# Adding R/C to a K-4



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Well finally got it done. What ever you do, don't believe every thing you read. One of the reasons I bought the K-4 as the ad said R/C ready. Not hardly. It was quite a challenge for Paul from Southern Digital to make the conversion but he got it figured out. Looks good but may not be for every ones taste as some small holes drilled in the cab. Me I happy. I have not had a chance to run yet as I just brought it home today. Good thing I did not have to have it shipped back and forth to have the work done as Paul had a shop about 40 miles from me. Here are some pics of the install. Later RJD


----------



## deltatrains (Nov 25, 2010)

Hi RJ,
On the tender I see a clear hose in the center. Would that be your Water Bypass Return? I have a K4 and my bypass return is on the bottom of the tender farside of drawbar, opposite the black hose. Just curious. Having control is going to be great when running. Even though this is a 1/29 scale engine, there really is not a lot of room in the cab, so job well done. 

All the best, Peter.


----------



## livesteam53 (Jan 4, 2008)

It looks like the best way to do it. 
I have been wondering how to do this one. 
The pictures are worth a thousand words. 
Thanks for posting. Now get out and do some running,


----------



## steveciambrone (Jan 2, 2008)

As far as I can tell R/C ready from Accucraft means the Lever type control arms on the Throttle and Gas valves, there is also the tube that runs from the front to the back space in the tender for the servo wires. 
Granted it could be taken farther like the Roundhouse engines with servo mounts provided and servo rods also, it could easily be provided as an additional option at extra cost, I would buy it. 
What RX was used in the tender and did it fit throught the narrow hatch on the rear deck of the tender? 

Installing R/C in my K4 is my next project. Although I am only planning to control the throttle only. 

Thanks 
Steve


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

The clear plastic line you see is for the installation that I did for the hot water bath. I can now warm the water in the tender. 

Well I think it's a lame excuse for saying R/C ready. Just having a arm for throttle and fuel with holes in them, to me is pretty far fetched for being R/C ready in my book. 


The RX receiver is a Spektrum AR500. More of a heavy duty type. It was installed by removing the tender shell and then building a platform for it to rest on. Also this is where the on/off switch is located and up close to the water door opening. Also the charging connection is there also. 

Now that I got my work done in the yard I can hopefully try it out tomorrow. Later RJD


----------



## JWLaRue (Jan 3, 2008)

Looks good and looking forward to a run report.

Question: with the Spectrum receiver inside the tender, where is the antenna?

-tnx,

Jeff 
@import url(http://www.mylargescale.com/Provide...ad.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/providers/htmleditorproviders/cehtmleditorprovider/dnngeneral.css);


----------



## weaverc (Jan 2, 2008)

Jeff,
One of the nice things about 2.4 GHz receivers is that they are small with short antennas. This one is a little larger than a quarter with antennas less than 2 inches. Other Spektrum receivers are similarly small. Two of my receivers are buried inside tenders with no interferance at all.


----------



## JWLaRue (Jan 3, 2008)

Carl,

I am pleasantly surprised to learn that 2.4GHz receivers can be used with the antenna(s) enclosed in metal.

My current use of that kind of r/c is in boats made from fiberglass, hence no metal shielding worries.

-tnx,

Jeff


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Like wise mine is also inside the tender. Little interference and one must remember we do not get to far away from ones loco. Later RJD


----------



## jlinde (Jan 2, 2008)

Thank you for posting this! I've been puzzling over this install for quite a while. Note - In Accucraft-speak, "RC ready" means "not completely impossible to modify for RC."


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Well it is not impossible to RC but I do believe the ad is a bit deceiving as far as I'm concerned. R/C ready to me is like a plug and play install. They got me once but not again. Later RJD


----------



## Phippsburg Eric (Jan 10, 2008)

Well, It is such a nice engine, even if it didn't say R/C Ready you would have jumped on it!


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

I do believe the ad is a bit deceiving as far as I'm concerned. R/C ready to me is like a plug and play install 
There's a whole thread about what Accucraft means by 'r/c ready', that happened about the time the EBT #12 came out, which was also r/c ready. 

I'm not disagreeing with you - while EBT #12's tender is definitely r/c ready - even to holes pre-drilled under the water hatch for your switches and sockets; the loco is not. 

