Templot Club Archive 2007-2020                             

topic: 2399Dual Gauge Turnouts - Basic Principles?
author remove search highlighting
 
posted: 8 Feb 2014 21:17

from:

Steve Bedding
 
Swindon - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Hello Martin et al,

I have been using Templot for a number of years for a several 2mm projects and although fairly happy that I can muddle my way through most simple tasks/functions, I have been asked to produce a plan for a 7mm dockside layout that incorporates both standard (SG) and narrow gauge (NG) lines; this has taxed my abilities beyond what I can achieve without guidance.

I have searched the forums for any pointers/tips but can't seem to find a definitive tutorial or guide to the basic steps and principles to be followed; I would prefer to understand the sequence of producing the turnout rather than ask for a single solution as this way I can further my learning/understanding.
My best guess is that the steps would be something along these lines...
  1. Created base turnout (standard gauge - GoG-F) which in this case is a GWR 9ft regular crossing v5.
  2. Store & background base turnout.
  3. Modify track gauge (of the control template) from 32mm to 16.5mm.
  4. Remove the timbers (real-timbering-no timbering)
At this point, the tie-bars are aligned, NG track is correctly 'sided' with the SG for the main-road (common stock rail), but the NG is centralised on the turnout-road.  Now I start to encounter difficulties...  I have tried roaming the NG turnout along the SG one and changing the NG v angle, but without any degree of success!

Please could you give some pointers on the steps that I should be following to get this type of turnout produced.

Many thanks in anticipation,

Steve

Attachment: attach_1745_2399_GoGF_O165-DualGaugeTurnout001.box     261

posted: 8 Feb 2014 21:35

from:

Martin Wynne
 
West Of The Severn - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Hi Steve,

Mixed-gauge track comes in a multitude of different designs, so there isn't really a set procedure which will work in every case.

To get a feeling for what is involved, you might like to download this sample file:

 topic 289

and look at all the partial templates.

Note that this is a crossover without side-swapping, so not much use for passenger trains between platforms. Adding a side-swap complicates it even further -- an interesting exercise for the reader. :)

I will write again with some suggestions soon.

regards,

Martin.

posted: 8 Feb 2014 22:44

from:

Steve Bedding
 
Swindon - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Martin

Many thanks for your quick response - I've had a quick look at the recommended file and can start to see the logic in which is comes together. I just need to see if I can replicate the partial templates in 7mm!

Thanks again,

Steve

PS Suggestion for a future Templot capability - draw 'dual gauge' from the drop down menus? :D

posted: 9 Feb 2014 12:24

from:

Martin Wynne
 
West Of The Severn - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Hi Steve,

An important point to bear in mind for mixed gauge track is that both gauges must use the same flangeway gap, and ideally therefore the same wheel profile.

This can be a problem if you are using the wheels and RTR mechs from a smaller scale for narrow-gauge models in a larger scale. For example 0-16.5 layouts often use 00 gauge wheels and loco mechs. The normal 00-BF flangeway is 1.2mm* whereas for GOG-F it is 1.75mm. If you run 00 gauge models over that you are going to get derailments or at the very least a bumpy ride.

A possible solution would be to adopt the 0-SF standard for the 0 gauge track. This is 31.2mm track gauge with 1.2mm flangeways, so matching 00-BF flangeways. The disadvantage there is

a) you will be restricted to the current 0 gauge "industry standard" wheels (i.e. matching Slaters wheels) -- older wheels may be troublesome on 0-SF, and

b) I'm not aware of anyone supplying gauge tools for 0-SF. You would have to make your own, or Debs. of this parish may be able to help.



*varies between 1.2mm and 1.3mm according to where you look, see for example:

  http://www.doubleogauge.com/standards/commercialtrack.htm

The original BRMSB flangeway for 00 was 1.25mm.

regards,

Martin.

posted: 9 Feb 2014 17:47

from:

Steve Bedding
 
Swindon - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Hi Martin,

Yet more information to add to the melting point...  I am kind of stuck with the GoG-F standard for the standard gauge as the project is for a club 'shunting plank' layout and the majority of the membership is most likely be wanting to run RTR stock or at best if they make their own (minority) will be presumably using Slaters Fine standard wheels.  There is only one member who wants an 0-16.5 input (he seems to think all layouts should have a narrow gauge component...) and the amount of mixed gauge track is accordingly limited with only a few mixed gauge turnouts.

1739_091215_270000000.png1739_091215_270000000.png

The track highlighted in pink is where the mixed dual gauge is planned.

