Couplings...

[Mountain]

I have tried all sorts of things, Staples, Chain and Magnets. After being disappointed in all of them I switched to Kadee. (not yet perfect and need some adjustment)

However - To get small British outline wagons to be worked individually they need to be 'dead' and not roll. I use small hard
sponge axle brakes that just allow wheels to rotate. These brakes while making the hands free
and free shunt operate very reliably you can only pull short trains. My Ruston's struggle at
more than 6 wagons, a weighted Hornby Sentinel can start to struggle above 10.

Geoff T

I have a shunting layout Coppenhall Good's running small British wagons, with a Jinty and 08 loco's.



I have seen a You Tube Video about 8 months ago, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHkG1Gp ... 3_52RnmEZ4 which mentions in the comments by the poster Geoffrey Trenholme adding hard foam to axles as brakes. Now Dad-1 here you mention the same technique but with soft foam. Have you details of how to do this, any pictures? or Video??

That is interesting. I didn't have a problem with Sprat & Winkle with this, BUT I did have a different issue in that I found that the magnets needed to be mounted closer to the surface of the sleepers to make their effect stronger. This was done via cutting out a bit of depth to the sleepers from underneath if using Peco Strreamline track (Code 100 in 00 gauge) so the magnets could sit higher up. I never really noticed the "Stall" effect, (But to be honest, I only ever experimented and didn't end up converting my fleet other than a few "Test" wagons) but if it did happen if didn't cause them to uncouple with this design.

Will Kadees work if the magnets are mounted deeper so their effect is weaker so less likely to "Grab" the steel axles?
Could one mount something below the axles to reduce the magnetic effect?

[Dad-1]

O.K. This is going to take some time.
The video in question is one of mine and yes I have my Kadees working almost perfectly.
To achieve that takes care and sensitivity.

First - The Problem.
Kadees work on a gentle use of magnets to open the trip. There are two Kadee magnets.

One is fixed between the sleepers where, when set correctly they are just above rail head height.
These tend to offer a higher magnet pull to the magnetic trip, which is probably best adjusted to
JUST touch the magnet when pulled open.
These magnets do pull on magnetic axles & wheel sets. This magnetic 'Creep' can result in a wagon
being pulled gently forward during the opening window and therefore not being dropped as wanted.

Two is a much larger magnet designed to be laid under the sleepers. The nightmare here is that the
actual magnetic force you're going to be wanting to use will vary depending on the actual track you
are going to be running on. Think about it : Code 100 track has a deeper rail section and heavier sleepers
than code 75 with thinner sleepers and to complicate more you could use code 75 rail on very thin
copper-clad sleepers. I've done all three !!
I find under board magnets exert a greater pull on magnetic wheels & axles with a larger 'Creep' factor.

Now let's get away from the track magnets for a while and look at Wagons & their Kadee couplers, well
in fact we will start with standard well set-up Bachmann couplers. IF you have a super free running wagon
and move to couple-up it is possible for the force required to lift the hooks is greater than the force needed
to make the wagon roll. Try an experiment yourself VERY slow movement. I do have very free stock that is used
on my long freights where 20 is a short train.
With Kadees I find it takes even more force to open the jaws than the afore mentioned situation.

So now let's look at axle brakes for individual wagons. I fit 'loose' hard sponge brakes, usually but not always
acting on the axles. The harder sponge tends to exert pressure without grabbing the moving axle. The aim is
to get a 'dead' non rolling wagon, but one where the wheels are rotating. Sometimes I use a brake on each axle
to reduce the chance of wheel locking, but get the required brake effect. Here are some examples :-

A small piece teased between the Bachmann mounting and axle.



A larger piece resting on the Dapol coupler mounting



On some Vans and in this case a Dapol kit built Lowmac a piece that rubs the tyre



These are easily removable should I wish to remove the Kadee coupler, replace with my Bachmann version and
run the wagon in one of my unbraked long freights.

Braked wagons have the magnetic creep eliminated so are a step towards perfect Kadee working. The brake helps on
coupling-up and when separating a train over the magnet by providing a stable stop.