Take a look at http://www.mylargescale.com/Community/Forums/tabid/56/aff/11/aft/121521/afv/topic/Default.aspx [www dot mylargescale.com/Community/Forums/tabid/56/aff/11/aft/121521/afv/topic/Default.aspx if that link doesn't work.]


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Well did a test run today. Not happy so it's back to the drawing board to do some re engineering. I'm hoping to avoid adding a chain drive to the throttle servo, we shall see. Later RJD


----------



## steveciambrone (Jan 2, 2008)

what were the problems? 

Steve


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

RJ, 

What would you hope to gain with chain and sprocket drive that you couldn’t provide with levers? 

It looks to me like you have a linkage ratio problem; I'd guess you’re unable to rotate the needle valve adequately and or in the finite steps required thereof? By simply elongating the pushrod and re-clocking the arms you could garner more travel volume in your example. That said an ideal set-up would require different length arms (or pivot points thereof), repositioning of the arms and a new pushrod length. 

Michael


----------



## weaverc (Jan 2, 2008)

The advantage of gear and chain is increased throttle rotatation over a lever. On my K-27 and K-28 I get about 270° travel on the throttle valve, whereas with a lever, I got far less. The small gear the throttle shaft has 12 teeth (K-27) 16 teeth (K-28) and the large gear on the servo has 36 teeth.


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

Carl, 

You can garner the same results with levers, after all the gears are simply levers. 

In your example the K28 36/16 nets a linkage ratio of 2.25:1. Which equates to a 1" servo arm and a .444" needle arm 1/.444 = 2.25:1. 

Michael


----------



## steveciambrone (Jan 2, 2008)

I have looked at chain and gears as possible solutions for control and concluded that it its simpler to make and easier to adjust levers and pushrods for the desired throws needed. Coupled with a computer radio with adjustable end points and the capability to get even greater servo throws up to 150% in each direction it becomes a lot easier to make any needed adjustments. 

Steve


----------



## weaverc (Jan 2, 2008)

Michael, The way I see it is that max travel on the HS-81MG, a frequently used servo, is only 40° each side of center or 80° side to side when used on the throttle terminal on the receiver. In order to get the mechanical advantage to exceed 80° travel, gears are the way to go. The Dx6i, which is the tx I use only has 125% max travel and although set to this, it doesn't really get that much, more like a little past 100% on the throttle and something less than 125% on the left/right and up/down terminals. The Dx7, which I have not used, is supposed to offer 150% max travel.


----------



## steveciambrone (Jan 2, 2008)

A lever that is 1/2" long connected via a pushrod to a servo arm that is 1" long will approximittely double your travel. 

Steve


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

since RJ has a D6i, maybe the thing to buy is a "stretcher"... 

Has anyone used one of these? 

http://servocity.com/html/180o_servo_stretcher.html 

Greg


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

Carl, 

I’m very familiar with the Hitec servos you mention…. The maximum servo angle or travel arc the HS-81 and most other servos can work with is 120 degrees and or sixty degrees either side of center, there are exceptions… Transmitters are not capable of overdriving a servo much past the aforementioned 120 degree total servo angle. 

You mentioned “mechanical advantage” in error I believe as this is a value realized or not specifically of the linkage and or gear ratio in-play. 

Think of your gears pitch radius as levers, essentially that’s all they are and they abide by the same math as lever arms. There is NO benefit that I can factor gears verse levers, i.e., travel volume arcs its all the same… No matter how you get there your limited by the servo angle factored and or realized.

Michael


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

Posted By steveciambrone on 01 Apr 2012 04:38 PM 
A lever that is 1/2" long connected via a pushrod to a servo arm that is 1" long will approximittely double your travel. 

Steve 

Steve, 

“Approximately” validates your assertion IMO, in a perfect world it works as noted. Trains are not perfect and the specific linkage geometry in play skews the net results. Linkage binding more often than not plays a factor in reducing the calculated values and there is miss-matched linkage arms, vertical height, horizontal and depth offsets of the servo axis and throttles needle, as well as the distance between the servo axis and throttle needle axis. Binding can be mitigated with some attention to linkage arm lengths, pushrod length (as you note) and the servos neutral angle. 

