LBSC’s Designs

[RRMBKParticipant @rrmbk]

" Marcus. I would expect that as younger generations enter the hobby, the development of open source communities supporting and updating model engineering plans in CAD format will eventually become a reality. You are making very valid points on this subject. "

I fully support the above comments and this is probably the most practical method by which we are going to introduce newcomers to a hobby which is clearly dwindling. You only have to look at the reduction in ME castings suppliers in recent years. Whilst the LBSC 31/2 & 5 " designs still sell, Reeves for example, no longer sell the 2.5 gauge designs they used to and there are very few G1 suppliers for the LBSC designs .

Whilst I appreciate the technical details that Marcus throws up, If these 3D draftings are acknowledged as re drawn and any omissions or errors are the responsibility of the user to check prior to use, either for hand manufacture or CNC then I don't see what the problem is.

I think there is a real opportunity here to revive interest in our King of Hobbies among a whole new generation, lets not pass it up.

Kind regards

Brian.

Edited By Neil Wyatt on 05/09/2017 09:47:26

[Dean da SilvaParticipant @deandasilva59410]

If it comes down to it I will buy collections of these magazines if I have to.
I frankly don't mind.

Now, regarding the designs: I want these designs to go to clubs and organisations- such as the National 2.5" Gauge Association for their enjoyment and for the enjoyment of their members. There is some touching up that all of these designs could need that would be best left to a professional model engineer. The boilers for example are going to have to be changed. What I am doing is giving someone who is CAD savvy over there a head start if you will.

Pictures of the designs as rendered and made to look semi-realistic will be shown for folks to enjoy, and if someone sends me scans of what ever of a design I will dedicate the renderings to them.

Now, the whole Imperial vs. Metric debate….
DRO.
It was invented by a live steamer! As was the power feed for the milling machine!

[Jeff DaymanParticipant @jeffdayman43397]

All the recent high-end numbers theory and metric/imperial debate to me is pretty much the opposite of what LBSC was trying to do – to enable Joe Blow to make a good running small locomotive with basic equipment (and maybe his only initial measuring tool being a 6" fractional scale rule).

Could we get back to that theme please, as Mr da Silva started out to do, and dispense with the extensive theory, at least in this thread?

[John LluchParticipant @johnlluch21161]

Posted by Jeff Dayman on 05/09/2017 13:46:56:

All the recent high-end numbers theory and metric/imperial debate to me is pretty much the opposite of what LBSC was trying to do – to enable Joe Blow to make a good running small locomotive with basic equipment (and maybe his only initial measuring tool being a 6" fractional scale rule).

Could we get back to that theme please, as Mr da Silva started out to do, and dispense with the extensive theory, at least in this thread?

Indeed, the thread is about making the hobby more accessible and appealing for the next generations. He also was concerned that the LBSC designs would eventually fall into oblivion.

Dean da Silva proposal was creating updated 3D plans of existing LBSC designs, and possibly adapt them to what's available or more common today.

One of the questions he raised was whether he should keep the plans in imperial units, or switch to metric. He said he would rather choose metric. I feel some responsibility for your discomfort because I first ignited the debate about the practical difficulties of moving existing plans from imperial to metric. My view was that I would rather stick to imperial for the existing LBSC designs, but only move to metric for any new developments. Others seemed to agree on that, or otherwise they highlighted the feasibility of moving to metric.

However, instead of reviving the LBSC designs, my preferred proposal would be to work on a set of totally new locomotive designs, with several levels of difficulty, created from scratch in 3D CAD, and starting with a very simple entry level locomotive. The entry level locomotive should be easy to make for the average person, and require only simple tools to be completed. For example, it could be designed in a way that it would use a majority of laser cut parts, and avoid or minimise the need for castings and complicate machining. Essentially, a revival of the old LBSC spirit, but not by using his old locomotive designs, but by creating totally new ones.

