|
|
| Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings (693105) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|
|
|
| (693106) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 11 18:49:06 2008, in response to Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 11 18:43:36 2008. Primarily lower weight, which is as you know, happier for the track. The inboard design was also supposed to result in less stress in the center of the axles by bringing the "load" further in, and allegedly the wheels and brake rigging themselves get more air circulation which helps keep the temperatures a bit lower. Funny though how the inboard doesn't seem to be working out as well in the real world as the theories suggested. :) |
|
|
| (693135) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat Oct 11 20:09:11 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 11 18:49:06 2008. Inboard bearings seem to work well on the Broad Street Line, PATCO and WMATA. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (693138) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Oct 11 20:15:35 2008, in response to Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 11 18:43:36 2008. With inboard bearings you can change wheels, without ruining the bearings.the Advantage of old outboard bearins was you could change friction material without getting the wheel off. Todays bearings last way longer than the wheels. |
|
|
| (693147) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 11 20:30:08 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by RonInBayside on Sat Oct 11 20:09:11 2008. Strangely, they never worked out for NYCTA the few times they tried them. Some R32's came with inboard bearings - I saw them in the yards when I worked there. They were "shop queens." :( |
|
|
| (693150) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat Oct 11 20:33:26 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 11 20:30:08 2008. The most comparable line I can think of to New York is the Broad Street Line; the Kawasakis are 1976 vintage (correct me if I am wrong). I do not know their precise MDBF, but they did not appear to need an inordinate amount of maintenance.What's the difference between track conditions and weight of passengers on the Broad St line and the Lex or Central Park West? |
|
|
| (693154) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 11 20:39:11 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by RonInBayside on Sat Oct 11 20:33:26 2008. Don't know the numbers. FWIW, just about every carbody builder has said that NYCT's tracks are the worst there are anywhere, so I'd have to GUESS that this is a factor as well.TD started this thread, I'm sure given what he does and knows, we're going to hear some interesting stuff. |
|
|
| (693155) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat Oct 11 20:42:35 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 11 20:39:11 2008. Even the newer track sections? |
|
|
| (693163) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 11 20:55:59 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by RonInBayside on Sat Oct 11 20:42:35 2008. THAT I don't know ... not an area of spcialty ... but I do recall TD agreeing with the concept a couple of years ago ... Amtrak does inboards as well on their pepsi cans, and they run on CSX track ... soooooo ... :) |
|
|
| (693169) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by nasadowsk on Sat Oct 11 21:13:32 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 11 18:49:06 2008. From Budd's patent, 2908230, the point of inboard mounting was a reduced bending moment on the axle, and secondly, lower weight.The point of the design overall was a simple truck that was light, easy to maintain, and didn't derail on bad track. Inboard bearing trucks existed long before the PIII, but it was Budd that popularized them. BTW, the first powered version, on the 1958 Silverliners, had a right angle drive with a high speed traction motor (6500 rpm!). It wasn't fully successful, and a traditional drive was adopted in on the SL II cars. I don't know if the right angle drive was ever duplicated, either. I'm guessing the reduced bending moment was also to allow for hollow axles with the metal technology of the time, though they're pretty much standard on everything outside North America these days. The PIIIs, at least, had them from delivery to retirement - you can see them in the DOT tests using those cars. |
|
|
| (693184) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 11 21:34:41 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by nasadowsk on Sat Oct 11 21:13:32 2008. Guess we need to wait for the Dude then ... there ARE reasons why they didn't work out for NYCTA ... hopefully we'll hear them ... |
|
|
| (693203) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 11 22:20:27 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 11 21:34:41 2008. According to a Timken Rep., from a mechanical standpoint, there is no benefit to either inboard or outboard. I took issue with this issue but from a maintenance point of view. Inboard bearings cannot be visually inspected during a 'walk-around'. Hot journals may be harder to detect with inboard bearings as was the case in the NJT derailment a few years ago. As to replacing wheels, the bearing is not "ruined" when removed from the axle. Once the 3 end-cap bolts are removed, the journal bearing will slide off the axle with only the seals needing replacement.I don't know of any finding that deemed inboard bearings unsuitable for NYCT use. What I was primarily interested in is why Metro-North and LIRR made the switch. Will NJT, based on their recent unfortunate incident, also switch? |
