Replacements for LGB couplings

[Zerogee]

Hi Jon
The pressure is about the same as for an LGB coupler which is less than that needed for an HLW wagon coupling - yes phosphor bronze is much springier than brass or steel - and easier to solder than steel.

Still the same uncoupling procedure as previously, which is one of the main attractions - together with the compatibility with LGB couplings which means I can combine stock with old and new couplings - provided I enlarge or replace the smaller LGB buffers. .........
Rik

All sounds good! I've been looking at your pics and just thinking about ways to perhaps make the design easier to batch-produce.... I am wondering if you could get a small, flat block of plastic of some kind, and drill three holes into the end of it - two to take the ends of the bent loop of brass, and one between them to take the phosphor-bronze hook wire? Then with a single screw hole drilled down through the block to screw it in place, you might have a solution that would do away with the need for soldering at all......?
Just thinking completely off the top of the head here (or possibly talking out of somewhere else...), so please just take it as a "stream of consciousness" idea... might work, might not.....

Jon.

 

[stockers]

 

[ge_rik]

Nice idea, Jon. But my worry would be that, under the strain of hauling a heavy load, the hook and/or the loop might pull out from the block. Soldering, to my mind is a bit more secure.

I'm now bending down the ends of each loop and the hook and inserting them into three holes drilled into the bracket so I'm not relying completely on the solder.

Rik

 

[Zerogee]

Nice idea, Jon. But my worry would be that, under the strain of hauling a heavy load, the hook and/or the loop might pull out from the block. Soldering, to my mind is a bit more secure.

I'm now bending down the ends of each loop and the hook and inserting them into three holes drilled into the bracket so I'm not relying completely on the solder.

Rik

Fair point, Rik, though (in the "block" idea) a drop of superglue into each hole before inserting the wire would be about as permanent as you could ever need, I reckon - but I think your revised version with holes for the wires sounds like it will be fine too!

Jon.

 

[dunnyrail]

Nice idea, Jon. But my worry would be that, under the strain of hauling a heavy load, the hook and/or the loop might pull out from the block. Soldering, to my mind is a bit more secure.

I'm now bending down the ends of each loop and the hook and inserting them into three holes drilled into the bracket so I'm not relying completely on the solder.

Rik

I think that now you will be into production as it were a simple wooden jig with some nails or screws will help the bending of loop and hooks so that you can mass produce a shed load all the same. Be nice to see pics of it perhaps with dimensions if you do that.

 

[ge_rik]

I think that now you will be into production as it were a simple wooden jig with some nails or screws will help the bending of loop and hooks so that you can mass produce a shed load all the same. Be nice to see pics of it perhaps with dimensions if you do that.

Funny you should say that. .......


Struggling a bit to keep the bends consistent, but it does make keeping the dimensions the same a lot easier.


Still tweaking to ensure they fit all the various types of stock I have, but I've more or less got a standard for the dimensions.

Rik

 

[ge_rik]

Whilst I'm awaiting delivery of more Binnie buffers for my non-LGB stock, I've been experimenting with ways of replacing LGB buffers with something wider to avoid buffer lock when stock is being propelled.

The LGB buffers are somewhat small which is why they need replacing....

However, I have discovered they can be removed, leaving a 4mm dia hole. I discovered that a No.8 woodscrew is a tight fit and so will act as a self-tapper. So ......

With a bit of solder and some burnt fingers, I end up with a reasonably passable buffer .......

Which simply screws into the housing on the buffer beam.

More importantly, it doesn't lock when the wagons are being propelled around even the sharpest (R1) curves.

There's still a bit of tidying up needed - I've ordered some brass screws and I'll chemically blacken the the buffers, but I'm pleased to have found a relatively simple way of replacing the buffers on ex-LGB wagons with something which seems reasonably realistic, is simple to make and is cheap!

Rik

 

[dunnyrail]

Whilst I'm awaiting delivery of more Binnie buffers for my non-LGB stock, I've been experimenting with ways of replacing LGB buffers with something wider to avoid buffer lock when stock is being propelled.

The LGB buffers are somewhat small which is why they need replacing....

However, I have discovered they can be removed, leaving a 4mm dia hole. I discovered that a No.8 woodscrew is a tight fit and so will act as a self-tapper. So ......

