What Sort Of Locomotive Is Best For The Narrow-Gauge Railway?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 лис 2021
- Which sort of train should I build - or try to build?
By the way, there's a Facebook group called Minimal Railways for people who want to make small but useful railway lines.
Here's our main UA-cam channel.. / wayoutwestx2
And here's my online shop www.ironpig.ie
And here's our Patreon page if you could spare a little to help.. www.patreon.com/user?u=2761318
And here's the Fairtube Union's page - fairtube.info/
If you need to contact me ... rustyironpig @ gmail.com
I think Sandra is the most sustainable option, though the need for constant maintenance might be an issue. She seems super able and ready for anything though and well worth any investment you can come up with. Cheers
If Sandra is anything like my wife,then it would not be a suitable option. They are high maintenance and very temperamental under load😁
@@philleeson7835 From the videos, she's nothing at all like my wife and I suspect yours too. Such is our lot, I've afraid. Still - for putting up with us, they're all keepers, I'm sure. :)
Yeah, but how long does it take to get her into a harness ?
@@massimookissed1023 That is BAAAAAADDDDD!!!!!! VERRRRRRRRY BAAAADDD!!!!!! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@yeagerxp But does Sandra have a reverse gear ??
The railway being still short and being able to push everything around by hand is the worst excuse for not having a locomotive I have heard :)
It seems that an electric battery operated one would be the most practical option while steam powered would be the coolest option.
One option you didn't mention was a stationary engine and a winch. They were popular for pulling mine trains up from underground. OTOH, I'll be amazed if an electric motor doesn't work out to be the best way to do this.
Beat me to it, might need a few pulleys here and there and you coukd use another old stationery engine if you wanted
Problem is that the track is branching and is just not going to cut it alone. Really the track as it stands seems to not be able to support anything but being pushed by animal or external force in some way that get around the track problem. But having a train that require a winch to go up a incline heavy loaded is a option indeed. Even downhill having a train to pull and brake the descent is not a bad idea so winches alone is not really fun or helpful downhill unless to stop a runaway. But to have the hole rail network work of a winch is not going to very helpful. Since your going to need so many that pushing carts by hand one by one probably is easier then dealing with multiple winches and derailments.
A winch system would definitely be useful for a simple two-track line, and if it were straight. But not only does it branch as diner says, it also bends, which a winch would be ill-suited for, at least not without applying various odd bits of special infrastructure to support it over the distances required.
That said, if any part of the line needs to climb a steep gradient, then this is nonetheless a good option.
I like the winch idea but mounted on a carriage using fixed ground points, removes any friction drive limitations. May get frustrating clipping and unclipping between posts though
I love the flywheel idea! There are a few flywheel powered locomotives out there that work on light rail duties. They are called "parry people movers", and the first ones were purely flywheel driven, with an electric motor to charge them at stations. The ones in service now have a tiny IC engine which keeps the flywheel spinning, allowing a big loco to move with only a tiny energy input. Reckon electric would be the best though, as you could easily make one with car batteries, a normal wagon chassis and a few big old DC motors from treadmills hooked via chains to the front and rear axels. Could be solar charged with normal charge controllers. Keep up the amazing work, can't wait to see what you come up with next!
I used to detest the Parry People Mover with a passion but I don't know why, now I know that the early models were flywheel storage powered they make a lot of sense.
Electric is the way to go! And he can charge the batteries as you go with the air/steam engine that he built in a future video. Then you have efficiency from the electric motors and that cool clickity clack from the air/steam engine.
I’m pretty much an expert at narrow gauge locomotives. I have watched Thomas the train with my kids for about four years LOL. I’m sure whatever you come up with will be amazing. Make On my Friend!
Based on the options you have provided, I would prefer the cars to be towed by a fleet of pop-pop boats in a canal beside the tracks. I wonder how many you would need? A lock system would be needed for changes in grade, but I'm sure you could sort that out.
Battery electric is probably best though. LiFePO4 cells have become very cheap. They offer great energy density and are much safer than the Li-ion type. I highly recommend the DIY Solar forums for advice. Motors and speed controllers for everything from scooters to forklifts to buses are pretty widely available. I think the only thing you'd really need to sort out would be a transmission with sufficiently low gearing. It wouldn't take many solar panels to charge up your loco, especially if you don't need to use it every day. Of course there is the option of a wood-fueled, steam driven generator to charge the batteries as well.
I wouldn't mess with lithium ion or lithium ferrophosphate in this application, since Tim actually needs the weight in the loco in order to provide friction on the thin rails. Just do it simple and cheap with some nice heavy lead acid batteries. But since it seems like Tim's got his heart set on building a steam engine and using his own wood/charcoal one way or another, ultimately building a steam-electric hybrid seems like the best of both worlds: eliminate all the troublesome gearing by using direct drive electric (1 motor per axle would provide nice scalability if 0-4-0 proves inadequate and you need 0-6-0) and you can always use the steam engine to turn a generator tuned for exactly the power output/speed your steam engine puts out.
And when (not if) the steam engine breaks down, you can charge the batteries at the shop while you enjoyably tinker about repairing it.
Next up they'll be hanging up some wires and making an overhead electric railway
A batteries powered engin sound like the more robust and easy one to build. I think it will be easy to build or scavenge an electric throttle to regulate the power and direction. You also will have a lote of flexibility to recharge the unit. Like you mentionne with gazoline engine or maybe a electrify line. Or just make it easy to exchange the set of batteries for new one. Also, for the 4 wheels drive, if you find the rights motors, you can implement them directly on each axels. Reducing the mechanical part needed.
Weight of the batteries may also help giving traction.
Having tried some of your steam notes, I'd point you at electric. I have a 7.5in gauge steam locomotive called a cli-shay. It uses a water tube boiler, similar although different than a flash boiler. It needs constant attention. You cannot ignore the engine, or it will lose pressure or water quickly.
The other glorious monstrosity I've tried was a compressed air engine with a group of friends. We used a gasoline compressor on a flat car behind the engine. While I will admit we didn't have a good seal on the cylinders, it was very noisy, and didn't last off of its air tank for very long.
My main engine is an electric engine that weighs around 800lbs in 7.5in gauge. It can pull about 20 tank cars built from old propane tanks and 5 people up a 3% grade. The engine is 24 volts, running four 6 volt golf cart deep cycle batteries. It will run for about a day and a half of heavy running on a battery charge. I would recommend building some fail safes into your engine, as mine is run closer to the edge of what it will do more often than I'd like.
My engine runs 3, 30 amp motors, although if you're doing a 2 axle engine, I would go for one motor and chain drive from there. With all the batteries in the engine, you would have a relatively heavy (good for traction), self contained locomotive.
I think that this is probably the most suitable solution for your locomotive needs.
The compressed air variant sounds quite good, as you could modify your stationary engine to create pressured air, whenever you are not chopping wood. Maybe with an additional belt-clutch-assembly. Also you could use old fire extinguishers, old diving tanks or even old LNG-Tanks to store the pressurized air.
I've found that water heaters when stripped down to just the tank make really nice pressure tanks, they're rated for 150psi max and have many inlet/outlet ports.
I just don’t think it’ll be possible to store enough energy without making a bomb at high pressure.