|
|
| (693205) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by nasadowsk on Sat Oct 11 22:28:10 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 11 22:20:27 2008. Did the LIRR and MN explicitly state outboard bearing in the M-7 order, or was that BBD's doing? From what I've heard, the reason the comets still have 'em is NJT asks for them.If it was BBD's choice, I'm guessing it's because nobody uses them anywhere else. |
|
|
| (693209) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 11 22:32:44 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by nasadowsk on Sat Oct 11 22:28:10 2008. I don't know and that's partially what I am asking. My usual sources were not privvy to that issue. My main concern is that catastrophic inboard bearing failure may not be "seen" by a hotbox detector and most certainly won't be seen during a visual inspection except over an inspection pit. |
|
|
| (693218) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 11 23:00:40 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 11 22:20:27 2008. Well ... we know the Pioneer trucks were a disaster ... but I could have sworn there were discussions years ago about the inboards not being as (yipe) "robust" as the outboards as far as NYCTA went. As to the actual reasons, I don't fix trains and am useless with automobiles. So went with what I thought I'd heard ...I'd imagine in IR gun would solve the problem from an inspection pit if the cars are straight off revenue at least. And there are defect detectors on railroads that look at both sides of the wheels on the iron. |
|
|
| (693234) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat Oct 11 23:57:10 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by nasadowsk on Sat Oct 11 22:28:10 2008. When an RFP os put out for a railcar, one advantage of not specifying inboard vs. outboard bearings is to allow the competing manufacturers the freedom to present a case for the best railcar designs they feel will serve the need. One manufacturer might go with an inboard bearing for the reasons stated in this thread, or other reasons (how valid they are is not something for me to judge). Then another manufacturer could offer a competing design with outboard bearings, and say in their proposal, as Train Dude points out, "We feel outboard bearings will help your maintenance people, prevent derailments and get your cars in and out of the shop quicker" etc etc.In general, the more details you specify up front in an RFP, the fewer options each bidder has to present you with a new or different approach. Going too far in that direction is not a good thing, in my opinion. |
|
|
| (693237) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by chuchubob on Sun Oct 12 00:07:09 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by RonInBayside on Sat Oct 11 20:33:26 2008. The most comparable line I can think of to New York is the Broad Street Line; the Kawasakis are 1976 vintage (correct me if I am wrong).Broad Street Subway Kawasakis entered service in 1981. |
|
|
| (693244) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sun Oct 12 00:23:15 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by chuchubob on Sun Oct 12 00:07:09 2008. Thanks. |
|
|
| (693276) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by Jeff H. on Sun Oct 12 02:57:57 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 11 22:20:27 2008. The Timken guy is selling bearings, so yeah, from his perspective,inboard bearings do nothing. Inboard trucks will ride smoother and quieter with less mass in the truck frame and axles. I've always felt that in a "rough service" environment such as NYCT, outboard bearing trucks are superior. |
|
|
| (693279) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Oct 12 03:22:21 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 11 22:20:27 2008. How did the inboard bearing truck work out on the R110B cars..?Any real differences that were that "stuck out"..? |
|
|
| (693302) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Oct 12 08:11:03 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 11 22:32:44 2008. It ought to be simple enough to create a hotbox detector that can read inboard bearings. Just put them between the rails instead of outside of the rails.Are there any hotbox detectors on NYCT? on LIRR? LION dint tink so, bu that does a Lion know anyway. Out here, yeah you need them, what with 100 car freight trains running 200 miles between crew points, and maybe only minimal inspection there at that. LION has (in the past) watch the crews change without even stopping the train. Now that is a sick bird, and the train must be stopped for crew to even touch the ladders. Hot box inspection not do much good in terminals: bearings are cooled off by the time the car knockers get to look at them. Yes it would seem that outside bearings easier to inspect, but on small rrs like LIRR putting pits at eastern terminals is no big deal. On NYCT it is even easier on most routes. Just stick an inspector under the Manhattan Bridge, and watch the trains go bye. ROARING |
|
|
| (693304) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Oct 12 08:45:16 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Jeff H. on Sun Oct 12 02:57:57 2008. As for better or worse there is no difference in ride quality.but like you say the weight savings on inboard bearing trucks is huge, specially the unsprung weight. The truck frame on inboard bearing truck is much narrower. The axle is about two feet shorter ( couple of hundred pounds) And the stuff like brake rigging, third rail gear etc has more room to be worked on. |