We shall have to be careful with the flangeway gaps, however since the track area in question is to be set in cobbles I suspect that we will be having a surfeit of extended check rails (to stop the cobbles from moving) but these may assist in keeping the O-16.5 stock on the rails so to speak. :)

As to the example file you pointed me towards, I am having some difficulty with creating the partial template for the NG element when resizing the turnout.  Although starting with a 9ft GW switch, the 'Switch Setting' increases to GW 10ft and then between V5.85 and V5.89 jumps rapidly to GW 12ft. This causes the turnout crossing rail to jump either side of the partial template for the wing rail already created.

The steps I've followed so far are:

1.              Create base turnout (wider track gauge…)
1.1.        In this example it is a GWR 9ft v5 Regular turnout
1.2.        ‘Omit rails’ – leave Turnout stock, Turnout check, Vee, and Main check rail.
1.3.        Store & background
2.              Create blade end of the main road crossing rail (copy from base turnout)
2.1.        No timbering
2.2.        ‘Omit rails’ – leave Main crossing rail
2.3.        Shorten to about 1/3rd length (F4)
2.4.        Store & background
3.              Create wing rail and crossing  end of the main road crossing rail (copy from base turnout)
3.1.        No timbering
3.2.        ‘Omit rails’ – leave Main crossing rail
3.3.        Shorten to about 1/3rd length (Blanking length Ctrl + F3)
3.4.        Store & background
4.              Create wing rail and crossing  end of the turnout road crossing rail (copy from wing rail and crossing  end of the main road crossing rail)
4.1.        No timbering (already set)
4.2.        ‘Omit rails’ – leave turnout crossing rail
4.3.        Shorten to about a couple of sleepers length (Blanking length Ctrl + F3)
4.4.        Store & background
5.              Create ‘narrow gauge’ main road (copy from base turnout)
5.1.        No timbering
5.2.        Modify track gauge (in this case 16.5mm)
5.3.        ‘Omit rails’ – leave Turnout crossing, Vee, Main crossing, and main stock rail
5.4.        Change V-Crossing settings to ‘Curviform crossing’ (?)
5.5.        Shorten the NG turnout such that the turnout crossing rail leading from the ’Vee’ falls short of the wing rail and crossing  end of the turnout road crossing rail previously created.
5.6.        Change the size of the turnout (set F5 to accept any angle) - this is where it appears to be going wrong... (not the program, rather the user!)
Notwithstanding the problems with the switch settings jumping, this last step seems wrong - the gauge looks to be overly wide throughout the turnout road?

I'd greatly appreciate some pointers and suggestions whenever is convenient - the principle seems straightforward, but my understanding and implementation is where the shortfall is :)
Attachment: attach_1748_2399_GoGF_O165-DualGaugeTurnout002.box     279
Last edited on 9 Feb 2014 18:28 by Steve Bedding
posted: 9 Feb 2014 18:38

from:

Martin Wynne
 
West Of The Severn - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Steve Bedding wrote:
Although starting with a 9ft GW switch, the 'Switch Setting' increases to GW 10ft and then between V5.85 and V5.89 jumps rapidly to GW 12ft. This causes the turnout crossing rail to jump either side of the partial template for the wing rail already created.
Hi Steve,

Use F9 instead of F5 to adjust the V-crossing angle without changing the switch size.

Alternatively, while using F5 you can right-click and select the lock switch (in F5) menu option.

regards,

Martin.

posted: 9 Feb 2014 20:56

from:

Steve Bedding
 
Swindon - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Thank you Martin - it seems so straightforward and easy when you point out the obvious (reminder to self - keep looking at the Function Key Chart!)

I had consciously deselected the 'Lock Switch' option having misunderstood what effect it would have :(

For the three K-crossing elements (not the crossing check rail), the Peg appears to be in the 'middle' of the turnouts; this does not appear to correspond with a DP for either the SG (base) or NG turnouts.  How is this peg position derived, and how/where do the two half-diamonds come from?

I'm starting to understand the process by which the mixed turnout is made, but I'm afraid its my knowledge of the way in which to manipulate Templot is letting me down so I really appreciate the time you are spending in helping me out.

Many thanks

Steve

posted: 9 Feb 2014 21:26

from:

Martin Wynne
 
West Of The Severn - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Steve Bedding wrote:
For the three K-crossing elements (not the crossing check rail), the Peg appears to be in the 'middle' of the turnouts; this does not appear to correspond with a DP for either the SG (base) or NG turnouts.  How is this peg position derived, and how/where do the two half-diamonds come from?
Hi Steve,

It's over 6 years since I did that design, so you will have to give me a while to re-familiarise myself with what I did there. :?

