Use of roller gauge

[trisonic]

Still following how you're getting on Jonte!

Turnout building is one of those area's where you can get it perfect first time; then the second time you tear your hair out trying to figure it out. It's all logical though.

 

Best, Pete.

[martin_wynne]

I've been reading through these topics and understand the frustrations.

 

There is one clear reason why you are having trouble -- the C&L gauges are for the DOGA Fine standard and are NOT suitable for unmodified RTR models. If beginners build turnouts using them, it's not surprising they have trouble with wheels binding on wing and check rails.

 

It's a great pity that C&L don't make this properly clear on their web site. I can't begin to imagine how much frustration and tears this has caused over the years.

 

For 00 turnouts which will run current RTR models there are two choices, the 00-BF standard, which is essentially the same as NMRA H0. Roller gauges for 00-BF are available from Markits. Or 00-SF which requires a bit more care, but gives better running and appearance. Gauge tools for 00-SF are available from Brian Tulley (polybear on RMweb).

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[Guest jonte]

I'd put your calipers in both of the flangeways of that supplied crossing and send the picture to C+L asking for a new one if they are as out as they look.

 

The C+L kits aren't as good as the newer Exactoscale ones for the same price but then the Exactoscale ones are P4 only..

 

You're right of course, Craig.

 

Best wishes,

Jonte.

[Guest jonte]

I've been reading through these topics and understand the frustrations.

 

There is one clear reason why you are having trouble -- the C&L gauges are for the DOGA Fine standard and are NOT suitable for unmodified RTR models. If beginners build turnouts using them, it's not surprising they have trouble with wheels binding on wing and check rails.

 

It's a great pity that C&L don't make this properly clear on their web site. I can't begin to imagine how much frustration and tears this has caused over the years.

 

For 00 turnouts which will run current RTR models there are two choices, the 00-BF standard, which is essentially the same as NMRA H0. Roller gauges for 00-BF are available from Markits. Or 00-SF which requires a bit more care, but gives better running and appearance. Gauge tools for 00-SF are available from Brian Tulley (polybear on RMweb).

 

regards,

 

Martin.

 

In hindsight, perhaps I should have asked first.

 

Thank you for your concern and valuable advice, Martin.

 

Best wishes,

 

Jonte.

[Donw]

If you adopt the DOGA fine standard you may as well go for EM because you have to check and replace some wheelsets. In the eighties many modellers adopted EM more for consistent wheel sets and a matching track standard than the extra 1.5mm. These days the commercial wheel standards are better but not it would seem suitable to DOGA. I have never tried 00-sf but have heard good reports. If you are building your own track and running commercial stock it makes sense to adopt a track standard designed to accept the stock you will be using. There is a similar factor in 0 gauge where some people have found improved appearance and running using 31.5mm gauge instead of 32. One point you only need to use the standards through pointwork. On plain track normal 0 gauge or in your case 00 gauge track works fine. Of course if you want to build all the plain track you 00-sf gauges will work fine.

 

Regarding your earlier question about the posistion of the knuckles. The important factor is the alignment so that the wheel set runs cleanly onto the crossing nose or visa versa. If the wingrails are bent to a slightly wrong angle holding the wingrail tight to gauge can distort the angle of approach to the crossing nose. If you make your own you take care to get these right. It is important that they match the crossing V.

Don

[martin_wynne]

Here's a diagram which may help when setting the wing rail knuckles:

 

 

The blue infill shows the theoretical ideal with a sharp bend at K exactly matching the angle of the vee and in line with it. In practice on the prototype it is not possible to make such a sharp bend because of the 1:20 inclination of the rails.

 

Instead, a short curve is used, as shown by the green line, making the knuckle gap wider than the flangeway gap. It works fine, and can help if replicated on the model. Some companies made this curve quite gentle and obvious as shown -- the NER for example. On the GWR the curve matches the crossing angle in feet, so for example a 1:7 crossing has the knuckle bend curved at 7ft radius.

 

But it's important to get the flangeway gap correct alongside the nose of the vee at X in the diagram, otherwise there is a risk of wheels dropping into the gap in front of it.