 

Edited By John Lluch on 05/09/2017 14:53:21

Edited By John Lluch on 05/09/2017 14:57:49

Edited By John Lluch on 05/09/2017 15:01:26

[Marcus BowmanParticipant @marcusbowman28936]

LBSC's magazine articles did that, of course. His subsequent books did the same thing for individual designs. In modern times, the equivalent is the ARM1G design, the book for which is shown here: http://www.g1mra.com/shop/

and its predecessors (Project and Dee), although ARM1G is designed to accomplish just what you describe, including lots of parts which can be bought from trade sources, such as frames, complete cylinder assemblies etc, so that the entry level can be tailored to an individual's pocket, capabilities and resources.

There is a case for 3D modelling of LBSC's designs, as a project in its own right.

There is another case for updating those designs, by converting sympathetically to metric dimensions (which would get my vote) to make them accessible for younger or newer builders (say under 70), and/or by updating the designs comprehensively to modern standards and practices, including modifications in the light of previous builders' experiences.

There is also a case for preserving the 'words and music' of text and drawings from the magazine articles. Those preserve an important aspect of his success, which is the 'can do' spirit. I agree with earlier comments about LBSC's intentions, and his ability to describe how to do the job with limited resources. It would not, however, be my approach now, as I think that although it may (and I do say 'may&#39 lead to success, there is a danger that it fosters an attitude which rather devalues the depth of understanding and sheer skill which can be developed by deliberately pushing oneself to develop the appropriate workshop resources and associated skills to do the job in a more precise, and often more effective, way. This is, if you like, the difference between the approaches of LBSC and G. H. Thomas [I will stop here, as I notice a hobby horse preparing to gallop]. This is important, though, as it impinges on the discussion of whether to simply preserve the LBSC designs in their original state, or whether to comprehensively update them.

Drawings re-drawn by the magazine staff would be M.E. copyright, of course, as would the page layouts, but the words and original illustrations and drawings belong to LBSC's estate. Which takes us full circle, I think…

Marcus

[Niels AbildgaardParticipant @nielsabildgaard33719]

If we can have a society named Deans L&BSCR with a anual fee of say 25£ I will join imidiately.

If it comes to voting I want metric and Fusion 360 or Onshape as CAD system.

[Dean da SilvaParticipant @deandasilva59410]

Posted by Niels Abildgaard on 05/09/2017 16:21:27:

If we can have a society named Deans L&BSCR with a anual fee of say 25£ I will join imidiately.

If it comes to voting I want metric and Fusion 360 or Onshape as CAD system.

Sir, I've seen your work before with your Myford lathe. You are an artist!
I'll make you a trade: free life time membership to said "organisation" (more like disorganisation) and the chance to personally place my Imperial minded self in a burlap sack and flog me senseless for the price of one homely but sound ML7 lathe.

[Niels AbildgaardParticipant @nielsabildgaard33719]

Hi Dean and thank You for membership.

It is a Boxford I modify by the way.

If I inherited a Myford I would cash it imidiately and buy two Boxfords.

Starting again I would buy this:

**LINK**

[Dean da SilvaParticipant @deandasilva59410]

Neils,

In the near future I am getting my hands on a nice sound Southbend.
But the Myford is THE model engineers lathe.

It's like the spindle rotates with magical blessings of Kozo and LBSC while it whirls about spreading chips everywhere.

[David Reeves 1Participant @davidreeves1]

Hello Dean
I inherited a part-finished Juliet from my late father and set out to complete it. (It is still not finished but I have made some progress.)

Although I had the six drawing sheets, I needed LBSC's 'words' to go with the 'music'. I thought I had struck gold when I found scanned copies of ME on Jon Tomlinson's website but there were problems – see my post on the "Juliet" thread. LINK
Consequently I have now compiled a Word document which contains the complete words (no drawings) for Juliet 1 and 2 and relevant extracts from Hielan Lassie to which LBSC cross refers. To this I have added a corrections, clarifications and appendices. It runs to about 80 pages of A4 and has taken a lot of my time to compile from old MEs purchased on eBay.

