|
|||
author | remove search highlighting | ||
---|---|---|---|
posted: 26 Jul 2009 17:29 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
IMPORTANT NOTE - 3-WAY TURNOUTS This topic is about three-throw turnouts. 99% of 3-way turnouts are not three-throw turnouts. They are tandem turnouts. Three-throw turnouts are tricky to build and have very limited prototype applications. If you have arrived at this topic looking for information about 3-way turnouts, please refer instead to tandem turnouts. Click here to search for the relevant topics: tandem turnouts ___________________________________ Hi Richard Hope this is what you were looking for. Please let me know if it needs any adjustment. Regards Alan McMillan |
||
Attachment: attach_598_911_LMS_Tandem_for_R_Lambert.box 591 | |||
posted: 26 Jul 2009 18:54 from: Richard Lambert click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Alan Many thanks indeed. That looks to be exactly what I want. I shall have to print it out and try it in place to confirm. I will report back. Regards Richard |
||
posted: 26 Jul 2009 20:58 from: Richard Lambert click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Alan I've now tried it in place, and It's a huge turnout! It looks far too, well, spread out in the yard. I had in my mind something far more cramped. If the inner radius is tightened to say 5' (and whatever seems best for the other 2 radii - 7'6'' and 10'?) and the whole thing made as short as possible, what would it look like then? I don't know if that will even make sense, but at the moment, I would be better off with 2 normal turnouts than the 3 way. It does look magnificent though. Thanks. Regards Richard |
||
posted: 27 Jul 2009 09:21 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Richard What about these two alternatives? Please let me know and I'll complete the template you want and fill in all the details. Regards Alan |
||
Last edited on posted: 27 Jul 2009 10:09 by Alan McMillan |
|||
27 Jul 2009 10:09 from: Richard Lambert click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Morning Alan I have printed that off, tried it in location, and it looks very much better, thank you. However, template 21 has a minimum radius of 52 1/2 '' which is too tight. That needs to be a minimum of 60''. If it is possible to revise template 21 to 60'' and the footprint is no bigger (or even smaller), then it will fit the location. And I will then have the pleasure of building it! Regards Richard |
||
posted: 27 Jul 2009 10:14 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Richard We're getting there! Try this one. The minimum radius is just over 5 feet. The difficulty with the footprint is caused by needing to give the second set of blades room to open. The only alternative might be a genuine three way with the blades all together. Alan |
||
Attachment: attach_605_911_LMS_Tandem_for_R_Lambert_V3.box 494 | |||
Last edited on 27 Jul 2009 10:46 by Alan McMillan |
|||
posted: 27 Jul 2009 10:52 from: Richard Lambert click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Alan We are indeed. What would a genuine 3 way look like...if I haven't exhausted your goodwill yet. Yours Richard |
||
posted: 27 Jul 2009 11:04 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Richard Here's a genuine three way. I've had to increase the largest radius to prevent the smallest from reducing too much. The length is slightly increased as the smallest turnout's crossing rail was in danger of fouling with one of the check rails. See what you think. Alan |
||
Attachment: attach_606_911_LMS_Tandem_for_R_Lambert_V4.box 463 | |||
Last edited on 27 Jul 2009 11:05 by Alan McMillan |
|||
posted: 27 Jul 2009 11:15 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Also try this one - I have figured out a way to deal with the check rail problem and this one has the virtue of having the exit tracks more evenly spaced. Alan |
||
Attachment: attach_608_911_LMS_Tandem_for_R_Lambert_V5.box 419 | |||
Last edited on 27 Jul 2009 11:24 by Alan McMillan |
|||
posted: 27 Jul 2009 11:46 from: Richard Lambert click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
I like V5 a lot, but template 1 has a minimum radius of 57.4'' Can you please make that 60", then I will go with that. Thank you Richard |
||
posted: 27 Jul 2009 11:58 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Richard That was my mistake - sorry. I have amended the template to include a minimum radius of five feet dead. I have reattached it here. Let me know for sure if this is the one you want to go with and I will complete it and do all the details. Alan |
||
Attachment: attach_609_911_LMS_Tandem_for_R_Lambert_V6.box 469 | |||
Last edited on 27 Jul 2009 11:59 by Alan McMillan |
|||
posted: 27 Jul 2009 12:52 from: Richard Lambert click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Alan That's the one! No further amendments. Looking forward to building it! Yours Richard |
||
posted: 27 Jul 2009 13:17 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Richard I'll have it for you in the next half hour or so. Regards Alan |
||
