Jackn2: A warning not to be taken lightly (and not the only one posted here - another person referred to the results of extended “smoke” production as a “nightmare” - which sounds accurate for the music store!)
I’m going to focus on machines that use water-based fog (I have a suspicion that water/alcohol solutions may be involved for some of them). Even this could have its effects over a long period, however - such as, will the paint on roofs and other parts of buildings get faded or discolored? I was going to build a mill first and experiment with steam later, but I already have a powerhouse model with a smokestack, and may try the technology before the entire plant is even built. I admit it will be a challenge to try to reproduce the effects seen with the real thing:
Being an O-Gauger myself, I will say that if you are trying to recreate the effects in that last pic, my advice would be LOTS OF GOOD VENTILATION, regardless of what type of smoke or fog generator you end up using. Even the water based ones are going to put a lot of humidity into the air in what is most likely a relatively small enclosed space. The humidity will have it’s own issues, as well as those who claim that smoke generators cause problems, which I haven’t had any yet, but I don’t have a permanent layout yet, and have only been 3-railing for less than 3 years now, so I guess I’ll find out in the future about smoke unit residue.
Good Luck, it does sound like an interesting project,
I agree that good ventilation will be needed regardless of the final technology used. The concerns you note are one reason why I originally was going to try dry ice - carbon dioxide is about as clean as “steam” could get, with the possible exception of compressed liquid nitrogen, which can be kept in a pressurized container and wouldn’t have the cold handling issues associated with actually having to move pieces of dry ice. Even so, releasing carbon dioxide from dry ice, or compressed nitrogen into a closed area for long enough will eventually asphyxiate the operator, which would tend to take a lot fun out of an operating session (that boomer’s been transferred to the great layout in the sky . . .) So you are right - a well-ventilated train room will be required to safely represent a steaming mill.
Something that I haven’t seen mentioned yet, though it does tend to look corny, is cotton stretched out into the shape of a steam cloud with one end stuffed into the chimney. This doesn’t move, so is very obviously artificial.
But no chemicals, heaters, dry ice, or other materials to fuss with.
I agree that the animation could cause many problems completely out of proportion to the realism that white clouds from scale smokestacks would offer. I may end up taking your advice if the technical challenges prove too difficult to overcome. However, the difference between a static model of a large mill and one that is “alive” with steam is really the difference between a mill that is operating and one that isn’t - there is something truly ominous about such an installation that has no steam around it; like finding a dead whale on the beach. A mill that goes without steam for too long is a dead thing - no money, no jobs.
BlueHills: I had overlooked the obvious answer you point out: Nothing looks more like steam than steam! I had a small steam engine when I was a teenager; it made billows of steam and also smelled like steam (and steam has a distinctive smell - or maybe it’s the hot metal containing the steam . . .)
Here’s a place that sells engines (but they ain’t cheap!)
Cacole: I have freqently used stretched cotton to simulated chimney smoke from houses or small buildings; it would be possible to string large “clouds” of it on wire armatures to simulate a mill. It might even be possible to direct a fan across it so it actually did move (a little, at least!)
In my long-past smoking days I was a pipe smoker and let me say that you can get three times as much smoke from a burning bowl of pipe tobacco as you can from any cigar. The big problem with pipe tobacco, however, is keeping the burn going so that pretty well eliminates that. I suppose it might be possible to fabricate some Rube Goldberg device but is it really worth it?
True, though a steam engine would add sound, but that could be more easily simulated electronically. I’d like to add all kinds of animation to complete the effect started by the steam, including the sounds of chippers, blowers, escaping steam, an occasional mill whistle signal (when still used, they are usually created by blowing compressed air horns rather than steam, but can communicate in a place that is extremely noisy). But you are right - steam can be generated by something much cheaper than a steam engine!
Indeed steam would seem like the obvious answer when trying to model steam but then I started thinking about the water that steam becomes when it condenses…water and model railroads do not always get along. Then the other thing with the steam. You need more than a way of heating water. Without a way to store the steam you will not get the BLAST of white steam that a plant would give off. All you would have is steam wafting out of the stacks unless it is under some amount of pressure. IMO
I’m still going with the idea of using a fog machine. Haven’t come up with anything better so far.
