Jump to content

New range of simple to assemble 00/EM gauge pointwork kits


NFWEM57
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 07/10/2021 at 17:00, Wayne Kinney said:

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.

 

 

 

does this affect releace for 14.2mm 3mm version?

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, RBAGE said:

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.

 

It's probably more complicated than just die wear. Like any process I imagine there are all sorts of variables that need to be carefully controlled.

 

If Wayne is supplying the rail either in kits or in bulk form he can maintain control over the quality and ensure that it's compatible with his turnout bases. If the rail comes from another source he no longer has that control. It's only going to take one batch of rail that's out of tolerance or simply the wrong stuff and people are going to start complaining that there's a big problem with the bases. If it were me I wouldn't dare take that chance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be starting to lay track shortly and was hoping the diamond would be ready for the junction. Things being as they are I considered building one with a C&L diamond kit.

£60.95.

I can wait a bit longer.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, AndyID said:

 

It's probably more complicated than just die wear. Like any process I imagine there are all sorts of variables that need to be carefully controlled.

 

If Wayne is supplying the rail either in kits or in bulk form he can maintain control over the quality and ensure that it's compatible with his turnout bases. If the rail comes from another source he no longer has that control. It's only going to take one batch of rail that's out of tolerance or simply the wrong stuff and people are going to start complaining that there's a big problem with the bases. If it were me I wouldn't dare take that chance.

 

Phil at C&L found rail can vary quite a bit when he was designing and making his new revised products, I have also noticed some times that the definition between the head and foot of bullhead rail varies a bit. No doubt Wayne will be checking this

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, hayfield said:

 

Phil at C&L found rail can vary quite a bit when he was designing and making his new revised products, I have also noticed some times that the definition between the head and foot of bullhead rail varies a bit. No doubt Wayne will be checking this

 

It's quite tricky to determine exactly what the profile is. I've found I have file away various bits to get a clear picture. I imagine Wayne could use a set of go/no-go gauges to quickly test for compatibility with his chairs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree with you Wayne. It is very refreshing to see the thought process that you as a small manufacturer has to go through as well. I am looking forward to the new points, crossings and slips etc.

 

Keith

  • Like 1
  • Agree 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wayne Kinney said:

Hi Guys,

 

Sorry for not replying, I've taken the weekend to allow me to absorb all the feedback. Also took my wife and little boy to London on Sunday for some sightseeing and to watch the 'Back to the Future Musical' at the Adelphi Theatre (highly recommend!).

 

Regarding my decision to stop using castings and going with an all rail design. I have tested all the suppliers that cast in Nickel Silver, including:

 

Beechcast

Platorum

Just Like The real Thing

Merrell

Sans Pareil

Slaters Plasticard

 

For the majority of the years, I was using 'Just Like The real Thing' for my castings, they were great quality. But then they closed shop in Feb 2018 so I had to find another supplier.

 

After testing many suppliers I went with Sans Pareil (Iain young) as his castings are amazing quality. But as I've said before he is close to retirement and the K crossings were not working anyway.

 

This left just one supplier from the list above that I had not yet tried. I won't mention which one, but I just received sample casting from them. I sent them 5 of my waxes to cast in N/S so I could test their casting quality.

 

Oh guys, receiving these cast samples only cements my decision to move to ‘all rail’. The quality is terrible, putting it mildly. Completely unusable! I’ve now tested all the available suppliers, and only Sans Pareil is up to the quality needed (at least for the common crossings). When he retires, I would have no other supplier up to the job. ‘All rail’ is the way forward.

 

I’ve also come to a firm decision on the tie bar design/solution. I’ve had much feedback and the consensus seems to be that people don’t like the ‘Normal Solomon’ method that I proposed. They all like the method I was using with the etched plates and pin.

 

So I am going to do what I’ve been doing with the N Gauge range for years. My N Gauge kits currently are supplied with the tie bar, etched plates and wire for the pins as separate items. I then also offer soldering jigs (sold separately) that the builder then uses to solider the etched plates and pins to the switch blade themselves. You only need one jig for multiple turnouts. The switch blades would still be supplied pre machined.

 

This would then produce the same result, only the builder solider it using the jig (sold separately).

 

I hope you can agree that this is the best compromise/solution.

What some contributors forget (not just on this thread but many many others) most of our hobby except for the big boys is a cottage industry by enthusiast's for enthusiast's...and if you don't like what thay do give them constructive feed back....if you still don't like what they produce...make it your self...you will soon see how hard to make 5 of somthing the same let alone 500...you never know you may hit on a idea to become a supplier....

G

  • Agree 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Hi Wayne,

 

I don't fancy assembling your slab & bracket "A" chair, the bolt has a bend in the middle! :)

 

The slab is rectangular, skewed at half the crossing angle (sorry about the scruffy mash-up) :

 

wayne_bolt.png.3188187e5fb1a2051ec6b415679335ab.png

 

 

The same applies to the "B" chair -- it's a one piece chair with a rectangular base, skewed at half the crossing angle.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/10/2021 at 16:53, Wayne Kinney said:

Darn, that's gonna interfere with the M0.15 bolts I'm getting turned :laugh_mini2:

At what distance can you still see or discriminate M0.15 bolt?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NFWEM57 said:

At what distance can you still see or discriminate M0.15 bolt?  

 

A bit further away than the distance you need to see a human hair 

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/10/2021 at 14:50, Wayne Kinney said:

Thanks Guys,

 

This is the part that holds down the 2x V's:

2040639229_crossingVs.JPG.13781b0ed0c0be8a135739106105e011.JPG

515516334_crossingVs_2.JPG.c0ae14b964d0e2d380e9bb06bf968485.JPG

 

 

Wayne - firstly these are excellent kits! I've just received two in the post and I can say that I'm impressed!

