Templot Club forums powered for Martin Wynne by XenForo :

TEMPLOT 3D PLUG TRACK - To get up to speed with this experimental project click here.   To watch an introductory video click here.   See the User Guide at Bexhill West.

  • The Plug Track functions are experimental and still being developed. Some of the earlier pages of this topic are now out-of-date.

    For an updated overview of this project see this topic.   For some practical modelling aspects of using Plug Track see Building 3D Track.

    The assumption is that you have your own machines on which to experiment, or helpful friends with machines. Please do not send Templot files to commercial laser cutting or 3D printing firms while this project is still experimental, because the results are unpredictable and possibly wasteful.

    Some pages of this and other topics include contributions from members who are creating and posting their own CAD designs for 3D printing and laser-cutting. Do not confuse them with Templot's own exported CAD files. All files derived from Templot are © Martin Wynne.
  • The Plug Track functions are experimental and still being developed.

    For an updated overview of this project see this topic.   For some practical modelling aspects of using Plug Track see Building 3D Track.

    The assumption is that you have your own machines on which to experiment, or helpful friends with machines. Please do not send Templot files to commercial laser cutting or 3D printing firms while this project is still experimental, because the results are unpredictable and possibly wasteful.

    Some pages of this and other topics include contributions from members who are creating and posting their own CAD designs for 3D printing and laser-cutting. Do not confuse them with Templot's own exported CAD files. All files derived from Templot are © Martin Wynne.

Experimental 3D plug track - up to version 244c

Quick reply >
Thanks Martin,

I will have a go at building a point at the weekend. QQ that I should be able to find the answer for but for some reasons failing, if the control panel disapears from my screen and I lose the minimum radius alert is there an easy way to get it back?

Michael.
 
_______________
message ref: 6741
Thanks Martin,

I will have a go at building a point at the weekend. QQ that I should be able to find the answer for but for some reasons failing, if the control panel disapears from my screen and I lose the minimum radius alert is there an easy way to get it back?

Michael.
@Michael Woods

Hi Michael,

Press the F2 key, or the very first item on the trackpad menu.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 6742
If the chairs are so tight that they need a lubricant to slide, you may want to ease the fit a fraction larger. They should slide on quite easily dry, and just manage to remain in place if you hold the rail on end, without all falling to the bottom.
@Michael Woods

p.s. Michael,

There is an option on the DXF dialog to include a non-prototypical filler chunk below the key. I strongly recommend that you don't use this option, and I'm minded to remove it.

It risks increasing the stress on the chair, and prevents the jaws from gripping the rail web in the prototype manner to keep it upright.

And for the loose jaws, it prevents the rail from being dropped into position as intended.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 6743
Thanks Martin, I dont think I am using that - the rails are very nicely possitioned from what I can see....but I will double check next time I am up and running.
 
_______________
message ref: 6744
Hi Michael.
I would recommend printing out the F key chart for reference. Most of the commonly used shortcut keys are now available as buttons at the top of the screen, but there are many more to discover. This can be accessed under the help drop down menu print F key chart.
Regards
Tony.
 
_______________
message ref: 6746
Hi Martin,
very much out of curiosity and certainly no rush, planting and enjoying the sun both come first.
I was wondering if you have and if so could post some more photos of prototype crossing chairs, similar to the one attached which you posted previously,
phil

1685681296402.png
 
_______________
message ref: 6752
.
Evidence of a bit more progress -- the front of a 1:14 V-crossing with the base in progress for the XN chair under the knuckle bend:

xn_in_progress.png


The X chair should be 8-sided with a wider area under the middle. Having more than 4 sides on a chair at this stage would mean a major re-write of the code and delay me several weeks. So for the present I have approximated the appearance by making the XN chair rectangular, and wider than the ZY chairs, but having a larger corner radius. I doubt the difference will notice in 4mm/ft scale, but it might in the larger scales. At some future time I shall have to come back to this and do it properly. :)

These chairs will all default to loose jaw, because that makes it much easier to assemble than the three hands needed with solid jaws.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 6753
Hi Martin,
very much out of curiosity and certainly no rush, planting and enjoying the sun both come first.
I was wondering if you have and if so could post some more photos of prototype crossing chairs, similar to the one attached which you posted previously,
phil

View attachment 5836
@Phil G

Hi Phil,

That above shows the B and C chairs. Notice that the C chair is inside-keyed, and we won't be able to replicate that in 00/EM because the wheel flanges would clonk the key.

