Any Question Answered

[2mm Andy]

I wonder whether anyone can help as I am looking for the LNWR wagon etches that were available a while ago.I am particularly looking for the Diag 33 covered wagon and the Diag16 brake van but if any one has the whole set that they would like to sell I would be very grateful

John

 

John,

 

Have you tried contacting David Eveleigh or Roland Smith (who commissioned the LNWR kits from David Eveleigh)? If you send an email to the Association Data Officer, he should be able to pass your email on to Roland. I think David's contact details are on his website.

 

HTH

 

Andy

 

(edit to correct name)

Edited November 6, 2018 by 2mm Andy

[Argos]

Hi Coaltank.

 

They are available from Roland Smith.

I'll PM you with his email address when I get home this evening.

 

Angus

[Coal Tank]

Hi Andy and Angus thank you both for replying

I have emailed Roland and he thinks that he may be able to locate some but I thought that I would just ask here just in case someone had some

John

[CF MRC]

Hi Tom,

 

May be worth looking at this:

 

https://tramfabriek.nl/Dapol-a4.html

 

It's for a Dapol A4 but may fit in the Schools tender as well.

 

David

I have just fitted one of these into CF’s Dapol B17. Much better performance, which will make it completely compatible with all the other layout engines. The performance difference reminds me of when I replaced the original Minitrix motor with a Portescap motor in my Johnson single 40 years ago! I wonder if that was the first use of a coreless motor in 2mm scale?

 

Tim

[Lacathedrale]

Before I try my next piece of 2FS track, I want to know how to handle the tie bar. So far, it's been my kryptonite. I've used PCB, but found that any adjustments to the rail alignment causes it to desolder and then I have been soundly unable to get a clean joint back together. Any ideas? I've done (and think I will continue to) soldered PCB track. The method used on the easitrack turnouts worked (or rather, it would have done if I didn't snip the pegs off too close to the bottom of the switchblade tabs.

Edited November 17, 2018 by Lacathedrale

[Izzy]

 

I think that possibly tie-bars are one of those things where either you manage to get them to work easily without issue, or have endless problems until you find a design/solution that works for you. This accounts I believe for the wide number of differing ways of producing some that work reliably without frequently failing.

 

My preference has always been for a type which allow the blades to pivot, even if it is just a little bit. One simple way is to turn the sleeper upside down, drill two small holes ( 0.5/0.6mm) about 7.5mm apart and insert Peco track pins as pivots to attach the blades. They don’t want to be more than 0.5mm above the sleeper to clear the wheel flange but can be filed down afterwards. Putting the non- copper surface on top stops solder creep. Either make sure the solder doesn’t run down the pin to the head and lock it all up, or remove some of the copper around the pin heads first. As an alternative drill the two holes 0.3/0.4mm, stand the sleeper on edge, and loop fine wire through the holes to which the blades are then soldered. Again I removed the copper surface near the loops to leave them flexible.

 

I have used both designs with success but the latter needs clearance cutting into the track surface. Don’t forget to cut a middle isolation slot, it’s easy to forget if the sleeper is on it’s side or upside down........

 

I actually use an under-sleeper tie-bar system now, (different to the available under-baseboard ones but using similar principles), mainly because it looks better and can be hooked up to different ways of operating, manual, servo, etc.

 

Do try and find something reliable first though, whatever it is, because having blades constantly break when trying to progress a layout or get stock running does get very annoying/frustrating over the long term.

 

Izzy

[Lacathedrale]

Thanks Izzy, so if I understand correctly for your pin method is to:

 

Drill a hole under the middle of the tie bar location to account for the actuating wire

Complete the turnout in-situ as normal

Drill a PCB sleeper in the centre, and at a 7.5mm gauge, then slice away some of the copper around the top of the holes to use as a tie bar

Feed track pins from underneath and cut/grind down to 0.5mm above the PCB

Solder the switch blades to the tip of the pins to make them 'captive' to the pcb tie bar

Feed the actuating wire through the centre hole

 

Is that about right?

 

My issue at the moment hasn't so much been that they break, it's that once I'm at the stage where everything is soldered down I find tweaking/troubleshooting basically impossible.

Edited November 17, 2018 by Lacathedrale

[Donw]

What solder are you using 145deg solder may avoid the copper delaminating from the resin base. You can also use Izzy's method of inverted pins with a thin ply sleeper. Provided there is enough clearance when the tiebar is thrown to let  the wheels pass through the open side the actual setting is not critical perhaps try drilling at 7.2mm or 7mm and see if that work better for you. The other thing is to check the blade can nestle correctly against the stock rails. To do this the planned section must match against the stock rails. The planed face should be straight.

