If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

Tyre Flange Profiles

Discussion in 'Locomotive M.I.C.' started by David Withers, Mar 14, 2019.

Tags:
  1. David Withers

    David Withers New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired mechanical design engineer
    Location:
    North Cambridgeshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I'm preparing drawings of new brake blocks for the NVR's Danish 0-6-0T loco. These each have an extension that wraps over the tyre flange and follows it closely so as to locate the block laterally.

    I'm looking for a dimensioned drawing or sketch of P1 and P9 tyre profiles so as to specify the blocks correctly and would be grateful if someone could point me in the right direction.
     
  2. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    8,944
    Likes Received:
    3,841
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    You could have a look at https://www.rssb.co.uk/rgs/standards/GMRT2466 Iss 4.pdf although it doesn't give a dimensioned detail drawing.
    I wouldn't be bothered in closely following the profile, though. As you say, the important thing is that the wrap round the flange back is to prevent the blocks from 'flanging' and being forced outwards. I always leave a generous clearance round the flange profile if I have to make a pattern for a new block. I certainly can't see the logic of having different blocks for P1 & P9 tyres.
     
    David Withers likes this.
  3. David Withers

    David Withers New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired mechanical design engineer
    Location:
    North Cambridgeshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Many thanks for coming to my rescue again, Steve! The document and your comments together should be all I need, fingers crossed.

    I wasn't intending to have different blocks for P1 and P9; I used the plural as the blocks for the leading wheelset are different from those for the driving and trailing wheelsets. Unfortunately the difference is so great that we can't have the pattern for one adapted to make the other so will have to commission two separate patterns.
     
  4. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    8,944
    Likes Received:
    3,841
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Well, the next question I'll ask is why are the blocks different? The second question is do they need to be? Just curious.
     
  5. David Withers

    David Withers New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired mechanical design engineer
    Location:
    North Cambridgeshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Good questions!

    The blocks on the driving and trailing wheelsets are mounted partway down hangers in an area with ample space. Those on the leading wheelsets are mounted low down directly on the cross-shaft ends, pivoting from a short hanger, as space is very limited, and they are much heavier. The reason for them being heavier isn't apparent to me but may be related to reduced application leverage (less liable to bounce?).

    We couldn't use the same blocks all round as a significant redesign would be needed and this would have safety implications. That level of change would also deviate too far from 'preservation'.

    The brake block difference may have originated in Britain, since the engine genealogy goes back to four engines supplied to Denmark by R & W Hawthorn in 1873. In 1887 Otto Busse used the Hawthorns as the basis for his own design, 105 engines being built to this between 1889 and 1923 (one of the differences was the use of Allan rather than Stephenson's valve gear). A further 15 were built in 1949 to essentially the 1887 design as an expedient way of recovering from war devastation, the NVR's No. 656 being one of that batch.
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2019
  6. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    8,944
    Likes Received:
    3,841
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Having now looked at a photo of F No.654 I can see what you mean about the position of the front blocks. However, the photo that I'm looking at seems to show all the blocks being the same and not that massive, probably on a par with those fitted to Hs No. 385.
    I haven't been able to find a sufficiently good photo of 656 to compare.
     
  7. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    8,944
    Likes Received:
    3,841
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I know that this is no GA drawing but it looks as though the brake blocks are the same on all wheels. DSB Cl F.jpg
     
  8. David Withers

    David Withers New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired mechanical design engineer
    Location:
    North Cambridgeshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Though the 'wearing' part of each block is similar, you may be able to see that the leading block has a bigger hole and more meat around it. It is also chunkier in (unshown) end profile.

    Below is a DSB chart showing the weight and hole diameter differences between type 1671 (driving and trailing) and 1672 (leading), those on 656 'as received' being Mark I. The loco is shown as FII to distinguish from the Hawthorns which were the original class F. I also have copies of the original detail drawings which have legibility problems but confirm the size and weight differences.

    You can see from the chart that class Hs used type 1671, fitted to all wheels as you intimated.

    Brake Block - Overview.jpg
     
  9. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    8,944
    Likes Received:
    3,841
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Very interesting. You've obviously got a lot more fundamental information than me.
     
  10. David Withers

    David Withers New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired mechanical design engineer
    Location:
    North Cambridgeshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I've been collecting information, drawings and documents on the class for 16 years, including a research visit to Denmark in 2005.

    However I'm still learning when it comes to practical application, so thanks again for the help you've given via the Forum and in Conversation.
     
    Steve likes this.

Share This Page