Freelance Mixed Gauge - Handbuilt Trackwork

[murphaph]

Ken, thanks for your explanation. It is certainly worth bearing in mind for certain sections of my layout and doubtless for others.

For my layout I will almost certainly be starting with soldering directly to copper clad, simply because the first part of the layout to receive track will be either the difficult to see eye level (but set back from the viewer tight to the wall) section or the hidden staging stuff which can look as rough as a badger's behind but actually needs to be the most reliable track of all as access later will not be the easiest. 

I anticipate a long testing phase before the scenic layer can be begun. All my stock will need converting and at least a couple of examples of each type of stock need to "be cleared" over the hidden areas before they are built over.

[KMCE]

7 hours ago, WRENNEIRE said:

read this twice and I still haven't a bleedin clue what you are talking about!

Might have a natter about it on Sunday at Bray?

Thanks Dave,

Not sure which bit (or all) is not clear, I have photos of different stages of the build if that will be of assistance.

Or if you prefer we can have a chat on Sunday. 

See you then.

 

Ken

[RichL]

11 hours ago, KMCE said:

One bit I do find tricky, (and there's not a lot of information out there) is switchblade stretchers and ensuring the switch rail sets firmly to the stock rail.  Any tips on this element would be most appreciated.

Ken.

 

 

Your track does look very nice! I did think about rivet construction, but almost arbitrarily went for copper clad construction instead - probably in the end because I had only ever tried this method before.

Tiebars are a perpetual problem, especially if you want something that looks realistic and is also reliable - almost a contradiction in terms! I have experimented with a few, but never reached a firm conclusion. The more solid and predictable the setup the better though, I think. Worst, for me at least, are the TOUs where wobbly wires extend from an under-baseboard slider to each rail individually. Some people swear by them, but I don't see how they can ever be made to hold the point blades really solidly to the stock rails.

I shall be experimenting with mine before I settle on anything.

[David Holman]

Ambis Engineering do some neat prototypical tie bars, though must confess have no idea how they work. In the past have simply used another copper clad sleeper as the tie bar and [mostly] hidden it with planking/boarding. Yes the switch rail solder joints can break occasionally, but are easy to repair.

 On Belmullet have followed what Gordon Gravett used on Pempoul, using 0.8mm dropper wires from the point blades, through holes in the baseboard to short pieces of brass tube soldered to a copper clad sleeper set on edge immediately under the baseboard. The brass tube is meant to reduce stress on the solder joint. A bit fiddly to set up, but seems ok thus far. Am using servos to move the tie bars, work from a Megapoints control panel

[RichL]

We could turn the tiebar discussion into a lengthy topic all of its own! Reliability is one issue, along with appearance and operation - and these all conflict with each other to some degree. A prototypical-looking, fully-functional tiebar tends towards being very weak.

Then there is the issue of what a prototypical tie bar actually looks like. This varied considerably over time and is a very neglected area amongst modellers. Only to be taken seriously if we really want to, of course - and only a handfull probably do. In 7mm scale realistic and robust enough tiebars are probably possible. In 4mm scale, it is more challenging though one or two modellers have achieved success using novel materials and advanced adhesives.

The Ambis tiebar tries to reproduce a relatively modern design. There is a spider-like etch which has to be folded up. One of these is soldered to each point blade with a thin, horisontal, upright aligned piece of PCB joining them together. Masokits do a slightly more robust version with a full-width brass etch which is folded around thin PCB, soldered together and then the insulation gaps are cut.

Really old tiebars were made of round rod which passed through the rail and was bolted from the outside.

The most outstanding 4mm operating tiebars I have seen are Howard Bolton's on his Minories P4 layout, where everything looks and operates in a prototypical manner, right from the lever frame through operating point rodding to realistic tiebars (or stretcher bars as they are properly called - at least in the UK?)

I wouldn't even begin to dream of being able to do things this well.

Edited August 9, 2020 by RichL
typos

[RichL]

...and here is one of my all-time favourite drawings showing just how complex things can get....

[RichL]

At risk of getting totally carried away, here's some useful drawings of prototypical Irish track from around the beginning of the C20

https://www.oldpway.info/opw_drawings.html   

There are some great GS&WR details, amongst others worth studying for anyone interested in old trackwork.

[murphaph]

3 hours ago, RichL said:

...and here is one of my all-time favourite drawings showing just how complex things can get....

I wonder was anything like Fig. 107 ever built in Ireland. I think they'd only resort to such things if space was very tight. Note the joggled (kinked) stock rails for the second set of facing switch rails, whereas the first set would appear to be "undercut".

Edited August 9, 2020 by murphaph

[RichL]

27 minutes ago, murphaph said:

I wonder was anything like Fig. 107 ever built in Ireland. I think they'd only resort to such things if space was very tight. Note the joggled (kinked) stock rails for the second set of facing switch rails, whereas the first set would appear to be "undercut".

The drawing is for bullhead, which wasn't so fashionable in Ireland. I think they were only used in sidings even in the UK. Never say never though - someone may quickly prove us wrong!

