FDM chairs in 0 gauge - 7mm COT track

[Hayfield]

Martin

Thanks for the explanation, prior to you writing this I made a change which may have been the incorrect correct thing to do (or I had the incorrect settings

Previously you suggested (unless I misunderstood what you) I reduced the depth from 1.6mm to 1.5. I left the width the same at 1.6mm. I thought I would experiment with a 1-7 crossing filing jig as to me the rail was a tad loose, so I changed the width to 1.5mm. The rail is a tight fit but the rail is firmly held. The jig was printed on my Neptune 4 but I use the same settings on my Kingroon

I am a bit pushed for time today to absorb what you have written

As for chairs, I have found COT chairs act very similarly to ABS injection moulded chairs. On their own they are weak and will break if someone is heavy handed. However when used as a group the rail is held more firmly,

I will try the experiment you suggested, but at the moment I feel you have the balance correct, as if the chairs are tighter they may tend to break more. For instance we thread pre-bent check rail through check rail chairs, they flex to allow the rail through, but relax back into position

I have printed the S7 base and checked the rail gauge on all 3 bricks, the gauge is constant. I still have to check the wing and check rail gauges, but will do so. (should I use the distance of outside of both rails as I dont have a wing rail or feeler gauges)

 

[Martin Wynne]

On their own they are weak and will break if someone is heavy handed.

@Hayfield @James Walters

Hi John,

Which filament are you using? I have found using this filament with my suggested Cura profile

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B07Y5K1TB5

that the chairs are almost unbreakable, and need a tool such as a pair of pliers to break them. I think James reported the same.

I found with some grey filament (I can't remember which one) that the chairs were easier to break.

I'm just running a test with a new reel to check that it is still the same.

cheers,

Martin.

 

[Hayfield]

Martin

I use Esun PLA+
https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=esun+p...efix=esun+pla,industrial,128&ref=nb_sb_noss_1

I will give Sunlu PLA+ when I buy the next reel

It may be that Sunlu is better quality

 

[Martin Wynne]

It may be that Sunlu is better quality

@Hayfield

Hi John,

Hmm. I think the Esun brown may be better for the filing jigs. Sunlu may be better for COT. It will be a nuisance if they are not equally good for both. It's even more of a nuisance that the names are easily confused.

cheers,

Martin.

 

[Hayfield]

I have not tested my new B switch back yet, will try it later as I am both going out and have visitors. Some how I brought a reel of any Cubic PLA+ it works and whether its any better or worse I have no idea and to be quite honest its probably quite subjective

I know we don't want to start prescribing either machines or filament/resin. But you will have two types of users, those who know how to use and adjust their machines and numpties like myself who rely on guidance

Templot 2D has been used and abused by modelers. Most of the complainants are those who refused to spend time learning how to use the system, which itself over the past 10 years has become far easier to use

3D printing whether using Templot or other similar systems for printable programs will suffer the same. For some the transition from Templot 2D into Templot 3D will be easy. I am beginning to realize for most the gap is too big and I think this thankfully stop you and others from getting swamped

However I think Terry is on to something by supplying a service which will bridge the knowledge gap. I think there is another service which is to produce RAW printable files as well as printed or laser cut items. I know there might be issues with different machines giving variable results, but Its better than nothing. I had and have been given some printable building files. Without any tuition I got the first batch working with out knowing what machine they were designed for. (I have not tried the next batch.) They worked straight out of the box

Perhaps by using the same file why not try printing it on all of the differing printers to see how a file works on various machines without tweaks

 

[Terry Downes]

Hi John, what do You mean by 'RAW printable files'? I think the output from Templot stl/dxf is the RAW file which is then input into individuals slicing or pre-cutting software. Or have I misunderstood this

 

[Hayfield]

Terry

My bad terminology.

There will be lots of modelers falling into many groups who could/ would like to benefit from the end product (a printed Turnout). British finescale have successfully found a niche between track builders and those who depend on ready to run.

By asking for a box file we are limiting those we assist to Templot users or people who have friends who are Templot users

There will be another group of modelers who have and can use printers, but not Templot savey. Can we help them ? They have a printer of their own and know how to use it. All they require is a printable file, is it a service we would like to make available ? and if so do we with

1 A Raw file
or
2 a file which has gone through 3D builder?

For some time I have been happy to supply templates (plans) usually via a PDF as well as Templot box files, if an applicant (for want of a better word) does not have/use Templot. No doubt at some point in the future someone will ask for assistance in obtaining a printable file, no doubt a conversation would be needed

 

[Martin Wynne]

.
ZOOM meeting at 8pm this Wednesday to discuss progress with Templot5 and writing docs for plug track. All welcome.

