More Experimental trackwork

[Stuart Birks]

I was about to post a topic about some turnout kits I was working on when Martin posted a line to the topic I had written on Model Rail Forum .

 

This is a repeat of the link   http://www.modelrailforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=28398

 

I have now finished laying the rails so here is an update. A general shot of the finished slip

 

 

The starting sequence I used is shown in this diagram.

 

 

When making a turnout it seems the starting point is to lay a stock rail as a datum so I used the same logic and put in rails 1 & 2 for the datum. The problem is that the defines the location of everything else so things start going adrift. I think a better sequence would have been to put in rails 3 & 4 followed by Rails 5 & 6. Getting 5 & 6 right would be tricky as the gauge has to be correct from the other end but it would be possible. This would provide a good set of datum points from which to work inwards and outwards for all the other rails.

Here are some close up shots. If you look carefully you will see that the relationship between the tip of the frog and the sleepers is not quite right. The result still works well in operation terms and a wagon rolls along it all with no problems.

 

 

 

And looking along it.

 

 

Next step is to make the blades operational.

Stuart.

 

[Brian Harrap]

I was about to post a topic about some turnout kits I was working on when Martin posted a line to the topic I had written on Model Rail Forum .

 

This is a repeat of the link   http://www.modelrailforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=28398

 

I have now finished laying the rails so here is an update. A general shot of the finished slip

 

slip06.jpg

 

The starting sequence I used is shown in this diagram.

 

single_slip_construction_sequence.gif

 

When making a turnout it seems the starting point is to lay a stock rail as a datum so I used the same logic and put in rails 1 & 2 for the datum. The problem is that the defines the location of everything else so things start going adrift. I think a better sequence would have been to put in rails 3 & 4 followed by Rails 5 & 6. Getting 5 & 6 right would be tricky as the gauge has to be correct from the other end but it would be possible. This would provide a good set of datum points from which to work inwards and outwards for all the other rails.

 

Here are some close up shots. If you look carefully you will see that the relationship between the tip of the frog and the sleepers is not quite right. The result still works well in operation terms and a wagon rolls along it all with no problems.

 

slip07.jpg

 

slip08.jpg

 

And looking along it.

 

slip09.jpg

 

Next step is to make the blades operational.

 

Stuart.

Nice piece of work Stuart, I particularly like the way you have dealt with the removal of the copper, did you etch it away - something I've not had much success with. Anyway it looks much neater than those horrible sawn or cut gaps down the middle so often seen on such work. Regards, Brian

[Stuart Birks]

Thanks for the comment Brian.

 

If you look at the post on Model Rail Forum linked to at the top of my post you will see that they are a new product soon to be released by DCC Concepts that come already etched and machined to size.

 

Stuart

[hayfield]

Stuart

 

Looks very good, Martin has already put this on another thread and it looks very interesting. I have used the occasional copperclad sleeper in the past and lifted it up using the same method, but hats off to you for doing each joint, Perhaps there is an angle for a brass etch to be made available, with larger etches for the slide chairs and crossings.

[alangdance]

Looks good. Do we know what the pricing will be.

 

Alan

[Stuart Birks]

John, the main reason for spacing the rails is that Richard Johnson who sent me the frets to have a play with has said that he is planning a full range of cast brass chairs although I don't think they have got beyond the planning stage. I thought I would try to show what soldered track could look like with full chairs. I don't know how well what I am doing will represent the final product as I have not seen the chairs Richard is planning but it has been an interesting experiment.

 

Alan, I have no idea on pricing. I am just playing with some pre-release frets doing a sort of beta test. I have been feeding information back to Richard and there are some changes required before they are released.

 

Stuart

[Stuart Birks]

Getting it all moving.

Although the two ends of the slip are supposed to be mirror images I decided to try a couple of different methods of operating them.

The first end is basically standard. I wasn't sure how Richard intended the tie bar to be connected to the blades and my method of using a bit of 0.5mm brass wire resulted in the gap between the blade and the stock rail being much too wide so I made a new tie bar. The result is better but at 2mm it is still too big I have left it at this because I will not be using this slip.

This is the view of the tiebar



And a conventionally mounted Cobalt underneath.



