Richard's Workbench - Adams' Radial Tank

[Steph Dale]

Richard,
Have you soldered in the cab windows? They're probably better going in after painting, they can then trap the glazing in place.
Easier to paint too; they should be wood.

Steph

 

[Neill]

Amazing work, no visible solder at all.

 

[Dikitriki]

Hi,

I feel that I have reached a key point in that the smokebox/boiler/firebox is now attached and all square. The only problem I had was of my own making. The boiler has a raised strip at the rear. I didn't protect the boiler with thin card (as I would do if I was rolling a rivetted section) so the rear was belled and stretched. Careless. I was either going to spend a long time trying to straighten it, probably unsatisfactorily, or scratchbuild a new firebox. I chose the latter, and cut the firebox from the boiler to use as a pattern for the new one. The only thin sheet I had was nickel silver, but that was fine, and I added the strip once the whole lot was attached to the footplate and front spectacle plate. It's stronger and sharper than the original and in truth did not take long to do.




I'm waiting for some brighter weather for better pics!

Richard

 

[Dikitriki]

Richard,
Have you soldered in the cab windows? They're probably better going in after painting, they can then trap the glazing in place.
Easier to paint too; they should be wood.

Steph

Hi Steph,

I thought long and hard about this. The instructions say it may be better to leave the frames off until after painting too. However, I thought it would be quite difficult to get the frames square and secure when all was complete, as well as there being a risk of marking something or having to get excess glue off. I can still get the glazing in by making opposite sides slightly too wide and snapping the glazing in place (can't use glass though!), and the top of the interior is in a 'woody' like colour anyway, so just painting the faces wood would not be a problem.........At least that's the plan.

Richard

 

[Steph Dale]

Richard,

That sounds reasonable. Nice recovery on the firebox too!

Steph

 

[Neill]

Hi,

I feel that I have reached a key point in that the smokebox/boiler/firebox is now attached and all square. The only problem I had was of my own making. The boiler has a raised strip at the rear. I didn't protect the boiler with thin card (as I would do if I was rolling a rivetted section) so the rear was belled and stretched. Careless. I was either going to spend a long time trying to straighten it, probably unsatisfactorily, or scratchbuild a new firebox. I chose the latter, and cut the firebox from the boiler to use as a pattern for the new one. The only thin sheet I had was nickel silver, but that was fine, and I added the strip once the whole lot was attached to the footplate and front spectacle plate. It's stronger and sharper than the original and in truth did not take long to do.

View attachment 66918

View attachment 66919
I'm waiting for some brighter weather for better pics!

Richard

Nice work. I has a lot of fun and games rolling up and fitting the boiler and firebox on the Adams T3 kit as a combined unit. I quite like the idea of separating them, though whether I'd have the courage to cut them I'm not sure. I think I'd use the kit part as a pattern as you did.

 

[Dikitriki]

Nice work. I has a lot of fun and games rolling up and fitting the boiler and firebox on the Adams T3 kit as a combined unit. I quite like the idea of separating them, though whether I'd have the courage to cut them I'm not sure. I think I'd use the kit part as a pattern as you did.

Cutting them was dead easy. If you recall, there is a short half-etched (or perhaps etched through) line on each side where the firebox straightens out at the bottom. I just put a steel rule across and used an Olfa cutter to extend the lines and then wiggled and snapped the heavily scored line. In fact, I might be tempted to do this as a matter of course as it seems to me easier to roll the (round) boiler on its own and form the firebox separately which if you have rolled round as part of the boiler you will then have to straighten. There are the 2 additional formers for the back of the boiler and the front of the firebox, so matching them up should not be a problem, and in any event, there is a boiler band to disguise the joint.

Richard

 

[mickoo]

Nice work. I has a lot of fun and games rolling up and fitting the boiler and firebox on the Adams T3 kit as a combined unit. I quite like the idea of separating them, though whether I'd have the courage to cut them I'm not sure. I think I'd use the kit part as a pattern as you did.

This seems a common trend, not to divert from Richards work, but the B1 is already split for the very reason you speak of.

Use Richards method of cutting, it's cleaner and straighter than a fret saw.