 

What you must not do is make the knuckle bend too sharp, as shown by the red line. This is guaranteed to cause problems.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[Guest jonte]

If you adopt the DOGA fine standard you may as well go for EM because you have to check and replace some wheelsets. In the eighties many modellers adopted EM more for consistent wheel sets and a matching track standard than the extra 1.5mm. These days the commercial wheel standards are better but not it would seem suitable to DOGA. I have never tried 00-sf but have heard good reports. If you are building your own track and running commercial stock it makes sense to adopt a track standard designed to accept the stock you will be using. There is a similar factor in 0 gauge where some people have found improved appearance and running using 31.5mm gauge instead of 32. One point you only need to use the standards through pointwork. On plain track normal 0 gauge or in your case 00 gauge track works fine. Of course if you want to build all the plain track you 00-sf gauges will work fine.

 

Regarding your earlier question about the posistion of the knuckles. The important factor is the alignment so that the wheel set runs cleanly onto the crossing nose or visa versa. If the wingrails are bent to a slightly wrong angle holding the wingrail tight to gauge can distort the angle of approach to the crossing nose. If you make your own you take care to get these right. It is important that they match the crossing V.

Don

 

Noted, Don. Thank you.

 

Jonte

[Guest jonte]

Here's a diagram which may help when setting the wing rail knuckles:

 

 

The blue infill shows the theoretical ideal with a sharp bend at K exactly matching the angle of the vee and in line with it. In practice on the prototype it is not possible to make such a sharp bend because of the 1:20 inclination of the rails.

 

Instead, a short curve is used, as shown by the green line, making the knuckle gap wider than the flangeway gap. It works fine, and can help if replicated on the model. Some companies made this curve quite gentle and obvious as shown -- the NER for example. On the GWR the curve matches the crossing angle in feet, so for example a 1:7 crossing has the knuckle bend curved at 7ft radius.

 

But it's important to get the flangeway gap correct alongside the nose of the vee at X in the diagram, otherwise there is a risk of wheels dropping into the gap in front of it.

 

What you must not do is make the knuckle bend too sharp, as shown by the red line. This is guaranteed to cause problems.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

 

 

Crystal clear, Martin. Thank you for your trouble.

 

Best wishes,

 

Jonte

[Geoff Cook]

In hindsight, perhaps I should have asked first.

 

Thank you for your concern and valuable advice, Martin.

 

Best wishes,

 

Jonte.

 

It wouldnt have made any difference if you had ask C&L first, according to the instructions supplied with their turnout kits, it says that should you have any problems they can be cured by adjusting the check rail to fit the rolling stock,which makes the use of gauges in the first place a joke.

 

I know a fellow modeller who got into the same mess when using C&L point kits and thought it was his fault when his stock kept riding the wing rails, he has now been converted to 00-SF

[blueeighties]

Interesting comments. I don't want to start appearing overtly political, but a few beginners, myself included, have commented about the rather laxadasical attitude taken when you ring up the supplier for advice and guidance, especially if you make the mistake of mentioning you work to OO gauge standards.

I think people with more experience, find it very easy to forget how difficult some things can be to learn for The 1st time.

Thankfully, everyone that has offered help and advice on this forum, has been encouraging and positive. It's kept me going. Being made to feel that 'you really shouldnt need to ask those silly questions' does absolutely nothing for ones confidence.

Regards,

Lee.

[Guest jonte]

Interesting comments. I don't want to start appearing overtly political, but a few beginners, myself included, have commented about the rather laxadasical attitude taken when you ring up the supplier for advice and guidance, especially if you make the mistake of mentioning you work to OO gauge standards.

I think people with more experience, find it very easy to forget how difficult some things can be to learn for The 1st time.

Thankfully, everyone that has offered help and advice on this forum, has been encouraging and positive. It's kept me going. Being made to feel that 'you really shouldnt need to ask those silly questions' does absolutely nothing for ones confidence.

Regards,

Lee.

 

Hear, hear, Lee.

 

Well put.

 

Jonte

[Donw]

Interesting comments. I don't want to start appearing overtly political, but a few beginners, myself included, have commented about the rather laxadasical attitude taken when you ring up the supplier for advice and guidance, especially if you make the mistake of mentioning you work to OO gauge standards.

