Cromford Wharf Shunting layout - structures and scenery

[westerhamstation]

Hi Al, so this is where you have been hiding, I had been looking under Grindleford, then under Bakewell for you, by the way theres a lot of interesting stuff under the Bakewell baseboard. I found a tin of Waxoyl, half a Land Rover, and what looked like an attempt to motorise a micro lawn mower. Anyway now that I know where you are, I will follow with my usual interest and bad punctuation. All the best Adrian.

[Alister_G]

Hi Al, so this is where you have been hiding, I had been looking under Grindleford, then under Bakewell for you, by the way theres a lot of interesting stuff under the Bakewell baseboard. I found a tin of Waxoyl, half a Land Rover, and what looked like an attempt to motorise a micro lawn mower. Anyway now that I know where you are, I will follow with my usual interest and bad punctuation. All the best Adrian.

 

I can't believe you missed the two cases of wine that are under Bakewell...

 

Hmm, hang on, I'm just going to check....

 

Al.

[Alister_G]

Not much to report yet, but here's the track plan you've seen before:

 

 

 

And here's the track!

 

 

 

Well the turnouts, anyway.

 

So all I need is some wood, now.

 

This will be bought on Friday, hopefully.

 

Thanks for looking,

 

Al.

Edited July 30, 2022 by Alister_G
re-upload images

[Andrew P]

Will work on Grindleford stop now mate, and will Bakewell ever be seen again?

[Middlepeak]

Neil asked for some photos of Middlepeak. Here's a couple of shots of the bottom of the incline. If you want the full layout description, I'll refer you to MRJ110 from some time in the early 'noughties'. The layout was on the circuit from around 1994 in the original "Middlepeak Wharf" incarnation, extended in 1996 and saw its final exhibition appearance at the Manchester Show in October 2003. It was dismantled around 2 years ago, after a couple of failed efforts to turn the top section into a workable representation of Middleton Top for home use.

 

Looking at Al's baseboard designs, there does seem to be a lot of wood under there! Certainly the hillside section above the wharf trackage is a good candidate for the type of foam baseboards now being advocated by people such as Gordon Gravett and Iain Rice - a lot lighter too! I'm currently working with lightweight laser cut ply baseboards for my latest effort in p87, and for anyone with a friendly CAD package to work with, these are dead easy to design and assemble.

 

Have a look at  http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/51216-obbekaer-p87/page-4  starting at post #86.

 

And just to prove that I haven't deserted the High Peak altogether, I have designed a version of Friden yard for home use, which will make for interesting shunting, as well as allowing a nice mixture of High Peak and Buxton main line locos. Trouble is I'm not as fast as Al in turning ideas into reality!

 

Regards,

 

Geraint

Friden V3.pdf

[mjcampbell]

Just found this thread, looks like it will be an interesting layout! 
 
I'm pleased to see you went for code 75 streamline, it will be more fitting for an industrial line, and set-track points wouldn't look so good. Plus if you had gone down to 1st radius curves 6-coupled locos may have struggled, never mind that you'd never couple or uncouple anything - a small issue for a shunting layout!

 

With such a complex and compact plan, have you tried a full-size mock-up to check it all fits? I find it very helpful to check clearances and radii, and that points won't sit on board joints...
 
As for baseboard construction, have you considered foam-core board? You get 4x A1 sheets for £10 at Hobbycraft - though you might need quite a lot! The construction is as you suggest for ply - a series of formers or cross members, running both ways across the board to form an egg-box, with track bases across the top at the levels required. The difference is it doesn't weigh a ton, and it's much less like woodwork - you just need a stanley knife, a steel ruler, and a hot glue gun (or PVA for bigger joins). 
 

 
This was a small triangular layout I built a couple of years ago. The problem with foam-core is that while constructed in this way it is surprisingly strong, it isn't tough to knocks and handling, so it needs to be "skinned" in thin ply or MDF. 3mm will do for fascias and in this case I used 3mm for a backscene too, though it needs to be well supported. For a larger backscene 6mm may be better. Set blocks of timber into the corners of the foam-board baseboard, then stick the cut fascias / ends / backscenes onto the foam with PVA and put screws through into the corner blocks. 
 

 
Now that's a very small layout, but I've used the same method this week to build this (incomplete but you get the idea) 4' 6" x 15" board. The top is pretty flat but for a dropped river bank at the front, but it works just as well for more open boards. I've yet to cut the front fascia.
 
