maxium incline in OO Guage

[richard-g8jvm]

Hi,

my last layout was 40 years ago, and I captured the dinning room, but since moving everytnig has sat in boxes in the loft.

Now I sorta retired, I'd like to get something back up.

It would need to be split level with storge sidings on an upper level, shelf.

My space availble is small 2400 x 900 mm, so I can get a first turning radius in.

 

If I start to climb as soon as reach one end how much hieght should I be able to gain , in say 1.8mtrs, I intend to use the end loop to gain enough hieght to

bridge over the incoming track. if that makes sense, so on the 15" radius, that about  2mtrs to gain 100mm (4" ). 1 in 20 , maybe too steep

 

If I stick to scale I wouldn't be able to get more than 3cms ,1:100.  What could I achieve without looking stupid and losing traction, I would be running on nickel silver tack, so no magnetic adhesive gain.

 

I can maintain motor torque with PWM control, as an electronics enginner that the easy bit

 

I guess I'm also into a bit of a culture shock as most of the manufacturers of kits ect are proably no longer in business

 

TIA

 

Richard

[Gruffalo]

Hi Richard,

 

You don't mention the scale in which you will work, only that you can accommodate a first radius curve. That is significant as you can run N at two levels separated by a minimum of 40mm whilst 00 needs 70mm. Raising track from datum to a crossing point over 1200mm would give a gradient of 1:30 but if you start your climb on the curves, you can get an additional 1200mm so your gradient eases to 1:60. The next way of gaining extra height is to lower one track whilst raising the other and this has the effect of almost doubling the effective track length and thereby easing the gradient to at least 1:100. At that sort of gradient, it is unlikely that any engine would struggle and curves would have minimal impact. Using 00 gauge would involve a ruling gradient of 1:50 or much greater and you are very likely to have trouble with traction and friction on curves. With your size constraints, I would strongly advocate you consider N Gauge and there are many excellent contributions on this site from modellers in that scale. I could envisage a double track mainline roundy-round in N whilst that could not be achieved in 00. 

 

If you really want to re-use old stock, first thing is that the wheel standards from 40 years ago were much coarser than todays and you could have a few issues there. Next is that old locos have less efficient motors and probably will have deteriorated over the years of storage. Expect to have to have new motors or re-magnetising. Old stock would not have low friction bearings and will need a bit of servicing too. Hornby and Peco fixed track is probably steel so will need a lot of servicing and old points will be pretty poor so may need replacing (or at least re-springing and cleaning).

 

Get yourself to your nearest exhibitions and see what others do "in the flesh" so to speak. Talk to exhibitors and you will get a lot of advice. I can't offer much more as I am lucky enough to have more room and I am working in 00.

 

Best of luck,

 

Gruffalo

[Kenton]

Welcome to RMWeb - gradients is a very common question on RMWeb and worth searching through the site for previous replies.

 

My view is that you do not have anywhere near enough space for a 2 level layout in OO. You must always remember that you require enough space t get access to the track under for the inevitable derailment or track repair/cleaning - that usually means a hand or arms depth at least.

 

Steep gradients are also not just about getting the loco and stock to go up them you have to allow for transitioning or at best everything will uncouple as it goes between gradient and flat.

 

Curves- that is another serious space issue. A gradient through a sharp curve will exaggerate the curve, throwing the train off and potentially causing even worse buffer lock / coupling misalignment.

 

Then there is the aesthetics - it just looks wrong and unprototypical.

 

[richard-g8jvm]

Thanks for the replies, yes it is OO, 4mm, and I will use old stock.

There shouldn't be any problem with wheel bearing friction as all wheels were changed to meta with pin point bearings. All the track was nickel silver, so that hould be OK.

Motor demag, well if need be I could deal with that.

Yes I know curves are aeshetically nasty, but cant really do anything without .

Acess to the secound layer  is not a problem, as it will be on a much narrower shelf, just basically storage sidings, I could squeeze the crossing poing on the loop

another mtr which would drop the incline down.

I regert at times changing guage from 3mm to 4mm back in the 80's , but I dont wont to change to N guage, the idea was to use what I have instead of leaving in the loft for someone to throw out when  I pop my clogs.

