# Articulated Porter 2-4-4-0



## Cmorais (Mar 11, 2013)

The Caminho de Ferro da Lapa Furada (Pierced Rock RR) was a narrow gauge mining railroad, established in 1905 in western Portugal to explore rich wolfram deposits, used to harden steel and in great demand at the turning of the 20th century. 

The mines were originally operated by a US mining concern and were mainly equipped with American hardware. The enterprise thrived trough the Great War years and the roaring twenties, when high strength steel was in great demand to supply the then new automobile industry.

The railway traversed rough terrain, requiring steep gradients and tight curves, and justifying it being built to 3ft gauge. Long strings of ore wagons were carried from the mine to the washing and concentrating facilities some 5 km away and from there the concentrated ore was transported a further 20 km to the broad gauge interchange at Bombarral, were it was sent to the Lisbon harbor for shipping abroad.

At its peak, the railroad saw considerable movement, and it even included a significant passenger service catering for the mine workers and for the inhabitants along the way. 

The stock market crash of 1929 put an end to those prosperous years and, as the demand for wolfram vanished, the mines were left lingering, its activity being a small fraction of the former one. 

Given the importance of the mine and rail activity to the region, the mine and the railroad were taken over by the Portuguese government in 1933, when the American enterprise went belly up. 

The mine activity resumed in full during WWII. After the war, however, the railway, upstaged by the road transport it had helped to build, lingered on transporting agricultural products and a few passengers until the closure of the line in the late sixties.

During the Portuguese period, the railroad equipment was slowly “europeised”, but their American origins remained clear up to the end.
….
To tackle the difficulties of the line, including steep gradients, tight curves and light infrastructure, the CFLF ordered, in 1907, two small, lightweight, articulated engines from H. K. Porter Inc. These locomotives, both 2+4+4+0’s, were quite successful and saw service down to the closure of the line. In each locomotive both sets of cylinders were supplied with high pressure steam, so they were not technically Mallets, tough their architecture was similar. 
…
This is part of the fictional story behind my currently under construction garden railroad, covering the period of the WW2 resurgence.

The model version of the CFLF has ordered two Bachmann 0-4-0 from Trainworld and will try to reproduce one of these articulated Porters. I attach a preview of what I'll try to achieve. Your feedback is welcome.


Articulated Porter 2-4-4-0

Jose Morais
Headmaster of the CFLF


----------



## Garratt (Sep 15, 2012)

Hmm, Maybe the engine's weight could be better distributed on the drivers. Perhaps the drivers should be a little more forward.
I guess that's why mallets usually have a bit that sticks out at the front. 
Need to get the best traction for those steep grades when hauling heavy ore.

Andrew


----------



## Cmorais (Mar 11, 2013)

Thanks for your input Andrew.


I think you're right about the back engine having too little weight over it, being prone to slippage. I just tried to keep the total length of the final engine as short as possible to make it look good on the curves - I’ve established a minimum radius of 1,6 m (5’4”), although with 3 ft long 8ft radius transition curves on each side.


Since the cylinders on the Bachmann Porter are placed farther forward than really needed and the wheels are quite spaced so as to give an acceptable wheel base to a 0-4-0, it results that the total wheel base of the “Mallet” will be quite large – almost 8 wheel diameters! – with very spaced wheels that look too small. Since modifying the drive units is out of the question, I will have to live with that.


I’m still unsure whether the final engine will use a separate tender or, given the relatively small length of the line, will carry a small load of coal behind the cab. In this case, the overhang will be larger and an extra carrying wheel will be advising, making it a 2-4-4-2.


I’ve posted on the same link two additional drawings, with these two alternatives. I'm not certain that the alternatives dont look overlong!
Articulated Porter 2-4-4-0 


Thanks again.


Jose Morais.
Headmaster of the CFLF


----------



## DKRickman (Mar 25, 2008)

You can definitely shorten the model a bit by moving those cylinders closer to the #1 axle on each engine. As shown, the cylinders are closer to the drivers in front than the ones behind them. Then move the whole boiler and cab assembly back. Ideally, you'd like the rear engine to be in front of the firebox, but you can run the drivers beneath it as well, if needed. Consider locating the stack roughly over the first driver, which should give a better proportion to the model. 

