Layout Design in Illustration software

[Harlequin]

I've updated the Peco geometry resources at the top of this thread to include part numbers for the new Code75 bullhead large radius points. (Version 9.)

[Harlequin]

Here's another design I did recently in this thread: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/110147-kings-tawton/

 

 

KingsTawton8.pdf

 

 

[Harlequin]

Here is my first attempt at a "mini-tutorial" video:

http://youtu.be/Q0R1DjOgUUo?hd=1

 

I might do more explaining other procedures that I commonly use when drawing up designs.

[imt]

Here is my first attempt at a "mini-tutorial" video:

http://youtu.be/Q0R1DjOgUUo?hd=1

 

I might do more explaining other procedures that I commonly use when drawing up designs.

 

I for one would like to see more.  In my case, how did you get the parallel  lines in at the right distance apart, how did you pick up that first point and from where (library of bits?).  If it was a library, how do you set it up etc.

[Harlequin]

Thanks Iain.

 

Good questions. I'll do some more when I get time and when I've learnt a bit about the screen recording software.

 

There are lots of ways to get the lines the correct distance apart. The spacing is 51mm (the closest whole number of mms to 2inches) and Peco have arranged things so that any two straight OO Streamline points joined as a crossover will give that spacing.

So one way is to get the spacing is to form a crossover, as in the video, and then join tracks to the points.

Another way it to draw a guide rectangle, set it's width or height to 51mm then snap lines to it. (Then delete or hide the rect when you're finished).

And another way, if you lines are exactly horizontal or vertical is to look at the X or Y position on the page and add or subtract 51mm.

 

For curves, if you know one of the radii then you can draw circles of that radius +/- 51mm as a guideline and then fit the line to it.

Or, for compound curves, draw a guide circle of 51mm diameter and drag it along between the two lines, adjusting them as needed to keep the spacing. When radii are small you may have to increase the spacing to ensure that the overhangs of long vehicles will pass each other.

[ISW]

Here is my first attempt at a "mini-tutorial" video:

http://youtu.be/Q0R1DjOgUUo?hd=1

 

I might do more explaining other procedures that I commonly use when drawing up designs.

 

Phil,

 

The 'snapping' would be a little clearer if the line ends were 'butt' not 'round'.

 

Ian

[Harlequin]

The round line ends help to ensure there are no gaps when things are snapped together, which can appear at high zoom factors due to tiny maths errors in the drawing programs. (Er, in Xara Designer, anyway...)

 

But I take your point (haha!) - maybe the snapping positions are still not clear enough in the point templates. I'll have a think.

[ISW]

The round line ends help to ensure there are no gaps when things are snapped together, which can appear at high zoom factors due to tiny maths errors in the drawing programs. (Er, in Xara Designer, anyway...)

 

But I take your point (haha!) - maybe the snapping positions are still not clear enough in the point templates. I'll have a think.

 

Phil,

 

But who goes zooming in to 'that' degree? Even with my eyesight I don't 'need' to zoom to the high factors you describe.

 

Just shows though, after using Xara for ~20-years I still never knew about the tiny maths error.

 

Ian

[JohnR]

Would you need to zoom in that much to print these out full size for track laying purposes? Would it matter?

[Harlequin]

Phil,

 

But who goes zooming in to 'that' degree? Even with my eyesight I don't 'need' to zoom to the high factors you describe.

 

Just shows though, after using Xara for ~20-years I still never knew about the tiny maths error.

 

Ian

I could give you chapter and verse on maths errors and rendering glitches at high zoom factors but, you're right, they're not really such a problem for most people. It's just my personal and professional interest.

 

It is sometimes useful to zoom in very close to make sure things are lined up but you really aren't going to see the glitches in normal use.

 

Would you need to zoom in that much to print these out full size for track laying purposes? Would it matter?

 

Since printing at real size involves quite a high zoom factor then, yes, some of these artefacts might become visible but they don't affect the accuracy of the line for track laying.

 

I've found that Adobe Acrobat Reader has a very good tiled printing feature and so for track layout I'd recommend exporting your design as PDF and then printing it from Acrobat Reader. It's quite easy to work out the scale factor needed and the results are very accurate.

