Freight car truck side bearings

Burl Rice

Burl Rice

Registered
A while back, I decided to try making side bearings for my trucks. I used .012" phosphor-bronze wire (wound around a 1/32" wire for a mandrel) to make the spring. They are anchored to the bolster with 1/32" rivets. The bolster is 3d printed SLS nylon. If I could ever get around to finishing a freight car, I could tell you if they work or not.

side_bearing1.jpg


side_bearing2.jpg
 
On a practical side I think they would need to rub on another metalic surface to give some strength to the rubbing. Also perhaps some lubrication and cleaning once a Year depending on the amount of running they would get. It is a dusty dirty environment in the Garden. Would certainly help to stop any rocking that a vehicle might be tempted to do.
JonD
 
This is an interesting area - or one that interests me :nerd::nerd::nerd::nerd::nerd::nerd: and it is the 1:1 things that can be replicated in 1:20, and whether they work or not.

Bachmann and Accucraft have various methods of restraining lateral rocking which vary sometimes from model to model. Bachmann's most unsuccessful method IMHO was the 'legs' on the Connie tender bogies. This rigidity, allied to a lack of compensation within the bogie sideframes, and screws for securing the sideframes to the bolsters that were too short, eventually caused the mounting between bolster and sideframe to fail.

The problem is that there needs to be some lateral movement, because our garden railway tracks are rarely dead level - just like the real thing. With Accucraft wagons, I have always had to remove a couple of helix' from the bolster centre springs in order to give the bogie a bit more movement - I now do it as a matter of course with every new Accy wagon that I might acquire if SWMBO isn't looking :mask::mask::mask:

I wonder whether it would be better to have the side bearings on one bogie only, leaving the other to rock n' roll at will :think::think::think::think::think: it's the crudest form of compensation, but it would work.

The other thing that I have found to be essential, is to ensure some sideways movement in the axle boxes. I find that if they become a bit dry of oil, and the axles do not have any lateral movement; that's normally the first cause of de-railment. :nod::nod::nod::nod:
 
You raise some interesting points.

I have begun to look for solutions to some of our "garden railway" problems with the thinking: how did the prototype address it? Not currently having a layout to run on, I am doing a lot of my modeling just to see if I can build a particular item. All the while, I'm keeping the idea in the back of my mind, if I can make things work prototypically, things should run better when I have track down & can try them out. Suspension is an area I think the big box manufacturers have neglected.

When I first started trying to make a rotary coupler, I looked at what other people had tried, threw in a few of my own ideas, and began experimenting. Where I was hindered there was trying to make it fit a Kadee draft gear box (Nothing against Kadee - they make good stuff), but it just wasn't working for what I wanted to do. Then the light bulb came on: why not make a prototypical draft gear? It took a few weeks do figure out how to draw it all, but all the engineering problems had been solved by someone else.

Same idea with side bearings. I only copied what has already been engineered.
 
Burl Rice said:
Suspension is an area I think the big box manufacturers have neglected.
Click to expand...

Yes, and particularly locos - the Connie's strongest point is the adhesion generated from a sprung chassis; I'm surprised that it's not more common.
 
Rhinochugger said:
This is an interesting area - or one that interests me :nerd::nerd::nerd::nerd::nerd::nerd: and it is the 1:1 things that can be replicated in 1:20, and whether they work or not.

Bachmann and Accucraft have various methods of restraining lateral rocking which vary sometimes from model to model. Bachmann's most unsuccessful method IMHO was the 'legs' on the Connie tender bogies. This rigidity, allied to a lack of compensation within the bogie sideframes, and screws for securing the sideframes to the bolsters that were too short, eventually caused the mounting between bolster and sideframe to fail.

The problem is that there needs to be some lateral movement, because our garden railway tracks are rarely dead level - just like the real thing. With Accucraft wagons, I have always had to remove a couple of helix' from the bolster centre springs in order to give the bogie a bit more movement - I now do it as a matter of course with every new Accy wagon that I might acquire if SWMBO isn't looking :mask::mask::mask:

I wonder whether it would be better to have the side bearings on one bogie only, leaving the other to rock n' roll at will :think::think::think::think::think: it's the crudest form of compensation, but it would work.

The other thing that I have found to be essential, is to ensure some sideways movement in the axle boxes. I find that if they become a bit dry of oil, and the axles do not have any lateral movement; that's normally the first cause of de-railment. :nod::nod::nod::nod:
Click to expand...
I have in the past modified a Scratch Built Bogie Vehicle so the one bogie would rock left to right the other forwards and backwards. Made quite a difference to the quality of running.
JonD
 
Would the prototype not have rollers rather than rubbing pads? I don't know one way or the other but I was just thinking of methods used (once upon a time) in the British tramcar industry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom