Construction of a Test Track
-
- Posts: 1947
- Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 7:49 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
When I have converted some Hornby engines using Alan Gibson steel tyred drivers, one of the ‘benefits’ has been the effect of a low slung powerful can motor adjacent to the wheels. Magnadhesion whether you wanted it or not, because when picking up a chassis from my test length, which also happens to be steel, the track lifted with it! On the ‘Grange’ the effect was quite pronounced, but I have never carried out haulage tests to see if it improved things.
Philip
Philip
-
- Posts: 916
- Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:00 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
Interesting Philip.
One of the effects of motor magnets that you might not think of is if you use electronic switching for points using servos and servo 4 boards the locomotives can interfere with the circuitry. My friends in the group who have Alloa had to move all their servo4 boards away from the tracks as the engines made signals twitch and points move below trains momentary so you can imagine the difficulties that might engender - there have been other problems with servo4 boards that I know about, so I am keeping well away from their use as I do not want to be re-programming chips at exhibitions.
Allan
One of the effects of motor magnets that you might not think of is if you use electronic switching for points using servos and servo 4 boards the locomotives can interfere with the circuitry. My friends in the group who have Alloa had to move all their servo4 boards away from the tracks as the engines made signals twitch and points move below trains momentary so you can imagine the difficulties that might engender - there have been other problems with servo4 boards that I know about, so I am keeping well away from their use as I do not want to be re-programming chips at exhibitions.
Allan
-
- Posts: 654
- Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 8:06 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
Surely passing motors affecting trackside servos is a deliberate attempt to replicate the real railway - isn't that why signalboxes have to be encased in Faraday cases on overhead electrified lines?
David L-T
-
- Forum Team
- Posts: 3918
- Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
I have been using Servos with Servo4 boards for years now with no problems and no need to reprogramme. There have been issues with servos twitching which have been investigated and are now understood and readily avoided by good installation practice. So there is no need for blanket condemnation of servos or servo4 boards.
I am not aware of any issues related to motor magnets, there were 4 primary issues
1. Use of inadequate power supplies, fixed by ensuring the supply is adequate
2. Missing Pullups on the Servo4, fixed in build and configuration
3. Leaving the control signal on after the throw is complete, fixed in the firmware
4. DC locos with poor suppression, common with kit built, fixed by adding suppressors across the track.
Using servos for point control is fine, with just a bit of care.
Regards
I am not aware of any issues related to motor magnets, there were 4 primary issues
1. Use of inadequate power supplies, fixed by ensuring the supply is adequate
2. Missing Pullups on the Servo4, fixed in build and configuration
3. Leaving the control signal on after the throw is complete, fixed in the firmware
4. DC locos with poor suppression, common with kit built, fixed by adding suppressors across the track.
Using servos for point control is fine, with just a bit of care.
Regards
-
- Posts: 916
- Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:00 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
Sorry Keith,
I know of your good work on MERG and thoroughly recommend joining to everyone. I know you have far greater expertise than myself in such matters and can speak with some authority on the subject having seen the work you have put in on all this. I bow to your knowledge as I am just a novice in such matters and do not pretend to be anything other than that. My experience of such things has been while operating several other layouts at exhibitions and when faults have occurred have listened to others comments when they have had to deal with them, so in that way my experience is second hand. However due to these experiences I decided simply not to use them and to use other methods instead.
As a matter of interest, I did ask at a meeting of our local MERG group how many of the members in a fairly packed room actually took their layouts to shows and was quite surprised to discover that none of them did. They were all building layouts at home. I realise that it is quite possible that I could install the latest version of the Servo 4 board and have no problems whatsoever. I am simply wary of anything which may fail me at an exhibition. I can perfectly believe that you personally have had no problems, which of course is great and that might encourage me to install a couple on my layout and see how I get on. The last section in the woods could be worked using a couple of them- so I will follow your lead Keith and try them out, just to make the experience a bit more closer to home. I assume you have installed them on your exhibition layout and have had no problems. So worth trying again. Thank you.
A much encouraged
Allan
I know of your good work on MERG and thoroughly recommend joining to everyone. I know you have far greater expertise than myself in such matters and can speak with some authority on the subject having seen the work you have put in on all this. I bow to your knowledge as I am just a novice in such matters and do not pretend to be anything other than that. My experience of such things has been while operating several other layouts at exhibitions and when faults have occurred have listened to others comments when they have had to deal with them, so in that way my experience is second hand. However due to these experiences I decided simply not to use them and to use other methods instead.
