RE: Nightmare Units

[Lee Hill]

The published figures in Aster's manual.

Lee

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of William F. Kaiser
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2000 9:51 AM
To: Multiple recipients of sslivesteam
Subject: Nightmare Units


On Thu, 10 Feb 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Subject: Re: Aster Safety Valves
>
>  Ok Lee  --  now how does that 4kg/cm2 convert to a language that we
> understand.   This old brain does not operate well on metric.   This
happens
> when one gets old and set in his (or her) ways.


Where did this messy mixture of units, Kg and Cm, come from?  My old
physics teacher used to say that if you mix MKS and CGS units in the same
calculation, you're heading for a wrong answer.

To make it worse, pressure is force per unit area.  Kg is a unit of mass,
not of force.  For any of this to make sense, the units should be
Newtons/Sq.M. or Dynes/Sq.Cm.

Let's stick with the real world and use PSI.  At least the units make
sense.

--
Bill Kaiser
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

There are three ways to do a job: good, cheap, and quick.
You can have any two.
A good, cheap job won't be quick.
A good, quick job won't be cheap.
A cheap, quick job won't be good.

 

RE: Nightmare Units

[Lee Hill]

There's a conversion table at http://www.wctc.net/~wallin/convert/cvert.html
which is the one I used to do the kg/cm2 conversion to lbs/sq.in.

As a newbie live steamer, neither of them translate to anything meaningful
to me since I can't see how 200lbs of steam pressure against a cylinder face
of x inches in diameter can move a multi-ton  Loco and it's consist, but it
does somehow. Especially when you consider that the piston rod cranks thru a
smaller diameter than the actual drive wheel, which performs it's work out
at the edge where it meets the rail.

My original point however was that (regardless of how you measure it) I've
observed that since my 1:22.5 scale model still requires about 30 pounds of
steam to move anything, and operates at around 60 lbs, it seems obvious that
steam pressure does not "scale" out in direct proportion to size and weight
for the amount of work it has to do. Given that the piston is roughly 1/22.5
the size of the prototype, but the weight of the loco at 13 pounds sure as
heck ain't. In other words, to me, models are not nearly as efficient as
prototypes.

Since I'm new at this, I guess the metric part doesn't bother me, since the
math still has to be done the same regardless.

Your earlier message to me had the point about force against the piston
which of course IS the bottom line, but it seems the force required to
perform the work gets greater (in proportion), as the machine gets smaller.

Just the physics of what I see, that's all.

Lee

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2000 12:14 PM
To: Multiple recipients of sslivesteam
Subject: Re: Nightmare Units


  Beg your pardon Kg is a weight unit in metric and therefore convertable to
pounds.   I know how confusing it gets,  as the company I was working for
prior to retirement was converting our documentation to metric units.  You
should see some of the other measurements that they can come up with, like
newtons - a measure of force etc.  One of the reasons that I retired a
little
early, at 64 this ol' brain didn't do metric.  There will always be the two
standards until the U.S decides to change entirely to metric.  The
conversion
process is a real nightmare.  Part of the product we manufactured used
metric
fastners, others used good old SAE.  Drawings were mostly metric but there
were older ones that were in English measurement.  As for the British
fastener threads that is another world,  Lord knows where they came up with
that one.   I am afraid that it will be a very long time before all the old
measurement standards go away,  it sure will not be in my lifetime.  I guess
that we will have to grin and bare it.   It's a good reason to keep your
pocket calculator handy, and a large conversion scale hung on the shop wall.
 

RE: Nightmare Units

[Lee Hill]

I posted a translation table earlier, but for convenience, I'll do it again.

http://www.wctc.net/~wallin/convert/cvert.html


It goes right with what you say here.

Lee
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Clark Lord
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2000 6:55 PM
To: Multiple recipients of sslivesteam
Subject: Re: Nightmare Units


I think of bars or kg/cm2 as atmospheres.  Loosely translated, multiply
the bar reading by 15 (really 14.7 psi on a standard day at sea level).

Therefore when you see 4 kg/cm2 it's around 60 psi or 3 kg/cm2 is around
45 psi and so on.  Close enough for live steamers out running at the
track.  If you need exact numbers then you will have to do the math.

Clark.

Peter Foley wrote:
>
> At 02:51 PM 00-02-14 -0500, you wrote:
>
> >Let's stick with the real world and use PSI.
>
> I think you need to re-think this one, Bill.  North America, and to a
> lesser extent the UK, is/are the last bastion(s) where this terminology is
> in regular use.  The rest of the world use 'bars' or kg/cm2, or some other
> expression that is SI based (metric to the non-initiated).  I'm afraid
that
> it will be us who will eventually have to catch up with the rest of the
world.
>
> regards,
>
> pf
 

International Dutch steamup

[bertie . tilmans]

Hello all,

Sunday on march 19th 2000 a spring steamup will by held at the National motorcar 
museum in Raamsdonksveer. Between the old-timers model engine
ers from Europe will demonstrate their models. This ranges from locomotives to 
stationary machines and everything in between. All in various scales including one 
half-size.
This event is organised by "Stoomgroep Zuid" (Southern Steam Society) and "Het 
Nationaal Automobielmuseum" (National motorcar museum). The address is Steurweg 8 in 
Raamsdonksveer. Next to the A 27 motorway exit nr. 20 near Geertruidenberg. I hope you 
all 
can pronounce these city names.

I remembered a fellow steam enthusiast asked something about the meths / water ratio 
in a steam locomotive, I did try to find the message in the groups archive but did not 
succeed. Last weekend during a two days steamup in a city called Breda, I took 
some notes about speed, timings and usage of water and fuel.

Engine type : a heavy modified Mamod 0-6-0 fitted with Wilesco cylinders (no RC)
Load : brass tender, four bolster cars each set loaded with two logs and a guards van
Track : continuous circle diameter 6 metre (indoors) stretched length 18.85 metre
Typical lap time : 36 seconds
Total running time : 3.8 hour
Distance covered : 6.9 kilometres
Water consumption : approx. 1 litre
Meths consumption : approx. 1/2 litre
Battery usage : two penlights rechargeable for the headlamps

Are these figures comparable with other small scale live-steam locomotives, or am I 
wasting to much fuel. Please let us know.

Greetings,

H.A. Tilmans (Bertie)
the Netherlands
ÿ

NEWBIE WITH A RUBY

[Casey Sterbenz]

Friends,

After some correspondence with Vance Bass and with his kind help getting 
over some initial problems with my Ruby, I'm on the list.  Ruby is my second 
live steam locomotive - my first is a scratch built "dickins" based on the 
articles that appeared in "Live Steam" back in 1976.  Some images of that 
model, along with some images of the frame of a 4-6-4 in 1-1/4" gauge that 
I'm building, are posted at 
http://privat.schlund.de/h/hubertwetekamp/oscaletrains/casey.htm.

