Flex track curve techniques

[hon30critter]

Once again, apologies to the OP.

This is a note that I just sent to Steven Otte:

Hello Steven,

I'm sure that this is absolutely the last thing that you want to deal with on your Friday morning, but I have to speak my mind. To state it simply, Lastspikemike has upset a lot of people over the last few weeks. I'm sure that you are aware of that. Here is my stance:

I put a lot of effort into contributing to the forums, not that that gives me any more say than any other participant, but recently I have begun to dread reading any thread where Lastspikemike is posting his opinions. He is clearly upsetting many members of the forums, including me. I have come to fear what he says next and who he offends. My enjoyment of the forums has been severely diminished.

This person is clearly incapable of participating in the forums in an acceptable manner. He is absolutely entitled to his opinions, but he is not entitled to offend as many people as he has. As I said in the forums, in 14 years of forum participation I have never seen anyone who poisoned the atmosphere as much as he has.

I just posted a note suggesting that we try to ignore him. That may be an acceptable solution, but I strongly believe that it is your duty to maintain the friendly and respectful nature of the forums.

If I am out of line, please say so. I apologize for disturbing your day.

Sincerely,

Dave Warnica

 

[gmpullman]

Well said, Dave

Thank you for speaking up.

Regards, Ed

[hon30critter]

With apologies to the OP, I'm going to hijack this thread.

I'm sitting here feeling quite stressed by Lastspikemike's approach to the forums. I know that I am not alone in this. I know that Lastspikemike is upsetting other people too.

I enjoy the forums very much, so I have to ask why someone is permitted to be a participant when he frequently causes upset and friction. In the 14 years that I have participated in the forums I don't recall anyone who has poisoned the atmosphere to this extent.

If Kalmbach won't deal with the situation then I suggest that those of us who he has offended simply stop responding to his posts. There seems to be nothing to gain by doing so anyhow. Hopefully, not too many newcomers will fall victim to his assertions.

Sincerely,

Dave Warnica

 

 

[ATLANTIC CENTRAL]

Doughless

 

 

Lastspikemike

 

  

 

 

As a relatively new member I understand why this forum has trouble keeping new members. I noticed that while researching topics of interest to me.

However, even if I tried to explain this I would be misunderstood by the very posters that are the problem. 

 

 

 

 

I for one do not think you are a troll.  And actually appreciate a lot of what you have to say.  Free thinking is a good thing.

Assuming that you have humility and sincerity that approaches average human levels, I'll offer what I've learned on this forum when it comes to drafting comments.

Our group's experiences vary as they pertain to time and circumstances. What is absolutely right to one, is completey wrong to another, or many, depending upon how broad or narrow our experiences are.

I for one am interested in building layouts with a modern shortline theme.  Its not a particulalry popular theme amongst the group. 

As an example of circumstances influencing my experience in the hobby:

There have been times years ago where there were heavy dc vs dcc conversations in many threads.  I took the opinion that operating  multiple trains at one time was not a feasible activity, so there would be "no advantage for someone to have a nonsound dcc system that allows for multiple independent train control", rather than simply having dc. (I still have that opinion by the way )

I ran one train at a time, no matter how big the layout was.  Always have, always will.  So my right-minded opinion came (comes) from my circumstance.

Others have different circumstances.  For instance, club style layouts, with many members needing to control many trains at the same time.  DCC is much better than flipping toggle blocks for 5 operators.

And its not only a group thing.

Some lone wolfs like to model engine servicing.  While only having one operator move one loco at a time, cramming 26 locos into a 20 SF engine servicing module would be a pain to wire and operate in DC.  DCC is much better for that style of layout.

So while making a statement such as, for example, "there is no advantage to a DCC system over DC" might look correct to the person writing it, its actually quite wrong.  The problem arises when the writer has no ability or willingness to comprehend how wrong they are.

And that's not a matter of opinion.

 

Douglas, well said. I was concidering a similar response to some of Mike's recent comments.

And was considering starting a new thread to do so.

