Accurate intersection of rails

[Phil O]

Hi Phil,

EMSF is fine, it was at one of the Zoom meetings that you mentioned P4 and it was when I switched the information panel on to check the radius of the slip curve that I noticed the EM as I was expecting to see P4.

The make ladder option is still available tools, make ladder. Third from the bottom. That option will make regular V crossings, not the curviform that you currently have.

I will get around to the more complex formations, once the parts of a basic turnout and it's components are sorted.

 

[Phil G]

Hi Phil,
I must be going daft I looked for make ladder and just could not see it. you of course right its exactly where you said.
I did note it was only for regular diamonds and slips but will worth following the video set by step.
cheers
Phil,

 

[Phil G]

Hi Phil,
Here is another file, containing some more tiles.
I think you should be able to just add them to the one I already sent.

The other option would be for me to send you a beta test copy of T5v556sbc, if that is ok with Martin.

Is it ok if I remove the first file I sent from the post, to avoid cluttering up the forum?

STeve

Hi Steve,
Sorry for late reply, yes what you have done is fine thats for that.
all good to remove.
cheers
Phil,

 

[Phil G]

@Martin Wynne @Phil O
Hi Guys,
I have spent a bit of time following and trying to fully understand the irregular and transitional single slips fbr video. one thing that puzzle's me part way though the instruction it talks about switch to the correct size for the slip real> switch settings then either A for 1:6 slip, B for 1:7 slip (clearly the one to pick in video given the project started with a B 1:7 turnout.) B for 1:8 slip and C for 1:10 slip, Assuming anything bigger than a 1:10 would change to a switch diamond.
The first question does this mean only 1:6, 1:7; 1:8 or 1;10 slips can be made? or does it mean you have to select the one closest to your slip? what then happen if the slip is 1:9 which of the switch options should be chosen?
cheers
Phil

 

[Phil O]

Phil,

Select the one closest to that, which you're using. It's the same principle of standard switches, they cover more than one crossing angle.

 

[Phil G]

Phil,

Select the one closest to that, which you're using. It's the same principle of standard switches, they cover more than one crossing angle.

Thanks Phil/Martin
Ok got that? Just for my piece of mind if it turns out to be a 1:9 I.e. equal distant would it be normal to go down to 1:8 or up to 1:10 switch?
cheers
Phil,

 

[Martin Wynne]

Ok got that? Just for my piece of mind if it turns out to be a 1:9 I.e. equal distant would it be normal to go down to 1:8 or up to 1:10 switch?

Hi Phil,

Use the one which fits best. Most likely a B switch for 1:9.

That will be a switch-diamond, so no K-crossing check rails. Which means plenty of room for the slip road (but maybe not easy for the switch drive connections for the K-crossing).

cheers,

Martin.

 

[Phil G]

Hi Phil,
I have made some progress but once again back to scratching my head.
I have installed the 50 inch maps tiles kindly supplied by Steve thanks to Phil's work on the maps. this is inclued in a zip format

As such I stared again and this time in S4. the reason for this was not so much because I have made up my mind to switch but more because thought if I keep as prototypical I have the best chance of getting it as prototypical as possible.
Anyway you were right the B V8 on the up slow makes it quite obvious the single slip on the up fast should be a regular V8 diamond as well which it now is. I have also figured how to make this into a single slip this now ( done).

As for the scissors on the down lines, it's still a bit tricky. the bottom left turnout is now a D+v8LH (the D switch was the only way I could get the switch toe in the right place) it does make sense being a V8 given, that the same as the one on the set line.
The bottom right is a C+V10 and the one on the top right is also a C+V10 so thats just a C10 crossover. The diamond in the upper right quadrant of the scissors is a regular diamond K7.58 + V8.15 and everything looks to fit ok. I have not yet done the single slip for this diamond but I don't see any issue, Its just until I have got the inner diamond sorted. I did want to do it as this diamond my need to be tweaked. what I could not make to work was the inner diamond, I did try making two dummy plain tracks and then do a make diamond but it will not work.
I think it may need the find intersection function ( not sure to be honest.
anyway both a zipped bgs.3 file and a box file included.
any comment's or suggestion very much appreciated.
cheers
Phil,

 

[Phil O]

Phil,

I will have a look after lunch. No boiled eggs, just a sarnie and a cuppa soup.

 

[Phil O]

Hi Phil,

You had the two halfs of the diamond overlapping, I deleted the platform end one, made a diamond from the remaining half adjusted the two approach tracks and then added the slip road.

