MOC: Track, Ramp and Shelf Maintenance Train - extended version

[Haddock51]

Based on the comments I received on the Rail Clean Train, I decided to finetune the Vacuum Cleaner Waggon and to build two additional waggons.

The extended version - The Track, Ramp and Shelf Maintenance Train - consists now of:

* a slightly modified locomotive (set 7939) with two 9V engines (450 g)

* a railbrush waggon with metal load (260 g), max whidth: 8 studs

* a vacuum cleaner waggon with a 6V mini vacuum cleaner ( 290 g), max whidth: 7 studs It sounds like a lowflying aircraft ....

* a rail clean waggon with two vertically flexible cotton bars mounted on holders with springs (to manage inclination edges), and a load of iron rods (400 g), max whidth: 8 studs

* a ramp and shelf clean waggon with a 12V axial fan and a Maintenance Control Team - or even better: The Dust Scouting Squad! - at the very end of the train (280 g ), max whidth: 8 studs

Total train length: 106 cm

Total train weight: approx 1,7 kg

This weekend, I will set up a small test display and take some videos.

Preliminary tests with very small confetti showed that it works .....

To quote Shakespeare: A lot of Noise for (almost) Nothing ....

Edited April 5, 2013 by Haddock51

[spzero]

that's cool would be great to use it to clear snow from a track after it has snowed, in scalextric they use flour as snow as it acts in a scale manner when the cars slide thru it, but it might be too heavy to vac up with that, you will have to try it then use it to clear all the snow,

[Luke_likes_Lego]

Clever!

[Haddock51]

that's cool would be great to use it to clear snow from a track after it has snowed, in scalextric they use flour as snow as it acts in a scale manner when the cars slide thru it, but it might be too heavy to vac up with that, you will have to try it then use it to clear all the snow,

I tried flour but it´s actually too heavy, even to blow it off the track. I used coloured confetti (in very small pieces) and most of it was sucked up - and almost all of the remaining pieces blown off the track.

[Werlu Ulcur]

The is awesome!

And best of all, it looks just like a "regular" L-gauge train .

[Locomotive Annie]

I love the diligent minifigs hard at work making sure everything is functioning correctly.

[Electricsteam]

Why not use double sided tape?

[Haddock51]

Why not use double sided tape?

It is rather tricky to fix cotton bars to lego plates. In the case of the railclean waggon, I had to glue them to the plates (you can´t even drill a hole through the cotton bars because they dissolve).

W.r.t. the vacuum cleaner, it is even more difficult given the large hole and the structure under the plate. The space is just too small for double sided tape. If you want to tape a round cotton bar, you certainly need quite some contact surface.

Probably, I will make a try with zap-a-gap (my absolute favourite glue when it comes to modifying lego parts, in particular rails), but again, gluing space and contact surface will be the key issue.

And then there is of course the question if there are other ways to narrow that space, i.e. to get the vacuum cleaner sucking closer to the rails. Any advice is welcome.

I love the diligent minifigs hard at work making sure everything is functioning correctly.

Thanks Locomotive Annie.

Yeah, I am not sure I would apply for such a job - scouting for dust in the midst of all dust, and a lot of noise ....

Edited April 6, 2013 by Haddock51

[Haddock51]

Todays test results:

The two 9V engines did not manage to pull the train, Most likely because of the weight and/or the resistance due to the brake-effect of the railclean waggon. I added the cargo locomotive from set 4564 with another two 9V engines which solved the problem. However the question remains whether this will work once this train has to cope with inclinations. Most likely, I will have to split it up into two entities.

The waggon sequence turned out to be suboptimal. The railbrush is simply too efficient (?) and collects the dust - in this case the cotton - itself. So I had to put the railbrush waggon after the vacuum cleaner waggon. Conceptually this means that the rotating railbrush is supposed to "pre-treat" the metal rails prior to the rail cleaning (and/or to brush up remaining parts to be blown off by the fan). At least this is the best story I can come up with....

To test the vacuum cleaner, I used small cotton pieces which actually have several similarities with dust - and are easier to video.... The result was amazing - everything was sucked up!

So take a glass of beer, lean back and watch Lego doing the job - simply awesome .....

Edited April 16, 2013 by Haddock51

[bricks n bolts]

So take a glass of beer, lean back and watch Lego doing the job - simply awesome .....

