Using the easy-assembly Finetrax pointwork kits in 00 and EM (and in P4 from the S4 Society)

[Harlequin]

What does the change mean for the electrical setup? The cast crossing seems to provide a neatly isolatable short section that can be electrically switched and anchored more securely than separately isolated rail sections.

Will the short lengths of rail around the crossing, needed for isolation, be held securely in place? Will there be enough fixings to hold them in alignment either side of isolation joints within the footprint of the turnout/crossing? Another advantage of the castings seems to be that there’s plenty of chairing to hold rails in place and correctly aligned without them touching the casting.

 

Maybe a small local engineering company could cast the parts and do some machining to remove the sprues, and improve the running qualities?

 

Edited October 7, 2021 by Harlequin

[NFWEM57]

2 hours ago, Harlequin said:

What does the change mean for the electrical setup? The cast crossing seems to provide a neatly isolatable short section that can be electrically switched and anchored more securely than separate rail sections.

Will the short lengths of rail around the crossing, needed for isolation, be held securely in place? Will there be enough fixings to hold the rails in alignment either side of isolation joints within the footprint of the turnout/crossing? Another advantage of the castings seems to be that there’s plenty of chairing to hold rails in place and correctly aligned without them touching the casting.

 

Maybe a small local engineering company could cast the parts and do some machining to remove the sprues, and improve the running qualities?

 

Looking at Wayne's picture of the all rail turnout, I think it would be possible to leave isolation gaps either side of the frog (red circles)  and simply link the four frog rails together (yellow rectangle) which could also be the connection point for the frog lead?  So, one bridging solder joint at the frog and the two usual ones on the switch rails further back.  If the two switch rail connections are staggered it would be a simple matter to cut out the connecting material between 2 sleepers to facilitate a solder connection without compromising the base.

 

 

 

Even without ballast, this would be a fairly unobtrusive solution.  And the bridge at the frog would provide additional mechanical rigidity as well as electrical connectivity. 

 

Edited October 7, 2021 by NFWEM57
typo and additional

[Wayne Kinney]

Thanks Patrick,

 

The intended location of the isolation gaps will follow standard track laying practise and where templot also suggest (circled in red). This also serves as the prototypical location of the join between switch and closure rails. I can also include insulating fish plates to use there, as per the prototype.

 

Once the 2 'Vs' are slide into place, run some solder on the top to bond the 2 V's together, making a stronger joint and electrically bonded. File the tops clean once soldered.

 

Then, the 'frog' can be powered using 2 feed wires, soldered to the bottom of the rails where I've shown in green. These 2 feed wires can be bonded together at the other end to provide switching polarity.

 

 

5 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Will the short lengths of rail around the crossing, needed for isolation, be held securely in place? Will there be enough fixings to hold them in alignment either side of isolation joints within the footprint of the turnout/crossing? Another advantage of the castings seems to be that there’s plenty of chairing to hold rails in place and correctly aligned without them touching the casting.

 

The special chairs I have designed clamp and hold the Vs very well. I would say its strong enough even before it's soldered.

Edited October 7, 2021 by Wayne Kinney
image edit (crop)

[jamespetts]

Interesting. May I ask whether the code 40 N gauge products will also change over to "all rail" in due course?

[martin_wynne]

20 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

The special chairs I have designed clamp and hold the Vs very well. I would say its strong enough even before it's soldered.

@Wayne Kinney

 

Hi Wayne,

 

If the base includes the full set of prototype spacing blocks, I think it will be. After adding the soldered links across the bottom, you could set it all solid by applying some penetrating low-viscosity cyano, rather than need to solder the visible top of the vee rails. Then just a rub over the rail tops to restore contact.

 

Much as I'm planning for Plug Track in Templot. Who's copying who here?

 

 

Martin.

Edited October 7, 2021 by martin_wynne
image added

[martin_wynne]

3 hours ago, NFWEM57 said:

I think it would be possible to leave isolation gaps either side of the frog (red circles)  

@NFWEM57

 

Hi,

 

That won't work. You would get short-circuits from the wheel backs (the same problem arises with some models on the Peco 00 bullhead turnouts).

 

The best place for the isolation gap is at the prototype wing-front rail-joint, where the timbers are closely spaced for the purpose:

 

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

[Wayne Kinney]

14 minutes ago, jamespetts said:

Interesting. May I ask whether the code 40 N gauge products will also change over to "all rail" in due course?

That's the plan

 

14 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

Hi Wayne,

 

If the base includes the full set of prototype spacing blocks, I think it will be. After adding the soldered links across the bottom, you could set it all solid by applying some penetrating low-viscosity cyano, rather than need to solder the visible top of the vee rails. Then just a rub over the rail tops to restore contact.

You are right, it's certainly holding well without the solder, but it's also for electrically bonding them.

