Starter question - track work

Help and advice for those starting in, or converting to P4 standards. A place to share modelling as a beginner in P4.
User avatar
Martin Wynne
Posts: 1172
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Martin Wynne » Tue Jan 19, 2016 10:34 pm

Le Corbusier wrote:Looking at the photos .... what would you hazard a guess the switches were..... B7 ? .... or longer ? Templot gives so many options!

Hi Tim,

See also back issues of "Midland Record" magazine: http://www.midlandrailway.org.uk/midland-record/

http://titfield.co.uk/WildSwan/WSR_MREC.htm

They won't be "B" switches, because the REA switches (A, B, C, etc.) were introduced in 1925 after the grouping. For your period they will be typically loose-heel switches. Try the 12ft or 15ft straight switches in Templot if you can't find specific MR data. Here is a scan of a Midland Railway 15ft flexible switch which you could create in Templot as a custom switch. It is approximately equivalent to a "C" switch:

Image

Here is a link to a full-size scan of that: http://85a.co.uk/forum/gallery/2/origin ... 000001.jpg

The crossing angle is likely to be either 1:7.5 or 1:8. The latter is the flattest angle allowed for fixed K-crossings (in the slip). 1:7.5 is a common size for single slips. Anything shorter than 1:7 will have too small a radius for running-line use. I would go for the 15ft switch and 1:7.5 if you can't find specific data.

For more help, ask on the Templot Club forum: http://85a.co.uk/forum/

If you don't want it immediately, I will create it in Templot for you.

regards,

Martin.
40+ years developing Templot. Enjoy using Templot? Join Templot Club. Be a Templot supporter.

martinm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby martinm » Wed Jan 20, 2016 12:56 am

Le Corbusier wrote:
In an endeavour to try and research all of this further .... would anybody be able to give a steer/suggest a source where I might find out a little more on prototype Midland track work in the Edwardian era? I was thinking in terms of the sleepering configuration and also what switches might have been used in this location ... the choices are bewildering in templot and my knowledge is currently limited to 4 bolt chairs/9ft sleepers and Alan's steer on ballast plus ash to the siding.
Tim


Tim,

Looking at my references, I see that there was also a series of articles in Modellers' Backtrack
Volume No.1
Number 2 June/July 1991 Making Tracks
Number 5 December 1991/January 1992 Making Tracks part 2 Early Midland Railway permenant way
Volume No.2
Number 3 August/September 1992 Making Tracks part 3
Volume No.3
Number 1 April/May 1993 Making Tracks part 4
Volume No.4
Number 2 June/July 1994 Making tracks part 5 Switching trains

There was quite a discussion on http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/56856-midland-railway-prototype-turnout-design-loose-heel-turnouts/ This discussion will answer some questions and, undoubtedly, raise yet more.

It also points to the three main historical sources and I quote:

1) The National Archives at Kew (RAIL 491/643).
2) The HMRS Study Centre at Butterley (who now have Bob Essery's collection of MR permanent way information).
"(HMRS) Members may be interested to know that a full set of Midland track drawings for this period, (c late 19th century), are held in the archives at Butterley and copies can be supplied to members."
3) The Midland Railway Study Centre at the Silk Mill Museum at Derby.
The MRSC holds 161 drawings of MR permanent way. Their catalogue is online at http://www.midlandra...k/catalogue.php where search of "permanent way" with category "drawing" finds 483 entries. The 483 entries are actually 161 drawings each reported 3 times by the search! The 161 drawings include an 1896 book of 75 p.way drawings using 100lbs rail (ref 20335-00 to 20335-75) and an 1885 book of 68 p.way drawings using 85lbs rail (ref 20337-00 to 20337-68). Both books include drawings of points and of crossings in many different sizes.
The search detailed above gives full descriptions of every drawing and the website at http://www.midlandrailwaystudycentre.org.uk explains how to use the MRSC and how to see the drawings.

