Helston Revisited

[Andy Keane]

10 hours ago, 5BarVT said:

45 years ago I used a wooden alignment system - it was fine for accuracy but I could see it wearing a bit. It was alignment posts not dowels so a greater wear area, but also in pine not hardwood.  My worry with hardwood dowels would be wear over time and possibly vulnerability to snapping.
I’m a great fan of DCC Concepts alignment dowels because they are accurate and also easy to fit.  My old boards got separated quite a bit and didn’t show any signs of wear. (I haven’t, and probably wouldn’t use their power connector dowels.).

Paul.

 

Great! The DCC dowels look perfect. I was thinking of having to machine my own from brass stock but why bother when you can get those. Many thanks for that lead 

Andy

Edited July 4, 2021 by Andy Keane

[Andy Keane]

When I did this last time the standard approach was to lay cork sheet on the baseboard with PVA type glue and then pin or glue the track down. Is this still the best approach? There are now things like gorilla glue but this seems like overkill to me. Also getting the track exactly where it needs to be is clearly still critical. I could get the whole plan printed full scale on a single roll of paper and glue that over the cork. I also have read about people getting their track plan laser etched onto the base boards but then the cork would cover it. So is there a thread someplace in RMweb that sets out a good approach - I have searched but not found a good summary. I will also need to match up the custom entrance throat track on fibreglass sleepers with the Peco code 75 bullhead so that may require some slight packing.

[Andy Keane]

Also having found the DCC concepts stuff I am looking at using their ABC modules to control movements in the fiddle yard, though I still want to “drive” in the station, so I will need to wire in the braking and stop zones there which will of course require rail cuts. So this is another worry when laying the track. Is it best to track lay first and then cut the track to create zones or cut first and then lay? I am rather inclined to lay first. Though I will need to get the point motors in first I guess. What I really need is a well set out book on this aspect.

Andy

Edited July 5, 2021 by Andy Keane

[5BarVT]

Back to dowels: here are some examples so that you can learn from my experience (= mistakes).

 

I recommend that you invest in their pack with the right sized spade bits, even though that will probably leave you with one spare dowel.  The technique is to drill a pilot hole right through, then rebate @ 19mm from the outside and then finish with 13mm from the inside.  Its easy to countersink too deep . . . I used the female dowel the wrong way round until it went in far enough but discovered that the 13mm hole removed some of the centre so that it then slips too far in.  Now I just make sure that outer edge of the hole is deep enough and that seems to get it sitting right.  Easy enough to do some practice holes in scrap if you can generate the patience (!)

 

This is the first joint I did: 9mm end board with ~21mm corner support.  You can see how deep the dowel is inside.  The problem with that is that even with the pilot hole right the way through there is too much scope for the 13mm hole to wander off centre.

 

This was a later joint on the old layout showing 9mm side with 6mm scrap added to give sufficient depth.

 

This is my latest layout using 2x6mm bonded together - sufficient depth and less opportunity for wandering off course.

 

And finally, one drilled but not yet fitted.  On the left hole you can see that the white paint has overlapped on the inside.  Before fitting I will ease that back to size with the 13mm drill and also use the 19mm to clear the grey paint out of the corners of the rebate.  The DCC Concepts spade bits are the same size as screwdriver bits so I use a manual screwdriver for this as I can do it more gently and carefully.

 

Paul.

[Stubby47]

For track laying, I tend to lay the critical / central / most difficult set of points first, and then line up the connecting tracks by eye to get the smoothest alignment.

If I have other points which are also critical, then I lay those next, then the track between them is laid after, again aligned by eye.

 

 

Edited July 5, 2021 by Stubby47

[Andy Keane]

53 minutes ago, 5BarVT said:

Back to dowels: here are some examples so that you can learn from my experience (= mistakes).

 

I recommend that you invest in their pack with the right sized spade bits, even though that will probably leave you with one spare dowel.  The technique is to drill a pilot hole right through, then rebate @ 19mm from the outside and then finish with 13mm from the inside.  Its easy to countersink too deep . . . I used the female dowel the wrong way round until it went in far enough but discovered that the 13mm hole removed some of the centre so that it then slips too far in.  Now I just make sure that outer edge of the hole is deep enough and that seems to get it sitting right.  Easy enough to do some practice holes in scrap if you can generate the patience (!)

 

This is the first joint I did: 9mm end board with ~21mm corner support.  You can see how deep the dowel is inside.  The problem with that is that even with the pilot hole right the way through there is too much scope for the 13mm hole to wander off centre.

 

This was a later joint on the old layout showing 9mm side with 6mm scrap added to give sufficient depth.

 

This is my latest layout using 2x6mm bonded together - sufficient depth and less opportunity for wandering off course.