I'll take some exact measurements and see if I can hold the incline to less than 1 in 60.

[Gruffalo]

Thanks for the replies, yes it is OO, 4mm, and I will use old stock.

There shouldn't be any problem with wheel bearing friction as all wheels were changed to meta with pin point bearings. All the track was nickel silver, so that hould be OK.

Motor demag, well if need be I could deal with that.

Yes I know curves are aeshetically nasty, but cant really do anything without .

Acess to the secound layer  is not a problem, as it will be on a much narrower shelf, just basically storage sidings, I could squeeze the crossing poing on the loop

another mtr which would drop the incline down.

I regert at times changing guage from 3mm to 4mm back in the 80's , but I dont wont to change to N guage, the idea was to use what I have instead of leaving in the loft for someone to throw out when  I pop my clogs.

I'll take some exact measurements and see if I can hold the incline to less than 1 in 60.

Post a sketch of what you want and the dimensions you are constrained by (that bit as accurate as possible) and someone will try and create a plan for you I'm sure. For aesthetic reasons, scenic breaks are needed to hide your curves as much as possible.

[Kenton]

 

Yes I know curves are aeshetically nasty, but cant really do anything without .

 

My comment on aesthetics was not related to the radius 1 curves (though yes should have been applied to that too) But was directly about the gradient itself - even 1:100 looks pretty awful popping out of the flat baseboard.

 

Access - I have seen too many layouts fail on RMWeb - some much much bigger than yours simply as not enough space was planned between levels. Probably the best way to make a two level layout is to incorporate a helix - but you don't even have enough space for that - they don't work with radius 1.

[HLT 0109]

I don't see how you can achieve a 1:60 gradient.  A rise of 70mm over 1200mm (as suggested by Gruffalo) is 1:17 according to my calculations rather than 1:30.so, to achieve 1:60, all your track would be on an incline.  However, allowing for modeller's licence, if you just want to enjoy trains running, I see no problem in a 1:30 gradient from storage yard to scenic area.  To be honest, a prototypical incline of (say) 1:100 is in my view barely perceptible except when rolling stock becomes uncoupled.  Certainly, it is worth keeping gradients to a minimum but, if we only do what is prototypical, we might miss a lot of fun.  On the other hand, as Kenton says, you do need to allow for transitions top and bottom and, the steeper the gradient, the longer each transition.

 

Harold.. 

[Crewlisle]

 

With reference to the gradients, my 00 gauge exhibition layout 'Crewlisle' runs a mixture of modern steam and diesel locos. It is 2.6M x 2.3M with three interconnected levels and a central operating well. In the central operating well there is a cartridge exchange system, each cartridge 1.37M long, which forms part of the reverse loop and goes under the main baseboards to join the up side of the continuous run main line under the shed water tower. Up is clockwise; down is anti clockwise. To me fiddle yards are wasted space; that is why I use 14 individual cartridges, each holding a complete train with loco.

 

I have the minimum height between levels to reduce the gradients required. It made it very difficult to fit OLE in the tunnels of the middle level continuous run! The visible gradient from the continuous run main line up to the high level terminus is 1:38; reversing loop through operating well cartridge exchange is 1:28 (normally only one way but if required to go up, a little help from the 'big hand in the sky'! This is no problem as it is in the operating well.); reversing loop to up main line (under main baseboards) is 1:33. All my pacific steam locos can handle six Bachmann Mk 1s (internal weights removed from coaches and additional weight in locos) both running and from a standing start from adverse signals (except the 1:28). 4-6-0s (Hornby, Mainline and Bachmann) and other steam locos can handle five Mk 1s or six ex-Airfix Stanier coaches (weights removed). I have a couple of tender drive steam locos with traction tyres - no problem. All diesels have plenty of weight to handle any sized train.

 

However, as other contributors on this subject have said, keep gradients away from curves as you tend to lose traction on them. My gradients are relatively steep because I wanted to get a lot of railway in a small space.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

The one thing to add is that it costs nothing but a little time to do the experiments with the stock you wish to run, to see whether the stock will work on the gradients you will require. It is often possible to 'make things work' by the sort of modifications 'Crewlisle' describes, altering and loco vehicle weights, and even providing a helpful hand if that is acceptable to you. Once you know the limits of what is possible with what you have, then you can make a confident decision on the basis of your own knowledge.