Also I have to consider whether subsequent new features in Templot2 mean there are now easier ways to arrive at the same result. Certainly the ability to adjust the check rails by mouse action will make a big difference.

I will write again soon.

regards,

Martin.

posted: 16 Feb 2014 11:05

from:

Steve Bedding
 
Swindon - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Hi Martin,
Sorry to bother you with this, but have you had a chance to look back over the old design for the Peg positioning and the K-crossing elements?
Cheers
Steve

posted: 16 Feb 2014 14:02

from:

Brian Nicholls
 
Poole - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Hi Steve,

The PDF file below, is something I cooked up a year or two ago, regarding the peg positions used in Templot.

I hope it helps.

All the best,

Brian.
Attachment: attach_1754_2399_PEG_MENU_POSITIONS_ILLUSTRATED_v2.pdf     323

posted: 16 Feb 2014 17:26

from:

Steve Bedding
 
Swindon - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Thanks for the suggestion Brian.  I have that very useful reference to hand and it was from that I was trying to work out where the Peg position for the k-crossing was supposed to fall.  It appears to be on the main road centre line but not at the DP so I was trying to ascertain how exactly it was arrived at.
That and how to arrive at the 2 v-angles of the k-crossings...
Cheers
Steve

posted: 16 Feb 2014 18:48

from:

Brian Nicholls
 
Poole - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Hi Steve,

Glad the document was of some help.

As far as adjusting the diamond crossing angles are concerned, you can use the following keys:

F9  ---  To adjust the diagonal road alignment and angle of crossing Vee

F10 ---  To adjust the forward and backward position hence the angle of the K crossing point.

In general to align an irregular diamond that has a very short (small) K angle, it is necessary to use both the above keys alternatively to get the best (if not quite correct) alignment of both the Main and Diagonal roads of the diamond crossing.

I have developed my own method if I ever need a very accurate crossing match, which gets much more complicated, and you have to use multiple templates to do.

It is, in general terms, done by using copied diamond templates, and using them on each of the curves for only the main road halves in each case, then removing the unwanted diagonal road parts, you then have to use additional partial templates to tidy up the K crossing area.

However, I will not go any more into this method, as I do not wish to confuse you further, I think you should be able to get what you want from the usual Templot2 methods, and it’s best to start with, and understand, those first.

All the best,

Brian.


posted: 18 Feb 2014 14:10

from:

Steve Bedding
 
Swindon - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Following the suggestions to play around with F9/F10 to get the k-crossing adjusted, I have come up with this.  I'm still not totally happy with the actual k-crossing I have produced - it seems too much like guess work and what sort of looks almost right!  I'm sure that there must be some better method of coming up with the k angle other than simple looks?
Having got to this position, I suspect that it will be easier now to actually build to gauges the turnout rather than try and guess the 'perfect' drawing...
Attachment: attach_1761_2399_GoGF_O165-DualGaugeTurnout004.box     268

posted: 18 Feb 2014 14:30

from:

Martin Wynne
 
West Of The Severn - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Steve Bedding wrote:
Following the suggestions to play around with F9/F10 to get the k-crossing adjusted, I have come up with this.  I'm still not totally happy with the actual k-crossing I have produced - it seems too much like guess work and what sort of looks almost right!  I'm sure that there must be some better method of coming up with the k angle other than simple looks?
Hi Steve,

There is. Templot can calculate it for you. I am currently preparing a tutorial reply.

Unfortunately it is not for the faint-hearted. Mixed gauge constructions are at the upper end of Temploteering and do require a full understanding of all the functions.

Also, I'm not sure we have solved the problem of the flangeway gap. I can only repeat that your design will not work unless both gauges use the same flangeway gap. Mixing G0G-F with 00 gauge wheels won't work, they will bump heavily or derail on the crossings. You may just about get away with 0-MF* (which will still accept all your club members' wheels) instead of G0G-F if you use sharp-nose vees, and don't mind a slight bump. But for best results you need 0-SF (which will limit you to Slaters type wheels only). Alternatively, the proper solution is to re-wheel the narrow-gauge stock with 7mm scale wheels.

*0-MF is 31.5mm gauge, 1.5mm flangeways. Gauges available from Debs. of this parish.