8pm UK time (20:00 UTC) - 6th November 2024

How to take part: https://85a.uk/templot/club/index.php?threads/zoom-meetings-access-links.620/latest

Martin.

 

[Phil G]

@Hayfield
Hi John

There will be lots of modelers falling into many groups who could/ would like to benefit from the end product (a printed Turnout). British finescale have successfully found a niche between track builders and those who depend on ready to run.

By asking for a box file we are limiting those we assist to Templot users or people who have friends who are Templot users

Firstly thank you for the offer of the C&L chairs, as you say these can be used as a sort of mix and match approach to making things such as slips 'that are not currently able to be produced in Templot5 3D. The offers is genuinely appreciated. However I will not be taking you up on this offer.

This and the above comments. I believe come to the crux of why you and me have such differing views.

Please note I do respect your position, and I acknowledge what you doing and saying is certainly an option.

But here is the thing,
Please correct if I have this wrong. You are basically saying both Plug track and COT are tools that can be used by modellers to make trackwork, If they can't make the components at this time, for what ever reason Terry and possibly others are offing a service, that for a small cost. Can supply you the modeller these items. There are certain elements that are not yet avaible IE some types of chairs, However these can be sourced from other traders who also offer components. By doing it this way, it can all be assembled to make your track. You simply mix the two together and you have a viable why to make what you want.

As I said, that is a view which I do respect, and to be honest Martin does not seem to have a problem with it either.

My view and I stress this is my personal view is this,
I don't yet see Plug Track or COT as a tools at all. I see both Plug Track and COT as something Martin and now others are still experimenting with.
Yes he has offered this up to anybody who wants to have go, but that is very much on the understanding it is an experiment, and like any experiment it could and in all likelihood will change, thats because as we learning we are evolving.

In fact there is likely to be a quite major change with the introduction of the so called 8 sided chairs, In truth more likely to impact Plug track than COT track this time.
The reason for the change being the plugs will change size. this then means if you have premade lots of Timbers or lots of chairs you will no longer be able to mix and match them if made between program releases. You can still use them as long as the plug and the socket are a matching set however. EDIT I should have said lots of the chairs that will be changing. its only the 8 sided chairs that will be impacted here.

The difference between a tool and experiment is subtle, but really comes down to the perception of pressure.
The more it becomes a widely used tool, the more pressure is applied on the designer, even if unintentionally to get everything working as fast as possible.

This is compounded by the simple truth, the more people get involved the more the same basic questions get asked again and again. I know the answer to this one is for other people to answer these questions, Which is true, but they still become an unwanted distraction if only by reading them and then waiting for others to reply correctly.

We can't unopen Pandora's box, but we could maybe try to slow down the rate the whole concept is being received.

Please note non of this is meant to be a slight on the good work both You and James have been doing in showing the world just what a great tool Templot5 is now, and what a great tool both Plug Track and COT will be when there ready to be called a tool.

cheers
Phil,

 

[Hayfield]

Between doing other things I have turned my attention to the filing jigs. For some time now the performance in gripping the rail in code 125 has not been as good as code 75. I guess the forces at play are bigger as the surface area is larger.

The first thing I did a few weeks back was to reduce the width of depth from 1.6mm to 1.5mm. This had a visual effect of showing a slight gap between both sides, but failed to improve the grip very much. However I found by filing across the rail, excellent results were obtainable

Anyway last week I decided to experiment with a 1-7 vee filing jig, by reducing the width of the gap, which but coincidence was also 1.6mm down to 1.5mm. Instant success with the rail holding fast. The fit of the rail is a push fit and may benefit from opening up a bit to 1.52mm, but unless there is breakage of the jigs I am reluctant to do so

At the weekend I printed a switch rail back jig, again reducing the width to 1.5mm. Again the difference was striking, however there still is a bit of rail creep. The main issue is only about 20mm of rail is fully enclosed by the jig, 155mm has 1 side open. Again the jig is much better and it is possible to file along the rail.

I have found though the jig top needs filing flat as the outer edges (bottom of the print) of both sides are more prominent than the middle section (top of the print), but only affects the first usage

Both jigs were printed on my Neptune 4 with eSun filament. when I can I will use both my Kingroon printer and any Cubic filament. Also on my shopping list this month will be a reel of Sunlu filament

Off topic

A 7mm signal box file sent to me by one of the exhibitors at Scaleforum, a very small (yard?) signal box FDM printed on my Neptune 4

Do we have a buildings section?