Excellent, and the durt is gone!

[Locomotive Annie]

Congratulations on your successful test run

[zephyr1934]

Excellent! The colors work very well on this train and the video from the camera train is great.

[Selander]

That looks awesome - and it prooved to work !!

Another piece in place in your big jigsaw puzzle ;-)

[kieran]

I think you did a really good job on this, I like the way the train looks juts like a normal train, but has a very specific purpose. to help with the drag of the cotton pads, is there a way to use round polishing wheels and actual make them turn with a motor or some clever gearing so that you need less direct friction with the rail?

[Haddock51]

I think you did a really good job on this, I like the way the train looks juts like a normal train, but has a very specific purpose. to help with the drag of the cotton pads, is there a way to use round polishing wheels and actual make them turn with a motor or some clever gearing so that you need less direct friction with the rail?

Thanks kieran.

There have been several comments and proposals on the theme railcleaning (which was not even part of the original Rail Clean Train).

I guess the fundamental issue is that you need real pressure - and friction - on the rails to get any cleaning at all - just like when you do it manually.

The concept with cotton pads seems to work ok (I haven´t used any chemicals so far, but it would probably make a significant difference).

To get that pressure - and to avoid derailings at inclination edges - I loaded the railclean waggon with 400g of iron rods. I think this still is the easiest - and most likely the cheapest - approach. The combination of high friction and heavy load - not to mention the inclinations! - requires a lot of engine power. Since I don´t have these inclinations in place yet, I will have to wait for the ultimate test.

However, intuitively, I sense that I will most likely have to split this train into two units, operated with two 9V engine powered locomotives each.

Edited April 7, 2013 by Haddock51

[Haddock51]

That looks awesome - and it prooved to work !!

Another piece in place in your big jigsaw puzzle ;-)

Thanks Selander.

I keep thinking of the other pieces in this big jigsaw puzzle ...

[zephyr1934]

You could probably solve the propulsion problems with one or two PF XL motors. I've pulled over 50 cars with a pair of them.

[Haddock51]

You could probably solve the propulsion problems with one or two PF XL motors. I've pulled over 50 cars with a pair of them.

I am still very hesitant/reluctant to the entire PF concept, not just because I have invested a lot in 9V over the past 15 years.

As you can read in my other topic "9V Extreme", I am planning to set up a huge display later this year with a total track length of approx. 175 m - incl. a double high-speed track of 2x25 m - with 4 levels and inclinations of approx. 8 percent (total altitude diff. approx. 150 cm).

I don't know how PF would work in such an environment, and I don´t know about the difference in strength between a 9V engine and a PF XL engine, but I just dislike the idea of worrying all the time about batteries. How long would a set of batteries last to pull a 1,5 - 2 kg heavy train several times all the way up and down to/from the top? The total weight of the extended Horizon Express is 3 kg ... To pull a 50 car train on a plain level is one thing, to pull heavy trains on a track with 8 percent inclinations is something very different - just think about the magnets.

To solve the 9V power supply issue, I will have double 9V transformers for the various sections of this track, with power connections soldered directly to the rails each 5 m. Tests and experiences so far have shown that it works and the trains run smoothly. Maybe I can find stronger 9V transformers that are compatible with Lego 9V and 9V rails.

Most of my trains are equipped with double 9V engines, the extended Horizon Express, the Santa Fe Train and the Track Maintenance Train with four engines each - all in all about 50 engines ... To switch to PF would cost me a fortune, for what benefit?

Edited April 9, 2013 by Haddock51

[alainneke]

I am still very hesitant/reluctant to the entire PF concept, not just because I have invested a lot in 9V over the past 15 years.

I don't know how PF would work in such an environment, and I don´t know about the difference in strength between a 9V engine and a PF XL engine, but I just dislike the idea of worrying all the time about batteries.

I have also heavily invested in the 9V system (heck, I still do), but it didn't stop me from using PF motors. The PF XL motor is very powerful, and the Emerald Night is just not the same without it...

Forget about the batteries: if you want to run PF motors using track power, you can use a modified 9V train motor as a power pickup. Just remove the internal motor from one of your defective 9V train motors (which I'm pretty sure you'll have some) and connect the PF motor to the top connector with a PF extension cable.