 

Don 

[Izzy]

Thanks Izzy, so if I understand correctly for your pin method is to:

 

Drill a hole under the middle of the tie bar location to account for the actuating wire

Complete the turnout in-situ as normal

Drill a PCB sleeper in the centre, and at a 7.5mm gauge, then slice away some of the copper around the top of the holes to use as a tie bar

Feed track pins from underneath and cut/grind down to 0.5mm above the PCB

Solder the switch blades to the tip of the pins to make them 'captive' to the pcb tie bar

Feed the actuating wire through the centre hole

 

Is that about right?

 

My issue at the moment hasn't so much been that they break, it's that once I'm at the stage where everything is soldered down I find tweaking/troubleshooting basically impossible.

Ah, here’s where differing construction methods come into play which often affect/dictate how things are done. Whatever method of track construction I have used I have never built track in-situ. It has always been produced on the bench, (complex formations as sections are easier this way I find), tie-bars added, (so the point is placed over the tie-bar with the pins in it on a flat surface and the blades soldered to the pins when this type is used), the track checked and proved okay, and only then laid. I never use the ‘pin’ type tie-bars with central holes for operating, I find it weakens them too much and they then tend to fracture. But In general I only use them for when quick/temporary tie-bars are needed anyway.

 

If you are building straight onto the baseboard then my advice would be to use under-baseboard tie-bars such as the 3D printed ones the association sells. These allow re-jigging/re-attachment of the blades should joint breakages occur as do my under-sleeper ones. I don’t know how you would/could easily add the pin type tie-bar to a point already laid. It can be done with the sleeper-on-edge type.

 

Izzy

[2mmMark]

There are a number of things you can do to ensure tiebar good health.

 

Most important is a pivoting joint as Izzy mentions. I also use Peco track pins but have also employed phosphor-bronze wire suitably bent in a sort of lazy 3D z-shape.

 

The second is to use something bigger or stronger than a 2mm sleeper.  4mm pcb sleepers filed down so they fit entirely within a pair of sleepers works very well, being wider and thicker than the 2mm sleeper material.  An alternative is a strip of fibreglass or epoxy PCB (FR4 type), again very strong and unlikely to fracture.

 

The third is to move the tiebar gently. This is where wire in tube and other manual methods score over motorised methods. Some point motors are quite aggressive in their movement. If that's the case, some form of cushioning or physical restriction away from the tiebar is essential. It's not necessary to ram the point blades hard up against the running rail, all that's needed is to close them up securely.  Very little force is needed to move 2mm point blades.

 

Mark

[Lacathedrale]

I was always going to build on a work board, but just wanted to make sure that I don't get myself into a sticky corner by soldering bits together without doing the preparatory work ahead of time.

 

Izzy, if you don't use central holes for operating your pin-type tie bars, how DO you operate them?

 

Mark, I'm using an all-soldered construction on my turnouts, so I don't think I can use thicker PCB for the tie bar, unless I fit it in situ with a corresponding gap in the roadbed to permit it?

 

This is how far I've got so:

 

 

I'm happy to gap the PCB after I've soldered it all up, but with regard to this conversation around tie-bars, is there anything special I need to do? Top-left is my only surviving turnout with a the blades soldered directly to the PCB sleeper.

[Izzy]

I was always going to build on a work board, but just wanted to make sure that I don't get myself into a sticky corner by soldering bits together without doing the preparatory work ahead of time.

 

Izzy, if you don't use central holes for operating your pin-type tie bars, how DO you operate them?

 

 

Generally I just solder a wire to the outside edge to connct up whatever I use to move them. Mostly it's manual operation via DPDT switches and rod/wire. Either sunk into slots in the cork base if on top, (which can then be covered over), or mainly underneath. Having gone through several different designs with the 2fs layouts I have bulit in the last few years trying to find a workable solution ( i.e. that can be driven by different means without issue), I would now strongly recommend a type that can be repaired or is so substantial it will not fail, or perhaps a mix of the two which is what I have tried to produce with my under-sleeper design. Some work involved when making and installing them, but hopefully then a case of fit and forget. I'll try and gather some photos of them along with what they look like installed on Priory Road and post them later to give you a few ideas.

 

Izzy

[Izzy]

Okay, here's a few shots of the build of my under-sleeper tie-bars. Self explanatory really.

 

 

Some 4mm pcb sleepers drilled to take 1mm Albion alloy tube, a short central one for an operating wire, the others to connect droppers to the blades. The ID is 0.5mm. Two plain sleepers either side glued to the ply base to which the lower cover is glued. the droppers are long to allow small tube to go on the ends and be crimped to prevent the blades rising up.

 

I make them up in batches for the layout concerned. Catch points just need one dropper of course.

 

 

Sinking the design into the track base means it takes up little depth and it's easy to sit servos over if you want to use them to drive it.The sub-sleeper design also means it's helpful when adding cosmetic details, rodding, FPL's etc. as per that on Priory road.

