Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Easement Placement

1322 views
25 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May, 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 48 posts
Easement Placement
Posted by corsiar on Tuesday, May 14, 2019 11:25 AM

I am getting back into MR after leaving it around 25 years ago. First layout I built didnt have any easements. Going to use them on the new layout I am working on. Where should they be used, just on the mainline or on everything? I am designing the track plan in Solidworks so I will draw in the easements then I can print a 1:1 plan to place the track.

  • Member since
    June, 2007
  • From: Grew up in Calif, left in 84, now in Virginia
  • 6,929 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Tuesday, May 14, 2019 4:44 PM

I put them everywhere practical, even my staging yard.  The offset for my curves (32-inch radius) are approx 1/2 inch which is close to what John Armstrong recommended in his book Track Planning for Realistic Operation.

Reasoning behind easements in many places is it less "coefficient of lurch" and smoother operation, less chance of derailments and it's a "best practice"  and not hard to do.  I didn't use any fancy track planning software, just good old pencil, 11x17 graph paper, compass and scale rule.

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    May, 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 48 posts
Posted by corsiar on Tuesday, May 14, 2019 6:35 PM

I am doing N scale so it is a bit smaller. This is the track plan so far. Trying to model the Cheyenne UP yard. The squares are 3' x 3'.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/vcecpmmymqbfd2q/Layout%203-2.JPG?dl=0

  • Member since
    April, 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 570 posts
Posted by SPSOT fan on Tuesday, May 14, 2019 10:53 PM

I’d say at a minimum on the mainline, but I’d refer to picture of the prototype to see where they put easements. I don’t think real railroads put them on industrial spurs and other low speed places very often.

I’m a bit confused as to why you are using solid works to track plan. That is a 3D design program, great for designing stuff for 3D printing on your model railroad, but I don’t see how it would be used for track planning. I’m sure it will work, but there are dedicated track planning softwares out there.

Regards, Isaac

I model my railroad and you model yours! I model my way and you model yours!

Moderator
  • Member since
    June, 2003
  • From: Northeast OH
  • 14,803 posts
Posted by tstage on Wednesday, May 15, 2019 12:19 AM

SPSOT fan
I’m a bit confused as to why you are using solid works to track plan. That is a 3D design program, great for designing stuff for 3D printing on your model railroad, but I don’t see how it would be used for track planning. I’m sure it will work, but there are dedicated track planning softwares out there.

SPSOT,

Have you ever used SolidWorks?  It's actually great for 2D and 3D designing.  And not just for 3D printing but for all aspects and types of machining processes.

I actually found it quite useful for designing, drawing, and viewing my own layout ideas - especially in determining what was the absolute maximum radii of curves I could achieve for the size room and space that I had.  It was also handy for designing the framework for supporting the layout.  And, should I desire to create drawings of it, I could even do it 1:1, if I so chose.

It's too bad that SolidWorks is so expensive per seat because I would use it for designing all sorts of things.

Tom

http://www.newyorkcentralmodeling.com

Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.

  • Member since
    April, 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 570 posts
Posted by SPSOT fan on Wednesday, May 15, 2019 3:07 AM

I have used SolidWorks, I took a semester long class almost exclusively on it last year. I never used it for anything 2D. I though the 2D was for making nets for shapes and such. You learn something new everyday! I suppose the OP could disregard my previous comments if he wishes...

Regards, Isaac

I model my railroad and you model yours! I model my way and you model yours!

  • Member since
    January, 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 8,167 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Wednesday, May 15, 2019 6:06 AM

SPSOT fan

I’d say at a minimum on the mainline, but I’d refer to picture of the prototype to see where they put easements. I don’t think real railroads put them on industrial spurs and other low speed places very often.

I’m a bit confused as to why you are using solid works to track plan. That is a 3D design program, great for designing stuff for 3D printing on your model railroad, but I don’t see how it would be used for track planning. I’m sure it will work, but there are dedicated track planning softwares out there.

 

All curves on the prototype are a spiral easement when possible. Some just spiral faster than others.

Many, if not most curves on the prototype are really just elliptical curves with no fixed radius. They gradually get sharper going in, reach an apex, or minimum radius, then gradually get broader going back to striaght.

This is typically true of curves that change direction less than 90 degrees, virtually always true of curves that change direction less than 45 degrees.

Just think two easments back to back with no fixed radius in between.

Sheldon

PS - now for a slightly "political" statement - Guess when and how I learned the facts presented above? Way back in 1969, when I was just twelve years old, I joined the NMRA. Back in those pre "information age" days, NMRA membership came with a printed set of NMRA Standards, Recommended Practices, and DATA SHEETS which covered a wealth of technical information, including track geometry in detail, and including how to layout easements and the spiral curves described above.........  

