Templot Club Archive - Search Results
To search again, click the Back button in your browser.
Search results for: blunted
78 results found.
4 pages of results.
... rail, but no matter. Turn the vee round or over to make the second cut. The result is as shown after making two cuts on the sander. If it gets hot stop and dip it in a jar of cold water. If necessary the bulk of the metal can be quickly removed with a coarse file or metal shears before finishing on the sander. The end result is an accurately aligned vee comprised of solid rail at the nose. All that then remains is to fettle the running edges at the tip and blunt back the nose. It's a good idea to take a few thou off the top of the nose so that it dips down slightly below the wing rails. This allows for the coning angle on the wheels as they run off the wing rail onto the nose, producing smoother running. Don't overdo it. N.B. Wear a mask while sanding and wash hands afterwards. The sandings will contain lead from the solder. Far East-quality disc sanders are available at lowish cost and very useful for other workshop jobs: sander1.jpg ...
... adjust the middle set of sleepers. The timber spacings within the switch section are set as part of the switch. You need to create a custom switch -- at real> switch settings... menu item click the set custom switch... button. The timber spacings within the V-crossing are set as part of the V-crossing, and are determined by the relevant rail lengths. Make all the settings at real> V-crossing options> customize v-crossing> menu items. Set the blunt nose position first, because the remaining settings derive from that. I do not know how to adjust the plain track sleeper spacing. It seems there are only pre-set values i.e. 60ft rail/25ft sleeper spacing options. I have tried the customised spacing option however it seemed I would have to input the spacing of every sleeper on the track plan. You can create a custom plain track setting at real> plain track options> rail lengths and sleeper spacings... menu item. Stuart Hince has written ...
63. TDV feedback
... they are on the list for the next upgrade after this one. There are some tricks you can use to help -- I will reply separately shortly. regards, Martin. posted: 11 Oct 2011 19:53 from: leo_sandstrom Hi Martin Im not saying you should delay the already delayed lauch of the next version, just tro to keep these sort of things in mind when you are redesigning something. Im am under no impression that it is a CAD software, so dont worry about that. My post might seem blunt, but its an honest impression after working with the software, the learning curve is very steep. I do know Templot is a very small company, and I also know it can never compare to Solidworks. What I do say is that you should steal design features from the best, simply because its proven and it works, saving you the time of inventing them. And yes, I have started to look into other features, I have lots of feedback from everything I poked into, I just wrote feedback on ...
64. Flatbottom Flaw?
... no rails setting has been changed accordingly, and the rails have become visible. The modify group to match option changes all the rail settings in this sub-menu. There are two possible solutions: 1. de-select the "no rails" templates from the group before modifying the group, or 2. omit all the unwanted rails at do> omit rails menu item instead of using the above menu option. This is the problem with the modify on rebuild function -- it tends to be a bit of a blunt instrument. The only solution if you want more control over each setting is to modify each template individually. regards, Martin. Parts of Templot Club may not function unless you enable JavaScript (also called Active Scripting) in your browser. Templot Club> Forums> Development doings- archive> Flatbottom Flaw? about Templot Club Templot Companion- User Guide- A-Z Index Templot Explained for beginners Please click: important information for new members and first-time visitors. indexing link for search engines back to top of page ...
... , there are several such rail joints, also notes of amounts "to be cut off splice rail" in making the joints. Also some rail joints are shown on a saddle chair. The table on page 28 shows the splice rail length for a 1:9 crossing is 16ft-9in, although it is not clear where this is measured from. It's likely to be the length of the original raw rail -- the drawing on page 33 shows the end of the splice rail is 10.1/8" behind the blunt nose. regards, Martin. posted: 18 Jul 2016 11:50 from: Stephen Freeman Hi, whilst it happened in real life, I personally would try to avoid it if at all possible, though sometimes it just can't be helped. Not impossible just more difficult. posted: 18 Jul 2016 12:57 from: DerekStuart Martin, as ever, many thanks for your kind help. Is a saddle chair the one that looks like an overscale normal chair but has a hole in each side for a bolt ...
... count :-) I could stagger through the software on the debugger to see how I have transgressed and maybe that will give a clue. :-) I haven't bothered to sort it out since a one event input is extremely rare, and the workround is to add another dummy event which is easier than re-writing the program :-) Jim. posted: 16 Nov 2009 12:12 from: Brian W Lewis Hi Martin and Jim! In days of yore I used to write software too. The "blunt instrument" workaround I used was to check the index, and if less than 1 set it to 1. Not, you'll notice, "equal to zero" (which would allow -1 to get through). Oh OK, mothers and eggs and all that :-) posted: 16 Sep 2011 22:38 from: Martin Wynne Just bumping this topic to say that thanks to Len Cattley I have now at long last found this bug. It will be fixed in the next TDV update. This bug ...
