RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 16, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 16, 2012 I am going to base my branchline viaduct on Lunds (S&C). This has a much wider archspan and thicker piers. Lunds is double track, my branch will only be single. My viaduct will also (hee hee) be curved... Hopefully the different style will contrast with the one I've just built. Jeff Will it also be a bit lower Jeff? (in order to give a view over it to the big 'un on the mainline perchance?) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted July 16, 2012 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted July 16, 2012 (edited) Hi Mike, I can't really make it any lower given that the branchline and mainline leave the station at almost the same place and cross the river very close to each other. That's a real pity as I'd like to have a clear view of both viaducts. Any suggestions? Btw, the single track branch viaduct will be 3 arches and about two-thirds the length of the previous one. Jeff Edited July 16, 2012 by Physicsman Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 16, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 16, 2012 Hi Mike, I can't really make it any lower given that the branchline and mainline leave the station at almost the same place and cross the river very close to each other. That's a real pity as I'd like to have a clear view of both viaducts. Any suggestions? Btw, the single track branch viaduct will be 3 arches and about two-thirds the length of the previous one. Jeff Not sure how big your branch trains will be but how much drop do you get with a 1in60(ish) gradient straight of the platform end? (a viaduct on a curve on a gradient, hmm!!! ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted July 16, 2012 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted July 16, 2012 Yes, I don't think I'll go there. I'm almost tempted to scrap the branch line, but I think that would reduce the level of operations on the layout. So I think it'll just be a contrast in size and shape between the two bridges! Jeff 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWJ Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Or... Will's silly idea No.2: If the branchline viaduct were to be built in a much lighter style it wouldn't eclipse the view of the main line viaduct - I'm thinking of long steel plate girders with fewer piers, or even one of those spindly metal viaducts (not sure if there are any left) favoured by the NER in rural areas. The kind of thing you'd find on the coastal route through Whitby or the Stainmore line. I'll stop waffling and link to some photos: http://www.bridgesonthetyne.co.uk/images/lipwood1.jpg http://www.atlaso.com/images/Trackstuff/girderbridge.jpg http://www.stainmore150.co.uk/images/Belah%20500.jpg http://ecol.org.uk/loftus/wp-content/MAX/2011_04/scn_002.jpg ...obviously if you went for the 'spindly' type (only the most professional civil engineering terminology here) yours would be smaller and less complex, but construction could still be a daunting prospect! Cheers, Will Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted July 16, 2012 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted July 16, 2012 Will, I assume silly idea number 1 was the curved viaduct! It was actually a great idea and I have to admit that you were the initial catalyst in setting the wheels in motion! Idea number 2 is also a good one - though I haven't a clue how to build one! I'm going to have a re-think about the whole branchline concept and where it crosses the stream. Keep the ideas coming - this thread is open for any discussion, the more the better!! cheers, Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 16, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 16, 2012 Jeff how far are the two viaducts from the platform ends? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted July 16, 2012 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted July 16, 2012 Approximately 90cm - shall we say 3 feet in old money... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted July 16, 2012 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted July 16, 2012 Mike, I'm assuming you are going to suggest a 1:45ish gradient, allowing a 2cm drop for the branch... If the branch only handles traffic in an anticlockwise direction I could go a bit steeper... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted July 16, 2012 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted July 16, 2012 Alternatively, behaving Godlike, I can move the river a little, giving a bit more distance between the platform and branch viaduct. Yes, that might work. I will play with the plans...back soon! Jeff PS casual observers, please bear with these musings! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 16, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 16, 2012 Mike, I'm assuming you are going to suggest a 1:45ish gradient, allowing a 2cm drop for the branch... If the branch only handles traffic in an anticlockwise direction I could go a bit steeper... I think 1in45 is too steep Jeff - I wouldn't go any steeper than 1in60 even assuming quite short branch trains but what I was going to suggest was to also put a slight rising gradient into the mainlines up to the viaduct (then level) plus some perspective/gradient trickery with the river bank to add to the suggestion that the branch is dropping away from the mainline. More a germ of an idea than anything really solid at present but perhaps you can see the way my mind is moving? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted July 16, 2012 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted July 16, 2012 I think 1in45 is too steep Jeff - I wouldn't go any steeper than 1in60 even assuming quite short branch trains but what I was going to suggest was to also put a slight rising gradient into the mainlines up to the viaduct (then level) plus some perspective/gradient trickery with the river bank to add to the suggestion that the branch is dropping away from the mainline. More a germ of an idea than anything really solid at present but perhaps you can see the way my mind is moving? Mike, I see your idea. Of course, even a 1:90 rise to the main viaduct and a 1:90 fall to the branch viaduct could generate a 2cm difference in height. B****y laptop I'm using for the plans is loading updates at the mo, so can't see about moving the river just yet. Keep thinking about it and I'm sure a viable solution will appear. Costs nothing to think! Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 16, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 16, 2012 I wonder if moving the river a bit might indeed might indeed work? if it were to come under the mainline viaduct more or less parallel tp the left hand (on the drawing) wall of the room and centred where its current right hand bank is (so the viaduct is no longer at an approximate right angle to it) the continue so the branch crosses pretty near to 'e' at the end of the legend 'hillside' after which the river is deflected sharply towards the operating well by a rock 'wall' (over which the railway passes into the tunnel) would that work? Albeit more shades of Monsal Head than the high Pennines but ... http://www.google.co.uk/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=monsal+head+viaduct&oe=UTF-8&redir_esc=&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=UXMEUMCHD9Sa1AXnm724Bw&biw=1096&bih=970&sei=VnMEUNT8KfSq0AXV_62KBw Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted July 16, 2012 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted July 16, 2012 Mike. a quick whizz gives this... