Fiddle yard design

[Julia]

 

Am working on the design for the fiddleyard/shadow station for my H0e modular layout. I Want to be able to hold 3 trains of at least 1000mm long, with entry from either end, at 150mm center. Playing with xtrkcad I get the below layout.

 

Can anyone see any obvious mistakes of made, or things I can improve on? I've already bought the 2x 3-way points. But not the rest. 

 

J

Edited April 15, 2019 by Julia

[Flying Pig]

You're using up a lot of length by placing plain track between the three-ways and the ordinary points to get your track spacing.  Perhaps try SLE-397F Y points connected directly to the three-way?

[Julia]

1 hour ago, Flying Pig said:

You're using up a lot of length by placing plain track between the three-ways and the ordinary points to get your track spacing.  Perhaps try SLE-397F Y points connected directly to the three-way?

 

You're right, it improves things a lot in terms of length. I've only got 4 sidings now, but in a total length of 2000mm. 2x 800x300mm boards, and a 400x300m board. Uses 1 fewer point too. 

 

Any thoughts on the revised version? 

 

 

Thanks

 

J

[Flying Pig]

I actually meant connecting the Y points to the diverging roads of the three way, which would give you 5 sidings.

[Julia]

11 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

I actually meant connecting the Y points to the diverging roads of the three way, which would give you 5 sidings.

 

Wouldn't that cause reverse curve issues? 

 

J

[Flying Pig]

It might. The outermost siding would start with one and a half times the divergence angle of the points, but your tracks are spaced quite widely so it would be worth a try to see how the radius works out.  

[Julia]

 

Had another play:

 

 

I'm not sure of the 2nd siding on the right hand side, but this does get me 5 sidings, 4 of them over 1m long. 

 

J

[Gordon A]

Have you thought of two three way points in tandem on the middle line at each end?

 

Gordon A

[Julia]

2 minutes ago, Gordon A said:

Have you thought of two three way points in tandem on the middle line at each end?

 

Gordon A

 

Yes, but a 3-way is 28 quid, where as Y's and standard points are only a tenner...

 

J

[Gordon A]

1 minute ago, Julia said:

 

Yes, but a 3-way is 28 quid, where as Y's and standard points are only a tenner...

 

J

 

Fair comment.

 

Gordon A

[Zomboid]

But what's £40 (assuming you buy 2 3 ways instead of regular points) if it gets rid of a compromise you want to avoid?

 

Not saying it would, but they're assets which should last a long time, so probably not something to cut corners on if there's a tangible benefit. 

[AndyID]

Might not fit your layout but an efficient way to arrange yards is with a double ladder something like this.

 

[The Stationmaster]

3 hours ago, AndyID said:

Might not fit your layout but an efficient way to arrange yards is with a double ladder something like this.

 

But It might well make the whole thing wider if you are trying to get a reasonable length on each road.

[Harlequin]

Andy's idea with in and out connections central and perpendicular to board ends and using 2 asymmetric 3-way points (and two others):

 

 

Not drawn using Code 55 parts and not to scale!

 

Has the possibly useful property that all roads are roughly the same length.

 

Edit: In fact it's not quite the same as Andy's version because it does not use opposing ladders - but anyway, there it is.

 

Edited April 16, 2019 by Harlequin

[andyfoulger]

pointless traverser.pdf

If it's just a fiddle yard - would a 'pointless' fiddle yard be of interest ? 

The attached PDF is intended to show a sliding board that replaces 5 off points - a pair of these boards would be required per fiddle yard. The stub on the left being the scenic section, the green section being part of the fiddle yard.

Some of the earlier images in this post have stub sidings - OK,  just add straight track to the sliding board as required.

Interlacing the 5 off curved tracks will reduce the required travel - no point blades would be required - just 'frogs' for the crossings. Wiring becomes 'more interesting' with the interlacing ....

 

regards

Andy

 

[Julia]

8 minutes ago, andyfoulger said:

pointless traverser.pdf 10.08 kB · 0 downloads

If it's just a fiddle yard - would a 'pointless' fiddle yard be of interest ? 

The attached PDF is intended to show a sliding board that replaces 5 off points - a pair of these boards would be required per fiddle yard. The stub on the left being the scenic section, the green section being part of the fiddle yard.

