BITTON

[Memphis32]

TBH I don't care to much as all my stock that I've tried so far seems to run through a dream, I just wish I could do it that good, but practice makes less Bodge as they say.

 

Cheers

The reason for checking would be so Cav can set the templot settings, giving you the right templates for check and wing rails.

[Jason T]

*bangs head on wall*

 

Do you all work for Peco as you are doing a great job of encouraging Andy (and countless others no doubt) of using their products.

 

Andy, just do what we talked about this morning and you'll be fine. 1mm, 1.2mm, who gives a as long as it looks ok and works?

[The Stationmaster]

 

Gordon the crossing angle caan matter in the larger turnout sizes. It is one of the reasons for using swing nose crossings in High Speed turnouts. However for crossing up to say 1:10 is shouldn't matter as long as the flangeways suit the wheels and vice versa.

 

Don

Working from prototype dimensions it would indeed be a high speed turnout - a 90mph turnout requires a crossing angle of c.1 in 32 (the exact decimal after the 32 varying according to whether the rail is vertical or inclined) and a swing nose crossing isn't required until the angle is flatter than 1 in 35, i.e. for turnout speeds in excess of 100 mph.

 

For most model railway purposes I would have thought the equivalents are most likely going to be angles of 1 in 8 (20mph with B switches) or even 1 in 7 (20mph with A switches) or tighter than that for trailing crossovers while the flatest is likely to be no flatter than 1 in 15 (40mph with E switches) - 40mph seemingly having been the maximum turnout speed through pointwork in the steam age.  We obviously can't necessarily exactly scale all aspects of the prototype geometry and Gordon is an expert with considerable experience of putting together points with the 1mm gap with various crossing angles and I doubt he has ever got anywhere near 1 in 20 let alone 1 in 35

[Andrew P]

*bangs head on wall*

 

Do you all work for Peco as you are doing a great job of encouraging Andy (and countless others no doubt) of using their products.

 

Andy, just do what we talked about this morning and you'll be fine. 1mm, 1.2mm, who gives a ###### as long as it looks ok and works?

Yes, as I said, yours works with my stock, mine works with my stock, Cav's templates works apart from manually adjusting the Check and Wing Rails as I have done this morning and laying YOUR POINT over mine, I think there is little or no difference now, (your V is prettier).

 

I have it sussed, I have a Point to work from, (2 including Jason's) and a better idea of what I need to do to achieve a nice flow through the pointwork and end up with the same results as Jason, Cav, Gordon and George, so I'm now happy.

Edited December 1, 2014 by Andrew P

[gordon s]

I'm not the least surprised there is so much confusion…:-)

 

Lets start with the gauges.  I know these aren't the exact ones Andy has, but they appear to be similar and may at least remove some of the confusion.

 

The large brass one on the left is 00 with a flangeway of 1.3mm.  Perfectly OK for 00 track to run Bachmann and Hornby.  

 

The steel gauge in the centre is 00 with a flangeway of 1mm.  This will run 00 RTR stock, but it is possible/probable the B2B's with need to be increased to 14.8mm.

 

The two gauges on the right are 00-SF.  16.2mm with 1mm flangeways.  One is the actual track gauge and the second the gauge for the wing rail/check rails.

 

You pays your money and takes choice…:-)

 

Edited December 2, 2014 by gordon s

[Donington Road]

 

I have it sussed, I have a Point to work from, (2 including Jason's) and a better degree of what I need to do to achieve a nice flow through the pointwork and end up with the same results as Jason, Cav, Gordon and George, so I'm now happy.

 

Now you have Jason's point to work from and you know it works stick with that as your pattern and all will be well.

There has been some good discussion in the last few pages but it has got quite confusing at times but I think we have all learned a lot more about building track then we ever knew before.

[Jeff Smith]

Time to address the point blades, tie bar(s) and electrical gapping......

[RBE]

I'm not trying to confuse or put anyone off as I for one hate Peco track with a passion (on the scenic side). I am trying to simply educate Andy and let him choose the best course of action at the earliest stage of the build. It may be that all of the stock any has tried so far goes through Jasons slip and thats great but if it was built using a DOGA gauge as mine on Outon were then there is no gaurantee everything you throw at it will go through. By extention there is then no gaurantee that the subsequent points built using the same gauges will allow everything through either. If you are committed to Jasons gauges (16.5mm with 1mm flangeways) you have to accept that at some point you WILL have to deal with a Back to Back issue. I did on Outon Road and simply by the maths you will have to as sooner or later you will get some stock with wheels on the narrow side of the spec. If you are happy to do B2B tweaking they all is good. The other option is wider flangeways but 1mm ones look good and there is no need to sacrifice those looks if you go OO-SF instead. I went DOGA OO on Outon through inexperience of the sheer amount of standards available and as I was having to B2B a lot of stock (locos mainly I must admit) I often wondered why I didnt just go EM and be done with it. OO-SF would have sorted all that.

