Elmleigh

A forum for participants in the Standard Gauge Workbench.
User avatar
Jol Wilkinson
Posts: 804
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby Jol Wilkinson » Fri Jun 27, 2014 7:49 am

Will L wrote:
Tim V wrote:Noise, of course, comes from mechanisms, look there for sound reduction.


Of course this is another reason for using CSBs. They are definitely quieter, as a sprung suspension helps isolates noise motors from the track/baseboard.


Which is a little surprising, as the motor/gears are all connected to a wheelset that sits directly on the track. The other wheelsets are partially isolated from the frames, but surely no more so than with compensation?

Jol

User avatar
Guy Rixon
Posts: 681
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 6:40 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby Guy Rixon » Fri Jun 27, 2014 10:04 am

Jol Wilkinson wrote:
Will L wrote:
Of course this is another reason for using CSBs. They are definitely quieter, as a sprung suspension helps isolates noise motors from the track/baseboard.


Which is a little surprising, as the motor/gears are all connected to a wheelset that sits directly on the track. The other wheelsets are partially isolated from the frames, but surely no more so than with compensation?

Jol


I suggest a selection effect. People who build CSB chassis that work tend to build quiet, well-behaved transmissions.

User avatar
Will L
Posts: 1768
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby Will L » Fri Jun 27, 2014 11:08 am

Jol Wilkinson wrote:Which is a little surprising, as the motor/gears are all connected to a wheelset that sits directly on the track. The other wheelsets are partially isolated from the frames, but surely no more so than with compensation?


I don't think so, I certainly feel it is observably true that CSB loco's run quieter as a breed.

While it is true that the motor is directly connected to the track via one axle, it is only connected to the body via the CSB spring and the torque reaction link, so is isolated from the body. On a compensated chassis there is are hard weight carrying links between motor wheel chassis and body down which vibration will pass. While one axle of a CSB chassis may be transmitting motor noise direct to the track, it will be deadened by the loco weight bearing down on the springs, assuming you avoid a resonant frequency, and the other axles and the proportion of the loco weight they carry will not be transmitting vibrations. On a compensated chassis all the compensated wheel will be transmitting these vibration with the full weight of the loco. I only said a CSB loco is quieter, I made no claim for silence.

Guy Rixon wrote:I suggest a selection effect. People who build CSB chassis that work tend to build quiet, well-behaved transmissions.


There could be some truth in that too.

User avatar
4307
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 7:38 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby 4307 » Fri Aug 15, 2014 9:37 pm

This forum is full of advice and information! Sometimes hidden as a one-liner reply to a post, they need searching out. My search for adhesives for camping mat found nobody in support of using it, and the few who had would not use it again. The consensus of views suggested a cork base, the track constructed off-base and not stuck to a template. And stick the cork to baseboard, and track to cork, preferably not using PVA or any adhesive which is inflexible.

So I took the bold step of scrapping the camping mat and removing the paper underlay from my sections of track. The camping mat was removed in seconds but removing the paper underlay was a long patient slog. I was able to cut away most of it and then remove any remaining paper stuck to the sleepers by dampening it and then scraping it away with a Swan Morton knife blade.

What was immediately obvious was that the track now lay flat instead of being forced into an arc by the paper albeit only 5mm over 450mm but enough to complicate sticking it to the camping mat. But the downside was that one or two sleepers with plastic chairs fell off the rail, and all the sleepers with slide chairs fell off as none were stuck to the rail only the paper. I also suspect that some of the curved rail had been under a slight tension and held in place by the paper so that when loose it straightened slightly and made aligning the sections difficult.

Before removing the paper I had drawn alignment marks to guide where the track should be glued onto the baseboard, and used these to cut out 1/8th inch cork sheet which I then glued to the MDF baseboard using Evostick Timebond (currently £5.08 for 250ml from B&Q; I will use just over half for both cork and track). This is a flexible adhesive and gives sufficient time to peel off the cork and resit it before pushing it down firmly to give full adhesion. Another advantage from removing the paper was it gave me the opportunity to fix droppers to the rails and bonding across the frog and wing rails. I started with the right hand turnout as that could be laid flush to the board edge and soldered bonding strips of n/s across the bottom of rivets, and also Paladine droppers.
DSC01519.JPG
Bonding between stock and switch rails