For now at least, you saved me the trouble.

Sheldon

[Bayfield Transfer Railway]

richhotrain

 Lastspikemike

 

As a relatively new member I understand why this forum has trouble keeping new members. I noticed that while researching topics of interest to me.

However, even if I tried to explain this I would be misunderstood by the very posters that are the problem. 

 

 

 

This is called blaming the victim. You, sir, are the problem, not the rest of us.

 

 

Amen, amen, and amen.

 

[richhotrain]

Lastspikemike

 

As a relatively new member I understand why this forum has trouble keeping new members. I noticed that while researching topics of interest to me.

However, even if I tried to explain this I would be misunderstood by the very posters that are the problem. 

This is called blaming the victim. You, sir, are the problem, not the rest of us.

[Doughless]

Lastspikemike

 

  

 

 

As a relatively new member I understand why this forum has trouble keeping new members. I noticed that while researching topics of interest to me.

However, even if I tried to explain this I would be misunderstood by the very posters that are the problem. 

 

I for one do not think you are a troll.  And actually appreciate a lot of what you have to say.  Free thinking is a good thing.

Assuming that you have humility and sincerity that approaches average human levels, I'll offer what I've learned on this forum when it comes to drafting comments.

Our group's experiences vary as they pertain to time and circumstances. What is absolutely right to one, is completey wrong to another, or many, depending upon how broad or narrow our experiences are.

I for one am interested in building layouts with a modern shortline theme.  Its not a particulalry popular theme amongst the group. 

As an example of circumstances influencing my experience in the hobby:

There have been times years ago where there were heavy dc vs dcc conversations in many threads.  I took the opinion that operating  multiple trains at one time was not a feasible activity, so there would be "no advantage for someone to have a nonsound dcc system that allows for multiple independent train control", rather than simply having dc. (I still have that opinion by the way )

I ran one train at a time, no matter how big the layout was.  Always have, always will.  So my right-minded opinion came (comes) from my circumstance.

Others have different circumstances.  For instance, club style layouts, with many members needing to control many trains at the same time.  DCC is much better than flipping toggle blocks for 5 operators.

And its not only a group thing.

Some lone wolfs like to model engine servicing.  While only having one operator move one loco at a time, cramming 26 locos into a 20 SF engine servicing module would be a pain to wire and operate in DC.  DCC is much better for that style of layout.

So while making a statement such as, for example, "there is no advantage to a DCC system over DC" might look correct to the person writing it, its actually quite wrong.  The problem arises when the writer has no ability or willingness to comprehend how wrong they are.

And that's not a matter of opinion.

[Bayfield Transfer Railway]

selector

The forum needs another emoticon...starts with “Heinz.”

 

No, it bloody needs a 'block' function.

[Bayfield Transfer Railway]

Lastspikemike

It does depend also on the type of flex  track. Peco is flexible both ways as is ME flex track. Atlas and Walthers is springy.

The joiners will be enough if you actually bend the curve leaving no tension in the rail. 

Atlas and Walthers (formerly Shinohara) spring back as you release the bending force. You have to over bend by just the right amount so the desired curve results after the bending force is removed. If you try to  hold the bend with glue or nails or joiners you will not be happy.  

Peco is slightly springy but much easier to bend by just the right amount.

ME bends if you just look at it funny and won't try to straighten itself. 

If your rail joints kink it's not the joiners. The joiners are not supposed to be under any tension whether you're using flex track or sectional track. Once joined you glue or nail down the track and all locating forces should be transferred to the glue bond if the nails. 

I must say it is curiously gratifying to be able to predict the posts after such a short while on this board.

 

Hush, dear, grownups are talking.

 

[Bayfield Transfer Railway]

SeeYou190

So here we have another honest question asked by a forum member that had turned into a chest-thumping contest by he who obviously knows very little about model railroading but will never admit he is wrong.

We will never grow the active member population in here if this happens to every honest question, especially questions asked by people who really just need an answer.

-Kevin

 

So report him.  And keep reporting him.

