I have always used good old fashioned grid bench work. When I build my new layout, I was considering L girder benchwork. It would not be attached to the wall, but would butt against it. I would use 1X4 for legs.
Caldreamer
Personally and respectfully, I prefer I beams. They're engineered and can be modified to suit your needs.
There's another thread here that covers this.... L girders are good. I beams are better.
TF
Scroll down in this forum, just a few threads down is a thread titled: "How long for an unsupported span of L girders"
It addresses your questions.
Mike
My You Tube
Our club layout peninsula which is roughly eight feet wide x 16' long has four 16' L girders made from 1x4s each supported by just two 2x4 legs. It is as solid as a rock. We could have gotten away with just two L girders but we wanted to be able to split the peninsula in half if we ever have to move the layout.
The rest of the layout has simple 1x4 gridwork. It is as solid as a rock too.
You choose.
I would suggest that the benchwork, regardless of the design, be attached to the walls in a few places just to prevent it from moving around.
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
I prefer open grid, but on a previous layout did use L-girder for a long-span area which included a duck-under.
For my current around-the-oddly-shaped-room layout, open grid is more suitable,as it's easily tied to the wall studs, so that even with a generous overhang of the layout into the aisle, the grid remains sturdy enough to lean on the overhanging portion, or stand on the fully-supported areas (now mostly covered with track and structures, leaving little foot-room).
L-girder on this layout would be simply a waste of good-quality Select Pine, as I chose to support the layout mostly with 2"x4" kiln-dried lumber mysteriously left-over after I had built my house. In addition to supporting the layout, it provides a good platform for under-layout storage...
The open grid itself is Select 1"x4" Pine. I also used open grid for the partial second level of the layout. Done in 8'-10' segments, the front (aisle-side) and end members are 1"x4", while the rear and intermediate members are 1"x2", the latter screwed to the wall studs and the entire grid sections supported by welded-together 1.5" angle iron brackets, lag-bolted to the wall studs.
I can't imagine anywhere I'd need to use a long span, so I wouldn't waste money creating L-girders when I could simply add a few more legs, made from cheaper dimensional lumber.
As I understand it, L-girder's main benefit was the ability to easily move crossmembers if turnouts or other similar things happened to fall directly over them, making under-layout switch machines, etc., difficult to install. You simply unscrewed, from below the layout, the crossmembers which were in the way, then re-aligned them as needed, re-installing the screws....with open grid, it's only slightly more work, although I have only one under-layout switch machine, and its location was well-thought-out in advance.
Wayne
doctorwayneAs I understand it, L-girder's main benefit was the ability to easily move crossmembers if turnouts or other similar things happened to fall directly over them, making under-layout switch machines, etc., difficult to install. You simply unscrewed, from below the layout, the crossmembers which were in the way, then re-aligned them as needed, re-installing the screws....with open grid, it's only slightly more work, although I have only one under-layout switch machine, and its location was well-thought-out in advance.
Based on our club's experience, I can see little if any advantage to L girder benchwork vs open grid. As doctorwayne says, if you plan your benchwork properly then open gridwork will work just fine. We chose L girder construction for the 8' x 16' peninsula because the track is on a grade throughout the entire area. However, the south side of the layout uses open grid construction and almost everything is on a grade too. If I was to be perfectly honest, I would say that the L girders were a waste of material.
The location of the Tortoise motors was taken into account in both the L girder and the open gridwork thanks to the use of 3rd PlanIt so the different construction methods really didn't make any difference.
Please don't cut me up too badly!
I use both grid and L. Grid for the parts of the layout where the fascia side is straight, such as being parallel to the wall; and L where the fascia will be curved, such as for a turn-back loop. Having the ability to vary the length of the cross members to address irregular shaped layout sections is the big advantage of the L girder method.
I screw my benchwork to the wall studs, so there is a “chair-rail” of 1x4's around the room. This is the “wall-side” of both bench methods. I glue a 1.5” long 1x4 block to it every 14” so cross pieces are attached to the blocks with screws set at right angles, rather than being “toe-nailed” In L girder sections, the cross members butt against the chair-rail on the wall side (as on the grid) but have an L girder supporting them on the fascia side.
I rip 2x4s to make 2x2 legs, mainly because, in my world, store-bought 2x2's are never straight.
Jim
hardcoalcase...Having the ability to vary the length of the cross members to address irregular shaped layout sections is the big advantage of the L girder method....
...all that's required is to stagger the intersecting crossmembers so that some can be left with their ends free, by inches, or even by feet.