    

  • Member since
    April, 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 570 posts
Posted by SPSOT fan on Wednesday, May 15, 2019 8:11 AM

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

PS - now for a slightly "political" statement - Guess when and how I learned the facts presented above? Way back in 1969, when I was just twelve years old, I joined the NMRA. Back in those pre "information age" days, NMRA membership came with a printed set of NMRA Standards, Recommended Practices, and DATA SHEETS which covered a wealth of technical information, including track geometry in detail, and including how to layout easements and the spiral curves described above.........  

Don’t see how that’s political? I think it would be awesome if they still did that, it would be very helpful and end the need to search the NMRA website for what you need. Also you could view it pretty much anywhere, not just were you have internet access (okay, that is pretty much everywhere nowadays).

Regards, Isaac

I model my railroad and you model yours! I model my way and you model yours!

  • Member since
    March, 2002
  • From: Milwaukee WI (Fox Point)
  • 10,047 posts
Posted by dknelson on Wednesday, May 15, 2019 9:37 AM

Ideally, you'd never have a fixed radius curve meet a perfect tangent, so some easement curve, however slight, is approrpriate everywhere and anywhere on a layout - and because it is not just visually pleasing and realistic but practical and useful, this includes hidden trackage, staging yards, helixes, and so on.  Whether you use the math based easement, templates from NMRA or the old ones from MR, the simple offset method, the bent stick method, the spline roadbed easement, or the old trick of having a single piece of flex track span the area between tangent and curve (flex track creates its own easement curves), or the other "mechanical" easements, any easement is better than none, and again not just from a cosmetic standpoint.

Dave Nelson

 

  • Member since
    May, 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 48 posts
Posted by corsiar on Wednesday, May 15, 2019 9:52 AM

I am using Solidworks because it is what we have at work plus I have been using it for 20 years. Was looking at dedicated track planning software. If there is a good free one I would be interested.

  • Member since
    December, 2001
  • From: Northern CA Bay Area
  • 4,067 posts
Posted by cuyama on Wednesday, May 15, 2019 10:24 AM

Here is your image.

Easements are indeed a good idea if there is space. I’ve found even a relatively short easement of the longest-car-length, or 1½ car-lengths, helps a lot. Note that the diverging leg of a turnout is the rough equivalent of an easement, so an additional easement is not necessary in the model in some track arrangements.

I see a few places on your plan where s-curves have been created by curves leading into turnouts which appear to diverge in the opposite direction. Removing these would be an important first step to improve reliability.

One of the challenges with using a general CAD program for model railroad design is that it is easy to overlook the length commercial turnouts actually require for the entry to the points and the point rails themselves. I’m not sure your rendering allows enough length for pre-fab turnouts, but I could be wrong. And if you are planning to handlay-to-fit, the frog angle may be sharper than you expect if built as drawn.

Good luck with your layout.

Byron

  • Member since
    May, 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 48 posts
Posted by corsiar on Wednesday, May 15, 2019 12:04 PM

I am going to use PECO code 80 #6 turnouts mainly with a couple #8 on the main line cross over. I measured an actual turnout and use the length and radius so I can model them correctly. 

Want to use Woodland scenics stands that are 3' x 3' but may have to build my own benchwork to get a little more space. The room is 10' x 10' with a door on one wall only leaving 6'. Would like to do a square but would have to walk under the layout to get in the room.

  • Member since
    May, 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 48 posts
Posted by corsiar on Wednesday, May 15, 2019 8:36 PM

What is the best way to approach an easement when a turnout is in the middle of it?

  • Member since
    March, 2002
  • From: Milwaukee WI (Fox Point)
  • 10,047 posts
Posted by dknelson on Thursday, May 16, 2019 9:24 AM

corsiar

What is the best way to approach an easement when a turnout is in the middle of it?

I had this very situation on my layout and the Peco "large radius" curved turnout came to my rescue.  I believe the larger of the two curves is 60" radius on that turnout.  However that is a solution only under certain conditions.  In a situation that differed I was able to use a "normal" large Peco turnout but the diverging track - again equivalent to a large radius curve -- was the mainline, with the straight track being the diverging route in my usage.  There are other situations where perhaps a large radius wye turnout from Peco could be part of an easement curve.  My easements are not mathematically pure obviously.
Dave Nelson
  • Member since
    May, 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 48 posts
Posted by corsiar on Thursday, May 23, 2019 12:33 AM

Layout has taken a complete 180. Still need to do easements on the main lines but was going to leave the yard as is. 

