Bohemian Saxony

[RichardS]

This thread will record the building of a continental tram layout in HO by a small group of railway modellers who started the project thinking that modern trams were just skinny dmus! Not an auspicious beginning I would suggest, but we're game and the project is underway.

 

This small group met while working or volunteering at the Wroxham Miniature Worlds project (see elsewhere on RMweb). None of us have any connection with WMW any longer but it is gratifying to see some of our work being featured on TV and in the press since the project opened. 

 

Mr H approached us in mid 2013 looking for somebody to build him an HO tram layout upon which he could run his collection of over 90 mainly continental trams.

 

There was a period of discussion, site visits, drawings, drawings ripped up, drawings changed, decision to use a different room in his house, debates about track, U-Bahns, track again, and again until eventually a couple of weeks ago the order for the wood to construct the baseboards was placed.

 

The layout is 11 feet by 8 feet 2" at its extremities. The boards have been constructed from 15mm exterior plywood with 9mm plywood tops. Legs are 75 by 75 mm 'deal' bolted to the boards. There are 5 boards. The layout is being built about 100 miles from its ultimate home and thus has to be 'portable.' In fact we might try and exhibit it before it is finally installed in Mr H's home.

 

There are 4 separate 'tram' loops on the plan. 2 at 'ground level' and 2 at a higher level. The lower 2 will rise and visit a town before descending again and travelling under the town forming a sort of UBahn section. The lower section will serve a tram depot. There will be a link between upper and lower loops to allow movement of trams to and from the depot. On the upper level, the lines will circumnavigate the town, serve a dorf and also run past a mine where Mr H has asked for a narrow gauge railway to be incorporated.

 

In addition, there will be a rack railway and a cable car!  It's going to be busy I think.

 

The boards have now been built to 'ground level' as the picture shows. The next stage is to create the higher level sub bases and the inclines. Where there are inclines we have made the 9mm top from a sandwich of 5.5mm ply and 3.6 mm ply. The thinner sheet being on top and this will be cut and lifted to create the slopes. Well that's the plan anyway.

 

After that we shall use Peco HO railway track to test the functionality of the track design before embarking upon the inclusion of sections of tram track. In another thread you might have seen discussion about the best track to use. At the time of writing we are probably going to use Tillig Luna in the urban areas.

 

One area of debate has been whether an underlay should be employed. The thinner Woodland Scenic's foam (the black stuff) is where our thinking is at present.    

 

Pictures follow, and I shall endeavour to keep this thread updated as the build proceeds. Mr H is presently in Europe on a tram tour and will visit the big exhibition in Germany next weekend, he'll no doubt come back with some new ideas......

 

The name - Bohemian Saxony - illustrates the notional location of the layout. I'm just rather pleased that the name was not B.....Rhapsody as that might have caused copyright problems.

 

Thanks for reading this thread.

 

I've attached the track plan (designed in AnyRail) and a picture of the boards.

 

Track Layout008.pdf

 

 

 

RichardS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

[RichardS]

It's been a couple of weeks since the first posting describing the build of this StrasseBahn. In that time we have continued to build the baseboards and following Mr H's visit to Prague and Germany some changes have been made to the track plan, partly as a result of seeing the layout in three dimensions for the first time. The attached photo's show that the upper level lines will now climb even higher and describe a figure of eight.  The requirement for a FeldBahn has now grown into a requirement for three similar narrow gauge lines around the boards served by a small loco depot.

 

At the German exhibition Mr H inspected various layouts and discussed track with the operators, and with the results of our own deliberations we have settled on Tillig LUNA for the town areas and PECO code 100 concrete sleeper for all other parts.

 

One of the dilemmas we faced was the gradient for any inclines. We aimed for 1 in 20 but some will be slightly more than this. Accordingly we tested a selection of different model trams on various angles and found that some models will actually climb a 1 in 5. This is far steeper than we need but we can be confident that if the gradient is a bit steeper than 1 in 20 this won't matter too much.