|
|
| (693317) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sun Oct 12 10:19:38 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Jeff H. on Sun Oct 12 02:57:57 2008. "The Timken guy is selling bearings, so yeah, from his perspective,inboard bearings do nothing." Why? Timken doesn't sell inboard bearings? Timken sells bearings. Why would Tinken rather sell you an outboard bearing than an inboard bearing? Do they charge you less for one than the other? See here: Timken bearings |
|
|
| (693345) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by aem7ac on Sun Oct 12 11:56:33 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 11 22:32:44 2008. My main concern is that catastrophic inboard bearing failure may not be "seen" by a hotbox detectorwasnt the m-7 and m-8's ordered (at least, the specs were finalized) long before njt had their incident? does anyone have a viable inboard bearing design right now? the only one i can think of in a commuter rail application are the ones on the comet derivative cars. everyone else seem to have an outboard bearing design, including many of the japanese manufacturers. the boston red line cars have inboard bearing in a subway application. as far as i know, they don't have a reputation for being a maintenance problem. but redline has always had inboard bearing trucks ever since the days of the SOAC. of course, not being a mech-e, i don't have any information about this other than what i observe by casually looking at equipment. |
|
|
| (693347) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by aem7ac on Sun Oct 12 11:58:36 2008, in response to Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 11 18:43:36 2008. NYCT has always (at least in my lifetime) used outboard journal bearings.didn't R-44 have some problematic rockwell truck from delivery that had inboard bearings, which had to be replaced en-masse? |
|
|
| (693379) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Oct 12 13:28:59 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by aem7ac on Sun Oct 12 11:58:36 2008. It was the R-46s. |
|
|
| (693549) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Oct 12 21:22:49 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 11 23:00:40 2008. Nobody knows whether or not the Pioneer III trucks on the R-32s or the General 70 trucks on the R-29s were a dosaster or not since there were insufficient numbers of them ordered to make a viable test of their performance. Only 4 cars iwth each type of truck were specified and there were no orders given either on the BMT or IRT to even keep those cars together. As a result, when these cars did run, they ran in trains with other cars with standard heavyweight trucks and could not give an accurate accounting of their actuale performance capabilities. The TA should have ordered 10 cars of each type and required that they be kept together in one train and monitered for performance. Then an accurate assessment could have been made. As for the R-32s spending time in the shop, sources have told me that they were in the shop for problems totally unrelated to the trucks and in the typical TA paranoia of the day, when the upper TA management discovered that they had spent so much time out of service, they jumped to the conclusion that it was because of the trucks and declined to consider any future orders of inside bearing trucks for a long time. As for the earlier use of inside bearing trucks, when the PCC streetcars and the later PCC rapid transit cars were being developed, I have heard that some R-9s received PCC trucks as an experiment and the B of T engineers who rode the cars were afraid of the extra sway associated with this type of truck and declined to consider their application in NY. |
|
|
| (693552) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Oct 12 21:26:51 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Oct 12 13:28:59 2008. The Rockwell trucks wer actually an outside bearing truck and there was actually nothing wrong with the truck design per se. The problem was that the inept TA new car engineering department issued incorrect specifications for the amount of stress that the trucks would be required to accomodate. The result was a truck structurally insufficient for the conditions on the NYCTS. |
|
|
| (693556) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sun Oct 12 21:35:49 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by randyo on Sun Oct 12 21:26:51 2008. The Rockwell trucks wer actually an outside bearing truck and there was actually nothing wrong with the truck design per se. The problem was that the inept TA new car engineering department issued incorrect specifications for the amount of stress that the trucks would be required to accomodate. The result was a truck structurally insufficient for the conditions on the NYCTS.To that end, didn't Rockwell end up supplying the trucks for WMATA's 1000 series, which was either very similar or identical? |
|
|
| (693565) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Oct 12 21:45:08 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by randyo on Sun Oct 12 21:26:51 2008. Did the R-44 trucks experience the same amount of cracking? IIRC at one point they were putting some of the R-46s on R-44 trucks. |
|
|