My adventures with Ruby started out with some problems.  It would take 8-10 
minutes to get steam up and I had a very hard time keeping the flame going 
in the boiler flue.  It kept insisting on burning in the smoke box.  I 
consulted with Vance and he made several suggestions, one of which was to 
ensure that the burner had an airtight fit in the boiler flue.  (Just as an 
aside, some of Vance's e-mail to me had time stamps showing 2:00 AM.  You 
KNOW he is a dedicated fan!)  That suggestion made sense since the burner 
was loose in the flue.  By this time I had done 4 or 5 test runs with Ruby 
up on blocks.  Performance deteriorated on each successive run.  By the 
fifth run it was taking 12 minutes to get steam up and even with the 
throttle open only 1/4 turn the boiler quickly ran out of steam.

To seal the burner in the flue tube I tried wrapping some asbestos thread 
around the burner flange.  That bunched up when I inserted the burner back 
in the flue and did not seal the opening.  I then cut a strip of aluminum 
foil 1/8” wide and put two turns of this over the burner flange.  That 
worked – sort of.  I discovered the burner would not burn too well.  No 
matter how high I turned up the gas valve the burner would just sort of sit 
there, acting like something was blocking the fuel line.  It still took well 
over 10 minutes to get steam up and, with the wheels turning, the boiler 
would run out of steam in a minute or two.  When the fuel was exhausted 
after an 18 minute burn there was 50 ml of water remaining in the boiler of 
the original 80 ml.

Hm.  Something is still wrong.

I pulled the burner and removed the tube between the fuel tank and the 
burner to inspect everything for blockage.  Nothing apparent.  I pulled the 
screen off the burner and everything looked OK.  I even removed the throttle 
stem and the filler valve from the fuel tank to inspect them.  Nothing 
amiss.

I put everything back together, except that I left the burner out in open 
air to see how it would work.  It took 2 matches to get the burner lit and 
it burned very softly for about a minute, even with the fuel valve opened 
two full turns.  Then, the burner began to “wind up” until it was roaring.  
I hurriedly turned it down and now had full control over the burner from a 
very soft flame (with the valve barely opened) to a solid roar (with the 
valve opened a half turn).  I conjecture that, with my initial difficulties 
and the flame burning in the smoke box, the burner screen got clogged up 
with carbon deposits or something from incompletely burned fuel and oily 
water spatter from the steam exhaust.  Once that stuff burned off the burner 
began to function as it should.  All this took about 2 minutes of burning.

I shut down the burner and got ready for a test run.  I had Ruby on blocks 
over a metal pad on my work bench so the wheels could turn freely and so the 
oily steam condensate could be easily be cleaned up.  I rewrapped the burner 
flange with a fresh piece of aluminum foil, then inserted the burner into 
the boiler flue.  The burner lit off immediately on the first match and 
burned correctly in the boiler flue.  This time the safety valve was popping 
off in about 5 minutes and the wheels were turning a minute later, after I 
worked the water out of the cylinders.  With the fuel valve open about 3/8 
of a turn and the burner at a soft roar I could keep the engine at full 
throttle (two turns on the throttle valve) and still have the safety 
lifting.  The two foot high plume of steam from the stack showed up nicely 
in the cold air of my garage.  Very, very satisfying.

Not counting the initial 2 minutes with the burner going in open air, the 
fuel lasted something over 14 minutes, most of the time with the burner at a 
soft roar.  Cutting that back would doubtless add many minutes to the burn 
time.  At the end of the run, with the throttle cranked up high most of the 
time, there remained about 8 ml of water in the boiler.  In a more typical 
situation, with the wheels turning at an equivalent of about 20 mph the 
water should remain at quite a safe level throughout the burner operating 
time.  With the burner at a lower setting I won’t be losing steam through 
the safety valve and with the throttle at a lower setting I won’t be using 
quite so much water.  Those are things I'll try another day.

So, thats the first steps for me with this new machine.  I'm looking forward 
to putting together an outdoor track to let Ruby e

Re: Nightmare Units

[WKuehsel]

In a message dated 2/14/00 5:16:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

<< Beg your pardon Kg is a weight unit in metric and therefore convertable to 
 pounds >>


Sorry, Mass should not be confused with weight.  Mass and weight are two 
different quantities.  Mass is a term used to measure inertia.  The SI unit 
of mass is the Kilogram.  The weight of an object is equal to the force of 
gravity acting on the object and varies with location.  For example, an 
object weighing 180 pounds on earth will weigh about 30 pounds on the moon.  
However, the Mass of an object is the same everywhere.  A 10 kg Mass on earth 
is a 10 kg Mass on the moon.

Bill Kuehsel
Cold Spring, NY 

Re: Nightmare Units

[William F. Kaiser]

On Tue, 15 Feb 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> 
> In a message dated 2/14/00 5:16:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> << Beg your pardon Kg is a weight unit in metric and therefore convertable to 
>  pounds >>
> 
> 
> Sorry, Mass should not be confused with weight.  Mass and weight are two 
> different quantities.  Mass is a term used to measure inertia.  The SI unit 
> of mass is the Kilogram.  The weight of an object is equal to the force of 
> gravity acting on the object and varies with location.  For example, an 
> object weighing 180 pounds on earth will weigh about 30 pounds on the moon.  
> However, the Mass of an object is the same everywhere.  A 10 kg Mass on earth 
> is a 10 kg Mass on the moon.
> 
> Bill Kuehsel

Hooray!


I looked over the conversion table suggested by others.  Obviously, one
can multiply a number by a conversion factor and come up with another
number, but not necessarily with a meaningful unit.

I recall a number of years ago, when the USA was trying to metrify, that a
physicists society voted to censure the US congress for confusing the unit
of mass, Kg, with the unit of force, pound.  It seems that the rest of the
world has latched onto the same sort of confusion, and come up with
the useless unit of Kg/Cm^2.

Maybe we need to break with tradition, and express boiler pressure with
something like bushels / acre.


--
Bill Kaiser
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

There are three ways to do a job: good, cheap, and quick.
You can have any two.
A good, cheap job won't be quick.
A good, quick job won't be cheap.
A cheap, quick job won't be good.
 

Biography - Arthur W Walker

[ArtwalkJ98]

I live in Guildford, England, 59ys old & recently retired. Got hooked on  
playing trains some 20-25 ys.ago as a result of taking my two boys to 
preserved railways etc. They grew up, I suffered reversion.
Interests, Brit built locos for overseas, Dutch steam trams, & US locos- 
small stuff, partic sugar cane locos is what interests me. All gauges 
provided can be reduced to fit on 32 or 45 mil track. Therefore have built 
Hawaiian loco in 1/20 scale for 45mm ga & have just finished US Mogul 
inspired by southern states logging loco in 1/32 scale for 45mm ga. 
Well equipped with requisite mills & lathe but skills a bit marginal. Have 
built my own boilers but generally use Roundhouse cylinders & commercial 
fittings.
Member GIMRA, 16Mil Assoc & Guildford & Sutton MESs both of which have 32mil 
& 45 mil tracks. Apart from the activities of these societies addicted to 
attending Stoomgroep Zuid/Ramsdonksveer & Nienoord/Leek show in Netherlands & 
Diamondhead show in US plus Pickett's Lock & Midlands ME shows in UK.
Subscriber Ga1 Newsletter, 16mil Today, Onder Stoom (NL), Garden Rail (UK), 
Steam in the Garden & Australian Model Engineering.
No, I am not interested in Welsh 2-footers, but they are getting more 
interesting as Garratts & Baldwins come in from RSA.

