Construction of a Test Track

[Will L]

I really don't understand why so many people shy away from the proper tool for the job of gluing ballast, which is PVA. Ok If you really want floating track you will need something else, but for all other purposes you can't beat it.

The idea that PVA makes for noisy track is a mis-attribution of the problem. If you glue a hard filler material together, like fine granite, its the filler that makes the resultant composite material very rigid and noisy not the glue. The misuse of Klear or any other varnish will produce the same result for the same reason. PVA by it self is quite plastic particularly in thin layers, PVA glued paper or card models are no more hard/rigid than the paper/card used.

Use a soft ballast, like a powdered Cork(?) and the result is much softer, less rigid and quieter I'm not sure what Dick Petter used on Knutsford East but it was a softer brown material which produced a must softer, and to my eyes, very effective finish. He is a traditionalist and used the P4 recommended method on Knutsford . PVA down first, then lay the track, scatter the ballasts and weight down the track till the glue sets. Presumably he did it again on Slattocks. Once you've removed any excess ballast powder, what's left remains firmly stuck.

Alan,you only need to add a wetting agent if you use the alternative method of laying the track then ballasting dry and flooding the result with well watered down PVA, which is presumably how you use Klear? This certainly works but isn't as neat or controlled as Dick's traditional P4 method.

[Le Corbusier]

I really don't understand why so many people shy away from the proper tool for the job of gluing ballast, which is PVA. Ok If you really want floating track you will need something else, but for all other purposes you can't beat it.

The idea that PVA makes for noisy track is a mis-attribution of the problem. If you glue a hard filler material together, like fine granite, its the filler that makes the resultant composite material very rigid and noisy not the glue. The misuse of Klear or any other varnish will produce the same result for the same reason. PVA by it self is quite plastic particularly in thin layers, PVA glued paper or card models are no more hard/rigid than the paper/card used.

Use a soft ballast, like a powdered Cork(?) and the result is much softer, less rigid and quieter I'm not sure what Dick Petter used on Knutsford East but it was a softer brown material which produced a must softer, and to my eyes, very effective finish. He is a traditionalist and used the P4 recommended method on Knutsford . PVA down first, then lay the track, scatter the ballasts and weight down the track till the glue sets. Presumably he did it again on Slattocks. Once you've removed any excess ballast powder, what's left remains firmly stuck.

Alan,you only need to add a wetting agent if you use the alternative method of laying the track then ballasting dry and flooding the result with well watered down PVA, which is presumably how you use Klear? This certainly works but isn't as neat or controlled as Dick's traditional P4 method.

What ballast do you use Will? Also, isn't some noise desirable ... I rather like hearing the sound of wheels on rails ... after all the real thing was far from quiet.?

[Philip Hall]

I had an early experiment with self adhesive granite ballast from Kings Cross Models, which was solid, without a doubt, with no chance of getting the track to move. It set like granite because it was, and the noise of running was horrendous. Since then I have always used granulated cork. On my old layout track and ballast were stuck down onto cork in one hit in the traditional way. It worked and lasted well, but drilling holes through the Copydex was fun as it wrapped itself around drill bits.

That layout was very much a branch line, but with the new line being the exact opposite with Pacifics and the like hurtling around at sixty or so with eight on the drawbar, I want to make sure the track is in perfect working order before adding the ballast, at least around the pointwork. I also want to experiment with a little bit of superelevation on the bends, and to have the flexibility to dispense with it if it causes problems with engines and stock which have rigid chassis. Yes, I know suspension is better, but I would like to have a fair amount of stock running quickly, so for a Southern man, RTR is the way to go until I get around to building the more esoteric stuff.

I was tempted to try foam underlay, but have come back to cork simply because it is a known and trusted material, stays flat (those rigid chassis again) and I don't want to be digging the track up as as the years pass to cure variations in level.

Philip

[Will L]

What ballast do you use Will? Also, isn't some noise desirable ... I rather like hearing the sound of wheels on rails ... after all the real thing was far from quiet.?

Before I was involved with Knutsford I used real granite, and you could file your nails on it, I now prefer the cork granules used on Knutsford. And yes I think a certain amount of track noise is no bad thing.

