Advice needed on cable troughing and relay box positions

[Powerhaul 70 Pey]

Hello everyone, I have some Wills 00 gauge cable troughing (I need some more) and some dummy Peco point motors and I am just wondering if their position looks ok on the crude photo attached below.  I intend to get some relay boxes and would the positions of the relay boxes also be ok?  I believe the orange/red pipes are so Tamper operators know where the cables are and that they just carry cable to individual components hence the 2 lengths of cable troughing along the 2 tracks.  I would like to know so I can begin to fit the components and then ballast around them.  Thanks for any help in advance.

[St. Simon]

Hi,

 

There isn’t any real design standard on locating Location Cases* (their proper name, not rely boxes ), but the general rule is to place them to minimise the tail cable length to the equipment that they are connected to, so I think your positions wouldn’t be too out of place.

 

The other rules are that they should be located in the Cess as much as possible and that the doors are perpendicular to the track (I.e so that a tech standing looking into the cases faces up / down the line)

 

You are correct in that the orange piping was to allow Tamper operators to locate the cables, officially it was so that they could avoid them, but every signalling engineer thinks that it’s actually so that the Tampers can accurately cut through the cables!

 

As a side note, Orange Piping is now totally banned from use (if we find some still installed, we have to change it for a UTX, a hollow sleeper or to just be attached to a suitable concrete sleeper.

 

Hope that helps!

 

Simon

 

* Bearing in mind I’m a schemes guy, I haven’t come across a standard just yet!

Edited May 17, 2020 by St. Simon

[phil-b259]

18 minutes ago, St. Simon said:

 

The other rules are that they should be located in the Cess as much as possible and that the doors are perpendicular to the track (I.e so that a tech standing looking into the cases faces up / down the line)

 

 

 

That is the new standard - before that it was the practice to put cases parallel with the track (normally, but not always with a guard rail to try and prevent S&T staff from coming into contact with trains). Not sure when putting cases at right angles to the track started, but I think it was around the time of privatisation, but virtually every single case erected as part of the mind to late 1980s BML resignalling (and associated branches) are parallel to the track.

 

21 minutes ago, St. Simon said:

You are correct in that the orange piping was to allow Tamper operators to locate the cables, officially it was so that they could avoid them, but every signalling engineer thinks that it’s actually so that the Tampers can accurately cut through the cables!

 

 

The new standard NOT to use orange pipe  - it is to have the cables clipped to the tops of sleepers, possibly because tampers tend to be rather good at hitting Orange / yellow pipe. This can of course bring other issues like rail dumped by the p-way in the 4ft squashing it, or occasionally where protectors are not fitted it getting pinched where it goes under the rail*.

 

 

* Such a circumstance ended up causing a wrong side failure that went on for two days till the track circuit tail cable concerned was found.

 

 

 

[Powerhaul 70 Pey]

4 hours ago, St. Simon said:

Hi,

 

There isn’t any real design standard on locating Location Cases* (their proper name, not rely boxes ), but the general rule is to place them to minimise the tail cable length to the equipment that they are connected to, so I think your positions wouldn’t be too out of place.

 

The other rules are that they should be located in the Cess as much as possible and that the doors are perpendicular to the track (I.e so that a tech standing looking into the cases faces up / down the line)

 

You are correct in that the orange piping was to allow Tamper operators to locate the cables, officially it was so that they could avoid them, but every signalling engineer thinks that it’s actually so that the Tampers can accurately cut through the cables!

 

As a side note, Orange Piping is now totally banned from use (if we find some still installed, we have to change it for a UTX, a hollow sleeper or to just be attached to a suitable concrete sleeper.

 

Hope that helps!

 

Simon

 

* Bearing in mind I’m a schemes guy, I haven’t come across a standard just yet!

 

3 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

That is the new standard - before that it was the practice to put cases parallel with the track (normally, but not always with a guard rail to try and prevent S&T staff from coming into contact with trains). Not sure when putting cases at right angles to the track started, but I think it was around the time of privatisation, but virtually every single case erected as part of the mind to late 1980s BML resignalling (and associated branches) are parallel to the track.

 

 

The new standard NOT to use orange pipe  - it is to have the cables clipped to the tops of sleepers, possibly because tampers tend to be rather good at hitting Orange / yellow pipe. This can of course bring other issues like rail dumped by the p-way in the 4ft squashing it, or occasionally where protectors are not fitted it getting pinched where it goes under the rail*.