For a good understanding of the context and development of railway track, I can recomend Andrew Dow's book The Railway - British Track Since 1804; ISBN-10: 1473822572

Hope this helps you in your quest,

regards,

martin

Alan Turner
Posts: 643
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:24 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Alan Turner » Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:45 am

When I drew up Monsal Dale in Templot some years ago these are the sizes I ended up with:

scan0028.jpg


regards

Alan
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:50 am

Alan Turner wrote:When I drew up Monsal Dale in Templot some years ago these are the sizes I ended up with:

scan0028.jpg


regards

Alan


Alan,

I am curious .... what was the project?

Tim
Tim Lee

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Wed Jan 20, 2016 2:57 pm

On the track plan attached

Image

What do the 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 3/4 3/4 annotations next to the lines refer to.

Is there any way of telling where track is straight and where curved .... or is it all curved?
The plan seems to suggest it is all gently curving .... but looking at the photos there is a suggestion that there are portions of straight linked by curves? From some of the images it suggests that the track in the station is straight up to the first switch and then it starts curving till just past the signal box then reverting to straight again.
Image

Tim
Tim Lee

Alan Turner
Posts: 643
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:24 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Alan Turner » Wed Jan 20, 2016 4:18 pm

Le Corbusier wrote:
Alan Turner wrote:When I drew up Monsal Dale in Templot some years ago these are the sizes I ended up with:

scan0028.jpg


regards

Alan


Alan,

I am curious .... what was the project?

Tim


I have been planning to build Monsal Dale for the last 30 years! Some day .... some day.

By the way The Midland used 45ft rail with 18 sleepers/panel; 12" sleepers at rail joints.

They also used 36ft rail panels at an earlier time. they could still exist in sidings in 1910.

regards

Alan

Alan Turner
Posts: 643
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:24 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Alan Turner » Wed Jan 20, 2016 4:28 pm

Le Corbusier wrote:On the track plan attached

What do the 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 3/4 3/4 annotations next to the lines refer to.

Is there any way of telling where track is straight and where curved .... or is it all curved?
The plan seems to suggest it is all gently curving .... but looking at the photos there is a suggestion that there are portions of straight linked by curves? From some of the images it suggests that the track in the station is straight up to the first switch and then it starts curving till just past the signal box then reverting to straight again.

Tim


First thought is that they are mile posts but that can't be correct as there are two of each - interesting.

The track through the platforms has a good chance of being straight but I would guess the rest is curved.

regards

Alan

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Wed Jan 20, 2016 4:46 pm

Alan Turner wrote:
Tim

I have been planning to build Monsal Dale for the last 30 years! Some day .... some day.

regards

Alan


As I am just looking at the station and signal box area at present ..... hopefully I haven't bit off more than I can chew! ..... though I suspect it will take a fair old time given my other commitments .... work/family/cycling/the summer/life..etc etc.... .

I blame the whole endeavour on teenage cycle trips in the late 70s around the area and down to Matlock bath to gawp at the Slaters model ... which I recall was of both Monsal and Millers Dale .... I would love to know if any photos of that model still exist and whether it was as good as my memory makes it!

Tim
Tim Lee

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Wed Jan 20, 2016 8:54 pm

Le Corbusier wrote:On the track plan attached

Image

What do the 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 3/4 3/4 annotations next to the lines refer to.

Is there any way of telling where track is straight and where curved .... or is it all curved?
The plan seems to suggest it is all gently curving .... but looking at the photos there is a suggestion that there are portions of straight linked by curves? From some of the images it suggests that the track in the station is straight up to the first switch and then it starts curving till just past the signal box then reverting to straight again.
Image

Tim
Tim Lee

User avatar
Noel
Posts: 1976
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 1:04 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Noel » Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:04 pm

The plans and the photographs suggest that virtually all of the track shown is curved, although much is to a large radius. Given the desire to minimise expensive earthworks in achieving the minimum curve radius and maximum gradient required by the builders this is to be expected in a twisting valley. Even on main lines any significant length of dead straight track is probably the exception, unless the geology is exceptionally favourable.