... .. could you possibly advise or direct me to where it is? Hi Rich, The special chairs (i.e. any other than ordinary chairs) will fit the rails in only one position, so you must have some timber under those positions. For example the "A" chair fits one position only under the crossing nose: 2_181643_360000000.png 2_181643_590000000.png You can change the actual position of the "A" chair relative to the vee nose to match your prototype at real> V-crossing options> customize V-crossing> blunt nose... menu item. Check rails have special left and right-hand end chairs for the flared ends, but generally check rails can be extended or shortened as necessary so that those chairs come over a timber. If you change from square-on to equalized timbering, Templot moves the check rails accordingly. I have written a lot in the past, but I'm too tired tonight to find it all, sorry. Here are some links: message 2272 topic 2628- message 18087 topic 1153- message 6920 ...
... highlight the dimensional error The problem seems to be only around the Vee rail joint, as all other timber spacings are correct. Now the prototype dimensions I wanted scaled, are as follows: Timber spacing from A timber X3-A to X4-B= 30ins.} X4-B to X5-C= 30ins.} All OK X5-C to X6-D= 28ins.} X6-D to X7= 28ins.} X7 to E1= 24ins. Shows error Vee rail length= 11ft. from blunt nose. Dimension OK Dimension Anomaly Measured with the Templot ruler, X7 to E1= 6.884 mm= 20.652ins. ??? This is also verified in the CAD program. Yet the Shove Timbers Dialog Screen shows 24ins ??? The ruler measurements were taken perpendicular to the angle of the timber centre lines. Can you please advise as to what may be wrong? All the best, Brian Nicholls. 1853_191232_520000000.png 1853_191234_280000000.png 1853_191235_430000000.png Attachment: attach_1359_1838_Dimension_Anomaly _B.box 332 posted: 19 Feb 2012 21:04 from: Martin Wynne Hi Brian ...
69. tandem turnout
... I have created the tandem in the attached box file. I'm quite pleased with it, but before I go and build it, would anyone please advise if there are any apparent "oops" in there? I do know that there is a slight overlap of wing rail and V in the centre, it is so slight that I did not see any reason to create another partial template to resolve it. I think the timbering is reasonable, but there is a significant angle on timber CR214X4-A relative to theFP and Blunt nose marks on the plan- nose of the middle crossing. To ensure that the chair would fit, should I use a bigger timber, or shove it backwards or...? intended region/ period is GW/ 1930 or thereabouts. The smaller radius leads off to the coal stage ramp, the larger to the rest of the shed. Comments very welcome! Happy New Year to all Simon Attachment: attach_2028_2606_porth_dinllaen_en gine_shed_version_4_tandem.box 281 posted: 1 Jan 2015 08:47 from: Hayfield This is a guess as I ...
... provided by the likes of Brian at C&L). Being a novice when it comes to track building and knowledge of the permanent way what is the best approach when it comes to deciding and detailing the appropriate chairs required to build the trackwork? Hi Paul, For REA bullhead turnouts there is some information on the Templot web site at: http://templot.com/prototype_info.php#chairing_info For V-crossings the special chairs are identified Z Y X A B C D etc., the A chair being under the blunt nose of the crossing. These identification letters are included in the timber numbering on Templot templates. For switches, the count of slide chairs and block chairs is as given in the table. Elsewhere in the turnout ordinary S1 chairs are used, unless two are so close together that there isn't room, in which case one or both is changed to an L1 "bridge" chair: chairing_patterns.gif Exact details vary by prototype and period. You can get a good idea of the arrangements by looking at the Exactoscale P4 kit templates ...
... in the photo below. Switches and V-crossings based on 24" timber centres, rail joints spaced 21", turnout fill timber spacing set at 25" maximum. Check and wing rails (all angles): working length 63", extension/reach length 39", bent flares length 9" to match the typical short n.g. look and keep the flares clear of the fixings. See photo below. Wing fronts span 2 timbers (all angles). Vee rails span 4 timbers (all angles). Blunt nose 1/2" wide overlapping timber centre by 3". A range of loose-heel switches based on 2ft increments, 5ft- 11ft. Heel spread 4.5", giving 2.5" clearance behind the 2" wide rail. This is wider than the Fn3 flangeway, so there is no need to move the loose heel for the model. There will be such need in 4mm scale unless P4 wheels and flangeways (or finer) are used. Loose heels between the timbers (loose fishplates). Switch stock ...
... scale, but can be printed and used for 7mm scale models. The .box file for download is at the end of this message. Standards to match NMRA H0 gauge -- note that this means you won't be able to create mixed-gauge track with standard-gauge 0 scale flangeways. 1:48 scale, 16.5mm gauge, 1.3mm flangeway, rail-head width 2" scale, flat-bottom rail. 12-degree crossing angle (1 :4.7), generic V-crossing, 1/2" blunt nose, custom curved switch not recommended for any other use. Nominal sleeper (tie) spacing is 23.25" scale. Plain track has 33ft rails, 17 sleepers per length. Sleepers 60" long and 9" wide. 2_281637_570000001.png 2_281637_560000000.png Printed template: 2_281637_570000002.png For other 0-16.5 templates, see also: topic 28 Attachment: attach_1937_2526_peco_0n30.box 557 Parts of Templot Club may not function unless you enable JavaScript (also called Active Scripting) in your browser. Templot Club> Companion> Samples and examples> Peco 0n30 templates about ...