This view, before the area became a catch-all, illustrates it bit better...
hardcoalcase I use both grid and L. Grid for the parts of the layout where the fascia side is straight, such as being parallel to the wall; and L where the fascia will be curved, such as for a turn-back loop. Having the ability to vary the length of the cross members to address irregular shaped layout sections is the big advantage of the L girder method. I screw my benchwork to the wall studs, so there is a “chair-rail” of 1x4's around the room. This is the “wall-side” of both bench methods. I glue a 1.5” long 1x4 block to it every 14” so cross pieces are attached to the blocks with screws set at right angles, rather than being “toe-nailed” In L girder sections, the cross members butt against the chair-rail on the wall side (as on the grid) but have an L girder supporting them on the fascia side. I rip 2x4s to make 2x2 legs, mainly because, in my world, store-bought 2x2's are never straight. Jim
I do benchwork just like this with a few minor exceptions.
I have the right to remain silent. By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.
doctorwayneprobably because it's also possible with open grid
Yeah, but you're cheating.
The way your grid sits on the top of the cabinets relieves the front edge of the grid of the requirement of holding up the front edge of the layout. While certainly clever construction, this is not a typical open grid. You could almost call it "cabinet girder" where your grid is analogous to the joists in L-girder construction.
I have 2X4 legs screwed into L shapess for my current layout. I could use thes for my new L-grid layout legs. That would make it as study as a rock. I have always overbuilt my layouts. You could dance on my current layout without any problem/ Even the center peninsula is immovable.
carl425...this is not a typical open grid....
The only other type of open grid, at least with which I'm familiar, is that used with tabletop-style layouts, with the support legs at the corners (and with intermediate legs where necessary) and usually with a plywood top. My first layout, a 4'x8' was built like that.I wanted to use the under-layout space for storage, and didn't want to be accidentally kicking it everytime I wanted to run trains, hence the choice to have the overhang on the aisle side.
If I had built it in modular-style sections, it could have been easily lifted from the 2"x4" support structure simply by unscrewing the short pieces of 1"x2", visible in the last photo, which secure the grid to its support system.In retrospect, if I'd not needed the storage space, I could have simply constructed the grids, along with a series of 2"x4" legs, attached to a suitable length of on-edge 2"x4"then, with someone to assist, lifted the grids onto the upright legs, securing the rear member of the grid to the wall studs (as it is now on those areas where there's a wall) and securing the single support structure to some points on the bottom of the grid. That would have eliminated all of the rear legs supporting the back of the layout and all of the 2"x4"s needed to connect those legs to the front ones, and also all of the material used to create the under-layout shelf.When the layout comes out, which may be sooner than I had hoped, it likely won't be salvageable.
To answer the question in the title of the thread... L Grider benchwork is amazingly sturdy.
.
If you want strength and durability and long spans, it is great.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
However, early int he construction, at least if built in the traditional way, it can be shakey. But this is long before you put track on, by the time you get that far, it's stabl and sturdy. The traditional method of building L-girder is to make 2 girders, make 4 legs, and 2 cross joists. Put that all together and with only the one cross joist at each end to stabilize it, it may feel like it's about to fold over on itself. Get the leg braces and the rest of the joists in place and it's very stable. This may be disconcerting to a beginner, who may think they did something wrong or else the method is just useless, when it comes out so shakey. But rest assured, when the benchwork is complete, it's as stable or more stable than other methods, plus it can have a much greater span between legs without sagging.
I do find L-girder to be complete overkill for something like a flat pieceof plywood 4x8 layout. All it does for such a thing is create more work in the cutting of all the risers and cleats to attach the top. If you're making a perfectly flat layout with no grades, attaching a sheet of plywood to a simple grid is going ot be easyer and 'waste' less vertical height, meaning more room UNDER the layout compared to building it with L-girder, assuming the top side of the plywood is at the same elevation from the floor.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
doctorwayneAs I understand it, L-girder's main benefit was the ability to easily move crossmembers if turnouts or other similar things happened to fall directly over them, making under-layout switch machines, etc., difficult to install.
No, the primary advantage of L-girder was/is that precise measurement of the structure components is not required.
maxman doctorwayne As I understand it, L-girder's main benefit was the ability to easily move crossmembers if turnouts or other similar things happened to fall directly over them, making under-layout switch machines, etc., difficult to install. No, the primary advantage of L-girder was/is that precise measurement of the structure components is not required.
doctorwayne As I understand it, L-girder's main benefit was the ability to easily move crossmembers if turnouts or other similar things happened to fall directly over them, making under-layout switch machines, etc., difficult to install.
Well, L-girder has lots of advantages if you are building dramatic scenery and have lots of elevation changes in the track. Used in conjunction with hard shell scenery it can even provide better access to trackage hidden under the scenery.
It is also good for those who are not great "planners" because it does make some changes easier.
Every layout I have built has used a combination of different bench work construction, but only one was mainly L-girder.
