Triple deck benchwork

[Anonymous]

I think you could skip the cross braces if you anchor the top of the benchwork to the wall every 4 to 6 feet. That should elimnate cross sway and provide protection against the benchwork falling forward. The back-to-back benchwork *might* need to get anchored to the ceiling rafters every 4 to 6 feet.

This looks like a very long term project. The benchwork alone will take a while to complete. I hope you have friends to help you out.

[electrolove]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BigRusty

"How would you build a nolix instead of the two helixes in this picture, is it possible?"

Rather than the loops at the end of each lobe, I would just continue behind a hill or building and then start the nolix down to whatever is the next level. I would hide the staging yards under one of the other lobes. You would use one of the tracks in the staging loop for continuous running and get rid of the visible return loops and/or helixes. Your layout is ideal for this because you actually have three ends of your line and can hold out bound trains there until you are ready to bring them back according to your timetable. You can still have whatever classification yards the prototype had and make up trains for local freight service, or whatever branches to mines or other industry they had to provide a layout designed for full prototypical operation just like the prototype did.

Do you think you can draw your idea in this picture? It does not have to be perfect, just a basic idea so I understand what you mean. I really don't like helixes so it's very nice if your nolix plan works.

[BigRusty]

"How would you build a nolix instead of the two helixes in this picture, is it possible?"

Rather than the loops at the end of each lobe, I would just continue behind a hill or building and then start the nolix down to whatever is the next level. I would hide the staging yards under one of the other lobes. You would use one of the tracks in the staging loop for continuous running and get rid of the visible return loops and/or helixes. Your layout is ideal for this because you actually have three ends of your line and can hold out bound trains there until you are ready to bring them back according to your timetable. You can still have whatever classification yards the prototype had and make up trains for local freight service, or whatever branches to mines or other industry they had to provide a layout designed for full prototypical operation just like the prototype did.

[cuyama]

I have been watching people suggest increasingly complex and costly methods of construction.

Benny, I think you'd be much better off just using commercial shelf standards and brackets and simply repairing the holes in the walls yourself or paying someone to do so if you ever have to move. The time and money you will spend on building freestanding triple decks amounts to building an entirely new set of walls in front of the existing walls and is bound to be much, much more than the cost of the simpler construction plus any later repairs.

If you just go with shelf brackets and sectional benchwork, nearly everything is easily removed and saved for a new location, if necessary.

And IMHO, if you are pretty sure you are going to have to move in a year or two, is it really wise to plan for such an ambitious design? There seems little chance that you'd be able to put much of it in place before you might have to start worrying about a move. And in that situation, I'm guessing it would be hard to motivate yourself to build more complex benchwork that is only going to be taken apart.

Good luck!

Regards,

Byron

[jeffers_mz]

Here's a pic:



The idea to angle the benchwork with the grade is a good one, but in practice I'd prefer a level benchwork, with risers screwed to the frame so that they can easily be individually adjusted for heigth.

For two sided peninsulas, just make the horizontal bench supports longer, extending in both directions, don't build a whole new tree. They will counter balance each other.

Small errors in installation will translate to big problems (up and down waves) at the outer edge of the bench. Consider adding a long piece across the front edge of the horizontal bench supports for alignment. This could be integrated with your valences if desired.

[electrolove]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jeffers_mz

I don't like the butt joint between the main verticals and the flat on the floor support members. You can add plates that lap the joint, but an easier attachment would be a lap joint to begin with. Vertical from top to floor, floor member overlaps vertical member, fasteners extend through both pieces.

If the floor is concrete, then the floor members will need to be at least 0.27 CCA (pressure treated) lumber, while the vertical members will stop just short of the floor so they don't touch. Use a shim of standard thickness for this spacing, half inch if you have a lot of that around etc. If the area is damp, use 0.40 pressure treated lumber.

Two diagonal braces per standard are redundant, use one, save lumber.

I recommend another stringer at the rear of the horizontal floor members.

The standards and floor level stringers would need to go up first on concrete, minus the platform supports and any stringers with vertical dimensions larger than their horizontal dimensions. The concrete will vary in heigth, and stringers on edge will not allow the standards to float up and down with the floor without adding stress, which over time, will cause problems.

There is no diagonal bracing to counteract end to end sway. Walk up to the end of the structure shown, tap the top of the standard, and the whole struture will sway back and forth, end to end. One brace per run might be sufficient, two opposing braces per run would be better.

The three two-piece stringers shown are probably redundant. I would place the two lower stringers as one member units flat against the verticals, and only use a front to back stiffener on the top stringer. Preferably, the top stringer and fore and aft stiffener would form a corner/cap over the top of the standard uprights. This will save lumber, save front to back waste space, and accompli***he same structural objectives.