Last edited on 27 Jul 2009 13:27 by Alan McMillan |
|||
posted: 27 Jul 2009 13:35 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Here it is then - the final version! Regards Alan |
||
Attachment: attach_612_911_LMS_Tandem_for_R_Lambert_Final.box 495 | |||
Last edited on 27 Jul 2009 13:39 by Alan McMillan |
|||
posted: 27 Jul 2009 14:08 from: Richard Lambert click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Alan Many, many thanks for the template, and the generous use of your time. It would have taken me an age to do what you can obviously do so effortlessly. The turnout will be very interesting to build, and if you are so motivated, you will be able to see the fruits of your labour over on my RMweb thread ('Heyside' in layouts) in due course. Regards Richard Lambert |
||
posted: 27 Jul 2009 14:15 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
You're very welcome Richard. I enjoyed it. I look forward to seeing the finished article on your forum thread. Best Regards Alan |
||
posted: 27 Jul 2009 14:31 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
You're very welcome Richard. I enjoyed it. I look forward to seeing the finished article on your forum thread. Best Regards Alan |
||
posted: 27 Jul 2009 15:05 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
IMPORTANT NOTE - 3-WAY TURNOUTS This topic is about three-throw turnouts. 99% of 3-way turnouts are not three-throw turnouts. They are tandem turnouts. Three-throw turnouts are tricky to build and have very limited prototype applications. If you have arrived at this topic looking for information about 3-way turnouts, please refer instead to tandem turnouts. Click here to search for the relevant topics: tandem turnouts ___________________________________ Hi Richard, Alan, I don't want to throw a spanner in the works. But around timbers S8 - S10 you have the two switch rails in contact. In will be extremely difficult to provide sufficient opening at the points (blade tips) to ensure that a 1.5mm flangeway opens clear between the switch rails at this location. 3-throws are tricky to build, especially single-sided, and do generally require equal/double switch deflections. So for a straight single-sided 3-throw, one switch is likely to be 1:24 deflection (equivalent to a 9ft switch or A switch, but requiring special planing at 1:48) and the other will be 1:48 (equivalent to 18ft switch, or D switch). However, this one isn't straight, it's quite severely curved. Which means you can't use 1:24 deflection without imposing a very tight radius. If you now have a footprint which fits the site, try changing to 12ft and 24ft switches. Then for the 24ft-10 turnout, put the peg on FP (CTRL-4) and lengthen the crossing entry straight until the switch toes are coincident. I just tried that quickly, and got 61" and 63" as the minimum radii. If I can find time later, I will post a screenshot. regards, Martin. |
||
posted: 27 Jul 2009 15:50 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin, Richard. Thanks for your input. I have to say I hadn't noticed that problem. I've remade it as you've suggested and have reattached it here. Regards Alan McMillan |
||
Attachment: attach_615_911_LMS_Tandem_for_R_Lambert_Final_2.box 418 | |||
Last edited on 27 Jul 2009 16:20 by Alan McMillan |
|||
posted: 27 Jul 2009 19:19 from: Richard Lambert click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Alan, Martin I was hoping Martin was keeping a paternal eye on this! I'm aware it's a tricky build, but I'm looking forward to the challenge (sad, isn't it). There's a couple of timbers I will need to relocate (or maybe one to add) around the Vee and check rail bottom left, but I shall do that as I build. Again, thanks for your efforts. Yours Richard |
||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 09:58 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Richard Lambert wrote: I'm aware it's a tricky build, but I'm looking forward to the challenge (sad, isn't it).Hi Richard, Please hold fire on this. |
||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 11:44 from: Richard Lambert click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
'Please hold fire on this.' Fire is being held Martin. Looks like I won't have it built for Thursday's session then Richard |
||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 12:34 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
IMPORTANT NOTE - 3-WAY TURNOUTS This topic is about three-throw turnouts. 99% of 3-way turnouts are not three-throw turnouts. They are tandem turnouts. Three-throw turnouts are tricky to build and have very limited prototype applications. If you have arrived at this topic looking for information about 3-way turnouts, please refer instead to tandem turnouts. Click here to search for the relevant topics: tandem turnouts ___________________________________ Hi Richard, Sorry about my abrupt message. I'm struggling to find time to help with this. Try these two skeletons attached and see which fits best, or something in between. If one fits, perhaps Alan would complete it for you. All use 18ft switches, outer turnouts are RH to give split deflection. 2_280729_000000000.png File attached below. regards, Martin. |