Michael


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 01 Apr 2012 10:37 PM 
since RJ has a D6i, maybe the thing to buy is a "stretcher"... 

Has anyone used one of these? 

http://servocity.com/html/180o_servo_stretcher.html 

Greg 
Greg,

I haven't played with the one you note, but have tested many similar products in the past. They seem to work quite nicely. Some of these ancilalry gadgets offer lots more features than others, the one you link to is a simple offerring.

Michael


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Thanks for all the replys. For one Greg left out that the transmitter is a DX6i not a D6i. I have tried to adjust the trow of the Servo as it is suppose to have a max travel of 180 but I barely get 90 degrees. I have tried to adjust but can not get it to travel any further. The servos are hyteck HS-82MG. If I can gain a little more throw and yes redoing the linkage I think I'll get enough travel on the throttle to run. For now the best movement I get is from about 12 o'clock to 3 o'clock. Any other pointers will be appreciated. Later RJD


----------



## Phippsburg Eric (Jan 10, 2008)

With a linkage, of course, the most rotation you can get on the throttle approaches 180 degrees, in reality it will be less than that; perhaps 150 degrees. It does not matter what the rotation of the servo is. if you need more rotation on the throttle or more you will need the chain and sprocket system. 

Of course none of my engines seem to need more than about 90 degrees of rotation, which is easy enough. I can easily move the link from one set of holes in the servo horn (or the throttle horn) to the next to tweek the rotation as needed. It may also not be necessary for your engine to have the throttle completely close or completely open. you can stop the engine by shifting the Johnson bar to neutral once it has slowed down a bit.


----------



## chooch (Jan 2, 2008)

RJD, 
With the Dx6i transmitter, servo throw adjustments are done at both ends of the control stick. Full up AND full down position, or full left AND full right positions. You may already know this, but I'm just making sure. You should be able to get over 180 deg throw if adjusted properly.


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

In your example the K28 36/16 nets a linkage ratio of 2.25:1. Which equates to a 1" servo arm and a .444" needle arm 1/.444 = 2.25:1. 
Michael, 

While I can't fault your math, I'd love to know how that 1" servo arm turns the throttle through 270 degrees!


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

Posted By Phippsburg Eric on 02 Apr 2012 06:24 AM 
With a linkage, of course, the most rotation you can get on the throttle approaches 180 degrees, in reality it will be less than that; perhaps 150 degrees. It does not matter what the rotation of the servo is. if you need more rotation on the throttle or more you will need the chain and sprocket system. 

Of course none of my engines seem to need more than about 90 degrees of rotation, which is easy enough. I can easily move the link from one set of holes in the servo horn (or the throttle horn) to the next to tweek the rotation as needed. It may also not be necessary for your engine to have the throttle completely close or completely open. you can stop the engine by shifting the Johnson bar to neutral once it has slowed down a bit.



Eric, 

You suggested "it does not matter what the rotation of the servo is" if the servo angle is less than 120 degrees total you'll never see the 150 degrees you suggest is "reality" of which I concurr. 180 degreees maybe plausible in some circumstance. I rigged up some servos arms attached to a piece of plywood earlier with photo copied protractors fixed on the axis of each lever with a horizontal offset of 2". I noted 160 degrees output with 120 degrees input with a 5/8" servo arm and a 1/2" driven output arm before binding occured. I tried other arm lenghts too, the 5/8"-1/2" seemed to be the best combination.

Michael


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

Posted By Pete Thornton on 02 Apr 2012 09:06 AM 
In your example the K28 36/16 nets a linkage ratio of 2.25:1. Which equates to a 1" servo arm and a .444" needle arm 1/.444 = 2.25:1. 
Michael, 

While I can't fault your math, I'd love to know how that 1" servo arm turns the throttle through 270 degrees! 
Pete, 

All right then I see the light, while the math supports the 2.25 ratio it does not take into consideration the binding that occurs once the driven arm rotates over center due to the dissimilar arm lengths. The chain simply goes on by unloading at half the diameter of the sprocket while the arm is still hard connected. To that end 270 degrees rotation of the throttle needle is available with 120 degrees servo angle with sprockets.