[Le Corbusier]

What ballast do you use Will? Also, isn't some noise desirable ... I rather like hearing the sound of wheels on rails ... after all the real thing was far from quiet.?

Before I was involved with Knutsford I used real granite, and you could file your nails on it, I now prefer the cork granules used on Knutsford. And yes I think a certain amount of track noise is no bad thing.

Will,

I quite fancy having a trial go with cork ... presumably from your earlier post you ballast using PVA (neat or watered down?). Do you simply sprinkle on to the surface and then clear the loose granules .. (do you clear immediately or once set?) ... or do you tamp down? Are there any issues with clumping/static or the like? Which granules do you favour? Are they all self coloured for painting after ... or can you get different colours?

apologies for the stream of questions

[Colin Parks]

Having noted all the comments re. ballast and the sticking down thereof in the recent posts, I am fast coming to the conclusion that dilute PVA will be the method used on the test track. The Greenscene ballast is not as heavy or hard as real stone, so should be quieter (though quietness is not a concern of mine). The Deluxe Ballast Bond behaves like dilute PVA in application, so I cannot see any advantage to it.

The trial section of sleepering ballasted with Ballast Bond is very firmly stuck in comparison to the section treated with Quick Shine polish. Howard's description of his use of Klear as an adhesive, with the deterioration in its condition over time has now really put me off that sort of product.

As for sticking down templates, like David, I too have used 3M Spray Mount, fixing the templates directly to the base board. One flaw in my trialling of ballasting methods has been to omit a section of paper template under the sleepers, so I cannot report on how a paper template reacts to adhesives. If the paper does ripple when wet, that could be bad, but fingers crossed it will not.

Colin

[Knuckles]

I was tempted to try foam underlay, but have come back to cork simply because it is a known and trusted material, stays flat (those rigid chassis again)......

I will never ever ever use it again. Ended up ripping up a previous layout due to the cork warping making a roller coaster. Based on reading many comments on many forums it seems to be mainly me who is unlucky as lots of people like it. Too much water in the glue mixture and you can forget it. Same goes for card as track packing. Just ripped another layout up due to same issue.

Sigh.

[David Thorpe]

I was tempted to try foam underlay, but have come back to cork simply because it is a known and trusted material, stays flat (those rigid chassis again)......

I will never ever ever use it again. Ended up ripping up a previous layout due to the cork warping making a roller coaster. Based on reading many comments on many forums it seems to be mainly me who is unlucky as lots of people like it. Too much water in the glue mixture and you can forget it. Same goes for card as track packing. Just ripped another layout up due to same issue.

I've never had any such problems with either cork or card, but there again I've never watered down the PVA - I've always used it neat. Paper and PVA, on the other hand, is a different matter, and can easily lend itself to wrinkling.

DT

[Will L]

I quite fancy having a trial go with cork ... presumably from your earlier post you ballast using PVA (neat or watered down?). Do you simply sprinkle on to the surface and then clear the loose granules .. (do you clear immediately or once set?) ... or do you tamp down? Are there any issues with clumping/static or the like? Which granules do you favour? Are they all self coloured for painting after ... or can you get different colours?

I wouldn't want to claim to have used the cork granules personally, I just watched Dick do it with interest and was sold.

He paints the whole area to have track or ballast with PVA, neat out of the bottle I think but it was a faily liquid variety. May be a little experimentation is due depending where you buy yours from to get the right constance, as they vary. Every PVA I've ever met was happy to be let down with a little water

The ballast granules were sprinkled on and left while the track, weighted down flat was allows to stick. Once the glue has done its stuff, the excess ballast was swept way/vacuumed off. No tamping required.

Greetings From Scaleforum.

[Le Corbusier]

I quite fancy having a trial go with cork ... presumably from your earlier post you ballast using PVA (neat or watered down?). Do you simply sprinkle on to the surface and then clear the loose granules .. (do you clear immediately or once set?) ... or do you tamp down? Are there any issues with clumping/static or the like? Which granules do you favour? Are they all self coloured for painting after ... or can you get different colours?

I wouldn't want to claim to have used the cork granules personally, I just watched Dick do it with interest and was sold.

