NFWEM57

Check Rails A labour of love with regard to filing but only took 30 minutes or so for both check rails. Inverted flat bottom rail with one foot filed almost flat and the other tapered as per the prototype. Mount with slow zap and, when turnout complete, copper strips added to bind the check rail to the stock rail (as Martin Wynne alway recommends) and provide the support and strength required. For the prototype, the support for the check rails are right angled buttresses. 3mm thick plasticard difficult to cut into tiny triangles..! Check rails an obvious candidate for milling...! More pictures. If you are at the EMGS Expo at Bracknell tomorrow, I will be there in the morning and will have prototype #1 with me which I will leave at the EMGS stand for viewing. Prototype #1 far from perfect but show the art of the possible regarding modelling shallow depth turnouts. See you there. Patrick

Hi, Thank you for your comments, much appreciated. Interesting comment on plastic built points and gauge narrowing. I have had British Finescale turnouts in the most extreme environment for 3 year; a conservatory which ranges from 3 to 45 degree centigrade with daily 20 degree excursions with no issues. However, my scratch built track has yet to be laid on my test track. We shall see...! Thanks for the tip.

Build Progress Turnout now ready for check and switch rail installation. The shallow height rail is installed to the left of the closure rails. Note th etapering of the rail head on the code 83 to match the code 60 width, cosmetic rather than functional. On a 3d printed track base, the dual rail baseplate's and the distance blocks (red) would part of the print. The usual arrangement for common crossing isolation. And the other end. Note the tapers on the check rails which means the check rail gauge is only effective at the centre of the check rail..! Aim to complete tomorrow.

Check Rails In prototype #1, conventional flat bottom rail was used as the check or guard rail but this compromised the securing and alignment of the stock rail. For prototype #2 the stock rails were secured adjacent to the check rails with standard pandrol baseplates which has the side on the running edge trimmed. Modern check rails use a UIC 33 profile rail with height equivalent to Code 50 rail and has an asymmetric profile with a scale width of around 1mm to scale at the head . The solution for prototype #2 is to use inverted code 83 rail with the foot on one side removed and the foot on the other side profiled as a check rail. The check rail bearers have a 0.5mm shims added adjacent to the stock rail pandrols and the inverted rail is temporally positioned using pandrol baseplates at the ends mounted on sleeper cut offs to ensure the correct height. With the rail in position, slow zap is used to secure the rail and then a plasticard buttress is pushed up again the rail and secured using slow zap. The stock rail and inverted check rail baseplate combination is clearly suitable for a 3d printed solution similar to that available for bullhead. But, it is early days.

The only ones I have seen available are for bullhead, I have not found a flat bottom version in the UK. As I only need 3 sizes I purchased the Fast Track Jigs which can do both switch and vee rails for full height turnouts. However, full depth turnouts did not exist for very long in the UK before they were superseded by shallow depth turnouts (some 40 years ago) which are widely used on the continent. So, the switch rail part of the Fast Tracks jigs are of no use to me. Still, cheaper than buying a milling machine, the only other precision and repeatable alternative. Lining up the vee rails for soldering in the bullhead jigs can be somewhat awkward, as others with far more experience than I have informed me, hence my crossing vee soldering jig. As I stated at the start on my FB journey, there is precious little out there for the modern modeller and many of the more established modellers say it doesn't matter because there is still plenty of bullhead around. Maybe on the preservation lines but on network rail there is very little, most replaced a long time ago. The manufacture of prototypes 1 and 2 were moderately challenging, prototype 3 will be far easier and will be used on my test track. Thereafter, manufacture for the planned layout, mixture of bullhead and flat bottom, will be relatively simple. I am not sure when FB jigs will be available, if ever, given the investment by most individual track component providers into bullhead solutions. So, no choice other than to make my own or buy from abroad. One thing is for sure, IMHO and based on experience, none of the bullhead jigs are suitable for scratch building FB modern turnouts. Patrick

Hi, Thank you for the suggestion. The whole purpose of the exercise if to avoid all unnecessary filing...! The current flat bottom common crossing jig I have developed avoids any filing but need refinement which may result in a revised jig which allows upright assembly of the common crossing in one go and with the correct gap; 1mm. Must crack on, need to get prototype 2 built by Friday, important milestone on Saturday. So, refinements for prototype #3 will have to wait until after the milestone. But, if you have to modify the bullhead jig a lot, you may as well build another jig...! Patrick

Hi, Thank you, you are correct, it is not for the timbers..! In my rush to get an answer out before departing for work, I got it wrong..! Apologies. For bullhead, I assemble the common crossing in place so do not use the jig. But, the jig is good for bullhead only. Whilst the same approach for flat bottom could be used there is an issue with clearance. Only 0.1mm space is available between vee and check rail foot so soldering the vee in place first will likely cause solder leakage thus preventing the correct check rail distance being achieved. That is why I settled on the inverted assembly jig described in another thread. That is not perfect but I have an idea for a jig the right way up. Thanks again for spotting my error. Patrick