Michael


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

Posted By aceinspp on 02 Apr 2012 06:02 AM 
Thanks for all the replys. For one Greg left out that the transmitter is a DX6i not a D6i. I have tried to adjust the trow of the Servo as it is suppose to have a max travel of 180 but I barely get 90 degrees. I have tried to adjust but can not get it to travel any further. The servos are hyteck HS-82MG. If I can gain a little more throw and yes redoing the linkage I think I'll get enough travel on the throttle to run. For now the best movement I get is from about 12 o'clock to 3 o'clock. Any other pointers will be appreciated. Later RJD 

RJ,

The Hitec HS-82MG is capable of swinging a travel arc of 120 degrees or servo angle out of the box. Sounds like you are not driving the servo to its maximum travel arc. In my previous post I suggested how I did a real world test evealuation with servo arms or levers, 120 degrees input netted 160 degrees output with 5/8" and 1/2" arms.

Michael


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

The servo is mechanically capable of 120 degrees, but most transmitters do not put out a pulse that yields more than about 80 degrees... 

The specs on that servo state both the max angle, and the angle per pulse... 

Carl Weaver's post has the info... although what you really want is the spec of the length of the pulse in microseconds that your transmitter puts out, then you can see what angle you get.

If you read the specs on this page for the servo: *http://servocity.com/htm...trong>** 


It states the pulse signals required for desired angles.... to get the full mechanical travel, you need a transmitter that goes from 600 microseconds to 2400 microseconds... as stated right on that page, your transmitter might not do this.

Michael, you did state that the servo "stretcher" I found was pretty basic. While I think it will work, could you provide me with some links or brand name and models of the more advanced ones you have tried? Very interesting stuff, and I'd like to learn some more. 


Thanks, Greg*


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 02 Apr 2012 11:22 AM 
The servo is mechanically capable of 120 degrees, but most transmitters do not put out a pulse that yields more than about 80 degrees... 

The specs on that servo state both the max angle, and the angle per pulse... 

Greg 
Greg,

Most "LOW END Transmitters" suffer from the limits of the pulse train code as you suggest, in fact most spec 100% travel volume which nets the 80 degrees servo angle as their benchmark. Typically transmitters operate with 1200ms bandwidth, some Transimitters can provide up to about 1300ms. This OEM specific anomally wreaked havoc with OEM compatibilty years ago when Hitec's programmble digital servos were designed to work with the aforementioned 1200ms pulse code bandwith limit. The net result caused the programmable digital amplifiers to "REBOOT", this was NOT desirable in flight......

Michael


----------



## Phippsburg Eric (Jan 10, 2008)

What I am trying to say is that a linkage cannot reliably drive the throttle more than 180 degrees (probably 150 or possibly 160 degrees) because it cannot push the throttle around farther than that because the angles will not allow it to happen. Even if you could rotate it 180 degrees, from the farthest "open" point the throttle would have a random choice whether to close again or just open farther. you can have this problem in any case if the link between the servo and throttle arm line up with the servo arm at any point in its range of motion. Ideally you want the servo and throttle arms to be working more or less parallel to each other and perpendicular to the link between them (in the middle of the range of motion). If the servo tries to push the throttle too far it will stall or break something.


If the angle between the throttle arm and the link get small you will not provide as much torque to turn the throttle. if you are looking for angles of 120 or more you may get into trouble pretty easily. 


If you need more rotation on the throttle than the servo produces, you can lengthen the arm on the servo or shorten the arm on the throttle until you are in the 160 degree range (on the throttle arm), beyond that you will have to use sprockets and chain. use the big sprocket on the servo and a smaller one on the throttle. if you need more torque to drive that sprocket, get a more powerful servo...they come in all sizes and torques and operation angles. For my model sailboats I use a very hi torque servo (as a sail winch) with seven or so turns from full in to full out.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

So, the Spectrum series is a "low end" system in this perspective? Interesting. To me, and I certainly am not an expert in this realm, 100% "travel volume" when it only controls about 50% of the servo capability seems weird. 