Looking the other way, these are the A chair (bolted slab&bracket), and the X chair under the knuckle:

2_270449_340000000.jpg

© Mick Nicholson

The yellow lines have been added to show the nose blunted back from the FP intersection, a dropped below the level of the wing rails to match the wheel coning.

I have lots more photos, I will see what I can find worth posting.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 6755
@Phil G

Hi Phil,

That above shows the B and C chairs. Notice that the C chair is inside-keyed, and we won't be able to replicate that in 00/EM because the wheel flanges would clonk the key.

Looking the other way, these are the A chair (bolted slab&bracket), and the X chair under the knuckle:

2_270449_340000000.jpg

© Mick Nicholson

The yellow lines have been added to show the nose blunted back from the FP intersection, a dropped below the level of the wing rails to match the wheel coning.

I have lots more photos, I will see what I can find worth posting.

cheers,

Martin.
Hi Martin,
Once again your on the case, it is the C chair I am particularly interested in, and yes it is about musing how to get around the flange issue, I was thinking would a non prototypical double inside chair work?
either slide the rails in separately, or prebuild the Vee plus the C chair and then bash fit this into the timber as a sub assembly, at this stage purely musings on my part,
phil
 
_______________
message ref: 6756
Hi Martin,
Once again your on the case, it is the C chair I am particularly interested in, and yes it is about musing how to get around the flange issue, I was thinking would a non prototypical double inside chair work?
either slide the rails in separately, or prebuild the Vee plus the C chair and then bash fit this into the timber as a sub assembly, at this stage purely musings on my part,
phil
Sorry that should have read double inside jaw on the chair!!
 
_______________
message ref: 6757
Hi all,

Sorry to keep asking dumb questions but here is the next one :).

I have printed my point timbers and most of the chairs.

I suspect that I may not be doing this right but the way that I print the timbers is to take the whole point (box file 1) into my slicer and then chop the template up into three sections using the cutting facility within the slicer. I then print each of the three sections. This works OK.

But what I really want to be able to do is to integrate the return curve (box file 2) and the exit together just to the point that they become seperate tracks...so that I have one print that has this intersection rather than having to use hand tools to manually try and fit the ruturn curve after printing...

I guess my question is, using Box File 2 as an example, is it possible to create an STL with an integrated point and return curve. Clearly I would have to cut it to fit on my printer. Or is there a better way?

My lack of Templot knowledge is probably the problem here, Rather than a 3D specific situation.

Many thanks

Michael
 

Attachments

  • question for Martin.box
    80.1 KB · Views: 54
  • question for Martin 2.box
    18.1 KB · Views: 52
_______________
message ref: 6758
Hi all,

Sorry to keep asking dumb questions but here is the next one :).

I have printed my point timbers and most of the chairs.

I suspect that I may not be doing this right but the way that I print the timbers is to take the whole point (box file 1) into my slicer and then chop the template up into three sections using the cutting facility within the slicer. I then print each of the three sections. This works OK.

But what I really want to be able to do is to integrate the return curve (box file 2) and the exit together just to the point that they become seperate tracks...so that I have one print that has this intersection rather than having to use hand tools to manually try and fit the ruturn curve after printing...

I guess my question is, using Box File 2 as an example, is it possible to create an STL with an integrated point and return curve. Clearly I would have to cut it to fit on my printer. Or is there a better way?

My lack of Templot knowledge is probably the problem here, Rather than a 3D specific situation.

Many thanks

Michael
@Michael Woods

Hi Michael,

You can obviously do whatever you want with the Templot files, but there is an entire system of timbering bricks already provided in Templot to break a track plan into clip-together timbering bases for FDM printing.

You can put the breaks and connector clips anywhere you want within your track plan by creating brick templates as partial copies of your underlying track plan templates. The brick templates are identified by their marker colour.

index.php


index.php


If you have missed it entirely, I'm wondering how many others? On the other hand maybe you are aware of it but prefer not to use it?