One possible reason for the duplicate quarter mile markings is that the Midland measured distance from Derby and the LMS [I think] from London, so if this version of the plan is from the 1930s or later it may have been updated to take this into account. This is pure speculation on my part, however.

Noel
Regards
Noel

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:41 pm

That will presumably involve me in trying to get to grips with transition curves in templot .... hmm! .... Though in Martin's single slip tutorial he states that slips and turnouts in the prototype predominantly occurred within sections of true curves or straight.
Tim Lee

User avatar
Noel
Posts: 1976
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 1:04 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Noel » Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:09 pm

If you haven't done so already, you may want to start by working out the actual length in 4mm of the section you want to model, versus the actual space available. You may get a surprise...

Noel
Regards
Noel

Alan Turner
Posts: 643
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:24 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Alan Turner » Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:14 pm

Noel wrote:If you haven't done so already, you may want to start by working out the actual length in 4mm of the section you want to model, versus the actual space available. You may get a surprise...

Noel


I can tell you from the road under bridge to the end of the first crossing back on to the main line is 20' (in old money).

regards

Alan

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:42 pm

The space I have initially is 2.5m x .5m for the station diorama .... with the hope of adding to later. This equates to 625ft x 125ft full size. Initially I pulled the track plan and the historic OS plan into CAD to scale and overlaid the base board size...

Image

This will allow me to model the road leading to the station, the station itself complete with yard and wharf and the signal box. The red on the plan is an indication for size purposes rather than any finalised position.

Image

Then when checking straights and curves I find that one arc describes the track from the bridge through to the start of the switch. This changes to a tighter curve through to a little beyond the signal box ... which then relaxes out again beyond the box. There would appear to be no straight. It would be nice to mirror this on the model I think.

I have pulled the plan to scale into templot and these findings appear to be confirmed.

Anyway these are my initial thoughts.

Tim
Tim Lee

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:50 am

I would be interesting to hear thoughts on track building.

To date I have experimented with copper clad and soldering to get a feel for things and understand what I am trying to do. However thinking further ahead i want to have properly chaired track.

I am also seduced by the merits of ply sleepers over plastic as I like wood. However ply sleeping was I understand developed for use with rivet construction where as plastic chaired systems were developed for use with plastic sleepers and a solvent bond. I understand that using Butanone as the solvent does work to bond the chairs to the plywood but that the bond is not as strong as to plastic.

Iain Rice in his book on track work advocates a mix of rivet and plastic construction with plywood ... the thinking being that where a solid joint is required rivets are used with cosmetic chairs and elsewhere bonding the plastic to the plywood is fine.

Another method I have come across uses soldered up sub assemblies with the bonded chairs and pin locators (Howard Bolton).

Norman solomon in his DVD uses the all plastic method but where chairs are cut and therefore cosmetic the sleepers flap around a fair bit.

I have to admit to vacillating between all three approaches plus just using the butanone with the plywood!

It would be good to have some individual opinions as a guide.

Tim
Tim Lee

User avatar
Will L
Posts: 2516
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Will L » Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:20 am

Le Corbusier wrote:... I understand that using Butanone as the solvent does work to bond the chairs to the plywood but that the bond is not as strong as to plastic.


While true, I think that gives the wrong impression. The bond may be less than plastic to plastic, but the chairs are quite well enough stuck down on the wooden sleeper for all practical purposes, with the advantage that you can get them off again with a sharp blade.

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:53 am

Will L wrote:
Le Corbusier wrote:... I understand that using Butanone as the solvent does work to bond the chairs to the plywood but that the bond is not as strong as to plastic.


While true, I think that gives the wrong impression. The bond may be less than plastic to plastic, but the chairs are quite well enough stuck down on the wooden sleeper for all practical purposes, with the advantage that you can get them off again with a sharp blade.


So that presumably means that one is looking at either a sub assembly approach or a localised use of rivets for those areas where the chairs have been cut due to the converging of rails to securely hold everything in place? Also would I assume that the sleepers are permanently fixed prior to building the track (maybe even painted and ballasted)?
Tim Lee

junctionmad

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby junctionmad » Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:17 pm

Le Corbusier wrote:I would be interesting to hear thoughts on track building.