But, I guess maybe from a historical point of view, maybe servos used to only have about 80 degrees of travel, so maybe a while ago that would be viewed as 100%... (man, enough maybe's in that sentence? ) 

"growing" the capability of a system to greater performance / features can sometimes be painful.. yes, I'm not happy when my phone reboots mid call, a reboot mid flight must have been pretty nasty! 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

Eric, 

Seems you have an excellent understanding of servos and linkages… I’ve been playing with this stuff for many years with all things radio controlled. Most modelers fall short in understanding the basics and more specifically when it comes to calculating torque values with lever or arm changes and not to mention when we get into precision set-ups desired of precision aerobatic models. The most common problems are realized by using the transmitter to correct bad linkage geometry which creates offsets in equal stick movement as compared to equal movement or travel in either direction of the TX stick and the control surfaces. 

To clarify for others, servo torque ratings are specified with 1” arms. A smaller arm will provide a higher torque value at the servo axis. The linkage ratio will dictate the torque at the control surface axis or in the case of steam engines throttle needle axis. 

Michael


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

Greg, 

Yeap, Spektrum equipment is NOT top of the line stuff….. Many believe Spektrum is a JR Radio sub-product, not! That said JR like other OEM’s offer low end equipment too! The 100% travel volume benchmark is typical, many but not all TX’s are able to be trimmed or programmed to deliver more than 100% travel volume and still work within the 1200ms pulse train code limit mentioned previously. 

The 100%/80 degree servo angle or travel volume mitigates over driving servos and allows for some headroom with the typical travel volume offsets realized with bad linkage geometry and TX programming, hereto with the TX trims, sub-trims, programmable mixes, conditions and more. 

I never had a problem with the aforementioned “reboot” unfortunately many lost expensive models when combining Hitec’s programmable digital servos with other OEM receivers and transmitters. I always take the time to set-up the model linkage correctly and never use the TX to accommodate poor set-ups. Had Hitec had the foresight to test and evaluate other OEM equipment this phenomena would have never seen the light of day. Of course if there was such a thing as “standards” in the RC industry this would have been a non issue too. After the fact Hitec reprogrammed their amplifiers to recognize control signals outside the 1200ms base of theirs and may others equipment offerings. 

Michael


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

Greg, 

Find below devices that offer additional features as comapred to the aforemetioned "stretcher". There used to be more devices, some were simply inline devices with “trimmers” others were more in line with what you linked to with single servo capabilities. To be honest I haven’t paid much attention to the RC Industry for several years, I used to live and breathe this stuff, accordingly I may step on my toes when I comment on things it seems I have forgot a lot more than I recall of late. 

I did note the info Servo City is providing suggests Hitec’s Analog servos are now able to realize 180 degrees total servo angle with the proper pulse train out of the box, woohoo…. 


Ganging multiple servos is a more common need in todays giant scale aero modeling.

http://www.horizonhobby.com/product...em-JRPA900 
http://www.horizonhobby.com/products/matchmaker-JRPA915 
http://www.smart-fly.com/products/EqualizerII/equalizer.htm 
http://www.futaba-rc.com/accessories/futm4155.html 
http://www.troybuiltmodels.com/ns/manuals/wrcservomatch_.pdf 

These allow all of the above and more: 
http://shop.rc-electronic.com/e-vendo.php?shop=k_emcotec_e&SessionId=&a=catalog&t=6&c=6&p=6 
http://www.powerbox-systems.com/e/powerbox_systeme/produktuebersicht/start.php 
http://www.min.at/prinz/oe1rib/I2C-Servo/ 
http://www.pololu.com/blog/17/servo-control-interface-in-detail 

Michael


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Thanks Michael, all information is appreciated, I'm on a learning curve here, it's not the wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am as many would be lead to believe apparently! 

Greg


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Same here reading and grasping all the info that has been provided. We may be getting close to our goal for operating the loco with the mechanical linkage. Later RJD


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Michael Glavin on 02 Apr 2012 12:21 PM 
Eric, 

Seems you have an excellent understanding of servos and linkages… I’ve been playing with this stuff for many years with all things radio controlled. Most modelers fall short in understanding the basics and more specifically when it comes to calculating torque values with lever or arm changes and not to mention when we get into precision set-ups desired of precision aerobatic models. The most common problems are realized by using the transmitter to correct bad linkage geometry which creates offsets in equal stick movement as compared to equal movement or travel in either direction of the TX stick and the control surfaces. 


Michael,

I have had an education in r/c servos and torque - the Steam in the Garden article "A tale of Two Servos" describes the fun I had with a small servo and a big sprocket. I also managed to arrange a lever system so the servo's 90 degree arc turned the throttle 120 degrees on my C-16.