DSC01517.JPG
Paladine droppers soldered to underside of rivets

I then positioned the turnout onto the cork, marked and cut into the cork to accommodate the bonding and droppers, and then using the Timebond stuck the sleepers to the cork. I had laid the loose sleepers roughly where they should be but not well enough as the rails did not align correctly over the slide chairs; these had to be cut off the sleeper on one side so that the sleeper could be positioned correctly onto the cork. Other sleepers with plastic chairs had twisted or slid along the rails and it took some time to get all these aligned.
DSC01524.JPG
First turnout stuck to cork with Evostick Timebond

On the second turnout I decided to fix all the sleepers where they should be which meant the plastic chairs had to be glued to the rails. I set the turnout onto a template using short lengths of double-sided sellotape, to give me a guide for where the sleepers should be glued. Loctite make a variety of superglues but the differences are to accommodate heat, humidity or vibration. The basic superglue seems good enough and has worked and at 10% of the price of the others was the obvious choice. (Loctite Superglue Precision, currently £2.00 for 5g from B&Q). This time I soldered droppers to the underside of the foot between sleepers which, if my soldering could be improved, seems a better method than onto the bottom of the rivets. (Better still would be to fix them onto the rivets when first building the track). I had already bonded the frog, but needed to add bonding between each stock rail and its switch. I had not positioned the first turnout close enough to the edge of the cork, so the second turnout now overlaps the opposite edge. That will be filled before I lay ballast.
DSC01526.JPG
Second turnout

DSC01527.JPG
Paladinee droppers soldered to foot of rail

Although it seemed a drastic course of action, I am pleased to have done this. I think the result is much better than the method I was following. I would welcome any comments or suggestions on improving this. Now I will continue with the other sections of track.

Terry Bendall
Posts: 1726
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:46 am

Re: Elmleigh

Postby Terry Bendall » Sat Aug 16, 2014 5:48 am

4307 wrote: (Better still would be to fix them onto the rivets when first building the track).


That was always the recommended method when building rivetted track. It does man a bit of forward planning however and making sure that any baseboard bracing is not in the way.

Terry Bendall

User avatar
4307
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 7:38 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby 4307 » Tue Sep 02, 2014 4:30 pm

After a long slog, I have relaid the track using cork as underlay - no paper template, no camping mat. On the remaining sections of track, I superglued all the chairs to the rails and got the sleepers aligned before glueing them to the cork. I also fitted droppers to the underside of the rails.

DSC01532.JPG
Track now relaid on a cork base; paper underlay removed.

Not getting the very first section glued down in the right position has meant that the rest were difficult to align. I also think that the paper underlay was holding the curve of the rail, so when it was removed, the track tried to straighten even though there were a lot of soldered sleepers. This may have been very slight but it is enough to have changed the alignment. It does not seem as smooth at the joints as I remember it. Conclusion - curve the rail as required before fixing it to chairs/rivets/sleepers.

I have a few sleepers to lay at the baseboard joints, and some chairs to replace which fell off, and fix the point blades again, but the next key stage is wiring. The photo above shows where the power feed droppers are located and I have gently bent them upwards to drill holes underneath for feeding wire through. My wiring will be more complicated than it needs to be so that I can isolate sections of the layout - after all, the original concept of this was not just a test track but somewhere I could admire my rolling stock! All yet to be built, I hasten to add. Currently I am working out a wiring diagram.

But where to put the control panel?

User avatar
RobM
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby RobM » Wed Sep 03, 2014 10:07 am

4307 wrote:But where to put the control panel?


There must be loads of options but on Manston Brewery I incorporated it in one of the fiddle yard boards and connected to the main board with a d connector.
The 'frame' holding the handsets is held in place with velcro.

mbcp.jpg
mbcp.jpg (82.57 KiB) Viewed 7729 times


Rob
http://www.robmilliken.co.uk
Updated December 2016

DougN
Posts: 973
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 9:57 am

Re: Elmleigh

Postby DougN » Thu Sep 04, 2014 2:11 am

Looking forward to seeing Manston Brewery in the flesh Rob! :thumb
Doug
Still not doing enough modelling

User avatar
4307
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 7:38 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby 4307 » Thu Sep 04, 2014 9:16 am

Rob
RobM wrote:
There must be loads of options but on Manston Brewery I incorporated it in one of the fiddle yard boards and connected to the main board with a d connector.
The 'frame' holding the handsets is held in place with velcro.