He paints the whole area to have track or ballast with PVA, neat out of the bottle I think but it was a faily liquid variety. May be a little experimentation is due depending where you buy yours from to get the right constance, as they vary. Every PVA I've ever met was happy to be let down with a little water

The ballast granules were sprinkled on and left while the track, weighted down flat was allows to stick. Once the glue has done its stuff, the excess ballast was swept way/vacuumed off. No tamping required.

Greetings From Scaleforum.

Wow! ... above and beyond the call of duty me thinks Will be attending tomorrow

[David Thorpe]

Personally I much prefer to have my track laid, adjusted if necessary, painted and working before I ballast it. I use thin ply sleepers and so I find the method I referred to earlier (http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index. ... per-track/) best for me.

DT

[Le Corbusier]

Personally I much prefer to have my track laid, adjusted if necessary, painted and working before I ballast it. I use thin ply sleepers and so I find the method I referred to earlier (http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index. ... per-track/) best for me.

DT

David ... I am kind of in the middle here - but as I am not powering the track it makes things simpler. I intend to have a go at getting all the sleepers down, constructing the sub assemblies as per Howard's articles, then ballasting the whole lot before laying the track and sub assemblies. Pretty much as Chris Gough did on his Cadhay post. I will certainly try the method on your link.

[John Bateson]

How about:-
double sided carpet tape
then the sleepers - using Colron to suit
then sprinkle the granules on, tamp down and brush off the floaters - the carpet tape will hold most of the granules
add enough granules to hide any gaps
add 50% white glue with an eye dropper

Rock solid

Then paint the rails

John

[Colin Parks]

Thanks to all who have contributed advice to the debate regarding ballast adhesives and methods. The 'usual method' of dilute PVA seems by far the safest route to go, so that is what I will probably go for.

Meanwhile, all the rails for the plain track on the board with the point work have been cut and chairs slid on. It quickly became apparent that the C&L own-brand S1 chairs, ordered some three years ago, are a very tight fit on the rail, causing them to curve at the base. Perhaps just as concerning, they are not at ninety degrees to the rail: the representation of the key on these mouldings pushes the chairs diagonally. I have only five hundred of these chairs, so they might have to be replaced with Exactoscale-moulded version, though these are not Exacto-ly flat either when gripping the rail. Conversely, the Peco code 83 flat bottom rail, which is now supplied as a substitute for the withdrawn IL-115 code 82 rail, has proved to be quite acceptable, despite having a slightly narrower head and foot, the Peco Pandrol rail fixings slide onto the code 83 rail perfectly.

Also this week, the remaining Templot templates have now been stuck onto the other two boards of this test track assemblage, thus completing the track plan so far. Choosing to have individual sleepers and chairs rather than using flexitrack, has left me facing many more happy hours of chair-threading, with about seven metres of palin track to go!

Colin

[JFS]

Hello Colin,

This is a big problem as it prevents the chairs being properly stuck down and (worse) causes them to come adrift later as the stress in the glued joint wins out.

I discussed it with Pete Llewellyn a year or four back and I think there are a number of causes. Firstly, the rail section seems to be a very variable quantity and, as the tool wears, the thickness of the web increases - only a thou or two but that is more than enough. I know many changes to the Exactoscale Check chair tool were made before this issue surfaced.

Secondly, the mould for the C&L chairs has worn over the years causing the slot in the chairs to narrow. I have upstairs a bag of the original C&L chairs - now archeological relics - and they are wonderfully crisp and a perfect fit on the rail of the day. In this regard, the Exactoscale chairs are better.

No doubt there are a number of manufacturing variables in moulding the chairs and I am not sure these get enough attention with the result that even the Exactoscale chairs can vary in appearance (at least) from batch to batch. I suspect this is the cause of the "twist" you saw in the keys

Well done for finding that the PECO rail is a better fit - personally I would go that route rather than risk the evil of poorly fitting chairs. Likewise, I have been buying old Studiolith rail whenever I see it at bring and buys... !!

I think an article in Snooze exploring the different rail sections would be a good thing - where is My Venton...

