Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

benchwork/grade

2689 views
20 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Christchurch New Zealand
  • 1,525 posts
benchwork/grade
Posted by NZRMac on Thursday, April 6, 2006 2:31 PM
My top level will need a grade down to the bottom level. the benchwork will be the same construction as the bottom level only 12" deep.


Do I just screw it on the wall at the correct grade, or down in steps like this.


Thanks, Ken.
  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: St Paul, MN
  • 6,218 posts
Posted by Big_Boy_4005 on Thursday, April 6, 2006 3:18 PM
I think you're better off using the riser method. You already have the supporting cross members in place. Beside, if you ever need to move it, it won't have more connections to the wall.
  • Member since
    July 2003
  • From: Indy
  • 997 posts
Posted by mononguy63 on Thursday, April 6, 2006 3:23 PM
Seems to me that if depth isn't an issue, then the simplest thing would be to build as much benchwork as possible at a single elevation and use risers to make your grade.

Then again, judging by the quality of your work so far, making multiple stepped levels as you've shown wouldn't present much challenge for you. That option would give more under-layout space, shorter risers, and perhaps more flexibility with the fascia.

"I am lapidary but not eristic when I use big words." - William F. Buckley

I haven't been sleeping. I'm afraid I'll dream I'm in a coma and then wake up unconscious.  -Stephen Wright

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • 1,168 posts
Posted by dgwinup on Thursday, April 6, 2006 3:59 PM
Will the upper layer have angled supports underneath it? That might interfere with your lower level and preclude you from "stepping" the upper level.

How far above the lower level do you want the upper level to be? That height and the length of your run will determine your grade.

What grade do you want to maintain?

Not knowing the answers to the above questions leaves me only guessing at what might work for you. Were I in your situation, I would prefer shallower grades at the expense of length of run. I would use a combination of graded risers AND stepped benchwork. This might give an added benefit of having mini-dioramas on each step as the grade ascends.

Sounds like an interesting concept.

Darrell, quiet...for now
Darrell, quiet...for now
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 6, 2006 6:07 PM
I would keep the benchwork level and use risers. The higher benchwork portion is effectively a "riser" in the corner where the layout transitions down. You will definitely require risers on the lower portion (if you decide to leave it) to decrease the slope as the track departs from the upper level benchwork.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 6, 2006 9:55 PM
Ken,

I would definitely go for the risers, but not in steps as you show in the drawing. Just a long ramp supported by risers.

From the look of your photo "just screw it on the wall" is not an option. The "wall' is a window, or am I missing something?

For my money a long ramp supported by risers and built into the scenery as a rock ledge or similar. However, I would like to see the plan to see how it fits from a bird's eye view and how long you have the run and consequently how steep the grade would be.

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Christchurch New Zealand
  • 1,525 posts
Posted by NZRMac on Thursday, April 6, 2006 10:57 PM
I've just remeasured the benchwork heights, it comes down from 70" at the coal mine around three walls (the windows will be filled over) down to the gate I've built which is 64". The Grade is only 0.8%
Seems like you guys like the riser method and stepped benchwork, it makes for nice level fascia's too.

The gap between the top of the bottom fascia and the bottom of the top fascia (try saying that fast!!) is 17" at the gate which is the smallest gap. I'm planning either shelf brackets or angled braces on top of the benchwork hidden in the scenery, or a combination of both.

Thanks, Ken.
  • Member since
    November 2004
  • From: Chateau-Richer, QC (CANADA)
  • 833 posts
Posted by chateauricher on Friday, April 7, 2006 3:15 AM
It all depends on what you plan to include along the grade.

If you plan to place structures or level track along side your grade, then go with the stepped benchwork using risers to form the grade. This will give you level areas for the structures and track, while allowing you to incorporate a grade.

If you plan to place nothing else there (just the track down to your lower deck level), then it might be simpler to install the benchwork at the 0.8% grade and forget using risers. This method eliminates the need to do tedious calculations to determine the heights of each riser. Each riser will have only a slight difference from the next; and a mistake in cutting or installing can make your grade uneven. The facia can be installed horizontally, disguising the fact that the bechwork is actually at a slight angle.


Timothy The gods must love stupid people; they sure made a lot. The only insanity I suffer from is yours. Some people are so stupid, only surgery can get an idea in their heads.
IslandView Railroads On our trains, the service is surpassed only by the view !
  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Christchurch New Zealand
  • 1,525 posts
Posted by NZRMac on Friday, April 7, 2006 5:43 AM
The grade is 1" rise in 10' is that right? So I could just build the bench work and screw it to the wall and put some sidings/industries up there too. 0.8% isn't going to make cars roll on there own? Or I could have some level areas and increase the grade between those areas. Oh decisions!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ken.
  • Member since
    November 2004
  • From: Chateau-Richer, QC (CANADA)
  • 833 posts
Posted by chateauricher on Friday, April 7, 2006 6:02 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by NZRMac
The grade is 1" rise in 10' is that right?

1" in 120" (10ft) is 0.833%

QUOTE: So I could just build the bench work and screw it to the wall and put some sidings/industries up there too. 0.8% isn't going to make cars roll on there own? Or I could have some level areas and increase the grade between those areas. Oh decisions!

