Hayfields turnout workbench

[hayfield]

Time fly's the rail journey to Italy now a fond memory especially going through the Alps on a different route

 

Had a struggle to get back into the throws of building again, I can thoroughly recommend our Rail Discoveries holiday with this one we seemed busier and had less down time, a wonderful holiday again though a bit tired at the end

 

Still managed to get a more modern flatbottom turnout built, and now on to a small copperclad EM formation (will add a photo later)

 

 

On the experimental side I have some Exactoscale turnout and crossing bases, I want to build a P4 turnout using a pre-made vee rather than a common crossing, and use the Exactoscale chairs functionally for the wing rails. If all goes well will have it with me at Scaleforum on the C&L stand

Edited September 20, 2016 by hayfield

[hayfield]

Well here goes, an EM gauge complex in copperclad

 

 

Just the switch rails to make and fit, then a few isolation cuts as the rail curves nicely this way rather than making the vees separate from the stock rails. No check rails and one switch blade shorter than the other as these are built to replicate the Fox Henderson design. May need the odd tweak or two on the curved wing rails as these have to be spot on (they should be anyway) to prevent any derailing, as no check rails to steer the wheels.

 

Off to the dump before work as been cutting down a fir tree in the back garden

[hayfield]

I am hoping to take this to Scaleforum with me as I will be in the C&L stand. Simply its a P4 turnout built on an Exactoscale P4 turnout base with a pre-made Vee rather than common crossing and using the Exactoscale chair range functionally (simple build). Here is a selection of photos, write up in my P4 turnout building thread

 

[hayfield]

I have been asked to make a 3 way turnout as a direct replacement for an old SMP turnout on a layout, at the same tome make it to 00SF standards, thankfully its in copperclad so a certain amount of tweaking can be done. In the past the major problem linked to 3 ways is the centre road, as this has to be spot on with the wing rails, which are best fitted with check rail gauges not wing rail bars

 

I seem to have overcome several issues, firstly scanning the plan into Templot, as I do not fully understand the rational I either get it too big or too small, still prior to scanning it I make marks every 3" so I can match it up with the grid in Templot

 

 

After that it is just a case of sizing the first turnout and putting it in place, the second turnout is again sized and curved correctly and placed on top of the first. next is a series of making the rail breaks where rails go through the crossings and adding a further common crossing. Then of course the timbers have to be altered to match each other. Whilst most things in Templot are quite if not very easy to produce, you need a bit of experience to do these 

 

Pointless me describing what I have done as it is very cack handed and confuses me let alone others. I have one check rail on the plan(which I found very difficult to shorten ) and is not on the SMP plan anyway

 

This may not be very prototypical, but its to replace an ageing piece of track work on a layout

 

Sorry about the labels on the plan, cannot find how to switch them off, can find the restore button though!!

Edited September 27, 2016 by hayfield

[hayfield]

I will add to this there are some who are not so dexterous with either Templot or have the drafting skills to do it by hand, it was quite common at one time (and still goes on now) to splice one turnout plan with another, or with Templot lay one turnout (without timbers) over a second and work out the sleeper spacing on the work bench. Not ideal but we are talking about a plan not a work of art, if the resulting piece of track works who cares if the rails run through the crossings (providing you can see where the gap is). BUT it is quite satisfying to do something correctly, and I am not advocating that others should not do likewise

 

Thankfully with the internet modellers can assist each other with simple requests and either forward Templot boxfiles to another who can open it up in their own Templot program or send it in a PDF to be printed off. I do recommend that a modeller should at least have a try at the simple things themselves, seeking assistance from Templot club site as and when required

 

However I know that there is at least one person taking on paid commissions after speaking with a very satisfied customer, so for those who either are time poor or just cannot do it themselves, there are other options

[hayfield]

I was helping Phil out at Scaleforum this weekend, how nice it was to see so many giving P4 a go, not that I model in P4 but where trackwork is required there was a high interest in 4 mm scale track and not just for P4. I guess at this type of show is frequented by modellers who just want something a bit better and it seems now to include the track.

