Templot Club Archive - Search Results
To search again, click the Back button in your browser.
Search results for: attach_21_p1.chacewater.jpg 0 1387746997_thumb.jpg
No results found containing all search terms. 430 results found containing some search terms.
Did you mean: attach_23_p2.chacewater.jpg 0 1330887824_thumb.jpg?
22 pages of results.
... topic: 1825 Roller gauges for 0-MF with gauge widening posted: 12 Feb 2012 18:12 from: LSWRArt Debs has kindly offered to make me some special roller gauges. These will be a four-slot combined roller gauge to 0-MF standard, but with 0.25mm gauge widening, to allow for radius down to 1200mm. So they will have 1.5mm common crossing gap, 30mm check rail gauge and 31.75mm track gauge, to give a gap between the running rail and the check rail of 1.75mm. There ... - track gauge 31.75mm- crossing flangeway 1.5mm- running rail to check rail gauging 1.75mm (i.e. the check gauge stays the same at 30.0mm.)- a chord-flat milled to both ends (opposingly phased) msg-13493-0 -25656400-1387746997_thumb.jpg Further information and pricing on the above and also on the full range of 'Specialty Gauge Products' 0-MF and S7 track-gauges, may be found by clicking here posted: 23 Dec 2013 11:56 from: LSWRArt Hi Debs Best of luck ...
... topic: 1811 0-MF track gauges now available. posted: 28 Jan 2012 19:25 from: Debs. Following the encouragement of fellow 0-MF gauge modellers, and by kind permission of Martin to post here, I'm now able to offer for sale, a series of precision track gauging tools for our hitherto under catered-for gauge. Update...as of Sept., 24th., 2017: I now have stock to hand of all the 0-MF (31.5mm. x 1.5mm ... - track gauge 31.75mm- crossing flangeway 1.5mm- running rail to check rail gauging 1.75mm (i.e. the check gauge stays the same at 30.0mm.)- a chord-flat milled to both ends (opposingly phased) msg-13493-0 -25656400-1387746997_thumb.jpg My gauges sit only on the head of bullhead rail, as the 1.2mm. slot depth permits the rail being gauged to cant to the required angle when seated in moulded plastic or brass, scale chairs. Purchase payment is accepted via Paypal, or by good ...
... fires a monostable and that starts a servo positioning cycle. The width of the input pulse provides the desired position information. There's not too much data available on the chip inside the servo but from what I've seen the input goes straight into the base of a NPN transistor. If the input signal rises to around 0.7 volts, the transistor turns on and triggers the monostable cycle. Rather than increasing the noise margin a pull-up resistor can actually reduce it. One solution that does seem to help is to elevate the servo's 0 volt rail above the 0 volt rail of the controller. That can be done with a diode, a resistor and a capacitor. The voltage drop through the diode raises the the servo's 0 volt rail by around 0.7 volts and that does add quite a bit of noise margin. Unfortunately it also violates the servo's spec (such as it is), but in practice it doesn't seem to cause a problem. Oh dear! Maybe we should start a new thread on servos Regards, Andrew B posted: 23 Oct 2017 ...
... quote this information when they reviewed a product but seem to have stopped now.) What is the correct back to back for 31mm gauge track? I have looked at the C and L website and they quote different types of chair. I am intending to model BR 1960's eastern region, what should I go for? Also regarding chairs, are there special ones for holding the check rails and Vees etc or are they made up by cutting and glueing existing ones? (Do you know where there are examples of well made 0 gauge track that I could access on the web for reference purposes?) When at the exhibition I noticed that a jig was used to put a small dog-leg in the stock rails to allow the point blades to fit snugly, is this standard procedure, or are there alternative methods? Thanks again for your time Chris Blaxland Brian Lewis wrote: Hi Chris, Here is my, (probably biased), answers to your questions: 1. 32mm or 31mm. The latter looks and runs better. NB. ...
... _& _Wheelset_Standards_Sept_2017.pdf 287 posted: 1 Jun 2018 22:55 from: Martin Wynne David Gregory wrote: Will the real O-SF standard please step forward? I mean, before I get some gauges purchased (made-up), can someone please advise which is the "correct" O-SF gauge or is the apparent disparity just an indication that O-SF has somehow evolved from 31.2 to 31.25 over time? Hi David, Welcome to Templot Club. It is 20 years since I first included the 0-MF and 0-SF standards in Templot (and until recently also the flawed 0-XF standard). At the time some members of the Gauge 0 Guild were hostile to any diversion from the long-established GOG-F (0 -F) standard, and it has taken the Guild all this time to finally update their technical data to reflect what a great many modellers have been doing in practice for years. The original standards were both based on a 30.0mm check gauge (because both are running the ...