See this topic. However, you will need to read all through it, because there were many changes along the way as I developed the functions:

https://85a.uk/templot/club/index.php?threads/extracting-a-3d-timbering-brick-from-a-track-plan.295/

Another topic which you may have missed is:

https://85a.uk/templot/club/index.php?threads/building-3d-track.520/

There are more topics in the Plug Track section:

https://85a.uk/templot/club/index.php?forums/plug-track.34/

I shall be writing all this up, providing diagrams, photos, tutorial videos, etc., but I just CAN'T do it until I have completed the crossing chairs for a full turnout.

Meanwhile folks are jumping ahead of me by using plug track for their actual layouts instead of just experimenting with all the functions and settings to discover what is possible. I knew this would happen, and I don't know what to do about it.

So far only the plain track is actually ready for use. Anything and everything else might yet change within the pointwork. It is all just an experiment to find out what works.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 6759
@Michael Woods

Hi Michael,

You can obviously do whatever you want with the Templot files, but there is an entire system of timbering bricks already provided in Templot to break a track plan into clip-together timbering bases for FDM printing.

You can put the breaks and connector clips anywhere you want within your track plan by creating brick templates as partial copies of your underlying track plan templates. The brick templates are identified by their marker colour.

index.php


index.php


If you have missed it entirely, I'm wondering how many others? On the other hand maybe you are aware of it but prefer not to use it?

See this topic. However, you will need to read all through it, because there were many changes along the way as I developed the functions:

https://85a.uk/templot/club/index.php?threads/extracting-a-3d-timbering-brick-from-a-track-plan.295/

Another topic which you may have missed is:

https://85a.uk/templot/club/index.php?threads/building-3d-track.520/

There are more topics in the Plug Track section:

https://85a.uk/templot/club/index.php?forums/plug-track.34/

I shall be writing all this up, providing diagrams, photos, tutorial videos, etc., but I just CAN'T do it until I have completed the crossing chairs for a full turnout.

Meanwhile folks are jumping ahead of me by using plug track for their actual layouts instead of just experimenting with all the functions and settings to discover what is possible. I knew this would happen, and I don't know what to do about it.

So far only the plain track is actually ready for use. Anything and everything else might yet change within the pointwork. It is all just an experiment to find out what works.

cheers,

Martin.
Thanks Martin - I had been told about the colour coding before but did not realise the context at the time. The attached is very helpful helpful - thank you. I will try again.
 
_______________
message ref: 6760
Martin - sorry couple of questions that I cannopt answer even after reading the excelent material

In the material it suggests that I should be able to perform the action in the red circle.

1685826476379.png


On my screen I cannot call that up
1685826867277.png

View attachment 5842


Also in my top left I have draw and make

1685826903918.png

View attachment 5843

rather than the web instruction which is set and move...

1685827077308.png



Once again sorry for all the questions....
 
_______________
message ref: 6764
Martin - sorry couple of questions that I cannopt answer even after reading the excelent material

In the material it suggests that I should be able to perform the action in the red circle.

View attachment 5841

On my screen I cannot call that up
View attachment 5845
View attachment 5842


Also in my top left I have draw and make

View attachment 5846
View attachment 5843

rather than the web instruction which is set and move...

View attachment 5847


Once again sorry for all the questions....
@Michael Woods

Hi Michael,

As I mentioned, a lot of things changed and developed during the course of that topic. Originally as a temporary measure I was using the image boundary function to mark a brick boundary.

That has now been replaced by this menu:

brick_boundary.png


which creates rectangle shapes specifically marked as brick boundary indicators. They can be moved and adjusted using the usual controls for adjusting background shapes.

See this post and subsequent:

https://85a.uk/templot/club/index.p...mbering-brick-from-a-track-plan.295/post-4439

I'm sorry it seems a confused jumble of ever changing settings -- it's just the consequence of conducting an experiment live on Templot Club.

It's all quite simple really, but I can't stop now to create detailed instructions and tutorials. I just CAN'T, sorry. I'm desperately trying to get the chairing done at least to the stage of a full REA turnout, and there seems to be one distraction after another.

I promise that when I'm ready to remove the "experimental" tag from the plug track project, I will produce all the instructions, explanations and tutorials needed to make it easy. But not now. I just can't do it yet. I'm sorry.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 6765
.
I regret to report a bug in 238a.

