DHS Diecast Discussion Forum
Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In

Some German Heavy Metal Options · View
kcmtoys
Posted: Monday, May 23, 2016 10:41:30 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/3/2003
Posts: 1,780
Location: Rockford,IL.
Very nice. Thanks for posting. Ken

Model Albums: https://www.facebook.com/Kcmtoys-904904696294223/
Mr. Scholz
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 4:48:24 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/14/2008
Posts: 202
Location: Germany, CE
Thanks, Ken!

Now, what we've got here... hmm. An N-Scale model and not even finnished: It's an MENCK Model F quarry shovel from the 20ies. A machine of the 300 ton class with an 6,7 cy dipper. Mainly for ripping lime stone.


MENCK MODELL F 001 by FatCatGotHot
Mr. Scholz
Posted: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 4:07:22 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/14/2008
Posts: 202
Location: Germany, CE
Hey mates,

almost finished - a dedicated 90 ton MENCK M251 rock ripping shovel.



M251 Heavy Duty ripper dipper 010
by FatCatGotHot



M251 Heavy Duty ripper dipper 011
by FatCatGotHot


It's the 1/87 NZG model combined with a 1/60 Wiking face shovel attachement. A lot of work went into it.


M251 Heavy Duty ripper dipper 004
by FatCatGotHot



Here you can see this dipper means business! It's made for ripping slag and such.


M251 Heavy Duty ripper dipper 001
by FatCatGotHot



Also the base machine recieved some customization.


M251 Heavy Duty ripper dipper 005
by FatCatGotHot, yes, we know, on Flickr...




Have fun!

Cheers,
Max
modelmaniac
Posted: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 6:14:35 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 10/4/2005
Posts: 655
Location: england
Looks goodApplause Those teeth look straight out of a dinosaur's mouth!LOL.Looking forward to finished pics,with cables in place.
Exkvate3140
Posted: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 10:15:57 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/6/2015
Posts: 1,053
That dipper looks great.
Steve
Mr. Scholz
Posted: Thursday, August 01, 2019 2:55:58 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/14/2008
Posts: 202
Location: Germany, CE
Thank you for the feedback!

I never found a manufacturer that designed their shovels so much for ripping like MENCK did. Probably because blasting quickly generated "collateral damage" to nearby towns here in Germany.

Before the M251 will be weathered, I hought of making some photos of it still factory-fresh. In other words: Just caught this truck yesterday, looks like somthing big is going on in my neighbourhood...




M251 Heavy Duty ripper dipper 014
by FatCatGotHot



Cheers,

Max
modelmaniac
Posted: Thursday, August 01, 2019 6:25:41 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 10/4/2005
Posts: 655
Location: england
I never found a manufacturer that designed their shovels so much for ripping like MENCK did.

I remember way back in the early eighties,getting a Siku Menck m500h.From then on,I knew they made proper digging machines.Looking at older Menck equipment,shows they were always innovating,many things they patented are now 'standard'.
Mr. Scholz
Posted: Friday, August 02, 2019 10:34:46 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/14/2008
Posts: 202
Location: Germany, CE
Yeah, i had this very same SIKU toy. My M500H was red and silver. It weven had a small sprocket on the turntable. Pretty cool toy excavator.
Weserhutte
Posted: Friday, August 02, 2019 3:12:24 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/2/2005
Posts: 614
Location: America
Mr. Scholz wrote:
I never found a manufacturer that designed their shovels so much for ripping like MENCK did.


What do you mean by this? How were Menck cable shovels distinctly different (better for ripping) compared to those from Demag, O&K, Weserhütte, etc.?

modelmaniac wrote:
From then on,I knew they made proper digging machines.Looking at older Menck equipment,shows they were always innovating,many things they patented are now 'standard'.


What innovations are you referring to? The only significant patents I'm aware of were for the scrapedozers and diesel pile hammers. Menck hydraulic excavators were not that great other than the Koehring machines produced under license.

