Jump to content

gordon s

Eastwood Town ...Going down.....

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, gordon s said:

Thanks for that Martin. Been giving some thought as to how I can cut side rails on an angle

 

Hi Gordon,

 

You don't need to! Use a parallel strip and raise one end.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 .....but the side rails are laid flat on the saw bed. My thoughts were to cut a dummy side fence with spacers to bring out one end. That can be considerably longer than the fitted fence to allow a 1200mm length to be supported over it’s whole length. The dummy fence could be screwed or clamped to the one fitted on the saw. It the same thing , but you’re giving me the impression that you cut the side rails vertically rather than flat.

 

The other alternative would be to mark them out and then cut manually on my rail saw.

 

Congratulations on post 4,000 on ET....:)

 

Who’d have thought it after all these years.

 

Edit: It’sOK, the penny has dropped. I hadn’t realised you were using parallel side rails. Doh!

 

 

Edited by gordon s
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Gordon,

 

These tracks appear to be at constant spacing:

 

gordon_multiple_tracks.png.b82ee60cb7ad28be09aeb9c97c87cd9e.png

 

That won't look prototypical. To comply with the regulations, multiple track like this should alternate 6ft way and 10ft way.

 

If the outer lines are Goods Loops, they should be spaced at 10ft way from the main running lines (spaced at 6ft way). So the spacings would be 10ft way + 6ft way + 10ft way. In 4mm scale that's 60.67mm + 44.67mm + 60.67mm centres.

 

If the outer lines are Up and Down Slow Lines, they could be at the same spacing as Goods Loops above, or they could be 6ft way +10ft way + 6ft way. It varies with different prototypes and locations.

 

Where space constraints make it unavoidable, such as on viaducts or between platforms, the 10ft is allowed to be 9ft absolute minimum (56.67mm centres).

 

I realise that because of the curves at each end you are probably using wider spacing than the minimum 6ft way (44.67mm centres) anyway, but it still needs to be wider on multiple tracks to look right. It also helps a lot with positioning signal posts, bridge piers, etc., between the tracks.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

Edited by martin_wynne
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, gordon s said:

 Edit: It’sOK, the penny has dropped. I hadn’t realised you were using parallel side rails. Doh!

 

Hi Gordon,

 

In that 1985 pic they were in fact tapered side rails. But that was only because we were starting from a flat-top baseboard (I can't remember why we did that). You are using an open-frame baseboard, so you can easily use parallel side rails and raise the support under one end by whatever the gradient requires.

 

The tapered side rails were cut for us by a local firm of Ecclesiastical Woodworkers (church-fitters). They made a superb job of matching our specified angles, but of course they did have a higher power working for them. :) We even specified different angles for the inside and outside of the curves. Using parallel side rails you don't have that issue of course, the inner is just a bit shorter than the outer.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I'll try to do a sketch tomorrow Gordon - it's a bit late at night now!

Hope this makes things a little clearer.

 

813915913_riserfixitblock.jpg.c2176e580787aea41e5f8f37af2e4c37.jpg

  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, martin_wynne said:

Hi Gordon,

 

These tracks appear to be at constant spacing:

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_2019_11/gordon_multiple_tracks.png.b82ee60cb7ad28be09aeb9c97c87cd9e.png

 

That won't look prototypical. To comply with the regulations, multiple track like this should alternate 6ft way and 10ft way.

 

If the outer lines are Goods Loops, they should be spaced at 10ft way from the main running lines (spaced at 6ft way). So the spacings would be 10ft way + 6ft way + 10ft way. In 4mm scale that's 60.67mm + 44.67mm + 60.67mm centres.

 

If the outer lines are Up and Down Slow Lines, they could be at the same spacing as Goods Loops above, or they could be 6ft way +10ft way + 6ft way. It varies with different prototypes and locations.

 

Where space constraints make it unavoidable, such as on viaducts or between platforms, the 10ft is allowed to be 9ft absolute minimum (56.67mm centres).

 

I realise that because of the curves at each end you are probably using wider spacing than the minimum 6ft way (44.67mm centres) anyway, but it still needs to be wider on multiple tracks to look right. It also helps a lot with positioning signal posts, bridge piers, etc., between the tracks.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

 

Thanks Martin. Hopefully you have a copy of 'Bridges for Modellers' as there are some pics there which perhaps have muddied the waters (for me, anyway).....:D

 

Figure 112 on page 85 shows four parallel lines, all equidistant, but of course it's hard to tell if they are 6' or 10' apart. Likewise with Fig 160 on page 115.

 

The other pic I saw was Fig 69 on page 57 which is of interest. It may well be I'll have a plate girder bridge over the shed entrance and here there is a central girder, possibly within the 6'. Again hard to tell. Would the four tracks then realign into pairs or remain in the 10', 6', 10' as per your first comment?

 

What happened in station approach areas? Was it acceptable to have four or more tracks on 6' spacing as traffic speed would be slower? Did they widen out away from stations?

 

I really appreciate you sharing your knowledge on this subject or it's likely I could have some real howlers. Ultimately prototypical practice may not be possible within the space I have or without ripping up a lot of the work I have completed. If that were the case, I'd live with it as most people wouldn't know it wasn't accurate.......;)

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.