Minimum angle for track crossing a hinged break in the baseboard?

[clod]

Hi Team,

 

I have permission from SWMBO to begin construction of my alternative history version of the NSWGR in our in-law ( outlaw? ) accomodation. Currently it looks like I will have a folding 8" x 4" that will mate to a shelf section permantly attached to the adjoining wall.

 

I am thinking sneaky thoughts about the folding 4x8 in that SWMBO has not specified that it be attached DIRECTLY to the existing wall. This would allow an additional shelf section and expand the working area of the folding section to perhaps 5"6' x 8", and allow for greater height of buildings, etc., on the folding section when it is stored.

 

The folding 8x4 is a hollow core door that is a relic of my ( vastly ) younger modelling days, already fitted with hardware to fold against a vertical wall, and I plan on using it as it is a quick and easy fix for my need for a baseboard. The shelf section will be about 10 inches wide and 12 feet long running at 90 degrees to the main axis of the door. The folding section will mate to the shelf along one of the 4 foot sides as well as the 'stolen' 18 inch area along the 8 foot hinge.

 

Planned ( imagined ) industries to be supported will be a small scale mine producing coal and a rare heavy metal ( Niptonite or Unobtainium ) and a locomotive servicing/garaging area ( I have TOO MANY locomotives ) also a passenger facility ( perhaps at the mine and the loco point ). Through traffic with notional start and end points not modelled will also be an essential feature.

 

I am probably being too ambitious in my plans for the operational side of the layout, but as it is all still in my head at the moment I can probably afford to be. The size and scope of the layout indicates that point to point will be the major feature of operations, but I will be having some sort of loop for running in etc.

 

So...

 

Minimum angle for crossing a hinged point in the baseboard?  A 90 degree cut is probably ideal, but it will leave me with 18 inches maximum to complete a 90 degree turn, with a high possibility of unrealistic appearance and highlighting the 'break' in the landscape.

 

What do you think?

[rrinker]

 Have a cut right in the middle of a curve is probably asking for trouble. Hoever, if it is straight track, there is no reaon it can't cross the gap at any angle. In fact an angle might be BETTER than goign straight across since while one side would be crossing the gap, the other side would have solid rail, and vice-versa.

 

                                                 --Randy
 

[selector]

I generally agree with Randy, and have done what he suggests....so far.  HOwever, if a tight curve makes or breaks your idea, then you will have to improvise.  Maybe do a bit of several things to get the effect you need for your space and enjoyment.  Personally, my curve minima are fixed in concrete.  If I can't have the curve mins that I need for my preferred rolling items, I change my ideas and plan.  If what I am to give up is substantial, essentially a severe loss, I will look for a solution of the nature that you are contemplating.  With my current skills and experience, nothing to brag about if you care to know, I would not hesitate to cross a well laid gap in tracks along a curve.  In fact, I purposefully build my current open box layout as a modular one that, after a bit of scenery sawing and wire clipping, can be unbolted and carted out to a truck.  That means the tracks are physically gapped on curves where the modules are to be taken apart.  I took my time and used track nails and glue to make sure the ends met everywhere, and it all works seamlessly to this day.  My access to my diagonal reversing loop bridge at operating pit centre is necessarily gapped at each end of the swing-down platform.  I sometimes find that I have to do some re-shimming on one rail to restore a height match, but that is it.

[tgindy]

Here's a link to a recent PDF in MR's "articles section" on a swinging gate...

http://www.trains.com/mrr/default.aspx?c=a&id=1100 

...with some pictures of angled cuts across tracks that may be helpful for perspective.

[joe-daddy]

The common advice from most people I've read about is, "no duck unders and no swinging gates."  But go to any train show and you see dozens of modules with sectional track that seems to work flawlessly.

My new layout needed a walk through.  I wanted a swing gate. I found about a dozen examples of them with reasonable pictures and some with excellent drawings.

Unlike Crandall, I thought I had above average technical skills. So I built one, er, tried to build one.  It seems there are a few basic requirements necessary to make a gate 'easy' and straight forward.  They include, but are not limited to:

1. Both sides of the gate should be solidly fixed so they do not move, meaning attached to the walls or floors or both.
2. Approaches should be straight, no curves near the thing.
3. Not wide, maybe 5-8 inches max.
4. Easy to open and close with one hand.

 Like I said, I'm no novice so I ignored rules 1, 2, 3 & 4.  After two days of work building the thing, at least a month thinking about how I would actually make it work, and another day and a half trying to make it line up reliably, I abandoned the whole thing and redesigned my layout to not require a walk through at all.

Conclusions. 

• What ever skills I may have are certifiably less, much less than Crandalls! 
• There is a reason why people say avoid ducks and gates in model railroading.

Just my 2 cents, not worth a cent more!

Joe 

[simon1966]

I have a 2' lift out section that is part of a sweeping curve.  It has a curved turnout mid span and so has one track entering and 2 leaving.  This was the compromise that I took to get the radii I needed.  It worked very well for about 6 months and then I suppose due to the very subtle shifts in the underlying bench-work on either side it now requires careful shimming at the start of a running session.  I used short sections of Atlas rerailer tracks at the join, so I suppose that the track is actually straight for all of 2" at the join.  I think this weekend I will undertake a project to get this sorted.

[tomikawaTT]

My two removable yard throats have a total of nine break-line curved crossings, at angles ranging from 10 degrees to 65 degrees.  They're all solidly anchored Atlas code 100 flex, pre-curved to eliminate any tendency to shift sideways.  In addition, I have used straight guard rails on the inside of each crossing, and `battered' all of the rail ends to eliminate any potential flange climbing points.

The key is to align both sides of the break within a few thousandths of a millimeter, both horizontally and vertically.  Any significant deviation is an invitation to disaster.

Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)

[rrinker]

 If your choices are duckunder, liftout, or swingign gate, the gate is by far the more desireable choice. Properly built it will be plenty reliable AND  gives you full access. Liftouts can be reliable but are more of a pain to get through. AN dduckunders, well, I like the top of my head. In a non-traditional layout design, such as a mushroom, you can do thinks like have a step or two down at the duckunder point and increase the clearance.

 

                                    --Randy
 

[jeffrey-wimberly]

I don't recommend any angle except straight across. If there are cuts on an angle the wheels are going to grab into the cut and cause a derailment. Been there and done that.

[jwar]

Perhaps this may work,...These are two swing ups for my upper and lower level, both have 90 degree tuns with multible tracks and turnount's mounted on them, are bullet proof as far as alignment and adjustment( both vert and horz). Let me know if you need further info on how to do.shown in up position..John

[joe-daddy]

Hi John!  Hope all is well.  I'd certainly like to see and read more about how you did what you did so well!

Oh, and I ran my first train around my new 220' mainline last night!

 

Joe