 

The coming week will see further track beds constructed and more underlay in place pending the delivery of the Tillig LUNA.

 

Thanks for reading.

RichardS

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

[RichardS]

A brief update-  just more of the inclines and high level track beds being built.

 

Most of the inclines are about 1:20 but we did experiment with some of Mr H's trams and had one going up an incline of 1:5 which rather surprised us. 

 

More soon.

 

[RichardS]

It's been a while since I updated this thread. So here's a few pics at year end which show some of the progress such as it has been. (yes we've had a few problems - project creep, supply of some components and so forth) 

[colin penfold]

I was expecting Freddie Mercury, but this is good stuff anyhow

[RichardS]

Thanks for the kind comments.

 

No it's not all tramway. There are 4 loops of tramway two at an elevated level and two below. The lower lines pass through an U-bahn section and also rise to the higher level in the 'town section.' The lower level also has access to the tram depot.

 

The future owner specified the Busch Feldbahn system to run throughout the layout. We have persuaded him to have MInITrains running on 9mm track. There are two NG railways, one leading to a forest area. There is a branch off this line to a station in a proposed 'park area' adajacent to the town at the higher level. The second line climbs into a mountain mine.

 

Its a very busy layout! It is also planned to have a cable car and a rack and pinion railway ahs been mentioned but I cannot see where the latter will go!  The future owner is not (presently) an 'operationalist.' He is a watcher and therefore the layout is principally a running track for his collection of tram models.

 

The track plan has changed several times and presently there isn't one, however a colleague is constructing the control panel and this will feature a diagram of the lines so watch this space.

[RichardS]

Meant to add that the layout is being built in the workshop of Train Terrain Ltd www.trainterrainmodels.co.uk This is upstairs at Great Eastern Railway Models www.greateasternmodels.co.uk  on Plumstead Road In Norwich. Please call in if you are that way. (Tues-Sat 09.30-16.30) 

[Lloyd.L]

I live 1/2 a mile away, seriously tempted to have a look sometime!

 

Regards, Lloyd.

[RichardS]

Bohemian Saxony has an U-Bahn section. The future owner requires the tram pantographs to run on the overhead wires. We did not plan to string wires in the U-Bahn section so needed an alternative way of ensuring that the pantographs would continue their path when transiting from the 'open-air' catenary to the underground section and then back again when emerging from the tunnels..

 

The solution we have used is code 100 flat bottomed rail. This is easy to bend to match the centre lines of the underground tracks. We 'spiked' the rail at intervals with brass pins and soldered the rail to these. 

 

Now, we are not claiming that we have invented a new way of doing this as I'm sure that others will have already used the same or similar method. But it is pleasing to share something that seems to work. Here's a pic.

 

Edit: 23/01/15 - since this photo was taken we have now lifted the 'top' by 9mm this provides a more flexibility for the pantographs and permits greater clearance should different models be used.       

[RichardS]

I've attached a photo of the control panel (presently being constructed) which shows a schematic of the track plan for this Tram layout. The Red and Blue are the loops at the upper level. The  Yellow and Green are the lower loops which climb to the higher level in the lower left section of the layout. The lower level also serves the tram depot. The dark lines are the HOe lines - planned to serve; top left - a forestry area, middle - a station in the town park, and on the extreme right climbing into a mine. The HOe crosses the HO Tram tracks in places and although Tillig do make such crossings one of the team applied 'cut and shut' techniques to some standard set track crossings. (Don't by a car from him!) Hope this is interest.

 

[RichardS]

It's always nice to see things starting to come together and these pictures show Bohemian Saxony with the track work complete, electrics almost complete and clean and tidy for testing. Hope of interest.