 

Considering that there will be an element of redesigning your track bases, I noticed that the current ones are made up of two elements linked together. My engineering brain identified a way that might make creating bases for crossovers and junctions a bit easier:

 

If the last three sleepers are a separate element then these can be swapped out for a five sleeper crossover element, or double junction element and so on. This allows the first two elements to be common to all kits and then only change the later portion - while it increases the number of elements (upto 3 for a standard turnout, 5 for a crossover, etc) it might reduce material usage. It also means that you can provide the crossover portion to suit different track centres (i.e prototypical 6', or Peco equivalent 50.2mm, etc) while reducing the need for 'cut and shut' and providing a more stable base all round. 

 

Its a shame about the castings - these are what make these kits so simple to make and less scary for the faint of heart, but i have no doubt that what ever solution you adopt, they will be a great success - I'm just waiting for an elusive Bullhead Double Slip so i can move forward with a planned layout that has been on the backburner since Peco teased us all with their offering that seems to be forever 'coming soon'. 

 

Keep up the excellent work!  

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Wayne,

 

A possible alternative to the cast frog is to print everything including the rail :scratchhead:

 

DSCN5142.JPG.86ab4efd146b47d24c93c955f4fe2d04.JPG

 

Here's an example. The rail is made conductive by attaching a U-shaped nickel-silver cap to the resin rails. With this version all the rails, including the check rails are capped with NS, but the same method could be applied to the frog only.

 

Of course there are advantages and disadvantages with this approach. Obviously it eliminates the need for a casting while maintaining similar tolerances. The major disadvantage is bonding the caps electrically.

 

Producing the NS cap should not be too difficult. I made myself a tool to make them.

 

I had this printed at Shapeways as an experiment. I have a resin printer now and I plan to do more this way, if I ever get around to it :)

 

BTW, this example is 00-SF.

 

Cheers!

Andy

  • Like 3
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy,

 

There is a problem with your solution; if Wayne does it commercially it will be restricted to the curvature he chooses. Unlike the present system purchasers will not be able to curve it to their own requirements, thus taking away one of the advantage of a kit. 
 

Wayne the turnouts you have produced with the cast frogs are excellent and I believe the rail built ones will be also.

 

Cheers 

 

Godders

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the "K" crossing the only problem and the component that needs to be rail rather than cast?

That being the case, it would seem that the solution is clear. "K" crossings can be troublesome for me when scratchbuilt in rail but I expect the precision and refinement I've seen in Wayne's other kits would easily overcome the problems that I've faced in the past.

I suggest the solution is there.

My problem is timing. I'm now ready to lay track and the double junction is the logical start point. I may have to bite the C and L £60.95 bullet.

 

Andy,

Is it possible to supply diamond base, rail and common crossings so that I can attempt to produce a diamond using the same techniques and concept of your existing kits, please.

 

Thanks,

Bob

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Godders said:

Hi Andy,

 

There is a problem with your solution; if Wayne does it commercially it will be restricted to the curvature he chooses. Unlike the present system purchasers will not be able to curve it to their own requirements, thus taking away one of the advantage of a kit. 
 

Wayne the turnouts you have produced with the cast frogs are excellent and I believe the rail built ones will be also.

 

Cheers 

 

Godders

 

Hi Godders,

 

Yes, if the whole turnout was printed including the rails as I did in this experiment it would not be flexible. I was suggesting Wayne might use something along these lines to electrify an otherwise 3-D printed resin frog. It would be no less flexible than a cast frog :)  The other rails would still be threaded through the chairs.

 

It could also be extended a bit by also printing the check rails with or without the metal cap. That might help to maintain tight tolerances between the check rails and the crossing nose. That's a rather critical dimension.

 

Cheers,

Andy

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, RBAGE said:

Andy,

Is it possible to supply diamond base, rail and common crossings so that I can attempt to produce a diamond using the same techniques and concept of your existing kits, please.

 

Thanks,

Bob

 

Hi Bob,

 

I'm afraid I don't have any kits as such. I'm not selling anything. The postage and delay from the US to the UK would be pretty horrible if I was :). I could possibly knock out a CAD model that you could have printed locally but you'd still need to find a way to get the NS cap made locally.

 

But your mention of K crossings reminded me that this method might be a good way to made diamond crossings. The advantage is that the rail cap is simply attached vertically rather than having to be threaded horizontally. However, I should mention that I've never actually tried to make a diamond crossing this way. The only example I have is the one in the pic above and it's only the crossing part of a turnout.

 

Cheers!

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AndyID said:

 

Hi Bob,

 

I'm afraid I don't have any kits as such. I'm not selling anything. The postage and delay from the US to the UK would be pretty horrible if I was :). I could possibly knock out a CAD model that you could have printed locally but you'd still need to find a way to get the NS cap made locally.

 

But your mention of K crossings reminded me that this method might be a good way to made diamond crossings. The advantage is that the rail cap is simply attached vertically rather than having to be threaded horizontally. However, I should mention that I've never actually tried to make a diamond crossing this way. The only example I have is the one in the pic above and it's only the crossing part of a turnout.

 

Cheers!

Andy

Sorry Andy,

My post should have been addressed to Wayne. Grey moment.

Bob

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah we get to see the man behind the scene. Watch out these videos will be watched and watched and watched…….. Bring them on my play finger is poised ready to look.

 

Keith

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...