Point Rodding - some questions

[The Great Bear]

Further to the recent review and article of the Wills point rodding in Model Rail, I've some questions about point rodding that that doesn't answer, nor does the section in GWR Branchline Modelling on this.

 

1) Do the rods and signal wires leave the box in the order of the levers - I think answer is yes, have found post here suggesting so...

2) Where multiple points are worked by one lever (e.g crossover) there is still one rod coming out of the box, then this splits somehow. Again I assume yes?

3) Facing point locks and lifting bar(?) have their own set of rodding - I think answer is yes

4) Is there any constraint on rods crossing under tracks, you can have a run of rodding down one side of a double track and rods go across to the points as required. From photos of the protoype for my layout it looks like this was how it was done.

 

I think/hope from the Branchline book I understand compensators etc.To what level of detail I model the rodding I don't know at this stage, need to do a test. I'm pretty sure I'll chicken out of doign the area immediately outside the box by boarding over it.

 

The above, if it makes a difference, is asked in the context of a GWR location. The reason for the query at this stage is really planning, to make sure I make cess wide enough in my layout to fit things in etc and also a curious mind!

 

Many thanks

 

Jon

[The Stationmaster]

Further to the recent review and article of the Wills point rodding in Model Rail, I've some questions about point rodding that that doesn't answer, nor does the section in GWR Branchline Modelling on this.

 

1) Do the rods and signal wires leave the box in the order of the levers - I think answer is yes, have found post here suggesting so...

2) Where multiple points are worked by one lever (e.g crossover) there is still one rod coming out of the box, then this splits somehow. Again I assume yes?

3) Facing point locks and lifting bar(?) have their own set of rodding - I think answer is yes

4) Is there any constraint on rods crossing under tracks, you can have a run of rodding down one side of a double track and rods go across to the points as required. From photos of the protoype for my layout it looks like this was how it was done.

 

I think/hope from the Branchline book I understand compensators etc.To what level of detail I model the rodding I don't know at this stage, need to do a test. I'm pretty sure I'll chicken out of doign the area immediately outside the box by boarding over it.

 

The above, if it makes a difference, is asked in the context of a GWR location. The reason for the query at this stage is really planning, to make sure I make cess wide enough in my layout to fit things in etc and also a curious mind!

 

Many thanks

 

Jon

To the specific questions -

1. Generally 'yes' although sometimes signal wires can be 'out of order' although I would say not commonly so.

 

2. Yes. One rod which has cranks taken off it to drive individual point ends.

 

3. Facing point locks/lock bars have their own rod (except where Economical FPLs are in use - then one rod works the FPL and the switch, but these were comparatively rare on the GWR as the Company was not at all fond of them).

 

4. Basically no constraints but ideally the cross rodding should ideally make as near a possible a right angle with the runs each side.

 

I have plenty of detail pics available should you need them Jon - Western of course (other Railways/Regions are available)

[ozzyo]

Hello all,

 

what was the distance between point rodding stools, I've looked at some photos and it looks to be about four or five sleeper spaces.

 

Thanks for any help

 

OzzyO.

[The Stationmaster]

Hello all,

 

what was the distance between point rodding stools, I've looked at some photos and it looks to be about four or five sleeper spaces.

 

Thanks for any help

 

OzzyO.

I refer you sir to this item -

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/1559-the-distance-between-point-rodding-stools/

[RedgateModels]

I'm pretty sure I'll chicken out of doign the area immediately outside the box by boarding over it.

That's my plan on Fourgig East

[The Great Bear]

To the specific questions -

1. Generally 'yes' although sometimes signal wires can be 'out of order' although I would say not commonly so.

 

2. Yes. One rod which has cranks taken off it to drive individual point ends.

 

3. Facing point locks/lock bars have their own rod (except where Economical FPLs are in use - then one rod works the FPL and the switch, but these were comparatively rare on the GWR as the Company was not at all fond of them).

 

4. Basically no constraints but ideally the cross rodding should ideally make as near a possible a right angle with the runs each side.

 

I have plenty of detail pics available should you need them Jon - Western of course (other Railways/Regions are available)

 

Thanks, Mike. That numbering of levers in the prototype that I've just followed that seemed random is starting to make sense now... (for part of it at least)

 

Can rods cross?

[Miss Prism]

Can rods cross?

 

So long as they are at different heights, yes, but this was usually only a significant problem at the immediate exit from the box, which you are covering with planking (very sensible!). In other places, the height difference would be accomplished by cranking the crank, or cranking the rod, depending on the space available and the orientation and position of the crank. Crank axes below rods were avoided if possible because of the difficulty of maintaining them.

 

 

 

 

[The Great Bear]

So long as they are at different heights, yes, but this was usually only a significant problem at the immediate exit from the box, which you are covering with planking (very sensible!). In other places, the height difference would be accomplished by cranking the crank, or cranking the rod, depending on the space available and the orientation and position of the crank. Crank axes below rods were avoided if possible because of the difficulty of maintaining them.