The shelf supports and three long horizontal stringers would be applied to the installed standards after they were in final position, using a hose level, transit, laser or chalkline, either level or to grade, as established after the hills and valleys in the concrete floor had been eliminated. I'd probably tack or screw a single stringer in place at the top of the standards so they didn't topple over during assembly of the shelf supports.

Do you think you can draw a picture of this? Much easier for me to understand that way.

[jeffers_mz]

I don't like the butt joint between the main verticals and the flat on the floor support members. You can add plates that lap the joint, but an easier attachment would be a lap joint to begin with. Vertical from top to floor, floor member overlaps vertical member, fasteners extend through both pieces.

If the floor is concrete, then the floor members will need to be at least 0.27 CCA (pressure treated) lumber, while the vertical members will stop just short of the floor so they don't touch. Use a shim of standard thickness for this spacing, half inch if you have a lot of that around etc. If the area is damp, use 0.40 pressure treated lumber.

Two diagonal braces per standard are redundant, use one, save lumber.

I recommend another stringer at the rear of the horizontal floor members.

The standards and floor level stringers would need to go up first on concrete, minus the platform supports and any stringers with vertical dimensions larger than their horizontal dimensions. The concrete will vary in heigth, and stringers on edge will not allow the standards to float up and down with the floor without adding stress, which over time, will cause problems.

There is no diagonal bracing to counteract end to end sway. Walk up to the end of the structure shown, tap the top of the standard, and the whole struture will sway back and forth, end to end. One brace per run might be sufficient, two opposing braces per run would be better.

The three two-piece stringers shown are probably redundant. I would place the two lower stringers as one member units flat against the verticals, and only use a front to back stiffener on the top stringer. Preferably, the top stringer and fore and aft stiffener would form a corner/cap over the top of the standard uprights. This will save lumber, save front to back waste space, and accompli***he same structural objectives.

The shelf supports and three long horizontal stringers would be applied to the installed standards after they were in final position, using a hose level, transit, laser or chalkline, either level or to grade, as established after the hills and valleys in the concrete floor had been eliminated. I'd probably tack or screw a single stringer in place at the top of the standards so they didn't topple over during assembly of the shelf supports.

[Tom Bryant_MR]

I agree. Leon's idea is better. I believe your plan included a helix to traverse the levels. If you were using a nolix method instead, I think Leon is indicating as follows:



Regards,

[pedromorgan]

i think i would want to screw it to the wall as well.

Peter

[selector]

QUOTE: Originally posted by electrolove

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tom Bryant_MR

Re-reading selector's idea, this is probably more like it.



-Tom B

Ok, that will make the benchwork much stronger. Thanks for the drawing.

As they say in French, exactement! Thanks to Tom and EL for figuring it out. And I agree with Leon, too...a simple fix. Okay, elegant, too. -[:)]

[electrolove]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Leon Silverman

Your horizontal stringers should be on top of the the brackets instead of below them. Any load on the brackets would tend to make them want to rotate on the vertical supports. By placing the horizontal stringers on top of the brackets, they can resist the rotation tendency and you probably can eliminate the added braces suggested by selector.
Secondly, if you place these strings at a slight angle (one or two degrees, e.g.), they can form the template for you nolix.

Do you mean something like this?



Regarding the nolix, I'm not with you there. What do you mean?

[Leon Silverman]

Your horizontal stringers should be on top of the the brackets instead of below them. Any load on the brackets would tend to make them want to rotate on the vertical supports. By placing the horizontal stringers on top of the brackets, they can resist the rotation tendency and you probably can eliminate the added braces suggested by selector.
Secondly, if you place these strings at a slight angle (one or two degrees, e.g.), they can form the template for you nolix.

[electrolove]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tom Bryant_MR

Re-reading selector's idea, this is probably more like it.



-Tom B

Ok, that will make the benchwork much stronger. Thanks for the drawing.

[Tom Bryant_MR]

Re-reading selector's idea, this is probably more like it.



-Tom B

[electrolove]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tom Bryant_MR

EL, I took a stab at what I think selector is talking about. The red area should actually be an integral part of the arm that supports the RR. Hope this helps.

Ok, I understand what you mean. Thanks for drawing this and thanks selector for the idea.

[Tom Bryant_MR]

EL, I took a stab at what I think selector is talking about. The red area should actually be an integral part of the arm that supports the RR. Hope this helps.

[Anonymous]

That is basically the design I am using. I have found that wood glue and 1/4 bolts is good enough to keeping the cantileaverd supports from moving.