... /4 "/ ft 6.35mm/ft American 0 scale, not UK 7mm/ft. .box file attached below. Standards to match NMRA H0 gauge -- note that this means you won't be able to create mixed-gauge track with standard-gauge 0 scale. 1:48 scale, 16.5mm gauge, 1.3mm flangeway, rail-head width 2" scale, flat-bottom. 12-degree crossing angle 1:4.7 (enter k12 in the dialog), generic V-crossing, 1/2" blunt nose, custom curved switch. 2_281637_570000001.png I changed the switch radius to 2.5 chains= 165ft= 1980 inches. This gives a better tip deflection angle and a better relation with the turnout radius, which is thereby eased to 690mm (27.2"). But to get the required lead length that required changing to a generic-type V-crossing. At 1:48 scale the timber (tie) spacing seems to be a nominal 23.25", although it is tricky to measure this with the randomised timbering. For ...
... splits the difference at 30.0mm and is a good compromise for use with the widest possible range of wheels. It allows for a flange thickness up to 1.0mm for wheels set to 29.0mm back-to-back. For "industry-standard" wheels at 29.2mm back-to-back, flange thickness can go up to 0.8mm max. Check span is 28.5mm matching G0G-Fine, allowing a good clearance under BB on sharp curves, and a practical tolerance up to 28.6mm. The 1.5mm flangeway plus prototypical 3/4" blunt nose gives a minimum wheel width for full support at crossings of 3.4mm compared with the G0G-Fine minimum wheel width of 3.5mm. In summary, your track gauge tools need to produce track as follows. It is always preferable to have a check gauge tool separate from the track gauge tool, and to set the crossing flangeway (but not the check rail flangeway) with a suitable feeler gauge or precision shim. track gauge 31.5mm minimum check gauge 30.0mm minimum check span 28.6mm maximum crossing flangeway 1.5mm maximum For the manufacture of ...
... up to 1:8.5: Y- X- A- B- C- D up to 1:10.5: Y- X- A- B- C- D- E 1:11: Z- Y- X- A- B- C- D- E up to 1:12: Z- Y- X- A- B- C- D- E- F (These letters are on the templates as a suffix on the timber number. The A timber is always under the blunt nose of the vee.) Here's some text that I have posted a few times: Timbering style is a frequently asked question, because there is no clear answer. Generally speaking, equalized timbering was the norm in the pre-grouping period (before the 1920s), and square-on timbering is the standard now. Between then and now you get both. The change was gradual and varied in pace according to local practice. For much of the post-grouping steam era it would be common to see square ...
... support the rails in the proper place. Phil O of this parish posted some useful close-up pics of crossings in this topic: topic 475 and Michael Davies uploaded many track pics in the gallery at: http://85a.co.uk/forum/gallery_view.php?user=1679#gallery_top Here is a selection of them, all showing that the knuckle bend usually comes between the timbers: 2_200703_340000000.jpg 1679_261346_230000004.jpg 1679_261331_320000002.jpg 1679_261331_240000001.jpg On this pic below from Mick Nicholson I added yellow lines to show the relationship to the gauge-faces, the blunt nose on the vee, and the way the vee top is taken down below the level of the wing rails to allow for the coning angle on the wheels. In this pic the knuckle bend is closer to the timber than in the above pics because the crossing angle is flatter: 2_270449_340000000.jpg Many thanks to those members mentioned for uploading these. regards, Martin. posted: 20 Mar 2014 17:01 from: Ian T Thanks Martin, I now understand. I am about to start building my first crossing and I ...
... any V-crossing at any angle. It will run just as smoothly over a 1:20 V-crossing as a 1:5 V-crossing -- assuming the crossing has been correctly made of course, longer vees and crossings do require rather more care and skill in construction. The reason is that the width of the gap in the V-crossing at its widest part just in front of the nose of the vee is the same at any angle, and is approximately equal to 2 flangeway gaps plus the blunt nose width on the vee, as you say. If the wheel is wider than this it cannot fall into the gap and will run smoothly over the V-crossing remaining fully supported on the wing rails. The angle of the V-crossing and the length of the gap is immaterial. However, wheels which are narrower than the required width will fall into the gap with a bump. This effect will be worse or much worse on longer V-crossings than on shorter ones, which is probably where the misunderstanding ...
78. Forum emails
... farmed, and at one point I was getting in excess of 400 dodgy emails a day. So I worked with the IS&T people at work, along with a bunch of other people, to get the filters in place. At work I see just under 1000 emails a day come into my account, post spam filtering. After this I have about 70 mail rules in place to get it to a manageable 250 that I read. So I am a bit of a filter fan, but they are generally a blunt instrument and will get rid of email that is potentially interesting. It's a problem of drinking from a fire hose. Regards Nick posted: 6 Aug 2007 13:23 from: Paul Boyd Hi Nick If you get Cable, and most households in metropolitan areas get TV via cable then the "local" cable has a monopoly. It's not like I can say "I want TimeWarner to supply my cable" if Comcast are my "local" provider. There is no real choice, the only choice I have is ...
Search took 0.093 seconds
Back to Templot Club