DCC Concepts Powerbase

[Caxton]

On 07/04/2021 at 22:20, Monte said:

I have just come across this topic, and I have realised that I am going to need to install the Powerbase idea on my layout, but the cost of the "genuine article" i.e. the actual centipede plates available from DCC Concepts would cost me a fortune as my incline is over 80 feet long! So I will have to source some rolls or sheets of mild steel shim as suggested by Andy Reichert back 2014.

Does anyone what the thickness of the plates is that DCC supply?

 

TIA,

 

Monte

Hi, this is something that I am looking at presently. I bought a powerbase pack just to test the principle and I was happy with the results. Like you, I found that the cost is quite off-putting so I started searching for steel sheet to cut up. The thickness of the powerbase plates is 0.012" and although I managed to find comparable products (Search for Precision Brand Steel Shim), the cost worked out to be almost the same. Cutting the shim into 35mm wide strips to match the powerbase plates would work out at £2.16/metre compared with £2.20/metre for the powerbase. I had expected the Steel Shim to be significantly cheaper than something that has been custom made so I am hoping that someone on here will point us in the direction of a product which will suffice but at a lower cost than the Powerbase plates. I don't mind cutting the steel but it's not worth it for 4p / metre!

 

Many thanks

 

George

[SamThomas]

Find a sheet steel fabricators in your area & pay them a personal visit. These companies are often smallish & the man in charge often the owner - an offer of cash works wonders.

[GoingUnderground]

55 minutes ago, Caxton said:

Hi, this is something that I am looking at presently. I bought a powerbase pack just to test the principle and I was happy with the results. Like you, I found that the cost is quite off-putting so I started searching for steel sheet to cut up. The thickness of the powerbase plates is 0.012" and although I managed to find comparable products (Search for Precision Brand Steel Shim), the cost worked out to be almost the same. Cutting the shim into 35mm wide strips to match the powerbase plates would work out at £2.16/metre compared with £2.20/metre for the powerbase. I had expected the Steel Shim to be significantly cheaper than something that has been custom made so I am hoping that someone on here will point us in the direction of a product which will suffice but at a lower cost than the Powerbase plates. I don't mind cutting the steel but it's not worth it for 4p / metre!

 

Many thanks

 

George

Powerbase is a different take on the Triang Magnadhesion system which used magnets mounted between the wheels to attract the steel rails of 1960s Triang track and increase the grip of the relatively light Triang locos. That was the cheapest solution as there were no extra components. You bought the locos and the track and it just worked, and still does to this day. Magnets don't attract nickel silver which is why the powerbase system needs the steel plates under the track to take the place of Triang's steel rails.

 

You could try adding extra ballast weight to the locos to increase their weight and thus the friction between wheel and rail.

[SamThomas]

44 minutes ago, GoingUnderground said:

You could try adding extra ballast weight to the locos to increase their weight and thus the friction between wheel and rail.

Couple of cost effective ways to increase locomotive weight ;

Fit alloy wheel ballance weights like these ;

https://www.sportsbikeshop.co.uk/motorcycle_parts/content_prod/48039?gclid=CjwKCAjw47eFBhA9EiwAy8kzNP3-O-gwWQuk2iZLhMHTNFcNZVcFftBHunLhfUWkJytvQPPuVMLJJBoCkrwQAvD_BwE

(also available from any car tyres dealer.)

Lead shot from gunsmiths.

 

Also, make sure that your rolling stock is "rolling" freely.

 

Hope this helps.

[Caxton]

18 hours ago, GoingUnderground said:

Powerbase is a different take on the Triang Magnadhesion system which used magnets mounted between the wheels to attract the steel rails of 1960s Triang track and increase the grip of the relatively light Triang locos. That was the cheapest solution as there were no extra components. You bought the locos and the track and it just worked, and still does to this day. Magnets don't attract nickel silver which is why the powerbase system needs the steel plates under the track to take the place of Triang's steel rails.

 

You could try adding extra ballast weight to the locos to increase their weight and thus the friction between wheel and rail.

Hi, yes, Magnadhesion was a good system. I still have Hymek and a Brush type 2 packed away somewhere.

