wheel flange problem

H

HobbitFertang

Registered
Country flag
United-Kingdom
Hi Folks, I've been having problems with derailing of small 1:16 wheels (various Brandbright types) on LGB points. This seems to be due to the narrowness and lack of depth of the wheel flanges. They're catching on the blades and dropping into the rail-less sections (I don't know what they're called??) particularly on 4-wheeled wagons. Is there a 'thicker' version of this scale of wheel? DSC_0058.JPGApologies if this issue has been raised before!
 
I think some people have come up with ways to pack the bed of the frog - I sold my LGB points, but I have tried something similar on my #6 Aristocraft points.
 
That wheel set is just not compatible with track manufactured for the common commercial IIm scale wheel profile. Change the wheels or change the track.
 
Software Tools said:
That wheel set is just not compatible with track manufactured for the common commercial IIm scale wheel profile. Change the wheels or change the track.
Click to expand...
I think you'll find the wheelset is to G1MRA standards - but we all know that LGB wheels have very large flanges, and obviously make their track to suit them. Over here, quite a lot of people run those wheel profiles on LGB or modified LGB track.
 
Many moons ago in my Hertford days I encountered a similar problem with my Merlin live steam locs. Solution was to fit some code 100 flat bottom rail behind the outside flange that pulled the wheels back. Still got a bump at the frog but the G1 standard whelels passed ok as still did LGB ones. Backman do some smaller sized metal wheels if you can get them. But real solution is to swop to Peco track that has the finer standards to allow those and LGB wheels to pass ok.
 
I might be imagining it, but have I seen people add a larger diameter washer to the wheel backs? I imagine getting them concentric might be an issue, but it might be worth further research; or even trying -on one vehicle at first. As I say, I may have made the whole thing up!
 
I thought Bertram Heyn had produced some sort of insert for the frog - but I may be going mad :oops:
 
You could try increasing the back to back measurement to 40.5 mm to compensate for the finer flange thickness
 
Thanks everyone. The washer insert idea did occur to me, Northsider. I might give it a try. The problem with increasing the back to back distance might be that the flange is more likely to get caught behind the blade on entry to the points.
??
 
HobbitFertang said:
Thanks everyone. The washer insert idea did occur to me, Northsider. I might give it a try. The problem with increasing the back to back distance might be that the flange is more likely to get caught behind the blade on entry to the points.
??
Click to expand...
Shouldn't do, the blade should be sunk into the rail, so the flange should not be able to get behind it.
 
Yes, I had a couple of dodgy (new!) LGB points where the blade wasn't closing properly due to wobbly rivets (I referred to this in an earlier post). This may have had something to do with it.
 
MTheStrong said:
He does, here is a link: Switches gauge 45 mm

I have used his R3 check rails which has improved the running of various "troublesome trucks"
Click to expand...
Phwoar - my sanity is confirmed :rofl::rofl:

Yes, LGB's mis-located check rail on their R3 points drove me away from LGB points completely. It still puzzles me that even though everyone knows there is a problem, and many LGB locos jerk as the wheel hits the frog, LGB have never done the sensible and simple thing, which is to change the sleeper moulding and make the check rail longer :lipssealed::lipssealed::lipssealed:
 
Rhinochugger said:
Phwoar - my sanity is confirmed :rofl::rofl:

Yes, LGB's mis-located check rail on their R3 points drove me away from LGB points completely. It still puzzles me that even though everyone knows there is a problem, and many LGB locos jerk as the wheel hits the frog, LGB have never done the sensible and simple thing, which is to change the sleeper moulding and make the check rail longer :lipssealed::lipssealed::lipssealed:
Click to expand...
Oh never heard that before (still one does not know what one does not know) but it does answer the question of why certain track sliders shorted on R3 points only! Now being dead rail in the garden not a problem any more, in the loft which is track power I only have LGB R1 in fiddle yards and Peco in what is to be scenic areas.
 
Rhinochugger said:
Phwoar - my sanity is confirmed :rofl::rofl:

Yes, LGB's mis-located check rail on their R3 points drove me away from LGB points completely. It still puzzles me that even though everyone knows there is a problem, and many LGB locos jerk as the wheel hits the frog, LGB have never done the sensible and simple thing, which is to change the sleeper moulding and make the check rail longer :lipssealed::lipssealed::lipssealed:
Click to expand...
So they 'just' need to re-tool, on probably obsolete machines..
Also having someone who recognises both the problem, and the solution..

I doubt they have the will, the finances, or the knowledge.

PhilP.
 
Software Tools said:
It's just not a problem for the vast majority of LGB users and is relatively easily fixed for those who do consider it an issue.



See above. There are other manufactures of R3 points, so it's not like there are no other options.
Click to expand...
OK, but what I found was that of the two locos I had at the time, it was the LGB loco that kicked the frog every time. I've seen it on one of Ken Edwards' Thomas videos as well ( but that would be a Bachmann loco).

As you say, I went elsewhere for my turnouts and got rid of the LGB ones.
 
Locomotives kicking abruptly sideways by the check rail just didn't look good so I made a simple solution -
IMG_20210228_123646776_HDR.jpg
A short length or rail, slightly curved and filed to a point. Some 'builders adhesive' holds it in position and all locomotives now run through smoothly. It probably doen't need to be that long but glueing to 3 sleepers gives the strongest bond.
You can often see the damage to the start of the LGB check rail where the wheel flanges have knocked into it. Perhaps they wear down with use?

HobbitFertang said:
They're catching on the blades and dropping into the rail-less sections
Click to expand...
Back to the original problem.

A most important consideration would be that the point and the adjacent tracks have to be completely flat. There must be no twist in the rail heights.

Many people recommend using a spirit level for checking but I prefer to use a flat board of about the same length as the rolling stock. Using a board will check the whole area of the point much better than a spirit level. If it doesn't rock at all that is good but most unlikely. A rocking movement of 1 mm corner to corner (which is the maximum of what you need) would be hard to detect by using a spirit level. Use a spirit level in conjunction with a board.
Not sure about your track base but the tracks can settle over time and what was a perfectly level track can develop derailing issues so definitely worth checking.

Alan
 
AlanL said:
Locomotives kicking abruptly sideways by the check rail just didn't look good so I made a simple solution -
View attachment 339534
A short length or rail, slightly curved and filed to a point. Some 'builders adhesive' holds it in position and all locomotives now run through smoothly. It probably doen't need to be that long but glueing to 3 sleepers gives the strongest bond.
You can often see the damage to the start of the LGB check rail where the wheel flanges have knocked into it. Perhaps they wear down with use?


Back to the original problem.

A most important consideration would be that the point and the adjacent tracks have to be completely flat. There must be no twist in the rail heights.

Many people recommend using a spirit level for checking but I prefer to use a flat board of about the same length as the rolling stock. Using a board will check the whole area of the point much better than a spirit level. If it doesn't rock at all that is good but most unlikely. A rocking movement of 1 mm corner to corner (which is the maximum of what you need) would be hard to detect by using a spirit level. Use a spirit level in conjunction with a board.
Not sure about your track base but the tracks can settle over time and what was a perfectly level track can develop derailing issues so definitely worth checking.

Alan
Click to expand...
Alan, that's an important point (ha ha!). Several of my points are distinctly un-flat or twisted so I think I've got some serious learning to do here!! In fact there's very little on my layout that is flat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top