[RichardS]

6 weeks have passed since previous post. Here's a few more pictures. We've built some of the landscape, which to be frank is a bit cramped due to the owner specifying so much track and buildings. Nevertheless we've fashioned some hills which he seems happy with. The mine feature can now be seen and we have installed LEDs in this and the UBahn section. A Brawa cable car has also been installed and tested and removed for safety. Plus the latest pics show the extent of the buildings. The owner is considering automatic block working on some of the loops so this will need to be installed next.

[Bill]

This is a seriously amazing project - I do not have words for the level of complexity demonstrated..

Well - It's extraordinary and I have great regard for the obvious time and effort put into it.

Thank you for recording it here on RMweb

...

I do have a lot of questions as I am currently building an Austrian style tram track and investigating options -

If you have the time I would like to know something about the Luna track.

So here goes..

How did you manage to connect the standard track to the Luna track.?

What code is the Luna track?

Does the top of the Luna Rail match the code 100? Or is some jiggling necessary?

Anything else I really need to know?

Like how does one connect the power to it?

[RichardS]

This is a seriously amazing project - I do not have words for the level of complexity demonstrated..

Well - It's extraordinary and I have great regard for the obvious time and effort put into it.

Thank you for recording it here on RMweb

...

I do have a lot of questions as I am currently building an Austrian style tram track and investigating options -

If you have the time I would like to know something about the Luna track.

So here goes..

How did you manage to connect the standard track to the Luna track.?

What code is the Luna track?

Does the top of the Luna Rail match the code 100? Or is some jiggling necessary?

Anything else I really need to know?

Like how does one connect the power to it?

 

Hi Bill, firstly thank you for your kind words. When I next get round to recording progress on the layout you will see that we have been experimenting with Heathcote Electrics' block working system. The customer is coming to see the test installation this week and a go/no-go decision will be made then. 

 

I'll  also refer to Dutch_Master's (DM) comments post #16. 

 

Essentially, I am in broad agreement with DM about the LUNA track but I have no experience of the Easi-Street product to compare. I do have to say that for a Tillig product LUNA is not as easy to use as we expected nor is it, perhaps, of the expected quality. 'Swear at it,' I think, is more our experience. 

 

In addition to DM's comments we found that point motors are a problem - the throw in the actual switch is quite small - and while Tillig offer a slow motion unit it is far to big to fit under a point if there is another adjacent to it. Of course it may be possible to fit these motors remotely but we didn't find a way (that doesn't mean there is no way.) In the end we used Peco motors but I have reservations about these due to their violent action on the seemingly fragile point mechanisms. (In case anybody wonders they do latch and there is a small spring inside the point) We shall see how it goes in the future.

 

As you may know the LUNA system includes in-fills and side-fills. These are quite usable except for the printing of the cobbles (the tarmac version is plain plastic.) The cobbles show very little consistency in colour between individual units and are 'flat.' While cobbles surfaces will vary in colour it will be gradual and not in straight lines necessarily. The cobbles are awful to be honest. On Bohemian Saxony I think we shall end up using something else to make the in-fills in the town. The LUNA in-fills can be used as templates. 

 

The LUNA track is usable provided you are careful about how you lay it and you may find it necessary to cut pieces to complete a track design. Despite it's coarse design we have found that trams run on it quite well. To caveat is that this has only been for testing and not prolonged use. I cannot comment on it's suitability for an exact replica of a prototype situation as I don't have this knowledge. As most models are a compromise in the end it is up to the individual modeller to work to his/her own standards. Our customer is not un-discerning but remains realistic in his expectations.  

 

LUNA tracks sections are joined together by thin metal strips with a short leg half way a long. We found these work quite well although it is necessary to cut them where joining crossings and points. At such joins there are some places where the metal strip is not used and there is a tiny moulded 'pip' to align the adjacent piece this is not a very good design feature.

