PECO announces OHLE

[Drawed]

Picked up a copy of Railway Modeller yesterday, with enclosed 'Shows you how' Modelling Overhead Catenary.

 

Page 9 has a table of wire and associated minimum track radius, the shortest length of wire being 200mm and the minimum track radius for which is 803mm.

 

Think you'll need a lot of space for any curves with the Peco system.

 

 

Eddie

[Joseph_Pestell]

Picked up a copy of Railway Modeller yesterday, with enclosed 'Shows you how' Modelling Overhead Catenary.

 

Page 9 has a table of wire and associated minimum track radius, the shortest length of wire being 200mm and the minimum track radius for which is 803mm.

 

Think you'll need a lot of space for any curves with the Peco system.

 

 

Eddie

 

This is not specific to Peco, the laws of geometry being universal. And 200mm lengths make a layout look like a tramway with a forest of masts (as in Manchester).

 

One solution is to have the pantograph locked to a height just below the wires so that the wire can go beyond the contact point of the pantograph head.

 

But visually that is still not great so if you want catenary on a layout best to have only very gentle curves on the visible part of the layout.

[Clive Mortimore]

For curved track and OLE see http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/71591-british-railways-ole-part-two-curved-track/

 

The smaller the radius the closer the mast have to be to keep wire and pantograph contact.

[Titan]

There is never more than 14 mast from the overlap to the mid point anchor. Why 14, I have still to find out.

 

 

 

It is to do with what is called 'along track drag'. When the wire moves due to temperature change, the cantilevers and registration arms move through an angle to accommodate it. The closer you get to the balance weights, the bigger the angle required to deal with the extremes of temperature. If the equipment is set up correctly, the angle should be about zero at the average UK temperature, but at on very cold or very hot days there can be quite a large angle, especially on headspans where all the movement is handled by the short registration arm only, as opposed to the whole frame up to the mast on a cantilever.

 

The real problem this can cause is tension loss or gain in the wire. With a registration at a large angle it is not pulling the wire perpendicularly. If you resolve the forces - simple triangle geometry - then some of this force is being added or taken away from the wire tension - the arm is basically pulling on the contact wire one way or the other. More than 14 registrations from the mid point and the sum of all these forces, known as along track drag, can add/remove a significant % of the tension by the time you get to the mid point anchor on a cold/hot day.

 

There are different limits according to type of construction - If it is cantilever only you can have more structures than headspans, as the cantilevers would move through a smaller angle for the same movement in the contact wire and not affect the tension as much.

 

These days since headspans are rarely used, the number of masts is not so much of an issue and the overall distance from midpoint is more dependent on how much movement the tensioning devices can accommodate.

Edited April 14, 2016 by Titan

[darrel]

I'm in the process of building my layout and some of it will have OHLE I had already purchased the Dapol stanchions but couldn't get hold of the wires to go with it. My local model shop today had the PECO system.

The cost of one peco mast is £8 Dapol masts are 10 for £10 the peco wires are 5 for £10 Dapol wires are £25 a pack.

So it's cheaper to buy the Dapol masts and use peco wire with them. My local shop owner has been experimenting with it and it looks like it should work.

He did have the peco starter kit it has 12 masts and the wire for £84

[roy h]

regarding where the top wire sits I have found a section near to cheadle hulme station in stockport that has a mix of where the top wire is either on top or underneath the arm. 

[Clive Mortimore]

 

Hi Roy

 

Here are a couple of mast in Chelmsford showing the new system being used on the GER lines where the 1500v DC was first used. Yes there are mast with the catenary wire above the top arm. Your photos which show the UK1 system as applied to the old Mk1 areas of the WCML with the upgrade that happened a few years ago and the more recent upgrade of the GER lines. Both systems retain the old 6 ft system height (the distance between the contact wire and the catenary wire at the registration point). Peco state in their manual their models are based on Mk3.  

 

This is a mk3 mast, at Ely. The catenery wire is under the top arm. Note the system height is lower at 900mm.

[Crewlisle]

At long last, Peco has revealed its long promised ready to run catenary system.  From the photos in February’s Railway Modeller it is what 95% of 4mm modellers have been waiting for.  So all you armchair modellers, rivet counters (or should it be ‘insulator counters’), prototypical modellers & regular critics of what the major manufacturers produce please do not criticise Peco for their effort in producing catenary which the average modeller will welcome with open arms.  Is this the turning point in encouraging Bachmann (Fantastic Class 85; looking forward to the Class 91!) & Hornby to produce more AC locos, eg a decent modern Class 86, 87 or APT-P?

