door finished
Advancing the with hinges and a central clamp.
tool onto A short video is available on
the work. YouTube showing Yours Truly turning
the test piece – you’ll find it at
PHOTO 25: https://youtu.be/dLxhfGovotc
The end result. The tool worked well, it didn’t take
A neatly domed too long to make and I’m sure I will be
smokebox door using it again in future. I hope you
in turned steel. find it of interest. EIM
PHOTO EXTRA

n When you’ve been dragged out to go round a gardens all day, meeting a
model steam engine is a big bonus. Editor Andrew Charman captured this
Burrell attracting a lot of attention when Exbury Gardens in the New Forest
held a Garden Railway Show in August. The resident 121/4-inch gauge line
(right) was busy too. Exbury is closed for the winter now but well worth a
visit when it reopens in the Spring, whether you are a horticultural or steam
enthusiast, or perhaps both...

24 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk


A Feed Pump and double-clack
for the EIM Steam Plant
In this new short series Martin further enhances his popular stationary engine build
project, removing the tedious task of constantly topping up the boiler water.
BY MARTIN GEARING Part one of a short series
A
t the conclusion of my series on
constructing a double-acting
oscillating engine powered by
a vertical boiler (engine EIM Oct
2016-Dec 2017, boiler Oct 2018-March
2020), I offered several suggestions to
make further items that would
enhance what was then a small basic
steam plant – one of these was to
make a feed pump.
The actual inspiration for the
provision of a feed pump described in
this article came from our experience
of running the steam plant at various
shows, because given that it usually
ran for four hours, having to
continually add feed water sort of lost
its attraction after the first hour!
In 2017 I read an article, ‘Notes on
the Design of a Steam Engine
Feedwater Pump’ by Kenneth. J.
Hemmeigarn in Live Steam & Outdoor
Railroad magazine and this was
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
CONSTRUCTIONAL
BELOW: The the first example I’d seen of dealing me to choose a workable solution.
EIM Steam with the problem in a logical way. It
Plant with the prompted me to consider the Making space
feed pump practicality of making a pump, but A small additional consideration was
visible to the after working through the calculations my wanting to fit the pump onto the
lower left. I arrived at a figure that was just so engine’s existing baseboard, while I
small it didn’t make sense, and as would also require a modified ‘Double’
All photos and often happens other things demanded clack valve to enable the existing
diagrams by attention so it was forgotten about. boiler and hand feed pump to
the author Three years went past and having continue to be used without any
demonstrated the steam plant at a structural modification/additions to
couple of shows each year the original the boiler, but this was easily achieved.
fag of feeding water by On the first test, the pump worked
hand remained as the only but did not quite keep pace with the
major annoyance and water demand when running with the
prompted another look for a bypass shut. Having invested time and
solution. tempted by ‘nearly’ achieving success I
Going through my decided to increase the diameter of the
original working of the pump piston using the same stroke
Hemmeigarn’s calculations with everything else unchanged.
I found I’d made a mistake, The results from this
and when this had been modification were disappointing and
corrected, I obtained a very surprising as given that the
result that looked increase in output was 56 per cent,
more reasonable, the result only exceeded
Taking this consumption once the engine had
figure, I made warmed up and again only at certain
up a table of revs. Also because the output was so
various standard close to demand adjusting the bypass
diameters for was extremely ‘tetchy’.
the piston and I decided that what I’d produced
worked out the was ‘Not Fit for Purpose’ the modern
strokes required term for a dismal failure or rubbish!
to produce But this didn’t seem to make sense and
the volume prompted a search of proportions of
calculated which feed pumps used on small
then enabled locomotives. which produced such a
wide range as to be meaningless.
However it did explain why some
locomotive designs visibly ‘jerk’ when
being driven slowly with the bypass
fully shut due to the pump being
of an excessive size/output for the
application.
Taking another path I
looked at further suggestions
mostly in books; Model
Stationary & Marine Steam
Engines by K N Harris, a
1916 book Model Steam
Engine Design by R M
De Vignier, Model
Steam Locomotive
Construction by
Martin Evans,
Experimental
Flash Steam by J
H Benson & A A
▲
Rayman and a
ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 25
 CONSTRUCTIONAL

posting on The American Live Steam Far from solving the problem as to having adjustable ball non-return lift
forum. These also produced a very “The water which of the formulas/calculations limiters good for 4000rpm, but
wide range of figures – so wide in fact consumed were best suited to my application the supplying at a much higher pressure.
that as a last resort, I decided to see if water consumed actually appeared I knew from personal experience
it was possible to find out practically actually less than the revised pump I’d built that some 5-inch gauge locomotive
how much water the engine actually appeared had been designed to supply! axle pumps are good for 600rpm.
consumed whilst running. less than Looking at everything I’d read/ Martin Evans hit the nail firmly on
This was done by filling the the revised experienced in the light of this the head by saying “It is difficult to
feedwater tank to a mark and running discovery, it suggested that my pump specify exact dimensions for water-
the engine for 30 minutes, keeping the pump I’d built was suffering from a poor non-return feed pumps for model locomotives,”
engine revs as steady as possible to the had been valve function either by leaking or before giving a rough guide related to
1150rpm speed it usually operated at designed to ‘floating’ because of the speed it was track gauge and I assume twin
when demonstrating by means of an supply...” running at. De Vignier had suggested double-acting cylinders.
optical rev counter, and measuring that a pump of this size should not This tended to suggest that I’d
how much water had to be added to exceed 350rpm and that delivery perhaps be sensible to look at a new
bring the feedwater back to the mark valves should be spring loaded, whilst pump design considering De Vignier’s
in the tank. Benson & Rayman gave a design 350rpm maximum, which would
demand a larger output with some
EIM BSP Feed Pump & double clack – Parts List form of reduction. Additionally a
Manufactured Parts for Engine Driven Feed Pump common practice found in most of the
references was a need to add between
Part # Description No Off Material
50 to 65 per cent to the calculated
1 Base 1 MS, Brass or Ali Plate (See Text) figure to account for ‘losses’.
2 Bearing Block 1 Cast Iron 20 x 30 x 30 (From Ø50 x 25) Reducing the speed of a pump on
3 Pipe Stubs 3 Ø10 Brass an engine of this small size and power,
4 Pump Cylinder 1 Ø7/16” Brass so as to incur the minimal frictional
5 Valve Block 1 1½” x ½” Brass losses, prompted the use of a toothed
6 Drilling Plug 1 Ø4 Brass belt and pulleys giving a 5:1 reduction
7 Bypass Valve Body 1 ½” AF Hex Brass in pump speed and the use of a
small-section ball sealed race on the
8 Bypass Valve Spindle 1 Ø ¼” 303 Stainless
crank, both being freely available and
9 Bypass Valve Control Wheel 1 Ø20 Brass or Ali maintenance free in operation.
10 Bypass Spindle Gland Nut 1 ½” AF Hex Brass This then was the history that
11 Ball Valve Covers 2 10 AF Hex Brass
12 Pump Gland Nut 1 14 AF Hex Brass GENERAL
13 Pump Piston 1 Ø5 303 Stainless (
14 Piston Clevis Pin 1 From Ø5 303 St St
15 Pump Connecting Rod 1 Ø1” & 10 x 50 x 2 Brass
16 Connecting Rod Retainer 1 Ø16 MS
17 Shaft Spacer 1 Ø14 MS (Ø14 from Item 16)
18 Shaft Retaining Collar 1 Ø14 MS (Ø14 from Item 16)
19 Crankshaft 1 Ø8 Silver Steel
20 Crank Disk 1 From Ø1¼” MS
Purchased Items
21 Eccentric Bearing 1 61701-2RS (12 x 18 x 4)
22 60T Wheel 1 16 Wide x T2.5 Pitch
23 12T Wheel 1 16 Wide x T2.5 Pitch
24 265T Synchroflex Belt 1 6 Wide x T2.5 Pitch
25 Ball Valve 2/4 Ø4 (5/32”) St St Ball (4 If making Double Feed clack)
26 Crank Disk Securing Screws 3 M3 x 12 Countersunk Hd
27 Ball Valve Lift Limiter 2/4 M3 x 14 SHCS (4 If making Double Feed clack)
28 Nut 1 M4
29 Set Bolt 1 M5 x 8 Button Skt Hd
30 Component Securing Screws 4 M4 x 10 Countersunk Hd
31 Grub Screw 1 M4 x 4
32 Bypass Valve Spindle “O” Ring 1 BS 007 Nitrile
33 Pump Piston “O” Ring 1 Ø2 Section x Ø5 ID x Ø9 OD Nitrile
Modified Engine Item (If required)
34 Extended Engine Crankshaft 1 Ø5 Silver Steel
Manufactured Parts for Double Feed Clack Valve
35 Clack Valve Body 2 10AF Hex Brass
36 Clack Ball Valve Covers 2 10AF Brass
37 Central Banjo Body 1 12.x 16 x 9 Brass
38 Banjo Bolt 1 10AF PB 102
Purchased Items (See 25 & 27 above)
25 Ball Valve 2 Ø4 (5/32”) Stainless Ball
27 Ball Valve Lift Limiter 2 M3 x 14 Skt Hd Cap Screw

26 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk

 CONSTRUCTIONAL

produced my design for a feed pump RIGHT: A

to complement the EIM basic Steam view of the
Plant – the entire setup illustrated in feed pump
the heading picture to this feature, from above.
built to the following drawings and
construction notes.