Now much of the above needs to be achieved because of the inconsistency of wheel sets. Some are highly magnetic,
like Alan Gibson steel rimmed plastic wheel types, Most marginally magnetic like Bachmann, Hornby, Dapol. Some are
non-magnetic like Oxford Rail (Brass) and an unidentifiable number of Dapol sets. Here is a video (If I can find it) of
some magnetic wheel tests.

https://youtu.be/VreNTGz8HJs?si=8MVCgfvSlo62AAJw

Currently I'm running 2 different shunting puzzles with Kadees, One, mine has underboard magnets, the other is the Clubs,
that I made using between the tracks magnets. The choice for the club was to make the uncoupling locations easy for all
to see.

https://youtu.be/JU9U9-DquR0?si=3jPj9dVTSoyXKQ4d More videos on the HSII thread in Layouts under Construction

https://youtu.be/qnqmvTkUTus?si=uehd2MqOI_-18gsc A bit more on the Green Frog Brewery thread in Layouts under Construction

I will add the videos later as this will involve going back many years and the 400 ? videos I have on Youtube.
I shall also read back what I've written to see if I've messed up somewhare !!

Geoff T.

[Mountain]

I take it the sponges add just enough resistance to prevent the wagons from jolting?

I was considering fitting certain vehicles with a working handbrake but not for the same reason. More for holding things on hills, and if I do design and build something, it will be a small hand lever of sorts.

Going back to Kadees, I take it that the magnets pull the lower arms towards the centre of the track, thus opening the jaw of the coupling? Or do they do the opposite and take the lower arm away from the centre?
(I have the odd Kadee on narrow gauge stock that I have never tried. (Think some of them are at different heights as they used to be owned by different people in the past. I was planning (When I am.organized) to replace them with my own couplings so they may be offered in the future as spare, but I am not that organized yet).

Just a thought. (Though defeats the point), could they be converted to hand operated uncoupling instead by taking an arm above the coupling somehow? Haha! I am just exploring theoretical thoughts!

What keeps Kadees closed? What I mean is, when I look at one on the rare model I have that has them, they have a spring to close them (The few that don't stick open as the odd one may have had a rough time) but surely the spring is not strong enough when one pulls a heavy train? Or is it the angle they are made that helps? In other words, if the train is heavy enough, and the loco strong enough could they pull open in use? Just curious as I have seen really long H0 scale trains pulled and it makes me wonder if there is a limit to how much one could pull? As these H0 scale Youtube vids are taking on a lot of weight on those couplings! (Kinda like the real thing!)

I guess all couplings have a limit before they come completely away from ones vehicle, but I am not talking about this so much... More if the ability for the coupling itself to keep coupled under load. (As can be seen I have not used Kadees. My few rare items of stock with them are about four waggons and the odd loco or two, but like I said... Some are different heights so when I went to try some they were not ideally suited).

[Dad-1]

Mountain,

Too many questions !!

Kadees work on a split two way pull magnet where the trips are pulled out towards the rails.
Hence their ability to open.
Should you want to change back then you just pull them out of the NEM coupling mount and
replace with any other NEM couplers.

The sponge is there to add a braking effort, nothing to do with jolting although it would stop
any hunting effect. As brakes limit your train length it would be unusual to introduce hunting,
simply because your wagons don't roll easily.

Look at your kadees and the safe clasping for pulling is obvious.

Geoff T.

[aleopardstail]

for what some rolling stock goes for these days they should come with controlled functional brakes

and far better couplings out of the box. It would only take one manufacturer to have tension locks and KD in the box as standard to start something of a revolution, and at that scale it wouldn't cost a lot either - even if only on "premium" type products

[Mountain]

Thanks Dad-1. You have explained something which had puzzled me. The magnets pull the couplings the opposite way to the way I assumed they worked. Now they start to make sense!

[Mountain]

for what some rolling stock goes for these days they should come with controlled functional brakes

and far better couplings out of the box. It would only take one manufacturer to have tension locks and KD in the box as standard to start something of a revolution, and at that scale it wouldn't cost a lot either - even if only on "premium" type products

Actually, I have long thought that both in 00 and in N that "Surely it is about time manufacturers could do with something better?"

Magnetic couplings are ideal for permanent sets such as use with HST's or DMU's, but not for things which do not run in fixed rakes.
We need some sort of automatic coupling that either is hidden or looks prototypical.