||
Attachment: attach_616_911_3_throws_richard_lambert.box 370 | |||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 13:12 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin Thank you very much for this. I now understand what you meant but I have to say it's different to what I thought was involved. Regards Alan |
||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 13:14 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Richard Do you want me to do this for you and if so which of the two would you like? I have to admit I didn't understand the complications inherent in 3-throws but Martin has come to the rescue! Regards Alan |
||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 13:48 from: Richard Lambert click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Martin, The bottom one is perfect. Thank you for your input. Alan...... If you would please. I'm learning a lot too - principally how much I don't know All this for a yard turnout! My build better do it justice Regards Richard |
||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 14:22 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Richard I'll try to get it done for you before this evening. Alan |
||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 15:04 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Richard Lambert wrote: All this for a yard turnout! My build better do it justiceHi Richard, Alan, This is what you are trying to build. An exact replica would require custom switches in Templot and a lot of partial templates. It's all doable, but not quickly! Note that each switch comprises one long point blade (with undercut planing) and one short one (straight-cut joggled). There are 2 drives (point levers). Each stretcher bar is attached to one long switch blade, and through a hole in the other long blade to the opposite short blade behind it. The drives have to be moved in sequence. Each one must be returned to normal before you can reverse the other. The drawing shows both drives normal, so either can move as drawn. These switches are 12ft and 14ft-6in GER pattern with a common heel position. 2_280950_180000000.jpg The full-size scan can be seen by viewing this in the Image Gallery or by clicking: gallery/2/original/2_280950_180000000.jpg I used the longer 18ft switches in the design because you want to put the whole thing on a sharp curve. Curving this as it stands would create too sharp a radius. Alan, you might like to try changing the inner one to 15ft, and then aligning it on a common heel position with the outer 18ft switch. The switch front can be shortened if necessary, as in the drawing. One big problem with three-throw turnouts is that they often result in the V-crossings being opposite each other and therefore not properly checked for the middle road. That's just about acceptable for a straight turnout, but not a curved one like this. Derailments would be inevitable. That's why I used different crossing angles in each road, so that the V-crossings are sufficiently staggered to make room for the check rails. Richard, when you build this, it's essential to put the set in the outer stock rail, even though it is curved the other way. Otherwise, you will not get the switches to gauge correctly. The planing angle on 18ft blades is 1:48 (corresponding to REA D size). The set angle should match this. regards, Martin. |
||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 15:12 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Thanks Martin, It's a very interesting design and I have never seen a prototype drawing for this. Richard has plumped for the longer of the two designs you drew up and since they come from the pen of the master, I'm not about to muck about with them except to finish the one Richard wants! I'm in the process of doing that now and it should be finished in an hour or less. I'll post the finished article when I'm done. Thanks again for your wisdom on the subject! Regards Alan |
||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 15:33 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Richard and Martin, Here is the finished 3-Throw. Let me know if anything needs to be, or looks like it could benefit from, tweaking! It was fun! Regards Alan |
||
Attachment: attach_617_911_LMS_3-Throw_for_R_Lambert.box 400 | |||
Last edited on 28 Jul 2009 15:34 by Alan McMillan |
|||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 16:29 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Alan McMillan wrote: Here is the finished 3-Throw. Let me know if anything needs to be, or looks like it could benefit from, tweaking!Hi Alan, The timbering needs some work. It's best to keep the Z-Y-X-A-B-C timbers unshoved with their respective vee partial templates, so that the noses are properly supported, the special crossing chairs fit in the proper places, and the handed end chairs for the check rails fit correctly. Then you can start shoving from there for the rail joints, modified or long check rails, etc. Have a look at the tandem video to see what I mean. regards, Martin. |
