My son and I are realitively new at model railroads and are working on our first layout. We are using the dreaded 4 x 8 table and basing this inital part of our track from a plan on the model railroader web site. We are using extruded foam board for our scenery. My question is how to build elevations? We want to grade up to 7 inches. Do we simply build up the foam board? any tips on keeping the grade smooth for good operation?
Just go buy the Woodland Scenics 2% Riser sets. They are flexible for curves and easy to use. And most important, no thinking required.
http://woodlandscenics.woodlandscenics.com/show/Item/ST1410/page/1
They go from 0-4" high, so you will have to get additional sets and also the risers to get to 7".
Now I have to ask, why do you want to go 7" high? You only need 3" clearance on two over passing tracks.
Do not go over a 2% grade, or your asking for trouble.
And on a 4x8 table, you won't have enough room to even do that.
You should re-think your plan, with no, or minimal grades. Another option is to dig down into the 2" of foam to create the separation.
Michael
CEO- Mile-HI-RailroadPrototype: D&RGW Moffat Line 1989
elblis My son and I are realitively new at model railroads and are working on our first layout. We are using the dreaded 4 x 8 table and basing this inital part of our track from a plan on the model railroader web site. We are using extruded foam board for our scenery. My question is how to build elevations? We want to grade up to 7 inches. Do we simply build up the foam board? any tips on keeping the grade smooth for good operation?
I'm hoping the plan doesn't really show track elevations of 7". If it does, unless you have an extreme plan of some kind, chances are that it won't be practical to build/operate.
4% is kind of a maximum grade - and has quite a few limitations. Your engines will pull 25% or less of the cars they can pull on level track. This means they can only pull 4-5 cars up a 4% grade (some will pull more). A 4% grade tends to look toy-like for modeling mainline railroading. And a 4% grade takes 100" of track to rise 4" or 75" of track to rise 3". A 7" rise is going to take 175" of steady climbing track, which is pretty tough to arrange on a 4x8. And since there will be 18" radius curves in the grade to get those run lengths, the extra friction is equivalent to a nearly 6% grade, further decreasing the number of cars your engines can pull.
The easiest way to arrange grades on a 4x8 is to cookie cutter a plywood top. This automatically gives smooth grade transitions.
If you use foam top construction, most use the Woodland Scenics inclines, which have a 4% set in the line.
Cookie cutting the foam is another practical alternative.
Getting a smooth grade by carving stacked foam is quite difficult compared to the other methods. But carving stacked foam is a common technique for building terrain and scenery apart from the track.
my thoughts, your choices
Fred W
You didn't mention the scale you are using. The posts above, from their numbers, are probably talking about HO scale. Your 7-inch planned elevations would be more appropriate for O scale trains.
I use pink foam for my layout. I also work in HO, so that adds some bias to my preferred techniques. To make a ramp that tracks can climb, simply cut a piece of the foam a few feet long and build up supports beneath it. The foam itself is quite stiff, and 2-inch foam will easily span several feet unsupported. Again, O-gauge trains are heavier, so more support would be needed than for HO. You will need to use something softer for the "vertical transitions" at the top and bottom of the slope, as you can't have abrupt slope changes, and you will need to arrange for smooth tangential curves at both ends.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Depending on the length of rolling stock you can go up to 5% or more(logging railroads had 10%). But for good operation I would not go over 2%. A key area of inclines/grades are the 2 transition areas from flat to incline and back to flat again. These transition areas must be smooth at the top and bottom to make sure you don't uncouple, bottom out or have other problems. Without a smooth transition you will end up with kinks. For me, if I'm laying track quickly/easily I first place a board(subroadbed/roadbed) at the desired grade/incline in the position required. I then use a piece of 36" flextrack with half on the incline and half on the flat area. Then slowly bend down to a point that looks smooth and the rolling stock doesn't have problems, then backfill accordingly. For the top I place the track on the flat and incline sections by bending to the point that looks smooth(this piece of track will be to the side at the top kink sometimes. This isn't how I'd like to engineer the transitions, but it's a lot easier and usually works well after a little trial and error.
Richard
Unfortunately, I have to join the doom and gloom crowd here. When I got back into modeling, I had a 4x8 as well. I wanted a tunnel through a mountain with a logging camp on top of it. Unfortunately, this required a 6" change in elevation, which I very quickly figured out was not going to work on a layout that size.
Undaunted, I figured out a switchback arrangement, using an overpass at the opposite end of the layout. So, in theory, the train emerges from the tunnel and takes a switch, routing it to a 3% grade to the overpass and a Y, where the train would then climb another 3% grade to the logging camp. Now, if you're doing the math, you will see that I didn't quite have enough room for the 3% grade, so it ended up being almost a 4% grade, and I only had room for a loco and one car in the lead off the Y.
Six months later, frustrated beyond belief, I ripped out the track. A crawler tractor now drags logs down from the logging camp, across a planked-over railroad bridge to a little sawmill, where the boards are loaded on flat cars which are delivered 4 at a time by passing freights. The train reaches the sawmill on a gentle, 1.5% slope from the mainline.