Art 

Re: Nightmare Units

[ArtwalkJ98]

Well 'they' are winning but slowly. I am just back from a visit to Warco just 
outside Guildford, England, suppliers of Chinese & Taiwanese lathes & mills & 
I asked them what proportions of metric & imperial specified machines they 
sold. The reply was 60/40 in favour of metric, 'tho at the Yorkshire ME show 
the buyers overwhelmingly specified imperial. So there are still pockets of 
resistance in Anglosaxonia !

Art Walker, Guildford UK 

Re: Nightmare Units

[WaltSwartz]

Is that at mean sea level, or atop Mt. Everest? 

Re: Pipe Fittings

[SaltyChief]

In a message dated 00-02-14 23:59:54 EST, you write:

<< Neither of the above they are special taper. You can get more info from 
Cole's
 in Ventura CA. >>

 Well I am quite a ways from Ventura CA, and it would be quite a drive.  
Could Cole,s have a web page or catalog. 

Re: Pipe Fittings

[David M. Cole]

At 9:24 AM -0800 2/15/00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Could Cole,s have a web page or catalog.

Phone: (805) 643-0706. The catalog costs $4.

BTW, no relation.


---
Dave Cole
General Manager, Westline & Mussel Rock Railroad

Daly City, Calif. USA
List Mom: sslivesteam, the list of small-scale live steamers


 

Re: Nightmare Units

[SaltyChief]

 Lets all just face reality.   Some things you can scale to size and some 
things you can't.  Just make it look good, to hell with being accurate and to 
scale.
 Metric and English measurements will be around for the rest of most of 
our lives we are just going to have to deal with it.   
 Having worked in and around machine shops, sheet metal shops and in 
prototype fabrication the majority of my life I would highly reccomend that 
anyone who plans on doing any kind of machine work purchase a Machinery 
Handbook.  There is an unbleviable ammount of information in this one book on 
just about every aspect of metal fabrication.  They may be a little 
expensive, I think they are about $65.00 now, but the information that is in 
them amazing, more than you could imagine.  They have numerous pages on 
conversions of weights and measurements.  I would highly recommend this 
reference.

Lloyd F. 

Re: International Dutch steamup

[SaltyChief]

In a message dated 00-02-15 07:09:37 EST, you write:

<< Sunday on march 19th 2000 a spring steamup will by held at the National=
  motorcar museum in Raamsdonksveer. Between the old-timers model engine >>

Well I think I will pack my bagswhere the h#&& is Raamsdonksveer 
anyhow?

 I too have attempted to find out what fuel to water (or boiler size) 
would be only I was thinking in terms of butane fuel.  Mostly what I have 
heard is that there is really no formula or ratio to figure fuel to water 
ratio, it is more or less a trial and error method.  It appears that most 
model engineers have a general idea of how much fuel it takes to boil a given 
quantity of water and work from there.
I have a small steam locomotive that holds 85ml of water and at the end 
of a run when all the fuel is expended at least half of the water is 
remaning. I do not have any way to figure out how much fuel the tank contains 
other than by the size of the tank.  Once I figure a method of measuring the 
amount of fuel consumed I will be able to determine the ratio, however, it 
would only be appropriate for this particular boiler.  There is no way one 
could come up with a general formula or ratio as there are too many variables 
in the equation, boiler size, fuel type, burner type/size, and the work being 
done. etc.  I think perhaps by observation and study one can come up with a 
general formula / ratio for fuel - water but nothing absolute.

Lloyd F. 

Re: Pipe Fittings

[Cgnr]

In a message dated 2/15/2000 9:25:43 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

> Neither of the above they are special taper
I mentioned earlier about SSSteam Model's taps.  Bob seems to offer them in 
taper threads too.  I see no price difference between any of his styles.  BTW 
I have no association to his company.
Bob
 

Re: Nightmare Units

[Clark Lord]

Neither Walt.  It's the amount of pressure needed to open a Bud or Coors
or Miller's.:)

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> Is that at mean sea level, or atop Mt. Everest? 

Re: Nightmare Units

[SaltyChief]

In a message dated 00-02-15 08:34:03 EST, you write:

<< Sorry, Mass should not be confused with weight.  Mass and weight are two 
 different quantities. >>
  I do not want to seem to be a smart-ass but, sir, according to the 
Machinery's Handbook 21st edition (the handiest reference I had available) on 
page 2411  a kilogram, kg is a measurement of weight.  Unless it has changed 
since I retired.
I know I am getting old and set in my ways but you will have a little 
difficulty convincing me that I have been using kg as weight in my 
engineering technical reports for all these years.  If you want mass try 
kg/m3 (SI unit). 

Re: Nightmare Units

[SaltyChief]

I am sorry I got into the middle of this mess.  I really gotta learn to 
not respond to touchy subjects.Just remember  25.4.
It is all Lee's fault, he is the one that brought it up.

   I AM SORRY AND APOLOGIZE TO ANYONE WHO I MAY HAVE OFFENDED!!

Crotochity ol' Lloyd 

Re: Nightmare Units

[SaltyChief]

In a message dated 00-02-15 13:25:46 EST, you write:

<< Neither Walt.  It's the amount of pressure needed to open a Bud or Coors
 or Miller's.:) >>
  No, now your getting into pascals (Pa) and angular velocity (rad/s2) to 
open a can of Bud.  Also if you stay to the leeward side of the islands the 
sea isn't very mean!! 

CrtU factore or Crotchety Units

[Gary]

I like learning, and even more if there exists a little flair.
Thanks to everyone for sharing. Conversion of units and the concepts of what each
measure is actually describing is often a pain.

I am taking a community college course on cabinet making. Despite having used tools
for decades, I am learning a lot and relearning as well. I just wish there was a
machinist course for small steam engines. That would be fun to take!

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> I am sorry I got into the middle of this mess.  I really gotta learn to
> not respond to touchy subjects.Just remember  25.4.
> It is all Lee's fault, he is the one that brought it up.
>
>I AM SORRY AND APOLOGIZE TO ANYONE WHO I MAY HAVE OFFENDED!!
>
> Crotochity ol' Lloyd
 

RE: Nightmare Units

[Lee Hill]

Well that explains it. I live on the WINDWARD side of Oahu.