IMG_2631 by Michael Campbell, on Flickr
 
Underneath you see some of the bracing, there's timber around the ends (though thicker ply wouldn't have needed so much support) and a couple of thin strips so the support structure doesn't dig into the foam. The fiddle yard (which is ply and weighs more than the layout) attaches with the split hinges which needed enough timber to give a stiff end-frame to make a secure join. But most of the stiffness is from the foam-core board, and it doesn't bend or twist. Yet so far the board is under 4kg.
 
IMG_2633 by Michael Campbell, on Flickr

 

I'm not saying this is the best way to do it, but it would suit such a 3-dimensional scheme well without weighing a ton or needing a degree in woodwork!

Edited April 12, 2017 by mjcampbell

[Alister_G]

Will work on Grindleford stop now mate, and will Bakewell ever be seen again?

 

Hi Andy,

 

No. I'm hoping to get Cromford up and running over the Easter week, and then continue with Grindleford, and gradually do the scenics on Cromford, from then on.

 

I can't do a lot to Bakewell now until Grindleford is substantially complete, simply 'cos I can't get to it, but it's still there, underneath, and I have no intention of dismantling it.

 

Cheers,

 

Al.

[Alister_G]

On 12/04/2017 at 23:17, Middlepeak said:

Neil asked for some photos of Middlepeak. Here's a couple of shots of the bottom of the incline. If you want the full layout description, I'll refer you to MRJ110 from some time in the early 'noughties'. The layout was on the circuit from around 1994 in the original "Middlepeak Wharf" incarnation, extended in 1996 and saw its final exhibition appearance at the Manchester Show in October 2003. It was dismantled around 2 years ago, after a couple of failed efforts to turn the top section into a workable representation of Middleton Top for home use.

 

Looking at Al's baseboard designs, there does seem to be a lot of wood under there! Certainly the hillside section above the wharf trackage is a good candidate for the type of foam baseboards now being advocated by people such as Gordon Gravett and Iain Rice - a lot lighter too! I'm currently working with lightweight laser cut ply baseboards for my latest effort in p87, and for anyone with a friendly CAD package to work with, these are dead easy to design and assemble.

 

Have a look at  http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/51216-obbekaer-p87/page-4  starting at post #86.

 

And just to prove that I haven't deserted the High Peak altogether, I have designed a version of Friden yard for home use, which will make for interesting shunting, as well as allowing a nice mixture of High Peak and Buxton main line locos. Trouble is I'm not as fast as Al in turning ideas into reality!

 

Regards,

 

Geraint

 

Hi Geraint,

 

Thank you so much for posting those images, I only hope I can do half as good a job of it as you have.

 

I've ordered a copy of the relevant issue of MRJ, so I hope to be able to read your article when it arrives.

 

Regarding the baseboard construction, You've got me wondering now about the best way forward.

 

For Grindleford, I built the baseboards using 50mm thickness of Celotex PIR foam, with a thin 6mm ply surround for rigidity, and 19mm ply ends, like this:

 

 

 

The trackbed was then supported on a sheet of 6mm ply on top of (or dug into) the Celotex, like this:

 

 

 

These boards are incredibly light, and seem quite rigid, but they are only 4" x 3".

 

For Cromford, I was hoping to build the whole 6" length as a single board, and my thinking was that the open frame construction would be lighter, however, both you and Michael above are suggesting that this may be too heavy.

 

The issue I have found with the Celotex method is that you have to cut holes for point motors etc through the complete depth of the foam. This isn't too big a job on the Grindleford boards, but for Cromford, to gain the relief required, the trackbed is going to be sitting on 3 thicknesses, which will both add to the weight, and make access difficult.

 

I need to think of a way of combining the lightness of PIR, with the accessible structure of the open frame.

 

Many thanks again for all your help and advice.

 

Al.

Edited July 30, 2022 by Alister_G
re-upload images

[Joseph_Pestell]

Hi Geraint,

 

Thank you so much for posting those images, I only hope I can do half as good a job of it as you have.

 

I've ordered a copy of the relevant issue of MRJ, so I hope to be able to read your article when it arrives.

 

Regarding the baseboard construction, You've got me wondering now about the best way forward.

 

For Grindleford, I built the baseboards using 50mm thickness of Celotex PIR foam, with a thin 6mm ply surround for rigidity, and 19mm ply ends, like this:

 

grindleford-baseboard.jpg

 

The trackbed was then supported on a sheet of 6mm ply on top of (or dug into) the Celotex, like this:

 

grindleford-baseboard2.jpg

 

These boards are incredibly light, and seem quite rigid, but they are only 4" x 3".

 

For Cromford, I was hoping to build the whole 6" length as a single board, and my thinking was that the open frame construction would be lighter, however, both you and Michael above are suggesting that this may be too heavy.