Construction
As the most likely persons to be
interested in this feed-pump addition
will be those who actually constructed
the EIM Steam Plant described in this
magazine, I will assume that level of
experience has been gained and
therefore only give a very brief
description of the methods used unless DRAWING FP1
they haven’t been covered before. Base (material to
The engine-driven pump as match engine base)
described assumes that the base of the NOTE: Underside
engine was made to the original shown here
dimensions and that the engine and
boiler were fitted to a base also made
and oriented to the dimensions
suggested. If this is the case it will be
found that there is sufficient distance
between the engine base and the
fireproof mounting of the boiler for
the pump to be secured with room for
the pipework required.
If not, it may be possible to use
whatever base has been provided
simply by moving the engine a little
s

further from the boiler and making

L ARRANGEMENT DRAWING
(refer to parts list at left)

www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk 27
 CONSTRUCTIONAL
1 Right, let’s begin the build...
longer supply and exhaust pipes to
suit. Failing that option, the only
realistic option would be the simple
task of removing all the parts required
and making a new larger baseboard to
retain the heatproof boiler mount,
boiler, engine and hand feed pump,
2 to produce
3 4
5 6
28 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE
making up pipework to suit.
Speaking of pipework, at the end
of the pump construction, details for
the construction of a replacement
double feed clack will be described so
that the existing hand-pump clack
can be replaced but still use the
hand-pump pipework.
The Base
Item FP1 – 56 x 167 x (thickness and
material to match Engine base)
Refer to Drawing FP1 (drawing viewed
from underside as it shows more detail).
On the mill, machine the blank to size
in the form of the overall rectangle
and mark out detail as shown on the
drawing (Photo 1). Centre drill, then
drill 4mm diameter and countersink
at the four places indicated.
Centre drill and drill 4mm dia at
the ends of the two slots before using a
PHOTO 1: The 4mm slot drill to produce the two
base, machined slots as indicated (Photo 2).
to size and Centre drill and drill 3.5mm dia at
marked out. the four places indicated. Saw away
the waste using a hacksaw or band saw
PHOTO 2: (Photo 3).
Using slot drill Clamp on the edge and using an
adjustment slot.
end mill between 6-12mm dia,
machine the end corner (Photo 4).
Next machine the long length (Photo
PHOTO 3: 5) and finally the flywheel cut-out
Waste removed (Photo 6). Remove all burrs. EIM
from plate.
n Martin continues his build next month.
PHOTO 4-5: Anyone wishing to obtain the issues of
End corners and EIM detailing the original Steam Plant
long length then and boiler projects, as detailed in the
machined... opening paragraph, can download digital
back issues or order printed copies from
PHOTO 6: www.world-of-railways.co.uk/store/back-
...and finally cut- issues/engineering-in-miniature or
out for flywheel. by calling 01778 392484.
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
 PROTOTYPE

Classic British
Single-Driver Locomotives
Rodger describes how a succession of big-wheeled high-speed steam locomotives
made their mark on the 19th century railway scene.
BY RODGER BRADLEY

T
he classic single driving-wheel
locomotive in Britain evolved
from Stephenson’s ‘Patentee’
type of 1830, with 2-2-0 and a few
years later 2-2-2 arrangements, and
the early designs also found their way
to Belgium, Germany, and Austria, all
with inside cylinders.
Britain’s railways expanded at a
phenomenal rate in the mid 1800s –
the ‘Railway Mania’ years – and as the
number of railway companies grew
rapidly, so did ideas about design,
construction and performance needs.
For passenger service the simple 0-4-0
locomotive gave way to the 0-4-2, the
2-4-0 and 0-6-0 designation was
reserved almost exclusively for goods
traffic, while the faster speeds needed
for express passenger work saw the
size of driving wheels grow, to almost
ludicrous proportions.
Of course, the Great Western
Railway, under the stewardship of
Brunel and employing his broad gauge
produced very impressive designs that
appeared on the London to Bristol
main line in particular. But the broad
gauge was destined to disappear, as
the narrow, or standard gauge of 4ft
8½ inches took centre stage – and yet,
the great size of the driving wheels
was seen to be essential for increasing
speed on express passenger workings.
Wheel wherefore
Why the very big driving wheels?
Well, essentially it could be argued
that this was down to low piston speed
with lower-pressure boilers, and the
ABOVE RIGHT:
The first GWR
broad-gauge
2-2-2 was built
by Robert
Stephenson –
this replica is
on display at were built for use by that railway’s 2-2-2 called ‘North Star’ and possessed
the Swindon Northern Division. 7ft 0in driving wheels, with 16-inch
Steam Museum. Increasing numbers of single- bore by 16-inch stroke cylinders, with
driver types appeared in the middle an 8ft 6in long boiler housing 167
BELOW: The years of the 19th Century, but what tubes that provided, with the firebox
first single driver would be termed the ‘Classic Single an overall heating surface of 711
loco for the Driver’ only arrived after about 1860. square feet. A replica of this
LNWR was No. Designers had to consider both locomotive exists today, housed in the
3020 ‘Cornwall’, standard and broad-gauge use, until Swindon STEAM Museum.
photographed long after the Gauge Commissioners The equally impressive replica of
at Ordsall ruled that no new broad-gauge ‘Iron Duke’, which was one of the first
Lane shed, railways could be built after 1846. locos to be built at Swindon Works in
Manchester, Brunel and Daniel Gooch worked 1846, is now at the Didcot Railway
circa 1890. well on their broad-gauge designs, but Centre. In fact, the first Swindon loco
the first locomotive to haul a was the 2-2-2 ‘Great Western’, built as
Both photos: passenger train out of Paddington was a trial engine, and fitted with a
Tony Hisgett/ built by Robert Stephenson, in 1837, ‘haystack’ firebox – later members of
Wikipedia and originally intended for the New the class employed round-topped,
▲

gearing effect provided by the large Commons Orleans Railway in the USA. It was a wooden-lagged fireboxes and boilers.
diameter driving wheels, with lower
revolutions per distance covered.
Earlier designs such as the
‘Cramptons’ were superseded by
Alexander Allan’s single-driver ‘Crewe
Type’ which began to make headway
across all Britain’s railways by the
1850s, with the last of that design built
for the Manchester, Sheffield &
Lincolnshire Railway in 1882.
These single drivers were the most
well-known express passenger
locomotives of the day, and for the
London & North Western Railway,
over a 14-year period ending in 1857,
only Crewe-Type single -driver locos

www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 29

 PROTOTYPE

Swindon’s single-driver designs were

Built from the 1840s these were
impressive machines by any measure,
and their driving wheel diameter had
gone up to no less than 8ft 0in! The
2-2-2 arrangement was altered to a
4-2-2 as in Iron Duke, because the
leading axle broke during early
running of the prototype, so this loco
and subsequent members of the class
were fitted with two axles at the front.
In comparison with the ‘narrow
gauge’ engines, Gooch’s 1840s designs
certainly proved to be faster on
passenger trains, and it should be
recalled that the standard or ‘narrow’
gauge was devised for slow-moving
freight traffic. So, despite adopting 7ft
or even 8ft driving wheels, the broad
gauge supporters could be confident
they were winning on the speed stakes.
Once it adopted the ‘standard’
gauge the GWR built another classic
– William Dean’s 3031 Class 4-2-2 was
a development of an earlier 2-2-2, but
fitted with a leading bogie. On both
standard and broad gauge, all of
fitted with inside cylinders, mostly
with double frames, and outside-
bearing axleboxes.
LEFT: Back
home for Blooming ideas
Cornwall – On the West Coast Anglo-Scottish
No.3020 was services, only the Caledonian Railway
captured at the operated a single-driver passenger
Crewe Heritage loco of note in any quantity – and that
Centre in the despite the enormous influence of the
late 1990s when London North Western Railway and
it was well over Alexander Allan’s designs. South of
100 years old. Carlisle, the earliest Crewe-type
Photo: author single-driver the company built,
‘Cornwall’, proved not to be a great
BELOW: Crewe idea. But in the early 1850s, James
Works turned McConnell’s 7ft 0in ‘Large Bloomers’
out 60 0f these were more successful on express
‘Problem’ or passenger services – in addition to
‘Lady of the Sharp Brothers, these locos were built
Lake’ class 2-2-2s at Vulcan Foundry, Kitsons of Leeds,
for the LNWR’s and the LNWR’s Wolverton Works.
Northern division Crewe Works had been established
hauling the by the Grand Junction Railway in the
Anglo-Scottish mid 1840s – when John Ramsbottom
express trains. took over as the LNWR’s chief
Photo: Unknown mechanical engineer his first effort at
author/Wikipedia a single-driver express passenger was
Commons the ‘Problem’ or ‘Lady of the Lake’
class. Some 60 of these were built at
Crewe, for the first time using an
injector for the boiler feed – most
railways at this time used a basic feed
pump, but the Giffard Injector of 1859
was an immediate success and almost
universally adopted.
The Problem Class 2-2-2s were
again a very typical Crewe type with
outside cylinders, and perhaps
typified West Coast practice at the
time – at least until F W Webb came
onto the scene.
North of the border pride of place