| (693569) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Oct 12 22:00:04 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Jeff H. on Sun Oct 12 02:57:57 2008. The Timken Class D bearing would be the same basic bearing, inboard or outboard. I don't see the issue of less mass being correct except perhaps in the distribution.I suspect the ride issue might have some element of truth to it. Compare the ride of the M-7 with the ride of an M-3. |
|
|
| (693570) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Oct 12 22:02:51 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Edwards! on Sun Oct 12 03:22:21 2008. To the best of my knowledge, there were never any issues with journal bearings. However, the sample size and the length of service was so limitied that the result was likely inconclusive. |
|
|
| (693571) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Oct 12 22:06:47 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Oct 11 20:15:35 2008. With an outboard bearing you don't ruin the bearing to change the wheel. The bearing is held together by the axle end cap. When you remove the "end cap bolts" the bearing will come off the axle leaving only the seals to be replaced.I'm not sure of wheel life over on Metro-North but at NYCT, wheels are supposed to last for the 6-year cycle of the truck. Journal bearings are usually rebuilt and re-used when the truck goes through SMS. |
|
|
| (693573) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Oct 12 22:16:21 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by randyo on Sun Oct 12 21:22:49 2008. Interesting! Granted, I was in RTO and not CED. So dunno what the reason was other than I saw those cars out on the "dead zone" tracks and can't recall ever seeing them not there. Since I had a layover in the afternoon, I did spot them up on jacks every now and then but never saw them on the road. I concluded therefore from what I observed because they just looked so WEIRD. Couldn't miss those donuts over the axle ends. :) |
|
|
| (693585) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sun Oct 12 23:09:51 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Train Dude on Sun Oct 12 22:00:04 2008. From a passenger perspective, I found the M7s at first to sway a lot, but I did ride them after they were "stiffened" and the ride improved a great deal. I don't appreciate a real difference, but of course others may disagree. |
|
|
| (693586) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sun Oct 12 23:10:35 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by RonInBayside on Sun Oct 12 23:09:51 2008. And the ride quality (vibration, noise) was better in the M7 for me. |
|
|
| (693587) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sun Oct 12 23:13:25 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Train Dude on Sun Oct 12 22:06:47 2008. "but at NYCT, wheels are supposed to last for the 6-year cycle of the truck."How many BIE events are assumed in an average six-year period? I assume that truings are part of the wheel's lifetime, but that too many truings will cut that service life short. |
|
|
| (693662) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by Jeff H. on Mon Oct 13 02:14:12 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Train Dude on Sun Oct 12 22:00:04 2008. What I'm saying is that inboard vs outboard has nothing to do withthe bearing design. It's obviously the same weight on the same number of wheels. But an inboard truck requires less metal than a comparable outboard truck sized for the same carbody weight. AFAIK, inboard technology was originally developed during the period where the rail industry was attempting to borrow automotive technology to make the cars lighter, faster and cheaper. The biggest initial application was in PCC trucks. |
|
|
| (693849) | |
Re: Technical Discussion Train Dude not Knowing Vocabulary. |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Mon Oct 13 18:05:08 2008, in response to Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by Train Dude on Sat Oct 11 18:43:36 2008. Umm...I think you are confused. From what I know, all modern rail cars have roller bearings. Journal bearings are the simpler design where the metal axle goes into a hole, and there is oil there to lubricate it. An interesting thing is that journal bearings, if designed in the right way, can become fluid bearings at higher speeds, making them even better than roller bearings, but I don't think they have fluid bearings for such heavy trains. Though I think I read somewhere that low speeds are not good for journal "friction" bearings, but I am not sure.As for inboard VS outboard; I have asked that question here before with no responses, so I will see what people have to say about it here. |
|
|
| (693852) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Mon Oct 13 18:22:24 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Oct 11 23:00:40 2008. I don't know about that. Look at how long the BUDD m1 trucks lasted, and the NJT ARROWS, also the SEPTA silverliners. PATH has such bearings as well. Thouth I will say that NYCTA tracks are rough, NJT tracks can be rough as well. |
|
|
| (693856) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Oct 13 18:25:14 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Mon Oct 13 18:22:24 2008. Yeah, turned out most of what I thought I knew was wrong. Happens. :) |
|
|
