ATLANTIC CENTRAL And that works great if you don't have any hidden trackage below or behind your scenery. Sheldon
And that works great if you don't have any hidden trackage below or behind your scenery.
Sheldon
actually i do have some hidden track [ in three places] but none is longer than five feet, and easily reached with a bent stick ... had to do it twice so i know , lol
wvgca i made a 15 foot by 16 foot layout using 3/8 plywood as a base and foam on top, up to nine inches high .. i soldered all track joiners except for turnouts, and there i soldered on feeder wires on each leg whatever works for you is fine by me , lol..
i made a 15 foot by 16 foot layout using 3/8 plywood as a base and foam on top, up to nine inches high .. i soldered all track joiners except for turnouts, and there i soldered on feeder wires on each leg
whatever works for you is fine by me , lol..
Overmod At the risk of channeling the spirit of lastspike mike, plywood is intentionally made with crossed layers so it does not tend to warp or expand differentially with humidity or temperature changes. But it still does expand and contract as a unit, if the train room temperature can swing between extremes or humidity isn't controlled. It is that potential action that produces the concern in this specific context: if jointed track is installed too rigidly to plywood that changes size 'differently' there MIGHT be operating trouble with electrical continuity, gaps, or buckling. Hence the practice of dividing the rail into soldered-joint lengths, each with a high-integrity connection via feeder to a good electrical bus, with a few strategic joiners or gaps to accommodate any 'breathing' that might occur. Each modeler might have their 'sweet spot' between length of 'welded rail' and number of feeder drops and rail connections necessary. I have become a firm believer in the thin-layer-of-adhesive-caulk method of attaching track to roadbed, whether it is connected with joiners or soldered up, as providing "enough" compliance to preclude track buckling or pull-aparts. That is discussed in previous threads here by more experienced heads than mine.
At the risk of channeling the spirit of lastspike mike, plywood is intentionally made with crossed layers so it does not tend to warp or expand differentially with humidity or temperature changes.
But it still does expand and contract as a unit, if the train room temperature can swing between extremes or humidity isn't controlled. It is that potential action that produces the concern in this specific context: if jointed track is installed too rigidly to plywood that changes size 'differently' there MIGHT be operating trouble with electrical continuity, gaps, or buckling.
Hence the practice of dividing the rail into soldered-joint lengths, each with a high-integrity connection via feeder to a good electrical bus, with a few strategic joiners or gaps to accommodate any 'breathing' that might occur. Each modeler might have their 'sweet spot' between length of 'welded rail' and number of feeder drops and rail connections necessary.
I have become a firm believer in the thin-layer-of-adhesive-caulk method of attaching track to roadbed, whether it is connected with joiners or soldered up, as providing "enough" compliance to preclude track buckling or pull-aparts. That is discussed in previous threads here by more experienced heads than mine.
All true.
I have never built a model train layout in a crappy environment. Even when I built one in the attic of my 6 car garage it was a well insulated, heated and cooled finished space that remained stable in most weather even with the HVAC set on a "minimum" kind of temperature while unoccupied.
50' to 60' lengths of flex track all soldered joints never buckled, no expansion/contraction issues ever came about. Benchwork was a mixed bag combination of framing lumber, priemum 1x material, various grades of plywood, and OSB board.
DISCLAIMER - remember everyone, I am a DC modeler - I have multiple isolated track sections, commonly called blocks.
Each block only has single feeder for each rail, no "buss wire" system, because that feeder comes from a nearby relay panel, part of the sophisticated advanced cab control system. On a few bigger blocks (like 80' or more) expansion rail joints mid way are not soldered, but jumpers are soldered right at the joints (like prototype bonding).
Never any problems.
Most of my layouts, including my new one, have been build in Mid Atlantic region basements - all you need is a dehumidifier and you have a stable environment - 70 degrees, plus or minus 3 degrees, all year round.
If I live to be 100, I will never understand people who spend lots of money on things and then don't take care of them?
Model trains are expensive - I'm not leaving mine in sub zero or tripple digit temperatures, or damp/wet places.