More options means more difficult to make a decision! I like the idea of incorporating it into the fiddle yard. It was one of the options that went fleetingly through my mind, and out again because I do not have a fiddle yard yet. However, it does make sense and perhaps I can build something temporary, connected by D-connectors as you suggest, that later can be incorporated properly onto the fiddle yard. Thanks for posting a photo - the panel also gives ideas - a picture paints a thousand words!

Dave Harvey

User avatar
Ian Everett
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 9:43 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby Ian Everett » Thu Sep 04, 2014 10:41 am

Tim V wrote:Not exhibition quality?

Don't put yourself down, I'm sure Terry will bite your arm off...


I'm very pleased to be able to announce that Dave's arm has been duly bitten and Elmleigh will be displayed on the SGW stand at this year's Scaleforum.

A very worthy exhibit and an excellent example of how to build a small layout.

Ian

User avatar
RobM
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby RobM » Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:09 pm

DougN wrote:Looking forward to seeing Manston Brewery in the flesh Rob! :thumb

:thumb ..... See you there Doug.........

4307 wrote:
More options means more difficult to make a decision! I like the idea of incorporating it into the fiddle yard. It was one of the options that went fleetingly through my mind, and out again because I do not have a fiddle yard yet. However, it does make sense and perhaps I can build something temporary, connected by D-connectors as you suggest, that later can be incorporated properly onto the fiddle yard. Thanks for posting a photo - the panel also gives ideas - a picture paints a thousand words!

Dave Harvey


Dave,
Originally my control panel gubbins were mounted in a temporary free standing box so I could operate before I had built the fiddle yards. It was only after building the fiddle yards that I saw that there was enough room to incorporate the panel and all ended up as a neat fully incorporated unit.
Rob
http://www.robmilliken.co.uk
Updated December 2016

User avatar
4307
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 7:38 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby 4307 » Fri Sep 05, 2014 10:26 am

Wiring

I will make up a temporary control panel which will eventually be on the board for the fiddle yard.

Operation is DC using an old but little used Gaugemaster D controller. This offers two separately controlled track feeds and a 16v source. My layout has seven isolated rail lengths and this is known as Board 2, with Board 1 (the fiddle yard) to the left, and Board 3 (a possible extension) to the right

Board connections.gif
Power feeds to track sections
Board connections.gif (5.87 KiB) Viewed 7508 times

I will wire these so that there are five separate sections, with each one controlled individually via double-pole double-throw centre off switches. That may sound overkill for a small layout but it will enable me to display locos as well as test them. The codes I am using are:
Symbols.gif
Symbols.gif (1.37 KiB) Viewed 7508 times


The control panel will then look like this, about 6x12cm, the square blocks where the DPDT switches will be, and numbers 1-7 referring to the rail lengths, and A & B the point motors.

Control Panel.gif
Control Panel.gif (6.82 KiB) Viewed 7508 times


The wiring of the DPDTs for power feeds to the track, showing which sections they connect to and any connection to an adjacent board:
Power Feed Switches.gif
Power Feed Switches.gif (4.92 KiB) Viewed 7508 times

Note I have omitted the wires from controller 2 to the switches but they will mirror those from controller 1.

The Turnout Motor Feed has to be wired differently, and I will use a 9v battery to power them:
Point Motor Feed.gif
Point Motor Feed.gif (2.42 KiB) Viewed 7508 times


Wire Colour Coding
Brown, 7/0.2, Live feed to rail
Blue, 7/0.2, Return feed to rail
White, 13/0.2, Feed droppers from rail

Tortoise Motors terminated with 9-pin D connector
Red, 7/0.2, Terminal 1 Feed
Black, 7/0.2, Terminal 8 Return
Green, 7/0.2, Terminal 2 Straight stock rail
Yellow, 7/0.2, Terminal 3 Curved stock rail
Grey, 7/0.2, Terminal 4 Frog
Orange, 7/0.2, Terminal 5 Ground Signal
Purple, 7/0.2, Terminal 6 Ground Signal
Pink, 7/0.3, Terminal 7 Ground Signal

I will also connect wires to D-connectors for the control panel, and connectors between boards.


I know everyone is busy preparing for Scaleforum, but I would welcome comments and thoughts on alternatives, especially if anyone is screaming in their mind: "don't do it like that"!