On the trailing truck: Often the decision to add a trailing truck was not based on length or overhang, but rather on need. If the engine ran with a tender, a trailing truck was not as needed (though it could still serve to support extra weight). If the engine had no tender and did a lot of running in reverse, the trailing truck would guide it into curves just like the pilot truck. In your case, the decision might be between a 2-4-4-0 tender engine or a 2-4-4-2 tank engine.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

I like the longer later pics. 
The front engine should have it's pivot point at the rear, not under the stack. 
There were pipes with flexible connections from cylinder exhaust to smoke box. 
This is not a Mallet, both cylinders are the same size. A Mallet reuses steam from the rear high pressure cylinder to a low pressure cylinder up front. The articulated sends steam direct to each engine. 

Happy rails, 

John


----------



## Garratt (Sep 15, 2012)

If you look at most mallets, the drivers and cylinder are close to keep all short. The 0-4-0 axles are spaced for weight distribution. 
Do you think you can modify the cylinders closer to the wheels?
Two LGB stainz blocks may have worked better being shorter. 

I just looked at your updated designs. It is tricky isn't it. Getting very long! 
A matter of tweaking to keep as short as possible. 
I think start by putting the front driver immediately behind the smokebox/tank, taking the cylinder to the front and extending the pilot forward. 

Andrew


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

I think version #1 is too long as it is!  
making it even longer isnt the way to go IMO.. 

I would take version #1 and shorten the front end.. 
see if you can bring the cylinders closer to the drivers, to shorten up that gap, 
(will still need to make sure everything clears as the wheels turn, but I bet you can make that gap less than it is now) 
then shorten the smokebox as much as possible..bring the smokebox front up nearly to the stack, 
then extend the light out on a bracket, like this: 









(that's a Bachmann Spectrum mogul) 

then make the leading truck as short as you can.. 
that should make a nice stubby 2-4-4-0. 
generally, in prototype practice, articulated locos were made as short as possible!  
no one wanted them longer than necessary. 

Scot


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2008)

Jose

I realize that the following is not exactly the same as what you are modeling, being that it's an ALCO 2-4-4-2, tender loco exported to New Zealand, but maybe it may be of help to you none the less.

Neil Wiggins - Scratch Built: ALCO 2-4-4-2 Logging Mallet (PDF 4.46MB)[/b]


----------



## Cmorais (Mar 11, 2013)

I Thank you all for your comments.
I think the total lenght of the engine can only be reduced by repositioning the cylinders closer to the first axis of each engine; this will shave about 5 mm on each engine, that is about 10 mm in total. The rest of the lenght is largely due to the large spacing of the axis. Yes, two LGB Stainz chassis would allow a shorter wheel base, but at a cost that a small narrow gauge railway cannot afford!
Since the total wheelbase is more or less fixed by the chosen chassis, I think the main question is obtaining an aesteticaly pleasing global concoction. 
Following several comments I've prepared a new alternative, shown in the same link as before, were I've placed the cylinders closer to the front axles; this shortens the wheel base, but only slightly.
I've also shortened the boiler, aligning the chimney with the leading edge of the first pair of wheels. The swinging front platform, which will support the firebox with a sliding plate, is of a reasonable lenght  and pleasingly balances the rest of the engine.
Now, I must find a way of hiding the rear engine motor in the cab.
Thanks again.

Jose Morais
Headmaster of the CFLF


----------



## jonathanj (Jan 24, 2008)

Hi, 

Have to admit I think you're always going to struggle not to have it look too long and thin with those blocks. What about making it a meyer or kitson meyer? A handful of such things were built and (and even used) in the US. Apart from anything else, if you can live with a tank engine, you can hide some of the length by putting a bunker on. Haven't got time to sketch anything up right now, but something like this: 
http://freespace.virgin.net/hanson.mike/meyer at exmoor.jpg 
(I know it's minimum rather than narrow gauge, but you get the idea.) 
Something like this proportions http://www.internationalsteam.co.uk/articulateds/pics/indonesia09001.jpg but rod rather than chain drive. 

J.


----------



## Garratt (Sep 15, 2012)

It is a tricky one with those long blocks and 10mm shortening gained won't save the day in any big way. 
It would not look quite as long if the boiler was fatter but it turns into a major slice n' dice rather than a simple build. 
Maybe lift the boiler just a tad to help.
I think it is all you can do is win a little here and there so it has an overall 'looks OK' feel to it. 
Your 5th image is looking OK but the pilot is getting a bit out there! 
Below is an image of an engine from Portugal with the drivers under the cab to help support the rear bunker. 