[sp1]

I don't think I've seen a definitive answer to what the gauge is that Jason sent. Just lots of "if it's come from X then it must be Y". Any chance of getting some measurements from it so we know what standard the slip was made to?

Ah but we have - weeks ago a picture of the slip build was posted, with the gauges and the C & L packet they came in, and Jason said thats where they came from in a more recent post.

Knowing that, I foresaw this confusion coming when Andy said he had got his gauges from Marcway....

I give up!

[raymw]

 

Note how the wheel is now fully supported across the cross and the tread is on both elements of the crossing.  Pushing a wagon across this turnout is the same as moving it along a piece of plain track and with your eyes closed, you cannot feel any bump or drop across the turnout.

 

 

If the wheel tread is correctly tapered, then even if you can't feel the wheel drop, it will drop, unless the wing rail is raised through the gap in front of the V. Not that it matters, I'm just being pedantic. There are many ways of solving problems, Andy only needs to choose one. 

[Andrew P]

I'm not the least surprised there is so much confusion…:-)

 

Lets start with the gauges.  I know these aren't the exact ones Andy has, but they appear to be similar and may at least remove some of the confusion.

 

The large brass one on the right is 00 with a flangeway of 1.3mm.  Perfectly OK for 00 track to run Bachmann and Hornby.  

 

The steel gauge in the centre is 00 with a flangeway of 1mm.  This will run 00 RTR stock, but it is possible/probable the B2B's with need to be increased to 14.8mm.

 

The two gauges on the right are 00-SF.  16.2mm with 1mm flangeways.  One is the actual track gauge and the second the gauge for the wing rail/check rails.

 

You pays your money and takes choice…:-)

 

DSCF7071.jpg

Thanks Gordon, a great post with some really useful information for me at least, I never realised there were so many, and I bet there are a lot more out there as well.

 

Cheers.

[Andrew P]

Now you have Jason's point to work from and you know it works stick with that as your pattern and all will be well.

There has been some good discussion in the last few pages but it has got quite confusing at times but I think we have all learned a lot more about building track then we ever knew before.

Hi Mick, your right on two counts there, more confused and more knowledgable, I'm now sticking with what works.

 

Thanks Mate.

[Andrew P]

Time to address the point blades, tie bar(s) and electrical gapping......

Cheers Jeff, I'm o.k. with all that as I've done them before when I bought ready made, they came UN GAPPED etc.

[Memphis32]

Ah but we have - weeks ago a picture of the slip build was posted, with the gauges and the C & L packet they came in, and Jason said thats where they came from in a more recent post.

Knowing that, I foresaw this confusion coming when Andy said he had got his gauges from Marcway....

I give up!

The confusing bit for me is that my understanding (so far) is that those gauges are DOGA fine (16.5mm gauge, 1mm flangeways), Andy wants RtR stock with minimal adjustment, and Martin W (who seems to know what he's talking about) says "The huge disadvantage of this standard is that it requires the wheels to have a wider than

normal back-to-back dimension. All wheels using DOGA Fine track have to be adjusted to the DOGA Fine back-to-back gauge." (From his "A Comparison of OO standards")

 

It's not surprising the discussion goes on and on...

[RBE]

Exactly my point if you pardon the pun.

[Andrew P]

I'm not trying to confuse or put anyone off as I for one hate Peco track with a passion (on the scenic side). I am trying to simply educate Andy and let him choose the best course of action at the earliest stage of the build. It may be that all of the stock any has tried so far goes through Jasons slip and thats great but if it was built using a DOGA gauge as mine on Outon were then there is no gaurantee everything you throw at it will go through. By extention there is then no gaurantee that the subsequent points built using the same gauges will allow everything through either. If you are committed to Jasons gauges (16.5mm with 1mm flangeways) you have to accept that at some point you WILL have to deal with a Back to Back issue. I did on Outon Road and simply by the maths you will have to as sooner or later you will get some stock with wheels on the narrow side of the spec. If you are happy to do B2B tweaking they all is good. The other option is wider flangeways but 1mm ones look good and there is no need to sacrifice those looks if you go OO-SF instead. I went DOGA OO on Outon through inexperience of the sheer amount of standards available and as I was having to B2B a lot of stock (locos mainly I must admit) I often wondered why I didnt just go EM and be done with it. OO-SF would have sorted all that.