Back to you.

 

[Phil G]

@Phil O @Martin Wynne
Hi Phil,
Thanks for that the second slip looks good.
I am not surprised about the extra half diamond ( good pick up though) I did wonder if I had some debris left over on the inside diamond attempt. That was actually from playing around all yesterday my time with the inside scissors.

I had not yet made any attempt to do the second slip because Martin had said right at the start of the video tutorial. Best to do the slip after everything else is finalized.

It's the inside diamond on the scissors I need to get right. if you look at the scissors you will note there are no K or V crossings yet defined.
I need to create a diamond to go in there and then part everything off to to remove all the rail confits. no matter what I have tried I can't get the diamond to sit in the right place. I am not even sure you can create a diamond in there if the other diamond in the formation is a K7.58 and V8.15?
Basically on both crossovers, you have a right hand facing a right hand ( C-V10) and on the other side a left hand D-8 facing a K7.58+ V8.15 LH
which makes both sides a sort a S curve scenario. I simply have no idea how I would make a diamond fit correctly in this case.
I have a feeling its going to need the find intersection feature. and maybe even the bit that Martin is going to release in 556b even they I don't know what the starting size of the diamond would be.
any wise thoughts on that one ?

cheers
Phil,

 

[Phil G]

@Phil O @Martin Wynne
Hi Guys,
I have pulled out only the four elements of the inside scissors into a separate box file to make it a bit safer when experimenting.
cheers
Phil

 

[Phil O]

Phil,

I will give it the once over tomorrow, but if I was you I'd make the turnouts and the slip into whole or half numbers, the prototype rarely uses decimal places, except in extreme cases, in the model we may have to resort to such tactics, due to space constraints. You probably won't have the option as far as the diamond contained in the scissors.

 

[Phil G]

Hi Guys,
just a further update

Phil,

I will give it the once over tomorrow, but if I was you I'd make the turnouts and the slip into whole or half numbers, the prototype rarely uses decimal places, except in extreme cases, in the model we may have to resort to such tactics, due to space constraints. You probably won't have the option as far as the diamond contained in the scissors.

Hi Phil,
Agree thats exactly why K7.58 V8.15 did not look right to me. everything else is very doable in the real railway.
I was thinking of changing the slip diamond to a K8 V8 and then seeing if I could make that fit. The other thing am doing in Templot is using the s curve transition to get a nice match to the map, in the down slow and fast lines in reality in the real world this would be two counter facing regular curves. I did wonder if this then causes the math in Templot to create decimal places for vee and K crossings.

Non of that answers the C+V10 crossover, both of which are regular turnouts in the real railway this would still be a slightly S shaped transition from one turnout to the other. Is this a case of the big hammer doing the fine tuning required?
Bit of an further update.
I have managed to make an inside crossing by taking the TCP peg and making a small length of plain track adjust it the the length of the TCP on the other side of the crossover ( clearly it does not align) so I then curved it to suit did the same thing on the other crossover
seen as red and green on the photo then did a make diamond. It did not quite work, most likely because the two plain track are now slightly curved, resulting in the diamond coming out with slightly the wrong vee and K crossings. In fact the K may just be close enough to use? all seen in the attched photo.
New though if I did the same thing for only two elements without curving the resultant plain track, I should get at least one K or vee right. if I then did it for all four quadrants and only picked the correct K or V from each would then then work?
cheers
Phil

 

[Phil G]

@Phil O @Martin Wynne
Hi Phil,
I think I have cracked it, Martin maybe you should look away now, because I am not sure this is the correct way to do it but tackling each of the four quadrant's of the inside diamond as sperate items has given me both K and Vee crossing that seem to work, there one or two places which are maybe .02mm or so off, but nothing that I think should stop me building it.
Its a bit a rainbow, which I have done deliberately so I could keep up with where I was at. Assuming you happy with my cobbled approach I will start the laying the timbers and sleepers.
box file attched for checking purposes.
Cheers
Phil,
PS there is still likely a duplicate or two in there in places.

 

[Martin Wynne]

Martin maybe you should look away now

@Phil G

Hi Phil,

I can't see any obvious problems.

But I notice you are now building in P4 instead of EM-SF at the start of this topic?

cheers,

Martin.

 

[Phil G]

@Phil G

Hi Phil,

I can't see any obvious problems.

