Hayfields turnout workbench

[hayfield]

Derek

 

What is a proper gauge ? or even a correct gauge. Take a standard gauge, why has it got two check rail gauges ? check rails should be set from the Vee with a check rail gauge, the wing rail should be set with a wing rail gauge. The two check rail bars on a roller gauge just get in the way. That before knowing if the check rail gap is correct for the standards you are using. Also is your gauge for code 75 or code 100 ?

 

Now we get to how wide the slot should be in a roller gauge, copperclad needs them on the tight side, when building chaired track you require the head of the rail to rotate in the slot. 

 

Many now model in code 82 or 83 flat bottom rail, the head size differs from code 75 bullhead.

 

Far from a solving a problem that does not exist. they can be extremely useful. and setting the spring tension is easy

 

 

I have several of these flat Peco gauges, they are cheap and can be extremely useful, if you look at the right hand one I have removed some of the check rail pips, two together can be very useful holding up rail etc. Every now and then a situation arises where you need something different, I like to look for possibilities.  

 

I have some older coarse code 100 gauges, had them in a box for years unused, guess what there are great for 0-16.5 narrow gauge

[Derekstuart]

John

 

Perhaps I should have said a gauge that is designed for the job in hand.

 

My concern is that anything which introduces a variable is always going to lead to variable results- maybe in the hands of those who really know what they're doing those variations will be so tiny as to be irrelevant; but for anyone else- including beginners- it is introducing a potential variation.

Let me compare that type of gauge to a gauge suited specifically for the job in hand. Both a beginner and an expert should be able to produce exactly the same result from the latter, but could get different from the former.

As for check rails, whilst I understand why this is the most common method for modelling, I do not do it that way. Instead I get the far stockrail positioned properly and then set the check from that. That is after all how the real railways do it (naturally allowing for gauge widening etc). It works for me and doesn't work for others. Likewise crossovers, I've built a couple a few years back (though admittedly not slips) and I start at the K and work out towards the V. Both worked well.

Admittedly, I have not built anything like as many as you and like anything, what works for me, might not work for you and vice versa (we both started trying to use functional chairs to hold the vee at the same time)- everyone else said we were mad. Funny enough I had cause to go into my work's shed and one of them - a B8-  was still sitting on the shelf and after two years of frost and baking summers, it was still solid.

 

Anyway, thanks for the rationale behind the sprung loaded ones. I have them somewhere and will try them again. I am trying to get my spare room converted to model making ASAP.

 

Derek

[hayfield]

2 hours ago, Derekstuart said:

John

 

Perhaps I should have said a gauge that is designed for the job in hand.

 

My concern is that anything which introduces a variable is always going to lead to variable results- maybe in the hands of those who really know what they're doing those variations will be so tiny as to be irrelevant; but for anyone else- including beginners- it is introducing a potential variation.

Let me compare that type of gauge to a gauge suited specifically for the job in hand. Both a beginner and an expert should be able to produce exactly the same result from the latter, but could get different from the former.

 

 

 

Derek

The variable with the sprung gauges is not the gauge itself, but the rail width. This can be very handy as unfortunately not all rails are exactly the same, then there is the difference between flatbotton and bullhead rail widths

 

Some how lost the bit about check rails!!

 

As for check rails according to those more knowledgeable than me, the important than me dimension is the distance of the check rail from the vee, not the stock rail. That is why EM, P4 & 00SF have check rail gauges

 

2 hours ago, Derekstuart said:

 

Anyway, thanks for the rationale behind the sprung loaded ones. I have them somewhere and will try them again. I am trying to get my spare room converted to model making ASAP.

 

Derek

 

Do have a go, just have an open mind and look for their benefits. Good luck

[Derekstuart]

John

 

The spring determines how hard it pushes the rails, yes? Overtighten them with functional chairs, for example, and when they are released will that not lead to them springing inwards- ie gauge narrowing?

 

Check rails: In model form, as you know, the recommended way is to gauge the check rail from the vee as this is the critical distance. I don't. I gauge the check rail as 22.8 thou from the stock rail. This is against the advice from a range of people such as Howard Bolton and Martin Wynne to name but a few. I'm not sure which way you go, but this works for me.