 

And finally, one drilled but not yet fitted.  On the left hole you can see that the white paint has overlapped on the inside.  Before fitting I will ease that back to size with the 13mm drill and also use the 19mm to clear the grey paint out of the corners of the rebate.  The DCC Concepts spade bits are the same size as screwdriver bits so I use a manual screwdriver for this as I can do it more gently and carefully.

 

Paul.

Paul, that’s really helpful and I will get their full kit and do some practising. I am buying laser cut ply base boards so I don’t want to duff them up. I guess everyone is happy with just two dowels per joint. Do you put them wide apart or say it’s the track that matters and place them near the running rails? I would guess wide apart and assume the board will be stiff enough. I was wondering about using three pairs, one each side and one close to the track junction which is the really crucial area. Finally is this just bog standard paint or do you have views about what to use on base boards? As ever keen to pick more experienced brains.

Andy

[Andy Keane]

22 minutes ago, Stubby47 said:

For track laying, I tend to lay the critical / central / most difficult set of points first, and then line up the connecting tracks by eye to get the smoothest alignment.

If I have other points which are also critical, then I lay those next, then the track between them is laid after, again aligned by eye.

 

 

Interesting, I do agree the eye often sees a better curve than strict geometry. I think if I get the Marcway built throat section in first that will be how I start but on a station eighteen feet long by two foot six wide if I get the angle wrong I am going to be sorry! Maybe it will be worth having a long straight edge to help line up the platform edge rail as well.

From what you say you don’t see a need for a full length 1:1 track plan to paste down first though.

Andy

[Andy Keane]

4 minutes ago, Andy Keane said:

Paul, that’s really helpful and I will get their full kit and do some practising. I am buying laser cut ply base boards so I don’t want to duff them up. I guess everyone is happy with just two dowels per joint. Do you put them wide apart or say it’s the track that matters and place them near the running rails? I would guess wide apart and assume the board will be stiff enough. I was wondering about using three pairs, one each side and one close to the track junction which is the really crucial area. Finally is this just bog standard paint or do you have views about what to use on base boards? As ever keen to pick more experienced brains.

Andy

Ps - I see you use some make of snap over clip to join boards - is this any particular make?

[5BarVT]

1 hour ago, Andy Keane said:

Paul, that’s really helpful and I will get their full kit and do some practising. I am buying laser cut ply base boards so I don’t want to duff them up. I guess everyone is happy with just two dowels per joint. Do you put them wide apart or say it’s the track that matters and place them near the running rails? I would guess wide apart and assume the board will be stiff enough. I was wondering about using three pairs, one each side and one close to the track junction which is the really crucial area. Finally is this just bog standard paint or do you have views about what to use on base boards? As ever keen to pick more experienced brains.

Andy

Wide apart - as long as the end piece is rigid, and on laser cut boards it will be.  I guess it is 6mm ply ends - just stick a scrap piece inside where you want the dowel.  ‘Scrap’ is perhaps easier said than done with laser cut boards!

I just use one pair per join. From memory, DCC Concepts say up to 3’ wide for one pair.  See 30 June 2019 in my thread:

The top board is 18” wide and has tracks at an angle and I never had any problems with derailments on the join.  The dowels are on 395mm centres.

 

Paint:

Anything does, it’s just to seal the wood to minimise expansion due to humidity.  I know some people use cheap emulsion.  Mine happens to be Dulux so that it matched the woodwork of the room the railway was in before we moved house and I have stuck with that so that new matches old.  Inside is white to make it easier to see (Armstead (Dulux by another name) because that’s what all the woodwork is in our new house).  I put on undercoat first so as the gloss goes further, and inside I gloss to so that I have a smooth surface for labels.  A matt finish would be easier for writing in pencil!

 

Paul.

 

 

[5BarVT]

1 hour ago, Andy Keane said:

Ps - I see you use some make of snap over clip to join boards - is this any particular make?

They are Protex, bought direct from their website.  Only downside is that postage is a significant factor as they aren’t that expensive!

 

I use 18-2204MSZN and 18-1204MSZN latches and 01-2204MSZN, 01-613MSZN, 02-613MSZN, 03-613MSZN and 07-613MSZN catch plates depending on fit.  The long catches 18-2204MSZN and catch plates 02-613MSZN are my preferred choice but I have (or will) use all of them when limited space etc comes into play.

 

Very good service dealing direct with them.

 

Paul.

[Andy Keane]

7 minutes ago, 5BarVT said:

They are Protex, bought direct from their website.  Only downside is that postage is a significant factor as they aren’t that expensive!

 

I use 18-2204MSZN and 18-1204MSZN latches and 01-2204MSZN, 01-613MSZN, 02-613MSZN, 03-613MSZN and 07-613MSZN catch plates depending on fit.  The long catches 18-2204MSZN and catch plates 02-613MSZN are my preferred choice but I have (or will) use all of them when limited space etc comes into play.