 

[selector]

The forum needs another emoticon...starts with “Heinz.”

[York1]

Deleted by York1.

[Doughless]

York1

 

Lastspikemike

To recap, then, the answer is no, don't solder the rail joiners just to facilitate bending flex track into a nice smooth curve.

 

 

?

That is not the answer.

Evidently we weren't just talking past each other.

The answer, for me, when using N Scale Atlas flex track, is to solder the joiners and the track.  That facilitates bending flex track into a nice smooth curve.

This is amazing.

 

Congrats.  Calling him out for trying to move the goal posts nailed him down to what he was actually trying to say.

But there could be hidden meaning in "just to facilitate" that sets the framework for another twist later. 

 

[Doughless]

Lastspikemike

Now we're all on the same page  look who's moved the goalposts. 

Lastspikemike

I make no apologies for misunderstanding the supposedly obvious fact that nobody solders rails for structural reasons.

As it turns out, nobody actually moved the goal posts.  It was simply revealed by York1 and myself that you had no idea where they were located in the first place, but were calling plays with great vigor like you did.

Lastspikemike

I make no apologies

And there's the problem....you should.

Lastspikemike

I have soldered loose rail joiners to improve the connection. Waste of time imho

Well, at least you're humble enough in this sentence to clearly delineate that its your opinion.    That's a start.

[York1]

Lastspikemike

To recap, then, the answer is no, don't solder the rail joiners just to facilitate bending flex track into a nice smooth curve.

?

That is not the answer.

Evidently we weren't just talking past each other.

The answer, for me, when using N Scale Atlas flex track, is to solder the joiners and the track.  That facilitates bending flex track into a nice smooth curve.

This is amazing.

[Overmod]

The actual 'non-dissertation' answer to Rich is that his answer needs to be one sentence longer. You solder the ends and then bend the curve outward from the join to fit the ends, rather than naively starting at one fixed end, working around, and having to cut out and replace ties, fudge gauge at joints, etc.

One sentence longer: prebend the  half inch at each side of the joint to accurate 'final' radius with a jig or guide before hoining and soldering.

Both these methods work quite as well without soldering, if you absolutely positively can't solder, so no further need for the nontechnical to dispute that point more... .  Just that it's easier to solder and be done.

The procedure of posting pictures on an Internet site to get an URL, then inserting that URL in a post has been covered e both here and in other forums.  Do NOT expect Kalmbach to introduce embedded images and all the problems associated with that into their fancy BBS-based forum... now or in the promised stage 3.

I sympathize ... well, not really, but in principle ... with the lazy or non-tech-savvy who can't or won't follow simple directions.  But there comes a time when even great egoists have to accept they can't stamp or hold their breath until Kalmbach gives them what they want when it's needlessly difficult or costly for Kalmbach's IT to do so...

Just don't try saying there's an objective issue when it's just lazetail preference...

[trainnut1250]

cuyama

 

BigDaddy

If he really believes what he writes, we aren't going to change his mind.

 

 

I'm not worried about that, just that there are newcomers and folks with legitimate questions who may be confused or misled in the broadsides of verbosity.

 

+1

Byron,

I tend to agree with you, but some people are here to discuss things .... and discuss they will.....Even if the info is correct, there can be long winded responses to simple questions (I've been guilty of that many times).

When the long winded advice is questionable or plain wrong, then the thread becomes almost useless as other posters try to make sure that the correct info is presented and can be drawn into an argument. And of course, everyone on the web is an expert.......And so it goes.....

Guy

BTW: Love the diagram in the earlier post

[richhotrain]

FlattenedQuarter

Has anybody tried soldering 2 pieces of flex track together before forming curve? 

Question: Has anybody tried soldering 2 pieces of flex track together before forming curve? 

[Overmod]

Take this all with a grain of salt if you want; it's not meant either as  besserwisserism or 'chest-beating'.