But I notice you are now building in P4 instead of EM-SF at the start of this topic?

cheers,

Martin.

Hi Martin,
well thats good news
Yes thats right, I wanted to get it right using something scale first, now I start again in EMSF, I figure I could have Heaton Norris drawn up in both EMSF and S4 before I start building in earnest.

 

[Phil O]

Hi Phil,

That looks good.

Non of that answers the C+V10 crossover, both of which are regular turnouts in the real railway this would still be a slightly S shaped transition from one turnout to the other. Is this a case of the big hammer doing the fine tuning required?

Yes a bit of brute force will sort out small anomalies in track building, rail is quite flexible!

When you convert it to EM you will find that a bit of fine-tuning will be needed, due to the slight changes in geometry caused by the narrowing of the gauge.

 

[Phil G]

@Martin Wynne @Phil O
Hi Martin,
Sorry to be asking you this question when you so deep into programming, however I have been trying for the last few days to solve this problem and the answer is to say the least elusive.
the question in reality is about vee crossing on half diamonds.( or for that matter turnout) as well)

In the attached from the 1928 Permanent way pdf it shows the components used to make a 1 in 10 full straight scissors.
which I have been trying to replicate in Templot (S4 gauge) there are two things that stick out.
firstly if you create the four C10 turnouts that make up the scissors you then can't make the stated K5 V6 diamond fit into the center of the turnouts there close but not quite right, I have put this down to Templot using pure math when on the real railway they only had a certain range of chairs and if is did not quite fit mathematically, it would be nothing a big hammer could not persuade into place. After all the surface contact of the chair is quite small, so any error would be barely noticeable and there would be nothing stopping the rail deforming past the chair onto the slightly different angle required. So I was ok with this mismatch. @ phil O, I guess thats how it all works is that right?

What I have found I can't replicate in Templot however is the stated 1:6 vee crossing that is created as the two stock rails intersect.
I can find the correct intersection point, using the find intersection tool but I can't recreate a curved Vee. So does not come out right, no matter what I try to do. in relation to what is being show in the pdf image. Also notice the cutting of the two stock rails, they are not made from a point and splice rail but are equally spiced. Basically I have two curves and not straight rail at this point because the point if formed as both stock rails are still curving..
Can this be done in Templot? And if so how?

Cheers
Phil, .

 

[Steve_Cornford]

Hi Phil,
Any chance of posting your box file?
Steve

 

[Martin Wynne]

if you create the four C10 turnouts that make up the scissors you then can't make the stated K5

@Phil G

Hi Phil,

If you change to using CLM angles instead of RAM, you should find the middle K-crossings are very close to half of 1:10 CLM = 1:5 CLM.

I don't believe the equal-spliced 1:6 nose. It wouldn't last 5 minutes under traffic -- it is a smudged drawing (unless you have photographic evidence?)

You can get the curves through both sides of it if you change it to curviform, and use the isolate V-crossing function. Use F10 to adjust the radius on the diverging side. Alternatively take it from a gaunt turnout and use the adjust gaunt turnout radius mouse action.

This is a type 2 scissors -- I'm sure I've done a video or tutorial some time ago -- search "type 2 scissors".

Sorry this is a brief reply. I can't get into full track planning mode at present, too busy with chairs.

edit: correction it is a type 1, but searching "type 2 scissors" gets more results:

search results

type1 search

cheers,

Martin.

 

[Phil G]

@Phil G

Hi Phil,

If you change to using CLM angles instead of RAM, you should find the middle K-crossings are very close to half of 1:10 CLM = 1:5 CLM.

I don't believe the equal-spliced 1:6 nose. It wouldn't last 5 minutes under traffic -- it is a smudged drawing (unless you have photographic evidence?)

You can get the curves through both sides of it if you change it to curviform, and use the isolate V-crossing function. Use F10 to adjust the radius on the diverging side. Alternatively take it from a gaunt turnout and use the adjust gaunt turnout radius mouse action.

This is a type 2 scissors -- I'm sure I've done a video or tutorial some time ago -- search "type 2 scissors".

Sorry this is a brief reply. I can't get into full track planning mode at present, too busy with chairs.

edit: correction it is a type 1, but searching "type 2 scissors" gets more results:

search results

type1 search

cheers,

Martin.