 

We joined the LUNA track to code 100 PECO by soldering a shortened LUNA metal joiner strip into a standard PECO joiner to make an adapter. If I recall correctly the rails aligned well. You cannot file the LUNA Track. As DM observed it is actually folded sheet metal rather than a solid extrusion

 

Some pieces of straight track have 2 tags on both sides which are used for wiring. Note each side has a connection to each rail – it is not one side for each rail. So far we have found electrical continuity through the joiners to be good. LUNA provide many pieces with ' tags' whether this is because there is a need for multi feeds or whether it is an aid to creating sections is unclear.

 

With Trams there is, as we have learnt, a considerable variation in the surfaces that they run through. They are not confined to town streets. This is why we have used standard PECO concrete sleeper track for the non-street areas on the layout. Where there is ballast or grass reserve the PECO track gives a reasonable representation of modern concrete tram tracks. We have used code 100 in some 'surfaced areas' as well and here we intend to use a mixture of surfacing techniques to arrive at the required finish. One idea we have tested is DAS clay with a new product from Proses which impresses cobbles by simply rolling along the track this also creates a clearance for the wheel rims to run in. It seems to work and as it is 'bespoke' the actual colouring and final finish can be varied to suit the environment. It's worth a look.

 

Using standard HO track is fine where you do not need points or crossings - it can 'easily' be disguised. It is the points and crossing which create the biggest problem as far as we can see. Trams traverse much tighter turns than trains and as most RTR track is for the latter even set-track points, which many have used, (and for which new 3D printed infill system is now avaliable - recently reviewed on Model Rail) are often too big for tram curves. We have used ordinary points (Streamline and Set-Track) in all areas except for where the LUNA track has been used. The LUNA points are to a radius of about 250mm and 201mm. This is one advantage they do have. The whole thing though is a compromise.     

 

In summary, LUNA has to be an option for you to consider, simply because it exists, but I would seriously investigate and review other options thoroughly. Based on our experience we would probably avoid it again if we could.

 

Hope that helps.

[RichardS]

Quick update as I'm 'on topic' at the moment. Here's a quick video of our test installation using Heathcote Electrics' block signalling/working units SA-7SB and SA-8SB. The test track comprises 4 rather short sections and is running three trams. Because of the lack of length the acceleration/braking sequences may not be all that noticeable. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFyVp1I7aV8

[RichardS]

Having watched the video, I'm sorry to say the system hasn't convinced me. Its operation isn't realistic: the next tram only moves when the system has stopped the previous one in the next block and that's not how signalling systems work. It might satisfy your client though, which is essentially all that matters when building in commission

 

DM- yes that is how it works here. As it is analogue each section is electrically isolated from the others and has one control block. Thus it follows that a section can only have one vehicle in at a time. When a vehicle leaves a section nothing happens until it triggers the 'Train Leaving Section' command which doubles up as the 'Train Entering (next) Section.' The drawback to this is that TES has to be equidistant from the STOP to the end of section (i.e. the electrical break after STOP) to enable the acceleration and braking to function equally. This means that the TLS is not actually at the end of the section to which it applies but, and depending on the length of the section overall, somewhere after the start of the section. Of course it could be at the start but this is unlikely as it means the vehicle would accelerate then immediately brake rather than run for a period at the 'maximum speed' set. Of course that may be what is wanted in some situations.

 

Further more, the test layout has four equal length sections and all the acceleration and braking distances are equal to. So it's a bit rigid in that respect. Plus (second edit!) it must be remembered that the electrical sections do not necessarily coincide with the signalling sections. 

 

I wonder if using a third sensor rather than doubling one up would help in this although the constraint of one vehicle in a section would remain. If the sections were very long and the following vehicle took longer to transit the distances than the stop timer for the next first tram it might work. The test set-up also only has one empty section. If we had two or more then the functioning would be different. As usual modelling is a compromise.

 

The SA-8SB units have a signalled (compulsory) stop controlled by a variable timer (on the test this is set to minimum). The SA-7SB unit does not have a compulsory stop so will allow a vehicle to transit all the way through if the next section is clear, but if the next section is not clear the vehicle will stop for as long as it takes. 

 

On a very large layout by combining the various units and having many sections more variation would ensue, especially if the section length and timed stops were varied.

