|
|||
author | remove search highlighting | ||
---|---|---|---|
posted: 13 Dec 2017 23:00 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
A summary of the main changes in 217a: 1. There is a new minimum menu option for the turnout-road exit length: 2_131530_190000000.png Previously it was necessary to set adjustable and manually reduce it to the minimum. Now it is a single click. There is an existing peg position for this when pegging on the next template -- TMINP. 2. The main-road side now has a similar set of options: 2_131534_440000000.png and two new corresponding peg positions MMINP and MEXITP: 2_131538_430000000.png In addition there is a new mouse action for adjusting the main-road exit length: 2_131540_240000000.png Unfortunately there are no spare keyboard shortcuts available for this, it will be necessary to use the menu. These main-road functions won't be needed very often, because the main-road exit is normally set via the overall template length. But they will be useful on occasions, for example where it is required for the main-road radius to change beyond the crossing. Previously that would have required a zero-length transition, with a corresponding change on the turnout side. Now a length of sleeper-less plain track can be pegged on over the timbers. Also useful where the main-road rails need to be shorter than the wing rails and check rails, for example when using V-crossings as partial templates in other formations such as a tandem turnout. See also the "second turnout close behind first turnout" video at: http://templot.com/sk5/switch_close_behind_v_crossing_.sk5 which now needs a bit of updating. 3. If templates have the trackbed edges / ballast / cess options applied, these can now be shown on diagram-mode outputs. For full details see: topic 3034 - message 23076 Thanks to Phil O for this suggestion. 4. There are new options for the top toolbars on the trackpad. The toolbuttons can be displayed in one long row if your screen is wide enough, and can be dragged anywhere on the screen if preferred. For full details see: topic 3151 - message 23084 5. There are several new functions intended primarily to help with the creation and alignment of the additional V-crossing in a tandem turnout. For full details see: topic 3152 There is a scruff video showing the new functions in use at: http://flashbackconnect.com/Default.aspx?id=iYbIr74flWmgsI_8hlsXQQ2 6. The zoom to fit functions have been modified for a better fit on wide screens. For more details see: topic 3143 - message 22997 Thanks to Dave Turner for reporting this issue. 7. I have done some further work on the SK5 video downloader to improve error-checking and improve the visual appearance (on Windows). regards, Martin. |
||
posted: 15 Dec 2017 07:17 from: Godfrey Earnshaw
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin, I am a little puzzled by the operation of the "Main-Road exit" function. It allows the lengthening or shortening of the main road but it appears to do very strange things: If the turnout is inserted in a length of track then the main-road exit can only be shortened, in which case, the sleepers are left in position. It cannot be lengthened, beyond the template but the length indication says that it is lengthening. The extension can be split off. This is the same for a minted turnout, the turnout main rails cannot be extended beyond the minted limit. The above would seem to be the opposite of the turnout-road exit function which can be extended but doesn't have sleepers and cannot be split off. Cheers, Godders. |
||
posted: 15 Dec 2017 07:54 from: Godfrey Earnshaw
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin, 30 minutes later; I have just done program>clear all, leaving a length of track with a turnout. Pressed F4, to increase length, sleepers have extended but not rails. Minted new with LH B6, F4, worked perfectly. Made original control template, same as before F4 does not increase rail length. Cured this by; geometry> exit-length> normal (it was adjustable, which I thought would have been OK) Cheers, Godders. P.S. can only extend original template to about 2800 mm with F4 then sleepers only again. |
||
Last edited on 15 Dec 2017 07:57 by Godfrey Earnshaw |
|||