To date I have experimented with copper clad and soldering to get a feel for things and understand what I am trying to do. However thinking further ahead i want to have properly chaired track.

I am also seduced by the merits of ply sleepers over plastic as I like wood. However ply sleeping was I understand developed for use with rivet construction where as plastic chaired systems were developed for use with plastic sleepers and a solvent bond. I understand that using Butanone as the solvent does work to bond the chairs to the plywood but that the bond is not as strong as to plastic.

Iain Rice in his book on track work advocates a mix of rivet and plastic construction with plywood ... the thinking being that where a solid joint is required rivets are used with cosmetic chairs and elsewhere bonding the plastic to the plywood is fine.

Another method I have come across uses soldered up sub assemblies with the bonded chairs and pin locators (Howard Bolton).

Norman solomon in his DVD uses the all plastic method but where chairs are cut and therefore cosmetic the sleepers flap around a fair bit.

I have to admit to vacillating between all three approaches plus just using the butanone with the plywood!

It would be good to have some individual opinions as a guide.

Tim



In preparation for my layout construction later this year, I've been playing with various methods of track construction. I have come from the copperclad tradition , and the lack of assembled strength in functional chaired turnouts takes getting used to.

I personally think if you are assembling plain track from ply, then build the turnouts from ply. If plastic , id suggest plastic for the turnout.

In all cases of functional , or near functional chaired turnouts. I personally think that some form of soldered common crossing is best. After experimenting with several methods, I now think soldering up the crossing on 0.6mm copper clad , or brass/nickel shim , positioned at the sleeper positions and then gluing these down onto the plastic sleeper ( in my case ) . I now use a very high temp agressve superglue for this ( permabond)

I then add semi functional chairs on the outside crossing rails, Elsewhere fully functional chairs are used.

I'm still experimenting and haven't finished a full turnout in anger yet. Yes threading chairs is tedious, but less so then all that JBS rivet malarkey. I find I selectively glue the chairs , as I set up the track using the gauges , this means I've less hassle if I need to move a chair.

Yes on plastic sleepers once the chairs sets , I find it difficult to release the chair, I can do it with a very sharp scalpel , though a lot of the times I loose the chair in the process,yes, it is a pain if I need to get a replacement chair in there. ( I usually cut the chair )

For diamonds or other K crossings , I " think " I will use a mixture of glue on functional chairs /sleepers and copperclad with the rails raised using the "veropin" idea. This is because such track work has to fettled exactly to line up on the template and gauges have less usefulness. I would say that mixing copperclad with ply is the least visually acceptable , especially where dye rather then paint is being used on the ply. There's some argument that, in this case, selective use of rivets and all ply construction is visually better


I'm now happy that several combinations are available , all of which avoid the rivet method for plain turnout construction. The one thing I find is that soldering the common crossing is finicky, that is , soldering the rails to the shims , I'm experimenting with different ideas, including building a soldering jig. Interesting the permabond adhesive can handle typical solder temperatures as it was designed for electronic SMD applications. I use standard 198 degree solder for the V assembly and lower temp solder when soldering up the common crossing onto the shims, this prevents the V coming part as I goof around burning my fingers assembling the crossing.

To avoid the bending stresses , especially where slide chairs are used and hence have a poor grip on the rails ( even if glued) , I have tested transferring the whole turnout on its template and effectively burying the template under the ballast. I use a high quality 90 gm matt photo paper for this, simply held on my construction board by ordinary sellotape . I stress that this has all been small test track applications, but I see nothing that frightens me. ( no PVA glue issues either ) . I never build directly onto the baseboards ( bad for the back )


Edit : I'm now finding if I look at the cork underlay, that the paper prevents the PVA soaking into the cork and this has been remarked that this effect used to seriously lesson the sound deadening effects. I use a 3m spray glue to stick the template to the cork. I'm going to see how this all works with closed cell foam underlay too. Though many now build the sound deadening into the baseboard and forego underlay.