 

If we install it on the real layout then the sections are different lengths and there will be trams running in different directions so I think that any lack of prototypical divergence will probably be disguised.

 

Normally, I don't like this type of automation but I have found it quite fascinating to apply to a situation and try to get it working whether prototypical or not.

 

Thanks for the thoughts and observations - keep 'em coming!

[Alan J Kirkman]

I do know somebody building a largish Blackpool Illuminations scene which to be realistic need several cars on each direction "out front" and  at least a couple on shuffle up round the back hidden side. What they found was that Heathcotes units worked well with 3 cars but could not cope with enough units in each circuit for 6 cars. The owner and his helping group never managed to resolve it before ill health stopped play on the build.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Having watched the video, I'm sorry to say the system hasn't convinced me. Its operation isn't realistic: the next tram only moves when the system has stopped the previous one in the next block and that's not how signalling systems work. It might satisfy your client though, which is essentially all that matters when building in commission

 

In fairness, I don't think that the Heathcote system was designed with this use in mind. It's design purpose is to control trains in the hidden part (fiddleyard) of a layout.

 

Trams, of course, mostly run "on sight" and that would require something quite different: timed stops and insulated section(s) just in the rear of each tramstop to slow down and stop following cars. I'm no good at all with electronics but I am sure that those you are could build a suitable unit for each stopping place quite easily.

[RichardS]

Referring to Post #22 Joseph_Pestell (JP) and  Post #21 Alan.  Thanks for the comments.

 

JP - yes and no. Heathcote Electronics (HE) do produce units for fiddle yard working, however the SA7-SB and SA8-SB are designed for block working. The 7 controls a block section and also a signal, the 8, is the same but also has a station stop and as per the brochure the SA5SB, SA6B, SA7SB and SA8SB boards are designed to allow several trains to run on an oval without colliding. (The B obviously stands for 'block').

 

Regarding suitability for trams - yes clearly the system was deigned for trains originally but the principals of block working and an interval timing are not dissimilar. The ability of trams to 'back up' for a stop is something which cannot easily be replicated but should not be impossible although each tram requires a section and therefore the kit to operate it. (Costly!) By carefully measuring distances and adjusting the various speed controls something akin to such operation should be possible. The actual 'Tram Stops' (where 'people get on and off') would be controlled by the 8SB and the intermediate sections by 7SBs. There'd still be a need to compromise though. In an ideal world you'd have a computer controlled system with proximity sensors in the trams! (or one of these radio controlled DCC systems) 

 

I think such a layout would need to be quite big to do the system justice.

 

And that brings me to Alan's post. I cannot see why there should be a problem with more than 3 trams, as each board controls a discrete section and can be powered by it's own supply (the IRDOTs and control unit in a section must be powered by the same source). The block control is daisy chained to the previous and next board. I would say that theoretically the number is infinite - unless there is a bug or programming constraint in the system. There is nothing in the literature to suggest that there is any limit.

 

I wonder if the Blackpool system you describe was built on the same basis using the ABW control units.

 

 

I'll post pictures and videos as and when we install the system. Presently, we are 'sorting out' and tidying the wiring of the conventional system. 

 

Interesting project.

[Alan J Kirkman]

Nobody working on Len's project could explain the problem nor apparently could Heathcote's. It was suspected as some sort of stray residual current feed but full test information to Know what values should show across various components were not available from Heathcote's so well qualified electrical experts were getting nowhere in solving the problem. It worked for up to 3 but beyond that no. I wasn't part of the testing just got bemused phone calls after every session. My response was to suggest live overhead and letting the cars do their own switching but on a a layout intended t be after dark in the Illuminations the third conductor was required for a continuous feed lighting power supply. Not that testing had got far enough to allow the erection of overhead so that wasn't a source of stray feeds etc . It was a weirdness and a situation that it seemed wise to report.