Dave Harvey

nigelcliffe
Posts: 536
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:31 am

Re: Elmleigh

Postby nigelcliffe » Fri Sep 05, 2014 11:33 am

You could reduce the wiring complexity by using "common return". The two controllers in a Gaugemaster Model D are fed from separate transformer windings, so are suitable for common return wiring (information in Gaugemaster's instruction sheet).

With common return on a simple layout, label one rail as common (eg. rail nearest viewing side) and connect them all together. Label the other rail as switched and feed that through SPDT switches (or one half of the DPDT switches you already have).
Connect one output of each controller on the model-D together, and connect this to the common rail. Connect the other output of each controller to the terminals on the SPDT switches.


However, there is a case to be made for full DPDT switching (as you have outlined) in allowing more flexibility in selection and testing of future controllers.


There are numerous ways of powering the tortoises. 9v battery is fine. Alternatives include the DC outputs of the Gaugemaster, perhaps with a string of three or four diodes to reduce the voltage to nearer to 9v.


- Nigel

User avatar
Will L
Posts: 1768
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby Will L » Fri Sep 05, 2014 3:05 pm

4307 wrote:Wiring


I thoroughly approve of getting it all planned before you start wiring, because it tends to illustrate all the bits that you haven't yet considered or at least not documented. Such as the location of the switched feeds on the points.

I would agree with Nigel about adopting common return wiring as it reduces the amount and complexity of the wiring, and requires simpler switches. The basic rule is that each controller has to be fed from a different transformer (or electrically separate windings on the same one). Once you have your head round it, the results are simpler not more complicated. Not your concern at the moment I know, but when you get onto more complex point work, a full analysis of which bits needs switching with which point, to make the required routes/electrical sections, will throw up bits that are common return no matter what, giving simpler answers and less switching than you might have been expecting.

What I'm not with is the rainbow nation approach to wiring. I don't think trying to identify everything by colour is practical in any event. This is a small layout, your already up to 11 colours and it's unlikely you're done yet. Not only that, but buying small lengths of lots of different colours of wire is an expensive way of doing it. Then, it isn't as much help as you might think when you have you're head under the baseboard trying to solve a problem. Worse it leads to a false sense of security, so wires get added as and when it seems appropriate, identified only by a half remembered colour code and not otherwise documented. The net result is the multi coloured rats nests visible under far to many layouts, and further unnecessary ware and tear on many, already folliclely challenged, heads.

Colour coding has is uses, ask a skilled GPO cable jointer, required to reconnect the hundreds of circuits in an old fashioned copper trunk telephone cable severed by some navy with a JCB. However, the point is that, under a base board, you don't need to be able to identify the middle of a wire, what you need to identify are the ends. This is easiest done by identifying what they are connected to, and best achieved by using tag strips, with each tag numbered and its use carefully documented. Under the board you have a tag for each identified section feed, and you connect the dropper wire(s) from the track back to the tag. For the control panel you have a tag strip with a tag for each section feed which wires back to the section switches. To complete the circuit you just run a connection between the tags. If you have a problem and you want to check the section supply, your don't have to remember what the right colour is, then identify the right wire and then chase down the ends; you just look at you're documentation and it tells you which pins on which tag strips are of interest.

Once your into this way of thinking, you realise that everything else is best routed through the tag strips too, and with a little pre-planing it is perfectly possible (better still its a good idea) to document the full wiring plan of the layout before physically wiring anything. Remember documentation done after the event rarely is, done that is. It tells you some useful things too, like how many pins you need on the plugs between each board. On a group layout you can get other people to help do the wiring up as they just have to connect together readily identifiable points and not worry about the logic of the thing. They can then also test individual boards by doing continuity checks to prove that what the documentation says is connected together actually is. On this basis I have built, run, and happily maintained a good sized (7 board) layout exhibited regularly over 15 years with every wire coloured orange. Electrical problems were very rare* and always quickly cured.

* Don't talk to me about the Lytham St Anns show where the layout was positioned under a large glazed roof light. It was a glorious sunny day, the layout got very hot and .... all the rail gaps closed up. Once we'd sawed them through all the problems went away, and it never happened again, but it was one of those days that you remember!