 

If I'm not mistaken the way the real railway does it is similar- they set the gauge between the vee and the stock rail and of course the cast iron chairs (or steel base plates) make sure the check rail is at the correct distance. They will then measure the check distance to be sure, but not use that distance to set the stock rail in the first place.

[martin_wynne]

13 minutes ago, Derekstuart said:

If I'm not mistaken the way the real railway does it is similar- they set the gauge between the vee and the stock rail and of course the cast iron chairs (or steel base plates) make sure the check rail is at the correct distance. They will then measure the check distance to be sure, but not use that distance to set the stock rail in the first place.

 

Hi Derek,

 

The check chairs are set to give the required check gauge - 4ft-6.3/4in. Any gauge widening needed is then provided by using special check chairs.

 

Bullhead check rails are vertical, so providing a more accurate measuring face from the nose of the vee. Inclined rails are gauged at the gauging depth which is 9/16" below the rail top (allowing for the 1/2" top corner radius on the rails), which because of the inclination makes only a point contact with the gauge.

 

Model tolerances are looser in proportion* than the prototype, so it is important that the more significant dimension, the check gauge, is set correctly, rather than the track gauge. 

 

*in 4mm/ft scale, the typical model track-building tolerance scales up to over 1/8" on the prototype.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

[Derekstuart]

Hello Martin

 

As ever, I hold your guidance in the highest esteem and continue to believe your views to be the paragon or benchmark for the hobby to follow. (there are others who are also very, very good too).

 

I am only writing what works for me. Likewise as I wrote earlier, when building diamonds (I admit only twice) I started at the K and worked outwards, which goes against the advice of all (or certainly most of) the experts, yourself included. But it worked for me. PS that was in P4, though the next one will be S4.

 

EDIT: I may have incorrectly assumed this was advice. Please see Martin's comment below.

 

That said, I'm about to actually start building a permanent board and we'll see if this holds true once I've put them down properly.

Edited October 18, 2020 by Derekstuart

[martin_wynne]

2 minutes ago, Derekstuart said:

Likewise as I wrote earlier, when building diamonds (I admit only twice) I started at the K and worked outwards, which goes against the advice of all (or certainly most of) the experts, yourself included.

 

 

Hi Derek,

 

I'm not sure I have been very definite about that, only that it is very important that the V-crossings should be exactly the correct distance apart, as shown on the template. That is best achieved by fixing them early in the sequence. A common way of working is to treat each half of a diamond crossing separately (as Templot does). So you might start from the centre with one of the bent stock* rails, then move to each end to gauge each of the vees from it, then fill back from them towards the K-crossings. This is a good way of working for curved and irregular diamonds (where you can't use string lines across the job). 

 

*They are actually called "wing rails" on K-crossings, but if I use that term it will be confusing for many.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

[Derekstuart]

Hello Martin

 

Many thanks. I have updated my comment above to the effect that may have been my misunderstanding and to read your comments that follow. I don't want the search engines to throw up my comment and people to assume it was right.

 

That's one of the dangers of searching the internet; unless you recognise the poster's name and credentials, much of what is written is utterly useless, which is why I try to phrase things appropriately.

 

Derek.

[hayfield]

Derek

 

You are quite correct in saying different methods do work, I for one cannot lay the stock rail first and end up with an equally balanced turnout, they end up lop sided

 

Again on diamonds and slips I fit the common crossings first, but if you find starting from the center first is easier providing you end up with everything inline and in gauge then there is no problem starting in a different place

 

Simply use the method and or tools you feel comfortable with. But watch and learn from others, I always look at how others do something and see if it will improve my skill set.

 

[hayfield]

I have been working on a diamond crossing in code 83 flatbottom rail (00SF)

 

 

The obtuse crossings were built up in situ, ply timbers in temporary use, the copperclad strip is the C&L 0.6mm type

 

 

The ply timbers are removed and the two outside timber positions have the copperclad trimmed back first, center piece left in position until the first two timbers have chairs on them and set

 

 

Plastic timbers and chairs now fitted in the two outer positions, now the center copperclad strip can be removed and replaced by a plastic timber and chairs

 

 

All fitted and in place waiting for testing

[Ian_H]

Hi John,

 

Who's gauges are you using for 83 flatbottom rail in 00SF?