The pin on the loose jaw on the switch rail for the block heel chairs 3P..11P does not align correctly with the slot in the chair base. The result is that the jaw will be pushed slightly sideways, and not align correctly with the inner jaw on the stock rail.

bug_wire.png
bug_render.png


Will be fixed in the next update (he said hopefully, still scratching his head).

(The middle gap between the jaws is necessary to allow the loose jaw to flex outwards as it clips under the rail head. The gap will be filled by a separate filler insert after assembly.)

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 6783
Martin, making progress but one quick question if I may. How do I toogle between lose jaws and fixed jaws? Many thanks. I am probabaly missing the obvious.
@Michael Woods

Hi Michael,

Click this menu item:

set_loose_jaws1.png



This dialog appears. Make your settings as required for the different chair types:

set_loose_jaws2.png


You can change all the chairs in one go by clicking the buttons at the bottom.

Then click OK. (The top red X cancels any settings.) On a small screen you may need to scroll down to see the OK button.

This dialog changes the settings for the control template. You must then store a background template containing the settings. Often this will be a brick template rather than your underlying track plan templates. Alternatively you can click the modify group to match button, having selected a group of brick templates by brick colour.

This dialog will see several changes in the next update, with the buttons more conveniently at the top:

set_loose_jaws_list.png


cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 6795
.
A few more signs of progress:

xing_progress1.png


xing_progress2.png


We now have the XN knuckle chair.

These chairs in the wing rail front can't be strictly prototypical because of the wider than scale model flangeway gaps. Even the P4 flangeway is 15% over-scale.

This changes the knuckle gap and makes a big difference to the position of the knuckle bend relative to the timber centres/chairs. Accordingly I have modified the prototype chair designations for our purpose.

In a 1:7 crossing with 1mm flangeways (EM/00-SF) as above the knuckle bend comes directly over the XN knuckle chair. Some fudging is needed because the rail is curved through the chair at the knuckle bend radius. Even the prototype doesn't have curved keys. :)

The prototype X chair has a single rail seat for both rails. With the wider knuckle gap I thought that might look a bit odd. But maybe not. Decisions, decisions.

Not all these chair types will be present on all V-crossings, it depends on the flangeway gap and the crossing angle. For example the next chair is XA between the knuckle and the crossing nose. In EM/00-SF that replaces the XN chair for crossings longer than 1:8, and you get both XN and XA at 1:14 and longer. At 1:10 and longer there are two ZY chairs.

With these two new chairs now done I could release 239a. But there isn't much you can do with them until I have done some more, apart from experiments. Anyone?

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 6799
Hi Martin, This is all looking great. I would love to have an interim release of 239a to experiment with. If You are worried about too many queries, bug reports etc then maybe only make the release available to Members or a set of 'Beta Testers' like myself?
 
_______________
message ref: 6802
Hi Martin, another alternative would be for you to post some sample .STL files here so that we could try printing them for you, but only if that would help & not hinder your excellent progress so far.
Oh, and keep watering & weeding, as they seem to grow so fast out of nowhere!
Cheers Steve
 
_______________
message ref: 6804
Hi Martin,
Just a qualification question, given following true prototypical design is certainly not practical, or in most cases not even possible in the scales we work in, and because models are almost always compromising space. IE much sharper curves and very often non prototypical turnout angles.
Does a combination of say EM/00-SF and a range of 1:5 to 1:8 turnouts work in our favour, or add even more complexity?

Personally I am working in EM and trying to use as close to prototypical turnouts as I can, meaning my turnouts are typically 1:10 to 1:12 with the odd 1:14. Which just stuck me as being close to worst case scenario, for modeling prototypical turnouts.

Or putting it another way as we get closer to prototypical turnout angles, the more the overscale clearances become obvious and an issue. would you say that's correct?
Phil
 
_______________
message ref: 6807
Personally I am working in EM and trying to use as close to prototypical turnouts as I can, meaning my turnouts are typically 1:10 to 1:12 with the odd 1:14. Which just stuck me as being close to worst case scenario, for modeling prototypical turnouts.
@Phil G

Hi Phil,

I don't understand why you say that? I think the closer you can get to prototypical sizes, the more realistic it looks. Provided you have the space to keep things in proportion -- there is not much point in having a sweeping 1:14 junction leading to a platform only long enough for 3 coaches.

