Templot Club Archive 2007-2020
|
|||
| author | remove search highlighting | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
posted: 1 Sep 2010 23:20 from: Brian Nicholls
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi All, There are two box files of significance, which represent my first attempt at track design using Templot. The attempt covers a small area of Birmingham New Street Station and is a formation just to the South West of signal box 4 located on the old Midland Railway side of the station. The formation is made up of exit roads from platforms 5 & 6, plus exit roads from the old Fish Siddings ( I posted a JPEG photograph of this area a few weeks ago, however, do NOT use the photo as background as it is quite distorted due to whatever reason). After several aborted attempts, mainly due to my lack of knowledge and understanding of Templot, and also trying to overlay templates on the partial plan area in some sort of sequence, I eventually came to the conclusion that a new tack was required. I then decided to overlay simple plain track templates on to the plan, putting them as close as possible to the plan roads. Doing this gave me three distinct advantages; 1. Was that I had better defined and finer track lines to follow when placing and manipulating the required templates. 2. I could remove the distraction of the cluttered plan from the background, and in doing so help to speed up response, only bringing the plan back into view, as and when required to ensure things were in the right place. 3. It clearly defined and showed me where all the crossing were located, rather than the plan digitized zig zag lines which could be mis-interpreted when trying to overlay, on the plan, a complex template. The first attached box file ‘Plain_Track_BASE-AK’ shows the initial plain track overlay used as the start basis. The final result box file is ‘Bham_New_Street_Sig4-492-BS’ and will be posted immediately after this message has been launched. Be aware, that NO Timbering has been done (just the metal rails) in the final file, as this is work in progress, also I would like feedback, if you will be so kind, as to possible pitfalls in my attempt before I complete the timbers (just in case there are serious problems that may need correction). When timbering is completed, the box file will be posted for comments. I started the final overlay, with the Diamond Crossing, as I deemed this to be the crucial part of the formation. I opted for a 1:4 straight crossing which appeared to fit reasonably well into the plan, although there are a lot of curves in that area, I did not intend, at this stage, to get involved with trying to make a curved diamond out of partial templates. Having said that, I have, however, used several partial templates in other areas to get the best fit to the plan. It is recommended, that on the initial viewing of the formation, one should remove the track centre lines as these do tend to clutter and give false track alignments at first sight, these can then be replaced as and when during further viewing. BTW, In the final box file, the first 31 templates (hidden from the background) are the original plain track templates used as the base, which I have left in the box for comparison for anyone that wishes to look and check. Although, it took me quite a while to reach this stage, in doing this formation, I have learned a considerable amount about using Templot. I would be most grateful for any input comments from you more experienced Templotters, as I would like to get things put right (if in error). Best regards to all. Brian Nicholls. |
||
| Attachment: attach_860_1227_Plain_Track_BASE-AK.box 226 | |||
|
posted: 1 Sep 2010 23:26 from: Brian Nicholls
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi All, This is the second attached box file to my previous message, which is the, so far, end result of my labours[size=] Please remember the following: It is recommended, that on the initial viewing of the formation, one should remove the track centre lines as these do tend to clutter and give false track alignments at first sight, these can then be replaced as and when during further viewing. In the final box file, the first 31 templates (hidden from the background) are the original plain track templates used as the base, which I have left in the box for comparison for anyone that wishes to look and check. I would very much appreciate your comments. Best regards to all. Brian Nicholls. |
||
| Attachment: attach_861_1227_Bham_New_Street_Sig4-492-BS.box 252 | |||
|
posted: 2 Sep 2010 16:46 from: Jim Guthrie
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Brian Nicholls wrote:I would very much appreciate your comments.Brian, It looks good. I had a quick check of the closure rails and the switch blades in the middle of the four way and it looks as though there will be enough length to allow anchoring and gapping for insulation - re. our earlier discussion. I'm not sure where you would start to build this formation.  It is usually best to start with any diamonds so that you can get all the K and obtuse crossings aligned, and that might be the best with the diamond in the slip in this case, then work outwards, although it might be a bit difficult building the four way from the back (so to speak). I'm just starting building a double junction with two curved roads, both with gauge widening, through the diamond, so I'm in the throes of planning the best way to build that. Jim. |
||
|
posted: 2 Sep 2010 17:32 from: Brian Nicholls
