Are single/double-slips significantly more difficult?

[Lacathedrale]

I've built two sets of hand built points, both of which I'm happy to say worked fine - in S7 and EM. However, a new track plan I'm considering will have two double slips in it (cursed pre-grouping trackage!) to be accurate, and as such I need to make sure I'm not setting myself up for failure. Is there a jump in difficulty between turnouts and slips? If so, is there anything other than practise to help? I've yet to convert (my only) locomotive to any gauge to either EM/P4 so advise either way on that would be much appreciated.

 

EDIT: nothing is very unusual in the track plan itself, would one recommend they are built in panels and fitted, or done in-place?

Edited December 11, 2017 by Lacathedrale

[hayfield]

The only thing I have noticed is that due to the shortness of the switch rails, they have to be hinged. A method Norman Solomon showed me was to use cast metal fishplates soldered to the central part of the slip rail, allowing the switch blades to pivot in them. Works a treat and looks the business to suite

 

The other thing is to have a quality plan, the tips of the vees must be in the correct position (distance from each other) Templot or similar quality template

[Lacathedrale]

Interesting - do you have a picture of what you mean? I can't quite visualise it.

[hayfield]

Here is a photo of a partially built double slip, look at the top of the photo between the two red lines (either side) the slip roads are made from 3 rails, two switch rails and the centre part, the centre part is fixed to the sleepers as they are soldered to very thin bits (0.5 mm) of copperclad, the cast fishplates are soldered at each end of the centre rail

 

 

You will see there is a break in the rails with a cast fishplate which joins the switch rails to the centre rail, this is a push fit as the tips of the switch blades are soldered to a tiebar

 

 

Here is a picture showing the switch rails in position

 

 

This photo shows all the rails fitted, and a better vies of the fishplates. the copperclad strips are cut back to the rail joins and the cosmetic chairs will be glued in place

[dhjgreen]

I used thin phosphor bronze strip soldered to the outside of the switch rails. I also have two actuators for each end of the slip using piano wire. Picture below, EM copper clad construction, hayfield beat me to it.

Edited December 12, 2017 by dhjgreen

[Lacathedrale]

Ah wonderful, I understand what you mean now - the centre section being on copper-clad PCB due to the proximity of the rails, and then using fishplates/bronze strip/etc. as the hinge. Thank you!

[hayfield]

Ah wonderful, I understand what you mean now - the centre section being on copper-clad PCB due to the proximity of the rails, and then using fishplates/bronze strip/etc. as the hinge. Thank you!

 

 

All the timbers on the double slip are Ply, the copperclad strips are 0.5 mm thick (brass shim could be used) to match the foot of the plastic chairs which hold the rail 0.5 mm above the timbers, then either held in place with the plastic chairs and or stuck in place with super glue.

 

You could use copperclad timbers if you preferred, but unless you include 0.5 mm spacers the chairs will not fit.

 

Others use Lil or Vero pins pushed through pre drilled holes which the rails are soldered to

 

As I said the slip rail is in 3 parts, the central part which must remain fixed to the timbers and 2 switch blades, which must be made to move freely

[dhjgreen]

There are no chairs in my pointwork above, I soldered directly to the copper clad strip. It was 10 years ago, I am not sure what I would now but as it is a home layout I am happy with how it looks.

[dhjgreen]

I have built a single and double slip in P4 with the ply sleeper and rivet method (Brook-Smith) and there is no doubt they are more difficult than simple turnouts, However, if you can build your own simple turnouts reasonably well then it is not a quantum leap to go to slips. As all responders have indicated, care is needed, especially in the centre of the slip where it gets crowded. I find it takes care and patience and more frequent verification of alignments. I haven't found that hinging of blades is necessary, in mine I soldered everything up with no hinges. Obviously a personal choice.

 

John

As you are P4 are your slips quite long, mine are only 1:6 above.

Edit, the blades move a smaller distance too in P4.

Edited December 14, 2017 by dhjgreen

[hayfield]

There are no chairs in my pointwork above, I soldered directly to the copper clad strip. It was 10 years ago, I am not sure what I would now but as it is a home layout I am happy with how it looks.