[Andy Reichert]

The operating potential may be bit limited, but I think a lot of visitors are going to like it. And more than a few will be much more inclined to think about having a tram layout instead of the usual railway layout. The ability to have long meandering routes folding back and forth, with lots of close following traffic just doesn't exist with typical model trains.

 

Andy

[Andy Reichert]

Aging Suydam models and their ilk also need a bypass wire for the motor bogie pivot. The rapid and inevitable tarnishing of the brass to brass rotating surfaces is the main but little known cause of their reputation for intermittent running. That wire and magnets together turn them into completely reliable superb performers.

 

Andy

[Bill]

Hello again - I had a closer look at the layout and saw what I thought was a Tillig H0 / H0e or H0m crossover..

It looks like H0e but a bit hard to tell at that angle

It has also got me intrigued to the point of wondering what was going to be running on that circuit?

[Alan J Kirkman]

That is all true but not relevant to the problems experienced. The system failed to stop trams when there were more than 3 units on either circuit of the layout. there was no lack of power to run 6 there was no control coming from the Heathcote units when used in multiples of above 3. That is why investigations were taking place on the control input output values across the various components of the units but were nullified by an inability to find out what those values should be in normal working. It did seem as if the units had ben designed and tested on a work/not work basis and that detailed electrical testing and recording had not been done. Now as I say I never got down to Plymouth to see the tests only received the bemused phone calls. Sadly due to aging and Ill health the project seems to have had to cease now. Oh as for Saying that two BECs use more current and are more prehistoric than a twin motored Halling Artic, That may be true of the brass gears as against the precision moulded plastic ones of Halling , BUT IS TOTALLY WRONG as far as the motors are concerned. Since BEC changed to the Mabuchis many many years ago it is the same motor that Halling now use. It has gone though a few  versions but such is the quantity that Mabuchi now insist on for a Minimum Order the only way for yeas that BEC has been able to get Motors at an acceptable outlay is to get Batches from Halling who do bite the Bullet of the Minimum quantity. Indeed selling some batches on to the smaller cottage industries no doubt helps Hallings Cash Flow! So current consumption wise they should be little different, certainly in automatic operation I see little sign of one car grabbing all the current due to lower electrical resistance.

[RichardS]

Guys, I cannot reply quoting posts for some reason so I'll refer to the above by number etc.

 

#26 Andy R. Thanks Andy. Yes operating potential is limited but the owner just likes watching things run and then changing them over. His experience of model railways/tramways is limited and we have tired to keep this in mind. I think he'll enjoy himself with it which is what the object is really. In the UK we have not really embraced trams - large towns have them of course but it seems to me that our neighbours on the mainland are far more aware of their benefits. As they now resemble light railways rather than buses on rails I think they have the potential to become more popular. As mentioned before though for somewhere like Blackpool a system to run an intense interval service would be required.  One of the key advantages that I see (and bear in mind I am a railway modeller knowing next to nothing about trams) is the small radius curves that they will accommodate. This has great advantages for those with limited space for a model.

 

#28 Bill.  It may look like a Tilig HO/HOm or whatever but it's actually a home made cut and shut conversion of a standard PECO set track crossover!  We couldn't get the TIllig ones when we needed them so one of our number made these. The narrow gauge is just gauged to 9mm. He made a good job of them and they seem to work ok.

 

The future owner originally asked for the Busch Feldbahn to be used but we felt that this was too tiny for such a large application. It is now HOm and he will run Minitrains and Lilliput stock (I think). Actually, this is the most operation intensive part of the layout with three branch lines and a depot. One of the branch lines has a return loop. And as you realise the HOm crosses the Tram lines. We plan to include a panic button!  

 

I've attached a pdf of the areas where there is point activity on the layout which shows in diagrammatic format the extent of the HOm system. 

 

Please feel free to make as many observation and comments about anything on this build. We claim no expertise in the world of trams.

 

Regards

 

Richard

 

 

  

mimic board v1.pdf