I am actually surprized that they have not really "Cracked it" yet, though Kadees or Sprat & Winkle both offer an alternative. S&W are cheapef and for older wagons and stock can be made to look better, though Kadees are a very visual match for buckeyes used on coaches, and for some modern types of prototype couplings such as Delner or BSI etc. (Roughly speaking).

I think one ideally we could do with strong but wire thin type couplings at bufferbeam height which at a distance look like screw link or 3 link style couplings...

Actually surprized Hornby did not try experimenting with realistic looking couplings when introducing TT120. Maybe they did and thought better of it?

Wonder what a commercial more durable version of the Sprat & Winkle coupling would look like? The "Hook" part would need a slight widening for durability, and the bar would need to be stiff black wire to sit just behind the buffers... This to me would probably be the most practical looking one to go for...

BUT for coaches using buckeyes the Kadee just looks the part... BUT could both be used on the same bufferbeam? Problem is they are of similar heights. If Kadees could be mounted about 3 mm lower, there would be room for a S&W bar to fit...

Difficult isn't it! No easy solution! I'd love to come up with a solution that allows more than one coupling type to couple that also looks the part... Can it be done?

Wait. Looking at Dad-1's photos... I reacon it can be done if a S&W "Hook" is re-designed. into a horizontally flatter form into a type of upsidown tension lock but retain the S&W operating qualities... Think it is possible without altering the height of the Kadee. That way locos can be S&W. Wagons can be S&W only... Coaches can be Kadee with a wire bar above to accept S&W hooks... It can work I "Think", though coaches with dual couplings may restrict the ability for the S&W hooks to function... But it may work...

[Tom@Crewe]

Thanks' for the reply's

As you can see in the picture my magnets are between the rails as they were fitted long after ballasting and painting. (still need a bit more grime, oil and soot adding)

IF you have a super free running wagon and move to couple-up it is possible for the force required to lift the hooks is greater than the force needed
to make the wagon roll. Try an experiment yourself VERY slow movement. I do have very free stock that is used on my long freights where 20 is a short train.
With Kadees I find it takes even more force to open the jaws than the afore mentioned situation.

This is more a problem, re-coupling, if its only one or two wagons are being picked up the moving train hit's, pushes the wagon along but does not couple, (and this is well away from the magnet's) shunting is all low speed and even though I have weighted each wagon to around 40g some wagons just roll too easily.

Dad-1 where did you source the foam??

[Bigmet]

for what some rolling stock goes for these days they should come with controlled functional brakes and far better couplings out of the box. It would only take one manufacturer to have tension locks and KD in the box as standard to start something of a revolution, and at that scale it wouldn't cost a lot either - even if only on "premium" type products

Bachmann did this - getting on 15 years ago at a guess - on at least a couple of bogie wagons which operate with knuckle couplers, using their own E-Zmate clone of Kadees, and to really ice the cake installed them in the proper bufferbeam location. I reckoned that made them the most realistic wagons at the time in RTR OO, equipped with a coupler that looked much like the real item, and in the correct location. The NEM pockets on the bogies had their tension locks installed, so purchasers had both options. (What Bachmann missed is that there was no provision for a matching knuckle coupler on the traction; but their class 66 could have the drawbar location in the bufferbeam cut out and an E-Zmate installed in about ten minutes: done.)

Carriage stock with camming couplings typically have alternative couplers to operate these properly which is helpful.

Needing some braked carriages, I have transplanted discounted Heljan DMU drives into full brakes, the usefully near solid sides of the LNER designs concealing completely what is within.

[Dad-1]

Hi Tom,

I cadged it off another club member !!
I have sufficient to be able to send you enough for 20-30 wagons.

As I said you keep the brakes to your kadee wagons because depending
on locomotive use it's possible to get wheel slip when moving an unspecified
number. I note you adding weight, which as you've found it really doesn't make
that much difference. My very light Dapol Lowmac with brakes (on both axles)
works fine. It needed two axles braked due to it's light weight and the requirement
that wheels revolve !!