Just like I will never understand the people who bought $10,000 GRAVELY garden tractors and let them sit outside?
Modeling goals and trends have changed in this hobby, but I don't follow trends.
Over some 5 decades I have known a large number of modelers with moderate to large DC layouts, all with soldered rail joints within each block just like me, and the reports of expansion/contraction issues is a single digit percentage to be sure.
AND, many of those modelers successfully converted to DCC by simply connecting to their existing block feeders, and NEVER added additional drops of buss wire systems.
One modeler I know, whos layout I designed and help build, was DCC from the start. It contained two large helix connections to a lower level staging yard. The taller helix contained eight loops, 36" radius, or about 150 feet of track for each of two tracks.
He dropped feeders for each 18' loop - but it was years before he got around to connecting them to the buss. The joints were soldered.
Not one expansion/contraction issue - not one operational issue, even before the drops where connected. Imagine that.
But what could I possibly know, none of my little trains have any brains.
PS - My track construction method - homasote sheets over 1/2 or 3/4 plywood for yards, etc, homasote milled roadbed for mainline raised ballast areas. Homasote sheets screwed to plywood. Homasote roadbed nailed down to 1/2 or 3/4 plywood or 1x subroadbed with a pneumatic brad nailer. Track glued down with clear PolySeamSeal adhesive caulk. Turnouts not glued, held in place by ajacent track and two or three track nails.
SeeYou190 I sure didnl't mean to start a foam/plywood discussion in this thread. I just wanted to know why plywood was supposedly unstable. In my experience, plywood is perfectly stable and suitable. I have also used foam and had good results. -Kevin
I sure didnl't mean to start a foam/plywood discussion in this thread. I just wanted to know why plywood was supposedly unstable.
In my experience, plywood is perfectly stable and suitable.
I have also used foam and had good results.
-Kevin
You did not start anything and asked a perfectly reasonable question. It was the assertion that plywood is not a stable base for a model railroad that caused controversy.
I'm happy for all the foam users who like that approach - good for them. But we don't need to hear nonsense like "plywood is not stable" so they can defend their choice of foam.
Having done this for nearly all my life, I know what I want from my layout.
Here is what I don't want - a flat 2' deep shelf that that only models the 80' on either side of the tracks. So foam fails my design requirements on a number of levels.
Model railroad layouts can be built to be moved, with or without foam. But as I found out, with all my design and construction knowledge, as well 50 years of model train experiance, highly moveable/portable layout design requires a number of compromises - a great many of which I was not willing to make.
I'm still trying to understand why foam is considered "easier"?
I built a number of layouts with the once popular L girder approach. Now I just build an open grid, 2x4 lumber or 1x4 lumber depending on each situation. 1/2" plywood with 1/2" homasote for large flat areas, yards, cities, etc. And smaller plywood "bases" for large structures, etc.
And then any form of hard shell scenery - wire screen and plaster works as well as anything.
Hollow scenery means things like staging tracks can be under there. Room for turnout motors, electronics, relatively easy access to stuff.
I model the Mid Atlantic - we don't really have flat land here, and railroads are constantly going up or down minor grades.
Starting with a continious table top for that is counter productive.
And plywood with homasote works great. If it is not broke, don't fix it.
I'm building a large layout, benchwork requirements will be different in various areas of the layout based on track and scenery requirements.
In some places I will build a table top - with plywood - so my fat butt can climb/lean as required - because nearly all of it will be more than 2' deep.
It will all have to be strong enough to support my weight, and allow space below for hidden trackage - and access to that trackage.
Living the dream.