[Caxton]

17 hours ago, SamThomas said:

Couple of cost effective ways to increase locomotive weight ;

Fit alloy wheel ballance weights like these ;

https://www.sportsbikeshop.co.uk/motorcycle_parts/content_prod/48039?gclid=CjwKCAjw47eFBhA9EiwAy8kzNP3-O-gwWQuk2iZLhMHTNFcNZVcFftBHunLhfUWkJytvQPPuVMLJJBoCkrwQAvD_BwE

(also available from any car tyres dealer.)

Lead shot from gunsmiths.

 

Also, make sure that your rolling stock is "rolling" freely.

 

Hope this helps.

Hi, thanks for the info. The powerbase idea is really just a back up plan for me. I am going to build two helices to join an upper level scenic section to a lower storage yard. I really only model diesel and electric post 1990 but I do have some steam locomotives and that’s where the potential problem lies. I set up a straight 2% incline and found that a Bachmann class 20 could pull 10 Mk1 coaches from a standing start with no issue at all. A Hornby railroad 9f (loco driven) managed 7, a Hornby Princess Royal managed 6 and a Hornby B17 managed only 4. All three are loco driven and are smooth, responsive runners on the flat. This is why I thought that it would be worthwhile building in the steel plates from the outset as a contingency so that if I did encounter problematic locos, I could just stick some magnets on the bottom . The alternative is to prevent such locos from using the helices but that’s not really ideal. However, now that I can’t seem to find a cheap alternative to the powerbase steel, I need to weigh up the cost against the value of this contingency. Thanks again for your help.

 

George

[ITG]

2 hours ago, Caxton said:

Hi, thanks for the info. The powerbase idea is really just a back up plan for me. I am going to build two helices to join an upper level scenic section to a lower storage yard. I really only model diesel and electric post 1990 but I do have some steam locomotives and that’s where the potential problem lies. I set up a straight 2% incline and found that a Bachmann class 20 could pull 10 Mk1 coaches from a standing start with no issue at all. A Hornby railroad 9f (loco driven) managed 7, a Hornby Princess Royal managed 6 and a Hornby B17 managed only 4. All three are loco driven and are smooth, responsive runners on the flat. This is why I thought that it would be worthwhile building in the steel plates from the outset as a contingency so that if I did encounter problematic locos, I could just stick some magnets on the bottom . The alternative is to prevent such locos from using the helices but that’s not really ideal. However, now that I can’t seem to find a cheap alternative to the powerbase steel, I need to weigh up the cost against the value of this contingency. Thanks again for your help.

 

George

You’ve probably considered this, but traction around bends will be more challenging than on the straight you’ve tested. That said, I have 2% gradients on both straight and curve (albeit not a helix through 360 degrees) and both diesels and steam cope well. Not that I generally run 8-10 coach trains though. Definitely the diesels have better traction, but then they tend to be somewhat heavier.

I did install Powerbase as a contingency along my incline (10metres or so) but so far haven’t needed to fit magnets to locos as all mine cope.

Edited May 27, 2021 by ITG
Addition

[Caxton]

2 hours ago, ITG said:

You’ve probably considered this, but traction around bends will be more challenging than on the straight you’ve tested. That said, I have 2% gradients on both straight and curve (albeit not a helix through 360 degrees) and both diesels and steam cope well. Not that I generally run 8-10 coach trains though. Definitely the diesels have better traction, but then they tend to be somewhat heavier.

I did install Powerbase as a contingency along my incline (10metres or so) but so far haven’t needed to fit magnets to locos as all mine cope.

Hi, sorry, I could have provided more detail in that post. The helices are going to be oval and double track, rising 8cm per layer. The inner track will measure approximately 4.8m per layer and the outer around 5.2m, giving gradients of 1.67% and 1.54% respectively. I built my test ramp at 2% to try and compensate for the extra drag caused by the curves. There was no science behind that figure, by the way, it just seemed like big enough margin added to the 1.54% figure!!

I think that I’m just going to have to bite the bullet and build the powerbase in, knowing that like yourself, I might never need to fit magnets to anything. Better that though than not fitting it, crossing  my fingers now that it won’t be needed and regretting it in the future. 

 

Thanks for your input

 

George