The joggle was necessary to allow room for the second pair of point blades. Joggles in pointwork were otherwise rare, I think, unless you are modelling the GWR (England). I don't want to sound an expert though. Most of what little I know was from a talk I once attended on modelling prototypical track.

[murphaph]

BH was definitely used on mainlines in the UK and Ireland before the transition to FB began. I read that in my recently acquired "Track" book by the 2mm Scale Association. I am pretty sure you can even still find it on the mainline on concrete sleepers, but only lightly used lines.

[RichL]

16 minutes ago, murphaph said:

BH was definitely used on mainlines in the UK and Ireland before the transition to FB began. I read that in my recently acquired "Track" book by the 2mm Scale Association. I am pretty sure you can even still find it on the mainline on concrete sleepers, but only lightly used lines.

Looking at drawings, books and photos, FB was most popular to begin with on most if not all lines in Ireland. The GNR and NCC lines then converted to B/H extensively, with some main lines of other companies gradually being relaid with B/H roughly from the end of the C19. Some lines don't ever seem to have gone B/H. The earlier GS&W drawings in the collection I linked to above were nearly all F/B which I assume was their standard at the time.

This is all from casual browsing though - I am not an expert!

Edited August 9, 2020 by RichL

[murphaph]

Me neither! Fig. 1.2 in the "Track" book shows BH rail on concrete sleepers on the Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth line in 2010. So it was definitely used on the mainline in GB. I think you are right though that "simple" FB rail was more popular in Ireland, which is worth noting. I think I'll try to model a good mix of the types. I may even model the CWR on Cork line as in retrospect, the track will be difficult to see and modelling it is easier. The pandrol clips are so low profile that a little drop of solder is good enough! For BH you really need the chairs for it to look right.

[RichL]

Sticking to Ireland, the impression I get is that many lines were built with absolutely minimal resources - and light F/B rail laid directly on half-round wooden sleepers was just about as cheap as you could get. I think this was very high on maintenance. Baseplates between the rail and the sleepers and better quality sleepers helped a lot. Bullhead made some sense where there is very heavy traffic as it used to be much quicker and easier to replace the rails. There also seems to be imagined prestige attached to being able to show that you could 'afford' bullhead.

Looking quickly through a GNRI book I have, there seems to have been little or no bullhead in photos until around 1895 when it was definitely in use on the main line around Belfast, but not in other places. By the 1950s, photos of many if not most GNRI lines show bullhead - at least for the running lines. Another book on the GSR suggests some main running lines had bullhead by the 1920s, but not much else. It was only a quick glance through though.

I would have thought that the running lines at Limerick Junction would be a prime candidate for bullhead once it became the standard, if only because it was very busy, so would require fairly frequent rail replacement.

[Colin R]

4 hours ago, RichL said:

At risk of getting totally carried away, here's some useful drawings of prototypical Irish track from around the beginning of the C20

https://www.oldpway.info/opw_drawings.html   

There are some great GS&WR details, amongst others worth studying for anyone interested in old trackwork.

Rich that is great stuff and a great link thanks. The bit of the W&LWR that I am looking at as a possible model I think the prototype still has flat bottom even though it hasn't had trains run over it for some time.

[RichL]

Yes, I'm glad I found it too. Lots of interesting detail - especially in the GS&W drawings. I have been looking at lots of photos as well and suspect there is lots of stuff in early track construction, like cast crossing noses for example, that we modellers are not generally aware of.

[David Holman]

Remarkable!

[Colin R]

1 hour ago, RichL said:

Yes, I'm glad I found it too. Lots of interesting detail - especially in the GS&W drawings. I have been looking at lots of photos as well and suspect there is lots of stuff in early track construction, like cast crossing noses for example, that we modellers are not generally aware of.

It is Ironic that cast crossing noses are coming back in to fashion with high speed rail projects, nothing new there then.

[Colin R]

Just found this link I have been looking for, if anyone wants help in building track take a look at this site:-

https://www.clfinescale.co.uk/knowledge-centre

I am not the owner but this is the site I reconmend to anyone.

Colin

[Mayner]

From the horses mouth so to speak Railway Construction  by William Hemingway Mills  (former GNR(I) Chief Civil Engineer) Late Victorian/Edwardian civil engineering best practice. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/50696/50696-h/50696-h.htm

Full size tie bar and facing point lock. Newly installed connection between up Chester & Crewe lines Shrewsbury circa 2000 GWR style semaphore signals still in use at North Junction.

[RichL]

All the check rails are now soldered in place (unless I find I have missed any!)

Running with test wagons and wheel sets seems pretty good - both gauges. The Dundas 12mm gauge wheels seem fine too, which gives me a lot of confidence in my choice to go with P4 standards - at least for the time being!

I still have the insulation gaps and the wiring to do - maybe this evening, if I get time.

[jhb171achill]

23 hours ago, murphaph said:

I wonder was anything like Fig. 107 ever built in Ireland. I think they'd only resort to such things if space was very tight. Note the joggled (kinked) stock rails for the second set of facing switch rails, whereas the first set would appear to be "undercut".

You mean three-way points?

Yes, there were - but they were very rare indeed. I am unaware of any in existence either now, or anywhere in the last forty years anyway.

