Bookshelf Benchwork

[Anonymous]

Hello,

My son and I are building our first model railroad project. It's going to be a N-scale bookshelf layout of an industrial switching facility. It'll be 3'x1'. I plan on using 1/2" plywood base, 1/2" extruded foam "scenic layer" and cork roadbed. What I'm wondering about is how to mount the works. I've been thinking about using 1"x3" pine board as a frame all around so that it sits well above table top level and gives plenty of room for wiring, switch mechanisms, electrical components etc.

Trying to look forward, if this all goes well, I'd like to make another module and attach the two together so the pine frame then becomes more than just a pretty border. I can't decide whether the pine should totally enclose the foam or whether the foam should protrude some distance above the border. Oh, there will be one, possibly two mainlines that run lengthwise. Thanks.

Rob

[pcarrell]

Sounds like a good plan. I'd have the foam protruding so that you can cut and bevel the edges for scenic purposes.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by pcarrell

Sounds like a good plan. I'd have the foam protruding so that you can cut and bevel the edges for scenic purposes.

Thanks. Never thought of the bevel. I guess what I should be looking at is how people do modular construction (N-Trax or something like that) since they've already planned for interconnections. Obviously the track has to go right to the edge otherwise the connections can't be made, but unsupported foam is not very strong and some kind of overhang would be necessary.

I was flipping through Track Planning 2005 and was regarding the N-scale bookshelf unit there (my original inspiration). I figured that Phase Two could be another 3' x 1' section and I could hinge the two (space is a premium). In this case then, the end boards would have to come level with the foam board. Right?

[pcarrell]

Looking at how N Track does their modules would indeed be a good idea. The foam does need to be flush with the framework edges. The beveling and contouring would be done only on the front edges. The tracks don't go all the way to the edges but end a couple of inches back from them. When the modules are joined together a short section of track, often a rerailer section, is inserted between the modules to connect the track. Electrical connections are standardized plug type deals.

An alternative to hinges, which isn't a bad idea at all, is to build a framework that the modules fit into that allows them to be stackable. I saw one setup like this where the framework was then covered with 1/4 inch luan to form a carry box. It allowed three modules to fit in a protective box that fit neatly into the back of his minivan.

[nucat78]

Have a look at this:

http://bcn.boulder.co.us/recreation/bmrc/bmrcnmod.html

They have some interesting ideas.

[nfmisso]

Also take a look at:

http://www.nmra.org/standards/consist.html#module

[cuyama]

QUOTE: Originally posted by RobandFred
I was flipping through Track Planning 2005 and was regarding the N-scale bookshelf unit there (my original inspiration). I figured that Phase Two could be another 3' x 1' section and I could hinge the two (space is a premium). In this case then, the end boards would have to come level with the foam board. Right?

I don't know if you're referring to my article on the Alameda Belt Line in MRP 2005, but one thing to note if you plan to flip one section over the other (as I suggested in the article), the hinges should be mounted above the railhead -- just so that the rails don't bind when folding it over. This can be as simple as just putting the hinges on scrap pieces of plywood. Then they can be hidden with a removable structure.

This is illustrated and mentioned specifically in the article, but I know of at least one person who didn't heed that advice and put the hinges on the layout surface ... he eventually got it sorted out, but he was sure mad at me at first!

Regards,

Byron

[Anonymous]

QUOTE:
I don't know if you're referring to my article on the Alameda Belt Line in MRP 2005...

Byron, yes it is! Thanks for that. I did consider building it, but didn't feel a "connection" to Alameda. It was all very good and worthwhile, but I wanted to be able to use my rolling stock and locos to represent the local shortline (eastern Canada) should I ever get that deep into the hobby. The jigsaw industries, car float and other parts were inspirational and I may be using them down the road.

QUOTE: ...the hinges should be mounted above the railhead -- just so that the rails don't bind when folding it over.

To be honest, I hadn't looked that closely at the hinge position, but now that you mention it, if I hadn't scrutinised it more closely (and I hope I would have had I chose to build it) I may have messed up as well!

Again, great article as it pushed me off the fence and really got me thinking about getting into the hobby.

Rob

[cuyama]

QUOTE: Originally posted by RobandFred
Byron, yes it is! Thanks for that. I did consider building it, but didn't feel a "connection" to Alameda.

It was a neat little railroad. I'm working on my own proto-freelanced layout inspired by the Alameda Belt Line and other nearby scenes.
hendoweb.org/ohb

The web site is a bit sparse, but it might offer a couple of ideas for those considering industrial/terminal railroads.

QUOTE: Originally posted by RobandFred
Again, great article as it pushed me off the fence and really got me thinking about getting into the hobby.

Very glad to hear that, it's one of the goals when I publish an article -- even if the exact plan is not used in the end.

regards,

Byron