@@rallymax2 scuba tanks
@@rallymax2 remember how short the line is and how "little" energy needs to be stored to be effective on this line.
A safe amount of compressed air could still be enough.
And it does no pollution
Most people are saying electric, and I agree - however, I'll also add, there's nothing stopping you from making an electric loco and decorating it to look like a steam engine.
You'd probably have to simplify stuff like the running gear, but you could make it look really cool and somewhat believable.
Edit: to the numerous people who have crapped on this comment, I apologize that I insinuated that one should ever do things for fun - or that one should ever do something fun that is not in your approved fashion. I feel great remorse for my grievous error.
Oh Oh Oh! How about a Steam Punk Electric Engine "The S.P.E.E. 1000"
I hate steam outline exept for very rare exemptions
@@the_retag i meant esthetically steam punk, but an electric motor, batteries and a solar panel so it can charge its self up
@@krisking07 it was meant for op ;) well made steampunk can be really cool
thatt could work well anyway some steam locomotives haave the valve gear hidden on the inside of the frames so it could like a simple 0-4-0T or something
Hey Tim! Personally, I think that small petrol/diesel engines or electric motors are probably your most realistic options. Both are (comparatively) cheap and available, compact, and can be started without much preparation. Maybe you can use a belt or chain system to transfer power to the drive axles, as you have in some of your previous projects. Depending on the torque it produces, it may also be possible to connect an electric motor directly to a single wheel and either use four motors or two motors with connecting rods to achieve four-wheel drive. Since weight is likely not that much of an issue and your railway is not too long, you could use car batteries or other lead batteries, which should also be relatively cheap and available. Maybe then you could also think about using solar panels on your engine shed to charge your electric locomotive in the long run? Both compact combustion engines and electric motors would probably allow you to build a short locomotive that you can sit on top of, rather than having to climb into like you would in a converted golf cart or something similar. You could also combine a diesel aggregate and electric motors into some sort of "hybrid" locomotive, but this may end up being rather expensive without providing any significant advantages.
I kind of like the idea of a pressurized air locomotive as well. As far as I know, this type of locomotive was frequently used in coal mines to mitigate the risk of fires or explosions. However, since you can probably not buy a suitable pneumatic motor and the required mechanisms are rather complex to build yourself (even more so without a lathe for turning valves and pistons with a sufficiently tight fit), I think that this is a much more difficult route than either combustion or electric power.
You may be able to rig up a pneumatic tool like a drill to run the axles. Or even an off the shelf pneumatic piston could be used to run the axles
Another option is to just push compressed air through a combustion engine or air pump, and depending on how the valves are timed may be able to use that pressure to turn over the motor and spin the wheels that way
The pressure required for a realistically useful compressed air locomotive is way too high for the average person to safety engineer and build. The ones I have been around run at 800 psi and the tanks are much much thicker than boilers.
You could easily convert a battery operated mobility scooter. Not sure how much pulling force it may have. But! Cheap, easy and has all the features you'll need.
Yes, and right kind of speed range and torque characteristics. Easy enough to use a chain to drive two axles from the one motor. Very simple technology and few moving parts.
@@madleech Yep. 4 wheel drive. Although Tim may have to come up with a cunning wheel design, as his current wheels and the very small surface area of the rails are certainly going to lead to adhesion issues.
Surprisingly a lot I used to work on them
The only major disadvantage I see is that you would have to build a charging station for it, or otherwise make a way to supply electricity for the locomotive along the entire track. I don't what the state of Tim's workshop is in terms of electricity is, though, or how much a charger or power supply would draw from it.
Personally I think a petrol engine supplying power via a generator is an interesting idea, just a bit complicated is all. For the noise, one can probably fabricate a suitable muffler for it.
That's what I was thinking too. I work at a grocery store and I'm constantly having to drive them from the parking lot back into the store, or from one entrance to another where a customer is waiting for one.
It might be worth an experiment somehow as to how much traction you can put though to the rail before we all get excited! They are quite thin and might not have much surface area for a wheel to grab. If I had the money and wanted the seam experience with out the expense or warm up time, it would have to be compressed air. Could put a compressor or the chipper engine and top up between trips.
Nice point. Look at my answer.
Traction is only influenced by 2 things: adhesive weight and the coefficient between the 2 materials. If both are steel, in dry conditions the tractive effort is about 0.3x the adhesive weight.
Tim,
I haven't started building the loco for the Cross Timbers Railway yet, but I have some of the drive components. I'll eventually post in the Minimal Gauge Railways group when the build starts. My drive is somewhat unconventional in its power source. I have a DC 90-volt motor, 1/2 horsepower and a 15:1 gearbox to reduce the rpm's and increase power. Those will connect with chain sprockets to both axles.
The speed controller plugs into a standard household outlet. So to power this locomotive, it will carry a petrol generator on a wagon behind the locomotive. The advantage to this, is that I will have regular household AC current in the field for using tools, air compressor, and charging tool batteries when I'm working in the woods. And if we have a power outage, that generator is available to temporarily power lights and appliances.
I'm going to be using 7" drive wheels with a keyed drive shaft, and calculate that the loco should have a top speed of about 4 miles per hour at 1750 motor RPM.
I Like your idea, however, in my limited experience I haven't seen where that motor would be strong enough to pull a load. Have you researched this? I'm curious
I've asked one of the manufacturers of a very popular little locomotive that does a hefty amount of work, and his are equipped with a bicycle motor that is of substantially less power. It's multiplied by very large gear reduction. I'd rather have a 2 hp motor, but those are 180v and the controller is harder to find. But with a standard 56C frame it will be easy to swap out for other motors.
You seem to be leaning towards an electric Loco whether it is battery, or diesel electric which is very good idea.
Depending on how often or how long you will be running your Loco you can decide on the power source.
But I think a battery of some kind would be more than sufficient. Just have an engine shed where you have spare batteries stored and charged so on a particularly busy day on the railway you will have plenty of power.
In addition it would probably be more light than other options - I'm not sure if their rail design could handle the weight of s steam engine.
Battery storage + rainy weather might not be such a good idea, though.
@@AINGELPROJECT667 That's why you'd store it in a shed.
@@WasatchWind it would need to be a highly water-tight shed, then. Even moisture in the air can have disastrous effects on batteries. Car batteries might be okay but those are prohibitively heavy and you really don't want to have entire stacks around somewhere, because one beginning to leak can become a major issue
I think any steam loco would probably be too heavy for your track.
Electric is probably the simplest to make, as reversing an electric motor is easier than having a reversing gearbox with equal gear ratios in each direction.
If you went down the internal combustion engine route then consider using a hydraulic drive.
Whatever you do, I look forward to seeing you make it!
"I think any steam loco would probably be too heavy for your track."
You need to look up live steam, particularly 7.5" gauge equipment. A very light articulated or gear-driven locomotive based on a widened 7.5" gauge design could work quite well on this line.
Still, battery power or gas-electric (gas generator powering electric traction motors) is probably going to be the best choice for a first-time build, especially if it's a working locomotive. Miniature steam locomotives are complex and expensive to build. There's also the tightness of the line's curves to consider, so a conventional steam locomotive wouldn't work well. It would have to either be articulated (meyer or garret, mallet still wouldn't work) or a geared design.
@@VestedUTuber Live steam has purpose built scale rails though, not just random steel beam from a hardware store.