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Jim Guthrie wrote: It looks good. I had a quick check of the closure rails and the switch blades in the middle of the four way and it looks as though there will be enough length to allow anchoring and gapping for insulation - re. our earlier discussion. Hi Jim, Many thanks for your comments.  I do indeed remember your previous discussion on the JPEG photo of this formation I posted earlier. I think because the photo was so distorted, it gave one the impression that it was tighter than was the fact with the true drawing of the plan. I discovered this when I finally received the plan drawing from BCL.  I do agree with your thoughts, that the best place to start to build is from the diamond, particularly bearing in mind my statement added below about partial templates and curves in my next posting. Regarding the four way, I may consider trying to split it, and build as normal from the front in each case, but time and mistakes will tell. Best regards. Brian. |
||
|
posted: 2 Sep 2010 17:33 from: Brian Nicholls
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi All, I have today started to do the timbering on the previously posted formation, however, I cannot seem to get the timbers back on the two halves of the diamond crossing, does anyone have any idea why this is ? Also I would like to clear up one erroneous point I mentioned on the formation, I did make a slight TYPO when I stated that “I used a straight 1:4 diamond crossing, and I did not intend, at this stage, to get involved with trying to make a curved diamond out of partial templates”. This implied that the whole diamond was straight, where in fact I did actually use partial curved templates to complete the diamond. The only part of the diamond that is straight is the is the two obtuse crossing halves at the centre which are straight, in each direction, from the centre and outwards to the ends of the associated check rails. Beyond the ends of the check rails, I used partial templates with slight curves and Vee’s to complete the diamond. Best regards to all. Brian Nicholls. |
||
|
posted: 2 Sep 2010 18:09 from: Brian Nicholls
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Jim Guthrie wrote: I'm just starting building a double junction with two curved roads, both with gauge widening, through the diamond, so I'm in the throes of planning the best way to build that. Hi Jim, PS to my last, Only 6 or 7 more of these formations to go ! All the Best. Brian. |
||
|
posted: 13 Sep 2010 20:57 from: Brian Nicholls
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi All, As promised, I have attached a box file which is the previous formation I posted, but now with timbers. The timbered box file is ‘Bham_New_Street_Sig4-492-CO’. Needless to say, it took quite a lot of sorting out, but have strived to do the timbering as near to prototype as possible. I have tried to keep ‘A’ timbers, associated with the Vee noses with as little movement as possible, there has been, however, some twisting, but only for small angles. The same applies to the timbers associated with the knuckles. Also there are a few changes to the rail structure, since I was very fortunate, within the last week or so, in finding a book with two photographs of the exact formation at New Street. The two photo’s show views of the formation from either end, and although the photo’s were taken during the late 1950’s, the formation appears to have remained the same right through from 1921. I have structured the rails to match the photographs as closely as possible, however, the timbering in the photo’s is, although helpful, not as clearly defined as the rails, but have followed the photo’s where possible and then have made my best guesstimate as to how the remainder was done. Sorry I cannot post any of the photo’s as these are subject to copyright, however, if anyone is interested in viewing the photo’s, they can be seen in the following book: D.J.Norton’s Pictorial Survey of Railways in the West Midlands, part two (2) and the photo’s in question are on pages 54 and 55. Finally, I would be most grateful for any comments, in particular related to the timbering, as it was, as stated above quite a job to get things out of the way and lined up (very much ‘shoving’ of timbers, since many partial templates have been used in various places throughout). Best regards to all. Brian Nicholls. |
||
| Attachment: attach_866_1227_Bham_New_Street_Sig4-492-CO.box 201 | |||
|
posted: 13 Sep 2010 21:30 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Brian Nicholls wrote:Sorry I cannot post any of the photo’s as these are subject to copyright, however, if anyone is interested in viewing the photo’s, they can be seen in the following book:Hi Brian, Are they on this excellent web site? : http://www.photobydjnorton.com In which case you could post a link. regards, Martin. |
||
|
posted: 13 Sep 2010 23:11 from: Brian Nicholls
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Martin Wynne wrote: Are they on this excellent web site? : http://www.photobydjnorton.com Hi Matin, Sorry to say, the two particular photo’s are NOT on that web site. All three books of DJ’ Norton are mentioned there. Another interesting thing, is that a few weeks ago, I was in email contact with his son Mark and what can out of the conversations was that Mark had just discovered another couple of boxes full of his fathers photo’s and negatives which, as of yet, have not been published in anyway. Mark also stated that he did have plans to publish more of the photo’s, as and when time permits. Needless to say I am keeping an eye on his web site, and will be in email contact every now and again. Best regards. Brian Nicholls. |
||
| 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. |