NFWEM57

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 However, full depth turnouts did not exist for very long in the UK before they were superseded by shallow depth turnouts (some 40 years ago) which are widely used on the continent.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

Assembled the first sample, a few issues. Common Crossing below. The running edges of the vee are not aligned with the running edges of the wing rails so a bit of modification needed. tried copper strip, 0.5mm, to join but a bit fiddly so will try plain 24 gauge solid core wire. Issue with misalignment show below. Check gauges tight fit between crossing vee and check rails but there is a gap on both side where it meets the wing rail. The solution to increase distance from crossing vee nose to neck from 8.5mm to around 12mmm. calculation based on PWI data indicated it should be 8.5mm when modified for a 1mm check gauge but looks like an empirical approach might be required..! I'll have another go..! Stay tuned. Patrick

Almost completed the 1:8 flat bottom common crossing soldering jig. Just need to add hold down straps to that the rail is held flat and flush for soldering. The bare jig: The aluminium is 1.5mm thick, the rods are 1mm steel. This jig is for OO/EM so the check rail distance is 1mm. The marks above the jig allow a check of the wing/check rails to be made and fine tuned if required. The aluminum is scored with a stanley knife on both side and then placed in a vice and gently bent backward and forwards to give a clean break and cleaned up with a few strokes of a file. With a crossing vee and wing/check rails inserted the jig looks as follows. The black marks are the bearer positions so the thin (1mm copper strip is soldered in place between them. The neck of the common crossing is 8.5mm from the nose of the crossing vee for a FB 1:8 and the nose is 1.6mm from the intercept point of the running edges. Whilst the feet of the rails look close around the crossing vee in fact the gap should be around 0.13mm. A bit of fine tuning may be required around the neck area as the rectangular guide is glued but may need to be lifted and screwed in place to close up the neck gap. Cost is around £3 for two 100m lengths of 1mm steel rod, one sheet of 1.5mm aluminium sheet (100mm square) and a few 1.4mm screws. I will use a 150mm rod for the straight section for future jigs which will need to be longer. Patrick

I am just making a crossing vee jig for flat bottom rail. I need it to pre assemble the common crossing for my Flat Bottom turnout solution (separate thread). Sadly, it is not adjustable, but a fixed size. But I only need 3 jigs; 1:8, 1:10 and 1:12. And they are simple and cheap to make, I'll upload my solution later. Sometimes you have to scratch build because nothing is available, very true of flat bottom, or because even Wayne's excellent products can't satisfy the requirement; for example size of points. I need everything from B6 to D12 on my planned layout in bullhead and B8 to D12 in flat bottom.

Thank you. That is the reason I researched modern, now over 40 years old, track engineering and came up with this solution...! It works for OO & EM but P4 solutions will still have a bit of filing to undertake in the check rail areas to reduce the width of the foot of the rails. Patrick

Hi, Thank for your continued interest and comments. I have the EMGS supplied case hardened steel bullheads jigs for 4~8 and 9~12 and A to D switches. Needed FB jigs for half the track on my planned layout. Mainline FB turnouts and concrete track, branch lines all bullhead. Surprising how little filing is required for a shallow depth FB turnouts which have been around on the prototype for quite a while. Regards, Patrick

Hi thanks for the advice. But no experience of 3d printing or making 3d printing files, so very steep learning curve. The templot jigs are bullhead I believe. I can use the Fast Track jigs straight out of the box and I need my second prototype, with all the design changes, for a show in a few weeks time as well as a 3rd prototype for my test track which is getting an update in May 24. Will starting the second prototype this weekend and hopefully finish by Monday 6th. Patrick

Update - Final cost of 3 jigs from Canada is £235.74. Customs cost £33.35 with £12.90 brokerage charges. Mail option might not have attracted the brokerage charge. Parts for common crossing soldering jig have arrived. I'll make a 1:8 jig first, the rest are similar.