 

I have had OHLE on my 00 gauge layout ‘Crewlisle’ for 30 years & it is always a point of interest & questions at exhibitions.  I used JV single masts (still available) as they looked like BR single masts, modified their continental portal frames  to look like early WCML masts but scratchbuilt the actual catenary wire as it is unique to each layout as it depends on the radius of the curves & points.  The loco pantograph is always in contact with the contact wire.  It is all portable & is tested to a scale speed of 100 mph.   I have seen a number of layouts at exhibitions with super detailed scale catenary but only dare run their locos at just over shunting speed!  Why have an APT & not run it at its scale speed?

 

Looking at the Peco offering, it is sturdy enough for the pantograph to be in contact with the wire, the catenary wire appears to be a good compromise between prototypical & practical size in 4mm scale & (if required) appears to be quite easy to make both the masts & catenary wire portable like mine.  Making it portable makes it easy for track cleaning/repairs, fitting across baseboard joints & entrances to tunnels.  

 

However,  do not think it will be cheap!  The masts are nickel silver/steel & I believe it is made by Sommerfeldt.  However, if I was starting again I would bite the bullet & pay the price for a ready-made quality product designed for the British market.  Modellers have waited a long time for this so don’t moan at the price or what Peco have not provided!

 

My OLE scratch built portable catenary is made of 0.5mm piano/high tensile steel wire.  When I have had the occasional pantograph mishap with my Class 87 traveling at 80 mph & catching the contact wire on a joint, it has been bent up to approximately 60 degrees off the line of the track.  However, because it is high tensile steel wire it sprang back almost to the original alignment.

 

The Peco catenary is made of copper.  Copper is normally very 'soft' & kinks very easily.  Is the Peco/Sommerfeldt catenary made of 'soft' copper or some copper alloy to make it resistant to 'kinking' in the event of an accident?  This could be very important if you want to run your layout at scale speeds.   

[Clive Mortimore]

Given that Peco actually (and very smartly cleverly) outsourced the production of their catenery to market leaders Sommerfeldt says enough, doesn't it?

 

IMO you Brits see too many imaginary bears if it';s not made in Britain. Really, it looks like you lot are scared sh*tless for anything  even remotely smelling of the Continent   (it's not just this, I see a whole lot more and not only on RMweb )

 

I tried to attach the trilingual Sommerfeldt catalogue, but it's too big (3MB). But to answer your question, Sommerfeldt wires are copper plated mild steel, a decent set of wire cutters has no problems with it.

No......if something is not right then it doesn't matter where it comes from, it is still wrong. What is on offer is not a model of Mk3 OLE as stated in the Peco booklet.

 

They only just mention the Zig-zag that is required. They do not even call it by its correct name of "stagger" or you need a pull off assembly over one track and a push off above the other and these alternate along the track except on curved track where the pull off is always on the outer track. . They ignore the stagger effect on curved track, if they included the stagger the spans as made would be suitable for tighter radii. The registration arms look rubbish. As for their suggested method of wiring a crossover, it is nothing like what is needed physically on a real railway, oddly Sommerfedlt do make the correct stuff for HO modellers in other parts of the world. So where in that is anything remotely suggesting because it is continental it is not liked.

 

Peco asked if they could include details of my old website on OLE in their booklet. Sadly it is no longer up and running because if it was it would have been included. I would have been more than happy to check their pre-production models and helped them in designing a better system.

It is again another "put up and shut up" we Brits get from our own manufacturers. 

[John ks]

​While slightly off topic this is what can be done with slightly modified Sommerfeldt OHE and a bit of kit-bashing.

 

 

the next 2 use Brass I & H beams with Sommerfeldt wire and insulators

this one is based on what is at stations around Brisbane Qld

 

 

this span is typical of what QR ( Queensland Rail ) use to span multiple tracks

 

 

QR OHE is based on BR OHE

 I wanted a OH system that loosely followed BR and at the time Sommerfeldt with slight modification worked for me

 

John

[Joseph_Pestell]

Picked up a copy of RM this morning and taken a look at the booklet. I think that the new product will meet most folks' requirements but it would be nice to see a few more mast types to cover other situations and certainly better ways of dealing with junctions and crossovers. Expect to see many "how to" articles on catenary in the mags over the next few months.

[Crewlisle]

Given that Peco actually (and very smartly cleverly) outsourced the production of their catenery to market leaders Sommerfeldt says enough, doesn't it?

 

IMO you Brits see too many imaginary bears if it';s not made in Britain. Really, it looks like you lot are scared sh*tless for anything  even remotely smelling of the Continent   (it's not just this, I see a whole lot more and not only on RMweb )

 

I tried to attach the trilingual Sommerfeldt catalogue, but it's too big (3MB). But to answer your question, Sommerfeldt wires are copper plated mild steel, a decent set of wire cutters has no problems with it.