Sprockets have other advantages, being easy to remove the chain and run in manual mode - which I've had to do a few times. And the ratio is easily adjusted - I order a 20, 18 and 16 tooth sprocket and I play with the different sizes to get the loco to work.

Servocity now has sprockets that fit directly on the 'standard' Hitec servo shafts - of which the HS-81 is the smallest member. 
In any case, most Accucraft locos will operate under load with only 90 degrees of throttle, so the 225 degrees is not needed.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Pete:

Interesting about the chain and sprocket. would like to see some pics of your install. I'm not quite happy with the power of the K-4. Finally got it to run on my layout but as I mentioned not more than 1% grade and the K-4 really bogs down to a crawl. The more throttle you give it does not really increase the speed once as I consider the fastest it will run is reached. 


For now with the adjustments I have made it would probably run quite well on a flat table top RR. Will still be doing more experimentation with the system. Later RJD


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

Pete, 

I'll have to look at your artice.... 

Many years ago I machined a slotted a servo/lever arm with a pushrod collar which was able to transverse the slot on a non train project that required about 180 degrees servo angle with a long pushrod it worked fine for that application. I'd guess you did soemthing similar? I haven't done anything wtih sprockets to date, in fact a until few years ago they were ot even offered for RC applications; now they run the gamut with lots of offerrings. I'd suggest the sprockets became "common" so to speak with the introduction of RC robots!. 

Michael


----------



## steveciambrone (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By aceinspp on 03 Apr 2012 01:52 PM 
Pete:

Interesting about the chain and sprocket. would like to see some pics of your install. I'm not quite happy with the power of the K-4. Finally got it to run on my layout but as I mentioned not more than 1% grade and the K-4 really bogs down to a crawl. The more throttle you give it does not really increase the speed once as I consider the fastest it will run is reached. 


For now with the adjustments I have made it would probably run quite well on a flat table top RR. Will still be doing more experimentation with the system. Later RJD



What was the Steam pressure of the engine when trying to go up the grade?

Thanks
Steve


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Steve:
I'm running 60 psi on the K-4. It just seems this loco does not have a lot of excessive power. Later RJD


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

would like to see some pics of your install 
Here's a few. Plus there are pics all over MLS of other similar r/c installs. 










This is the FWRR/Ruby, which has plenty of cab space. 












EBT #12, (which will be described in full in SitG this summer.) 











EBT #7, the Accu C-19. The throttle shaft overlay pipe with the (hidden) small sprocket can be seen. 



as I mentioned not more than 1% grade and the K-4 really bogs down to a crawl. . The more throttle you give it does not really increase the speed 
You've got a problem with steam delivery or timing then. The K-4 seems to have a boiler about the same size as EBT #12, and my #12 can start a heavy train on a 3-4% grade on just 90 degrees of throttle. [Wow - another chance to post my favorite video! Only 54 secs.] 



If you have 60 lbs on the dial it should have no trouble with a 1% grade. Are you using lots of water (EBT #12 does!) 


with a long pushrod it worked fine for that application. I'd guess you did something similar


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Pete thanks for the replay. One thing to remember that these are large drivers compared to you ET loco. Yes it could be a timing issue also but the guy said he adjusted it maybe he made it worse but it sems to run smooth and runs at a nice slow speed on rollers. 










Here is the latest on redoing the travel. Later RJD


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Forgot the pic showing the open position of the throttle and showing the trow. Later RJD


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

but it sems to run smooth and runs at a nice slow speed on rollers 
In that case I would investigate a blockage in the steam delivery. Accucraft is notorious for leaving bits in the pipes - teflon in the gas supply and crud in the superheater pipe. 

