Inclines

[Serjt-Dave]

Hi All, just want to run this past you all and get some advice please. I'm in the early stages of planing my layout, I have a track plan with a scenic part taking up just over half the area and a fiddle/storage yard in the rest. What I was thinking was to have the fiddle/storage yard under the layout itself. This would obviously would increase my scenic area and also give a longer running time. However what concerns me is having to have an incline or ramps to connect one level with the other. I have seen this done on layouts but mainly modern image where diesels tend to have greater traction and also our Keith has inclines on his layout. I was thinking of having the lower lever about 12" below the main layout, would this be too much? And how long would the incline need to be to allow trains to run without stalling etc. As I'm doing a S&D layout banking and double heading would fit in well here.

Any ideas, help and advice please.

All Best

Dave

[Paul Townsend]

Highbridge has two grades each on the S&D and B&E sections. Only one is a problem for single headed steam trains we run. All are 1:40 to 1:50 with transitions of 1:80 at each end. The troublesome one is 1:40 on a 4' radius curve. Most of our steam locos cope with 4-5 carriages or 40 waggons but a few don't. Visiting diesels cope better. Long ago I trialled grades and effect on hauling before committing the Highbridge design and was satisfied that 1:40 on the straight was OK.

NO trials were done on curved grades....that was a mistake!

Unless you have hugely long lines I would suggest a 12" separation will be hard to achieve. If the FY is at minimal clearance below the scenic section aim for around 3". Handling access to stock in the FY will be only possible in the front road so occasional access to rear roads will need lift-up scenery.

Consider a paternoster.

[John McAleely]

Consider a paternoster.

What's one of those?

[Paul Willis]

Consider a paternoster.

What's one of those?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paternoster

We had one of those in one of the lecture buildings at Leeds Uni. It used to be a bit of a dare (a) to see how many students you could fit in one "box" and (b) to go "over the top".

The latter was worth it for the "where did you come from?" looks on the faces of those waiting on the "top" floor...

HTH
Flymo

[Serjt-Dave]

No I will not consider a Paternoster. LOL. And yes I had to look that one up to.

Understanding what your saying Paul, what might be better is to stagger the hight of the FY, so where I need access to get to rolling stock etc will be about 12" lower than main layout and then slow raising the track bed up to a level so where it comes out onto the main layout the incline is greatly reduced.

And it's still a No for the Paternoster.

Dave

[Tim V]

Why not put the staging roads behind/in front of the scenic area at the same level?

[Serjt-Dave]

I had thought about that Tim but the issue there is the maximum width of the baseboards I can have. The layout will be in my cellar {15'x10'} where the main station and good yard area will be about 3' wide and then the other areas will be about 2' wide. I wouldn't want to increase the widths of the baseboards any more as this would reduce the access area in the centre. Also you would have a scenic break to hide the FY and that will effect accessibility to stock etc.

I'm quite happy to stick with half the layout as a FY all on the same level but it would be nice to increase the amount of layout you get for your buck but in the same amount of space. I think I might try jacking up one end of my test track to see to simulate an incline.

Dave

[Tim V]

The staging roads could be behind the station area, but hidden under a removable hill. Once automated, you won't need to remove the hill too often.

[Will L]

How about making you fiddle-yard traverser style, which is shorter anyway, making it the minimum distance below datum you can manage, and making it slide right outs so you can get easy access to all road.

[Serjt-Dave]

Thanks Tim but the station I wish to recreate is Shepton Mallet where it's fairly flat, so that knackers that idea.

Will, it's though I'm short on space to fit the FY in but to create more railway in the space I have. In my original {MKII} plan I allowed for an 8 road {4 up and 4 down} which I could get on a 2' wide base broad. In my original {MKI}, original plan I was going to have and end to end type layout and was going to have a traverser storage at each end, but now I've blagged it so I can tunnel through the cellar stairs I can have two continuous ovals.

Just out of interest this afternoon I did an inclined test with my test track. It's 6' long and I lifted one end at different heights. Using my trusty Jinty {being the only loco I have} and some over weighted 16 tonners she managed to push and pull them up until the incline was at 8" high and that was from a standing start. So I reckon if the FY track is about 4-5 inches below the main layout at the point where it's climb up, and the incline about 9' long most trains should be able to cope.The rest of the FY will drop away to about 8-10 inches to be able to gain access I think that might just work? Fingers and toes crossed etc etc. I will of course make a mock up before committing.

Thanks for helping

Dave

[Guy Rixon]

Is your fiddle yard to be single ended or double ended? If double ended, it might be tricky to work if it slopes.

