By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more

Member postings for julian atkins

Here is a list of all the postings julian atkins has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.

Thread: Any "Beginners" building 5" gauge Boxhill?
21/02/2012 23:43:50

dennis,

thanks for your post! i had found your youtube clip sometime ago and it's great! you have built a cracking loco!

as mentioned in a few other posts on this subject here and elsewhere the drawing errors seem to be as follows:-

the axlebox and horncheeck drawings are awful.

the boiler is nothing like a fullsize TERRIER and neither are the cab controls (which is such a shame as Stroudley was an artist down to the very last detail). so far as the boiler is concerned, it goes for overkill with the grate area and ends up with quite a low free gas ratio through the tubes. it doesnt have the sort of rectangular firehole that the fullsize has nor the large radius on the backhead flange, and it is extended and slopes down over the rear axle. this is quite unnecessary IMHO, and mine has a full depth firebox sitting within the rear horns as per fullsize. the 1/16" inner wrapper i think is suspect as is the lack of proper girder stays. i dont think the palm stays are up to modern standards either. the lower water gauge bush is too low (there should be 2 water gauges anyway as per prototype). my boiler design has a 5/16" foundation ring all round and a 3/32" inner wrapper and a flat topped inner firebox with girder stays. dont forget the boiler is working pressure 90 psi. my own boiler is 4" dia which fits easily between the frames and the front of the rear horns losing only 1" on the grate area of martin evans' boiler design despite the wider foundation ring, and thicker inner wrapper. i have had to use some quite thin boiler insulation material to just about keep to the correct outside diameter. the dome is moved forward to be in line with the driving wheel centre line for the later Marsh boiler.

although the side elevation is pretty accurate in martin evans' drawing, the front elevation is NOT! for some inexplicable reason he widened the buffer beams and side tanks and cab. the GA side elevation is correct for the shape of the cab roof but as you have noted on sheet 8 the detail of the cab roof is not and is wrong.

depending on how particular you want to be, there are lots of differences from the prototype that add nothing to the miniature ie tank extending into the cab on the r-h side, cab windows too large and in the wrong place, tanks slightly too low etc..

for an original A class TERRIER the smokebox should NOT be circular, and in any event martin evans shows the diameter of the smokebox and smokebox door too small by quite a lot.

unfortunately martin evans also completely cocked up the valvegear which has far too large a throw on the eccentrics. this can be accomodated but only with a longer length expansion link to correct this fault. no suspension offset is shown whereas there should be one for good valve events.

apparently the balance pipe requires additional holes in the frame not shown, though personally i dont see a problem with making the balance pipe as per prototype. i dont like the well tank idea, so mine will have a wagon to go behind for extra water and coal.

i have heard horror stories of the press fit valve spindle glands coming adrift so best to silver solder these in place.

the balance weights on the wheels shouldnt be proud of the wheel tread and should be slightly less. the works diameter of the wheels is 4', so martin evans' 4 3/16" is slightly less than fullsize.

shame about the lack of room for 4 lifting links to the expansion links and the cut away required on the slidebars as this precludes the use of channel section slidebars as per prototype. my TERRIER has the cylinder block moved forward by 1/4" to give a longer conn rod length nearer to prototype. if i hadnt already machined the cylinders and crankaxle to drawing i would make the outer crank webs 1/4" thick and gain a bit more space for the port passages and a larger exhaust passage. i would also make the cylinders as long as the castings would allow to get a bit more piston width as there is ample room at the front for longer cylinders.

the front frame cut out should be the same height as the rear freame cut out and it doesnt take much to fabricate a crosshead pump body to fit the larger cut out. the crosshead pumps are in line with the motion centre line on fullsize, and again it doesnt require much to achieve this in miniature.

the reverser arrangement is nothing like Stroudley's, and can easily be made to be the same in miniature.

as mentioned above Stroudley was an artist when it came to details, and there is no reason whatsoever why the correct arrangement and design of cab controls should not be incorporated in miniature.

one advantage of modelling STEPNEY though is that she hasnt had a westinghouse pump fitted since the 1930's! on mine, the brake cylinder (vacuum on the fullsize STEPNEY) is a steam brake cylinder, and the large reservoir contains a filter and supply from the wagon and acts as a sump to feed the injectors which are rather small but are tried and tested!

martin evans' frame stretchers and motion plate are nothing like the prototype, and in fact the prototype had more frame stretchers that can be with advantage be reproduced in miniature.

Stroudley's design is so beautiful and perfect that it seems such a pity to depart from it in any way! generally, a very successful design in fullsize can be reproduced successfully in miniature without any departure from the original apart from the internals of the boiler, and the salter safety valves etc.

otherwise a lovely design and it is remarkable how so many successful working locos have been built to the BOXHILL drawings!