Reflection on Jigs, How to bend flat bottom rail. Next steps. Two of the jigs critical to scratch track building are the crossing vee and the switchblades. Whilst these are available for bullhead, none, as far as I am aware, are available for flat bottom rail. And if making them oneself, neither are there any jigs. Martin Wynne, of Templot fame, has developed and 3D printed such jigs, but I think once again, they are for bullhead rail. in any case I don't own a 3D printer...! The only solution viable solution to the crossing vee jig issue are those made by Fast Tracks although the switchblade part of the jig is obviously of no use for shallow depth switch rails. Moreover, they are single size per jig, unlike 4 sizes per jig like the current bullhead offerings, and quite expensive; both the items and shipping. With a need for 2 x 1:8, 5 x 1:10 and 5 x 1:12, and made up bullhead crossing vees costing £22 (the flat bottom would be similar) the cost is £264 plus shipping, say £12, so £276 total. The cost of 3 jigs and shipping from Canada is £176 including shipping. Add in 20% VAT and possible 10% customs and the cost rises to £229. So, have bitten the bullet and ordered. I did notice when browsing that the Fast Track Jigs come in various styles. I ordered one #12 Point Form Filing Jig and a #8 and #10 Crossing Point Form Filing Jig. The crossing point form filing jigs are the same as the point form filing jig but with an additional angle for making the sharper vees for double crossovers. It increased the overall bill by £3. So the 1:8 has an additional 1:4 crossing vee slot, whilst the 1:10 has an additional 1:5 crossing vee slot. Whilst these ratios do not match those required for a UK double crossing, they might be useful for other purposes. Somebody did suggest on an american forum just buying the 1:12 as then you can make any angle you want down to 1:4 simply by filling in with solder. See why their trains don't go very fast..!! The solution for the switchblades might be simpler, I think the bullhead switchblade jig can be used, at least for part of the process. One of the issues I had when bending flat bottom rail to make wing/check rails is that is distorts the rail so one leg of the wing/check rail is raised and may be twisted. This means the rail does not sit flat and the railhead is misaligned. The solution is to file a v slot into the foot of the rail just up to the web, maybe slightly less, on the side where the bend is to be made inwards. The rail can then be bent with minimal distortion. Image on the left with the 'nick' and on the right without. Notice the rail has lifted and twisted when the other half of the wing/check rail is held flat. Hopefully, I am not teaching people to suck eggs on bending rail..! Whilst I await the jigs from Canada I will make a common crossing assembly jig. I only have 3 sizes, so not complicated. Patrick

Diverging Switch Rail, Closure rail and Check Rails - Assembly Complete The diverging closure rail and switch rail have been fitted as well as the two check rails. Note the two stage taper on the check rails. Overall view. Alongside a recently complet bullhead B9 crossover. Note the thicker bearers and longer wing/check rails. A few modifications to assembly, for scratch building, required: Assemble the common crossing separately in a jig soldering the crossing vee and wing/check rails together using thin copper strip place to avoid the bearers. A jig rather like that sold by the EMGS will need to be manufactured. Soldered at 34/35 (the neck), 35/36 the crossing nose and 38/39 the check rails. This still allows baseplates to be fitted but provides the alignment accuracy required before assembly. Curve the diverging check rail to match the diverging stock rail. Use regular pandrol baseplates at bearers 15~18 and use 0.4mm thick pads to mount the C&L baseplate's onto. Use pandrol baseplates for the check rail area and use and modified code 83 rail upside down, one side made flush with the web, the other side with the head removed leaving just the foot (now at the top) as the check rail edge. Glued into a ABS plastic holder the, the prototype ones are quite substantial, the assembly can then be secured using MEK. Whilst a test bogie has run through freely aside from a small issue with the common crossing on the diverging route, this first attempt will not be used on any layout, the second version will be. I will be using British Finescale Tie Bars, Wayne kindly sent me some, and, given the more fragile nature of the code 60 rail, will be fitting 2 (as per the prototype), the one nearest the toe driven. Was it worth it, yes. Because it saved a lot of filing and I discovered that very few new additional baseplate types are required, possibly just 2; the shallow depth slider baseplate and the shallow depth rail pandrol baseplate. And that means scratch building modern turnouts can become a reality. The plethora of chairs required for bullhead turnout are simply not required for a flat bottom turnout. Actually, having undertaken the Normal Solomon track building course, it appear, in practice, not many are really required for bullhead scratch building either..!!!! Any constructive comments most welcome. Thanks for the feedback and reactions thus far. Patrick

