Author Topic: Derrick Car possibilities  (Read 5782 times)

Ed Lecuyer

  • Administrator
  • Supervisor
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,863
    • View Profile
    • wwfry.org
Derrick Car possibilities
« on: April 06, 2009, 02:26:07 AM »
MODERATORS NOTE:
Derrick Car possibilities has been converted from the pre-July 2008 WW&F Discussion Forum.
Some formatting may have been removed or modified from the original postings that appear quoted in this topic.
Information contained within this post may be superseded by more recent postings and conversations.

Stephen Hussar wrote:
Quote


Bottom photo: Bob Nimke
_________________
*                *                    *                   *
"Give me enough Swedes and whiskey and I'll build a railroad to Hell."
- James J. Hill

Wayne Laepple replied:
Quote
Steve put these two pictures up at my behest as examples of what WW&F derrick car. no. 10 may have looked like. The little four-wheeler is a model of a car offered by Billmeyer & Small of York, Pa. B&S built three-foot gauge equipment for predecessors of the Maryland & Pennsylvania, Newport & Sherman's Valley, Tuscarora Valley and East Broad Top, among others.
The other one is obviously a home-made rig built on the frame of a cut-down boxcar. The crane looks similar to the one we have at Sheepscot. If this crane was mounted over the truck at one end of a flatcar, the boom could extend over the end of the car to place a frog or a bridge timber.

Ira Schreiber replied:
Quote
Actually, the crane on the Rutland car appears to be base mounted at the center of the car. The boom is long enough to reach over the car end, but at very reduced capacity.
The taller the boom towards vertical, the more it can lift. Without out riggers, the lifting capacity 90* to the car is minimal due to the tip over possibility.
I learned alot about cranes after owning a 110' telescoping crane.

Stephen Hussar replied:
Quote
Ira, the crane part does look VERY similar to the one Dwight brought to the museum -- I'll have to ask him if he thinks it was made by Fairmont. But I think what Wayne is saying is that IF this thing was mounted over one of the trucks of a WW&F flatcar it could place a frog or bridge timber with relative ease. I don't think there's any question that the Rutland crane is mounted in the center of the car. (what a beast, looks like it was thrown together at the bitter end...)

Mike Fox replied:
Quote
Steve, I would say by the looks of your latest photo, that is exactly what Dwight brought up. It used to look like that until it got taken apart. Now it is on the to do list. I think re-guaging of the wheels is what we are waiting on now.
Mike

Wayne Laepple replied:
Quote
My concern with regauging the Fairmont car for use as a derrick is the potential for tip-over and the limited usefulness of such a small car. If the Fairmont crane was installed on a full-size flatcar, a frog, rails, bridge timbers, etc. could be transported on the car itself. Perhaps someone can come up with a way to use the overhead crane in the shop to lift the Fairmont crane onto one of our present flatcars only when it's needed. The base plate is bolted through the floor of the current pushcar, so perhaps it could be bolted through the floor of the flatcar, with some sort of backing plates underneath.

Ira Schreiber replied:
Quote
Thanks for the input.
Dwight's derrick is definitely a Fairmount.
To prevent tipover, it had a rail clamp at each corner to clamp to the rail for stability.
Since that will not work for 2' track, I designed a simple telescoping beam outrigger system that would spread to about a maximum of 7'.
I went over this with Jason and got a tentative OK, but time ran out. As anside, I had the two new frame rails cut to length and one of them drilled for the new axle gauge. The other one disappeared.
Hopefully this coming year, the project can move forward.
At least things will be picking up!
Happy New Year
Ira

gordon cook replied:
Quote
A thought on the lifting capability of these  derricks:
The boom length is going to multiply the weight of what is lifted by the ratio of the boom length to the length of the support that counteracts that force.
In other words, a boom hanging out 10 feet from center  that is supported by an outrigger that's  out 2 feet, is going to apply 5 times the weight being lifted to that outrigger. I think this is fairly intuitive.
Likewise, a counterweight can be used, but it has to counter the weight lifted in the same way.
So a Fairmont type of arrangement, where there are clamps that grab the rail to steady it, is at a real handicap on a 2 footer.
As Wayne and Ira have noted, lifting over the end of the car helps a lot, but limits the usefulness of the derrick, since you still have to place the load somewhere even if you can pick it up over the end.  The rotation to the side would need to be very limited. You'd almost be limited to between the rails on the heaviest objects.
Long outriggers would work, but present a problem if you're not on relatively level ground, and they have to be strong and therefore heavy.
I think this is a case of the narrowest gauge being a big obstacle to creating a useful derrick car. The existing hydraulic lift may be the best solution.