When you don't want open up a 9V motor, you can also use some model railway components for the electrical pickups: http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=79145 (sorry, mine are currently still sold out...)

[Haddock51]

I have also heavily invested in the 9V system (heck, I still do), but it didn't stop me from using PF motors. The PF XL motor is very powerful, and the Emerald Night is just not the same without it...

Forget about the batteries: if you want to run PF motors using track power, you can use a modified 9V train motor as a power pickup. Just remove the internal motor from one of your defective 9V train motors (which I'm pretty sure you'll have some) and connect the PF motor to the top connector with a PF extension cable.

When you don't want open up a 9V motor, you can also use some model railway components for the electrical pickups: http://www.eurobrick...showtopic=79145 (sorry, mine are currently still sold out...)

Thank you alainneke for your comment and input. I truely appreciate your feedback - interesting and useful as usual.

Maybe I am simply too old (61+) or simply lack the technical knowhow and experience with PF to understand and appreciate all the articles about PF, DCC etc. which I have been reading since I joined Eurobrick some months ago, so I certainly need some more guidance and convincing arguements before switching from 9V to something else.

First of all, I still don't understand all these complaints about 9V engines like overheating etc. Sorry alainneke, after all these years, I don´t have one single defect 9V engine... and some of them are close to 15 years old! I have never experienced overheating, not even when pulling a 4 engine powered Santa Fe Train up 8 percent inclinations - dozens of time. So please tell me - how did you damage your 9V engines?!

I remember somebody complaining about overheating when using "massive" loads. I have more than 20 trains and all in all 120 rolling units. In the past I didn´t have enough space to run trains with "massive" loads in terms of dozens of waggons. Maybe the answer simply is that you have to properly size the trains with enough engines - and preferably rather oversize than undersize. Some members recently questionned the need for 4 9V engines on my extended Horizon Express. Maybe it would work with two, but why take the risk? Yes, this is of course also a question of money, but maybe undersizing engine power gets more expensive in the long run.

I remember one of your comments re maintenance of 9V engines, i.e. using lubricants. I will definitely follow that advice which will certainly contribute in prolonging the lifetime of my engines.

Now coming back to your comment on the "very powerful PF XL" and the "Emerald Night is just not the same without it". It´s difficult to judge when you haven´t made this experience yourself but the way I read your comment is that you were not happy with a regular PF motor and therefore decided to upgrade to PF XL. Fair enough. My Emerald Night is extended (tender plus 4 coaches) and I have mounted a 9V engine under the first coach. Maybe it´s not in line with the "steam engine philosophy" but it works very well - and fast!(you can´t use maximum speed). Or is this primarily about design?

I understand the advantage of the steel wheels picking up power from the top of the rail and not from the flange (inside) even though I have difficulties to draw any conclusions in terms of efficiency, speed, wearing out material etc. Alainneke, you have a lot of experience and knowledge in both 9V and PF, tell me - what are the key convincing arguments to replace/modify 50 9V engines with/to modified PF engines that are able to pick up power from 9V rails? What are your experiences using 9V and PF on tracks with inclinations similar the ones I will have in my future track? And what makes you still investing in 9V despite your belief in PF?

Edited April 9, 2013 by Haddock51

[alainneke]

Thank you alainneke for your comment and input. I truely appreciate your feedback - interesting and useful as usual.

You're quite welcome! It's nice to see someone putting this amount of research and preparation into his layout, and the result will definitely be second to none :)

Maybe I am simply too old (61+) or simply lack the technical knowhow and experience with PF to understand and appreciate all the articles about PF, DCC etc. which I have been reading since I joined Eurobrick some months ago, so I certainly need some more guidance and convincing arguements before switching from 9V to something else.

I'm not trying to convince you here, but instead helping you to think outside the (9V) box. Combining different generations of electronics is one of the unexpected strengths of the LEGO system. Just take a look at the forums: PF motors on 12V tracks, IR receivers powering 4,5V motors and battery-powered 9V trains which raise and lower the booms of level crossings! If you cannot solve the problem with 9V train motors, why not try to fit another generation of LEGO motors?