As far as plug track is concerned, Templot will create whatever you want, in EM or any other gauge/scale, and only you and I will ever notice anything amiss. Here for example is a curved E-14 in EM, as Templot stands today:


em_e14_curved1.png


em_e14_curved2.png



Here the wider EM flangeways mean an additional XA chair will be needed on the timber between the crossing nose and the XN chair at the knuckle. How many folks do you think will point out that a prototype 1:14 crossing has only one X chair? :)

Did you notice the deliberate mistake?

chairing_error.png


The closed-up timbering shows that there are rail-joints here, and fishplates on these two rails at this location. That means the L1 bridge chair can't have its key driven as shown. Fortunately L1 bridge chairs and/or their loose jaws are interchangeable, so it can be swapped during construction with the one to its left. However, the ZY chair to its right is not interchangeable, so I shall have to work out how to deal with that if its jaw gets generated with the wrong keying direction (key direction is random within pointwork). Heaven knows how I'm ever going to write up all this stuff, I think I shall be looking for help with that.

p.s. Notice also that the rendering of the rails is a bit iffy in places. That's been on the list for attention for at least 10 years!

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 6809
.
Next task is the XA chair. I'm feeling a bit tired, so I went looking for some help.

"Hello ChatGPT, please could you write the Delphi program code to generate XA chairs for Templot plug track?"

Any normal intelligence would ask a few questions about the prototype, rail section, etc. But Artificial Intelligence doesn't bother with any of that. It just ploughs straight in:


"Certainly! Here's an example of Delphi program code that generates XA chairs for Templot plug track:"

delphi

program GenerateXAChairs;

{$APPTYPE CONSOLE}

uses
SysUtils;

const
ChairSpacing = 150; // Spacing between chairs in millimeters

var
TotalChairs: Integer;
TrackLength: Integer;
ChairCount: Integer;
ChairPosition: Integer;

begin
// Get user input for total chairs and track length
Write('Enter total number of chairs: ');
Readln(TotalChairs);

Write('Enter track length in millimeters: ');
Readln(TrackLength);

// Calculate the number of chairs required based on the track length and spacing
ChairCount := TrackLength div ChairSpacing;

// Check if the user-specified total chairs matches the calculated number of chairs
if TotalChairs <> ChairCount then
begin
Writeln('Error: Total chairs does not match the calculated number of chairs.');
Exit;
end;

// Generate XA chairs
Writeln('Generating XA chairs:');

ChairPosition := 0;
while ChairPosition < TrackLength do
begin
Writeln('Chair at position ', ChairPosition);
ChairPosition := ChairPosition + ChairSpacing;
end;

Writeln('Chairs generated successfully.');
end.


"This Delphi program prompts the user to enter the total number of chairs and the track length in millimeters. It calculates the number of chairs required based on the specified chair spacing. If the user-specified total chairs do not match the calculated number of chairs, an error message is displayed. Otherwise, it generates XA chairs by printing the chair positions at the desired spacing until the track length is reached.

Please note that this code assumes basic knowledge of Delphi programming language and the availability of a Delphi compiler for running the program."


And it did all that without even a boiled egg! Unfortunately we are none the wiser because it didn't understand the word "generate". I didn't ask it to lay out some XA chairs in a neat row -- I could have done that myself. Try again:

"Hello ChatGPT, What do you understand by the term "generate" in relation to XA chairs for Templot plug track?"


"In the context of generating XA chairs for Templot plug track, the term "generate" refers to the process of creating or producing the XA chairs programmatically. Instead of manually determining the positions of each XA chair, the program calculates and generates the positions automatically based on certain criteria such as the track length and chair spacing.

By generating the XA chairs, the program eliminates the need for manual calculations and allows for efficient and consistent placement of the chairs. It simplifies the process of designing and laying out the track by automating the generation of the necessary components, in this case, the XA chairs."



Very good! If I keep going, what might it come up with? The snag is that the only place an XA chair exists at present is in my head. And I haven't written it down. Will ChatGPT eventually ask me some questions about it? Or does it assume it already knows everything?