I think people with more experience, find it very easy to forget how difficult some things can be to learn for The 1st time.

Thankfully, everyone that has offered help and advice on this forum, has been encouraging and positive. It's kept me going. Being made to feel that 'you really shouldnt need to ask those silly questions' does absolutely nothing for ones confidence.

Regards,

Lee.

 

There are no silly questions. Asking the same thing twice means you didn't understand the first answer and are seeking clarification. Sometimes people ask the wrong question when its based on the wrong assumptions but that isn't silly either just harder to answer.

Don

[hayfield]

Owing to being on holiday for the past 2 weeks I an late (as usual) to this thread.

 

I think it is a good move in building a copperclad turnout as its easier to adjust them. In hind sight it would have been better to build in this mode before starting a C&L plastic kit, but then with the common crossing being pre-made you should have encountered no problems.

 

The biggest problem with 00 is the wide variation of standards under the 00 universal standards, 00-SF, EM and P4 are a bit easier to work with as each group works to their own standards.

 

I have often wondered about standard 00 roller gauges, firstly having no flat on one side to put against the V and having the check/wing rail gauges as an integral part, still easy enough to get a file out to remedy the first item.

 

I have built turnouts in 00-SF and they do work better than 00 universal, however there is nothing stopping you using a 00-SF check rail gauge on an 00 universal turnout, normally not needed as the universal standards normally cater for this.

 

A flangeway gauge does make the job of setting the flanges and knuckle a lot easier and I would not build a turnout without one. I have just got a couple of pieces of 1.25mm ali strip (1 for me and 1 for the club for their 7mm layout)as my old ones have worn down a bit or they were just wrong when I got them with some older SMP kits years ago.

 

Hope you do better with the copperclad turnout, cannot think that the standards have dropped with the new owners of C&L as they only have just taken over from Brian, and I guess they are using his old stock. More likely to be a one off faulty item, happens to the best of companies.

[Guest jonte]

Owing to being on holiday for the past 2 weeks I an late (as usual) to this thread.

 

I think it is a good move in building a copperclad turnout as its easier to adjust them. In hind sight it would have been better to build in this mode before starting a C&L plastic kit, but then with the common crossing being pre-made you should have encountered no problems.

 

The biggest problem with 00 is the wide variation of standards under the 00 universal standards, 00-SF, EM and P4 are a bit easier to work with as each group works to their own standards.

 

I have often wondered about standard 00 roller gauges, firstly having no flat on one side to put against the V and having the check/wing rail gauges as an integral part, still easy enough to get a file out to remedy the first item.

 

I have built turnouts in 00-SF and they do work better than 00 universal, however there is nothing stopping you using a 00-SF check rail gauge on an 00 universal turnout, normally not needed as the universal standards normally cater for this.

 

A flangeway gauge does make the job of setting the flanges and knuckle a lot easier and I would not build a turnout without one. I have just got a couple of pieces of 1.25mm ali strip (1 for me and 1 for the club for their 7mm layout)as my old ones have worn down a bit or they were just wrong when I got them with some older SMP kits years ago.

 

Hope you do better with the copperclad turnout, cannot think that the standards have dropped with the new owners of C&L as they only have just taken over from Brian, and I guess they are using his old stock. More likely to be a one off faulty item, happens to the best of companies.

 

Thanks, John and..........better late than never!!

 

Best wishes,

 

Jonte

[Guest jonte]

Dear All

 

Made a brief start last night and have successfully fabricated a 1 : 6 vee which I've temporarily mounted on PCB strips. Am going to use a copy of the C&L template that came with the kit as a guide, although I'm aware that the rails will be slightly closer together on the OO-SF point.

Template mounted on length of glass using double sided tape and PCB sleepers of an appropriate size, which have been electrically gapped and stuck onto the template. I've only a limited supply of PCB strip so am using them sparingly by locating them at salient positions only, like some of the American ytpe kits; the remainder will be formed of bits of thin ply secured to the rails with epoxy. Have been at a flower show all day to day (Saturday) so will continue proceedings tomorrow. Hopefully by this time tomorow, I'll have something to show you.