My new layout will not use L-girder at all. It offers no advantages for my next layout, and like Randy says, it just eats up vertical space under the layout - I want the storage and easier access.
Is L-girder strong? - sure, as a finished product. It is truely the model railroad equal to light frame construction, each piece adding strength to the others like modern house framing.
With the popularity of double deck layouts, and/or shelf depth layouts, the need and reasons for L-girder have given way to other methods.
How dramatic can your scenes be in a 2' depth from layout edge to back drop?
Only the lower level of a multi deck layout can effectively use L-girder.
Many of the classic layouts built with L-girder had benchwork 4' - 6' deep, or even deeper, especially penisulas or "island" style layouts. When was the last time you saw a layout in the middle of the room where you walked all the way around it?
Sheldon
ATLANTIC CENTRALWhen was the last time you saw a layout in the middle of the room where you walked all the way around it?
My last plywood central was an island layout. I kept the switching, industries and town settings within 24" of the edge.
Of course the average track height was about 40", so everything was accessible.
It started out as a 4'x8' and grew outward from there, so the bench work, if I dare even call it that, was a hodge-podge of different lumber.
I still like that style, if I were to ever do it again, which is highly unlikely, space wise, I would have a divider down the center.
I think that style of layout gives a more sense of "expansivness" or distance than the current around the wall that I have now.
I could walk around the layout, plug my home made version of a throttle into various spots around the layout, and run trains. It was a cab control, with 2 cabs.
Oh well, maybe in another life, still having fun going through this life. I venture into the 70's age group in June.
Mike.
mbinsewi ATLANTIC CENTRAL When was the last time you saw a layout in the middle of the room where you walked all the way around it? My last plywood central was an island layout. I kept the switching, industries and town settings within 24" of the edge. Of course the average track height was about 40", so everything was accessible. It started out as a 4'x8' and grew outward from there, so the bench work, if I dare even call it that, was a hodge-podge of different lumber. I still like that style, if I were to ever do it again, which is highly unlikely, space wise, I would have a divider down the center. I think that style of layout gives a more sense of "expansivness" or distance than the current around the wall that I have now. I could walk around the layout, plug my home made version of a throttle into various spots around the layout, and run trains. It was a cab control, with 2 cabs. Oh well, maybe in another life, still having fun going through this life. I venture into the 70's age group in June. Mike.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL When was the last time you saw a layout in the middle of the room where you walked all the way around it?
Mike,
After building a number of different styles of layouts, and helping some friends design and build layouts, I have decided that I need scenery with depth.
My new layout will be around the walls, with two large penisulas into the room, but the benchwork/scenery will be 3' to 4' deep everywhere. The peninsulas will be 8' wide to allow for my required 36" and larger curves.
I have not decided if I will put backdrops down the center of the peninsulas, I may just use scenery as the view block.
The layout will be built with a combination of table top and open grid construction.
All the visable trackage will be within the front 24-30 inches, and the change in elevation from the lowest to the highest track will be no more than 6".
There will be hidden staging with other means of access.
This 18' x 6' bench is solid. I ran all the 1" x 4"s through the saw and made lap joints. Glued and screwed. The legs are set in so my toes never hit them. The leg assembly just sits there and I can just lift the top off and they won't fall over. It will come apart quite easily.
I saw a three-deck layout on a FaceBook sight that looked amazing. Like a wedding cake, each deck was not as wide as the deck beneath it. It was very appealing to the eye in both the videos and photos that had been posted.
I read a great article about L-Girder construction once. It stated that it was a great method for when people didn't have the tools that are available today. However, there are much more practical ways to do things today with even just basic power tools.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
Layouts are still being built with L-girder – I just visited one of my client's under construction a few weeks ago. And it works fine. So does grid-style. So do others.
He chose L-girder for its fast construction with less precision required and (especially) because it made it easy to accommodate curves in the benchwork edge.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
cuyama Layouts are still being built with L-girder – I just visited one of my client's under construction a few weeks ago. And it works fine. So does grid-style. So do others. He chose L-girder for its fast construction with less precision required and (especially) because it made it easy to accommodate curves in the benchwork edge.
Agreed, I forgot to mention that earlier, if you are into the free form curved benchwork thing, then L-girder has some major advantages.
I personally have never cared one way or the other about the free form layout shape idea. Many of the free form curved fascia layouts I have seen over the years seemed to have more aisleway bottle necks then those with generally straight benchwork.
Some people are big advocates of free form because they feel it has a more "natural" flow, that things in nature are are not at right angles to each other.
Most of this school of thought also lobbies against trackage parrallel to the benchwork edge.
It is my view that while nature may not be full of right angles, man made stuff is full of them, and as veiwers of model train layouts we are much like a railfan walking up to the tracks. We have a natural tendency to stand facing the tracks at a right angle to them, and look left and right down the line.