posted: 15 Dec 2017 14:52 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Godfrey Earnshaw wrote: I am a little puzzled by the operation of the "Main-Road exit" function.Hi Godders, Sorry if I didn't explain this very well. The first thing to say is that we managed perfectly well for 20 years without this, so it is not something likely to be needed very often. If you leave the setting on normal it should behave exactly as before. Or if it doesn't, that's a bug which I need to know about. Setting a new mint template resets normal every time. But it will be useful on occasion, to avoid needing partial templates. For example, this is a straight turnout, but using the adjustable main road exit it is possible to have a change of radius immediately beyond the crossing without losing the long timbering, by pegging on a separate template having a few shoved timbers omitted (radius exaggerated here for clarity): 2_150917_500000000.png (Note that the adjustable main-road exit applies only to the running rails. The check rail and wing rail are not affected, and could be extended using real > adjust check rails menu item as before. In which case they won't follow any change of radius in the running rails, so would need to be used with care.) The F4 overall length mouse action sets the final cut-off position for the template. Only two things can go beyond that (see below)*. Which means that "adjustable" for the main-road exit in effect means shortenable. If you extend the exit length beyond the current F4 setting, the program will happily let you do it. But you won't actually see the longer exit because the F4 overall length setting will be cutting it off. If you subsequently extend the F4 overall length, the longer exit rails will reappear, but only as far as you set it. Beyond that will be timbering only. If you then revert to the normal setting for the main-road exit, the rails would extend to the far end of the template as before. These changes are not applicable to plain track. If you split off the exit road as a separate template, the full rails will appear. (But the adjusted exit would reappear if you then inserted a turnout in the plain track. As with all other turnout settings, they carry over in the control template until you change them.) *Only two things can go beyond the F4 overall length cut-off: 1. the adjustable turnout-road exit (but not the main-road exit) can go longer. This was necessary to fill in gaps when there was no other way than F4 to shorten the main road. Now that is no longer the case, there may now be no need for the turnout road to go beyond the overall length cut-off. I will have a think about that. I hope that is clearer than mud, although I fear it may not be. cheers, Martin. |
||
posted: 15 Dec 2017 15:03 from: Godfrey Earnshaw
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin, I'm in agreement with you, it is not something I am likely to be using but I thought I had better report what I found. Cheers, Godders |
||
posted: posted: 15 Dec 2017 15:16 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Godfrey Earnshaw wrote: I'm in agreement with you, it is not something I am likely to be using but I thought I had better report what I found.Hi Godders, Yes, thanks. What you found is what I intended. I'm sorry it is not amenable to an easy explanation. There is a new function do > isolate V-crossing which makes use of the modified main-road exit. A typical use for that is shown in this tandem video: http://flashbackconnect.com/Default.aspx?id=iYbIr74flWmgsI_8hlsXQQ2 Note in the video that the new functions apply only to the running rails. The check rail and wing rail are not affected, and could be extended using real > adjust check rails menu item as before. This is sometimes needed in a tandem turnout. cheers, Martin. |
||
15 Dec 2017 15:16 from: Godfrey Earnshaw
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin, What I should have said was, I like the moveable toolbar option. I have noticed that, by moving them to the bottom right hand corner of the screen, I tend not to use them as they are out of my eye line. This makes me use the shortcut keys a lot more. One thing I don't like but it doesn't matter much because of what I have said above is the reverse order of the keys; Ctrl-F5, Ctrl-F9, F8, F7, F6, F5, F4 I think ascending order would have been more logical. Cheers, Godders. |
||
posted: 16 Dec 2017 00:16 from: madscientist click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Love the movable toolbar Next " wish " would be to have some user programmable buttons |
||
posted: 16 Dec 2017 00:52 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
madscientist wrote: Love the movable toolbarHi Dave, How many? Coding them wouldn't be too difficult, but the big issue is where to put them? See this post from John Hawtin: topic 3151 - message 23083 Not cluttering the screen has always been a priority because track design needs every square inch it can get. I'm aware that some dialogs take up far too much room already. See the dummy vehicle dialog for example, which I'm planning to split in two. Not everyone has a widescreen monitor to spread out on. I was in two minds about the second row of beginner buttons. Most of the frequently-used functions do have keyboard shortcuts. If you print the F-key chart you will see that it matches exactly behind a standard-size Windows keyboard (assuming such things still exist). regards, Martin. |
||