@@ahalfsesameseedbun7472
7.5" gauge track is also typically made from extruded 5052 aluminum, which is quite a soft metal, so your argument doesn't actually work. The loading gauge would still be less than this line's.
Not to mention steaming bay rails tend to be made from "random steel beams" in order to allow access to a locomotive's ash pan. Using the typical aluminum rail would require sleepers on the steaming bay, preventing underside access.
@@VestedUTuber Ah, ok. I wasn't aware of that information.
your surprised out how tiny you can make a feldbahn steamer
I should also note: Steam is an exciting choice however the amount of maintenance and specific parts required may be challenging. Safety is another thing to factor in: There is a park with a miniature ride-on steam locomotive and they claimed that if something went wrong with the locomotive, the blast could be the equivalent to four sticks of TNT. I'm not sure if this claim is true but if it is, it seems like a serious risk. Especially if you haven't had much experience with building and operating something like this before.
Electric traction has a lot of simplicity advantages, whether with an engine to charge batteries or with just batteries. If you wanted to get ambitious, you could even string up some overhead wire and run your electric locomotive off of that! Although I would bet there would be serious problems with safety and power supply. Battery locos would also be quite heavy, which would help with traction, although that means you also need a strong motor. The other benefit of electric, of course, is not having to walk behind a gas engine.
That’s not very Great Western if you.
@@thetransportationguy7930 Ah, but is it Great Southern & Western? (That's one of the pre-CIÉ railways in Tim's part of Ireland.)
Electric is very popular for people who have these sort of things. The advantage is they are great for short quick trips and require not too much maintenance day to day. I would stay away from those experimental type engines. They would be lots of fun but in most cases there is a reason they never caught on.
The reason that things like fireless steam locomotives didn't "catch on" in the sense of being more broadly used is because they were designed for very specific tasks.
Having a fireless loco is a really good idea when working at a chemical plant or factory that deals with food, where ashes from a traditional loco would be unsanitary.
They weren't more widely used because it was just more convenient to use traditional engines with well established tech. Maybe in another world all steam locos could've been fireless, who knows.
@@WasatchWind Fireless locomotives are tied to a plant boiler and not practical for long distance runs and are limited in their size, the concern over open flame was there main reason for use. I think there are still a few left working.
Weight is an important issue to consider when designing a locomotive to gain sufficient traction when hauling heavy loads on steel rails. You might consider using a diesel engine in this case. I have a small, single cylinder, Deutz diesel engine of about 17 horsepower. It's air cooled with electric start and hand crank with compression release. This engine features a huge and very heavy flywheel. These engines are commonly used in industrial applications such as cement mixers, air compressors, road side generators for portable highway signs, etc. Mine was assembled as a marine version, coupled to a Hurth marine transmission intended as the prime mover in a small work boat. It weighs around 500 pounds (or around 227 kilos). The weight and torque of this type of engine would make an ideal power source for a small loco. You would have to marry it to a transmission with forward and reverse gears but that shouldn't be a problem. One of the reasons I think this is a viable option is because you would have the horsepower and weight you need to move the heavy carts (especially up hill) but not too heavy like a steam locomotive would be for your railway. This is just a little food for thought. You might be able to find a similar type of engine made by Lister (probably more common and easier to come by in your location).
You could also hook the diesel up to a hydraulic pump and a motor to have a diesel hydraulic locomotive
What type of rails do you run on? The only field rails ive seen have been box section that seem to work well, i dont know if the surface contact will allow the loco to get traction on the thin rails. What is your thoughts?
Personally, if you can ignore the noise issue, the best idea in my mind would be a simple petrol engine running to four wheels by means of a chain/belt drive system, as it's probably the best all round mixture of cost-effectiveness, strength, simplicity & ease of maintenance, and would be ready to go ideally at a moment's notice. That being said, it really boils down to whatver you can build in the workshop, but I look forward to seeing whatever happens of the locomotion ideas all the same.
Could always make the largest muffler/silencer you can to decrease the volume.
Not nearly as cost effective as using the charcoal - the very cargo on board
As long as the motor was a four-stroke it'd quite happily run on wood gas/carbon monoxide
I was just thinking about your railways and lo and behold, you upload a new video :D
We used 'Road-Railers', a special type of shunting engine which has hydraulically lowered rail wheels but uses conventional truck wheels to provide the power and to allow the unit to be moved around site more quickly than a shunting engine (North-South was easy at our works but east-West meant lots of back and forth and points changing). Two disadvantages were that the unit was relatively light (compared to the Class 08 it replaced) which meant it couldn't provide as much traction of braking and the rubber tyres wore out quickly compare to steel wheels.
What kind of car would you use for an 2 ft gauge road railer?
@@steffenrosmus9177 a small one? Actually the driving wheels don't have to ride on the rails, just on firm ground. The wheels on the rails are only guide wheels anyway and just make for easier coupling to the train (the ones I worked on had Delner autocouplers and only required the operator to connect compressed air to the train to release the brakes). Ground clearance would be the real limiting factor if the rail head is a lot higher than the ground. Oh, and the need to have a slow speed drive. 1st gear on a car might not be low enough to give power at the low rpm.
In my location, Lawn tractors are everywhere and cheap and would make a great platform. They would meet most of your criteria except the noisy motor and an additional downside is maintenance/fixing the buggers. A hydrostatic transmission would be ideal if going this route. If you were to start from scratch, it would be very hard to beat Li ion battery bank like they use in sailboats or RVs/caravans. You then could use a smaller old style quiet motor with an alternator as needed to charge while out and about. I don't think solar cells in your area would provide enough to keep them charged. A mains charging station where you plan on parking the loco would be the easiest and most efficient way to make sure the batteries are topped off. Some people might suggest lead acid but a little reasearch will show you that they are not ideal for potential deep discharges which not only robs you of actual working energy but shortens their lifetime considerably, thus making their actual cost much higher in the long run.
Counterpoint: using lead acid batteries reduces the amount of tractive ballast needed
And you can get lead acid batteries optimized for deep discharge...and you can also choose not to deeply discharge them. Get twice as many batteries (car batteries are fairly cheap) and only run them down halfway. Limiting discharge depth is actually what electric cars are doing -- Lithium is even worse for deep discharge than lead acid.
Also -- making it a steam-electric hybrid would mean you're effectively continually topping off the batteries, another way to limit discharge depth.
Vertical boiler steam tram loco, like "Swift" at North Ings farm museum, would be nice. A small diesel (like the Talyllyn Railway's Toby the tram) would probably be more practical.
Diesel-electric is likely the most versatile, simple to build, probably reliable locos you likely have access to. They also have generally better acceleration that anything other than pure electric and as you said are easy to control. I would also like to see maybe bi-mode diesel-electric/battery-electric as they are able to power the same motors while giving some more choice.
I would also say this too you get a lot of power out of these, or steam but purely for its cool factor. You'd have to wait for the pressure to build each time you'd want to use it.
If you want reliable don’t get steam. Get diesel or gas electric. Try to do diesel cuz it’s more efficient. It seems good to convert an existing machine it’s just not feasible. I’ve been in trains for 10yrs, & the frames have to be made different.
Just do diesel electric, if I was gonna do a loco for a garden railway I’d be doing diesel electric.