So my layout design approach has always been a mix of both, and a natural flow of scenery can be achieved by setting roads and structures at odd angles just as, or more, easily as placing track at odd angles to the benchwork edge.
Curved corners are fine, but most of us are fitting our layouts into rectangular spaces, so rectangular benchwork is often the most effective use of space.
One more thought, the typical penisula end turnback curve, so frequently made completely curved to match the radius by free form layout designers, does nothing in my mind to minimise the fact of our sharper curves or the "horse shoe" route.
Whereas straight edged benchwork likely with 45 degree corners, provide scenic opportunities to model cuts, trees, land forms, etc outside the loop of track.
Just my view,
There are a world of options for L-girder benchwork. This is my 2nd layout using it. I know of nothing that offers a higher level of sturdiness.
Unlike some, I put 1/x3's across the top every two feet to hold the foam. Doing that provides me the ability to run wires through the benchwork to the buss lines underneath. I find it's much easier/faster punching holes through the foam than wood.
Hi Sheldon,
As a contractor, I'm sure you've built a deck or two over the years. Don't you use joists resting on beams? All the ones I've seen around here built in the last 20 years or so are done that way. I'm curious why this type of construction would be better for decks but not for model railroads.
Carl,
As I have stated above several times, and have others, the problem for some of us is not wanting the extra vertical thickness of the structure.
L-girder with plywood and homasote is 8.5" thick. My freight yard area will be just as strong with a single plane grid at only 4.75" thick and will require less lumber.
We build decks that way when the clearance below is not an issue, because it is faster. When we need to, we build floor systems, for decks or buildings, all in one plane with hangers.
Disclaimer about model train benchwork - I don't use foam in any way shape or form.
In Linn Wescott's original article, he stated three design goals for L girders:1) No more lumber than necessary
2) Easy to build
3) Easy to change
People don't change their layouts as much as they used to, so 3 isn't as big a deal as it used to be.
Disclaimer: This post may contain humor, sarcasm, and/or flatulence.
Michael Mornard
Bringing the North Woods to South Dakota!
My thoughts on these reasons:
1) No more lumber than necessary. Bah, my system uses even more lumber!.
2) Easy to build, Nope, my system is not easy to build.
3) Easy to change. Maybe, but I doubt I will ever change anything.
These are my reasons I am using a modified L girder system:
1) Long unobstructed spans for easy construction, working from underneath, and storage.
2) All scenery can flow freely up and down, above and below track level.
Although LVL custom-made I beam construction for a cantilevered 4x8 layout is not too hard to do with quarter inch OSB.
I do believe this prototype is a little beefy looking for the living room.
This new resting place from the dining room glass table for the 4x8 layout may need to be revamped.
You could park an elephant on it but I'm not real happy with it.
Just a little beefy, (Overkill structurally) I will work on the cosmetics here
SeeYou190 2) All scenery can flow freely up and down, above and below track level. . -Kevin .
I always felt this was by far the most important advantage of L-girder - if it applies to the situation.
The other primary benefit I see to L-girder is the free form fascia, which I do not care for.
I will give an example of one section my new layout.
24' length against a wall, benchwork 4' deep from front edge to wall. In very front, along the whole 24' a freight yard, 8 tracks, elevation 40" above the floor. This is both the lowest track and lowest scenic elevation in this area.
Behind the freight yard, a double track mainline at the same elevation, except on raised roadbed, behind that a 2" high retaining wall and passenger terminal at 42" elev., 4 tracks plus platforms. We have now used about 34" of the available 48" of depth.
Now another retaining wall, about 4" high, and the remaining distance to the back drop is urban scenery, streets, buildings, elevated passenger terminal over the passenger tracks, etc. Urban scene street elvations can vary up from 46" elevation.
Under the urban scenery - again at elevation 40", a 6 track staging yard.
L-girder would do nothing to improve the construction of this section of layout, other than subtract another 5" of under layout clearance.
This area will be build entirely on solid plywood and homasote with a 1x4 framework. Legs every 8' will be just fine.
Other areas will be done differently as needed, but most trackage climbs from the freight yard, so in moast cases the 40" benchwork elevation will provide plenty of scenery below track level.
Homemade quarter inch OSB I joist with premium Lumber. (stronger than all get-out)
7000 lb PSI high performance glue.
You need a finish nailer, 3/4 inch, 1 1/2 nails.
Track fiddler Homemade quarter inch OSB I joist with premium Lumber. (stronger than all get-out) 7000 lb PSI high performance glue. You need a finish nailer, 3/4 inch, 1 1/2 nails. TF
And a lot more time than just buying good poplar 1x4's and some 3/4" birch plywood...........
Nobody around here sells 1/4" OSB........
But I agree, I have no doubt it is strong.