 

Thanks

Ian

[hayfield]

21 minutes ago, Ian_H said:

Hi John,

 

Who's gauges are you using for 83 flatbottom rail in 00SF?

 

Thanks

Ian

 

Ian

 

They are the original ones I got from Polybear which I think C&L now sell

 

Flat bottom rail head is thinner than bullhead. DCC Concepts code 75 flatbottom rail gauges does not fit code 75 bullhead, so I was not surprised to find standard code 75 gauges for bullhead rail fits code 83. My calliper measures the head at 0.95mm, I have measured code 75 bullhead rail at 0.91mm 

[martin_wynne]

Hi John,

 

I notice on page 51a of the latest Railway Modeller (December) that Peco advertise ref IL-115 Code 82 FB rail:

 

 

 

Is this the same skinny-headed Code 82 FB rail which C&L and the scale societies are selling?

 

Or is Peco's rail a proper 4mm scale FB rail? The scale head width should be the same as bullhead at 2.3/4" (0.92mm), using the same gauges.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

[hayfield]

Martin

 

Firstly either at the end of last year or early this I tried to order some via my local shop, they came back saying its has been replaced bt code 83. I have both in stock. No longer in their online catalogue, but code 83 is  IL83 @ £9.80 for 6 yards. I guess the news has not got through to the advertising dept 

 

C&L have their own rail drawn so its different from other code 82 (or should be as its their tool which is used)

 

The EMGS now only sell code 83

 

Make                           Height           head width

Peco code 82               2.37                   0.94

Peco code 83               2.11                   0.81

C&L code 82                2.06                   0.74

EMGS code 83            2.13                   0.91

 

Its pretty sad I have all 4 items

 

[martin_wynne]

Thanks John.

 

Something odd about that Peco rail. If it is 2.37mm high that's code 93, not code 82. ?

 

It seems the EMGS rail is closest to prototype BS-113A section (should be 2.08 mm high, 0.92mm head width).

 

What are most folks using now? Presumably the EMGS rail.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

[hayfield]

2 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

Thanks John.

 

Something odd about that Peco rail. If it is 2.37mm high that's code 93, not code 82. ?

 

It seems the EMGS rail is closest to prototype BS-113A section (should be 2.08 mm high, 0.92mm head width).

 

What are most folks using now? Presumably the EMGS rail.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

 

 

It will not fit the Exactoscale track base they sell !!  Phil sold lots of code 82 rail at one of the society shows

[St Enodoc]

8 hours ago, hayfield said:

 

Ian

 

They are the original ones I got from Polybear which I think C&L now sell

 

Flat bottom rail head is thinner than bullhead. DCC Concepts code 75 flatbottom rail gauges does not fit code 75 bullhead, so I was not surprised to find standard code 75 gauges for bullhead rail fits code 83. My calliper measures the head at 0.95mm, I have measured code 75 bullhead rail at 0.91mm 

I have found empirically that SMP rail has a narrower head than C&L but I haven't measured the difference.

[blueeighties]

Good morning John,I hope you are well. I wonder if you could tell me...do you know the correct spacing measurement for 0 gauge sleepers....I need a small amount of track for a photo plank. Using Peco flexi. 

[Stephen Freeman]

35 minutes ago, blueeighties said:

Good morning John,I hope you are well. I wonder if you could tell me...do you know the correct spacing measurement for 0 gauge sleepers....I need a small amount of track for a photo plank. Using Peco flexi. 

A can of worms. Prototypical variations are numerous, easiest way is to download Templot and print off a suitable section. For best effect handbuild.

[hayfield]

2 hours ago, blueeighties said:

Good morning John,I hope you are well. I wonder if you could tell me...do you know the correct spacing measurement for 0 gauge sleepers....I need a small amount of track for a photo plank. Using Peco flexi. 

 

Lee

 

Good to hear from you, ) gauge now?

 

I will send a Templot plan in a  PDF for you in a PM

[hayfield]

8 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I have found empirically that SMP rail has a narrower head than C&L but I haven't measured the difference.