TABLE 1: Some leading single-driver locomotives

Railway Great Western Great Western LNWR (Southern Div) LNWR Caledonian LNWR (Northern Div)
Introduced 1837 1846 1851 1847 (rebuilt 1858) 1859 1859
Designer: Stephenson Gooch McConnell Ramsbottom Connor Ramsbottom
Name/class North Star Great Western Large Bloomer Cornwall 76 Problem
Lady of the Lake
Builder R. Stephenson Sharp Roberts, Fenton Sharp Brothers/ LNWR /Crewe St Rollox LNWR /Crewe
& Co. Murray & Gaskell, Nasmyth- Kitson
Wilson, + four others.
No. built 12 62 40 1(i) 12 (ii) 60
Gauge 7ft 0 ¼ ins 7ft 0 ¼ ins 4ft 8 ½ ins 4ft 8 ½ ins 4ft 8 ½ ins 4ft 8 ½ ins
Wheel arrangmnt 2-2-2 (4-2-2) 2-2-2 2-2-2 2-2-2 2-2-2 2-2-2
Driving wheel dia 7ft 0ins 8ft 0ins 7ft 0ins 8ft 6ins 8ft 2ins 7ft 7 ½ ins
Leading wheel dia 4ft 0ins 4ft 6ins 4ft 6ins 3ft 6ins 3ft 8ins 3ft 6in
Trailing wheel dia 4ft 0ins 4ft 6ins 4ft 0ins 3ft 6ins 3ft 8ins 3ft 6in
Cylinders 16ins x 16ins 18ins x 24ins 16ins x 22ins 17 ½ ins x 24 ins 17 1/2 ins x 24 ins 16ins x 24 ins
Boiler pressure 60 psi 100 psi 150psi (cut to 120psi) 140psi 120psi 120psi
Weight (wrkng ordr) 18 tons 5cwt 29 tons 29 tons 10cwt 54 tons 18cwt 30 tons 13 cwt 27 tons
Notes (i) The Cornwall was originally built in 1847 to Richard Trevithick’s design, at Crewe, with the boiler carried below the driving axle,
to lower the centre of gravity and provide stability.
(ii) A further four were built in 1875 as Class 113, and a batch of four with 7ft 2in driving wheels was completed in 1864.
This table indicates rapid technological development, especially around boilers, with a doubling of permitted working pressures
in 13 years and continuing to rise throughout the late 1840s into the 1850s. The driving wheels, typically flangeless, remained at
around 8ft – even on the ‘narrow’ or standard gauge express passenger types.

30 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk

 PROTOTYPE

should go to Benjamin Connor’s 8ft

2in single for the Caledonian Railway,
which was built at the company’s St
Rollox Works in 1859. Connor had
been works manager at Neilson & Co’s
Hyde Park Works, before moving to
the top job for the Caledonian. As
testimony to his design’s success,
Glasgow builders Neilson & Co also
built three of this design for the
Khedive of Egypt – an early sign of
export success for Scottish builders.
Connor’s design was a Crewe-type
descendant, with cylinders
sandwiched between the inside and
outside frames, and with outside
bearings for the carrying wheels.
However the cylinders were The single driver though would and Kitson & Co included a couple of
horizontal, rather than inclined, and see its swansong in the work of the intriguing design features – one being
the boiler, with a centre line at 6ft 6¾ Great Western, Great Northern, Great the ‘circular slide valve’ which was
inches above rail level looked ‘top Eastern, North Eastern, Midland and similar to a design introduced by
heavy’, and was only practical at this the Caledonian railways. Webb, across the Pennines on the
height because Connor had opted for a The North Eastern Railway LNWR. I wonder if they shared the
specific valve gear design that had example in Table 2 was a rebuild from design details, or did it arrive from the
been developed by Daniel Gooch. ABOVE: The a compound design of 1889/90, and East Coast to the West by other
On the east coast, Archibald design ultimately the rebuild included such innovative means? This GER design also featured
Sturrock designed a 7ft 0in single for derived from features as piston valves, driven by outside cylinders, with the valves
the Great Northern, whilst out on the the ‘Crewe Stephenson link motion. The trailing between the frames, and the piston
Great Eastern Robert Sinclair designed Type’ the GER’s axle featured outside-bearing rods hung from a single slidebar, with
a true Crewe-type 2-2-2. Despite Massey Bromley axleboxes, which were visually an actuating rod passing through the
having outside cylinders (16-inch x designed these similar to designs for the Great frames – that idea was typical of
24-inch) they had inside bearings to 4-2-2s. Photos Eastern by Holden and Johnson for American practice.
the leading and trailing axleboxes. Tony Hisgett/ the Midland Railway. Also on the East Coast route,
These locos were built by Fairbairns, The GER 4-2-2 built by both Dubs Patrick Stirling was in charge at

s
Wikipedia
Kitsons of Leeds and the Avonside Commons
Engine Co in Bristol – along with
some that were the first locomotives RIGHT: One
built overseas for a British railway. of the LNWR
Southern
The Later Years Division’s
Over the half century from 1850 to 2-2-2 ‘Small
1900, the classic express passenger Bloomers’ No
locomotive evolved, with expanded 602, seen posed
wheelbases, from four to six-coupled, outside one of
amongst which could be counted the Rugby’s coke
famous 4-4-2, ‘Atlantic’ designs for sheds circa 1868.
engines that were produced by the Photo: Unknown
Lancashire & Yorkshire and London, author/Wikipedia
Brighton & South Coast railways. Commons

TABLE 2: Later single-driver locomotives

Railway Great Northern Great Eastern Caledonian Great Western North Eastern Midland
Introduced 1870 1879 1886 1894 1895 1896
Designer: P. Stirling M Bromley Neilson & Co W Dean T W Worsdell S W Johnson
Name/class No. 1 Class 245 123 (i) 3031 Class J (rebuild)(ii) 115/‘Spinner’
Builder Doncaster Dubs/Kitson Neilson & Co Swindon Gateshead Derby
No. built (iii) 20 1 80 10 15
53
Wheel arrangmnt 4-2-2 4-2-2 4-2-2 4-2-2 4-2-2 4-2-2
Driving wheel dia 8ft 1in 7ft 6in 7ft 0in 7ft 8½in 7ft 0¼in 7ft 91/2in
Bogie wheel dia 3ft 11½in 4ft 0in 3ft 6in 4ft 1in 3ft 7¼in, 4ft 7½in 3ft 6in
Trailing wheel dia 4ft 1ins 4ft 0in 4ft 6in 4ft 7in 4ft 4in
Cylinders 18in x 28 in (1870 series) 18in x 24in 18in x 26in 19in x 24in 19in x 24in 19½in x 28in
Boiler pressure 140psi (1870 series) 140psi 150psi 160psi 175psi 170psi
Weight (wrkng ordr) 39 tons 9 cwt (iv) 41tons 10cwt 41tons 18cwt 49tons 0cwt 46tons 19cwt 47tons 6½cwt(iv)
Notes (i) Won Gold medal at Edinburgh International Exhibition 1886
(ii) Larger than Class 1, two-cylinder compound, rebuilt as simple 1894–95, withdrawn 1920–22
(iii)The first 47 were built from 1870, with the other six appearing in 1884 and 1894, just about at the end of the ‘Single Driver Era’.
(iv) Locomotive weight only

www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 31

 PROTOTYPE
Doncaster, and produced perhaps one
of the three most famous single driver
designs of the era – the No.1, with its
8ft 1in wheels.
These engines were furnished with
such enormous wheels in order to
provide better grip on the 80lb steel
rail used on the Great Northern’s
main line at that time. But, with such
large wheels, the compromise was that
outside cylinders were essential, and
these were the only such locos built by
the Great Northern during Stirling’s
time. The steam chests were
positioned vertically, inside the
frames, which were cut out to locate
the cylinders on the outside.
Another issue which appeared to
be a ‘problem’ was the potential
overhang of the cylinders at the
leading end. The solution was to
provide a bogie – a feature that
32 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE
Stirling was not keen on in his other
designs. But with No.1, it was
essential, and was not simply fitted to
enable a more stable entry to curves
on the track.
All 53 of this classic design were
built between 1870 and 1895 – but
initially, Doncaster only built one or
two at a time, instead of the usual
batch of 10, and by 1875 there were
still only 12 in service. The remaining
41 were constructed over the following
20 years, by which time the classic
British single driver was on the wane.
Stirling’s design was a very
successful express passenger type,
hauling most main-line workings
from London to York until the turn of
the century. These locos took part in
the famed 1895 Race to the North,
competing with the West Coast
companies – No 775 was said to have
ABOVE LEFT: covered the 82 miles from Grantham
Massey Bromley to York in 1 hour 16 minutes, at an
designed and average speed of 64.7mph.
Kitson-built Mention must be made of a
GER Class 245 one-off design for the Caledonian
4-2-2 No 609 Railway, the famous 4-2-2 No. 123,
Photo: Alon built at Neilson & Co.’s works in 1886.
Siton/Historical This engine won a gold medal at the
Railway Images Edinburgh International Exhibition
that same year. However, this was a
ABOVE: Patrick joint project between Dugald
Stirling’s eight- Drummond, the Caledonian’s CME
footers for the and Neilson & Co, intended as what
Great Northern we might describe as a showpiece for
Railway – No.1 PR purposes representing the railway
at the National company and the builders.
Railway Museum. In fact at the time No 123 was
Photo: Author built, with the increasingly heavy
LEFT: GNR trains on the Anglo-Scottish routes
Stirling Single particularly, single-driver types were
Class 4-2-2 No. 5 falling out of favour, due to their low
at York station. tractive effort, poor acceleration and
Photo: Alon adhesion – especially on gradients.
Siton/Historical
Railway Images The Final Examples
Despite the single driver’s waning
BELOW: The popularity in the 1880s, two railway
Caledonian companies bucked the trend and
Railway’s gold produced two of the classic designs
medal-winning ever operated on a British railway.
project, No.123. These were the 80 engines from
Photo: Stuart Swindon, under William Dean – the
Sellar/Wikipedia 3031 Class for the GWR, and the five
Commons batches of ‘Midland Singles’ built
between 1887 and 1900 for the
Midland Railway under S W Johnson
at Derby Works. The final batch of 15
– the ‘115 Class’ were completed in
1900, and one of these – ‘Princess of
Wales’ – was exhibited at the Paris
Exhibition where it won a gold medal.
Given that it was well known by
the 1890s that single-driver
locomotives had problems with
adhesion, why would the Midland
Railway opt for this design? One of the
answers may well lie in the invention
of the steam sanding gear at Derby, by
F Holt in 1886, which led to the
production of the Johnson 4-2-2
‘Spinners’ from 1887.
Another key feature was the axle
load of 18½ to 19 tons, which
provided the class with the ability to
haul 120-ton loads on the 1 in 90 to 1
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
 PROTOTYPE