 

Best wishes,

Jonte

 

PS.....Before construction could begin, I first had to remove the C&L point subject of this topic, from the surface of the glass plate. As it's also secured to the surface of the glass by double sided tape, I turned to Mrs. Jonte's trusty hairdrier for leverage. Unfortunately, I forgot that most of it is of plastic construction. After a number of chairs decided to part company with their repective sleepers at the toe end, the end sleeper also succumbed and is now at an attitude of a permanent ninety degrees. Somehow, I don't think it was ever destined for a role in Harpford. Oh well.........

[trisonic]

Jonte, Life is one long learning process!

Consider yourself lucky it a was a turnout and not a Marriage!!!

 

Well, it's one way of looking at it...........

 

Best, Pete.

[Guest jonte]

Jonte, Life is one long learning process!

Consider yourself lucky it a was a turnout and not a Marriage!!!

 

Well, it's one way of looking at it...........

 

Best, Pete.

 

If she ever finds out I'm guilty of misusing an essential beauty enhacing tool, our marriage may also follow suit!

 

Best wishes, Pete.

 

Jonte

[hayfield]

Dear All

 

Made a brief start last night and have successfully fabricated a 1 : 6 vee which I've temporarily mounted on PCB strips. Am going to use a copy of the C&L template that came with the kit as a guide, although I'm aware that the rails will be slightly closer together on the OO-SF point.

Template mounted on length of glass using double sided tape and PCB sleepers of an appropriate size, which have been electrically gapped and stuck onto the template. I've only a limited supply of PCB strip so am using them sparingly by locating them at salient positions only, like some of the American ytpe kits; the remainder will be formed of bits of thin ply secured to the rails with epoxy. Have been at a flower show all day to day (Saturday) so will continue proceedings tomorrow. Hopefully by this time tomorow, I'll have something to show you.

 

Best wishes,

Jonte

 

PS.....Before construction could begin, I first had to remove the C&L point subject of this topic, from the surface of the glass plate. As it's also secured to the surface of the glass by double sided tape, I turned to Mrs. Jonte's trusty hairdrier for leverage. Unfortunately, I forgot that most of it is of plastic construction. After a number of chairs decided to part company with their repective sleepers at the toe end, the end sleeper also succumbed and is now at an attitude of a permanent ninety degrees. Somehow, I don't think it was ever destined for a role in Harpford. Oh well.........

 

Jonte

 

The replacement parts are quite cheap by comparison to the price of the kit, not much lost then and you could havea second go. Next time use very thin strips of double sided tape, and soak in whitespirit before relesing.

[Guest jonte]

After a rather piecemeal approach to things today, I'm afraid that I've not accomplished what I'd intended i.e. a fully wired and operative 1 : 6 turnout by this evening, however, on a brighter note, that which has been completed is working smoothly so I'm quite optimistic as to the outcome.

 

Here are a couple of photos of progress to date (apologies for the appearance of a pair of feet in the second shot and the extremely poor quality of the final shot):

 

 

The switch rail in the final shot has just been placed there for appearance.

 

A car 'feeler gauge' was used to set the flangeways and calipers to set the track gauge. The flangeway is set to a gap of 1mm and the check rail to a distance of 15.2 mm from the vee rail. Overall gauge is 16.2 mm as proscribed by the OO-SF society.

 

I'm quite happy with the smooth running experienced - albeit with only a single set of wheels and just around the area of the vee - however, I have had to cheat slightly: there was a difference in height between the point of the vee and both wingrails causing the wheel to drop from the vee onto the wingrails. I attribute this to the relatively shallow radius I've place on the bend of each wingrail which has probably caused each wingrail to lean slightly. I believe this could have been avoided if I had created a a sharper bend in the wingrails, however, I'm aware that this is advised against. The solution was to 'raise' each wingrail to match the height of the vee nose, and now smooth running is assured. I measured the difference in height which has worked out at 0.10 mm. In future, I shall serach for a piece of shim of this thickness and solder it below each wingrail. Therefore, if anybody knows where I can purchase shims of such fine thicknesses, please would they kindly let me know?

 

I Will attempt to complete it tomorrow and provide an update.

 

Fingers crossed.

 

Jonte

[craigwelsh]

That sounds great work .

