Templot Club Archive 2007-2020
|
|||
| author | remove search highlighting | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
posted: 21 Apr 2010 09:02 from: David click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hiya guys  I would be grateful for any thoughts on the Timbering as shown on this Crossover which has greater spacing between tracks. 1522_210347_340000000.png  I have highlighted in red an aproximation for the joints and have extended timbers from each turnout. The Gwr seemed to have their joints after the 5th crossing from the nose, but the difficulty here is to timber from each nose equally to achieve a joint after the 5th crossing timber. I am by no means an expert here and would appreiate any thoughts people have. just want to get it right before I build. As an after thought, I have not built a crossover yet.  Would any one have any advice? as apposed to a single turnout.Regards Dave |
||
|
posted: 21 Apr 2010 12:09 from: Nigel Brown click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Dave Just checked in David Smith's book; as I thought, from the examples in that you don't need to have the rail joints in each road in the same sleeper space. Just count 5 sleepers from the crossing nose in each case. By the way, I think your check rails should span 4 timbers not 5, for the GWR. cheers Nigel |
||
|
posted: 21 Apr 2010 13:12 from: David click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Nigel Brown wrote: DaveHiya Nigel thanks for your reply.... Does this pic look better. 1522_210807_180000000.jpg  I have the book by David J Smith, looked at figure 44 which is a 1:7 Crossing. My Crossing is quite a bit wider apart. Thanks for tip on check Rails, bit of an oversight on my part...ooooppppss...  much appreiated.Regards Dave |
||
|
posted: 21 Apr 2010 14:19 from: Nigel Brown click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Dave That's the idea. To get your 5 sleepers you might have to shift them in the other direction; can't quite see on your diagram where the crossing nose comes, in fact your diagram may be OK. cheers Nigel |
||
|
posted: 21 Apr 2010 14:29 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Dave, I think perhaps you have overdone the number of long timbers. Prototypes differ widely on this of course, but long timbers are expensive and only used where really needed. Here I have reduced the number to 6 long timbers instead of 11 in your plan, set the vee rails to span 5 timbers as you wanted, and closed up the timbers at the joints (1:7 wide crossover, 9ft sleepers): 2_210922_240000000.png  You could argue that only 4 long timbers would have been enough, although the GWR did tend to use more than most companies. regards, Martin. |
||
|
posted: 21 Apr 2010 14:57 from: David click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hiya guys Thanks for your replies.... Martyn, thanks for your diagram, its very helpful. I think the reason I had used so many extended timbers was because the crossing is slighty wider apart than the normal 6' way, i think its called. I shall see how many I can get it down too. I am modelling the GWR. Many thx .... Gr8 program by the way be lost with out it .... Regards Dave |
||
|
posted: 21 Apr 2010 17:13 from: Nigel Brown click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
There's a good diagram of a 1 in 7 crossover on page 86 of Smith's book; he seems to use quite a lot of long timbers, although that crossover is at GWR standard 6'6" track spacing. In the accompanying text he mentions a 3' spread between the arms of the V as being the point at which sleepers start to be used on the straight roads, which might help. |
||
|
posted: 22 Apr 2010 07:17 from: David click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hiya Nigel Thanks for the addition infomation, very informative. That diagram actually shows through timbers right back to the Closure Rails/Crossing joints. I have gone for more of a practical comprise, which I'm sure they would have on site. 1522_220214_580000000.png  Thanks for every ones thoughts Regards Dave |
||
|
posted: 22 Apr 2010 08:33 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
David wrote: That diagram actually shows through timbers right back to the Closure Rails/Crossing joints.Hi Dave, The limiting condition is not the position within the turnout, but the proximity of the adjacent rails outside the turnout. Long timbers tend not to be used where the space to the next set of rails is more than about 3ft-ish. Two shorter timbers, or a timber and a sleeper, would be used instead. This means that your crossover with widened track spacing requires fewer long timbers -- but each one is longer than the 19ft-6in shown in that diagram. As the tracks widen further, the number of long timbers needed gets fewer, but the timbers get longer. If the crossover is sufficiently wide, no long timbers are needed and a length of sleepered plain track can link the crossings. Notice also in that diagram that the vee rails are spanning 6 timbers, not 5. The rail length is shown as 12ft-7.1/4in from the FP. regards, Martin. |
||
|
posted: 23 Apr 2010 09:14 from: David click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hiya Martyn Thanks for your expalnation of the diagram on page 86, of Smith's book. I understand the practicalities of the timbering so much more clearly. Many thanks Dave |
||
| Please read this important note about copyright: Unless stated otherwise, all the files submitted to this web site are copyright and the property of the respective contributor. You are welcome to use them for your own personal non-commercial purposes, and in your messages on this web site. If you want to publish any of this material elsewhere or use it commercially, you must first obtain the owner's permission to do so. |