... an example of what a BGS3 file looks like: <? xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8 "?> <BGS3> <HEADER> <program_name>Templot2 background shapes, saved from version 2.25.a</program_name> <program_version>225</program_version> <file_date>27/11/2019 01:50:17</file_date> <shapes_count>6 </ shapes_count> </ HEADER> <BGND_SHAPE_0> <shape_name>baseboard joint</shape_name> <wrap_offset>0 </ wrap_offset> <show_transparent>False</show_transparent> <shape_code>0 </ shape_code> <shape_style>0 </ shape_style> <picture_is_metafile>False</picture_is_metafile> <hide_bits>0 </ hide_bits> <option_bits>0 </ option_bits> <p1.x>430.871098</p1.x> <p1.y>289.968693</p1.y> <p2.x>525.013974</p2.x> <p2.y>283.980807</p2.y> </ BGND_SHAPE_0> <BGND_SHAPE_1> <shape_name>drawn rectangle</shape_name ...
7. Track Gauges
... topic: 455 Track Gauges posted: 12 Jun 2008 13:16 from: BeamEnds Hi All, does anyone know a source of 0-FS track gauges? Results from google are somewhat confusing as to exactly what is being offered! Cheers Richard posted: 12 Jun 2008 19:08 from: Brian Lewis BeamEnds wrote: Does anyone know a source of 0-FS track gauges? Results from google are somewhat confusing as to exactly what is being offered! If 0-FS is normal finescale 32mm Richard, then C+ L sell them. We also sell the finer scale alternative- 0-XF- 31.0mm. There is another scale 0-SF, which is 31.2mm. I know of nobody who sells them, (although there well may be), and we have no plans to produce such a gauge. Regards Brian Lewis Carrs-- C+ L Finescale. posted: 12 Jun 2008 20:32 from: BeamEnds Brian Lewis wrote: BeamEnds wrote: Does anyone know a source of 0-FS track gauges? ...
... posted: 30 Oct 2019 02:46 from: Martin Wynne Graeme wrote: Could you outline the file structure you intend to use? Hi Graeme, Here is a bit more of it: DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE == == == == == == == == == === template data- saved from TemplotMEC version 2.24.a saved_at 03:11:43 on 29/10/2019 26 templates from Downingham EM 0000-i =26 ``` 0999-i =0 1000-s =N 0 1005-i =145686781 1010-s =01/08/2019 1015-s =02:33:51 1020-s= BH EM half-diamond K- 8+ V- 8 RH 1025-s =Downingham EM 1030-s =[ slip 023300] slip half-diamond 1035-b =0 1040-i =0 1045-i =0 1050-i =0 1055-e =72 1060-e =0 1065-b =0 ...
... topic: 378 0-XF or 0-SF? posted: 21 Mar 2008 23:16 from: Martin Wynne In the file uploaded in this topic: topic 379 I noticed that Raymond is using the 0-XF standard (31.0mm). I now believe this to be flawed, and I'm minded to remove it from Templot. I would suggest changing to 0-SF instead (31.2mm). For more about this, see: http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/7mm/message/35046 and a lot of discussion about the current 0 gauge standards at: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?p =281000#p281000 http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?p =281534#p281534 regards, Martin. posted: 22 Mar 2008 02:48 from: Brian Lewis I would ask you to consider leaving 0-XF in your portfolio Martin. I certainly do not agree that 31.00 mm is, as you put it, 'flawed'. My own 40 foot 0 gauge layout is 0 ...
... requiring to be skewed on the timber. But that arrangement is not shown on any drawing I have found. So take your pick... regards, Martin. posted: 20 Feb 2016 06:31 from: Andrew Barrowman This is a new B switch for 3D printing. The block chairs might not look very ornate, but they were a right$$$$ to create. I wonder if the subtle changes I've made will show up in the printed version. Probably not in 00, but possibly discernible in 0. The bridge chairs are a bit of a cheat. They are all M1 size. I should probably replace them with L1 chairs and see what happens. 2983_200116_090000000.png posted: 24 Feb 2016 21:39 from: Martin Wynne Martin Wynne wrote: This location is easily accessible, so I will go and have a closer look. Hi Andy, Today the sun shone on the righteous, and me, so I went back for another look. That block chair is definitely skewed on the timber, and square-on ...