posted: 16 Dec 2017 01:18 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Godfrey Earnshaw wrote:One thing I don't like but it doesn't matter much because of what I have said above is the reverse order of the keys; Ctrl-F5, Ctrl-F9, F8, F7, F6, F5, F4Hi Godders, They are primarily intended as "beginner buttons" for those who don't know the keyboard shortcuts, so the numerical order is a bit academic. If the shortcuts are known the buttons are not needed. I arranged the bottom row before I introduced the movable toolbar option (which beginners might not notice anyway), the intention being to have the most frequently used functions nearer the middle of a typical 1280-wide screen. It's easy to change the order now, if there is a consensus. What we can't do is change it later after I have made a dozen more videos using them. Do you see why I have been dragging my feet so much over the docs? Already there are videos and pages made quite recently which are out of date, without looking at stuff which is 15 years old. I have some ideas for the next 217b to automate at least some of the process of creating a tandem turnout. Which would mean that I should be putting off yet again making an up-to-date full tutorial for tandems. regards, Martin. |
||
posted: 16 Dec 2017 08:02 from: Godfrey Earnshaw
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin, If I may be so bold, my preference would be the tutorial for tandems and other matters. Following the new features in 217a and using the video, I was able to construct the tandem in minutes very easily. For example, I hadn't realised until last night, that the "click-drag zoom rectangle", went to maximum zoom if you don't drag a rectangle but just clicked. It was something I picked up from the video. Cheers, Godders. |
||
posted: 16 Dec 2017 08:34 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Martin Wynne wrote:Coding them wouldn't be too difficult, but the big issue is where to put them?Hi Dave, How do you feel about programmable items on the right-click menu on the trackpad? The right-click menu has received very little attention for years, it is mainly used for the mouse action options while using the mouse actions. It is overdue for some housekeeping. I don't imagine many folks nowadays are using systems so slow that they need to turn mouse-tracking off. regards, Martin. |
||
posted: 16 Dec 2017 23:07 from: Rob Manchester
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin, If you manage to make the process of drawing a tandem turnout as easy as possible, if not fully automated, it will help many new users to Templot. Think how many times the first help request from a new user comes in as something concerning a Tandem. They are popular track items - Peco sell a lot of them - and they are often a stumbling block for new Templot users. Better that they can construct a three way easily rather than just get stuck. What about having some 'typical' tandem turnouts available in a library for download ? I know there are zillions of possible options but it would be good to have say three "ready to plant" tandems available - that is 3 times as many options as you get with Peco ( and yes I know Templot is not like other track programs but the odd nod in their direction may save you some hassle in the long run ) Just a thought. Rob |
||
posted: 16 Dec 2017 23:36 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Rob Manchester wrote:I know there are zillions of possible options but it would be good to have say three "ready to plant" tandems availableHi Rob, I have considered this in the past. The difficulty is selecting a small number of suitable sizes, without triggering a flood of requests for other sizes. For example, the first decision is the scale/gauge. Say we cover 4-SF, EM, P4, 0-MF as the common handbuilt track sizes. Then we need to cover single-sided and double-sided versions. Straight and curved. So that's 16 tandem turnouts, before even considering the sizes. Say a shortish one for goods yards, and a longer one for junctions and station throats. 32 tandem turnouts. On top of that, we need to allow both curviform and regular crossings for one or both of the base turnouts, in case the user wants sidings or crossovers. That would be 128 tandem turnouts. And then if they are for beginners, a tutorial about grouping and shifting partial templates, and how to adjust your track plan to fit a ready-made fixed-size tandem. It's too much. I can only do so much. But of course there is nothing to prevent others posting their tandem .box files here. There is a "Share and show" forum section specifically for that purpose: "A place to share your completed designs and data for other Templot users to download and use. Post a message and attach your file. For multiple files, simply post another message for each one." http://85a.co.uk/forum/view_forum.php?id=12 cheers, Martin. |
||
posted: 17 Dec 2017 00:41 from: Rob Manchester