 

[KHC1]

A piece of experimental COT 7mm 0mf. Have done a colour change set up in the slicer. Another question I have a pack of rail that I bought some 15 years ago but am not sure what code it is. The Pack came from C and L when based in Henbury near Bristol. The code on the packet is 7RA101A. I cannot match this code to the present website. Any thoughts.

Keith

 

[John S]

A piece of experimental COT 7mm 0mf. Have done a colour change set up in the slicer. Another question I have a pack of rail that I bought some 15 years ago but am not sure what code it is. The Pack came from C and L when based in Henbury near Bristol. The code on the packet is 7RA101A. I cannot match this code to the present website. Any thoughts.

Keith

A quick search,using Lilo, on "7RA101A" brought up the following link that should help.

https://www.clfinescale.co.uk/onlin...L-10-X-1-METER-FINESCALE-95lb-RAIL-p128200402

John
from 33820 St Ciers

 

[KHC1]

Thanks John so code 131. That’s why I broke a couple of chairs. Will try another test tomorrow I had the settings for code 125.

Keith

 

[Martin Wynne]

The code on the packet is 7RA101A. I cannot match this code to the present website. Any thoughts.

@KHC1

Hi Keith,

Why not just measure it? Most likely it is code 125, see:

Here on the Wayback Machine is the old C&L website from 2003 (Brian Lewis days) -- it might take a few minutes to load:

http://web.archive.org/web/20030209204148/http://www.finescale.org.uk/#7mm Track components

From which:

"with either nickel silver or steel bullhead rail, of code 125 section. This is equivalent to BS95R in the prototype."

Which is wrong. Fake news there from Brian. Code 125 represents BS-85R 85lb/yd rail.

Code 131 is the much more common BS-95R 95lb/yd bullhead rail.

cheers,

Martin.

 

[Hayfield]

I don't think code 131 was available 15 years ago

Code 131 SKU7RA101AA
Code 125 SKU7RA101A

Confusing yes, but C&L do not sell code 125 anymore

 

[Martin Wynne]

I don't think code 131 was available 15 years ago

@Hayfield

Hi John,

Code 131 flexi-track was available from the original C&L long ago before Brian Lewis took over. I have a yard length of it somewhere in the attic, and when/if my shoulder is up to it I will clamber up there and find it. I remember the height difference from Peco being an issue for users. Likewise code 131 rail was available from Slater's at that time (and is still mentioned in their track building handbook).

cheers,

Martin.

 

[Stephen Freeman]

I can't remember exactly when it was that Brian took over C&L but around the year 2000 or possibly a couple of years before that. I don't think people know exactly how close it came to disappearing altogether until he did.

 

[Stephen Freeman]

I could be wrong but perhaps the change to code 125 was more of a response to the difference in rail height to PECO than anything else. I think that it was probably code 125 before Brian took it over. I certainly don't remember it being code 131 from at least 1985, C&L came out before that though of course it was K&L and originally marketed by Alan Gibson (at least the 4mm stuff was), probably around 1981/2.

 

[Hayfield]

I could be wrong but perhaps the change to code 125 was more of a response to the difference in rail height to PECO than anything else. I think that it was probably code 125 before Brian took it over. I certainly don't remember it being code 131 from at least 1985, C&L came out before that though of course it was K&L and originally marketed by Alan Gibson (at least the 4mm stuff was), probably around 1981/2.

When Phil changed from code 125 to 131 he said it was for a more prototypical size for 7mm (Finescale 95lb) Steel rail is still code 125 without this claim)

John

 

[Hayfield]

@Hayfield

Hi John,

Code 131 flexi-track was available from the original C&L long ago before Brian Lewis took over. I have a yard length of it somewhere in the attic, and when/if my shoulder is up to it I will clamber up there and find it. I remember the height difference from Peco being an issue for users. Likewise code 131 rail was available from Slater's at that time (and is still mentioned in their track building handbook).

cheers,

Martin.

Martin

I was reading a 2020 GOG mag where there was a large advert from C&L, the code numbers ending in A,AA,AAA all relate to code 125. A for 10 x 1m lengths, AA for 20 x 500cm and AAA 3/2 x 1m

Phil seemingly has kept the same rail reference for codes 131 as they were for 125

Confusing