Tram and Railbus motors

[DAVID L]

Some time ago I built an IP Railbus about which I managed to place a short article in Garden Rail magazine.

IP Railbus

P1010275.JPG (4.67 MiB) Viewed 23118 times

In the article I mentioned that my attempts to achieve the promised "silent running" by adjustng the nylon worm and gear hadn't been entirely successful. The bus was noisier and rougher than my IP Jessie, which had IP's new brass-geared box, which bugged me somewhat. Casting around for an alternative I came across the AppleTree Gauge 1 inline metal gearbox, which as I am a 45mm guy, seemed like a possible upgrade. The problem was it had to be mounted into axleboxes with a locating rod through the sideframes. The IP railbus has plywood sideframes with dummy axleboxes which the axles do not touch, and the gearbox/axle/wheel unit is screwed to the floor.

Original gearbox

P1010288.JPG (1.91 MiB) Viewed 23118 times

I noticed that Occre trams also have their wheels mounted in blocks that attach to the floor, as do Swift Sixteen 4 wheel trucks and coaches, so if Appletree could produce a floor mount for their gearbox, there could be a good little niche market for drop in motorisation solutions. I contacted the very approachable and friendly Tim Gleed-Owen at AppleTree, and he not only liked the idea but produced a mounting bracket in an amazingly short time.

AppleTree Motor/gearbox/mounting bracket

image3.jpeg (47.72 KiB) Viewed 23118 times

So, with the limit that it has to be 45mm because of the side by side mounting of motor and gearbox you can motorise almost anything very easily. Tim asks if anyone interested could enquire at AppleTreeRailway@icloud.com rather than via Facebook, where messages can get lost.

[Lonsdaler]

It's a very tidy solution. One of my in progress projects is an Occre tram model, but I want to run it on 32mm. Sadly that will require some miniaturisation skills to achieve, and Tim isn't keen

[philipy]

It's a very tidy solution. One of my in progress projects is an Occre tram model, but I want to run it on 32mm. Sadly that will require some miniaturisation skills to achieve, and Tim isn't keen

You could use the N20 gearbox motor that I'm using in the contractors loco.

[Lonsdaler]

You could use the N20 gearbox motor that I'm using in the contractors loco.

Ah! Interested However there seem to be so many permutations of gearing available. Do you have a link to your choice? I would also be interested to see an in situ photo if possible Philip.

[philipy]

You could use the N20 gearbox motor that I'm using in the contractors loco.

Ah! Interested However there seem to be so many permutations of gearing available. Do you have a link to your choice? I would also be interested to see an in situ photo if possible Philip.

This is the one I used, https://thepihut.com/products/dual-shaf ... -gearmotor
with the 42:1 ratio. I think the top speed might be a wee bit on the fast side for a tram, but you don't have to run it flat out!
It is available on ebay etc and I think there are some different ratio's around but the delivery was longer.
There are two pictures of my chassis on my contractors loco thread, so I won't disrupt this one any more, I'll put something up there about how I mounted it.

[Lonsdaler]

There are two pictures of my chassis on my contractors loco thread, so I won't disrupt this one any more, I'll put something up there about how I mounted it.

Of course you have - a thread I've been following avidly, if not apparently thoroughly
So to get a slower running motor I would need to reduce that ratio (i.e. 1:47 or less) is that correct? I am not a mechanic, as you will have gathered

[philipy]

So to get a slower running motor I would need to reduce that ratio (i.e. 1:47 or less) is that correct? I am not a mechanic, as you will have gathered

Usually gear ratios like this are quoted the other way round. i.e 50:1 not 1:50. 50:1 means that for every 50 turns of the motor, the output shaft rotates once. So for 100:1 for every 100 turns of the motor the output shaft turns once, so it goes at half the speed.
Now my Chinese gearbox is quoted at 1:42 so that implies that for every single turn of the motor, the output turns 42 times, but that can't be correct, the loco would go into orbit, so we have to assume that it's Chinese writing backwards as usual!
So to answer your question, no, you need a higher ratio to get a lower speed.

I suggest you wait a little bit longer and I'll do a video of my wee beastie when its finished so you can judge for yourself.

[Lonsdaler]

So to get a slower running motor I would need to reduce that ratio (i.e. 1:47 or less) is that correct? I am not a mechanic, as you will have gathered

Usually gear ratios like this are quoted the other way round. i.e 50:1 not 1:50. 50:1 means that for every 50 turns of the motor, the output shaft rotates once. So for 100:1 for every 100 turns of the motor the output shaft turns once, so it goes at half the speed.
Now my Chinese gearbox is quoted at 1:42 so that implies that for every single turn of the motor, the output turns 42 times, but that can't be correct, the loco would go into orbit, so we have to assume that it's Chinese writing backwards as usual!
So to answer your question, no, you need a higher ratio to get a lower speed.

I suggest you wait a little bit longer and I'll do a video of my wee beastie when its finished so you can judge for yourself.

No wonder I'm confused Thanks Philip.