For the other end things are somewhat different. For a start the rails are joggled in standard GWR/BR style. Then instead of having a tie bar between the sleepers I have hidden it underneath with the brass rod going through the sleeper itself. A couple of small slots are made in the sleeper and it looks like this from the top.

One advantage is this becomes a sealed unit from the top and so when flooding everything with glue when ballasting it will not be affected so no need to worry about it all locking up.

The slots in the sleeper will be more closely covered by having a narrow slot in the slide chair.The gap between the blade and the stock rail is 1.7mm. I was aiming for 1.6 but that is close enough.

The unit under the slip (or it could be a normal turnout) looks like this.





A final layer of 0.25mm sheet is glued to the bottom holding the tiebar in place. The result is 3mm thick to match the cork I lay the track on.

On the board I am planning to build a small station I do not have enough clearance between the underside of the board and the fiddle yard underneath to mount a cobalt in the normal way. This hight was set when the mark one station used Seep motors ant the clearance was bade small to reduce the gradient to it. To overcome this I have made a simple crank to bolt onto the end of a Cobalt motor



Mounted it looks like this.



Note the addition of a bracket at the bottom. This takes all the twisting moment off the tiebar so It moves much more freely.

Now its just the cosmetic bits.

Stu
 

[Stuart Birks]

The slip is now finished so here are the final pictures. I have attempted to show how soldered track might look if brass chairs become available.

A general shot
 

And a bit closer of the middle bit



This is the end built fairly standard with a tie bar



This is the end built with the joggled rail and the tie bar hidden.



You can see the small slit in the slider chair for the operating wire.


At the start of this topic I showed this picture where I deliberately did not clean up the sleepers where I broke them out of the fret.



This is the same bit of track after ballasting



I also mentioned the supplied templates for A5 to B9 turnouts. This is a screen shot of the B8 template.



These templates are all for straight turnouts and I wondered how well this system would cope with custom track from Templot. So I printed out a B8 turnout just how Templot creates it.

This is the template stuck to a board with some strips of double sided tape already applied ready for the sleepers.



And the final result which also shows the sleepers that are left over and a frog that I have made. I will post some details of that soon.



I am not going to actually make this turnout, I just wanted to show how it could be done.

It seems to me that if you want to make soldered track work then this system will work very well.


This is the end for this project.

Stu

 

[Stuart Birks]

The end of the slip project but a short note on a trial of making some frogs.

 

For the frogs on the slip I just built them directly on the sleepers as the solder construction makes this possible. For my other turnouts I will probably use plastic sleepers and chairs and so I wanted to have a go at making the frog as a separate assembly.

To start with I made a jig out of a bit of Tufnol. This one is for a 1:8 frog, I need to make another one for 1:6.



To shape the ends of the rail I made a simple holder so that setting the correct angle on the guide I could form the Vee.





So the rail come out looking like this


For this first try I have not made any attempt to Bend the end of the rail so that the web goes right to the end. Something for another try.

Once the rails are formed and a couple of bits bent to for the wing rails they are put in the jig


And then some strips soldered across. For this I just put them anywhere. For a real one the strips need to be placed so that the chairs can be fitted.



The final thing looks like this when removed from the jig. OK for a first go but I need to tweak it a bit when I make some more.


Stu

 

[steve howe]

Hi Stu,

 

I like the ballast you used on the finished slip, looks good in close-up, whose brand is it?

 

 

Steve

[Andy Reichert]

Dumb question about the sleeper layout. Don't UK turnouts have sleeper layouts that curve along the centre line rather than stay aligned to the straight route?

 

Andy

 

(USA)

[martin_wynne]

Dumb question about the sleeper layout. Don't UK turnouts have sleeper layouts that curve along the centre line rather than stay aligned to the straight route?

 

Hi Andy,

 

Some do. Nowadays most don't. Lots of stuff about this on the Templot forum over the years, like this:

 

I have just got Templot and played with it last night creating a couple of templates, via tutorials and free hand. I have hit one problem and cannot find the answer.

 

First question why do the point timbers follow the curved stock rail and not the straight stock rail, what am I doing wrong and please how do I change it?