First of all, I still don't understand all these complaints about 9V engines like overheating etc. Sorry alainneke, after all these years, I don´t have one single defect 9V engine... and some of them are close to 15 years old! I have never experienced overheating, not even when pulling a 4 engine powered Santa Fe Train up 8 percent inclinations - dozens of time. So please tell me - how did you damage your 9V engines?!

Actually, I have never been able to overheat - let alone damage - a 9V train motor. The motors are very robust, to say the least. However, I do receive some damaged motors through Ebay purchases from time to time: pet hairs, sand and broken gears. I try to fix most of them, but some are just beyond repair!

Now coming back to your comment on the "very powerful PF XL" and the "Emerald Night is just not the same without it". It´s difficult to judge when you haven´t made this experience yourself but the way I read your comment is that you were not happy with a regular PF motor and therefore decided to upgrade to PF XL. Fair enough. My Emerald Night is extended (tender plus 4 coaches) and I have mounted a 9V engine under the first coach. Maybe it´s not in line with the "steam engine philosophy" but it works very well - and fast!(you can´t use maximum speed). Or is this primarily about design?

When I got my Emerald Night, I didn't have a permanent 9V layout and decided the power it as per instructions. Directly powering the driver wheels was more important to me than using track power. Later, having fitted a DCC sound decoder and smok generator, it became obvious that track power was the way to go. I didn't want to lose the powered drivers, so I decided to make my own electrical pickups and fit them under the tender (very prototypical: the engine can't run without the tender!).

I understand the advantage of the steel wheels picking up power from the top of the rail and not from the flange (inside) even though I have difficulties to draw any conclusions in terms of efficiency, speed, wearing out material etc. Alainneke, you have a lot of experience and knowledge in both 9V and PF, tell me - what are the key convincing arguments to replace/modify 50 9V engines with/to modified PF engines that are able to pick up power from 9V rails? What are your experiences using 9V and PF on tracks with inclinations similar the ones I will have in my future track? And what makes you still investing in 9V despite your belief in PF?

I made the steel wheels and pickups primarily for power pickup, and can't say anything about efficiency or wear. To me, the fact that they are able to power my decoders and train lights is far more important than any added drag or wear.

I'm surely not suggesting to replace all your gear with PF engines! I was merely trying to help you solve the problem at hand: improving the power output of your cleaning train. When adding more 9V train motors doesn't help, you could try to fit PF XL motors. If you need even more power, the Technic RC motor could be worth a try...

Investing in the LEGO 9V and 12V systems is obvious to me, as battery-powered systems are too limiting for my needs. However, I do use a fair amount of PF components on my layout: PF M motors for the switch tracks, PF XL motors for some train engines and a lot of PF LEDs to light up the trains and buildings. I don't use the PF IR receiver though, as all the motors and lights are (directly or indirectly) powered from the tracks.

[CarrollFilms]

Super cool train.

Where did you get that little vacuum and how does it suck up all the dust? Did you cut a hole in the bottom of the train car?

[zephyr1934]

I am still very hesitant/reluctant to the entire PF concept, not just because I have invested a lot in 9V over the past 15 years.

...

I don't know how PF would work in such an environment, and I don´t know about the difference in strength between a 9V engine and a PF XL engine, but I just dislike the idea of worrying all the time about batteries. How long would a set of batteries last to pull a 1,5 - 2 kg heavy train several times all the way up and down to/from the top? The total weight of the extended Horizon Express is 3 kg ... To pull a 50 car train on a plain level is one thing, to pull heavy trains on a track with 8 percent inclinations is something very different - just think about the magnets.

...

Most of my trains are equipped with double 9V engines, the extended Horizon Express, the Santa Fe Train and the Track Maintenance Train with four engines each - all in all about 50 engines ... To switch to PF would cost me a fortune, for what benefit?

Yes, like alainneke said, I wasn't suggesting converting your entire fleet, rather, since your track cleaning train is rather unique in terms of how much weight it has to pull/push that PF probably has the power you need for this special purpose. I would estimate that a single XL motor has at least as much power as two 9v train motors (or more if you use gear reduction). I used this configuration based on the work of many others, It isn't fast but it IS strong. The PF motors are a lot smoother than the 9v, without the jolts they can pull more weight through the magnetic couplers than 9v can, but you still may need to either use a draw bar or rare earth magnets. In this case, putting the locomotive in the middle of the train will minimize the draw bar pull.