 

 

Currently I use 1mm brass rodding with DPDT's under the baseboards with short lengths 0.5mm to give a measure of spring take-up, ( this is soldered into the 1mm via drilled holes). this all varies according to needs/location. Can't get to Priory road at the moment. These are from the initial test one.

 

 

Hope this might help give a few alternate ideas for tie-bars. I often think there are as many floating around as there are modellers as we all have our own preferences.

 

cheers,

 

Izzy

[Lacathedrale]

That is most helpful, thank you - It looks like an amazing unit. It seems the association 1-100 under-baseboard operating unit while certainly more pricey than your example may provide a reasonable intermediate solution while I get my eye in (tho these 3D printed ones are >£4 each, any test plank is going to be small enough for this to be swallowed fairly easily). It does seem to operate at a distance though, so I imagine an easitrac turnout bar would be required to keep things aligned at track level?

 

Do you solder the wires for the tie bar to the switch-blades ahead of time, or while they are in-situ? I see the jig on the easitrack turnout construction page but the only reference to it on the shop appears to be an item you can't buy (1-176).

Edited November 18, 2018 by Lacathedrale

[Izzy]

Similar units to the association one have been used in P4 for quite some years. I am not aware that anything other than attaching the droppers to the blades in the same way as mine is needed. However, I developed the simple sub-sleeper design initially back in the early 1980's in P4 because I did find the tendency for the long tubes to allow give/movement if they were very long, i.e. the baseboard through which they went was deep. If I recall correctly both the association and P4 has similar designs as well in the past for this reason. Mine is just a simple/cheap/easy to make version. I attach the droppers to the blades once the unit is in place on the point and fully bonded to it. This ensures the droppers and tubes all line up and there is no/minimal friction. It's all a bit nip & tuck with tie-bars with code 40 being 1mm high and flange depth of 0.5mm leaving just 0.5mm to make a good strong bond with the blades at their thinnest juncture.

 

Izzy

[Lacathedrale]

Gosh, OK - sounds like a challenge but I guess if I just tack the closure rail section of the switch blade then if I make a right pig's ear of it can remove and try again. Thank you!

[Lacathedrale]

Beyond the crossover above, I've got a  single separate turnout completed and working fine other than the dodgy tie-bar/switchblade configuration. Is there any issue with desoldering the switchblades and re cutting/filing/fitting. a new set (in terms of physically being able to align/gauge them) - it seems like I could use a combo of roller and button gauges for the curved closure rail, and then a judicious use of the 3-point gauge for the straight closure rail. Is that correct?

[justin1985]

[quote name="Izzy" post="3369436"

Currently I use 1mm brass rodding with DPDT's under the baseboards with short lengths 0.5mm to give a measure of spring take-up, ( this is soldered into the 1mm via drilled holes). this all varies according to needs/location. Can't get to Priory road at the moment. These are from the initial test one.

 

I think some people seem to have a good natural intuition when it comes to making these kind of mechanical linkages work - in terms of balancing the different throw of the electrical switch and the turnout with the springiness, limits of throw of the linkage etc. Personally, I found this next to impossible (at least without building in stresses that end up with something breaking).

 

I suspect this is something that comes pretty naturally if you've had some kind of background in engineering or equivalent, but is an uphill struggle if not.

 

Justin

[Caley Jim]

I think some people seem to have a good natural intuition when it comes to making these kind of mechanical linkages work - in terms of balancing the different throw of the electrical switch and the turnout with the springiness, limits of throw of the linkage etc. Personally, I found this next to impossible (at least without building in stresses that end up with something breaking).

 

I suspect this is something that comes pretty naturally if you've had some kind of background in engineering or equivalent, but is an uphill struggle if not.

The important thing is to incorporate an omega loop or a Z bend into the linkage. This will then take up any excess throw and keep the switches hard against the stock rails.

 

Jim

[Donw]

I think some people seem to have a good natural intuition when it comes to making these kind of mechanical linkages work - in terms of balancing the different throw of the electrical switch and the turnout with the springiness, limits of throw of the linkage etc. Personally, I found this next to impossible (at least without building in stresses that end up with something breaking).

 

I suspect this is something that comes pretty naturally if you've had some kind of background in engineering or equivalent, but is an uphill struggle if not.

 

Justin

 

You learn by doing these things. The more you do the more you develop a feel for when it is set right.

AS for the engineering background it depends somewhat on what engineering you do. My years as a cable jointer did leave me with no fear of wiring however complex but most soldering was doing lead wipes on cables with a blowtorch and solder sticks of 1in by 1/4in section not exactly transferable to 2mm etched brass.

 

Don

[Izzy]

I think some people seem to have a good natural intuition when it comes to making these kind of mechanical linkages work - in terms of balancing the different throw of the electrical switch and the turnout with the springiness, limits of throw of the linkage etc. Personally, I found this next to impossible (at least without building in stresses that end up with something breaking).