If you want reliable don’t get steam. Get diesel or gas electric. Try to do diesel cuz it’s more efficient. It seems good to convert an existing machine it’s just not feasible. I’ve been in trains for 10yrs, & the frames have to be made different.
Just do diesel electric, if I was gonna do a loco for a garden railway I’d be doing diesel electric.
@@tobyharrison9515 you can keep it on standby with an immersion heater.
In keeping with your current theme I would suggest basing a loco on a stationary engine as you mentioned, something like a Lister/Petter geared down for low speed high torque, a slack belt clutch like the chipper and a tumbler gear reverse, don't build it too light otherwise you will have wheel slip on the narrow rail head.
The added bonus is that you have a portable power plant as well which could be used for driving other items such as a small genny or any flat belt driven implements, good luck, have fun and I love what the pair of you are doing, thank you.
Most miniature railroads here in the states make use of battery and lawn-mower engine equipped locos for "practical" use. they're much cheaper and and easier to maintain and operate than a steam engine. The few cases I can think of where "practical" miniatures use steam power is if there's a large combined range and power requirement. For this reason, in addition to the quality of track, I would suggest using a battery powered engine of some kind first. If/when your railway grows in size and gets better trackage, then I would recommend commissioning a model engineer to build you a small (probably a tendered 2-4-2) steam locomotive that would be designed to run on the produced charcoal. this engine would be initially very expensive, but would most likely be able to pull well over 1000 kilos of product to wherever it needed moving to.
A battery electric from scratch is likely the most practical from my limited experience. Relatively simple to scratch build as just need to source a set of motors, one per axle, and could run it using car batteries. Car batteries gives a nice safe voltage, plenty of existing bits of kit to work with, and are nice and heavy to provide the weight needed to get reasonable tractive effort.
could even see about fitting motors to cargo wagons with electricity provided by the locomotive, thus making use of the weight of what you're moving to help adhesion. With your light-weight track this might be a good way to get adhesion without making a locomotive that's too heavy and damages the track
Steam is imho the worst, for all the reasons you mention. Although very romantic as an idea it's simply not practical. Compressed air could be done for something that's mechanically a steam engine but just without the dangerous boiler, indeed many places where a fire would be dangerous used these before diesel or electric shunters could replace them.
I agree, though I have no experience whatsoever. A motor on each axle, or one motor driving both axles through some chain (although that would need a chain tensioner of some sorts) would be brilliant, and there are plenty motor drivers available that you hook up to a battery and some simple controls and off you go. Depending on your needs you could charge the batteries from the grid, or from solar power, or - if you really need unlimited range - from a generator. You still want the batteries so the generator doesn't have to deliver the peak power, just enough to top up the batteries while waiting and coasting along.
One thing at least - with the relative simplicity of electric, he could modify the loco to appear to be steam for decoration.
Tim, along with a lot of others, I think that a DC motor with several 12v car batteries in parallel, kept topped up intermittently by a small petrol generator (or a wood-gas powered one?) is the way to go. No problem with reversing or gearing, instant get-up-and-go. No waiting for steam to generate or having to swap out or test pressure vessels. And easy to construct and control. Well done for making us all think!
Beautiful though steam engines are, electric power would probably simplest and most versatile, plus easiest to get hold of. Something you could swap car batteries out to from charging in your barn, maybe. Whatever you choose, since you're not going fast, huge gear reductions could help get the required torque out of smaller engines or faster motors.
On the other hand, the same gearing applies to human-powered versions, which are even cheaper to run, haha. How about a bicycle-powered cart? The bonus of that is your weight will help the traction... the downside is what to do if you're not feeling up to cycling a few dozen kilometres over a few dozen metres!
The only steam i can think would be the most effective for your track and operation would be a Climax. The class A climaxes are small and compact. Much simpler than a conventional steamer (lighter too) can use a vertical or T boiler and just needs to carry its own water. All its wheels are powered which is 2 Trucks (bogies for the european term) and of you want to haul feul with it then a thrid truck can be added increasing power on the track yet keeping weight down. They can be covered or open. The best example i can think of one would be the Locus Heights & Western one in West Virginia.
Now I am in no way an expert, but as others have said here before me the homemade track might not take a huge amount of weight. I also saw some ideas about using your current static engine to charge batteries or power air pumps when not being used for chopping wood. However that all seems like extra steps if you have an engine already then why not just make a cable way down the track and use the engine you have to pull the wagons along, plus if you have enough cable you can go back and forth a few times and make a big pully and reduce the forces needed. I might not be as fun and I don't know how much it would cost to get that much rope or cable but to me that seems like the simplest option. All the best.
I remember as a kid seeing a motor bike converted to a rail car by adding a third wheel to run on the other track. It takes you back to a gas engine but that might be the quickest and easiest way to start as well as being fun to drive. I don't know if it would have the pull capacity you need, but as I think about it and second motor bike, one for each track, joined together might be a real cool look. What ever you do I am looking forward to seeing what you come up with. Thanks for sharing.
Hi Tim, big fan of your videos!
My two ideas are:
Simple and easy way:
My Grandfather build me a kids car himself which was about 200kg on rubber wheels, so maybe comperable to lot more heavy railway. It used an old truck starter for 24V with only some old 12V batteries attatched in paralell which made it durable on continous operation. Then there was a small gearbox attatched by pully, im not shure where it came from, nut it had 3 forward and one reverse gear. and was driving axle by chain. This thing would run for hours and charge with a regular car cahrger so I guess is sufficient for use in garden railway.
Steam way:
I know they had these duesenberg steam cars around 100 years ago with contious heating and steam production. Something this way could use charcol, start imidiatly and dont require gearbox or big high pressure tank. It would be a very exciting thing to see something like this to be created, but also complicated I guess. Maybe one could use parts of an old broken steam engine and only build a new steam generating unit consisting of long copper pipe and burner with liquid to start and charcol below.
have fun :)
Start simple, an Electric engine, then add a generator motor. Then you can go an continue if you love steam but first something simple and that turns the key and works
I can’t say that I know enough to give you any real help, but operating the engine off of the fuel you make at home is very tempting. For that reason I would look at steam in some mode.
Needs to be heavy too, else the wheels will spin. The multiple sets of wheels only bring more traction if there bis proper weight on them, or else they will actually be counter productive because they distribute the weight across the wheels, effectively losing relative traction.
Therefore, this armchair philosopher’s opinion is to opt for something battery powered, because they are quiet, heavy (batteries weigh a lot), and you can get a lot of torque out of them.
Maybe a used electric forklift could be good? It doesn’t necessarily have to be a full scale one, you can get the smaller ones which are basically a glorified pallet hand-truck but you stand on the back or walk alongside and have a little forwards and backwards paddle lever. They will run for hours and once you lock in the steering functionality /convert to rail somehow, they might just do the trick.
Onwards Tim and team! *reaches for popcorn*
The biggest issue I can see is that as your rails are designed very utiliarian and cheap, any more advanced form of locomotion would be very liable to derail, or damage the rails.
Naturally I'm partial to steam, and wood is certainly not a rarity in your region. But they are slow to start and one must be carefully maintained to prevent explosions. Not that I think maintenance would be an issue for you.
Ultimately given your lightweight rails, I imagine a simple electric motor on wheels would be best suited, though you'd also need to take tractive effort into account.
