|
|||
author | remove search highlighting | ||
---|---|---|---|
posted: 29 May 2007 04:08 from: lippydavies click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hello I am currently building some Flat bottom EM gauge turnouts for a new layout. Question is the check rails have printed and are 5 sleepers long. Now a fellow modeller has built some more trackwork for this layout and reckons that they should be over 7 sleepers going off prototype. Is this strictly correct? cheers Lee |
||
posted: 29 May 2007 08:20 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Lee, > the check rails have printed and are 5 sleepers long. > Now a fellow modeller has built some more trackwork > for this layout and reckons that they should be over > 7 sleepers going off prototype. The length of check rails depends on the V-crossing angle. For most UK flat-bottom track, check rail lengths are: angles up to 1:10 --- 13ft check rails spanning 5 timbers angles over 1:10 up to 1:12 --- 15ft-6in check rails spanning 6 timbers angles over 1:12 --- 18ft check rails spanning 7 timbers Templot makes these changes for you. Try using the F5 mouse action to adjust the crossing angle and watch the check rails change length. Note that for most standard-gauge FB track the flare angle on the wing and check rail ends is machined rather than bent. This makes a noticeable difference to the appearance of a turnout. You can make this change in Templot at "real > rails > flared ends bent" or "real > rails > flared ends machined" menu options. regards, Martin. |
||
posted: 30 May 2007 02:30 from: Keith Norgrove click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Martin said, " The length of check rails depends on the V-crossing angle. For most UK flat-bottom track, check rail lengths are: angles up to 1:10 --- 13ft check rails spanning 5 timbers angles over 1:10 up to 1:12 --- 15ft-6in check rails spanning 6 timbers angles over 1:12 --- 18ft check rails spanning 7 timbers" This, however, is far from the whole story! I think this is correct information for early (pre 1969) FB track which generally kept very clost to the contemporary Bh designs. With the introduction of 'Vertical' FB designs from 1969 check rail length depended on both crossing angle and line speed as follows: For speeds up to 75mph. angles 1:4 to 1:13, 4980mm long (7 baseplates) angles 1:15 - 1:24, 5690mm long, (8 baseplates) For speeds over 75mph. angles 1:4 to 1:9.25, 5690 long, (8 baseplates) angles 1:10 to 1:18.5, 6400mm long, (9 baseplates) angles 1:21 to 1:28, 7110 long, (10 baseplates) angle 1:32.365, 8410 long, (12 baseplates) Wing rail flares are extended to match the check rails. Where the crossing is in the high rail of a curve with speeds between105 and 125 mph then further extended check rails arerecommended. When we get to current standards for UIC 60 rail things get more complex. Firstly the flares are asymnetric depending on the normal direction of traffic being facing or trailing, ie the flare is gentler when running into the check rail for the normal direction. Then there are tables of preferred lengths and minimum lengths, some checks have speed limit of 50 in the revese direction. The tables give details of entry and exit flares but I have just given the total length here. 1. Preferred lengths, Check rail type; speed; crossing angles; total length. A; up to 30; up to and incl. 12.5; 5020mm. B; 30 to 50; up to and incl. 17.25; 7625mm. C; up to 75; up to and incl. 31.25; 9520mm. D; 75 to 125; up to and incl. 31.25; 12120mm. E#; 105 to 125 up to and incl. 31.25; 12200mm. # crossing in high rail of curve, reverse speed limit 50mph. Types A - D used in turnout and crossover route. Types C - E used in the through routes. 2. Minimum lengths, this is a bit of a complex table and essentially allows shortening the exit flares at the expense of speed limits in reverse. Above is from the Railtrack track design handbook, hope it helps a bit. NB. crossing angles finer than 1:31.25 now have to be swing noses and hence don't need check rails. Regards Keith |
||
posted: 6 Jun 2007 17:10 from: adj click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
What technique are you using to build the turnouts? Any info will be useful. Cheers, Ad |
||
Last edited on 6 Jun 2007 17:10 by adj |
|||
posted: 7 Jun 2007 02:54 from: Templot User
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
----- from Andy Reichert ----- If you switching from BH to FB rail for the first time and using a proto:scale, such as P:87 or P4, please be aware that the rail bases will overlap at check rails and wing rails. You have to file one side's base away to get the narrow flangeways needed. Andy http://www.proto87.com |
||
posted: 8 Jun 2007 01:38 from: lippydavies click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
adj wrote: === What technique are you using to build the turnouts? Any info will be useful. Cheers, Ad === Thanks to Martin and Keith for their replies In reply to the above, I am using Copperclad with a mix of solder and Peco Individualay construction. I have attached a photo hopefully and have more but don't want to block the forum with them. Happy to send them direct or check out our web sites, hopefully they will have been updated. http://roundtreesidings.fotopic.net/ http://roundtreessidings.fotopic.net/ Cheers Lee |
||
Attachment: attach_28_lippydavies1.jpg 610 | |||
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. |