[Serjt-Dave]

Hi Guy. The FY will be a through type, so the slopes will start at either ends but the FY itself will be level.

However, one thing I have forgotten about is the depth of the main layout base boards sides. I was planning on having them about 4" deep to allow for hiding point motors etc. Which means it will restrict access to the lower track where it rises to meet the main layout. Hmm.

Dave

[Paul Townsend]

So I reckon if the FY track is about 4-5 inches below the main layout at the point where it's climb up, and the incline about 9' long most trains should be able to cope.The rest of the FY will drop away to about 8-10 inches to be able to gain access I think that might just work? Fingers and toes crossed etc etc. I will of course make a mock up before committing.
Dave

So you are contemplating a grade of 5" in 108", nearly 1:20. I would not consider that wise, even on the straight. However your test should guide you. IF you persist with such a steep incline you must make long transitions at each end and I recommend calculations using longest wheelbase stock. I suspect you will find the transitions will need to be at least 6" long and you may need double transitions:
Level, 1:80, 1:40, 1:20
Don't be fooled by what bods get away with in 00. Our fine flanges are an issue here.

[Terry Bendall]

How about making you fiddle-yard traverser style,

I would support this idea. Uses much less space than an incline, much easier access - How will you access the tracks underneath the layout when something falls off, or for maintenace? I described traversers in S4News 176. They will take time to make but no longer than building inclines and getting them to work. More details can be supplied by PM if required.

Terry Bendall

[grovenor-2685]

Uses much less space than an incline,

This is an apples and oranges comparison, a traverser substitutes for a siding fan, not for the approach track. For any given number of sidings the traverser halves the length and doubles the width, and Dave has said he is restricted in width! Either way, traverser or sidings fan approach tracks are needed and if the sidings are to be under a scenic section as Dave specified gradients have to be accomodated.
To get a decent vertival seperation in the space concerned I think the sidings need to be under the station so the inclines extend round both ends and along the scenic side opposite the station.

I suspect you will find the transitions will need to be at least 6" long

And then some, I would suggest, this is an area where we need to stick to prototype dimensions, a minimum vertical curve radius around 1000m. (or 12m to scale).
Keith

[grovenor-2685]

Uses much less space than an incline,

This is an apples and oranges comparison, a traverser substitutes for a siding fan, not for the approach track. For any given number of sidings the traverser halves the length and doubles the width, and Dave has said he is restricted in width! Either way, traverser or sidings fan approach tracks are needed and if the sidings are to be under a scenic section as Dave specified gradients have to be accomodated.
To get a decent vertival seperation in the space concerned I think the sidings need to be under the station so the inclines extend round both ends and along the scenic side opposite the station.

I suspect you will find the transitions will need to be at least 6" long

And then some, I would suggest, this is an area where we need to stick to prototype dimensions, a minimum vertical curve radius around 1000m. (or 12m to scale).
Heres an example of the gradients under discussion, the Jinty is actually pushing rather more wagons than the WD is pulling.

Keith

[Serjt-Dave]

You're spot on there Keith with what I was thinking. I have about 3m or 9' 9" {in old money} of straight tack before I have to start the curves to go round. So the storage sidings would be this long as well as the final incline from the lower to the upper boards. The curves themselves would have to incline as but no more than 2" and if I keep the main incline 4" I think most thing should cope. the sidings would need to be about 6-8 inches below the main layout.

However other issue arise with access and maintenance and also as I've decided to go with screw and three link couplings, trying to couple and uncouple in confined area would test the patience of a saint and I ain't no saint.

What I think is required is a full size mock up of the required incline and see what the minimum distances,angles and clearances I can get way with and of course how it will effect traction etc.

Again thanks for your input.

Dave

[grovenor-2685]

Dave, you did not say how many wagons you used to test with your Jinty. Just gave mine a run on my steepest grade, maximum load for reliable hill climbing was 13. And my Jinty is packed as full of lead as I could get it.

Just to be clear, this shows the grade,

gradient.jpg

Regards
Keith

[Serjt-Dave]

Thanks Keith, that gives me hope. I was beginning to question whether this was going to work or not.

I tried my Jinty with 6 wagons as that's all I have at the mo. But they were weighted down quite a lot with anything I could cram into them. The Jinty was as it came from the box. She preformed very well up and to a 6" incline but at 8" she needed a little help in getting going but once she was moving she could clime. If she stopped the train would slide back down the track.

Like I say a full size mock up is called for and some serious wagon making.

Cheers

Dave

[John Fitton]

Keith! 6.3%!! Doesn't that qualify as cruelty to locomotives!! Quite remarkable though that the little jinty could push that many vehicles...

John