that characteristic huge steam dome, Century provided a glimpse into the
and in the case of these single drivers, world of the engineer artists perhaps,
the firebox was raised over the level of and these elegant machines were
in 100 gradients of the Derby to ABOVE: The the boiler to provide extra steam space. typical of the thinking and the
Manchester route. One of the class Midland 4-2-2 Both the new and rebuilt members approach to the engineering of the
was recorded as hauling a 325-ton No. 673 at the of the class have been described as an steam locomotive. But that elegance
train between Kettering and National Railway elegant, stylish design, but then so did not disappear in 1900, it was
Northampton, unassisted, at an Museum in York. were the numerous other single-driver replaced by equally classical steam
average of 51.7mph – not bad for a Photo: Author types across the country, from the locomotives with a 4-4-2 Atlantic
design that could be traced back 20 Great Eastern, North Eastern, Great wheel arrangement.
ABOVE RIGHT:
years and more, and of a type that had Northern, Midland and even the I still wish I’d been able to buy one
Works picture of
adhesion problems, but which was London, Brighton & South Coast of those Triang Lord of the Isles
an early Johnson
definitely a classic of the age. Railway. The last decade of the 19th models though! EIM
‘Spinner’. Photo:
I have to confess a preference for
Lens of Sutton/
the GWR Dean Singles, which maybe
RPB Collection
had something to do with the
OO-gauge model of No. 3046 ‘Lord of RIGHT: Replica
the Isles’ made by Triang back in the of 4-2-2 ‘The
early ’60s – a loco I always wanted for Queen’ built
my train set at the time. The real thing at Steamtown
was developed from a 2-2-2 design Museum.
– the 3001 Class from 1891, for the Photo: Author
standard gauge passenger workings as
the GWR was busy converting from BELOW: Scale
the broad gauge. drawing of Dean
Converted to 4-2-2s they arrived Single No.3009
in 1894 and were of course intended ‘Flying Dutchman’,
for the West of England expresses as converted
from Paddington to Bristol and from broad to
Newton Abbot, where they had been standard gauge.
operating for the previous two years as Image: F W Roche
2-2-2s. The class was numbered from /RPB Collection
3001 to 3080, and only the first 30
were converted, while the first
new-build 4-2-2 was No. 3031,
completed in March 1894 and
carrying the name ‘Achilles’.

Gauge convertible
The 2-2-2 3001 class, which formed
the basis of the new Achilles class
were built as broad gauge, but
convertible (to narrow gauge) engines,
with the wheels outside the frames
and were delivered from Swindon in
1891-92. Despite their success in the
final years of the broad gauge, after a
derailment in 1893 in Box Tunnel they
were found to be too heavy at the front
end, and the leading axle was replaced
by a bogie, after which they became
part of the 3031 Class.
Detail changes in Dean’s design on
conversion included replacing the
underhung spring to the trailing axle,
and a major extension to the front-end
frames to enable the leading bogie to
be fitted. Dean’s locomotives all had

www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 33

 YOUNG ENGINEERS

Where schools fear to tread...

Innovative young engineer and regular EIM contributor Matthew describes why the
FMES Polly Award is one you or one of your protégés should enter...
BY MATTHEW KENINGTON

I
t might sound obvious that the
encouragement of young engineers
is crucial to the future of our
1
hobby, but it is true, and with schools
struggling to teach engineering (I
know of a school that used cardboard
for its Design Technology projects,
due to lack of funding) model
engineering clubs have an even greater
opportunity and, dare I say it, a
responsibility to help to create the
engineers of tomorrow.
Engineering is a rewarding
occupation, both as a hobby and a
career – I hope I am preaching to the
converted here? I speak from personal
experience when I say that schools,
even very good ones, just don’t get it.

Off the curriculum

‘Design Technology’ (DT) sounds like
a grand name (and it is), but it hides a
much less grand ambition. The vast
majority of schools are limited to
wood or plastic work. Even where they
have the equipment to do metalwork,
it stands idle as few teachers know how
to use it. Metalwork, as my father and
grandfather experienced it, is
essentially absent from almost all
schools including my own – so much
so that I was banned from involving
metalwork in my GCSE DT project!
With that background, it might
seem odd (even miraculous) that I am
now a keen Young Engineer, with a
number of projects under my belt and
even a few articles printed in EIM. I
have model engineering and,
specifically, my local club at
Hereford, to thank for this. I have a
number of good friends at Hereford
who are similarly grateful and we all
look to give as much back to our club
2 and makes you feel that the young are
as we can (for example helping on
running days – which is great fun –
and dragging our parents along to
help as well). The encouraging of
young engineers is a great way of
revitalising a ‘greying’ club, whilst
simultaneously helping the next
generation of engineers.
Young engineers do need
encouragement, not only to join clubs
in the first place (how many budding
young engineers have family who are
also model engineers?) but also to
complete ‘proper’ engineering
projects. Such projects take a large
amount of time, and this can get
slightly boring for an impatient young
engineer – if there is one thing model
engineering teaches, it is patience!
It is wonderful to see a model
completed and to drive/run/admire it
for the first time; it is equally, if not
more, rewarding to enjoy the
“Even where admiration of your peers, mentors and
schools other, unconnected, model engineers
(those who don’t have to say nice
have the things about your pride and joy!). This
equipment is where awards come in – they are an
to do important means of encouraging the
metalwork, young, in fact engineers of all ages.
it stands Polly Prize
idle as few The Federation of Model Engineering
teachers Societies (FMES) Trophy and the Polly
know how Model Engineering Ltd Prize gives a
to use it...” Young Engineer something to aim at
and aspire to. Unlike with some other
competitions, it is awarded in
recognition of a combination of
factors rather than for just a specific
piece of work. This friendly
competition is also fun; seeing the
work that other young engineers
produce is inspiring and interesting,
a major part of the hobby, a feeling
that is missing at some other events.
The awards ceremony itself is also
a fantastic event, taking place at a
different, but interesting location each
year – recent examples, both of which
I attended, have included the
Wolverhampton Society’s new club
house and the STEAM museum in
Swindon. There are fun activities
arranged for young engineers, from
driving a 5-inch gauge LNER J39
locomotive (Photo 1) to learning
about casting, both of which I
experienced at Wolverhampton. At
STEAM everyone attending got a free