Hi Martin,
I fully understand re chairs,
I will give all you say a go and report back.
@Steve_Cornford no point in posting a box file until I have done all Martin is suggesting.
thanks guys
cheers
phil,

 

[Martin Wynne]

@Phil G

Hi Phil,

I have made you a bit of scruffy video, showing how to get the middle V-crossing aligned. It is for a C-10 in EM. Done in Templot2.
Sorry it's so scruffy -- done at 2am trying to keep my eyes open.

See: https://flashbackconnect.com/Default.aspx?id=fHNXh7NE7Xay3_Z6UY8HLg2

The check rails need shortening a bit with shorter flares to clear the other rail.

cheers,

Martin.

 

[Phil G]

Hi Martin,
Thanks very much for taking the time out of programming to do that, a great video not scruffy at all.
To be honest by the time I watch the video I had already achieved the same thing, by following your written instructions. That said it did take me three of four goes before I got there.

I had no idea F10 had that effect on a half diamond vee crossing, a very good learning. Worth noting the starting vee setting also has a big impact on how much you can get out of the F10 function.
I also did not use the mirror function as you showed I simple turned the vee round 180 degrees. Got the same result though.
PS it was 2.00am NZ time when i cracked it. I am feeling a bit jaded as a result, I guess you are likely to be in the same boat
cheers
Phil,
.

 

[Phil O]

Phil,

I found it a great help to print off the F_chart, it's in the help menu print f key chart.

 

[Martin Wynne]

Phil,

I found it a great help to print off the F_chart, it's in the help menu print f key chart.

@Phil O @Phil G

Hi Phil,

Some of the shortcuts which were working in Templot2 are not working in Templot5.

Two which I know about and have now fixed for the next release are:

F10 mouse action, adjust K-crossing angle in irregular half-diamond.

CTRL+DELETE to clear (delete) all background templates.

If you find others not working, please let me know. There is a list of shortcuts at help > shortcut keys list menu item.

If not working, use the menus instead.

cheers,

Martin.

 

[Martin Wynne]

@Phil G

Hi Phil,

Note that when using F9 mouse action on a half-diamond template, you can swap instantly to F10 and back by clicking the mouse-action icon:

There are several of these instant mouse action swaps available by clicking the icon. It must be years since I last made a list of them, someone remind me.

Martin.

 

[Phil O]

Martin,

Yet another school day, I never knew that, or at least if I did I forgot it a long time ago.

 

[Phil G]

Hi Guys,
one step forward and one step backwards again I am afraid.
Just to recap what I am trying to archive here which is to make and exact match (in S4) to the 1 in 10 straight scissors shown on page 76 of the Permanent 1928 pdf with the final aim to be able to create chairs SC10C, SC10B and SC10A as well as the Slab and Bracket A chair on the four 10 in 10 turnouts. the crossover is set with the gap between TS to TS is stated as 6' 5 1/2" or 77.5 inch ( 46.67mm scale) The first go was to do as Martin suggested in the scruff video. This created all the elements needs, however I just could not get the timbers to line up. Given that the dimensions are given in the PDF it should have been easy. I then noticed the point rail shown below was too long on my box file. In order to correct this moving from the center point of the crossings I snaked though the peg each of the four turnouts in turn. this worked and both the timbers and the length of the point rail now look correct. I then had to redo the vee crossing intersects which was fine, that worked exactly as the scruff video again. however I now find I have the K crossings in the wrong place. what I believe I need to do is slide them long in the horizontal plain but leave the timbers as they are. the problem is neither slide though the peg or snake though the peg gives me what I am looking for. Is there a way I can achieve this? current box file attached.

 

[Phil G]

Hi Guys,
I think I may have just figured it out. By using Find intersection using relevant stock and check rails, then adjust curve and F10 each time to align required rails, trim to suit, then omit all the rails that are not needed. it seemed to work on at least the first quadrant I tried it one. so I guess its repeat for each quadrant in turn.
EDIT That idea will not work, by snaking the turnouts they no longer intersect in the required place!!
Therefore the question remains, how can you archive what is shown on the drawing IE a point rail measuring 16' 6''? At this stage it does not seem possible. Either the crossing angle or the stated distance between the two stock rails, prevents the math working out. Or am I missing something here?
cheers
Phil,

 

[Martin Wynne]

EDIT That idea will not work, by snaking the turnouts they no longer intersect in the required place!!
Therefore the question remains, how can you archive what is shown on the drawing IE a point rail measuring 16' 6''? At this stage it does not seem possible. Either the crossing angle or the stated distance between the two stock rails, prevents the math working out. Or am I missing something here?