[Kenton]

 

With reference to the gradients, my 00 gauge exhibition layout 'Crewlisle' runs a mixture of modern steam and diesel locos. It is 2.6M x 2.3M with three interconnected levels

That is considerably greater that the OP's 2.4 x 0.9 proposal, and it is still a tight shoehorn - having seen your excellent videos it is a fantastic example of a cramed-it-in layout and the ultimate in playability in a train set.

 

What has always puzzled me about the layout is how the two levels below the top level actually work, playing mental trains I always get lost on the middle level, which is I believe a double track circuit. The reversing loop remains a mystery - I know it is there, it even says so, but how?

[richard-g8jvm]

Hi all

A few sums and playing with xtrkcad, and in the space available , apologies for imperial measurements,

 

I have from zero level , 195degs of 17" radius, then 66 degs of 44.4 " radius to get to +2.5 ", very tight on the loading guage,

Then 236 degs of 17" radius to get to +3.5" .

Doing a few sums the first incline is about 1 in 50 and the second on the end loop is 1 in 70.

After that point its off layout up to storage sidings , so it will get steeper.

 

My next problem is to keep the track level on a curved incline, as I think the easiet way of making the track bed is to cut a loop from 3 ply, which as the incline is produced will

skew, I dont think the idea of tilting trains was in vogue in the late 1940's. and I need to make sure all pick up wheels are in contact with rails

 

The really big problem for me will be to make a spark transmitter running on a 450 ohm transmission line quiet, I want to be able to use all the radio equipment in the same room

preferable ay the same time. I like a technical challenge

Now you all know I'm mad

[Crewlisle]

Kenton – The lines down from the terminus join the double track ‘WCML’ via a double junction on the right hand side. The WCML is a continuous run double track oval with clockwise being ‘up’ and anticlockwise ‘down’. The relief line through the low level station joins the down main under the steam loco shed at top of plan. The reversing loop leaves the WCML under the signal box by the steam loco shed, down the inside of the operating well through the cartridge exchange system, under the right hand baseboard, on a rising 1:33 gradient under the bottom baseboard/goods yard on the plan and joining the up WCML under the steam shed water tower. It was designed so trains could leave, ‘disappear’/held on reversing loop or removed on a cartridge then reappear later on the up WCML to either do a couple of circuits or go straight up to the terminus. But most importantly it entertains visitors at exhibitions with a minimum of two locos/trains running and sometimes as many as four running simultaneously. When four are running there is one shunting in goods yard + shunting locos in the two sheds or turntable and two complete trains on both WCMLs.

[Kenton]

 

Kenton – The lines down from the terminus join the double track ‘WCML’ via a double junction on the right hand side. The WCML is a continuous run double track oval with clockwise being ‘up’ and anticlockwise ‘down’. The relief line through the low level station joins the down main under the steam loco shed at top of plan. The reversing loop leaves the WCML under the signal box by the steam loco shed, down the inside of the operating well through the cartridge exchange system, under the right hand baseboard, on a rising 1:33 gradient under the bottom baseboard/goods yard on the plan and joining the up WCML under the steam shed water tower. It was designed so trains could leave, ‘disappear’/held on reversing loop or removed on a cartridge then reappear later on the up WCML to either do a couple of circuits or go straight up to the terminus. But most importantly it entertains visitors at exhibitions with a minimum of two locos/trains running and sometimes as many as four running simultaneously. When four are running there is one shunting in goods yard + shunting locos in the two sheds or turntable and two complete trains on both WCMLs.

Thanks for the explanation. The only way that I had imagined it was as basically a near figure 8 on the bottom level with the cartridge system on that bottom line next to the operator and the line curving round under the goods yard and back up the lh side to join somewhere on the turntable side. The combination of curves and steep (though hidden) inclines always seemed to defy possibility)

 

It has always been up there among the best "fit it in a spare room" layouts. Nice one.