 

I acknowledge that Sommerfeldt are probably the market leaders, but mild steel is a low carbon steel which does not have much resistance to bending/kinking unlike high tensile steel which has a higher carbon content.  Has anyone bent a Sommerfeldt catenary wire to see how easy it resists a permanent bend/kink?  How many OLE modellers run their locos at scale speeds of 80 to 100 mph?

 

When referring to my portable catenary in Comment 61, I have made it in approximately 3ft lengths spanning 3 or 4 mast sections.  I have had no problems with point work or tunnels. 

Edited April 19, 2016 by Crewlisle

[lyneux]

Hmmm... I wonder whether electro-plating guitar strings with copper (to aid soldering) is an option for home-made wires?

[Dagworth]

Given that Peco actually (and very smartly cleverly) outsourced the production of their catenery to market leaders Sommerfeldt says enough, doesn't it?

 

IMO you Brits see too many imaginary bears if it';s not made in Britain. Really, it looks like you lot are scared sh*tless for anything  even remotely smelling of the Continent   (it's not just this, I see a whole lot more and not only on RMweb )

 

I tried to attach the trilingual Sommerfeldt catalogue, but it's too big (3MB). But to answer your question, Sommerfeldt wires are copper plated mild steel, a decent set of wire cutters has no problems with it.

Cor what a load of prejudiced guff!

 

I've absolutely nothing against non UK companies, I am very strongly Europhile. Personally I would rather that Sommerfeldt had made AND MARKETED under their own name, and invested in enough parts to make a complete system viable, as they have done with so many Mainland European systems. Maybe then they would also come out with some accurate models of UK pantographs too. Then again maybe if they had marketed it under their own name they might have done some proper research into what UK OLE (no H!) looks like and made an accurate version!

 

And as an aside I do find myself looking at the Sommerfeldt catalogue reasonably regularly as part of helping my Brother-In-Law with the OLE on his German TT layout

 

Andi

[rob D2]

Given that Peco actually (and very smartly cleverly) outsourced the production of their catenery to market leaders Sommerfeldt says enough, doesn't it?

 

IMO you Brits see too many imaginary bears if it';s not made in Britain. Really, it looks like you lot are scared sh*tless for anything  even remotely smelling of the Continent   (it's not just this, I see a whole lot more and not only on RMweb )

 

I tried to attach the trilingual Sommerfeldt catalogue, but it's too big (3MB). But to answer your question, Sommerfeldt wires are copper plated mild steel, a decent set of wire cutters has no problems with it.

 

 

We don't make anything in Britain.

The continent smells ? 

Edited April 22, 2016 by Andy Y

[ThaneofFife]

the how to guide in this months RM magazine for the new PECO OHE looks fairly good tbh. good to see 500mm lengths of wire available too.  longer would be even better say 700mm or the length of a couple of mk3 coaches together. 

[Joseph_Pestell]

The Peco guide suggests that on curves one can take the wire to within 2mm of the rail alignment (or 6.25mm off track centre if you prefer). That seems a lot to me relative to the width of some pantograph heads.

[Clive Mortimore]

The Peco guide suggests that on curves one can take the wire to within 2mm of the rail alignment (or 6.25mm off track centre if you prefer). That seems a lot to me relative to the width of some pantograph heads.

Hi Joseph

 

Had Peco looked at the positioning of the contact wire on the real railway regarding curves then things might be different. The contact wire is off set by up to 15 inches off center towards the outer rail at the registration point (the mast). This means the contact wire will be at track center the 1/4  and 3/4 positions of its span and up to 15 inches off center towards the inner rail at the half way point. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/71591-british-railways-ole-part-two-curved-track/

 

Peco have the wire on the center of the track at the registration points, which means the modeller needs to use larger radii for his curves using the same span length than if he used the method the prototype is set up.

[The Ghost of IKB]

  There again Dapol have said they intend to carry on developing their range this year so by the time I come to stringing up the knitting I might be able to use Dapol OHLE for my needs.

 

 

AT the lightning pace that Dapol are developing this you may need to think about how you intend to ensure (unless you are under 10 year old) you're still around to use it!

 

 

Rumour is that Nixon had his head cryogenically frozen for just this eventuality.