Thanks for uploading the file. You have done a good job with the partial templates. :thumb:

regards,

Martin.

posted: 18 Feb 2014 15:14

from:

Steve Bedding
 
Swindon - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Martin,

Thanks for the words of encouragement - it's been an interesting challenge to get to this stage!  All my previous Templot experiences have been working with 2mmFS track-work with no complicated gauge mixing and I have found that the drawn output has made up very nicely.

I can see your concerns with the flangeway gap issue and suspect our way forward will be 7mm scale wheels on the NG stock; I'll bring this up with our NG aficionado and he can adjust to suit this constraint - its still early enough in his build programme to allow.  We are going to knock-up some simple dual gauge track-work including turnouts using rail on copperclad to test the extended checkrails and 'embedding' the rails in cobbles/setts so this is where we will really see the impact and effect of the solution(?)

I'll look forward to seeing the dual gauge tutorial - it should be interesting to see how it should be done rather than muddling through until something fits  :D

Thanks again

Steve

posted: 18 Feb 2014 18:41

from:

Martin Wynne
 
West Of The Severn - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Hi Steve,

Sorry to raise another problem with your design. :(

There is no checking at A to prevent narrow-gauge wheels travelling from right to left from hitting the nose of the vee at B. As this vee is on the outside of a curve, a check rail is essential:

2_181336_310000000.png2_181336_310000000.png

And travelling in the trailing direction they will bump against the check rail knuckle.
 
If you want this turnout to use a common switch, the only solution is to change the size of the underlying turnout.

regards,

Martin.

posted: 19 Feb 2014 00:16

from:

Steve Bedding
 
Swindon - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Hi Martin,

Thanks for your eagle-eyes...  ...there's no such thing as a problem - just another challenge to overcome...   :)   I can see exactly what you mean; this could/will have disastrous implications so I'd better have a rethink! 

I have had a couple of very quick and dirty experiments with changing the switch from a GW 9' to a normal A type and varying the V angle from 5 through to 7 and whilst some improvements are seen the problem still persists!  This is supposed to be a dockside environment and so would expect small stock - the min rad accepted for this is 4' hence the v5 turnouts, increasing the v too much would move away from prototypical for this scenario - plus use too much of the space available...

I'll try a 'proper' build of an A5 turnout to see exactly what improvement is made, but I have a suspicion that 0-16.5 over GoG-F (32mm) may be too close to a half width and this may be the root of the problem with the v 'noses' and k-crossings aligning!

regards

Steve
Edit: version 5 file attached shows the A5 turnout - this has pretty much convinced me that there is some fundamental incompatibility in the straight turnout option where the NG is approximately half of the SG!
Attachment: attach_1763_2399_GoGF_O165-DualGaugeTurnout005.box     243
Last edited on 19 Feb 2014 06:20 by Steve Bedding
posted: 19 Feb 2014 12:28

from:

Martin Wynne
 
West Of The Severn - United Kingdom

click the date to link to this post
click member name to view archived images
view images in gallery view images as slides
Steve Bedding wrote:
Edit: version 5 file attached shows the A5 turnout - this has pretty much convinced me that there is some fundamental incompatibility in the straight turnout option where the NG is approximately half of the SG!
Hi Steve,

Yes, I agree. I tried a few sizes and came to the same conclusion. :?

This may be a case where you need one of those wonderful 19th-century patent devices -- sliding or pivoting check rails, flangeway filler blocks which lift up and down, etc.

Alternatively, change the narrow-gauge to 2ft Welsh or 3ft Irish. Or change the standard gauge to 5ft-3in Irish. :)

Another option might be to change to 4-rail mixed gauge on a common centre-line.

Keith Norgrove may be able to help if you try a PM -- I believe he worked on mixed-gauge tracks in Australia. He is Grovenor on RMweb:

 http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/user/3169-grovenor/

He is also a member here, but I don't think he visits very often.

regards,

Martin.



Templot Club > Forums > Baffled beginners > Dual Gauge Turnouts - Basic Principles?
about Templot Club

Templot Companion - User Guide - A-Z Index Templot Explained for beginners Please click: important information for new members and first-time visitors.
indexing link for search engines

back to top of page


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.
The small print: All material submitted to this web site is the responsibility of the respective contributor. By submitting material to this web site you acknowledge that you accept full responsibility for the material submitted. The owner of this web site is not responsible for any content displayed here other than his own contributions. The owner of this web site may edit, modify or remove any content at any time without giving notice or reason. Problems with this web site? Contact webmaster@templot.com.   This web site uses cookies: click for information.  
© 2020  

Powered by UltraBB - © 2009 Data 1 Systems