... topic: 3063 Beginner 2nd (or 3rd) time around posted: 15 Aug 2017 11:18 from: Andrew Howlett Dear Martin& fellow Templotters, I purchased Templot 0.74A on 28/09/2002 and did have a go at learning it then, but have forgotten 99% of it since! I've now started a new project- ordered the shed, booked a builder to lay the concrete foundation, booked the electrician, and drawn the track plan on the back of an envelope (designed around Peco 0-gauge track. Last night at the club I was told I should be building my own C&L track, so I guess I should be drawing up the plan in Templot as well. If there is anyone who can spare a few minutes give me a nudge into the right menus in those new dark unknown areas that were not even a twinkle in Martin's eye when I first started, I should be most grateful. Firstly I need to draw a 24ft by 13ft rectangle (the shed), followed by a second ...
... chosen location/era etc. The reason I suggest this is because the rail slots in Russ's Track Gauge and also the Check Rail Gauge to be available shortly (I'm arranging the manufacture of a batch at the moment) are suited to this size of rail. 3. I'm not familiar with the radius of Peco 2nd radius curves; in general 00-SF follows EM guidelines with regard to minimum radius (I'd say around 36" minimum radius). However this would very much depend on what locos you are using; 0-4 -0 or 0-6 -0 locos will obviously be a lot more tolerant than large mainline locos! Using gauge widening techniques during tracklaying will also help (e.g. using a triangular 3-point track gauge- I'm working on producing this at the moment). To be safe you can always make a short section of track at minimum radius as a test track to see if it works ok (please let us know how you get on). 4. Personally I favour using 16.2mm gauge throughout ...
... kits) and short 4 wheel stock( 1930's period) I will probably only use Slaters wheels on locos and stock. I want to be able to build turnouts down to A4 if possible but will use gentler ones if I can fit them in. I want to be able to buy the required gauges to make the track. I will be buying C&L components. Comments please. Rob posted: 27 Feb 2011 23:13 from: Martin Wynne Hi Rob, The best advice seems to be to ignore both 0-XF and 0-SF and choose between 0-MF and S7. 0-MF (31.5mm gauge, 1.5mm flangeway) accepts all existing G0G-Fine "industry-standard" wheels easily, and gives much improved running over the original G0G-F 32.0mm standard. The narrower flangeways look much better too. For some track pics of a large layout using 0-MF, see: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php/blog/253/entry-1422-heyside-trackwork/ Richard ...
... construction use. The most I do is to join a few turnouts together for complex formations. The sketchbook concept therefore sounds especially interesting to me. I look forward to its introduction. Glen posted: 6 Mar 2009 14:26 from: Martin Wynne Glen Suckling wrote However, I occasionally foray into 1/4 inch scale on 1.25" gauge track (the standard for fine scale O gauge in North America) which is not in your list of scale/gauge combinations. Hi Glen, Thanks for that. We've got 0-NMRA on 1.25" track gauge at 9/32"/ft. Is that wrong? It's been there for 10 years without anyone mentioning it. At 1/4 "/ ft (1 :48) there is only P-48. I will add 1:48 on 1.25" Of course, it's easy to create a custom gauge/scale setting for any size. The list of pre-sets is just for convenience. regards, Martin. posted: 6 Mar 2009 14:59 from ...
... :02 from: Terry Flynn I would suggest an easy way to determine track centres is to use the AMRA standards located at http://www.amra.asn.au/standards.htm which will produce a conservative result for UK models. Unfortunately the older version with the 1:76.2 scale errors in it are still on the web. Hopefully this will be corrected soon. Using the latest AMRA standard results for the original question of UK prototype, EM gauge 1:76.2 scale using 48" curves, minimum track centre= 55mm. For the 0 gauge example the AMRA standard for UK prototype, 1:43.5 scale, 1800mm radius, minimum track centre= 99mm. The AMRA standard makes loading gauge and maximum vehicle length assumptions for each group of prototypes and includes allowances for the above model railway issues. posted: 20 Feb 2012 07:22 from: Dave Summers Terry Flynn wrote: For the 0 gauge example the AMRA standard for UK prototype, 1:43.5 scale, 1800mm radius, minimum track centre= 99mm. The AMRA standard makes loading gauge and maximum ...