Good Morning, The slots in the EMGS jig are to position copper clad sleepers so that the crossing vee and wing/check rails can be soldered in position. It does not work for FB rail because the bearers for FB are wider and the bearer spacing is different. A picture is a thousand words... Note the width of the bearer at 8AV is wider than the slot in the jig and the spacing is different. Hope this clarifies. Patrick

Hi, Thank you for your comments. I will be uploading construction notes in due course for both the crossing vee jg and the common crossing jig. On the PWI handbooks, I have the 3rd edition (1964) and it is focused mainly on bullhead and early flat bottom solutions. I then acquired the 5th edition (1979) which contain a bit more about full height flat bottom switches and crossings. It is only when you acquire the latest set, yes there are now 4 manuals, that you see modern track work described and that shallow depth turnouts and switches are the norm and have been for many years. The books are not cheap but the information therein is invaluable. There is a separate volume on bullhead switches and crossings and a thick volume on flat bottom switched and crossing which started me thinking about the art of the possible back in Jan 24. A few months research on top of the day job and here we are. My next project will be shallow depth switched crossings as I need some 1:10 and 1:12 crossings for my planned layout. Patrick

Hi, Thank you for your interest. No link as I have just designed & developed it myself. May yet change the design but when complete I will upload a note on construction which is fairly simple. It is for modern flat bottom track only as the bearer (what sleepers are called for flat bottom) spacing is different as are the bearer widths. There is a bullhead common crossing jig available from the EMGS. Patrick

Prototype 2 Progress After the diversion to develop a comom crossing jig for flat bottom, seperate thread, work has begun on the the 2nd prototype which is somewhat different to the first: A pre assembled common crossing used. 0.5mm black plasticard is used to make the raised slide plates 0.75mm back plasticard is used to make a mounting plate for the fixed part pf the shallow depth rail (4 sleepers) The check rails (for the stock rails) wil be glued in place, the check rails is an inverted code 83 flat bottom rail filed flat on one side; this resemble the bespoke check rail used on the prototype. A few pictures of progress thus far: The slide chairs are modified by slicing off the bolt heads top allow the raised slide plate to sit flat. I need a better MEK applicator..! The pre assembled common crossing in place. Test bogie ran through very smoothly. 8.5mm nose to neck distance is correct. So what does it cost, approximately, to make a flat bottom shallow depth turnout from scratch, time and consumables excluded..! Two 1m lengths of EMGS Code 83 flat bottom rail (£5.16) About 0.5m of PECO Code 60 Flat Bottom Rail (£1.61) Around one pack of PECO timbers (£5.50) Around 98 PECO pandrol baseplates (£2.90) Around 18 PECO slide plate (£2.75) Plasticard, 0.5mm and 0.75mm Sundries Around £18~£20 for a B8. Work will now get in the way of pleasure for a few days but I will finish prototype #2 by Friday. Patrick

After a bit of a battle with the prototype common crossing solder jig (separate thread) I have managed to make a flat bottom common crossing. Now I can progress the 2nd flat bottom shallow depth turnout. Not perfect, but progress..! Once again, lots of lessons from making the first common crossing solder jig for flat bottom rail. Patrick

Update on Flat Bottom Common Crossing Jig First Point, i should really change the title; of this thread to Bullhead / Flat Bottom Crossing Vee and Flat Bottom Common Crossing Solder Jigs. Alas, unable. Moderator action I guess. In the end, 8.5mm between nose and neck was correct, there was a misalignment in the jig. After 2 further attempts I managed to solder up a flat bottom common crossing. It's not perfect, but far better than the first attempt and thus usable. A number of minor issue identified with jig which will a rethink on jig assembly. But in general, concept worked. It might be possible to make a multi angle jig if the base is aluminium, say 5~6mm thick. There are several fixed parts on the current jig and all that would be required are a set of spacers with different angles. Food for thought. The completed common crossing is shown below. Switching task to making the 2nd Flat Bottom Shallow Depth turnout. Patrick

Made a common crossing solder jig, just fine tuning it, seperate thread.

Hi. Thank you for your comments and interest. On the flat bottom use first. The 1mm rod is used to keep the rail heads apart by the check gauge amount, 1mm. The aluminium spacers are 1.5mm thick so is below the rail foot and, again, used to keep the rail heads apart. I might try 1mm thick instead if the issues mentioned in my last update are not resolved, You might be able to use it for bullhead but I generally assemble the common crossing on the actual turnout as there is room for chairs on both check and crossing vee rails allowing the wing / check rails to be fitted after the crossing vee has been fitted. Not possible with flat bottom, as I found out on my first prototype (seperate thread), hence this jig. Patrick