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Martin, I wasn't intending to burden you with more work and yes of course members of Templot Club can post templates etc for use by others but new users won't know the facility is there. If you are planning a layout with Peco you can cut up their printed turnout templates to shove around on the baseboard and find an acceptable design. This can include the tandem/3-way if desired. I realise that Templot is intended to be used in a much more sophisticated and realistic manner but if there isn't a facilty to generate a tandem from the menus beginners won't know or be bothered to look round the site for one. Templot moves ever upward in it's features, the single/double slip generation being one of the more recent gems. Searching on Templot Club ( where a beginner may look ) for "tandem box file" gave me 60+ hits many of which are attempts to generate a tandem turnout which is not right in one or several details. These posts result in help and advise from yourself and the more expert users on here but if a user ( with good intentions ) uses the "Share and show" facility to post a tandem that isn't correct in detail it may cause more problems than it solves. That's more than enough from me but as always don't think I am trying to make more work for you. Just a few suggestions for you to consider. You are the owner of the ball - if we want to play with it we need to be nice to you Rob |
||
posted: 17 Dec 2017 08:37 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Rob, See: topic 3152 - message 23142 Please don't reply in this topic, which is intended only for the 217a update. regards, Martin. |
||
posted: 30 Dec 2017 00:32 from: madscientist click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Martin Wynne wrote: Martin Wynne wrote:I missed this reply, Personally templot has so many functions that some form of user programmable feature is needed , either customisable right click menus , custom screen buttons , optionally replacing existing ones , or even a user definable menu,Coding them wouldn't be too difficult, but the big issue is where to put them?Hi Dave, common stuff these days on most software Regards and a happy new year Dave |
||
posted: 30 Dec 2017 01:14 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
madscientist wrote:common stuff these days on most softwareHi Dave, That aspect doesn't concern me much. I'm not really interested in what happens in other software unless it would clearly be helpful in the design of model railway track. For example Jeff Geary's Trax has an ingenious dummy template which can be used as a double-track spacer. I've been minded to steal that idea for years. What would be helpful would be to know which specific functions you would want to assign to a custom button or menu item or keyboard shortcut? The internal design of Templot having been developed piecemeal over 20 years, would make it a major coding task to allow any function to be assigned to any button. What I do feel is that it is easy to forget that Templot is a hobby program. It is not a case of "time is money" as in business software. It doesn't actually matter if it takes a few seconds to find the next function in the menus. In fact it can be helpful to give you time to think what you are doing, and not become click-happy. Coffee? Happy New Year and best wishes for 2018. regards, Martin. |
||
posted: 1 Jan 2018 01:04 from: madscientist click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Martin Wynne wrote: madscientist wrote:My suggestions fall into the realm of " hobby " suggestions , I'm not paying you, so feel free to treat mine in that vein . They all fall under the category of " nice to haves )common stuff these days on most softwareHi Dave, My idea would be to allow reassignment of the 4 or five main buttons ( curve , etc ) to other main features , I use " make the control " a lot for example Happy new year Dave |
||
posted: 1 Jan 2018 01:27 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
madscientist wrote:My idea would be to allow reassignment of the 4 or five main buttons ( curve , etc ) to other main features , I use " make the control " a lot for exampleHi Dave, Thanks for the reply. make the control is context-sensitive, you must click the required template first to get its menu. After which it is just one click on the menu, the same as would be the case for a button. Or even quicker -- just press M on the keyboard. I'm struggling to think of anything which I use so often that it would benefit from a new dedicated button at the expense of screen space. Opening the storage box and background shapes perhaps. But it is easy to remember the CTRL-B and CTRL-S shortcuts. The switch settings... and V-crossing settings... dialogs don't have a keyboard shortcut or a button, so I will think about faster access to them. But they are linked from the NEW dialog. 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. |