 

The issue I have found with the Celotex method is that you have to cut holes for point motors etc through the complete depth of the foam. This isn't too big a job on the Grindleford boards, but for Cromford, to gain the relief required, the trackbed is going to be sitting on 3 thicknesses, which will both add to the weight, and make access difficult.

 

I need to think of a way of combining the lightness of PIR, with the accessible structure of the open frame.

 

Many thanks again for all your help and advice.

 

Al.

 

Do you need point motors at all on this sort of layout? Manual operation (tube and wire) might be better if you can find a suitable place to put a lever frame.

[Alister_G]

Just found this thread, looks like it will be an interesting layout! 

 

I'm pleased to see you went for code 75 streamline, it will be more fitting for an industrial line, and set-track points wouldn't look so good. Plus if you had gone down to 1st radius curves 6-coupled locos may have struggled, never mind that you'd never couple or uncouple anything - a small issue for a shunting layout!

 

With such a complex and compact plan, have you tried a full-size mock-up to check it all fits? I find it very helpful to check clearances and radii, and that points won't sit on board joints...

 

As for baseboard construction, have you considered foam-core board? You get 4x A1 sheets for £10 at Hobbycraft - though you might need quite a lot! The construction is as you suggest for ply - a series of formers or cross members, running both ways across the board to form an egg-box, with track bases across the top at the levels required. The difference is it doesn't weigh a ton, and it's much less like woodwork - you just need a stanley knife, a steel ruler, and a hot glue gun (or PVA for bigger joins). 

 

 

 

This was a small triangular layout I built a couple of years ago. The problem with foam-core is that while constructed in this way it is surprisingly strong, it isn't tough to knocks and handling, so it needs to be "skinned" in thin ply or MDF. 3mm will do for fascias and in this case I used 3mm for a backscene too, though it needs to be well supported. For a larger backscene 6mm may be better. Set blocks of timber into the corners of the foam-board baseboard, then stick the cut fascias / ends / backscenes onto the foam with PVA and put screws through into the corner blocks. 

 

 

 

Now that's a very small layout, but I've used the same method this week to build this (incomplete but you get the idea) 4' 6" x 15" board. The top is pretty flat but for a dropped river bank at the front, but it works just as well for more open boards. I've yet to cut the front fascia.

 

MG_2631 by Michael Campbell, on Flickr

 

Underneath you see some of the bracing, there's timber around the ends (though thicker ply wouldn't have needed so much support) and a couple of thin strips so the support structure doesn't dig into the foam. The fiddle yard (which is ply and weighs more than the layout) attaches with the split hinges which needed enough timber to give a stiff end-frame to make a secure join. But most of the stiffness is from the foam-core board, and it doesn't bend or twist. Yet so far the board is under 4kg.

 

IMG_2633 by Michael Campbell, on Flickr

 

I'm not saying this is the best way to do it, but it would suit such a 3-dimensional scheme well without weighing a ton or needing a degree in woodwork!

 

Hi Michael,

 

Thank you very much for taking the time to make such an informative post.

 

You present a very interesting alternative solution to baseboard construction, and one that I will have to investigate further.

 

You will see from my reply to Geraint what my thinking was with regard to construction, however you have both pointed out the potential weight issue with my original plan, so I will be thinking again!

 

Thanks again,

 

Al.

[Alister_G]

Do you need point motors at all on this sort of layout? Manual operation (tube and wire) might be better if you can find a suitable place to put a lever frame.

 

That's a fair point, (excuse the pun). My plan was to operate this from the front, which makes locating a lever frame a difficult task. The ideal place would of course be behind the blooming big hill at the back of the layout, but that would mean operating from the back, which I was hoping not to have to do, again because of reaching over the blooming great hill!

 

Dunno now...

 

Al.

 

EDIT:

 

Of course what I could do is have wire-in-tube from the turnouts to behind the hill, and have the point motors concealed there.

Edited April 13, 2017 by acg_mr

[Gordon A]

Also you could make the point motors accessible for any maintenance or adjustment.

 

Gordon A

[New Haven Neil]

Thank you Geraint, for posting those photos.  Oddly I have a complete set of MRJ but don't recall your layout being in it!  I see my memory of the scenic work being good was correct though, and the mind-s eye of the incline was spot on so that was obviously what I was obsessing on at the time!  Getting my wife's seal of approval was high praise indeed, she is highly observant of scenic reality but likes to see the trains run well too.  She has dissed several famous layouts at shows over the years - and all of mine of course.  Such is life.