 

One pedantic point i'll mention is that when making the vee up the rail forming the tip is always on the 'main' route through the turnout and the splice rail butting onto it forms part of the diverging route. It obviously depends on your track layout which part of your turnout becomes what but I thought i'd mention it.

 

The tip of the vee is rounded a little looking side on btw as well as where the blunt nose is formed.

[Guest jonte]

That sounds great work .

 

One pedantic point i'll mention is that when making the vee up the rail forming the tip is always on the 'main' route through the turnout and the splice rail butting onto it forms part of the diverging route. It obviously depends on your track layout which part of your turnout becomes what but I thought i'd mention it.

 

The tip of the vee is rounded a little looking side on btw as well as where the blunt nose is formed.

 

 

Not pedantic at all, Craig. Noted for the future - depending on how this fare's of course

 

I remember you pointing out about the rounded/blunt nose on a link in one of your previous posts. It's just that I didn't have the courage to do it just yet. Perhaps confidence will increase with time!!

 

Many thanks for your words of encouragement also, Craig.

 

Best wishes,

 

Jonte

[craigwelsh]

I've uploaded this example of my interpretation of a crossing vee but I couldn't find the thread so here it is again..

 

You can see how i've rounded the nose and also the splice rail being the nearer one.

 

One thing you might be doing or find useful is to hold the track up to your eye and sight through the crossing..

Not the most focused picture but it shows the idea, main route is to the right in this crossing.

[Guest jonte]

I've uploaded this example of my interpretation of a crossing vee but I couldn't find the thread so here it is again..

 

You can see how i've rounded the nose and also the splice rail being the nearer one.

 

One thing you might be doing or find useful is to hold the track up to your eye and sight through the crossing..

Not the most focused picture but it shows the idea, main route is to the right in this crossing.

 

 

Gosh! A feat of engineering indeed. Incidentally, how do you manage to build the vee and wingrails 'off model' so to speak? I thought that you had to gauge the lower part of the wingrail from the adjacent stock rail? Am I right in thinking, therefore, that its built solely with flangeway gauges?

 

Best wishes, Craig.

 

Jonte

[craigwelsh]

Yes build with a flangeway gauge sort of jig and then gauged off the stock rail when laid.

 

It is easier to build in situ if its quite a curved bit of P+C though.

[hayfield]

After a rather piecemeal approach to things today, I'm afraid that I've not accomplished what I'd intended i.e. a fully wired and operative 1 : 6 turnout by this evening, however, on a brighter note, that which has been completed is working smoothly so I'm quite optimistic as to the outcome.

 

Here are a couple of photos of progress to date (apologies for the appearance of a pair of feet in the second shot and the extremely poor quality of the final shot):

 

 

The switch rail in the final shot has just been placed there for appearance.

 

A car 'feeler gauge' was used to set the flangeways and calipers to set the track gauge. The flangeway is set to a gap of 1mm and the check rail to a distance of 15.2 mm from the vee rail. Overall gauge is 16.2 mm as proscribed by the OO-SF society.

 

I'm quite happy with the smooth running experienced - albeit with only a single set of wheels and just around the area of the vee - however, I have had to cheat slightly: there was a difference in height between the point of the vee and both wingrails causing the wheel to drop from the vee onto the wingrails. I attribute this to the relatively shallow radius I've place on the bend of each wingrail which has probably caused each wingrail to lean slightly. I believe this could have been avoided if I had created a a sharper bend in the wingrails, however, I'm aware that this is advised against. The solution was to 'raise' each wingrail to match the height of the vee nose, and now smooth running is assured. I measured the difference in height which has worked out at 0.10 mm. In future, I shall serach for a piece of shim of this thickness and solder it below each wingrail. Therefore, if anybody knows where I can purchase shims of such fine thicknesses, please would they kindly let me know?

 

I Will attempt to complete it tomorrow and provide an update.

 

Fingers crossed.

 

Jonte

 

Jonte

 

Well done in not giving up you seem to be progressing very well. I seem to have missed how the V is higher than the wing rails.

 

As for wheel drop from the knuckle to the V nose, I seem to remember a thread on this site where it was stated that unless you build to P4 (or was it S4)standards then there will be an amount of wheel drop anyway, in EM & 00 because of the looser tolerances used in these gauges.