||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 16:43 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Thanks Martin, will do. Alan |
||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 16:51 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin & Richard, Here is the version with Martin's recommendation for the timbering carried out. Alan |
||
Attachment: attach_618_911_LMS_3-Throw_for_R_Lambert.box 362 | |||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 17:40 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Alan, These vees are not properly aligned to the timbers, and the timber spacing is not the correct 30". Switch the timbering on for the partial templates forming these vees, as you did for the middle vee. Also, I think the timbering should be square-on to the middle road. I'm really sorry that I just don't have time today to do it properly for you. 2_281240_140000000.png Martin. |
||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 18:47 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin That's it this time I hope. There's more to this turnout making lark than I thought! Regards Alan |
||
Attachment: attach_622_911_LMS_3-Throw_for_R_Lambert.box 376 | |||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 19:32 from: Richard Lambert click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin, Alan Many thanks for your help. I could never have done that in a reasonable time scale and I am very grateful to you both. The working stretcher bars will require some thought, especially where there are two in the same between-timbers space, but I'm eager to have a go. It's an interesting little project. I shall, however, wait for Martin to give the green light before I go rushing to the building board! Regards Richard |
||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 19:46 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Richard I hope it's OK this time - I'm seeing that turnout every time I close my eyes! Best of luck for the build. Regards Alan |
||
posted: 28 Jul 2009 22:17 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Richard, Alan, I have rearranged the timbering a little so that the timbers for each crossing are part of the relevant crossing template. To show what I mean I have separated out the partial templates in this screenshot: 2_281657_530000000.png The modified end of one check rail will need some extra flaring during construction to ensure that wheel flanges don't catch it in the trailing direction. I wouldn't attempt the joggles shown in the GER drawing. Simplify it to plain sets in the stock rails as drawn for the long point blades, with the short blade tips one timber back behind them. Likewise for 0-MF it is not possible to build working loose heels in the correct position, and achieve the correct flangeway gaps. I would build it as flexible switches. Remember that each short blade works with the opposite long blade. Good luck with the stretcher bars! File attached. regards, Martin. |
||
Attachment: attach_623_911_3_throws_richard_lambert_1.box 376 | |||
posted: 29 Jul 2009 09:13 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin, Richard Thanks for the tidying up you've done. The check rail you mentioned has a point on it at the "blunt" end already. I've attached a blown up picture to show what I mean. Regards Alan |
||
Attachment: attach_624_911_3Throw_Flared_Checkrail.png 1064 | |||
posted: 29 Jul 2009 09:29 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Alan McMillan wrote: The check rail you mentioned has a point on it at the "blunt" end already.Hi Alan, Yes, I saw that. But the tip needs some flare angle on both sides to avoid catching the flanges in the trailing direction. You could do that by using a blunter vee to make the tip. Like this: ======> regards, Martin. |
||
posted: 29 Jul 2009 09:35 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Ahhh! I see what you mean Martin. I'll try that. Alan |
||
posted: 29 Jul 2009 09:41 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin Is this more like it? Alan |
||
Attachment: attach_625_911_LMS_3-Throw_for_R_Lambert.box 318 | |||
posted: 30 Jul 2009 08:27 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Alan McMillan wrote: Is this more like it?Hi Alan, Richard, That's better, yes. But I did a bit more tweaking. I have split one long timber so that the crossing chairs can fit for both V-crossings, and the wing front joint on the 1:10 crossing is better supported. I think also that the modified check rail could be shortened and have a short bent flare, and still provide adequate checking. There's no right or wrong, because we don't have an actual prototype for this turnout. 2_300325_100000000.png 2_300325_510000000.png File attached. regards, Martin. |
||
Attachment: attach_630_911_0_mf_3_throw_richard_lambert_2.box 452 | |||
posted: 30 Jul 2009 08:44 from: Alan McMillan
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Thanks Martin, This has been a fairly steep learning curve! Regards Alan |
||
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. |