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 6810
I don't understand why you say that? I think the closer you can get to prototypical sizes, the more realistic it looks. Provided you have the space to keep things in proportion -- there is not much point in having a sweeping 1:14 junction leading to a platform only long enough for 3 coaches.
Hi Martin,
I was not suggesting, using turnouts in the A5 to B8 range made models look more prototypical, or more realistic. I agree as long as everything is in proportion, the closer to prototypical you can get the better it will look.
My point was, if you look at a prototypical turnout, you can say its all about correct timber placing in relation to rail geometry. I believe you can go further and say its the A chair on a prototype turnout that is essentially the datum point for all regular turnouts, from there via wing rail prototypical clearance, you get the correct position of the X, Y and B, C chairs etc. my point (no pun intended) is the extra clearance required for models, push the prototypical chairs out of position, with the larger the Vee crossing angle the worst the issue.
In a round about way two wrongs, (tighter then normal vee angle's, and larger then prototype clearances)
almost make a right.
Ps your 1;14 curved turnout, which I have to say does look quite good, follows the logic I am getting at.
Phil,
 
_______________
message ref: 6816
Hi Martin,
I was not suggesting, using turnouts in the A5 to B8 range made models look more prototypical, or more realistic. I agree as long as everything is in proportion, the closer to prototypical you can get the better it will look.
My point was, if you look at a prototypical turnout, you can say its all about correct timber placing in relation to rail geometry. I believe you can go further and say its the A chair on a prototype turnout that is essentially the datum point for all regular turnouts, from there via wing rail prototypical clearance, you get the correct position of the X, Y and B, C chairs etc. my point (no pun intended) is the extra clearance required for models, push the prototypical chairs out of position, with the larger the Vee crossing angle the worst the issue.
In a round about way two wrongs, (tighter then normal vee angle's, and larger then prototype clearances)
almost make a right.
Ps your 1;14 curved turnout, which I have to say does look quite good, follows the logic I am getting at.
Phil,
@Phil G

Hi Phil,

I can see the point you are making, that at the longer crossing angles the increased model flangeway shifts the knuckle further from the prototype position relative to the crossing nose. But I think you may be making too much of that in terms of the actual change in appearance of the track.

Here I have marked the knuckle bends in yellow:

model_chairing.png


The upper two are S4-X gauge, i.e. exact scale to prototype, marked with the prototype chair designations.

The lower two are EM (00-SF is the same), marked with my modified designations for the programmatically generated model chairs.

On the left are 1:12 crossings, on the right 1:14 .

You can see that the number and spacing of the chairs doesn't change on the model. Only the physical dimension of some chairs changes. Only someone very knowledgeable about bullhead track is going to notice that, and only in photographs and close inspection of the model. At normal viewing distance in the smaller scales, I doubt anyone would notice.

But it does of course make a big difference to me in designing the chairs to fit the rail.

In the 1:12 crossings you can see that the X chair, with the rail at the knuckle bend through the chair, has become a longer XA chair in the EM model with the wing rails straight through the chair and wider apart. But the overall difference in appearance is not great.

In the 1:14 crossings the changes are slightly more noticeable. The Y chair has been replaced with a wider XN knuckle chair, so that we have two X chairs and no Y. That might just about notice at normal viewing distance -- but only by someone who knows what they are looking for.



For someone wanting to build the most realistic-looking track, the biggest single factor is the flangeway gap. Forget all the fuss about the track gauge, which folks get so worked up about. I can't help feeling that if we were starting with a blank sheet for 4mm/ft scale hand-built track, the two best options would be EM-SF for finescale model making, and 00-SF for use with RTR models.

EM-SF only came about by accident, as a result of Len Newman accidentally making some 0.8mm check rail chairs, but I think that if/when we get to see some layouts built in EM-SF there would be a big swing towards it. It runs unmodified EM wheels (except widened RTR wheels) and can be mixed with EM pointwork on existing layouts. It is hard to see the difference from P4, and when the plug track is done it will be just as easy to build as EM or P4. No moulded chairs to source and no gauges needed. :)

Here are the 1:14 crossings with EM-SF added:

model_chairing_emsf.png


( EM-SF is 18.0mm track gauge with 0.8mm flangeway gaps. The all-important check gauge remains at 17.2mm, making it interchangeable with regular EM.)

