Coder Tim Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Hi, The layout I'm about to build requires a tandem turnout. I've created one in Templot but the flangeway flares for n mean it wasn't straigthforward. I've made some alterations to try and cope for this and would appreciate opinions on whether they will work or not. Also any general feedback on anything I might have stuffed up would be great. The issues I'm worried about are: Circled in red - I had to remove the flare entirely from the wing rail here. I've extended the check rails on either side to hopefully stop wheels hitting the tip of the wing rail. No idea if this is a sensible solution. Circled in blue - the checkrail fouls the crossing rail. I think this will be ok because I can just solder the two together as long as the switch blades have enough flex to open the switch in the length available. As far as I can see the crossing rail will guide the wheels on to the checkrail so there is no chance of them hitting the end of the checkrail even though it doesn't have a flare. All thoughts and opinions greatly appreciated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grovenor Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Hi, The layout I'm about to build requires a tandem turnout. I've created one in Templot but the flangeway flares for n mean it wasn't straigthforward. I've made some alterations to try and cope for this and would appreciate opinions on whether they will work or not. Also any general feedback on anything I might have stuffed up would be great. The issues I'm worried about are: Circled in red - I had to remove the flare entirely from the wing rail here. I've extended the check rails on either side to hopefully stop wheels hitting the tip of the wing rail. No idea if this is a sensible solution. The check rail does not make any difference to this as a wheel at risk of hittting the wing rail will not be in contact with the check rail. What I do in this scenario is to file a chamfer on the rail end, effectively creating a flare without bending the rail, you can fit a short one in without overlapping the crossing nose. Circled in blue - the checkrail fouls the switch crossing rail. I think this will be ok because I can just solder the two together as long as the switch blades have enough flex to open the switch in the length available. As far as I can see the switch crossing rail will guide the wheels on to the checkrail so there is no chance of them hitting the end of the checkrail even though it doesn't have a flare. No problem with that arrangement, on the GWR they called it a "check lump". just file the end of the check rail to be a good fit against the back of the switch rail. The switch rail should be fine, but if its flat bottom rail you can file off the foot for part of the length if you need a bit more flexibility (the real thing does this on short switches). All thoughts and opinions greatly appreciated. Hope this helps, regards Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coder Tim Posted July 21, 2015 Author Share Posted July 21, 2015 Brilliant, thanks. I get it about the check rail not being in play, weird how you can try and work something through by yourself and get it totally wrong until someone explains it. I'll chamfer the wing rail as you suggest. It's going to be bullhead track, I'll give it a go and see if it flexes enough. I'm planing on using Code 40 so too little strength might be the problem in the end. Thanks a lot, Tim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grovenor Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 Hope the build goes well, don't forget to post a photo when its done. With code 40 bullhead you will only need to allow 6 or 7 slide chairs to get enough flexibility in the switches. Regards Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabs Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 I hope this works well, It's nice to see other people doing custom trackwork in N. The advice above looks very sensible to my inexpert eyes. Is this turnout going to be completely scratch built, or are you using parts from finetrax or the 2mmSA? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coder Tim Posted July 23, 2015 Author Share Posted July 23, 2015 Thanks all. I'm going to do a build thread for the whole layout when I get on with it. It might be a while before I get on to this turnout as I want to do some of the simpler ones first but I needed to know about this in case any changes had knock-on effects on the rest of the design. I'm planning on using finetrax for the chairs, rail, and flexitrack. I have some of their flexitrack and it seems to be just the right balance between accuracy and easy of construction for me. I'm not sure on the actual construction process though. I have two ideas (the second stolen from the 3d printed turnouts thread): 1) Use the chairs with no locating pins and conventional construction gauging from already laid rails. 2) Use the chairs with locating pins and 3d print a trunout base with corresponding locating holes in the timbers. Number 1 is tried and tested but could be fiddly in 2mm, number 2 should be easier and faster if it works. I think I'll make one normal turnout using each method and compare the results. Best wishes, Tim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.