I take full responsibility for the mess here on this issue. (heh heh)

Now... If we're done with this bar room brawl over weight vs mass vs metric
vs imperial vs miller vs bud, can somebody PLEASE tell me why my little 13
POUND Loco requires at least 30 Pounds of steam pressure to even move, while
200 Pounds of steam will drive a multi-ton critter?

(Just to keep things on point you understand.)

I propose a round of Tequila Shots for the house and extra Nachos for the
best answer. I sure as heck don't know what it is.

Smiles,

Lee

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 9:09 AM
To: Multiple recipients of sslivesteam
Subject: Re: Nightmare Units


In a message dated 00-02-15 13:25:46 EST, you write:

<< Neither Walt.  It's the amount of pressure needed to open a Bud or Coors
 or Miller's.:) >>
  No, now your getting into pascals (Pa) and angular velocity (rad/s2) to
open a can of Bud.  Also if you stay to the leeward side of the islands the
sea isn't very mean!!
 

Re: Nightmare Units

[Geoff Spenceley]

Clark Lord and Pete Foley hit the nail on the head concerning bars/kg/cm2.
Of course Clark usually does hit the nail on the head--squarely!! For our
hobby, there is nothing complicated about the  conversion. Multiply 14.7
(or even 15) by the reading on the kg/cm2 and you have psi.  or vice versa.
The gauges on my air compressor have dual readings and when comparing them
with the 14.7 multiplier the amount of error is far too small to  worry
about. The inaccuracy of the gauges in our hobby is probably much greater.
We are not launching a shuttle using critical pressures, and frankly, to
resort to mathematical formulas is needless.
Since I have owned locos with metric  and psi  gauges for years I almost
automatically read them either way (practice!)

It seems to me that some members of our group like to get very technical on
some subjects  reaching far beyond  the requirements of our little engines.
The subject matter goes back and forth and gets beaten to death . It  is my
belief that some of these discussions go beyond the main interests of our
hobby!  Let's keep to the "nuts and bolts"-that's where my metric etc
nightmare lies!

Now I realise some members enjoy getting into "Cal-Tech" discussions beyond
the requirements of our locos--perhaps we should have  an
sslivesteam@colegroup. hitec.com as addtional forum!

Stay the course,

Geoff


I think of bars or kg/cm2 as atmospheres.  Loosely translated, multiply
>the bar reading by 15 (really 14.7 psi on a standard day at sea level).
>
>Therefore when you see 4 kg/cm2 it's around 60 psi or 3 kg/cm2 is around
>45 psi and so on.  Close enough for live steamers out running at the
>track.  If you need exact numbers then you will have to do the math.
>
>Clark.
>
>Peter Foley wrote:
>>
>> At 02:51 PM 00-02-14 -0500, you wrote:
>>
>> >Let's stick with the real world and use PSI.
>>
>> I think you need to re-think this one, Bill.  North America, and to a
>> lesser extent the UK, is/are the last bastion(s) where this terminology is
>> in regular use.  The rest of the world use 'bars' or kg/cm2, or some other
>> expression that is SI based (metric to the non-initiated).  I'm afraid that
>> it will be us who will eventually have to catch up with the rest of the
>>world.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> pf


 

Re: Nightmare Units

[WKuehsel]

In a message dated 2/15/00 1:47:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

<< Sorry, Mass should not be confused with weight.  Mass and weight are two 
  different quantities. >>
   I do not want to seem to be a smart-ass but, sir, according to the 
 Machinery's Handbook 21st edition (the handiest reference I had available) 
on 
 page 2411  a kilogram, kg is a measurement of weight.  Unless it has changed 
 since I retired.
 I know I am getting old and set in my ways but you will have a little 
 difficulty convincing me that I have been using kg as weight in my 
 engineering technical reports for all these years.  If you want mass try 
 kg/m3 (SI unit) >>


Sorry again, but you are wrong.  I will quote to you from "Fundamentals of 
Physics" by Halliday & Resnick, third edition, John Wiley publisher, page 86. 
This is a text used in engineering schools, and Resnick was/is a professor at 
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, a respected engineering school.

"The mass and the weight of a body are totally different properties.  They 
are often confused because, at any point near the earth's surface, they are 
proportional to each other.  For example, if you increase the number of 
marbles in a sack by 10%, you have increased both the mass and the weight of 
the marbles.  This proportionality means that you can measure the mass of a 
body by measuring its weight and conversely.  It also leads to unit 
borrowing, so that mass units are sometimes used to specify weight and the 
other way around.  We need to be very clear about mass and weight.

Mass
Mass is a scalar, its SI unit being the kilogram.  The mass of a body - one 
of its intrinsic properties - may be found by comparing the body with the 
standard kilogram.  The mass of a body is the same on the earth's surface, in 
an orbiting satellite, on Mars, or in interstellar space.  If you kick a 
bowling ball and stub your toe, its the mass of the ball that accounts for 
your misery.

Weight
Weight is a vector (a force), its SI unit being the Newton.  The weight of a 
body - unlike its mass - is not an intrinsic property of the body.  If the 
mass of a body is M, its weight is defined from  W=m*g, in which g is the 
free fall acceleration at the location of the body.  Thus, the weight of a 
body depends on its location because g varies from point to point.  The 
weight of a certain bowling ball, for example, is 71 Newtons on the earth's 
surface, 27 N on Mars, and 12 N on the Moon.  Its mass is 7.2 kg in all three 
places.  When a child tries to lift a bowling ball from the floor, it is its 
weight that the child complains about"


Sorry for the tutorial.  But contrary to Machinery's Handbook, mass is not 
weight.  I hope they have corrected the error in later editions

Bill Kuehsel
Cold Spring, NY 

Re: Nightmare Units

[Jim Curry]

>Now... If we're done with this bar room brawl<

Is that a pun on the discussion - "bar" room brawl?



>can somebody PLEASE tell me why my little 13
POUND Loco requires at least 30 Pounds of steam pressure to even move, while
200 Pounds of steam will drive a multi-ton critter?<

Your 9/16 diameter cylinder has .248 square inches, multiplied by 30 psi =
7.4 lbs.  driving each cylinder.

Then take a 20" diameter cylinder having 314 square inches, multiplied by
200 psi = 62,832 lbs. of force driving each cylinder.

So, the ratio is not 30/200 but 7.4/62,832.