 

There is no getting away from the fact that building in copperclad is a simpler construction method and one which suits most beginners, unless close inspection is needed they look as you can see excellent from the photo,

 

One issue now is the cost of copperclad strip which has rocketed up in price over the past 5 years, also whilst laborious you can life up the rail with 0.5 mm packing pieces so chairs can be used, can be very effective where most of the timbers are either Ply or plastic using chairs as designed, only using copperclad where rails are to be held in gauge in strategic positions, this may seem to be over complicating the issue only

[Brassey]

Here is a photo of a partially built double slip, look at the top of the photo between the two red lines (either side) the slip roads are made from 3 rails, two switch rails and the centre part, the centre part is fixed to the sleepers as they are soldered to very thin bits (0.5 mm) of copperclad, the cast fishplates are soldered at each end of the centre rail

 

159.JPG

 

You will see there is a break in the rails with a cast fishplate which joins the switch rails to the centre rail, this is a push fit as the tips of the switch blades are soldered to a tiebar

 

160.JPG

 

Here is a picture showing the switch rails in position

 

168.JPG

 

This photo shows all the rails fitted, and a better vies of the fishplates. the copperclad strips are cut back to the rail joins and the cosmetic chairs will be glued in place

 

Maybe I'm missing something but I can't quite see how the switch rails are "hinged" as they appear to be fixed in chairs?

[Reorte]

For more of a beginner perspective, I've built one (single slip) and it works, but it's not perfect by any means. But neither are my turnouts, so if you've built decent turnouts you should be able to make a decent slip. There's more to throw everything out if you get something slightly out but that's just a matter of being careful, and where copperclad construction is probably simpler.

 

Go for it and see how you get on I'd say. If you can build trackwork at all you'll be able to build any bit of trackwork, even if it takes more than one attempt.

Edited December 14, 2017 by Reorte

[St Enodoc]

I've built two sets of hand built points, both of which I'm happy to say worked fine - in S7 and EM. However, a new track plan I'm considering will have two double slips in it (cursed pre-grouping trackage!) to be accurate, and as such I need to make sure I'm not setting myself up for failure. Is there a jump in difficulty between turnouts and slips? If so, is there anything other than practise to help? I've yet to convert (my only) locomotive to any gauge to either EM/P4 so advise either way on that would be much appreciated.

 

EDIT: nothing is very unusual in the track plan itself, would one recommend they are built in panels and fitted, or done in-place?

Single slips are not too difficult. Double slips are more tricky because of the need to fit two pairs of switches and slip rails into a very congested space. I manage without hinged switches, for simplicity, but I do operate the two tiebars/stretchers at each end separately. The most critical part in my experience is getting the area around the elbows right. Copperclad construction gives you the chance to make adjustments with the soldering iron after building. The most tedious part for me is making eight switch blades!

[Junctionmad]

why not pivot the slip blades with a dressmakers pin as a pivot ?

[hayfield]

Maybe I'm missing something but I can't quite see how the switch rails are "hinged" as they appear to be fixed in chairs?

 

The cast fishplates slide either side of the web in the rail, it is soldered to the centre rail, however the switch rail is a push fit. The other end of the switch rail is soldered to the tiebar, the gap between the switch and stock rails when open is 1,25/1.5 mm, the movement at the other end is just the pivot point, and the chairs under the switch rails are slide chairs except for the first one (which also acts as an anchor. Works a treat as the tiebar stops any forward or backwards movement. Must be a cast metal fishplates though for strength 

why not pivot the slip blades with a dressmakers pin as a pivot ?

 

 

Works perfectly well without doing this

[woodbine]

Just dive in.

I spent a couple of years unnecessarily stressing about starting track-work. Ply sleepers and plastic C&L chairs, EM Gauge. I decided to bite the bullet and laid out the plan without the benefit of Templot but with the aid of Rice's book.

 

It was obvious to me that the easiest way was to start directly on the baseboard at the double slip 

 

 

and work outwards to the three-way tandem

 

 

and then the single slip,

 

 

then the plain turnouts, and finally the plain track. If I'd done it the other way round everything would certainly have gone pear-shaped somewhere. All this and fabricating my own common crossings and switch blades.