Mr. Scholz
Posted: Friday, August 02, 2019 5:08:45 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/14/2008
Posts: 202
Location: Germany, CE
Ooooh yeah, Weserhutte! Thanks for chiming in. Now we are talking.


I have to say that I was rather aming towards established US-manufacturers like BUCYRUS, P&H, MARION etc. then comparing MENCK to other german brands.


In general, Germany is much denser populated then the US and so our quarries are much closer to settlements then in America. And so the walls are much steeper then in american quarries. Of course, also other german manufacturers had to deal with it. DEMAG built some amazing quarry shovels like the U34 and U35, but only until shortly after WW2. With other quarry shovels, DEMAG never had the success like MENCK. Also Weserhutte build big shovels, but no all-electric sepcialized quarry machines like its two direct competitors.


In many cases, blasting in quarries here in Germany was forbidden because of proximity to buildings. So ripping was needed, but the narrow quarries then offered a big risk of rock slides. When you want to rip rock with a shovel, you have to get it close to danger. MENCK was the only supplier who really could provide machines suited for ripping under such very severe conditions from the 1920ies onwards.


So here the destinct features of MENCKs quarry shovels and why they are so good for ripping:


1. Extremly massive, short and high quarry undercarriage. Puts all upper works as high as possible. So in case of rock slide, it acts like a wave-breaker and can take some serious beating

2. Upper carbody armoured with up to 1/2" of sheet metal.

3. Compared to machine weight, relative small dipper on a long boom/handle combination. The 230 ton MENCK EN had the same reach like a 350 ton MARION, but only a 6 yard dipper. So you keep a nasty, instable wall during ripping as far away as possible. And you concentrate the bail pull on a relative small bucket, which increases ripping force

4. Compared to BUCYRUS quarry shovels, also MENCK had double reduction hoist winch drives. But further the hoist line used a double pulley design. This made the shovels slower compared to US-machines, but offered very high bail pull.

5. MENCK designed specialized ripping teeth for its dippers, often tailored to meet the requirements of a customer. I never saw this on DEMAG, Weserhutte or american machines or elsewere.


On international jobs, like hydro powerplants in the Alps in Switzerland and Austria, it showed that US-american shovels were designed rather for speed and efficiency while the MENCKS were much slower, but could work where other shovels had to be withdrawn. In Sweden, a quarry used a Ruston Bucyrus 110 RB next to a MENCK EN. Where it needed 20 seconds cycle time, the EN needed 30 seconds - but the EN could rip material that needed to be blasted when the 110 RB moved in.


A 1930ies vintage MENCK Model E during ripping. Note the high undercarriage

Bild 018 Menck-Mod.E-02 by FatCatGotHot


A MENCK EN showing its long reach over 105 feet combined when swinging 180°

Bild 031 MENCK EN Rheinkalk Schlagweite by FatCatGotHot


The EN from Malmoe, the one that was working next to the 110-RB. Picture from collection of T. Andersson

MALMOE MENCK EN Andersson 001 by FatCatGotHot


A 165 ton, 5 yard MENCK DN in front of a threatening highwall

Menck-DN-53 by FatCatGotHot


Another DN in a Pozzolana quarry near Rome, had a 3.3 yard dipper on a longer boom. When you can see the passes of its teeth, it's a ripping job.

Bild 047 DN Lava Italien by FatCatGotHot




But all my talking, you can concentrate it on the following two pictures: Specialized ripping teeth MENCK developed for a DN and a M250 - who else did this for their shovels?


MENCK Reisssporn DN by FatCatGotHot


MENCK Reisssporn M250 by FatCatGotHot



Cheers,

MENCK-Max




Mr. Scholz
Posted: Friday, August 02, 2019 6:15:58 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/14/2008
Posts: 202
Location: Germany, CE
Hey mates, saw that my pictures from my first posts got lost. Re-uploaded them.