The question is what can I do with my Magnum Opus to make it avalable for future generations? I don't wish to publish it myself and the problem of copyright is an unanswered question. I would be happy to provide copies on request to interested people for just the cost of printing and postage. I sent a copy to Neil Wyatt who passed it on to the ME publishers but this has come to nothing. I can e-mail you a copy if you wish.

You have ambitions to collate all of LBSC's work: here is one contribution.
Regards
Dave Reeves

[LainchyParticipant @lainchy]

Hi David,

I would be very interested in your compilation, if it's made available, as I'm just looking at plans for Juliet II (Baker valve gear). I too have downloaded Jon Tom's document, and I've spent the last couple of weeks looking at the plans, and the words, although they are of course for Juliet 1.

Regards

Ian

[Howard LewisParticipant @howardlewis46836]

Putting aside the matters of copyright and iintellectual property rights, before too long we shall have to face the fact that Imperial fasteners will become extinct. Ther have been increasing in cost for a long time. Some twenty years or more ago I wanted some 1/4 BSF capscrews. The local hardware stockist had none. The only Imperial that he had was the last box of 200 1/4 BSF hexagon head setscrews. I was on the point of offering to take it off his hands when I was told that they were 75p each. I decided not to spend £150, and bought just three!

So, the decisions will have to be made. As Rod jenkins said, these decisions will interact with mating components. Should 1/4 BSF be replaced by M6? If 3/16 holes are opened up to 5 mm will there be enough meat around the new hole to be safe and strong enough? Should 1/8 be breplaced by 3 mm or would 3.5 mm be better?

How many of us already do these sorts of things? Probably when we make a model, or a tool, dimensions are slightly changed to suit the material that is available. My Bending Rolls are mounted on 100 x 12 mm steel, because 4" x 1/2" was not available

If the drawings are completely remade using metric dimensions, they may retain the spirit of the original design, but the detail will will be different, as will the end result. The original 6 " dimension will have become 150 mm.

So are the new drawing a breach of the original copyright, since nothing on them corresponds / duplicates the original, possibly fractional, ones? Presumably the copyright of the metric dimension drawing now lies with the CAD operator rather than the man who first put pencil to paper with Imperial, probably, fractional sizes..

The only alternative will be to make Imperial fasteners, and work to partial Metric dimensions, trying to drill holes that are 6.354 mm in diameter by 12.7 mm deep, and milling 0.0752 mm off pieces of 8 mm key steel,

But how long will Imperial drills, taps, dies and cutters remain available? So full scale Metrication may well be forced upon us,

Howard

[David Reeves 1Participant @davidreeves1]

Ian (Lainchy): you have a private message. DR

[HOWARDTParticipant @howardt]

I am in the process of building a 3 1/2 inch Evening Star, all fasteners, threads and holes are metric. All parts are made to fit each other so who knows looking at a model wether it is metric or imperial. Alright the hexagons are a little bigger but I am building for my satisfaction not an exhibition piece or for club critique.

[RedsetterParticipant @redsetter]

Copyright issues apart, Mr De Silva would be well advised to build one of LBSC's locomotives himself before he starts trying to redesign them. It is not as easy as he seems to think.

[Former MemberParticipant @formermember19781]

[This posting has been removed]

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Redsetter on 26/02/2020 18:54:27:

Copyright issues apart, Mr De Silva would be well advised to build one of LBSC's locomotives himself before he starts trying to redesign them. It is not as easy as he seems to think.

Not sure why?

Until having to work for a living sidetracked him Dean was translating 2D plans into 3D model form. It's a good way of finding faults in original plans because 3D components are dimensionally accurate making it possible to detect misfits when parts are assembled in cyber-space.

Also possible to detect the same errors by making real parts out of metal, but that's expensive and liable to lead to bodges, because the builder is likely to 'fit' rather than correct the plan and remake an expensive part when the build can be massaged to accommodate it.

Better I feel to correct those errors in a 3D model, before starting work in the real world.

