Jump to content

ianb3174

Drakelow

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, ianb3174 said:

Can't help feeling that something is missing after reading this last night.

 

Hi Ian,

 

There was a post by Andy Reichert with photos showing check-rail contact marks on some USA prototype pointwork. That post seems now to be missing.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21/03/2020 at 07:36, martin_wynne said:

 

Hi Ian,

 

There was a post by Andy Reichert with photos showing check-rail contact marks on some USA prototype pointwork. That post seems now to be missing.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

 

You are the moderator who modifies my posts. So you restore it.  Also "Grovenor" pointed out those marks properly and normally appear on UK trackwork as well. 

 

Andy

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Andy Reichert said:

You are the moderator who modifies my posts. So you restore it.  Also "Grovenor" pointed out those marks properly and normally appear on UK trackwork as well.

 

Andy, I have no moderator permissions in this section of RMweb. I did not remove your post from this topic and I have no means to restore it.

 

In the UK, it is true that most check rails show contact marks, and in some cases severe wear. However those marks are NOT caused by the check rail pushing the wheelset to a central position between the running rails, as you claimed. If a wheelset is running central between the rails, it does not contact the check rail.

 

However, just at the moment we all have far more important matters on our minds. Please give it a rest. 

 

Martin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we stop now. I started this thread to support and encourage my own, somewhat fragile, modelling skills and to, hopefully, encourage others.  I appreciate all the knowledge that is shared but I just want to build my layout as accurately as I can manage. It'll probably have the running quality of a corrugated roof but it might be my greatest work. It won't be surgical level accurate for certain. 

Personally speaking there is fantastic modelling all over this site but I can't stand 00. It looks wrong. I'd willingly model in any odd scale to have prototypically gauged track. My skills don't always match my ideas but that's where I'm at. 

We're all going to have some enforced modelling time now to hone our skills and achieve results better than we may have ever achieved. 

Let's all work towards that. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Martyn, is there a source of EM-SF check gauges or is it best just to use verniers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ianb3174 said:

Martin, is there a source of EM-SF check gauges or is it best just to use verniers?

 

Hi Ian,

 

The important 17.2mm check gauge is the same as for standard EM, so for the check rails just use your usual check gauges from EMGS.

 

If you are using the 0.8mm check rail chairs, fix the check rail using the check gauges, and let the running rail gauge at that location be whatever it turns out to be. It is not as important as the check gauge.

 

I'm tempted to leave some space here for Andy R to disagree: smile.gif

 

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

After much deliberation, and sketching, and researching, and fretting, I've actually chosen my method of tiebar/Stretcher. 

I looked at all the fancy fold up etches from Ambis and Masokits and didn't fancy looking for them on the floor of my dimly lit workshop, as that's where they'd inevitably end up. I went for a simple yet robust approach.

Basically it involves 2 small plates of double sided pcb with a piece of Code 75 BH soldered to the underside. The switches are soldered to the top surface whilst the stock rails were kept free by putting a piece of paper between rail and plate (not my original idea and I nearly forgot to do it). The rail is isolated from the power by the pcb core.

Following other advice I have allowed the switches to spring against the stock rail, apparently this allows any throw action to use less force and allows the blades to seat in the joggle/set better. Tip 1, leave these 4 slide chairs off until after you've soldered. (I'll let you guess what happened when I first attempted it).

I intend to put a piece of paper over the tiebar itself to hold ballast and glue in a cosmetic plastic rod/bar at rail web level. I'm no expert but I think the solder on both sides of the plates will offset any torsional/rotation stress in use. The main fillets of solder run at 90° to each other.

Ignore the chairs on the left sleeper, I'm going to replace them. I think some low skilled operator may have left the soldering iron on the rail too long, and the far switch is a bit awry. Both need a rub down but work as intended. In fact you could say I was more than pleased with the result. The throw action is firm but precise. The plates stop the switches rising above the level of the stock rails and the rail section allows me to make a robust connection to the Wire in Tube method of operation that I'm planning. 

Although it was intended as a 1200x200 fiddle yard to test/refresh my skills I'm thinking it could become a scenic section as well. I'm imagining a loading platform and low relief factory with sidings. It's only a basic straight inglenook with a kickback siding, just right for those tight factory yards that used to exist all over the network. 

As usual I invite you all to offer a critique/opinion or whatever in response. 

 

IMG_5991.jpg.38117830d2c00479e6518fa13d9e41f9.jpg

Edited by ianb3174
  • Like 2
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Version 2 is likely to have the rail vertical and thinner pcb. I'm thinking it could also be half the width too. 