14/02/2012 09:18:48
i am building a 5"g terrier as a copy of STEPNEY in fullsize too!
there are a few other posts about BOXHILL on here and the model engineering clearing house website that may be of help.
good luck with your own terriers! i am afraid that there are quite a few errors small and large in martin errors' drawings, though lots of people have built locos strictly to the drawings ok.
so far ive done the frames buffer beams crankaxle other axles and the wheels and the completed cylinder block, and also made the chassis for an LBSCR 10 ton wagon to go behind for extra coal and water.
i can also recommend norman barber's excellent write up of his POPLAR on the modelengineeringwebsite referred to above.
i am trying to make my STEPNEY as close as possible to the original as she now is, so am departing quite a bit from the drawings of BOXHILL
trevor-i think you have gone for overkill with the 5mm frame thickness instead of 3mm though as long as you remember to keep the outside frame dimension of 4.5" this wont cause any problems as long as you adjust the stretchers and cylinder block width accordingly etc the boiler as designed is only 3.75" wide so will fit ok between the thicker frame material you are using
good luck!
Thread: Boxhill by Martin Evans
24/06/2011 13:20:41
Dennis is quite correct about the cab roof... sheet 8 of the drawings shows the shape of the cab for the side elevation as the front elevation! a typical martin evan's error, though to be fair to him the general arrangement drawing on sheet 1 does show the correct front elevation curve to the very distinctive Stroudley cab roof.
 
i would be very interested if anyone has the details of a Gordon Smith type safety valve suitable for Boxhill please?
13/06/2011 09:50:53
by the way, martin evans did take liberties with the buffer beam and running board width to accomodate wider side tanks than prototype, and of course the tanks never protruded into the cab as per one side of BOXHILL. anyone building a model of engines post 1905 needs to check if it was one of the locos fitted for motor train working because these had their buffers raised (see pics of Stepney etc..). A class Terriers should not have a round smokebox as described by martin evans, and the boilers of the prototypes were quite different with the rear of the boiler being shorter and not sitting above the rear axle, and with a large radius to the backhead flange and a completely different arrangement of controls and firehole ring and door 9what an awful backhead he designed when compared to Stroudley's artistic design!).
the smokebox diameter and smokebox door diameter should also be larger by 1/4".
there are other detail differences between martin evan's drawings and the fullsize locos...the rear drawbar should extend forward as far as the rear axlebox, and martin evans did comment on the use of 'channel' shaped slidebars in his description. the axleboxes had a high lip on their outside face to prevent grit and dirt getting into the axleboxes from the wheels, and of course the prototype engines all had underhung leaf springs which isnt difficult to do in miniature.
you will gather from the above that martin evan's side elevation is very accurate to prototype at 1 1/16" scale, but the end elevations are not! i have a copy of the original Stroudley general arrangement drawing from Engineer magazine in 1873. don young's 7 1/4" gauge design NEWPORT is far more accurate to prototype.
13/06/2011 09:19:36
Stroudley had his own pet ideas about balancing cranks, and position of crankpins vis-a vis the crank axle... the balance weights were large and crescent shaped and at 180 degrees to the crank axle webs. the crankpins were in the same position and in line with the crank axle webs/connecting rod pins for each side of the engine. martin evans explains this on p. 360 ME 15th sept 1963, and there is no error in his drawings for the wheels, apart from the fact that to be true to prototype the balance weights are flush with the spokes which as already commented upon he corrected in a later article. it would be quite wrong to follow the 'usual' arrangement of balance weights and their position relative to the crankpins and crank axle on a Stroudley engine!
a close examination of photographs of Terriers will confirm this.
hope this helps.
Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of Model Engineer or Model Engineers' Workshop? Use our magazine locator links to find your nearest stockist!

Find Model Engineer & Model Engineers' Workshop

Sign up to our Newsletter

Sign up to our newsletter and get a free digital issue.

You can unsubscribe at anytime. View our privacy policy at www.mortons.co.uk/privacy

Latest Forum Posts
Support Our Partners
cowells
Sarik
MERIDIENNE EXHIBITIONS LTD
Subscription Offer

Latest "For Sale" Ads
Latest "Wanted" Ads
Get In Touch!

Do you want to contact the Model Engineer and Model Engineers' Workshop team?

You can contact us by phone, mail or email about the magazines including becoming a contributor, submitting reader's letters or making queries about articles. You can also get in touch about this website, advertising or other general issues.

Click THIS LINK for full contact details.

For subscription issues please see THIS LINK.

Digital Back Issues

Social Media online

'Like' us on Facebook
Follow us on Facebook

Follow us on Twitter
 Twitter Logo

Pin us on Pinterest

 

Donate

donate