 

Note that there are bugs in Acrobat Reader that cause worse printing glitches than the drawing programs sometimes show on screen (urgh, always bugs to be fixed) - but again, they're not really a problem for track laying.

[Harlequin]

I've been thinking about a design for a very restricted space in my house - about 400mm by 3900mm. (On top of a built-in sideboard behind my sofa!) That might seem quite a generous width but it has to include the fiddle yard or possibly another scene that could act as a fiddle yard.

 

I looked at Moretonhampstead for inspiration because it's very linear and at first glance it appears to be quite simple but it was first laid out in virgin countryside in broad gauge days and so they had plenty of space available which makes it difficult to compress into a model. (see http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/120942-moretonhampstead-goods-yard-access/page-2#entry2929572 )

The old broad gauge train shed, which survived until the line was finally closed, also made the track plan difficult to compress. (It has to be up the line from the loco release crossover to protect a standing carriage and that in turn pushes all the other station elements further up the line.)

 

So, I have arrived at this, which is showing some potential:

(Click to enlarge)

 

It's 2440mm wide (8ft) and so leaves 1460mm (~4ft9in) for fiddle yard.

 

Edit: I should have said that all points are streamline OO large radius pattern so that the trackwork can be bullhead throughout.

Edited November 23, 2017 by Harlequin

[Harlequin]

Here's a drawing I've done for another thread in this forum (http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/128727-what-process-can-i-use-to-narrow-down-my-layout-ideas/)

[Click to enlarge]

 

This drawing is a large sketch to mainly work out what will fit in the space so it's not fully resolved and since the owner may scratch-build his track does not use Streamline point templates.

 

I created brushes for single track and double track, including trackbed, so that I could see how the trackwork would fit and to save time drawing parallel tracks. (Hence the rather odd looking junctions.)

 

The stations are condensed representations taken from 1930s maps on old-maps.co.uk, that hopefully express the feel without being slavishly accurate.

 

LaCathedrale10b.xar

LaCathedrale10b.pdf

 

This design is now being shelved and we're going back in time to the late 1890s and back to the original idea of more modular baseboards.

 

[Chimer]

Without the constraints and wishes to follow real life that I know you were working under, that would be a great universal plan (imho) if you ditched the double crossover bottom left, let the Caterham branch fall gently from the junction and had the main line in full view on an embankment / viaduct behind the terminus.  And perhaps a different FY arrangement.

 

I love the quality of plans you produce this way.  But the thought of learning a CAD package which isn't optimised for railways, then working out how to use it for railways, only to use it for railways, makes me think I'll stick to XTrackCAD myself! 

[imt]

.........................

I love the quality of plans you produce this way.  But the thought of learning a CAD package which isn't optimised for railways, then working out how to use it for railways, only to use it for railways, makes me think I'll stick to XTrackCAD myself! 

 

He's a professional designer/artist and it shows!  I wish I could find something which will work through a browser page.  I am giving up on Windows after a lifetime using it professionally - becoming far too much of a hassle and rather expensive too.  I can get all I need on a Chromebook apart from a model railway design package!  So I am trying to make use of the design packages I can get hold of - with little progress.  Sadly they are not very intuitive for a ham-fisted CAD man.

[Kiwi]

He's a professional designer/artist and it shows!  I wish I could find something which will work through a browser page.  I am giving up on Windows after a lifetime using it professionally - becoming far too much of a hassle and rather expensive too.  I can get all I need on a Chromebook apart from a model railway design package!  So I am trying to make use of the design packages I can get hold of - with little progress.  Sadly they are not very intuitive for a ham-fisted CAD man.

Have you tried "Trax"? (www.traxeditor.com). Not to my taste, but it's the only browser-based product I'm aware of.

[Harlequin]

Just to set the record straight, I'm a programmer (what they call a "developer" these days) and I'm one of the team that develops the "Xara Designer" range of products - the program that I use.

 

So you might say I've got inside knowledge of how to use the program but I'm just using pretty standard features most of the time, that anyone could pick up quite quickly in any good illustration software.

