Templot Club Archive 2007-2020
|
|||
| author | remove search highlighting | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
posted: 18 Jun 2008 16:51 from: BeamEnds click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Another question..... I have obtained an 0 track gauge that has both the running and check rail positions cut as slots in round bar, rather that the check rail being butted up against a rib as in the gauges mentioned so far. This seems to have the advantage of being able to hold all 4 rails at a time, but I'm thinking there could be problems with the Vee's - or am I getting over worried? Cheers Richard |
||
|
posted: 18 Jun 2008 16:52 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
BeamEnds wrote: Another question..... I have obtained an 0 track gauge that has both the running and check rail positions cut as slots in round bar, rather that the check rail being butted up against a rib as in the gauges mentioned so far. This seems to have the advantage of being able to hold all 4 rails at a time, but I'm thinking there could be problems with the Vee's - or am I getting over worried?Hi Richard, My feeling is that gauge tools which combine more than two slots in a single tool are next to useless, but I know they are commonly available. There has been a lot of discussion about this recently on the 00-SF group at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/00-SF . If wing rail and check rail slots are combined in a single 4-slot roller gauge, then: 1. It's impossible to construct V-crossings on sharp curves with gauge-widening. 2. It confuses the setting of the V-crossing flangeway with the check gauge. These are two completely independent settings and shouldn't be mixed up. The flangeway gap dimension at the check rail is the instantaneous difference between the check gauge and the track gauge at that location. It's not necessarily the same as the V-crossing flangeway gap at the wing rail. And it's not necessarily the same for every V-crossing, i.e. if there is any gauge-widening. 3. If there is a problem with the track, it is impossible to see which rail is in error, using a combined multi-slot gauge tool. The rules are: a. Use a track gauge tool to set the running rails. This can be a roller gauge with two slots, or a triangular 3-point gauge to introduce automatic gauge-widening. b. Use a check gauge tool to set the check rails. This is usually a two-slot roller gauge, with a flat-portion for gauging from the nose of the vee. This dimension is the most important in constructing track. You could just about get away with constructing the other rails by eye from the template, but not the check rails. c. Use a crossing flangeway gauge to set the V-crossing flangeway gap between the vee and the wing rails. This is usually a small flat piece of metal of the required thickness, usually sourced from precision shim or a feeler gauge or similar. Under no circumstances should this be used to set the check rails -- use the check gauge tool as in b. above. The EMGS and Scalefour and other societies supply sets of the 3 gauge tools as above, so that the above rules can be followed. They don't supply combined roller gauges. regards, Martin. |
||
|
posted: 18 Jun 2008 17:38 from: BeamEnds click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Ok, thanks Martin. I'll go with the three gauges then as that seems to be the best solution. I'll price some splip gauges as well while I'm at it. Drawings nearly done, so watch this space..... Cheers Richard |
||
|
posted: 18 Jun 2008 19:15 from: Brian Lewis
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Martin Wynne wrote: My feeling is that gauge tools which combine more than two slots in a single tool are next to uselessAmazing! Folk have been using these for generations without problems. C+L, Slaters, S7G, Markits, Marcway, DOGA and probably a host of others produce these gauges and yet Martin Wynne calls them useless. Boy, he really has flipped his lid this time...... Regards Brian Lewis |
||
|
posted: 18 Jun 2008 19:34 from: BeamEnds click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
I'll get a quote for some tin helmets too! ;-) Cheers Richard |
||
|
posted: 18 Jun 2008 19:48 from: davelong click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
The arguement against all in one gauges is compelling though. The differenes may be acceptable in certain gauges but at the finer end of the scale (no pun intended) I wouldn't build p4/s4 even EM and 00SF with out multiple gauges. Dave |
||
|
posted: 18 Jun 2008 22:38 from: Brian W Lewis
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Brian Lewis wrote: Martin Wynne wrote:Brian, you really are sounding rather tetchy these days. This isn't like you.My feeling is that gauge tools which combine more than two slots in a single tool are next to useless<snip>  Martin is making points about tracklaying "properly", and in that context his comments are valid. Many of us have used things like the Peco Rollergauge with perfectly adequate (i.e. functioning) results over many years, but that is not to deny that, if you want to "do it right" they don't cut the mustard. In practice, most of us want something that "works" adequately, and - providing we are not working in scale/gauge combinations where extreme accuracy is /required/ then rolling gauges seem to be perfectly adequate. Where extreme accuracy /is/ required (or desired) the appropriate set of gauges as outlined by Martin removes the need for extreme skill (thankfully!). Looking forward to seeing you and Mrs L in Lakeland (I nearly said "in the Lakes" - which could be misconstrued) if you're in the area. Brian W Lewis (Lakeland) |
||
|
posted: 19 Jun 2008 02:36 from: Brian Lewis
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Brian W Lewis wrote:Brian, you really are sounding rather tetchy these days. This isn't like you.No. I have nothing to be 'tetchy' about. In fact I feel like a spring lamb. They took my catheter out yesterday and now I can pee like any other man. It's a great feeling...... But to business. Martin has some kudos in this field and when he talks, folk listen. I would hate anyone to take this remark seriously, else they might feel the manufacturers who supply their raw materials have got it wrong over the years. Regards Brian Lewis Carrs - - C+L Finescale |
||
|
posted: 19 Jun 2008 02:42 from: Brian Lewis
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
davelong wrote: The argument against all in one gauges is compelling though. The differences may be acceptable in certain gauges but at the finer end of the scale (no pun intended) I wouldn't build p4/s4 even EM and 00SF with out multiple gauges.Well all I can say Dave is that I once built track professionally. In the month I ceased I produced singles and arrays to a total of 36 turnouts and that was just an average month. In all that time I have never used anything other than a set of 6 roller gauges of the type now being frowned upon. Regards Brian Lewis |
||
|
posted: 19 Jun 2008 02:58 from: davelong click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
I'm not saying that they don't have merits, and I'm certain your pointwork was to a terrific standard. But looking at it from a purely mathematical stance the part about setting the check rail from the Vee is extremely valid. You can't really argue that from a maths stand point that the crossing flangeway gaps are the same or should be the same as the check rail gaps, which ultimately will be the same if a 4 slot gauge is used. I wouldn't want and I don't think that sales of such gauges would ever suffer from these ramblings, its probably just one of those each to their own, growing up with a maths teacher Dad has meant I see things this way. Dave |
||
|
posted: 19 Jun 2008 03:18 from: Brian W Lewis
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Brian Lewis wrote: Brian W Lewis wrote:Brilliant! Glad to hear it!Brian, you really are sounding rather tetchy these days. This isn't like you.No. I have nothing to be 'tetchy' about. In fact I feel like a spring lamb. They took my catheter out yesterday and now I can pee like any other man. It's a great feeling...... Regards, "Dubya" |
||
| 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. |