Edited April 26, 2016 by The Ghost of IKB

[Joseph_Pestell]

Hi Joseph

 

Had Peco looked at the positioning of the contact wire on the real railway regarding curves then things might be different. The contact wire is off set by up to 15 inches off center towards the outer rail at the registration point (the mast). This means the contact wire will be at track center the 1/4  and 3/4 positions of its span and up to 15 inches off center towards the inner rail at the half way point. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/71591-british-railways-ole-part-two-curved-track/

 

Peco have the wire on the center of the track at the registration points, which means the modeller needs to use larger radii for his curves using the same span length than if he used the method the prototype is set up.

 

I had not spotted that error in the Peco booklet.

 

But then nor had I realised that the stagger could be as much as 15" either side of track centre (but which only equates to 5mm and therefore the wire should only get to within 3.25mm of the inner rail). Unless the heads of model locos are longer than they should be, I foresee dewirement problems with the dimensions suggested by Peco. When I have a bit more time, I will do a few calculations as to how wide a radius is needed for each of the available wire lengths.

[Titan]

Hi Joseph

 

Had Peco looked at the positioning of the contact wire on the real railway regarding curves then things might be different. The contact wire is off set by up to 15 inches off center towards the outer rail at the registration point (the mast). This means the contact wire will be at track center the 1/4  and 3/4 positions of its span and up to 15 inches off center towards the inner rail at the half way point. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/71591-british-railways-ole-part-two-curved-track/

 

Peco have the wire on the center of the track at the registration points, which means the modeller needs to use larger radii for his curves using the same span length than if he used the method the prototype is set up.

 

 

Not quite, the aim on full size is usually to get the offset as near zero as possible at the center of the span. This ensures that when the wind blows then the wire has to move further at the center of the span before it risks falling off the edge of the pantograph. This means that the contact wire should be at track center or close to it at mid span irrespective of whether the track is straight or curved.

 

However in this case it is one aspect that I would not recommend following for the model. You are not going to have to cater for wind, and in order to achieve a zero mid span offset the spans on a model railway curve would have to be even shorter than they would otherwise be. In any case the shorter the spans in real life, the less the wind can blow the wire off, and the greater the permissible offset at the middle. By the time you get to model railway span lengths the permissible offset would be pretty much equal to the full 15 inches anyway.

[wombatofludham]

AT the lightning pace that Dapol are developing this you may need to think about how you intend to ensure (unless you are under 10 year old) you're still around to use it!

 

 

Rumour is that Nixon had his head cryogenically frozen for just this eventuality.Futurama-Richard-Nixon.jpg

 

Well, in an answer to a question on their Facebook page which a decidedly not under ten year old me read, they intend to get the remaining range to market this year.  We will of course see, but I suspect there's every chance now that Peco have launched their range they will want to beat them to market with a fuller range of items.

[Clive Mortimore]

Not quite, the aim on full size is usually to get the offset as near zero as possible at the center of the span. This ensures that when the wind blows then the wire has to move further at the center of the span before it risks falling off the edge of the pantograph. This means that the contact wire should be at track center or close to it at mid span irrespective of whether the track is straight or curved.

 

However in this case it is one aspect that I would not recommend following for the model. You are not going to have to cater for wind, and in order to achieve a zero mid span offset the spans on a model railway curve would have to be even shorter than they would otherwise be. In any case the shorter the spans in real life, the less the wind can blow the wire off, and the greater the permissible offset at the middle. By the time you get to model railway span lengths the permissible offset would be pretty much equal to the full 15 inches anyway.

Thanks again Ian

[Dagworth]

Tensioning the wire may help, but it's not overly effective (yup, experience )  

Tensioning the wire and reducing pan spring pressure can be hugely effective (yup, experience )

 

Working tensioning gear is viable in 4mm if you want to put the effort in to getting it right

 

 

Andi 

[ThaneofFife]

whilst those who feel nothing less than working (live) OHLE is the way forward might be commended. I'd still pull it back to the simple practicalities;  the main one of which has perhaps not been considered by those pro-live contact wire posters and that is that unless youre modelling a small plank type layout chances are youll have a decent sized fiddle yard or traverser.  many OHLE layouts that stick with the traditional pick up through the rails system use dummy non working overhead for the scenic sections which looks absolutely fine and then ramp on and ramp off at the non scenic sections or entrances to fiddle yards so that you've still got great access without fouling any knitting.

 

now unless youre prepared to run your leccies "on the juice" to a stop, pan down and then model the "drags" from on scene to off scene or reverse to access your fiddle yard youll need to consider putting knitting above said yard or at least a couple of roads on it for it to be a workable operation.

it will also make putting stock on or taking it off trickier from underneath the yards wires.

 

From a modelling perspective I still really don't see the gain to be had from actual live contact wires.  just bear the above in mind if this is really the way you wish to take your modelling.