David Barrow's CMSF

[davekelly]

Dave H.
Oh there you go letting fact get in the way of opinion!

Dave

[dehusman]

There is no requirement in the construction of a Domino that it be a flat table top. You can build Domiones with grades, valleys, etc. People have been building open grid benchwork for years with grades. The last 3 layouts I have had were all open grid and I have had up to 8" in elevation difference. The people that say it has to be flat are looking at the last couple itterations of Barrow's layouts, not the original articles on the Domino concept.

Dave H.

[Anonymous]

Good greif people, can't you just give a piece of good advice without such harsh critisizm of eachother. You know in some cases the domino layout would be a great solution for many people, although I fully agree that if you want grades to climb and decend this is not the way to go.

If you love to do switching and solving puzzles then this is for you, but if you enjoy running long trains you should reconsider.

Its that simple.

[dehusman]

The original concept of the Domino was to give a flexible form of benchwork that could be moved or rearranged as required. The actual design of the benchwork is called open grid. The other major concept which has not be discussed as far as I can tell in this thread is that the Domino is designed to be removed and the work done on it at the workbench. You don't crawl under the layout to wire switches and hook up linkages, You pull the piece out of the layout, set it on the work bench and comfotably seated upright work on the wiring, etc. Same with the track. No trying to fit things in awkard reaches, you pull the section out and can turn it to get whatever access you need.
Another part of the concept that has been lost in the shuffle was that there was (in the original concept) a sub benchwork that supported the Dominoes. That's where the leveling took place. The original concept didn't use 2x2 legs attached to the frame of the Domino like an N-Trak module, it had 1x4's built in a framework that supported the Dominoes.

While I was very critical of the concept when it first came out (it was like somebody was trying to patent open grid benchwork) the more I read about it the more I understood what the purpose was.

The whole concept is flexibility. It is designed for the person that likes to change his mind and try new track arrangements (whether due to moving or just getting bored with the first attempt). The latest incarnation is totally driven towards a short term layout. I wouldn't be suprised if any layout Mr. Barrow builds, well actually more correctly, any trackplan Mr. Barrow builds, lasts more than a couple years. The whole system and concept is geared to letting him build a trackplan, then tear it apart and reconfigure both the benchwork and trackplan in a minimum of time with the maximum of recycling of benchwork and track. i have never read where he said this was a good approach for everybody. If you are a person who likes to switch from railroad to railroad, era to era, scale to scale, this might be a good concept for you.

Dave H.

[Don Gibson]

BARROW is incorporating ideas that the likes (and uses) in a hot Texas Garage . When he rebuilt the CM&SF he rearranged the sectional pieces easily. I gather that he is a person that like's to change things.

HE LIKES
A 'representational' RR.
A 'walk along' design.
radio control
Buss wiring
Integrating overhead lighting to dramaticly show off the RR and scenery.
Wood sub roadbed

HE DISLIKES Homosote for vertical expansion reason's.

He is an Achitect that incorporate's construction techniques with asthetic's. To my knowlege he has never claimed to 'invent' building a house - (or a model RR) He did give the nickname "Domino's" to his stand-alone sections, since they could be configured widthwise and lengthwise, like their namesake.

As for 'bridging gap's - and he is a nut on vertical vagaries - I have to think the good practice rule of 'not putting track joint over a wood joint' would apply.

[Anonymous]

I see there's a post earlier about the South Plains District. The South Plains District is NOT DAVID BARROW'S CURRENT LAYOUT. The South Plains District was a domino based layout created by David Barrow specifically for a series of construction articles he did for Model Railroader about ten years ago. The South Plains District co-existed with the CM&SF. I believe it was in the CM&SF's crew lounge. My current layout is based on the published track plan for the South Plains District. As I stated earlier I began using dominos and encountered problems specific to my train room. Plans are to add extensive staging and other features to the basic South Plains Division layout..

Cheers,

Ed

[Anonymous]

I have tried the domino approach and ran into problems related to my layout room. David Barrow's layout is built in a room above his garage. Mine is built in a basement with a cement floor. The floor of his room above the garage tends to have a nice flat surface. My basement floor is a bit irregular to the point that the T-nut adjusters on the ends of the domino legs cannot compensate in some instances. Therefore an open grid or so called "L" girder approach works better for my situation because the roadbed surface can be leveled by raising and lowering risers without regard to adjusting the legs themselves. Also the more traditional construction results in fewer legs. In addition, I have no plans to move and work for myself so don't have to consider a work related relocaton so the portablility of the layout does not concern me.