 

16 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

Much as I'm planning for Plug Track in Templot. Who's copying who here?

Come now, it's not a competition 

[hayfield]

1 minute ago, Wayne Kinney said:

That's the plan

 

You are right, it's certainly holding well without the solder, but it's also for electrically bonding them.

 

Come now, it's not a competition 

 

For some reason many still do not trust that plastic will hold metal rail in gauge. Just go on and prove them wrong.

 

As for soldering many/most will solder dropper wires on the rail, this is harder to do than soldering two pieces together which are a very close fit

[martin_wynne]

2 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

but it's also for electrically bonding them.

 

Hi Wayne,

 

If you moved the bottom link to the next timber space on the end of the wing rails, that would provide all the electrical bonding needed.

 

Come now, it's not a competition

 

Of course it is, even as we speak folks are placing their bets.

 

Actually I'm not planning to supply anything. Plug Track is a concept, not a product -- folks have to make it themselves from the Templot files.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

[St Enodoc]

4 minutes ago, hayfield said:

For some reason many still do not trust that plastic will hold metal rail in gauge. Just go on and prove them wrong.

It works well enough for Peco and others...

[NFWEM57]

16 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

That's the plan

 

You are right, it's certainly holding well without the solder, but it's also for electrically bonding them.

 

Come now, it's not a competition 

We need a guinea pig....

[KeithHC]

50 minutes ago, NFWEM57 said:

We need a guinea pig....

You and me………. He he he again

 

Keith

[Wayne Kinney]

51 minutes ago, NFWEM57 said:

We need a guinea pig....

Gothca! 

[jamespetts]

1 hour ago, Wayne Kinney said:

That's the plan

 

Very interesting - there is much to be said for this approach.

 

May I suggest that it would be helpful to have more detailed instructions about how and where to solder the droppers, especially if you go over to an all rail system? I have had problems on the code 40 N gauge products that I have had working out how best to deal with the very short length of rails immediately beyond the cast crossings; the solution that I adopted, making them longer than the ends of the bases, often a continuation of the rail from the preceding straight section of track, caused problems in that the wheels would cause shorts on these where they converged. Cutting them back so as not to converge so closely then resulted in large gaps.

 

A better solution electrically would be to make the whole of the crossing and the short parts of the rails that emanate from the crossing to the end of the turnout section all connected to the crossing polarity switch, but, in the current design, this requires soldering droppers to two very short pieces of rail, and it is not at all clear how to do this effectively. An all rail solution would of course need droppers soldering to such short sections of track in any event, so having detailed instructions on how to hold these in place while soldering and how to do it without melting the chairs, etc., would be most welcome.

 

Since I am planning on possibly building some more N gauge layouts in the future, these developments are of interest.

[Stephen Freeman]

Interestingly, when I built some of the N gauge ones a year or two ago/, the customers prime reason was that he preferred the common crossing to be rail built, which I did in the conventional manner. Other than that they went together very easily,  the track bases were accurate and I didn't need to use any gauges.

[Wayne Kinney]

Hi Guys,

 

Just a few quick snaps of an 'all rail' 1in7 diamond in EM Gauge. Photo's arn't great as I was loosing light. I'm quite pleased with how it looks, though.

 

EDIT: BTW, my test bogies and 0-6-0 chassis runs really smoothly through it!

Edited October 7, 2021 by Wayne Kinney

[Denbridge]

6 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

Hi Guys,

 

Just a few quick snaps of an 'all rail' 1in7 diamond in EM Gauge. Photo's arn't great as I was loosing light. I'm quite pleased with how it looks, though.

 

EDIT: BTW, my test bogies and 0-6-0 chassis runs really smoothly through it!

I was impressed by the look of these kits from the outset, though switching to an all rail design really is a game changer. I must admit to thinking the cast crossings let the rest of the turnout down aesthetically. This crossing looks superb.

[KeithHC]

37 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

Hi Guys,

 

Just a few quick snaps of an 'all rail' 1in7 diamond in EM Gauge. Photo's arn't great as I was loosing light. I'm quite pleased with how it looks, though.

 

EDIT: BTW, my test bogies and 0-6-0 chassis runs really smoothly through it!

Looks spot on to me Wayne. How close are you to the slips as well. 
 

Keith

[Wayne Kinney]

33 minutes ago, KeithHC said:

Looks spot on to me Wayne. How close are you to the slips as well. 
 

Keith

Thanks Keith,

 

It was going to be the next kit I work on, but I will first be needing to go back and modify the current kits to the new 'all rail' design. This includes the 2mm and 3mm kits.

 

This change to all rail design will of course need a complete rewrite of the instructions. I think this time having them online instead of printed (not restricted to an A4 page), in a step by step form with each step accompanied a really short YouTube video. All presented as bite sizes bits of information.