 

Very good service dealing direct with them.

 

Paul.

Just had a look - a huge selection to chose from. Did you consider the sprung ones which might not need such accurate fitting? Or are the ones you show relatively easy to get right? I plan to link all the boards up upside down to start with so should not be too hard I guess.

[5BarVT]

1 minute ago, Andy Keane said:

Just had a look - a huge selection to chose from. Did you consider the sprung ones which might not need such accurate fitting? Or are the ones you show relatively easy to get right? I plan to link all the boards up upside down to start with so should not be too hard I guess.

Almost too many!

 

The two catches I quoted are sprung (slightly).  You do only get one shot with fixing and first time round some of mine were very stiff and others a bit loose.  I forgot to say that I use 9mm No.6 pan head self tap to secure them.  The are slightly sloppy in the fixing hole so I fit offset so that they don’t slip closer.  I’ve taken to fitting one screw each side with the catch pulled finger tight then unclip, slide slightly further out and put in the second screw.  Same again on the latch if the first ‘move’ isn’t enough.  Again, a bit of practice on scrap wood will give you confidence.

 

On my old layout, one was very loose and I ended up wrapping thin card round the latch and securing with tape to make a bit tighter.  Didn’t look as pretty but it worked!

 

Paul.

[5BarVT]

I’ve seen your post about lever colours and it has reminded me to come back here about the layout.

Your signalling plan is the 1958 version and includes the stone siding.  The 1956 plan does not have the stone siding: Tony Cooke’s Track Layout Plans annotates it as being removed in 1932 and reinstated 1958.  Will you be modelling it In or Out?

Looking at the track layout plans and photos on the cornwall railways site I can ‘see’ a design for the original layout using 13 levers of a 14 lever frame with ‘shunt’ signals being point indicators operated directly from the point rodding.  As the layout was altered, it was amended to separate points and shunt signals and an additional FPL such that by ‘56 only one point indicator remained at the far end of the loop.  Due to limited levers/spaces some levers were not in the ideal place in the frame and an extra lever 0 had been added.

Paul.

[Andy Keane]

On 30/06/2021 at 07:42, Andy Keane said:

About to order up the baseboards.

Order now in. 3-6 week wait and then I will be buried in laser cut ply.

[Andy Keane]

On 05/07/2021 at 20:56, 5BarVT said:

I’ve seen your post about lever colours and it has reminded me to come back here about the layout.

Your signalling plan is the 1958 version and includes the stone siding.  The 1956 plan does not have the stone siding: Tony Cooke’s Track Layout Plans annotates it as being removed in 1932 and reinstated 1958.  Will you be modelling it In or Out?

Looking at the track layout plans and photos on the cornwall railways site I can ‘see’ a design for the original layout using 13 levers of a 14 lever frame with ‘shunt’ signals being point indicators operated directly from the point rodding.  As the layout was altered, it was amended to separate points and shunt signals and an additional FPL such that by ‘56 only one point indicator remained at the far end of the loop.  Due to limited levers/spaces some levers were not in the ideal place in the frame and an extra lever 0 had been added.

Paul.

I plan to have the stone siding so from what you say I am basically modelling 1930 to 1932. Is there any way of seeing the signal plan at that point and the matching frame layout? It would be really helpful to know what ground signals were in play then and how driven. I guess the main semaphores were unchanged from then until closure?
Andy

[5BarVT]

Hi Andy,

 

I think that the last changes that would affect the signalling will have been 1925, so the 1956 plan will be good for ‘39-‘32, with a couple of assumptions that I will list.  I’ll have a go at something over the next few days.

Paul.

[5BarVT]

I’ve also been thinking about sprung points and FPLs when using DCC points.  Can you remind me how you think your system will work?  (What will the DCC Concepts levers connect to and how will the points be connected.)

Paul.

[Andy Keane]

4 hours ago, 5BarVT said:

Hi Andy,

 

I think that the last changes that would affect the signalling will have been 1925, so the 1956 plan will be good for ‘39-‘32, with a couple of assumptions that I will list.  I’ll have a go at something over the next few days.

Paul.

Thanks, it will be great to settle on the correct ground signal layout but no doubt you saw how the one down at the far end of the platform has been in two places in this range of dates. I do plan to have working ground signals but will try and control them as per a real gwr box.

Andy

[Andy Keane]

4 hours ago, 5BarVT said:

I’ve also been thinking about sprung points and FPLs when using DCC points.  Can you remind me how you think your system will work?  (What will the DCC Concepts levers connect to and how will the points be connected.)

Paul.