Oh, as an additional thought: The sharp bends on your points are also very likely to be a source of derailments, should you add a loco with a long wheelbase. This narrows down your options a bit further as you can realistically only operate something with a very short wheelbase.
The rails would definitely need some improvement in the future I would think it would be easier if his rail had was a bit wider, right now it's less then a inch
How about a motor on two wheels with a vertical handlebar that can run on the rails and push/pull the cars? Something in the form factor of a Segway Ninebot. You could have a lip on one side that slips under a car and, by pulling the handle down as a lever, uses the car's own weight to give traction to the lightweight scooter.
I bet a Segway would have enough power to keep the cars moving, even if it needs a little assistance to get started.
There are some tiny european shunting locos that work on exactly this principle, lifting tend of the wagon being moved. The full-size things have four wheels, which might work better than two even on 15" gauge to be honest. And given the track/curves/grades you're working on here, 'stealing' adhesion from the load is pretty much a necessity unless you build a loco weighing upwards of half a ton. The human-pushed trains now have far better traction than any loco will get.
like a modified rotovator?
Didn't think I would see you here :D
@@excitedbox5705 ?
Who Might You Be? lol
@@krisking07 I am nobody. But in case you didn't notice OP is a youtuber with lots of great videos about science.
Since the wheels on the locomotive are not going to turn relative to one another the simplest you could do would propably be to take a flat waggon and mount a motor on it with chains and sprockets connecting the motor to one of the two wheel shafts and then again between the two wheel shafts.
In regards to fuel, a petrol engine converted to run on wood gas along with a wood gassifier might also be an option. Would be more compact than a steam engine aswell as being faster to start up, plus if needed, it can be run on other types of gas aswell or even petrol, if it still has its old kaburator.
i like this!
This is a great 💡
As others have said, battery electric is probably easiest and quiet too.
If you want a more conventional locomotive look I would try to design a Stirling engine using air-cooled gasoline engines for parts.
That would be quite a challenge so in the meantime you could build the rest of the drivetrain and use a conventional gasoline engine until the Stirling engine is ready.
A Watercooled gasoline engine can be made to run fairly quietly with noise enclosures and proper exhaust muffling.
I have often wondered if running the exhaust into a water tank would reduce the exhaust noise.
Anyway, lots of fun to watch you do this.
Cooling the exhaust does reduce the noise but I don't think a heat exchanger would work very well. In order to reduce the noise you need to remove the heat quickly and to do that with a heat exchanger means lots if tubes which would then be prone to clogging.
I helped build an engine test bed for testing Rolls-Royce Merlin engines and on that we piped the exhausts into a 600mm diameter pipe (one down each side of the engine) with closed ends and used a pump to spray a fine mist of water into the exhaust. The water was evaporated by the heat of the exhaust, the exhaust significantly cooled and the noise reduced dramatically. The water came out of the outlet pipes as warm steam so long as you didn't inject too much water. The 600mm diameter pipes were sized so that the engine didn't 'see' them and had no measurable effect on the engine performance.
@@davidquirk8097 Fascinating!
So with an adequate water supply and downward facing exhaust tips you could reduce the noise volume of an internal combustion engine.
I should try that with the exhaust from the 3600 RPM generator on the recreational camper.
Building a sort of diesel electric loco from scratch sounds really interesting
A friend and I made a gas engine powered rail speeder a couple years ago, made a two speed gearing system with slip-belt clutches and to reverse we made a center jack so that it can pivot easily and turn to face the other direction. If you're interested in seeing any pictures or a further description I'd be happy to jump on a call or email at some point. Keep up the great work!
I think the two weel tractor is the most sensible option. It is strong, geared correctly and easy to convert
Electric - and there are some really good ESCs now for brushless DC motors (recycle battery electric drills?) - all you need is suitable sustainable batteries - e.g. NiFe cells if you have the space. Charger? Solar + wind + a small stand-alone steam plant driving a generator into an MPPT charge controller and off you go. ...
Or... out there in windy old west Ireland how about the first loco with a sail ...
I'd recommend looking into making an upscaled "Scamp" locomotive, they're relatively simple in construction and could be easily powered by petrol or electric. I wouldn't recommend steam sadly as not only are boilers regulated but also it's the most complicated, labour intensive, expensive and time consuming option. The best power source would probably be electricity from old car batteries, and electric locomotives are by far the most simple to build and maintain. And as a bonus you could easily add a small petrol engine and alternator or petrol generator to top off the batteries. Electric locomotives are comparatively cheap and easy to build and maintain. Maybe look into industrial and field locomotives as inspiration since they're fulfilling the same needs as you want
Another one to watch.Will have plenty to watch now.Thank you .🌈🇮🇪🇮🇪🌈☮️☮️☮️☮️☮️☮️
I think the vintage engine with a wood gas generator might be the best option. It's reliable, easy to maintain. You can use wood as a cheap fuel. It requires a bit of time to start the gas generation process but not as much as a steam engine.
Colin Furze made a wood gas generator - and it worked to a degree...
Hmmm. Whichever option you go for, weight is the thing. Enough weight for traction, and if that’s too much, tires on the wheels, should allow you to reduce it. Battery power is instant, and can produce a lot of torque, but there’s the trade off in weight, and cold weather is not battery friendly. As always I’m confident you will solve the puzzle… if you haven’t already.
Mount that hit-and-miss engine you use to power the chipper on wheels and use it. Plenty of weight for traction and is pretty nice to listen to as it chugs along. Build some track back to where you can park it for stationary use--can't be any worse than using a belt drive off a 1940s farm tractor.
steam does sound very cool, it'd be brilliant to see someone do that. You defiantly have my attention.
Perhaps using your wood chopping engine as means of mechanical energy to drive a system of cable and pullies bettween the track and so each wagon can attach to this cable and be pull along the rails. this would keep the powerplant in one place for easier cooling and fueling, save space on the railway for more wagons, and may be easier to maintain.
this would be similar to how roller-coasters get pulled up their respective initial inclines.
There is a thing called a fireless steam locomotive, like a usual steam locomotive only it uses a steam accumulator on board instead of a boiler.
The locomotive is reloaded from a separate heat source so might be safer too with all that wood in the store!
Yes, but those are pressurised tanks - scary!
No suggestions here, just fascinated by the process! Can't wait to see what you come up with!
I love how you ran through the list of ideas, but in the end you say, "Which would you choose?" while showing your partner keeping her glutes in excellent shape, and with a smile! I've loved the idea of a locomotive since you first mentioned it, but do we really want another piece of machinery we have to maintain? With the mostly short distances needed, maybe the added bonus of upkeeping the human machine while getting the job done, is the most reasonable solution. The biggest challenge I see, is that the loco needs to be heavy for traction, and then the motor driving it, also needs to be heavy to pull all the weight. There is very little surface to get hold of between that 8mm rail, and the circumference of the wheel. Any available engine or motor could likely handle the weight as is, but what will keep the drive wheels from just spinning in place with such little friction to pull against? Home made glute worker for the win!
Something I thought of is adding a cog to the wheel of each cart, then getting a small engine with a chain drive. You could then hang the motor on the side of the cart and run the chain through the cog wheel, turning any cart into the locomotive. This way you wouldn't need to mess around with moving a physical engine along the rails, and instead could just park your carts, pick up the motor and go to the next set of carts.