34 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk


3 4
ticket to go around the museum,
which was an added bonus.
The Federation of Model
Engineering Societies AGM also
occurs at the same time, which means
that you can get your voice heard at
these events and help shape the
direction of the hobby. You also hear
the insurance report, which is my
favourite bit (not just because of the
free sweets, liberally distributed at the
‘were you awake?’ quiz afterwards…).
My first experience of the
FMES-Polly Award (as it is commonly
shortened to) was at Cardiff, when it
was presented to Noah Eggar, in
recognition of his efforts in building a
Gauge 1 locomotive and a Stuart 10V
stationary engine. I had just built my
first engine (a simple oscillating
engine, described in the Feb-June
2021 issues of EIM) and was looking
for a future project.
Inspiring work
Seeing what another young engineer
had made inspired me to start
building a Stuart S50 (Photo 2), which
I enjoyed greatly. It was very satisfying
to see it running for the first time, and
I daresay that the knowledge of the
competition prompted me to make it
more accurately than I otherwise
might!
The next time I encountered the
FMES-Polly award was at
Wolverhampton, where I had a lovely
day out and drove the LNER J39
which was a nice surprise. I also learnt
about casting and grew envious of
Wolverhampton’s new clubhouse. The
award that year was won by Daniel
Bell in recognition of his construction
of an electric Foden ‘steam’ wagon
based upon parts salvaged from a
mobility scooter (Photo 3).
The most recent award ceremony
was held at the STEAM museum in
Swindon, mere days before the Covid
pandemic’s first lockdown. Free entry
to the museum was included in the
day; seeing all the old locos (polished
to perfection) and the interactive
exhibits made for an enjoyable day
out. The award that year was won by
myself, for my combined raised and
ground-level riding truck in 5-inch
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
YOUNG ENGINEERS
PHOTO 1:
Matthew drives
a J39 loco at
Wolverhampton gauge (Photo 4). It was brilliant to interview was entirely based upon it.
– a definite finally win (having been a runner-up If you want to apply (or encourage
highlight of the a couple of times), and nice to have one of your young engineers to apply)
awards day. external recognition of the work I had for the award, application forms can
put into the hobby. It was also great to be downloaded from the FMES
PHOTO 2: see what everyone else had been up to website which can be found at: www.
Matthew’s – there is always an exhibition of the SFMES.co.uk – look for the ‘FMES-
Stuart S50 – the entries (Photo 5). Polly Award’ in the menu on the left.
construction The award is not only a great The entry form is simple to fill in, and
of which was trophy but is very useful when the project you enter can be anything
inspired by a applying for future positions. It looks mechanical or engineering-related, in
previous winner. great on a UCAS (University) the loosest terms. The closing date for
application, and to apprenticeship this year’s entries is 31st January 2022.
PHOTO 3: providers, as it shows dedication and If you are a young engineer
Daniel Bell and knowledge and an unquestioning reading this, aged 24 years or under, I
his then newly- passion for ‘real’ engineering. encourage you to enter. I enjoyed it,
completed and This was especially important to and I hope you will too. You will see
as-yet lacking me recently, as it allowed me to gain a interesting places and talk to other
outlining, Foden nationally-recognised Arkwright knowledgeable, like-minded, fellow
‘steam’ wagon at Engineering Scholarship. Fewer than travellers. If you are a not-so-young
the Much Markle 300 people in the whole of the UK engineer and know anyone who might
rally in 2018. receive these, making it a fantastic be interested, please encourage them.
achievement and one I doubt I would Details about starting a young
PHOTO 4: have obtained without the FMES-Polly engineer scheme are under
Matthew’s award and the project I undertook development by FMES and will be
raised-level for it – I submitted the riding truck published when they are ready.
riding truck as my ‘project’ and my formal In conclusion – enter! EIM
exhibited at
STEAM during
the SFMES AGM
in 2020.
5
PHOTO 5:
Some of the
award entries
exhibited at
STEAM – the
breadth of
the entries on
display is always
interesting.
Photos by
Matthew and
Peter Kenington
ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 35
 ???????ENGINE BUILD
ROAD
A freelance traction
engine in 3-inch scale
Jan-Eric continues his latest build, inspired by a full-size engine but designed to work rather
than follow a particular prototype – this month he makes the flywheel and wheel hubs.
BY JAN-ERIC NYSTRÖM Part 4 of a series
U
sually, the flywheels of model
traction engines are castings.
However, I no longer had the
opportunity to visit the friendly local
foundry that helped me with casting
the wheels of my locomotives – alas, it
had gone out of business due to cheap
foreign competition! Also, as with the
large front and hind wheels of this
project, the 340 mm/13½-inch
flywheel presented another design
problem, considering the limited
swing of my hobby lathe. Thus, I had
to think up a fabrication method that
did not require any turning work.
Photo 43 shows my solution: the
flywheel rim is a strip of plasma-cut
3mm steel with six evenly spaced
holes for the spokes, the strip rolled to
a circular shape. In order to get it
perfectly round, the inner edge of the
strip needs support by an accurately
shaped, circular piece of steel plate.
Again, this was too large for the
plasma cutter, so it was made in two
44
36 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE
43
PHOTO 43:
The parts for
the flywheel,
before they
are assembled.
PHOTO 44:
Protecting
the workshop parts, as can be seen in the photo. were 3mm wide and quite deep, I
from flying The hub, made from a surplus reckoned it would take many passes
sparks while piece of cast iron, is drilled for six back-and-forth, and that I would
grinding in spokes of 15mm round, bright steel. In wreck, or at least wear out, quite a few
the mill. order to attach the spokes to the tiny and fragile 3mm end mills, if
protrusions on the circular rim, they attempting the job in such a way.
Photos by had to be slit quite deeply. I did not As you all know by now, I have a
the author want to mill these slits – since they favourite tool that can solve such
dilemmas! But there was a problem:
the angle grinder motor has a
gearhead hub covering a large part of
its 5-inch disk, so it would not have
reached deep enough. Instead, I used
my mill at its highest speed with a
home-made arbor holding an angle
grinder cutting disk. In this way, the
disk reached deep enough.
Photo 44 shows the slitting
operation in progress – note the
pieces of steel and brass plate
surrounding the operation; I did not
want to have sparks flying all around
the workshop! The metal plates
collected the sparks; there was quite a
heap of fine powder after the
operation, considering the amount of
material that was removed from each
of the six spokes.
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
 ROAD ENGINE BUILD

Photo 45 shows the slit spokes, the

lower one not yet polished in order to
remove the burr and the ‘tempering
“The metal
plates
45
colours’ which appeared during the collected
slitting; the spokes got pretty hot
during the operation! The edge of the
the sparks
slitting disk also glazed over a couple – there
of times, so I used the point of the was quite
little dressing diamond shown at the a heap of
bottom of the photo to clean up the fine powder
edge of the disk so that it would cut
well once again. after the
In Photo 46, I have welded the operation...”
spokes to the rim, forming a complete
flywheel. I am still going to make a
fillet weld all around, and then PHOTO 45: The
smooth everything out with some ‘split’ spokes
polystyrene filler in order to get a for the flywheel.
good looking flywheel resembling a Below them
casting. The wheel rim will also be can be seen a
thickened with another layer of 3mm tiny grinding-
steel strip and all the welds will wheel dressing
eventually be cleaned up with my diamond.
trusty you-know-what!
PHOTO 46:
Wheel hubs The assembled
The wheels, described in the first
instalment of this series, have
flywheel will
yet be made to
46
substantial, heavy hubs. I turned them look more like
from very thick-walled, 80mm outside a casting.
diameter tubing that my steel supplier PHOTO 47:
had laying out in the yard. He sold me A steel bar is a
a hefty, 2ft long chunk of this cheap insurance
surface-rusted metal at an attractive against the
price and this avoided having to drill workpiece
and bore through a solid piece of steel. coming loose
In Photo 47 I have gripped the from the chuck.
piece in my rather small, four-inch
diameter, three-jaw chuck. In order to PHOTO 48:
protect myself from a heavy, flying Hubs for the
workpiece if the chuck grip might front wheels.
ever fail, I passed a length of steel axle Each hub
held in the tailstock chuck through contains two
s

the centre hole of the piece and well ball bearings.

47

48

www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 37

 ROAD ENGINE BUILD

49 into the lathe mandrel. Better safe

than sorry...
Photo 48 shows the two hubs for
the front wheels. The ball bearings fit
snugly into the bored depressions, and
will be held in place with a bolt and a
washer on the axle end.

Putting it together
For the final assembly, I clamped the
axle vertically in my bench vice and
balanced the spoked wheel loosely on
the hub. By rotating the wheel, and
holding a steel ruler close to, but not
touching its rim, I could rotate the
wheel, check and adjust the
positioning by tiny increments, until
the wheel was well-centred and
balanced. Then I could tack-weld the
spokes to the hub. The arc of a TIG
welder is ideal for fusing parts
together – unlike stick or MIG
welding, nothing touches the
workpiece, risking displacing it.
In Photo 49 the bearings have
been removed and the spokes finally
securely welded to the hub – the heat
from the more substantial welding
seen here could well have destroyed
the ball bearing’s rubber shields, so
that’s why I only tacked them at first.
The construction of the hind
wheel hubs is more complicated, since
there is a bevel gear attached to the
right-hand hub, seen in Photo 50, the
spokes cannot be welded directly to
the outside of the hub. Instead, I
attached a plasma-cut circular flange
about ¼-inch from the edge, and the
spokes were welded to this flange,
again only by small tacks when
balancing and centring the wheel on
the bearings.
On the left in the photo you see
50 the parts forming the other hub – note
the piece of tubing to be inserted into
the hub before assembly; it is
necessary for spacing the inner races
51 “Heat from the
more substantial
of the ball bearings to the same
distance as the outer races when
welding could well tightening the wheel to the axle.
Without this tube there would be an
have destroyed axial pressure on the bearings’ inner
the ball bearing’s races when the securing bolt is
rubber shields...” tightened, possibly causing the
bearings to seize.
Photo 51 shows the assembled
right-hand wheel (less its drop-shaped
PHOTO 49: The ten hubcap) attached to the main axle.
front wheel spokes are Some of the engine’s gearing can be
welded to the hub, five seen behind it. I’ll return to those
on each side. gears, and some other details of the
engine’s drive mechanism in the next
PHOTO 50: The episode in this series. EIM
parts for the hind
wheel hubs. Note the n The first three parts of this series
flanges to which the appeared in the September to November
spokes will be welded. issues of EIM – you can download a
digital back issue or order printed copies
PHOTO 51: The hind from www.world-of-railways.co.uk/store/
wheel has 16 spokes, back-issues/engineering-in-miniature or
eight on either side. by calling 01778 392484.