 

 

* Such a circumstance ended up causing a wrong side failure that went on for two days till the track circuit tail cable concerned was found.

 

 

 

Thank you both for the replies and information it is much appreciated.  I can crack on with this area now and know it is something like the real thing.

[iands]

9 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

The new standard NOT to use orange pipe

 

"New" being a relative term. I still have a copy of the original letter buried away in my archive) issued by the then Head of Track at Railtrack HQ banning use of new installations of orange pipe for cross-track cable management, IIRC the letter was issued in 1995. It primarily related to "main lines" where track quality was becoming difficult to maintain to the required standards as the tampers were missing out two sleepers at every orange pipe, and sometimes there were several orange pipes in a few 10s of metres.

 

On another note, whilst what both St. Simon and phil-b259 have said is correct, it depends on what period is being modelled (if you want/need to model accurately). When I started my railway career back in 1973 there were numerous Locs on the ECML (particularly between Selby and Doncaster, but other sections as well) where the Locs were fitted with doors on both sides. So you could be working in the Loc with your back to an open line - with no barrier (it was a tad unnerving as a 16 year-old new to the industry when a Deltic went thundering past at 100 mph!). Something not practised today thankfully (a positive H&S "intervention"). As has been mentioned, most Locs are nowadays positioned with the doors perpendicular to the track.

[The Stationmaster]

There are some design notes in respect of cable route planning and location cupboard placement when used in conjunction with IECCs and there is some detail in the original IECC design manual (which I can't reach at present because it is in a bookshelf in the room my son is using as his home office (officially the dining room).  I did the scale drawings for St Pancras International cable routes and locations using that plus information from colleagues and the installation was more or less as per my drawing!!

 

But as others have pointed out it all depends on area and BR Region for stuff installed before the late 1980s because there were different designs of location cupboard in use and the way they were arranged did vary between Regions.  For example WR cupboards were almost invariably sited parallel to running lines and only had doors on one side - which usually faced the nearest line or siding.  Installation at 90 degrees to lines was unusual and tended only to happen when there was a lot of soace to erect the cupboards.

 

You also need to get your dummy point machines the right way round.  This shows one mounted the right way round -

https://peco-uk.com/products/dummy-point-motor-2

 

And you might find this thread helpful as well -

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/84599-dummy-point-motor-placement/&tab=comments#comment-1417059

 

[Nearholmer]

If the OP is very particular about era and area, this could get complicated, because standards and practices were different in different places at different times, and, of course, the nature/purpose of the cables routed in the troughing dictates a fair bit.

[Dungrange]

20 hours ago, St. Simon said:

As a side note, Orange Piping is now totally banned from use (if we find some still installed, we have to change it for a UTX, a hollow sleeper or to just be attached to a suitable concrete sleeper.

 

19 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

The new standard NOT to use orange pipe  - it is to have the cables clipped to the tops of sleepers, possibly because tampers tend to be rather good at hitting Orange / yellow pipe. This can of course bring other issues like rail dumped by the p-way in the 4ft squashing it, or occasionally where protectors are not fitted it getting pinched where it goes under the rail*.

 

10 hours ago, iands said:

"New" being a relative term. I still have a copy of the original letter buried away in my archive) issued by the then Head of Track at Railtrack HQ banning use of new installations of orange pipe for cross-track cable management, IIRC the letter was issued in 1995. It primarily related to "main lines" where track quality was becoming difficult to maintain to the required standards as the tampers were missing out two sleepers at every orange pipe, and sometimes there were several orange pipes in a few 10s of metres.

 

So, if orange piping was banned from 1995, how long has it taken to be largely eradicated from the network?  My primary period of interest is circa 2005-2010, so I'm interested in knowing whether it was still common by this time period.  I'd assumed that it was, but now I'm not so sure.  I'm assuming that the best way of modelling cables clipped to the top of sleepers is just to use fine black painted wire glued to the sleeper?

[iands]

1 hour ago, Dungrange said:

 

 

 

So, if orange piping was banned from 1995, how long has it taken to be largely eradicated from the network?  My primary period of interest is circa 2005-2010, so I'm interested in knowing whether it was still common by this time period.  I'd assumed that it was, but now I'm not so sure.  I'm assuming that the best way of modelling cables clipped to the top of sleepers is just to use fine black painted wire glued to the sleeper?