Good luck and may the traction be with you.

http://www.railfaneurope.net/pix/pt...c/pix.html 










Andrew


----------



## Garratt (Sep 15, 2012)

Jose, 

Here is a rough mock-up I did. 
Bring the cylinders closer to the wheels. 
Lift the boiler and tanks higher so it does not appear as long and skinny. 
Extend the side tanks lower.
Shuffle the top bits. 

There is perhaps some justification for the raised boiler because of the underlying articulation and swiveling steam pipes etc.
The axles are near evenly spaced for the less than ideal mountain track. 
You could fatten up the front lower pressure cylinders to make it compound as mallets are. 
From this point you could add a bunker and a trailing axle if a tender was not used. The symmetry would be there for running backwards. 
A mini Uintah, kind of... 


 

http://www.mylargescale.com/Communi...s74c57e24.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src=" 

Andrew


----------



## Garratt (Sep 15, 2012)

Revised image with 'some' spacing between both engine blocks for clearance when swiveling on curves. 
Steam dome above high pressure cylinders. 
Sand domes centered between axles. 
Steam delivery pipes to larger front low pressure cylinders. Front cylinders could be left the same size and be an articulated rather than a true mallet.
Rear light for reverse running. 


Would have to establish where the blocks swivel, probably both (then not really a mallet) and what radius curve is required.
Set-up engine blocks on curved test track to determine distance between pivots to keep the spacing between engine blocks a minimal amount while not hitting each other.
http://www.mylargescale.com/Communi...s9e3215cf.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src=


Close up of Bachmann Porter 0-4-0 valve gear which can be shortened:

http://www.mylargescale.com/Communi...s80719ffe.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src= 

Andrew


----------



## Cmorais (Mar 11, 2013)

Hi all 


These last two days have proved to be really useful in terms of defining alternatives for kitbashing two Bachmann 0-4-0 Porters into an articulated locomotive.


It is clear that the Porter chassis is not very well suited to the job, mainly because of the very large wheel spacing. However, I think that with suggestions received from the Forum, I’ve inched toward a balanced (if long) alternative.


Then yesterday (well, I think it depends on the time zone) Jonathan suggested a Kitson-Meyer type alternative. Well, this has the advantage of allowing the central axles to be much closer, thus reducing the overall length and the “thin” look of the loco. I’ve tried the idea and joined the results in the same link. I like it. What do you think?
Articulated Porter 2-4-4-0 


I see two major problems with the alternative, besides the many problems that plagued the originals: Kitson-Meyers were only used in Africa and South America, and, in reality, the two engines, both articulated by the way, were usually widely separated to allow for the large firebox, needed to feed both sets of high pressure cylinders, to drop between them.


For the first problem we can assume Porter, which was always an innovative company, tried to innovate on its first sale to Portugal. For the second one, we can assume Porter innovated in enlarging the firebox sideways, using part of what externally looks like the water tank, thus allowing the engines to stay really close.


I now must see if the placement of the electric motors of both Bachmann engines is compatible with this design. That will have to wait for the next weekend.


Jose Morais


Headmaster of the CFLF


----------



## jonathanj (Jan 24, 2008)

Hi all,

Scribbled up a couple of KM type tanks, complete with rear unit facing backwards. But I can't see how to post pics up on the forum any more, guess that's cos I'm not any kind of premium member. Anyone want to PM me and I'll PM/email them to someone who can post them?

J.


----------



## Garratt (Sep 15, 2012)

Open a free account at PhotoBucket.com, upload images from your PC then copy the 'HTML' code in the box there and paste in the link dialog window when you post a reply here. All very easy!

Andrew


----------



## jonathanj (Jan 24, 2008)

Hi All,

Porter-Kitson-Meyers :

2-4-4-0T
2-4-4-2T

I've just kludged them together by editing the mallet images, and left the cylinders standard, but they'd definitely benefit from the cylinders coming in towards the wheels. The scribble on the back of end of the 2-4-4-2T is a pair of large brake air tanks fitted by Porter on account of the things' mountain duties. Nothing to do with needing to fill the space over the rear pony truck and extra bunker being wrong..

J.