Jim


 

BAGRS Kit--Getting Started (Long)

[Dr. Robert M Blackson]

   A couple weeks ago Michael Martin asked for reactions to the BAGRS
project loco, and I wrote to him with a couple of my concerns about the
BAGRS loco as well as with a request for sources of information for rank
beginners in small-scale live steam. Michael responded to me with a most
thoughtful and thorough reply, and he suggested that if I found his
comments useful I might want to forward them to the list.  I am quite
pleased to do so and expect that others will profit from his remarks. I
should add that the article on silver soldering to which Michael refers
is entitled "The Art of Silver Soldering" and is to be found in the
March/April 1996 issue of _Live Steam_, and that back issue is still
available (as of Feb. 9) and may be ordered by telephoning 800-447-7367.
Bob Blackson
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2000 21:43:43 -0800
From: Michael Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Dr. Robert M Blackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: BAGRS kit reaction

Bob,

You bring up several interesting points.  Please let it be understood that my
rebuttal is not in any way intended to invalidate your observations.  In fact,
I appreciate your spending the time to elaborate on the reservations you have
that may be shared by others.  I am concerned that this lack of basic
information may still prevent potential live steamers from joining the ranks.
I must take the blame for not "spreading the word" better.  The Project Engine
was designed with the intent of giving people enough confidence to "jump in".
The fact is, I never envisioned the world wide attention that the engine seems
to have garnered.  I am always available at local steamups to help with
questions and have spent countless hours helping people learn about running
live steam engines (usually by putting them in charge of one of my locos).
The following points need to be made clear to any prospective builder of this
engine.  If you feel that this is of help, feel free to forward this letter to
the small scale live steam list.



Dr. Robert M Blackson wrote:

>My first reaction or opinion regarding the BAGRS project is the need to
> have an assembled boiler available.  As a rank beginner, and I still am, I
> have no experience with silver soldering whatsoever;

The boiler that is part of the Midwest kit is designed by the manufacturer to
be assembled with ordinary soft solder.  The pressure it operates at is about
10 to 15 psi.  The temperature at that pressure will not get high enough to be
a problem.  Any solder available at your local hardware store that has a
melting point above 400 degrees fahrenheit will work well.  If you would like
to avoid the lead fumes, consider one of the many lead free solders made for
household plumbing repairs.  You may also use "silver bearing solder" which is
still a low melting point "soft solder" that contains about 5% silver.  It is
somewhat stronger than ordinary "plumbing" solder but does not require any
special skills or equipment.  The liquid flux required is readily available in
the same section of the hardware store.  I used "Staybrite" brand.  You still
need plenty of ventilation when working with these kinds of chemicals.
Outdoors is ideal.  The amount of heat required to successfully solder the
boiler in one operation is available from any of the standard multi-purpose
propane torches that are available at the hardware store.  The key is to
thoroughly clean the mating surfaces with medium-fine sandpaper, apply a
liberal amount of flux, and avoid playing the flame on the joints.  The heat
is conducted to the joints quite well by the copper portions of the boiler.
(I set the parts up on ordinary bricks that were arranged to support the
flue.)  The whole assembly must be allowed several minutes to cool before
being disturbed.  The engine requires considerably more skill to cleanly
assemble than does the boiler.  That said, it's not all that difficult and is
exactly the sort of skill builder that will give you pride and may lead to
more advanced projects.


> I am not excited about working with cadmium fumes.

Neither is OSHA.  The vast majority of silver solders no longer contain
cadmium.  Manufacturers are required by law to disclose the contents of their
silver solder alloys.


> I doubt that other entry-level people to whom the BAGRS project is directed
> have experience in silver soldering,

True, yet in many ways it is easier to master than soft soldering.  I would
encourage you to try your hand at it if you have a chance. (Not on the Project
Engine) The temperature requirements are greater of course, but don't let that
discourage you from experimenting with small workpieces.  You can easily bring
small parts up to a dull red heat with a household propane torch.  I have a
tiny little butane torch that I purchased for under $10 that is ideal for
really small jobs where precise application of heat is required.


>Second, the engine on the project loco is, I believe, referred to as a
> 

Re: Nightmare Units

[Peter Foley]

At 03:01 PM 00-02-15 -0500, Bill Keuhsel wrote:

>Sorry again, but you are wrong.  I will quote to you from "Fundamentals of 
>Physics" by Halliday & Resnick, third edition, John Wiley publisher, page 86. 
>This is a text used in engineering schools, and Resnick was/is a professor at 

Please don't.  If you really feel the need to straighten him out, please
take it off list.  

rta,


Peter Foley
Hamilton, Ontario. 

RE: Nightmare Units

[Lee Hill]

Jim,

Excellent. Thank you!

Wish I could take credit for the pun, but you're the guy that noticed it,
not me.

See my response to Geoff Spence...

There really was a point to my originating this mess and you hit right on
it.

Lee

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Jim Curry
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 10:31 AM
To: Multiple recipients of sslivesteam
Subject: Re: Nightmare Units


>Now... If we're done with this bar room brawl<

Is that a pun on the discussion - "bar" room brawl?



>can somebody PLEASE tell me why my little 13
POUND Loco requires at least 30 Pounds of steam pressure to even move, while
200 Pounds of steam will drive a multi-ton critter?<

Your 9/16 diameter cylinder has .248 square inches, multiplied by 30 psi =
7.4 lbs.  driving each cylinder.

Then take a 20" diameter cylinder having 314 square inches, multiplied by
200 psi = 62,832 lbs. of force driving each cylinder.

So, the ratio is not 30/200 but 7.4/62,832.

Jim



 

RE: Nightmare Units

[Lee Hill]

Geoff,

I hope your not holding me too responsible for getting too technical since I
started this, but there really was a point I wanted to address and learn
about.

Namely,

If I start out to design a model Loco, what formula (if there is one), can I
apply to calculate how much steam pressure I need to generate, on what size
piston, to move x amount of weight?

(Since it's obvious that models need PROPORTIONATELY more steam pressure to
work than prototypes. I wasn't sure everyone would even agree with this at
first...)

Charles Dockstader's software (which you can get from Vance Bass's site)
does a great job of demonstrating valve gear layout and modifications, but
the pressure issue is not one I've seen specifically addressed anywhere.

Jim Curry posted the answer I was looking for.

AND...

I thank EVERYONE for their input on this, including the digression into
measuring systems.

Thanks,

Lee

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Geoff Spenceley
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 9:46 AM
To: Multiple recipients of sslivesteam
Subject: Re: Nightmare Units


Clark Lord and Pete Foley hit the nail on the head concerning bars/kg/cm2.
Of course Clark usually does hit the nail on the head--squarely!! For our
hobby, there is nothing complicated about the  conversion. Multiply 14.7
(or even 15) by the reading on the kg/cm2 and you have psi.  or vice versa.
The gauges on my air compressor have dual readings and when comparing them
with the 14.7 multiplier the amount of error is far too small to  worry
about. The inaccuracy of the gauges in our hobby is probably much greater.
We are not launching a shuttle using critical pressures, and frankly, to
resort to mathematical formulas is needless.
Since I have owned locos with metric  and psi  gauges for years I almost
automatically read them either way (practice!)

It seems to me that some members of our group like to get very technical on
some subjects  reaching far beyond  the requirements of our little engines.
The subject matter goes back and forth and gets beaten to death . It  is my
belief that some of these discussions go beyond the main interests of our
hobby!  Let's keep to the "nuts and bolts"-that's where my metric etc
nightmare lies!

Now I realise some members enjoy getting into "Cal-Tech" discussions beyond
the requirements of our locos--perhaps we should have  an
sslivesteam@colegroup. hitec.com as addtional forum!