38 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk


Driving the point home...
P icking up a thread from David
Coney’s excellent article on page 34
of the November 2021 edition of EIM,
impact drivers, similar to the one he
showed removing the smokebox door
ring of his Rob Roy locomotive, have a
multitude of uses. Have you ever
tapped a joint together and then, just
as you drive it home, wondered how
you are going to take it apart again?
Such was nearly the case for me
when I was assembling the
superheaters into my 5-inch gage
Gemma 0-4-0 saddle tank (described
in EIM, volumes 5 & 6). I had
modified the design slightly and my
wet header is secured to the boiler on
three 6BA studs.
I have a dummy header, without
the holes to let the steam into the
superheaters, that I used for my initial
hydraulic boiler test which I secured
with bolts rather than studs. I had
made it slightly tight and noticed that
I could not just pull it to remove it
(there was nothing to get hold of) and
I didn’t want to risk damaging the seat
by prizing it off. I was, however, able
to remove those bolts and then just
wring the header slightly to free it
from its register.
At this point I realised that once
the studs and superheaters were fitted,
I would not be able to give the unit
that slight twist that was needed to
free it – I needed, instead, to be able to
give it a sharp axial tug to free it.
My thoughts turned down exactly
the same path as David’s – I could use
an impact driver if I had something to
attach it to.
As shown in my first photograph, I
silver soldered a ¼-inch long stainless
steel 4BA bolt to the middle of the wet
L&SWR Drummond Passenger & Mixed Traffic Locomotive Classes
By David Maidment
T his is another in the growing library of
Pen & Sword locomotive class profiles
and similar in format to the same author’s
book on the GWR King class that we
reviewed in the October issue – with this
book he returns to “home territory”,
documenting locos he saw as a young train
spotter in the late 1940s.
A well-researched work running to in
excess of 340 pages, the book firstly describes
Dougal Drummond, a Scotsman who having
made his name in his native land moved far
south, eventually taking over as engineering
head of the London & South Western
Railway in the mid 1890s. Drummond is
dubbed “a martinet... at times hard to reason
with,” and who was so stubborn that after
scalding his feet in an accident died early
having refused proper treatment.
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
LETTERS
header. This serves absolutely no
purpose when assembling the boiler or
when in service.
n Letters to
the editor on
any model
when multiplied by the mechanical
advantage given by the outside
diameter of the pulley compared with
Should I ever need to remove the engineering that of the shaft may be sufficient to
superheater, however, (and I can’t subject are overcome the friction in a radial
believe I won’t!), once I have removed welcome – direction, thus allowing the pulley to
the three 6BA nuts from the studs, I contact details be moved axially at the same time.
can screw my impact driver to it and are on page 3. Alex Ellin
by judicious use of the striker (it is
only a 4BA bolt in tension after all),
break the wet header-to-boiler joint
and thus withdraw the superheater
from the boiler.
As shown in my second
photograph, my impact driver is made
from a large old bolt of unknown
origin with a lump of steel suitably
drilled to act as the striker.
Incidentally, have you ever
stopped to wonder why wringing a
recalcitrant pulley off its shaft can free
it when a straight pull won’t? This is
because it is impossible for friction to
hold in one direction (for example
axially) when it is not holding in the
other (for example radially).
The torque you can apply by hand
when rotating the pulley on its shaft
REVIEWS
ISBN 9781 52676 981 7 Price £35.00
The overwhelming majority of the book,
however, is devoted to profiling in detail
Drummond’s output – he was responsible for
Published by Pen and Sword.
Web: www.pen-and-sword.co.uk
some classic locomotive designs such as the Email: enquiries@pen-and-sword.co.uk
T9 4-4-0 tender engines and the 0-4-4 M7
tank locos, though the author describes his
designs as “a mixed proposition of good, bad
or indifferent,” reserving his harshest
criticism for the 4-6-0 tender locomotives.
This book is particularly heavy on photo
content, almost all period shots of the
various classes at work, all very well
reproduced and likely to be a great aid to
model engineers reproducing these locos.
Each class does get a general arrangement
drawing in the appendices, though these are
reproduced quite small and show only the
basic outlines. Nonetheless Southern Railway
fans in particular will enjoy this book. AC
ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 39
 GENERAL NEWS
Atlas – a new loco from Polly
M odel engineers enjoyed a much-awaited
event to go to on 16th October when
long-established kit manufacturer Polly
Model Engineering revived its open day at
the workshops in Nottingham, and star of
the event was a brand new 5-inch gauge kit,
the 0-6-0 saddle tank ‘Atlas’.
1 2
I t’s that time of year and if you have to buy
Christmas cards it’s far better to help a
preserved railway or two than just add to the
coffers of retail giants. We kick off the
selection here with EIM tech ed Harry’s
Fairbourne Railway (Photo 1), cards available
online at www.fairbournerailway.com in
packs of 10 at £6.99 per pack including post.
The Welshpool & Llanfair Light Railway
card (Photo 2) is available from the website at
www.wllr.org.uk in packs of five at £2.50 each.
We illustrate in Photo 3 the Ffestiniog
Railway card, which comes in a mixed pack
of 10, also including a Welsh Highland
Railway scene at £5.50 per pack, by phone
from 01766 516034 or at www.festshop.co.uk
The Talyllyn card (Photo 4) can be had at
40 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE
The kit follows typical Polly style, being
supplied in a number of packages, both the
build and the cost of £7875 being spread over
12 months.
The parts in each package are supplied
fully machined with assembly requiring only
hand tools – no riveting, soldering or any of
£3.95 per pack of five plus post on 01654
711012 or online at the shop page of www.
talyllyn.co.uk.
The Corris Railway card (Photo 5) is
£5.00 per pack of five plus £1 post, from John
4 5
the other workshop processes that are
necessary when building a locomotive from
castings or from scratch.
The entirely British-made kit includes a
boiler that meets both UK and Australian
standards. Polly adds that compared to
others in its 11-strong range the new loco
offers extra water-carrying capacity and
more power through bigger wheels and a
longer stroke, while upgrades for the basic kit
will also be available.
More details of Atlas and the other locos
available are on the Polly website – this also
includes a page detailing in pictures the
contents of each stage of a typical kit.
Polly Model Engineering
Web: www.pollymodelengineering.co.uk
E-mail: sales@pollymodelengineering.co.uk
Tel: 0115 973 6700
3
A Knight, 40 Fladgate Road, Leytonstone,
London E11 1LY – cheques to Corris Railway.
Finally the Lynton & Barnstaple Railway
card (Photo 6) retails at £2.50 a pack of five
plus P&P, at www.lynton-rail.co.uk/shop
6
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
 CLUB & TRACK NEWS

Preparing for winter, and

perhaps a restored diary?
Public running has come to an end and the clubs are looking forward to hopefully
somewhat more active winter seasons than was the case a year ago...
COMPILED BY ANDREW CHARMAN

W
elcome to this month’s club
and track news round-up, at “The EIM
what is a somewhat
uncertain time, yet again! As I write
club diary
these words the news is again full of page has
foreboding over whether Covid will been
make yet another comeback this missing
winter and what that could mean.
However, what also seems clear is
from our
that we won’t be returning to the level pages for 20
of lockdowns that we saw a year ago, months...”
and while for most clubs the welcome
return of running sessions at tracks
for both members and the public has
come to an end with the onset of the
winter months, we are beginning to
see evidence of clubs planning a
winter programme for their members,
as was the case before the harsh RIGHT: Next
winter of 2020. generation in
Which brings me to the EIM club action – Beatrix
diary page, something that has been Huddart, aged
missing from our pages for 20 six, is confident Steam Chest is that the scale is scale really fits into today’s lifestyle
months now. I would like nothing working n her healthy with many proponents and a where everyone is downsizing,
better than to restore it, and I will do dad’s 2¹₂-inch wide variety of locomotives being whether they want to or not! And I’m
just that as soon as I receive enough gauge Purley modelled – demonstrated by delighted to reveal that we will soon
entries to occupy a diary. So please, if Grange. Malcolm Brown’s example from the be featuring a 2½-inch gauge
your club is starting or scheduling 2ft gauge Burma Mines Railway locomotive build series in our pages
meetings for its members again, ask BELOW: Lots reproduced on this page. – watch this space!
your diary secretary to send details of variety in The other picture from the same
to us to help you publicise them. 2¹₂-inch gauge, Association running day inspires Railway for sale
such as this confidence for the future of the Going to the other extreme, if you
Small objects of delight model of a 2ft hobby, when six year-olds such as are suitably endowed with funds and
We start with the smaller scales this gauge Burma Beatrix Huddart can become so fancy owning your very own
month, and last time in these pages I Mines Railway engrossed in feeding the Purley 10¼-inch gauge railway, then you
mentioned Steam Chest, the journal locomotive. Grange loco of her father Dave. could! The Ferry Meadows Railway,
of the National 2½-inch gauge As I mentioned last month I which since 1978 has run around a
Association, a copy having been sent Photos: Cedric believe 2½-inch gauge could be in country park close to the standard-
Norman, N2¹₂GA
▲

in by a reader and I stating that this line for renewed growth, because the gauge Nene Valley Railway in
was one we hadn’t seen before. Well
the hint certainly worked, editor of
the Association journal Cedric
Norman quickly getting in touch and
popping the most recent four
editions into the editorial inbox.
These have proven to be very
interesting reading – I admit to not
knowing that much about 2½-inch
gauge, it’s not that long ago I learnt
the difference between the gauge and
Gauge 3, which also runs on rails 2½
inches apart. Basically, Gauge 3 is
more for railway modellers, building
layouts with scenery and such, and
2½-inch for the model engineers
building and running locomotives
that they can be hauled by.
What is clear from the editions of

