General Discussion (Model Railroader)

Andre, When you get a plan please send it up this way and we will look at it for you.. We are very in to operations and we can tell you what you need to or not to do ! If you ask for our advise we will give it ..........just trying to help though
WP Steve

QUOTE: Originally posted by wpsteve Andre, When you get a plan please send it up this way and we will look at it for you.. We are very in to operations and we can tell you what you need to or not to do ! If you ask for our advise we will give it ..........just trying to help though WP Steve

Essentially, the track plan will be determined by Sanborn fire insurance maps, with whatever adjusting is required to make things fit. I don't think I'll be in the position of having to eliminate anything of interest. I'll be modelling from the Monterey stariona area to the sand mine at Lake Majella in DelMonte Forest. That's a total distance of 4.3 miles or about 260 ft. in HO. Just off the top of my had, the space I have available gives me about 115 ft of trackage given the way I have it laid out in my head. That's about a 2.5:1 compression ratio and what will be eliminated will be trackage between operationally interesting areas. In essence, Monterey, Cannery Row, and Pacific Grove can be modeled fairly close to full scale.

My God, what am I getting myself into?[:D]

Andre

Topic this post: Aisle width

With the ability to make the benchwork higher and narrower, you can either cram more railroad into the room, or you can give that room to the people. Based on my operating experiences on other layouts, I would suggest you give that space back to the people.

The more pleasant the operating experience, the more fun the layout is to operate, and decent width aisles are a part of that. So what's a good standard width for an aisle?

I find that 36" is a great width for an aisle on a walkaround layout design. Two people can be operating on opposite sides of the aisle and a 36" aisle feels quite comfortable. I've also seen 48" aisles on a large home layout and that feels absolutely luxurious!

But what if you can't get everything to fit and you have to constrain the aisle under 36"? Ergonomically, what's the narrowest an aisle can be and still allow two people to pass comfortably? One of the LD SIG members did a study of this and they found that 28" is the narrowest you can go and still have most people get past each other without too much interruption.

So my recommendation when planning your walkaround layout for satisfying operations is to start with 36" aisles. If something won't fit, narrow the benchwork first, even 6"-12" wide can work for benchwork with HO single track, especially if the benchwork is chest height or above.

After narrowing the benchwork, you probably will have a few places where things still don't quite fit, so it's okay to create an aisleway choke point that is less than 36" as long as it's length is not more than a few feet. If you keep the choke point at 28", then two people could still pass each other easily there. 18" is considered to be the minimum aisle width for one person.

If creating a choke point of 18" in a place or two gets your "dream plan" to fit into your space, then that's very workable.

Next topic: Have your cake and eat it too ... wider benchwork AND wider aisles.

I couldn't agree more Joe, operator space and comfort are what make a railroad pleasant to run. I have managed to hold all of my aisles to at least 36" or more, with one small exception. There will be about 3 linear feet of 28" aisle, to accomodate wide radius curves, not bad when you consider that the room has well over 100 linear feet of aisle. There are also a number of wide areas at the ends of aisles, where 4 or 5 people could comfortably stand.

The floor space in my aisles is actually 48" minimum, which means there is 6" of toe space on each side. The main level of benchwork is a relatively low 30", but since I am working in O, I wanted good seperation between levels. The upper level is at 60" allowing a clear 24"+ seperation. The upper deck fascia will also form a valance for lower deck lighting.

For the most part I have held to a maximum reach of 48". One thing that I have done is make most sections of the upper benchwork narrower than the lower. This helps remove the "canyon effect", leaving more headspace for opreators to not feel clostrophobic.

Finally, when it comes to fascia, I am a big fan of no sharp corners, where ever possible. Inside corners might as well be rounded in favor of the layout. Outside corners, if not rounded should not form a hazzard like a "bellycatcher".

When designing and thinking of isle space, if double deck, please don't stack your towns over each other. [[:(!] Appears almost everyone does it. Bad Bad.
If single deck, try not to put towns across from each other, many do that also. Bad Bad.
When talking about it, everyone will tell you it was the only place to do it.. Not always true, it is the most logical place, not the only place.
You just have to work harder to not create this operational problem.
WP Steve

All excellent points!

That's one of the reasons I like the mushroom* benchwork configuration. It spreads out the aisle traffic more like a single deck design does.

If you aren't sure what a mushroom design is, here's a cutaway diagram.



*NOTE: Basically, with a mushroom configuration, the two decks face *opposite* directions, unlike the more traditional multideck designs where both decks face the same direction.

A few more points on the mushroom.

I have found you need a room at least 12 feet wide to have enough width to fit a mushroom design.

The raised floor will cost you some money, since it needs to support people safely. That means you will have to use solid construction and larger lumber members than you use for your benchwork.

A raised floor makes a mushroom convenient because it allows you to keep both decks at a similar relative height from the floor, but a raised floor is not *absolutely necessary* as long as you don't mind the different heights from the floor.

But if you do want a raised floor, the other constraint is ceiling height. You'll need at least a 7 foot ceiling if you want to have headroom for a raised floor. I have a 7'-9" ceiling in my basement, and my raised floor on the Siskiyou Line is 15", for example.

