SeeYou190 gregc building an experimental interim switching layout using spare 8' sheets of blue foam. All-foam layouts work, I have seen a few. Two 2 inch thick foam sheets laminated into a 4 inch sheet is remarkably strong, and you can use cheap folding tables as your supports. -Kevin
gregc building an experimental interim switching layout using spare 8' sheets of blue foam.
All-foam layouts work, I have seen a few. Two 2 inch thick foam sheets laminated into a 4 inch sheet is remarkably strong, and you can use cheap folding tables as your supports.
-Kevin
i've never read/heard of "experimental" layouts. presumably they are less than permanent or have short lifespans? perhaps a section of a layout is experimental
what layout construction techniques have been tried on experimental layouts?
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
Probably a bit of everything in small doses to see how it comes out before applying a technique that's unfamiliar to a large area. Could be construction, scenery, track planning, whatever the problem du jour is you're trying to solve.
In hindsight, all layouts before your current one are experimental.
Phil
I have what I call a test layout. It is 5'4" x 12'. I use it to try out different track, building, scenery arrangements. Sometimes I'll set up 1 or more ovals of track to run some of my HO, S, O, and/or 3 rail O gauge trains.
Paul
I use my old ping pong table to try out ladder arrangements, various radii and switching etc. just to confirm the longer passenger cars and autoracks operation.
gregci've never read/heard of "experimental" layouts.
Greg: An experimental layout is one that is built to test or prove an idea, and is destined for the landfill from the moment it is created. I have built three experimental layouts. I do not include these in my list of the six versions of the STRATTON AND GILLETTE.
The first was a fully functioning example of the very weird entry to my yard from the International Bridge on my Dream House N scale layout. This experiment proved that my long trains would pass through all of the Peco trackwork with no problems. This layout was on a 4 by 16 table, and trains could run in loops around the trackage for hours to prove it would work under all circumstances.
Of course, me being me, I added scenery and pretty much completed the layout. This was in 1989 or so, and I do not have any pictures of it.
The complicated trackwork arrangement in question was built so it could be removed from the experimental layout and installed on the permanent layout once reliablility was proven. The rest of the layout was scrapped. Some lumber was salvaged, but nothing else.
- - - - - - - - - - -
In 2017 I built an entire layout out of cardboard, and even added scenery and some operable trackage to test things out. This layout was 7 by 16 when it was done, and represented, in full size, about 65% of my planned layout.
This proved the yard throat would fit, and what track components were needed.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Last year I built a fully operable 8 foot long layout section to test out my ideas for benchwork, fascia, and controls for my final layout. Again, it was completed to operation and full scenery before I cut it up and sent it to the landfill.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
danno54I use my old ping pong table to try out ladder arrangements, various radii and switching etc. just to confirm the longer passenger cars and autoracks operation.
My tile just happens to make a perfect 12 by 12 grid. Using Kato Unitrack, I have been able to use the tile floor as full size graph paper and do track planning in full scale!
I have also used good-old plywood to make experiments of planned track arrangements.
Living the dream.
It wasn't perhaps a full "experimental layout" but before I started in earnest on the real layout, I took a sheet of plywood and some old old brass Atlas fibre tie flex track (which is darn hard to "flex" by the way) and laid the track in a series of concentric circles with 2" spacing because I knew I 1) wanted to keep the spacing the same for my curves as for my tangents and 2) wanted to make sure trains on my double track main with full length passenger cars could pass each other on curves. So I had curves of 42" radius, 40", 38", 36" and 34" using Ribbonrail templates and tested (pushing cars by hand; the track was unpowered) just about every combination of passenger car that I owned, and threw in a few 85' flatcars for good measure.
One obvious conclusion from my experimental track layout was that I sure was glad fibre tie flex track is a thing of the past! And I thought MicroEngineering flex track was hard to bend evenly - sheesh.
While it appeared that having curves of 36" and 38" radius with 2" centers could work for almost all of my cars, there were some combinations which nicked each other or came so close that I decided 38" and 40" would be my minimum radius choices, with 40" and 42" being a luxury option for one curve. Those are broad curves by many standards for HO but they are still very disappointingly sharp -- not the sweeping "photographer's curve" that John Armstrong advocates there should be at least one of on a large layout.
Once the test was done I pulled up the track and returned the plywood to future use.
Dave Nelson
I consider my entire current layout an experiment.
Twenty years ago when I got the MRR bug again as I started to slow down I started reading about the hobby and subscribed to some of the usual mags. I had been exposed to L-Girder construction in my childhood/youth and basically had it ingrained in me that L-Girder was the way of the MRR world. I did not put a lot of thought into it and figured I would be using L-Girder once again. I then read an article that said L-Girder was an easy build at a time when most people had only basic tools in the home, however, a lot of homes now have a wide array of tools in them and so much more can now be done. Well, this is what I had been thinking in the back of my head as I had a pretty well-equipped workshop compared to what my Dad had. So I departed the traditional way of MRR benchwork building realizing I had a radial arm saw, table saw and mitre saw along with numerous handheld saws.
I decided to experiment and use foam and spline. I ripped all the spline on the saw having moved it outside in anticipation of the dust cloud that would and did consume the property. Underneath the foam, I have open grid all put together with lap joints. No, I did not need the lap joints, however, it only took minutes to run the 1" x 4"s through the saw and that allowed the benchwork to be put together quickly with precision and strength.