John-NYBW ATLANTIC CENTRAL I don't see the attraction of foam, I just don't get it. I don't like working with it as insulation, and I'm surely not building a model train layout with it. As for scenery, I like my scenery hollow - wire screen and plaster or other hard shell methods. The advantage of foam is its lightweight which makes it easier to move. I built the first section of my current layout using a foam base but soon discovered its main disadvantage which is it makes using undermount switch machines difficult. My solution was to mortoise out a rectangular section from the foam and glue a plywood piece into it. Those have held up for 20 years now. After dealing with that, I realized it's unlikely I'll be moving my layout so why worry about having a lightweight base. The rest of the layout was built with a sturdy plywood base. I've tried several methods for scenery contours but have settled on using webs made of cardboard strips and covered with red resin paper. I cover that with joint compound in the back half and plaster of paris in the front half. I buy the joint compound in powdered form in large bags. It's sturdy enough for the background scenery but I prefer the extra strength of plaster for the foreground.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I don't see the attraction of foam, I just don't get it. I don't like working with it as insulation, and I'm surely not building a model train layout with it. As for scenery, I like my scenery hollow - wire screen and plaster or other hard shell methods.
I don't see the attraction of foam, I just don't get it. I don't like working with it as insulation, and I'm surely not building a model train layout with it.
As for scenery, I like my scenery hollow - wire screen and plaster or other hard shell methods.
The advantage of foam is its lightweight which makes it easier to move. I built the first section of my current layout using a foam base but soon discovered its main disadvantage which is it makes using undermount switch machines difficult. My solution was to mortoise out a rectangular section from the foam and glue a plywood piece into it. Those have held up for 20 years now. After dealing with that, I realized it's unlikely I'll be moving my layout so why worry about having a lightweight base. The rest of the layout was built with a sturdy plywood base.
I've tried several methods for scenery contours but have settled on using webs made of cardboard strips and covered with red resin paper. I cover that with joint compound in the back half and plaster of paris in the front half. I buy the joint compound in powdered form in large bags. It's sturdy enough for the background scenery but I prefer the extra strength of plaster for the foreground.
John, when I was younger I tried for years to design a layout that would be built in modules in case of a move. I found all such track plans unable to meet my scenic and operational goals.
I prefer plaster on wire screen, and open grid/plywood benchwork.
Overmod I do NOT believe in using those insulating rail joiners with a fin or pin to accomplish the task of gapping.
I do NOT believe in using those insulating rail joiners with a fin or pin to accomplish the task of gapping.
Rich
Alton Junction
rrebell ATLANTIC CENTRAL rrebell I found out that it is best to solder everything and then cut any gaps needed. Now this is asuming track is laid on a stable base, plywood is not stable. At the risk of sounding elitest, any kind of quality plywood is plenty stable in any environment which a model train layout should be constructed. Don't even begin to tell me foam is stable. Anything I can break over my knee is not stable. Sheldon That is why you use wood framing like 1x4's to set it on, and by the way, those expand but caulk has enough plability that is a mute point.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL rrebell I found out that it is best to solder everything and then cut any gaps needed. Now this is asuming track is laid on a stable base, plywood is not stable. At the risk of sounding elitest, any kind of quality plywood is plenty stable in any environment which a model train layout should be constructed. Don't even begin to tell me foam is stable. Anything I can break over my knee is not stable. Sheldon
rrebell I found out that it is best to solder everything and then cut any gaps needed. Now this is asuming track is laid on a stable base, plywood is not stable.
I found out that it is best to solder everything and then cut any gaps needed. Now this is asuming track is laid on a stable base, plywood is not stable.
At the risk of sounding elitest, any kind of quality plywood is plenty stable in any environment which a model train layout should be constructed.
Don't even begin to tell me foam is stable. Anything I can break over my knee is not stable.
That is why you use wood framing like 1x4's to set it on, and by the way, those expand but caulk has enough plability that is a mute point.
If I can't lean my 230 lbs on it, it's not "stable".
If humidity and temperature are stable, wood is stable. Especially plywood.
To add my small opinion to that of the practical model railroaders: My advice would be to solder the joiners in a length of rail served by a physical soldered feeder. If the feeders are parallel-joined to an adequate undertrack bus -- as they should be -- there will be little if any discontinuity, of either electric power or DCC logic, across joints left open for expansion or to facilitate switch extraction.
I liked Mel Perry's apporoach to joints, which was to cut the gap with suitable kerf, file up a 'fitting' piece of sheet styrene or equivalent to 'rail profile', cement it in, and file or dress the railhead contact area to smoothness. I do NOT believe in using those insulating rail joiners with a fin or pin to accomplish the task of gapping.