Pressurized air,because ✨compressed air whistles✨ (if you're wanna make a fleet of these,make sure each engine has a different whistle.)
Im happy you went with Fireless Locomotives. Fits well as your First locomotive.
Hi there, I've built several small locomotives for agriculture. The first locomotive I built was from a two wheeled garden tractor driving a second axle by chain and sprocket. All the rest were ground up diesel-hydraulic locomotives, and these were far better and would be what I'd recommend.
To do this you will need to find a ride-on lawnmower or garden tractor that uses a hydrostatic transmission. The transmission would be mounted transversally in the locomotive frame so that its output shaft is parallel with locos axles. Since the engine is only connected to the transmission via a hydraulic line, it can be mounted wherever is convenient, and is easily detached for servicing. Attached to the transmission output shaft (technically the axles of the tractor it came from) would be a pair of sprockets, with drive chains (forklift trucks are a good source) to a sprocket on each axle. Thus you achieve two driven axles on a locomotive made with only parts from a single driven axle tractor. If the engine has a PTO clutch, so much the better, as it's possible to use this to run a small air compressor to fill a reservoir tank, to supply air for braking. Air brakes are easily acquired from commercial vehicles in scrap yards, along with leaf springs for suspension, and on really small locomotives it's actually a lot easier to put the brake drums on the transmission output shafts than it is to put them on the axles - this only gives you two brake drums despite having 4 wheels, but being hydrostatic means you get a good amount of transmission braking when you come off the power so the effect stacks up.
Controls for such a locomotive are extremely straight forward, much like a mower but without the steering wheel; a direction lever (which also gives movement, push forward to go forward, pull back to go back, with a neutral in the middle), an engine throttle, and a brake. To avoid damage from operator error, it is a good idea to link a hydraulic cutoff with the brake lever, so that pressurized fluid cannot be sent to the transmission while the brakes are engaged. You will not need a hand brake, since in an air brake system the brakes apply automatically when not pressurized, giving you redundancy in the event of a failure. It is however a good idea to have a linkage on the brakes that allows you to manually disengage them so that the locomotive can be freewheeled without needing an air supply.
One important thing to keep in mind that the locomotive will need to be designed with the ability to adjust slack out of the chains. The easiest way to do this is to have an adjustable wheelbase somewhat like a motorcycle - this has the advantage that if the chains wear differently (and they usually do) you can take different amounts of slack out of each chain by moving each axle independently. One development I made on my locomotives was a worm and spur gear linkage that ensured the adjustment was always the same on both sides of the axle to avoid the problem of the axle becoming misaligned from perpendicular, greatly simplifying this regular maintenance item.
The final step is the easiest part, which is to build the cabin and bodywork, keeping in mind maintenance access, fuel tank access, oil and transmission fluid dipsticks, etc. These can be easily constructed using angle iron for framing, and your preference of aluminium or steel sheet for the panels. Perspex makes good glazing, easily cut and simple to fix in place using automotive glazing gaskets.
Thanks, Bulletz. I'm still working on my air-powered loco, but might visit your type too, in the future
Since this railway is never going to get that big and that quickly so ill be safe to say the 15 inch gauge engine will be a shunter and doesn't need to go fast, It's a long distance heavy puller.
Lets not get ahead of ourselves when its going to be designed from scratch so ill type out standards to help plan out for Way Out West's Locomotive
1) If the steam engine needs to fit on the barn's turntable then its length will be based on that, so the engine will be a 0. 4. 0. with one as a Steam driving wheel or a 2. 2. 2. for an Electric locomotive.
2)Your railway would make the engine's width between 16 to 22 inch wide, big enough to fit a seat but you are able to put your hand across the cab so you don't have to ride on the loco to get control. (that means most of the controls need to be higher so the driver may reach them while standing beside the rails)
3) when years go by a going back and forth locomotive on an even longer railway is really needed then ideal way with such a small size to work with is to have two small locos back to back with a turning seat on top/tender between the two. Tim can just make one of the engines because building all of that now would be to much.
(they can ever be two electric, two Steam coffee pots, or one of each)
G’day Tim, electric power is the best solution for the train.. plenty of power and easy to use and easy to build! Charging is easy from solar and wind as you won’t be using it constantly. Yes the more I think about it the more convinced I am about it. Love your channels.. regards to you both from Brisbane Australia.
Greetings from the USA. I'm thinking: riding lawn mower (RLM). Mount rail flanges to inside face of the tires bolted/welded back to the wheels and let the rubber tires grip the rails and remove mower deck, or not. RLM's power train comes with with forward & backward variable speed tranny and an air cooled small gas engine- nuthin to customize here. Demount the wheel flanges and you can use it as a RLM with mower deck back in place, or not. A 2nd hand RLM could be gotten for a song and I recommend Sandra do the singing.
You could call it the "Re-purposed Redneck Rider" and then you name the whole system, "Triple 'R' Railroad." Next step: Turntable. Thanks for your inspiration Tim.
The best one ive seen on the same gauge even. Is someone took a ride on garden mower and used it to create a Petrol Mechanical drive for their locomotive. With that you can already have a gearbox, you'd just need to make a chain drive to each of the wheels.
Yes this. Lowest cost way to get forward-reverse and brakes with quick start up utility. Found at garage sales or scrap yards.
I‘d suggest A) a battery powered electric locomotive because it would be easy to build (part out a mobility scooter or something similar) and charging over night would not be a problem. B) part out a lawn mower tractor. It already has an engine and gearbox with reverse, probably enough power and runs on gasoline so fast refueling is possible.
What about a power-assisted electric/hand-pushed locomotive? Handles with triggers that toggle an electric motor. It reduces the difficulty, but doesn't do all the work. You could even charge it slowly with solar or wind.
Simplest, would be to add an electric drive to the ballast-cart, as:
1. It is existing rolling-stock
2. It is currently and probably will remain the heaviest rolling-stock on your rail network
-a. Meaning the rail is already proven to be able to handle its mass
-b. The mass equals traction
-c. ballast can be removed to reduce strain on the motor/current-draw on the battery
-d. It has the strongest bearings of your rolling-stock
3. The only challenge then remaining would be finding a way to power it
4. Changing direction should be simple as reversing the polarity through the motor
5. It already has a pair of solid axles to run a pulley or chain-drive to.
Some power can be redirected off the woodchipper to run a generator, or the woodchipper can be ran on a stationary wood-fired steam-generator that powers all the electronic motors of the operation (or kept on-grid, but it would be nice to have an wood-fired backup generator for the novelty at some point).
Compressed air locomotive has a lot of advantages in this situation. It makes only a slight chuffing noise (compare to petrol engine...), it's not as expensive as a real steam locomotive but you'd have all the fun of operating one, and needs very little maintenance. However, like an electric locomotive, it would need to "charge up" between journeys.
You could use old, empty bottles of gaz as air tanks placed horizontally, it would give it the look of those air powered mining locomotives. Or if you have a tank that's bigger than a gaz bottle you could place it vertically and give it the look of vertical boiler locomotives, that would be delightful and quite unique for a homemade narrow gauge railway.