I plan to drive each and every point direct from its own lever / DCC concepts switch, except the loco spur catch point and the stone siding point which seem to follow the feeding points. So if that is correct I will link these to the same DCC switch. Similarly some ground signals seem to link to some points so can share a switch. I plan to drive the box fully manually as though I was actually in the real one. I will ignore FPLs except to add some representative static modelling and paint the switch lever tops blue. The sprung points remain an issue. I will add motors but may use some kind of track sensor to “spring” them open when crossed. The alternative is to simply add levers that were never present in reality in the box on the grounds that the points did have ground levers. Maybe those levers would need their own colour to make clear that although alongside the box levers they are really “remote” ground levers. Any thoughts?

Andy

[5BarVT]

A suggestion for your hand points and sprung points.

This link is to a photo of the lever frame at Porthmellyn Rd on St. Enodoc’s layout.  All the signalled functions are connected to the frame, but the hand points are controlled by a separate set of switches that you can see behind and to the right.  For sprung points, just use a biased switch  ON-(ON) rather than a two way ON-ON.  Though you might get fed up with having to hold in position when shunting, so for model purposes it might be better to just make them ‘normal’ hand points.

Paul.

[5BarVT]

Hi Andy,

 

I’ve made up a table for the 1956 frame which I think will also be what was present in 1932.  Following a comment from The Stationmaster, and the photo of the point indicator signal, I have assumed that the diagram has transposed the shunt signal and the indicator.  Since no-one can know for sure, we can’t be wrong!  There aren’t enough levers to signal the Stone Siding accessed from the Loading Dock so I have also assumed that shunt signal 4 in the Dock is fitted with a white light to permit a move into the siding when the signal is on.  It’s all right under the eyes of the signalman so can be controlled safely by communication between him and the shunter.

 

Paul.

 

Helston 1956.pdf

[Andy Keane]

2 hours ago, 5BarVT said:

A suggestion for your hand points and sprung points.

This link is to a photo of the lever frame at Porthmellyn Rd on St. Enodoc’s layout.  All the signalled functions are connected to the frame, but the hand points are controlled by a separate set of switches that you can see behind and to the right.  For sprung points, just use a biased switch  ON-(ON) rather than a two way ON-ON.  Though you might get fed up with having to hold in position when shunting, so for model purposes it might be better to just make them ‘normal’ hand points.

Paul.

That’s an impressive frame. I will not have so many levers but it is what I have in mind as an approach. I will use extra levers for the sprung points and as I said not bother with locking levers so I hope 20 levers max. I also plan a classic box diagram to go with it. Do you know if StEndoc actually controls working locks from his box? He has lots of “blues”.

regards

Andy

[Andy Keane]

2 minutes ago, 5BarVT said:

Hi Andy,

 

I’ve made up a table for the 1956 frame which I think will also be what was present in 1932.  Following a comment from The Stationmaster, and the photo of the point indicator signal, I have assumed that the diagram has transposed the shunt signal and the indicator.  Since no-one can know for sure, we can’t be wrong!  There aren’t enough levers to signal the Stone Siding accessed from the Loading Dock so I have also assumed that shunt signal 4 in the Dock is fitted with a white light to permit a move into the siding when the signal is on.  It’s all right under the eyes of the signalman so can be controlled safely by communication between him and the shunter.

 

Paul.

 

Helston 1956.pdf 41.52 kB · 1 download

Paul, very many thanks for this. I will update my diagram to match and copy it back here just to be sure I have it right. I will also add the extra levers I will need for my frame to deal with the sprung points and ground levers. Are there any obvious rules for how the table would have evolved if GWR had decided to control everything from the box?

Andy

[St Enodoc]

2 hours ago, Andy Keane said:

That’s an impressive frame. I will not have so many levers but it is what I have in mind as an approach. I will use extra levers for the sprung points and as I said not bother with locking levers so I hope 20 levers max. I also plan a classic box diagram to go with it. Do you know if StEndoc actually controls working locks from his box? He has lots of “blues”.

regards

Andy

Andy, the FPLs are dummies but the levers are there for the interlocking - they just don't activate anything.

[St Enodoc]

10 hours ago, 5BarVT said:

A suggestion for your hand points and sprung points.

This link is to a photo of the lever frame at Porthmellyn Rd on St. Enodoc’s layout.  All the signalled functions are connected to the frame, but the hand points are controlled by a separate set of switches that you can see behind and to the right.  For sprung points, just use a biased switch  ON-(ON) rather than a two way ON-ON.  Though you might get fed up with having to hold in position when shunting, so for model purposes it might be better to just make them ‘normal’ hand points.

Paul.

Thanks Paul. That was the temporary handpoint panel. A few pages later in the thread you can see the permanent panel, to the left of the frame, which has rotary switches for the hand points and biased toggle switches for the uncoupler magnets.

 

 

Edited July 9, 2021 by St Enodoc