As a matter of interest, I did ask at a meeting of our local MERG group how many of the members in a fairly packed room actually took their layouts to shows and was quite surprised to discover that none of them did. They were all building layouts at home. I realise that it is quite possible that I could install the latest version of the Servo 4 board and have no problems whatsoever. I am simply wary of anything which may fail me at an exhibition. I can perfectly believe that you personally have had no problems, which of course is great and that might encourage me to install a couple on my layout and see how I get on. The last section in the woods could be worked using a couple of them- so I will follow your lead Keith and try them out, just to make the experience a bit more closer to home. I assume you have installed them on your exhibition layout and have had no problems. So worth trying again. Thank you.
A much encouraged
Allan
-
- Forum Team
- Posts: 3918
- Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
I don't have an exhibition layout either, but I see no reason why going to an exhibition should affect a servo4. Like everything, you have to make a proper job of it to get reliability.
Regards
Regards
-
- Posts: 916
- Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:00 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
I agree totally about you comment on reliability Keith, absolutely!
I have done a huge amount of exhibiting, both with my own layout and with many others and know that what you say is true, but there has to be robustness in all matters of a higher level than most are happy with on a home layout. I will not go into examples of the sort of things that can and have gone wrong here as it would only be embarrassing for the individuals involved and it would not be fair to air them on an open stage, but I am willing to discuss it privately, if you like, in the interests of further development and my own edification, and not take over Colin's thread which has been developing nicely.
MERG, for those who do not know and are not members, does have its own forum, which I can highly recommend, for problems and dissemination of information and that is probably the best place for discussion of these matters which can become quite technical.
Allan
I have done a huge amount of exhibiting, both with my own layout and with many others and know that what you say is true, but there has to be robustness in all matters of a higher level than most are happy with on a home layout. I will not go into examples of the sort of things that can and have gone wrong here as it would only be embarrassing for the individuals involved and it would not be fair to air them on an open stage, but I am willing to discuss it privately, if you like, in the interests of further development and my own edification, and not take over Colin's thread which has been developing nicely.
MERG, for those who do not know and are not members, does have its own forum, which I can highly recommend, for problems and dissemination of information and that is probably the best place for discussion of these matters which can become quite technical.
Allan
-
- Posts: 813
- Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 3:47 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
grovenor-2685 wrote:I don't have an exhibition layout either, but I see no reason why going to an exhibition should affect a servo4. Like everything, you have to make a proper job of it to get reliability.
Regards
Ha! going to an exhibition should not affect DIN plugs, D sockets, switches LEDs nor anything else - but it does! At Scaleforum, I had two brand new electrical faults - one affecting the block instruments and one an isolating track section. I plugged-in, unplugged, plugged-in a million times to no avail.
Got home, set it up again ... - all fine... My Design for Reliability analysis had not predicted that one.
I went to the Stafford show a couple of years back and there was a lovely little Irish layout in 3mm scale - complete with inside working motion on the locos... But the signal arms were all over the shop - the mechanics bent and mauled, weeks of work needed to sort it out. The poor chap explained "the servos have never plaid up before and were working fine when I left home..."
There is it seems, more afoot than the mere laws of physics!
-
- Posts: 813
- Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 3:47 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
Some while back there was a discussion on the use of mechanical lever frames. Those who are interested in such things might be interested to see something I have posted on RMWeb here:-
http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index. ... try3106858
As I said there, I am happy to post further details if there is interest, but I should say here that for those who are contemplating such a path, we are well on track to having the necessary etches on sale from the Stores at Scalefour North in a couple of weeks time. Though I am not expecting traffic jams on the M1 as a consequence ...
Best wishes,
http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index. ... try3106858
As I said there, I am happy to post further details if there is interest, but I should say here that for those who are contemplating such a path, we are well on track to having the necessary etches on sale from the Stores at Scalefour North in a couple of weeks time. Though I am not expecting traffic jams on the M1 as a consequence ...
Best wishes,
-
- Posts: 66
- Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2017 3:15 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
Brilliant. Would love to know how it goes together.
Al.
Al.
-
- Posts: 916
- Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:00 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
Wonderful Howard!
My new layout in the real thing had virtually no interlocking being a coal line. Some very rudimentary stuff on the signal box frame, but the majority of the points in the yard were on separate levers. There was a phone line between boxes I believe and a bell, but no complicated codes other than to offer, to accept and clearing. Really basic, however the next layout I plan to be a main line railway and I look forward to using your parts then Howard.
Allan
My new layout in the real thing had virtually no interlocking being a coal line. Some very rudimentary stuff on the signal box frame, but the majority of the points in the yard were on separate levers. There was a phone line between boxes I believe and a bell, but no complicated codes other than to offer, to accept and clearing. Really basic, however the next layout I plan to be a main line railway and I look forward to using your parts then Howard.
Allan
Re: Turnout construction - Question here please.
