Sheffield Midlands Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Just in the process of planning out a baseboard arrangement for my new layout using the plywood crossmember/open frame format but I am using multiple boards bolted side by side as well as end on end. Has anyone experience of arranging baseboards in the fashion in the picture/scribble below? Normally I would keep them all level but arranging them in a sort of brick formation appeals for strength, alignment etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hayfield Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 No experience with the formation you have, but if it is to be portable the defining design may be where turnouts and crossings are to be located, it may be better having them turned 90 degrees so track joins are easier Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 What about using pronged T nuts rather than wingnuts? I use them a lot and they make assembly much easier. You may have to glue a packing piece for them if you are putting them in a single skin of plywood but this little extra work is worth it. Chaz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
corax67 Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Providing you keep everything square during construction and use something like cabinet makers dowels to ensure everything aligns perfectly each time you setup then I don't foresee a problem. As has been said, track planning will be of utmost importance as you will need to think very carefully about point placement and scenic/track breaks between boards. Are you thinking of DCC or DC as inter-board wiring may also be a consideration with potentially so many boards. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheffield Midlands Posted March 16, 2014 Author Share Posted March 16, 2014 What about using pronged T nuts rather than wingnuts? I use them a lot and they make assembly much easier. You may have to glue a packing piece for them if you are putting them in a single skin of plywood but this little extra work is worth it. Chaz Past experience with these hasn't been great for me Chaz but they are on my radar as a possibility still. I suspect I have simply installed them incorrectly and resorted to taking them off and going for standard bolts. No experience with the formation you have, but if it is to be portable the defining design may be where turnouts and crossings are to be located, it may be better having them turned 90 degrees so track joins are easier I see what you mean although I am hand building my track so not expecting too many problems across boards. Providing you keep everything square during construction and use something like cabinet makers dowels to ensure everything aligns perfectly each time you setup then I don't foresee a problem. As has been said, track planning will be of utmost importance as you will need to think very carefully about point placement and scenic/track breaks between boards. Are you thinking of DCC or DC as inter-board wiring may also be a consideration with potentially so many boards. The track plan is going together in Templot at the moment. Once complete, the idea is to fit the baseboards around it to ensure there is no interference with turnouts. The layout is a scale model of Sheffield (link below in my signature). The whole layout will be DCC with bus systems for track power, signals and motors and in time a full train detection and identification system (if I decide it is worth doing!) so hopefully the electrical joins between boards will be little more than a 6 pin plug and socket with each board holding any decoders etc. I am a bit of a whiz with electronics Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maunsel Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 I can't see why it wouldn't work. However I am a great believer in the KISS approach. Is there a specific reason to build it in the way you plan? Eric Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheffield Midlands Posted March 16, 2014 Author Share Posted March 16, 2014 I can't see why it wouldn't work. However I am a great believer in the KISS approach. Is there a specific reason to build it in the way you plan? Eric Hi Eric, Ive not heard of the KISS approach - what is it? The main reason for building it in this way is for strength and rigidity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAF96 Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Keep It Simple Stupid - no offence meant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RhBBob Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 On the subject of baseboard joining devices, I have successfully used these beasts on a previous layout and on the new one: http://www.protex.com/toggle-latches Yes, they have to be fitted to the front and rear edges of the baseboards, but they offer a very positive fitting combined with ease of assembly and disassembly. Edit: sorry, might have been more helpful if I'd explained that I use steel dowels to align the boards. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheffield Midlands Posted March 16, 2014 Author Share Posted March 16, 2014 On the subject of baseboard joining devices, I have successfully used these beasts on a previous layout and on the new one: http://www.protex.com/toggle-latches Yes, they have to be fitted to the front and rear edges of the baseboards, but they offer a very positive fitting combined with ease of assembly and disassembly. Edit: sorry, might have been more helpful if I'd explained that I use steel dowels to align the boards. Not sure this method would be an option to me as my boards sit side by side as well as end over end and all bolt together. I only have one side available on each board to use the toggle latches. The trials and tribulations of building a layout of vast size that needs to remain portable enough to go through a loft hatch! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 ...Normally I would keep them all level but arranging them in a sort of brick formation appeals for strength, alignment etc. What about the support system for your baseboards? Are you going for the 'master board' style of construction where one board is selected to be the master free standing unit that is erected first, and then the other boards bolt on, with a support at the far end from the bolt on point, for example? If that is the case, then placing the boards aligned rather than staggered may be simpler as the paired boards can have a single support structure at the far end. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted March 17, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 17, 2014 I think that type of structure is likely to cause you a few problems. However, if you really have to go that way, staggered joints will give a much better result. Do you really need a full 48" to get the station in? If you could get the track onto 36" boards and perhaps have buildings/retaining walls on separate boards alongside that could be better. Of course a 36" wide baseboard is still a big chunk to get through any sort of loft hatch. Any chance that you can modify the hatch? I also think that 6' long boards might be tricky through a loft hatch - both for manoeuvrability and weight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 The brick formation precludes, at least for the most part, the use of dowel aligners.M10 seems a bit over the top. I would suggest M6 is big enough, but use large washers either side (preferably with the washers screwed to the boards, for convenience) to spread the pressure.Where bolts/wingnuts are in two corners, some thought is needed on how easy it will be to insert them (finger space).I think the biggest problem with the brick structure will be the accurate drilling of the bolt holes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter220950 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 I have a similar arrangement, only three deep, on my layout. I have gone for building an aluminium tube into the boards and connecting them by inserting a threaded rod from front to back to clamp the boards together, 6mm threaded rod is relatively cheap from B&Q and the like. I put a captive nut and washer on one end and a wingnut and washer on the other, seems to work o.k as long as the original hole drilling was accurate. Longitudinally there are conventional dowels and bolts and wingnuts, however I would point out that I have no track crossing the sections joined with only tubes and bolts as there's a canal running down the middle of the layout. As pointed out previously there may be a problem with a lack of dowel location on track alignment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheffield Midlands Posted March 17, 2014 Author Share Posted March 17, 2014 Its early days at present - the track design hasn't been completed in Templot as yet. Patternmakers alignment dowels will be employed whichever way I decide to go but the "brick system" appealed as the layout would become self aligning and levelling. I have worked out a very accurate way to drill holes for the dowels and bolts etc which I have tested on a mock-up boards and the resulting structure is substantially stronger than aligning all the boards/corners etc. My initial thoughts around the support system were for it to be completely separate (ie no master board) with boards plugging in to the leg framework but given the strength of my test boards, the framework would probably be a lot more engineering than is required! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheffield Midlands Posted March 17, 2014 Author Share Posted March 17, 2014 I have a similar arrangement, only three deep, on my layout. I have gone for building an aluminium tube into the boards IMG_2820.jpgIMG_2821.jpgIMG_2822.jpg and connecting them by inserting a threaded rod from front to back to clamp the boards together, P6280018.JPGP6280019.JPG 6mm threaded rod is relatively cheap from B&Q and the like. I put a captive nut and washer on one end and a wingnut and washer on the other, seems to work o.k as long as the original hole drilling was accurate. Longitudinally there are conventional dowels and bolts and wingnuts, however I would point out that I have no track crossing the sections joined with only tubes and bolts as there's a canal running down the middle of the layout. As pointed out previously there may be a problem with a lack of dowel location on track alignment. IMG_2980.jpgP6280006.JPGP6280005.JPGP6280016.JPG Thanks Peter - really useful Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.