----------



## Garratt (Sep 15, 2012)

Jose, 

I have a pair of Bachmann 0-4-0s and a heaps of LGB blocks that I wish to do something with so I am also interested in the concept you have prompted. 
I have come to realize why many Mallets have the front cylinders sticking out past the smokebox. It is because of the geometry of the flexible steam exhausts which have a ball swivel joint. They can't go directly into the smokebox like most locos because the boiler is swinging about there. 
The Meyer had a small firebox because there was a bogie underneath. The reason they made the Kitson-Meyer was so there was space between the bogies for a larger firebox. They usually had a fuel bunker/water at the rear to aid in traction. The design never took off because the Garratt was more popular. 
I tried another Mallet/Articulated design with some of this in mind. This has been a fun learning process.

http://www.mylargescale.com/Communi...s8914aef0.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src= 


A shorty with a small firebox
http://www.mylargescale.com/Communi...s5416b8b2.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src= 
Andrew


----------



## Garratt (Sep 15, 2012)

Posted By jonathanj on 14 Mar 2013 07:09 AM 
Hi All,

Porter-Kitson-Meyers :

2-4-4-0T
2-4-4-2T

I've just kludged them together by editing the mallet images, and left the cylinders standard, but they'd definitely benefit from the cylinders coming in towards the wheels. The scribble on the back of end of the 2-4-4-2T is a pair of large brake air tanks fitted by Porter on account of the things' mountain duties. Nothing to do with needing to fill the space over the rear pony truck and extra bunker being wrong..

J.

Jonathan J, I didn't see your post until after I just posted, I hadn't refreshed. 
I like the Kitson-Meyer modifications you did. They have the big firebox which was the whole point of the Kitson-Meyer design. You might have to move the steam dome forward though.
If you hit the 'HTML Code' on the PhotoBucket site then edit your post and click on the 'Insert Hyperlink' icon up top and paste the HTML Code in 'url' they should appear in your post. I will do it for you so we can see them all together, hope you don't mind.

JonathanJ's Kitson-Meyer modifications:-
http://www.mylargescale.com/Communi...s1ba757d6.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src=
http://www.mylargescale.com/Communi...sa79a8e94.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src= 
Cheers
Andrew


----------



## jonathanj (Jan 24, 2008)

Posted By Garratt on 14 Mar 2013 08:13 AM 
You might have to move the steam dome forward though. 
- 
Having it more-or-less over the centre off the boiler water space (ie midway between the back of the firebox and the front tubeplate) makes the loco less prone to priming with sharp gradients and sudden changes. Another tactic is to put a nice big dome over the firebox crown sheet and always run with the water nice and high. Haven't got the reference to hand, but there's a story about the first Uintah mallet 2-6-6-2T mallet having a dome hastily retrofitted after the contents of the boiler sloshed forward somewhere on the pass and left the gauge glass bone dry. I think the engineer quit too.


J.


----------



## jonathanj (Jan 24, 2008)

Finally found a minute to make note of the Meyer / Kitson-Meyers built in the US. 

Best known and last were 7 locos in various gauges by Vulcan Ironworks in the Early thirties 
http://brassbackshop.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=771&sid=58805001cee9bab7095e537e5c209cbd 
(thread shows an HO brass model in need of some work, scan down for an original works catalogue shot). 

Binns & Koch list a few others : 

The original meyer-with-the-trucks-spread-and-room-for-a-deep-firebox 'Edward T. Johnson', built by Baldwin for the Sinnemahoning Valley RR. 
It doesn't seeme to have lasted long, and the designers included various contemporary technical innovations that weren't popular in the long term (Vauclain compounding for example), but stripped of those the the basic outline reappeared a couple of years later in the Prototype KM from Messers Kitson. 

Eureka Foundy built a single 0-4+04-0T meyer (as opposed to KM) in 1910 for a local customer, allegedly using a second hand Heisler as a starting point. 

CWHunt of New York catalogued small meyer type machines for 20" (ish*) gauge in various weights from 8-20 tons from about 1880 till 1900. It's less than clear who actually built them, how many were supplied etc, etc. There is however a photo of at least one actual locomotive that's probably at the upper end of the weight class. This had the powertrucks spaced apart, but used the space between for a water tank instead of an enlarged/deeper firebox - squinting at the grainy reproduction suggests that the loco in question was probably fitted witha marine type boiler. 

*actually, CW Hunt used wheels with outside flanges and quoted 21-1/2" across the outside faces of the rails.