 

Thanks. I can only find a couple of photos in the various books I have showing rodding, but from these know where the main runs coming out of the box went, one heading in the up direction in the up cess, the one heading in the down direction in the six foot (betwen the up and down lines, that's the right term isn't it). For the down direction this comes out sweetly. For the up direction things cross, need to rethink through how this might have worked, working backwards from the levers.

 

[Tim V]

You might like this picture of Ffestiniog Box, then derelict.

as others have said, this would normally be covered over, for the signalman to walk over for collecting tokens from the platform etc.

 

[Miss Prism]

Jon - Your downside 6-rod run looks good in the 6'. You've got 11 rods on the upside run, which will mean your box will need to stand quite a bit back from the track shoulder. Nothing wrong with that, except that many of the compensators for 11 to 26 in the upside run will be 'under' that run, and thereby not particularly accessible (for greasing). I'd be inclined to think about taking 21, 24 and upside 26 straight from the box into the 6' either between the running lines or between the down and the loop. And possibly also 22 and 23, depending on that choice. Such a routing might be able to save on some compensators, depending on the crank-to-crank distances.

 

Under track rodding between timbers is usually a maximum of say 3, so you could group 22/23/24 through one timber bay if taking them under the up main. (Also, pass 31/32 and 34/35 through separate timber bays.)

[TheSignalEngineer]

Roller stools should be 9' apart with joints midway between alternate stools.

 

I would avoid putting a main rodding run in the interval between running lines if possible. Try to keep it on the cess side. Also when crossing tracks don't put too many rods together as using consecutive beds ( in 12" to the foot) will weaken the track especially on a curve.

[Miss Prism]

That's the problem with rodding - there's always 57 ways of doing it!

[ozzyo]

For levers 24, 26 & 26a these may have run between the up and down roads? A lot would have depend on the curve. It could also have worked that way for 31, 31a and 32.  Also I don't think that 35 and 35a would have been connected as it looks like you have an unnumbered point between them that then becomes the second half of the crossover.

 

I'm probable wrong on all of these points (sorry).

 

OzzyO.

[The Stationmaster]

Here are some rodding run /leading off bed pics to give some ideas (hopefully) (incidentally Kidlington would probably have been round rodding although a lot of replacement work was done in the 1950s  (attached pics taken during an official visit to the Railways concerned)

 

 

 

 

[The Great Bear]

To the specific questions -

 

I have plenty of detail pics available should you need them Jon - Western of course (other Railways/Regions are available)

 

Out of sheer curiosity at this stage, but more pictures would be great, please Mike. In particular my head is scratching how compensators would be installed in a run of many rods (I reckon I have one of 10 or so), what happens to the rods in the middle of this if one is needed. Also rods passing over or under each other?

 

I have scanned in pictures from my various books which show the rodding and zooming in gives me a better idea of how things were arranged in reality, but what the arrangement was by the crossover and double slip is difficult to fathom; the bridge and shadows get in the way. Some points like 14 and 17 seem out of sequence, either the rods crossed under each other or something happened in the locking room...?

[The Stationmaster]

Out of sheer curiosity at this stage, but more pictures would be great, please Mike. In particular my head is scratching how compensators would be installed in a run of many rods (I reckon I have one of 10 or so), what happens to the rods in the middle of this if one is needed. Also rods passing over or under each other?

 

I have scanned in pictures from my various books which show the rodding and zooming in gives me a better idea of how things were arranged in reality, but what the arrangement was by the crossover and double slip is difficult to fathom; the bridge and shadows get in the way. Some points like 14 and 17 seem out of sequence, either the rods crossed under each other or something happened in the locking room...?

 

 

Out of sheer curiosity at this stage, but more pictures would be great, please Mike. In particular my head is scratching how compensators would be installed in a run of many rods (I reckon I have one of 10 or so), what happens to the rods in the middle of this if one is needed. Also rods passing over or under each other?

 

I have scanned in pictures from my various books which show the rodding and zooming in gives me a better idea of how things were arranged in reality, but what the arrangement was by the crossover and double slip is difficult to fathom; the bridge and shadows get in the way. Some points like 14 and 17 seem out of sequence, either the rods crossed under each other or something happened in the locking room...?

My pic above should give you an idea of how comps were arranged although the third one is quite close toe the other two - basically the comps sat underneath the rodding run and teh usualWestern maximum was two to a bed - as in the pic.  Because of differences in the length of run etc not all comps occurred in the same place.

 

As for rods 'crossing' - simples; when a drive was taken off a rodding run there would be a step down pinjoint to the crank which would sit below the level of the rods passing it.  If you look at the lower picture in my most above very carefully you will see that the rod on the extreme right is driving the nearest point toe with the drive passing under the other two rods - enlarge the pic and you can see the crank and the bolt heads where the pinjoint is fixed to the rod

[The Great Bear]

My pic above should give you an idea of how comps were arranged although the third one is quite close toe the other two - basically the comps sat underneath the rodding run and teh usualWestern maximum was two to a bed - as in the pic.  Because of differences in the length of run etc not all comps occurred in the same place.

