New range of simple to assemble 00/EM gauge pointwork kits - EM B7 Prototype - First Look

[Harlequin]

8 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

 

I said nothing about daubing!

 

Slide the rail up to the crossing, pull it back a bit, apply a small amount of epoxy to the end of the crossing with a cocktail stick, gently push the rail forward again into it, go and make a coffee while it sets.

 

If even that is beyond someone, how on Earth will they be able to build the rest of the layout?

 

Martin.

 

I was over-dramatising to make my point, of course.

 

Anything that makes the product easier to use, eliminates a required material and speeds up the build must be a good thing, no matter how skilled the builder might be. (So long as it doesn't increase the cost significantly, obviously.)

 

[Wayne Kinney]

Thanks Patrick for building up my EM Gauge 'Work in Progress' kit

 

I'll try and answer a few questions that have been asked:

 

14 hours ago, hayfield said:

Observation rather than a criticism. In the Y timber position on the common crossing I believe that there should be a crossing chair rather than two chopped down L1 chairs, strangely Peco have added an extra block chair is what would be an Z position (if this existed).

 

 

I think you are right, I was following the Exactoscale chair layout:

 

14 hours ago, gordon s said:

I assume both blades are isolated from each other and the frog switched to match polarity of the route. Is there any danger at all of a short from the back of any wheels at the close gap before the crossing? I tend to extend the crossing out to the ends of the check rail and make the cut further out to completely eliminate any risk of short at all.

There will be no shorting out on a wheel back at that locating unless a wheel set back to back is very out of spec - at which point it would not run through the crossing V and check rails. I've done this design for years in N gauge which has fatter flanges and looser dimensional tolerances.

 

14 hours ago, martin_wynne said:

Also I suggest a moulded upstand from the base web at F to preserve the isolation gap. It doesn't need to be the full rail height. Easily cut off by those who prefer to use epoxy filler.

This is a little difficult to position accurately due variations caused by the small amounts of shrinkage in the cast crossing.

 

I recommend simply leaving an air gap. I've adopted this approach for years on my N Gauge kits. Cosmetic fishplates can then be glued on further down the switch rail at the correct position.

[martin_wynne]

20 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

I think you are right, I was following the Exactoscale chair layout:

 

Hi Wayne,

 

Exactoscale seems to be wrong for the 1:7.

 

A Y-chair is used on REA crossings 1:6.5 and above. See Table 13 in BRT3 and page 30 in the NERA reprint.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

[KeithHC]

No matter what Wayne it still looks a cracking point. Any hints on dates yet.

 

Keith

[martin_wynne]

27 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

I recommend simply leaving an air gap.

 

Hi Wayne,

 

It's difficult to disguise an actual gap. A physical barrier can be safely made much thinner, and more easily lost under the track paint.

 

But it is a kit. Modellers can improvise whatever they prefer.

 

Martin.   

[hayfield]

47 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

Thanks Patrick for building up my EM Gauge 'Work in Progress' kit

 

I'll try and answer a few questions that have been asked:

 

 

I think you are right, I was following the Exactoscale chair layout:

 

There will be no shorting out on a wheel back at that locating unless a wheel set back to back is very out of spec - at which point it would not run through the crossing V and check rails. I've done this design for years in N gauge which has fatter flanges and looser dimensional tolerances.

 

This is a little difficult to position accurately due variations caused by the small amounts of shrinkage in the cast crossing.

 

I recommend simply leaving an air gap. I've adopted this approach for years on my N Gauge kits. Cosmetic fishplates can then be glued on further down the switch rail at the correct position.

 

Wayne

 

This drawing does not match either the B7 Exactoscale plan in their kits or the Exactoscale common crossing sprue, As far as the Exactoscale products are concerned this diagram is wrong (there is also a couple of other errors in this diagram.