@Phil G

Hi Phil,

You have the TS track spacing set at 6ft-6in way in the BOX file. The outline drawing at the top shows the tracks at standard 6ft way (6ft-5.1/2in between the gauge faces). You need to change that. It will make a big difference. The centres should be 44.67mm, not the 46.67mm which you have there.

Also, as the switches are type C (which is the Natural size with 1:10 CLM), I suggest changing the V-crossing type to generic. This will set the turnout lead (toe-to-blunt nose) to 81ft-5in as shown, and change the turnout radii a little, all of which will affect the position of the middle V-crossings.

As always when trying to match the prototype exactly, you need to start off with the correct settings in the first template:

exact scale track gauge
exact scale flangeway gap
crossing angle in CLM
crossing type usually generic
track spacing usually 6ft way

I have scanned the same drawings from the LNER version, as reprinted by NERA. You will see there are some minor differences from the LMS, but essentially both have been copied from the same REA original.

These scans are at a bit better hi-res quality then the LMS PDF versions. Not brilliant, but a bit better. Zoom in to see the details. If your browser won't zoom them when clicked twice, download them using the links below and open in your graphics editor program.

You could also try using the drawing as a background drawing in Templot, although it is almost certainly distorted and will take some effort to get it aligned and scaled. I will see what I can do with it.

Download links:

https://85a.uk/images/rea_10_scissors.png

https://85a.uk/images/rea_10_scissors_chairs.png

cheers,

Martin.

 

[Phil G]

@Phil G

Hi Phil,

You have the TS track spacing set at 6ft-6in way in the BOX file. The outline drawing at the top shows the tracks at standard 6ft way (6ft-5.1/2in between the gauge faces). You need to change that. It will make a big difference. The centres should be 44.67mm, not the 46.67mm which you have there.

Also, as the switches are type C (which is the Natural size with 1:10 CLM), I suggest changing the V-crossing type to generic. This will set the turnout lead (toe-to-blunt nose) to 81ft-5in as shown, and change the turnout radii a little, all of which will affect the position of the middle V-crossings.

As always when trying to match the prototype exactly, you need to start off with the correct settings in the first template:

exact scale track gauge
crossing angle in CLM
crossing type usually generic
track spacing usually 6ft way

I have scanned the same drawings from the LNER version, as reprinted by NERA. You will see there are some minor differences from the LMS, but essentially both have been copied from the same REA original.

These scans are at a bit better hi-res quality then the LMS PDF versions. Not brilliant, but a bit better. Zoom in to see the details. If your browser won't zoom them when clicked twice, download them using the links below and open in your graphics editor program.

You could also try using the drawing as a background drawing in Templot, although it is almost certainly distorted and will take some effort to get it aligned and scaled. I will see what I can do with it.

Download links:

https://85a.uk/images/rea_10_scissors.png

https://85a.uk/images/rea_10_scissors_chairs.png

cheers,

Martin.

Hi Martin,
And the moral of the story is always consult the experts
On a more serious note I had worked out it almost worked with a 6 foot way. I did not pick from the drawing was showing gauge face to gauge face but now you mentioned it that makes total sense.
I will take on board all your other comments.
I had considered using exact scale and I may yet still do that first..

One question if I can cad draw the SC10 series of chairs (full size) would that help you in anyway? I mean when you get time to take on these chairs I mean. My other option is to only make them as S4 components at this time. the same thing also applies to the L1CC chair.

My original though process was to make something in S4 as a prove of concept. The real problem is always the depth of the model flanges. I have concluded S4 will just about work as drawn, but it maybe prudent to lower the CI block height a bit anyway. EM-OO Gibson type will not work and will need the CI block reducing in depth. No other wheel profile such as RP 25 has any chance. (same issue as the inside half chairs.)
I have further worked out a 0.5 mm rod if dropped 0.15 mm from the true bolt centre line on the rai will just about pass inside a CI block and will still be in the narrowest part of the rail extrusion. if made for S4. it should work ok. Again it will not work for EM or OO profiles!!!
I have dome some experiments and you can just about drill rail at 0.5 mm, as you thought my drill breakage is currently unacceptable unless a guide bush is used. Once you have it in a guide it does seem to work. No idea how many holes you could actualy drill though before the drill breaks though.
cheers
Phil,
Ps the scans are quite a bit better than the PDF from the LMS society thanks for that.