Stay the course,

Geoff


I think of bars or kg/cm2 as atmospheres.  Loosely translated, multiply
>the bar reading by 15 (really 14.7 psi on a standard day at sea level).
>
>Therefore when you see 4 kg/cm2 it's around 60 psi or 3 kg/cm2 is around
>45 psi and so on.  Close enough for live steamers out running at the
>track.  If you need exact numbers then you will have to do the math.
>
>Clark.
>
>Peter Foley wrote:
>>
>> At 02:51 PM 00-02-14 -0500, you wrote:
>>
>> >Let's stick with the real world and use PSI.
>>
>> I think you need to re-think this one, Bill.  North America, and to a
>> lesser extent the UK, is/are the last bastion(s) where this terminology
is
>> in regular use.  The rest of the world use 'bars' or kg/cm2, or some
other
>> expression that is SI based (metric to the non-initiated).  I'm afraid
that
>> it will be us who will eventually have to catch up with the rest of the
>>world.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> pf



 

I Apologize!!

[SaltyChief]

 Geoff, Lee and all others.  My apologies  I am the Dumb A## that stirred up 
this hornets nest.  Partially trying to be funny and partially trying to 
figure out what the pressure in metric converted to english units.  I should 
have kept my trap shut (or fingers off the keyboard).
  I am just an old codger who was brought up on the english measurement 
system and find it difficult to convert.  It has been a sore spot with me 
when I get drawings that are in metric and all my tools and instruments are 
in english.


  PLEASE FORGIVE MY MISGUIDED ATTEMPT AT HUMOR!!! 

Re: I Apologize!!

[WKuehsel]

In a message dated 2/15/00 6:20:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

<< 
  Geoff, Lee and all others.  My apologies  I am the Dumb A## that stirred up 
 this hornets nest.  Partially trying to be funny and partially trying to 
 figure out what the pressure in metric converted to english units.  I should 
 have kept my trap shut (or fingers off the keyboard).
   I am just an old codger who was brought up on the english measurement 
 system and find it difficult to convert.  It has been a sore spot with me 
 when I get drawings that are in metric and all my tools and instruments are 
 in english.
  >>
Why apologize for anything.  You had a legitimate concern.  Many people are 
confused about Mass and Weight and the Metric and English systems.  When I 
had similar problems, tI wish there was a forum I could go to get help.  But, 
at that time, there wasn't.  Regardless of what others may say about a 
specific issue, I always felt these lists were to serve a broad constituency 
of interests and abilities.  If I am not interested, I can always ignore the 
posting.

Bill Kuehsel 

Re: Nightmare Units/ K4 mods

[Phil. Paskos]

O.K.Clark;
Thanks for the info. I will call them and get the gauge. I measured the
glass and according to Sulphur Springs the 6mm glass is what we'll need. The
fun part comes in identifying  the threads on the fitting. The assembly
manual calls it 8-3. This is further identified as an M6 locknut.  We're
getting closer now right? Wrong. They identify the hardware in the front of
the manual, but don't tell us what threads are on the M6 nut. ARGHH!   The
thread gauge should do the trick. Then all I have to do is find a source for
the threaded
fittings I need. Drilling and tapping the new block will be the easy part of
this project. I'm also going to make the burner mode right away. That one is
pretty easy. By the way Clark, How does your burner fit in the boiler? Mine
is a bit looser than I'd like.

Phil.P. Reading,Pa.

> Phil.  I too have a K4 that needs the same mod.  I haven't done it yet.
> But you asked about thread gauges.  I got my dual Metric / SAE gauge
> from Travers Tool Co.  On page 613 of their catalog one finds Screw
> Pitch Gages by Products Engineering Co (PEC) tools in several
> combinations.  Model 5629 has SAE on one end and metric on the other.
> Costs $13.50.  Phone 1-800-221-0270.
>
> As a quick and dirty attempt I tried to screw in a 1/4-32ME tap and a
> 1/4-40ME tap into the sight glass bush on my dead K4 boiler carcass
> without success.  Sorry I couldn't give you the exact size.  Maybe later
> when I get into myself.
>
> Clark
>
> "Phil. Paskos" wrote:
> >
> > I bought an Aster K4 and want to make the sight glass mod to it. The
> > original is to low and when you can see the line at the top of the glass
> > you're already to low on water. The problem is figuring out what the
thread
> > sizes are on the fitting that has to be moved up. It's 6mm (I think),
but
> > the Aster manual doesn't give what threads are on it. Metric thread
gauges
> > are scarce items in these parts and the regular American gauge is Way
over
> > priced.
> >
> > Any suggestions?
> > Phil.P. Reading,Pa.
 

Re: I Apologize!!

[Jim Curry]

Go do three Hail Mary's and you're forgiven.

Jim
 

Re: I Apologize!!

[Ktaylorlv]

In a message dated 2/15/2000 6:52:10 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

>   Many people are 
>  confused about Mass and Weight and the Metric and English systems. 
I'm confused also, but my wife says if I'm concerned about mass I should eat 
less!
Keith 

Re: Nightmare Units

[McDavid]

Lee,

Get your calculator out and figure the thrust on the surface of a 1/2 dia
piston at 30 psi and the thrust on a 18 inch dia piston at 200 psi and I
think that should answer it for you.

Jim McDavid

-Original Message-
From: Lee Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Multiple recipients of sslivesteam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 11:31 AM
Subject: RE: Nightmare Units


>Well that explains it. I live on the WINDWARD side of Oahu.
>
>I take full responsibility for the mess here on this issue. (heh heh)
>
>Now... If we're done with this bar room brawl over weight vs mass vs metric
>vs imperial vs miller vs bud, can somebody PLEASE tell me why my little 13
>POUND Loco requires at least 30 Pounds of steam pressure to even move,
while
>200 Pounds of steam will drive a multi-ton critter?
>
>(Just to keep things on point you understand.)
>
>I propose a round of Tequila Shots for the house and extra Nachos for the
>best answer. I sure as heck don't know what it is.
>
>Smiles,
>
>Lee
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
>Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 9:09 AM
>To: Multiple recipients of sslivesteam
>Subject: Re: Nightmare Units
>
>
>In a message dated 00-02-15 13:25:46 EST, you write:
>
><< Neither Walt.  It's the amount of pressure needed to open a Bud or Coors
> or Miller's.:) >>
>  No, now your getting into pascals (Pa) and angular velocity (rad/s2) to
>open a can of Bud.  Also if you stay to the leeward side of the islands the
>sea isn't very mean!!
>


 

Re: International Dutch steamup/East Coast Steamup

[Phil. Paskos]

Anyone in the cold dreary middle Atlantic Region might want to go to
Steamtown in Scranton this weekend for the : PRESIDENT'S DAY WEEKEND ; FEB
19-21 AT The museum in Scranton ,Pa. 9-5 PM Sat,Sun, and Mon.  There will be
several Gauge 1 tracks set up in the roundhouse plus some large scale
electrics.