Water usage is a good indicator - EBT #12 uses plenty of water (i.e. steam) when working hard even at 1/4 turn throttle. Are you getting lots of steam out of the stack when trying the 1% grade? 
I don't buy the driving wheel size argument. EBT #12 had 48" drivers, equivalent to 69" drivers in 1/29th (= 2.36" actual.). Small steam engines are incredibly powerful - mine has pulled very long trains without slipping.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Pete: Yes the loco uses lots of water but it does have an axle pump which again in my case can not be used as now you slow the loco more. Plenty of steam out the stack. Does have a sutherland chuff pipe also. Yes the driving wheels will make a difference. These are quite large compared to yours and being a Pacific type loco it takes some extra to move and keep it moving. I see now blockage as fuel flow is excelant along with the water. It ran fine at Diamond Head before the conversion but then again flat top running. Later RJD


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Well did a few more adjustments to the loco. Got it to run a couple of laps around my RR. Made it without derailing which was a plus. Had to re work the front truck to eliminate the problem of derailing. It kept on wanting to derail but found the problems and now it works fine. Looks like a minor track improvement to eliminate some of the grade that the loco has problems with. Once corrected it should run pretty steady around the layout. Hoping to run on a table top RR soon to conclude my assessment of the loco. Once that is done then I can give a full update as to what the loco likes and dislikes. Later RJD


----------



## steveciambrone (Jan 2, 2008)

Simple questions. 

Did you remove all the packing material from the tender trucks, I think mine came with some foam stuffed inbetween the trucks and the frame. 

Look at the passenger truck wheels, a little oil might help. Also check the swivel of the truck, I put some wax where the truck has a pivit point against the floor. It did seem to smooth out the pivit of the truck. 

A video was posted which showed a single K4 pulling twelve cars on a flat layout. 

I noticed mine got a little weaker and less pressure half way through a run and one burner was no longer burning. To help with this I am going to try using a 70/30 fuel instead of butane. 

I received some replacement safety valve from Cliff but have not steamed with them yet. 

Thanks 
Steve


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Steve:

I have done all as you mentioned plus some extra things. I have not been pulling any cars as yet. Just a trip to get the loco around the layout for now. I do use the 70/30 mix all the time. As for the safety valves I had some made up for me from WeeBee locos as the ones that I got from Accurcraft for the 2nd time also were faulty. You might want to consider doing the same. Later RJD


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

As for the safety valves I had some made up for me from WeeBee locos as the ones that I got from Accurcraft for the 2nd time also were faulty. 
Were they 'faulty' or just typical Accucraft, where they "weep" at anything above 40 psi ? Accucraft's aren't pop valves - they just release pressure as they feel like it. My #12 's safeties blow almost all the time, but the pressure reduction isn't great until I'm pushing 60 psi.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Pete
They where faulty from the get go and so where the replacements. They where lucky to not trip at 30 psi and always weeping so I could never get the loco up and running like it should. Since I have replaced them the new ones work great. No weeping and they will pop at 60 as designed. Later RJD


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

I'm not quite happy with the power of the K-4. Finally got it to run on my layout but as I mentioned not more than 1% grade and the K-4 really bogs down to a crawl. 
There's some positive reviews of the K4 on this recent thread: http://www.mylargescale.com/Community/Forums/tabid/56/aff/11/aft/124326/afv/topic/Default.aspx [ www dot mylargescale.com/Community/Forums/tabid/56/aff/11/aft/124326/afv/topic/Default.aspx ]. The owners don't sound like they are unhappy by how much it pulls.


----------



## Bob in Mich (Mar 8, 2008)

RJ Try this: Remove the sutherland chuff pipe,It is restricting the Exaust.I put one on a club Members and the Engine would only Go Slow.Just Try it,I think this is Your Problem. It is like having a Hemi with 1 inch Exaust pipe "No Horse Power" 
Let Me Know !


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

It really sounds like the loco cannot "breathe"... one thing that RJ has mentioned that beyond a certain throttle opening, the loco does not seem to get any more speed/power. I'm not a steam expert, but understand fluidics to a point. If there was some restriction in the steam path, that would seem to explain how more throttle does nothing. 

Greg


----------



## Bob in Mich (Mar 8, 2008)

Greg,The stock chuf Pipe has a 1/8 inch Hole,On the sotherland chuff pipe it goes down to I think a # 50 drill hole to make the chuffs


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

That would certainly seem to be quite a difference in flow, as a guess. Well, the test should be pretty simple. Worth a try in my opinion. 

Greg


----------



## steveciambrone (Jan 2, 2008)

Is your K4 consumming oil? I forget if it was this thread or the other but mine initially was not passing any oil. 