Thanks Cav, now this is me being really THICK, as I said earlier, if its written I struggle to take it in.

 

So I took Locos, (Bach, Horn and Hel ) up to both Jason's and Jeff's along with Bachmann wagons, and Dapol 6 Wheel Milk Tanks and all ran over both layouts without problems.

 

So the gauges I have used and Jasons are the same Gauge, apart from the Wing and Check's and I have tried my wagons across them with no issues.

 

So what is DOGA?

 

And what is OO-SF?

 

And if my stuff is compatible with Jason's Slip, would that need altering if I went OO-SF which I probably wont, but it would just be nice to know what all this DOGA and OO-SF actually means as I want to learn for the future?

 

Cheers Mate.

[Andrew P]

O.K. Guys, This afternoon I have finally finished the Down Trailing Point to my TOTAL SATISFACTION.

 

I have run a mixed rake of wagons with mixed wheel sets and a variety of couplings  including a Bogie Bolster and Standard 4 Wheel Vans at speed over in all directions.

 

Bachmann with SWINGING BOGIE.

 

Bachmann with PLASTIC WHEELS.

 

This is now my Standard Point and I'm pleased with it.

 

 

EDIT = Sorry about the Slug crawling over the Tie Bar   :no:    

Edited December 1, 2014 by Andrew P

[RBE]

Ok Andy in the simplest terms I can.

 

Standard OO is 16.5mm gauge with 1.5mm flangeways. Evrything will run on this its peco and the like. However it looks awful as the flangways are wide as hell. Distance across check rails is approx 13.5mm ish.

 

DOGA fine is what Jasons roller gauge is and what I used on Outon Road. Its 16.5mm Gauge same as standard OO and same as your markway roller gauge but has 1mm wide flangeways which look much better, however because the check rails are 0.5mm nearer to the running rails it means that the distance across the check rails is more akin to 14.5mm. Now rtr stock has a tolerance for which the back to backs on the wheels are set (I believe this is something like 14.3 to 14.6mm which means that at some point along the way you WILL get a set of wheels that are set below the 14.5mm that the dostance across the checks are set to and its this stock that will either ride up or wedge in the checks.

 

OO-SF has the same 1mm flangeways but in order to solve the back to back issue the track gauge is changed to 16.2mm not 16.5mm thus earning 0.3mm and as such allowing the wheels to pass even if on the bottom end of the tolerance scale.

 

As I said before a lot of my stock ran fine as is on Outon Road but some stock such as Neils 56 and my 08 didnt. In fact Neils wedged in the check so hard once a had all on getting it out. The 08 was a pain because like a steamer the wheels needed to be quartered.

[RBE]

That point wasnt made using the DOGA gauge so I would expect it to be ok as the flangeways are wider.

 

Edit:Looks pretty good btw.

Edited December 1, 2014 by RBE

[Andrew P]

Ok Andy in the simplest terms I can.

 

Standard OO is 16.5mm gauge with 1.5mm flangeways. Evrything will run on this its peco and the like. However it looks awful as the flangways are wide as hell. Distance across check rails is approx 13.5mm ish.

 

DOGA fine is what Jasons roller gauge is and what I used on Outon Road. Its 16.5mm Gauge same as standard OO and same as your markway roller gauge but has 1mm wide flangeways which look much better, however because the check rails are 0.5mm nearer to the running rails it means that the distance across the check rails is more akin to 14.5mm. Now rtr stock has a tolerance for which the back to backs on the wheels are set (I believe this is something like 14.3 to 14.6mm which means that at some point along the way you WILL get a set of wheels that are set below the 14.5mm that the dostance across the checks are set to and its this stock that will either ride up or wedge in the checks.

 

OO-SF has the same 1mm flangeways but in order to solve the back to back issue the track gauge is changed to 16.2mm not 16.5mm thus earning 0.3mm and as such allowing the wheels to pass even if on the bottom end of the tolerance scale.

 

As I said before a lot of my stock ran fine as is on Outon Road but some stock such as Neils 56 and my 08 didnt. In fact Neils wedged in the check so hard once a had all on getting it out. The 08 was a pain because like a steamer the wheels needed to be quartered.