So take my advice and rethink your track plan, before you get really frustrated.
Connecticut Valley Railroad A Branch of the New York, New Haven, and Hartford
"If you think you can do a thing or think you can't do a thing, you're right." -- Henry Ford
Can I assume you are modeling the Rosston Joelberg RR plan? I am also planning to do that layout starting sometime this winter. The climb up to 7 inches really occurs in three laps around the 4 x 8 layout. I am planning on using the cookie cutter method with 3/4" plywood subroadbed. I would be very interested in hearing about your progress.
My Layout Pics
RogerThatCan I assume you are modeling the Rosston Joelberg RR plan? I am also planning to do that layout starting sometime this winter.
I hope that you folks will do yourselves a favor and build it in 5X9 or 5X10 rather than 4X8. That will allow you to broaden the curves and ease the grades. The effective 3% grade on the 17" minimum radius is nearly 5% when you factor in the friction of the tight curves. It appears that this was not author Van Laar's first layout.
Unless you absolutely must carry the finished layout in the bed of a pick-up, as he intended, there's no need to limit yourself to an HO 4X8.
Byron
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
I built a layout with 4% risers/inclines from Woodland Scenics. Like mentioned, they are flexible and no thinking required. I ended up tearing it down!
I reduced to the WS 3% risers/inclines and had to tear IT down!!!
ASK me WHY? My LOCOs COuldn't Wouldn't, SHouldn't have to pull much more than 4 cars up those steep inclines with curves in them!!! I had to learn the HARD WAY and tear down and start over form two layouts cost and time again!
I am Joining in the choir of "don't go over 1% or 2% grades"...JUST DON'T!!! You'll be SORRY!!!
ANd IF you ADD curves to your inclines it effectively INCREASES the grade % on your poor loco!!!
Stick to 2% and NO MORE.. YOu may Not get an "over and under", but what you can do if that is what you are trying to do is to put 2" extruded foam {the pink or blue stuff} on top your table and carve down a ramp of 2' deep and run an incline 2" UP to get a 4" crossover!!!
Hot Stuff!
Good luck in your endeavor...we are just trying to save you grief, time and money!
-G .
Just my thoughts, ideas, opinions and experiences. Others may vary.
HO and N Scale.
After long and careful thought, they have convinced me. I have come to the conclusion that they are right. The aliens did it.
All of the subgrade on my layout - accurately descibed as, `A collection of grades with a few level spots at stations' - is cookie cut plywood. Not that I have anything against foam board. I couldn't find a source for it here.
Unlike Galaxy, I deliberately designed my coal-hauler with a 4% ruling grade. I have no heartburn with having to power a relatively short train (three 4-wheel wagons and a short passenger car) with three locomotives! That's the only way I can justify a whole fleet of teakettle tanks.
Likewise, my mainline has a 2.5% ruling grade. So does its prototype. A train equivalent to nine American cars and a caboose has to have either doubleheaded 2-8-2s or a pusher upgrade to the summit - just like its prototype.
Bottom line? It all depends on the prototype. The NYC along the Hudson had a ruling grade of something slightly above zero (the Hudson is sea level to Albany) while the Grande (and the present day C&TS) climbs from Chama to Cumbres on a sustained 4% grade. If you want to run long trains, you need close-to-level track. If you want to build a roller coaster you will have to settle for lots of tractive effort on short trains.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
hi,
Galaxy, I am not sure if you are completely right. Treinlength, curves, length of the grade and abilities of the engine, just to name a few, do make the difference. No two engines behave the same. This is what makes model railroading tricky. Not everything goes over everything. Grades, radii and switchnumbers should be appropriate. If you forget to allow space for vertical and horizontal easements, surprises will be yours.
One of my Athearn switchers takes 20 cars on 4% (relatively short) grades with ease. Another engine has trouble getting 6 cars up.
Having said the above, lots of newbies are overly optimistic. Learning by doing might cost you. Maybe it is possible to do some tryouts. Build a nice grade with snaptrack; use small pieces of wood or cardboard to support the track under the rail joiners. The abilities of your engines on grades will become clear soon. Build the grade with curved pieces too, the difference will be surprisingly great.
SmilePaul
I had 4% grades into and out of my subway. It was a mistake, and they have been removed. A 4 car subway train had trouble with them.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
I had a 5% ruling grade(with only slight curvature) in my last layout up to a mountain top as a part of an US Army installation for cannons. Those cars weren't short. No problem pulling them up the grade as in the case of some WWII prototypes where tracks had to be laid quickly. I'm NOT saying I could pull a long train up that grade. Maybe 4 to 5 cars. The difference really was the ease of wheels turning on rolling stock, properly weighted(not too much) cars(NMRA), good couplers and heights as well as good wheels on the loco as well as a heavier loco. Much like the prototype.
I use a 5 1/2" grade in one spot because I had to, no problems but then my cars are not over 40' and not weighted. The problem with grades is that people think they need to weigh the cars to NMRA standards which are based on the premise that you should be able to grab any car at any time. Real railroads haul light to very heavy loads and a cars position in the train is sometimes determined by weight and not destination!!!!!