www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 41

 CLUB & TRACK NEWS
Peterborough, was put up for sale at
the end of September. It’s an
extensive line with a number of
steam and diesel locomotives – if you
are seriously interested more details
will be found on the line’s website at
www.ferrymeadowsrailway.co.uk
Bouyant Bradford
Bradford ME is a very busy society,
publishing a monthly Bulletin, and
perusing the latest issue my attention
was drawn by quite a small picture
taken at the 17th October public
running day, and which we are
delighted to reproduce rather larger
above. Not only does is show lots of
people enjoying themselves taking
rides, but in the foreground is a
superb example of the novel
Crampton type built by club
president Jim Jennings (at left) – your
editor is a sucker for early locos,
especially unusual early locos!
42 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE
ABOVE: Busy Equally encouraging to read in
day at Bradford. the issue of Bulletin is Jim’s report on
Photo: David how the Bradford club was able to
Jackson, BME hold its October meeting indoors, for
the first time since early 2020. Social
BELOW: A distancing measures were put in
realistic cover place and around 30 members turned
at Oxford, made up to hear Roger Backhouse’s talk on
all the better the noted model engineer Jim
by the rake of Crebbin. “After 18 months or so
appropriate without proper meetings, I think
freight stock. everyone appreciated being together
BELOW RIGHT: to hear Roger’s very well researched
One from the and fascinating presentation,” Jim
71/4-inch gauge reports. Amen to that...
AGM that missed By the way we asked last month
our report last why Bradford has an August meeting
month. Sally tradition of French crêpes being
Nicholson on a provided by Isabelle, “a cheerful
Romulus 0-4-0 French lady.” Jim Jennings dropped us
she built with a line to reveal why, and it’s a touching
her dad John story, beginning at the club’s August
Photo: John social meeting some years ago.
Arrowsmith “One of our very active members
was terminally ill after a relatively
short illness, and it was decided to
add something (French crêpes) to
make the evening more special and
to create a happy memory which we
knew would be that member’s last
visit. Unfortunately, the member was
too ill to attend, and he died soon
afterwards. But the crêpes were very
much enjoyed by everyone, and so it
was decided the following year to
repeat the invitation to Isabelle, the
maker of the crêpes. Thus was born
the tradition!”
Of course while your editor likes
early locos, anyone that knows me
also knows I have a passion for the
narrow gauge – after all I also edit
EIM’s sister magazine Narrow Gauge
World. So the front-cover picture on
the latest edition of the COSME Link
from the City of Oxford SME was
bound to catch my eye.
The picture of club member Sam,
driving his 7¼-inch gauge example
of the Talyllyn Railway’s ‘Tom Rolt’
on the club’s Cutterslowe Park
Miniature Railway, is made all the
better for the fact that the loco is
pulling a rake of some 16 slate
wagons – while the full-size Tom
Rolt was not built until long after the
Talyllyn’s original role as a slate
carrier had ended, it certainly looks
appropriate with such a train. I think
it’s good to see how many model
engineers make the effort to create
appropriate scale stock for their locos
to pull, not just cars for rather
out-of-scale passengers...
Plastic fantastic
An interesting note in the Link is a
forthcoming winter project at
Oxford, the completion of sleeper
replacement on the inner loop of the
ground-level 5/7¼-inch gauge line.
The new sleepers are recycled plastic,
which are growing in popularity on
all sizes of railway – a few years ago
your editor spent a day under a
Welsh mountain watching the
Ffestiniog Railway lay recycled
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk

plastic sleepers through its Moelwyn
Tunnel, while this Autumn the
Welshpool & Llanfair Light Railway
has been reinstating a passing loop at
its Sylfaen halt, the resited main line
gaining plastic sleepers. As well as
helping the environment the sleepers
have other advantages – they are
believed to last significantly longer
than wood equivalents, and the
Oxford members report they give an
improved ride.
The Lincoln & District ME is
another to have resumed evening
meetings, though it asks that
attendees have had both their Covid
vaccinations. Meanwhile the club
tried an experiment at the end of
October, running trains for the
public over the Thursday of the
school half-term, and this proved
very successful. “One young boy even
got to drive the Hymek (diesel) under
close supervision – was he a happy
bunny!” reports Lincoln newsletter
editor Neil Grayston.
Back to old locomotives and a
welcome new issue of Lionsheart, the
newsletter of OLCO, quite simply the
Old Locomotive Committee and
focused primarily on the Liverpool &
Manchester Railway’s ‘Lion’. This
loco, star of the Tifield Thunderbolt
movie, is shortly to be offered in OO
model railway scale by two different
manufacturers (which seems rather
pointless to your editor...).
Show swansong?
I always enjoy perusing Lionsheart,
but the thoughts of OLCO chairman
John Brandrick in the latest issue, on
the subject of future model
engineering shows, make for
sobering reading. While suggesting
that the Doncaster show organisers
have expressed their intention to
hold their event next May, on a date
to be decided, John adds; “The
Alexandra Palace show will not be
held next January and one wonders if
the increasing logistical problems of
access to London and other major
cities, such as stricter emission
requirements, will prove to be a
significant deterrent to those who
support these events and effectively
kill them off.”
He adds the case of the Model
Engineer Exhibition, once “a part of
London’s cultural programme and
supported by his late Royal Highness,
the Duke of Edinburgh? I can’t see it
ever happening again as a feature of
the London calendar...”
A depressing point of view, but
are things that bad? Personally I
think shows will return from the
pandemic traumas and will happen
again, though not necessarily in city
centres. And this is not necessarily a
s
disadvantage – one of the biggest
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
Ted Jolliffe,
1939 – 2021
W e at EIM were very sad to hear of the
passing in early October of Ted
Jolliffe, whose name was well-known in our
pages with features over many years
covering a wide variety of subjects – most
recently in our June issue. We are grateful
for the following appreciation of Ted’s life.
Ted was born in Kinson, Bournemouth in
1939. His father, Jack, was in a reserved
occupation as a skilled potter, the whole
male family worked in heavy clay, (bricks
and salt glazed drain pipes). Many of the
wartime airfields had drains made from the
firm’s products laid along the runways.
As a youngster he was taken under his
grandfather’s wing, and initiated into
working on the large twin-cylinder steam
engine which powered the works. Electricity
came from an ex-World War 1 dynamo
powered by an early Tangye hot-bulb engine
delivering DC current to the plant, later
supplemented by an ex-German submarine
diesel engine and generator. From this he
got his lifelong love of steam, and
mechanical work.
Ted was the only pupil in his junior
school to win a scholarship to the local
grammar school. After a short spell in retail
sales he joined the Metropolitan Police
Cadet Corps in 1956, later serving as a PC.
He was for many years an area car driver,
and during the later years of service worked
as part of an accident investigation and
prevention team.
He retired in 1984 to take over as Editor
of Model Engineer magazine, a post he held
until retiring in 1999. This made him, apart
from the founder Percival Marshall, the
longest serving Editor in the 120-plus year
history of the magazine.
Ted had always been involved in
modelling and engineering, as Editor for
The Southern Federation of Model
Engineers for several years, as well as
Secretary at Chingford MEC for some years
prior to the move into publishing. He was
instrumental in introducing battery-
powered electric locomotives to the
passenger-hauling stud, and served for
several years on a HSE Committee dealing
with many aspects of the safe operation of
public passenger-hauling miniature railways.
Many older model engineers will remember
Ted and his family travelling at weekends to
their sites, hauling his ancient caravan
behind his overworked Skodas, a marque he
was faithful to for over a million miles.
Following a short-lived first marriage in
1962, in 1968 he met and in 1974 married
Mary. Their younger son John is a graduate
engineer, (many will remember his efforts as
a youngster in providing many front covers
for Model Engineer magazine). John is
currently living in Vietnam where he set up
CLUB & TRACK NEWS
a major workshop in the textile and
footwear industry.
In his second retirement Ted was
extremely active in the Bedford MES, having
moved there from Enfield, to be closer to the
office, but following a heart attack in 2008
he stood down. He concentrated attention to
health issues, serving on the board of the
local NHS monitoring group (The Link),
and later as Secretary of Hearts in Beds
Cardiac Support Group, a post he held for
over 12 years.
Other interests included a love of nature,
bird watching and an interest in birds of
prey, as a volunteer at the Raptor Foundation
near St. Ives, and being secretary of the local
gardening society.
Following many holidays on the Isle of
Man with Mary, where they built up lots of
enduring friendships, latterly because of
distance, allegiance changed to the Isle of
Wight where they became supporters of the
Donkey Sanctuary, and part of the
preservation group for red squirrels – the
island boasts a large colony of these
enchanting animals.
Never quite sure how it came about he
served for many years on an advisory panel
for the DVLC, an activity done online,
suiting his later life mobility issues.
He loved his workshop, and freely
admitted to a love of tool making and
repairing rather than loco building. He
wrote many articles for the model
engineering press and during the Covid
pandemic wrote regular construction
articles for the Chingford MEC newsletter,
claiming that this diversion kept him sane
during the various lockdowns.
When failing mobility restricted access
to the workshop he set up a small one in the
garage adjacent to the kitchen; buying and
installing a Unimat SL lathe to go with the
Sherline mill. He was then able to continue
with his project of building components of a
typical medieval siege train based on his
research and several designs from the
Leonardo da Vinci drawings.
Latterly he was diagnosed with terminal
throat cancer; the last few months of his life
were owed in large part to his wife Mary, for
her devoted care, they tried hard to pack in
as many experiences as possible having
regard to the increasing difficulties of
getting about.
ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 43
 CLUB & TRACK NEWS
shows of a typical year, the Midlands
Model Engineering Exhibition, is
held at a venue out in the countryside
with no rail station or similar close
by, yet it sees large attendance
figures, so perhaps the model
engineering show’s swansong is still
a good way off. Let us hope so!
The OLCO, by the way, is still on
the hunt for an unfinished 3½-inch
gauge ‘Lion’ chassis, as we reported
some months ago. If you have one,
get in touch with the EIM editorial
office and we will pass on your
details to the Committee.
Not so many newsletters as usual
this month from clubs outside the
UK, but we have received details of
the Small Gauge Festival that was
planned for 6th-7th November by the
Sydney Live Steam Locomotive
Society in Australia.
Continuing a theme from the
start of this feature, the festival was
specifically aimed at owners of 2½
and 3½-inch gauge locomotives – the
44 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE
club has a 400-metre long raised
track to operate them on, and this
includes stub points which allow
trains to move onto the track from
the loco depot or sidings without
removing their footboards.
Sydney was confident of holding
the festival despite Australia still
feeling the effects of the Covid
pandemic – let’s hope it was a success
(how could it not be, the poster
stated that sausage sandwiches would
be on offer!) and we might see some
pictures from the fun!
Feeling flat
The quarterly newsletter of the
Plymouth Miniature Steam reports
a pleasing return to “something
approaching normality” at its
Goodwin Park track, though the
pandemic has thrown up a different
sort of problem – mechanical issues
with the club’s electric locomotives.
Having been stood unused for more
than a year, the loco batteries are no
longer holding a charge, which is
described by chairman Ian Jefferson
as “a bit of a challenge..”
Other challenges remain more
familiar; “Rain! This year it has not
been just the usual wet days, but real
downpours and several of them,
enough to leave the track flooded for
days, not just hours...”
A quick update from the Leeds
SME which reports in the latest
edition of its LeedsLines newsletter
that the last two cooling towers at
Eggborough power station have now
been demolished, raising the prospect
of the club being able to return to its
former track site in 2022. But the ‘Not
from the Chair’ column (the post of
club chairman currently being
vacant) adds; “While planning for a
return to Eggborough, we continue to
“This year look at other sites including three in
the Wakefield area.”
it has not
been just Sisters meet
the usual Another busy month at the Rugby
wet days, ME, of course! The picture opening
the club’s typically full newsletter
but real caught my eye – yes, it was narrow
downpours gauge, and a meeting of two sister
and several Kerr Stuart locos, 7¼-inch gauge
of them...” models of the class that ran on the 2ft
gauge Metropolitan Water Board
Railway close to Kempton Park
racecourse in south-west London.
The pumping station’s beam engines
are now a museum and a project to
revive the railway is underway. There
have also been very recent efforts to
start a full-size new-build project to
recreate one of the Kerr Stuarts, none
of the originals having survived.
Rugby members do seem to like
muscular locos. Just a short month
after loaned East African Garratt
‘Mount Kilimanjaro’ returned to
service after a major overhaul, club
member Dennis has been testing the
ABOVE: A pair almost complete Garratt, pictured at
of Water Board left, that he designed and built
Kerr Stuarts at himself. Likely to be ready for service
Rugby – resident in 2022, the loco is predicted by
‘Hampton’ newsletter editor Howard Brewer to
to the fore, be “a good crowd puller...”
with visitor There always seems to be some
from Surrey major development going on at the
‘Kempton’ Rugby club’s track. The latest is a
coupled behind. new facilities building – the
foundations have been sorted and
LEFT: Rugby lots of reinforced steel has been
member Dennis delivered for the structure. Definitely
has been out a healthy club, Rugby...
test running Oh look we are out of space
his almost again. Thanks as ever to all the clubs
completed who send in their newsletters, and
Garratt, which especially those that also send us
he has both photos – we never have enough so if
designed you’ve taken a nice shot of goings-on
and built. at your club, please send it in.
And a further reminder to send
Photos: in your meeting dates – we want the
Rugby ME diary back! EIM
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
 The Digital Membership
that brings you all of this...
SIGN UP
NOW!