Common Crossing, Straight Closure and Straight Switch Rail Fitted. Well a few lesson learnt around the common crossing area, not as simple as bullhead but have solutions going forward. Discovered th etip of the crossing vee was misaligned after fitting, have solution for that as well for this example. Unlike for bullhead, the diverging stock rail must be fitted and secured before the switch rail is fitted, I gauged off the wing rails then followed gauged off the diverging closure rail on the template, it worked. Usual electrical isolation at the wing rail. I tapered the heel end of the straight closure rail to match the width of the switch rail, possibly should have tapered the foot as well. The original slide chairs have 0.5mm thick slide plates fitted on top to raise the height for the code 60 rail. I know, they are white, i couldn't find any 0.5 x 2.5mm strip in black. And they do not fit using butanone, slow zap was used. The code 60 rail undercuts the code 83 rail at the toe as can be seen. With a tie bar fitted the blade will fit snugly under the head of the stock rail. So, a few errors along the way but a few months research and design work and the concept has been proven. Bespoke shallow depth slide chair baseplate's and transition area baseplates could easily be 3d printed, ditto some items around the common crossing. In fact, all that is required are maybe 3 types of baseplates to add to the PECO pandrol baseplate: Shallow Depth Slide Baseplate Shallow Depth Pandrol Baseplate for the fixed/transition area. Combined Stock and Check Rail baseplate (using check rail as per the prototype made from flat bottom rail) Now to finish the other side, add the check rails, wire up, strengthen and correct in places. I will modify the design in a couple of places and manufacture another before making up a test board with concrete track to test the turnout with a range of locos. Not sure, but I think I might be the first to have done this..! Patrick

Straight Switch Blade Once again, no jigs, all by hand and eye..! The first of two shallow depth switch blades made from code 60 rail. The side opposite the running face has the foot and head filed back to taper over the required 46mm of planing length. The head of the rail on the running face is filed back to taper over 46mm. Finally, the top of the rail head is filed back to form a vertical taper some 23mm long. The code 60 rail (should) fit snugly inside the web of the flat bottom rail as can be seen below, Difficult to hold the two rail together in one's fingers whilst trying to get a macro shot..! Hopefully, the concept is clear. Once the ordered parts arrive, I'll test fit this before I make another. Might need fine tuning. I may attempt to mill (using a pillar drill with a compound table) another one. The hand made one took an hour. Milling one would take minutes provide the rail can be held firmly enough. Patrick

Common Crossing Manufactured the 2 wing/check rails with the usual bends as we have with bullhead but with the inner faces of the check rails tapered as per the prototype. Positioned the crossing vee with 4 pandrol baseplates where the vee is clear of the check rails and a cut down slide baseplate on the inside of the vee. The wing/check rail are shown in place but have yet to be secured. I am waiting for a some additional parts which will allow me to set the distance between the vee and check rails at 1mm. I will be using slide baseplates to hold the check rails in position and proved support for both vee and check rails. The wing rails will be held in place with pandrol baseplates, obviously cosmetic only at the neck. The taper on the check rails can bee seen on the final image. Once the parts arrive in the next day or so I can finish the common crossing and the rest of the turnout is relatively straightforward, aside form the switch blade profiling which I will start now whilst there is a break in assembly. Patrick