Best wishes,

[Allan Goodwillie]

Hi Colin,

It looks like you have had a lot of ideas as answers here and have made your choice. I will still be using the classic chairs with rivets and using the chairs cosmetically. In the thread elsewhere I mention that I do use the chairs (Bullhead) when building points in the curved sections, but deliberately gauge widen in these areas as due to my own experimenting in earlier years I discovered that the points could go tight to gauge, both with plastic sleepers and wooden ones.

Your own experiment looking at the rail and how it behaves is very interesting. I am going to have a look at the new Hi-Nickel rail and check it against other stocks I have available at home. The new points I have been building are working out well with it, but only when I have tested when laid and running will I be totally happy. John Bateson has obviously had success with his carpet tape method. I am a bit behind with my own progress with my test piece and am pleased that you seem to be making real progress with yours. I had to get things ready for Scalefourum as my son wanted a Co-Bo running for the show and other stock had to be made ready, thus I am a bit behind.

I spent the first hour chatting with Howard and watching his layout perform superbly. His track work is absolutely superb and right from the start the trains ran beautifully on a very intensive service - superb! Howard knows his stuff about track and has produced some lovely pieces within his layout including an outside slip integrated with a tandem - something Michael Godfrey would perhaps been pleased with. I had a few complex items when I had my museum layout, but nothing quite as complex in such a small area. When you add the third rail detail and working point rods plus interlocking - a complete tour de force. I waited on to see your electric set run smoothly and what a beautiful job you have made of it! People don't appreciate always the effort to build carriages and make them look right. Building locomotives often is thought the pinnacle of the modellers art, but with most engines you rarely have to make more than two of each thing (and most times they appear one on each side). Regular window cut outs and other details like door handles are difficult to achieve and finish properly. You managed to get a superb finish. Excellent! Not in any way out of place on Howard's layout. I did take some photographs if you would like me to post them.

[Le Corbusier]

Hi Colin,

I will still be using the classic chairs with rivets and using the chairs cosmetically.

On the whole issue of track twisting due to ill fitting chairs/twisted rail and the butanol bond to the wooden sleepers not being strong enough to cope with this, does anyone have any thoughts/comments on Iain Rice's suggestion in his track building book of using a mixture of rivet and chair construction. If I remember rightly he suggested that every 5th or 6th sleeper might be rivet fixed to ensure the rail never broke the bond, and the rest being bonded chairs to avoid having to produce so many cosmetic chairs? On the flip side I remember reading on a thread somewhere that one of the advantages of the plastic chair method was that it allowed the rail to slide within the chair and presumably soldered rivets would negate this?

[David Thorpe]

I used the Rice method of mixing rivet and chairs on my pointwork, but not on plain track save at baseboard joins. I find applying cosmetic chairs to riveted track a complete pain!

As for C&L chairs, my experience has been similar to Colin's. A batch bought some years ago were very good (and slid onto the rail a little more easily than Exactoscale ones) but in a batch I bought much more recently, many were not 90 degrees to the rail but were neverthless tight enough on the rail to resist attempts to straighten them.

DT

[Allan Goodwillie]

Hi Colin,

it is OK to use the chairs as Ian has suggested, although I would be less sure if the layout is being kept in a space with extremes of temperature. Also if you are hoping to keep the angle that the chairs have on the set of the rail the proportion that Ian suggests is fine. Probably soldering the riveted sleeper after the other sleepers are done to ensure the angle remains the same. The first bit of Burntisland was done using rivets throughout and the chairs stuck on later once the track was tested. The later track was done with a proportion of one to two rivet/chaired.

The first method took some time, but looked and functioned well, despite there being a few chairs which sat slightly high - not particularly noticed in running except for a little Neilson 0-4-0 tank which just happened to have the same wheelbase as pairs of chairs - the engine happening upon a few high pairs would lift both wheels off the rail on one side of the engine as the flanges lifted over the chairs. Of course everyone was keen to tell me that the loco was at fault - especially as other engines seemed to run over the spots OK - however close examination of the tack showed why this was happening and the chairs were rubbed down where this happened and all was well. In the meantime I built a barrier wagon which I attached to the engine with additional pickups - belt and braces. More recent track work has proved more troublesome and has required much more alteration, but, sorry, I am not in the position to comment upon whether the difference in method of construction has had any effect on this. Since you are working with EMU's I would look out for the first problem (perhaps) showing up.