 

I can't be 100% certain, but it is fair to say that all orange pipe on the major main lines (GWML, WCML, GEML, ECML etc.) has now all gone, but orange pipe may well still exist on some secondary lines and more than likely on freight lines.

[Powerhaul 70 Pey]

Many thanks for the information and replies everyone,it is much appreciated.  There is certainly still orange piping around the north west, even on the WCML!  Here is a photo at Wigan North Western at the end of platform 5 with a train heading north.  I Suppose this will only be replaced when major engineering is taking place and not something which justifies a line closure for it to be swapped out.

 

[phil-b259]

3 hours ago, Dungrange said:

 

 

 

So, if orange piping was banned from 1995, how long has it taken to be largely eradicated from the network?  My primary period of interest is circa 2005-2010, so I'm interested in knowing whether it was still common by this time period.  I'd assumed that it was, but now I'm not so sure.  I'm assuming that the best way of modelling cables clipped to the top of sleepers is just to use fine black painted wire glued to the sleeper?

 

1 hour ago, Powerhaul 70 Pey said:

Many thanks for the information and replies everyone,it is much appreciated.  There is certainly still orange piping around the north west, even on the WCML!  Here is a photo at Wigan North Western at the end of platform 5 with a train heading north.  I Suppose this will only be replaced when major engineering is taking place and not something which justifies a line closure for it to be swapped out.

 

 

 

The key thing to note is the ban was for new works - orange pipe that already existed in 1995 was left alone until major renewals of the formation (i.e ballast removed + replaced) took place. Similarly a relocated signal would have its cables clipped to the top of the sleeper but an adjacent untouched one still used cables in orange pipe.

[ess1uk]

I’ve seen existing orange pipe used as it was easier than getting a UTX put in.

not really in the spirit of the rules

[Powerhaul 70 Pey]

Here are some photos I took today of location boxes whilst on daily exercise combined with seeing a few trains along the WCML at Euxton in Lancashire.

The majority facing up/down the line and with some sort of barrier protection.  No sign of orange piping but cables clipped to the tops of sleepers as people have mentioned.

 

Thanks everyone.

[steve1]

Here's one of the 'hollow sleepers' that I saw at Eastrington Station on the Selby-Hull line when the level crossing was being updated in summer 2018.

 

steve

[iands]

2 hours ago, Powerhaul 70 Pey said:

Interesting to see a Mk1 stump box still in-situ. These were originally part of the lineside infrastructure for the 4Mhz Telecoms transmission system. The top half of the stump box was pressurised and housed the 32 interstice pairs of the composite Coax cable. Probably did on WCML the same thing they did on the ECML  south of Doncaster. When the 4Mhz system became redundant,  the cable remained intact and the pairs bonded together to form a ready made screening cable - saved all the hassle and cost ripping it out and installing a new screening cable.

[pheaton]

The only thing I  would say about the wills cable trough is its a little on the overscale side, have a look at the Ten Commandments cable troughing its much more closer to OO gauge.

[iands]

1 hour ago, pheaton said:

The only thing I  would say about the wills cable trough is its a little on the overscale side, have a look at the Ten Commandments cable troughing its much more closer to OO gauge.

Just out of interest, how do you define "overscale"?

[bécasse]

The prototype troughing comes in standardised sizes*, determined originally IIRC by the maximum size that two men could be expected to manhandle. Thus troughing for a OO scale model railway should be to dimensions 1/76 th of those on the prototype. If it is bigger than that it is "overscale", simples!

 

In fact, given that OO track is narrower than scale, and that model railway layouts tend to be somewhat compressed compared with the real railway, there might be something to be said for having model troughing a little underscale.

 

* Concrete troughing has been around for a long while. It would originally have been cast to imperial sizes, modern ones are metric but little different.

Edited May 19, 2020 by bécasse

[iands]

9 minutes ago, bécasse said:

The prototype troughing comes in standardised sizes*, determined originally IIRC by the maximum size that two men could be expected to manhandle. Thus troughing for a OO scale model railway should be to dimensions 1/76 th of those on the prototype. If it is bigger than that it is "overscale", simples!

 

In fact, given that OO track is narrower than scale, and that model railway layouts tend to be somewhat compressed compared with the real railway, there might be something to be said for having model troughing a little underscale.

