Templot Club Archive 2007-2020
|
|||
| author | remove search highlighting | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
posted: 2 Mar 2014 06:41 from: Murryb
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Now that I am reasonably happy with my design I now have to build my first switch. I propose to get a kit from C&L and then proceed from there the switch sizes are B/V6 and C/V10, The slightly finer gauge sounds like the way to go. Any comments please. I feel like I have been seduced(with eyes wide open) by templot into hand built track. Murry |
||
|
posted: 2 Mar 2014 09:23 from: alan@york click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
The finer the gauge the better, within limits. I first built OO standard trackwork, but the gaps (for the wheelsets then available) 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
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
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 wheels only. I'm not aware of any gauge tools available, you would need to make your own. 0-XF -- 31.0mm gauge, 1.2mm flangeways. Gauge tools are available from C&L but this is not recommended, it doesn't work. The check gauge is wrong for current wheels. S7 -- 33.0mm gauge, 1.0mm flangeways. This is exact scale from the prototype. For S7 wheels only. Full details and gauge tools from the ScaleSeven group: http://www.scaleseven.org.uk The track gauge affects the length of turnouts, so for accurate track building you need to convert your Templot track plan to your chosen gauge before printing the construction templates. Click the gauge > other gauges... menu item, then convert group button. regards, Martin. |
||
|
posted: 2 Mar 2014 18:08 from: Murryb
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Martin Thanks for the reply, O-MF, Will the turnouts, Kits from C&L still work. Murry |
||
|
posted: 2 Mar 2014 22:14 from: mike47j click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
In the standard C&L parts the V crossing and wing rails will be set at 1.75mm not the 1.5mm needed for 0-MF. A 1:6 crossing is probably OK in GOG-F, but with 1:10 the wheels will drop into the gap at the V making the running look rough. Mike Johnson |
||
|
posted: 3 Mar 2014 10:22 from: stuart1600
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
mike47j wrote: .....A 1:6 crossing is probably OK in GOG-F, but with 1:10 the wheels will drop into the gap at the V making the running look rough.I'm puzzled by this. Perhaps mistakenly I was under the impression that it was the relationship between the total width of the wheel (i.e. tread+flange) and the distance between the wing rails at the crossing nose that was crucial to whether or not wheels dropped into a gap at the crossing. In 0-MF the distance between wing rails is about 3.5mm (2 x 1.5 flangeways + 0.5 nose width), so provided the wheel width is greater than 3.5mm it shouldn't drop. In normal finescale it would have to be 4mm to avoid dropping in the gap. The angle of the V-crossing doesn't affect these measurements at all and so would seem to be irrelevant. If a particular wheel drops in a gap at 1:10 it will still do so at 1:6, assuming the same gauge/flangeways. Or am I mistaken in my understanding of what happens at the V-crossing gap? Best regards, Stuart |
||
|
posted: 3 Mar 2014 11:56 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
stuart1600 wrote:Perhaps mistakenly I was under the impression that it was the relationship between the total width of the wheel (i.e. tread+flange) and the distance between the wing rails at the crossing nose that was crucial to whether or not wheels dropped into a gap at the crossing.Hi Stuart, You are entirely correct. It is a very common misconception that wheels drop into long angle V-crossings (frogs) but not into short angle ones. Provided the wheel is of the correct width, it will not drop into 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 arises. I think this is the point Mike was making -- with 3.5mm wheels on GOG-F the bump may be acceptable at 1:6 but not at 1:10. But they will drop to some extent at all angles. It's unfortunate that the Gauge 0 Guild's long-standing published Fine track standard (GOG-F in Templot) doesn't actually work with most of the currently available 0 gauge wheels, a situation which has existed for over 10 years now. Fortunately a solution is available in 0-MF, which I believe the Guild will include in their revised standards in preparation. Ideally the GOG-F standard should be withdrawn as obsolete and Guild members advised not to use it for new work, but I doubt they will go that far. regards, Martin. |
||
|
posted: 3 Mar 2014 18:36 from: mike47j click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
I don't think you can get rid of GOG-F. If you run large locos on small radius pointwork then the narrow flange gap of 0-MF may cause derailments. While the small wheels on GOG-F large radius pointwork only looks terrible to the track builder (no one else seems to notice). Perhaps anything over 6ft radius should be 0-MF and anything under should be GOG-F ? Mike Johnson |
||
|
posted: 3 Mar 2014 18:50 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
mike47j wrote: I don't think you can get rid of GOG-F.Hi Mike, On sharp curves you can add some gauge widening -- see Debs 0-MF+ gauge tools. This increases the check rail flangeway by the same amount as the gauge-widening so that the check gauge remains the same. The V-crossing flangeway gap remains at 1.5mm so that wheels are fully supported. Older 0 gauge Fine wheels have flanges 1.0mm thick. Current wheels have flanges 0.8mm thick. Either way there is plenty of leeway in a 1.5mm flangeway gap for sharp curves. If you are getting derailments, check the wheels back-to-flange dimension. This BEF dimension should not exceed 30.0mm max. The back-to-back should be not less than 28.8mm min. Beginners are advised to avoid GOG-F if they want good running with current wheels. 0-MF is a better choice. regards, Martin. |
||
| 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. |