Though seeing your post, the one big problem with PF is that when the batteries die, they can do so suddenly with little warning. Or if the IR receiver gets too hot, the train can stop abruptly then when it cools down half a second later lurch away and potentially breaking the magnetic coupling (I've had this overheating problem when using PF train motors, but NOT with the XL motors). Either one of these events would be especially bad if your train were up on the hard to reach part of your layout. So perhaps pure PF is not for this layout. Still, using a dead 9v motor as a power pickup, you could still use the PF motors without any batteries. I'm sure someone around here could sell you a dead 9v motor if you don't have any of your own (and kudos to you for being so gentle on your equipment, keep it up).

Oh, and while I do have a few dead 9v motors, I am not yet ready to part with any of them. I have heard that often when the motors fail it is because the brushes wear out, which could also preclude using them as a power pickup if you do not replace the brushes. Still some motors die because the actual motor itself burns out and those would be ideal for a PF power pickup.

Finally, nothing wrong with having two 9v trains that follow one another on your layout, that should work just as well and would require less experimentation on your part. Presumably the maintenance train is primarily for keeping the track clean. If it looks a little awkward that's fine as long as it gets the job done.

[Haddock51]

Super cool train.

Where did you get that little vacuum and how does it suck up all the dust? Did you cut a hole in the bottom of the train car?

Yes, I cut a hole in the bottom of the waggon and strengthened the platform with two 1x10 plates below.. In addition, I taped a couple of cotton pads close to the hole to get the vac closer to the rail.

I guess it´s a mini vacu cleaner to be used for sucking up crumbs on a kitchen or dinner table. It´s powered by 4 AA batteries - and sounds like a low flying aircraft (my dogs certainly don´t like that vacu cleaner in action ...)

I got it through an auction on ebay.de

You can find quite some mini vacu cleaners on the intranet, but I haven't found this one (which is actually the only model among those I found that fits lego train from a size point of view. I had to extend the lower platform by 2 studs).

It's a "Batteriebetriebener Mini Staubsauger" imported by Georg Roth GmbH, Lebensmittelfilialbetrieb KG, Würzburgerstrasse 196/198, 90766 Fürth, Germany

Edited April 10, 2013 by Haddock51

[Haddock51]

Yes, like alainneke said, I wasn't suggesting converting your entire fleet, rather, since your track cleaning train is rather unique in terms of how much weight it has to pull/push that PF probably has the power you need for this special purpose. I would estimate that a single XL motor has at least as much power as two 9v train motors (or more if you use gear reduction).

I am sorry for the misunderstanding.

My plans are to start building the new 9V Extreme layout in my new hobbyroom at the end of the summer/early fall. By then, I need to take some important and critical decisions. The guiding principle will be - based on the specific requirements related to this track - to take the best from 9V and PF, i.e. to get a maximum leverage of the investments already made in 9V, and to combine it with products/solutions made available through the introduction of PF. I agree with alainneke that it´s certainly worth exploring these opportunities. "Seeing is believing", so I might decide to visit a site not too remote from here to get more inspiration and understanding. Eventually this will also entail some basic learning and practice w.r.t. to micro electronics....

I'm not trying to convince you here, but instead helping you to think outside the (9V) box. Combining different generations of electronics is one of the unexpected strengths of the LEGO system. Just take a look at the forums: PF motors on 12V tracks, IR receivers powering 4,5V motors and battery-powered 9V trains which raise and lower the booms of level crossings! If you cannot solve the problem with 9V train motors, why not try to fit another generation of LEGO motors?

I'm surely not suggesting to replace all your gear with PF engines! I was merely trying to help you solve the problem at hand: improving the power output of your cleaning train. When adding more 9V train motors doesn't help, you could try to fit PF XL motors. If you need even more power, the Technic RC motor could be worth a try...

I am sorry for the misunderstanding. I guess I have simply become somewhat allergic to PF, which in fact is quite stupid since this "allergy" seems to be cultured by basic lack of knowledge and experience.

However, I still have a lot of curiosity and eagerness to learn more and to look for/materialize opportunities. "Seeing is believing", so I guess I need to get out of this splendid isolation and visit some sites fysically to learn more.

I will visit Normandy and Bretagne by car within short and pass through Belgium. Why not step by at your place?