 

I suspect this is something that comes pretty naturally if you've had some kind of background in engineering or equivalent, but is an uphill struggle if not.

 

Justin

 

Sorry you have difficulty with it Justin, perhaps it does just come naturally to me, I have never had training of any kind in the engineering or construction fields, or much else come to that. Mostly self-taught whatever has been involved, which usually shows quite easily!

 

I wonder if a couple more shots of the latest install on Priory road might assist. I dug it out of it's storage cupboard to take a couple.

 

 

Firstly I don't use omega loops or Z springs to take up excess travel. You can see the rod is bent a few times and then held loosly in place with Peco track pins bent into a U shape and driven into the baseboard ( handy when it's mount board, they go in nice and easy!). This shape adds a bit of 'give' in the rod but also prevents it twisting and the end falling out of the tie-bar. Had that happen...... Generally the rods/switches are placed in a fairly straight line from the tie-bar position as the layout is built/track designed and laid.

 

 

The DPDT switches I use are from Expo tools, also available from local model shops which they supply, and where I normally get them. They are quite large, but have a softer, sprung type action. I drill a hole though the middle of the handle bit so whatever size rod I use ( either 1mm if short runs or 1.5mm if much longer than 12") is a nice easy sliding fit. I then add two short lengths of tube (round or square - whatever is to hand/available) over the rod each side of the handle. These are then used to 'set' the limit of rod travel. Set the switch one way, push the tube up to the handle just so it holds the blades under tension in  that direction - you have to be pushing/pulling the rod through the handle at the same time, easier to do than explain ; and fix with a spot of solder. Reverse the switch and do the same the other way. By adjusting just where these tube limiters are fixed in conection with the spring nature of the switch it is possible to get them to set the blades firmly without them being under too much tension.

 

Please ignore the brass bar. That is a simple locking idea to prevent both the switches to the single slip being set the wrong way causing a short. This is problem with a single-slip that doesn't occur with a double-slip.

 

Hope this might help a bit,

 

regards,

 

Izzy

Edited November 20, 2018 by Izzy

[CF MRC]

I think some people seem to have a good natural intuition when it comes to making these kind of mechanical linkages work - in terms of balancing the different throw of the electrical switch and the turnout with the springiness, limits of throw of the linkage etc. Personally, I found this next to impossible (at least without building in stresses that end up with something breaking).

I suspect this is something that comes pretty naturally if you've had some kind of background in engineering or equivalent, but is an uphill struggle if not.

Justin

Maybe, but not many could write as mean a history as you can Justin.

 

Tim

[justin1985]

I'm still working my way through some of the unfinished wagons from Bill Blackburn's collection on and off. Currently working on three SR 8 plank wagons.

 

I've used chassis 2-366 for them, which Bill had left in the same box. This is SR 10' 4 shoe fitted.

 

From the instructions I've deduced the brake system is called "Monarch" - which I'm not at all familiar with, and can't find any description or diagram of in any of my wagon books or online (I've never focused on modelling the SR, so don't have any dedicated SR wagon books). I haven't even managed to find a clear enough photo on Paul Bartlett's album site.

 

Unfortunately the instructions aren't that detailed on this particular point. Or at least I can't really visualise what is meant to happen with the linkage from them. 

 

 

 Fold up the brake levers (parts 8, or 8B for the bullied underframe). Small location pips are etched on the levers where bends are required. First form the main profile of the lever – guides are found on the etch to assist with this. Next fold up the brake lever ratchet into a box shape. Finally for Monarch brakes fold the linkage to the V hanger. This is best done over a scrap of nickel silver sheet, such as the underframe etch surround itself. Now solder the brake levers in place onto the rod protruding form the V hanger, and into the slots provided in the solebar. Trim off the excess brass rod.

 

Initially I thought one of the holes on each side was meant to align to the other small projecting tab below the solebar with a hole on each side - but I can't actually see these on the diagram on the website, so perhaps I was meant to snap these off? 

 

 

I've snapped one of the levers already by trying different folds to get something that works, so thought it would be worth checking I've got the right idea now before risking any more folding. Does each lever fold back over itself - so its essentially U shaped? And then does it have one side in front and one behind the V hanger? 

 

Cheers

 

Justin

[PaulCheffus]

I've snapped one of the levers already by trying different folds to get something that works, so thought it would be worth checking I've got the right idea now before risking any more folding. Does each lever fold back over itself - so its essentially U shaped? And then does it have one side in front and one behind the V hanger? 

Hi Justin

 

Although not the same type of underframe hopefully this shows that the end I think you are referring to isn't bent into a U shape but flat.

 

 

Cheers

 

Paul

[Chris Higgs]

 

 

Chris