| (693867) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Mon Oct 13 18:42:15 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Oct 13 18:25:14 2008. Though I see where the mindset comes from, since you don't see the actual steel structure of the truck, they look weak, I used to think this myself, before realizing this stuff. The BUDD Pioneer trucks have a pretty good looking I-beam of a good gauge metal which I have seen on each side. Though the metal is not as thick as I would assume it should be, it has lasted this long. And the NJT commet trucks seem to have the same design. Despite this, the inboard trucks still have a "weak look" to them, in my eyes.But all trucks can have failures. I read that the SEPTA M-4s have had truck failures(causing derailments), but there have been instances of outboard truck failures, like on R44s, though I don't know of any derailments due to this. A miracle, mayvbe? Also, the market frankford has smooth tracks, so a truck cracking on those tracks would be caused by a low quality truck. But thay can have an excuse on NYCTA. There are some places where you literally "hit" switches, and curves, with a very rough thrash. Plus, there is that occasional side to side banging, and even smooth curves can get bumpy. The way those cars(especially R32s) are tossed around by the tracks, their survival is a testament to the high quality construction. And for that reason, I say those cars should be used in trailer parks as homes, or something, maybe in hurrican hit areas. Think about it: they survive all that crazy stuff, there is no doubt they can survive hurricanes, and floods. The way houses are built, they snap like twigs. And I am sure an R32 can survive even a tree falling on top of it, with just a dent. Look at how they are stacked on top of each other during shipment to the reefs. Like containers. Though I know containers are used as houses(as you posted a while ago), but those probably rust. and I don't know their life span. |
|
|
| (693871) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Oct 13 18:50:26 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Mon Oct 13 18:42:15 2008. I don't consider metallurgy or mechanical design one of my strong points, so I must defer to those who actually do that stuff. I thought I'd heard a long time ago that the inner bearing designs didn't work out, now I'm hearing that it was more perceptual than anything else if in fact any decision was ever made. I'm quite interested in hearing the truth ... assuming there IS any. :) |
|
|
| (693873) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Oct 13 18:53:54 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Oct 13 18:50:26 2008. What is the truth?A long time ago this axle was wandering along, its wheels hurting from arthritis. Then they met some ball bearings.... |
|
|
| (693874) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Mon Oct 13 18:54:45 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by nasadowsk on Sat Oct 11 21:13:32 2008. Why would an outboard track derail on bad track, while an inboard truck wouldn't?Also, what is right angle drive? Do you mean a hypoind gear? I think that is similar to a PCC design, so maybe BUDD was doing some high performance cars? I bet those old cars had crazy fast low end acceleration with that low gearing. Also, is there any structural benefit of hollow axles other than their being lighter? |
|
|
| (693876) | |
Re: Technical Discussion Train Dude not Knowing Vocabulary. |
|
|
Posted by Jeff H. on Mon Oct 13 19:00:57 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion Train Dude not Knowing Vocabulary., posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Mon Oct 13 18:05:08 2008. No, oddly enough Train Dude does have some command over railroadtechnical vocabulary. Go figure. Technically the "journal" is a surface on a shaft which has been precision ground to mate with a friction bearing. On a powered axle, in addition to the journal surfaces for supporting the car body weight, there are journals for supporting either the traction motor, if axle-hung, or the gearbox unit. But in railroad usage, "journal bearings" always refer to the load-supporting bearings near the wheels. Even when those bearings are of a roller design. |
|
|
| (693882) | |
Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Oct 13 19:07:37 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion About Axle Journal Bearings, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Oct 13 18:53:54 2008. Balls, said the queen ... that musta hurt. :)Roller bearings are smoother. |
|
|
| (693909) | |
Re: Technical Discussion Train Dude not Knowing Vocabulary. |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Mon Oct 13 20:15:21 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion Train Dude not Knowing Vocabulary., posted by Jeff H. on Mon Oct 13 19:00:57 2008. Ok, I guess there is some ambiguity with that. Don't see the need to say "journal bearings" when all that SHOULD be said in the case would be "bearings." But Train dude does have bananas hidden in his behind though. |
|
|
| (693912) | |
Re: Technical Discussion Train Dude not Knowing Vocabulary. |
|
|
Posted by Newkirk Images on Mon Oct 13 20:31:41 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion Train Dude not Knowing Vocabulary., posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Mon Oct 13 20:15:21 2008. But Train dude does have bananas hidden in his behind though.Uh-oh.....................prepare for Armageddon ! Bill "Newkirk" |
|
|
| (693938) | |
Re: Link to journal bearing Wiki entry |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Oct 13 21:30:03 2008, in response to Re: Technical Discussion Train Dude not Knowing Vocabulary., posted by Jeff H. on Mon Oct 13 19:00:57 2008. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_(mechanical_device)Link |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|