Cheers,
Max
Weserhutte
Posted: Sunday, August 04, 2019 10:11:10 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/2/2005
Posts: 614
Location: America
Hi Max,

That is a lot to respond to and I'm sorry I don't have the time right now to dig out my Menck, Demag, Marion, P&H, etc. brochures and catalogs to respond in detail. I will come back to you on your 5 points in the nest days and the rest as time permits.
Mr. Scholz
Posted: Monday, August 05, 2019 1:13:37 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/14/2008
Posts: 202
Location: Germany, CE
Hello Weserhutte,

now this is the best I could hope for. Take your time, I posted a lot. As I was publishing an article on Menck quarry shovels, I had it all ready in the pipe. I appreciate your efforts, thanks mate.


With best regards,

Max
Weserhutte
Posted: Wednesday, August 14, 2019 10:50:35 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/2/2005
Posts: 614
Location: America
I didn't forget about you, Max.

Unfortunately, this is probably not the response you were hoping for. And for what it's worth, it's not the response I originally imagined writing.

What you have posted covers the '30s through the '60s/70s. In my opinion it is simply not possible to generalize anything over that length of time.

If you want to compare a particular Menck shovel, I've probably got the specs of an American machine of the same vintage and bucket size. Then we can try to make a fair comparison. I need to see what Menck brochures I actually have and that will help, but there is no extra time right now to unpack them.

I can also tell you for certain that I have never personally seen a cable shovel with grafted extra long teeth, but I seem to remember seeing a photo of a Northwest with a similar design. Maybe it was in one of the Northwest history books. One of the authors used to come on here and may see this (paging Mr. Torres). He could easily confirm or refute this so I will send a PM.






Mr. Scholz
Posted: Thursday, August 15, 2019 8:35:41 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/14/2008
Posts: 202
Location: Germany, CE
Hello Weserhutte,

thanks for the reply! If we want to focus on the ripping aspect, we should look at shovels from the 30ies/40ies. Since the first DN prototype was built 1938 (or so), we can use this as a starting point. As I have a brochure of a 120-B dated 1930, we can compare measurements, dipper length and capacity and so on. From the early 1960ies on, Menck shovels were used more and more for loading blasted material and this changed the design of the dippers. But this will be trated later.

Best regards,
Max
Weserhutte
Posted: Sunday, August 18, 2019 10:48:05 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/2/2005
Posts: 614
Location: America
If you have brochures of competitive shovel of the same vintage (within 3-5 years), that would be a great place to start if enough information is there.

I just don't have the free time to dig my stuff out at present. I'm lucky to look at this forum weekly.
Mr. Scholz
Posted: Saturday, August 24, 2019 6:51:40 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/14/2008
Posts: 202
Location: Germany, CE
Hi Weserhutte,

I'm still glad about your feedback, with or without catalogue material.


Best basis for are comparison are technical drawings. Thanks a lot to Wolf from the IghB technical archive who provided the MENCK DN drawing. http://www.ighb.de/


The drawings are in same scale. The 120-B was introduced with a riveted boom in 1925 as a 4-yard shovel weighing 351,300 lbs. Arround 1935 it recieved a welded boom and was upgraded to a 5-yard machine, so it grow from 3 to 3,8m³, but weight remained the same. The DN was introduced as a 3.2m³ in 1938, but soon was improved to 3.6m³, rising it's weight from 309,000 to 330,000 at the end of WW2. So both machines are roughly in the 150 ton class.


Ripping rock out of a bench differs from loading shot rock in the way that you have to get your shovel close to a high wall that you are destabilizing. You can compare it to demolition work on buildings to some aspect. While both shovels had the same reach of 13.4m/44feet, the DN could reach one meter higher: Its highest digging reach was 11.5 meters compared to 10.5 meters of the 120-B.

Vergleich BE120-B M&H DN 001b by FatCatGotHot




In this drawing, I marked the centerline of rotation of the upper works. You can also see that the undercarriage on the 120-B was the widest part of the shovel, on the DN it had the same width like the upper works. Both shovels had about the same diameter of rollers, but the 120-B had on further axle and lower ground pressure. On the DN, each wheel was designed to carry the whole weight of the machine, but I have no data on this for the 120-B.