User avatar
RobM
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby RobM » Fri Sep 05, 2014 4:34 pm

4307 wrote:The Turnout Motor Feed has to be wired differently, and I will use a 9v battery to power them:

I'm no electrics/electronics expert but during the initial trials on MB I used a 9v battery to power 3 tortoise motors. The battery became extremely hot!!!!... :o
A trip to Maplins and I bought a regulated 12v 500ma ac adaptor..........works great but was not strong enough to power the dingham coupling solenoids so then bought a 1000ma version.........with the 2 I now have sufficient power.
Rob
http://www.robmilliken.co.uk
Updated December 2016

Terry Bendall
Posts: 1726
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:46 am

Re: Elmleigh

Postby Terry Bendall » Sat Sep 06, 2014 6:50 am

Will L wrote:What I'm not with is the rainbow nation approach to wiring


This is one of the many examples of where there is more than one way of doing the job, and we each have our own preferences. I like the colour coding approach and usually use it, but using numbered tags is just as good. The colour coding approach works for me since I have a large box of suitable wire to hand. Whatever method you use, the important thing is to be consistent. and lable everything as needed.

Terry Bendall

User avatar
David B
Posts: 1183
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:30 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby David B » Sat Sep 06, 2014 8:13 am

Colour coding seems eminently sensible to me unless one is colour blind. I recently installed a DSL splitter and connected it to the three telephone extension points in my house. Whoever installed the extensions used the different coloured wires inconsistently but at least I could trace them reliably. I wish the original installer had been consistent in their use of the coloured wires - the job would then have taken me much less time. Mine was a simple job when compared to wiring a model railway but the principle remains the same - use a consistent approach so that lines are easily traceable.

I have heard it suggested several times that it is useful to mark where the track is the underside of the baseboard. Painting the underside a light colour first helps as well.

User avatar
Tim V
Posts: 2367
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:40 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby Tim V » Sat Sep 06, 2014 8:29 am

I agree with Will, but would add I do have a simple colour code, identifying the common return with a thicker wire - as it carries all the commons.
Tim V
Scalefour News Editor

User avatar
4307
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 7:38 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby 4307 » Mon Sep 08, 2014 3:55 am

Gentlemen - a lot of interesting replies, thankyou for taking the time.

nigelcliffe wrote:You could reduce the wiring complexity by using "common return".

My limited knowledge of electrics would not have led me to think of that, but I can see the sense in having a common return as it would simplify the wiring, especially on something more complex. I have been thinking of wiring for some time and have collected together the switches, connectors and wires that I need. To use the full DPDT switch is not much extra work on this size of layout. At the moment I have a clear picture in my mind of how it will (should!) look so I think I will stick with that for now. Next time ...

Will L wrote:I thoroughly approve of getting it all planned before you start wiring, because it tends to illustrate all the bits that you haven't yet considered or at least not documented. Such as the location of the switched feeds on the points.

Will - I would agree. Numbering the tags seems an excellent idea whether the wire is colour-coded or not. I don’t have tags as such, but do have copper strip board which I was going to cut and superglue under the baseboard and use in the same way a tag would be.

I agree with you Will that there should be up-to-date documentation to go with the wiring, and as Terry and David said, it is consistency in using colour coding that is important.

Yes, my drawing did not show the switched feeds. It does now! And they were there on the layout!

I will stick with colour-coded wire on this layout, partly because it is a small layout, and I already have the wire, but principally because it will be more obvious to me what is what when I look underneath. As a beginner, that will help but experience may well change what I do.

RobM wrote:I'm no electrics/electronics expert but during the initial trials on MB I used a 9v battery to power 3 tortoise motors. The battery became extremely hot!!!!... :o

When I had the layout on the camping mat, I did test the point motor with a battery holding the wires against the terminals and it did not get hot. But that was only one turnout - 3 might be different. Nigel suggested using diodes to reduce the auxiliary voltage from my transformer, and if need be I will take this route. The instructions with the Tortoise have a wiring diagram to do this.

davidb wrote:use a consistent approach so that lines are easily traceable.
I have heard it suggested several times that it is useful to mark where the track is the underside of the baseboard. Painting the underside a light colour first helps as well.

Yes, David/Terry - consistency is essential. And I like the idea of marking the track on the underside.

Will L wrote:further unnecessary ware and tear on many, already folliclely challenged, heads.

So Will, how did you know I am folically challenged? When I look in the mirror I see a full head of hair (well, almost) but when someone takes a photo, it is then that I see the monkey’s arse:
Monkeys arse.jpg
Monkeys arse.jpg (18.6 KiB) Viewed 7242 times

I no longer have any protection when under the baseboards! Maybe this photo should be my avatar!