With deadlines for university work taking priority, I have done very little of note recently. Thanks to all who have replied over the past week or more. One small triunph is that I have found out how to upload videos to you tube. A very blurry test video shows the Class 73 rattling over some pointwork. When I learn a little more about embedding videos, the video should be visible here. Anyway, here is the link:
Apart from that, a modest amount of progress has been made on the rails for the crossover on the third board, which will be to the right in the video. The crossing vees are soldered up and the rails are all filed and bent to shape. Being made of flat bottom rail, there is not one piece of rail that has not had some attention from the file. The crossing vees are filed in the same way as for bullhead rail, with the added complication of removing a portion of the rail foot on the inside of the point vee as well. Not too happy with losing the rail foot towards the vee point, but short of milling the angles there seems no other way of approaching this task.
The underside of this crossing is not the prettiest, but the over-zealous filing of the rail foot will be lost in the shadows - hopefully. somehow I got myself into all sorts of complications with the timbering where it intersects with the sleepers (in the top right of the picture). A couple of timbers cannot be shoved due to their being under the common crossing, so it will just have to remain like that.
Apart from that, a modest amount of progress has been made on the rails for the crossover on the third board, which will be to the right in the video. The crossing vees are soldered up and the rails are all filed and bent to shape. Being made of flat bottom rail, there is not one piece of rail that has not had some attention from the file. The crossing vees are filed in the same way as for bullhead rail, with the added complication of removing a portion of the rail foot on the inside of the point vee as well. Not too happy with losing the rail foot towards the vee point, but short of milling the angles there seems no other way of approaching this task.
The underside of this crossing is not the prettiest, but the over-zealous filing of the rail foot will be lost in the shadows - hopefully. somehow I got myself into all sorts of complications with the timbering where it intersects with the sleepers (in the top right of the picture). A couple of timbers cannot be shoved due to their being under the common crossing, so it will just have to remain like that.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by Colin Parks on Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Forum Team
- Posts: 3918
- Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
When I learn a little more about embedding videos, the video should be visible here. Anyway, here is the link:
Use the edit button to see how it was done.
Not too happy with losing the rail foot towrads the vee point, but short of milling the angles there seems no other way of approaching this task.
Don't worry you would have to remove foot anyway to fit the wing rail with the correct flangeway (As does the prototype).
Those vees look good.
Regards
-
- Posts: 813
- Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 3:47 pm
Re: Turnout construction - Question here please.
Colin Parks wrote: A very blurry test video shows the Class 73 rattling over some pointwork.
Ah ha! It lives! All looks good from here - does not look at all "rattly" to me.
But the question is - are you pleased with it Colin?
Very Best Wishes,
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
Many thanks for sorting out the embarassing error Keith!
As for rail foot removal, it seems to be necessary to remove part of the wing rail foot to achieve the correct convergence at the knuckle, Though I have opted to reduce the foot right along the wing rail, which is the simplet course of action. Perhaps a better solution would be to have an angled file cut at the knuckle. This would bring the knuckles together and then the crossing foot would be reduced to obtain an accurate flangeway gap. I shall have another look at prototype images to see if it is clear what is going on at the crossings of flat bottom turnouts.
Hello Howard,
I am quite pleased with the running of the loco, but less so with the video, which makes the engine seem a little jerky - which it is not! The 'clickety- clack' sound as the Class 73 goes over the rail joints is quite pleasing. The main thing is that I have managed to open a YouTube account. So there will be more videos in due course. Your work on the new S4 Society lever frame is superlative. I shall be ordering four units once all the track is down.
All the best to you both,
Colin
As for rail foot removal, it seems to be necessary to remove part of the wing rail foot to achieve the correct convergence at the knuckle, Though I have opted to reduce the foot right along the wing rail, which is the simplet course of action. Perhaps a better solution would be to have an angled file cut at the knuckle. This would bring the knuckles together and then the crossing foot would be reduced to obtain an accurate flangeway gap. I shall have another look at prototype images to see if it is clear what is going on at the crossings of flat bottom turnouts.
Hello Howard,
I am quite pleased with the running of the loco, but less so with the video, which makes the engine seem a little jerky - which it is not! The 'clickety- clack' sound as the Class 73 goes over the rail joints is quite pleasing. The main thing is that I have managed to open a YouTube account. So there will be more videos in due course. Your work on the new S4 Society lever frame is superlative. I shall be ordering four units once all the track is down.
All the best to you both,
Colin
-
- Forum Team
- Posts: 3918
- Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
I shall have another look at prototype images to see if it is clear what is going on at the crossings of flat bottom turnouts.
I would be very surprised if you can find an image that shows that detail, you really have to get up close and personal with the real thing to see down into the flangeways, but I don't have track access anymore. There might be a chance of finding some cross section drawings on the net. The modern prototype avoids the problem by going in for cast crossings and UIC check rails. For check rails the relevant amount was planed off the check rail foot, with wing rails I'm not sure but I suspect the crossing nose foot was left on and the wing rail foot planed off as needed.