The sketch shows the principle. 

I build all my track onto 5mm foamboard then stick to the baseboards so cutting a channel under the switchblades is easy, as is hiding WIT routes.

Onto the tandem next, with crossing jig and solder ready. Glad I've invested in more Exactoscale chairs as they seem to thread a lot easier than the C&L ones.

IMG_6028.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's some more Drakelow action. All very exciting receiving packages during a lockdown. Hearty thanks to the two suppliers I've made use of recently, C&L and the EM Gauge Society. 

On with the update.

Picture 1 is a lovely evening study of check rail gauges in their natural environment. Look how they hug the previously prepare check rail when sited correctly in the crossing assembly. 

Picture 2 shows the amendments to the fiddle yard exit tracks. I'm having a double exit, because I can. That will be the former passenger line to the now closed station. The tandem will exit into the former quarry yard. All this will become evident in around 2023, or May 2020 if the lockdown continues at this pace. 

The rails have been soldered to pcb at the edge of the board ready to connect to board 2. 

As you can see I've invested in a crossing filing jig. Blimey, who knew that using jigs and robust construction methods would be so easy? 

It'll come in very handy as the next two crossings are a 1:5 and a 1:8 in close proximity to each other. The designer has since left the country. 

Don't judge me on my soldering, I promise to get better. I didn't burn myself this session so that's a positive. I did nearly poke the crossing V through my thumb though. 

Off to drill some small holes in tiny places.

 

IMG_6231.jpg.732cb168429896cfbcf348f61278abea.jpgIMG_6230.jpg.04f8c62918f7f8d1a2d451f9d15a7439.jpg

  • Like 2
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This part of the tandem was the hardest bit of trackwork I've ever built. I could (should) have done it as two separate crossing assemblies but thought I'd be clever. Turns out I wasn't so clever. Never mind, it all works, stock with various wheels pass through it all but it looks like a dogs dinner. Those plans for making this bit scenic? Forget it, it's a fiddle yard again. I can see why people throw the rails down on pcb sleepers. 

Good practice for the future when I build Ludgate Hill in Proto Z. 

Off to have a lie down now.

IMG_6382.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that tandoms are a lot harder than slips mate. The left hand flangway on the lower crossing looks a bit tighter than the others. It might just be the angle of the photo but it definitely looks undersize compared to the one above it and the other two as well. Does the flangeway gauge fit or is it a bit tight? It'll look fab when it's done. It looks fab now for that matter. 

Regards Lez.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are supposed to be 0.8mm flangeways (EM-SF) so that one is likely correct and the others a bit wide. If it was for a scenic board I'd rip it out and start again as I think it's messy. 

I have used 0.8mm pcb strip to assemble the crossing in a society crossing jig and although I've not trimmed the excess lengths from the assembly I think the pcb looks too chunky. I've previously used Code 75 BH on its side for this purpose, again it looks chunky, and copper wire. Again this worked but was a nightmare to hold in place. I'm thinking 1mm brass bar might be best. Maybe I could try cutting the pcb lengthways? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took it all apart and rebuilt it as two separate crossings. I had to make a couple of new wing rails but the proof is in the pudding (which was fruit crumble and carnation milk btw) and all stock trundles through without a scrape or wobble. Next stop the sharp end. Maybe I'll ride the wave of excitement another day. I'm dreading wiring it up but after looking online it's not a lot more complicated than a regular turnout. 

IMG_6386.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Version 3 of this troublesome assembly is now in place and looking ok, given the effort put in. 

Judge for yourselves. Maybe a bit over the top for a fiddle yard but good practice for techniques in plan to use on the scenic sections. 

I've put in the stock rails and blades tonight so it resembles a proper tandem turnout. 

Comments, critique and suggestions gratefully received, but not necessarily acted upon. 

IMG_6393.jpg

  • Like 2
  • Craftsmanship/clever 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There probably are cleaner wheels to test with but these will do for now. A test CCT chassis (95mm) with regauged P4 wheels. Yes, the axles are 00, yes the W irons are bent all shapes and yes, that is fluff. But this is quite close to what you see when peering under a real wagon. It's standing on the B5 line and there's some lovely tight clearances as it rolls through the crossing. 

EM gauge wheels pass through ok, with 16.65mm b2b and regauged 00 at 16.5mm b2b work but only on the shorter wheelbase stock. 

IMG_6412.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.