Phil.P. Reading,Pa.


> << Sunday on march 19th 2000 a spring steamup will by held at the
National=
>   motorcar museum in Raamsdonksveer. Between the old-timers model engine
>>
>

 

Re: Nightmare Units/Pressure

[Phil. Paskos]

Not to make you feel bad Lee, but it's only the later steam engines that ran
on 200 to 300 Lbs. of pressure. The early engines ran on a lot less. Some
things scale down the way you think they should. others don't.

Phil.P. Reading,Pa.



> Now... If we're done with this bar room brawl over weight vs mass vs
metric
> vs imperial vs miller vs bud, can somebody PLEASE tell me why my little 13
> POUND Loco requires at least 30 Pounds of steam pressure to even move,
while
> 200 Pounds of steam will drive a multi-ton critter?
>
> (Just to keep things on point you understand.)
>
> I propose a round of Tequila Shots for the house and extra Nachos for the
> best answer. I sure as heck don't know what it is.
>
> Smiles,
>
> Lee
>

 

RE: Nightmare Units

[Geoff Spenceley]

No, NO! Lee--I wasn't referring to your comments--but some folks carried
them  into outer space.  Your queries below are very applicable to our
hobby where  scratch builders need this info. (sorry I can't help!)  We
have to be very technical at times--my concern is keeping the technical
stuff within our hobby.--That's all.--Wait--How DARE you appologise
SaltyChief --you add so much to our group-- your humor too-besides. I'm an
old codger, as you no doubt recognize! I sold construction  and industrial
air compressors during my career which makes me think I'm smart--UGH!

Tally Ho

Geoff.

>Geoff,
>
>I hope your not holding me too responsible for getting too technical since I
>started this, but there really was a point I wanted to address and learn
>about.
>
>Namely,
>
>If I start out to design a model Loco, what formula (if there is one), can I
>apply to calculate how much steam pressure I need to generate, on what size
>piston, to move x amount of weight?
>
>(Since it's obvious that models need PROPORTIONATELY more steam pressure to
>work than prototypes. I wasn't sure everyone would even agree with this at
>first...)
>
>Charles Dockstader's software (which you can get from Vance Bass's site)
>does a great job of demonstrating valve gear layout and modifications, but
>the pressure issue is not one I've seen specifically addressed anywhere.
>
>Jim Curry posted the answer I was looking for.
>
>AND...
>
>I thank EVERYONE for their input on this, including the digression into
>measuring systems.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Lee
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
>Behalf Of Geoff Spenceley
>Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 9:46 AM
>To: Multiple recipients of sslivesteam
>Subject: Re: Nightmare Units
>
>
>Clark Lord and Pete Foley hit the nail on the head concerning bars/kg/cm2.
>Of course Clark usually does hit the nail on the head--squarely!! For our
>hobby, there is nothing complicated about the  conversion. Multiply 14.7
>(or even 15) by the reading on the kg/cm2 and you have psi.  or vice versa.
>The gauges on my air compressor have dual readings and when comparing them
>with the 14.7 multiplier the amount of error is far too small to  worry
>about. The inaccuracy of the gauges in our hobby is probably much greater.
>We are not launching a shuttle using critical pressures, and frankly, to
>resort to mathematical formulas is needless.
>Since I have owned locos with metric  and psi  gauges for years I almost
>automatically read them either way (practice!)
>
>It seems to me that some members of our group like to get very technical on
>some subjects  reaching far beyond  the requirements of our little engines.
>The subject matter goes back and forth and gets beaten to death . It  is my
>belief that some of these discussions go beyond the main interests of our
>hobby!  Let's keep to the "nuts and bolts"-that's where my metric etc
>nightmare lies!
>
>Now I realise some members enjoy getting into "Cal-Tech" discussions beyond
>the requirements of our locos--perhaps we should have  an
>sslivesteam@colegroup. hitec.com as addtional forum!
>
>Stay the course,
>
>Geoff
>
>
>I think of bars or kg/cm2 as atmospheres.  Loosely translated, multiply
>>the bar reading by 15 (really 14.7 psi on a standard day at sea level).
>>
>>Therefore when you see 4 kg/cm2 it's around 60 psi or 3 kg/cm2 is around
>>45 psi and so on.  Close enough for live steamers out running at the
>>track.  If you need exact numbers then you will have to do the math.
>>
>>Clark.
>>
>>Peter Foley wrote:
>>>
>>> At 02:51 PM 00-02-14 -0500, you wrote:
>>>
>>> >Let's stick with the real world and use PSI.
>>>
>>> I think you need to re-think this one, Bill.  North America, and to a
>>> lesser extent the UK, is/are the last bastion(s) where this terminology
>is
>>> in regular use.  The rest of the world use 'bars' or kg/cm2, or some
>other
>>> expression that is SI based (metric to the non-initiated).  I'm afraid
>that
>>> it will be us who will eventually have to catch up with the rest of the
>>>world.
>>>
>>> regards,
>>>
>>> pf
>
>
>
>


 

Re: I Apologize!!

[WaltSwartz]

Did you forget an apostrostroke (  '  )in that word? 

Re: Nightmare Units

[Geoff Spenceley]

Amen, Peter!

Geoff.


At 03:01 PM 00-02-15 -0500, Bill Keuhsel wrote:
>
>>Sorry again, but you are wrong.  I will quote to you from "Fundamentals of
>>Physics" by Halliday & Resnick, third edition, John Wiley publisher, page
>>86.
>>This is a text used in engineering schools, and Resnick was/is a
>>professor at
>
>Please don't.  If you really feel the need to straighten him out, please
>take it off list.
>
>rta,
>
>
>Peter Foley
>Hamilton, Ontario.


 

Units

[WaltSwartz]

I am not, and never have, considered myself a modeler or a miniaturist. I 
feel that the level of frustration produced by such endeavors are not worth 
the effort -- as far as I am concerned, there never has been and never will 
be, a true "scale model" of anything UNTIL you come up with a way to make 
scale atoms and molecules!
Nuff said, now lets just have fun playing with these fascinating little 
critters, no matter how you measure them!
Keep your steam up!
Walt &  Mr. Lunkenheimer
 

RE: Apologies? Huh?

[Lee Hill]

Yeah I'm not sure there were EVER any apologies necessary here for any of
this.

The problem with the d*mn computer communication is that you can't see the
look on someone's face or hear the tone of their voice. (Always been one of
it's BIGGEST shortcomings in the "chat" area.)

So to iterate...

Hey... I got my question answered, learned something, and had a rousing good
beer brawl over it. No way I'm complaining!

The extra Nachos tho, go to Jim Curry for reminding me "gee... I shoulda
thunk 'o that myself". DUH! (With a nod to McDavid for ringing in at the
last minute with the same solution).

Again,
Thanks to ALL

Aloha! By all means!