My little Hornby Ruston DS-48 struggles with more than 5, heavy wagons with brakes
really do add drawbar load !! These are light, the 16 tonners no more than 18 grams.

https://youtu.be/d4GSNkWulsY?si=Tl69EMoJGmYyad76

I'm not certain to pass this on, but to help coupling up I weaken the cross spring that
fits in a groove. I crush the 180 bend with a fine screwdriver, it does need the spring
so this is an intuitive thing for me.

PM me your address

Geoff T.

[aleopardstail]

have to say the TT:120 couplings are very odd, I guess they wanted reliable operation and for a sprung uncoupler ramp to work though.

agree on stuff needs to work, magnetic is ok as you say for fixed rakes but pointless for anything like say loco hauled coaching stock on an end to end layout.

[Mountain]

Also the personal needs of the coupling come into play which can be influenced by scale.
Example, in 7mm scale, I perfer the "Hands on" approach as it feels more like a real railway somehow?
But if I was in 2mm scale, I would more likely prefer a coupling that works by itself and prefer them to be ready made and fitted as I would not want to mess about doing too many things myself in the small scale. In 4mm scale, I would normally prefer an automatic operation though if a manual operation is easy to do and build, I would opt for that if there was no standard coupling available. (One normally starts out with the easier option of using what is supplied, and nothing wrong with that if it works and one is happy with it).

I think ease of operation and looks and overall performance are the main criteria for me be the coupling manual or automatic, as I do not want to spend ages trying to get vehicles to couple!

Yes. TT120 couplings do look "Odd" and somewhat bulky looking for the scale. I am not sure how they work, but I have heard that they are already a standard version for that scsle which was already established amongst Continental modellers which is why they were adopted, which in a way is sad because Hornby potentially had a clean sheet to work from as their models were of British prototypes. Having said that, compatibility is the understandable way to go for most, as it is annoying having things one wants to run but won't couple as they are of different designs...

[Bigmet]

...TT120 couplings do look "Odd" and somewhat bulky looking for the scale. I am not sure how they work, but I have heard that they are already a standard version for that scsle which was already established amongst Continental modellers which is why they were adopted, which in a way is sad because Hornby potentially had a clean sheet to work from as their models were of British prototypes...

Far from sad for Hornby, if it indicates they have learned not to reinvent the wheel, but instead apply proven practise.(This in no way implies this coupler is ideal in all respects.)

[Dad-1]

Back to the Kadees,

Been playing indoors today, wet & miserable outside.
I was experimenting with one of my Dapol Lowmacs - it weighs in at 12.5 grams and it was difficult to get
a clean slow speed pick-up of that single wagon. I increased the brakes (thicker shreds of foam) to the degree
where the wheels were not turning continuously, but the energy to open the Kadees was still more than that
required to push the wagon along. Plonk a 27 gram track rubber on the wagon and it all worked perfectly. At
the same time I had a kit built Dapol 16 ton mineral wagon, that came out at 18.5 grams and worked much
more reliably. It would therefore seem that a minimum weight of around 18 to 20 grams is required for single
wagons to be shunted satisfactorily with Kadees, anything above 30 gram is likely to be overkill !!
I hate adding much weight, but believe that most RTR wagons will be somewhat above that minimum, therefore
only needing suitable 'brakes'.

The much maligned narrow tension lock coupler, is cheap to make, will accommodate quite extreme variances in
track quality & turn radius, can run somewhat out-of-line and will cope with some reversing out of the box. My
experience points to most users being unable to make minor adjustments to improve that out of the box product.
Visually they may leave much to be desired, but to be critically honest the majority of users couldn't cope with
anything more complicated.

Geoff T.

[Tom@Crewe]

It's a while ago but I looked into wagon weight and came across 2 recommended ways to calculate the weight of a wagon.

1. 25g per axle
2. 5g per cm length.

Bachmann 37-081F 7 Plank Wagon BR Grey 27g out of the box, rule 1 = 50g, rule 2 = 39g as I wanted a removable coal load I added some lead flashing to make total weight 40g.

Hornby R6240 Lowmac, 29g, rule 1 = 50g, rule 2 = 65g I added a JCB and it came to 46g, difficult to add more weight but comparing with other stock I decided to leave it at that for not.

My Vans came out of the box at 40g, Tankers at 44g and brake vans at 54g so left them all alone.
My Open wagons, and conflats all wanted weighting.

All my wagons with added weight are 40g - 45g