Regards
-
- Posts: 1172
- Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 4:27 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
grovenor-2685 wrote:with wing rails I'm not sure but I suspect the crossing nose foot was left on and the wing rail foot planed off
Hi Keith, Colin,
That's correct. The foot remains intact on the vee rails and is removed on the wing rails as necessary. Here is a scan showing the cross-sections. BS-113A Inclined design:
http://85a.co.uk/images/fb_xing_scan_960x700.png
Martin.
40+ years developing Templot. Enjoy using Templot? Join Templot Club. Be a Templot supporter.
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
Thanks for the link to the diagram Martin. Besides the detailed cross-sections, the positions of the spacing blocks is also clear. Although shaping the vee is fairly easy following the usual steps, I have yet to work out how it would be possible to achieve such a good fit of the point and splice rails on the inside faces, with each rail foot meeting perfectly.
All the best,
Colin
All the best,
Colin
-
- Posts: 813
- Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 3:47 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
Colin Parks wrote:... less so with the video, which makes the engine seem a little jerky - which it is not!
I had the same issue when I did the one of your SUB. I never got to the bottom of it, but I suspect it is due to the compression process. I wonder if it might be better if shot in lower resolution (ie simpest available mobile phone!)
Very Best wishes,
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
Hi Howard,
Maybe a mobile phone is the answer for avoiding jerky images on YouTube. It would mean buying a sefie stick and using that instead of a tripod as with the camera. Another thing I will try is filming square-on the track, which might help with the focus and also position the camera further away, as I have noticed that the background seems to be sharper than the subject in this first video.
All the best,
Colin
Maybe a mobile phone is the answer for avoiding jerky images on YouTube. It would mean buying a sefie stick and using that instead of a tripod as with the camera. Another thing I will try is filming square-on the track, which might help with the focus and also position the camera further away, as I have noticed that the background seems to be sharper than the subject in this first video.
All the best,
Colin
-
- Web Team
- Posts: 1092
- Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:03 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
The jerky running on YouTube videos seems to be quite a common phenomenon, I've uploaded a couple of videos, taken on an iPhone and they both suffer from the same 'jerkyness' when viewed on YouTube, something that the original video, when played on a PC, does not...
John
John
-
- Posts: 131
- Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2015 2:03 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
Martin Wynne wrote:
That's correct. The foot remains intact on the vee rails and is removed on the wing rails as necessary. Here is a scan showing the cross-sections. BS-113A Inclined design:
http://85a.co.uk/images/fb_xing_scan_960x700.png
Martin.
With regard to the diagram that Martin has linked.
At the cross sections B-B, C-C & D-D, it looks as though the head of the wing rails are planed on the running edge.
Are we meant to be mimicking this when building P4 crossings?
I cannot see any mention of this in the digests?
-
- Posts: 1172
- Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 4:27 pm
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
CornCrake wrote:At the cross sections B-B, C-C & D-D, it looks as though the head of the wing rails are planed on the running edge.
Are we meant to be mimicking this when building P4 crossings? I cannot see any mention of this in the digests?
Hi,
It is the machining for the end flares. Bullhead wing rails and check rails are usually bent outwards at the end to create a flare angle. Heavy-rail flat-bottom wing rails and check rails are usually straight at the ends, with the flare angle machined into the head. But only beyond the nose of the crossing, there is no such flaring at section A-A.
cheers,
Martin.
40+ years developing Templot. Enjoy using Templot? Join Templot Club. Be a Templot supporter.
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
Another experiment with video. This time, the 08 is propelling and pulling the sum total of correctly weighted wagons I have so far.
The only compensated wagon seen here is the brake van, which is also fitted with a 'brake', consisting of a length of guitar string which presses constantly on one axle. This is enough to prevent the surging usually seen on loose coupled model trains.
The picture quality is still not great, but all the better for having the train running reasonably slowly.
The only compensated wagon seen here is the brake van, which is also fitted with a 'brake', consisting of a length of guitar string which presses constantly on one axle. This is enough to prevent the surging usually seen on loose coupled model trains.
The picture quality is still not great, but all the better for having the train running reasonably slowly.
-
- Posts: 1252
- Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 9:57 am
Re: Track Construction for a Test Track
That is seriously nice, Colin . the amount of track building on here and with Alan has encouraged me to do some as well. I just hope it works as nicely as yours does in the clip. I have noticed that the wheel/ track interface is more critical than I first thought as I have run EM profile through the track but it bounced and lurched a bit... P4 profile however behaved and went through a lot better!
Depending on the weekend commitments I may create another thread for the small layout I think I will name "Thistle Beck" unless some one says it actually exists in the North east some where!
Depending on the weekend commitments I may create another thread for the small layout I think I will name "Thistle Beck" unless some one says it actually exists in the North east some where!
Doug
Still not doing enough modelling
Still not doing enough modelling
Return to “Layouts and Operations”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: ClaudeBot and 3 guests