 

Took my P4 turnout (part completed) just to show you can make P4 turnouts without pre-assembled common crossings, it seemed to go down well though there are still those who frown on or don't trust plastic chairs. 

Edited September 27, 2016 by hayfield

[roythebus]

Will you be at the Folkestone show this weekend?

[hayfield]

Roy

 

No I wont as its a small one, and I think Phil is quite happy to do it on his own, C&L will be there and Phil has a good stock of both C&L and Exactoscale parts, too late to make a special order to be picked up now.

 

I am very tempted to go as in the past its been a great show. But after being away all last weekend I must catch up with some chores like some fencing need erecting before it gets too cold and wet

[Derekstuart]

labels:

TRACKPAD>>HIDE NAME LABELS

 

Or use the END key to toggle between the two.

[hayfield]

labels:

 

TRACKPAD>>HIDE NAME LABELS

 

Or use the END key to toggle between the two.

 

 

Derek

 

Thanks, could not see it for looking

 

A better un-obstructed view, on the other hand the labels may be hiding some errors

 

 

Small EM complex and yes there are no check rails and the point blades are different lengths, Fox Henderson style 

[hayfield]

 

A 3 way in copperclad or is it a tandem ? like most things in life I get them mixed up

 

 

The P4 turnout waiting for some tiebars (was hoping Masokits were going to be at Scaleforum), the common crossing seems to be fine despite the views of some. Still its an option which may assist some. I must say the Exactoscale bases are just the job, and saves lots of time cutting sleepers off frets and of course the sleepers with slide chairs stay put !!

Edited September 28, 2016 by hayfield

[martin_wynne]

A 3 way in copperclad or is it a tandem ? like most things in life I get them mixed up

 

Hi John,

 

Difficult to say with the timbers on. But I fear it may be neither.

 

A 3-throw turnout has the blade tips overlapping, i.e. the stretcher bars are side by side, or between adjacent timbers.

 

A tandem turnout has the switches entirely staggered, one following the other, so that the stretcher bars are about 9 or 10 timbers apart.

 

Both can be called 3-way in the sense that there are 3 routes.

 

As best I can see the rails between your timbers, you have neither there. You may find that impossible to build -- the first switch bade won't open far enough for the one behind it to open properly. I hope I'm wrong.

 

For the shorter REA switches (A, B, C), a good rule of thumb for tandems is to align the second stretcher bar with the rail joints in the stock rails.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

Edited September 28, 2016 by martin_wynne

[hayfield]

Martin

 

Thanks, I also was a bit worried about the switch blades being too close but have copied the SMP plan in as far as the positions of the two right hand Vees and the position of the switch blades. I think SMP use wider switch blade gaps. At worst I can shorten the the blades a bit. But this is a drop in replacement turnout for an existing layout, having said that the issue of the existing turnout may be with the design !!

[hayfield]

The 3 way is under way now

 

 

Usual start with the Vee that is closest to the end, Prior to fitting the rails I made all the isolation cuts with a junior hacksaw. To start off with you can make nice neat shallow cuts (just break the foil) secondly you can test as you go, then it looks neater, finally if you want to fill the gaps its so much easier to do it without the rails in the way

 

 

Next up is the straight stock rail, followed by the next Vee, I have kept the rails long on both vees so I can get nice curves on them

 

 

Starting the first vee and closer/wing rails, finer scale wheels work OK through the centre road but my 03 is struggling on the back to backs, like my Mainline J72 one set of wheels have narrower back to backs and I find they are a good test, the first priority is have something that works with RTR stock. I find on 3 ways the centre road is the one which always causes problems, less so with finer scale gauges,I use check rail gauges rather than wing rail gauges, which sometimes may be a little on the tight side

 

 

Starting to build up the crossings and adding the curved stock rail. I have not soldered the right hand part of the curved stock rail as I like to get the switch rails in place first, then fit the stock rail to match them.