 

Rail outline measurements will vary from one supplier to another for various reasons, with modern CNC methods it is likely that new dyes are now more accurate, dyes wear with use making the rail slightly larger, so over time the rail could differ from the same supplier. Also the drawings now that are used may also be more accurate, 

 

It has also been suspected that one companies dye has been used for a competitor, this is not only wrong but it may have been an old worn out dye giving the wrong sized profile

[St Enodoc]

54 minutes ago, hayfield said:

Rail outline measurements will vary from one supplier to another for various reasons, with modern CNC methods it is likely that new dyes are now more accurate, dyes wear with use making the rail slightly larger, so over time the rail could differ from the same supplier. Also the drawings now that are used may also be more accurate,

True enough John. My empirical evidence is based simply on the fact that I have an ancient pair of roller gauges (I think they came from Precision Scale Models in Newport) that have been a perfect fit on SMP rail for over 40 years, and still are, but they've always been just too tight to fit C&L rail (as used for their ready-made vees and switches) properly. Nothing more scientific than that.

[hayfield]

6 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

True enough John. My empirical evidence is based simply on the fact that I have an ancient pair of roller gauges (I think they came from Precision Scale Models in Newport) that have been a perfect fit on SMP rail for over 40 years, and still are, but they've always been just too tight to fit C&L rail (as used for their ready-made vees and switches) properly. Nothing more scientific than that.

 

I know for a fact that C&L have just renewed their tools for making both 4 & 7 mm rail, especially as the two best selling chairs sprues in 4 mm scale have been remade and the 7 mm scale ones  are on the way 

[Donw]

Interesting discussions about gauges back there. I think use whatever suits you best. I find a couple of roller gauges most useful and a three point one is useful in addition. The pictures I have seen of engineers checking the gauge of full size track use a bar with some bits dangling down. Probably the nearest is those peco gauges. I may have 0 gauge ones from the guild and the 16mm association. These are ok for checking but not great for construction. If you have one a digital caliper is good for checking. For construction a gauge that holds the rails is better. 

As for the rail section I tend to model pre-group days when a lot of sidings etc. were most likely still laid with lighter gauge rails. 

 

Don

[hayfield]

9 hours ago, Donw said:

Interesting discussions about gauges back there. I think use whatever suits you best. I find a couple of roller gauges most useful and a three point one is useful in addition. The pictures I have seen of engineers checking the gauge of full size track use a bar with some bits dangling down. Probably the nearest is those peco gauges. I may have 0 gauge ones from the guild and the 16mm association. These are ok for checking but not great for construction. If you have one a digital caliper is good for checking. For construction a gauge that holds the rails is better. 

As for the rail section I tend to model pre-group days when a lot of sidings etc. were most likely still laid with lighter gauge rails. 

 

Don

 

Don

 

Not enough people actually know very much about track gauges, especially those who sell them, also those who start out track building struggle to find the appropriate advice. Sadly in some cases this leads to disappointment. One retailer for years sold inappropriate roller gauges for 00 gauge, and many fail to invest in a decent range presumably due to both cost and lack of interest

 

Soldered construction requires a gauge which holds the rail vertical, where as chaired construction requires a gauge which allows the head of the rail to rotate

 

00 gauge has an inbuilt gauge widening within its standards, P4, EM, 00SF all require gauge widening  in certain instances

 

Then you get to personal preferences, I prefer roller gauges not to have check rail gauges. That's not how you set check and wing rail gaps in P4, EM & P4 gauges !! and to be quite honest they get in the way in 00 gauge. Cost is another factor, gauges are expensive but if looked after last a life time and are really an investment

 

In the old days you could go into a model railway shop and buy a few lengths of rail, some copperclad strips and a roller gauge and cheaply build a turnout. Or buy a SMP turnout kit (still good value starting at £7.75). Many think they have to buy a C&L or Exactoscale kit at £50+, no wonder track building fails to catch on.

 

I would suggest go and buy a kit and a pair of roller gauges, it will be either slightly cheaper or dearer than a Peco Streamline turnout. If the plans have not been updated, don't use them. Download a Templot plan, they are far more accurate. Again if the instructions have not been updated (the one which states to put pins into the plan to hold the rails) just follow one of my or someones elses tutorial.  Its so easy to make a copperclad turnout, but you need a kit, a plan, some instructions and a track gauge or two