Templot Club Archive 2007-2020
|
|||
| author | remove search highlighting | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
posted: 11 Mar 2010 17:44 from: polybear click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
(Apologies if anyone has seen this on RMWeb also) Hi, I'm currently experimenting with different methods of trackmaking, to see what I like best and to learn the techniques. I've previously made a turnout using plastic components, but it wasn't too successful first time round (my fault). I've also been experimenting with Masokits etched brass chairs and pcb sleepers (pretty reasonable, very strong, looks reasonable but does take time). I'm now onto pcb trackwork (very strong, fast, but attaching chairs is a pain because they are too high due to the rail sitting directly on the sleeper). Now I've just tried ply and rivet, which I do like; however again there are problems attaching chairs because the size of the rivet head means the chair half is held away from the rail, even though I'm using the smaller copper rivets with 2mm diameter head. Any suggestions with regard to fitting half chairs to pcb and also ply & rivet trackwork would be much appreciated ....  I'll have a play with ply sleepers later, with the chairs bonded on. However, I do prefer the strength and ease of adjustment of soldered construction I think. Thanks. Brian |
||
|
posted: 11 Mar 2010 18:05 from: Paul Boyd
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
I'll have a play with ply sleepers later, with the chairs bonded on. However, I do prefer the strength and ease of adjustment of soldered construction I think.Go with that method - it works! It's sometimes a good idea to scatter a few rivets at strategic points, but plastic chairs solvent glued onto ply sleepers are very strong. It might seem contradictory, but it's also relatively easy to loosen the chairs by slipping a blade underneath if you need to make adjustments. One issue with plastic chair/ply timber construction is that unsupported track can be distorted. I now get around that by printing the templates onto thick card (Bristol Board, 250gsm) and building onto that, then the card forms the trackbed. Cheers |
||
|
posted: 11 Mar 2010 18:19 from: Dellboy
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Paul Boyd wrote:
Paul That's an interesting way to do it. Presumably you have any underlay between the card & baseboard, and you glue the card down with Photo-mount or PVA etc.. What do you fix the sleepers down to the card with and do you pre-ballast and colour your track 'at the work bench'? Derek |
||
|
posted: 11 Mar 2010 18:42 from: Paul Boyd
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi DerekThat's an interesting way to do it. Presumably you have any underlay between the card & baseboard, and you glue the card down with Photo-mount or PVA etc.. What do you fix the sleepers down to the card with and do you pre-ballast and colour your track 'at the work bench'?Yes, there is underlay under the card. I used to using 3mm foam, but the next time I lay track I'll use 9mm camping mat. The card is brushed over with a very, very dilute brown enamel just to stop any white that may show through, then the sleepers/timbers stuck down with double-sided tape. The whole lot is fixed with photo-mount. I have tried pre-ballasting, but in future ballasting and painting will be done in situ! I like to fit dropper wires as I build, which leaves the problem of making corresponding holes in the baseboard to take the wires. I stuck another template under the card which then acts as a drilling template during installation. I've yet to see how well this works, but the photo may explain it better. I have a few building boards mad from Contiboard with roughly 1" square timber underneath, and any drilling goes right through the lot! 105_111333_460000000.png  |
||
|
posted: 11 Mar 2010 18:50 from: Dellboy
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Paul Thanks for that. Sorry the pre-ballasting didn't work out. Derek |
||
|
posted: 12 Mar 2010 10:35 from: Dasatcopthorne click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Brian. I only use rivets in important places the retain the gauge and at the ends of rails. ie where cuts will be made to insulate the crossing, at the point of the crossing, at the centre point of each checkrail, one sleeper before the trailing end of a wingrail etc. The rest are plastic/bonded. At the tips of the blades, the first two slide chairs under each blade is a brass one soldered to the stock rail and superglued to the sleeper. Hope this helps Dave Smith |
||
|
posted: 12 Mar 2010 11:15 from: Dellboy
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Dasatcopthorne wrote: Hi Brian. Dave What you describe is a method I propose trying as it retains the strength/ease of solder construction but with the advantage of using mostly rail fixed cosmetic chairs. Its appeal being it should be a noticeable quicker method of construction !? Brian One solution I have come across for retro fitting cosmetic chairs to riveted sleepers is instead of grinding the rivets back to get a proper chair seating is to apply gentle heat using a temp controlled soldering iron to the rail/rivet which softens the chair allowing proper setting of the chair against the rail. BUT I HAVEN'T TRIED IT! Derek |