... looked so bad that I went to P4. Admittedly I was recreating a particular place, and wanted all the timbers in the right place...... it just wasn't possible with the compromises in OO. alan@york posted: 2 Mar 2014 10:44 from: Martin Wynne Hi Murry, The file which you posted was for GOG-F gauge so I assume you mean the various options for 7mm scale standard gauge? which are: GOG-F -- 32mm gauge, 1.75mm flangeways. Traditional 0 gauge, but no longer recommended because the currently available wheels are not wide enough to run properly over the V-crossings (frogs). 0-MF -- 31.5mm gauge, 1.5mm flangeways. This has now become the preferred standard for use with all existing 0 gauge wheels. Gauge tools for building 0-MF pointwork are available from Debs: message 11756 http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/user/13493-debs/ 0-SF -- 31.2mm gauge, 1.2mm flangeways. For Slaters ...
... topic: 1578 American standards for 0 scale/gauge posted: 28 Jul 2011 22:50 from: Glen Suckling Hi Martin, While you are preparing the current major revision to TEMPLOT would it be too much trouble to update the scale/gauge data that TEMPLOT uses for American O scale/gauge (NMRA-O )? TEMPLOT currently lists NMRA-O as 9/32" per foot scale running on 11/4" gauge track. I know that there is a prototype for everthing and I am sure that somebody, somewhere is using 9/32" =1 foot scale on 11/4" gauge track but I do not know that person. My modelling aquaintances in America are not aware of that scale/gauge being used nor is 9/32" per foot scale referenced in the NMRA standards. There are three commonly used standards for O scale/gauge modelling of standard gauge (4' 81/2 ") railroads in the USA. These three probably account for 99.9% of all of the O scale ...
... topic: 2491 Three basic questions posted: 20 Jul 2014 11:13 from: Howard I've been using Templot for some time now, but have found three problems, all of which seem very basic, and I cannot see how to overcome them.undefined First, I have moved the track to position (0 ,0 ), but it is above the horizontal datum. (I don't want the track here, this is just an illustration). Second, the trackpad grid shows as squares in the positive quadrant only. This is a problem because I am developing a layout where I want to plan each baseboard separately, starting from that on the far right, so I will have future baseboards in negative territory. Third, the outline of the baseboard has been generated as a rectangular shape, and modified via font/colours and setting the trackpad line width to 3. This setting is not saved when I save the background shapes. 2_200624_500000000.png Howard Watkins Attachment: attach_1882_2491_templottest_2014 _07_20_1054_25.box 220 posted: 20 Jul 2014 12:17 from: Martin Wynne Howard ...
19. Autumnal gloom
... posted: 20 Oct 2007 03:54 from: rodney_hills I've been in the model trade on and off for 33 years, so the likelihood or otherwise of getting rich thereby is not lost on me! See for example: http://www.templot.com/martweb/go_hunslet.htm (1992-1998). Martin, By sheer coincidence I picked up a copy of the October 1993 "Railway Modeller" magazine at my local MR club last week, and there, also in glorious colour, your "Ready-to-run 0 gauge Hunslet" is the headline item in the 'Latest Reviews' section (page 472). The (anonymous) reviewer writes in glowing terms about the loco: "This super little shunter is really quite exceptional value, and represents a milestone in the history of gauge 0 model locomotives." Innovation indeed! I read therein that R.M. was supplied with the review sample by a delighted customer, not by the manufacturer (" who was pre-occupied with satisfying a considerable initial demand"). Did you you ...
... have used diamond crossovers to represent double or single slips (or simply crossed straight tracks to represent crossings) because I'm not sure how to achieve slips, as yet. Any help and constructive comments would be welcomed. Rich Edit: Added Templot File Attachment: attach_2266_2872_160416-Marsh_Lane_Yard_Ver2.box 357 Last edited on 27 Apr 2016 21:15 by RK posted: 27 Apr 2016 21:58 from: Martin Wynne Hello Rich, Welcome to Templot Club. You have some close-spaced sharp curves there for a main-line layout in 0 gauge. For example the inner curve here is under 4ft-6in radius. Templot has a dummy vehicle tool for checking clearances, and unfortunately as you can see you have some significant conflicts on these curves: 2_271638_330000000.png It does depend on the actual size of your rolling stock of course. Short 4-wheel coaches may clear on these curves, but bogie stock would need to be very narrow to clear. I notice also that you are using the traditional GOG-F track standard. Most track builders in 7mm scale ...
Search took 0.125 seconds
Back to Templot Club