Forum wont let me paste an image so here is the link.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/824vkbrrhmnxv0g/Layout%205-3.JPG?dl=0

  • Member since
    April, 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 570 posts
Posted by SPSOT fan on Thursday, May 23, 2019 3:29 AM

I can’t see the image when I click on your link, I’m not sure you can use Dropbox to add a picture to the forum. Perhaps someone else know how to fix this...

Regards, Isaac

I model my railroad and you model yours! I model my way and you model yours!

  • Member since
    August, 2011
  • From: A Comfy Cave, New Zealand
  • 3,922 posts
Posted by "JaBear" on Thursday, May 23, 2019 3:51 AM

"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."

  • Member since
    April, 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 570 posts
Posted by SPSOT fan on Thursday, May 23, 2019 5:03 AM

Thanks for posting the image Bear!

Looks like a nice track plan corsair, a great plan for a lot of running.

I do notice it lacks switching opertunities, but if your a running person that should be okay.

Regards, Isaac

I model my railroad and you model yours! I model my way and you model yours!

  • Member since
    May, 2010
  • 5,469 posts
Posted by mbinsewi on Thursday, May 23, 2019 7:02 AM

What are all the little + marks about?  Is that a reference point, or something to do with the drawing program your using?

Looks like a nice plan for steady running, and yard work, which gives the switching oppertunities.  Along with locomotive facilities.

I'm far from a track plan expert, but it looks like the yard easements are pretty good.  Especially on the left, as you look at the drawing.

Can you comfortably reach across the lay out on the side with the yard?

I use the same track planning program as RioGrande.  Smile, Wink & Grin

Mike.

  • Member since
    May, 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 48 posts
Posted by corsiar on Thursday, May 23, 2019 11:00 AM

The + marks are centers of all of the curves and the ones on the turnouts. Cant hide the center points in sketch mode in Solidworks.

How do I attach an image?

  • Member since
    May, 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 48 posts
Posted by corsiar on Thursday, May 23, 2019 11:16 AM

SPSOT what do you mean by doesnt have switching oppritunities? I am new at designing my own layout, couldnt find any track plans that would fit in a 112" x 78" space. I would be the only person running it on a 2 cab DC system. Had 2 main lines but needed the space for the 12" radius reverse loop so I can turn my big boy around.

  • Member since
    April, 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 570 posts
Posted by SPSOT fan on Thursday, May 23, 2019 12:28 PM

corsiar

SPSOT what do you mean by doesnt have switching oppritunities? I am new at designing my own layout, couldnt find any track plans that would fit in a 112" x 78" space. I would be the only person running it on a 2 cab DC system. Had 2 main lines but needed the space for the 12" radius reverse loop so I can turn my big boy around.

I’d put some industries on the layout, especially on the mainline. It looks like you have a few places to spot cars in the yard (besides in the classification bowl) but a few industries on the main could give more pourpose to trains on the main.

A train could be built in the yard, taking cars from the industries located within the yard, and be brought out on to the main. The train could run around the main as many times as you wish and then stop at the industry (top of the plan may be a nice place) and switch it, then head back around the main a few time to the yard.

If you need some ideas for where to put industries, check out the MR track plan database if you haven’t, if you have access to it, it will give some ideas of what others do if you need some ideas.

Regards, Isaac

I model my railroad and you model yours! I model my way and you model yours!

  • Member since
    May, 2010
  • 5,469 posts
Posted by mbinsewi on Thursday, May 23, 2019 2:09 PM

corsiar
How do I attach an image?

In the General Discussion forum, there is a tutorial on how to post images.  It's near the top, with our fearless moderator Steve O's picture.

Thats kind what I thought the + signs were for, just asking.

I think you have great switching oppertunities with in your yard, making up trains for departure, and classifying trains that come in the yard, and running the locomotive and rolling stock service facility.

Your lay out is kind of a "main line" running set up.  You could possibly sneak a couple of industries in along the sides.

Mike.

  • Member since
    May, 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 48 posts
Posted by corsiar on Thursday, May 23, 2019 8:53 PM

Made some changes. Added an oil refinery which I thought fit since there is a huge one in Cheyenne Wyoming right by the UP yard which this layout is based on. Put a coal tipple on the other side. May become a coal power station.

  • Member since
    April, 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 570 posts
Posted by SPSOT fan on Friday, May 24, 2019 1:24 AM

Great changes, at this point you’ve got a pretty go trackplan, with a better purpose for train to run! Nice job!

You may want a crossover near the bottom of the plan, to make easier access to the outer main from the yard, but it’s not nessessary.

Regards, Isaac

I model my railroad and you model yours! I model my way and you model yours!

  • Member since
    May, 2019
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 48 posts
Posted by corsiar on Saturday, May 25, 2019 12:20 AM

Should i use #4 turnots for the yard? I have been doing everything with #6 and using #8 on the main crossovers.

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!