You are not doing anything wrong. Templot has several timbering styles and you can choose which one you prefer, or the one which matches your prototype. The style you have there is called equalized incremental. The style you are looking for is called square-on. You can change between them by going to the real > timbering menu options.

 

 

Timbering style is a frequently asked question, because there is no clear answer. Generally speaking, equalized was the norm in the pre-grouping period (before the 1920s), and square-on is the standard now. Between then and now you get both. The change was gradual and varied in pace according to local practice. For much of the post-grouping steam era it would be common to see square-on used for main running lines, with older equalized timbered turnouts predominating in yards, sidings and branch lines.

 

(Except on the GWR, where there is evidence of the exact opposite! Early turnout drawings show a square-on style, but when the flexible switches were introduced in 1930, the drawings show equalized. In many cases it seems simply that the preference of the local relaying inspector was the deciding issue.)

 

There are several factors at work here. The main reasons for using a square-on timbering style are:

 

1. The main road is "stronger" in the sense that it is held to gauge with timbers at right-angles to the rails. This is always desirable for robust track. If timbers are skewed to the rails there is a much greater risk of gauge-spread, especially on curves. So if the main road of a turnout is a running line (and especially if it is on a curve), and the turnout road is a low-speed crossover or branch line, it makes sense to use the square-on arrangement to concentrate strength in the more heavily used road.

 

On the other hand, if both roads are running lines of similar importance, you would want to have some strength in both roads and an equalized timbering arrangement is then the best option.

 

2. Where pointwork is prefabricated in the works, dismantled and delivered to site as a kit of parts, with the rail-fixings already attached to the timbers, it is much easier to set out the timbers at the correct specified spacings if the timbers are all parallel to one another and square to the main rails.

 

3. For modern mechanised maintenance and tamping equipment, it is essential that the timbers are parallel to one another and square-on.

 

The disadvantage with square-on is that some rails are at a significant angle to the timbers. The chairs or baseplates at the V-crossing must fit the rails at the specified positions. This means that it can be difficult to position square-on timbering to support all the rails in the proper place, and occasionally extra timbers or wider ones have to be used to ensure that no chair screws are too close to the edge of a timber.

 

Which explains why equalized timbering was used in the first place, in the days when pointwork was laid out and assembled on site by the local gang. It makes it much easier to get all the chairs properly supported, and it doesn't matter too much if an odd timber is an inch out of position. It also means that the two check rails are both in the same position relative to the V-crossing (frog) for traffic on each road. Nowadays check rails are quite long, so that doesn't matter so much.

 

Diamond-crossings and slips are always equalized, as it is practically impossible to get all the K-crossing rail-fixings in the correct place if the timbers are square-on to one of the roads.

 

Complex junctions and station throats often require considerable ingenuity in laying out the timbering, to ensure that all rail-fixings are in the correct place on the rails, and properly supported, and that all timbers can be tamped. The timbering design of a complex layout was something of a black art. And with Templot's Shove Timber functions you can learn all about it!

 

Having decided on square-on or equalized style, you then need to decide between in-line or centralized timber ends. More about that in this group message:

 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/templot/message/773

 

There is also a lot of further discussion about timbering in this group sequence:

 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/templot/messages/2053?expand=1

 

Apart from equalized-incremental and square-on, Templot also has two further timbering styles - equalized constant and angled-on. These are intended for use when you are using superimposed partial templates, as an aid to subsequent timber shoving. (Equalized constant is also used for half-diamonds, of course.) I'm not aware that either of these styles would ever be correct for a single turnout - unless anyone knows otherwise?

 

regards,

 

Martin.

 

edit to update screenshot

[Stuart Birks]

Hi Stu,

 

I like the ballast you used on the finished slip, looks good in close-up, whose brand is it?

 

 

Steve

 

Hi Steve

 

It is probably Woodland Scenics but I am not really sure. It was whatever I had lying around at the time and could well be a mix of a couple of different makes.

 

The colour also seems to be partly down to the way I fixed it. I give the whole thing a spray with a mix of water and methylated spirit to get it wet and then apply PVA diluted with water and more methylated spirit using a dropper. No washing up liquid, the meths kills the surface tension of the water and it flows very easily. This seems to darken the ballast a bit compared with just PVA and water (with a bit of washing up liquid) I don't know why, it just seems to.

