TurboCAD – Alibre File Transfers.

[blowlampParticipant @blowlamp]

“The elegant shape might be fairly simple to draw but not to make except as a casting. I can make only simple rectangular recesses but with the DRO as aid might be able to cut steps to approach something like the same weight-reducing.”

 

It wouldn’t be a big job to cut the shape if you knew someone with a CNC miller…

… and especially if you could supply them with the 3d model to work from. 😉

 

Martin.

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

It is not even that difficult on a manual mill. Use your CAD to produce a set of co-ordinates and after roughing out the cavity work your way along with a series of cuts using a ball nose cutter. A DRO would make it a bit easier to set the numbers but not essential.

A more practical way would just be to tilt the block at an angle and cut a reactangle. It would give you some space for insulation and once th ecladding was on who is to know. But a syou are now doing a double high it does not even ned to be tilted.

[John HinkleyParticipant @johnhinkley26699]

Nigel,

Have you tried to trace the current whereabouts of the vehicle shown in the post above.  A Google search for the firm P O Baker & Sons throws up a garage in Station Road, Gillingham, Dorset, SP8 4QA.  Using Google Earth to go to the address, this is what you will find:

I have highlighted the sign to draw attention to the date on it.  That may, or may not, be coincidental, but I think the entrance to the larger building behind the white one looks very similar to that in the photo.

DVLA shows no record for the registration FX 33.  It might be worth a quick phone call to the garage to enquire?

John

 

 

[Nigel Graham 2Participant @nigelgraham2]

Thankyou Michael, for that photograph. I looked at the Trucknet site but it showed me “Part 2”, not 1.

It does show I had interpreted the front axle fairly, from very old photos! I can’t vouch for deceased rodents though. I’ll ask my sister to knit me one (about shrew sized).

One detail from these photos is that I had the brake-column location “wrong” but looking again at my collection I can see why. To be honest, Hindleys never built two wagons exactly the same so it would not really matter! Wherever it goes is designed to catch and burn the operator’s knuckles on hot fittings.

“FX 33” might no longer exist officially though how you can use it on the road, I do not know. The owner might have taken it from an ancient photograph.

I wondered if it was the wagon in the Dorset Year Book 1977, the one that had sent me into my spiral of insanity, but the angle makes its number plate hard to read. It is FX 3-something but that’s not very surprising. I will try to find my hand-written list of DCC vehicle registrations for Hindley’s products.

.

John –

The two buildings are not now the same.

The older one was brick and had the name above the door. Though the steel shed might have replaced the brick one since the photograph was taken, and with the change of name suggests Station Road Garage had moved to the Baker site entirely. Or perhaps Bakers closed and STG took over its former building. The shed is clearly now a fully-equipped automative workshop that cannot be used to house a steam-wagon.

With no access to the relevant part of Trucknet I do not know when that photograph was taken.

Gillingham is not far from Bourton, where E.S. Hindley & Sons were established, and its L&SWR railway-station on the London-Exeter line is cited in the original advertising.

Nor ever so far from Richard Vincent’s works – I wonder if the wagon had popped in for a fill of water during a road-test or something.

Perhaps the wagon was stabled there while the shed was still Baker’s; or at least prior to STG use.

(Nor is Bourton far from Templecombe, also with a former L&SWR station, which I think at the time included a very awkward junction with the S&DJR, a potential service for sending Hindley products North and South. The steam-wagons were really a fairly small part of the Hindley product range and volume in total.)

…

On making the model cylinders, I did think a ball-nosed cutter would be appropriate for carving oout tjose recesses. I have no access to CNC facilities, but since it is all hidden by cladding anyway the shape would not greatly matter. As well as insulation, the hollows will reduce the weight considerably.

 

Last night I had another go, revising the connecting-rod slightly… The original shank was a bit too thick. Plotting the small-end shape proved the Devil’s own job, it is not as it should be, and that tiny flat on the end was from trying to remove a fragment left from cutting the rest away.

I also saw a detail mistake in the assembly-drawing. The weighshaft is not at the right height. Besides, putting the main bearings above the base-plate will cause a lot of grief later on the real thing. They should be below, rather as in a normal car engine. The thin greyness is intentional, to give some transparency. That model is so full of CAD errors anyway it’s not much than a rough “artist’s impression”.

 

[Author]

Posts