SeeYou190 Morpar What is the consensus on soldering rail joiners when laying track? I doubt you will find a consensus. I solder rail into sections of about 72", and then leave a loose rail joiner for the next section. All sections get feeder wires. rrebell Now this is asuming track is laid on a stable base, plywood is not stable. How is plywood not stable? I thought it was pretty universal except for foam. -Kevin
Morpar What is the consensus on soldering rail joiners when laying track?
I doubt you will find a consensus.
I solder rail into sections of about 72", and then leave a loose rail joiner for the next section. All sections get feeder wires.
rrebell Now this is asuming track is laid on a stable base, plywood is not stable.
How is plywood not stable? I thought it was pretty universal except for foam.
I solder the feeders to the rail joiners and then solder those joiners to the rails. I do that at every other joint. That connects a feeder to every section of track with half the feeders required if you solder directly to the rails. It also makes for less soldering.
With all of the comments being for soldering the joints (as well as feeders) I am doing just that. Still getting the hang of using a resistance soldering rig, but so far it isn't bad. I have only had to relay 1 section of track and finesse 1 joint. Since I figured I need to get the helix at each end done to act as a baseline I started with the easier one yesterday. I got the first layer done and tested today and am almost ready to lay out the second layer tomorrow. Thanks for all the input! I really thought the joints should be soldered, but wasn't sure if in the long term people had issues with the rails being too solid.
Good Luck, Morpar
I solder feeders to the rail joiners for power connectivity, and, like a few others, I typically solder the rails on curves. I have tight 18-inch curves, so that helps keeping the track stable. I use Atlas flex track, so that is a bit springy.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
My 12' demo layout that I use to test ideas on just has the ends of the tracks soldered No joiners. But I do have feeder wires in 6 locations. The layout is moved around a lot and sometimes I drop heavy MDF on top and then set heavy equipment on that. It's endured basement floods, humidity, and dust from wood and metal working. Still always works and somehow trains continue to run smoothly on it.
When I set up a large permanent layout I'll do the same thing. soldered ends and feeder wires. It's just a pain to carefully flip like 10' of track that's been soldered becauee it will break apart. I have to ask my friends or neighbors to help set up track in the past.
MorparWhat is the consensus on soldering rail joiners when laying track?
rrebellNow this is asuming track is laid on a stable base, plywood is not stable.
"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."
I solder every rail joint that needs to be soldered. About 98% of the joints I'd guess.
Hello All,
I solder all the joints and feeders except for the insulated plastic rail joiners!
Hope this helps.
"Uhh...I didn’t know it was 'impossible' I just made it work...sorry"
In order to halve my work, or the chore if that is how you look at soldering feeders and joiners, I solder all along a curve and then only every other joiner. The ones not soldered act as aligners while still allowing for track wiggling. Soldering every other joiner allows for six contiguous feet of assured and reliable electrical power along the length.
Logically, and schematically:
x- are soldered, o- are open/sliding
======x===========o===========x=========o========
As you can plainly see, each soldered joiner, an X, powers 180 deg on either side for three full feet. The next on either side are open and sliding, but we don't care that they are electrically unreliable because....next to them are the required soldered/fed joiners.
Yes on the 1st one.
I also solder DCC feeders to track every three feet and three sets on the turnouts.
According to Wiring For DCC with Allan Gartner, everything should be soldered to something. Meaning if it doesn't have feeders soldered to it, it should be soldered to the next track that does. I followed this advice and have never had a problem.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
I solder only where necessary, meaning at two spots:
Other than that, all joints are unsoldered to allow for expansion and contraction.
Mark P.
Website: http://www.thecbandqinwyoming.comVideos: https://www.youtube.com/user/mabrunton
I'm also in the "solder everything" camp, and install my feeders every 10' or so, or as required for complex trackwork. I'm currently in the "debug" stage of construction - while the basement layout sees a reasonably stable temperature, there have been a couple places where expansion has been an issue and gaps had to be cut - with additional feeders added as necessary.