 

Lets hope I don't have any issues with the switches being so close together, I will be tacking them in place first as I might have to fit shorter ones

Edited September 29, 2016 by hayfield

[hayfield]

A busy few days have slowed progress, but the first one is nearing completion with rail trimming and final testing required

 

 

The problem with the centre road solved, a tweak with the start of the upper wing rail on the middle common crossing solved a slight binding issue, and all was fine. I find with 00 gauge using my worst chassis solves all problems

 

A second 3 way has been started, next will be marking and cutting the isolation gaps followed by checking the gaps with a multi meter. As mentioned earlier using a hacksaw to just cut through the foil makes a much neater job, and if filling in the gaps with filler, its so much easier to sand without any rails in the way

[hayfield]

Here is something I have been trying to create, an outside slip to match a plan (one of Iain Rice's I think) I have been sent

 

 

Have asked the Guru's at Templot club if I am on the right track so to speak

 

Edit

 

left the ruler on in error

Edited October 3, 2016 by hayfield

[martin_wynne]

Here is something I have been trying to create, an outside slip to match a plan (one of Iain Rice's I think) I have been sent

 

outside_slip_screen_shot.png

 

 

Hi John,

 

As I suspected when you mentioned Iain Rice, it is not an outside slip at all, it is a half-scissors. He has got them mixed up in his books. The side road does not run through the diamond. There is no way you can add a slip road of any kind to a 1:2.5 diamond-crossing and have a sensible radius.

 

If you want the turnouts to be the same, they need to be both 1:5.19 RAM angle (half of 1:2.5 RAM). Make them regular or generic v-crossings, so that you can snake them in close as possible to the diamond, otherwise you won't be able to check all the V-crossings:

 

 

The .box file I posted on Templot Club is just a bare bones. Over to you to adjust all the check rail conflicts, strip out the partial templates, and sort out the timbering.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[Derekstuart]

That is one construction I would like to see when it's finished. I hope you have plenty of Anadin there for when you do build it.

[hayfield]

That is one construction I would like to see when it's finished. I hope you have plenty of Anadin there for when you do build it.

 

 

Martins done a good job, started to tidy it up a bit but not too certain about the timbering. I have built a scissors before (built one not too long ago which was curved) so it looks worse than it is, thankfully if it proceeds at least its in 00sf, there is a curved 3 way to go with it which may turn out to be a bit harder to build and design

[Derekstuart]

I have one to build that is very similar to Martin's version above. Though I will build all the simple ones before starting on that.

[hayfield]

I have one to build that is very similar to Martin's version above. Though I will build all the simple ones before starting on that.

 

Derek

 

If you can make a common crossing then building an obtuse (K) crossing is very much easier, you are right cutting your teeth on something simpler is a far more sensible course of action, but there are some modellers who just have the ability and confidence to build a complicated crossing without any other track building experience. Having said that there are some who just struggle building track.

[Derekstuart]

Hi John

 

I've built a fair few turnouts now so it doesn't worry me. As we discussed at Aylesbury, I was building almost exclusively with the solder-less common crossing method, which won't work for some applications. Anyway, I've solved that... would you believe the extension lead to the desk soldering station was the problem? I plugged directly into the mains and now solder is behaving exactly as it should.

 

Of course, if soldering white metal kits from Branchlines, I think I will make good use of that extension lead.

[hayfield]

Derek

 

Why would the extension lead reduce the power?

 

Anyway been playing designing with Templot this morning and am getting used to using partial templates

 

 

I probably use a very long winded method, but I understand it. Still do not know the difference between snake and slide through template, other than which one works when and I must learn about pegs as at a guess I think they would make life easier. 

 

Still needs a little polishing up but happy with removing the rails going through the crossings

[Derekstuart]

Hi John

 

I have two of these extension leads that look identical. 1 is rated at a full 13 amp and the other is lower (can't recall exactly), but I would imagine if I were to use it again the wire would be getting warm (they are in those wind up drum things and I hadn't wound the full length out either).

 

The more important question is surely: Why would anyone make a sub 13 amp extension lead? Or perhaps Why would anyone not read the label more carefully when buying it.

[Campaman]

 

 

The more important question is surely: Why would anyone make a sub 13 amp extension lead? Or perhaps Why would anyone not read the label more carefully when buying it.

 

Probably price, AFAIK you can get 5amp, 10amp and 13amp, the smaller amp ones can use thinner wire so costs less to produce.