click here for a list of all existing Templot documentation
about Templot Club cookie information pre-print options:    

click image to open Templot Club in a new tab
Templot club top logo
looking for Templot? - (free)



 you are not logged in  - Login | Join


receive all messages by email: info


Recent Topics
Front Page  Search  Image Gallery  Gallery Upload  My Account  Members  Help  
make a donation  
please click: important information for new members and first-time visitors Templot Companion - User Guide
            messages archive on Yahoo
page trail:  Templot Club > Forums > Trackbuilding topics > GW concrete block and steel tie bar track work
Templot web site

                                       GW concrete block and steel tie bar track work
     
 Start new topic   Reply blank   Printer friendly 
  Rate this topic  
AuthorMessage
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
1st message | this message only posted: 30 Nov 2015 22:27
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
mikewturner
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Hi guys

Firstly apologies as am not really sure of the correct terminology for this type of track but can anyone point me in the right direction for details of block size, spacing etc etc. I assume that standard 2 bolt chairs were used?

Regards

Mike
__________
message ref: 19513

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
2nd message | this message only posted: 5 Dec 2015 10:09
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
John Shelley
St Ciers Sur Gironde 33820, France



view images in gallery
view images as slides
mikewturner wrote: Hi guys

Firstly apologies as am not really sure of the correct terminology for this type of track but can anyone point me in the right direction for details of block size, spacing etc etc. I assume that standard 2 bolt chairs were used?

Regards

Mike
I'm afraid that I can't help you directly, but I do have an LNER (GE Section) drawing of a proposal to use timber blocks instead of sleepers for siding renewals.  Would that be of use or interest?

John, from 33820 St Ciers sur Gironde

__________
message ref: 19528

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
3rd message | this message only posted: 5 Dec 2015 10:15
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
alan@york
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Is this the type of track?



__________
message ref: 19529

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
4th message | this message only posted: 5 Dec 2015 12:14
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Nigel Brown
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Came across a statement on RMweb which states that the subject is covered in Ian Rice's book on building finescale track. Don't have the book so can't verify it.

Nigel
__________
message ref: 19530

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
5th message | this message only posted: 5 Dec 2015 12:26
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Matt M.
Australia

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Concrete pot sleepers are covered in the late Andrew Dow's
'The Railway, British Track Since 1804. A worthwhile investment
if you like track work.
Yes there is a mention in Ian Rice's book with some thoughts on
ways to model it.

Regards Matt M.
__________
message ref: 19531

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
6th message | this message only posted: 5 Dec 2015 12:30
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Matt M.
Australia

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
And yes the drawing and photo in Andrew's book show
two bolt chairs on the GWR version. There is a 1944
technical drawing from The Railway Gazette which I
imagine would be a copy of the GWR drawing.

Regards, Matt M
__________
message ref: 19532

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
7th message | this message only posted: 5 Dec 2015 21:47
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Matt M.
Australia

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Hi Mike,

There were three types of concrete pot used by the GWR.
The basic dimensions are the same at 2ft-0½ inches long by
1ft-6½ inches wide. 5¼ inches high.

The flat top area was 1ft-7½ inches long by 1ft-1½ inches wide.

At the end of the flat area they have a 45 degree chamfer to the
sides which aren’t perpendicular but appear to have a slope of up to 5 degrees.

The corners are also chamfered from the flat top to the the base.
The measurement at the base is 4⅝ inches.

All three types used a ⅞ inch chair bolt.
On the type A and B pots these are centred at 11 inches apart. Though the type B could
also have them at 12 inches apart.

The Type C was experimental and moved the chair bolt holes further to the outside edge of the pot.

There is a ⅜ inch recess in the top of all of these types to take the tie bar. I’m not sure if the pots that
didn’t require a tie bar had the recess.
This goes in under the chair and is held in place by the inner chair bolt.
As the the tie bar clears the pot it changes from being a flat 2½ inch x ⅜ inch flat bar to
being L shaped with an extra 2½ inch drop on the return. this chamfered at each end at 45 degrees.

The tie bar for the Type A and B is 4ft-5¼ inches long. The one for the Type C would be longer on the flat
section due to the offset of the chair.

The chairs sit on a ½ inch elm pad.

