Re: 40 class bogies
Allan Brown (ajbrown@ozemail.com.au)
Sun, 19 Oct 1997 20:28:48 +1000
John McCallum wrote:
>
> In article <626r35$31e$1@lios.apana.org.au>, craigd@lios.apana.org.au (C.
> Dewick) wrote:
>
> >They also did it so they'd never have to worry about the problem of wheels
> >on the two driven axles slowly becoming smaller in diameter than the two
> >undriven axles. Remember that the if the driven axles slipped, the undriven
> >one wouldn't, so it's wheels would be slightly larger in diameter after some
> >time in service.
>
> I do not believe that the difference in diameter between the driven and
> undriven wheels would be a problem in service. It must be remembered that the
> 40 class, together with the later 43, 44, 45 and 48 classes, had equalized
> bogies.
> In this type of bogie, the weight of the locomotive is distributed between the
> axles by means of beams resting on the axle boxes. The weight on each axle
> does not alter because of rough track or uneven wheel wear. This is not case
> on 42, 421, 422, 442 and later designs, which were not equalized, and uneven
> wear would cause uneven weight distribution.
>
> John McCallum
So far you guys seem to have overlooked the basis of my original
question: why equidistant bogies as against the RSD4/5's standard
asymmetric ones? I have since found out the reason. I am still waiting
for one of you guys to hit on it. Come on; don't let me down.
Allan