But in the what-if universe, there's not much to stop Porter taking the Hunt locos in particular as inspiration for a larger but still lightweight articulated, and adding in some of the KM refinements which were reasonably well publicised by the turn of the century - the benefits of a deeper box would have been obvious. 

J.


----------



## Mik (Jan 2, 2008)

If there is anything here you can use, have at it. 
http://www.the-ashpit.com/mik/mallet.htm


----------



## Cmorais (Mar 11, 2013)

Hi all


I’ve passed these last two weeks over your side, to visit my new grandson in Washington DC. Of course, aside from family duties, we’ve used the occasion for a little bit of tourism, including three days in New York. 


Now, a trip by car to NY brings one dangerously close to some interesting garden railway spots. So I’ve managed some little detours, the first one to visit Aristocraft in Irvington, NJ, intending to buy some Revo receivers with steam sounds. I’ve been very warmly received by Scott Polk, who not only supplied me with six receivers at a very nice price, but he also offered me a 2013 ECLSTS Car (Altoona Brewing Company). Thanks Scott.


Also, before returning to Washington, I managed to justify a detour through Brooklyn and make a visit to Trainworld. There, besides a few small items (unfortunatelly luggage space is always limited), I picked up two Bachmann 0-4-0 Porters that are the main reason for this post.


Before packing them, I discarded all the packaging material (at least 30 times the volume of the locos!!), and also removed and discarded the steel weights and the electronic boards. The weights are, of course, quite heavy and occupy the space that will be taken over by the batteries, so no point in bringing them home. As an aside, the trip between DC and Newark Airport was very comfortably and quickly made on an Amtrak regional express – still the best way to travel!


I profited the dismantled state of the locomotives to study them and take a few pictures of the drive units, to see the possibility of making a Mallet impersonation. The pictures are here: 
Porter - Mallet


As you can see, the electric motor is horizontally placed behind the rear axle, connected by a gear box which is articulated with the rear axle itself. I’ve found that the gear box is kept in place by a locking pin. If this pin is pushed aside and removed, the gear box rotates freely around the rear axle. This means that, with a simple surgery, it will be possible to move the motor to a vertical position. That will allow shortening considerably the drive units, as indicated in picture #2.


The height of the motors will allow them to fit – just - inside the boiler, so that no major surgery will the necessary. The rear unit will be fixed to the chassis, in true Mallet style, and the motor will fit inside the firebox, allowing the rear unit to be pushed under the cab. The cab will need some doctoring to fit the rear wheels.


The front unit will be articulated with the rear one. The motor will swing inside the boiler in curves, but just under 3mm to each side on a 5 ft radius (10 ft diameter) curve, the minimum on the Lapa Furada layout. 


Picture #3 shows a preview of the project. Note that, since this is my first kit bash, and life is short, I decided to keep it as simple as possible. The side tanks are unchanged from the original loco, only the boiler is lengthened by about 5 cm. For this to be feasible the pilot wheel will not be included. Later, I will see if I have the courage to include it, which will require increasing the length of the side thanks.


Of course I know that, in reality, there would be no space for the firebox with the rear wheels in the proposed position, and that the chimney should line up with the front cylinders, to facilitate the exhaust. But this is in fact a battery powered locomotive, and I just want to have a little fun without too much work – I would rather finish an imperfect project than to be stuck with a perfect one.


Unless, that is, if you have a real neat suggestion. I’d like to hear it from you.
Jose Morais
Headmaster of the CFLF


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Your link 'Porter Drive Units' requires a password sign in .... what's yours? 
Just kidding please make it public if you can. 

Thanks 
John


----------



## Cmorais (Mar 11, 2013)

Hi John

I was just editing the link. It is now public (I think...).

Thanks

Jose Morais
Headmaster of the CFLF


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Works fine now. 
Only suggestion would be a longer firebox between the drivers. 
Have Fun 
John


----------



## DKRickman (Mar 25, 2008)

Actually, for a Mallet like this, the front cylinders typically did not line up with the stack or smokebox. Your design looks just right to me. As for the firebox, since the rear frame is fixed the firebox can drop down over the rear axle, with ash pans ahead of and behind it. 

In other words, I think you've got it nailed perfectly!


----------



## Dean Whipple (Jan 2, 2008)

*Pee Wee 2-4-4-2*








Bob Baxter built this is a loco a few years ago from a pair of Bachmann 0-4-0's

More info
*http://4largescale.com/baxter/10.htm*


----------