By the way, David Barrow's layout is called "The Lubbock Industrial District" NOT the Cat Mountain and Santa Fe. The old layout in it's many incarnations was THE Cat Mountain and Santa Fe. From his more recent articles it appears that Mr. Barrow (NOT BARROWS) considers the layout to be the Lubbock Industrial District of the Cat Mountain and Santa Fe. He has some well thought out and inovative approaches to the hobby and is not afraid to tear something down and start over to test his latest approach. Building domonos, however, does tend to use up a lot more wood than an L girder or open grid layout would use if building the same track plan.

For more on dominos do a search on the magazine article database on this website for "David Barrow" and you'll turn up a number of articles which will answer any questions you might have on the subject. Mr. Barrow is a good writer as well as a good modeler. His articles are enjoyable reading.

Cheers,

Ed

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by clinchvalley

It would be better to refer to the layout as the South Plains District, which is quite a bit different than the original Cat Mountain and Santa Fe. However, it is all moot as the layout in MRP is GONE. David is starting over again, doing a section of ATSF prototype modeling. I really look forward to see what he's doing, with his penchant for detail and design, I'm sure it's going to be great.

Has anyone heard news about this? I would love to see what he's up to now.

[johncolley]

All this going on and on about Dave Barrow's "dominoes", for what? If you don't like it, don't do it, that's easy! If you are interested to see what can be accomplished, check out Free-mo.org It is a great concept for those who don't have space for a large layout. The curves are big and beautiful, the trains look and are run realistically, and you can have terrain, tunnels, gullies and bridges, galore. What more can one ask? And yes, I think the term dominoes instead of modules is misleading. John Colley Port Townsend WA

[jfugate]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rsn48

... it is a GREAT misconception that domino's sections have to be flat, in one of his articles Dave shows how build a domino, kind of like L girder so that you can have height.

While it is certainly true that a "domino" does not have to be flat, or even symetrical, I think the name "domino" does the idea a dis-service, and all the examples David has ever shown are flat, flat, flat. Pictures speak louder than words.

So what else are you going to expect people to think unless they really read things closely?

I think Mr. Barrow (or someone), to break the mold, ought to do a domino article that shows non-symetrical sections with mountainous scenery. Anyone?

[Anonymous]

In the October 1995 issue of MR David Barrow wrote an great article on operating, and refered to his 'blocking instructions' which were supposed to be shown in 'fig. 6'...but there is no fig. 6...I don't know if MR reprinted the blocking instructions in a subsequent article; if not, perhaps if DB reads this message he could post the missing 'fig. 6'?
Thanks'
Bob Burke

[ClinchValleySD40]

It would be better to refer to the layout as the South Plains District, which is quite a bit different than the original Cat Mountain and Santa Fe. However, it is all moot as the layout in MRP is GONE. David is starting over again, doing a section of ATSF prototype modeling. I really look forward to see what he's doing, with his penchant for detail and design, I'm sure it's going to be great.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by orsonroy

Unfortunately, this wasn't the case. All the lumber was mid grade pine with as tight a grain as you can find (these days...). Everything was sanded and sealed with two coats of latex paint before it was assembled. Didn't help. The problem is that wood will move dimensionally no matter WHAT you do to it. With over 20 joints on the longest side butted up to each other, if every piece swelled 1/32" of an inch (not an unreasonable amount) I'd have 40 pieces of lumber moving for a total of 1-1/4" of movement, and THAT's enough to pop a lot of track!

I agree that using dimensional lumber is not the way to go with module/domino construction. But please check David Barrow's specs for his dominos. He uses 3/4" Birch plywood for all his dimensional pieces. True this method of construction is more expensive than dimensional lumber (even "A" grade birch dimensional lumber will warp over time), but the laminated plywood properly sealed is much more stable than any dimensional lumber. Direct quote from David Barrow's Cat Mountain and Santa Fe Soutnplains Switching Distric article on Domino construction in the September 1996 Model Railroader "The domino frames and tops in my construction are 3/4" Birch plywood. I stopped using 1 x 4 white pine for these frames because even the best lumber I could get would occasionally warp." "This allows you to save the significant towns & yard in a move to a new home."