With a bit of solder and some burnt fingers, I end up with a reasonably passable buffer .......

Which simply screws into the housing on the buffer beam.

More importantly, it doesn't lock when the wagons are being propelled around even the sharpest (R1) curves.

There's still a bit of tidying up needed - I've ordered some brass screws and I'll chemically blacken the the buffers, but I'm pleased to have found a relatively simple way of replacing the buffers on ex-LGB wagons with something which seems reasonably realistic, is simple to make and is cheap!

Rik

What may also help a little would be to put Washers on your Axles to cut down smewhat on the side to side slop of the wheels, I have used Nylon ones from Squires M3 are the size. Ref ( W-M3B) . My old cat (2010) shows them at £3.10 for a pack of 100 which may or may not do all of your stock. I find that many of my vehicles have needed 6 to cut down the slop. Not my original idea, cribbed from John Lythgoe's Garden Rail Special 2 "Your G Scale Locomotive" a bookzine that I still refer to on occasion.

 

[ge_rik]

What may also help a little would be to put Washers on your Axles to cut down smewhat on the side to side slop of the wheels, I have used Nylon ones from Squires M3 are the size. Ref ( W-M3B) . My old cat (2010) shows them at £3.10 for a pack of 100 which may or may not do all of your stock. I find that many of my vehicles have needed 6 to cut down the slop. Not my original idea, cribbed from John Lythgoe's Garden Rail Special 2 "Your G Scale Locomotive" a bookzine that I still refer to on occasion.

Great idea, thanks.
I'm trying to decide whether I can get away with making the 4 wheel swivelling wagon chassis rigid. I still have some R1 points leading to my storage sidings so may have to keep them. I find the swivelling chassis give all sorts of problems - especially when point blades haven't quite bedded tightly into their stock rails.

Rik

 

[dunnyrail]

Great idea, thanks.
I'm trying to decide whether I can get away with making the 4 wheel swivelling wagon chassis rigid. I still have some R1 points leading to my storage sidings so may have to keep them. I find the swivelling chassis give all sorts of problems - especially when point blades haven't quite bedded tightly into their stock rails.

Rik

Point blades can be an issue, one of the things that has pretty much dissapeared with my Air Operated Points, though if a small piece of ballast gets in the way..............

 

[a98087]

Nice work with the buffers, will be watching with interest,if can you post the materials and dimensions once you’ve tested them, as tempted to copyright if they work well

To secure swivelling lgb wheel sets, if you put in small screws from underneath the wagon, you can always remove them if you done like them,

I’ve secured some and it’s made no difference to the running
Dan

 

[ge_rik]

Nice work with the buffers, will be watching with interest,if can you post the materials and dimensions once you’ve tested them, as tempted to copyright if they work well

To secure swivelling lgb wheel sets, if you put in small screws from underneath the wagon, you can always remove them if you done like them,

I’ve secured some and it’s made no difference to the running
Dan

Thanks Dan. Nice idea. I'll give it a try.

Once I've perfected the coupling, I'll post all the details on my blog. Still at the tweaking stage. As I fit them to more stock, I kerp altering the design slightly.

Rik

 

[ge_rik]

Latest update
Must admit, this development has been on tickover, lately. My excuse (sorry reason) is that I have been evaluating my various versions of my coupling to see how they perform. As a result, I have enlarged the loops (the smaller previous versions were difficult to align for reliable coupling-up), I've modified the hooks (provided a lower 'tail' to improve latching on to the hook), and simplified the mounting bracket because my limited metal-working skills were not up to doing a double U shaped fold with any degree consistency.

Version 3 (or maybe 4) couples with tolerable reliability to LGB style couplings

.
It is also compatible with itself (thank goodness)

.
The hook now has a tail (as you can see) which means there is now twice the amount of leeway in alignment with the loop

.
And the bracket is a lot easier to manufacture (and requires less brass)

.
I am in the process of testing and evaluating this version to ensure it lives up to expectations and if so, I will replace all the previous versions before rolling it out across the entire fleet.