 

Stuart

[ianb3174]

How did you make that tufnol jig? Is it thinner pieces glued in layers or some other method?

[Tase]

How did you make that tufnol jig? Is it thinner pieces glued in layers or some other method?

I'd be interested in how this was made too. I'm looking at making my own vee's rather than buying ready made. Anyone got any tips please?

[Simond]

Do have a look at my Porth Dinllaen thread (link below) - been building point work recently.

 

Hope it helps

Simon

[hayfield]

I'd be interested in how this was made too. I'm looking at making my own vee's rather than buying ready made. Anyone got any tips please?

 

Just make some simple jigs to firstly check the filed angle then to hold all together when soldering

 

 

File the first rail carefully to the correct angle, may take a few goes. I use an 8" no 3 cut (smooth cut) file as I have found it a bit easier than a 10" file. Use a sharp file (cost 6.75 at local tool shop) as blunt/worn ones need more strokes and you run the risk of a curved cut rather than a straight cut

 

The second rail can be slightly over filed as the solder will fill any gaps

[meil]

I'd be interested in how this was made too. I'm looking at making my own vee's rather than buying ready made. Anyone got any tips please?

Well you don't make them as shown in the above photos. Suggest you look on the Templot site to find out how to do it properly.

[Stuart Birks]

Mine were made by milling it out of a solid block. The block was mounted on a rotary table allowing the angle to be set reasonably accurately and the milling table allowed the offset for the check rails to be set.

 

Stu

[Simond]

Well you don't make them as shown in the above photos. Suggest you look on the Templot site to find out how to do it properly.

 

 

Planet Templot is a big place.  Do please clarify, specifically what in the above photos you should not do?

 

thx

Simon

[Junctionmad]

Planet Templot is a big place.  Do please clarify, specifically what in the above photos you should not do?

 

thx

Simon

The rails should not be filed in the way they are shown in the tufnol picture, with each rail having a chamfer and filed to a point.  They are several tutorials on Templot Club and rmweb that show more correct ways, including the prototypical approach that leaves no web at the fine point.  ( and the fine point should be reduced to a blunt open anyway ) 

 

if you going to build handmade track , you might as well improve the look of the track and do it right etc 

[Simond]

ah, thanks

 

I see what you mean. I was busy enviously admiring the tufnol jig...

 

you can see my approach in my PD thread.

 

best

Simon

[hayfield]

if you going to build handmade track , you might as well improve the look of the track and do it right etc 

 

Junctionmad

 

Slightly harsh comment I am afraid, in 4 mm scale after painting other than from the top view it is extremely difficult, if not imposable to see the sides of the rail. That is of course unless you are using flangeways as wide as Peco products, which I guess is equally wrong in your mind

 

Simond

 

If you wish to follow prototype practises then by all means spend the time bending and filing the outer edges of the Vee rails before splicing one into another, especially if that is what you enjoy doing. On the other hand, in my humble opinion it is just as acceptable to splice one rail into the side of the other so it can be seen from above to have been done in a prototypical fashion.  

 

Life is fill of compromises and please feel free to model which way you prefer. I have found it hard enough just to paint the dam things (even using an airbrush) let alone building something that cannot be seen, I feel its much better spending the time on the visual aspects. 

 

Do keep up the good work, but if it does interest you, do try the method referred to just for the hell of it.

[Simond]

John,

 

I made no criticism!

 

I admired the tufnol jig, I offered my way of doing things.  I too found the wording of the post #18 appeared a little harsh, hence my request for clarification.

 

It's not for me to tell anyone how they should, or should not do their hobbies! 

 

If what I do & post helps someone to do something, perhaps something they were not confident enough to try, great, if not, no worries.  I think that's what these fora are all about.

 

best

Simon

[hayfield]

Simon the first part of my reply was in answer to the previous post to yours #21, not your post. I added the part of the post to highlight what I was referring to, edited to clarify 

 

Just read #18 again, it's just as bad as #21

 

I am a firm believer in encouraging folk, I admire those who slavishly copy the original in miniature, but that does not mean I have to copy them. Keep posting as it encourages others to have a go

 

Sorry for the confusion