Yes, you could easily double your grade to 2% (2.4" rise in 120") and allow yourself some sidings/industries. A 2% grade should be easy for most locomotives to climb.

As for whether your cars will roll on their own with a 0.8% grade... probably. But how well they will roll will depend on how freely their wheels turn; their weight; the cleanliness of the track/wheels; etc.

I agree. Sometimes we have way too many choices. [sigh]


Timothy The gods must love stupid people; they sure made a lot. The only insanity I suffer from is yours. Some people are so stupid, only surgery can get an idea in their heads.
IslandView Railroads On our trains, the service is surpassed only by the view !
  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Christchurch New Zealand
  • 1,525 posts
Posted by NZRMac on Friday, April 7, 2006 1:56 PM
Thankyou Timothy, Everybody. I think I'll go with the level areas and increase the grade too.

Ken.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, April 7, 2006 3:37 PM
1% is 1" in 100". or about 8 ft (96")
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, April 7, 2006 10:48 PM
If you want to bend your mind on gradients and gradients for various curve radius have a look at the link http://www.angelfire.com/clone/rail/GRADE81.html

The author notes that he would like comment on whether his calculations work in practice, so have a look.
  • Member since
    July 2004
  • From: Weymouth, Ma.
  • 5,199 posts
Posted by bogp40 on Saturday, April 8, 2006 7:54 AM
For me it seems that the ramp to the second level should be designed into your first problem of how to set/ anchor the second level across the windows. Is there any issue as to the exterior appearance of blocking the windows? If a shelf runs across w/o any backdrop the glare and asthetics of the layout will be affected.
As far as the ramp, I would go with the riser and 3/4" ply as mentioned by many already. Just need to be careful of the grade. Don't know if you have any room to incorporate a helix.
Bob K.

Modeling B&O- Chessie  Bob K.  www.ssmrc.org

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Christchurch New Zealand
  • 1,525 posts
Posted by NZRMac on Saturday, April 8, 2006 2:10 PM
Bob, I have posted the track plan etc(somewhere in these pages!!) the windows are painted over now (look great from the outside) The windows will be framed over and the layout/backdrop attached to that.
I have a Helix in the next room that returns the trains to the top level and coal mine for loads out empties in operation. A train comes out of the mine down two and a half levels and up the helix again

Ken.
  • Member since
    July 2004
  • From: Weymouth, Ma.
  • 5,199 posts
Posted by bogp40 on Sunday, April 9, 2006 9:37 PM
Ken,
Will have to check out your track plan, sounds very interesting and great of operational purposes.
Bob K.

Modeling B&O- Chessie  Bob K.  www.ssmrc.org

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Christchurch New Zealand
  • 1,525 posts
Posted by NZRMac on Sunday, April 9, 2006 11:53 PM
Top
http://www.railimages.com/albums/kenmackay/afe.jpg

Middle
http://www.railimages.com/albums/kenmackay/aff.jpg

Bottom
http://www.railimages.com/albums/kenmackay/afg.jpg

It's changed a bit from these but haven't updated railimages yet.

Ken.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, April 10, 2006 1:30 AM
Mate! That is what I call a layout. Colour me green.

I found your other thread about "It has begun, the Midland line". I have not seen anywhere whether it is HO or Sn3.5 or HOn3.5. I assume since it runs through Christchurch station the trains are NZ prototype. Just curious because I am wondering what track you intend to use.

I will also be building a layout soon, and have not settled on the brand of Code 83 HO track. However, I would not be game to show my modest plans after looking at yours. Do not have so much real estate to work with for one thing. Also could not match your construction skills. [sigh] {Could not find a jealous smilie}

PS. What is bar stool racing? Can't see how you find time for much else with that beauty you are building there.

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Christchurch New Zealand
  • 1,525 posts
Posted by NZRMac on Monday, April 10, 2006 3:32 AM
Wow that's a goof!! It's HO running on code 100 budget brand of flex and peco turnouts.

American loco's, Norfolk & Western ( the coal mine is north west from here ) and Sourthern Pacific ( New Zealand is in the south pacific )

A freelanced RR based on my local prototype using US rolling stock!! Cool aye!!

Ken.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, April 10, 2006 6:18 AM
Sounds good Ken. The North American scene is a good one to model.

It's up to you what to spend your money on. Something that rings a bit of a warning bell is the "budget brand of flex". All that good (excellent) layout work and then you take a risk on "budget track". Your choice though, I should not interfere.

For what it's worth I reckon the track makes or breaks the appearance of the layout. But then your "budget" track might look just as good as the expensive stuff once you lay it and ballast it. You need a few yards of track. Maybe the Peco dealer would give you a bulk discount? You say you are using his turnouts.

I see from your name that your ancestors came from a place to the north of England, and people from those parts have a reputation for being thrifty.

Sorry to pull your leg.




  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Christchurch New Zealand
  • 1,525 posts
Posted by NZRMac on Monday, April 10, 2006 2:03 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by bush9245

I see from your name that your ancestors came from a place to the north of England, and people from those parts have a reputation for being thrifty.

Sorry to pull your leg.



Ah, Yes that's me [:D]

The track is actually very good quality just a cheaper brand[:D]


Ken.

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!