Ok I know that the bigger the turnout the better it looks and runs. For the most part. Also the
bigger equipment right? So what is the need for a #8 ? Wont #6 handle it all and have that proto
look about it?
Next, what should I go with as far as insulated frogs or non? going to be dc at first then a dcc
when funds allow. 9 X 12 shelf type. All to be used with ground throws.
Thanks.......J.W.
I am going with Walthers/Shinohara turnouts (DCC friendly). All my mainline crossovers will be #8s, anything leading into the the yards off the main will be #6s, and within the yards will be #5s. I have found that this will work best for me. I am also using 7.5 curved turnouts where needed.
I would start out with insulated frogs to save headaches in the future.
Edti: I should add that my major consideration for using the combination of turnouts that I am is because I will be operating passenger equipment. I considered using #6s for crossovers, but figured out really quick that they are a little "short" for a mainline crossover with scale length passenger cars. To me #4s seemed too small for anything, even a small industrial spur off the main. I wanted to go with #5s on my industrial branch, but the smallest I could get from Micro Engineering for code 70 is a #6. Basically what I think it boils down to is what kind of space you have to work with. I tried using #7 curved turnouts, but they proved to be too tight. I was lucky enough to be able to squeeze a 7.5 in there. Those things have a huge footprint.
You have five distinct issues here.
The principles that apply to 1 on the big planet can be carried across to a layout if you have the space. If you lack space you have to choose compromises. The best way to make compromises work is to figure out a way in which they can all be compatible with each other.
Are you familiar with the parts of a turnout? The bit where one rail crosses the other (that can be insulated or live) is the "frog" or "common crossing". The pointed bit of this where two rails come together is the "nose" of the common crossing.
The number of a turnout/switch is worked out by finding the location at which the diverging rails are one foot apart and then finding out how many feet this location is from the tip of the nose on the straight track (on a Y a theoretical straight line is taken down the centre of the frog... on an equal sided Y this will be 1' away from each curved rail at the same point... on the other hand (because both rails are diverging) the 1' between rails location will be met twice as fast - so the number will be 1/2 that of a eft or right hand switch with the same curve on one side only).
The relevant thing is that low number switches have sharper curves and high number switches have shallower curves.
In the real world less strain is put on the equipment and trains can move more rapidly over shallow curves than over sharp ones... same as you when you're driving your car really. So the RR use the largest curve(s) they can fit in subject to the cost/availability of land and the speeds they want the trains to do.
So... YES a #6 will do the same thing as a #8.... BUT a #4 does the same thing as a #12.... provided that the speed of the equipment is correct.
Ultimately if the RR can't find/afford the space to provide large curves... which take more space... the trains have to slow down. The other way round trains can take switches at high speeds where space allows them to be very long with very shallow curves.
In the real thing some switches have moving common crossing/frog elements that close the gap that occurs in a regular turnout common crossing/frog. This makes for smoother and safer running. There is no normal need to model it.
So we get into the question of compromise on the layout and appearances.
In the compromise situation of a layout you will probably have restrictions on the largest radius curves that you can use. If you are restricted to a very tight curve a long switch will only show up against this and either one or both will look wrong. Less often this works the other way... if you can fit in long curves you generally want long switches... at least in tracks where things will be moving at speed... BUT this applies to speed across the curved route of the turnout more than in the straight route.
As an example... You have long curves in double or triple track and crossovers that trains only use to go across the lines to get into a small yard... You won't want anything crossing over at speed because it's going into a small space. Then again, if the crossovers are used for trains to change track at speed you will want them as long and shallow as possible to allow the higher speed - which may still not be full line speed.
there are two things to think of...
This kind of leads on to the question of insulated or live frogs.
The longer the crossing the longer the gap will be so that from an electrical feed point of view there is more space to have no feed in an insulated frog. Against this there is potentially more space to avoid the problems of false feeds/shorts if you are using metal wheelsets.