Of course modelling a machine in 3D doesn't guarantee all be well by a long shot, but it's a much better start than assuming the 2D plan is trustworthy – many of them aren't quite right.

LBSC claimed to provide all the 'Words and Music' needed to build his engines, and much of his early work does come up to scratch. Not all of it though; LBSC made mistakes and left important details out. I find his later work less complete, possibly because he was only exploring ideas rather than designing fully debugged engines to be built by beginners. Lots of smoke around the subject because at the end of his career LBSC became intolerant of criticism and never answered questions, preferring instead to assert he was always right. Even when he was obviously wrong.

I don't think it necessary for Dean to build an actual LBSC engine first. I agree it would be wise for an experienced builder to build one of Dean's interpretations before unleashing it on an unsuspecting public because making things often reveals practical problems and improvements. It's easy to design 3D models that are all but impossible to make in the real world and are therefore useless. Nonetheless, modern professional design always starts in CAD : no-one designs a new car engine in 2D and makes a prototype before daring to go 3D. Doing so costs a fortune.

Good for Dean, I hope his career allows him to resume his CAD adventure.

Dave

Edit:Typos due to cat employing 'pester power'.

Edited By SillyOldDuffer on 26/02/2020 22:34:30

[HopperParticipant @hopper]

Posted by Howard Lewis on 20/02/2020 14:35:08:

So are the new drawing a breach of the original copyright, since nothing on them corresponds / duplicates the original, possibly fractional, ones? Presumably the copyright of the metric dimension drawing now lies with the CAD operator rather than the man who first put pencil to paper with Imperial, probably, fractional sizes..

Most likely they are a breach of copyright. Copying someone else's drawings and changing a few details such as dimensional units does not make it your own original work. The actual design itself is the intellectual property of the copyright holder — whoever that is these days, possibly LSBC's estate or a publisher who bought the rights.

For example, you can't copy Dan Brown's latest best seller thriller novel and change the names of the characters and the locations and call it your own. On a lesser scale, I know if someone changed a few details such as measurements on one of my magazine articles I've had published and stuck their name at the top and sold it to another mag, I'd be pursuing them with lawyers blazing.

Intellectual property law is complex and an IP lawyer would need to look into the specifics of the LSBC case to get a definitive answer. But a deal might be able to be worked out with the copyright holder/s if they are interested in receiving royalties from sales of a metric version.

[David Reeves 1Participant @davidreeves1]

In Model Engineer of FEBRUARY 6, 1947 Page 207, in his discussion of: Variations for "Juliet", Walschaerts or Baker Gear?, LBSC writes:

… others who are rather tickled or intrigued by the simplicity and ease of construction of the little nest of rods and links, designed by the Baker who didn’t know what a BU was (lucky fellow!) want to know if they can Bakerise “Juliet”.

Does anyone know what BU is short for?

Dave Reeves

[J HancockParticipant @jhancock95746]

For those wishing Mr da Silva would build one of LBSC's locomotives, yes please and finally provide

a set of correctly dimensioned drawings for each one.

[Frances IoMParticipant @francesiom58905]

Re the Baker is it a ref to the Hunting of the Snark – the Baker called out thinking he’d found it but then disappeared for it was a Boojum he had found.
The other one I recall from my sheltered childhood is B*gg*rs Uncle but what or who that is I can’t think

[Former MemberParticipant @formermember19781]

[This posting has been removed]

[Former MemberParticipant @formermember19781]

[This posting has been removed]

[Jeff DaymanParticipant @jeffdayman43397]

Frances IoM – I'm sure I am not the only one who has no idea what your post refers to. I do understand that Mr Reeves was asking about a quote about Baker valvegear by LBSC but what is all the text about Boojum, snarks, uncles etc?

(I was raised in the 1960's – 1970's – maybe I am too young to understand the refs)

[Frances IoMParticipant @francesiom58905]

lookup Lewis Carroll – Hunting of the Snark –

[Author]

Posts