Some of the earlier images in this post have stub sidings - OK,  just add straight track to the sliding board as required.

Interlacing the 5 off curved tracks will reduce the required travel - no point blades would be required - just 'frogs' for the crossings. Wiring becomes 'more interesting' with the interlacing ....

 

regards

Andy

 

 

I'd rather go with a point based option, as it can be operated from a distance. I can be stood at one end of the layout, drive a train into the fiddle yard, flip the points, and drive another one out. All from the comfort of the other end of my layout. 

 

J

 

 

[imt]

4 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Andy's idea with in and out connections central and perpendicular to board ends and using 2 asymmetric 3-way points (and two others):

 

That's a good wheeze from you both - I'd not seen it before and I have copied it into my ideas box.  Could come in handy some time!

[woodenhead]

4 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Andy's idea with in and out connections central and perpendicular to board ends and using 2 asymmetric 3-way points (and two others):

 

 

Not drawn using Code 55 parts and not to scale!

 

Has the possibly useful property that all roads are roughly the same length.

 

Edit: In fact it's not quite the same as Andy's version because it does not use opposing ladders - but anyway, there it is.

 

The beauty of this design is that the entrance and exit are still roughly level as opposed to the double ladder which keeps all lines the same length but entrance and exit are top and bottom  

[DCB]

I am not sure if the OP wanted a set of off screen sidings for storage or somewhere to actually do fiddling as in crane shunting with a giant hand from the sky. For a giant hand you need something like a clear inch (25mm) between tracks, in 00 this is sort of set track spacing, maybe 60mm , for storage this can come down to a couple of mm, just as long as the trains clear on the straight.

For maximum length trains in a given length of FY I would put spurs on both outside loops so a train can run into one spur, reverse straight back into the other and then drive out without any need to reverse round any curves. 

Edited April 17, 2019 by DavidCBroad

[Chimer]

On 16/04/2019 at 11:41, Harlequin said:

[snip] ...Has the possibly useful property that all roads are roughly the same length.

 

 

Possibly useful, that certainly means any train can go anywhere which can be handy.  But contrariwise, I tend to plan to make one loop as long as humanly possible, so I can store one decent length rake, and am not fussed if the subsequent ladder design means the shortest loop will only hold a 2-car multiple unit.

[Flying Pig]

6 hours ago, Chimer said:

 

Possibly useful, that certainly means any train can go anywhere which can be handy.  But contrariwise, I tend to plan to make one loop as long as humanly possible, so I can store one decent length rake, and am not fussed if the subsequent ladder design means the shortest loop will only hold a 2-car multiple unit.

 

There was a young man from Japan

Whose limericks never would scan.

When asked why that was,

He replied "It's because

I always try to cram as many words into the last line as I possibly can."

[The Johnster]

On 17/04/2019 at 00:41, DavidCBroad said:

I am not sure if the OP wanted a set of off screen sidings for storage or somewhere to actually do fiddling as in crane shunting with a giant hand from the sky. For a giant hand you need something like a clear inch (25mm) between tracks, in 00 this is sort of set track spacing, maybe 60mm , for storage this can come down to a couple of mm, just as long as the trains clear on the straight.

For maximum length trains in a given length of FY I would put spurs on both outside loops so a train can run into one spur, reverse straight back into the other and then drive out without any need to reverse round any curves. 

The spurs also come in handy for trains that can simply reverse direction; dmus, railcars, autos etc.  When not being used for these, they are handy for topping and tailing longer trains on a double ended fiddle yard like this one.

[Mike Storey]

On 17/04/2019 at 17:27, Chimer said:

 

Possibly useful, that certainly means any train can go anywhere which can be handy.  But contrariwise, I tend to plan to make one loop as long as humanly possible, so I can store one decent length rake, and am not fussed if the subsequent ladder design means the shortest loop will only hold a 2-car multiple unit.

 

I agree with that. Once you have at least two roads capable of taking the longest train(s) likely to run, then I tend to go for as many other loops and spurs as possible, to give maximum flexibility in releasing stock/rakes when wanted.

 

In the design I have been working up for the Queenborough/Sheerness storage loops, I have also introduced crossovers half way along some of the loops (into the run-round), to avoid trains being trapped, and allowing variation to the pattern. But I will have a much greater length available so this may not be an issue for Julia, perhaps.