Lee

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Geoff Spenceley
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 2:53 PM
To: Multiple recipients of sslivesteam
Subject: RE: Nightmare Units


No, NO! Lee--I wasn't referring to your comments--but some folks carried
them  into outer space.  Your queries below are very applicable to our
hobby where  scratch builders need this info. (sorry I can't help!)  We
have to be very technical at times--my concern is keeping the technical
stuff within our hobby.--That's all.--Wait--How DARE you appologise
SaltyChief --you add so much to our group-- your humor too-besides. I'm an
old codger, as you no doubt recognize! I sold construction  and industrial
air compressors during my career which makes me think I'm smart--UGH!

Tally Ho

Geoff.

>Geoff,
>
>I hope your not holding me too responsible for getting too technical since
I
>started this, but there really was a point I wanted to address and learn
>about.
>
>Namely,
>
>If I start out to design a model Loco, what formula (if there is one), can
I
>apply to calculate how much steam pressure I need to generate, on what size
>piston, to move x amount of weight?
>
>(Since it's obvious that models need PROPORTIONATELY more steam pressure to
>work than prototypes. I wasn't sure everyone would even agree with this at
>first...)
>
>Charles Dockstader's software (which you can get from Vance Bass's site)
>does a great job of demonstrating valve gear layout and modifications, but
>the pressure issue is not one I've seen specifically addressed anywhere.
>
>Jim Curry posted the answer I was looking for.
>
>AND...
>
>I thank EVERYONE for their input on this, including the digression into
>measuring systems.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Lee
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
>Behalf Of Geoff Spenceley
>Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 9:46 AM
>To: Multiple recipients of sslivesteam
>Subject: Re: Nightmare Units
>
>
>Clark Lord and Pete Foley hit the nail on the head concerning bars/kg/cm2.
>Of course Clark usually does hit the nail on the head--squarely!! For our
>hobby, there is nothing complicated about the  conversion. Multiply 14.7
>(or even 15) by the reading on the kg/cm2 and you have psi.  or vice versa.
>The gauges on my air compressor have dual readings and when comparing them
>with the 14.7 multiplier the amount of error is far too small to  worry
>about. The inaccuracy of the gauges in our hobby is probably much greater.
>We are not launching a shuttle using critical pressures, and frankly, to
>resort to mathematical formulas is needless.
>Since I have owned locos with metric  and psi  gauges for years I almost
>automatically read them either way (practice!)
>
>It seems to me that some members of our group like to get very technical on
>some subjects  reaching far beyond  the requirements of our little engines.
>The subject matter goes back and forth and gets beaten to death . It  is my
>belief that some of these discussions go beyond the main interests of our
>hobby!  Let's keep to the "nuts and bolts"-that's where my metric etc
>nightmare lies!
>
>Now I realise some members enjoy getting into "Cal-Tech" discussions beyond
>the requirements of our locos--perhaps we should have  an
>sslivesteam@colegroup. hitec.com as addtional forum!
>
>Stay the course,
>
>Geoff
>
>
>I think of bars or kg/cm2 as atmospheres.  Loosely translated, multiply
>>the bar reading by 15 (really 14.7 psi on a standard day at sea level).
>>
>>Therefore when you see 4 kg/cm2 it's around 60 psi or 3 kg/cm2 is around
>>45 psi and so on.  Close enough for live steamers out running at the
>>track.  If you need exact numbers then you will have to do the math.
>>
>>Clark.
>>
>>Peter Foley wrote:
>>>
>>> At 02:51 PM 00-02-14 -0500, you wrote:
>>>
>>> >Let's stick with the real world and use PSI.
>>>
>>> I think you need to re-think this one, Bill.  North America, and to a
>>> lesser extent the UK, is/are the last bastion(s) where this terminology
>is
>>> in regular use.  The rest of the world use 'bars' or kg/cm2, or some
>other
>>> expression that is SI based (metric to the non-initiated).  I'm afraid
>that
>>> it will be us who will eventually have to catch up with the rest of the
>>>world.
>>>
>>> regards,
>>>
>>> pf
>
>
>
>



 

In-line twin Again

[Carl H. Malone, O.D.]

Some info to pass along...
>From a previous posts concerning ossicilating in-line steam power plants
I ended up aquiring a Cheddar machined engine kit. It was and easy bolt
together job that took an evening and has now been steam tested with
good results.
Now, to build the rest of the locomotive! (class A climax)
Photos at http://web2.airmail.net/cmalone/temp/twin.htm

Carl Malone
Algerita Botanical Railway
San Angelo, TX
http://web2.airmail.net/cmalone 

Re:boiler pressure

[Gary Broeder]

>
>As a newbie live steamer, neither of them translate to anything meaningful
>to me since I can't see how 200lbs of steam pressure against a cylinder face
>of x inches in diameter can move a multi-ton  Loco and it's consist, but it
>does somehow. 



Remember that is 200 PSI. There is 200 pounds pushing on every square inch of surface 
on that piston!

GaryB ( I remember from the 60s that a kilo was always 2.2046 Lbs.!) 

RE: Units

[Lee Hill]

I hear you. Neither am I and I never will be. But it won't stop me from
playing with toy steam trains.

It's a "Catch 22". If you have a sparkie model steam loco, you can detail it
to the nines but it's still not a steam engine anyway you look at it. On the
other hand, with a model steam engine, there's no way you can scale the
details of the inside cab, tender or whatever, due to the mechanisms
involved to make it work in a controllable manner.

BTW, have you seen the Faberge Egg with the wind up scale model of the
Siberian Express in it that actually runs? I don't think you could build a
live steamer this small. But I don't wanna start another beer brawl over it.

(Smiles)

Lee

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 3:02 PM
To: Multiple recipients of sslivesteam
Subject: Units


I am not, and never have, considered myself a modeler or a miniaturist. I
feel that the level of frustration produced by such endeavors are not worth
the effort -- as far as I am concerned, there never has been and never will
be, a true "scale model" of anything UNTIL you come up with a way to make
scale atoms and molecules!
Nuff said, now lets just have fun playing with these fascinating little
critters, no matter how you measure them!
Keep your steam up!
Walt &  Mr. Lunkenheimer

 

Re: Units

[SaltyChief]

   Speaking of units  when I was surfing the web I ran across somewhere that 
a modeler had built a N guage live steam engine that really runs.  Honest,  I 
am an old sailor and old sailors never lie!!  Really! 

Re: Nightmare Units/ K4 mods

[Clark Lord]

"Phil. Paskos" wrote:
//snip//
> By the way Clark, How does your burner fit in the boiler? Mine
> is a bit looser than I'd like.

Mine is snug.  You can tighten it some by taping close the copper flange
on the boiler tube.  I have several projects ahead of the K4 fix so it
will be a time before I get to it.  I am interested in your leading the
way for us on this mod.  I'm really glad that we discovered this
information while at Diamondhead 2000.  That week is always full of fun
and discovery.

Clark