The only challenge there is to build or find the cylinders of the engine. Even the valve gear would not be so complex to build, you can find all the documentation about steam locomotives valve gears online (steam and compressed air locomotives uses same chassis and mechanism, only the "boiler" changes).
A compressed air locomotive would be challenging to do, but so rewarding, and it would be quite unique. Nobody has made youtube videos of building a homemade air powered loco.
Seeing other people make steam locomotives, this more than often takes several years. Compressed air isn't much simpler and also has pressure regulations. Batteries are quite expensive when you don't wanna constantly change them. I'd say go horse drawn (use grass as fuel) or diesel electric (easy control, reasonably reliable, always ready)
In the battery powered category, a shopping cart 🛒 pusher (not sure if those are common in Ireland) would probably be a great fit!
Someone else's idea of a winch might also be a great option, pull the carts to you!
I like the look of that last example you showed. She seems very strong and versatile. :)
As much as I enjoy watching your creativity and engineering process, untill the track gets bigger I think using a donkey is best. The cost pumped into making a loco would be better spent on making more track. Once the track is built a donkey would still work and give you time to save up for the loco. The donkey is practically free after all as you are already paying for its upkeep.
2nd option would be a DC electric motor running off a large generator battery, they are common enough that the price is not painful and powerful enough to run a small DC motor each for an acceptable time. Then when filling with chippings or loading with chippings, connect to a dynamo (would have to work out the size of dynamo that the engine can cope with alongside the chipper).
You didn't mention it but you could have a cable hoist system. With the cable hoist fixed to a frount and rear wagon link to give forward pull, down hill restraint, and reverse. Then have fixed point posts that you pull to where there is not a handy tree already.
If you do end up making a locomotive, I'd suggest making the tracks more sturdier as locos are quite heavy and can warp the tracks if they're not sturdy enough (the tracks loading gauge)
The tracks are rather strong already, they did take those heavy loads of stone without problem
@@andrewreynolds4949 True, but the loads of stone are one thing - depending on your locomotive, which needs to be heavy in order to gain the tractive effort necessary, they might not hold a candle in terms of weight.
@@MrJoeyWheeler The full stone wagon carried 300 kilos, I think that's about what a full riding mower weighs for comparison. I don't expect he will see any problems, but the only way to really know will be to test it.
The horse drawn option seams the better in this case. No need for a heavy locomotive, since traction will come from the ground. It also negates the problem of the rail beaing too thin. They already have the horses. No expenses with fuel. No need to acquire any new equipment. The horses will always stay fit and entertained. To move backwards is just a matter of deteach the horses at one end attach to the other.
I've seen horse treadmills used to drive machinery. I suppose they could hook up a cable to the treadmill, which wouldn't have to move at all, through a system of pulleys to whatever railroad cars they have from either end. Then maybe it's just throwing the treadmill into gear.
Personally, I think what I would do is start with a battery-electric design, and build it to be adaptable as you refine it (like you've done everything else!). I think I'd do a basic four-wheel platform chassis with a "triangle" suspension like a tractor -- that is, one axle is fixed, one has a pivot in the middle, no need for any springs. You almost certainly want to have the motor geared down a good bit more than it would be in a golf cart or such, since you want low speed and high torque. I'd probably start with a chain drive to the fixed axle, and another chain from there to the pivoting axle.
Actually, I would probably start by trying a two-wheel-drive setup, just to learn some things first. Full-size locomotives almost always have solid axles, but I think I remember you needed to have the wheels able to turn independently on your wagons to go around the sharp turns. Does that mean you'll need to put a differential in your loco? Easier to learn that with only one axle (and I think some golf carts have chain-drive differentials that would be convenient here). Also, a typical thing to increase pulling power in model trains is to put rubber "traction tires" around some of the wheels, so if you have wheel-slip you could try using drive wheels with rubber tires on them rather than all-metal wheels.
Then, once that's working, I'd duplicate the setup for the second axle if that seemed worth doing.
If you decide the batteries don't last long enough, you could add a generator to the platform to make a diesel-electric or petrol-electric. Or you could swap out the electric motor for a direct-drive off of a petrol or diesel engine. Or a number of other options like that....
You could also, if you really have traction problems, retrofit small electric motors onto your wagon axles, and run cables from the battery "loco" to the cars so that they're self-powered.
What I said about a Railway engine rang true. They were just suggestions !! I absolutely love both your channels I adore your mechanical problems and solutions and extremely adore Annie and Bob and Trudy and Turnip and the Horses and Donkeys and the Sheep. etc
The electric version seems easier , maybe with some sort of dynamo to recharge the locomotive via belt next to the standing engine. Or perhaps a woodgas conversion on a locomotive frame, weight and size shouldnt matter that much and the fuel loop would be kinda closed .Love the railway videos, always happy about updates :)
be careful about weight, what you make might have good traction but it ma be heavy enough to warp and deform your rails, further more weight also has a big effect on how much traction a locomotive has. as for locomotives in your case I personally would go for one powered by a internal combustion engine.
you can also increase traction with more wheels. but that would require functioning suspention
@@abrr2000 Additionally, more wheels means a longer wheelbase, and the points at the passing points section of the track are very sharp, which means they wouldn't support anything with a long wheelbase very well.
@@abrr2000 while adding more wheels does increase traction. It also restricts a locomotives ability to navigate tight corners
@@mikenutter not really. What's normally done, is the middle wheels don't have a flange, or are allowed an extrordanary amount of lateral movement. But usually flangeless. You'll see this on some main line engines even. It's just something people don't tend to notice.
@@abrr2000 the increased wheel base would also ad resistance to sharp bends regardless of whether or not the center wheels are flanged. Ran into that issue help a friend on his model railroad
A loco is a no brainer
As soon as i saw you laying track i knew it wouldnt be long before you put something motorised on it!
Even better, steam power!!
Tom, I think that your best option is to go battery electric, probably in a 24 volt system. This would give you access to truck electric components for reliability and performance plus affordability. A couple of deep cycle truck batteries and suitable motors and some simple electrical controls and you are halfway there. Someone mentioned that the friction coefficient of steel wheels on steel rails in the dry is 0.3, this can be improved upon by using rubber tires for improved traction on wet steel, something like tram and railway service vehicles do by having guiding rail wheels and driving using the road tires. The way that ordinary trams and trains improve traction is by sanding the rails but yours are so narrow that it would be difficult to get it to work.
Keep up with the interesting work.
Mark from Melbourne Australia
You might not need full suspension. If one axle is fixed and the other is free to pivot around its centre point (so as one wheel moves up the other moves down) you effectively have three points of support. This is known as "compensation" in model railways.
Use a donkey, or a horse as you will be returning with an empty cart most of the time, which means that the reverse gear is not that critical.
So I'm an engineer and I used to work in rail. I have to say, DC electric motors really sound like the way to go in this situation. They have good low speed torque which means you don't need a clutch or gearbox. You could get a 12 V motor and power it with a bank of car batteries or even electrify the rails and control it remotely. The motor itself could be quite expensive but you can always get a smaller one and gear it down.