Another experiment I tried was building a section across the fireplace. Code says combustibles must be 18" from the glass front on the gas fireplace. I could have used regular lumber as I met the distance requirements, however, I thought the heat may come into play so I went to the scrap metal yard and got a 20' piece of 1" angle iron and welded that into a rectangular frame and inserted a double layer of 1/2"cement board into it. I had my fireplace crossing and turned the fire on and after hours it was still completely cool on the top.
Foam and spline.
Open grid done with lap joints.
The steel and cement fireplace experiment.
Cement roadbed.
The rockwork is thin-set and other similar material that I just slapped on as I had leftovers from the endless renovations in the house. Once painted it should look pretty good.
What I learned with my experiment is, I would use spline again in a heartbeat, I had a lot of fun laying out the spline and it has been perfect in every way in the job it was assigned to do. Though not a consideration for me the cost is cheap, cheap, cheap.
What I would not do again is put the mainline on foam. While I would have foam as a tabletop, I would have spline as the roadbed attached to the grid underneath. Sidings, spurs lines are great on foam but the foam does not offer enough support for "high performance" railroading IMO.
Like I said my layout was an experiment and it worked out quite well all in all. Having the ability to build the benchwork to suit makes things easier and allows more creativity.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
Well, like Dave Nelson I have made small mockups to test stuff, but I am a skilled draftsman and good planner. The idea of building something knowing it is "temporary" goes against my nature, both from a time and resource standpoint.
I have designed HiFi speaker systems, control system accessories for the GRAVELY tractor, hot water heating systems for homes, electrical controls for assembly lines, and drawn hundreds of floor plans for new homes and renovations.
Seldom do I ever have to make any more than the smallest "field adjustments" to those designs.
My model train layouts have been the same way.
Sheldon
I suppose that my entire layout could be considered "experimental", as soon after beginning layout construction, I was forced to move it (due to other family requirements) into an oddly shaped room....
Of course, the layout, pictured in the rough sketch above, wasn't there, so I moved what I could of the already-built benchwork into the room and placed portions of it where it would fit. I then continued building benchwork to fit the remaining space, leaving aisleways as wide as possible. Without a track plan, I cut-up a couple of sheets of 3/4" plywood into roadbed, starting with curves of 30" radius, and increasing them each by 2" as I proceeded.I then placed the broadest curves possible (most were 34" or more) in each of the ten corners of the room.
Next, I simply connected all of the curves with straight-ish track, doubled through all of the towns, which I began to envision as I worked.
While it's far from complete, with some areas barely presentable, I'm pretty-well satisfied with how it's turned out. The original "planned" layout was poorly developed, and would have been, I think, not as interesting, nor as much fun to build and use.
Wayne
BATMANI consider my entire current layout an experiment.
Do you have plans to tear it out and replace it with the real layout? If not, it is not an experiment. It is just a place where you tried out new processes, and if they worked out, you left them there. This happens on 99% of permanent layouts.
Experimental layout all meet the landfill quickly, and they are built only to prove or test an idea.
Well, when I set off building it I was quite prepared to rip it down if it did not work out, but I must admit I was surprised that I have had to do nothing as it all unfolded as I thought it would. I am only now going to make one small change to the track plan after all these years. So if the fact it was a success does not make it an experiment so be it.
I use to scratch build R/C airplanes that I considered experimental. I knew nothing more than the basics of how to engineer a plane but they all flew, some better than others and none of them crashed. Most of them had lots of flights and only went to the landfill two years ago when my crawlspace flooded and they met a watery end. So I guess they were truly experimental, they just took a while to get to the landfill.
When I use to fly real airplanes I saw lots of home builts with the word experimental on them and as far as I know, they are still flying.
BATMANSo if the fact it was a success does not make it an experiment so be it.
My experiment in benchwork construction was 100% successful.
It still went to the landfill on schedule... as all experiments will.
BATMANWhat I learned with my experiment is, I would use spline again in a heartbeat, I had a lot of fun laying out the spline and it has been perfect in every way in the job it was assigned to do. Though not a consideration for me the cost is cheap, cheap, cheap. What I would not do again is put the mainline on foam. While I would have foam as a tabletop, I would have spline as the roadbed attached to the grid underneath. Sidings, spurs lines are great on foam but the foam does not offer enough support for "high performance" railroading IMO.
Exactly as I plan to do on my new layout this winter. I love the easy sweeping bends and elevation changes the spline affords. Last layout was plywood roadbed and left a lot of drop-off, or waste, while cutting for curves and a noticable butt joint where pieces meet.
Purchasing masonite at my local H.D. or Lowes, I have them rip the 4x8 sheets in 2ft wide pieces making ripping the narrow strips on my tablesaw a one-man operation. And I can haul them in my car.
I do like the spacer method of construction using spacers after each pair of continous strips.
Sidings and scenery will be built-up foam also.
I've always wanted to expand to O scale, but space is lacking in the basement. So, in addition to the Chrismas tree circle that I do every year, I experimented a portable O scale layout made of fiberglass. Why? The idea is to bring the layout to shows and shopping centres, but to store it vertically when not in use. And it has to be rugged enough to transport the thing without wrecking the scenery. I mixed earth to the fiberglass to give it texture, and I glued grass on it. I still need to add some wire trees to it, but it essentially worked. Because the track is not set permanently, I can do O scale, On30 and HO scale. Two loops, nothing fancy.
So it's not the most detailed and attractive layout, but I would say it is above average to what I have seen locally.
Simon
20170917_162651 on Flickr
20171015_165430 on Flickr