Ira Schreiber replied:
Quote
The design of the telescoping outriggers allow both horizontal and vertical adjustment thus compensating for the terrain.
Since the crane is only of limited capacity, (I believe 4000# at vertical) the outriggers should be more than adequate.
I need to consult my lifting charts, which I still have from my crane days, to confirm the limits.
Ira

Wayne Laepple replied:
Quote
I think a pair of chains, one on each side, looped through the stake pockets and around the rails, would keep the car from tipping over, if the Fairmont crane was mounted on a full-size flatcar.
However, it has been my experience with these manually-operated cranes, that the greatest danger is not in tipping over, but in injury to the operator. If the dog on the winch doesn't catch properly or the brake is not set, the winch can run away and the handle can break an arm or a wrist in the blink of an eye. In our case, this situation could arise if someone who has little experience operating the equipment becomes momentarily distracted or confused. The big railroads recognized this danger pretty quickly and stopped using these Fairmont rigs.
Perhaps we should be thinking about how often we actually need a half-ton lift and how much time and effort we are expending on attempting to modify a standard gauge car for occasional use on our narrow gauge and whether it's worth it.

Ira Schreiber replied:
Quote
Good points on safety on using a manual crane.
One point always stressed was that except when cranking, the handle was to be removed at all times.
Sometimes called the Model T syndrom.

Ira Schreiber replied:
Quote
Actually, Wayne, chains through the stake pockets to the rail would not help tip over as the tie points(rails) are well inboard of the outside of the flat car. This triangulation moves the tip point back to the 2' apart rails.
For stability, the contact point to the ground must be outside the deck of the flat car(6').
Think in terms of triangles for the stability points from the tip of the crane to the ground.

Mike Fox replied:
Quote
I think Wayne is trying to use the weight of the flat car itself as a stabalizer. Which would work great for over the end. If done over the side, some blocking under the flatcar on the side you are working on would work.
But the crane has been dismantled. It lays in pieces around the yard.  Could be reasembled to the frame but I think the axles have been cut.
Mike

Josh Botting replied:
Quote
A short wheel base will be detramental to the capacity of the crane.  It will most likeley be easier to beef up the arm, to get out farther.  Also the capacity outboard of the rail is limited by the 2' gauge.  I can find out the standards which govern the  design of cranes next week.  As for the stability of the crane, that is an easy calc.  all that is needed is the weight of the car, and the CG.  Adding weight will not necessarly benefit the stability of the car.  If we had a desired capacity to lift at a distance, it is easy to determine the stability of the car, and the beam required.
I deal with these issues all of the time.

James Patten replied:
Quote
Keep in mind, everybody, that we have the portable hydraulic crane, purchased for railroad use this summer.  This crane is I think rated for 1 ton.  It has moved rail and frogs around with ease.
Fred created an arrangement where it can be mounted on a flatcar without any permanent attachments.  Do we want to consider this for the Fairmont crane?  Some attachment method to the end of a flatcar which isn't permanent, allowing for it to be used when we need it and stored somewhere out of the way when we don't.

Josh Botting replied:
Quote
We may want to evaluate the real capacity for this setup, in order to maintain safety, as well as to satisfy the insurance.

Ira Schreiber replied:
Quote
The length of the Fairmont derrick car will not change.
With the telescoping outriggers, the spread will be able to be at least 10' and this is much more then the original 5' with the rail clamps. This will allow easy use over the side.
My 110' crane only had a 16' spread with the outriggers and that worked fine.

Mike Fox replied:
Quote
With 10 foot outriggers you will need 20 foot legs. There is not many places that are level with the track 10 feet out.
Mike

Ira Schreiber replied:
Quote
Sorry, the outriggers have a total spread of 10', not 10' each.

Mike Fox replied:
Quote
So still 5 feet out from the center of the track there is still a substantial drop. The outriggers will have to have tall feet. A lot of places have got about a 1 to 1 pitch, begining shortly after the tie ends.
Mike

Ira Schreiber replied:
Quote
The  feet are tall, about 4' vertical with adjustments. Horizontal riggers are also adjustable.
Ed Lecuyer
Moderator, WW&F Forum