Flat Figure 8 Using 1st Radius Set-Track?

[JC]

I am having to move my steelworks layout into a tiny room and thus am starting again - pretty well room size is 170x170 with a bit extra down one side. I'm pondering several options to make use of the space, one of which involves a stand-alone figure of 8 located inside the outer end to end loop (see photo for clarification) so I can run a roundy roundy inside of a shunting end to end. Most of the figure 8 would be hidden inside a huge steelworks building with the shunter and its wagons appearing and reappearing as it moves round the figure 8.

 

Obviously I could create something with flexitrack and a crossing, but given the tightness of the curves I wonder if I could avoid "dog-leg" kinks in the flexitrack joins by just using set-track. There's no points on it so I don't see a real need for flexitrack. 

 

However, having played around on a computer modeller it doesn't appear that 1st radius set-track with a crossing fits together to make a figure-8, which surprised me as I'd have thought it would be easily feasible using set-track as loads of train sets for kids must have done 1st radius figure-8s, but I can't make it work.

 

Is there 1st radius set-track solution? Apologies if I'm missing the obvious but I'm relatively new to the hobby.

 

 

[RobinofLoxley]

You have a situation where you have 15 16teenths of a circle created by setrack and the residual angle doesnt on paper appear to bridge the gaps. If its because the angle is wrong or the gap is too small, remember you have other options including shortening of curved sections by sawing, inserting small straight sections, eg R610 or equivalent. Also, having so many track joins on a circle may allow a small amount of slack to develop around the circle during assembly. First radius is a strange beast as almost nothing runs on it and it doesnt really integrate terribly well into track plans involving R2 and R3 as an interior loop. Hence nothing like a crossover is purpose designed to fit it, the gaps are for R2 curves if they are for anything.

[Chimer]

It certainly looks to me as though the misalignments would be fudgable using a bit of slack at the joins.  Gets even closer using R2, but still not perfect.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

I think Standard Setrack geometry has the points and crossings designed for R2 (not R1).  If you are using Hornby then they have a “left hand” and a “right hand” crossing to make it easier to create junctions - this would mean a figure of 8 would have the two sides slightly out of alignment with each other.  
 

Theoretically, to get a figure of eight to fit, I think it means you need a single R2 curve on the other side of each R1 loop to compensate for the R2 crossing in the middle.  It should work with Hornby track.

 

The Peco Crossing is, if I remember correctly, universal, but it may not quite work as I think each ‘side’ of the crossing is the same length as a standard straight.

 

Whether your computer program makes it fit might be another thing, I guess it depends on how it models track joints.  Afraid I no longer have any R1 track to test this out in practice for you, sorry.

Edited February 16, 2021 by Keith Addenbrooke
Additional information re: Peco crossing.

[Andrew1974]

If you change the R604’s opposite the diamond to R606’s then you should be able to get it to work.

 

Either Hornby crossing should work in the middle, never used the slightly different peco one so not sure if that would work or not

[KeithMacdonald]

Does this help?

 

R604, 00 Hornby Standard Track, Curve radius 37.1cm, angle 22.5º    Qty 2
R605, 00 Hornby Standard Track, Curve radius 37.1cm, angle 45º    Qty 14
R610, 00 Hornby Standard Track, Straight 3.8cm.    Qty 2
SL-93, H0 Peco Streamline Code 100, Crossing 12.7cm.    Qty 1

 

Using the Peco SL-93 because it's more symmetrical than Hornby crossings.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 16, 2021 by KeithMacdonald
Typo fix

[JC]

12 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

I think Standard Setrack geometry has the points and crossings designed for R2 (not R1).  If you are using Hornby then they have a “left hand” and a “right hand” crossing to make it easier to create junctions - this would mean a figure of 8 would have the two sides slightly out of alignment with each other.  
 

Theoretically, to get a figure of eight to fit, I think it means you need a single R2 curve on the other side of each R1 loop to compensate for the R2 crossing in the middle.  It should work with Hornby track.

 

The Peco Crossing is, if I remember correctly, universal, but it may not quite work as I think each ‘side’ of the crossing is the same length as a standard straight.

 

Whether your computer program makes it fit might be another thing, I guess it depends on how it models track joints.  Afraid I no longer have any R1 track to test this out in practice for you, sorry.

12 hours ago, Andrew1974 said:

If you change the R604’s opposite the diamond to R606’s then you should be able to get it to work.

 

Either Hornby crossing should work in the middle, never used the slightly different peco one so not sure if that would work or not

Ok that's interesting thanks chaps....

[JC]

12 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said:

Does this help?

 

R604, 00 Hornby Standard Track, Curve radius 37.1cm, angle 22.5º    Qty 2
R605, 00 Hornby Standard Track, Curve radius 37.1cm, angle 45º    Qty 14
R610, 00 Hornby Standard Track, Straight 3.8cm.    Qty 2
SL-93, H0 Peco Streamline Code 100, Crossing 12.7cm.    Qty 1

 

Using the Peco SL-93 because it's more symmetrical than Hornby crossings.

 

 

 

 

 

Thank you Keith, though I can't see the R610 in the diagram?

[Keith Addenbrooke]

If you use the Peco crossing, one way to make the track meet up is to have a single piece of flex track on the other side of the loop curved to fit - I think the radius would be a tiny bit wider than R1, and if it was just a 22.5 Deg. curve fitting between two pieces of Setrack it should be a bit easier to avoid kinks in the track.  You could create a template by marking out the ends of the Peco crossing and working from there.  Just a thought, Keith.

[DCB]

I would take a saw to the set track and treat it a bit like flexi, you can cut between sleepers and ease the curves out a bit, rather than splicing in bits of flexi.

 

[KeithMacdonald]

On 19/02/2021 at 20:21, DavidCBroad said:

I would take a saw to the set track and treat it a bit like flexi, you can cut between sleepers and ease the curves out a bit, rather than splicing in bits of flexi.

 

Good idea, that will get rid of the little bits of  R610 Straight 3.8cm (that didn't fit perfectly anyway)