 

[Phil G]

Hi Martin,
One other thing, on the prototype there is a knuckle on both sides of the K crossing rails IE the slice rail and the check rails. because we create half template of diamonds we don't get this. Should I consider doing it anyway? clearly it would then mean both the slice rail and the check rail are made from one rail each? My concern is because we used overly wide gaps between running rails and check rails ( even in S4) would trying to create a knuckle bend also result in a gap that is then too big for wheels to cross?
cheers
Phil,

 

[Martin Wynne]

@Phil G @Hayfield

Hi Phil,

It's going to be some time before we can construct such complex assemblies entirely as plug track or COT track.

A hybrid solution might be possible. All the special chairs are slab & bracket designs. It might be possible to include the slab part in the FDM timbering base. Or as resin plug-in slabs. The slabs could have raised grooves up to the rail foot only, to align the rails. The rails could then be glued in place on the slabs (or possibly soldered to 1mm pins inserted in resin slabs). The remaining parts of the chairs to be added as glue-on cosmetic resin prints after the unit has been built and tested.

Fortunately for K-crossing assemblies we don't need to include electrical isolation gaps within them.

Putting the proper middle knuckle bend radius in the half-diamond templates has been on my to-do list for ages. I ought to get it done before I start on the K-crossing chairs. Likewise the correct timbering layouts and rail joints.

cheers,

Martin.

 

[Phil G]

Hi Martin,
I am sorry to be asking you this question, as I am sure its come up before, but after over an hour looking all over the forum I have come up empty.
Has there even been a drawing or sketch of the correct dimensions for code 75 rail?
I assume there has given most of the dimensions are adjustable to ensure the chairs fit on the rail. If so could you point me in the right direction?
cheers
phil,

 

[Steve_Cornford]

Hi Phil,
I think you will find that there are several versions of code 75 rail. Which one in paticular are you looking for?

Steve

 

[Phil G]

Hi Steve,
EMGS supplied which I believe is the same as the S4 supplied rails ( i.e. same die used to extrude)
I though getting a dimensioned drawing would be easy but I can't find it anywhere.
cheers
Phil,

 

[Steve_Cornford]

I am reliably informed that EMGS are supplied by S4society, so it is the same rail.
Steve

 

[Martin Wynne]

@Phil G

Hi Phil,

The dimensions Templot uses for S4/EMGS/C&L code75 rail
(all supplied from Wintwire in Yorkshire - see https://wintwire.co.uk/18-nickel-sliver-wire/ 18% is Hi-Ni),

and for SMP/Marcway code 75 rail (supplied from ?) are included in dxf_unit.pas.

Note that these dimensions have been obtained from actual measurement by me -- I don't know of published drawings anywhere, other than a scale reduction from BS-95R -- which neither of them are.

    if dxf_form.emgs_75_rail_radiobutton.Checked=True
       then begin

              rail_section_option:=1;

                 // convert to full-size at 4mm/ft and back to current scale   (4mm/ft = *3" per mm)

              rail_depth_mm:=1.90*3*inscale;   // code 75 // - 2D TEMPLATE SETTING MAY DIFFER  (cpi.rail_height_pi - inclined rail calcs - in inches)

              rail_head_width_mm:=0.90*3*inscale;   // - 2D TEMPLATE SETTING MAY DIFFER  (cpi.railtop_pi - in mm)

              rail_corner_rad_mm:=0.15*3*inscale;

              rail_foot_width_mm:=0.90*3*inscale;

              rail_fish_angle:=1.5;          // 1:n   arbitrary

              rail_web_top_mm:=0.80*3*inscale;        //  from rail top to intersection fish angle on rail centre-line
              rail_web_bottom_mm:=1.25*3*inscale;     //  from rail top to intersection fish angle on rail centre-line

              rail_web_thick_mm:=0.35*3*inscale*(100+chair_web_adjustment)/100;
            end;

      // SMP code75 bullhead ...

    if dxf_form.smp_75_rail_radiobutton.Checked=True
       then begin

              rail_section_option:=2;

                // convert to full-size at 4mm/ft and back to current scale   (4mm/ft = *3" per mm)

              rail_head_width_mm:=0.8*3*inscale;  //  2D TEMPLATE SETTING MAY DIFFER  (cpi.railtop_pi)

              rail_foot_width_mm:=0.8*3*inscale;

              rail_depth_mm:=1.92*3*inscale;  // 2D TEMPLATE SETTING MAY DIFFER  (cpi.rail_height_pi - inclined rail calcs)

              rail_fish_angle:=1.5;    // 1:n    arbitrary

              rail_web_thick_mm:=0.35*3*inscale*(100+chair_web_adjustment)/100;

              rail_web_top_mm:=0.8*3*inscale;                    //  from rail top to intersection fish angle on rail centre-line
              rail_web_bottom_mm:=rail_depth_mm-0.6*3*inscale;   //  from rail top to intersection fish angle on rail centre-line
            end;

p.s. there is no guarantee I have got these dimensions correct, or that they couldn't be improved. They are simply the ones which I have been using and found to work ok. If you think something would be better changed, please let me know.

cheers,

Martin.