I built my SP Sanderson yard 50" from the floor (it's the second lowest part of the layout)...it's just right for me, but that's not why i built it so high...I built it that high to control small children in the layout room. That way, when the kids come over, they will have to stand on a step stool in one spot to see the layout and can't go running hog wild throughout the entire room messing with stuff they ought not to be touching...funny how some things fall hand in hand...chuck [:D]

Topic this post: Have your cake and eat it too ... wider benchwork AND wider aisles.

One of the things to remember when planning your layout is to think in all 3 dimensions. This is especially true when planning a multideck design, but you can also find useful tricks you can accomplish with the height dimension if you will remember you have all three dimensions to work with.

Here's an example to illustrate how you can find space you didn't know you had by remembering that third dimension of height. If you take advantage of the earlier concept I discussed of higher, narrower benchwork, you can find some aisle space you didn't know you had, a true have your cake and eat it too situation.

Take a close look at this photo.

This is the aisle on my HO Siskiyou Line where Rice Hill summit is located. The track at the left is at 65" from the floor. But notice that the bottom edge of the benchwork is 60" from the floor, which is enough to clear most people's shoulder as the photo shows.

So even though the fascia to fascia distance here is 28", the Rice Hill summit benchwork is high enough I was able to offset the supports back and give enough room for a 36" aisle!

I was able to have my cake and eat it too with regards to aisle space in this location!

So remember to think in all three dimensions when planning your layout and you may find space you didn't know you had. [;)]

Next topic: Don't let vertical curves sneak up on you

This is so true. I built my Wichita Falls sub with 36" isles. I had one place where I had to narrow to 24" for a distance of 4'. I thought this would not be a problem for such a small space, but this has become a real bottleneck as someone has to step out of this area for someone else to pass. the 36" isles are much more comfortable.

Ron

Topic this post: Don't let vertical curves sneak up on you

Curve radius and grades are covered a lot in track planning discussions but one gotcha you need to watch out for is the vertical curve.

A vertical curve happens when you change the grade of your track. For example, if you go from level track to a 4% grade, the region of transition is a vertical curve. Less obvious is at the summit of a grade or bottom of a grade -- here the vertical curve potentially may be *double* because you could go, for instance, from 4% up, to level, to 4% down all in a very short distance. The effective grade change in this example is a whopping 8% !

Vertical curves can be a real bugaboo in layout planning and construction. Do it wrong and you will have nothing but grief at that grade-change location. Car break-aparts and derailments will abound at a poor vertical curve transition.

So how do you keep from doing a vertical curve improperly?

The key is to make your grade change gradual.

I use a rule of thumb that a grade change needs at least one car length per percent of grade change. Using the 6" per 40 ft car in HO example, the 4% summit example earlier needs 9 car lengths to do correctly -- which means about 54" (4-1/2 feet). That's 4 car lengths to go from 4% up to level, one car length level, then 4 more car lengths to go from level to 4% down ... or 9 car lengths.

The vertical curves problem is one reason why I like spline roadbed over the homasote and plywood sandwich method. Spline roadbed naturally makes it hard to do tight vertical curves, but you can do the 8% grade transition discussed earlier in a few inches with plywood-homasote!

So be careful, and always allow sufficient distance for vertical curve transitions in your track plan!

Next topic: Checking your track plan operational satisfaction .... before you build it.

Long time reader, first time poster. I'm really interested in the next installment. Can I ask for two more topics to be talked about. Easments and super-elevation. These are two things I have no clue how to do. Thanks for all the wonderful posts jo.
Andrew

Topic this post: Checking your track plan operational satisfaction .... before you build it.

Using a scale ruler and some simple formulas, you can check out your track plan for it's operational abilities before you build it. To make it easier to analyze and compare plans from different scales, I suggest you use 40 foot car lengths for all your measurements. Here's a table that lists all the major scales and how many 40 foot cars will fit in 12":

40' cars in 12"
O .......... 1.0
S .......... 1.5
HO ........ 2.0
N .......... 4.0
Z ........... 5.0

First, take a look at your track plan and categorize it into these groups (do not count 'fouling points', that is track where cars do not clear each other):

Mainline: Track that connects the various parts of the layout together and allows the trains to go from here to there.

Passing: A second track along the mainline with turnouts at both ends and allows one train to pass another.

Storage: Track on the visible layout that is used to store cars, either at industries or in a yard.

Staging: Track (often hidden) that is used to store completely premade trains for operating on the layout.

Service: Track used to store or service locos (includes things like a turntable, turntable lead, etc.)

Connecting: The track that's left after categorizing everything else as above. Since you cannot count track that would be fouled (cars would hit each other) then this track is essential to moving more cars on your layout.

Here's a diagram showing the various track types.


Connecting track is the key to being able to move lots of cars around on your layout, because that's the track you use to get cars from here to there! Yet it is the track we think about the least in our design.

If you want to know more about using this information to determine how your layout operates, then see this article on my web site:

http://siskiyou.railfan.net/model/layoutDesign/layout.html

Next topic: Operational satisfaction analysis, part 2

QUOTE: Originally posted by george745 Long time reader, first time poster. I'm really interested in the next installment. Can I ask for two more topics to be talked about. Easments and super-elevation. These are two things I have no clue how to do. Thanks for all the wonderful posts jo. Andrew

Andrew:

Sure thing. Will cover easements and super-elevation next after the operational analysis discussion.

Thanks for the suggestion!