woodbine Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 ....or anywhere else for that matter? My baseboard joint falls in the middle of a crossover, as in the diagram. It has been strongly recommended that I dont have the break coinciding with the join. Is it permissable to stagger the breaks on either side of the baseboard joint? As far as I can see, it shouldn't cause any problems as no loco will be in two sections at once unless the road has been set for it. Is that right? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
66C Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 As the board join very conveniently provides the break for you there is no problem. Just make sure that you wire the V in the turnout so that it is not dead. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 Personally I would move the track plan or change the board dimensions - why do they have to be in 1m units? You have a mechanical problem in addition to the electrical one. running a track join at a severe angle is very prone to small changes in the track - I would say this is far worse in EM and P4 than OO and your cross-baseboard track should be as perpendicular to the join as possible. Electrically I think it has been pointed out elsewhere that you should not trust the small gap between the boards to act as your insulation breaks. Even placing some araldite/paint on the ends is not fool-proof and the crossing rails in particular MUST both be isolated (even if you are not doing bullet proof DC). So with the crossing on the break you have a lot of additional wiring - most of which is also going to have a plug/socket on it to cross the join. Forgetting the baseboard join aspect a crossing is the ideal place to make a DC section (power district) break as both rails in the crossing MUST be isolated anyway (facing frogs). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodbine Posted January 28, 2010 Author Share Posted January 28, 2010 Hello again Kenton, Once again, thanks for your replies. I'm finding the way the forum is laid out a bit tiresome! As I said in my first post here , all my questions are about the essentially same subject, my proposed Woodbine Grove layout. Initially I could either have started a Blog, or a thread in Layout and Workbench Topics>Layout Topics, or a thread in Skills and Knowledge Centre>Layout and Track Design, and I am currently trying to keep track of questions I have asked about it in Skills and Knowledge Centre>Electrics(non-DCC) and two separate ones in Skills and Knowledge Centre>Permanent Way,Signalling and Infrastructure. Yet the questions are all bound up with each other as your post yet again indicates! I am in danger of losing track of it all. Some advice on the best place to keep it all together wouldn't come amiss:blink:. Personally I would move the track plan or change the board dimensions - why do they have to be in 1m units? Back to the matter in hand. Making the baseboards, say 1200mm, would still leave either leave the joint in the midst of a different turnout or force me to start again. I have a storage and transport problem above 1m anyway. I suppose I could separate the trailing crossover, from the turnout into the loop, and move the crossover to the left, out of the way of the joint, but it leaves less room for a train to stand waiting at the Up platform. I like the idea of the single slip and it all flows quite nicely (in theory, anyway!). I have reasonable confidence in my carpentry skills so I don't think the angle at which the track crosses the joint (7.5 degrees) is severe/extreme/unmanageable (or is it?). the board join very conveniently provides the break for you there is no problem. There seems to be a strong possibilty of problems, as Kenton warns. So what about making the breaks where I indicated in the above sketch? Would it lead to any electrical problems other than a little extra work? Should I remove all my questions from separate threads and have them together somewhere? I'm asking this now, before Kenton goes mad trying to follow them all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted January 28, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 28, 2010 ....or anywhere else for that matter? My baseboard joint falls in the middle of a crossover, as in the diagram. It has been strongly recommended that I dont have the break coinciding with the join. Is it permissable to stagger the breaks on either side of the baseboard joint? As far as I can see, it shouldn't cause any problems as no loco will be in two sections at once unless the road has been set for it. Is that right? Moving the section breaks away from the board joints is not a problem per se, only if you get the breaks in the wrong place will it be a problem - so Yes it is permissable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Stubby47 Posted January 28, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 28, 2010 As for keeping track of all your questions, I'd be tempted to just ask them from within your main layout thread - you can (or could in RMweb3) alter the heading for the first post to include the questions - eg "Woodbine Grove - help with track laying please". You could then also ask the Mods if they could merge all your existing threads into your main one. HTH Stu Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 Initially I could either have started a Blog Nah, they are not very good at the moment as there is no notification system so noone knows what is being commented on. Back to the matter in hand. Making the baseboards, say 1200mm, would still leave either leave the joint in the midst of a different turnout or force me to start again. I have a storage and transport problem above 1m anyway. A smaller board at either end perhaps and split about the middle? I don't think the angle at which the track crosses the joint (7.5 degrees) is severe/extreme/unmanageable (or is it?). I was referring to the centre of the crossing in the above image where the frogs face eash other. Surely that will be closer to 45 degrees? Perhaps that is an exaggeration. Would it lead to any electrical problems other than a little extra work? That is really all that it involves - more wires and connectors - which some folk find really daunting and would rather prevent. As you have seen others are quite happy just leaving the board break as the electrical "section" break - that is fine it is not that it will not work that way - it is just that it is not ideal. So when you come back and say "it is shorting" we can say "yah boo, told you so" Should I remove all my questions from separate threads and have them together somewhere? Your new to RMWeb - some allowance is made There are no rules on this - as long as you don't post in completely inappropriate places. But it is easier to follow in a single thread - for some Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodbine Posted January 28, 2010 Author Share Posted January 28, 2010 I was referring to the centre of the crossing in the above image where the frogs face eash other. Surely that will be closer to 45 degrees? AHA! You mean in the .BMP above? If I used that as a track template NOTHING would work! Here's my track template, giving 7.5 degrees on my protractor. The loop then progresses for 1.6m right across the layout at that same angle, so the angle would be the same wherever I cut it. The red line is the Baseboard join, the blue lines the proposed breaks. I will attempt to consolidate my scattered stuff into one file, though I fear the UK2 problem is more demanding of moderator's time at present. In any event, I will not post any new questions outside of my original thread. See you there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 The angle referred to here is the angle between the red and the green lines. The ideal is 90 degrees as in the black line I think you are referring to the main line tracks with your 7 degrees actually 90-7 to the baseboard join. The closer the angle comes to 0 degrees the harder it will be to cross the join - to the position where a board crossing angle of 0 degrees will never cross Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodbine Posted January 28, 2010 Author Share Posted January 28, 2010 Yes you're right, I measured it as 7.5 degrees against the Up line, so that makes it 82.5 degrees to the baseboard join rather than the ideal 90, which isn't too bad is it? BTW, following your advice I'm trying to merge my threads into this one :- Woodbine Grove from now on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.