My new layout will be using dominos built with 3/4" Birch. Yes, it will cost me more money than using conventional construction methods but it also allows me the freedom to work on specific sections at the bench & also allows me to rearrange the layout without loosing the major portions if I choose to. In the MRP 2004 article, it appears that David may have saved parts of his staging yard & Mesa yard in this latest rendition of the Cat Mountain & Santa Fe.

Orsonroy, you might try some 3/4 inch Birch Plywood ripped into 3 1/2 inch wide boards. You might find some of your dimensional stability problems will go away no matter what construction you use (especially in a damp basement). Good luck & remember Model Railroader's OLD motto Model Railroading is Fun!

BTW, using extruded foam for benchwork tops is a very good idea in a damp basement.

[Anonymous]

I THINK THAT EVERYONE SHOULD DO WHAT THEY FEEL IS COMFORTABLE FOR THEM.I.E. SKILLS,COST,APPROACH YOU ARE FIGHTING OVER DOMINO LAYOUT THAT THE MAN IS JUST TRYING TO SHOW OTHER PEOPLE HIS IDEAS,THAT WORK FOR HIM AND JUST TRYING TO SHARE WITH OTHER PEOPLE.NO WONDER OUR HOBBY IS SO VAST AND APPEALING.................. EVERYONE HAS A IDEA THAT WORKS FOR THEM.I PERSONALLY LIKE MR. BARROWS ARTICLES,AND HIS IDEAS.JUST TAKE WHAT WORKS FOR YOU AND REMBER TO ALWAYS HAVE FUN RUNNING TRAINS PAUL CHESSIE SYSTEM

[johncolley]

Hello, have you folks checked out the spec's for Free-mo modules? A lightweight but rigid frame of Birch plywood with a 1 1/2" or 2" foam deck. This makes for an easy to move module, light enough for one person to handle and set up even an 8 footer! Carry the structures, hills, etc in a separate box and put them in place after setting up and levelling. Nice large radius eased curves to show your equipment at its best! Check it out, and leave the bitterness in the closet, it has no place here! While we may all have a slightly different perspectve we are all friends when it comes to trains! John Colley Port Townsend, WA

[orsonroy]

QUOTE: Originally posted by ndbprr

It appears your dimensional stability scenario isn't from the type of construction as much as it is from not sealing the wood before construction which is one of my paramters this time regardless of method of construction.

Unfortunately, this wasn't the case. All the lumber was mid grade pine with as tight a grain as you can find (these days...). Everything was sanded and sealed with two coats of latex paint before it was assembled. Didn't help. The problem is that wood will move dimensionally no matter WHAT you do to it. With over 20 joints on the longest side butted up to each other, if every piece swelled 1/32" of an inch (not an unreasonable amount) I'd have 40 pieces of lumber moving for a total of 1-1/4" of movement, and THAT's enough to pop a lot of track!

Frankly, I'm pretty fed up with using porus natural materials for layout construction in general, mostly from my last layout's issues, which is why I'm such a big supporter of all-foam layout construction. Yes, I still use wood as an underlayment, but if I could find anything better and as inexpensive and easy to use, I'd try it.

[Anonymous]

ndbprr, I would have to think sealing the wood would go along ways towards minimizing material shrinkage or growth.

[ndbprr]

It appears your dimensional stability scenario isn't from the type of construction as much as it is from not sealing the wood before construction which is one of my paramters this time regardless of method of construction.

[orsonroy]

QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith

As an avid fan of the Micro Layout I got the nasty idea of using the "Dominoe" principle to create an A4 paper sheet sized MicroLayout or better a series of A4 paper sheet sized Microlayout vignettes tied together to create one large layout. I think the idea of many small peices that can be built then added on as time and money allow is a great idea!

And you wouldn't be alone. MR ran a short article a few years ago on Japanese modular layout meets, and this is how they have developed their version of Ntrak. They can pop a layout module into a briefcase and take it on the subway with them. All the track is Kato Unitrack for tight mating. The modules don't have legs. Rather, they set up the modules on tables or on the floor.

[Anonymous]

Orsonroy, If you have a current layout, what is it built of? I can't see how the problems you describe with sectional layouts wouldn't effect a regular layout. If it's built of wood, there will be swelling and shrinking or "movement". However, as Barrow's layouts have been built with mostly plywood table tops, there would be less movement than a splined or solid wood road bed. Because plywood's grain is Bi-directional, it is more stable.