 

And that's the reason for this thread: I think it's easy to draw track plans using normal drawing programs and, although you do have to do more work yourself, the end results are visually superior to dedicated track planning software. So I'm showing the things that I do and hoping that it might encourage other people to have a go.

Edited December 10, 2017 by Harlequin

[imt]

Just to set the record straight, I'm a programmer (what they call a "developer" these days) and I'm one of the team that develops the "Xara Designer" range of products - the program that I use.

 

.....

 

Thanks Phil.  I have been inspired by your talent, but unable to replicate it.  I won't hijack your thread further.  I have just tried Trax and I don't think I'll be going further there.

[Harlequin]

Woohoo! I have a layout design in this month's Railway Modeller! (January edition.)

 

They haven't used the final revision I sent them, though, in which I corrected some problems and added some details. And some elements seem to have very heavy line widths...

 

Ho Hum. I think I need to check it thoroughly.

Edited December 11, 2017 by Harlequin

[imt]

Woohoo! I have a layout design in this month's Railway Modeller!

 

They have't used the final revision I sent them, though, in which I corrected some problems and added some details. And some elements seem to have very heavy line widths...

 

Ho Hum. I think I need to check it thoroughly.

 

Congratulations.  The rest is pretty much par for dealing with the press - they mix things up, get things in the wrong order, print the wrong revision etc.  I don't know how you avoid it.  Anyway your designs are excellent and inspirational.  Who knows you might get the job of doing all their layout plans - they need someone to improve them!

[sammyboy]

I like the look of all these computer generated track plans, very clear to understand.

 

Sam

[sigtech]

Sproston  - future possible redrawing of signalling and trackplans in illustraton software.

 

Hello. Phil, My first post on this thread, as you suggested to move the topic here away from the Hampton Malstead one.

 

Regards,

(SIGTECH)

Steve..

Edited January 22, 2018 by sigtech

[Harlequin]

Hi Steve,

 

Thanks. So can you post the info about your layout here (again) and I'll produce a Signalling Diagram like the diagrams that were found in GWR signal boxes and like the one I drew for my own proposed layout:

 

I'll post the result here and we'll probably have to do a few iterations until it's correct and you're happy with it. I'll probably do a lever allocation list as well because it helps to ensure that the diagram is correct.

 

When it's done I'll give you PNG or JPEGs at whatever size you want and PDFs that you can print out at high-res or edit in whatever drawing program you like.

 

OK?

 

[sigtech]

O.k bear with me Phil, and I'll see what I can do.

The original layout is mounted on 2 flush panelled doors found in the loft. They are screwed together with 1"X1" wood frame fitted around the outside. That gives an external dimension of: 6' 7 1/2"  x  5' 1 1/2".

This is mounted across the axis of the roof (for adequate headroom ) on the old supporting timbers for the water tank in the loft .....

The track is Peco code 100 wooden sleepered flexi with small radius (24") live frog points and 22" radius curves laid on thin cork ballast.

Trackplan draw using 'ANYRAIL'. (free version),

 

 

Present signalling.

 

Scenery.

Scan 1.pdf

Scan 2.pdf

 

The two plans above are not totally up to date, but the changes are only small scenic items and there final positioning. I no longer have 'Anyrail' installed so cannot updated it.

Just for info - this is where the idea for the design came from - good old C.J. Freezer and Railway Modeller!!

 

Scan 3.pdf

 

This has not been installed yet - just the design for the route of the rod-run.

 

 

Hope this is enough to start with, the layout was printed out 1:1 scale and then laid on the baseboard. Trackwork was glued over the plan to try to obtain accuracy.

 

Let me know if you need anything else....

Regards (and thanks  once again)

(SIGTECH)

Steve.

Edited January 22, 2018 by sigtech

[Harlequin]

Hi Steve, Which way does the signal box face? Windows facing the turntable or windows facing the fiddle yard?

[sigtech]

Hello Phil - The windows face turntable, and blockshelf is behind main windows, with a 25 lever frame in front.

I hope these photos from my blog make it all clear.

 

 

and the 3 doll inner home signal.

 

 

Regards, and thanks.

(SIGTECH).

 

Steve.