• Digital Magazine Library

• Trackplan Archive
• Great videos
• Exclusive competitions
• Free Show Ticket
• RMweb Gold access

STEAM AGE NAMEPLATES

GAUGE 1 UP TO 7-1/4” NAMEPLATES AND

HEADBOARDS MADE TO ORDER MACHINE CUT
FROM BRASS AND NICKEL SILVER
Tel: 01530 542543
Email: nameplates@mail.com
www.steamagenameplates.com
https://steam-age-nameplates.sumup.link/
www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 45
 COPPER BOILERS FOR LOCOMOTIVES
AND TRACTION ENGINES etc.
MADE TO ORDER
Constructed to latest standards. UKCA stamped.
Over 20 years experience.
Enquiries, prices and delivery to:
' Coventry 02476 733461 / 07817 269164
Email: gb.boilers@outlook.com
46 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk
 Visit our website:

www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 47

 Steamways Engineering Ltd MODEL MAKING METALS
1/32in. to 12in. dia. bright steel, stainless steel, bronze, spring
steel, brass, aluminium, silver steel, steel tubes, bolts, nuts &
screws, tap dies + drills, white metal casting alloys.
Fine materials, chain, plastic.
Lathe milling machines and equipment, new and secondhand.
Mail order nationwide and worldwide callers
Mon.-Fri. 9 - 5pm. All cards welcome.
Send now for a FREE catalogue or phone
Milton Keynes Metals, Dept. ME, Ridge Hill Farm, Little
Horwood Road, Nash, Milton Keynes MK17 0EH.
Tel: (01296) 713631 • Email: sales@mkmetals.co.uk

www.mkmetals.co.uk

STEAMWAYS ENGINEERING LTD

Dovecote House, Main Road, Maltby Le Marsh, Alford,
Lincs, LN13 0JP
Tel/Fax: 01507 206040
Email: info@steamwaysengineering.co.uk

www.SteamwaysEngineering.co.uk

48 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk

www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk ENGINEERING in MINIATURE | DECEMBER 2021 49
 CLASSIFIED ADVERTISEMENTS
Trade
enquiries
welcome

Manufacturer of Steam Fittings INCORPORATING MODEL

for Model Engineers ENGINEERING PRODUCTS, BEXHILL
T: 07811 768382
3” to 6” Scale
From Lubricators, water gauges, E: apmodelengineering@gmail.com
gauge glass protectors, AP Model Engineering
whistles & sirens, supplies the largest range of
4” & 6” Injectors battery electric diesel outline
sales@rabarker.co.uk ready-to-run locomotives,
www.rabarker.co.uk locomotive kits, riding cars, rolling
Phone: 01245 462100 stock and accessories in 5" scale,
Mob: 07980 855510 7¼" scale and 3½" scale. Quality
Briars Farm, Main Road, Boreham, products at affordable prices!
Chelmsford, Essex CM3 3AD www.apmodelengineering.co.uk

ITEMS MAIL ORDER LTD

MAYFIELD, MARSH LANE, SAUNDBY,
RETFORD, NOTTS, DN22 9ES
Tel/Fax: 01427 848880 stephen_harris30@btinternet.com
BA SCREWS IN BRASS, STEEL AND STAINLESS.
SOCKET SCREWS IN STEEL AND STAINLESS. DRILLS,
RIVETS, TAPS, DIES, END MILLS, SLOT DRILLS ETC
EMAIL: lostignition8@gmail.com or
PHONE: 01427 848880 FOR FREE PRICE LIST
www.itemsmailorderascrews.com

webuyanyworkshop.com FOR SALE
Home workshops cleared, Two 7 ¼ gauge
good prices paid, especially 060 diesel outlined
for those with either Myford locomotives. Parkside
7 or 10 lathes. electronics, good haulers,
ready to run £1,750 each
Send your photos to
andrew@webuyanyworkshop.com Also one coal fired
Or call me on 07918 145419 bridged steam
locomotive, copper boiler
I am also interested in buying well detailed
Polly steam locomotives, Good value £5,500
especially those that need
Tel: 01922 400389
some ‘TLC’
West Midlands
ADVERTISERS’ INDEX
17D MINIATURES................................................................48
ABBOTS MODEL ENGINEERING ............................................46
AP MODEL ENGINEERING ....................................................50
BARRETT STEAM MODELS LIMITED .....................................48
CUP ALLOYS .....................................................................46
GB BOILERS.......................................................................46
HOME & WORKSHOP ..........................................................52
HORLEY MINIATURE LOCOMOTIVES .....................................46
ITEMS MAIL ORDER ...........................................................50
LASER FRAMES..................................................................50
LIVE STEAM MODELS..........................................................46
LYNX MODELWORKS ...........................................................48
MAXITRAK LIMITED .............................................................49
MECCANO SPARES .............................................................50
MIDLAND LOCO WORKS......................................................45
MILTON KEYNES METALS ....................................................48
PAUL NORMAN PLASTICS ..................................................49
POLLY MODEL ENGINEERING ..............................................49
R.A BARKER ENGINEERING ..................................................50
SILVER CREST MODELS .......................................................5
STATION ROAD STEAM .......................................................51
STUART MODELS ................................................................2
SUFFOLK STEAM ................................................................50
TEE PUBLISHING ..........................................................47,50
TONY HAYWARD.................................................................50
TOWERGATE INSURANCE ....................................................49
TRACY TOOLS ...................................................................47

50 DECEMBER 2021 | ENGINEERING in MINIATURE www.model-engineering-forum.co.uk