[vsmith]

As an avid fan of the Micro Layout I got the nasty idea of using the "Dominoe" principle to create an A4 paper sheet sized MicroLayout or better a series of A4 paper sheet sized Microlayout vignettes tied together to create one large layout. I think the idea of many small peices that can be built then added on as time and money allow is a great idea!

And to CNJ831...it will be sceniced!

[orsonroy]

QUOTE: Originally posted by ndbprr

Could someone explain please how modular construction leads to more track problems? I would think that having expansion joints (read track joints) at fixed distances would minimize those problems. Since I am planning to make 6' modules for most of the railroad so I can move it in 5-10 years I'd like some further details as to why this is worse than a standard open grid construction. thank you

Simple: when you build a sectional layout, you generally end up with a lot of wood butt joints that just sit next to each other. Wood likes humidity, and will swell and contract like mad. Not all wood expands/contracts at the same rate, even from the same piece of lumber, so you've got a layout that wiggles all over the place. And yes, wood will move even if stained or painted. There's no way around it, unless you're using petrified wood!

With all that shaking going on, your track joints are moving too. Usually, you get pieces that are too far apart, creating a gap and dead spot on your mainline (and what good is a mainline that won't work?). In extreme and really interesting cases, track sections will be forced closer together, shifting the track and making for all sorts of cool roller-coaster contours. I finally gave up on the sectional layout idea after I came down to a damp basement, only to find that my mainline looked like a Hot Wheels loop-de-loop!

In addition, sectional layouts are meant to be portable. That means keeping the weight down so you can carry the pieces up and down a flight of stairs on your own. THAT means that the layout pieces aren't heavy enough to be stable unless you've got some really major legs (and I mean 4x4's; Barrow's legs are about what I had built, and they weren't enough for lateral stability). Operating on a layout that moves from side to side when someone bumps into it is like trying to play pool on the deck of the Titannic.

[Anonymous]

ndbprr, When built as a perminent lay-out, I can't see how there can be any problems. You do not have to have your track connections directly at the interface between two dominos or sections, you simply lay track like you would normally. I do not see these layouts as being layouts that will be disassembled and reassembled on a regular basis. The idea I like about them is that at some future point, the whole layout can be taken apart and broken down into easily handleable sections for moving to a new location, or a particular section replaced with another totally differant section or multiple sections. I also don't care if this is new or old technology, it is technology I like and would now use, if I wasn't so deeply commited to what I have now. As far as the objection to them being flat table tops, I don't recall seeing this rule written anywhere. I think any scenery which could be used on any shelf layout, could be used on dominos.

[Anonymous]

I like the CMSF more and more, so I am going to build a small switching layout with some track i have on a peice of plywood and I f i like It I will build a layout, without sencery !!!!!

[ndbprr]

Could someone explain please how modular construction leads to more track problems? I would think that having expansion joints (read track joints) at fixed distances would minimize those problems. Since I am planning to make 6' modules for most of the railroad so I can move it in 5-10 years I'd like some further details as to why this is worse than a standard open grid construction. thank you

[Anonymous]

CNJ831, My "infintile ranting" point is, I feel you come off in this forum as someone whom feels his ideas are the only legitimate point of view and that the rest of us are all to stupid to have our own opinions! Whether this is truly your point of view or a manifestation of how you communicate with your fellow man, I can not tell.

I have refrained from name calling. I'm taking you to task over how you present yourself on this forum. At all times you have had the option of contacting me directly through email. Possibly if you communicate directly with me we can come to some understanding of each other.

[DavidH]

A few comments. Firstly, his last name is Barrow, not Barrows. Secondly, his message is about a different approach to track planning, facilitated by sectional construction that he calls dominos. I've been reading his stuff for years, and I don't recall him ever claiming to have invented anything. He is just trying to communicate ideas for the benefit of his fellow modelers. You can take them or leave them. I often wonder why anyone bothers exposing themselves to public scorn and criticism when they try and share some of their thoughts with the hobby at large. Seldom do you see their detractors publishing.

David

David

[Anonymous]

Do you use a "double 6" or "double 12" set of dominos?

[lupo]

I got my MR planner last week and I agree with the OTN aka TB, nice clean and wide looking atmosphere, with long stretches of straight tracks as in the real world, even the structures are detailed but no overdose of "DisneyDetailing" must be great operating on that lay-out !