 

 

This is a close up of the Exactoscale plan included in the kit, as you can see there are block chairs in the X & Y timber positions

 

 

In the left hand sprue is the centre part of a block chair numbered 7Y . The right hand photo shows the outer parts of the block chair marked 7Y. As you can see nothing like 2 L1 chairs. Now it might well be that some companies used L1 chairs, but if you are using the Exactoscale products and drawings the plan is clearly wrong, I have checked my GWR track book and it seems the GWR also used a block chair in 1-7 crossings. As you can see 2 L1 chairs do not fit 

 

Wayne this is not a criticism, but an observation. 

Edited January 17, 2021 by hayfield

[Wayne Kinney]

Strange, the chair layout PDF on their website only uses the Y chair on 1in8 and above...

https://exactoscale.com/wp-content/uploads/web-Common-Crossings.pdf

Edited January 17, 2021 by Wayne Kinney

[hayfield]

4 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

Strange, the chair layout PDF on their website only uses the Y chair on 1in8 and above...

https://exactoscale.com/wp-content/uploads/web-Common-Crossings.pdf

 

I assume the plans were drawn by someone else other than the designer and a typo crept in. From memory when this range was introduced the designer was unwell, I remember it was touch and go as to whether the Exactoscale stand would come to the Watford Finescale show the year the track range was introduced 

[martin_wynne]

13 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

Strange, the chair layout PDF on their website only uses the Y chair on 1in8 and above...

https://exactoscale.com/wp-content/uploads/web-Common-Crossings.pdf

 

Hi Wayne,

 

Here is the REA list:

 

Martin.

[Wayne Kinney]

Thanks Martin, very useful reference.

[Wayne Kinney]

The exactoscale plan also shows 2x L1 Bridge chairs where your table shows a 'D' chair...

[hayfield]

1 minute ago, Wayne Kinney said:

The exactoscale plan also shows 2x L1 Bridge chairs where your table shows a 'D' chair...

 

That was one of the other errors I was referring to, there is also an error on a sprue numbering. Len is human !!!

[martin_wynne]

13 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

The exactoscale plan also shows 2x L1 Bridge chairs where your table shows a 'D' chair...

 

Hi Wayne,

 

It's not my table.

 

It's the Permanent Way Institution's. Here is the LNER drawing of REA 1:7 and 1:7.5 crossings.

 

(The exit timbering and vee rail lengths are specific to the LNER.)

 

p.s. these reprints are available from NERA. Very useful.

 

 

Martin.

[Wayne Kinney]

20 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

It's not my table.

I just meant the table that you posted, Mister Pedantic...LOL haha

 

Thanks for the info and drawings, all very useful indeed!

 

Edited January 17, 2021 by Wayne Kinney

[martin_wynne]

Hi Wayne,

 

Here's a better-quality drawing of 1:8, with more conventional exit timbering and vee rail lengths. Sorry I can't find a 1:7 like this.

 

The heavy line along the rail shows the rail-foot where the rail is canted. Note that the check rail is vertical, and the twist in the rail between the B and C chairs (very difficult to model and keep the rail-head in a straight line). My vote is for all rails to be vertical below about Gauge 1. No-one can see the difference.

 

 

Martin.

[Wayne Kinney]

17 hours ago, martin_wynne said:

 

 

Also I suggest a moulded upstand from the base web at F to preserve the isolation gap. It doesn't need to be the full rail height. Easily cut off by those who prefer to use epoxy filler.

 

cheers,

 

Martin. 

I'll run a test now of an upstand and send it to the printer, photo's to follow (the power of ultra fast prototype revisions, thanks to 3D printing).

I'm concerned it will be visible under the rail.

[Wayne Kinney]

I dunno about this....LOL

[martin_wynne]

17 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

I dunno about this....LOL

 

HI Wayne,

 

Does it need a block to support it? Does the block need to be the full width of the web and so chunky? That's going to be difficult to hide in the ballast. A more spindly upstand would be easier to hide and might flex a bit to allow for variable casting shrinkage.

 

Martin.

[Wayne Kinney]

16 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

That's going to be difficult to hide in the ballast.