 

[Phil G]

@Phil G

Hi Phil,

The dimensions Templot uses for S4/EMGS/C&L code75 rail
(all supplied from Wintwire in Yorkshire - see https://wintwire.co.uk/18-nickel-sliver-wire/ 18% is Hi-Ni),

and for SMP/Marcway code 75 rail (supplied from ?) are included in dxf_unit.pas.

Note that these dimensions have been obtained from actual measurement by me -- I don't know of published drawings anywhere, other than a scale reduction from BS-95R -- which neither of them are.

    if dxf_form.emgs_75_rail_radiobutton.Checked=True
       then begin

              rail_section_option:=1;

                 // convert to full-size at 4mm/ft and back to current scale   (4mm/ft = *3" per mm)

              rail_depth_mm:=1.90*3*inscale;   // code 75 // - 2D TEMPLATE SETTING MAY DIFFER  (cpi.rail_height_pi - inclined rail calcs - in inches)

              rail_head_width_mm:=0.90*3*inscale;   // - 2D TEMPLATE SETTING MAY DIFFER  (cpi.railtop_pi - in mm)

              rail_corner_rad_mm:=0.15*3*inscale;

              rail_foot_width_mm:=0.90*3*inscale;

              rail_fish_angle:=1.5;          // 1:n   arbitrary

              rail_web_top_mm:=0.80*3*inscale;        //  from rail top to intersection fish angle on rail centre-line
              rail_web_bottom_mm:=1.25*3*inscale;     //  from rail top to intersection fish angle on rail centre-line

              rail_web_thick_mm:=0.35*3*inscale*(100+chair_web_adjustment)/100;
            end;

      // SMP code75 bullhead ...

    if dxf_form.smp_75_rail_radiobutton.Checked=True
       then begin

              rail_section_option:=2;

                // convert to full-size at 4mm/ft and back to current scale   (4mm/ft = *3" per mm)

              rail_head_width_mm:=0.8*3*inscale;  //  2D TEMPLATE SETTING MAY DIFFER  (cpi.railtop_pi)

              rail_foot_width_mm:=0.8*3*inscale;

              rail_depth_mm:=1.92*3*inscale;  // 2D TEMPLATE SETTING MAY DIFFER  (cpi.rail_height_pi - inclined rail calcs)

              rail_fish_angle:=1.5;    // 1:n    arbitrary

              rail_web_thick_mm:=0.35*3*inscale*(100+chair_web_adjustment)/100;

              rail_web_top_mm:=0.8*3*inscale;                    //  from rail top to intersection fish angle on rail centre-line
              rail_web_bottom_mm:=rail_depth_mm-0.6*3*inscale;   //  from rail top to intersection fish angle on rail centre-line
            end;

p.s. there is no guarantee I have got these dimensions correct, or that they couldn't be improved. They are simply the ones which I have been using and found to work ok. If you think something would be better changed, please let me know.

cheers,

Martin.

Hi Martin,
Thank you maybe I was not losing my mind looking for a drawing after all.
Fully understand what your saying about the rail dimensions, that is why I was asking for a drawing, I have no reason to disagree with any of your measurements that I can measure. (and we know your other values work just fine)
You have also confirmed the three I could not measure with enough accuracy to be happy
which are,
rail_fish_angle:=1.5; // 1:n arbitrary

rail_web_top_mm:=0.80*3*inscale; // from rail top to intersection fish angle on rail centre-line
rail_web_bottom_mm:=1.25*3*inscale; // from rail top to intersection fish angle on rail centre-line

It looks as though you have done exactly the same thing as I was proposing to do I.E. take the model measurement and multiply them up to full size ad then covert then into imperial units. then add these model dims to the prototype chair values.
So when you apply scaling to the chairs you end up back at the same rail measurements.
cheers
Phil