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 > Templot talk > Help with a failed double slip
Templot web site

                                       Help with a failed double slip
     
 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: 27 Oct 2017 09:34
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
RPEDDER
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Dear All
 
I am hoping that someone can help me with a problem I am experiencing with a double slip shown below
 
It has been built to OO standards, along with the rest of the track on the layout (which with the exception of another double slip that I have yet to finish trouble shooting, all works ok).   There have been a number of issues with the build of the slip but I think they have been now resolved (mostly around the gauge around the slip rails and the quality of the K checks.  My intention is to lift the whole point and completely rebuild improving from the lessons learnt so far.
 
However there is one area which is still giving me problems, when a train exits the branch platform (1) and heads towards the branch (4) the majority of times it will go straight on through the slip road towards 3 (or some axles will go to 3 while others go to 4 causing a derailment. 
 
Before I rebuild the slip, my concern is that this is being caused (or at least compounded by) the reverse curve between the platform and the slip. 
 
I would welcome any advice as to whether this is the case, (or conversely if I have made a silly error on the slip design), and whether it is possible to improve the design in order to mitigate the issue.  Would an extended check rail through the vee at (1) assist in keeping the loco / coaches to the right hand side of the track guiding them the right way through the slip?
 
When finished the main operations will be a 4500 class with between 2 and 5 coaches going heading from the platform (1) to Kingsbridge (4), or the 4500 taking through coaches from Kingsbridge for Paddington from the platform (1) to the up main via the single slip at (3).
 
All other points are fully built, hence limitations on routes 2 (next point starts circa 1 inch from the end of the vee), on route 3 there is a 3 inch curve between the double slip and the single slip on the down main, while on 4 there is approximately a 12inch curve before the next point.
 
I will upload the box file later when I get home, but for the moment I have attached a diagram below

__________
message ref: 22635
Attachment: brent 1-7-17.box (Downloaded 13 times)
 
 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: 27 Oct 2017 12:26
 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.
Hi,

Welcome to Templot Club. :)

It's difficult to see much from your small image, but we probably don't need to.

A curved slip in "00 Standards" is always going to be difficult. The wide flangeways don't provide for sufficient (or with some wheels, any) checking at fixed K-crossings at the flat angles suitable for adding slip roads. Even straight slips are tricky.

One solution is to change to narrower 1.0mm flangeways as 4-SF (00-SF), the same as EM. You can do that on individual areas of trackwork without needing to change the rest of the layout. But if you do that you MUST reprint the template in 4-SF for the reduced 16.2mm gauge and rebuild from scratch, don't try to adjust an existing slip or diamond from 16.5mm to 16.2mm because it will be too long between the vees and it will be physically impossible for the rails to align properly.

Templot can now create slips, including curved ones, with a couple of clicks.

But even after all that it is still going to be tricky with fixed K-crossings for a curved slip.

The much better solution and strongly recommended is to build it as a switch diamond with movable K-crossings instead. That is actually much easier to build because there are no K-crossing check rails to find space for. But it does mean you will need two extra point motors (or only one, with a suitable rocking crank)*.

To create the template for that, click real > K-crossing options > movable K-crossings menu item.

*If they are Tortoise pattern point motors and fitted the opposite way round from one another to make room, you can drive them both in parallel from a single panel switch.

regards,

Martin.

__________
message ref: 22636

 
 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: 27 Oct 2017 13:50
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
RPEDDER
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Thanks Martin for the feedback, I have now uploaded the .box file.

I think I understand what you are saying regarding the K crossings, can definitely see how both solutions would result in improved running (much less of a bounce through the gap). However I am not so clear on how it will resolve the more fundamental issue, in that the derailment is being caused at the switch area. Would tightening the gauge to SF standards through the Vee area potentially provide similar improvement here (in that there will be much less slop between wheels and rail, hence less chance of a wheel riding up and over the switch rail?)

Thanks again
Rich
__________
message ref: 22638

 
 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: 27 Oct 2017 15:13
 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.
Hi Rich,

There isn't any significant difference between a switch in a slip and any other switch.

Most switch over-riding problems are caused by the switch being under gauge. And that is nearly always caused by not providing a sufficient set in the diverging stock rail. It's very important to check that the stock gauge is correct (or at least, not too small) before fitting the switch blades.

For a slip, this applies to the outer stock rails. They will need a set at both ends, so some careful matching to the template when marking the set positions is important.

More about all that here:

 http://85a.co.uk/forum/view_topic.php?id=491&forum_id=1

regards,

Martin.

__________
message ref: 22640

 
 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: 27 Oct 2017 15:22
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
RPEDDER
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Thank again, so in conclusion the reverse curve from the platform into the slip shouldn't be an issue (assuming that the switch area has been built correctly).

As a result I think I will redraw the double slip with moveable K crossings. Accept the need to buy an additional two Tortoise motors in order to power it, and then fully lift and rebuild (this time I think I will build it off layout so that it can be tested in isolation prior to installing.) Hopefully that will resolve the final issue. First of all I have a couple of P4 points which need making for my exhibition project, so I think building these will be good practice before returning to working in OO for Brent's slip!
__________
message ref: 22641

 
 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: 27 Oct 2017 16:04
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Nigel Brown
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
RPEDDER wrote: Thanks Martin for the feedback, I have now uploaded the .box file.

I think I understand what you are saying regarding the K crossings, can definitely see how both solutions would result in improved running (much less of a bounce through the gap). However I am not so clear on how it will resolve the more fundamental issue, in that the derailment is being caused at the switch area. Would tightening the gauge to SF standards through the Vee area potentially provide similar improvement here (in that there will be much less slop between wheels and rail, hence less chance of a wheel riding up and over the switch rail?)

Thanks again
Rich
Just a thought. How are the tie-bars for your switches arranged? Are you using a single tie-bar for both switches at one end? If so you'd need to get it spot on so that both corresponding switch blades close together.

I wondered because your problem sounds a bit like a switch blade not closing fully.

Cheers
Nigel

__________
message ref: 22642

 
This is topic ID = 3117     Page created at 02:51 (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 > Templot talk > Help with a failed double slip
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