Mike in Tulsa
BNSF Cherokee Sub

[selector]

EL, I don't have any CAD or similar software, so I cannot draw it. Look at your second picture. Your horizontal rails, at the back, support the "heels" of your shelf braces. I would add little pieces of wood or brackets at the end of the heels, and they should extend downard, flush with the face of the horizontal railing that the heels meet. Screw the pieces of wood to both the heel and the rail to reinforce the braces.

I am not an engineer, so my proposal may have little merit, but as you have shown it, the shelf braces are fastened to their vertical posts in a small area. This is what I see as a problem. You may need more area of fastening to keep the braces strong enough to support the shelving.

Sorry I could not draw it in for you. If you can suggest a method, I'll try.

[DrummingTrainfan]

I would advise somehow anchoring the benchwork to the wall. I'm guessing it will be very heavy, it'd be a shame for it to fall (especially on a person).

[electrolove]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BigRusty

With all of the space you have I would consider using nolixes instead of helixes. That is a long decending grade up or down to the next level. Helixes are a pain to build and I only use one where there is no way to use the nolix. As I recall you are designing a railroad with a central point that extends to connections with other railroads at each end. I would consider adding a fourth level below the present bottom level and I would put a multitrack reverse staging loop on the lower level to represent one of the connecting roads. I would also do the same with the third level to represent the road at the other end of the line. I am not sure about having the upper level the same width as the mid level. Maybe some of you multi tier builders can offer advice on that. I am building a workshop added to the main building and I plan to put the helix over my workbench so that I can have easy access to it. If steel studs are available in Sweden you might get a copy of a recent MRR issue showing how to do that a lot easier than the plan you have shown. That is the method I plan to use. Nothing will ever WARP or SAG.

I don't know if you have seen this before, this is the latest plan:



How would you build a nolix instead of the two helixes in this picture, is it possible?

[BigRusty]

With all of the space you have I would consider using nolixes instead of helixes. That is a long decending grade up or down to the next level. Helixes are a pain to build and I only use one where there is no way to use the nolix. As I recall you are designing a railroad with a central point that extends to connections with other railroads at each end. I would consider adding a fourth level below the present bottom level and I would put a multitrack reverse staging loop on the lower level to represent one of the connecting roads. I would also do the same with the third level to represent the road at the other end of the line. I am not sure about having the upper level the same width as the mid level. Maybe some of you multi tier builders can offer advice on that. I am building a workshop added to the main building and I plan to put the helix over my workbench so that I can have easy access to it. If steel studs are available in Sweden you might get a copy of a recent MRR issue showing how to do that a lot easier than the plan you have shown. That is the method I plan to use. Nothing will ever WARP or SAG.

[electrolove]

QUOTE: Originally posted by selector

I would favour adding fortifying blocks of wood beside each horizontal bench support, but at the rear. In other words, at the back, against the wall, where each arm is fastened to the long board or rail, I would add a small piece of 1 cm ply, maybe 4 cm X 10 cm, screwed into the side of each horizontal arm, and also into the rail back. Not sure if I am being clear, but the diagram doesn't show how well cantilevered they are, and weight may cause overload, especially a reaching arm attached to an off-balance torso.

Do you think you can draw this in my picture, I'm not totally clear what you mean.

[selector]

I would favour adding fortifying blocks of wood beside each horizontal bench support, but at the rear. In other words, at the back, against the wall, where each arm is fastened to the long board or rail, I would add a small piece of 1 cm ply, maybe 4 cm X 10 cm, screwed into the side of each horizontal arm, and also into the rail back. Not sure if I am being clear, but the diagram doesn't show how well cantilevered they are, and weight may cause overload, especially a reaching arm attached to an off-balance torso.

[electrolove]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Bill H.

Do you plan on means to interconnect the levels?

If this is to be "freestanding" a little thought should be given to extending the length of the feet, both in front and behind. Put another way, I would want the 5 vertical support to resemble inverted "T" shapes.

IMO

Thanks for your answer. There is no problem extending the legs at the front a little. But I can't extend them at the back because it will be standing against the wall. But I wonder if that is a problem because it will not fall over backwards when I have a wall there, or what do you think?

Yes, there will be a helix to connect the levels. And for peninsulas I just use two of these benchwork constructions back to back, bolted together.

[Bill H.]

Do you plan on means to interconnect the levels?

If this is to be "freestanding" a little thought should be given to extending the length of the feet, both in front and behind. Put another way, I would want the 5 vertical support to resemble inverted "T" shapes.

IMO

[electrolove]

Here is two picture of a freestanding triple deck benchwork. It's just a sketch so it's not perfect. Can it be done in a better way?