Someone else can probably advise you better on this but the issue with live frogs and metal wheels seems to be greater with DCC where the rails are permenantly live. As far as I can tell the way round this is to get DCC friendly switches from the start... then they will be good for DC or DCC.
With short curves/sharp turnouts the gap is smaller so there is less insulated/dead rail area....BUT the live bits are closer together.
After all that... the other thing that goes with this is simply the issue of what locos you are running at what speeds... with what electrical pickup on the locos.
A Big Boy with collection on all loco and tender wheels is going to be able to crawl across the longest dead section of an insulfrog switch. A twin axle roadrailer (sorry, Hirail) is not going to like crawling over any insulated switch though.
Back at what swicthes where... the Big Boy is going to look best out on the prairie or on mountain mainline with big curves and long switches - and will run more freely - (BUT it can negotiate some reduced curves in a loco facility... just not too many and fewer reversed curves)... a rorailer or car pusher (can't recall their name) is going to look happy in an industrial situation or small yard (big yards push cars with locos) and with very tight switch curves... right down to #4... all you have to do is sort out the power feed/pickup... definitiely go for live frogs and, if you plan to go DCC get/fit DCC friendly switches from the start.
Sorry I didn't segregate out the bits of the answer too well.
Last bit... ground throws... doesn't matter. Good quality switches work well with either manual ground throws or power.... on the model it is difficult to get a manual throw that you operate that is anywhere near small enough and sufficiently robust. On answer to this is to fit decorative throws at the trackside and do your manual control by a linkage under the baseboard. This can even turn switch indicators through the action of the switch blades if you want. Personally i prefer to install power/switch motors and work all swicthes from a CTC (control) board.
Hope that this helps.
You will move on to DCC, so go DCC-friendly right away. If you ever build your own turnouts, say with the Fast Tracks system as I have, you will find that their gapped frogs are DCC friendly and all other rails get power via the copper cladding on the PCB ties. They work so well it isn't funny.
Yes, a #6 within 90% of either side of the spec for NMRA will suffice for nearly all applications wherever you desire them, including the main. However, as correctly stated at least twice above, your determined room and track plan will impose limits on what you can use from the commercial market.
Personally, I wanted #6 in my yard for looks and for ease of movement with my 2-10-4, and I kept the main and sidings with #8's. It is really cool when the trains diverge on the #8's at or near eye-level because they change direction so little that you can't tell at slower speeds and wonder if you have forgotten to throw the turnout.
Dave,
Your last paragraph touches on a subject that I am struggling with at the moment. I was going to go with all ground throws, but I purchased a Micro Engineering turnout, and it came with a really nice dummy ground throw in the super detail package and that prompted me to have second thoughts. Then I thought about whether or not to have turnout machines for all my mainline crossovers or not, as well as the junction where the Santa Fe becomes joint track with the Southern Pacific.
You mentioned throwing turnouts manually from under the table. How is this done (kind of linkage, etc)? Sorry if I am hijacking the thread. Thanks for the responses.
Smitty
I have to go to work soon so just a quick answer.
Do you mean "How do you get from below the board to above"? "How do you drive from the edge of the board to the switch"? or both?
I can't do pics here but I could e mail you attachments of sketches... you might be kind and post them here for others to use.
It might be better to start a new thread.
I'm pretty busy right now. If I don't come up with anything soon e mail me a reminder please.
You might get a result from doing a search on "wire in tube control". that's one of the ways of doing it.
I can answer both questions with several alternatives.
Dave-the-Train wrote: SmittyI have to go to work soon so just a quick answer.Do you mean "How do you get from below the board to above"? "How do you drive from the edge of the board to the switch"? or both?I can't do pics here but I could e mail you attachments of sketches... you might be kind and post them here for others to use.It might be better to start a new thread.I'm pretty busy right now. If I don't come up with anything soon e mail me a reminder please.You might get a result from doing a search on "wire in tube control". that's one of the ways of doing it.I can answer both questions with several alternatives.