The Type A has a 9 inch dome, that is about 1½ inches hit at the centre, cast into the bottom of the base
between the about 3 inches wide, ½ inch high bolt mounting cutout. This you can’t see while in position.
The other difference is there is a return chamfer around the bas at 45 degrees starting about 1½ inches from the bottom.

The Type B and C simply go, not so quite, straight down to the base which has a rough bottom.

There were two spacings used on 45ft track. Goods loops and sidings generally had 17 sleepers per length.
Tie bar at the end of the track. Then 1 pair of pots without tie bars. Tie bar. Then 2 without. Tie bar. Then 2 without.
Tie bar. Then 2 without. Tie bar. Then 2 without. Tie bar. 1 without. Tie bar.

Lightly worked sidings had 16 sleepers per 45ft length. This is evenly spaced at 2 without tie bars between those with tie bars.

I think that covers most of the salient points clearly.
The drawing would make this clearer of course, but I hope this is useful to you to start with.

Regards, Matt M.
__________
message ref: 19537

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
8th message | this message only posted: 6 Dec 2015 21:28
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
mikewturner
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
John Shelley wrote:
mikewturner wrote: Hi guys

Firstly apologies as am not really sure of the correct terminology for this type of track but can anyone point me in the right direction for details of block size, spacing etc etc. I assume that standard 2 bolt chairs were used?

Regards

Mike
I'm afraid that I can't help you directly, but I do have an LNER (GE Section) drawing of a proposal to use timber blocks instead of sleepers for siding renewals.  Would that be of use or interest?

John, from 33820 St Ciers sur Gironde


Hi John

Thanks for the offer but looks like Matt has given chapter and verse on the GW version!

Regards

Mike
__________
message ref: 19551

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
9th message | this message only posted: 6 Dec 2015 21:30
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
mikewturner
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
alan@york wrote:
Is this the type of track?




Hi Alan

It's similar yes but not the same. Where is this as a matter of interest?

Regards

Mike
__________
message ref: 19552

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
10th message | this message only posted: 6 Dec 2015 21:36
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
mikewturner
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Hi Matt

Thank you for your very comprehensive reply. The description you give exactly matches the photo I've seen which is in a siding at Barmouth, although I remember seeing some in sidings at Croes Newydd North Fork too.

I've looked in the Rice book and it gives some basic ideas on modelling but with what you've told me and the drawing if I can get a copy should give me an idea of how to model it.

Regards

Mike
__________
message ref: 19553

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
11th message | this message only posted: 6 Dec 2015 21:59
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
alan@york
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Hi AlanIt's similar yes but not the same. Where is this as a matter of interest?RegardsMike
Mike:Mallaig Extension!(the siding was possibly relaid during the war years)Alan
__________
message ref: 19554

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
12th message | this message only posted: 6 Dec 2015 22:04
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
mikewturner
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Hi Alan

Wow that I did not expect!

Regards

Mike
__________
message ref: 19555

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
13th message | this message only posted: 6 Dec 2015 22:06
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
mikewturner
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Hi guys

This is the Barmouth shot I mentioned.

Regards

Mike
__________
message ref: 19557
Attached Image (viewed 466 times):

image.jpg
 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
14th message | this message only posted: 6 Dec 2015 22:30
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Matt M.
Australia

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Hi Mike,

Concrete Pots (also known as 'twin-block' or occasionally 'monoblock' sleepers),
were a wartime thing.

Most of the big companies had been looking at reinforced concrete sleepers for a while.
But earlier the cost benefits weren't there. There was no scrap value to a concrete sleeper,
unlike timber and steel sleepers. Also concrete sleepers damaged during a derailment
were not recoverable for further use, unlike timber.

The LSWR had used Pot sleepers during WW1 due to wood shortages.
And the same thing happened during WW2 and the austerity measures post war
which made timber very hard to get for the railways.

With the exception of the LNER which experimentally trialled some on running lines,
this type of sleeper was used for sidings were the lack of resilience wasn't a problem.
Lots of sidings were laid during the war.

Andrew Dow goes into the development history of concrete sleepers in the UK along
with the change to flat bottom rail in his book.
Which will give you the drawing require and all the extra history for free...

Really it is a worth while purchase.

Glad to be of help.