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted July 16, 2012 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted July 16, 2012 Sorry Mike, I posted that picture before I read your post. the diagram below may be closer to what you had in mind. It certainly shifts the branch viaduct across instead of being directly in line with the mainline. I may not have it quite right, but maybe it's getting there? Anyone else is free to comment! Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted July 17, 2012 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted July 17, 2012 Basic measurements made for branch viaduct. Busy with retirement "dos" for the next couple of days, so it may be Friday before any cutting action takes place. You've seen it all before on the previous 4 pages, so to save a great "yawn" I will keep details to a minimum. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew P Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Hi Jeff, I have been reading this with interest over the last few days, I am glad I read the bit about the gradient, I was planning a 1 in 60 ish for my main line on my LAST GREAT PROJECT, and that would have involved full (poss 30+) wagon frieghts behind 8f etc. Back to the drawing board, I will be back in about a MONTH OR TWO, ha ha. all the best Andy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 17, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 17, 2012 Sorry Mike, I posted that picture before I read your post. the diagram below may be closer to what you had in mind. It certainly shifts the branch viaduct across instead of being directly in line with the mainline. I may not have it quite right, but maybe it's getting there? Anyone else is free to comment! Jeff Getting towards what I had in mind - if I get a chance later today I 'draw on it' (!!) to hopefully give a clearer impression of mumblings. and you need to watch all those retirement 'dos' - they tend to get a bit boring (but the subsequent 'old boys' meets in later years can be good fun although talk turns to 'what pills are you on?' and 'are you alright after your last operation?'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted July 17, 2012 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) Mike, The retirement dos are already getting me down. Too much food and alcohol! It's good once or twice, but after that it's a pain...and I have to give a speech at the one on Friday afternoon. Oh well, that'll be short and sweet. I mean, what can I say after 28 years in the job? Lol! Btw, keep the "mumblings" coming. You fellas keep me on the straight and narrow. Andy, Good to hear from you - I thought you'd emigrated (have you moved from Derbyshire to Cheshire? Lol)!! I've never been a fan of gradients, especially with decent-sized trains. I made that mistake on my current (soon-to-be-scrapped) layout and won't make it again. Having said that, I'd have thought 1 in 60 is probably ok - hope you aren't modelling the Lickey Incline!! See you in a month or two!! Cheers, Jeff Edited July 17, 2012 by Physicsman Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schubert Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Hi Jeff, Thinking about the 'spindly' type viaduct, you could draw the outline of the sides on paper then build up the frames using plastic angle. To give it a bit of strength you could build the uprights out of brass angle. Would it need to be straight though? Al Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold ChrisN Posted July 17, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 17, 2012 I have hesitated to comment on how you should proceed as it is all down to personal choice and what I would like someone else may not. Having said that I think you are right on going with gradients, especially ones you know you cannot take a train up. Also having moved the viaducts round so they are half clear of each other looks good. A bit worried about the river as it looks as though it might dribble off the edge and get your feet wet. (Sorry ) Enjoy your retirement do. They will soon be over and you will be back modelling. Your workrate is quite impressive; I am not sure I have managed to touch anything in about 6 weeks. It looks as though I may retire earlier than planned, well I will if they reorganise my Department and my wife has her way, not that I am going to complain. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew P Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Jeff, I am waiting for my move and nd a final room size, but yes I think I will try to stay on the streight and flat if I can, Will keep looking, All the best Andy, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted July 18, 2012 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted July 18, 2012 I have hesitated to comment on how you should proceed as it is all down to personal choice and what I would like someone else may not. Having said that I think you are right on going with gradients, especially ones you know you cannot take a train up. Also having moved the viaducts round so they are half clear of each other looks good. A bit worried about the river as it looks as though it might dribble off the edge and get your feet wet. (Sorry ) Enjoy your retirement do. They will soon be over and you will be back modelling. Your workrate is quite impressive; I am not sure I have managed to touch anything in about 6 weeks. It looks as though I may retire earlier than planned, well I will if they reorganise my Department and my wife has her way, not that I am going to complain. Cheers Chris, My existing layout looked great on paper but I made too many basic errors - too much in too small a space, no proper fiddle yard, inaccessible track and the dreaded gradient... about 1 in 25 ... FAR too steep. That layout was started nearly 10 years ago and I really hadn't the experience then. If possible I now shun any gradients. Steam locos struggle, in my experience, even at relatively modest gradients, especially when loaded... so I'm trying to keep things as level as possible. The river. If I had a bit more space to work with I'd run the river across the layout - I drew an idea a few pages back. I am VERY concerned about the river spilling onto the floor, given the appalling English weather! Thanks for the comments. All ideas/suggestions gratefully received. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted July 18, 2012 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted July 18, 2012 Jeff, I am waiting for my move and nd a final room size, but yes I think I will try to stay on the streight and flat if I can, Will keep looking, All the best Andy, I'm sure you always keep on the straight and narrow Andy! Lol. The rate you work, you will have your new layout up-and-running within the year! It will be very entertaining to watch developments. Cheers, Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted July 18, 2012 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted July 18, 2012 Hi Jeff, Thinking about the 'spindly' type viaduct, you could draw the outline of the sides on paper then build up the frames using plastic angle. To give it a bit of strength you could build the uprights out of brass angle. Would it need to be straight though? Al Hi Al, I'm going to stick to a smaller, curved viaduct. Plans already sketched out, and hope to start building it soon. Pop round later in the month and see what's been achieved! Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now