Anything you can post in regards to this would be great. I think it will be a benefit to all involved.
wjstix wrote:BTW on the prototype a no.6 or no.8 would be very sharp - like for streetcar lines or limited space industrial trackage. Real turnouts are usually more like no. 20's.
Actually, #8s were commonly used in yards and in industrial trackage. I believe #8 yard ladders were the most common. However, due to longer modern equipment, modern railroads like to build sidings and yards with higher numbered frogs somewhere in the #12 range. #20s are typically only used on the main for passing sidings and crossovers.
Dave wrote:
You have five distinct issues here.sizes of turnouts available space for a layout prototypical look DC or DCC groundthrows or powered switches
I would agree with this - except for #1 being SPACE. #2 DC/DCC.
ChessieFan13:
SIMPLE QUESTIONS GET SIMPLE ANSWERS: 1. SPACE limits layout size. ('Selective Compression'). as does Cost & acquiring skills.
90 % of equipment sold today operates on #4 and #6 turnouts. #4s for yards; #6 for mainlines. WHY? Because a simple 4X6 sheet of plywood compromises realism. Can you buy/build other sizes? Sure!! Will you? - is a bigger question.
2. DCC requires insulated frogs (Atlas, Kato, Walthers). DC requires powered frogs. (Shinohara, BK). Either can be converted to the other. (Cutting rail / Insulating joiners).
"PROTOTYPICAL LOOK" CO$T$ more. (code 70, code 83) (Cheap: code 100).
'Hand Throws' vs Automatic: Your choice.
Don Gibson wrote: Dave wrote: You have five distinct issues here.sizes of turnouts available space for a layout prototypical look DC or DCC groundthrows or powered switches I would agree with this - except for #1 being SPACE. #2 DC/DCC.ChessieFan13: SIMPLE QUESTIONS GET SIMPLE ANSWERS: 1. SPACE limits layout size. ('Selective Compression'). as does Cost & acquiring skills.90 % of equipment sold today operates on #4 and #6 turnouts. #4s for yards; #6 for mainlines. WHY? Because a simple 4X6 sheet of plywood compromises realism. Can you buy/build other sizes? Sure!! Will you? - is a bigger question.2. DCC requires insulated frogs (Atlas, Kato, Walthers). DC requires powered frogs. (Shinohara, BK). Either can be converted to the other. (Cutting rail / Insulating joiners)."PROTOTYPICAL LOOK" CO$T$ more. (code 70, code 83) (Cheap: code 100).'Hand Throws' vs Automatic: Your choice.
I wasn't trying to give an order of i,portance: just seperating the issues.
absolutely do not agree with yor statement that I've highlighted and crossed out. It would be a complete waste of time and money and a lot less easy than building your own track from plain rail and ties.
You also haven't mentioned DCC friendly switches which are the best for both jobs if you can afford them.
Okay... manual operation of switches... i.e. shifting the blades from "normal" to "reverse" position.
"Normal" is the position the points lay in when the (armstrong) lever is back in the frame and the route is set for ordinary/normal traffic.
"Reverse"/"reversed" is the position the points lay in when the (armstrong) lever is pulled out in the frame and the rout is set for the diverging direction from the ordinary/normal traffic.
N.B. The ordinary/normal route can be the curved track while the diverging route can be the straight track. In a Y both will be curved routes. In a three way switch there will be two normal positions and two reversed positions - each set of blades is dealt with seperately. In UK practice we attach cast metal numbers to the ties and put them on the side of the switch that the blades lay closed when the switch is set to the normal route. (Even if you don't put numbers on the track you might find it useful to do something like this on your track diagram - whether you are using manual or power switches.
We actually need to do two things:-
I have to say that I've always been spoilt so far because Peco swiches have an over-centre device bult in which holds the switch in one position or the other. The only thing that I can really say beyond this is that the alternate ways to go are either vey good adjustment in your mechanism or an omega loop in spring wire in as -near-to the last leg of the drive as possible. The omega loop allows the mechanism to over-drive a bit while providing spring tension/compression (?) that holds the blades irmly in place.