 

As for rods 'crossing' - simples; when a drive was taken off a rodding run there would be a step down pinjoint to the crank which would sit below the level of the rods passing it.  If you look at the lower picture in my most above very carefully you will see that the rod on the extreme right is driving the nearest point toe with the drive passing under the other two rods - enlarge the pic and you can see the crank and the bolt heads where the pinjoint is fixed to the rod

Ah, thanks for explaining the pictures in your first reply, when knowing what to look for (and where) makes sense!

[TheSignalEngineer]

Try to get your rodding run arranged so that rods drop off from the track side as you go along. The furthest points from the box should be furthest rod from the track. It makes it a lot easier when fitting and maintaining cranks as the stud and adjusting slipper won't be under the run. Do the getting in to the correct positions on the box lead-off, see Mike's pictures above and note how many of the rods go over or under each other..

 

As Miss Prism said you have a big run going to the left. As there is a wide interval two track from the box I would consider taking the rods for 21, 24 and 26 straight across to there rather than on the box side of the line. Also think about where staff are going to walk, for instance the signalman getting to the box. Where does he come in? does he arrive by train?

 

To the right I would avoid using the 6 foot, a nasty place to put rodding from a Lineman's point of view especially where there is a restricted view of oncoming traffic. Much better to have it from both a safety and engineering point of view. It is nigh impossible to get in the standard arrangement for fitting crank frames and they often ended up mounted on the sleeper ends or specially made plates.

[The Stationmaster]

Not sure if this link will work but at Kidlington the whole of the rodding run towards the station was kept on the signalbox side according to this view -quite a large run resulted!

 

http://www.railuk.info/gallery/notes/getimage.php?id=2273

[The Great Bear]

Try to get your rodding run arranged so that rods drop off from the track side as you go along. The furthest points from the box should be furthest rod from the track. It makes it a lot easier when fitting and maintaining cranks as the stud and adjusting slipper won't be under the run. Do the getting in to the correct positions on the box lead-off, see Mike's pictures above and note how many of the rods go over or under each other..

 

As Miss Prism said you have a big run going to the left. As there is a wide interval two track from the box I would consider taking the rods for 21, 24 and 26 straight across to there rather than on the box side of the line. Also think about where staff are going to walk, for instance the signalman getting to the box. Where does he come in? does he arrive by train?

 

To the right I would avoid using the 6 foot, a nasty place to put rodding from a Lineman's point of view especially where there is a restricted view of oncoming traffic. Much better to have it from both a safety and engineering point of view. It is nigh impossible to get in the standard arrangement for fitting crank frames and they often ended up mounted on the sleeper ends or specially made plates.

 

Thanks, dropping the rods along the run makes sense; should also make modelling them easier in due course. The rodding in the 6 foot was definitely there in the prototype, though looks a couple less rods than I have (possibly because the farthest points in reality were so far away they were electrically worked). Will think about 21-26. Photo shows a cinder path in the up cess behind the rodding, down to the main road and station.

 

Once again, thanks

 

Jon

[TheSignalEngineer]

Not sure if this link will work but at Kidlington the whole of the rodding run towards the station was kept on the signalbox side according to this view -quite a large run resulted!

 

http://www.railuk.info/gallery/notes/getimage.php?id=2273

Nice shot, shows that each job is different. At Kidlington the second interval looks narrower than between the main lines outside the box. Also the proximity of the trailing points to the box and the width of the interval going away from the camera probably meant that there was more room for the rodding there than in the cess

[The Great Bear]

Not sure if this link will work but at Kidlington the whole of the rodding run towards the station was kept on the signalbox side according to this view -quite a large run resulted!

 

http://www.railuk.info/gallery/notes/getimage.php?id=2273

 

That link  works fine, thanks. That's a photo I haven't seen before; I like the signalman crossing the tracks after having collected the train staff.

[The Stationmaster]

Nice shot, shows that each job is different. At Kidlington the second interval looks narrower than between the main lines outside the box. Also the proximity of the trailing points to the box and the width of the interval going away from the camera probably meant that there was more room for the rodding there than in the cess

Don't forget that the 'six foot' is wider than that on 'other railways' because the route was originally broad gauge although I would agree that it was better - for all sorts of reasons - not to have rodding runs in the six foot.

 

A couple of points (sorry) for Jo -

 

1. The cess path is a bit better than usual on the Up side as it would be the Walking Route to the signalbox but in any case cess paths were far better in the old days than they are nowadays.

 

2. Although not too clear note there is a wooden boarded crossing for the Signalman to get over to the branch.

[TheSignalEngineer]

Don't forget that the 'six foot' is wider than that on 'other railways' because the route was originally broad gauge although I would agree that it was better - for all sorts of reasons - not to have rodding runs in the six foot.

 

 

Yes, I've been to a few places where the 6 foot was 9 feet wide and what should have been a 10 foot was about 5 foot 9 inches.

[The Great Bear]

What happens if you end up with two compensators that would clash, for instance point and facing lock rodding? They somehow get set at different levels? Having drawn something up that's what I have...