 

This will of course push things back a little. I'll be using the CAD model for the diamond as the basis for the slips, which saves a lot of work. just modify the areas that need it.

 

I also need to change the N Gauge kits over to this new design, but the slip kits in 4mm will take priority over this.

 

Time really does fly and it'll be Xmas before we know it! Hopefully by that time I'll have all the current 4mm kits converted, the diamond released and the slips at least finished in design with basic prototype build and pictures up, like the diamond in my previous post.

 

 

 

Edited October 7, 2021 by Wayne Kinney

[NFWEM57]

1 hour ago, Wayne Kinney said:

Hi Guys,

 

Just a few quick snaps of an 'all rail' 1in7 diamond in EM Gauge. Photo's arn't great as I was loosing light. I'm quite pleased with how it looks, though.

 

EDIT: BTW, my test bogies and 0-6-0 chassis runs really smoothly through it!

It keep getting better....  well done..!

[SteveCornford]

Hi Wayne,

 

This is some journey that you have started.  It is very interesting to see the progress and devlopment of your products, having purchased 4 turnouts I find that I need another two.

 

Heres my twopenneth.

 

Tiebar

Instead of us having to bend a pin and solder could we not stick with existing design but you just supply the pin, plate and the machined switch blade, and we do the soldering?

I assume it helps to have a jig to get the pin, plate & switch blade aligned before applyig solder?

Cold the jig be a modified version of the existing blade holder that you already supply the blades in?

 

Crossover

Where you are replacing the length of rail with the knuckle bend with two lengths that butt together, are you machining the butt ends so that we get a really good fit or wil we have to prepare them?

If we have to prepare them would it be possible to include a small 3D printed jig to hold them at the correct angle for filing?

 

Turnout

Are the lengths of rail with knuckle bends split into two pieces of rail?

 

Knucle Bend Rails

Having watched the N scale turnout base milling video you posted on the Templot Club showing the production of sockets, so this and a keen interest in following Martin's Templot developments leads me to ask:-

instead of splitting the rail into two pieces have you thought of implementing a "Plug Track" (a la Martin Wynne) approach by providing sockets in the 3D trackbase, then 3D printed chairs that can be slid onto the one piece rail and the resulting assembly plugged into the base?

 

Cast Crossings

The current cast crossing does have the benefit of some bolt head detail on the visible sides of the casting.

 

Could the castings be replaced by 3D printing in metal?

i found this supplier that quotes some tolerances but are these good enough?

I assume some post printing machining would be necessary to the running surfaces.

 

Good luck with your product whatever solution you decide upon, Steve

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SHMD]

Hi Wayne,

 

I already have two (unstarted) LH points but am waiting for a Single Slip to go with them - but this is not why I am writing.

 

On my home based daily commute I travel between Stalybridge and Manchester Piccadilly. Just over 7 miles. I have noticed (and now counted twice) that there are over 20 common crossings (frogs) left abandoned in the 4', 6', and cess along the entire route always very close to where they were extracted from - and in one place piled on top of each other!

This is something I would like to model.

 

So I have a request, when I order the Single Slip could you also bang in four "reject" castings that are otherwise aesthetically OK, in with the order?

 

 

Cheers,

Kev.

 

[92220]

Hi Wayne,

 

These all rail versions look great - and will save me no end of time as well as being excellent.

 

They also got me wondering whether eventually you would sell components like the bases and tie bars separately - like a few probably I would be more than happy to cut and prepare my own rail pieces given what I have built so far, but the real saver and guarantee of smooth running would be the timbering and chairs. 
 

Either way I will be in the market for a few, so thank you.

 

Iain

[AndyID]

3 hours ago, 92220 said:

They also got me wondering whether eventually you would sell components like the bases and tie bars separately - like a few probably I would be more than happy to cut and prepare my own rail pieces
 

 

One potential snag with that is that certain rail profile dimensions have to be within some fairly critical tolerances. Code 75 or whatever is quite insufficient. Dies do wear over time. Wayne could source acceptable rail if he wants to go to the trouble.

[RBAGE]

6 hours ago, AndyID said:

 

One potential snag with that is that certain rail profile dimensions have to be within some fairly critical tolerances. Code 75 or whatever is quite insufficient. Dies do wear over time. Wayne could source acceptable rail if he wants to go to the trouble.

I'm not sure I follow. Presumably you're talking about the rail die. If die wear is such an issue, surely it would affect Wayne as much as any of us and I expect he has as much control over rail dimensions as anyone. Apart from the bloke doing the excrusion of curse.

What I would think is more of an issue is the source of the rail. One extruders code 75 might not be the same as anothers. So, the source is critical.

One way around this would be for Wayne to let customers know the source of his rail or maybe sell rail to those few interested parties.