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 6820
Hi Martin,
Thanks for the excellent explanation, and the track layout drawings, less impact than I was envisioning. very enlightening. I do agree with you, there are very few people would pick your solution to the chair issue is not 100% prototypical, as your right it has no impact on the timber position, and is in truth no worse then my thoughts of B and C chairs having inside jaws on both sides, to prevent wheel flanges hitting the keys. (I know that idea has a loose jaw implication) which could be a bigger driver then the wheel flange piece.

To be honest I have been thinking of switching to EM4 for a few weeks now, but on reading your post and digesting it fully, I totally get it, its exactly in line with my my thinking flangeway gap has a noticeable effect on the aesthetics of the turnout. Also when I found out its origins lie in Manchester, given I am a proud mancunian by birth, I have decided to switch to EM-SF going forward.
Good Job I have not progressed very far with anything yet :)
Thank you Martin for your very timely comments.
cheers
Phil,
 
_______________
message ref: 6828
.
A bit more progress. We now have the XA chair done to fill the crossing gap on widened model flangeways. This is 1:14 in EM:

xa_chair_1n14.png


Thanks for the offers of help. I think I try to get the EF chairs done too, and then release 239a while I set to work on the vee nose.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 6829
.
Thanks Steve.

The EF chair is now done too. It didn't take too long as it is essentially the same code as for the ZY chair with different numbers. This is part of a B-7 turnout in EM. Notice that this size doesn't need an XA chair:

em_b7_xing_chairs.png


ef_chair.png

EF chair

This chair fits the vee rails in the crossing exit between the special vee chairs and the resumption of normal chairs up to the rail joint. It doesn't appear in all crossing sizes.

As with the switch heel chairs, the middle gap allows room for the loose jaws to flex past the rail head as they are inserted. The gap gets filled with an insert afterwards. These loose jaws will be a bit fiddly to insert because there isn't space for the special tweezers, but no doubt we will find ways of doing it. Blu-Tack on a stick is a good way of holding tiny components.

That completes the conventional outside-keyed chairs for a V-crossing, so I think I will now release 239a, after tidying up some loose ends. There will then be a break while I work on the special vee chairs (and enjoy some summer weather). :)

Without the remaining chairs there is not much you can actually do with 239a, except some experiments and tests. I suppose it would be possible to use moulded plastic chairs in their place if you are in a hurry to get some usable results.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 6840
.
Before releasing 239a I had better say something about this dialog:

chairs_interchange.png


The blue chair types in the list on the left are fully interchangeable (for the same model scale, flangeway gap and rail section). i.e. they can be used in any socket of the same type in any position on any template. They can therefore be printed in bulk and kept in stock ready for use as required during track construction. I will be posting some BOX files to make this easy, and STL files for 4mm/ft and C&L rail to make it even easier.

The red chair types in the list are not interchangeable. They will fit only in the corresponding socket in the template they came from. That's because they are generated programmatically to fit the rails for the specific template. This not only affects the fit of the jaws on the rail, but also the size of the chair and its socket. They could be interchanged on identical templates if they really are identical, i.e. both regular-type crossings, no timber shoving, no adjustments to check rails, etc. But it looks like a recipe for confusion if you don't keep careful records of which chair is what, if using the red chair types interchangeably.



The loose jaws are interchangeable according to the colour code at the top of the dialog. i.e. any loose-jaw of a given colour will fit any corresponding chair on any template. They too can therefore be printed in bulk for use as required. The loose jaws shown in black are not interchangeable and will fit only the corresponding chair in the template they came from.

Note that the XN knuckle chairs are a special case. In theory the outer jaws are standard SC jaws, but there is a difference in the key:

When outer jaws are printed as solid chairs, the keys have a taper at each end to allow for easier threading onto the rail, and they make firm contact with the rail only in the middle of the key. When outer jaws are printed loose, they will never need to slide along the rail, so there is no need for a taper on the key and they are printed fully straight to make them a bit more robust.