I should say. I now using the thick plastic sleepers and have no issues with sleeper curling , but I use butanone quite sparingly compared to more flooding when used with ply.

I would recommend setting up a test plank , buy a whole cross section of components and give several methods or combinations of methods a try. You'll find you are drawn to ones that suit you. Don't expect to build the perfect turnout first time, focus on areas you find difficult and build multiple test track areas around that issue until your happy with the results. There's no point in repeatidly building all the tedious but straightforward parts of the turnout , if you can't finish the tricky bits to the required standard. Hence build lots of " tricky bits " on their own till your happy you have a basic workable repeatable standard.

All of the described methods produce in skilled hands :D , an excellent turnout.

Dave

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:53 pm

Dave,

Your reasoning sounds similar to that of Iain Rice except for plastic sleepers.

I am leaning towards using ply for plain track as well. So perhaps Butane + chairs in general with riveted sleepers at those points requiring additional strength and cosmetic chairs?

Thanks for such a comprehensive explanation

Tim
Tim Lee

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Fri Jan 22, 2016 9:20 pm

Le Corbusier wrote:I would be interesting to hear thoughts on track building.

To date I have experimented with copper clad and soldering to get a feel for things and understand what I am trying to do. However thinking further ahead i want to have properly chaired track.

I am also seduced by the merits of ply sleepers over plastic as I like wood. However ply sleeping was I understand developed for use with rivet construction where as plastic chaired systems were developed for use with plastic sleepers and a solvent bond. I understand that using Butanone as the solvent does work to bond the chairs to the plywood but that the bond is not as strong as to plastic.

Iain Rice in his book on track work advocates a mix of rivet and plastic construction with plywood ... the thinking being that where a solid joint is required rivets are used with cosmetic chairs and elsewhere bonding the plastic to the plywood is fine.

Another method I have come across uses soldered up sub assemblies with the bonded chairs and pin locators (Howard Bolton).

Norman solomon in his DVD uses the all plastic method but where chairs are cut and therefore cosmetic the sleepers flap around a fair bit.

I have to admit to vacillating between all three approaches plus just using the butanone with the plywood!

It would be good to have some individual opinions as a guide.

Tim
Tim Lee

User avatar
Paul Willis
Forum Team
Posts: 3035
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 6:00 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Paul Willis » Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:57 pm

Le Corbusier wrote:Dave,

Your reasoning sounds similar to that of Iain Rice except for plastic sleepers.

I am leaning towards using ply for plain track as well. So perhaps Butane + chairs in general with riveted sleepers at those points requiring additional strength and cosmetic chairs?


I've been a recent convert to plastic chairs on ply sleepers, from the old Brook Smith method. I find it much easier, quicker and realistic looking. Like others, I find the plastic/ply bond to be more than strong enough.

My solution to the problem of the vee area is to assemble it onto some strips of thin brass shim, which sit between where the sleepers go. Trimmed back to the base of the rail, they are virtually invisible when the turnout is completed, and will be even more so when it is laid and ballasted. I think that it was Jim Smith Wright that initially suggested this, but I may be mis-remembering.

Unfortunately, compared to the riveted method, there is more scope for the sleepers to slide around along the rail until the track is fixed down. I've overcome this to a degree by using a splash of butatone to fix the top of the chair into the web of the rail. It doesn't make a strong joint, but it's enough generally to stop them sliding freely along the rail.

HTH
Flymo
Beware of Trains - occasional modelling in progress!
www.5522models.co.uk

junctionmad

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby junctionmad » Sat Jan 23, 2016 12:16 am

Unfortunately, compared to the riveted method, there is more scope for the sleepers to slide around along the rail until the track is fixed down. I've overcome this to a degree by using a splash of butatone to fix the top of the chair into the web of the rail. It doesn't make a strong joint, but it's enough generally to stop them sliding freely along the rail.


yes thats the reason I looked at leaving the template attached and laying the whole lot.

in my case the shim is 0,6 and is glued to the sleeper

Terry Bendall
Forum Team
Posts: 2420
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:46 am

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Terry Bendall » Sat Jan 23, 2016 8:27 am