Matt M.
__________
message ref: 19558

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
15th message | this message only posted: 7 Dec 2015 23:29
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Tony W
North Notts., United Kingdom

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Hi Mike / Matt.
Below are a couple of pictures I took of some LNER pots that formed part of a short section of pot track in the goods relief on the lea valley line just north of Angel Road station North London. Although the rail and chairs have been removed, the outline of the chair can still be made out. Being LNER they were 3 bolt chairs. They are a different pattern to the GWR ones. I measured them at 2' 2" long, 12" wide and 6" deep. There is little or no taper below the corner chamfers. These particular two were at 2' 3" centres. They would certainly have been a war time replacement, possibly for bomb damaged track. From what I remember before the track was lifted, only every second or third pair of pots were tied together to hold them to gauge. It is something I hope the model a short section of one day.
Tony W.





__________
message ref: 19563

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
16th message | this message only posted: 8 Dec 2015 00:41
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Matt M.
Australia

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Hi Tony,

It was't just bomb damage replacement.

They also needed to lay new sidings and loops due
to the increased wartime goods traffic.

Timber was hard to get and was reserved for main lines
due to issues of resilience between the sleeper and the ballast.
This is a particular problem as speed increases.

With very few exceptions pots were only used in low speed applications.

The pot sleepers are a compromise between material use
and suitability for purpose. Hence the lack of tie bars on a majority
of sleepers per length of rail.
In a wartime and austerity settings they don't use too much steel or concrete.

And don't use timber.

During and post war a lot of energy was spent coming up with ways to make
what would have previously been considered useless split timber sleepers
be useable. Various clamps and straps and bolting formats were developed.
It was that bad.

Matt M.

Nice, useful, photos by the way.
__________
message ref: 19564

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
17th message | this message only posted: 31 Dec 2015 19:43
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
mikewturner
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Hi guys

Thanks to Matt's suggestion Santa brought me a copy of Andrew Dow's book so I have the drawings :-)

Regards

Mike
__________
message ref: 19659

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
18th message | this message only posted: 23 Jan 2016 03:57
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Andrew Barrowman
USA

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Going a bit "off topic", but isn't there a French version that uses (or used) zig-zag ties?
__________
message ref: 19856

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
19th message | this message only posted: 23 Jan 2016 14:39
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Martin Wynne
West Of The Severn, United Kingdom



view images in gallery
view images as slides

Please do not send requests for help direct to me via email or PM.

Post your questions on the forum where everyone can see them and add helpful replies.
Here is a scrap pile of GWR-pattern concrete pots.

Sorry for not posting this photo earlier, I had forgotten I had it.





Martin.

__________
message ref: 19862

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
20th message | this message only posted: 9 Feb 2016 19:07
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
mikewturner
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Hi guys

This turned up today from an ex BR engineer and must say blew my mind completely as didn't expect pots to be used in pointwork!

Regards

Mike
__________
message ref: 19988
Attached Image (viewed 302 times):

image.jpg
 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
21st message | this message only posted: 19 May 2016 22:41
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
alan@york
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Turning from the prototype to the practical model railway, has anyone built track of this type. If so, did you have a baselayer below to stabilise the gauge, or was another method used to tie the blocks together.
Thanks
Alan@york
__________
message ref: 20346

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
22nd message | this message only posted: 22 May 2016 04:07
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Andrew Barrowman
USA

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
alan@york wrote: Turning from the prototype to the practical model railway, has anyone built track of this type. If so, did you have a baselayer below to stabilise the gauge, or was another method used to tie the blocks together.
Thanks
Alan@york
Haven't tried it Alan, but it would not be too difficult to make something like this on a 3D printer. If I was making them I would add low profile webs to connect the blocks. The webs would be hidden under the ballast.

__________
message ref: 20352

 
This is topic ID = 2797     Page created at 16:02 (local time)  
You can type a quick reply to this topic here.

Click in the box to begin.


But to reply to an individual message, or to include images, attachments and formatted text, use the reply buttons on each message above.

To start a new topic in this forum, click the Start new topic button below.
To start a new topic in a different forum, click the Forum Jump drop-down list below.

             Start new topic 

 click to jump to a different forum:     Back to top of page

Templot Club > Forums > Trackbuilding topics > GW concrete block and steel tie bar track work
about Templot Club

list recently active topics Templot Companion - User Guide - A-Z Index Old Templot Companion Please click: important information for new members and first-time visitors.
indexing link for search engines only

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.  
© 2017  

Powered by UltraBB - © 2009 Data 1 Systems