As to chairing track retrospectively, the way I and others have dealt with it is to have chairing parties where everyone gets together and does the job jointly - we have had some good sessions with a lot of banter and the time passes quickly as it is a job that can be done without too high a level of concentration. Another way of dealing with it is to spend half an hour at bed time - it is a good relaxation at the end of the day and may help improve sleep. It is also good thinking time as you are spending time with the layout and can consider what you might do next.

[JFS]

I really don't understand why so many people shy away from the proper tool for the job of gluing ballast, which is PVA.

... it worked for me! But just to say - there are PVAs and there are PVAs and you MUST use one of the latter.

Best wishes,

[Le Corbusier]

... it worked for me! But just to say - there are PVAs and there are PVAs and you MUST use one of the latter.

Best wishes,

Cryptic??

[David Thorpe]

What kind of chairs and glue do people use when applying them cosmetically to rivetted track? Are there special "cosmetic" chairs available for this purpose? Neither Exactoscale nor C&L chairs when cut in half fit properly on the rivets without some remedial work and and any slight excess of solder makes things even more difficult. If you've got to buy the chairs anyway it's surely far easier just to use them without the rivets? With butanone they certainly stick very firmly to ply sleepers.

DT

[Martin Wynne]

I really don't understand why so many people shy away from the proper tool for the job of gluing ballast, which is PVA.

The proper tool for the job is a latex adhesive (Copydex). Dries to rubber instead of concrete. Can be diluted with water.

Don't try to drill through the dried film, use a spike instead.

Martin.

[JFS]

Re Cryptic. Take two examples - "School" (washable) and "Resin W" (waterproof). Both PVAs both very different in their characteristics. Which works best depends on how you intend to use them.

Re Copydex (latex) I used this for all cases where I laid the track en bloc as a formation, but it does not work with my current method of ballasting the sleepers before laying the rails. (this requires the ballast/glue to partly go off to a "pasty" state so that I can "trowel" the surface flat - Copydex and expensive PVA just did not work, but cheap PVA did).

I started using Copydex because an article mentioned "white glue" and the only glue in the house which was white was Copdex so I used that (I was only 12 at the time). But it is not a perfect solution - it allows the track to creep over time and this led to problems on my previous layout. Equally, I used it on some track I built for a mate and it is working fine. Experience with the current layout ("concrete" ballast, no underlay, thin (drumming) baseboards also tells me that the bogey of "noisy running" no longer applies - these cheap Chinese toys I run are bloomin' well made!

In short, the best tool for the job depends on the method and the best method depends on the how the track is being built and how the track is best built depends on the nature of the trackwork and that depends on the kind of the prototype being modeled and that depends on your choices as a modeller. The only way I know of making these choices for the less experienced is to talk to as many people as you can who have done it and made it work, then to practice on a test-plank!

Hope that helps!

Best wishes,

[Le Corbusier]

Re Cryptic. Take two examples - "School" (washable) and "Resin W" (waterproof). Both PVAs both very different in their characteristics. Which works best depends on how you intend to use them.

Re Copydex (latex) I used this for all cases where I laid the track en bloc as a formation, but it does not work with my current method of ballasting the sleepers before laying the rails. (this requires the ballast/glue to partly go off to a "pasty" state so that I can "trowel" the surface flat - Copydex and expensive PVA just did not work, but cheap PVA did).

I started using Copydex because an article mentioned "white glue" and the only glue in the house which was white was Copdex so I used that (I was only 12 at the time). But it is not a perfect solution - it allows the track to creep over time and this led to problems on my previous layout. Equally, I used it on some track I built for a mate and it is working fine. Experience with the current layout ("concrete" ballast, no underlay, thin (drumming) baseboards also tells me that the bogey of "noisy running" no longer applies - these cheap Chinese toys I run are bloomin' well made!

In short, the best tool for the job depends on the method and the best method depends on the how the track is being built and how the track is best built depends on the nature of the trackwork and that depends on the kind of the prototype being modeled and that depends on your choices as a modeller. The only way I know of making these choices for the less experienced is to talk to as many people as you can who have done it and made it work, then to practice on a test-plank!

Hope that helps!

Best wishes,

Thanks ... food for thought!