However this doesn't apply to the keys on the XN chairs, which are always printed with end tapers, for a better fit to the rail curving through the knuckle bend. This means that the SC outer jaws for the XN chairs are not strictly identical with other SC jaws, but practical experience may find that the normal SC jaws with straight keys work ok in them. That would avoid making separate SC jaws for XN which are almost impossible to tell apart from the normal SC jaws. In the larger scales the straight keys could be filed to shape for a better fit to the rail.



I can't make up my mind about what to set as the switch-on defaults for this dialog. It is likely that anyone trying some 3D prints for the first time would want to see fully formed solid chairs. They may find it disconcerting to see all the jaws missing and only empty slots in their place. But as soon as someone has got well into building plug track, that is exactly what they will want, and having to change the default setting every time will become a nuisance. But maybe not for plain track?

Having abandoned my original intention of splitting the special chairs into two half-chairs, in practice having all solid jaws throughout is going to make assembly very tricky. Bash-fitting chaired rails will require 3 hands, or if pre-fitting the chairs in the base for later rail threading it will be necessary to split the rail at the knuckle bend in the same way as in the Finetrax kits.

The loose jaws avoid all that and make assembly much easier and less frustrating. So at least for now I have set that as the default, as shown above.

When all is done and dusted I will provide some buttons which beginners can click to get started with plug track, without having to go through all the detailed settings.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 6842
.
Just to say that for 239a I have updated para. 5 of the Templot2 terms of use:

5. Printed track templates, screen images, data files and all other material derived from Templot2 software contain design elements and data which are the copyright intellectual property of Martin Wynne. You may not claim ownership or copyright of such Templot2 material. If you provide such material to others you may charge a fee for your work in preparing it, but you may not make a charge for the material itself or demand its return. All computer files generated by Templot2 software are the copyright intellectual property of Martin Wynne and are licensed to you for personal non-commercial use only. If you take or send such files to a commercial undertaking for processing, it is permitted on condition that they are not retained or used for any purpose other than to fulfill your personal requirements.

The full terms of use for Templot2 are at:

https://85a.uk/templot/companion/terms_of_use.php

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 6846
Hi Martin,

To facilitate track widening on my curves I am making the adjustment in "gauge" and this is being reflected through into my STL prints. When I build my track I am getting the exact gauge that I need - which is great.

Will the Flangeway adjustment in "gauge" automatically flow through to the STL with the corresponding changes to the chair sizes and Timber cutouts without any further adjustments in the "3D chair adjustment"? I think that the answer is probably yes but want to double check before creating the prints. It is not a problem if I have to use the 3D chair adjustment but want to avoid making the adjustment twice.

Thanks in advance.
 
_______________
message ref: 6864
Hi Martin,

To facilitate track widening on my curves I am making the adjustment in "gauge" and this is being reflected through into my STL prints. When I build my track I am getting the exact gauge that I need - which is great.

Will the Flangeway adjustment in "gauge" automatically flow through to the STL with the corresponding changes to the chair sizes and Timber cutouts without any further adjustments in the "3D chair adjustment"? I think that the answer is probably yes but want to double check before creating the prints. It is not a problem if I have to use the 3D chair adjustment but want to avoid making the adjustment twice.

Thanks in advance.
@Michael Woods

Hi Michael,

I assume you mean these settings:

modify_track_gauge.png


The answer is yes -- BUT bear in mind that these changes apply to the control template. In order to be included in your 3D exports you must subsequently store background template(s) containing them. No change will be made to any existing background template.

The usual process would be to delete to the control on the background template, make your changes, and then store it again.

For easier future work using the modified settings, you might want to create some library templates containing them, or set up a custom gauge/scale option.

The adjustment on the export dialog is not intended for such intentional design changes. It is to correct the output if the printed part doesn't turn out to meet your design dimension.

Please note also that I haven't tested any of this. The chair sizes and positions should accommodate small changes to the gauge and flangeways -- that's how it can do both 00 and P4. But large unusual changes might create some unexpected results in the chair design. If you notice anything odd please let me know.

cheers,

Martin.
 
_______________
message ref: 6865
Thanks Martin. I will follow your guidance. Everything so far has worked perfectly. This includes the chair adjustment, I found it easier to make some small changes here to find the best fit for the rail. Once I was happy I went back and changed the rail profile settings.

Just ordering my baseboards so hopefully full steam ahead.
 
_______________
message ref: 6866
Back
Top