I'll do another post for the next bit.
I'll go with the getting from below the board to above the board with the drive next.
You have a straight chice:-
I would tend to decide on one and stick with it.
Rocker action.
This involves a frame with a pivot and a lever.
Frame:-
This wants to be something like a matchbox shell (I hope your matchboxes are the same as ours!)... in other words a rectangular tube. (The drawer of the box is set aside for other use). Except this tube wants to be brass (for preferance) with walls that are either thick enough to act as bearings or solid enough to support small bearings soldered onto them.
There is a bot of a need to work out distances, amount of throw of the lever (top and bottom - which may be the same or different)... and from this... where the pivot needs to be in the slot. If nothing else this can be worked out by mocking up prototypes in balsa wood.
Right, you have a tube. lay it down flat (horizontal in all directions) on your bench, mark the position of the pivot hole and drill straight down - as in VERTICAL - through both sides. Whether you use a pilot hole is up to you. The pin that will act as the pivot of the lever goes through both these holes.
There are all sorts of detail variations here but this is the basic.
Lever.
The lever is best if it is a pretty tight fit in the box sideways - to minimise slop/waggle/lost motion/stresses/wasted energy/access for dirt. Its length needs working out to suit your board thickness and other things that you are getting up to.
The good news is that unless you enjoy inflicting mental pain on yourself you only really need one design and two just allows for the odd situation... three is getting suspicious. Four and you've become a geek.
Pivot.
All that really needs to be said is that it is best (but not essential0 that the bit that bears the lever is best to be smooth (i.e. not the threaded part of a screw or bolt) and you don't want the thing to be free to drop out. So a set bolt is good if you can locate the unthreaded part of the shank in the slot in the rectangular box where the lever sits in it.
(this is so much easier with a sketch)!
Anyway...
If you can't get a rectangular tube you could solder a flat chanel onto flat stock to get the same effect.
OR... you could solder the channelupright on an L section to provide a flange on one side.
A flange on one side or all round is useful if you want to give yourself more control on how the thing is located in the baseboard.
A straight tube can be glued into a press-fit hole in the board. With a flange the mechanism can be located by small screws driven into the baseboard.
[Um - you'll have to forgive me, I'm used to using wood composite boards like ply and not foam plastic... you'd have to work out variations for this... one part being to allow for the greater depth of material... it might be easer to go with rotary action where dealing with getting up through thick foam].
I would always put the flange under the board to keep it out of the way of scenic work and allow later adjustment/maintenance.
Apart from the need to work out how much throw you want on the lever mechanism that's it. for the rocker system.
Rotary Action
All this involves is a hard wire passing through a close fitting tube... which passes up through the baseboard material with as tight a fit as possible. The length of the tube and wire are only limited by the ability of both to not flex.
In the sort of hard/wood baseboard situation that I am used to the tube can be given a rim at the bottom end. (this makes it similar to a rim-fre cartridge except that the flange is relatively much bigger and the tube as small as possible to fit round the wire).
The clever/awkward bit is that at both top and bottom of the tube the wire that transmits the movement need a right angle bend. This can be followed at one end or both by another right angle bend upwards or downward - but this gets difficult.
The first bend at each end can be in any direction so long as it makes a rght angle to the wire that will be sitting vertically in the tube as it passes up through the baseboard (Okay, if you're really clever you could do all sorts of angles... but why make life even more complicated... if you want clever agles go for "wire in tube" flexible drib=ve which will be in the later post about bowden cables - if I recall to include it...).
The top and bottom bends are more simply kept:-
The length of the bent bit at each end will act as a crank and how far from the vertical you connect to it (top and bottom) will control the amount of throw you put into and tke out of the rotation action of the vertical... er... in other words... you will push/pull one horizontal which will turn the vertical and push/pull the horizontla above.
I'm going to go and get some zzzs
You did say that "anything would be useful"???