 

* Concrete troughing has been around for a long while. It would originally have been cast to imperial sizes, modern ones are metric but little different.

Hi bécasse,

My apologies, perhaps my query was a little too brief. I was trying to understand pheaton's comment about the differences between the "Wills" and "Ten Commandments" troughing at OO scale. However, your 2nd paragraph explains it nicely, thanks.

 

Yes, handled a lot of troughing in my time on the railway, and some of the original stuff was bigger than the "standard" sizes of today.

[The Stationmaster]

14 hours ago, iands said:

Hi bécasse,

My apologies, perhaps my query was a little too brief. I was trying to understand pheaton's comment about the differences between the "Wills" and "Ten Commandments" troughing at OO scale. However, your 2nd paragraph explains it nicely, thanks.

 

Yes, handled a lot of troughing in my time on the railway, and some of the original stuff was bigger than the "standard" sizes of today.

Over the years there have been three (to my knowledge_ 'modern' widths of WR troughing and that was from the 1960s onwards before the BR standardised sizes came into use on the Western.  The narrowest WR size didn't have a top and could effectively hold little more than one of two snall diameter cables and was very commonly used for signal wires where they. crossed pathways.

[iands]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

.......  The narrowest WR size didn't have a top and could effectively hold little more than one of two snall diameter cables and was very commonly used for signal wires where they. crossed pathways.

Hi Mike,

I think what you are referring to were known as "inverts" (at least that's what they were called on BR(E), presumably because they were installed "inverted" to normal cable troughing). As you say, used sometimes to cover track feed cables (or similar small diameter cables), and/or signal wires that crossed pathways/walking routes. More commonly used (again from my own personal experience on BR(E)), to protect gas pipes for points heating, later production ones (from York CCE Concrete Depot) having the word PROPANE cast into them.

[Powerhaul 70 Pey]

Good evening to everyone and thanks for the help and information following my initial question.

 

I have searched TWPS loops on this forum but not found too much info.  I have read that they are positioned 180m from a signal.  I have searched through my photos and found 2 examples below.

Location is Euxton with this particular TWPS on the fast line to which Euxton junction is literally around the curve in the distance.  Would there be another at the next signal?

Warrington Bank Quay with one in the middle of platform.  Would there be another at the next signal?

 

I am just curious as to their positioning relative to any signals, stations and junctions.

 

[ajwffc]

On 19/05/2020 at 17:53, Powerhaul 70 Pey said:

Here are some photos I took today of location boxes whilst on daily exercise combined with seeing a few trains along the WCML at Euxton in Lancashire.

The majority facing up/down the line and with some sort of barrier protection.  No sign of orange piping but cables clipped to the tops of sleepers as people have mentioned.

 

Thanks everyone.

the one facing the track with the yellow stripe will contain scotches, clamps, point-handles(if u are lucky) and if you are very lucky blue roll.  

[Trog]

On ‎18‎/‎05‎/‎2020 at 09:15, iands said:

 

"New" being a relative term. I still have a copy of the original letter buried away in my archive) issued by the then Head of Track at Railtrack HQ banning use of new installations of orange pipe for cross-track cable management, IIRC the letter was issued in 1995. It primarily related to "main lines" where track quality was becoming difficult to maintain to the required standards as the tampers were missing out two sleepers at every orange pipe, and sometimes there were several orange pipes in a few 10s of metres.

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

 

Once the S&T started doubling up the track end cables to IBJ's each IBJ had four orange tubes running to it. The big problem was where there was a four track line with an IBJ in all four lines, that resulted in 16 pipes crossing the track nearest the troughing route in a matter of a few yards. This made the track un-tampable just at an IBJ where it needed it most.

 

Another alternative used was the ducted sleeper which had groove in the top surface large enough to hold a couple of reasonably thin cables. The one most often seen was the G44D, I did try to interest head office in making a version with two ducts as the G44Ds were often used in pairs one for each set of track ends. But for some reason I could not get them to take the idea of a G44DD seriously.

[TheSignalEngineer]

This post shows standard location cases and typical arrangements used from the early 1970s to around the time of privatisation.

The standard metric troughing sizes are shown here, basically they were a rounding of the old imperial sizes to convenient millimetre equivalents.

.

https://www.unipartrail.com/WebPDF/StockPDF/Concrete Troughing.pdf