 

The experiments with lightweight boards are interesting, I am leaning that way for my next layout.  I use bicycle spokes under the boards for point actuation on my current layout (walkaround US style) with micro-switches, I think with the foam construction to use them on top and use electronic switches for the frog polarity.

[Alister_G]

Well, it's the Easter holidays, and for the acg household, this signals the start of the layout building season.

 

Accordingly, at silly o'clock this morning, I set off on the 20 mile trip to my nearest DIY / timber merchant, and returned triumphant two hours later with 6 sheets of plywood in varying thickness, a new cordless drill (I broke the old one), a fold up pasting table, a Workmate (a second one to add to the collection) and lots of screws.

 

This is the first time in living history that I can remember actually managing to get everything I wanted, and resisting the temptation to buy most of the displayed power and hand tools so enticingly displayed.

 

This was a good omen, and so I wasted no time in setting up the pasting table, and plonking a sheet of 5.5mm ply on top of it, to start laying out the track.

 

I'm everlastingly grateful to Geraint Hughes, who this week supplied me with a blown up copy of the 1:25,000 OS map of the Cromford area, as well as elevation drawings for some of the workshop buildings.

 

Having perused this, I have made some alterations to the track plans you've so far seen.

 

Here's a crop of the OS map, rotated to match the orientation of the layout:

 

 

 

And here's the amended track plan, based on the track shown on the map:

 

 

 

I then spent a happy few hours shoving bits of track around on the plywood, until I was happy with the result, and here's what I eventually settled on:

 

 

 

There's one missing siding at the top, which I need to buy another turnout for.

 

I then drew around the track:

 

 

 

and then took the plywood off to be butchered with a jigsaw.

 

Here's what's left:

 

 

 

So this is now the bed on which the track will be laid. When I'm happy with where the buildings fit, I will be removing some more of the ply at the nearer end where the hillside rises again.

 

The plan now is that this trackbed will sit on top of 5 supporting bearers cut from 12mm ply, which will be spaced out at roughly 1 foot centres, more or less where the grid lines appear on the plan above. The hillside and base of the road will be formed using PIR foam. This cuts down massively on the amount of timber used, and therefore should be much lighter than my original ideas.

 

To help you envisage this, here's another pretty picture:

 

 

So everything in green is PIR.

 

I'm confident that this will be sufficiently sturdy, and yet light enough to lug around.

 

I will start cutting the bearers tomorrow, and assembling the basic structure.

 

Thanks for looking,

 

Al.

Edited July 30, 2022 by Alister_G

[Marcus 37]

Looking good mate. I would have thought it should be more than strong enough. The PIR, although light, is quite robust. Damn, I used enough of it on PDW. Six 8x4 to be exact.

[Andrew P]

That looks very good Al, I like the planning mate, it's worked out really well.

[Alister_G]

Well, I've had a really productive day, today.

 

Out of deference to my neighbours, I left it until half-past nine this morning before I converted my front garden into a joinery workshop:

 

 

A little over an hour later, with much screaming of the circular saw, howling of dogs and crying of babies,  I had reduced two sheets of 12mm plywood into a pile of parts:

 

 

The first thing I built were two "L" girders. 

 

 

 

Then, all the longitudinal members were marked out every 12 inches, and the cross joints were cut:

 

 

 

 

Then, the shorter 4 foot lengths were marked, and more cross-joints were cut:

 

 

A notch was cut to accommodate the bottom plate of the rear L girder:

 

 

 

All the sections were then dry-assembled:

 

 

 

I then took the trackbed sheet of ply, which I cut out yesterday, and laid it, and its offcut on the framework, to determine the total width I would require, and the location of the canal section:

 

 

Once I was satisfied, I cut the lateral members to length, and added the second "L" girder as the plinth for the front of the layout:

 

 

 

I had one misfortune, this end of one of the lateral members split after drilling out the screw hole. I will have to glue and clamp this:

 

 

Then, I re laid the trackbed surface to check it was ready for fixing it down:

 

 

 

 

That's most of the woodwork completed, unfortunately rain stopped play before I had chance to fix the track surface to the base framework.

 

I'm pretty happy how it has turned out though, and it is still light enough to lift one-handed, so that's a good thing.

 

I will carry on with this tomorrow, and start cutting flexitrack and thinking about turnout operation.

 

Thanks for looking

 

Al.

[Enterprisingwestern]

The speed you are moving at I fear I may be too late, but, for getting a loco up and down the incline successfully have you considered using the magnetic under track gizmo from, I think, DCC concepts?

 

Mike.

[Andrew P]

Well, I've had a really productive day, today.

 

Out of deference to my neighbours, I left it until half-past nine this morning before I converted my front garden into a joinery workshop:

 

the-cromford-build004.jpg

 

A little over an hour later, with much screaming of the circular saw, howling of dogs and crying of babies,  I had reduced two sheets of 12mm plywood into a pile of parts:

 

the-cromford-build005.jpg

 

The first thing I built were two "L" girders. 

 

the-cromford-build006.jpg

 

the-cromford-build007.jpg

 

Then, all the longitudinal members were marked out every 12 inches, and the cross joints were cut:

 

the-cromford-build008.jpg

 

the-cromford-build009.jpg

 

the-cromford-build010.jpg

 

Then, the shorter 4 foot lengths were marked, and more cross-joints were cut:

 

the-cromford-build011.jpg

 

A notch was cut to accommodate the bottom plate of the rear L girder:

 

the-cromford-build012.jpg

 

the-cromford-build013.jpg

 

All the sections were then dry-assembled:

 

the-cromford-build014.jpg

 

the-cromford-build015.jpg

 

I then took the trackbed sheet of ply, which I cut out yesterday, and laid it, and its offcut on the framework, to determine the total width I would require, and the location of the canal section:

 

the-cromford-build016.jpg

 

Once I was satisfied, I cut the lateral members to length, and added the second "L" girder as the plinth for the front of the layout:

 

the-cromford-build017.jpg

 

the-cromford-build018.jpg

 

I had one misfortune, this end of one of the lateral members split after drilling out the screw hole. I will have to glue and clamp this:

 

the-cromford-build019.jpg

 

Then, I re laid the trackbed surface to check it was ready for fixing it down:

 

the-cromford-build020.jpg

 

the-cromford-build021.jpg

 

the-cromford-build022.jpg

 

That's most of the woodwork completed, unfortunately rain stopped play before I had chance to fix the track surface to the base framework.

 

I'm pretty happy how it has turned out though, and it is still light enough to lift one-handed, so that's a good thing.

 

I will carry on with this tomorrow, and start cutting flexitrack and thinking about turnout operation.

 

Thanks for looking

 

Al.

Such precision mate, that is so professional, and NOT a Hot Glue Gun or any 6 inch nails in sight.

 

Well done Al.

[Alister_G]

Such precision mate, that is so professional, and NOT a Hot Glue Gun or any 6 inch nails in sight.

 

Well done Al.

 

Thanks Andy, that means a lot coming from you.

 

All the six inch nails are carefully hidden in the structure...

 

Al.

[Bogie]

I presume the garden will be all clear for the Easter egg hunt.

Have the negotiations relating to the storage of this marvellous creation been satisfactorily concluded?

 

I know if I constructed something like that outside and made a move to bring it inside I would find all the doors suddenly locked.

[Alister_G]

 

Have the negotiations relating to the storage of this marvellous creation been satisfactorily concluded?

 

I know if I constructed something like that outside and made a move to bring it inside I would find all the doors suddenly locked.

 

I received an exasperated sigh, and a quelling look, which leads me to believe that further sanctions may be exercised in the future...

 

Al.

[gismorail]

One has to admire your determination and resolve for this wonderful piece of construction which seems to being built in full view of the general public in such a restricted space. You must be a very organised chap with a very logical mind to undergo such a task, and I have to say that it puts my efforts to shame with all the space that I have at my disposal which is always a total muddle of tools and off cuts etc .......I bow my head in shame and toff my cap to you in admiration Sir 

[Alister_G]

One has to admire your determination and resolve for this wonderful piece of construction which seems to being built in full view of the general public in such a restricted space. You must be a very organised chap with a very logical mind to undergo such a task, and I have to say that it puts my efforts to shame with all the space that I have at my disposal which is always a total muddle of tools and off cuts etc .......I bow my head in shame and toff my cap to you in admiration Sir 

 

Thank you very much Martin, but you do me undeserved honour, this is the normal state of my cellar / workshop:

 

 

Even Bodgit was horrified!

 

So you can remain shame free

 

Cheers mate,

 

Al.

[Alister_G]

The speed you are moving at I fear I may be too late, but, for getting a loco up and down the incline successfully have you considered using the magnetic under track gizmo from, I think, DCC concepts?

 

Mike.

 

Thanks Mike, sorry I somehow missed your post last night.

 

I have yet to do any experimentation, but I was hoping that due to the relative lack of weight in 00 wagons, it might be possible to just drive the loco up the incline under it's own power, with three or four wagons ahead of it.

 

As I said, I haven't tried it yet, so may have to consider something like you suggest, if I find that it isn't possible.

 

Many thanks,

 

Al.