Cav Thanks mate, that's brilliant, now I know where I am, I'm happy to do a few wheels on Vans and Coaches if necessary but if a Steamer needs doing then In know an MAN THAT CAN so that can be sorted, if they ran on Jason's layout the I know most should be o.k.

 

Cheers again for that and all your input.

[sp1]

Ok Andy in the simplest terms I can.

Standard OO is 16.5mm gauge with 1.5mm flangeways. Evrything will run on this its peco and the like. However it looks awful as the flangways are wide as hell. Distance across check rails is approx 13.5mm ish.

DOGA fine is what Jasons roller gauge is and what I used on Outon Road. Its 16.5mm Gauge same as standard OO and same as your markway roller gauge but has 1mm wide flangeways which look much better, however because the check rails are 0.5mm nearer to the running rails it means that the distance across the check rails is more akin to 14.5mm. Now rtr stock has a tolerance for which the back to backs on the wheels are set (I believe this is something like 14.3 to 14.6mm which means that at some point along the way you WILL get a set of wheels that are set below the 14.5mm that the dostance across the checks are set to and its this stock that will either ride up or wedge in the checks.

OO-SF has the same 1mm flangeways but in order to solve the back to back issue the track gauge is changed to 16.2mm not 16.5mm thus earning 0.3mm and as such allowing the wheels to pass even if on the bottom end of the tolerance scale.

As I said before a lot of my stock ran fine as is on Outon Road but some stock such as Neils 56 and my 08 didnt. In fact Neils wedged in the check so hard once a had all on getting it out. The 08 was a pain because like a steamer the wheels needed to be quartered.

Correct

For completeness, you have missed out 'DOGA intermediate' (otherwise 00-BF) a 16.5mm gauge, 1.25mm (or sometimes 1.3mm) flangeways: this is what the Marcway gauges are that Andy has.

[sp1]

Cav Thanks mate, that's brilliant, now I know where I am, I'm happy to do a few wheels on Vans and Coaches if necessary but if a Steamer needs doing then In know an MAN THAT CAN so that can be sorted, if they ran on Jason's layout the I know most should be o.k.

 

Cheers again for that and all your input.

Knew you'd get there in the end Andy!

As I have said all along - pick one standard and stick to it.....forget what you don't know: it's irrelevant to what you are doing.......

[Donw]

Working from prototype dimensions it would indeed be a high speed turnout - a 90mph turnout requires a crossing angle of c.1 in 32 (the exact decimal after the 32 varying according to whether the rail is vertical or inclined) and a swing nose crossing isn't required until the angle is flatter than 1 in 35, i.e. for turnout speeds in excess of 100 mph.

 

For most model railway purposes I would have thought the equivalents are most likely going to be angles of 1 in 8 (20mph with B switches) or even 1 in 7 (20mph with A switches) or tighter than that for trailing crossovers while the flatest is likely to be no flatter than 1 in 15 (40mph with E switches) - 40mph seemingly having been the maximum turnout speed through pointwork in the steam age.  We obviously can't necessarily exactly scale all aspects of the prototype geometry and Gordon is an expert with considerable experience of putting together points with the 1mm gap with various crossing angles and I doubt he has ever got anywhere near 1 in 20 let alone 1 in 35

 

Quite true . However it is an issue if you use wheels that are narrower than the track standard was defined for and the flatter angles seem be affected more.

Don

[Clive Mortimore]

Cor Blimey all thas track stuff does seem confusing.

 

Any how Mr P, I was hoping to give you some good news about the sausage making machine, the one my old mate's dad has in his garden. Well over the weekend we cleared away vast amounts of folage. In the process we were scratched by the blackberry brambles, and stung by the stinging neetles only to find there is problem. Both the RSPCA and the RSPB say the animals and birds that have built their homes in it will need rehousing before we can move it, and that will have to wait until the summer after they have all had their young. Good news the BBC want to film it, as its new potential owner do you want to be on Spring Watch?

[HealeyMills]

Cor Blimey all thas track stuff does seem confusing.

 

Having just read several pages of this thread that seems like the understatement of the century!

 

Andy,

 

Your point/ turnout looks great and I'm glad to see that you have persevered with it to produce something that looks and works well.  Goodness knows some of us would have given up ages ago.  However, on the up side there is now some really informative posts here that will help many other out I guess.

 

Looking forward to seeing the rest of the layout being built now.

 

Cheers

Lee