Richard what thickness nickel silver did you use for the firebox please?

MD

 

[Dikitriki]

Richard what thickness nickel silver did you use for the firebox please?

MD

0.28mm - it seems plenty strong enough.

R

 

[mickoo]

Richard,

Much obliged, nickel silver is much stronger for a given gauge over brass, it's the forming that was concerning me, given recent work on the other project.

MD

 

[Neill]

Cutting them was dead easy. If you recall, there is a short half-etched (or perhaps etched through) line on each side where the firebox straightens out at the bottom. I just put a steel rule across and used an Olfa cutter to extend the lines and then wiggled and snapped the heavily scored line. In fact, I might be tempted to do this as a matter of course as it seems to me easier to roll the (round) boiler on its own and form the firebox separately which if you have rolled round as part of the boiler you will then have to straighten. There are the 2 additional formers for the back of the boiler and the front of the firebox, so matching them up should not be a problem, and in any event, there is a boiler band to disguise the joint.

Richard

Thanks Richard. I will bear this in mind, especially when the pre-grouping GWR locos start to be available.

 

[Dikitriki]

Well, a nice sunny day, and on a Wednesday too. I took the opportunity to get some better photos.

The cab inside splashers are best detailed before soldering them in place. Trimming all the platework to fit is a bit tricky as they will need a bit of filing to fit in all planes, and access is awkward.



Some bunker top detail:



You can see the replacement band at the boiler/spectacle plate join. Having thought about it, I will separate all similar boiler/firebox joins as a matter of course. I think it will be much easier to roll/form them separately.



Clearly I have put the sides on, and that doesn't half change the appearance. I have not yet soldered the top of the panel to the cab rear as I wanted to see where the roof fitted first to see how much space I have to strengthen the join. It's rather flimsy without any strengthener at the moment. I also discovered that not all Radials had the handrail ahead of the cab sheets. It's a good job I hadn't drilled the hole in the footplate to receive the bottom of the handrail!



And a profile picture of progress:



Cheers,

Richard

 

[JohnFla]

Beautiful workmanship Richard.

 

[Scale7JB]

Looking lovely..

JB.

 

[Overseer]

The model is looking really good.

But did William Adams actually design the prototype? I think it was probably a Robert Stephenson & Co design as they had been building similar looking locos to their own design from at least 1871, albeit a bit smaller and without the radial axle.

Maybe the Adams Radial name started because the rear axle was a William Bridges Adams patent radial axle rather than the whole loco being designed by the other William Adams. Has anyone researched this?

 

[Steph Dale]

Fraser,

There's enough evidence in the drawings at York and with the earlier 4-4-2 (nee 4-4-0) tanks that these are genuinely a Nine Elms design. What I can't quantify is whether Stephenson offered any advice.

Certainly Stephenson was involved in building them, but so were Dubs, Neilson and Beyer-Peacock.

Most casual observers seem to think the two William Adams were the same person, but I'm reasonably confident they were named for the LSWR engineer. After all the 395 class is equally known as an Adams Goods.

Steph

 

[Peter]

Hi Fraser and Steph,

“LSWR Locomotives The Adams Classes” by D.L. Bradley on page 39 states that:

“William Adams had designed and supervised the building of twelve 4-4-2 tanks for the Fenchurch Street-Southend services of the London, Tilbury & Southend Railway in June 1879. These engines were supplied by Sharp Stewart & Co.”

Peter

 

[Steph Dale]

Peter,

I'd forgotten that, I remember wondering why he went back to a 4-4-0 tank for his first LSWR loco.

Steph

 

[SimonT]

May I point out that you can never have enough Adams Radials. This is because no two were ever built the same and each was modified in a completely different way as Msrs Adams and Drummond had never heard of the engineering term 'Configuration Control'.
SimonT

 

[Steph Dale]

May I point out that you can never have enough Adams Radials. This is because no two were ever built the same and each was modified in a completely different way as Msrs Adams and Drummond had never heard of the engineering term 'Configuration Control'.
SimonT

In your opinion

Circumstantial evidence would seem to indicate that the optimum number is three or more...

Steph