Rik

 

[dunnyrail]

Latest update
Must admit, this development has been on tickover, lately. My excuse (sorry reason) is that I have been evaluating my various versions of my coupling to see how they perform. As a result, I have enlarged the loops (the smaller previous versions were difficult to align for reliable coupling-up), I've modified the hooks (provided a lower 'tail' to improve latching on to the hook), and simplified the mounting bracket because my limited metal-working skills were not up to doing a double U shaped fold with any degree consistency.

Version 3 (or maybe 4) couples with tolerable reliability to LGB style couplings

.
It is also compatible with itself (thank goodness)

.
The hook now has a tail (as you can see) which means there is now twice the amount of leeway in alignment with the loop

.
And the bracket is a lot easier to manufacture (and requires less brass)

.
I am in the process of testing and evaluating this version to ensure it lives up to expectations and if so, I will replace all the previous versions before rolling it out across the entire fleet.

Rik

You are now almost into the realms of Alex Jackson Couplings. Very suitable for Magnetic Uncoupling. You would need to have them so that they can swivel freely with a weight to return to coupled normal and a few Steel Loops to look like couplings that can be attracted to a Magnet. AJ's work somewhat differently, are a real pain to keep adjusted but your way looks somewhat mire robust.

 

[Rhinochugger]

Latest update
Must admit, this development has been on tickover, lately. My excuse (sorry reason) is that I have been evaluating my various versions of my coupling to see how they perform. As a result, I have enlarged the loops (the smaller previous versions were difficult to align for reliable coupling-up), I've modified the hooks (provided a lower 'tail' to improve latching on to the hook), and simplified the mounting bracket because my limited metal-working skills were not up to doing a double U shaped fold with any degree consistency.

Version 3 (or maybe 4) couples with tolerable reliability to LGB style couplings

.
It is also compatible with itself (thank goodness)

.
The hook now has a tail (as you can see) which means there is now twice the amount of leeway in alignment with the loop

.
And the bracket is a lot easier to manufacture (and requires less brass)

.
I am in the process of testing and evaluating this version to ensure it lives up to expectations and if so, I will replace all the previous versions before rolling it out across the entire fleet.

Rik

That may well work for your railway operation - it would never work for the weight that is involved in Fn3

Horses for courses

 

[stockers]

How does it work when pushing. I assume the plastic buffers will over lap and lock!

 

[ge_rik]

You are now almost into the realms of Alex Jackson Couplings. Very suitable for Magnetic Uncoupling. You would need to have them so that they can swivel freely with a weight to return to coupled normal and a few Steel Loops to look like couplings that can be attracted to a Magnet. AJ's work somewhat differently, are Thea real pain to keep adjusted but your way looks somewhat mire robust.

I did consider AJs but decided it would be a nightmare to keep them aligned in a garden railway environment.
Rik

 

[ge_rik]

How does it work when pushing. I assume the plastic buffers will over lap and lock!

Hi Alan See post #27 above

Rik

PS (Edit) Just realised you probably mean the Binnie buffers which are slightly narrower than my brass replacements for LGB buffers shown in post #27. I've not experienced any buffer lock yet. That might be because all my longer wheelbase wagons have the brass LGB replacements and I've only used Binnie plastic buffers on shorter wheelbase wagons. I'll do some experiments to see how the Binnies fare on longer wheelbase wagons. There is a larger version of the Binnie buffer so, if there's a problem I could use them for longer wb wagons. Alternatively, I could increase the buffing plates on the Binnies in the same way I've done it on the LGBs.

Not yet tackled the bogie coaches which, of course, will have the largest out swing on tight curves. May have to make especially wide buffers for them!

 

[ge_rik]

That may well work for your railway operation - it would never work for the weight that is involved in Fn3

Horses for courses

Maybe, maybe not. When I get my stock out from the storage sidings, I haul around 25 wagons with a loco with one of my couplings ok

Rik
PS (Edit) I suppose, strictly speaking, my railway is Fn3, as it represents a 3' narrow gauge railway. But then my scale ruler is somewhat elastic!

 

[Rhinochugger]

Maybe, maybe not. When I get my stock out from the storage sidings, I haul around 25 wagons with a loco with one of my couplings ok

Rik
PS (Edit) I suppose, strictly speaking, my railway is Fn3, as it represents a 3' narrow gauge railway. But then my scale ruler is somewhat elastic!

Oh, I don't accept any scale compromises


Except for the odd wagon or six


and the Aristo Rogers


and.........................