One idea would be to use a fireless steam engine running off of steam from a standalone boiler. A lot of industrial steam engines were designed this way, mainly to avoid having live fires near combustible resources. This could simplify the design of a steam locomotive, since you just need a steam tank rather than a complicated boiler, while being safer and still having the benefit of it being powered by your own production
Well I would suggest a compressed air locomotive, the parts for movement (pistons) are already available! You could try making then the pistons with pneumatic pistons or simpler there are pneumatic ?Turners/motors/rotors? wich are like turbines. The rest can be pretty simple! I also wanted a small pneumatic engine for my backyard :) Or have you thought about as an experiment gravity powered trains like the ones with slate trucks in wales. Also an idea is a funicular railway but that is very complicated. I wish you good luck! Greetings from Germany!
Brilliant video as normal , can you not use your existing engine that runs the wood chipper with some sort of pulley system and cables, to pull the carriages like a ski lift or cable car ??
Aye, if you set it up in a circular motion, you could move the carts forward and backward. Perhaps with some sort of hooking mechanism, to make hitching up quick.
+1 for cable cars. Look up cable cars in San Francisco ua-cam.com/video/YNM8Sz9vEHM/v-deo.html . They've scaled up the concept well beyond simple needs (even tracks crossing).
Though safety will be an issue. The cable is supposed to be underground. If not, you (or animals) may get caught between the cable and a pulley. Low speed probably would help. Maybe you can enclose the pulleys and disengage/reengage before/after each pulley.
You can have several cables when the track splits. A problem then is to power every N tracks without running N cables to the motor. I think this could be solved with triple pulleys (one cylinder with three grooves) : when the track makes a Y, it has three ways, each would have its own cable; they all insert in a triple pulley; this way, the one that is powered by the motor powers the others. Tension pulleys could be added near the split of the track in order to disengage a side of the Y and save on fuel.
All of this requires disengaging/reengaging. So it'll take time to operate though. A cam could be used to mechanize disengaging. When the cam bumps into a pulley, it disengages and lifts the grip (what grabs the cable) . The grip then needs to be moved left or right between the tracks in order to position it exactly above the cable, lowered back and reengaged.
I really love your videos and contraptions! Thank you!
I'm sure many have already mentioned riding lawnmowers, and I have seen at least one other gentleman with a yard railway who has such a device (with a chain drive to power both axles). I remember seeing another gentleman (first through eBay) who was building his own wood-fired steam engines with vertical boilers, one of which he used to power a small trolley on a standard gauge railway line, but I'm sure you'd have to scale something like that up to get it to develop enough traction to be able to haul anything, and however, then also keep it small enough not to damage your rails and trackwork. For simplicity's sake, I think I'd go for the jazzed-up riding mower - with a nice muffler, since I don't like loud engines, either. Whatever you choose, I'm sure it will be interesting.
I did want to also say that your railway project has inspired me to look at doing something similar in my own yard, albeit, since there is a significant incline, I would likely be jury-rigging up a cable railway set-up to haul heavier loads up the grade, then gravity and good brakes when going the other way. We'll see. ;)
You could put an air tank and a small air motor on each piece of rolling stock you make, and even use your chipper engine to pump air for you, thereby saving money and getting rid of the need for a locomotive. I gotta tell you though, that 0-6-0 steam engine was looking mighty fine. 💙 T.E.N.
As already mentioned, a couple of old electric mobility scooters may be a good option. use the rear axles from each and design a small loco around that. No need to have steering as you say so could use the rear fixed axles with motor for the 4wd and the weight of the batteries will help with traction
It's not on your list, but have you considered using a bike/leg-driven loco? Should be simple to build, no noisy engine, just the right speed and can even go on reverse!
What I've learned from converting a garden tractor is even if it has a lot of what you need to start, there is still much that must be scratch built. The tractor gave me the engine, clutch, and transmission all in one neat package, but that all had to get set in a larger frame to support the suspension, axles, brakes, and of course all the drive sprockets and chain. If I started again I'd choose a battery electric, seconding other's suggestions. Keeps control systems simple, easy to set a motor and big box of car batteries on any type of frame you come up with. Plus such locomotives have a precedent for use on mining and agricultural lines.
I have plans/ dimensions for the basic frame I made if you'd be interested to see them.
Thank you - I'll get back to you if I decide to go that route. So many suggestions coming in..!
Hello! I would attach an electric motor to each axle and power it with a small but adequate internal combustion engine. The more the engine speed is increased, the more power is available from the electric motor. All in the guise of a steam locomotive ... perfect! One more word about the tracks: Since the ground is quite muddy and soft, the first thing I would have done was to apply a layer of gravel. The tracks will then not sink in as quickly because of the weight. But I like the ideas in general! Greetings from Germany!
I would use a stationary engine and cable system as I don't think an engine powerful enough to pull your loads would get enough traction on your rails.
I came to the comments to recommend the same. Aka a funicular railway. Though we would love to see a locomotive, as they are fun, I think for the size of railway you have, a winch and cable would be more practical. You mentioned the capability to reverse in your video though, that is hard to arrange with a funicular, as well if there are curves involved it can get tricky. If you can however manage the tricky bits by hand pulling, perhaps disconnect the carts and move them one by one, then hook up to the winch only for long straightish pulls, that could work well.
Electric and diesel/petrol engines are somewhat the same thing, the term diesel-electric is basically a electric train with the diesel engine as the generator. I personally think electric might be a good option.
There are also diesel direct-drive locos (which is what the converted tractors and such would be) although they're not very popular anymore for numerous reasons
Personally, i would make a person powered cart using a bicycle for the power and transmission. Use a similar frame as used in the ballast wagon, it will probably need additional weight for traction. I Would weld a bike frame where the pedals have clearance, keeping the handlebars, and seat, but removing the front wheel completely. i would leave the rear wheel in, including the brakes and tire. On both the rear and front axle, i would add a middle wheel that is similar size or slightly larger than the rail wheels, and a chain between them. I would make a mount on each end that attaches with a bicycle quick release to where the front wheel went on the bike that is properly located so when the bike is mounted, the rear wheel sits on the middle wheel on the axle. now when you sit on the bike, it will drive the axle backwards, and have brakes. to change direction, release the mount with the quick release, swap it to the other end, and reinstall. voila, reverse and brakes.
Simple, easy for tim to do, and cheap, old bikes are often had free. bonus if its a mountain bike that has high reduction gearing for climbing steep hills. making the middle wheel larger, or getting higher reduction gearing will also increase the torque.
There is a type of engine you forgot about. Stirling engines. They turn heat (which could be directly from burning your charcoal) into rotation through temperature differentials between two metal plates. They are incredibly simple, and if used similarly to disel electric engins (the stirling engine in this case produces electricity to power an electric motor) it could also be very versitle.
Stirling engines are also VERY efficent, ~25% more efficent than a regular petrol engine.
what sort is best?
a working one!
The air pressure one seems cool but ide go with a little electric engine and put it on a chassis as I feel that would be simple to make and operate
Take the best of both worlds:
Modify a golf cart (or build a frame to cannibalize 4 scooters for four-wheel-drive), then install a small old engine to act as a generator to charge the batteries when they get low on the go. The electric motors would be silent, so you'd get the enjoyment of that iconic steady chuff/chug an old flywheel engine would make every time you wanted to run it.
Actually another good idea would be to find some sort of oil powered engine like the one seen at 2:26, they’re quite reliable, not too expensive, fairly easy to maintain and operate, powerful and easy to install in machinery or vehicles.