Re: Rio Grande 223

Stephen M Smith Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kelly can best comment on what the elements of the
> decsion as to whether straightnening or a new rod
> are.
> a Magnaflux and Ultra-sound would be our best
> start to check for any internal damage, and go
> from there.
> Advise please Kelly, between Heber Veterans
>
> Stephen Smith
> Ogden, Utah

If it were my engine, I would be inclined to initially measure the bushing holes for being worn oversize (the rod may be just flat out worn out and not worth straightening). Then proceed to magna-flux the rod for cracks (the whole rod, it may be cracked elsewhere from service), and take a sample to be tested for the chemistry of the steel. Depending on the chemistry and any cracks found, if it is worth continuing, then weld repair any cracks (if possible, it depends on the chemistry), straighten the rod hot, re-magna-flux, and send it to the heat treater’s to be annealed. The last operation should be to re-bore the bushing holes to ensure they are perfectly in line with each other.

Adam Wright Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi Kelly,
> Just curious as to the particular grade of steel
> used and any heat treatments it received.
>
> Thanks,
> Adam

The WMSR rods were made of annealed 1045, which is the currently available equivalent to the old AAR M-102 Grade 3 spec which was the industry standard for rods, crankpins, crosshead guides, etc. I have come across rods made of wrought iron on an old, old 4-4-0, the rods we made for the Lyon replica were made of A-36 mild steel due to their being so lightly loaded (I’m sure the originals would have been made of wrought iron), and of course some modern locomotives had light-weight rods of high alloy steel. The variety of possible materials used is why you always have to have a sample tested to be sure of what you are working with.