Rails in modeling usually have to be treated as in the prototype to behave 'like the prototype'.  I experimented with varieties of 'stampcrete'-like outdoor roadbed construction in HO, and here are some of my observations:

Nickel silver rail should not be butt-soldered.  It will work for smooth bending on installation (it's more appropriate to consider this a 'brazed' butt joint, with the materials and temperatures that implies) but it will likely stand little mechanical manipulation, and filing the excess is tedious for the value gained.  The correct method of butt-joining rail is to dress the rail ends carefully, use  gas blanket and jig that can lightly preload force between the ends, and use resistance welding to make a homogeneous joint.  Spot-welding also "works" but it messes up the joint more.

In the real world any non-welded rail joint is always reinforced, by carefully aligned plates on either side that usually have lockwasher or Belleville tension on their bolts.  "Scale" re-creation of this with tiny holes in the rail, little fishplates, etc. is possible, but would be extremely tedious even if the necessary superfinish and fabricating precision could be assured.  Instead we use a one-piece formed clip that aligns the rail bases and holds the web firmly with spring tension over a distance comparable to that which fishplates would provide.  This of course is the traditional 'joiner'.  

One issue with this is that the leverage between relatively stiff rail ends occurs at a shallow angle with increasing lever arm out to the 'mouths' so that bending deforms the spring tension where it is least needed for smooth bending -- you will tend to see kinks if the rail itself is not formed to the correct curve before insertion (yes, to be consistent you would lightly form the joiner to match this).

Were you to do this before forming the rest of the curve in the rail, including when the rail is in some 'flex track' tie strip arrangement, the situation with 'strength' is as lastspikemike intimates it: you do not have to stress the thin spring metal of the joiner, so there is no more issue with joint integrity than in a straight joint, and no concern if joints are staggered if they are both pre-bent in assembly even if the curve as a whole is then bent using a gage to final alignment with the joinered 'location' slipping relative to the ties.

The added strength and integrity from soldering joiners while the ends are held straight is as the old heads observe; it makes kinking at the joint impossible.  However, it also results, unless great care and force is then used, in a rigid short length of rail that is more difficult to bend than the 'rest' -- so there will be a kind of reverse kink even if the curve is laid with something like a Ribbonrail gage to continuous curvature.  This is of course relatively slight; it can in fact be filed or ground to 'true' on one of the two rails, and any transient kinking at the outer ends eased in the other the same way.  I suspect most anyone not working to P:87 standards would never notice this (although they might well notice kinks from overbending an unsoldered-joiner joint!)

That you want the joints in a curve to remain solidly aligned over time is almost a truism.  Even lightly soldering joiners, either before or after the track is lined and surfaced, assures this better than relying on the mechanical properties of what is basically a machine-bent skelp formed from a stamped strip that is crudely fatigue-bent or cut apart...  Personally, I think there are far more reasons to 'solder' than not to, particularly if you so do lightly enough to allow relatively easy desoldering if for some reason you want to break the joint.

Continuity issues for those who solder feeders to joiners is something lastspikemike glosses over, although that may be because he doesn't practice that method.  There, using a higher-temperature solder and technique between feeder and joiner (or indeed using resistance welding, as is easily possible in large jigged quantity as it can be done away from the layout in ideal conditions) and then using whatever gives adequate electrical conductivity into the nickel-silver to the point of 'moving' contact is what I'd recommend.  I certainly wouldn't trust just the use of dielectric grease between spring joiner and rail to assure enough contact area for what may be relatively high peak current transmission, or high digital frequencies without dropout...

[Doughless]

mikeGTW

Douglas  that percentage is probably higher   I've been doing this for close to 50 yrs and never saw anyone try to solder rail end to end without a joiner

I would try it but can't get in the basement right now   since me and my moterbike got into an arguement with a car  we lost  

I don't bother reading his posts anymore  since he stated fact about atlas #6 snap switches    have yet to find any   and I have over 150 #6 

One other thing he states "we" did this on our layout  like it's a club  then "he" did this on his    So kind of like   "show me the money"

 

Show me some pictures  never posted a single one 

 

I was thinking 100%, but you know, there's always that one person somewhere.