Le Corbusier wrote:Iain Rice in his book on track work advocates a mix of rivet and plastic construction with plywood ... the thinking being that where a solid joint is required rivets are used with cosmetic chairs and elsewhere bonding the plastic to the plywood is fine


Yes he does and quite a lot of people use this method - I have done so successfully. However the problem with using a river at every 4th or 5th sleeper is that the rail is held firmly at these points but can move in between which can cause problems. If plastic chairs are used throughout the rail can expand as on the prototype. If rivets are used on every sleeper the rail is held so firmly that it cannot move. I have successfully used the Rice method without any problems although that part of the layout where this was done has now been dismantled. Talking last week to the owners of an EM layout where the same method was used, they had a lot of problems with rail moving and buckling on a hot weekend at an exhibition

junctionmad wrote:I have tested transferring the whole turnout on its template and effectively burying the template under the ballast.


Personally I don't like this method. When fixed down the ballast and whatever you use to fix it will prevent sideways movement but what stops it moving upwards? When building a turnout, even an Exactoscale kit one, I tape down the template and hold the sleepers down with double sided tape. When the job is finished I side a scalpel blade underneath to release the sleepers from the tape. Another tip is to remove some of the stickiness of the tape first by putting it on a piece of plastic first and then taking it up and transferring it to the template.

junctionmad wrote:Though many now build the sound deadening into the baseboard and forego underlay.


Personally I think a lot of unnecessary fuss is made about the noise of trains moving. :) It may be a problem for layouts used at home but at exhibitions you don't hear any noise from trains moving.

Terry Bendall

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Sat Jan 23, 2016 9:15 am

Terry Bendall wrote:
Le Corbusier wrote:Iain Rice in his book on track work advocates a mix of rivet and plastic construction with plywood ... the thinking being that where a solid joint is required rivets are used with cosmetic chairs and elsewhere bonding the plastic to the plywood is fine


Yes he does and quite a lot of people use this method - I have done so successfully. However the problem with using a river at every 4th or 5th sleeper is that the rail is held firmly at these points but can move in between which can cause problems. If plastic chairs are used throughout the rail can expand as on the prototype. If rivets are used on every sleeper the rail is held so firmly that it cannot move. I have successfully used the Rice method without any problems although that part of the layout where this was done has now been dismantled. Talking last week to the owners of an EM layout where the same method was used, they had a lot of problems with rail moving and buckling on a hot weekend at an exhibition



Terry Bendall


Terry,

I would be interested in what method you now use and why?

My thinking was to go for the butane for all the fixings except the main crossings/locations where the chairs can only be cosmetic as they have to be cut to fit .... these I was considering using rivets .... but perhaps a .6 strip lowered to the base is the way to go?

Tim
Tim Lee

User avatar
Le Corbusier
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Starter question - track work

Postby Le Corbusier » Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:31 pm

Le Corbusier wrote:
Terry Bendall wrote:
Le Corbusier wrote:Iain Rice in his book on track work advocates a mix of rivet and plastic construction with plywood ... the thinking being that where a solid joint is required rivets are used with cosmetic chairs and elsewhere bonding the plastic to the plywood is fine


Yes he does and quite a lot of people use this method - I have done so successfully. However the problem with using a river at every 4th or 5th sleeper is that the rail is held firmly at these points but can move in between which can cause problems. If plastic chairs are used throughout the rail can expand as on the prototype. If rivets are used on every sleeper the rail is held so firmly that it cannot move. I have successfully used the Rice method without any problems although that part of the layout where this was done has now been dismantled. Talking last week to the owners of an EM layout where the same method was used, they had a lot of problems with rail moving and buckling on a hot weekend at an exhibition



Terry Bendall



My thinking was to go for the butanone for all the fixings except the main crossings/locations where the chairs can only be cosmetic as they have to be cut to fit .... these I was considering using rivets .... but perhaps a .6 strip lowered to the base is the way to go?

Tim
Tim Lee


Return to “Starting in P4”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ClaudeBot and 0 guests