||
|
posted: 14 Mar 2010 21:38 from: polybear click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi all, Many thanks for the replies. I'm still experimenting with the different methods and variations and will report back soon. Many thanks. Brian |
||
|
posted: 15 Mar 2010 21:39 from: Mark Leigh
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Brian, I agree with Dave Smith in the fact that strategic placing of fixings is the key to reliable and quickness of track build. On Eridge Mk2 we employed the brass rivet placed at locations around the crossing vee/ wing rails, check rails and blade tips. However i understand the pain you have to go through to hide these rivets away. Having tried the heat method to fuse the cosmetic chair into place with little success i wouldn't recommend that idea. Grinding away the rivet normally results in weakening the track to rivet bond so i pointless really. One idea that i have had is an adaptation of the rail joints at the end of baseboards we have employed on Eridge. Eridge Mk 2 (photo number 6) Instead of brass rod using lace making pins and put the copper clad underneath the baseboard. Basically using lace making pins (Eileens Emporium and other places) at said strategic locations, soldered to the track work prior to fixing into position, so that the pins are in the centre of the sleepers. Drilling a hole through the baseboard (snug fit) into a pre-positioned piece of single sided copper clad board suitably bonded to the underside of the baseboard. Complete the laying of the track by bonding the chairs into their retrospective positions along the other sleepers (thus getting the correct height of the rails). Turn board upside down and solder pin to copper clad (or do from underneath). Advantages 1. The unsightly soldering is hidden away 2. This also doubles as droppers for you track feed (great for dcc) 3. The pin heads are small enough not to interfere with the cosmetic chairs Disadvantage Soldering underneath baseboard if you cant invert it. Might be worth a go. Mark |
||
|
posted: 23 Mar 2010 11:16 from: polybear click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi all, Many thanks for the replies; the suggested method of "Strategic Placing" of rivets on Turnouts etc. plus the use of them on perhaps every fourth(?) sleeper on plain track work sounds like a good comprimise between strength and ease of producing chaired trackwork without being dragged off screaming.... Many thanks for the responses. Best Regards, Brian Tulley |
||
|
posted: 15 Apr 2010 17:54 from: Templot User
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Posted by email by Andrew Jukes ___________________________ Hi Brian In reality, the 'good compromise' is likely to give the worst result as it detracts form the (different) advantages of the two very different methods of construction. What has to be thought through is how the track will cope with expansion/contraction of the rails and/or the baseboard. Soldered track is adjustable (an advantage) and needs to be strong to cope with the forces resulting from rail or baseboard movement. Those favouring soldered construction often look for some compliance in the sleeper/baseboard area to accommodate movement - but for this to work, the track has to be strong enough to make use of the compliance. Alternatively, the track needs to be strong enough to resist the movement, which is very difficult if temperature or humidity changes are large. Track with functional chairs can be arranged to allow the rail to move in the chairs so that relative movement between rail and baseboard is accommodated by changes in the gaps at rail joints. If the rail is pre-curved before track is assembled/built (always a good idea), then the result can be track in which the forces between sleeper/chair and rail are very low. Care needs to be taken to manage rail gaps, but these can be adjusted as track is laid by sliding rail so each gap is correct before moving on to the next section. Track built with plastic functional chairs bonded to plastic sleepers is amply strong when used like this and (though I've no personal experience) many achieve strong bonds between plastic chairs and ply sleepers. In either case, minimising the forces on the bonded joint in the way I've described makes sense. The 'good compromise' weakens the strong track approach whilst taking away any possibility of dealing properly with relative movement between rail and baseboard. In local areas of pointwork where adjustment is expected to be needed, mixed construction may be worthwhile, but it's a long-standing modelling myth that mixing construction on plain line gives any benefit. Regards Andrew Jukes |
||
| Please read this important note about copyright: Unless stated otherwise, all the files submitted to this web site are copyright and the property of the respective contributor. You are welcome to use them for your own personal non-commercial purposes, and in your messages on this web site. If you want to publish any of this material elsewhere or use it commercially, you must first obtain the owner's permission to do so. |