In the event, the double slip was not as hard as you'd imagine, even for me as a complete beginner, with patience, and everything after that was a doddle compared to assembling an average brass kit.

The point being that as you've already proved to yourself that you have the skill and patience required for a turnout, none of the rest is as hard as you think it's going to be.

Edited April 16, 2023 by woodbine
restored lost images

[hayfield]

Maybe I'm missing something but I can't quite see how the switch rails are "hinged" as they appear to be fixed in chairs?

 

 

This photo may assist, though the ones in the photo are plastic which I use to fit the switch rail to the common crossing in turnouts, it also acts as an electrical insulator

 

 

The Exactoscale cast metal fishplates are exactly the same E4XX FP11 . They are 4 bolt locking fishplates in brass

 

As I said fishplates are fitted to both ends of the central part of the central part of the slip rail and soldered in place, the switch rails are just a push fit

[t-b-g]

Building slips with a soldered construction is much easier than one with plastic chairs as some of the rails are short and have other rails close by either side, which makes holding them in place with just plastic chairs difficult.

 

The difficult bits have been mentioned already and it is interesting that some people hinge the blades and some don't. I have found that the critical factor is the length. If you are building a 1 in 7, there are enough sleepers to enable a blade to move without hinges but with a 1 in 6 or shorter, you get into trouble as you only have one or three sleepers to provide the fixing.

 

Getting 2 blades to meet up with the stock rails exactly together on a double slip is key to success, as is the alignment through the centre of the slip.

 

Having said that, with care and not rushing, I built a double slip and a three way tandem very early in my point building to see if I could and both went well enough so they are not beyond a relative novice with the right tools, techniques and attitude!

Edited December 15, 2017 by t-b-g

[hayfield]

Building slips with a soldered construction is much easier than one with plastic chairs as some of the rails are short and have other rails close by either side, which makes holding them in place with just plastic chairs difficult.

 

The difficult bits have been mentioned already and it is interesting that some people hinge the blades and some don't. I have found that the critical factor is the length. If you are building a 1 in 7, there are enough sleepers to enable a blade to move without hinges but with a 1 in 6 or shorter, you get into trouble as you only have one or three sleepers to provide the fixing.

 

Getting 2 blades to meet up with the stock rails exactly together on a double slip is key to success, as is the alignment through the centre of the slip.

 

Having said that, with care and not rushing, I built a double slip and a three way tandem very early in my point building to see if I could and both went well enough so they are not beyond a relative novice with the right tools, techniques and attitude!

 

Certainly agree with you about building slips with ordinary chairs can set some challenges, but lets face it using the incorrect parts building anything will possibly cause problems

 

Exactoscale do a range of 4 mm scale chairs for situations where non standard chairs are required, in fact by using the appropriate chair it is quite possible to build turnouts and crossings (certainly to the 00 gauge variants and EM gauge) with the minimum amount of soldering and in fact without having to get a soldering iron into very confined spaces. It may also be possible to use this method in P4 gauge but I have not tried it yet

 

The other critical measurement is that between the tips of both Vees, they must be at the exact distance apart to avoid kinks in the crossing

 

 

These chairs are for either the centre of diamond crossings (2 packs required) or the non slip road on a single slip

 

 

These chairs are for slips, one pack required for single slips, two for double slips.

 

There is a quick dodge for using the Exactoscale 0.8 mm check rail chairs both for the 00 gauge variants and EM gauge turnouts and crossings, and I have used these to set wing rails in place on common crossings

 

Various gauges have to be used at all times, but using plastic chairs on plastic timbers and sleepers is far easier than soldering rail to copperclad strip. If using ply timbers it is wise to make both common and obtuse crossings as sub assemblies using either wafer thin copperclad strip or shim left over from brass kits.

[woodbine]

On 15/12/2017 at 10:15, t-b-g said:

Building slips with a soldered construction is much easier than one with plastic chairs as some of the rails are short and have other rails close by either side, which makes holding them in place with just plastic chairs difficult.

 

 

Very true that plastic chairs on their own can't hold the tricky bits. By that method I really mean not using a) rivets, which I tried on a test piece and hated, plus it nearly drives you insane adding the cosmetic half chairs afterwards, and b) copperclad sleepers, again because of the chairs.