I think there were two at Polloxfen's sidings at Ballysodare - certainly one anyway. There was another somewhere else, the location of which now escapes my mind.

[murphaph]

Was space at a premium at these sites or why did they build them as opposed to simply cascading normal turnouts/points?

I learned something new this week:P

PW engineers call them turnouts. Signalmen call them points! (At least that's UK practice, would be interested to know if it's different in Ireland)

[RichL]

According to this photo it wasn't quite the same as the 3-way drawing - the point blades for the two turnouts look clearly separated to me

Edited August 10, 2020 by RichL

[Colin R]

3 hours ago, murphaph said:

Was space at a premium at these sites or why did they build them as opposed to simply cascading normal turnouts/points?

I learned something new this week:P

PW engineers call them turnouts. Signalmen call them points! (At least that's UK practice, would be interested to know if it's different in Ireland)

I think this is down to how the railway was operated in the first place, in the UK everyone was in a hurry and space and construction costs where/are at a premium. If you then go to Ireland you don't have the same amount of traffic on offer and space was more available to build railways plus by then everyone had learnt how to keep things simple in railway building terms.

You don’t need to build a dual track system unless traffic demands it and from what I have seen so far there are only a few places in Ireland that requires this:- Dublin / Cork / Belfast those links are important and are used a lot.  

It is by far easier to build passing loops along one track and maintain it as that. If you look around the rest of the world you will see this is more of the case, in the UK it was all a big experiment and everyone learn from the mistakes at the time.

One of the other major points about the railways of Ireland is, they where used to transport people to America or around the rest of the World and as a result you also had a lack of hard working skilled labour.

One other point Ireland never really required the same size of steam locos as we had in the UK the humble 4-4-0 Tender loco type was very popular, only on the main line between Cork/Dublin/Belfast did you get to see 4-6-0's on such services as the mails, some of the Woolwiches may have traveled around a bit more than anything else, but the whole Irish railway system has a charm all of its own, even today.

 

 

 

 

 

[Edo]

4 hours ago, jhb171achill said:

You mean three-way points?

Yes, there were - but they were very rare indeed. I am unaware of any in existence either now, or anywhere in the last forty years anyway.

I think there were two at Polloxfen's sidings at Ballysodare - certainly one anyway. There was another somewhere else, the location of which now escapes my mind.

Fethard - on the Clonmel - Thurles Line springs to mind........thanks Ernie!

 

[jhb171achill]

1 minute ago, Edo said:

Fethard - on the Clonmel - Thurles Line springs to mind........thanks Ernie!

 

Indeed, Edo - I had forgotten about that one.

I think there was one somewhere in Wisht Caark too.... as I said earlier, I cannot remember but I've a note of it SOMEwhere...........

[Edo]

13 minutes ago, jhb171achill said:

Indeed, Edo - I had forgotten about that one.

I think there was one somewhere in Wisht Caark too.... as I said earlier, I cannot remember but I've a note of it SOMEwhere...........

JHB, just for the craic - I went and had a look at the OSI historical maps of the West Cork at the turn of the last century.....thinking maybe Baltimore or Bantry.............but no..........but I found not one , but two 3 way points in Bandon yard of all places.................must hunt for a photo of Bandon yard.............Im sure it stayed the same more or less until closure in the late 50s.

 

[jhb171achill]

11 minutes ago, Edo said:

JHB, just for the craic - I went and had a look at the OSI historical maps of the West Cork at the turn of the last century.....thinking maybe Baltimore or Bantry.............but no..........but I found not one , but two 3 way points in Bandon yard of all places.................must hunt for a photo of Bandon yard.............Im sure it stayed the same more or less until closure in the late 50s.

 

Very many thanks, Edo! There ye go then......

My Dugort harbour (currently in Baseboard Dave's) has one too! Given that the fictitious "prototype" of this place would have been very much built on the cheap, space-saving would be as important as in my attic!

[RichL]

Just to show the finished test track. It occurred to me that the straight track wasn't going to test the ability of stock on curves. I extended the 'spare' ends of the diamond to form an S bend. This involved a slight widening of the board at one end. The curves are fractionally sub-4ft due to using an OO Tracksetta to set the inside of the curves. That's fine as I don't really want to go below 4ft radius on any layout I build in the future - at least not for 21mm main line stock.

I shall install a DPDT switch to switch the polarity of the diamond crossing, depending on which route any powered vehicle is on. I almost altered the diamond to a single slip, but decided that would be a step too far!

[David Holman]

Impressive, though Iain Rice would certainly argue in favour of a single slip having designed numerous layouts using one with just a three way point for company. A dual gauge single slip is probably stretching things though...

[RichL]

5 hours ago, David Holman said:

Impressive, though Iain Rice would certainly argue in favour of a single slip having designed numerous layouts using one with just a three way point for company. A dual gauge single slip is probably stretching things though...

Yeah, if I were starting from scratch I might do things differently, but I couldn't bring myself to destroy much of the existing diamond crossing just for a bit more operating potential on what is after all just a test track

[DLTaylor]

Interesting project, and great to see some mixed gauge track being modelled.

Cheers, Dave.