Steve


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

It had crossed m mined that the chuff pipe could possibly be causing some of the problem. Per Bobs suggestion I have replaced with the original pipe. Did a bench test for now as it's raining. Seems to run better. Will try to run on the layout tomorrow and see how well it performs. Hoping better. 

Yes Steve It is using oil so not the problem. 

Later RJD


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Well did get a chance to run on the layout today. It made it around without a stall but sure slowed down. It did help by removing the chuffer but not much. Now one of two things is happening. 

1. There is some kind of blockage in the steam lines or what ever.
2. My grade maybe more than anticipated but still once beyond that I see no high rate of speed once over the grade.


So where to go to now? Later RJD


----------



## StevenJ (Apr 24, 2009)

Posted By aceinspp on 11 Apr 2012 04:49 PM 
Well did get a chance to run on the layout today. It made it around without a stall but sure slowed down. It did help by removing the chuffer but not much. Now one of two things is happening. 

1. There is some kind of blockage in the steam lines or what ever.
2. My grade maybe more than anticipated but still once beyond that I see no high rate of speed once over the grade.


So where to go to now? Later RJD 


Just a thought, take the chuffer to a drill press and bore out the hole. The sound might change but at least you'll still get chuffs. Try running the engine on an air compressor for twenty to thirty minutes or so to blow out all the water/ oil.


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

Per Bobs suggestion I have replaced with the original pipe 
I carry the original pipes around with me just in case I want to test with them. 

So where to go to now? 
Well. One thought is to call Cliff at Accucraft and ask him what he thinks. He may say send it back so he can fix it. If it is timing, that's the best answer. 

Next thing is to start eliminating the various steam pipes. 
Dig out a compressor - the one you use on the car tires will do and connect it to the water feed chack valve with a piece of plastic pipe - that should allow you to pressure the boiler without a fire. 
Unscrew the throttle shaft completely and make sure it looks as if it is working. Put it back, and start testing the pipes. There is a pipe from the throttle to the 'superheater' tube that runs through the flue - release it from the bottom at the flue and turn on the compressor. There should be a strong blow of air out of the pipe - that's your benchmark. 
Put that pipe back and go to the other end of the boiler. The superheat pipe screws into the top of the cylinder block [I think - I don't have a K4. When I was doing my C-19 I found it easiest to take off the smokebox front - it is usually held on by one little screw on the top of the smokebox. Try not to chip the paint!] Crank up the compressor again and verify you are still getting a strong blast of air from the pipe. 

The final test is to put the engine on rollers, reconnect the pipes and try it on air.


----------



## Phippsburg Eric (Jan 10, 2008)

Now that I think back, I had a similar problem with my Modified Ruby. she seemed to have full boiler pressure, the safety would blow and all but no get up and go. 

At some point I thought to take apart the throttle valve, and that was IT! It had accumulated some little bits of stuff that must have fallen into the boiler as I was filling it. 

I would recommend that treatment. take out the throttle spindle and bow some air through the boiler (and out through the throttle valve spindle hole.) see if anything comes out.


----------



## Bob in Mich (Mar 8, 2008)

19 Dec 2011 04:17 PM Quote Reply Alert 
After looking at mine when I first got it, it looked like the small hole in the oil reservoir may have been plugged. I took a small thin steel rod and after screwing out about 3 turns inserted in hole seem to do the trick and allows the oil to flow. Works great now. Later RJD 


RJ when You did this to Your Oiler,Did You block the Steam Line ??? You can Remove it and Blow it out to see if there is Blockage!


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Bob do not think I blocked the steam line as every thing seems to work with the oil reservoir. I think I will try the removeal of the throttle and see what happens when I clean it. Later RJD


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Well made a trip to FL to Sals so we could check out the loco. we spent about 6 hrs with it on rollers and air. Founds a issue on the timing on the engineers side. Made some adjustments and then finally put it under steam on his layout. We got it to run so much better. It even pulled 10 cars after our adjustments. Still was not fully satisfied but it was so much better. Got home and finally was able to run today. Well it ran so well on my layout and could not believe it. I still using the mechanical linkage with about 110 degrees of movement. This is better than I thought it would do and was considering doing a chain drive. For now that will be put on hold as it runs great now. Will do a little more testing when I get time. Later RJD


----------