In a turnout there are inevitably small sections that chairs won't suffice for, but these can be pre-assembled onto bits of fret-waste on the bench and then epoxied in place.

Shown here (upside down of course), where the substrate has been added to coincide with sleeper positions.

 

 

 

In a slip the principle is the same, the complicated bits are electrically a unit, so they can be soldered as a unit and then epoxied into place.

Edited April 16, 2023 by woodbine
restored lost images

[t-b-g]

The double slip is #6 and the single is #7.  True, blade movement is small in P4.  Hadn't thought of the difference for EM.

I have seen some P4 track where the gap through the blade opening is too small. In real life it varied slightly from company to company but on the GCR was 4 1/2", or 1.5mm in 4mm scale.

 

So I use a bit of 1.5mm metal as a gauge for my usual EM and for OO and find it works just fine. If I built any track in P4 I would use the same gauge. Sure the check rail gaps are narrower in P4 but the gap at the blade shouldn't be.

[martin_wynne]

I have seen some P4 track where the gap through the blade opening is too small. In real life it varied slightly from company to company but on the GCR was 4 1/2", or 1.5mm in 4mm scale

 

On most prototypes the switch opening is 4.1/4", which scales to 1.42mm.

 

That would be too small for EM at the usual back-to-back, allowing some wheels to risk catching the blade tip. It is also not sufficient to create a minimum EM flangeway all along behind a flexible (not pivoted) open switch blade. It is barely sufficient for P4.

 

For EM, 4-SF (00-SF) and 00-DOGA-Fine, the usual setting is 1.8mm (the thickness of a 20p coin).

 

For 00-DOGA-Intermediate and 00-BF, the usual setting is 2.1mm (the thickness of a new 10p coin).

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[t-b-g]

On most prototypes the switch opening is 4.1/4", which scales to 1.42mm.

 

That would be too small for EM at the usual back-to-back, allowing some wheels to risk catching the blade tip. It is also not sufficient to create a minimum EM flangeway all along behind a flexible (not pivoted) open switch blade. It is barely sufficient for P4.

 

For EM, 4-SF (00-SF) and 00-DOGA-Fine, the usual setting is 1.8mm (the thickness of a 20p coin).

 

For 00-DOGA-Intermediate and 00-BF, the usual setting is 2.1mm (the thickness of a new 10p coin).

 

regards,

 

Martin.

You are quite right and I should have qualified my comments more.

 

I should have said that I adopted 16.7mm as my EM back to back many years ago and the only OO layout that I have seen with these standards has no really coarse wheels and a 14.7mm back to back. It is the EM minus 2mm standard.

 

There was talk of the official EM back to back being increased to that sort of dimension a while ago as wheel standards have improved so much since it was set at that but it all seems to have gone quiet.

 

I have built many points using the 1.5mm blade gap in EM, well over 500 including complex points, slips and crossings and have never had a problem.

[martin_wynne]

There was talk of the official EM back to back being increased to that sort of dimension a while ago as wheel standards have improved so much since it was set at that but it all seems to have gone quiet.

 

I don't know about "official", but the back-to-back depends on which wheels are used. For EM see these figures for 4-SF (00-SF) and add on 2.0mm:

 

http://4-sf.uk/#setting_wheels

 

For the optimum back-to-back, use a wheel setting fixture as described there.

 

Martin.

[t-b-g]

I don't know about "official", but the back-to-back depends on which wheels are used. For EM see these figures for 4-SF (00-SF) and add on 2.0mm:

 

http://4-sf.uk/#setting_wheels

 

For the optimum back-to-back, use a wheel setting fixture as described there.

 

Martin.

 

Indeed Martin.

 

I am well aware of problems which can arise with varying wheel standards in EM. The wheels on Buckingham vary from coarse Triang and suchlike from the 1950s through to modern Gibson, with just about every variety in between. It makes adjusting crossings and checkrails, shall we say, interesting!

 

At least most modern wheels, especially if you don't use RTR ones opened up, are pretty consistent in their flange sizes and work with a 16.7mm B to B, a 1mm check rail gap and 1.5mm through the blade gap. I haven't found any that don't work well with those dimensions.