I think it would nearly impossible to solder two rails together.  

Part of the point of a joiner is to align the profiles of the two pieces of track, laterally. 

How would you get perfect and smooth lateral alignment without a joiner, fancy up a jig of some sort?

[mikeGTW]

Douglas  that percentage is probably higher   I've been doing this for close to 50 yrs and never saw anyone try to solder rail end to end without a joiner

I would try it but can't get in the basement right now   since me and my moterbike got into an arguement with a car  we lost  

I don't bother reading his posts anymore  since he stated fact about atlas #6 snap switches    have yet to find any   and I have over 150 #6 

One other thing he states "we" did this on our layout  like it's a club  then "he" did this on his    So kind of like   "show me the money"

 

Show me some pictures  never posted a single one 

[cuyama]

BigDaddy

If he really believes what he writes, we aren't going to change his mind.

I'm not worried about that, just that there are newcomers and folks with legitimate questions who may be confused or misled in the broadsides of verbosity.

[Doughless]

York1

 

 

Doughless

I don't think the OP's premise was that he was thinking of soldering track together without using joiners, although some probably do that. Most of the responses assumed he was asking if you solder the joiners on first before bending and installing the track, not whether or not to use joiners at all.

 

 

 

I think you've hit the nail on the head.  It's possible a poster assumed that when someone says they are soldering track, they are doing that instead of rail joiners.

I believe the rest of us are talking about using joiners, and then soldering the track and joiners both together.

I have never tried soldering track together without joiners.  If that were the case, then that would change the entire discussion.

 

Yep.  Assuming the goal posts haven't been moved to win a straw man argument, it appears to be an argument over whether soldering two pieces of track together, sans joiners, is as strong as using joiners.

Problem is, only one person is having that argument. 

Everybody else is talking about using rail joiners AND solder.  Experience says that 95% of us use joiners, so when somebody asks questions about soldering track, we assume its inclusive of joiners.

Less experienced folks might take the phrase "soldering track together" more literally.

[selector]

Mike, everyone reading along in this thread understands that one doesn’t attempt to abut two rail ends, solder them, and then expect to have a robust and functional joint that will withstand the attempts to then fashion a curve that incorporates the soldered joint. We all assumed that, when one asks about “soldered joints”, one means a metal joiner that has solder applied to it. You were apparently the only one arguing that a solely soldered joint won’t suffice having assumed that we all routinely solder joints minus a metal joiner in place. I can assure you that nobody with any experience in the hobby does that. I  hope you can take it on good faith that we have taken to soldering our joints here and there on our track systems because of the salutary improvements such soldered joints afford those of us who adopt that practice. None of us enjoys doing unnecessary work, but we have adopted a technique of fortifying metal joiners because it works!

[floridaflyer]

Reading this thread it appears to me that we have one poster that is the seat of all wisdom and everyone else is uninformed, or worse yet, old and uninformed. 

[York1]

Lastspikemike

Solder is much less rigid than rail joiners.

 

I think you and I are talking about two different things.

When I said soldered joints, I meant that a rail joiner is soldered in place to the rails, using both a rail joiner and solder.

I did not mean to imply that I am soldering the rails together without a rail joiner -- I can't imagine that would work.

Sorry for the confusion.

[selector]

BATMAN

 

 

selector

 

 

paucity 

 

shrift

 

 

 

 

 

 To, too, two more words I had to look up. 

 

 

Sorry, Brent. On the upside, at least sumbuddy is willing to learn in this thread.  

[BATMAN]

doctorwayne

 

 

BATMAN

 selector

 paucity 

 shrift

 

 

 To, too, two more words I had to look up. 

 

 

 

Look on the bright side of it, Brent...at least you learned from the lesson...some don't.

Wayne

 

Ya, and at least I looked them up, some wouldn't.

[doctorwayne]

BATMAN

 selector

 paucity 

 shrift

 

 

 To, too, two more words I had to look up. 

 

Look on the bright side of it, Brent...at least you learned from the lesson...some don't.

Wayne