This is what I meant when I said I'm concerned it will be visible under the rail.

 

Any smaller and its going to be too fragile. I've just printed this one and its already too thin.

 

I am going to keep it as it was as its been like this for years on my N Gauge kits with zero issues.

Edited January 17, 2021 by Wayne Kinney

[martin_wynne]

10 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

This is what I meant when I said I'm concerned it will be visible under the rail.

 

Any smaller and its going to be too fragile. I've just printed this one and its already too thin.

 

I am going to keep it as it was as its been like this for years on my N Gauge kits with zero issues.

 

Hi Wayne,

 

Ok, you know what you are doing!

 

Here was my quick sketch:

 

 

How about supplying a bit of 0.25mm x 0.75mm plastic strip in the kit? User snips a bit off and plugs it into a slot in the base?

 

From among others:  https://evergreenscalemodels.com/collections/14-white-polystrene-strips/products/101-010-x-030-opaque-white-polystyrene-strip 

 

Martin.

[Wayne Kinney]

Thanks Martin,

 

Yes, it's way too thin. It does print but too fragile.

 

I believe the plastic strip would be a better route.

[dhjgreen]

2 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

 

Hi Wayne,

 

Ok, you know what you are doing!

 

Here was my quick sketch:

 

 

How about supplying a bit of 0.25mm x 0.75mm plastic strip in the kit? User snips a bit off and plugs it into a slot in the base?

 

From among others:  https://evergreenscalemodels.com/collections/14-white-polystrene-strips/products/101-010-x-030-opaque-white-polystyrene-strip 

 

Martin.

Is it just me?  I have never filled gaps in pointwork or track in EM,  makes a lovely clickety clack as the trains pass.  Layout built in the mid year months, lives in a garage and been there for over 10 years with no issues.

[martin_wynne]

1 minute ago, dhjgreen said:

Is it just me?  I have never filled gaps in pointwork or track in EM,  makes a lovely clickety clack as the trains pass.  Layout built in the mid year months, lives in a garage and been there for over 10 years with no issues.

 

Hi David,

 

What size gaps? Bear in mind that there is no gap in the rail on the prototype at this location. So it needs to be as narrow as possible not to notice. Without any fill, that requires a very neat square end on the rail, and no risk of metal particles ever getting trapped in the gap. The usual solution is to put a vertical angle on the rail end, so that the gap widens below the rail top and any trapped debris falls through. No problem for experienced track builders, but these kits are intended to be easy-assemble for beginners.

 

Martin.

[NFWEM57]

On 17/01/2021 at 15:50, martin_wynne said:

 

Hi Wayne,

 

Ok, you know what you are doing!

 

Here was my quick sketch:

 

 

How about supplying a bit of 0.25mm x 0.75mm plastic strip in the kit? User snips a bit off and plugs it into a slot in the base?

 

From among others:  https://evergreenscalemodels.com/collections/14-white-polystrene-strips/products/101-010-x-030-opaque-white-polystyrene-strip 

 

Martin.

Hi,

 

Which is what I did using plastic sheet 0.25mm thick until the rails were fixed in position.  But no vertical angle, good point. Next time...!  Every day is a training day..

Patrick

 

Edited April 2, 2022 by NFWEM57
Add additional info.

[martin_wynne]

54 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

I am going to keep it as it was as its been like this for years on my N Gauge kits with zero issues.

 

Hi Wayne,

 

Hmm. I wonder if you are looking at a different market with these new kits? Anyone who builds their own track in N Gauge, even from kits, is likely to be a reasonably experienced modeller. The 00 kits are going to appeal to many beginners at track building. You are calling them "easy-assemble" kits, which hardly squares with the need to leave a 10 thou gap between the rails -- which is essential for them to work.

 

When you get the phone calls from disappointed users complaining of short-circuits, it will be easier to say "Did you use the plastic strip as explained in the instructions?" than "How wide a gap did you leave? It needs to be at least 10 thou. Did you test it with a multi-meter?"

 

cheers,

 

Martin.