Both shovels had double-reduction hoist winches, but the DN also had a double pully. On the 120-B, both ends of the hoist line were attached to the drum, but there was no pulley reduction. Its boom head with large wheels offered higest efficiency. Bail pull on the 120-B was about 42 tons for a 5 yard dipper and 55 tons on the DN for a 4.75 yard dipper.


The 120-B had a 187 1/2 HP (yes, B-E was that exact in the specs) hoist motor, the DN a 246 1/2 HP hoist motor. But the 120-B was Leonard-Ward control and reached about 20-25 seconds cycle time. It was a fast, high-performance loading shovel. Speed was not that important on the DN. It had AC motors with 3-step controls and needed 30 seconds cyle time, 50% slower than the Bucyrus. But under the dangerous conditions during ripping, speed was often not of interest.

50B00111000_Dreimotoren_Elektro_Löffelhochbagger_DN GIMP 004 by FatCatGotHot



On the last drawing you can see that the machinery deck of the DN was 2 feet higher then the one of the 120-B (red line). Also the undercarriage was higher (yellow line). What is sitting high is mostly out of danger in case of a rockslide - that was one of the philosophies of Menck's design. The sprocket on the Bucyrus has ten teeth compared to eight on the DN - and you can really see that the tracks on the DN are designed very heavy. They, together with the heavy wheels, were the best protection for the UC during rockslides. We believe that 33-40% of the machine weight on a DN was in the UC. Some of the driveline parts on the 120-B were unprotected, while on the DN, everything was covered.


Vergleich BE120-B M&H DN 003 by FatCatGotHot


I was also chatting with MarioT on the specialized ripping buckets/teeth Menck used. He stated that he never saw anything like it on US-made shovels.


I do not want to say that the 120-B was a bad ripping shovel. By far not, it absolutely revolutionized the mining shovel industry. The high quality cast steel construction of the big Bucyrus, made of best steel alloys available, was something Menck only could dream about. The DN was welded from normal construction steel for most of the parts, cast steel alloys only were other solutions were not possible. But I hope I can illustrate how Menck used clever design to cope with the dangerous task of ripping rock.

Mr. Scholz
Posted: Sunday, September 22, 2019 2:49:09 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/14/2008
Posts: 202
Location: Germany, CE
Some progress on my aircooled, Deutz-driven Magirus 6x6 Autobahn snowblower. First time I have everything together. I'm always shocked to see all the dents and faults of my customs the first time I look at them on a photo. But after I time, I start to weather it and to enjoy what I have built. After all, it's 1/87.


Magirus Autobahn Schneefräse 008 by FatCatGotHot

Magirus Autobahn Schneefräse 010 by FatCatGotHot

Magirus Autobahn Schneefräse 009 by FatCatGotHot


Cheers,
Max
Mr. Scholz
Posted: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 1:11:25 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/14/2008
Posts: 202
Location: Germany, CE
It's not an Oshkosh or FWD heavy plow truck, but I'm a fan of these german highway authority vehicles since childhood. And I keep up the HO scale flag in this wonderful forum! Hope you enjoy this, weathering is always the most fun part of the building process.



Magirus Autobahn Schneefräse 011 by FatCatGotHot

Magirus Autobahn Schneefräse 012 by FatCatGotHot

Magirus Autobahn Schneefräse 015 by FatCatGotHot

Magirus Autobahn Schneefräse 016 by FatCatGotHot

Magirus Autobahn Schneefräse 017 by FatCatGotHot

Magirus Autobahn Schneefräse 018 by FatCatGotHot

Magirus Autobahn Schneefräse 014 by FatCatGotHot


Best regards,
Max
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

SoClean Theme Created by Jaben Cargman (Tiny Gecko)
Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.8 (NET v2.0) - 3/29/2008
Copyright © 2003-2008 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.