Dave Harvey

User avatar
Will L
Posts: 1768
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby Will L » Mon Sep 08, 2014 9:09 am

4307 wrote:Gentlemen - a lot of interesting replies, thankyou for taking the time.

....Numbering the tags seems an excellent idea whether the wire is colour-coded or not. I don’t have tags as such, but do have copper strip board which I was going to cut and superglue under the baseboard and use in the same way a tag would be.

I agree with you Will that there should be up-to-date documentation to go with the wiring,


For what it worth, I think you have drawn the right conclusions from the discussion, design and document first, method is secondary. Giving some thought to a format for your documentation that makes sense to you and that you find easy to follow, would not be waisted time either.

My tag strips were bits of copper clad, only you might find araldite more appropriate than supper glue which might give up if you get to enthusiastic with the soldering iron.

Will L wrote:further unnecessary ware and tear on many, already folliclely challenged, heads.

So Will, how did you know I am folically challenged?


Because, given your hobby, you are probably male and not under 25. Despite my own thatch seeming reasonably permanent from the front, photos taken from the wrong angle display an unwelcome truth.

User avatar
Mark Tatlow
Posts: 749
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby Mark Tatlow » Mon Sep 08, 2014 12:21 pm

Dave,

The curve in the siding that has been described as section 7 in your wiring diagram does look rather sharp? Could you ease it?
Mark Tatlow

User avatar
4307
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 7:38 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby 4307 » Mon Sep 08, 2014 8:37 pm

Mark Tatlow wrote:
The curve in the siding that has been described as section 7 in your wiring diagram does look rather sharp? Could you ease it?

I think this may be distorted perspective on the photo. There is a photo in my very first post on Elmleigh which shows less of a sharpness. But I have just measured the inside of the inner rail, and over a length of 154mm, the offset at the centre is 3mm, which gives a radius of 990mm. I think this was an accurate measurement but if the offset was say 3.5mm, that would give a radius of 849mm. In principle I am happy with 990mm as this siding would be for goods wagons.

Dave Harvey

User avatar
4307
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 7:38 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby 4307 » Fri Sep 26, 2014 10:38 am

I have done some wiring but still far from complete:

DSC01594.JPG
A start on the wiring

I used small pieces of copper stripboard to connect wires to, using superglue to fix the strips to the MDF. I soldered the wires to the tags using a cored electrical solder (by Antex from Maplin). I tried pre-tinning the wire but it didn't want to work, certainly not neatly, and I found it wasn't necessary anyway.

Will L wrote:
My tag strips were bits of copper clad, only you might find araldite more appropriate than supper glue which might give up if you get to enthusiastic with the soldering iron.

I am pleased to say none of the tag strips came away, even though I was using ordinary (cheap!) superglue, not a high temperature version.

The photo shows the turnout mechanism in place.

A few pointers:
- it was suggested to me I could have used a single copper wire instead of the flexible multi-strand white cable for droppers from the rail, and that could have been bent at right angles under the board. It would certainly look neater.
- why did I place the tag strips so far from the centre of the track? It would look a lot neater to have had each pair of cables running close to the centre line. It would also avoid having cables underneath scenic areas where I might want to fix through the baseboard, or wire from underneath. eg for signal posts, lighting, ...
- it would have been better to fix the Tortoise point motor and its 9-pin D connectors to the baseboard before placing the tag strips, as there is not a lot of free space to do it now.


Dave Harvey

User avatar
Tim V
Posts: 2367
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:40 pm

Re: Elmleigh

Postby Tim V » Tue Sep 30, 2014 4:42 pm

I would recommend not using superglue where you are soldering, I believe at high temperatures it can give off noxious fumes. I would have used a small screw.

You used to be able to get pre tinned copper wire (like fuse wire), but the last time I was in Maplins, no joy.

Looks very neat work under there.
Tim V
Scalefour News Editor

Terry Bendall
Posts: 1726
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:46 am

Re: Elmleigh

Postby Terry Bendall » Wed Oct 01, 2014 7:27 am

Tim V wrote:I would recommend not using superglue where you are soldering, I believe at high temperatures it can give off noxious fumes.


It certainly can - I have experienced it myself. No idea if they are harmful but they are certainly very unpleasent.

Terry Bendall


Return to “Standard Gauge Workbench”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest