Baseboard Legs

[BenW]

Hi all,

 

I'm in the process of building a small-space shunting layout, but I'm having problems coming up with a design for the legs.

 

The 2 boards are already built - one is 3'1"x 1'. The other is the same length, but is 12" wide and one end and 18" wide at the other end (sketch drawing attached). Both boards are 6" deep and are made of 6mm plywood in 'box' form. The larger of the two boards will have a cassette fiddle yard to one side of the wide end, so this board needs to be as stable as possible.

 

I'm looking fir the follwing specs for the legs:

1. The top of the boards should be 4 feet from the floor. The legs therefore need to be 3 1/2 feet tall.
2. The legs should not protrude outside the width of the boards at any point.
3. I'm not a fan of trestles (too bloomin' difficult to get right!), so would ideally like the legs to be perpendicular to the baseboards' surface.
4. The support system should ideally be free-standing (for the larger board at least), so that the layout boards can just be 'plonked' on top.

Any thought people? Ordinarily this would be a piece of cake, but having the end of one board wider than the other is causing me some trouble. I'm currently studying away from home, but will upload some photos of the boards as soon as I can.

 

Cheers,

 

Ben

[Kenton]

I think your specs 3 and 4 are exclusive unless you build a table.

Normal 'A' frame trestles would normally be ideal - and I'm not sure why you find them difficult to "get right" - they can be made to be adjustable in height and free standing.

Other alternative designs such as tripods and X frames (like that which supports the infernal invention, the ironing board) can be made but are less adjustable in height.

A simple post in each corner works well with adjustment feet - but I have found them very wobbly in practice and they most certainly are NOT free standing.

[66C]

Hi Ben

 

The drawing shows a design we have used for two different layouts so far.

 

 

 

The legs are built as units. The longitudinals and diagonals are strips of timber.

All is fitted together using flushmounts - see:

 

http://www.screwfix.com/prods/11423/Ironmongery/Brackets/Brackets/Flush-Mounts-Zinc-Plated-3-75-x-35-x-36-87mm-Pack-of-10

 

The pack of 10 is actually 10 pairs - a fraction of the price in B&Q.

 

No tools are needed for assembly - very useful for exhibition layouts and they take up very little space for transport.

 

Although the design is intended for rectangular baseboards, it could be readily adapted for other shapes by varying the leg design.

 

Nearly forgot to mention - the legs fit inside the baseboard frame which is supported by the upper longitudinals.

 

Regards

 

Bill Campbell.

[cromptonnut]

Thanks for posting this - I never knew those "interlock" things existed - I can see all sorts of potential there.

[Donw]

I use a lightweight base unit on which the baseboards sits. Additional baseboards then only need a single pair of legs. I attach some photos which I have compressed to reduce file size.

 

 

 

Note the two end boards have a curved front with the ends wider than the centre board. Hope this helps.

 

Donw

 

ps. The board bracing the legs is 4mm ply.

[Gwiwer]

Another quick-assembly product is slotted angle steel sections such as Dexion. That is what I use. Not only does that prevent any rot in the legs (on an outdoor layout) but they are also light and would be easy to move. Assembly is simple with nothing more complex than hex-bolts to tighten. The worst that can happen is you might need to cut the standard lengths to the height you require. That's also not so hard but do take care when cutting metal and wear both eye and hand protection.

 

I also use Dexion-style strips to form cradles which take the weight of each baseboard separately. The boards are bolted together but each sits in its own steel cradle and could, if required, be lifted out.

[unravelled]

I know you said no trestles, but maybe there are some ideas in these which you could adapt. These were a couple of trestles I made 30 odd years ago to test some ideas. I was looking for a way of making them thinner when folded.

">

 

The idea I had was to hinge then asymmetrically. this probably shows better in the right hand version. If this is allowed to sink down to the floor, it ends up at just two thicknesses of wood high. The asymmetry means it would be a little longer than a symmetricay version, but that would be at least 3 thicknesses when folded.

If you want legs at right angles to the top, the left hand version would do just that.

These were just done to test geometry, and could do probably with greater rigidity. The inner pair of legs could easily be cross braced, possibly even joined with sheet material.

 

These were hinged with countersunk allen headed bolts into threaed inserts, so could be tightened into a rigid structure in use.

 

Just add adjustable feet to finis

 

hth

 

Dave

[mjcampbell]

Ditto about Trestles ...like Unravelled I considered the design of trestles for some time, so that that could be compact when folded, produce a free-standing frame to support various layouts (so I didn't have to keep making more legs each time), and perhaps most importantly, easy to make with minimum of skill and tools. I borrowed a circular mitre-saw but other than that I used a jigsaw, cordless drill/driver, 2"x1" timber, and some MDF. Here's what I did ... described on my blog.

 

Some dodgy and none-too-clear photos:

 

Using the timber at right-angles to the norm makes it better able to take the load, while one side of the trestle slots into the other when folded so it is only as deep as the 2" timber plus MDF brace on the "outer" legs. Hinges are just bolts, all joints are just screwed, and the only complex bit is working out the lengths and angles (remember trigonometry? ) and cutting the timber at the angle (hence mitre saw). I made beams to support the layout but that isn't necessary.

[BenW]

Thanks for the advice everybody - some good stuff in there.

 

I especially liked mjcampbell's advice on the use of school trigonometry and a mitre saw - quite frankly it's a bit embarrasing that I didn't think of it before! I'm now gradually coming round to the idea of trestles as the most suitable option, especially as with this design their depth when folded is kept to a minimum. I just have to knobble a friend's mitre saw for the weekend now...

 

Apologies for the late reply by the way, I was expecting RMweb to drop me an email when I got a topic replied to, but apparently things don't work like that! I was just checking on the off-chance and found seven replies waiting for me - all very surprising.

 

Right, time to get the calculator out and get drawing (not with the calculator obviously, I'll use a pencil for that bit...). Progress will be ridiculously slow as I have a dissertation to write this summer, but I'll try and get some pictures of the baseboards up a when I get half a chance. Will start a layout thread at some point as well - I'll post a link on this thread when I ger round to it.

 

Many thanks again.